The Messiah last night in his State of the Union Address:
I’m a Democrat. But I believe what Republican Abraham Lincoln believed: that government should do for people only what they cannot do better by themselves, and no more. That’s why my education reform offers more competition, and more control for schools and states. That’s why we’re getting rid of regulations that don’t work.
While it is accurate to say that Obama has been friendly to school choice and charter schools, how can he with a straight face say that he's offering "more control for schools and states?" Here in the First State, his Race to the Top monies have come with innumerable strings attached, from the same mandated tests statewide, to the same teacher evaluation system ... again, statewide. There's very little, if any, school (local) control anymore. The state DOE, if anything, is running things more and more rather than the individual districts. Which, unfortunately, means the vast majority of Race to the Top funds have done nothing but expand another bureauacracy.
Folks, this is what we have to vote out of office this November:
As Obama called for passage of those bills, he also responded to a recent Republican push to require him to approve the construction of the Keystone XL pipeline from Canada. "However many jobs might be generated by a Keystone pipeline," he said, "they're going to be a lot fewer than the jobs that are created by extending the payroll tax cut and extending unemployment insurance."
You follow that? Actual jobs that are, in The Messiah's parlance, "shovel ready," don't compare to the "jobs" "created" by the payroll tax cut and unemployment insurance.
Meanwhile, The Messiah's own jobs council says "YES" to projects like Keystone.
Unreal.
UPDATE: ABC News: In Wake of Keystone Decision, Prime Minister Harper Tells President Obama that Canada Will Work on Sending Oil to Asia.
We should all know by now that nothing is The Messiah's fault. Nothing. Ever.
During Monday night’s GOP debate, Newt Gingrich observed that more Americans have been placed on the food stamps program under President Obama than any other president in the country’s history. Although Gingrich’s assertion was based on the current number of people on food stamps, White House Press Secretary Jay Carney attempted to spin the narrative 180 degrees by saying that it was in fact Republican policies that created the demand for food stamps. He cited a lack of Wall Street regulation as the catalyst.“The economic policies that contributed to the great recession were supported by and are being proposed by I believe all the [Republican candidates],” Carney said during the press briefing Tuesday. Criticizing Republicans for opposing Dodd-Frank regulations, Carney added, “We look forward to the debate with whomever emerges from the primary process.” (Link.)
Soccer Dad sends word of a Weekly Standard article which notes that President Obama's pet education project, Race to the Top, has been a dismal failure:
Yesterday, the U.S. Department of Education issued first-year progress reports for 12 states that received $4 billion in federal funds through an Obama administration pet project, Race to the Top. Not one had followed through on the promises they’d made to secure these grants. For three states — New York, Hawaii, and Florida — their progress was so lax Education Secretary Arne Duncan threatened yesterday to pull their grant money if not accelerated soon.
Our own First State, Delaware, gets a needed mentioned too (being that we were one of the first recipients of the RTTT monies). It notes that state teachers "complained federal mandates created a third of their paperwork" ... while RTTT was "contributing a tenth of their funding." And this ratio is actually better than the national average!
Ugh. C'mon, people -- education has historically been a state and local function. The sooner it reverts to this idea, the better.
For great local education reporting laced with snarky commentary (including a ton about the silly Race to the Top), be sure to pop over to Kilroy's place.
The Messiah, once again demonstrating his complete obliviousness to the plight of Joe Six Pack: Obamas enjoy multi-course tasting menu.
President Obama enjoyed a five-to-seven course tasting menu Wednesday night at a dinner in Honolulu with first lady Michelle Obama and 10 friends.The Obamas were part of a group of ten, which included the president’s sister, and the party ordered off a special tasting menu – a multi-course meal designed specifically by the chef.
“The Obama party had a special 5-course tasting menu for $75 a person, $105 per person with wine pairings for each course," according to the pool report. "Highlights include "Sassey Salad" and bacon wrapped pork loin,” according to CNN’s Peter Morris, who the pool report said was at the restaurant when the president arrived.
The article also notes The Messiah spent seven hours on the golf course beforehand ... playing with long-time friend Robert Titcomb, "who earlier this year plead no contest to soliciting a prostitute in Honolulu." Nice. Either the course was very crowded (unlikely, since the prez was playing) or Obama and his chums royally suck at the game. And nice idea, Barry, playing with a convicted criminal.
"Progressives" are fond of pointing out how much, for example, George W. Bush went on "vacation;" however, he virtually always did so at his own ranch. He wasn't [at least seen] splurging on a multi-course meal in a notoriously expensive area of the country. And even if he was, the economy wasn't nearly as bad as it is now, so the perception wouldn't be as bad.
This is just yet another example of how "Hope and Change" was nothing but a massive fraud perpetrated upon the American populace. The list is endless: Phony stimulus spending "results," hypocrisy on measures in the War on Terror, backtracking on Gitmo and Patriot Act provisions, outright lies about "transparency," hypocrisy about appointments, hypocrisy about spending, hypocrisy about the debt and deficit ... the list is interminable.
And the Left/Democrats are silent. Because, like much of their agenda, it has "good intentions."
Obama Challenges Provisions in Budget Bill (via signing statements).
Via Doug Ross @ Journal:
A spokesman for President Obama‘s re-election campaign blasted Mr. Romney and questioned whether he had something to hide in his finances.“Why does Governor Romney feel like he can play by a different set of rules?” said Ben LaBolt, a spokesman for the Obama campaign. “What is it that he doesn’t want the American people to see? Governor Romney, who has favored secrecy over openness time after time, should live up to the same standard of disclosure his father and others set.”
Uh huh:
1. Occidental College records and transcripts -- Not released
2. Columbia University records and transcripts -- Not released
3. Columbia Thesis paper -- 'not available'
4. Harvard University records and transcripts -- Not released
5. Medical records -- Not released
6. Illinois State Senate schedule -- 'not available'
7. Illinois State Senate records -- 'not available'
8. Law practice client list -- Not released
9. Certified Copy of Original Birth certificate -- Not released
10. Harvard Law Review articles published -- None
11. University of Chicago scholarly articles -- None
12. Record of Baptism -- Not released or 'not available'
Now, I've made it plain in posts and comments that the birth certificate stuff is a non-issue. But the academic, health, legal, and Illinois Senate records? WTF is up with all those? Please, please, PLEASE Romney campaign -- hit this idiot back ... and hard.
The Idiot-in-Chief's latest:
As Obama called for passage of those bills, he also responded to a recent Republican push to require him to approve the construction of the Keystone XL pipeline from Canada. "However many jobs might be generated by a Keystone pipeline," he said, "they're going to be a lot fewer than the jobs that are created by extending the payroll tax cut and extending unemployment insurance."
Or, as Ace says, "Sums it up, doesn't it? A government program which puts people on the dole creates jobs, but a private venture to deliver energy does not."
... says that lying depends on "one's state of mind":
Be afraid, folks. Very afraid.
Because he ridiculously downplays very real threats with preposterously ridiculous euphemisms:
Sen. Susan Collins on Wednesday blasted the Defense Department for classifying the Fort Hood massacre as workplace violence and suggested political correctness is being placed above the security of the nation's Armed Forces at home.During a joint session of the Senate and House Homeland Security Committee on Wednesday, the Maine Republican referenced a letter from the Defense Department depicting the Fort Hood shootings as workplace violence. She criticized the Obama administration for failing to identify the threat as radical Islam.
This is the same administration that recommends to colleges and universities to do their best to skirt the law in order to utilize racial preferences.
This is the same administration that will make sure your embellished profile on Match.com gets you labeled a felon.
This is the same administration that is attempting to revive the Fairness Doctrine.
This is the same administration that wanted to apologize to Japan for the US dropping two A-bombs on it to end World War 2.
This is the same administration that refers to FEMA as your "Federal Family."
This is the same administration that gives rich kids free lunches so poor[er] kids don't feel "stigmatized."
This is the same administration that ... well, you get the point. I could go on forever.
UPDATE: Yorkshire chimes in: "It’s official, the country is Nuckin Futs. How ANYONE can call an act of terrorism 'workplace violence' is beyond that thing we try to call SANITY."
Via Civil But Disobedient: Dept. of Justice says Lying on Match.com needs to be a crime.
The U.S. Department of Justice is defending computer hacking laws that make it a crime to use a fake name on Facebook or lie about your weight in an online dating profile at a site like Match.com.In a statement obtained by CNET that's scheduled to be delivered tomorrow, the Justice Department argues that it must be able to prosecute violations of Web sites' often-ignored, always-unintelligible "terms of service" policies.
What makes this possible is a section of the CFAA that was never intended to be used that way: a general-purpose prohibition on any computer-based act that "exceeds authorized access." To the Justice Department, this means that a Web site's terms of service define what's "authorized" or not, and ignoring them can turn you into a felon.
On the other hand, because millions of Americans likely violate terms of service agreements every day, you'd have a lot of company.
How 'bout that? So if you wanna make yourself sound a little better to potential suitors by fibbing about your weight or height on Match.com or any of its competitors, you could be brought up on charges by the DOJ. On the other hand, if you blatantly and outright intimidate voters at a voting station during an election, you have nothing to worry about. Funnel firearms to Mexican drug lords? No problem. Look the other way while illegal immigrants game the system? Ain't a bother.
If there ever was a reason to ditch Obama next year, this is it.
Let's see if THE NARRARIVETM is true to reality:
Boston: Three are charged with dealing crack; situation "deteriorating."
Three people arrested Thursday night inside the Occupy Boston camp have been charged with dealing crack cocaine ... "Things have changed drastically. It seems to be deteriorating,” the man told Carl. “A lot of drug use, alcohol use, people getting into fights… It’s deteriorating pretty quick.”
In Los Angeles, OWSers shut down a Burger King in "protest":
OWSer found dead in tent in Vancouver:
Lauren Gill, an organizer at the camp, said the woman apparently died of a drug overdose. She said the death highlights the need for more addiction services because drugs are such a big issue in the city.
In Phoenix, several OWSers were arrested for violating urban camping laws:
Three people were arrested Saturday as part of the ongoing Occupy Phoenix protest. Sgt. Trent Crump, a spokesman for the Phoenix Police Department, said two people were arrested at Cesar Chavez Plaza in downtown Phoenix for breaking urban camping laws. One person was arrested on a felony warrant.
Here in Delaware, protesters are in danger of following in Phoenix's footsteps:
Occupy Delaware protesters, who are railing against perceived economic inequality and corporate control of government, thumbed their noses at Gov. Jack Markell again Sunday, rejecting a state permit to camp out in Wilmington's Brandywine Park.But the protesters' decision to migrate to Peter Spencer Plaza, next to the Boggs Federal Building, could lead to a confrontation with Wilmington police this morning.
As you've no doubt surmised by now, my main objection to OWS is the preposterous media double standard with regards to it and its coverage of the Tea Party. Not to mention, the preposterous double standard by OWS-supporting "progressives" themselves. For example,
And on and on it goes. In other words, do not listen to one word of protest from a so-called "progressive" about the coverage/treatment of the OWSers ... until you've established that he/she wasn't ridiculously critical of the Tea Party and its motives/actions.
