Horsesh*t And Fairy Tales: ‘Obama’s Coalition Of The Kicking And Screaming’

George W. Bush inadvisedly but successfully mustered a “coalition of the willing” at home and abroad to destroy Saddam Hussein in Iraq. Barack Obama’s uncertain kazoo call is scaring a “coalition of the kicking and screaming” abroad. In the United States the corrupt left that elected and reelected Barack Obama is also disintegrating into a “coalition of the kicking and screaming”.

Like faded “Hope and Change” posters advertising a long defunct circus Barack Obama is a tattered personality and politician even to his frat-house fan-boy liberal white base. These liberal left “creative class” loons stand aghast as they witness Messiah Obama – in of all places Iraq – wage war as a “unitary executive”. The “creative class” and the “coalition of the ascendant” are now the “coalition of the kicking and screaming” as they are dragged down to their fates by Barack Obama.

The Fairy Tale:

In 2008 Bill Clinton was denounced by Obama race-baiters as “racist” for saying that Obama’s opposition to the war in Iraq was the biggest “fairy tale” he ever heard. Dat no gud debil Bill Clinton was immediately called a “racist” by race-baiting creeps like Jim Clyburn as well as the Chappaquiddick Chauffeur Ted Kennedy. But now Obama’s “coalition of the kicking and screaming” witness for themselves what Bill Clinton meant.

Bill Clinton with his “fairy tale” comment, as Andrew Breitbart later noted, referred solely to Obama’s position on the Iraq war and nothing else. But race-baiters such as Bob Herbert of the New York Times distorted the remark and race-baited Bill Clinton. Breitbart explained the role of Herbert and other pro-Obama race-baiters in this ugly episode:

I could also sense how hard the Clinton camp was working to undermine Senator Obama’s main theme, that a campaign based on hope and healing could unify, rather than further polarize, the country.

So there was the former president chastising the press for the way it was covering the Obama campaign and saying of Mr. Obama’s effort: “The whole thing is the biggest fairy tale I’ve ever seen.

But – it wasn’t true. Watch Bill Clinton’s entire remarks and it’s 100% clear as to what he’s referring to as “the biggest fairy tale” and it’s not Obama’s candidacy. Nor is it the notion, as Herbert claims, that “a campaign based on hope and healing could unify.” No, the “fairy tale” is the idea that Obama was consistently opposed to the war in Iraq. Clinton points out speeches that Obama made and votes he cast as a Senator. His comments strike me as neither bizarre nor rambling, as the Times had claimed.

No matter. When Hillary Clinton appeared on Meet the Press just prior to the South Carolina primary, the late Tim Russert led with the race card attack against Clinton, including the quote from Herbert’s New York Times piece. Russert even plays a selectively edited clip of Clinton’s comments, where he cuts out every single part of what Clinton says leaving only ‘this whole thing is the biggest fairy tale I’ve ever seen.”

Russert follows this butchered video clip with the quote from South Carolina Senator and Congressional Black Caucus member James Clyburn that had also appeared in the Times; “To call that dream a fairytale, which Bill Clinton seem to be doing, could very well be insulting to some of us.” Hillary Clinton tries to point out that Russert is not playing the entire clip, but he shuts her down and plays a quote from Donna Brazil expressing disappointment in Bill Clinton and his “tone.” Russert continues to filibuster relentlessly for a couple of minutes, quoting the New York Times.”

Bill Clinton should have included Obama’s entire preposterous candidacy as a “fairy tale” back in 2008 as we did. It’s taken this long but most Americans now agree with us about the repellant and divisive Obama:

The most troubling number for President Obama in the new Washington Post-ABC News poll is this one: Americans say 55 percent to 38 percent that he is more of a divider than a uniter.

That’s a reversal from last year, when Americans said 47-45 that Obama had done more to unite the country than divide it.

Of course, Obama also has become significantly more unpopular over that span, so it’s not surprising to see his “uniter” rating drop (and in fact, both numbers have dropped equally over the past 16 months). But the uniter/divider number stings more than most other measures of Obama’s leadership.

Why? Because this was the thing that put Obama on the map.

The Obama fairy tale about “uniter not divider” is in the trash along with his “composite character” autobiographical garbage books. The fairy tale of Obama’s opposition to the Iraq war was used to sell Obama to the gullible low information and leftist dreamers is also in the trash as Obama prepares the Obama War In Iraq.

The Domestic Coalition Of The Kicking And Screaming:

The left? Those loons and totalitarians are shocked and awed into silence by their own hypocrisies:

But it still is a war, isn’t it, Mr. Secretary Kerry?

“I think that’s the wrong terminology,” he sniffed yesterday. “What we are engaging in is a very significant counterterrorism operation.”

Does that make it … a police action? Will we have to destroy the village in order to save it?

It’s all very confusing. When George W. Bush considered invading Iraq without a declaration of war, the Democrats wanted to try him for war crimes in The Hague. When Obama does the same thing … crickets.

Which raises another question: Where exactly is the anti-war movement?

Have you see a single “No Blood for Oil” sign in Cambridge?

To paraphrase the John Kerry of 2004: “Can I get me a candlelight vigil here?”

Whatever happened to Cindy Sheehan? Where is Code Pink? I haven’t seen an “EndLESS War” bumper sticker in years, since 2009 to be exact.

The anti-war movement is MIA as this war, er counter­terrorism operation, begins. Back when Bush was waging war, dissent was the highest form of patriotism. Now it’s “racism.” If you speak truth to power in the Obama era, they call it hate speech. The IRS will audit you.

Maybe the left is silent because they are low information idiots? Consider them informed by this op-ed in the Obama love machine called the New York Times:

Obama’s Betrayal of the Constitution

PRESIDENT OBAMA’s declaration of war against the terrorist group known as the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria marks a decisive break in the American constitutional tradition. Nothing attempted by his predecessor, George W. Bush, remotely compares in imperial hubris.

Mr. Bush gained explicit congressional consent for his invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq. In contrast, the Obama administration has not even published a legal opinion attempting to justify the president’s assertion of unilateral war-making authority. This is because no serious opinion can be written. [snip]

Mr. Obama may rightly be frustrated by gridlock in Washington, but his assault on the rule of law is a devastating setback for our constitutional order. His refusal even to ask the Justice Department to provide a formal legal pretext for the war on ISIS is astonishing.

Since ISIS poses a new problem for the president, the War Powers Resolution of 1973 requires him to seek a new mandate from Congress. [snip]

But for now the president seems grimly determined to practice what Mr. Bush’s lawyers only preached. He is acting on the proposition that the president, in his capacity as commander in chief, has unilateral authority to declare war.

In taking this step, Mr. Obama is not only betraying the electoral majorities who twice voted him into office on his promise to end Bush-era abuses of executive authority. He is also betraying the Constitution he swore to uphold.

It’s the worst of George W. Bush without the better qualities of George W. Bush:

Obama Will Fight ISIS With George W. Bush’s Legal Theories

John Yoo: “Obama has adopted the same view of war powers as the Bush administration.” [snip]

Among those doubters is Obama himself, or at least the pre-presidential version.

In late 2007, as part of a candidate Q&A, Obama told Charlie Savage, “The president does not have power under the Constitution to unilaterally authorize a military attack in a situation that does not involve stopping an actual or imminent threat to the nation.” And as Obama made clear in his Sunday appearance on Meet the Press, this is not the case in Iraq or Syria. “I want everybody to understand that we have not seen any immediate intelligence about threats to the homeland from ISIL. That’s not what this is about.”

This is about prevention and preemption, exactly the sort of thing that candidate Obama said presidents were not authorized to do without congressional approval. [snip]

Instead, whether out of expediency or outlook, he appears to have altered his views on constitutional power, and in doing so found himself relying on the same theories he once criticized. [snip]

“What is remarkable,” Yoo told BuzzFeed News, “is not that Obama eventually had to exercise the powers of his predecessors to protect American national security, but that his party in Congress, and his allies in the media and the universities, have remained so silent about it.”

It’s the silence of the lambs from what used to be wolves howling against the “unitary executive”. The left will pay for its hypocritical opportunism soon enough as even some of the juice vox boys are beginning to wail:

How Barack Obama is expanding presidential power — and what it means for the future [snip]]

Speaker John Boehner chided the Democrats: “Are you willing to let any president choose what laws to execute and what laws to change?” [snip]

“I taught constitutional law for 10 years,” Obama said in March 2008. “I take the Constitution very seriously. The biggest problems that we’re facing right now have to do with George Bush trying to bring more and more power into the executive branch and not go through Congress at all. And that’s what I intend to reverse when I’m president of the United States of America.

But interviews with academic, legal, and policy experts make clear Obama has done little to roll back Bush’s expansion of executive power — and that, instead, he’s added a few innovations of his own. [snip]

Many of Obama’s own controversial contributions cluster around one main theme: waiving, modifying, or refusing to enforce key provisions in laws dealing with domestic policy. And as he weighs a new executive action on immigration, he seems set to go further yet. In doing so, he’ll set new precedents that future presidents can cite for even more expansive action. [snip]

The problem for liberals is that there are many laws out there that conservative presidents dearly wish weren’t enforced. Indeed, the precedents Obama is setting “probably benefit conservative presidents who want to stop regulations and have a smaller agenda, to the extent it helps them gain control of the wider executive branch,” says Rudalevige, the Bowdoin professor.

So future Republican presidents will inevitably cite the new precedents Obama is setting to justify actions of their own. “I think Democrats are going to rue the day they did not push back against Obama on these things,” says Sollenberger, the University of Michigan professor. “Just as Republicans regretted the same thing when they didn’t push back against Bush.”

The response to all these warnings from the Obama left? One picture [HERE] tells the story.

The Horsesh*t:

The “horsesh*t” from Mr. Bullsh*t:

Hillary Clinton and congressmen alike have called on Obama to arm Syria’s rebels. But the president fumed at lawmakers in a private meeting for suggesting he should’ve done more.

President Obama got angry at lawmakers who suggested in a private meeting that he should have armed the Syrian rebels, calling the criticism “horseshit.” [snip]

Top Democratic lawmakers agreed with Corker and Clinton that doing more to support the moderate rebels would have at least had a chance of averting or mitigating the current crisis, which has now spread to large parts of Iraq as ISIS expands its newly declared Caliphate.

We may never know for sure if ISIS’s decisions were encouraged by Obama’s choices in Syria. What we know for sure is that ISIS metastasized in Syria and was not deterred because of anything Obama said or did so far.” [snip]

In a New York Times interview published Aug. 8, Obama said that the idea arming the rebels would have made a difference had “always been a fantasy.”

“This idea that we could provide some light arms or even more sophisticated arms to what was essentially an opposition made up of former doctors, farmers, pharmacists and so forth, and that they were going to be able to battle not only a well-armed state but also a well-armed state backed by Russia, backed by Iran, a battle-hardened Hezbollah, that was never in the cards,” Obama said.

Clinton told The Atlantic in an interview published Aug. 10 that Obama’s “failure to help build up a credible fighting force of the people who were the originators of the protests against Assad—there were Islamists, there were secularists, there was everything in the middle—the failure to do that left a big vacuum, which the jihadists have now filled.”

In 2012, Clinton revealed that she and then-CIA Director David Petraeus had pushed a plan earlier that year to arm the Syrian rebels that was rejected by the White House. Defense Secretary Leon Panetta and Joint Chiefs Chairman Gen. Martin Dempsey later said they supported the plan at that time. Many lawmakers, including Corker and Engel, still support that plan and they agree with Clinton that Obama’s policy left a vacuum that ISIS rushed to fill.

