The Vastness Of The Trump Revolution Is Immeasurable

Consider this article the latest in our long running series “Mistake In ’08” or proof that we have been so absolutely brilliant in our long running “Situation Comedy” series of analysis. Herein we discuss the 10 year plan that failed again, the 40 year plan that failed again, the cremation of the Democratic Party, the Clinton coalition renamed the Trump coalition, and assorted disasters inflicted by President-elect Donald J. Trump’s Revolution upon his enemies.

* * * * * *

Archimedes postulated that if he had a lever long enough and firm ground underneath he could move the world. In that spirit we note that if we had a measuring tape that could circumnavigate the political world it would fall short of measuring the immeasurable Trump triumph of 2016.

Those demonstrations and riots against the presidential election which resulted in President-elect Donald J. Trump? Excellent, most excellent. Those demonstrations are the death rattle of the Obamas choking in their own feces.

To try to measure the Obama catastrophe, the Mistake in ’08, we begin with the very premise of the Obama destruction of the Democratic Party in 2008. Recall that Obama and the Obamaroids rejected the FDR coalition and the updates to that coalition implemented by JFK and Bill Clinton. The new Obama coalition was “the coalition of the ascendant” which we declared to be nothing but a cult of personality.

There is no doubt now that we were right about “the coalition of the ascendant” being a “creative class” cult of personality for a tin plated wannabee “transformational” flim-flam man. The proof? The elections of 2008, 2009, 2010, 2012, 2014, and 2016. In the election years 2008 and 2012 the Obama cult successfully elected their tin plated object of worship. But that cult, that “coalition of the ascendant” was not transferable and in 2009, 2010!!!, 2014!!!, and 2016 without Obama explicitly on the ballot, the cult of the ascendant failed.

Remember what that “coalition of the ascendant” was? We explained it and the disasters for the Democratic Party that would result back in 2008’s Barack Obama’s Situation Comedy. That new coalition for the Democratic Party was blacks, young white liberals, enough Latinos, and the gentry class in the suburbs protected by wealth and class from their foolish choices.

We explained it all in “The Shield Maiden Of Chappaqua”:

For years we explained (see, “Mistake In ’08” Part I, Part II, Part III, Part IV, Part V, Part VI, Part VII, and Part VIII, and the “Barack Obama Situation Comedy” Part I, Part II, Part III, Part IV) that to build and grow a political party you first gather a core constituency then slowly grow the party by the addition of like-minded individuals and groups which share those interests of the core constituency.

The modern Democratic Party built by Franklin Delano Roosevelt had as a core constituency the white working class. This working class provided the party of FDR with guideposts on policy and guided the party in everything it did. The working class core of the party was white because it reflected the same characteristics as the general population.

Over the years groups were added to the FDR coalition. Senior citizens joined in on the coalition attracted by promises such as “Social Security”. In the 1960s John Fitzgerald Kennedy, a Boston Brahmin added black Americans into the Democratic Party fold with some deft politicking (and his father’s vast wealth) which smudged away the racist past of the party. JFK grew the Democratic Party by addition not subtraction.

In 2008, Barack Obama and assorted kooks decided to purposefully destroy the Democratic Party of FDR. Barack Obama and these kooks willfully embraced the idea of the new “coalition of the ascendant”. This “coalition of the ascendant” and their interests – which conflicted with the interests of the FDR coalition – made it necessary to kick out core Democratic Party constituencies such as senior citizens and the white working class.

The Barack Obama coalition slogan was a variation of the race riot 1960s slogan “burn, baby, burn”.

By the time of our last installment of “Mistake In ’08” we fearlessly declared:

What happened in 2008 is not a question of historical interpretation. The “mistake in ’08” is the defining question for 2016.

Now the question[s] has been answered. The Mistake In ’08 is the greatest political miscalculation in American history that led to the destruction of the world’s oldest political party and the ascension of the new Trump Republican Party. That Hillary2016 did not read and absorb the lessons we wrote about, particularly in that last Mistake In ’08 article is why Hillary2016 failed and why Hillary Clinton deserved to lose.

In our first “Mistake In ’08” article we wrote:

The selection of Barack Obama is an historical mistake which will continue to unravel the Dimocratic Party for generations. Only now are honest Democrats beginning to assess the damage done. “Mistake In ’08” is the first installment in a multi-part series which will detail how big a mistake was self-inflicted by Democrats in 2008.

The consequences of that “Mistake In ’08” are many, as we now begin to describe.

* * * * * *

The 10 year plan. In our first “Mistake In ’08” article we discussed “the 10 year plan”:

What was that 10-year plan?

The six letter word is “census”. “The Census is the count of the US population conducted every ten years mandated by the Constitution. Redistricting is the process of drawing political borders to reflect changes in population.” Post-census redistricting was the Democratic 10 year plan which Obama has already effectively destroyed. 10 years of planning gone in a puff of smoke.

The 10 year plan for 2010, as we predicted in 2009, was destroyed by Barack Obama. In 2010 an entire generation of Democrats was beheaded and Republicans won a massive victory. This meant the Republicans would determine the redistricted lines for congressional districts after the 2010 census. The Republicans redistricted and ensured a Republican House of Representatives for the foreseeable future.

The next census will be in 2020 and already we can safely predict more Republican victories and another failure for the Dimocrats 10 year plan.

By the way, did we mention that white millennials voted for Donald J. Trump?:

This comes as evidence mounts that US millennials are more likely to identify as conservative than either Generation Xers or Baby Boomers were at the same age. [snip]

Trump’s level of support amongst white college-educated voters and white female voters was also unexpected.

CNN’s data put the Republican candidate ahead by 10 points among white women (among black women he was 90 points behind). Trump also polled 15 points ahead of Clinton among white male college graduates.

Trump also gained vast margins among white voters without college degrees.

In other words, as we wrote in October of 2015, Donald J. Trump walked away with the winning “Clinton Coalition” which Hillary Clinton stupidly discarded in favor of the Obama kookdom:

As we predicted long before conventional wisdom caught up to us this past weekend – Yes, Donald Trump looks to be the Republican nominee for president in 2016. [snip]

The white working class should have been the bedrock of Hillary2016. The white working class support for Hillary Clinton in 2008 provided grand victories of 40 point margins when Hillary was most wounded. Now Hillary2016 has repeatedly abandoned those voters. [snip]

The bedrock of a winning coalition, the people Barack Obama dismissed in 2008 as “bitter” and clinging to their guns and Bibles, used to be the FDR coalition and the Clinton coalition. No longer. They are now part of the Trump Triumph. Hillary2016 has abandoned them so they have abandoned her. [snip]

In 2008 Hillary Clinton survived and thrived because she marched alongside the white working class. Now, the white working class is marching with Donald J. Trump – towards victory.

The real ascendant are ascendant for Trump. And therein lies the most catastrophic consequences for Barack Obama, the Clintons, Big Media, and the Dimocrats/Democrats.

Remember our argument that the FDR coalition which JFK and Bill Clinton built upon was the winning coalition? There is another aspect of the FDR victories which Democrats have dreamed of recreating. Think of it as a 40 year plan which led to the “Mistake In ’08” and other disasters. James Carville outlined the modest 40 year plan:

Now, no less a pundit than James Carville has stepped into the breach with his new book, 40 More Years: How the Democrats Will Rule the Next Generation, an extended boast that demographic trends, particularly the partisan preferences of young people, will ensure an era of Democratic dominance.

A Democratic majority is emerging,” Carville declares. “This majority will guarantee that the Democrats remain in power for the next forty years.

Carville admitted after the 2010 elections that the 40 years boast would not come to pass. The failures of 2009 and 2010 forced Carville to that admission. But that boast was not the real 40 year plan.

The real 40 year plan was that Democrats had to win in 2008 and thereby replicate the lasting victories of FDR. The Democrats thought if they gifted the nomination in 2008 to Barack Obama great things would happen. It was a “make Democrats great again” plan. The delusion was this: Barack Obama and the coalition of the ascendant would win in 2008 and soon there would be an economic revival such that Democrats would get all the credit. This would lead to 40 years of voters rewarding the Democratic Party with victory just as voters rewarded Democrats for 40 years after FDR – until it all came crashing down with the Republican takeover of the House of Representatives in 1994.

Of course, Barack Obama bungled the supposed economic recovery. In 2008 Obama inflicted his flim-flam stimulus and the deadly ObamaCare plans on the nation. Both such disasters that by the time they passed the nation revolted and rewarded Republicans.

The failed Obama economy of the first term did not sober up the Dimocrats. This time they were doubly sure of the 40 year plan. The thinking was “well, it didn’t work in 2008 but boy oh boy it will work in 2012 for sure by golly”. Again the notion was that in 2012 Barack Obama would win reelection and that would lead to a massive economic recovery and once again the Democrats would get the credit, as they got the credit for FDR, and that economic revival would lead to 40 years of voter rewards and endless power for Obama Dimocrats.

Now the 40 year plan works in favor of President-elect Donald J. Trump. If, as we suspect, President Donald J. Trump leads the nation to a great economic boom and lives up to “Make America Great Again” it will be President Donald J. Trump and the Republicans who will be rewarded for generations by the voters.

Already we see the road is clear for a massive generations-long Republican victory under the banner of President Donald J. Trump. How? The Dimocrats in 2016 knew they had to, had to, win the Senate. That’s because in 2018 there will be 25 Dimocrats up for reelection, many in Republican states, while only eight Republicans, mostly in red states, will be up for reelection.

So many endangered Dimocrats will make it easy for President Donald J. Trump to force his will on them. We expect Donald J. Trump Republicans will win at least 13 of those Senate seats in 2018 and build a super majority in the Senate that will last a very long time. In the House, the Republicans will redistrict after President Donald J. Trump is reelected and thereby keep their majorities for generations. The Supreme Court appointments by President Donald J. Trump will mean conservative majorities for generations as well.

The Obama controlled Dimocratic Party response to this catastrophic series of easily predictable events? A Muslim left wing loon to run the Obama Dimocrat Party.

The temper tantrum loons in the streets protesting the election of Donald J. Trump and those losers who can’t go to work or take exams because they are so very distraught are on to something. Deep down they realize that they are lost for generations and that Barack Obama is the tin plated calf god that failed. What they don’t realize is that the more they protest the more they help President-elect Donald J. Trump by alienating the American voter. The lessons of the failures of the Occupy Wall Street and Black Lives Matter loons are lessons lost on these latest loons and kooks.

President-elect Donald J. Trump has accomplished many great victories already. President Donald J. Trump’s victories are so many, so immeasurable, even he might get tired of winning.


Mistake In ’08, Part IX: Capitulation And The Lessons For Hillary Clinton 2016

The whores admit they’re infected with “the pox”. The last of the Obama hold-outs from 2008 capitulate to our argument. It’s over. Our analysis about 2008 prevails. Their analysis about 2008 has fallen. It’s all over. Hillary Clinton 2016 take note.

John B. Judis, one of the loons who sold the Democratic Party of FDR a turd covered in gold flakes, admits he was wrong:

The Emerging Republican Advantage
The idea of an enduring Democratic majority was a mirage. How the GOP gained an edge in American politics—and why it’s likely to last. [snip]

American parties routinely go through periods of ascendancy, decline, and deadlock. From 1896 to 1930, the Republican Party reigned supreme; from 1932 to 1968, the New Deal Democrats dominated; following a period of deadlock, the Reagan Republicans held sway during the 1980s. After the parties exchanged the White House, Democrats appeared to take command of American politics in 2008. In that election, Obama and the Democrats won not only the White House but also large majorities in the Senate and House, plus a decided edge in governor’s mansions and state legislatures.

At the time, some commentators, including me, hailed the onset of an enduring Democratic majority. And the arguments in defense of this view did seem to be backed by persuasive evidence. Obama and the Democrats appeared to have captured the youngest generation of voters, whereas Republicans were relying disproportionately on an aging coalition. The electorate’s growing ethnic diversity also seemed likely to help the Democrats going forward.

These advantages remain partially in place for Democrats today, but they are being severely undermined by two trends that have emerged in the past few elections—one surprising, the other less so.

Judis is excuse making when he writes that the “trends” he now sees “have emerged in the past few elections”. No. The trends were clear in 2007 in polls and in 2008 in exit polls as well. We saw what Judis refused to see and we wrote about it repeatedly:

For years we explained (see, “Mistake In ’08” Part I, Part II, Part III, Part IV, Part V, Part VI, Part VII, and Part VIII, and the “Barack Obama Situation Comedy” Part I, Part II, Part III, Part IV) that to build and grow a political party you first gather a core constituency then slowly grow the party by the addition of like-minded individuals and groups which share those interests of the core constituency.

The modern Democratic Party built by Franklin Delano Roosevelt had as a core constituency the white working class. This working class provided the party of FDR with guideposts on policy and guided the party in everything it did. The working class core of the party was white because it reflected the same characteristics as the general population.

Over the years groups were added to the FDR coalition. Senior citizens joined in on the coalition attracted by promises such as “Social Security”. In the 1960s John Fitzgerald Kennedy, a Boston Brahmin added black Americans into the Democratic Party fold with some deft politicking (and his father’s vast wealth) which smudged away the racist past of the party. JFK grew the Democratic Party by addition not subtraction.