The Messiah in Frisco:
“The one thing that we absolutely know for sure is that if we don’t work even harder than we did in 2008, then we’re going to have a government that tells the American people, ‘you are on your own,’” Obama told a crowd of 200 donors over lunch at the [ironically named -- Hube] W Hotel.
I wouldn't have it any other way, Boss. Just get out of my way and stay out of my business, thank you very much.
The Messiah of course mentioned things like polluted air (as if the GOP desires that), not being able to afford college (as if the feds don't already give out college loans, usurped from banks ironically), hidden fees from credi card companies (as if banks didn't raise fees elsewhere in response to federal meddling), and exposure to mercury (as if the GOP desires that).
To paraphrase John Kerry from 2004 regarding President Bush, "I can't believe the GOP could lose to this idiot."
The administration has insisted that the highest officials in Iran knew about the recent foiled (Saudi ambassador) assassination plot ... but why should we believe them? Those Iranian officials deny knowing about it. After all, if we're to believe that Eric Holder's story about Fast and Furious, then why shouldn't that same amount of belief be given to the Iranians?
Leaked cables show Japan nixed a presidential apology to Hiroshima and Nagasaki for using nukes to end the overseas contingency operation known as World War II.A heretofore secret cable dated Sept. 3, 2009, was recently released by WikiLeaks. Sent to Secretary of State Clinton, it reported Japan's Vice Foreign Minister Mitoji Yabunaka telling U.S. Ambassador John Roos that "the idea of President Obama visiting Hiroshima to apologize for the atomic bombing during World War II is a 'nonstarter.'"
The Japanese feared the apology would be exploited by anti-nuclear groups and those opposed to the defensive alliance between Japan and the U.S.
'Ya gotta love it -- the Japanese had to tell Obama to bag the apology. And precisely what would such an apology entail? Let's imagine:
... that he can't even remember his wife's name. Or, maybe he has the repeal of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" on his mind. Check it at about the 0:35 mark:
Seriously, in 2008 we elected a community organizer, state senator, college instructor first term senator over a guy who spent five years in a Vietnamese prison. And now he’s lecturing us about how America’s gone “soft”? Really?
'Nuff said. Well, maybe not -- here's Peter Kirsanow:
The Obama brand of liberalism not only is likely to contribute to a “softer” America, but a soft-headed America as well. We condemn tea-partiers and veterans as racists and potential terrorists but we release actual terrorists from Guantanamo because the evident cruelties of that country-club facility are too terrible to bear. We demonize the hard-won, self-made success of risk-takers, but shovel millions of their hard-earned dollars to prop up the uncompetitive but politically correct enterprises of the well-connected. Government policies proliferate that punish effort, risk, and success but reward sloth, identity, and failure.Soft America calls a 26-year-old a “child” under Obamacare, but court martials him if he’s a Navy SEAL who slaps a vicious terrorist in the course of capture. Soft America promotes the expansion of speech codes on college campuses so as not to give offense to anyone or anything but the First Amendment. Soft America spends $4 trillion to no effect and then asks for more. Soft America works diligently to turn the societal safety net into a hammock. Soft America bows to tyrants but lectures allies. Soft America waters down our history to give minor or even inconsequential figures as much play as giants. Soft America eschews absolutes, derides standards, ridicules heroes, and scoffs at virtue.
If the president is worried that America might get softer and lose its competitive edge, he should take a serious look at his own administration and the ideology that motivates it.
NOW it's 'nuff said!
Cheeyeah, right. Who the hell is buying this nonsense:
First Lady Michelle Obama was spotted this afternoon on a recession-friendly shopping trip at the Target in Alexandria, Va. A casually dressed Mrs. Obama was snapped by Associated Press photographers wearing a baseball cap and sunglasses pushing her cart and carrying shopping bags.While the White House does not provide details about the First Lady’s personal activities, “It is not uncommon for the First Lady to slip out to run an errand, eat at a local restaurant or otherwise enjoy the city outside the White House gates,” her Communications Director Kristina Schake said.
Right.
The woman who has an immense entourage with her when she's overseas and who spends her vacations in either Hawaii or Martha's Vineyard ... shops at Target.
Right.
The Messiah in 2009:
The Messiah just recently:
Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy
This video has been viral the last couple days showing the First Lady saying something about the American flag, and then making a face of obvious derision. Obviously, we don't know what she really said, although I think Michelle Obama's communications director, Kristina Schake's, "explanation" is outright ludicrous:
The First Lady was commenting to the President on how moving and powerful it always is to watch all that America's firefighters and police officers do to honor the flag. It was an emotional moment on a powerful day and she was awed by the ceremony and all that the flag symbolizes.
What?? Watch the video again and tell me the Obamas' reaction is one of being "moved" and "awed." No freakin' way.
As JoshuaPundit notes, there's plenty of reason to believe what many think Mrs. Obama said -- something like "All this just for a flag?"
My point is that The Obamas have a very different take on what our flag and our traditions mean than most Americans, and that's been evident for quite some time.So it would certainly not be out of character for our First Lady to say something disparaging like this, which is why the White House has mostly kept her selectively muzzled or away on high -priced vacations for the past three years. I don't know what she said, but the body language, the head shaking and the eye rolling definitely reinforce that whatever she had to say it probably wasn't something the Obama campaign wants to have surface.
What do you think the First Lady was whispering to her hubby in the vid?
Gotta love our current administration. It's NEVER to blame ... for ANYTHING:
After spending months touting the Obama administration's decision to loan $535 million to the California solar energy upstart Solyndra, top officials took a new tack Wednesday while testifying before Congress about the company's abrupt shut-down and bankruptcy: the loan, they said, was actually the Bush administration's idea. The Energy Department's top lending officer told Congress that the Solyndra loan application was not only filed during President Bush's term, but it surged towards completion before Obama took office in January 2009."By the time the Obama administration took office in late January 2009, the loan programs' staff had already established a goal of, and timeline for, issuing the company a conditional loan guarantee commitment in March 2009," said Jonathan Silver, who heads the Energy loan program. (Link)
There's just one small problem with this: Bush and co. refused the loan.
The results of the Congressional probe shared Tuesday with ABC News show that less than two weeks before President Bush left office, on January 9, 2009, the Energy Department's credit committee had voted against offering a loan commitment to Solyndra.Even after Obama took office on Jan. 20, 2009, analysts in the Energy Department and in the Office of Management and Budget were repeatedly questioning the wisdom of the loan. In one exchange, an Energy official wrote of "a major outstanding issue" -- namely, that Solyndra's numbers showed it would run out of cash in September 2011. (Link)
And waddya know? It's September, 2011.
Just imagine if Michele Bachmann, Rick Perry or Sarah Palin had said this whopper:
Eh, not quite:
Lincoln wasn’t even the GOP’s first Presidential nominee; the first Republican nominee was John C. Fremont in 1856. As the Independence Hall Association recalls, the actual founders of the Republican Party are “Northern leaders such as Horace Greeley, Salmon Chase and Charles Sumner.” Lincoln joined early, as did other anti-slavery Whigs whose party was unraveling at the time, and Lincoln came in second for the 1856 vice-presidential nomination, but he was not a founder of the party. By the time he became a factor in the GOP, the party had already taken a majority in the House of Representatives (1855); it also carried 11 states and 114 electoral votes in the 1856 election that sent Democrat James Buchanan to the White House.
Nice. But Obama is smart, remember. Just like he demonstrates here. (Check out the earliest entries.)
Why hasn't Barack Obama done anything about the historic flooding in Vermont? Doesn't he care about white people??
Maybe we can have another telethon to raise funds ... and maybe invite Kanye West again.
It's not the federal government anymore, folks. It's ... your Federal Family:
How freakin' pathetic is this? Gives a whole new meaning to "I'm from the government, and I'm here to help," huh? (And by the way -- you spelled "preparations" wrong, Mr. Federal Family.)
To quote Mike Protack (in reference to, ridiculously in that case, Bill Lee hanging out in bars to meet women), it's just "creepy."
Just on the heels of my sense-of-entitlement bashing post from last week, we read this insanity from one of the American bastions of insanity, Detroit:
Last month, with the federal government on the precipice of default, President Obama & Co. repeatedly warned that any cuts in government would amount to a terrorist Tea Party attack on assistance to the poor and elderly.Funnily enough, they failed to mention the recent $4.5 billion expansion of the Healthy Hunger-Free Kids Act, which will now provide free lunches to ALL — rich and poor, needy and non-needy — of Detroit’s 65,800 public school-students. (Detroit is one of three pilot programs starting this month for a free-for-all that will ultimately cover similar districts nationwide.)
This new program is part of Obama’s orgy of spending, a binge that has ballooned the federal budget by 25 percent since his inauguration. But the program’s logic is even more insane than the price tag: The administration says it is giving rich kids free food to eliminate the shame that less-fortunate students may feel in receiving free food. We’re not making this up.
“We’ve worked very hard to reduce the stigma,” Aaron Lavallee, a U.S. Department of Agriculture spokesman, told the Detroit News. “We’re seeing a lot of working-class families who’ve had to turn to free school meals to feed their children.”
Considering how I mentioned in last week's post that way too many kids getting free meals seem to have little difficulty purchasing cell phones, iPods, and pricey basketball shoes, is it really a hardship for working-class families to pack a PB&J sandwich and, say, a box drink in a brown bag for their kids?? My family was certainly working-class, and this is precisely what my mom did for my sisters and I each and every school day. That would sure heavily assist in avoiding any stigma, right? But no -- you and I have to pay these families so they can avoid "stigma."
Yeesh.
Next, our illustrious feds have nixed a New York City plan to limit the types of foods people can buy with food stamps. Why? Again, can't have any STIGMA.
What did I [snarkily] pen last week? "Wondering why that person is using food stamps to buy a bunch of junk instead of actual food at the grocery store? Who are you to judge? Just keep your mouth shut, dammit!"
And we wonder why we have an ever-growing sense of entitlement among our populace? As Henry Payne says regarding the Detroit lunch nonsense, "What’s next — handing out free Chevy Volts to all 16-year olds in order to reduce the stigma that low-income kids feel driving used 1990 Geo Metros?"
... maybe we can make some judgments based on his teaching. Remember Doug Ross's recent post about how the media wasted absolutely NO time tracking down recent GOP presidential candidate Rick Perry's college grades, yet our current president largely remains an academic question mark.
Take a gander at the following files courtesy of edu-blogger extraordinaire Matthew Tabor of Education News.org. It contains Obama's law course syllabus, exams and a few memos. You decide about the course's intellectual and academic rigor. (The entire syllabus packet was too large to upload to our server in its entirety; therefore, I've broken it down into several image files, per page. To start off, check out the requirements for 1994's "Current Issues in Racism and the Law":
What do you think? Rigorous or not? The entire syllabus is below:
Other files:
Matt, three years ago, originally solicited opinions on Obama's syllabus -- but without identifying the professor! Here was his own take (my emphasis):
1. For 40% of the grade for a graduate level class, a 3,000 word paper that requires no research at all is anything but rigorous.2. Encouraging students to draw on material/discussion exclusively from class can limit the intellectual breadth of the assignment.
3. Engagement/effort is a low bar. This is a graduate level course, not high school. I expect more than comprehension and trying hard.