“[ISIS’s threat in Iraq] is definitely tied to Syria because when the uprising started against Bashar al Assad, it was a movement of people wanting freedom and democracy in Syria, it wasn’t a war involving jihadism at all,” Engel said. “They desperately needed our help, which we didn’t supply, and as a result ISIS got the upper hand. We are now paying the price of that.”

Back when there was a possibility of success or what passes for success in the Middle East Barack Obama did nothing. Then he said doing what most everyone suggested was “a fantasy”.

Now, that it very late Obama adopts the long lost strategy as his fantasy strategy. But it is horsesh*t.

The Foreign Coalition Of The Kicking And Screaming:

Turkey is out. Germany and maybe the U.K. are out. The Barack Obama ISIS “coalition of the kicking and screaming” is horsesh*t too. Qatar? Really? Qatar?

Bahrain, the UAE and Saudi Arabia earlier this year withdrew their ambassadors from Qatar over Qatar’s support for the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt and beyond. [snip]

Qatar has also had a complicated relationship with the United States. Qatar hosts one of the most important U.S. military bases in the world, at the al Udeid Air Base. Additionally, the Sunni nation played a key role in negotiating the prisoner swap between the Taliban and the United States to free Army Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl, as well as in the release of American hostage Peter Theo Curtis.

At the same time, Taliban officials live and work in Qatar, and the Sunni nation has control of the often anti-American television network al Jazeera. The U.S. has taken issue with its support for Hamas. Meanwhile, support for Syrian rebel groups coming out of Qatar and other Arab nations may have contributed to the rise of ISIS.

Qatar? Really? The enemy within that coalition. In America that enemy goes by the name of Obama.

The Cost of Horsesh*t And Fairy Tales:

Obama apologist Karen Tumulty does the honors even as she weeps watching her own Messiah Obama fantasies disappear:

Obama losing the confidence of key parts of the coalition that elected him

Kimberly Cole was part of the coalition that voted in 2008 to make Barack Obama the 44th president and in 2012 gave him another four years to deliver on his promises of hope and change.

Now, the 36-year-old mother of three young children in Valencia, Calif., is among the majority of Americans who have lost confidence in Obama’s leadership and the job he is doing as president.

“He’s been faced with a lot of challenges, and he’s lost his way,” Cole said in an interview. She worries that Obama lacks the resolve needed at a time when things at home and abroad are looking scarier.

On the other side of the country, Karlene Richardson, 44, once counted herself a “very strong supporter” of the president. But now she feels much the same as Cole does.

“Honestly, I just feel that what I bought into is not what I’m getting,” said Richardson, an author and motivational speaker who teaches health care administration at a community college in Queens. “I’m starting to wonder whether the world takes us seriously.”

Both Cole and Richardson were surveyed in the latest Washington Post-ABC News poll and represent one of its most striking findings: the degree to which the president’s approval has slipped among key parts of the Obama coalition — the women, youth and Latino voters most responsible for putting him into office.

They’re kicking and screaming out ‘no we can’t – take it anymore’.

African-Americans? They’re still mostly sticking by skin color – 87% approve of Obama even as their communities and opportunities are decimated by Obama (although even there support is down from the 93% it used to be).

The coalition of the kicking and screaming here at home has many women:

Virginia Wilson, 60, of Charleston, W.Va., is another disillusioned Obama voter.

“I can’t blame it all on him,” she said, but added, “There was going to be a change, that we would see people coming together, instead of falling apart.” [snip]

And Richardson — interviewed before Obama gave a prime time speech Wednesday laying out plans to target Islamic State with airstrikes — said “he just made these promises that he doesn’t go through with” related to the terrorist group.

There was going to be a change, that we would see people coming together, instead of falling apart.” Are you kidding? With Obama???? That was all in your head darling. It was a fantasy. It was horseshit.


117 thoughts on “Horsesh*t And Fairy Tales: ‘Obama’s Coalition Of The Kicking And Screaming’

  1. “What is remarkable,” Yoo told BuzzFeed News, “is not that Obama eventually had to exercise the powers of his predecessors to protect American national security, but that his party in Congress, and his allies in the media and the universities, have remained so silent about it.”

    I have NO remorse as I tell all my o-bingo sycophant friends TOLD YA SO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


    Hillary 2016

    Great post, admin!! 😀

  2. Cognitive dissonance. Cascading catastrophic national failure. Tipping points. And now the preference cascade in public opinion can no longer be hidden or dismissed. The rest of the country is now faced with what a very large part of the country knew in 2008. There was never anything “there”. Marketing, fairy tales, bullying, ignorance, laziness, scamming was all there was to this nothing-burger of a president. Fears of his awesome executive action pen are baloney. His retreat over immigration edicts are what he is going to do for the rest of the time he is in office namely nothing with a few scripted doses of bullshit. Kick the can down the road is the default plan and with all of his administration fighting a rear guard retreat as the wolves close in. Even his “popular” wife is facing open revolt with her personal untreated orthorexia nervosa ( disorder plan to starve children. We are seeing that the all powerful media can’t save this boob especially now they know he will get them decapitated. If Democrats want to save the party they have to get rid of him and very soon. I would suggest a health issue resignation (he really does look like crap) followed quickly by appointments of minders for Uncle Joe who don’t think talking to Republicans is beneath them.

  3. Thanks for a very good read, admin.
    Must say I do appreciate opportunities to suggest to friends how they might better protect themselves in the future. And to enhance support to the hypothesis that a whole bunch of PUMAS have not been delusional for the past 6 years.
    Consequences of the Trojan Horse are in the fore today:
    Reuters. 1 hour ago (now 8:06 AM)
    Pope says world’s many conflicts amount to piecemeal World War Three
    and locally devastating
    5:15 a.m. UPDATE: State police in Harrisburg have confirmed one trooper is dead and another is injured following a shooting at a state police barracks in Pike County. No arrests have been made. The names of the victims have not been released.
    BLOOMING GROVE TOWNSHIP — State police have confirmed there has been a shooting at the Pennsylvania State Police Blooming Grove barracks in Pike County. The coroner has been called to the scene.
    There is no one in custody at this time.

  4. re above my 8:15 am post. The attack on State Police may well be due to operatives in sympathy to #Ferguson. Since the mid-1990’s the news here has gone from barn fires and car wrecks, to full-fledged drugs with typical consequences. Worst came just this week with typical hard-core bullying. It involved teenagers. 20 surrounded one hispanic riding his two wheeler. The crowd began shouting it was their bike, then lunged in to attack. This in a large gated community. The kid had injuries everywhere. No question he will survive, but it is going to hurt for awhile. Third time they’ve gone after this person.

    All that just to convince you that the really bad mentality IS here now.

    Back to massacre at PSP, how did perps escape? Surely there were cameras in police station? It is a rural area. Maybe not? Doubt they saw this coming.


    NBC Host: Obama On The Verge ‘Of Doing Jimmy Carter-Like Damage’ To The Democratic Party

    Meet The Press moderator Chuck Todd said Wednesday that President Barack Obama is “on the precipice of doing Jimmy Carter-like damage to the [Democratic] Party.” Todd’s remarks, made on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe,” came ahead of Obama’s Wednesday night address to the nation about the dangers of the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS).

    Obama’s weakness on ISIS thus far, Todd explained, has done some real damage to the president’s approval rating.

    “It’s not just him. It actually is impacting the entire Democratic Party,” Todd said. “We did some issue testing between who better handles which issues: Democrats or Republicans? Took out Obama. Republicans lead by 38 points on the issue of ensuring a strong national defense. 38! He’s on the precipice of doing Jimmy Carter-like damage to Democratic brand on foreign policy, if he’s not careful.”

    But in this case, Todd continued, Obama’s “not trying to rally the nation. The nation’s wanting him to come to his side. So he’s in an easy moment if he can step up on something he said he doesn’t like doing, which is the theater of the presidency. He needs to have a strong performance in the theater of the presidency tonight, because the country seems to be demanding it, they’re almost, they’re begging him.”

    “And the moment is these beheadings,” Todd emphasized. “One of the things that we found in this poll. Think about all the controversial stories we’ve covered in the last five years. This is the single most-followed story in the past five years.”


    New York Times Sees Drastic Swing In Alaska Senate Race

    The Alaska U.S. Senate race has seen a “significant shift” in favor of Republican nominee Dan Sullivan, according to new polling data from The New York Times.

    Democratic freshman incumbent Mark Begich had been leading Sullivan, the state’s former attorney general and a former Bush administration official.

    But a disastrous ad campaign by Begich recently upended the race, and now, based on updated data from an online panel The Times monitors in conjunction with CBS News and YouGov, Sullivan has seen an 18-point swing in his favor.

    “The only significant shift came in Alaska, where the result flipped from Mark Begich, the Democrat, who used to lead by 12 points, to the Republican Dan Sullivan, who now leads by six,” The Times reported Sunday. [snip]

    “The swing toward Mr. Sullivan can’t be dismissed,” The Times states.

    “Thanks to the panel data, it’s possible to see that much of the swing was indeed from panelists changing their answers: Six percent of repeated respondents shifted from “other” to Mr. Sullivan, along with 2 percent shifting from Mr. Begich to Mr. Sullivan.”

    The Times identified two likely explanations for the move from Begich to Sullivan. Sullivan’s Aug. 5 primary triumph and a decision by tea party favorite Joe Miller to stay out of the race was beneficial.

  7. Admin, in this article you connected the dots, put the pieces together, and said it all!! Amen, and pass the collection plate – the revival is at hand!!

    It is extremely heartening to see the awakening of some who allowed themselves to be totally blinded and brain washed – almost as if under magic spell, as often happens in fairy tales – by Barack’s promises of a progressive utopia.

    That they are finally seeing the light does not make them any less pathetic. They bear much blame for the damage done to this country by a president who should have never held that position to begin with. But, what about those who still support him, especially the so call journalists – the Tim Russerts still among us? They seem to be the last to acknowledge that their idol is not and was never worthy of their worship.

    Is their intent to enable The One’s efforts that are placing the country at risk? Are they deliberately facilitating Barack’s destructiveness? That seems to be the only explanation for their ongoing major efforts to defend and protect Him. Maybe they are just blind and stupid, still unable to see what they have wrought. Either way, they are culpable. They willing facilitated the efforts of this un-president..

  8. The Islamic wolf in sheep’s clothing as ISI# has shown itself to the world. A doctrine of aggression and violence claiming protection under the pretext of religion if plainly visible to the world.

    If we had a real POTUS they would have redefined these terrorists as IST, the Islamic State of Terrorists, instead of trying to protect Islam through his denial.

    Barack Obama is a traitor and a coward.

  9. Admin: excellent post.

    The other day, I noted that big media has stopped measuring “likeability”, therefore I wondered what his likeability numbers would look like today.

    I believe that uniter vs. divider number, i.e. 38% vs. 55% is a fair and accurate measure of his “likeability” as well.

    By the end of his term, given the more blatant abuses to follow, his likeability number we 33%.

    The problem is, it is eight (8) years too late.

    While we were declining on all fronts, other nations were catching up.

    The entire blame for this rests with big media.

    They are the architects of our demise.

    And they need to be held accountable.

    There will always be charlatans in the political arena.