In 2008, Barack Obama and assorted kooks decided to purposefully destroy the Democratic Party of FDR. Barack Obama and these kooks willfully embraced the idea of the new “coalition of the ascendant”. This “coalition of the ascendant” and their interests – which conflicted with the interests of the FDR coalition – made it necessary to kick out core Democratic Party constituencies such as senior citizens and the white working class.

The Barack Obama coalition slogan was a variation of the race riot 1960s slogan “burn, baby, burn”.

If Hillary Clinton 2016 comes into existence this July or later, the campaign strategy better consider our arguments and the ones that John Judis concedes he did not foresee. What happened in 2008 is not a question of historical interpretation. The “mistake in ’08” is the defining question for 2016.

In our last “Mistake in ’08” article we noted how Ruy Teixiera raised the white flag of surrender as he tried to rewrite his history and pretended he always understood the importance of the white working class vote. Now it is John Judis who pretends that he kinda sorta always believed in the importance of the white working class vote:

The less surprising trend is that Democrats have continued to hemorrhage support among white working-class voters—a group that generally works in blue-collar and lower-income service jobs and that is roughly identifiable in exit polls as those whites who have not graduated from a four-year college. These voters, and particularly those well above the poverty line, began to shift toward the GOP decades ago, but in recent years that shift has become progressively more pronounced. [snip]

To win elections, Democrats have still needed between 36 and 40 percent nationally of the white working-class vote—which, in practice, meant totals in the twenties or even the teens in the South, and near-majorities in many Northern and Western states. At one time, unions had provided a link between many of these voters and the Democratic Party.

Judis and others have finally caught on that yeah, the white working class vote matters:

Southern Democrats Should Just Forget About 2016
In Arkansas and West Virginia, Dems don’t see a comeback without at least an extra two years of distance from Obama. [snip]

Think President Obama hurt Democrats in 2014? It’s not over yet.

While many of the party’s strategists are banking on 2016 as a comeback year, in the South, the party’s congressional contenders can’t envision a rebound before at least 2018.

In fact, Democratic strategists think an extra two years of distance will be the minimum needed to separate their candidates from Obama’s record. That’s especially true in West Virginia and Arkansas, states where the local Democratic brand had stubbornly endured until last year’s Republican sweep.

“The farther he gets off the stage, the better,” said Arkansas Democratic strategist Robert McLarty. [snip]

Republicans will beat up any Democrat that runs by saying they’re a continuation of Obama’s anti-jobs, anti-coal policy,” said one West Virginia Democratic operative who has worked on multiple congressional races in the state. “In 2018, we’d be able to put it back into the D category, but next year will be another tough election.”

The party’s mood is similarly bleak in Arkansas.

“You don’t go from a complete shellacking one cycle to thinking you could take back congressional seats the next,” conceded Michael Cook, an Arkansas Democratic strategist.

This is likely the case even with Hillary Clinton sitting atop the ticket. While many Democrats argue that the former secretary of State and senator from New York could draw back to the party some of the Southern and blue-collar white voters who supported her husband’s presidential run, strategists on both sides acknowledge that the politics of the South have since changed.

“That’s the last hope Democrats in the state are clinging to,” said Conrad Lucas, chairman of the West Virginia Republican Party. “But the West Virginia of 2016 is not the West Virginia of 1992.”

And in Arkansas, more USA Today/Suffolk University poll respondents had negative views about Clinton than positive ones, and others are pessimistic that Clinton could compete in her onetime home state, much less win it.

“The landscape for Democrats in Arkansas does not look promising,” said Skip Rutherford, dean of the Clinton School of Public Service and a veteran of Arkansas politics. “Barring any major developments, it’s going to be a very steep climb.”

It is going to be an impossible climb if Hillary Clinton 2016 is seen in any way as tied to Obama or Obama policies. Half-assed arguments of “stay the course’ but with “changes” will be too cute and will throttle Hillary Clinton 2016. And it gets worse, as John Judis just jived:

The more surprising trend is that Republicans are gaining dramatically among a group that had tilted toward Democrats in 2006 and 2008: Call them middle-class Americans. These are voters who generally work in what economist Stephen Rose has called “the office economy.” In exit polling, they can roughly be identified as those who have college—but not postgraduate—degrees and those whose household incomes are between $50,000 and $100,000. (Obviously, the overlap here is imperfect, but there is a broad congruence between these polling categories.)

The defection of these voters—who, unlike the white working class, are a growing part of the electorate—is genuinely bad news for Democrats, and very good news indeed for Republicans. The question, of course, is whether it is going to continue. It’s tough to say for sure, but I think there is a case to be made that it will.

Yeah, the middle class. So Obama has finished off any chance of a white working class return to the party of FDR and now Obama will make sure that with his plans to target the middle class it will be “good-bye middle class” in 2016. Wanna get tied to this loser in 2016??? Obama started his overtures to the middle class this year with a call for new taxes on college education plans which were so mocked that Obama had to immediately withdraw the tax. What a way to charm the middle class!

Remember all the promises Teixiera and Judis along with other Obama supporters made in 2008 about “demographic destiny” and Obama as the new Messiah that would bestride the political world like a colossus for decades? Uh, that “future” faded fast:

From the 2008 to the 2012 presidential elections, Democrats maintained their core coalition—the Hispanic vote for Obama even went up 4 percentage points in 2012—but their support among both white working-class and middle-class voters began to shrink. After getting 40 percent of the white working-class vote in 2008, Obama got only 36 percent in 2012. And after winning college-but-not-postgrad voters and middle-income voters in 2008, he lost both groups to Mitt Romney, by 51 percent to 47 percent and 52 percent to 46 percent, respectively.

The drop in midterm House races was even more precipitous. Democrats slid from 44 percent of the white working-class vote nationally in 2006 to only 34 percent in 2014, and from a 49-percent-49-percent split among college-educated voters in 2006 to a 54-percent-44-percent loss among these voters in 2014. They also dropped from a 50-percent-48-percent advantage among middle-income voters in 2006 to a 54-percent-44-percent deficit in 2014. [snip]

Overall, Democrats have continued to get a lower percentage of the vote among white working-class voters than among middle-class voters. But during the Obama years, middle-class voters have moved away from the Democrats at a comparable—and, in a few instances, such as the Senate race in Colorado, a higher—rate than white working-class voters.

Obama, as his own henchmen boast is not really a party building type:

But Team Obama has long believed that the president’s support is built upon the bedrock of his personal qualities rather than mere party identification. [snip]

But a senior Democratic strategist familiar with the Obama operation noted that, among the millions of names and emails on the famous lists, there were many people whose primary loyalty was to Barack Obama rather than to the Democratic Party.

We always said it was a cult. The cult of not very well informed young people voted in 2008 and 2012 for Obama in the same way that blacks voted for skin color not character. Obama received meaningless victories personally but the party he headed withered. The party Obama heads will continue to wither. Any fruit on the Obama vine will wither and die. And that is what is happening now and will continue to happen in 2016 for anyone who is seen as in any way an Obama ally or tied to Obama policies:

And while the white working-class vote has steadily shrunk as a percentage of the electorate, middle-class voters—as defined by education and income—have grown. In the 1980 presidential election, the white working class made up about 65 percent of the electorate; by 1988, it was 54 percent; by the 2008 election, it was just 39 percent. Ruy Teixeira and John Halpin estimate that by 2020, it’ll be 30 percent of the electorate. On the other hand, voters with college degrees but not postgraduate degrees went from 26 percent of the electorate in 2004, to 29 percent in 2012, to 31 percent in the last election. And according to census estimates, turnout among middle-class voters is 10 percentage points or more higher than among working-class voters. So middle-class voters are a force to be reckoned with.

The core swing voters within the middle class are whites, who make up 70 to 75 percent of this group; but the voting patterns of minorities in this income bracket don’t necessarily mirror the overall minority vote.

That’s a too cute way of saying that the middle class votes and is growing in votes and that minorities in the middle class vote like whites in the middle class. Judis also notes that young millennial voters will not “mitigate any losses” and save the party of Obama because they too now resemble the “electorate at large—pessimistic, untrusting, lacking confidence in government.”

The middle class writes Judis, is returning to its roots:

TO MAKE AN educated guess about whether these trends will continue, it helps to look at how the white working class and middle class have behaved historically. [snip]

For their part, middle-class voters have long been mistrustful of government. [snip]

Before the Great Depression, middle-class voters had been a stalwart Republican constituency, and they moved back toward the Republican fold after World War II. They supported Reagan in 1980 in the wake of Carter-era stagflation and the tax revolt that began in California in 1978. Reacting to the 1991 recession, a plurality narrowly favored Bill Clinton in 1992 and 1996, but they began drifting to the Republicans in 2000 and favored Bush by 58 percent to 42 percent in 2004. In 2008, in the wake of the Iraq War and the Great Recession, they supported Obama; but in 2010—angry about Obama’s stimulus program and believing that the Affordable Care Act had cost too much without truly benefiting them—they once again began returning to the Republican camp.

Middle-class voters tend, on average, to be more socially liberal than white working-class voters, and they have punished Republicans for taking harshly conservative stands on social issues. [snip]

Yet while middle-class voters are generally socially liberal, they oppose candidates on this basis only when those candidates take extreme positions. And so, when Republican politicians have soft-pedaled their views on abortion or guns or immigration, middle-class voters have largely ignored these issues in deciding whom to back—reverting to their natural tendency to focus on topics like taxes, spending, and the size of government. [snip]

Middle-class voters also tend to be less populist than white working-class voters when it comes to blaming Wall Street and the wealthy for the economy’s ills. [snip]

Many of them work for businesses where their own success is bound up with the company’s bottom line. That makes them less susceptible than white working-class voters or professionals to Democratic taunts about the “1 percent.” [snip]

On the whole, the white working class and the middle class—animated by their distrust of government spending and taxes—have moved toward the Republicans in recent years, in the absence of some other issue (such as war or economic catastrophe or social extremism) temporarily taking precedence. And the two groups have done so largely in tandem.

These are chilling numbers for anyone who runs in 2016 perceived in any way to support Obama or Obama policies. Citing his wife and a fellow writer Judis provides anecdotal evidence of why the middle class is aghast at Obama and Obama policies “it appears that the election hinged on taxes and the size of government—the questions to which middle-class voters so often seem to return.”

Um, it gets worse. Judis interviews voters who voted for Obama but who recently voted for um, Republicans, in Maryland:

They are not driven by any racial animus. They are socially liberal, and would probably not vote for a Republican who was openly allied with the Religious Right, but they were willing to support an antiabortion Republican who didn’t make a fuss about the issue. They are not unbendingly opposed to government, like some libertarians or tea-party activists; but they are worried about overspending and taxes.

In a speech after the election, Democratic Sen. Chuck Schumer of New York advised Democrats to “embrace government” to “get the middle class going again.” But if Democrats take this advice, which has some appeal within policy circles, they could continue to drive middle-class voters like Jerry, Connie, and James away.

Read that Hillary Clinton 2016. Crackpot DailyKook propaganda of “demographic destiny” and generations of Republican losses have been crushed. As labor unions weaken, and the middle class drifts away along with the white working class, Hillary Clinton 2016 has lessons to learn:

The White House understands that Democrats have a problem with white working-class and middle-class voters and is now calling for a “middle-class tax cut” aimed squarely at them. Yet the Democratic nominee in 2016 will still have to shoulder the size-of-government and who-benefits-from-tax-dollars grievances created by Obama’s initial spending programs and by the Affordable Care Act. [snip]

After the 2008 election, I thought Obama could create an enduring Democratic majority by responding aggressively to the Great Recession in the same way that Franklin Roosevelt had responded in 1933 to the Great Depression. Obama, I believed, would finally bury the Reagan Republican majority of 1980 and inaugurate a new period of Democratic domination.

In retrospect, that analogy was clearly flawed.

Our take on Obama and FDR was not flawed. We were correct in our reading. We were correct in our prescriptions. Hillary Clinton 2016 take note of the Mistake in ’08 and don’t repeat them or get tied to them in 2016.


Ebola Obama Corpse – The Autopsy

Update: At the end of our article we note that the GOP has some chips to play in the identity politics game. Others have noticed:

GOP wins with Democratic demographic playbook by ewillies

The Daily Show’s Jon Stewart and Jessica Williams points out a rather interesting irony on the huge Republican win this week. On the more popular races, the Republican Party looked as diverse and fresh as the Democratic Party. Actually, it seemed quite a bit fresher. [snip]

“Jon, Republicans didn’t just take Democrats’ seat,” Jessica Williams said. “They stole their essence. The GOP went from a Brooks Brothers catalog to a United Colors of Benetton ad. [snip]

Jessica Williams then enumerated the list of ironies. “But sorry Democrats,” Williams said. “Utah just elected a young black congresswoman. Conservative Arkansas passed a minimum wage increase. What the f$ck kind of bizarro world is this Jon?” [snip]

This skit is funny. It is worth looking at the deeper message within and what it means for both parties.

Identity politics – the new GOP wildcard? Meanwhile, in the aftermath of Obama Dimocrats’ beheading, Obama golfs like an entitled Enron executive.


Bathe in gasoline and light a match. Do you really need an autopsy to determine cause of death? Stand in a pile of nuclear waste. Is it difficult to determine cause of death? Lick the juices oozing from an Ebola Obama. You don’t need a medical examiner to tell you what mistake you made.