4. Sections 2) and 3) from the syllabus – “thorough examination” of opinion and “concrete proposals” – are solid requirements. The problem is that the paper is likely too short and will draw on far too few sources to realize either of those goals.
Here's some other assessments from Matt's post's comments:
- For one- the length is way too long for this project. Second, the value is too low for the length. Third, WHAT the heck is this prof thinking with not having the students research and use peer reviewed research? “Minimum” of 12 pages on a vague topic… If I were a student in that class, I’d be screaming in frustration. (Link)
- I suspect I would have a problem with 60% being devoted to a group project and participation. Show me the rubrics of both of these activities. The idea that I could pass this class just coming to class, interjecting comments and loafing in a group blows my mind. Now the group project may be more rigorous and intense than any of the group projects I’ve had the displeasure of participating in, but I base my assumption on my own experience for now! (Link)
- Graduate syllabi are rarely complete guides to assignments or classes. Two points here:
1. The paper is to be a minimum of 12 pages with no maximum. A graduate student with any brain at all will see that as saying that a brilliant student with a thorough grasp of the subject will just barely be able to do it in 12 pages, and will think “I need to write a lot more than 12 pages.”
2. Graduate courses require conversation about ideas. This assignment is an invitation to the students to converse with their professor and refine their understanding of things. (Link)- “Fully engaged” and yet may only draw exclusively on the material and discussion presented in class. The dichotomy of thought is astounding! Sounds more like “I want to make sure you think as I do.” (Link)
... but our current president? Still an academic enigma.
In 2004, Barack Obama's GOP opponent for Senate -- Jack Ryan -- "mysteriously" had his sealed divorce records un-sealed. But I'm sure that's just coincidental.You know, I find the media quite honest and diligent. It mocks and vilifies Rick Perry's college transcripts, yet somehow forgot about checking:
1. Occidental College records and transcripts -- Not released
2. Columbia University records and transcripts -- Not released
3. Columbia Thesis paper -- 'not available'
4. Harvard University records and transcripts -- Not released
5. Medical records -- Not released
6. Illinois State Senate schedule -- 'not available'
7. Illinois State Senate records -- 'not available'
8. Law practice client list -- Not released
9. Certified Copy of Original Birth certificate -- Not released
10. Harvard Law Review articles published -- None
11. University of Chicago scholarly articles -- None
12. Record of Baptism -- Not released or 'not available'But I'm sure that's just an innocent oversight.
The most unbelievable of all the above is the Illinois State Senate records. WTF? Isn't that public domain?
Victor Davis Hanson has a spot-on article today at The Corner. He writes,
For example, on his (Obama's) fiftieth birthday, instead of hosting a $40,000-a-person fund raiser for “millionaires and billionaires” and “corporate jet owners,” he could have a picnic in a small farm town, eating hot dogs with rural folks and staging a photo-op driving a tractor (though I acknowledge the risk of a Dukakis-tank moment). Then, given that there are three wars ongoing, he could have renounced all golf outings until the troops are out of harm’s way; horse-shoes at the White House or jogging would send a better message for an era of 9.2 percent unemployment.During the August vacation time, Obama could veto the now accustomed first-family junkets to places like Costa del Sol and Martha’s Vineyard, and instead try a middle-class American favorite like a trip to Yosemite or Yellowstone. Given the president’s emphasis on green energy and rising gas prices, coupled with the current difficulty with the Chevy Volt, Obama might occasionally, for short trips, trade the huge SUV caravan for a motorcade of Volts.
Indeed. In yet another bullet point of "progressive" hypocrisy, why is it that libs like Obama -- who doesn't even come from money, unlike folks like the Kennnedys -- perpetually do the swanky vacation and cater to the uber-wealthy ... when it is so contrary to their constant [populist] rhetoric?
As Hanson notes, even Ronald Reagan and George Bush hit their respective ranches and chopped/chainsawed wood. Even though they're wealthier than a pol like Obama, this at least made a connection to their foundational constituents. How does The Messiah make such a connection other than to the [relatively small in number] insanely rich Hollywood types and faux guilt-ridden wealthy east coast white liberals?
Speaking of which, in a semi-related matter, I was flipping through the TV guide the other night and was amused by [Verizon-penned] synopsis for the film "Bob Roberts." It was pretty much like this: "A rightwing politician uses folk songs and manipulates the media during a Senate campaign." Heh. Just switch a few terms around and this describes election 2008 to the proverbial tee, eh?
That's what you say when you have no plan and you keep playing f***ing games:
Or, check out where some of Obama's vaunted stimulus funds went to:
The Omaha Public Schools used more than $130,000 in federal stimulus dollars to buy each teacher, administrator and staff member a manual on how to become more culturally sensitive.The book by Virginia education consultants could raise some eyebrows with its viewpoints.
The authors assert that American government and institutions create advantages that “channel wealth and power to white people,” that color-blindness will not end racism and that educators should “take action for social justice.”
The book says that teachers should acknowledge historical systemic oppression in schools, including racism, sexism, homophobia and “ableism,” defined by the authors as discrimination or prejudice against people with disabilities.
The authors argue that public school teachers must raise their cultural awareness to better serve minority students and improve academic achievement.
*Sigh* Here we go again -- educational charlatanry masquerading as scientifically-based research. Just like the preposterous "Courageous Conversations" (or "Difficult Dialogues" or whatever the edu-jargon du jour is) we've dealt with previously, this sort of crap does nothing to (or, at least, doesn't show how to) improve minority student academic achievement. What it does do is promote resentment -- among students and among faculty. After all, if one has to accept the premise of what the authors want, exactly what sort of "conversations" can be had? And how are they "courageous" when there exists that premise of acceptance ... and the implicit aura of "do not dissent"? Check it:
... these are “conversations” that... follow a structured format in which participants examine and embrace specific premises, such as the ubiquity of white privilege and racism, and thus raise the consciousness of whites.
Participants must “come to recognize that race impacts every aspect of your life 100 percent of the time.” Meanwhile, “anger, guilt and shame are just a few of the emotions” whites should expect to experience “as they move toward greater understanding of Whiteness.”
Again, we've been all through this before over the years here. It's bad enough when local/state funds are used to purchase such feces, but now bucks that are supposed to stimulate our economy are being used to purchase it. Again, such huckster-ish programs have never been able to prove they're effective at reducing the so-called achievement gap; however, they have been very successful at uniting folks from across the political spectrum. And this is not because of any intransigence about discussing -- or wanting to discuss -- race; it's because these programs demand adherence to one point of view about it. And that view is the program creators': radical Marxian-Maoist-Freireian victimology. Even more "mainstream" organizations like the National Education Association (NEA) have fallen victim to this as they advocate getting away from a color-blind belief, the more "classical" Martin Luther King Jr.-esque philosophy.
Such demands should be abhorrent to any rational political bent.
But these diversophiles would do well to heed the warnings of Hans Bader (to whom a big hat tip goes for this post): making belief/adherence to such [racial] philosophies (or even participation in such workshops) mandatory can invite legal trouble.
UPDATE: Good timing: Toronto School District decrees that only whites can be racist.
Or, why we learn nothing (all in the name of political correctness). I saw this article last week and forwarded it to my blog "godfather," John Rosenberg (since he'd do a much better job dissecting it than I); however, he must be on vacation so I'll take a [very] brief stab:
Holder Launches Witch Hunt Against Biased Banks.In what could be a repeat of the easy-lending cycle that led to the housing crisis, the Justice Department has asked several banks to relax their mortgage underwriting standards and approve loans for minorities with poor credit as part of a new crackdown on alleged discrimination, according to court documents reviewed by IBD.
Prosecutions have already generated more than $20 million in loan set-asides and other subsidies from banks that have settled out of court rather than battle the federal government and risk being branded racist. An additional 60 banks are under investigation, a DOJ spokeswoman says.
Holder and crew are using the 'ol "disparate impact" theory to judge whether an institution is "racist," much like the federal DoE is doing the same with schools with regards to discipline rates. But, arguably, while there is more of a subjective facet to school discipline, how can bank/loan figures lie? Either your credit is worthy or it's not. Either you make enough money to pay your mortgage or you don't.
Doesn't matter:
In several cases, the government has ordered bank defendants to post in all their branches and marketing materials a notice informing minority customers that they cannot be turned down for credit because they receive public aid, such as unemployment benefits, welfare payments or food stamps.Among other remedies: favorable interest rates and down-payment assistance for minority borrowers with weak credit.
For example, the government has ordered Midwest BankCentre to set aside almost $1 million in "special financing" for residents living in predominantly black areas of St. Louis. The program includes originating conventional home loans at fixed prime rates for African-American borrowers "who would ordinarily not qualify for such rates for reasons including the lack of required credit quality, income or down payment."
So ... someone on all sorts of governmental assistance could get the financing to buy a home, while your average joe six-pack busting his hump 60 hours a week but who may have missed a few bill payments here and there which has affected his credit ... gets turned down. Right. Got it. Sounds very fair.
Not only is this whole situation beyond insane (coming off of the too-recent previous housing crisis), but tell me -- how is it discriminatory to have set loan criteria that applies to all people?
... and you get on magazine covers:
But in reality?
Michelle Obama orders 1,700-calorie meal at Shake Shack.First lady Michelle Obama ordered a whopper of a meal at the newly opened Washington diner Shake Shack during lunch on Monday.
A Washington Post journalist on the scene confirmed the first lady, who’s made a cause out of child nutrition, ordered a ShackBurger, fries, chocolate shake and a Diet Coke(!) while the street and sidewalk in front of the usually-packed Shake Shack were closed by security during her visit.
For some reason, if Michelle was a Republican, I've a feeling that the MSM wouldn't let this outright hypocrisy die ...
UPDATE: GE Chairman and CEO Jeffrey Immelt -- The Messiah's chair of the Council on Jobs and Competitiveness -- said yesterday "that businesses needed to take the lead on job creation."
January, 2011:
As the administration struggles to prod businesses to create jobs at home, GE has been busy sending them abroad. Since Immelt took over in 2001, GE has shed 34,000 jobs in the U.S., according to its most recent annual filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission. But it’s added 25,000 jobs overseas.
And, don't forget that GE paid no federal income taxes in 2010, while earning over $14 billion in profit.
Mark Steyn has an item up from last night about our esteemed Secretary of Energy, Steven Chu. Chu, you might recall, once stated that “we have to figure out how to boost the price of gasoline to the levels in Europe.“ Aside from the fact that Chu appears to be getting his wish (notice how gas prices, after a slight dip the last couple weeks, are rapidly heading back up?), check out this smugly conceited piece of dreck he recently spewed forth regarding old-style light bulbs:
We are taking away a choice that continues to let people waste their own money.
Get it? People like Chu think it is their job to decide what you do with your money. As Steyn writes, "So what? I waste my own money on all kinds of things." As do I, most especially on golf. Maybe I should contact Chu and ask him to suggest a better choice ... oh, wait, that would have to be mandate a better choice for spending my money.
In conclusion, Steyn says it best:
Secretary Chu and his colleagues took a trillion dollars of “stimulus” and, for all the stimulating it did, might as well have given it in large bills to Charlie Sheen to snort coke off his hookers’ bellies with.