    But it took big media to blind the public to this charlatan.

    And to cover up his scandals and his destruction of this nation.

    You cannot count on most people to figure this thing out.

    They rely on the media to tell them what they need to know.

    Does anyone who lives in the same world as most of us believe that big media did its job.

    Will anyone who lives in the same world as most of us trust their judgment ever again?

    That is the only way to properly hold them accountable.

  10. The competition for political power is dirty and will always be so.

    But when big media forsakes its role as an honest broker and advances the level of dishonesty by one player and levels false charges against the other, the political situation becomes toxic and the interests of the nation are degraded.

    Blame big media.

    Blame big media.

    Blame big media.

    And do something about it.

    The first step is to tune them out.

    They are not on the side of the American People.

    They are dividers of this nation.

    And they are an extension of the elite class.

    The toxic assumptions they make

    Like Charlie Rose moral equivalency between the Muslim Religion and Christianity.

    Blind this nation to reality.

    Russets dirty tactic toward Hillary–I would hang all of them for that.

    But there are so many other beaches of the public trust–the political scandals, the race card, etc.

    How much does it take for even a stupid person like you average voter to wise up to who and what we are dealing with?

  11. Mormaer

    September 13, 2014 at 8:11 am

    Cognitive dissonance. Cascading catastrophic national failure. Tipping points. And now the preference cascade in public opinion can no longer be hidden or dismissed. The rest of the country is now faced with what a very large part of the country knew in 2008. There was never anything “there”. Marketing, fairy tales, bullying, ignorance, laziness, scamming was all there was to this nothing-burger of a president. Fears of his awesome executive action pen are baloney. His retreat over immigration edicts are what he is going to do for the rest of the time he is in office namely nothing with a few scripted doses of bullshit. Kick the can down the road is the default plan and with all of his administration fighting a rear guard retreat as the wolves close in. Even his “popular” wife is facing open revolt with her personal untreated orthorexia nervosa ( disorder plan to starve children. We are seeing that the all powerful media can’t save this boob especially now they know he will get them decapitated. If Democrats want to save the party they have to get rid of him and very soon. I would suggest a health issue resignation (he really does look like crap) followed quickly by appointments of minders for Uncle Joe who don’t think talking to Republicans is beneath them.
    Very well put.

    Let me be crude for just a minute.

    The reason why Obama’s numbers are sinking is not because the effects of his policies, and non policies are coming to full fruition. But bear in mind, it isn’t just him. These policies/non-policies are congruent with the belief systems of the self anointed elites in this country, which is why, apart from the fact that they invented him, they have found it impossible to criticize him. Trust me, we are beyond the point of racism. Simply put, his policies are their policies. Period. So if we let them off the hook by allowing them to get away with blaming him, etc. we are missing the real target. Yes, he needs to be thoroughly repudiated, and banished. But so do they, because they too are a threat to the nation.

    Now for the crude part I promised. No, I hadn’t forgotten. The main reason his numbers are falling is because big media has fallen down on its essential role of sucking his dick. Therefore, they need to re dedicate themselves to that task, and “make him successful”, as that cocksucker for the ages Chris Matthews so eloquently put it.

  12. Interesting that the WH is now describing the campaign against ISIS as “counter-terrorism”. Hell, you have to have terrorism before you can counter it. And, as we know the “T” word was declared off-limits by our king.

  13. American Journalist beheaded on international TV – golfing – another beheading – his excuse of not being “better about the theatre”

    ( or, in other words, taking the time to fool the people that he actually gave a damn)

    and now the parents coming out saying that people from his administration were going to prosecute them if they tried to save their son because they did not get any help from the administration…

    where (who) is our president?

    …the straw that broke the camels back…fair minded people take notice…his extreme callousness exposed…

  14. Well, FWIW, the postcard I sent Congress this past week ended with “It is past time to stop Obama’s reign of terror. SEND THEM BACK.”
    It took an amount of courage to leave it that way.
    So far, so good. 🙂

  15. Oh please Nan put the grey goose down….we survived nearly 10 years of your shit in the house……..we’ll survive again…..

  16. Look into the pewter pot
    And see Barack as Barack is not
    And faith–
    Tis pleasant–
    Til tis past . . .
    The mischief is
    That will not last

  17. Nancy has one too many before the show
    She is pickled.

    Lets put a lien on her 26 room mansion.

    The wrong people are in charge.

  18. One has to wonder how this much shit keeps rising to the top of the political tree……….

    I mean there must be a factory churning these dumbasses on a grand scale.

  19. Deliberate political tricks because they know the dumb low info voters think what they tell them and they lap it up as the truth.

    As an MSNBC panel discussed congressional reticence with President Obama’s strategy pertaining to ISIS, the Rev. Al Sharpton jumped in with a challenge to Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) and Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) to call floor votes on congressional authorization for action against the terror group.

    But while Republicans control the House, Democrats run the Senate and hence Sen. McConnell has no power to call a floor vote.

    SHARPTON: “It’s for them to convene and to say Mitch Mcconnell and John Boehner can call the vote.”

  20. moononpluto
    September 13, 2014 at 4:20 pm
    Deliberate political tricks because they know the dumb low info voters think what they tell them and they lap it up as the truth.
    There is that old saying: it is hard to get a man to understand your argument when his income depends on not understanding it.

    Here, it is impossible to get a left wing extremist and America hat’n shill like Sharpton to understand the truth when his livelihood depends on him not understanding it.

    Low information voter is a euphemism for idiot, or co’dependent.

    At this point, that is the coalition of the asscendant that still supports Obama.

  21. Admin

    “Bill Clinton with his “fairy tale” comment”

    There we have it folks! The Big Dawg spoke the truth about Barry then, and he still believes it now, wish he would just put on his big dawg pants and sing it again.

    A standing pResident or not, take those knives out of your backs Hillary and Bill, and kick Barry while he is on his knees.

  22. The Obama administration lied about the situation in Iraq

    By: streiff (Diary) | September 13th, 2014 at 01:56 PM | 8

    As we are on the cusp of watching helplessly as Islamic extremists carve a caliphate out of Iraq and Syria we need to ask how did we get in this mess. Though we know we left Iraq precipitously because of Obama’s political calculations we’re only now finding out that the administration was aware the situation was unraveling and lied about it.

    In an Ask Me Anything forum of Reddit on September 10, New York Times Baghdad Bureau Chief Tim Arango gave an amazingly candid interview:

    And there was one bizarre example where – I felt was bizarre – it was a kind of a – not even a huge story I did. But it was a story about the rising levels of violence and the sourcing was, you know, obviously the attacks that are going on. But there was actually United Nations data showing that civilian casualties were up fairly substantially. And the pushback was such that Tony Blinken, who was, you know, Biden’s national security advisor – and I believe he’s now a White House staff on the Obama side – and he wrote a letter to the editor. And he wrote me emails and saying – and his argument came down to that civilian casualties should not be the metric to judge the level of violence in Iraq. They had some other obscure metric to do this.

    And so he was trying to claim that Iraq’s violence was at historic lows.

    And that always stuck with me because it was sort of – it was just this very stark example of them trying to obfuscate the truth and what was really going on. And they just wanted to move on from Iraq. And so the lengths that they would go to sort of obfuscate the truth was sort of breathtaking in some instances.

    What we are looking at is not a deus ex machina, it isn’t a case of crap just happening, this is a case of an American administration deliberately creating the conditions for an Islamic extremist state and then allowing it to develop for no greater reason than to be able to say they got out if Iraq.

    There are two salient facts to keep in mind as this alleged attack on ISIS gathers momentum… or not:
    ◾When we left Iraq in 2011, it was on the upswing. There were problems but those problems were exacerbated by the administrations monomaniacal insistence on leaving regardless of cost.
    ◾The administration has know the situation has been deteriorating for three years and rather than take action they not only elected to ignore it, they elected to affirmatively lie about it.

  23. How ironic that our foreign policy would be in meltdown under Mess-I-ahhh Obama. If you think back to 2008, you may recall that NYT claimed that Hillary had no expertise in the area since she has spent her time as first lady in tea parties with foreign dignitaries, whereas the mighty Obama had spent part of a summer in a Kenyan village as a youth. The wisdom he gleaned from that experience coupled with his groundbreaking work in community organizing with the able assistance of Uncle Tony—and what could possibly go wrong?

    The loons who supported him are now in full scale retreat, assuming they are smart enough to understand the meaning of the word “war”. Since he is an anti war candidate, he goes to great lengths to avoid that word, and sooner or later he will settle on the word police action, which coincides nicely with his Miranda obsession. But it is important for the commander in chief to use that word, because the euphemisms he favors fail to communicate the serious nature to the American People, and fail to prepare them for the costs and risks of this undertaking.

  24. The Chuck Todd video and all the polls reminds us of what Joe Scarborough said after ISIS chopped off Foley’s head.

    Now that a third head is cut off will Obama go golfing again to Scarborough’s applause?

  25. I wonder if Obama will be taking those signs he has placed within 50 miles of the border warning that our territory is no longer defensible due to the illegal entry by drug gangs and others, and send some of them to Iraq so people there who believe it is a peaceful country will be forewarned. That would coincide with his wife’s powerful entreaty to Muslim terrorists send back our girls, scowl and all. That is what the power of this nation has been reduced to. Obama is beyond pathetic. The one we have been waiting for . . .

  26. Last night I said I hated Charlie Rose.

    I wish to reiterate and extend my remarks.

    The first thing I saw in that video was Maher making a cogent argument that the Muslim religion is not a religion of peace, therefore we cannot simply defer to it as we would other religions. I will not describe his points beyond that save to say that knowing too well Maher’s track record as a left wing bigot, even a blind hog finds an acorn, or in this case a valid point once in a while.

    The second thing we saw was the moderator Charlie Rose refusing to accept Mahers points, putting forth the hogwash he is famous for, in this case, it is comparable to Christianity–the false moral equivalency which he and his ilk are fond of because it relieves them of the responsibility for making judgments which the security of the United States depends on.

    The attitude expressed by Rose is typical of what Sowell talked about in his book The Vision of the Anointed. Moreover it is prevalent in Obama, big media and the political class in general. In fact it is damned near monolithic. If this vision were practical, if it was grounded in reality, it would be less objectionable. But as Tom notes, and as we have seen, too often, this vision is based on a set of assumptions which are demonstrably false, and the elites who harbor that vision seal themselves off to reality, and deprive us of the ability to respond to many of the problems of our time. Moreover, the elites do not bear the consequences when these assumptions fail. They are insulated from the consequences by their wealth, their control of the public dialogue, and the first amendment. That in a nutshell is the problem.

    The pattern we see is an altogether familiar one, and it is repeated over and over and over, to the same end: failure.

    Stage I: THE CRISIS: the anointed decide sua sponte that a situation exists which must be eliminated. Hence they characterize that situation as a crisis. No evidence is presented that the situation is worse than others or that it is getting worse. Sometimes it is getting better. Often, it is a crisis for no better reason that the anointed tell us it is.

    Stage II: THE SOLUTION: the anointed come up with policies to “solve” the problem. They dismiss contrarian arguments as either ignorant or malicious. They ignore the side effects of those policies. They ignore the overriding fact that there are few solutions in life, mostly tradeoffs. But because the anointed are insulated by their wealth and position, they and their families do not bear the cost of these tradeoffs.