Obama Dimocrats are about to spend some of their borrowed cash for an autopsy of 2014. We’ll save them that deficit expenditure. We performed the Democratic Party autopsy back in 2008. The autopsy was in our series “Mistake In ’08” (which will likely have a new installment after Veterans’ Day). It’s all there in Part I, Part II, Part III, Part IV, Part V, Part VI, Part VII, and Part VIII.

There’s also our series on the “Barack Obama Situation Comedy” coalition of death which explains it all. Read it Debbie and save yourself some money: Part I, Part II, Part III, Part IV.

Vito Corleone did not need an autopsy report to figure out what killed Sonny.

Can’t you figure out what killed Luca?

Do you really need an autopsy for cause of death?

Ebola Obama. No autopsy required but a fake autopsy to shift the blame will do nicely:

DNC chief: We have a problem

The Democratic National Committee is planning a “top-to-bottom assessment” of its campaign strategy after suffering worse-than-expected defeats in last week’s midterm elections.

Rep. Debbie Wasserman-Schultz (D-Fla.), who leads the group, announced Saturday that a committee will examine the party’s performance in the 2014 and 2010 elections.

“We are going to look at where we fell short. We’re going to identify our mistakes,” she said in a video that was sent to party supporters.

Our party has a problem,” she added.

The committee will specifically look at messaging, get-out-the-vote efforts and digital operations. It will form in the next few weeks and present a report at the organization’s winter meeting in early 2015. [snip]

“I’m not going to gloss over the facts: On Tuesday, the Republicans had a good night. We didn’t. We worked hard for months, we even won a few tough races, but it wasn’t enough,” she said.

In addition to losing control of the Senate this week, the Democratic party has lost 69 seats since Obama took office.

The problem is Barack Obama. The mistake is the Mistake in ’08. ‘Nuff said.

It will all be Obama excuses and phony explanations to avoid the obvious. The Obama Dimocrat “autopsy” will be a fake. Once again the blame will be shifted to “messaging”. The problem will be identified as “digital”. It’s all a fake. “You don’t need a weatherman to know which way the wind blows.” You don’t need an autopsy to know that Ebola Obama kills.

After 2012 the Republican Party held an inquest and autopsy too. The geniuses of the GOP came up with two conclusions. One of those conclusions was smart. One of those conclusions was stupid.

The smart conclusion, or rather the obvious conclusion was that the Republican Party had great need to catch up with the technology of elections. A modern campaign must utilize all modern technology and not go to sleep after an election. They spent money to come up with that brilliant conclusion. Mitt Romney’s ORCA system fell completely apart on election day so yeah, um, the GOP technology did fall short beyond a doubt so they spent money to uncover the obvious.

The stupid conclusion was on comprehensive immigration reform. This is another way for the “leaders” of the party to say “we have to pass amnesty on illegal immigration because that is what our Chamber of Commerce moneybags want to keep wages low”.

Fortunately for the GOP the rank and file as well as some leaders, like Ted Cruz, realized that amnesty was not a solution but a deadly draught. Amnesty, comprehensive immigration reform, was not the solution. In 2014 Republicans did much better with Latinos in part because they began to talk honestly about illegal immigration and their legitimate reasons to oppose amnesty.

In Texas Greg Abbott won 40% of the Latino vote. Part of his unique ability to garner Latino support came from the fact his mother-in-law is Latina. But the reason that fact was a benefit was because Abbott made sure the electorate knew he was not a Latino hater even if he opposed illegal immigration amnesty and supported border security.

Identity politics. Yup. Bill Clinton has warned against identity politics:

“I believe that in ways large and small, peaceful and sometimes violent, that the biggest threat to the future of our children and grandchildren is the poison of identity politics that preaches that our differences are far more important than our common humanity.”

We’ve seen the bitter fruit of identity politics in the Barack Obama harvest. But if Obama Dimocrats are gonna play that card, the GOP had to learn to play the game too. And they did in 2014. With Tim Scott, Mia Love, Susanna Martinez, Nikki Haley, Bobby Jindal, Allan West, Brian Sandoval, Marco Rubio, Ted Cruz, George P. Bush, Columbia Bush, Joni Ernst, and Ben Carson, identity politics can cut both ways especially if Republicans continue to expand their minority gains as well as continue to gain with their already large support base among the white working class. The GOP has a lot of identity politics chips to play with in this scurrilous game.

What will be the biggest lie to come from the Obama Dimocrat autopsy? Willie Brown who thought Obama Dimocrats would win in November 2014 writes the plan for 2016:

Veteran California politician Willie Brown has warned this weekend that presumptive Democratic Party presidential nominee Hillary Clinton “is going to lose” in 2016 “[u]nless there are some serious readjustments to the Democratic operation.” [snip]

“Everybody keeps asking me, “Why did this happen?’” Brown wrote. “Beats me. When it came to the elections, I was a dreamer who thought the Democrats were going to retain the Senate. Instead, we got walloped.”

Brown suggested that Democrats erred by running away from President Barack Obama, “which simply played into the Republicans’ strategy of portraying him as a failure.” The party also failed to turn out young voters, he said.

Hillary Rodham Clinton must be wondering whether she really wants to run for president. Unless there are some serious readjustments to the Democratic operation, she is going to lose,” Brown concluded.

Last year, Brown had predicted Clinton would win easily in 2016: “..[A]ll she has to do is continue to breath[e] and in 2016 she’ll be elected to the presidency of the United States,” he said.

In fairness, Brown appears to be saying that Hillary Clinton 2016 will fail unless the apparatus of vote turnout improves. But the suggestion that anyone should get closer to Ebola Obama is malarkey. On every issue he cites as reasons why Obama is popular, the polls state that the public as a whole is opposed to Obama’s policies – which were on the ballot in 2014 – every single one.

Anyone who suggests Hillary Clinton should stick by Ebola Obama is no friend to Hillary Clinton 2016. Hillary should not be a human shield for Barack Obama as so many Barack Obama supporters advocate.

Harry Reid who helped gift Barack Obama the nomination in the great “Mistake in ’08” is angry with Obama and blames Obama for the fact that he will now be a has-been in the Senate. Even bumblin’ Joe Biden has reason to be pissed off at his once savior and that’s not due to too much guzzlin’ liquor. If you think Reid and Biden are grinding their teeth, picture the Obama Dimocrats decimated in state and local elections.

If Hillary Clinton is anywhere near Barack Obama in 2016 we won’t need an autopsy to determine cause of death. Cause of death will be Ebola Obama.

The contagion of Ebola Obama will continue to kill in 2016 as in 2014. The solution is total cremation of Ebola Obama and the Ebola Obama Dimocrats. That’s the path to a healthy future.


Don’t Stop Thinking About Tomorrow

Update: Bad show ol’ sport! Republican(?) Senator Jeff Flake lives up to his name. Flake thinks Bob Gates’ new book giving Obama the ol’ Backpfeifengesicht is “Extraordinarily bad timing, and form”. Really??? It’s no surprise that the White House disputes Gates memoir claims but even those dolts have not yet called it “bad form”. Soon though, Gates will be called a racist by someone allied to the Obama occupied White House. The Gates of Hell are open.


For us, today’s Big Article is about tomorrow and written by pollster Andrew Kohut. Our regular readers won’t be surprised by Kohut because they read our version of the article some time back. This is wisdom we wrote in April of last year:

“We are sure Hillary Clinton will make a decision on seeking the presidency in 2016 after the 2014 elections which will be a referendum on ObamaCares’ corruptions. After November 2014 it will be time to decide on 2016 for the tribes on all sides.

Over the years even some Hillary Clinton supporters from 2008 are too angry with the corruptions of Barack Obama to support Hillary Clinton now. When they look at Hillary, they see Barack. And it is a maddening sight. [snip]

In 2016 the greatest threat to Hillary Clinton is once again Barack Obama – and his legacy of weakness and profligacy. Tie Hillary Clinton to Barack Obama and she loses. [snip]

What will matter in 2016 is the “center”. If Hillary stays in the center she wins. Hillary spent four years as far from Barack Obama as air travel made possible so she still can make it a convincing argument. If the Republican candidate seizes the center, he or she wins. In either case what matters is that the country win.”

Today, in Politico, Kohut writes:

Will Obama Drag Down Hillary Clinton in 2016?

There’s no question that Hillary Clinton would make a formidable presidential candidate. She routinely polls as America’s most admired figure, and voters gave her high marks during her tenure as the country’s top diplomat. But Hillary Clinton has a potential problem. His name is Barack Obama.

While she had to contend with “Clinton fatigue” in 2008, “Obama fatigue” is her potential stumbling block this time. Should dissatisfaction with the state of the nation and disapproval of Obama persist as 2016 approaches, the former secretary of state may well struggle to position herself as an agent of change.

Hillary Clinton, candidate of change, is exactly what we prescribed later in the year:

“Domestically, Barack Obama is a big stink too. The Obama stink will get worse as failure takes hold and will not turn to perfume by 2016.

Hillary Clinton should position herself as the candidate of “CHANGE!”. Repeat the positions taken in 2008 and note how wise that course would have been. Declare it is “time for a change” to effective leadership and unite the white working class with her campaign for change. Let Joe Biden be the “stay the course” candidate aboard the Titanic. Hillary Clinton 2016 could easily be the lot less scary candidate of “time for a change” which is the default on every Republican 2016 bumper sticker. But cutesie-wutsie won’t get the gold. Yet that muddled message mess is the course Hillary Clinton 2016 is on.”

Here is more Kohut on change, Hillary Clinton 2016 and why some Hillary Clinton 2016 strategists think we are wrong when we suggest Hillary rebuild her 2008 coalition and dump the Obama coalition:

“If Obama’s polling troubles persist as 2016 approaches, Clinton might have a problem with voters who want change. Other presidential candidates have had hard going when voters were dissatisfied with the times and/or their bosses. [snip]

More importantly for 2016, Clinton is especially popular among those who will pick the next nominee. Among Democrats and Independents who lean Democratic, fully 82 percent of the base holds a favorable view of her, and as many as 38 percent say they have a very favorable view of the former first lady. She is best regarded by women, liberals, older people and more affluent Democrats—the same constituencies that nearly won her the nomination in 2008.

Here’s the potential problem: Demographics notwithstanding, views of Clinton among Democrats correlate strongly with views of Obama. No fewer than 71 percent of Democrats who hold a highly favorable view of Obama feel the same way about Clinton. And the converse is true: Democrats who are unenthusiastic about the president are also unenthusiastic about Clinton—just 29 percent rate her very favorably.

And Clinton faces another potential challenge: the desire for change that divides the Democratic base between populists and centrists, given that she was married to one centrist Democratic president and worked for another. The appeal of populism among Democrats in 2016 cannot be discounted. Sixty percent of Democrats continue to say their finances are not in good shape, even as many of them see the stock market and real estate values having recovered. Little wonder that a September Pew survey found 62 percent of Democrats saying that regulation of financial organizations has not gone far enough, compared with just 32 percent of Republicans who hold that view.”

That math is what paralyzes Hillary Clinton 2016. The fear is that telling the truth and slamming Barack Obama will turn off Barack Obama supporters she will need for the nomination fight. This fear leads to the quicksand bog that drowns candidates. How else to explain the strong Clinton presence at the Bill DeBlasio inauguration?

At first the idea of the Clintons attending the DeBlasio inauguration made sense. After all why not throw the DailyKooks a bone and appear with DeBlasio? At first the idea of being seen with DeBlasio as a Kook sedative and lead them to at least accept the idea of Hillary Clinton 2016 and not fight it seems sensible. But they are not DailyKooks for nothing. At some point the DailyKooks and allies will agitate and then attack to “force Hillary to the left”. The DailyKooks and other assorted nuts have already begun pounding the drums in the deep which will eventually lead to all out attacks against Hillary.

Once the idea of the Clintons attending the DeBlasio inauguration is fully considered however it was not a smart thing to do. Already Governor Andrew Cuomo of New York is leading the charge to lower taxes in New York State while now Mayor DeBlasio is leading a nationwide coalition to raise taxes in New York City. Because the city of New York requires the state of New York to approve higher taxes the battle of Cuomo versus DeBlasio will soon be joined. What will the Clintons do then? Anyone recall the mess Hillary Clinton talked herself into during the 2008 debates when she tried to politically protect Governor Andrew Cuomo on driver licenses for illegal aliens?

Late last year we began to write a lot tougher critiques of Hillary Clinton 2016. We wrote this on November 11:

“Because of the ongoing internal debate at Hillary Clinton 2016 we have been advised to hit harder, tougher. We’ve been told the time is now to lambaste Hillary Clinton 2016 with critiques of what must be done and not to be too polite or too kind. There are many in the Hillary Clinton 2016 discussions who agree with us and they need ammunition and our voices as the informal strategy deliberations continue.”

The next day there was a strategy session at the Parker Meridian in New York for Hillary Clinton 2016. Yesterday, Politico reported on the Hillary Clinton 2016 “shadow campaign”. In the “shadow campaign” there are many warnings that neither Hillary Clinton nor America are the concerns of those coming in from the Obama campaign to “help”:

“Chief among those in the “no” camp is Clinton’s chief of staff at the State Department, Cheryl Mills, according to several people familiar with her thinking. Another close Clinton confidante, Maggie Williams, who took the helm of the 2008 campaign after a staff shake-up, is also said to have reservations for the same reason — the DNA-altering experience of a modern presidential campaign in which nothing is guaranteed.