There's a Mexican national who's about to be executed in Texas and The Messiah is intervening ... even though the US Supreme Court said it was up to Congress if the execution was to be thwarted:
In 2004, the International Court of Justice (ICJ), the principal judicial body of the United Nations, determined that Leal and some 50 other Mexican Nationals on death row in the United States were entitled to judicial hearings to determine whether there had been a breach of their rights.After the ruling, then President George W. Bush directed state courts to review the cases. But Texas pushed back, arguing that state courts were not subject to the rulings of an International Court.
In 2008, the issue reached the Supreme Court (Medellin v. Texas -- Hube), which said that Congress would have to pass legislation in order for the ICJ decision to be enforced.
Vermont's Patrick Leahy submitted legislation -- but too late. Only the US Supreme Court or Texas Gov. Rick Perry can halt the execution now. The Messiah's attorney's are asking the former to do just that. Why? "... officials ... do not want to send a message abroad that foreigners in custody have no right to consular notification."
Which I can understand -- to a degree. But our government doesn't do well in the common sense dept. when it cites Iran detaining those three hikers back in 2009 as a reason why we need abide by the initial ICJ ruling. Even though Iran is a party to the relevant Convention, does anyone seriously believe that this major state sponsor of terrorism follows such lawful dictates when it is not even remotely in its interest to do so?
Next, I thought Obama and the Democrats consider illegals who've been here as long as Humberto Leal has (since he was two) to be essentially "Americans" anyway, hence things they push like the DREAM Act. "Progressives" want illegals to be able to get drivers licenses, healthcare, and education, and hell -- our own 14th Amendment to the Constitution already guarantees that, much more often than not, non-citizens are to be afforded the same rights as citizens. So ... why all of a sudden the desire to make Leal out to be Mexican? Could it be that ... election 2012 is right around the corner and "the base" has to be mollified?
The No. 3 Republican leader in the House, Rep. Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.): "He's (Obama) got to get off the golf course and he's got to get engaged."
Dude, of all things to screw up:
President Obama got his Medal of Honor recipients mixed up today, accidentally referring to a posthumous recipient as alive.Speaking in upstate New York to troops at Fort Drum Thursday, the president was remembering the times he spent with the US Army’s 10th Mountain Division.
“Throughout my service, first as a senator and then as a presidential candidate and then as a president, I’ve always run into you guys,” Obama said. “And for some reason it’s always in some rough spots.”
“First time I saw the 10th Mountain Division, you guys were in southern Iraq. When I went back to visit Afghanistan, you guys were the first ones there. I had the great honor of seeing some of you because a comrade of yours, Jared Monti, was the first person who I was able to award the Medal of Honor to who actually came back and wasn’t receiving it posthumously.”
Jared Monti was killed in Afghanistan on June 21, 2006. He was awarded the Medal of Honor posthumously, September 17, 2009. (Link.)
Now, just imagine the field day the MSM would have if this was George W. Bush, Dan Quayle, Ronald Reagan, or just about any other Republican who was a favorite target and widely regarded as a "dunce."
Disgraceful.
From the (UK) Daily Mail via Insty: What would Michelle say? President Obama wolfs down TWO chili dogs and fries... the day after his wife unveils new dietary guide.
My "blogfather" John Rosenberg picks up on a verrrrry interesting point in The Messiah's mid-east speech from Thursday -- one that is easily missed, and was missed back in 2009 when he said the same thing:
So while the core issues of the conflict must be negotiated, the basis of those negotiations is clear: a viable Palestine, a secure Israel. The United States believes that negotiations should result in two states, with permanent Palestinian borders with Israel, Jordan, and Egypt, and permanent Israeli borders with Palestine. We believe the borders of Israel and Palestine should be based on the 1967 lines with mutually agreed swaps, so that secure and recognized borders are established for both states. The Palestinian people must have the right to govern themselves, and reach their full potential, in a sovereign and contiguous state.
Take a gander at the following map -- the diagonal lines denote the territory Israel won in the 1967 Six Day War:
Can anyone fill us in on precisely how a sovereign Palestine can achieve contiguous status from the Golan Heights, through the West Bank on to Gaza ... without drastically affecting not only Israel's extant territory but more importantly its security?
Many people have been (are) comparing Obama to the pathetic Jimmy Carter. And they're right more than they know: Former Carter secretary of state Cyrus Vance says that if Carter had won re-election in 1980, he "planned to sell out Israel."
Insty had a brief blurb up linking to a Guardian (UK) article which asks "Why don't we love our intellectuals?" In response, Insty also linked to articles by Christopher Hitchens and the inimitable James Taranto. The question is a good one; conventional wisdom, such that it is, posits that conservatives are the "anti-intellctual" crowd ... you'll see this conceit uttered frequently by folks like the usual suspects, and by those "big brains" in the mainstream media. As partial evidence, it's conservatives who are frequently made fun of and derided. George W. Bush was a total buffoon -- even though he had better college grades than Al Gore; Dan Quayle was a walking, talking gaffe machine -- but our current veep actually makes Quayle look like a professional motivational speaker; Ronald Reagan was a "lovable dunce;" Sarah Palin is [insert demeaning comment]," etc. etc. etc.
Take Hitchens' article next: He dissects the "intellectual" that is Noam Chomsky. Chomsky is sort of a radical leftist academic pop-culture icon (he got a nice gratuitous shout out in Matt Damon's "Good Will Hunting," for instance), who somehow has managed to evolve into this deeply heavy political and cultural thinker even though his area of expertise is ... linguistics. He is greatly admired by a former big-time Delaware blogger many of you probably know, Dana Garrett. Let me state right up front that I love Dana to death -- he's an incredibly nice and personable fellow, who actually listens to conservative arguments and concedes good points when they're made ... a very rare trait for a progressive. (Notice that I did not put quotations around the word "progressive" this time like I normally do, for Dana is a true progressive.) Chomsky was one of the [many] items Dana and I argued about back in the day. It's easy to understand why the noted linguist is endeared by progressives: the virtually constant tendency to side with the "underdog," taking up the cause of the historically oppressed, fighting for minorities and the poor, etc. The problem is that Chomsky and his acolytes will overlook virtually every negative aspect about the causes they take up. Why? To be consistent? Because maintaining a contrarian view is of utmost importance? This leads to what historian Paul Johnson (noted in the Guardian article) stated about people like Chomsky -- they are "moral cretins." Hitchens' article dissects much of this aspect, and is pretty much in line with how I feel about him. In this case, 'ol Noam chimed in on the death of Osama bin Laden where he questioned the al Qaeda leader's actual responsibility for 9/11, said bin Laden was no worse than George W. Bush, and claimed that, by our commando raid on bin Laden's compound, we thus "would justify a contingency whereby 'Iraqi commandos landed at George W. Bush's compound, assassinated him, and dumped his body in the Atlantic.'" Chomsky also complained that bin Laden's killing was a "planned assassination," and that he "should have been accorded all the rights of criminal suspects."
It should come as little surprise, then, that bin Laden was apparently a fan of the MIT professor:
The New York Times, reporting on the intelligence haul from Osama bin Laden's house, paints a picture of the mass murderer's politics: In 2007, he complained that Democratic control of Congress had not ended the war in Iraq, a fact he attributed to the pernicious influence of "big corporations." In other messages he commented on the writings of Noam Chomsky, the leftist professor at M.I.T., and praised former President Jimmy Carter's book supporting Palestinian rights.
In a brief side-note here, one of my favorite bloggers early on my blogging "career," Benjamin Kerstein, in his [old] blog Diary of an Anti-Chomskyite dedicates virtually every post to shredding the "logic" that is the blog's namesake. It's a must read for those interested in dissecting the meanderings of Chomsky-thought, where Kerstein's prose is both terse and quite delightfully sarcastic. (Currently, Kerstein has a new blog and has written for various online publications.)
So, are you still wondering why so many people do not revere our [so-called] intellectuals?
Chomsky and others of his ilk also dabble all the time in moral equivalence. International law (like the professor noted above) is of paramount import -- unless, of course, some oppressed group is undertaking actions to support their "cause" -- much like the Palestinians against Israel. Closer to home, our old friend Perry and New Zealand's "Phoenician in a Time of Romans" (the moniker really says it all) over at Common Sense Political Thought predictably take up the Palestinian mantle whenever the subject is broached, and they're supposedly intelligent individuals. They'll scream about Israel violating UN Security Council Resolution 242 time and time again, for instance, but, of course, the constant threat of Palestinian (and other) terrorism -- that breach of international law -- is conveniently overlooked. Heck, if you're such a proponent of UN resolutions, what about the very one that created the state of Israel and a state of Palestine in the first place? If you demand "legality" so vociferously, what about that action by the world body? Which group crapped all over that plan, and began a war of annihilation to subvert it? Hint: It was not the Jews. And check out Chomsky and Vietnam. I mean, c'mon -- can anyone other than a hardcore far-leftist take such drivel even remotely seriously??
Supposed non-intellectuals can somehow -- just "somehow" -- manage to realize that, for example, Israel has absolutely NO obligation to return land gained in a defensive war of survival until and unless it gets guarantees from the other parties involved that they will refrain from terrorist activity, agree that Israel has a right to exist, and sign a peace treaty. Gee, after all, take a look at what happened when Egypt did just that in 1979: it got back the Sinai Peninsula which Israel had captured after the 1967 Six Day War. Regarding Vietnam, somehow non-intellectuals can accept that, yes, perhaps the US should not have even been there in the first place; however, somehow an authoritarian communist regime making use of a terrorist effort (Viet Cong) to infiltrate a neighboring government, not to mention next door's Khmer Rouge in Cambodia murdering millions is ... justified?
In the educational realm, so-called "intellectuals" are all over the place (and I am excluding higher education here for the nonce). Let's just examine what has happened, and what is currently on, here in the First State. With all that Race to the Top cash that it won a couple years ago, here's what the high-powered "intellectuals" have come up with and have proposed to evaluate individual non-core subject area teachers: They'll be evaluated on their schools' test scores in core subject areas. That's right -- if you're a "specialist" -- an art teacher, phys. ed. teacher, foreign language teacher, or chorus teacher -- over half of your performance evaluation will be based on a certain number of students' state test scores in core subjects (like math and English) ... students that you "touch" (and yes, that is the exact terminology that these "intellectuals" came up with!) on a daily basis. [Supposedly] Very smart people actually came up with this. Of course, it doesn't take someone with a very high IQ to then ponder, "How does that measure the teaching performance of a chorus teacher?" Or someone with a normal IQ might wonder, "If the chorus teacher is being evaluated on students' English and math scores, why does she waste her time working on singing? Doesn't it make sense that she tutor the subjects on which she's being assessed?" This is the best idea the state higher-ups could come up with!
Let's not forget the experience with judicial-enforced desegregation in northern Delaware. It was "intellectuals" who told us that all black children needed to succeed in school was to be sitting next to a white kid. And then that "super" intellect known as federal Judge Murray Schwartz rejected the state legislature's proposal of a voluntary busing plan -- y'know, putting the decision in the hands of the people -- and instead implemented the infamous "9-3 Plan": city students would attend suburban schools for nine years, and suburban students would attend city schools for three. (Schwartz, by the way, ended up sending his own children to private schools during the deseg imbroglio. Go figure, eh?) After nearly a quarter century, busing failed to increase student achievement, and now we see [minority] calls for ... a return to a city school district. A city school district in Wilmington, just like the one that existed before 1978, the year the federal desegregation order was implemented. But -- we were told (by supposed intellectuals) that minority children needed to be with white kids! That a predominately minority district should not exist! And people actually wonder why we don't revere our "intellectuals?"