    Stage III: THE RESULT: often the cure is worse than the disease. Dependencies are created which were not there before. Ultimately, the program fails, and public money goes down the shitter, or into the pockets of members of the anointed class. The middle class is made poorer.

    Stage IV: THE EVASION: when the policies lead to the very failure the critics predicted, the anointed put the burden of proof on the critics to show that the failure was the sole result of the policies, and/or they argue that things would have been worse if the counterproductive policies had not been instituted. They brush off any attempt to place the burden of proof where it belongs, which is on the shoulders of the instigators of these policies, namely themselves.

    Sowell asks the question what is the purpose of this vision and the assumptions that sustain it? The answer is first and foremost, it is a way for the elite class to feel special, and that they are on a higher moral plane than the common herd. Second, it represents a secret handshake within their cabal of Harvard educated upwardly mobile people, who profess to be liberals, so long as they can do so with OPM–other people’s money.

    You ask me why I hate Charlie Rose. That’s why. And it is easy to see how he got there. His parents were tobacco farmers. He came out of the south. And by the time he hit Washington, the civil rights movement was in full swing. He is a lot like Bill Moyers in at respect. He felt a sense of shame for his region based on the segregation, and went far the other way to compensate. He embraced the entire liberal agenda, was accepted in the inner circle, and has since acquired vast wealth. At this point in life, his outdated and slippery assumptions are his convictions and his children. That is what Maher was running up against in that interview.

  27. I have no explanation for Scarborough other than osmosis which occurs from being on msnbc for too long. The only one who has managed to survive that ordeal with the brain half way intact is our friend Andrea Mitchell, who moves her chair up to the head of the class during press briefings. If MSNBC ever runs out of idiots, there is always Geraldo its in the vault Rivera. This being the season for beheadings, I think he needs to head over to the Middle East and interview ISIS.

  28. Yes, I know, it is unseemly to make fun of beheadings. Beheadings are barbaric. But these beheadings has one salutary effect. They resonated with the political class, because the reporters who lost their lives (and believe me these were not the ones I hoped would suffer such a fate) were similar to the elites themselves, in terms of ethnicity, wealth, education and in many cases profession. But as far as these individuals were concerned there is the doctrine of assumption of risk. That does not mean that anyone who goes to such places deserves to be beheaded. It is merely to suggest that if you venture to a place where beheading is in the vogue, do not be surprised if it happens to you. To the same point, there is that passage in the diary of the ill fated Shakleford Expedition where the captain complains about a seaman who goes to Antarctica and complains about the weather. For some time now, big media has assumed that they were above politics and could strattle the world, make nice to our enemies, and receive safe passage home. Not so these days.

  29. lorac

    September 14, 2014 at 3:09 am
    Well . . . since there is no end to it, I do not propose to worry about it. In 2008 I was a basket case, worrying about every sling and arrow. Today? I do not give a damned. She has people to defend her. She does not need me.

  30. Pity poor Messiah Obama. From Putin to ISIS–all these retards on the wrong side of history. Well, he told they were on the wrong side of history, and they did not leeesen. What’s a messiah to do? Oh please do not get discouraged oh great one, we need you, so sayeth big media.

  31. wbboei
    September 13, 2014 at 6:44 pm
    How ironic that our foreign policy would be in meltdown under Mess-I-ahhh Obama.

    Dogma really does get run over by karma. And then it bites him in the butt. If it wasn’t so horrific it would be funny.

  32. Here’s a trifecta at NY Post. All links begin slash slash nypost dot com. Hope spammy does not mind. Nothing new, but it’s great to see all this in that publication.

    Obama vs. Obama. By Post Editorial Board. September 10 2014. Snip Critics on both the left and the right will pick apart the portions of the speech they dislike. But the most daunting challenge to the president’s new way forward does not come from his critics. It comes from himself — specifically, the many contradictory things he has said about the fight against terrorism. Snip

    5 Lies That have shaped the Obama Presidency. By Jack Cashill. 9/13/14. If past presidents are remembered for their signature achievements, Obama will be remembered for his signature lie: snip

    Obama’s Ship is sinking. By Michael Goodwin. 9/14/14. snip. The disjointed speech wasn’t really about terrorism and launching a new war. It was about saving Obama’s presidency. He is sinking fast and could soon pass the point of no return. In fact, it may already be too late to save the SS Obama. Snip Earlier on, he could have trotted out his teleprompters and turned public opinion his way, or at least stopped the damage. But the magic of his rhetoric is long gone, and not just because the public has tuned him out. They’ve tuned him out because they’ve made up their minds about him. snip

  33. All this media that have shilled for Obama know the Obama era is at an end and are now trying to ingratiate themselves with whoever takes over.

    This is not about abandoning Obama, this is about saving their own necks. These guys would pull the plug on their own mother’s life support if it did them any good.

  34. moononpluto. September 14, 2014 at 8:10 am. True. There is little honor anywhere today, outside of the genuine citizenry. I’ll have to get used to the fact that what we’ve waited for so long to appear in print IS NOW COMMONPLACE. In the meantime….

    From a long article with admin picking up more points on Big Pink’s original immigration vote call.

    Rubio Taking Tougher Stance On Immigration As He Eyes 2016 Presidential Run. Published September 13, 2014. Fox News Latino
    MIAMI (AP) – Two years ago, immigration activist Gaby Pacheco got a call from Marco Rubio. The Florida senator wanted advice as he tried to develop a plan to help people like her: immigrants brought to the United States illegally as children.
    Now, Pacheco is aghast that Rubio is taking a harder line on illegal immigration. The potential 2016 Republican presidential candidate has abandoned the sweeping bill he helped write and is calling for an end to the Obama administration program that lets Pacheco stay in America. “It’s another Marco Rubio that I just don’t know,” she said.
    After the first-term senator saw his political standing fall among conservatives who balked at his immigration advocacy, Rubio is now focusing on border security — more in line with the GOP activists who wield great influence in how a White House nominee is picked. Last month, Rubio urged President Barack Obama not to take actions that would shield from deportation millions of people who entered the U.S. illegally. Congress, Rubio said, should first “make real progress on stemming the tide of illegal immigration.”
    Rubio’s aides say the senator always has stressed border security and that he insisted on tougher enforcement measures as a condition for his Senate vote last year. But immigrant advocates contend that in emphasizing only border security and dismissing his own bill, Rubio is effectively switching sides in the heated debate.
    The shift comes as potential 2016 rivals such as Sens. Ted Cruz of Texas and Rand Paul of Kentucky, who voted against the overhaul that Rubio helped write, take hard-line stands on immigration.
    Rubio has begun visiting South Carolina and Iowa, early-voting states in the 2016 nominating calendar where immigration is an important test for White House hopefuls.
    Rubio was the only potential GOP candidate who helped write the immigration bill, which would strengthen border security while also offering a way to citizenship for many of the 11.5 million people who are in the U.S. illegally.
    Now, in a sign of how much the political climate has changed, the party committee that’s working to elect Republicans to the Senate is using that bill, which more than a dozen Republicans back, in ads to attack Democrats as pro-“amnesty.”

    Nothing more from me, Marco. [He still sends approx 4 requests for $ per month. I return each one with a message in line with his current position.]

  35. moononpluto,

    I was part of the petrochemical industry for years. They are more powerful than the government. In fact, they are the government. USA, Inc. O can run the printing presses all he wants, energy is the commodity of value.

    Did you know that they have developed processes for producing gasoline from natural gas for less than it costs to make it from oil? It is a matter of finding the right catalyst. There have been 100’s if thousands tested and they have apparently developed some. Rumor has it that the Saudis are doing it already and there are plants that will be built in Louisiana, here. Yes, they will be fracking their brains out and there will be no stopping them. Most of the Federal Judiciary in Louisiana and the 5th Circuit have interests in the O&G industry and regularly rule on such cases, as common practice. It is politely call a “recusal problem” as, if they properly recused, there would not be enough judges to hear all the cases.

    This being said, O has staffed up the IRS instead of the EPA so there is virtually no protection from fracking contamination of drinking water supplies. This is why we need Hillary Clinton for our POTUS in 2016.

    Ofucktad cannot bomb ISIS oil? Give me as break.

  36. moononpluto
    September 14, 2014 at 8:49 am

    Like I said previously, Turkey should be reclassified as a terrorist state and booted out of NATO, but the other European countries and Obama are too chicken-shit to do it.

  37. Question: How would you describe the imperious reign of the big media beloved Messiah?

    1. An unmitigated disaster?

    2. A triumph of hope over experience?

    3. An empty suit?

    4. An outright hoax?

    Let me suggest the right answer. Option 4. Bill called it a fairy tale and we can argue until hell freezes over whether he meant just Obama’s anti war position or Obama himself. Generally speaking, however, fairy tales have a happy ending, whereas hoaxes have a bad habit of doing irreparable harm.

    The hoax consisted of getting the public to buy the absurd notion that a man with no experience and a bad habit of ducking tough decisions would make an effective president, and this nation would be safe in his hands.

    And that is yet another reason to blame big media. More than anyone they were the perpetrators of that hoax because it was good for them financially. But in so doing, in perpetrating this hoax, they betrayed the nation.

  38. And, to perpetrate that hoax they had to go deep in the swamp and abandon all pretense of journalism. In the process, they showed their true colors.

  39. And after getting Obama elected that lap dog Matthews, speaking for big media, stated: “Our job now is to make Obama successful.”

  40. Partisans might say that this was an experiment to find out whether a black man could run government. I reject that notion in its entirety, because there are black men I know who could do exactly that, but not this charlatan. More than anything, this was an experiment to see if big media could run government, and it is now beyond cavil that they cannot. As you know, this administration has more members of big media in its ranks that any other in history.

  41. And, as you may also recall, the head of MSNBC told the young Turk: we (big media) are not outsiders. Outsiders are cool, they wear leather jackets and they ride motor cycles. We however are insiders in this administration. Ergo, stop criticizing Obama.

  42. And that also explains why after years of denial this administration would finally respond when three JOURNALISTS were beheaded. When thousands of Christians suffered a similar fate, they hardly noticed. But an administration run by big media cannot countenance the beheading of journalist because now suddenly the flame is creeping closer the them. At that point, all their pious pronouncements about being above partisan politics and being willing to go anywhere and interview any enemy of the United States, fades into oblivion, and their own survival response is triggered.

  43. Looks to me like the GOP analysis of the delusional Rand Paul is pretty much my own:

    Inside establishment, pro-defense GOP circles in Washington…, there is growing angst about Paul as the party’s 2016 nominee.
    Paul is going to be our nominee. And it’s going to be a disaster,” said one Republican defense source and a former Senate aide. “He’s going to gut defense spending worse than Obama has, and he’s going to be less involved around the world — and nothing good will come of any of that. I’m telling you now: A disaster.”

    That has some GOP defense insiders shaking their heads and declaring Clinton their preferred candidate — at least on national security and foreign policy.

    “She gets it,” the Republican source said. “Hillary gets what’s happening to the military because of sequestration. And she gets that the United States can’t sit back and hope for the best.”

    This is why I’d be giddy if Rand Paul won the GOP nomination and faced HRC. It would be a landslide like we’ve never seen since George Washington.

  44. Reads as if we wrote it:

    The disjointed speech wasn’t really about terrorism and launching a new war. It was about saving Obama’s presidency.

    He is sinking fast and could soon pass the point of no return. In fact, it may already be too late to save the SS Obama.