The people cheerleading Clinton on the most are often less close to her. Their focus is primarily on winning ­ — they know Republicans probably won’t put up a candidate as weak as Romney next time and see Clinton as far and away their best shot. [snip]

Beyond potential health concerns, an unforeseen event could make running more complicated. Democrats could struggle mightily in the midterms, and Obama could have another difficult year. Another foreign policy headache could emerge, posing a fresh challenge for the former secretary.”

What is clear to us is that there are many given jobs by Barack Obama who want to keep those jobs and the potential rivers of money flowing to those in power. These people are not interested in Hillary Clinton nor what is good for America. They are “pimping” Hillary Clinton for self-interests (yes Donna, we are also talking about you). So what should Hillary Clinton do?

What Hillary Clinton should do is decide on who her friends are and who has the best interests of America in heart and mind. Those Obama apparatchiks now jumping on the Hillary Clinton 2016 team should be squeezed dry of whatever benefits can be extracted from them. But at some point (the clock started ticking the moment ObamaCare registration for January 1 coverage ended) Hillary Clinton has to choose between the Obama coalition and the Hillary Clinton coalition.

Hillary Clinton can win by bringing back senior voters and the white working class voters that have dumped the Democratic Party they once gave allegiance to. This will enrage the DailyKooks and Obama apparatchiks. But it is the only way for Hillary Clinton to win.

Barack Obama apparatchiks that have infiltrated Hillary Clinton 2016 are terrified that Hillary Clinton will succumb to logic and reality and become the candidate of change from Barack Obama. These Obama loving parasites in Hillary Clinton 2016 know if Hillary tells the truth about Barack Obama their lame duck will be a dead duck.

Today more shots fired at the lame duck wounding Barack Obama further. The shots came from Bill Bob Gates:

“Robert Gates: Obama White House ‘offended’ Hillary Clinton

Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton saw the Obama administration as deeply “controlling” on national security issues, Defense Secretary Bob Gates wrote Tuesday in an essay published adapted from his forthcoming book.

“The controlling nature of the Obama White House, and its determination to take credit for every good thing that happened while giving none to the career folks in the trenches who had actually done the work, offended Secretary Clinton as much as it did me,” Gates writes in an piece published by the Wall Street Journal.

His new book, “Duty: Memoirs of a Secretary of War,” is set for publication on January 14. According to an early writeup of the book by Bob Woodward of the Washington Post, Gates at times writes reverentially about Clinton, who is expected to decide later this year whether to pursue a presidential bid.

I found her smart, idealistic but pragmatic, tough-minded, indefatigable, funny, a very valuable colleague, and a superb representative of the United States all over the world,” Gates wrote.”

Obama lovin’ Veep Biden does not get a seal of approval from Gates: “I think he has been wrong on nearly every major foreign policy and national security issue over the past four decades.”

While some, many, will focus on the now shocking Casablanca revelation asserted by Gates that Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama both confessed their opposition to the Iraq “surge” in 2007 was “political” the problem for Hillary Clinton 2016 is that the respected Robert Gates – a good friend and ally of Hillary Clinton – lobs some serious ordinance at Obama and Hillary Clinton will at some point be forced to choose between treacherous boob Barack and smart good guy Bob Gates.

We believe the allegations of Bob Gates: Obama kept the war in Afghanistan going despite having lost faith in his strategy years ago

“Actual quote from Gates’s new book, writing about a meeting with O in March 2011: “As I sat there, I thought: The president doesn’t trust his commander, can’t stand Karzai, doesn’t believe in his own strategy and doesn’t consider the war to be his… For him, it’s all about getting out.” Nearly three years later, we’re still not out despite O’s alleged disbelief. I’m caught between astonishment that any president would send troops to die for a cause he apparently thought was lost and reminding myself that … we already knew this. Right? The Democratic commitment to Afghanistan was always chiefly a function of their opposition to Iraq. They wanted out of the latter but were afraid that the left’s anti-war brand would frighten centrist voters in 2008 who wanted something more muscular in the post-9/11 age. Ramping up in Afghanistan was the answer.”

Barack Obama foreign policy is a disaster. Bob Gates insulates Hillary by noting that the disasters were run from the White House and that the total control by the White House “offended” Hillary. Barack Obama domestic policy is a disaster as well.

The Obama apparatchiks will try to deflect from the foreign and domestic disasters birthed by Barack Obama with all sorts of distracting silliness. The man who vacationed for weeks in Hawaii and whose spousal mooch (and Valerie Jarret and Gayle King) will cost taxpayers millions more for her extended vacation will try to flim flam the voters with rubbish about inequality they don’t believe in nor practice.

In this series, Don’t Stop Thinking About Tomorrow, we’ll discuss why Barack Obama’s attempted distractions will not work. The issue in 2014, as in 2010, will be ObamaCare and the treacherous boob destroying America.

Of course there will be additional disasters authored by Barack Obama, both foreign and domestic, which will grab the spotlight intermittently but the crown jewel of Barack Obama incompetence and treachery is ObamaCare and that will be the issue in 2014. Those thinking about tomorrow better get ahead of events and fight the future fights that matter.


The Squealing Pig

Update: Before next month’s long Martha’s Vineyard Obama vacation Obama is taking another $100 million Obama vacation to Africa which starts today:

“In a move that can only fuel charges that his week-long trip to Africa is a de facto vacation, President Obama is taking his mother-in-law Marian Robinson and niece Leslie Robinson with him on Air Force One, which departed the United States this morning. Leslie is the daughter of First Lady Michelle Obama’s brother Craig.

Obama is already being accompanied by Mrs. Obama and their daughters Sasha and Malia. [snip]

The Obamas have been criticized for the massive expense of the trip, which reportedly could reach up to $100 million. Obama was ridiculed when news surfaced that he had been contemplating a safari that would have required Secret Service agents to act as snipers in case animals tried to attack the first family.”

Obama is a boob in government and in everyday life. But in terms of self-advancement, looting taxpayers, days off for parties and golfing in between vacations – Barack is a genius.


Has there every been such a boob???

A treacherous boob in a sea of scandals? It’s like pigs in a huge warehouse filled with slop. The pigs will eat-defecate-eat-defecate- and eat and eat until they explode. That’s the Barack Obama warehouse of horror.

Rolling Stone Mick Jagger knows Obama is a boob and mocks him with an NSA joke while in D.C. “I don’t think President Obama is here tonight… But I’m sure he’s listening in.” Expect an audit Mick.

Jay Leno knows Obama is a boob too:President Obama got some good news today. The IRS ruled he can write off the first half of his second term as a total loss.”

America brought so low by Barack Obama and leaders of other nations openly mock him. Consider, Obama and the lynch-Snowden-mob declare that Eddie Snowden is a Benedict Arnold that imperils the security of the nation and yet Obama does not have the respect of neither China nor Russia sufficient to extradite the great national threat. Quite the contrary.

The President of Russia Vladimir Putin proudly displays for all the world to see his loathing and contempt for the boob in the scandal warehouse White House. Putin in multiple levels of meaning mocks, slaps, and bathes Barack Obama in guano:

“It is true that Snowden has arrived to Moscow, and it really came as a surprise for us. He arrived as a transit passenger, and didn’t need a visa, or any other documents. As a transit passenger he is entitled to buy a ticket and fly to wherever he wants.”

“We can only extradite any foreign citizens to such countries with which we have signed the appropriate international agreements on criminal extradition.” “Snowden is a free person. The sooner he chooses his final destination, the better it is for him and Russia.”

“Just like Snowden, he [Assange] considers himself a rights advocate and fights for sharing information. Ask yourself: should or should not people like these be extradited to be later put to jail?

In any case, I would like not to deal with such issues because it is like shearing a pig: there’s lots of squealing and little fleece.”

Has any American president ever been so insulted? It’s a pussy riot of laughs from powerful Putin. A proud and strong Russian President representing Russian interests insults Barack by lecturing on civil rights and freedom while at the same time effectively calling Barack Obama a “squealing pig”. The proud, powerful, and strong Russian President is hard to argue with. We certainly won’t try.

China and Russia are having a grand old time slapping Barack Obama’s puss openly and with glee. Michael Vick treated his poodles with greater respect.

On Syria, Snowden, and elsewhere, Putin is cleaning Obama’s Kookoo clock. It’s like the latest fashion trend – high school anal hazing.

There is a theory coming from some that Obama at this point really truly does not want to get Eddie back from wherever it is he roams. This theory holds that Obama rather not be embarrassed further and that as with Bin Laden and other terrorists Obama does not want the legal and political headaches a return home of Eddie Snowden would bring (what would Occupy Wall Street do? what would Hollyweird say? would the DailyKooks get upset?).

We think this theory protects Obama with the “three dimensional chess” defense that Obama supporters always use to defend something stupid Obama has done as a really smart thing that ordinary minds can’t grasp. It’s a form of Stockholm Syndrome. What these theorists fail to fathom is the depths of Obama’s boobery.

Paul Ryan, might be an amnesty supporter on immigration but on Eddie Snowden it appears Paul has his wits about him:

“Paul Ryan: Snowden Affair ‘Reveals an Administration That Seems More and More Incompetent

CHARLIE ROSE, HOST: I realize you’re a House Republican and therefore you’ve had your moments of opposition to the president. This is from Politico this morning: “Six months into his second term, Barack Obama’s presidency is in a dead zone.” Now does what’s happening with Edward Snowden even emphasize that as well?

CONGRESSMAN PAUL RYAN (R-WISCONSIN): It does because it just reveals an administration that seems more and more incompetent by the day. When you see scandals such as the IRS or intimidation such as the Department of Justice…

ROSE: What would you have done that the administration has not done with respect to Edward Snowden?

RYAN: Well, first of all, how is it that a 29-year-old contractor with one year at Booz Allen Hamilton can get this kind of security clearance, get this kind of access to this kind of intelligence, walk out with a thumb drive and give it to the world? I mean, how is it that our security clearances are so low that something like this can happen? That’s number one. Number two, once we’ve discovered that this person has stolen our secrets, has leaked them, you’d think we’d have a better job of following up with that in China and these other countries.

ROSE: Now they talk about consequences and that the relationship with China and Russia may change. What tools does the United States have and what would you recommend the president do to instill those consequences?

RYAN: Well, I don’t want a knee-jerk, but I would say that we have extradition treaties. We have relationships. We should use those relationships. And if we’re not able to convince our allies or other countries to actually help us with this, that doesn’t speak very well to how we’re being viewed in the world. That doesn’t speak very well to our credibility. And if we try to leverage our credibility and we’re not successful, that does not help our image whatsoever.

The Washington Post is perplexed that it’s hero has a “hands-off approach to extraditing Snowden” that is drawing “criticism”. Ya think?

It’s not just Republicans, world leaders, rock and roll icons, and comedians that have contempt for Barack Obama. Even Obama Dimocrats are willing to publicly insult Obama, as Obama fanszine Politico documents:

“Not yet six months into his second term, Barack Obama’s presidency is in a dead zone. [snip]

But in a damning appraisal, a wide variety of congressional Democrats and presidential scholars said in interviews that there is another decisive factor behind Obama’s current paralysis: his own failure to use the traditional tools of the presidency to exert his will.

Obama does not instill fear — one of the customary instruments of presidential power. Five years of experience, say lawmakers of both parties, have demonstrated that there is not a huge political or personal cost to be paid for crossing the president.

Barack Obama wants to be loved. Daddy the sperm donor couldn’t stand to be near Obama for more than ten minutes for his entire life. Mama dumped the fat little kid in grandma’s custody. So Obama is driven by a narcissistic need to be loved because Obama knows deep down that he is a pig that nobody wants. That has led him to a life of flim-flams designed to advance himself in the deluded hope that would lead to love. At first the predisposition is to like or tolerate Barack. But eventually, as night follows day, to know him is to loathe him:

Obama cannot count on friendship. There are plenty of politicians who would love the political and psychic benefits of favored status from the president. But Obama’s distant style and his insular West Wing operation have left congressional Democrats resigned, many said in interviews, to the reality that they will never be insiders and, therefore, have no special incentives to stay on Obama’s good side.

Obama is not buoyed by the power of ideas. When President Ronald Reagan hit a similar second-term dead zone, during the Iran-Contra scandal in 1986, he was still regarded by conservatives as the godfather of a historic movement. Obama, while retaining wide support among progressives, remains known for a personal brand rather than an ideological one — a status that has not helped much when he is looking for friends in a storm, such as the recent uproars over alleged politicization at the Internal Revenue Service and National Security Agency surveillance.

Finally, Obama is standing in a presidential pulpit that recently has proved to be the opposite of bully. So far in 2013, he has tried to harness public opinion to bring Congress to heel on both the budget sequestration and gun control debates. In both cases, Republicans — and in key instances, moderate Democrats — shrugged it off with apparent impunity. [snip]

But in interviews in recent days, numerous congressional Democrats in background and, significantly, on-the-record comments made plain their view that it is not simply the hostility of Republicans responsible for the languid state of Obama’s presidency. [snip]

In fact, some see him as politically ham-handed. Many House Democrats have lingering resentment over what they see as his subpar effort to help them keep the majority in 2010. Democrats who voted for the bulk of his agenda lost, and Obama was perceived as abandoning them while he saved his political capital for his own reelection bid in 2012.