How many of you have ever managed to sit through a typical school district-level inservice? Intellectual "educationists" -- usually Ed.Ds from within the district or professional "experts" -- package and repackage ideas and theories over and over again but with different colorful names or acronyms, and we're supposed to "oooh!" and "ahhh!" them as if they're the latest and greatest scientific discovery. Of course, many of these same folks are responsible for "great" ideas like Whole Language Instruction, which the (year 2000) United States Reading Panel concluded has led to reduced reading abilities in children. And whattya know -- there's 'ol Noam Chomsky's moniker linked to Whole Language Instruction! But, at least, this is his area of expertise, but a particular focus area that ultimately proved not very well conceived.
In another example, one of my favorite edu-bloggers, Michael E. Lopez, notes how "intellectuals" did a study which concluded the following:
School safety depends far less on the poverty and crime surrounding the campus than on the academic achievement of its students and their relationships with adults in the building, according to a new study of Chicago public schools. The report, released Tuesday by the Consortium on Chicago School Research at the University of Chicago, finds that while schools in high-poverty, high-crime neighborhoods tend to be less safe than other schools, students’ level of academic achievement actually plays a bigger role in school safety than a school’s neighborhood. Furthermore, even in high-poverty, high-crime neighborhoods, the quality of relationships among adults and students at a school can turn one school into a safe haven while another languishes as a center of violence.
As Lopez notes, though, this is hardly "some sort of X-causes-Y phenomenon":
The “root cause” of school-wide (and even neighborhood-wide) suckage — safety, academics, attitudes towards authority, graduation and literacy rates, etc. — if some root cause there be, is actually likely to be extremely hard to identify because it’s probably something missing rather than something present.Still, it’s an interesting read. I was especially caught by this sentence:
After a trio of 7th graders “borrowed” a parent’s car for a joyride over the weekend, Ms. Hightower was able to retrieve the keys quietly and have the students meet with a community police officer—without threatening them with an official arrest.
This to me suggests that you not only need an involved, attentive faculty and administration, but it helps if you have a dollop of common sense, too. Children are not going to feel safe if they’re living in a thoughtless zero-tolerance prison system.
The problem with this is, when you do get someone in charge of such a school in such an environment -- someone like Joe Clark, the subject of the film "Lean on Me" -- the so-called intellectuals flip out. For proof, just check out this Time magazine cover from 1988. "Is Getting Tough the Answer?" the cover asks. "School Principal Joe Clark says yes -- and critics are up in arms" is the response. If you know the story of Clark, you know he was brought in to [hopefully] turn around the chaotic Eastside High School. He was a non-nonsense, no excuses kind of guy, with students and teachers alike. He "expurgated" (to use his words from the film) numerous chronic discipline-problem students, students who had repeated grades many times and "weren't going to graduate anyway" (again, his words from the film) as a beginning in restoring the necessary order and discipline a school requires if education is to even take place. But make no mistake -- Clark loved his students. He was the first to arrive at school, and the last to leave everyday. He told students to come see him in his office anytime about anything. In other words, he became like unto a father figure for many of the school's kids.
But to his critics, Clark was a loud-mouthed, egotistical authoritarian whose worst "crime" was expelling the perpetual troublemakers. The so-called intellectuals believe in the absolute "right" of students to get an education -- no matter what. And that "no matter what" includes countless -- innumerable, even -- discipline infractions, including countless violent offenses. It doesn't matter that these miscreants' behavior and attitude can disrupt not only individual classrooms but the entire building. The schools must "save" these kids -- even if it's at the cost of educating students who want to learn, and despite the fact that the vast majority of such kids can't be saved. And the "best" part of this whole debate is that those who are most vociferous about denigrating a man like Joe Clark either have never taught or have been out of the classroom for years (usually now in a comfy office at the central district office). But hey -- they've read theories on this stuff, don'tcha know!
In the arena of contemporary world politics, we've witnessed how our "intellectuals" have reacted to the killing of Osama bin Laden. Our president, long hailed as an "intellectual" by other "intellectuals" and so-called intellectuals in our media, campaigned on so many things that he has long since abandoned that it is hard to keep track. Among these are promising to close Guantánamo Bay prison, ceasing rendition of captured terror suspects, and promising civilian trials for terrorists. The instances of our intellectual class lecturing us common folk during the Bush years about the evils of all those things (and more) and endless. The biggest lecture, perhaps, was about the debauchery of waterboarding, and how it is not only depraved, but ultimately useless. But then lo and behold: It's revealed that the trail to Osama bin Laden was at least partially obtained thanks to the use of ... waterboarding the three al Qaeda bigwigs we captured in the early 2000s. B-b-b-b-but ... I thought such a practice was useless! And that's not the end of it: our "intellectual" class is also pulling out all the stops to justify shooting an unarmed, non-threatening man (bin Laden), while at the same time continuing either to claim that the waterboarding during the Bush years "didn't really work," or that there's "a legal and moral difference" between putting a bullet in a man's skull and subjecting him to simulated drowning (the former being legal and more moral, if you can fathom that; just take a quick look here for an example).
Is it any wonder why such "intellectuals" label President Obama an "intellectual?" Anyone who simultaneously claim that shooting an unarmed someone in the forehead is "legal" and "morally justified," but that waterboarding is not; claims that waterboarding was no factor in locating bin Laden despite all the evidence to the contrary; lauds the Navy SEAL team that offed bin Laden while at the same time bringing other SEALs up on charges for punching a captured terrorist; uses information obtained through waterboarding to locate and kill bin Laden while at the same time continuing to investigate these very same practices utilized by the CIA under the previous administration ... THAT, folks -- THAT takes some "brains."
But us "average folk" have very little difficulty seeing it for what it really is.
(Cross-posted at Truth Before Dishonor.)
Michelle Obama invites vulgar rapper to White House for poetry reading.
UPDATE: Heh -- he's a follower of the Rev. Jeremiah Wright!
... will push as hard for the release of Osama bin Laden's death photo as hard as they did for the pics of Abu Ghraib. Because The Messiah has decided that we ain't gonna see the former.
Aside from the fact that the MSM has such an ephemeral memory about gas/energy prices now that a Democrat is in the White House, The Foundry takes a gander at The Messiah's top six gas price claims (myths):
Be sure to read the more in-depth analysis for each myth here.
Finally ending (hopefully) the conspiracy theories, The Messiah apparently saw some political advantage in revealing his actual birth certificate today:
In a press conference announcing the release of his long form birth certificate, Obama denounced the “silliness,” the “sideshows and carnival barkers” that forced him to release a completely unremarkable document after years of speculation on the issue had metastasized into a political phenomenon he could no longer ignore.“We do not have time for this kind of silliness. We’ve got better stuff to do. I’ve got better stuff to do. We’ve got big problems to solve,” the president said.
Minutes later, he boarded a helicopter, bound for Chicago where he will interview with Oprah, the queen of daytime TV talk shows who recently launched her own network.
Of course, the silliness could have been ended a lot sooner if The Messiah obtained, as noted, this "completely unremarkable" document and released it. But let's face it -- by not doing so he made a lot of people look like idiots (Donald Trump being not the least of which). So ... why the revelation now? Something must be up. And it certainly ain't about ending the "silliness" and getting down to work; if The Messiah was actually concerned about that then WTF is he doing going on Oprah??
And Obama's bitching about the supposed media coverage of the Birther issue is just that -- bitching. The fact is, there hasn't been much coverage of it, The Donald notwithstanding. And the network that kept the issue alive the most? Nope, not Fox. It was MSNBC.
Heh.
... and "price gougers!"
How 'bout looking within, dope:
The Obama administration continued war against oil drilling as the Shell Oil company threw its hands up in the air and scrapped efforts to drill for oil this summer in the Arctic Ocean off the northern coast of Alaska. The reason? EPA regulations.The needed air permits were approved, but after a challenge by an environmental group, the board changed it's mind. Here's the "fun" part. The reason the EPA refused to grant the permit was the appeal board’s suggestion that the Arctic drill would somehow be hazardous for the people who live in the area. This is a very remote section of Alaska, the town of Kaktovik is the nearest community to the drilling site, its 70 miles away, occupies one square mile and has a population of 245. There is very little chance for Kaktovik to be affected by the drilling. (Link.)
Remember -- The Messiah doesn't care if gas prices go up. Period. Any obfuscation to deflect from this fact will be utilized.
It's bad enough that The Messiah and his National Labor Relations Board is threatening Boeing if they don't build their latest airliner in a union-friendly state; now they're suing two states because they've passed constitutional amendments banning the ridiculous process known as "card check":
On the heels of President Obama’s union-controlled National Labor Relations Board complaint telling the Boeing Company where it should locate its second 787 assembly plant, the NLRB has now decided to sue two out of the four states where voters audaciously passed constitutional amendments last fall requiring secret-ballot elections on unionization. Previously, the NLRB had threatened to sue all four states. However, those plans were delayed for a period of time as compromise talks began. However, those talks broke down when the NRLB wanted the talks to be conducted in secret. Now, the NLRB in an effort to save money, has announced it would be suing two states–Arizona and South Dakota–to invalidate their constitutional amendments.
Gotta love that -- they sue states because said states want a secret ballot for union votes ... but they wanted talks about it all conducted in secret. 'Ya can't make this up.
The good thing is, all four states' Attorneys General will vigorously defend their states against this inanity.
Former Delaware Senate candidate Christine O'Donnell had a problem with exaggeration -- OK, the truth -- during her failed office run; it looks as if our chief exec is taking a page from her playbook:
The Messiah says he lost Texas "by a few points;" he lost by 11.7%.
As Jim Geraghty says, "But when you throw that into Obama’s '57 states' and his pledge to enact a 'net spending cut' during his presidency, it becomes clear that Obama has always been a verbal guy, not a math guy."
Indeed.
Because I just sent in a fairly hefty check to the feds for Tax Day. Perhaps I should have just bagged it and said "I was unaware."
US Attorney General Eric Holder and his brother failed to pay the property taxes on their childhood home in Queens, which they inherited last August after their mother died, The Post has learned.And because their ailing mom, Miriam, was already behind on two quarterly tax bills when she succumbed to illness on Aug. 13, the charges went unpaid for more than a year -- growing to $4,146. (Link.)
Holder and his bro said they "were unaware" of the missed payments. I wonder if that excuse would work for me.
How many Obama administration officials does that make, now, who've had tax issues? Five? Six?
"I just miss - I miss being anonymous," he said at the meeting in the White House. "I miss Saturday morning, rolling out of bed, not shaving, getting into my car with my girls, driving to the supermarket, squeezing the fruit, getting my car washed, taking walks. I can't take a walk."I just want to go through Central Park (in New York) and watch folks passing by ... spend the day watching people. I miss that."