    The whole second term has been a string of disasters, with the toxic brew of his Obamacare lies, middling economic growth and violent global breakdown casting doubt on the president’s stewardship. Six years into his tenure, nothing is going as promised.

    Earlier on, he could have trotted out his teleprompters and turned public opinion his way, or at least stopped the damage. But the magic of his rhetoric is long gone, and not just because the public has tuned him out.

    They’ve tuned him out because they’ve made up their minds about him. They no longer trust him and don’t think he’s a good leader.

    Most ominously, they feel less safe now than they did when he took office. Americans know the war on terror isn’t over, no matter what their president claims.

    Those findings turned up in a tsunami of recent polls that amount to a public vote of no confidence. They shook up the White House so much that the plan to grant amnesty to millions of illegal immigrants was put on hold to try to protect Democratic candidates from voter wrath in November.

    That was a necessary tactical retreat, but it doesn’t change the ­basic calculation. The president’s problem is that he has been wrong about virtually every major issue.

    His worldview, his politics, his prejudices, his habits — they’ve been a mismatch for the country and its needs. He has been a dud even in the one area where he seemed a lock to make things better, racial relations. Only 10 percent believe race relations have improved under him, while 35 percent said they are worse, according to a New York Times survey. The remainder said there wasn’t much change either way.

    That’s shocking — but not surprising. Barack Obama was not ready to be president, and still isn’t. It is a fantasy to believe he’ll master the art in his final two years.

    The lasting image will be his yukking it up on the golf course minutes after giving a perfunctory speech on the beheading of James Foley. It revealed him as hollow, both to America and the world, and there is no way to un-see the emptiness.

    That means, I fear, we are on the cusp of tragedy. It is reasonable to assume the worst-case scenarios about national security are growing increasingly likely to occur.

    Obama’s fecklessness is so unique that our adversaries and enemies surely realize they will never face a weaker president. They must assume the next commander in chief will take a more muscular approach to America’s interests and be more determined to forge alliances than the estranged man who occupies the Oval Office now.

    So Vladimir Putin, Iran, China, Islamic State, al Qaeda and any other number of despots and terrorists know they have two years to make their moves and advance their interests, and that resistance will be token, if there is any at all.

    Throw in the fact that Europe largely has scrapped its military might to pay for its welfare states, and the entire West is a diminished, confused opponent, ripe for the taking. Redrawn maps and expanded spheres of influence could last for generations.

    Of course, there is a possibility that America could rally around the president in a crisis, and there would be many voices demanding just that. But a national consensus requires a president who is able to tap into a reservoir of good will and have his leadership trusted.

    That’s not the president we have.


    Obama Met Privately With Top Journalists Before ISIS War Speech

    President Barack Obama met with over a dozen prominent columnists and magazine writers Wednesday afternoon before calling for an escalation of the war against the Islamic State, or ISIS, in a primetime address that same night.

    The group, which met in the Roosevelt Room of the White House in an off-the-record session, included New York Times columnists David Brooks, Tom Friedman and Frank Bruni and editorial writer Carol Giacomo; The Washington Post’s David Ignatius, Eugene Robinson and Ruth Marcus; The New Yorker’s Dexter Filkins and George Packer; The Atlantic’s Jeffrey Goldberg and Peter Beinart; The New Republic’s Julia Ioffe; Columbia Journalism School Dean Steve Coll; The Wall Street Journal’s Jerry Seib; and The Daily Beast’s Michael Tomasky, a source familiar with the meeting told The Huffington Post.

    National Security Advisor Susan Rice, Deputy National Security Advisor Ben Rhodes and White House Chief of Staff Denis McDonough also attended the meeting, according to the source.

  46. jeswezey

    September 14, 2014 at 1:33 pm
    Won’t happen.

    From 2014 to 2016 the rinos will begin taking down the two headed dentist.

    Watch Jennifer Rubin spring into action.

    It won’t take too much heavy lifting either, because he will do it to himself.

  47. He is sinking fast and could soon pass the point of no return. In fact, it may already be too late to save the SS Obama
    That is an overly cautious assessment.

    When you have an ocean liner with all the hoy palloy aboard holding regal affairs and telling eachother how special they are and singing the Harvard fight song and then that ship of fools strikes an iceberg, then another, and then another, such that suddenly there is a gaping hole in the keel, she is taking on water, the hatches don’t dog, the water seeps over the gunnels, and all those special people start looking for their gold plated lifeboats lest rather than sacrificing themselves to the God Neptune and an icy death, an objective observer would not scruple to say that “the point of no return” has been passed, with no could, maybe or may about it. Too late to save the ship? In a word, yes. Yes in any language.

  48. Think of it in terms of momentum. Momentum is the key to any competitive contest, from the court room to the sports field. The momentum for Obama is all negative. He had a long run of good luck, but he stayed too long at the fair.

  49. His worldview, his politics, his prejudices, his habits — they’ve been a mismatch for the country and its needs.


    We learn nothing from this bitter experience

    If we personalize it only to him



    The world view . .

    The scorched earth politics (aka “the game”)

    The prejudices . . .

    The self indulgent habits . . .

    And the condescension toward the American People

    Mirror, mimic and epitomize the attitude of the ruling class


    Otherwise, all we have to look forward to in the future

    Is some new brand of politician conjured up by the corporate state

    Beyond brand Bush and now brand Obama

    To deceive the public to believe that their hour of redemption is at hand

    While a new set of insiders trudges their way to Washington to cash in at our expense.

    Simply put we need a leader who is truer to the American People

    Than to his or her friends and contributors

  50. A late friend of mine who was a great golfer, a solid ball striker, and in all respects a master of the game, save one thing: he could never hit a fade. And that was his undoing. He hit the ball right to left only, and that is called a hook. Hogan flirted with the hook early in his career and he concluded that a hook is like having a rattle snake in your pocket. In the late part of the round, you are leading the field, and then comes the hook with rolls and rolls and rolls until your shot ends up 6 feet out of bounds. You lose the tournament as a result of that. Hogan did not become the champion he was until he learned to hit a fade. My friend however never mastered that art. He would pound the ball out there only to find that if it bent left fractionally, he called it a fade and he announced you see, you see, I can hit a fade.

    Take a look at which journalists Messiah Obama invited to the White House to shill for his ISIS rube Goldberg strategy. Apart from the usual suspects, i.e. Brooks, Friedman and their ilk, one name caught my eye, because I have long suspected him of being an Obama lap dog as well from the way he interpreted everything. I have said as much here. But seeing is believing. His name? Gerry Seib of WSJ–that beedy eyed little mother fucker who looks like he swallowed a bottle of alum.

  51. Guess who’s in Iowa today?

    Let’s just get this out of the way now: She’s running.

    Hillary Clinton, who will be spending Sunday at an Iowa greasefest, has not announced her second candidacy for president. She hasn’t, in fact, done much since she left Foggy Bottom; she hasn’t done much politics since the Summer of 2008. And so the obsessive observers of her career and of American presidential politics have not had an occasion to declare the obvious. After all, what has changed, other than the passage of time?

    But asking what has changed is not quite the right question to ask of a Clinton campaign. That’s because campaigning has been the Clintons’ default mode since at least the late 1980s. And their campaign by now is not the typical, tiny pre-campaign organization of a married couple and a couple of trusted advisers. It is a vast apparatus of relationships and obligations, promises and chits, that has been moving steadily forward. It began when she stood on a stage with her old rival Barack Obama in a place called Unity, New Hampshire, in June of 2008, and swore her allegiance to the Democratic nominee and, less noticeably, to her own ability to fight another day. This is a road that leads straight to this weekend’s stop, Senator Tom Harkin’s famous steak fry.

    This isn’t the first time a Clinton campaign began with this steady march from inaction to inevitability. In fact, I wrote the same words that top this column 10 years ago, about the same woman. Then I was a local politics reporter and got a bit of mileage out of a New York Observer piece in a genre I’ve always liked: stating the obvious, forcefully.

    It was outrageously premature, but even then I’d been covering the junior senator from New York long enough to have the clear sense that this wasn’t exactly about covering one woman’s decision, more about an apparatus that, switched on, was chugging away.

    I reached back out this month to the usual suspects I quoted in that piece — organizer Harold Ickes, a couple anonymice, and strategist Howard Wolfson to ask if I should write it again. “Seems reasonable,” replied Wolfson, who now works for Mike Bloomberg. (That was an improvement on his 2004 reply: “You can say, ‘Wolfson would not discuss ‘08.’”)

    Today’s Clinton campaign, like the one back then, is a tractor trailer moving down the highway, one whose driver — Hillary — can exert some control over its direction and speed, but whose stopping distance is measured in miles, and who can barely control the thing at all once it’s rolling downhill.

    So the question isn’t what she’s done to run; it’s whether she’s made any effort to hit the brakes, or whether anything has fallen unexpectedly across her path. Since leaving the State Department last February, Clinton has focused primarily on making money. She’s on the speaking circuit, which while occasionally embarrassing is obviously a much cleaner and less compromising way to cash in than the rainmaking roles — “advising,” “consulting,” “lobbying” — where non-celebrity politicians make their bread. She’s written an innocuous book, come out on the correct side of various major issues — from Syria to Ferguson — once the dust had settled and the politics were clear; and rested up a bit. Her husband has been uncharacteristically low-profile, her daughter has left a job that threatened to become an embarrassing instance of patronage.

    Clinton hasn’t done anything much, that is. Certainly nothing even the most obsessive readers of tea leaves would interpret as a decisive move.

    But then that is the weird thing about the Clinton campaign. The campaign is the default. The tractor trailer has now proceeded rather far down the highway. It’s moving at a constant speed, not doing anything much to attract attention. But all the exits have passed, and all that’s left are those runaway truck ramps, not the sort of place Clintons historically wind up.

  52. Yay a new name for him…..President Notepad……..

    Seriously I just want stand for an hour and just repeatedly slap him stupid….

  53. HRC on CSPAN now from Harken Steak Fry. Don’t know how long she’s been on or when she’ll be through.

  54. Poll: Obama’s Black Supporters Abandoning Him

    (PJ Media)

    September 14, 2014 – 7:48 am

    Barack Obama’s approval numbers appear to be in freefall across the board as his most vigorous supporters in the past are now abandoning him

    The Washington Examiner reports:

    President Obama, plagued by growing disapproval ratings, is now losing support from his liberal base as the country appears to have given up on his administration and Washington, according new polling data.

    Once their hero, now only three-quarters of African Americans and Democrats support the president.

    One reason, according to Zogby Analytics: Jimmy Carter-style malaise is settling in.

    “There is clearly a growing amount of angst and malaise and it appears to be nonpartisan,” said pollster John Zogby, who provides the weekly Secrets report card on the president.

    In a new poll, he said that if the 2012 election were held today, Obama would tie Republican Mitt Romney at 40 percent. Zogby noted that both men have lost support among allies.

    For Obama it’s obviously worse because he has the Oval Office and needs public support to push through a new anti-terrorism policy, a developing plan to grant amnesty to illegals and continued efforts to bolster the sour economy and employment.

    Zogby reported that Obama “is losing, at this point in time, significant chunks of his base. He won 61 percent of the vote of 18-29 year olds in 2012 but now has only 47 percent of their support. He is down nine points among Democrats (from 82 percent to 73 percent), 12 points among moderates (54 percent to 42 percent), 11 points among Hispanics (71 percent to 60 percent), and 13 points among African Americans (91 percent to 78 percent),” said Zogby on his company’s blog.