“I think he could’ve done more to help those Democrats get reelected,” said Rep. Henry Waxman (D-Calif.), who has served in Washington since the Ford presidency. “They walked out on a plank for him and his program, but there was a huge tidal wave of opposition, and I don’t think it could’ve been overcome.”

Obama Dimocrats bought a pig in a poke in 2008 and 2012. The pig is now squealing and so are they.


Race War: Supreme Court Affirmative Action Decision, Illegal Immigration ‘Reform’, Plus Pothead Barack Obama’s Pothead Son Trayvon Martin

Update II: Prepare for Obama race-baiting. This news is breaking: Supreme Court strikes down part of Voting Rights Act. It’s a 5-4 decision in a case brought by Shelby County, Alabama. Section 4 of the Voting Rights Act declared unconstitutional!:

“Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act, reauthorized by Congress in 2006, gives the federal government the ability to pre-emptively reject changes to election law in states and counties that have a history of discriminating against minority voters. The law covers nine states and portions of seven more, most of them in the South. The formula used to decide which states are subject to this special scrutiny (set out in Section 4 of the law) is based on decades-old voter turnout and registration data, the justices ruled, which is unfair to the states covered under it.

The Justice Department used Section 5 of the law to block voter ID laws in Texas and South Carolina last year, and it also struck down early voting restrictions in five counties in Florida. [snip]

Another argument against Section 4’s constitutionality was that it’s unclear whether minority voters in Southern states are more likely to face discrimination at the polls than they are in other states.”

This decision was expected since at least 2009. Chief Justice John Roberts wrote the opinion.


Update: We wrote Deny It All You Want But Immigration Reform Is Dead back in April. Many dispute our contention and point to the Senate distraction and the Big Media myth making machine to discourage everyone into thinking that “immigration reform” is a done deal.

Today Fawn Johnson at National Journal writes Time’s Up. Immigration Won’t Pass This Year

“Plenty of effort will be devoted to reform over the next month, but it will die in August, just like last time.

Nothing less than a miracle will get major immigration legislation through Congress this year. [snip]

Indeed, the House might not kill the bill outright, but the GOP players are passing the ball around until the clock runs out.

What’s that clock look like? After senators get the bill done – probably in time to make their weekend barbeques — they have a weeklong July 4 break. And then they get to wait for colleagues on the other side of the Capitol who will have four weeks – four weeks – to deliberate before Congress takes off for an even lengthier recess in August. Once Washington meets autumn, immigration falls off the priority track thanks to the reemergence of fiscal crisis. [snip]

Then comes August, the month in which legislation dies. The last time the Senate passed a major immigration bill in 2006, House Republicans used the August recess to kill it by staging a series of hearings around the country that did nothing but rile up conservatives against it.

Let’s not forget the health care bill, which only passed after President Obama forced it through the Senate with Democratic votes using a parliamentary tactic that isn’t available on immigration. [snip]

When lawmakers return to the Capitol in September, they will be facing another financial crisis as they debate raising the country’s debt ceiling. The four- to six-week countdown toward extreme limitations on government payments to Social Security or military operations will do two things: It will suck all the life out of any deliberative legislative effort, immigration included, and it will polarize the political parties.”

Immigration “reform” is dead even as there will be an attempt in the Senate to flim-flam the country into believing it is going to happen. It’s not.

Hey! Greta Van Susteren has a real immigration reform plan that addresses the problem. But we doubt that will pass or even be proposed by the chuckleheads in congress.

So, is
immigration reform doomed
? Sarah Palin says ‘You betcha‘.


This coming week is going to be an explosive seven days in American history. On Monday the Jorge Zimmerman trial begins with one Latina and five white women on the jury. The Supreme Court will issue, starting on Monday, opinions which will likely lead to the end of race based “affirmative action” in undergraduate college admissions. The Supreme Court will also decide the fate of a key section of the Voting Rights Act. On Monday the Senate will start the process to try to pass another mess of a bill – this one the race-baiting amusement called “Immigration Reform“. Throw in the Supreme Court weighing in on gay marriage and the pot is boiling over.

The result of all these events hitting Barack Obama will be race-baiting of an intensity not seen since the embers of race riots from an earlier age scarred the nation – and the Barack Obama campaign of 2008 against Hillary Clinton. “Why?” is simple to answer.

* * * * * *

Survey the sociopolitical landscape and there is disaster everywhere. The answer from Barack Obama and his White House Down team will not be to respond to the disasters but to race-bait. Race-baiting is all Barack Obama and his minions have left in their arsenal of hate, fear, and smear.

The White House Chicago gang is aware that hypocrites on the left continue to voice support for their idol, But they are also aware that as independents turn hostile, Republicans remain hostile, even Barack Obama supporters are upset with Obama. So the way to get antsy Obama supporters back on board with their glorious leader is to race-bait. Shouting “RACISM!” and “RACISTS!” will force Obama supporters back on the farm like nothing else will. Race-baiting is the only answer left for Barack Obama as all goes from bad to Barack and a hard place.

Look around the world as Barack Obama confronts the reality of the mess he has made. The economic “glimmers of hope”, the green shoots of hope and optimism are scorched by last week’s stock market freeze. The future of the nation is so dire it is no longer a prosperous California of decades past, nor even the flailing California of the decade past. The nation’s economic future is bankrupt Detroit – already threatening the municipal credit markets.

American leadership? That is gone on a worldwide basis and nations like China know weak Obama will weaken America further.

Such is the contempt China has for Barack Obama that this morning this bit of news breaking: Snowden leaves Hong Kong for Russia and parts unknown. In the press release announcing the departure of Snowden the Chinese mentioned that the Hong Kong officials want the American government to explain the hacking of Chinese computers.

The Chinese government press release mocked the American government request to detain Snowden as not fully complying with Hong Kong law. Of course if China or Hong Kong wanted to detain Snowden they could have detained him for any series of trumped up charges such as littering or spitting on the sidewalk. The intent of such language is to slap Barack Obama in the face.

Snowden is a problem for Obama because many of his supporters in their heart of hearts like whistle-blowers and leakers. Hells Bells, even Obama thug Robert Gibbs states the White House has to come clean on the NSA scandal. The DailyKooks and assorted crackpots who support Barack Obama don’t want to voice support for Snowden but they die a little bit more every time they see Obama hunting down Snowden. How to get these DailyKook Snowden admirers back on the farm? Race-bait for Obama.

China slapped Barack Obama in the face. Russia kicked him in the dried out raisins which pose as Obama’s testicles. Picture Putin fresh from giving Obama the skunk eye at the G-8 as he spat his contempt for Obama on the front pages of the world by allowing Snowden to land in Moscow in a quest for freedom. Remember when dissidents fled to America not from America? WikiLeaks says they are helping Snowdon find “political asylum in a democratic country“. That “democratic country” is the United States Ecuador.

If you see Obama sweating some more this week it is not because he is still in Berlin embarrassing himself and this suffering nation. Nation after nation is slapping Obama on the face like a circus clown pelted with pies.

Russia not only defies Obama on Syria but declares they will not allow a “no-fly” zone in Syria. Barack Obama’s ‘Arab Spring’ is rapidly turning into nuclear winter having already manifested itself in Syria as a chemical fall.

Turkey which was supposed to supply weapons to the Syrian rebels has rebels of its own to suppress. Those weapons, many suspect, were to come from Libya but that plan failed at Benghazi. Yes Benghazi, the unforgotten scandal.

Benghazi is only one of the scandals that will slap Obama this week, especially if the Erdogen government in Turkey persists in its brutality. Who can forget Obama forced Israel to apologize to Erdogen for doing what Israel should have done in its own defense?

The other scandals are alive and well still. The IRS scandal has even awoken Big Pink hating Peggy Noonan from her Obama inspired slumbers. Ol’ Peg is accurately writing that Obama thugs purposefully blocked the Tea Party in order to protect Obama in election year 2012 after the beating Obama got from the Tea Party in 2010. Obama will get no let-up from scandals this week.

The Department of Justice scandal (not the other ones) with Obama targeting reporters shook Big Media. Big Media loves Obama but Big Media loves itself even more. The Obama response to this is the answer Obama will have this week: race bait. Declare the racists are winning. Distribute Joan Walsh’s race-baiting article attacking Sarah Palin. Race-bait, race-bait, race-bait.

As the ObamaCare fiasco reveals itself to be a bigger disaster than previously known, race-bait, race-bait, race-bait. Race-baiting might even get those idiot young people, who are healthy but not particularly bright, to sign up for ObamaCare and put aside their financial interests in order to buck up Obama at the cost of thousands of dollars a year.

Yes, that’s the ticket, race-bait.

To that end, enter pothead Trayvon Martin.

* * * * * *

Remember that party you went to? You were either 18 or 38. You were wearing a tie-dyed T-shirt with love beads or was it a Chanel suit with gold piping? Your conversation was effervescent and sparkling – just like the Champagne in your flute glass, or was it a paper cup with some horrid Portuguese wine? But then, horror! You noticed as you spoke people began to fall asleep.

At first you thought “Was it me? Was my cleverness tiresome and it caused this narcolepsy?” Then you realize there are food remnants clearly visible from those nodded out on the sofa. You clutch your pearls, or is it your love beads, and realize “I’m at a pot party.”

This traditional notion of pot smokers (that’s marijuana for you readers more adept at the culinary arts rather than botanical narcotics) is about to be tested.

The stereotypical notion of pot smokers is they smoke, get the “munchies”, then fall asleep. Trayvon Martin is about to test that assumption.

Assuming that Trayvon Martin was high on pot not some other chemically induced high, the defense of Jorge Zimmerman is going to have to get around the calming reputation of pot. Is it really possible that a pot smoker could be so into Mixed Martial Arts and brutally beating up someone – not nodding out on a sofa after consuming copious amounts of junk baked goods? We’re about to find out.

This week the Jorge Zimmerman trial begins. We expect the defense to mention the toxicology reports from the Trayvon Martin autopsy with regularity. We expect the toxicology report mentions will be twined with references to Zimmerman telling police that the man he saw that rainy night looked like he was on drugs.

All of these mentions will be made in order to goad the prosecution into saying something like “Trayvon was a good boy” and thereby, forcing the court to allow opening up an examination of Travyon Martin’s past. That past is one of school suspensions, pot smoking and selling, fight club experience, and the nasty emails and twitter account comments. And then there are the cell phone pictures of Trayvon with a gun, marijuana plants, finger gestures, gold teeth, in other words a portrait wholly different from the picture of that cute little boy Big Media and Barack Obama race-baited with, with such dexterity.

For Barack Obama, the former head of the Choom gang, the Trayvon Martin, Jorge Zimmerman trial is a golden opportunity to light up. Barack, like his “son”, loved tokes on the weed. Obama smoked all day and all night. Fortunately for Obama he was never arrested as so many pot smokers do and are carted off to jail. But let’s not digress into another instance of Barack Obama hypocrisy.

The Jorge Zimmerman trial is a golden opportunity for Barack Obama to race-bait. It’s not just the death of his “son” at the hands of the bloodied Jorge Zimmerman. Sure, Barack Obama will have the Martin family and the Al Sharpton’s of MSNBC screaming “RACISM!”. Barack Obama’s DailyKooks/Netroots Nation segregated white boys and girls will join the chorus too. “RACISM! RACISTS!” they will shout. The shouts might even drown out the plane as Snowden jets to a “democratic country”.

In this epochal moment for race-baiting Barack Obama will have an ally. The Supreme Court.

The Supreme Court has not been very good to Obama this year. In case after case the Supreme Court has decided against the government this year. Barack Obama’s very name has been mentioned with contempt at the court this term.

We differ with most opponents of ObamaCare in our analysis of the Supreme Court ObamaCare decision. We’ll have much more to say when we open fire on ObamaCare this summer and into fall as the campaign of deception by ObamaCare proponents is in full swing. What we are in the majority on is that the Supreme Court has legally beaten up on Obama this term.

But the Supreme Court, due to timing might in the short run help Barack Obama this week in the campaign to race-bait, race-bait, race-bait.

This week the Supreme Court will eye Barack Obama at the White House, Eric Holder at the Justice Department and at long last in all likelihood begin to get rid of race based affirmative action, first in college admissions and later in all other aspects of American life. The Voting Rights Act will likely also be gutted.

Barack Obama and his Chicago advisers will see this conjunction of the Jorge Zimmerman/Trayvon Martin circus in Seminole County, Florida, the Shelby County, Alabama VRA case, along with the Fisher-University of Texas case as grand opportunities to race-bait. Divide and conquer. Keep the Obama supporters on the farm with a divisive campaign of fear and smear.

An added bonus is that the Supreme Court has already agreed to hear another affirmative action case in the fall. This will be another opportunity to divide, smear, and race-bait – at the very moment that ObamaCare begins it’s reign of terror.

Race-baiting season, like the new born summer season, has just begun. It’s going to be a long hot summer of hate from the Barack Obama merchants of fear, smear, and racial division.