The Messiah also claimed that he's not the golf "fanatic" that people make him out to be. In fact, "It's the only excuse I have to get outside for four hours at a stretch," he said. That, and the mean Secret Service will only allow stuff like golf.
Right.
(h/t: Ace.)
Anyone remember just a few years ago when gas prices approached $4.00 per gallon? The mainscream media was yelling and hollering on a daily basis (hourly, actually) about what President Bush was going to do about it. And, there was usual innuendo about how Bush actually liked the price hike because it benefited him and his oil company "buddies."
You hear much MSM yammering now? Hell no. And what has been Barack Obama's reaction to the ever-rising gas price hike? He tells Brazil that we'll support their new drilling efforts so we can be a customer! Worse, he mocks average Americans when they ask about these insane prices -- telling them to "think about a trade-in" for a better MPG automobile if they don't like gas prices!
If the MSM was as conspiracy-minded as they were with George W. Bush, they might ponder that Obama wants gas prices to continue to hike. After all, there is evidence to support just that.
Barack Obama in January 2009, signing a resolution that the Gitmo prison will be closed in one year:
Eric Holder in April, 2011 explaining that Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and others will be tried NOT by a civilian court as he and Obama wanted, but by military tribunal ... at Gitmo:
Obama in 2012: We Learned Along the Way ... the Hard Way.
The Messiah's NCAA tournament picks (mentioned by Paul Smith earlier today) helped the Japan situation, according to New York Magazine:
People, understandably, would generally prefer their presidents to be doing important presidential things instead of goofing around, which is why pointing out when they do the goofy things — whether it’s golfing or clearing brush — is such a common political attack. But in reality, Obama is not in charge of solving the nuclear crisis in Japan. He should keep abreast of developments, but spending a few minutes with ESPN in the White House isn’t going to prevent him from doing that. And, in fact, Obama ensured that the ESPN video will actually help the Japanese people in tangible ways.A lot of people are going to hear that message on TV and online, and some of them will go donate. That will end up helping Japan a lot more than Obama not doing the ESPN segment because of concerns about superficially damaging optics.
Wow! Remember when the MSM reported on how George W. Bush's time on his ranch actually helped the Iraq War effort, because seeing him there "led" people to donate to our troops? Same with his father -- when he was seen fishing at Kennebunkport, Maine, people got right on the phones and took up the cause ...
Unbelievable ...
Years ago, back in my politically involved days, there were quite a few people who were very eager to climb the party leadership ladder as they wanted to be invited to the insider meetings and know what was going on, and be treated with the respect due to a party official. But when the time came for organizational work, they were nowhere to be found. They wanted the prestige, perks and ego-boost of the office, but refused to do the work that was the other part of the job.
Watching Barack Obama's performance as President has reminded me of those people. While this has been especially true recently, it was evident from the beginning of his political career. By the end of his time in the Illinois State Senate, he had voted "present" 130 times, rather than take a stand on controversial issues. His career in the United States Senate continued this pattern as he kept his head down and didn't stand out from the pack, preferring instead to focus on a Presidential campaign. This lack of energy continued in the the first year of his Presidency as he was largely a bystander on the passage of both the mis-named stimulus package and Obamacare through Congress. In both cases, he offered little more than rhetorical support and rarely intervened in the legislative process beyond making speeches. Similarly, when the people of Iran rose up in revolt against its dictatorial leadership who have spent years pursuing nuclear weapons they are threatening to use against Israel, he sided with Iran's dictators.
This lack of effort has become especially noticeable in recent weeks. When the people of Egypt erupted in revolt in search of democracy, Obama did little more than make a speech offering support to Egypt's dictator. When Libya followed in revolt, he made a speech stating that Qaddafi had to go, but has done nothing else to support those attempting to overthrow a man with long ties to terrorists, who was caught pursuing weapons of mass destruction and has a long record of brutality against his own people. He has opposed enacting a no-fly zone over Libya to keep Libyan air power from being able to kill the revolutionaries, a move which even the Arab League has endorsed. Even France, home of cheese-eating surrender monkeys, has been more active than the United States on this matter, going so far as to grant diplomatic recognition to the rebels.
He's taken a similar approach as our budget deficit has exploded. (An explosion he bears much responsibility for.) He's done little more than criticize the Republican budget proposals, while offering little input of his own, even going so far as to reject the recommendations of the panel he convened. Despite bipartisan calls for his involvement in entitlement reform, he has said it's the responsibility of the Republicans to take the lead, even though he leads the Executive Branch and the Democrats still control the Senate.
But not to worry, not all the president's responsibilities have been abdicated: he has been on ESPN to announce his NCAA tournament picks and hung out with celebrities at a White House event honoring Motown. And he has headlined four Democrat fundraisers already this month.
It seems pretty clear that Obama was really after the ego-boosting and prestige of the Presidency, rather than actually being interested in doing the work that the country needs the President to do. This country, and the world, will be worse off for this lack of leadership. Although the case could be made that given his instincts we're better off with him not trying to lead, with everything going on right now the world needs a leader in the White House. It's a shame we don't have one and won't until at least January of 2013.
Lowering entrance scores for police exams ... because there aren't enough of a certain group being represented:
DAYTON — The city’s Civil Service Board and the U.S. Department of Justice have agreed on a lower passing score for the police recruit exam after it was rejected because not enough blacks passed the exam.The city lowered both written exams a combined 15 points that resulted in 258 more people passing the exam, according to a statement released Thursday by Civil Service officials. The agreement allows the city to immediately resume its plans to hire police and firefighters.
The original passing scores determined by Civil Service required candidates to answer 57 of 86 (66 percent) questions correctly on one portion and 73 of 102 (72 percent) on the other. The lowered benchmark requires candidates to answer 50 of 86 (58 percent) questions correctly and 64 of 102 (63 percent) of questions on the other.
What's next? Will the DOJ go after schools now because not enough minorities are passing state tests and/or assorted teacher tests? As it is, the Education Dept. is using "disparate impact analysis" to go after school districts for varying discipline rates among ethnic groups.
Is this not just a step on the road to chaos? Failing is "passing," and schools afraid to apply disciplinary measures for fear of DOJ lawsuits?
Maybe more people like Zachary Williams need to speak out:
Williams said he understands what the Justice Department is trying to accomplish, but he thinks it’s the wrong method and it’s keeping him from achieving his dream.“You can’t blame the city for the lack of diversity,” Williams said. “This isn’t your normal 9 to 5 job and you have to want it. I don’t want to be in a department where I was hired because of my skin color. I want it because I earned it.”
Community leaders agree with Williams and said the Justice Department’s method stigmatizes blacks.
'Ya think? Why is this so easy to figure out for clear-thinking people, but not hotshot lawyers and career federal employees?
Got me.
UPDATE: It gets "better": Check out what happens when you call for a paramedic in Massachusetts!
Much needed from Victor Davis Hanson:
For all the anger at Bush’s budget deficits, a single month of Obama’s red ink now equals federal borrowing for the entire 2007 budget year. A better way of looking at it might be in terms of the Democrats’ offer to cut $6 billion from the annual budget — or 1/37th of what the U.S. Treasury is now borrowing each month.
Whoa.
No, he didn't really say that. But he should: US to resume Guantanamo trials after 2-year freeze. As Peter Hoekstra writes,
It is amazing. After 16 months of review we end up at essentially the same place we started. After years of harshly criticizing President Bush, President Obama now continues his policies. The least he could do is say “I’m sorry” or “Thank you.”
Yep.
... then I'll expect the next GOP president to declare ObamaCare and a host of other laws he (and his party) do not like "unconstitutional."
"Given a number of factors, including a documented history of discrimination," Holder wrote in a statement, "the administration has concluded that classifications based on sexual orientation must be subject to a higher constitutional standard than ordinary laws. And the federal Defense of Marriage Act does not meet that test," he says. (Link.)
In other words, Obama himself has decided that the law is unconstitutional and therefore won't defend it anymore. Or, as Orin Kerr writes,
By taking that position, the Obama Administration has moved the goalposts of the usual role of the Executive branch in defending statutes. Instead of requiring DOJ to defend the constitutionality of all federal statutes if it has a reasonable basis to do so, the new approach invests within DOJ a power to conduct an independent constitutional review of the issues, to decide the main issues in the case — in this case, the degree of scrutiny for gay rights issues — and then, upon deciding the main issue, to decide if there is a reasonable basis for arguing the other side. If you take that view, the Executive Branch essentially has the power to decide what legislation it will defend based on whatever views of the Constitution are popular or associated with that Administration. It changes the role of the Executive branch in defending litigation from the traditional dutiful servant of Congress to major institutional player with a great deal of discretion.
As I said, if this is what Democrats really want, then get ready to see ObamaCare, etc., thwarted as soon as a Republican gets back into the White House.
This is our modern Justice Dept. -- sues a state for enforcing immigration policy, fails to prosecute thugs who intimidate voters (caught on tape!), sues universities for using the Kindle reader, seeks attorneys who may be mentally retarded, and now ... sues a school district for not allowing a teacher three weeks off for the Hajj:
The federal government sued a suburban Chicago school district Monday for denying a Muslim middle school teacher unpaid leave to make a pilgrimage to Mecca that is a central part of her religion.In a civil rights case, the department said the school district in Berkeley, Ill., denied the request of Safoorah Khan on grounds that her requested leave was unrelated to her professional duties and was not set forth in the contract between the school district and the teachers union. In doing so the school district violated the Civil Rights Act of 1964 by failing to reasonably accommodate her religious practices, the government said.
Khan wanted to perform the Hajj, the pilgrimage to Mecca in Saudi Arabia which every adult Muslim is supposed to make at least once in a lifetime if they are physically and financially able to. Millions go each year.
Again, the teach wanted three weeks of leave for the trip, even though the Hajj lasts ... five days. Yes, she said she'd take three weeks unpaid leave, but why three weeks if the pilgramage takes less than a week? (And the district would still have to pay for a substitute teacher for those three weeks, by the way.) It seems to me that the district didn't fail to "accommodate" her at all. One, because three weeks isn't needed, two, because the Hajj only has to be done once in a lifetime, and three, as Ace notes:
... the timing of the Hajj varies due to the Islamic calendar. This means that in some years, the Hajj will naturally coincide with already-scheduled breaks in the school year. She couldn't wait for such a year?I can't help but notice that when she demanded her three weeks off, it seems to have fallen right in the middle of Thanksgiving break and Christmas break. I'm betting good money she planned to take off the entire month and a quarter between Thanksgiving and Christmas.
I wouldn't take that bet!
Hey, I'm just glad to see our Justice Dept. is out there fighting for YOU!
Iran? North Korea? Radical Islamic terrorists? PSHAW! Know what our biggest threat is? FAT KIDS!!!!
First lady Michelle Obama plans to warn in remarks Monday that the nation is seeing “a groundswell of support” for curbing childhood obesity, and she is unveiling new ammunition from current and retired military leaders.“Military leaders … tell us that when more than one in four young people are unqualified for military service because of their weight,” the first lady says in the prepared remarks, “childhood obesity isn’t just a public health threat, it’s not just an economic threat, it’s a national security threat as well." (Link.)
Folks, the era of preposterous hyperbole is NOT over. By any means.