    This news doesn’t necessarily work in the GOP’s favor. Republican candidates are not going to pick up 25% of the black vote, or 50% of the youth vote. The GOP may see marginal improvements in gaining votes from Obama’s base across the board, but it’s probably not going to be a difference maker.

    Turnout among most of those groups is historically low in off-year elections anyway. What is worrying Republicans, though, is the same turnout machine that brought the president victory in 2012 will increase the historical share of the vote among youth, minorities, and fervid Obama supporters.The same social networking infrastructure is in place from 2012 and even a small increase in votes among the Democrats’ base supporters might save one or two vulnerable Democratic senators.

    But if Zogby is right and many in the president’s base have given up on him, all the social network goosing in the world won’t matter in the end.

  55. holdthemaccountable

    September 14, 2014 at 5:10 pm

    Cancel that thought. She has just praised Obama and is on standard Dem talking points
    Well, she has decided that she will be the successor to Obama, rather than her own person.

    That is what the Republicans will try to prove, and she is making their case for them.

  56. I do not recall many Republican candidates after 1932 going out of their way to praise Herbert Hoover, even though he continued to have his supporters within the party up until 1948.

  57. Or many Democrat candidates after 1980 going out of their way to praise Jimmy Carter.

    The people we lose in the process of all this Obama love-festing are the independents.

    Yes, I did read the Iowa story showing that the Obama supporters from 2008 still distrust Hillary.

    They need to be written off, rather than catered to.

    If she hopes to win the general election.

  58. Now more than ever, she needs to be thinking about the general election, and how her continuing support for a failed president will be rewarded or punished by the electorate at large.

  59. If you believe the Zogby assessment, i.e. that Obama’s performance ratings are now in free fall, not only with independents, but with key sub groups of the Democrat base itself, then I submit this is not the time to be perpetuating the myth, praising his non-existent virtues and essentially propping him up.

    There is that scene in the movie Rommel where the latter and his boss Von Rumstead are discussing the Bohemian corporal, i.e. Hitler, who happens to have some of the same character defects as big media beloved Obama. With a heavy heart, Rumstead says to Rommel: after you have intervene time and again to save him from himself, always to no avail, there comes a point when you are inclined to sit back and simply observe the next brush with death and destruction with a quiet sense of fatalism and irony.

    Or, if you prefer a different proof statement there is this: If Gladstone fell in the Thames and drowned that would be unfortunate. But if someone threw him a line and saved him, that would be a tragedy.—Benjamin Disraeli.

    People need to understand to reflect on the bad choice they made if they got suckered into voting for him, and must learn something of value from a mistake which has imposed such a heavy cost. As Shakespeare noted, nothing will come of nothing, and perpetuating the hoax does a disservice to all parties.

  60. In one sense however Hillary is playing it right.

    Once you understand that big media is part of the Obama Administration, you can appreciate why they have been like Nazis looking for any sign that Hillary is breaking away, and monitoring everything she says and does with a sense of purpose bordering on desperation. They know they lashed themselves to him with reckless abandon, never believing this day of judgment would come, and now that they see their own careers sinking along with his, panic sets in. Yes, as the Post notes there is such a thing as a point of no return, best illustrated by the case of Jane Fonda. Whatever your politics may be, you cannot betray the nation, and not pay a price for it.

  61. The point being, she will have greater latitude to define the differences between herself and Obama, if November turns out to be a wave election.

  62. Obama Ditches Presidency to Become Commentator-in-Chief




    by Ben Shapiro 14 Sep 2014, 1:09 PM PDT 324 post a comment

    On Sunday, The New York Times revealed that President Obama seems to be feeling criticism from those who believe his foreign policy has fallen to shambles. “He’s definitely feeling it,” one guest said to the Times. The paper reported, “It was clear to guests how aware Mr. Obama was of the critics who have charged him with demonstrating a lack of leadership. He brought up the criticism more than once with an edge of resentment in his voice.”

    And yet the same Times piece depicted a president entirely unwilling to accept that he has ever made any mistakes, or that he will ever do so. When asked what he would do if his plans for ISIS did not go far enough, for example, Obama “rejected the premise,” according to the Times: “I’m not going to anticipate failure at this point.”

    That was not the only premise Obama rejected. The Times stated, “While some critics, and even his former secretary of state, Hillary Rodham Clinton, have faulted him for not arming moderate Syrian rebels years ago, Mr. Obama does not accept the premise that doing so would have forestalled the rise of ISIS.” Obama himself stated, “I have thought that through and tried to apply 20-20 hindsight. I’m perfectly willing to admit they were right, but even if they were right, I still can’t see how that would have changed the situation.”

    Obama’s confidence in his own infallibility does not extent to his predecessors in the Oval Office: the Times article has him ripping George W. Bush (“This isn’t going to be fireworks over Baghdad”) and Ronald Reagan (“At one point, Mr. Obama noted acidly that President Ronald Reagan sent Marines to Lebanon only to have hundreds of them killed in a terrorist attack because of terrible planning, and then withdrew the remaining ones, leaving behind a civil war that lasted years. But Reagan, he noted, is hailed as a titan striding the earth”).

    And Obama may not have a strategy for the United States, but he certainly can critique Russia and France and ISIS like a Brookings Institute fellow. Obama reportedly suggested that ISIS killing American hostages wasn’t good strategy, and that they should have instead released the hostages “and pinned notes on their chests saying, ‘Stay out of here; this is none of your business.’” ISIS was surely grateful for the advice. Obama was reportedly irritated with French President Francois Hollande for lying about paying terrorists for hostages. And he mocked Russian President Vladimir Putin’s excuse for invading Ukraine, suggest that the same excuse (defending nationals of the homeland) could be used to justify an American invasion of Mexico or Canada.

    The job of president, however, requires an actual strategy. And most of all, Obama hates that people want more of him than merely playing MSNBC contributor. The Times reported Obama’s “prickliness as he mocked critics of his more reticent approach to the exercise of American power.” Obama reportedly whined:

    “Oh, it’s a shame when you have a wan, diffident, professorial president with no foreign policy other than ‘don’t do stupid things,’ ” guests recalled him saying, sarcastically imitating his adversaries. “I do not make apologies for being careful in these areas, even if it doesn’t make for good theater.”

    But that’s the point: all Obama cares about is theater. That’s why he makes primetime announcements about ISIS, all to pump a non-strategy (all while telling his visitors that he’s just being “deliberate”). That’s why he finds pleasure mentally masturbating about the flaws of Ronald Reagan and the aggression of Vladimir Putin, even as he refuses to confront Putin in any real way.

    The Times piece, in short, is a profile of a man who does not want to be commander-in-chief, but would much rather be commentator-in-chief. He’s an observer to his own presidency. His salon at the White House – during which, the Times reports, Obama “was calm and confident, well versed on the complexities of the ISIS challenge and in no evident rush to end the discussions,” and during which Obama never opened his briefing book – paints a picture of a man holding court, rather than seeking input for making actual decisions with actual impact.

    Obama, it turns out, isn’t an empty chair. He’s just a wannabe MSNBC talking head.

  63. Stop ragging on Hillary for being a politician. She is not going to score any points bad mouthing him, especially when he is in free fall. She needs to take her shots when it counts.

  64. wbboei

    September 14, 2014 at 5:26 pm


    September 14, 2014 at 5:10 pm

    Cancel that thought. She has just praised Obama and is on standard Dem talking points
    Well, she has decided that she will be the successor to Obama, rather than her own person.

    That is what the Republicans will try to prove, and she is making their case for them

    The more I listen to her and Bill, the more I believe this to be the case. While I’m 1000% sure she would govern the way bumbles does, I can’t figure out why she would want to appear to. Is it to get elected? Is it to fool the MSM into not sabotaging her more than they are now?

    I don’t like it, I tell you. I just don’t like it.

    Hillary 2016

  65. wbboei – link…? thx…

    September 14, 2014 at 7:23 pm
    Obama Ditches Presidency to Become Commentator-in-Chief

  66. Lu4PUMA
    September 14, 2014 at 7:39 pm
    Stop ragging on Hillary for being a politician. She is not going to score any points bad mouthing him, especially when he is in free fall. She needs to take her shots when it counts.

    My thoughts exactly, Lu.

  67. Admin, that NY Post article is scathing and accurate.

    In the past, I wondered why some big wig Dim players did not have a private session with O and give him some stern advice, since Val Jar and his other advisers either don’t know sh*t or he won’t listen to him. My guess is that they think just as their master does. From that NY Post article web posted,it’s pretty clear that our belief that he was a delusional narcissist was even more accurate than we knew. He apparently listens to no one who disagrees with him. His ego just can’t deal with it.

    Like a kid, when Barack is criticized, rather than considering the validity of the criticism, he lashes out, belittles, throws a tantrum. How scary is it that this pathetic little man is in cargo of this country?!

  68. Is it to fool the MSM into not sabotaging her more than they are now
    Yes. I think that is a big part of it. In other words, it is defensive. Also, it is timing related. With him sinking in the polls and the party looking to lose control of congress, anything she says which big media can twist, misquote or lie into a criticism of Obama big media will do, exactly as we saw with Russert. And then they will blame her for the mid term losses. Just remember, they are looking to get not only him, but themselves off the hook. If I were advising her however, I would have her do a disappearing act between now and the midterms. But she and Bill will do the opposite, believing that they are supporting people who will be loyal to her in the future. I would admonish her not to help people like McCaskill, who have betrayed her in the past, regardless of what they might say now.

  69. Lu4PUMA

    September 14, 2014 at 7:39 pm

    Stop ragging on Hillary for being a politician. She is not going to score any points bad mouthing him, especially when he is in free fall. She needs to take her shots when it counts.
    It is not the ragging on him that is the problem now. There will be time later for that. It is the shilling for him, which gives the Republicans another shot at her that she does not need to be doing. If he were succeeding, if the country were prospering, it our foreign policy was not in meltdown, a few polite meaningless words would be okay. But when everywhere you turn is a disaster, and when the next president will have a challenge worse than the horses of the Agean Stable, this is not smart politics. It is not what a smart politician would do. In any situation where the leader is failing prudence dictates putting some distance between yourself and him. Otherwise you too can go down with the ship. Again, the question for the general election must be kept clearly in mind: stay the course or time for change. If you embrace the status quo, you cannot argue persuasively that you are the candidate of change. Timing, as noted above, is the critical factor. He must go down all by his lonesome, and big media too. If she rags on him now, she will be blamed for the wave election in November. But after that, she must swim as far away from the Titanic as possible. That is good politics.

  70. Obama has undermined the world order and in so doing he has spread death and destruction across the world. This assessment comes from one of my favorite people Harvard Professor Niall Ferguson, one of the great thinkers of our time. Professor Ferguson has given the big media beloved and scandal plagued messiah not the gentlemen’s C that Harvard is famous for if you have the right family connections. Obama has Saudi and Soros connections, nevertheless he receives a gentlemen’s F. How extraordinary. Putin believes Obama is a joke. And you know what? He is right. Ferguson is more diplomatic. He says this:

    Whenever peace—conceived as the avoidance of war—has been the primary objective . . . the international system has been at the mercy of [its] most ruthless member.”


    Niall Ferguson: America’s Global Retreat

    Never mind the Fed’s taper, it’s the U.S. geopolitical taper that is stirring world anxiety. From Ukraine to Syria to the Pacific, a hands-off foreign policy invites more trouble.