The Drunk Between The Trees

A drunk winds his way home. A few short steps from the entry door he turns slightly from the pathway and eventually bangs his head against a tree lining the walk. Turning completely around he walks until he ca-rooms his head against the opposite tree lining the pathway home. Once again he turns completely around until he bangs his head against the first tree he hit. Again he turns completely around and eventually bangs his head against the earlier banged tree. “Oh help me God – I’m lost in an impenetrable forest.”

That is the story of the Republican opposition to Barack Obama. That typical bang up job by Republicans was on schedule to be repeated in the fiscal cliff spitball fight of this December. But a funny thing happened.

The Republicans, especially the hapless Speaker Boner, found themselves in an impenetrable forest of their own imaginations. They banged their heads repeatedly. Then, perhaps it was a Christmas Miracle, they got tripped up and ended up at the front door and home. These stupid drunks stumbled their way home and out of the forest they created.

* * * * * *
Obama simply cannot be trusted. Our mantra since 2007: “Obama cannot be trusted on any issue. Obama cannot be trusted by his friends. Obama cannot be trusted by his enemies. Obama cannot be trusted.”

Foolishly, Hillary Clinton, John McCain, Mitt Romney and most of the Republican leadership never understood how correct our assessment is. They continue to try to speak the language of policy and economic common sense when all Obama cares about is himself and his “brand”.

Republicans were poised to cave on their principles and hand Barack Obama a major victory without a fight. The reasons for the cave were fear they would be blamed for disaster in the wake of the fiscal cliff jump and be punished at the ballot box in 2014. In 2014!

Republicans feared Big Media would blame them! Imagine that! Big Media was going to defend Barack Obama and attack his opponents no matter what happened. But these Republican drunken fools somehow figured that a population that cannot figure out Haley Berry is nuts after her latest domestic horrors would somehow remember the fiscal cliff of 12/12 and punish Republicans even in the Republican bastions which have secured them a House majority. So Republicans like John Boner went to negotiate with Barack Obama.

That must be powerful moonshine Big Media is serving and Speaker Boner is drinking. Imagine entering negotiations with Barack Obama! Those of us who have successfully negotiated deals know that you can only make a deal with people who can be trusted to do what they say. There has to be good faith bargaining from both sides in any negotiation that is worthy of that description.

Speaker Boner entered into negotiations with Barack Obama as if Obama could be trusted. This is what we wrote earlier this month about the fiscal cliff:

“Republicans will get blamed by Obama and Big Media for anything bad that happens or has ever happened or ever will happen. That’s what Obama does – blame everyone but himself.

What Republican leaders must realize is that if they are going to get blamed they might as well get blamed for fighting for their principles. Not fighting for principles will only lead to infighting within Republican ranks as “compromisers” and “purists” (that’s how Big Media will label the factions) battle it out for control of the party in the wake of the “cave-in” to Obama. Rank and file conservatives and other Obama opponents will be correctly discouraged from standing up for a party that won’t stand up for its principles. [snip]

If the Republican Party caves in to Barack Obama’s thuggery they will have effectively decided to jump the shark into obscurity.”

Republicans were set to jump the shark in an impenetrable forest of trees. But they stumbled their way home.

The Wall Street Journal published a bang by bang account of Speaker Boner lost in the forest of his imagination:

“Mr. Boehner had been negotiating a deal with the White House to let tax rates rise for upper-income people.

Mr. Boehner, irritated with the White House, was finding it hard to keep his troops in line as details of his negotiations with Mr. Obama leaked out. [snip]

The negotiations offer little evidence November’s election brought the president and House Republicans closer together. If anything, the talks poisoned an already distrustful relationship.

It took a while but the too trusting Speaker came to his senses: Obama cannot be trusted. Obama’s thuggery is what woke many up and saved the Republicans from destroying themselves and providing Obama a victory:

“Mr. Obama repeatedly lost patience with the speaker as negotiations faltered. In an Oval Office meeting last week, he told Mr. Boehner that if the sides didn’t reach agreement, he would use his inaugural address and his State of the Union speech to tell the country the Republicans were at fault.

At one point, according to notes taken by a participant, Mr. Boehner told the president, “I put $800 billion [in tax revenue] on the table. What do I get for that?”

“You get nothing,” the president said. “I get that for free.”

After the election, Boehner aides tried to shape the debate by offering early concessions, including that the GOP would agree to raise new tax revenue. [snip]

He and Mr. Obama didn’t sit down together for another 10 days. The session began genially. But tension quickly emerged over the president’s call to include increasing the U.S.’s borrowing limit in any final package.

Responded Mr. Boehner: “I’ve found in my life that everything I’ve ever wanted has come with price.”

Mr. Obama told the speaker he wasn’t willing to play games with the debt ceiling. [snip]

The White House made clear it wouldn’t agree to a plan that didn’t raise some tax rates immediately. [snip]

The president repeatedly reminded Mr. Boehner of the election results: “You’re asking me to accept Mitt Romney’s tax plan. Why would I do that?” At another point, the speaker noted his GOP majority would also return next year.”

Speaker Boner should have told Obama to go right ahead and start his second term with a dull inaugural speech filled with attacks. Boner should have told Obama to launch a State of the Union attack so that he could reply in kind. In a smart negotiation you take the opponent’s threats and turn them against him/her.

Speaker Boner did not negotiate with smarts. The Speaker was reasonable while Obama made threats. Obama the thug used thuggery:

“On Dec. 13, Mr. Boehner went to the White House at the president’s request, joking he was going to the woodshed.

The president told him he could choose one of two doors. The first represented a big deal. If Mr. Boehner chose it, the president said, the country and financial markets would cheer. Door No. 2 represented a spike in interest rates and a global recession.

Mr. Boehner said he wanted a deal along the lines of what the two men had negotiated in the summer of 2011 in a fight over raising the debt ceiling. “You missed your opportunity on that,” the president told him.

That night, the speaker and Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R., Va.) decided to make the biggest concession so far.”

In any negotiation you must be willing to walk away. If you are so desperate for a deal that you will tolerate the status of a beggar – you have already lost. Chicago thug Barack Obama understands this but made the mistake of jamming Speaker Boner’s face onto the pile of sh*t the Speaker and Republicans were being ordered to accept.

Speaker Boner made more concessions. The news from Connecticut provided Obama with another opportunity to flim and flam. Finally Speaker Boner got a clue:

“Finally, the speaker said, “Well, you and I can sit here and stare at each other,” or he could leave and they would talk later.

Back in the Capitol, Mr. Boehner told Mr. Cantor the president wasn’t moving. They agreed to call him. [snip]

Administration officials expected a few more days of back-and-forth, but the speaker thought the prospects were dim for a big deal. [snip]

“I’m going to keep the proposal on the table,” he said of the broader deal. “As I told the president, I’m not making an ultimatum. The offer stays on the table, even if we move on Plan B.”

His lieutenants made clear they preferred Plan B to the one Mr. Boehner was trying to broker.

The speaker called the president with news the House would move ahead with the backup bill, which would preserve Bush-era rates for all income below $1 million. The president was incensed.

It was long past time to walk away. Force Barack Obama to finally get to work and construct a deal was what the Republicans should have said from the very beginning.

What was the essential stupidity in all this fiscal cliff drama? Answer: It is Obama who should be begging for a deal and it is Republicans who hold the cards. The L.A. Times analysis provides some facts and numbers:

“In the days immediately after President Obama’s reelection victory, White House officials hoped that in a second term he might have better relations with congressional Republicans. The “fever will break,” more than one Obama aide forecast.

The last several days have demonstrated the opposite. Washington remains caught in a partisan stalemate on the budget, seems headed toward another on gun control and perhaps one on immigration policy as well.

That gridlock could inflict significant damage to the Republican Party. But Obama’s ability to manage an ambitious agenda in his new term also hangs in the balance.

The Republicans or any Obama opponent will be attacked and race-baited by Big Media and other Obama allies no matter what. Ignore the attacks. Republicans worried about electoral consequences in particular should remember that the next elections are in 2014 not in a few months and that those elections, as in 2010, will be played in some very red states.

Republicans in the House and Senate must also realize that their sole task is obstruction – just like the “scorched earth” resistance from Russian peasants during World War II. It’s Obama that has an agenda he wants to pass and therefore it is Obama that has to beg for a deal:

“Stalemates in Congress “may not affect his popularity all that much, but it will affect his ability to govern, if you define ability to govern as your ability to move your policy agenda forward,” said Bill Galston, a former domestic policy advisor to President Clinton. [snip]

To some degree, Obama’s difficulties in striking a budget deal with congressional Republicans are a reflection of the reality of his political position: He leads a nation that remains both deeply polarized and closely divided, as it has been for many years. He won reelection by only half the margin of his 2008 victory and with very limited coattails; the returning Republican majority in the House was barely dented by losses at the polls.

Of the GOP members in the incoming House, 219 come from districts carried by Mitt Romney, according to a Cook Political Report calculation. Add nine Democrats from districts carried by Romney, and a clear majority of the 435-member House hails from places where Obama lost.”

Consider that last paragraph. Control of the House requires 218 votes. Mitt Romney was the winner in districts which sent 219 Republican representatives to the House. Republicans can only lose in 2014 if they lose support from those who want opposition to Barack Obama.

Perhaps Speaker John Boehner should send a Christmas gift to Barack Obama. The gift should be a map of all the districts that sent a Republican to the House from districts Obama lost – 219 in all. The map should be emblazoned on a picture of a lame duck – which Obama will immediately be if he jumps off the fiscal cliff. The gift will have to be sent to Hawaii where Obama is on vacation golfing, again.


Big Media Lie Of 2008, 2012: The Republican Party Is Dead/Dying And Resistance To Obama Is Futile

Update: Secret recipe for cooking Rice? Answer: FIGHT. The news that’s breaking: Susan Rice withdraws from consideration as Secretary of State. This quit even before nomination is the first clear domestic policy defeat for Obama post election. It’s exactly the lesson we write about below.

As for who gets blamed for cliff jumping? A new poll answers by declaring that both the GOP and Obama will get the blame. It will only get worse for Obama if he goes to Hawaii for three weeks vacation while the United States goes from the ditch Obama has put us in to over the cliff. The answer for GOP: FIGHT.

The topic we focused on below is the GOP strength in the states. Michael Barone discusses the important news from blue Washington state in which some Democrats have joined the GOP and taken control of the state senate.

Obama’s health scam fiasco? Yup:

“Only 15 states have told the federal government they plan to operate health insurance exchanges under President Barack Obama’s reform law, leaving Washington with the daunting task of creating online marketplaces for two-thirds of the country. [snip]

But the administration would still be left to set up exchanges in at least 30 states, a challenge that is raising questions about how successfully U.S. officials can implement a key provision of the health care reform law.

Hint: FIGHT! Don’t whine. Don’t retreat.


There’s a lot of news that should cheer Obama opponents, particularly Republicans. First, let’s walk down memory lane and get some lessons from history.

* * * * *

In 2008 Barack Obama sent his gay-bashers to South Carolina in order to beat Hillary Clinton and win the socially conservative black vote in those parts. Throughout the nomination fight Obama used subtle and not so subtle misogyny and hatred of women to bash Hillary. Against John McCain and Sarah Palin the tactic was to trash war hero McCain as a doddering senior citizen (seniors were never part of the Obama Kook Klub) and Palin, well Palin was a woman so misogyny remained in style with the Obama campaign.

By race-baiting, senior and gay bashing, along with woman hating, Barack Obama won the 2008 popular vote by 7%. Obama Dimocrats won control of the House as well as the Senate by large margins and very soon a quisling Republican would give Obama Dimocrats a filibuster proof 60 vote majority. Big Media declared resistance to Obama futile.

The debate among Republicans after election day 2008 was whether or not to enable Barack Obama. Right from the start Obama bumbled and bungled and made a fool of himself (recall the president-elect seal and the garbled oath?) and Republicans decided to fight. Obama opponents such as those here soon saw Obama popularity plummet and by June the Tea Party was swinging.

In 2009 came Chris Christie, Bob McDonnell and most shocking of all Senator Scott Brown. Big Media wept as 2010 election results came in. The evidence mounted that resistance to Obama could very easily be successful. But you had to fight thug for thug, Chicago rules.

In 2012 Barack Obama was back in his element. A campaign of fear and smear began. Race-baiting was the Obama card. Mitt Romney replied with “Obama’s a nice guy” even as we advised otherwise.

We advised otherwise quite a lot this year including, what we are now more sure than ever, would have given Romney the game changing big victory. Alas, that was not to be.

On election eve 2012 the results gave Obama a 2.8% margin and the Republicans kept control of the House. Big Media declared resistance to Obama futile.

This week however, Republican resistance appears to be less than futile. All that is required is a will to fight. Hint: Michigan.

Consider Michigan a Republican 12 step rehabilitation program. It’s part of the election night story most in Big Media do not want to discuss and certainly not highlight:

Twenty-four states will be controlled by Republicans, including Alaska and Wisconsin, where the party took the State Senate, and North Carolina, where the governorship changed hands. At least 13 states will be Democratic, including Colorado, Minnesota and Oregon, where control of the legislatures shifted, and California, where the already dominant Democrats gained a supermajority in both chambers. [snip]

The fact is, they can do whatever they want now,” Chris Larson, the Democrats’ newly chosen Senate minority leader in Wisconsin, said of the Republicans in his state. He noted, glumly, that they have been holding planning meetings behind closed doors since the election.