How awful does this look? Obama has to bring in someone ... who actually knew what he was doing ... ??
UPDATE: OBAMA NAMES BILL CLINTON TO PRESIDENTIAL POST:
Ending weeks of speculation and rumors, President-Elect Barack Obama today named Bill Clinton to join his incoming administration as President of the United States, where he will head the federal government’s executive branch.“I am pleased that Bill Clinton has agreed to come out of retirement to head up this crucial post in my administration,” said Obama. “He brings a lifetime of previous executive experience as Governor of Arkansas and President of the United States, and has worked closely with most of the members of my Cabinet.”
Clinton said he was “excited and honored” by the appointment, and would work “day and night” to defeat all the key policy objectives proposed by Mr. Obama during the campaign.
Rep. Joe Barton (R-Texas) pushed back on Monday against a contention by a Democratic FCC commissioner that the government should create new regulations to promote diversity in news programming.Barton was reacting to a proposal made last week by FCC Commissioner Michael Copps, who in a speech suggested that broadcasters be subject to a new "public values test" every four years.
"I hope … that you do not mean to suggest that it is the job of the federal government, through the [FCC], to determine the content that is available for Americans to consume,” Barton wrote Monday in a letter to Copps.
Copps had suggested that the test would make a broadcaster's license renewal contingent upon proof that they meet a prospective set of federal criteria.
He said outlets should be mandated to do the following: prove they have made a meaningful commitment to public affairs and news programming, prove they are committed to diversity programming (for instance, by showing that they depict women and minorities), report more to the government about which shows they plan to air, require greater disclosure about who funds political ads and devote 25 percent of their prime-time coverage to local news.
You can just imagine the subjectivity involved with government bureaucrats "determining" just the "right" amount of "public interest" and "diversity" a station should have/report. It's pure nonsense, and still more proof that the Democrat Party (and "progressives" in general) still don't get why they got pasted a month ago.
"Just imagine, they say, if we hadn’t spend $800 billion in stimulus!" Obama and Co. say.
Via Ace: Wikileaks to reveal Obama opinions of world leaders.
With some 2.7 million communications from the US State Department about to be published online, Mr Obama is bracing himself for revelations that would not only be embarrassing but could also seriously damage his foreign policy.Thousands of these documents are believed to be diplomatic cables from Washington to the US Embassy in London, including brutal assessments of Gordon Brown's personality and cold-eyed judgements of David Cameron's capabilities.
The ramifications for Mr Obama could be enormous. With his popularity flagging at home, one of his remaining political strengths has been his high standing abroad - assiduously cultivated in a series of speeches in which he apologised for past US actions and promised a kinder, gentler America. (Link.)
Is this why the Dept. of Homeland Security is going all-out seizing domain names?
Back in 1979, a guy named Daniel Ortega led a revolution over a nasty dictator in Nicaragua. He was successful in large measure because he and his cohorts -- the FSLN or Sandinistas -- weren't entirely truthful about their revolutionary intentions. They were, in fact, Marxist-Leninists. So it was such that new American president, Ronald Reagan, began a counter-revolution led by the "Contras," mostly disaffected Sandinistas fed up with Ortega and co. The ensuing civil war was largely successful in that Ortega eventually agreed to free elections, and to his huge credit he actually went along with the results -- his defeat in 1990.
Well, he's been back since. In 2007 he was elected president of the country again. And no good leftist bigwig can stay true to his word for long, it seems. Lately, many of my friends from Costa Rica have been really upset. Why? Ortega has swiped a Costa Rican island for Nicaragua:
Unfortunately throughout both countries’ histories, it has become a norm that the Nicaraguan political class picks conflicts with Costa Rica in order to distract attention from domestic problems and rally nationalist support at home. Ricardo Jiménez, a Costa Rican president in the early 20th century, once said that Costa Rica had three seasons during the year: the rainy season, the dry season, and the season of conflicts with Nicaragua.This time around hasn’t been different. Approximately 20 days ago, a dredging project of the San Juan River, whose right bank serves as the border between both countries, led to an incursion of the Nicaraguan army into Costa Rican territory. The conflict area is an uninhabited island (approximately 60 square miles) at the mouth of the San Juan River. Aerial pictures show the destruction of tropical forest in the island—which is part of a protected area in Costa Rica—in what seems like an effort to detour the San Juan River at the expense of Costa Rican territory.
Just like his buddy Hugo Chávez of Venezuela (and too many other nutjob lefty dictators), Ortega is using this home-spun aggression as a rallying cry against, remarkably, “Costa Rica’s expansionist agenda” -- even though Costa Rica hasn't had an army since 1949. And, just like idiot Chávez, Ortega has attempted to prolong his power despite constitutional restrictions:
Since the Nicaraguan constitution bars him from running for a third term (he was president in 1985-1990), Ortega tried unsuccessfully to have the constitution amended by the National Assembly, where his Sandinista party lacks a majority to do so. However, through judicial shenanigans facilitated by a Supreme Court and an Electoral Tribunal packed with Sandinista allies, Ortega is likely to run again next year.
Costa Rica's only recourse is to protest at various international organizations. And where's the United States, for cripe's sake? The Messiah was all up in arms about Manuel Zelaya's ouster as president of Honduras back in 2009 because of similar constitutional shenanigans in his country -- and despite Honduras' legislature and Supreme Court supporting his removal from office. So why isn't he at his teleprompter telling Danny O. to get the f*** out of the Switzerland of the Americas, a pacifist nation with no armed forces??
He's taking a neutral stand in it all. NEUTRAL!!!
State is taking a carefully worded, almost neutral stand in the dispute between Costa Rica -- our ally, and the world's most pacifist country -- and Nicaragua, a key player in Hugo Chavez's group of Latin strongmen.Last month, Nicaragua sent troops into a jungle area at the mouth of the San Juan River, which has long been determined by mediators to be on Costa Rica's side of the border. The excuse for the invasion: Google Maps recently showed the area as part of Nicaragua.
State Department spokeswoman Viriginia Staab told me yesterday that "we encourage both sides immediately to distance any armed military and civilian security forces from the disputed area and avoid provocative rhetoric and actions."
Costa Rica's deputy UN ambassador, Saul Weisleder, told me Washington's low-key support of his country is meant to avoid riling the region's anti-Yanqui-imperialist hotheads while other countries do the heavy lifting. But, really -- "Both sides"? "Armed forces"? "Provocation"? Again, Costa Rica has no military -- it merely sent some policemen in to stare at the troops occupying its soil.
Indeed, State should be doing more, if only because Google was relying on State Department data when it mislabeled the land in question. (Link.)
If Obama is SO apologetic for America's past actions in the hemisphere that he cannot even defend a peaceful, army-less country, then he is a much bigger dolt than I ever thought possible.
Via Insty -- "progressive superiority" at it again:
Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood said using a cell phone while driving is so dangerous that devices may soon be installed in cars to forcibly stop drivers — and potentially anyone else in the vehicle — from using them.“There’s a lot of technology out there now that can disable phones and we’re looking at that,” said LaHood on MSNBC. LaHood said the cellphone scramblers were one way, and also stressed the importance of “personal responsibility.” …
“I think it will be done,” said LaHood. “I think the technology is there and I think you’re going to see the technology become adaptable in automobiles to disable these cell phones. We need to do a lot more if were going to save lives.”
"So dangerous?" Say Anything begs to differ:
The fact is that traffic accidents and fatalities have trended down to a 60-year low according to the NHTSA despite the rise in cell phone use while driving. There’s also a more recent study released by the CDC which shows that traffic accidents among young drivers have dropped 36% over the last five years despite an increase in cell phone use.Plus, there’s absolutely zero evidence to indicate that bans on cell phone use while driving have done anything to make roads safer where they’ve been implemented.
Look, I'm annoyed as anyone else when I get caught behind some dolt who's going 40 on I-95 because he can't drive the speed limit and talk on his cell at the same time. But still more annoying is the continued penchant of faux progressives to increase their control over individual freedom. This, despite The Messiah's claim that his administration would "return to following the science." Except for inconvenient statistics, however. And if it conflicts with its radical goals ...
Top Senate Democrats say Obama doesn't know what he's doing.
After all, they sure ain't busy worrying about folks like the New Black Panther Party, are they?
Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee (D-Texas) is asking the Department of Justice to investigate whether tea party groups are intimidating black and Hispanic voters in her district.Jackson Lee has asked Attorney General Eric Holder to send poll monitors to her district on Nov. 2 to make sure the King Street Patriots, a local conservative voter turnout and tea party group, aren’t stopping people from voting.
“Many of these incidents of voter intimidation have been occurring in predominately minority neighborhoods and have been directed at African-Americans and Latinos,” she said in the letter. “It is unconscionable to think that anyone would deliberately employ the use of such forceful and intimidating tactics in 2010 to undermine the fundamental, constitutional right to vote.”
I wonder if Jackson-Lee wrote a letter expressing such concerns about what we saw at that Philly voting place back in 2008? Speaking of which: DOJ Voting Section Deputy Chief Misled Civil Rights Commission on Black Panthers Case.
Kathryn Jean Lopez picks up on it via a Messiah speech noted in The Hill:
Latino voters, the president said, would have an opportunity to send a message to Republicans, who Obama accused of “politicizing” immigration reform and the border security debate. Obama said “pressure has to be put on the Republican Party” if immigration reform is to become a reality.“And if Latinos sit out the election instead of saying, we’re gonna punish our enemies and we’re gonna reward our friends who stand with us on issues that are important to us, if they don’t see that kind of upsurge in voting in this election, then I think it’s gonna be harder — and that’s why I think it’s so important that people focus on voting on November 2,” he said.
I thought the president was supposed to serve all the people ... ?
Obama and his allies dishonor our troops, and seek to disenfranchise them.
Democratic officials in Illinois officials missed the deadline to mail ballots to our troops overseas, but they hand-delivered ballots to inmates, without even waiting for inmates to apply. Perhaps this discrimination can be explained by the fact that inmates vote mostly for Democrats, while soldiers vote predominantly for Republicans.There are federal laws requiring states to send ballots in a timely fashion to troops overseas, but the Obama Administration is not enforcing them, as part of its ongoing politicization of the Justice Department (such as rubberstamping unconstitutional legislative proposals, and downplaying voter intimidation by liberal activists, while investigating Tea Party pollwatchers who uncovered rampant voter registration fraud in Houston).
Meanwhile, liberal Virginia Congressman Jim Moran has dismissed his opponent, a retired Colonel who served in the military with distinction for 24 years, saying that he had not “served or performed in any kind of public service,” and had simply “taken a government check.” (Moran, a career politician, has collected a government paycheck for many decades, first as a state official, and then, for the last 28 years, as a Congressman).
More here.
The Messiah visits the kids featured in "Waiting for Superman."
Too bad about that aforementioned voucher program.
An authentic grass-fire political movement threatens Democrats on all fronts. So as November's reckoning approaches, what does their president do? Why, whip up fear of foreigners in a throwback to the 1850s.Having rammed costly and unpopular measures through Congress by questionable means, Democrats are in big trouble come November. As their president's popularity tanks, the vast national Tea Party movement is mobilizing the public to vote them out, and America's private sector is at long last standing up for free markets.