    Since former Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke uttered the word “taper” in June 2013, emerging-market stocks and currencies have taken a beating. It is not clear why talk of (thus far) modest reductions in the Fed’s large-scale asset-purchase program should have had such big repercussions outside the United States. The best economic explanation is that capital has been flowing out of emerging markets in anticipation of future rises in U.S. interest rates, of which the taper is a harbinger. While plausible, that cannot be the whole story.

    For it is not only U.S. monetary policy that is being tapered. Even more significant is the “geopolitical taper.” By this I mean the fundamental shift we are witnessing in the national-security strategy of the U.S.—and like the Fed’s tapering, this one also means big repercussions for the world. To see the geopolitical taper at work, consider President Obama’s comment Wednesday on the horrific killings of protesters in the Ukrainian capital, Kiev. The president said: “There will be consequences if people step over the line.”

    No one took that warning seriously—Ukrainian government snipers kept on killing people in Independence Square regardless. The world remembers the red line that Mr. Obama once drew over the use of chemical weapons in Syria . . . and then ignored once the line had been crossed. The compromise deal reached on Friday in Ukraine calling for early elections and a coalition government may or may not spell the end of the crisis. In any case, the negotiations were conducted without concern for Mr. Obama.

    The origins of America’s geopolitical taper as a strategy can be traced to the confused foreign-policy decisions of the president’s first term. The easy part to understand was that Mr. Obama wanted out of Iraq and to leave behind the minimum of U.S. commitments. Less easy to understand was his policy in Afghanistan. After an internal administration struggle, the result in 2009 was a classic bureaucratic compromise: There was a “surge” of additional troops, accompanied by a commitment to begin withdrawing before the last of these troops had even arrived.

    Having passively watched when the Iranian people rose up against their theocratic rulers beginning in 2009, the president was caught off balance by the misnamed “Arab Spring.” The vague blandishments of his Cairo speech that year offered no hint of how he would respond when crowds thronged Tahrir Square in 2011 calling for the ouster of a longtime U.S. ally, the Egyptian dictator Hosni Mubarak.

    Mr. Obama backed the government led by Mohammed Morsi,after the Muslim Brotherhood won the 2012 elections. Then the president backed the military coup against Mr. Morsi last year. On Libya, Mr. Obama took a back seat in an international effort to oust Moammar Gadhafi in 2011, but was apparently not in the vehicle at all when the American mission at Benghazi came under fatal attack in 2012.

    Syria has been one of the great fiascos of post-World War II American foreign policy. When President Obama might have intervened effectively, he hesitated. When he did intervene, it was ineffectual. The Free Syrian Army of rebels fighting against the regime of Bashar Assad has not been given sufficient assistance to hold together, much less to defeat the forces loyal to Assad. The president’s non-threat to launch airstrikes—ifCongress agreed—handed the initiative to Russia. Last year’s Russian-brokered agreement to get Assad to hand over his chemical weapons is being honored only in the breach, as Secretary of State John Kerry admitted last week.

    The result of this U.S. inaction is a disaster. At a minimum, 130,000 Syrian civilians have been killed and nine million driven from their homes by forces loyal to the tyrant. At least 11,000 people have been tortured to death. Hundreds of thousands are besieged, their supplies of food and medicine cut off, as bombs and shells rain down.

    Worse, the Syrian civil war has escalated into a sectarian proxy war between Sunni and Shiite Muslims, with jihadist groups such as the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria and the Nusra Front fighting against Assad, while the Shiite Hezbollah and the Iranian Quds Force fight for him. Meanwhile, a flood of refugees from Syria and the free movement of militants is helping to destabilize neighboring states like Lebanon, Jordan and Iraq. The situation in Iraq is especially dire. Violence is escalating, especially in Anbar province. According to Iraq Body Count, a British-based nongovernmental organization, 9,475 Iraqi civilians were killed in 2013, compared with 10,130 in 2008.

    The scale of the strategic U.S. failure is best seen in the statistics for total fatalities in the region the Bush administration called the “Greater Middle East”—essentially the swath of mainly Muslim countries stretching from Morocco to Pakistan. In 2013, according to the International Institute of Strategic Studies, more than 75,000 people died as a result of armed conflict in this region or as a result of terrorism originating there, the highest number since the IISS Armed Conflict database began in 1998. Back then, the Greater Middle East accounted for 38% of conflict-related deaths in the world; last year it was 78%.

    Mr. Obama’s supporters like nothing better than to portray him as the peacemaker to George W. Bush’s warmonger. But it is now almost certain that more people have died violent deaths in the Greater Middle East during this presidency than during the last one.

    In a January interview with the New Yorker magazine, the president said something truly stunning. “I don’t really even need George Kennan right now,” he asserted, referring to the late American diplomat and historian whose insights informed the foreign policy of presidents from Franklin Roosevelt on. Yet what Mr. Obama went on to say about his self-assembled strategy for the Middle East makes it clear that a George Kennan is exactly what he needs: someone with the regional expertise and experience to craft a credible strategy for the U.S., as Kennan did when he proposed the “containment” of the Soviet Union in the late 1940s.

    So what exactly is the president’s strategy? “It would be profoundly in the interest of citizens throughout the region if Sunnis and Shiites weren’t intent on killing each other,” the president explained in the New Yorker. “And although it would not solve the entire problem, if we were able to get Iran to operate in a responsible fashion . . . you could see an equilibrium developing between Sunni, or predominantly Sunni, Gulf states and Iran.”

    Moreover, he continued, if only “the Palestinian issue” could be “unwound,” then another “new equilibrium” could be created, allowing Israel to “enter into even an informal alliance with at least normalized diplomatic relations” with the Sunni states. The president has evidently been reading up about international relations and has reached the chapter on the “balance of power.” The trouble with his analysis is that it does not explain why any of the interested parties should sign up for his balancing act.

    As Nixon-era Secretary of State Henry Kissinger argued more than half a century ago in his book “A World Restored,” balance is not a naturally occurring phenomenon. “The balance of power only limits the scope of aggression but does not prevent it,” Dr. Kissinger wrote. “The balance of power is the classic expression of the lesson of history that no order is safe without physical safeguards against aggression.”

    What that implied in the 19th century was that Britain was the “balancer”—the superpower that retained the option to intervene in Europe to preserve balance. The problem with the current U.S. geopolitical taper is that President Obama is not willing to play that role in the Middle East today. In his ignominious call to inaction on Syria in September, he explicitly said it: “America is not the world’s policeman.”

    But balance without an enforcer is almost inconceivable. Iran remains a revolutionary power; it has no serious intention of giving up its nuclear-arms program; the talks in Vienna are a sham. Both sides in the escalating regional “Clash of Sects”—Shiite and Sunni—have an incentive to increase their aggression because they see hegemony in a post-American Middle East as an attainable goal.

    The geopolitical taper is a multifaceted phenomenon. For domestic political as well as fiscal reasons, this administration is presiding over deep cuts in military spending. No doubt the Pentagon’s budget is in many respects bloated. But, as Philip Zelikow has recently argued, the cuts are taking place without any clear agreement on what the country’s future military needs are.

    Thus far, the U.S. “pivot” from the Middle East to the Asia Pacific region, announced in 2012, is the nearest this administration has come to a grand strategy. But such a shift of resources makes no sense if it leaves the former region ablaze and merely adds to tension in the latter. A serious strategy would surely make some attempt to establish linkage between the Far East and the Middle East. It is the Chinese, not the Americans, who are becoming increasingly dependent on Middle Eastern oil. Yet all the pivot achieved was to arouse suspicion in Beijing that some kind of “containment” of China is being contemplated.
    Whenever peace—conceived as the avoidance of war—has been the primary objective . . . the international system has been at the mercy of [its] most ruthless member.”

    Maybe, on reflection, it is not a Kennan that Mr. Obama needs, but a Kissinger. “The attainment of peace is not as easy as the desire for it,” Dr. Kissinger once observed. “Those ages which in retrospect seem most peaceful were least in search of peace. Those whose quest for it seems unending appear least able to achieve tranquillity.
    Those are words this president, at a time when there is much ruthlessness abroad in the world, would do well to ponder.

    Mr. Ferguson is a history professor at Harvard and a senior fellow at Stanford University’s Hoover Institution. His most recent book is “The Great Degeneration” (Penguin Press, 2013).

  71. Given the above, Hillary MUST find a way to separate herself from Obama. It is a sticky wicket in this sense. As Secretary of State she had the responsibility but she was not given the power. The key foreign policy decisions were made by three people: Jarrett, Axelrod, and Brennan. Those two ditzes Power and Rice were in the next ring out. Too often, Hillary’s advice, which was grounded in real politic and Kissinger type thinking was sacrificed on the alter of making Obama look good, or not look bad, to a domestic and international audience. And out of this witches brew came all the failures and tragedies enumerated by Niall above. Neither Jarrett nor Axelrod are remotely qualified to make foreign policy decisions. And that leaves Brennan. A former undersecretary of defense in the Reagan administration told me that he and others used to think Brennan was a good guy, but that opinion has since been revised in light of his more recent behavior. So what that leaves us with is a foreign policy conceived by idiots, which Hillary did not devise, and had little input on, but will be blamed for when she announces her candidacy. The question then becomes how do you get that monkey off your back without outing the real culprits. It is the same goddamn thing with big media. They are scared to death that they will be outed as well, which is why they are nervous as hell and watching every move she makes. But if she does not make some move away from Obama, she will bear the brunt of his failures, and the failures of his ignorant advisors and big media camp followers.

  72. In a recent interview with big media

    Obama had an out of body experience.

    Suddenly, he imagined that he was longer president of the United States.

    A condition most Americans with an IQ above room temperature would welcome

    Suddenly, poof, Obama is now a trusted advisor to ISIS.

    And he tells them how to continue doing what they are doing and avoid reprisals

    Good stuff, good stuff, good stuff Obama

    On second thought this may not have been an out of body experience as all

    For his cloud cuckooland strategy as president have paved the way for ISIS

    So perhaps–perhaps this was nothing more than a Freudian slip

    In foreign relations as in criminal law, intent follows the bullet.

  73. Obama is so, so, so all over the board, nobody can make heads or tails out of what he will say next. The closest thing to it is an unending stream of consciousness, with no beginning, no middle and no end, a realm of dragons and princesses under enchantment, with old man river humming in the background. There is a word for him: incoherent. Question: what the fuck is he doing giving advice to ISIS? If he is that chummy with them, how about making good on his campaign promise to go meet with the leader of Iran in the first year of his presidency. Since the Supreme Leader refuses to break bread with him, and is not willing to take an economic position on the March Madness basketball tournament, that has not happened. So why not go break bread with ISIS, and get them to renounce violence and embrace Sheik Saul Alinsky. It is called thinking outside the box.

  74. In the past, I wondered why some big wig Dim players did not have a private session with O and give him some stern advice, since Val Jar and his other advisers either don’t know sh*t or he won’t listen to him. My guess is that they think just as their master does.
    When the Democrat Party needed to be rid of LBJ a group of elder statesmen from that party paid him a personal visit and advised him to do what was right and announce that he would not run for a second term in 1968. I do not know who all they were, but probably Harriman, Rayburn et. al. Likewise, when the Republican Party needed to be rid of Nixon in 1974, a similar group of elder statesmen paid him a personal visit and convinced him to do the right thing. Again, I do not know who all they were, but I suspect that Henry Cabot Lodge, Howard Baker, Hugh Scott et al were among them.