Robin Vos, a Republican selected last week as the speaker of Wisconsin’s Assembly, voiced a willingness to work with Democrats, but also quickly ticked off plans to press for an income-tax cut, education changes and a “top-to-bottom review” of state regulations.

It’s a series of amazing numbers (2/3rds of states under one party control and Republicans at a surge of state capital power greater than in the past 60 years). These numbers from election night rarely get discussed, and oddly even with Michigan in the eye of the storm this week, few are noticing that Michigan is just part of the much bigger picture for Republicans.

It’s a much bigger picture than the one presented by Big Media. For instance, when we last discussed “Unravel #5” – Obama’s health scam – there was a question in our subsequent update concerning Tennessee. The question was answered when after a Tea Party rally the governor of Tennessee announced he will not set himself up as a bowling pin and approve an ObamaCare “exchange”. In that December 1 article we wrote the number of states rejecting Obama’s health scam was 17. Now?:

“More and more I’m convinced they are making this up as they go,” Haslam said. “It’s scary, quite frankly.”

With the governor’s announcement, Tennessee joins nearly half of the U.S. states in rejecting a state-run health care exchange. Tennessee became the 23rd state to do so.

Additionally, eight states have rejected expansions of Medicaid programs.

Chris Christie, a Republican governor in a very blue state, said “NO” bringing the resistance states almost to the 50% mark:

“Until the federal government gives us all the necessary information, any other action than this would be fiscally irresponsible. Thus far, we lack such critical information from the federal government. I will not ask New Jerseyans to commit today to a state-based exchange when the federal government cannot tell us what it will cost, how that cost compares to other options, and how much control they will give the states over this option that comes at the cost of our state’s taxpayers.”

“Financing the building and implementation of a state-based exchange would be an extraordinarily costly endeavor,” continued Governor Christie. “While the federal governmental has enabled states to apply for grant funding to cover some of the initial costs of such an endeavor, the total price for such a program has never been quantified, and is likely to be onerous. Without knowing the full scope of which exchange option would be most beneficial and cost efficient for New Jerseyans, it would be irresponsible to force such a bill on our citizens.”

A lot of states are rejecting Obama’s health scam for some very good reasons. As we go to press there is a breaking development as we learn today that Pennsylvania won’t be setting their own state exchange either:

“Health care reform is too important to be achieved through haphazard planning,” Corbett said. “Pennsylvania taxpayers and businesses deserve more. They deserve informed decision making and a strong plan that responsibly uses taxpayer dollars.” …

Corbett said it “would be irresponsible to put Pennsylvanians on the hook for an unknown amount of money to operate a system under rules that have not been fully written.” …

We’re getting awfully close already to half the states saying “No” to Obamacare, But it is not just Obama’s health scam that is in trouble in the states. Enter Michigan (btw, did AP ever ascribe “ruthless” to anything Obama has done (such as ramming through his health care scam?)):

“As the chants of angry protesters filled the Capitol, Michigan lawmakers gave final approval Tuesday to right-to-work legislation, dealing a devastating and once-unthinkable defeat to organized labor in a state that has been a cradle of the movement for generations.

The Republican-dominated House ignored Democrats’ pleas to delay the passage and instead approved two bills with the same ruthless efficiency as the Senate showed last week. One measure dealt with private sector workers, the other with government employees. Republican Gov. Rick Snyder signed them within hours. [snip]

Once the laws are enacted, the state where the United Auto Workers was founded and labor has long been a political titan will join 23 others with right-to-work laws, which ban requirements that nonunion employees pay unions for negotiating contracts and other services.”

What’s happening in Michigan is pretty much what happened in Wisconsin and for the same historic reasons and for the same cupidity of Big Labor:

“For the unions, the workers became less important. The workers essentially became only dues payers. The Big Labor bosses increasingly ignored the plight of the workers and only cared that the dues were paid. With the money from the workers’ dues unions paid for political protection and friendly negotiators in the public service labor arena. Instead of spending all their money on union organizing and increasing their ranks, unions saw their easy path on the political highway. Republicans noticed.”

When we wrote that back during the Wisconsin fight we did not have this official labor disclosure report to buttress our contentions:

“When continually focusing in the media on being “forced” to represent people who don’t pay dues under a right-to-work law, union heads are implying that they spend the vast majority of their money on contract negotiations, representation or other non-political work. That is a myth.

For example, according to the most recent federal filings, the Michigan Education Association — the state’s largest labor union — received $122 million and spent $134 million in 2012. They averaged about $800 from each of their 152,000 members.

According to union documents, “representational activities” (money spent on bargaining contracts for members) made up only 11 percent of total spending for the union. Meanwhile, spending on “general overhead” (union administration and employee benefits) comprised of 61 percent of the total spending.

So MEA members who disagree with the leadership of the union are paying up to 90 percent of their dues, but the union is only spending about a tenth of the dues money representing them. [snip]

A look at other groups yields similar results, and no major union spends the majority of its funds on local representation. The UAW spent about 41 percent of its receipts on “representational activities.” The Michigan branch of the SEIU got most of its money by forcibly unionizing home caregivers the past few years and used it to try and lock that into the state Constitution. Search for any major union with the United State Department of Labor here.

In the meantime, unions spent $4.4 billion from 2005-2011 on electing candidates and other political spending and twelve of the top 20 political donors going back to 1989 are unions. According to the Center for Responsive Politics, only 3 percent of union political spending goes to Republicans – while 40 percent of union members typically vote Republican. Here in Michigan, an MEA survey of its membership found that 45 percent of teachers under 30 classify themselves as “conservative” while 63 percent aged 40-49 say the same. At the same time, the union endorsed 97 percent Democrats. [snip]

In Wisconsin, allowing union members to have a choice in paying their dues has led to a shift in emphasis and positive changes. After the state’s largest union lost membership, the amount they spent on politics was refocused to “a potential shift to a much more grassroots model of advocacy and support for educators.”

According to the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, “That could mean becoming better advocates for different practices in teaching or for methods that recruit, train and retain high-quality educators … That could mean organizing teachers to champion what’s working best in the classroom by bringing new ideas to the school board, or working to get the community to support specific practices. It means working more collaboratively, and offering solutions.”

What’s happening in Michigan, and Wisconsin is not really about workers at all. It is about politics as the main purpose of these unions. The unions have become party activists with little concern for the workers (other than getting dues money from them) they are supposed to represent and so there has been a political response. Until Big Labor returns to making workers the focus of their activities, not the political pals of the big chiefs, they will always have to fear the day when workers are no longer a captive membership.

In Michigan as in Wisconsin Big Labor screwed itself:

“Democrats depend on millions — actually, billions — of dollars in support from the forced dues of union members. If that money supply were to dry up, or even just decrease, the Democratic Party would be in serious trouble. [snip]

In Michigan, they pushed what was known as Proposal 2, which would have enshrined union collective bargaining powers in the state constitution. If Proposal 2 had passed, what state GOP lawmakers are doing now would have been literally unconstitutional.

But Proposal 2 was decisively defeated on Election Day, 58 percent to 42 percent. The path was clear for Republicans to act.”

And act with alacrity they did. Via Huff n’ Puff:

“Republicans attempted to make the bill repeal-proof, attaching a $1 million appropriation on the measure for enforcing right to work. According to Michigan law, spending bills can’t be put on the ballot for the public to vote on.”

That was a brainy thing to do. If you fight and don’t give up resistance is not futile no matter how much Big Media tells you so. Resistance to the resistance is what is really futile.

Lesson for national Republicans from Michigan Republicans: fight.


Monica Lewinsky And What Is Bill Clinton Up To With Tonight’s Speech?????

Update: This story might upstage Bill Clinton’s speech tonight. Oh my: Boos at convention as Dems reinstate language on God and Jerusalem in platform. The horror of the truth broadcast for all to see.


Tonight Bill Clinton is conducting a master class in politics.

Republicans/conservatives and those supporting Romney/Ryan should watch closely and learn from Bill. These lessons from Bill Clinton are about politics and they are extremely relevant today. Knowing what Bill Clinton is doing and how he does it must be understood if you are interested in winning the election in November, not just winning an argument.

Those who want a deeper understanding of what Bill Clinton is doing and how he is doing it should follow the links in this article. Savor every word grasshoppers (and we admit we are often flummoxed as to how Republicans/conservatives think, but we are willingly learning). We’ve written so much on this topic there are a great many resources to a fuller understanding of how we Democrats think and how Bill Clinton functions. [Romney/Ryan strategist should read this article in its entirety – but for those that want the latest Monica news and only a superficial answer to our title question, skip to below the asterisked line.]

Recently in “The Battle For Bill Clinton” we discussed what Republicans should do in response to Bill Clinton. We discussed I/E Republicans and E/I Republicans (Intelligence over Emotion and vice-versa) and thus far, to their very great credit, most Republican/conservative websites/spokespersons have taken our advice. Today Paul Ryan is once again taking our advice.

Our argument for Intelligence over Emotion in politics does not mean that emotion is to be casually dismissed. We are arguing that in politics you need to make an assessment of what your objectives/goals are and then pursue them in the most effective way possible. You might have to ditch your “feelings” about an issue or a personality but the point is you must get your aims. For instance, you have to get elected before you can govern is an intellectual truism which at times is not emotionally satisfying. We all have favorite candidates that we like/love/support who really make it difficult to win elections with but we are so emotionally connected to them that we want to take a risk and want everyone to take the risk with us. But in the cold logic of day often these preferences are foolish and should be rejected if we want to win.

To “win” first “understand”. Bill Clinton is not only a graduate from some of the greatest intellectual factories on this planet Bill Clinton is also a very organic, emotionally attuned person. He knows how to connect intellectually and at the same time “feel your pain”. Calling Bill a “phony” doesn’t work because he connects and will continue to connect. His speeches, hated by many Republicans who never understood what he was doing, were masterpieces of emotional and intellectual language. They were post modern masterpieces which infuriated Republicans/conservatives who preferred to call “liar” or use ridicule instead of seeing what was staring them in the face.

When Bill Clinton gave his famous “the era of big government is over” he invested a great many paragraphs in the same speech to discuss new “initiatives”, new government programs that were often “silly” (think school uniforms) but emotionally spoke to women voters especially and families interested in education in particular.

Republicans erupted in ridicule and anger at the seeming “lie” but Bill Clinton was not lying, he was speaking two languages – intellect and emotion. Bill understood that women and voters generally were fed up with government but that at the same time they wanted help with “kitchen table issues”. Bill Clinton addressed both seemingly contradictory viewpoints at the same time. It was masterful but Republicans did not see this until it was too late. [Obama Dimocrats and the “creative class” ridiculed the Tea Party because of the contradictions over Medicare support and resistance to government in this movement and lived to regret the ridicule.]

Republicans/conservatives and all Romney/Ryan supporters should keep their eyes on the prize, the arrows on the target, the bombers over the bomb site. The target is not Bill Clinton but rather Barack Obama.

E/I Republicans/conservatives always want to re-fight the fights they have lost already and fights they would lose again if they take on Bill Clinton. It’s always panty sniffing and Juanita Broaddrick and Monica and Me and Mrs. Jones with these people and they always lose and then scream like Daffy Duck as Bugs Bunny outwits them again. Guys, you’re not going to win a fight with Bill Clinton and even if you engage in a fight with Bill Clinton you will lose because the target is not Bill Clinton but Barack Obama.

So what should Romney/Ryan supporters whether you hate Bill Clinton or love Bill Clinton do in practical terms? First of all understand what Bill Clinton does and how. Second of all take some action, don’t sulk.

You know, there is a really big season opening football game tonight. Bill Clinton knows about this game. Bill Clinton also knows that many of the people he is supposed to seduce will be watching the football game and not him. Instead of sulking, invite people on the fence in this election over to the house to watch the game. Make last night’s low viewership ratings even lower. Phone friends who like Bill but aren’t sure about Obama just before Bill starts to speak. If you have a website, talk football. Invite white working class voters over for drinks/game and keep them away from the great seducer – Bill Clinton.

What should Romney/Ryan supporters do to counter the great seducer on television and websites? First, don’t waste time trying to counter Bill Clinton on an intellectual level – you’re not going to win that debate and it’s a distraction away from attacks on Barack Obama anyway.

So, what to do, what to do? Again understand your objectives. It’s not Kill Bill. Also, there is more than one way to skin a cat (sorry cat lovers).

To counteract the great seducer use intelligence and emotion. When we Democrats are born we are sent to Mao training schools to wear berets, wave red books filled with slogans and hail the leader. Kidding, but there is a lesson to be learned from Mao and the cultural revolution.

When Madame Mao and her cultural revolutionaries wanted to launch a terror called the “cultural revolution” in China they knew that Chairman Mao posed a great obstruction to their plans. They realized there are two ways to make someone irrelevant: one, bury them; two, put them on a pedestal so high they become distant and irrelevant. The White Boned Demon, a.k.a. Madame Mao, chose to place the Chairman on that great pedestal and therefore away from the day to day relevance in China.

Romney/Ryan supporters should take a page from Madame Mao when it comes to Bill Clinton. Don’t fight Bill, elevate Bill. It’s a way to emotionally paralyze Bill too because he just wants to be loved (due to childhood issues). Embracing Bill will throw him for a loop. Don’t attack Bill, use Bill to attack Barack.