    Where are those elder statesmen today who might prevail upon messiah Obama to do the right thing? I have it on good authority that they no longer exist. They have been washed away by the flood tide of money. A few months ago, Peggy Noonan asked that very question with key members of the Republican party, and she reported, as I just did, that they do not exist. Of course, billionaires like Soros who own the democrat party, or their republican counter parts might fill the void. But do not hold your breath. This is why I have been so critical of Brokwaw for not speaking out against the abdication of journalism by big media–he being the closest thing they have to an elder statesmen. But all you hear is crickets.

    The tragedy I see in all this is neither party supports the country any longer. It is all a game of money. And those on the gravy train will lie cheat and steal to keep the vigorish rolling in. I can think of no better example than the targeting of conservatives by RINOs in Mississippi. And the same can be seen in the reactions of black caucus members to the honest reactions and love of country expressed by certain stand up blue dogs. It is all a game of money now. The constitution, the rule of law, the general welfare all yield to it. And until the public revolts there will be no end to it.

  75. From “Mail Online” (UK or South Africa, dunno), some more about HRC and forgiveness, this time coupled with reconciliation:

    Hillary Clinton has revealed that she worked through her husband’s affair whilst he was President by making him go through an agonising ‘truth and reconciliation’ process.

    The former US Secretary of State said that she forced Bill Clinton into South Africa-style hearings where he had to be completely honest before she forgave him.

    She told Psychologies magazine: ‘I’m inspired by the example of Nelson Mandela who led a country to a new future through forgiveness and reconciliation.

    It doesn’t mean that you forget – it’s truth and reconciliation. You have to be honest. You have to face the truth about whatever your situation, personally or nationally, might be.

    ‘But he (Mandela) has often made the point that if you carried bitterness and anger with you, you would remain in prison.

    ‘You would, in fact, be imprisoning yourself and be unfair to yourself because you can’t get beyond what happened to you.’

    South Africa’s truth and reconciliation process was started in 1996 by Mandela to investigate human rights abuses during the Apartheid era.

    But unlike the post-WW2 Nuremberg trials there were no punishments because it was felt that only through complete honesty could the country move on, something not seen as possible with the threat of justice.

  76. Here’s an article claiming outright that anthropogenic ‘global warming’ is a hoax (as I’ve claimed many times), that it was due to solar activity and that the earth is now back onto a cooling trend, and thus HRC is in trouble for calling ‘climate change’ the most serious threat to national security:‘global-warming’-greater-threat-than-islamic-state#.VBatEUugFhE

    I think her recent statements will come back to haunt her going forward.

  77. TheRock. September 14, 2014 at 7:56 pm

    wbboei. September 14, 2014 at 5:26 pm
    holdthemaccountable. September 14, 2014 at 5:10 pm
    I do not have the remarkable skills of analysis seen here all the time. I did have one of my overnight epiphanies – falling asleep with nothing, then waking up with something, and it is this:
    Given the growing number of political foes Obama has instructed Holder to “degrade” [degradation works on more than terrorists], maybe HRC also is wary of a judicial putdown … maybe over Benghazi. In which case she might have a time in mind when it would no longer be feasible for Obama/Holder to take her down.

  78. Within this post,admin utilized the word “fantasy” 4 times, and focused heavily on WJC’s use of “fairy tale” 6 years ago. Now Lindsey Graham, of all people, is channeling them both.

  79. holdthemaccountable. September 14, 2014 at 5:10 pm
    I do not have the remarkable skills of analysis seen here all the time. I did have one of my overnight epiphanies – falling asleep with nothing, then waking up with something, and it is this:
    Given the growing number of political foes Obama has instructed Holder to “degrade” [degradation works on more than terrorists], maybe HRC also is wary of a judicial putdown … maybe over Benghazi. In which case she might have a time in mind when it would no longer be feasible for Obama/Holder to take her down.


    I think you may be underestimating your skill level, hold’em.

  80. wbb

    “And until the public revolts there will be no end to it.”


    Your response makes much sense, wbb. Unfortunately, I fear that if a revolution is to occur, we had better get on with it. People, especially low info citizens, have a tendency to adapt to the circumstances government has created because they feel powerless to alter them. Many of those in the younger generations, whose knowledge of the founding of this country, the constitution, the Bill of Rights, etc. is limited don’t recognize the importance of maintaining and supporting them. Some of the more recently educated among us may have fully bought into the anti-American rhetoric to which they have been repeatedly exposed in their text books and classroom lectures.

  81. jes, I’m glad to see that article about Hillary and Bill, and the process necessary for her to be able to forgive. Many women, especially those who were in the twenty -something age group at the time of the Monica situation felt that Hillary failed them and feminism by not ditching Bill. Of course, it’s always easy to place expectations on others, when we don’t have to live with the consequences of their decisions.

  82. Maybe I was influenced more by this which Sharyl Atkisson tweeted about this early this morning. I focus on Maxwell soon as I saw he was a heavy Obama supporter. Here is some of what was written about it.

    Former Obama Supporter
    Maxwell, 58, strongly supported Barack Obama and personally contributed to his presidential campaign. But post-Benghazi, he has soured on both Obama and Clinton, saying he had nothing to do with security and was sacrificed as a scapegoat while higher-up officials directly responsible escaped discipline. He spent a year on paid administrative leave with no official charge ever levied. Ultimately, the State Department cleared Maxwell of wrongdoing and reinstated him. He retired a short time later in November 2013.
    Maxwell worked in foreign service for 21 years as the well-respected deputy assistant secretary for Maghreb Affairs in the Near East Bureau and former chief of staff to the ambassador in Baghdad. Fluent in Portuguese, Maxwell is also an ex-Navy “mustanger,” which means he successfully made the leap from enlisted ranks to commissioned officer.

  83. The big media beloved messiah goes begging.

    And the Supreme Leader tells him fuck off.

    I am shocked. Shocked.

    Actually, The Supreme Leader is to be commended for his candor.

    He is in good company–Germany and other nations sent their own Miss Otis Regrets to the Liar In Chief, as well.

    Like it or not Barack Hussein Obama, or hussy if you prefer, or maybe just hissy is now the laughing stock of the world.

    Hollywood will give him an Academy Award for the best comedy actor.

    It will sit next to his Nobel Prize as a man of peace.

    And his lifetime achievement award from the NAACP for bringing prosperity to the inner city community.

    But Obama is not depressed, discouraged or reflective.

    He is happy and hundreds of fundraisers are in his schedule.

    But Seib, Brooks, Friedman are a different matter.

    They are as much the architects of his fiascos as he is. Traitors to their profession. Traitors to the country.

    There comes a point where political explanations just don’t cut it any more.


  84. If this one falls, the Senate will definitely change hands…..Obama killing off Shaheen in NH.

    With approval ratings for Congress falling somewhere below used-car salesmen and three-card monty dealers, it’s not often one will see an incumbent underperforming their individual approval rating. Yet that’s just what Jeanne Shaheen is doing in her Senate re-election bid in New Hampshire. According to a new CNN poll of likely voters, Scott Brown has pulled into a 48-all tie with Shaheen, even though she has a majority favorable rating from the same pool of voters. The difference seems to be “presidential drag”:

    Scott Brown, the former senator from Massachusetts who moved to New Hampshire to run in a more friendly environment, appears to be in a dead heat with Democratic Sen. Jeanne Shaheen, a new poll shows.

    A CNN/ORC International poll out Monday finds Shaheen and Brown tied among likely voters, with both obtaining the support of 48% among 735 voters surveyed. …

    What could be a drag on Shaheen, however, is New Hampshire residents’ opinion of the leader of her party. Thirty-eight percent of New Hampshire adults polled approve of the job President Barack Obama is doing, while 60% disapprove. Throughout the campaign, Brown has sought to tie Shaheen to Obama.

  85. From Will Hillary Run Blog , the headline:

    “The Kennedy family endorses Hillary for 2016”

    Article states that the family endorses Hillary. No mention of any division among the clan. If they are unanimously behind Hillary, it’s probably because they finally accepted that Warren could not be prevailed upon to run. If she decides to do so, we can expect a number of the Kennedys to throw Hillary under the bus, as the Chauffeur did in 2008.

    For now, they are saying Hillary has their support.

    Feel free to bow and curtsy, now. Maybe just send thank-you notes to the Ks,. Or, you might want to do as the peasant classes did back in the day to show gratitude to the benevolent elite – send them some turnips from your garden or take them a live chicken.

  86. The Kennedy’s….fuck em…I could not give a shit about their opinion…..they gave up their right to be leaders by foisting that crap in 2008 and all the previous fuck ups.

    don’t want to hear nada, zero, zilch from those pieces of rubbish.

  87. Erdogan on Muslim B’hood leaders: if there is no problem for them to come Turkey, we would make it easy for them (to come to Turkey.)

    Erdogan says military is looking into option of buffer zones in Iraq & Syria, Turkey will decide after studying the plans


    This guy has designs….he needs to be put in his place…..

  88. Erdogan saying ‘buffer zone’ might be created, also means —> fighting w/ISIS w/Turkish troops bc IS is at the border. Can’t be No other explanation!

  89. “The Kennedy family endorses Hillary for 2016″

    Eff the Kennedy’s! John, John Jr. and Bobby are dead.

    The rest of them are worthless creeps, including dead-and-forgotten, Uncle Teddy.

  90. Moon

    Good idea, put some wheels on it and Hillary can drag it to DC and launch everyone on her ‘Enemies List’.

  91. Shadow…that would make a great inauguration day……time it to the music, everytime there is crescendo, shoot one out of a cannon.

  92. So what exactly is the president’s strategy? “It would be profoundly in the interest of citizens throughout the region if Sunnis and Shiites weren’t intent on killing each other,” the president explained in the New Yorker.

    Wow. It’s really true. He really is the smartest person in the world.

    I think he could have been more specific though – maybe he could have added that it would help if they would hold hands and all sing the Arab version of Kumbayah.

    And he could have added a Plan B – like telling them that all this killing is just so 20th century.

    But otherwise, yeah, his insight is really deep and astute.

    857 more days….

  93. Free:
    Many of those in the younger generations, whose knowledge of the founding of this country, the constitution, the Bill of Rights, etc. is limited don’t recognize the importance of maintaining and supporting them.

    When I was in high school in the late 70s in the midwest, you couldn’t graduate from high school without taking US History and the Constitution. I hope whoever takes over in politics will get that back into schools, because this country cannot survive if people don’t grow up understanding what and who we are.

    Those interviews I’ve seen of college students are scary. Imagine someone not knowing who we fought the Revolutionary War against or who was our first president.

  94. Oh ye of little faith.

    Just because He (capital H) is on the balls of his ass right now

    With polling numbers LOWER than the despised and repudiated Boooosh

    Is no cause for despair

    No cause to turn our back on the man Presidential Historian Michael Bechloss assured us

    Was, is and will always be

    The smartest man ever to occupy the White House

    (Note: explain to me the meaning of the word smart—oh, that’s right, being on the right side of history)

    Even Messiahs have been known to have a bad hair day

    Speaking of which Obama and Holder have made a secret pact

    The minute their term expires they are going to grow Afros

    And market themselves to Hollywood as the new and improved Cheech and Chong.

    As for the polls what can I say

    Into every life a little rain must fall


  95. Pingback: Irak

Comments are closed.