But you know that, we’ve written about it before. Don’t waste time attacking Bill Clinton, just say, “Barack, you’re no Bill Clinton”. This response not only neutralizes Bill but it drives Barack crazy:

The Romney/Ryan response should be “Bill Clinton worked with the Republican congress and they helped America. Barack Obama is no Bill Clinton. Barack Obama has made a bad economy worse. Barack Obama will continue to make the economy worse so we have to get rid of him if we want America to prosper.” See, it is simple. Paul Ryan agrees with us.

Romney/Ryan supporters must, for their own survival, understand that surrogates are not going to save either Mitt or Barack. It’s a tough lesson for them when it comes to Latino heavy states but it is a good lesson for them to remember when it comes to the role of Bill Clinton. As we wrote yesterday, “at the presidential level surrogates like Bill Clinton or Marco Rubio do not get votes, the most surrogates can do for a candidate is to get attention and possibly a listen from the voters who know/respect them.”

Now, there are plenty of other videos that Romney/Ryan supporters should deploy. It is important they do so. Don’t try to beat Bill Clinton intellectually or emotionally. Do some counter-programming. Do some counter punching. Respond emotionally to what will be a brilliant Bill Clinton speech by praising Bill Clinton and reminding the voters that Bill Clinton and Barack Obama have a history. Deploy that history (don’t forget Hillary):

Don’t forget “they played the race card on me”. Fight emotional appeals with emotional responses.

Discuss that history of “Democrats Versus Dimocrats And What Is Bill Clinton Up to?“. Don’t forget those incidents which led Charles Krauthammer to exclaim “Let’s face it, Bill Clinton’s a double agent for the GOP“.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

The question after all the above remains – Why is Bill Clinton speaking tonight at the Obama Obmination even after he has been called a “racist” and Hillary trashed by the Obama Dimocrats? Why Bill, why?

The answer lies in an advertisement for state run lotteries: You gotta be in it to win it.

For years we have discussed the war between the FDR/Clinton coalition and the Obama coalition. That war continues every day on multiple levels. Last night, at the Obama Dimocrat convention a video tribute was shown which featured Ted Kennedy’s endorsement of Barack Obama in 2008. In 2008 Ted Kennedy lied to Bill Clinton, pretended he was not committed to either candidate while secretly he was one of Barack Obama’s biggest backers. It was no accident that video was shown.

It is no accident that Monica Lewinsky’s Rabbi will be speaking shortly after Bill Clinton leaves the convention platform.

This is total war in the open and hidden. Bill Clinton has to be very agile in this war and often few see what is going on. When Bill Clinton extolls Mitt Romney’s business career as “sterling” and mocks Obama fiscal policy some understand what Bill is up to and that he does not like Barack Obama. When Hillary Clinton regularly disappears during big Obama events to attend some obscure ceremony in some far distant land out of the hemisphere many understand that Hillary can’t stand Barack. But then Bill Clinton agrees to speak to the Obama Dimocrats and endorse the Chicago flim-flam man and all we hear is “why, why, why?”. Well there are reasons and methods to the madness.

Whatever happens to Barack Obama in November there will be a battle for the soul of what was once the Democratic Party. Bill Clinton wants to resurrect the Democratic Party of himself and FDR. Barack Obama and his minions want to go “Forward” with the lunacy. So what to do?

Andrew Cuomo will run for president in 2016 from the center. Andrew Cuomo is no where to be seen at the Obama obamination. For Cuomo, who does not want to show his cards or ambition, that is a smart decision. Keep away from this stink-fest for the sake of the future. Bill Clinton does not have that option.

Bill Clinton must appear as a supporter or he and Hillary Clinton will be attacked – and when the fight for control of the future of the party (Obama Dimocrat or Clinton Democrat) comes – and that’s the battle that matters to Bill Clinton right now – he could lose. Bill Clinton knows that the election will come down to what Obama and Romney do and that in that fight he is not a determinative factor. In the fight for the future of the party Bill Clinton is a determinative factor.

Buzzfeed today published an article describing how at night, during prime time, the Obama Dimocrats are posing as centrists. During the day, they are full out KOOKS. Bill Clinton is thinking about the future and holding the flag of rational Democrats in the face of Obama Dimocrats.

Bill Clinton knows all this day versus night scheduling deception. Bill Clinton also knows his #1 guy Doug Band is voting for Mitt Romney. Bill Clinton wants everybody to know Doug Band, his #1 guy is voting for Romney/Ryan. Politics at this level are “complicated”.

Hey, remember that time that Obama was with Bill Clinton in the White House and Obama left? Watch the video. Bill Clinton said that he does not leak his advice to Obama to Big Media. That’s when Obama decides to go see Michelle. Reports that Obama wanted to ask Hillary Clinton to be his veep but was afraid to ask personally because he was afraid Bill Clinton would speak about the offer to Big Media is only one example of Obama fearing Bill Clinton using all channels to get out his message.

This is no caged bird.

For years the Obama henchmen have tried to cage Hillary Clinton and Bill Clinton. Now, Bill Clinton refuses to even give them a copy of his speech. It wouldn’t matter anyway. Bill Clinton can speak without a TelePromTer, as he did when his broke during a State of the Union speech. Barack Obama is no Bill Clinton.

When Bill Clinton in 2010 made the argument to voters to ‘Give us Two More Years,’ ‘Vote Against Us All If It’s Not Better’ he knew what he was doing. Bill Clinton was providing an ad for Republicans to use against what he knew he would have to do in 2012. That’s time travel Bill, anticipating the chess moves before he makes them and the counter chess moves to be made. Complicated.

“Vote us all out then!” Then is Now.

Bill Clinton is going to give a brilliant speech tonight. In order to make that speech Bill Clinton will have to speak about his achievements in office. And that is what Romney/Ryan need to focus on. “Barack, you are no Bill Clinton.”

In his more “flexible” moments Bill Clinton likes Paul Ryan. Remember?

Romney/Ryan supporters should remain focused on the target. Romney/Ryan supporters must remember that Bill Clinton and Hillary Clinton hate Barack Obama almost as much as they do.

Bill Clinton is speaking tonight because Bill Clinton is doing what he always does – thinking about tomorrow.


The Battle For Bill Clinton

Next week, the I/E Republicans will face off against the E/I Republicans. The E/I Republicans will have the advantage. But thus far we have been very impressed with the I/E Republicans in the face of a great provocation.

The E/I Republicans have the advantage because applauding seals have that distracting effect. The I/E Republicans have a much tougher task and that is to point out the strategic landscape and try to deploy reason and logic against colorful rubber balls.

We’ve written about E/I and I/E before. We’re on the side of Intelligence over Emotion (I/E).

In one of the I/E article from 2010 we quoted an I/E Republican as to why Republicans were not attacking Bill Clinton even as Bill Clinton campaigned in state after state:

“Today at the New York Times a not smart Bill Clinton article, of the type we have repeatedly “refudiated”, has a smart remark from a Republican explaining why the Republican party “mounted no counterattack” as Bill Clinton campaigns this year – “People have respect for him.” Last week Rush Limbaugh joined the NObama Coalition of Hillary Supporters, Tea Party members, Republicans and Independents.”

That’s an I/E Republican. The strategy was to respect Bill Clinton as he campaigned in state after state. I/E Republicans instead focused attacks on Barack Obama and guess what? They won big in 2010.

We understand that Republicans are tempted to go E/I. Bill Clinton is not only going to speak on “behalf” of Barack Obama at the Bank of America convention but today the Obama campaign released an advertisement which features Bill Clinton and only Bill Clinton. So we understand the great temptation for E/I Republicans to indulge themselves and thereby commit an strategic error.

In a smart post titled “Dear Conservatives: Don’t Go There” the Crawdads give good advice:

“I realize he’s not one of your favorite people but the last time you went after him it cost you two House Speakers and he ended up more popular than when you started. Bill and Hillary Clinton are currently the two most popular politicians in the country.

More importantly, the Clintons have a very loyal fan base that despises Barack Obama and the current Democratic leadership. (Most of us believe that Bill Clinton shares our feelings.) Many Clinton fans (like myself) voted for John McCain and Sarah Palin four years ago. Some of us will be supporting Mitt Romney this year.

If you start attacking the Big Dawg you run the risk of alienating these Clinton Democrats. There are plenty of sleazy Democrats you can go after instead, like Ted Kennedy, John Edwards and Anthony Weiner.

Keep your eyes on the prize and the best of luck this November.”

In short I/E, not E/I.

It’s a great temptation to try to beat Bill Clinton after repeated failures to get the better of him. But your focus should be Barack Obama, not Bill Clinton.

Every time Bill Clinton says something “nice” about Obama we have to point out yet again that every time Bill Clinton is seen it is very bad for Obama. Barack Obama suffers by comparison. No need to worry Republicans/conservatives. Focus on Barack, leave Bill alone, for your own good. E/I Republicans/conservatives, consider ingesting drugs to tranquilize your nerves if Bill plucks them every time you see him. But leave Bill alone. For your own good, leave Bill alone. Bill loves your attention and he benefits from the attacks, or haven’t you noticed?

Don’t leave Hillary Clinton alone. Quote Hillary Clinton as much as possible. She is greatly admired too. Do we have to quote Sun-tzu and The Art Of War, to you? Hillary Clinton is a great sun, a brilliant light. Quote her. Quote her often.

Now wasn’t that fun guys? You see how you can benefit?

But as we wrote there is a lot of upset because of that new video by Bill. But there is a dumb E/I way to lash out. There is a smart I/E way to respond to the “Video: Clinton cuts ad touting Obama plan that Obama never talks about“.

“But let’s give at least one cheer to former President Clinton — at least he’s talking about economic policy, even if he’s vague and misleading. When will the Leader of the Free World conclude his multi-city exposition on roof-riding dogs and rubbers to deign to discuss what his specific economic plans are for a second term?”

It’s a bit critical of Bill but the I/E comes from pointing out that Obama is not talking about “what his specific economic plans are for a second term”. When Stephen Moore was asked today by Neal Cavuto what he thought of the ad, Moore went into an I/E response pointing out the different failed policies of Barack Obama as contrasted to the successful Bill Clinton presidency/policies. Give Moore a gold star.

Avoid the temptation E/I Republicans/conservatives. Put on your thinking caps or hit the bars and drink yourself into oblivion. There is a better way. The better way is I/E. Instead of whipping yourselves into an anti-Clinton frenzy – in what will only help Barack Obama – think. Think.

How’s this for an I/E response which hurts Obama using Bill Clinton?:

See how it’s done the I/E way?

And don’t forget Hillary:

* * * * * *

There is a new film from Citizens United about to debut. The trailer for the film has already been released. You can see the trailer for “The Hope And The Change” here:

You see those people in that film? Those are the people that Barack Obama cannot get to vote for him again. Obama wants to use Bill Clinton to get him those votes. It’s a strategy that won’t work – unless E/I replaces I/E. Don’t attack Bill. The people in that film are the ones that like Bill Clinton. Attack Bill, you run the danger of losing these people. Lose these people and Barack Obama wins. I/E not E/I.

A big gold star goes to Sarah Palin who understands I/E. This is one smart lady who is ahead of the curve even though not very deep simpleton “analysts” don’t see how smart Palin is until it is too late for them.

Recently Palin was all I/E. Palin had this to say:

“Palin, the 2008 GOP vice presidential nominee and a Fox News contributor, had said Biden’s comments are the latest example of how he “really drags down that ticket.”

“If that’s not the nail in the coffin, really, the strategists there in the Obama campaign have got to look at a diplomatic way of replacing Joe Biden on the ticket with Hillary,” Palin said. “And I don’t want to throw out that suggestion and have them actually accept the suggestion because then an Obama-Hillary Clinton ticket would have a darn good chance of winning.”

How smart is that? Count the ways. Palin divides the opposition, hammers the real target (Biden) as a dunce, uses Hillary Clinton as a cudgel against Obama/Biden knowing Hillary is popular and has strong supporters who would like her to be in the White House not the boob, and Palin even honestly admits the obvious that an Obama/H_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ticket would be a very strong ticket – thereby making a great jiujitsu slam ensuring that ticket less of a possibility and even if it became a possibility it would be weakened as an attack on Biden. Smart, smart lady that Sarah Palin.

Next week will test Republicans/conservatives in many ways. The following week when Bill Clinton speaks at the Bank of America convention (on the same night many white working class voters will be watching the NFL season opener so even in the scheduling the Obama boobery is manifest) the temptation to attack Bill Clinton will be too great and many Republicans/conservatives will succumb to E/I. We hope that does not happen.

It won’t hurt Bill Clinton to be attacked. In 2008 Barack Obama via his henchmen played the race card against Bill Clinton – according to Bill Clinton. Bill Clinton was labeled a racist and he and Hillary Clinton were given last rites by stupid commentators and Big Media generally. But the other day Bill Clinton celebrated his birthday and his age matched his approval ratings. As he gets older his approval ratings will climb right along with him.

For I/E Republicans the challenge next week, and throughout the remaining few months of the campaign, will be to stay focused on Barack Obama and the economy. Don’t fall into E/I. Don’t let your E/I cohorts take control. Stay focused. Stay focused.

It’s the economy, stupid – and Obama made it worse. That should be your focus, not anything, or anyone, else.