Obama's attack is as hypocritical as can be, given that Team Obama really did take cash from foreign sources, having disabled a detector of foreign cash for online credit card donations during the 2008 presidential campaign. Democrats also accepted $400 million from labor unions whose foreign cash intake is higher than the chamber's.
The Washington Examiner reported that in one instance Obama took $32,000 or so from a credit card from two brothers on the Gaza strip.
Meanwhile, The Messiah and his acolytes are unleashing the IRS and DOJ on their political opponents:
Chairman (Democrat) Max Baucus of the powerful Senate Finance Committee got the threats going last month when he asked Internal Revenue Service Commissioner Douglas Shulman to investigate if certain tax exempt 501(c) groups had violated the law by engaging in too much political campaign activity. Lest there be any confusion about his targets, the Montana Democrat flagged articles focused on GOP-leaning groups, including Americans for Job Security and American Crossroads.Democrats claim only to favor "disclosure" of donors, but their legal intimidation attempts are the best argument against disclosure. Liberals want the names of business donors made public so they can become targets of vilification with the goal of intimidating them into silence. A CEO or corporate board is likely to think twice about contributing to a campaign fund if the IRS or prosecutors might come calling. If Democrats can reduce business donations in the next three weeks, they can limit the number of GOP challengers with a chance to win and reduce Democratic Congressional losses.
Par for the course with this bunch of ideologues.
Here's our race-transcending leader warning voters about that nasty GOP "counting on black folks staying home" on Election Day:
Just add this instance to this.
Stupidity like this:
If schools discipline more blacks or Hispanics than white students, federal officials warn they’ll use “disparate impact analysis” to charge civil rights violations, reports Education Week.Under “disparate impact,” schools can be in violation if discipline policies affect one racial group more than others, even if there’s no evidence of unequal treatment for the same offense or an intent to discriminate. An education agency would be found out of compliance if an equally sound policy would have less of a disparate impact, Russlyn Ali, an Education Department official, told Ed Week.
As mentioned, just another reason race relations have soured. "Stupid" is an understatement. What about the "disparate impact" of disciplining more boys than girls? Or what about that "unproportionate representation" of races on various sports teams?
No wonder The Messiah wants his daughters in a private school. Secretly, you know he wants to avoid edu-nonsense like this at all costs.
UPDATE: Sigh. Former director of [Delaware's] Moyer Academy Charter School Theo Gregory doesn't get it either.
RELATED: The dolts at the Philly Inquirer are distressed that in their city, which is 44% black, there's not enough black faces in the Philly Orchestra.
Departing WH Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel on The Messiah:
[President Obama is] "the toughest leader any country could ask for, in the toughest times any president has ever faced." (Link.)
Since we're living in an age where every kid is "special," I suppose nonsense remarks such as these shouldn't come as a surprise. I also think folks like Abe Lincoln, Franklin Roosevelt and George Washington, among others, might quibble just a bit with Rahm.
Yesterday we saw how our illustrious leader called Fox News "destructive" for daring to have opinions he doesn't share; as if on cue, we see whose opinions The Messiah admires:
[WH deputy press secretary Bill] Burton added that Obama does want to make sure that people on the left and right know that the administration's "done a lot" and that "we've got a lot more to do." He then lauded the efforts of MSNBC's top liberal hosts."And if you're on the left, if you're somebody like Keith Olbermann or Rachel Maddow or one of the folks who helps to keep our government honest and pushes and prods to make sure that folks are true to progressive values," Burton continued, "then he thinks that those folks provide an invaluable service. But at the same time, we need to focus our energy and our efforts on the choice that Americans have this fall."
Yeah -- "keeping our government honest" means "parroting every f***ing thing we say" Burton actually meant.
And that is by calling points of view different from his own "destructive":
Look, as president, I swore to uphold the Constitution, and part of that Constitution is a free press. We’ve got a tradition in this country of a press that oftentimes is opinionated. The golden age of an objective press was a pretty narrow span of time in our history. Before that, you had folks like Hearst who used their newspapers very intentionally to promote their viewpoints. I think Fox is part of that tradition — it is part of the tradition that has a very clear, undeniable point of view. It’s a point of view that I disagree with. It’s a point of view that I think is ultimately destructive for the long-term growth of a country that has a vibrant middle class and is competitive in the world. But as an economic enterprise, it’s been wildly successful. And I suspect that if you ask Mr. Murdoch what his number-one concern is, it’s that Fox is very successful.
The question is, just how far can The Messiah go to prove how out of touch he is with the country? Polls show that FNC is the most watched and most trusted news source today. Obama's sinking in the polls with Election Day right around the corner -- and this is what he offers up? Didn't the constant attacks on the Tea Party teach him and his fellow progressives (like MSNBC) anything? -- that it's only gonna backfire? And c'mon, "destructive?" Like a true "progressive," it isn't enough to merely disagree. Your opponent must be deemed EEEEEVIL!!
My buddy Brent e-mails me "I love the last paragraph. It's not like we're still looking for Bin Laden or anything right?!"
Ace writes:
Call me when Fox News has put this country on a path to fiscal ruin. Call me when Fox News has endangered the health care of nearly every American. And call me when Fox News has sold out freedom loving allies to authoritarian thugs.Until then Mr. President...shut the fu** up.
Oh one other thought...this "golden age of an objective press" Obama misses so much? Yeah, that's when the mainstream media consisted of the 3 networks regurgitating what they read in the liberal NY Times earlier in the day. All this holding liberal propaganda to some competition and fact checking is so darn destructive to the country.
Indeed. And what's more destructive, Mr. President -- Fox News or, say, a Justice Department that consciously violates the Voting Rights Act?
Obama: D.C. schools don't measure up to his daughters' private school.
And why would that be, Mr. President? Why would let lapse a voucher program for DC students ... so that they might get a semblance of the same education your own daughters get for $31,000 per year??
Ye gad. Hurry up, 2012.
John Kerry: Democrats’ woes stem from uninformed voters: “We have an electorate that doesn’t always pay that much attention to what’s going on so people are influenced by a simple slogan rather than the facts or the truth or what’s happening,” Kerry told reporters after touring the Boston Medical Center yesterday."
Yeah. Simple slogans like "Yes We Can!" and "Hope!" and "Change!"
That extremely educated, incredibly smart commander-in-chief:
"Long before America was even an idea, this land of plenty was home to many peoples. The British and French, the Dutch and Spanish, to Mexicans, to countless Indian tribes. We all shared the same land," President Obama told the Congressional Hispanic Caucus.
RealClearPolitics notes: Mexico declared its independence on September 16, 1810. It was recognized on September 27, 1821. The United States of America declared its independence in 1776.
"Long before ..."
Via the Washington Examiner:
President Obama's top education official urged government employees to attend a rally that the Rev. Al Sharpton organized to counter a larger conservative event on the Mall."ED staff are invited to join Secretary Arne Duncan, the Reverend Al Sharpton, and other leaders on Saturday, Aug. 28, for the 'Reclaim the Dream' rally and march," began an internal e-mail sent to more than 4,000 employees of the Department of Education on Wednesday.
Although the e-mail does not violate the Hatch Act, which forbids federal employees from participating in political campaigns, Education Department workers should feel uneasy, said David Boaz, executive vice president of the libertarian Cato Institute.
"It sends a signal that activity on behalf of one side of a political debate is expected within a department. It's highly inappropriate ... even in the absence of a direct threat," Boaz said. "If we think of a Bush cabinet official sending an e-mail to civil servants asking them to attend a Glenn Beck rally, there would be a lot of outrage over that."
'Ya think? The MSM and the usual suspects would be all over it in a heartbeat.
Oops. 18% of Americans believe that President Obama is a Muslim. The number among the GOP is higher. Stay tuned for the inevitable "crazy Republicans" posts from the usual suspects.
But just remember this little factoid: 61% of Democrats believe Bush either knew in advance about 9/11, or aren't sure if he knew in advance. Included in that figure are our 'ol local buddies Perry and Jason "Trust Fund" Scott. But that was over three years ago. Nevertheless, the moonbattery continues:
For what it's worth, Obama might just want to consider his approach to the misinterpretation of his supposed Muslim beliefs.
Remember that U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services internal memo that examined methods of circumventing Congress regarding so-called "comprehensive" immigration reform? It gets better:
ICE's misleadingly-named Office of State and Local Cooperation (OSLC) has announced the next step in the Obama administration's efforts to drastically diminish the scope of immigration law enforcement. According to a draft policy document now being circulated among a limited group of stakeholders, ICE chief John Morton intends to prohibit not only his officers, but also local officers with 287(g) immigration authority, from busting illegal aliens who are discovered as a result of traffic violations.
Mark Krikorian says,
So that means we’ll go back to the situation where illegal aliens can drive illegally with impunity, like the Ft. Dix plotters, who were stopped 75 times by local police for traffic violations and never turned over to immigration.Feel safer yet?
Oh, yes. Very much so!
Via Rhymes With Right:
Afghanistan was dubbed ‘Obama’s War’ last night after it was revealed that as many American soldiers have died in the conflict during his presidency as during George Bush’s entire time in office.According to the latest death tally, 575 U.S. troops have lost their lives in Afghanistan in the 20 months since Barack Obama took office in January last year.
That is the same number of fatalities the U.S. military suffered under Mr Bush, who launched the Afghan invasion nine years ago in the aftermath of the 9/11 attacks.
With his White House honeymoon well and truly over, Mr Obama is no longer able to blame his country’s travails on the previous administration. (Source.)
As RWR notes, "this statistic is neither an indictment nor an endorsement of Obama's policies in Afghanistan or Iraq." It's a statement about pathetically biased our MSM is.
Recall back on the 10th Greg Gutfield's idea of building a gay bar near to the Ground Zero mosque? Gutfield said,
As you know, the Muslim faith doesn’t look kindly upon homosexuality, which is why I’m building this bar. It is an effort to break down barriers and reduce deadly homophobia in the Islamic world.
Now, check out what the official Twitter account of the Park51 Lower Manhattan community-center project -- the Ground Zero Mosque -- has said in response:
You’re free to open whatever you like. If you won’t consider the sensibilities of Muslims, you’re not going to build dialog.
Why exquisite hypocrisy! What better example of the hilarious two-facedness that is political correctness! Sensibilities of almost 70% of Americans regarding the mosque? No big deal. (Included: Lectures on "religious freedom," "the need for tolerance" and "open discussions.")
Sensibilities of Muslims regarding homosexuality? A "dialogue killer."
I wonder if The Messiah is aware of this ridiculous double standard? Of course he is! He's a living, breathing example of political correctness. Meaning, some things are "worthy" of people's feelings, while others are not.
Via The Corner: And people thought (think) George W. Bush is stupid. Here's The Messiah discussing reading and David Axelrod:
I got talking to him about what he reads and was telling me about these different policy tomes. And I said, ‘Well, yeah, but come on. I’m out here on the campaign trail with you, you’re up even earlier than I am, and I’ve been carrying around this Philip Roth book with me for two months and I’m yet to even crack it.’ He actually laughed at that point, and said, ‘Yeah, you have very little chance to really read. I basically floss my teeth and watch Sports Center.’
Hopefully he's not referring to this Philip Roth novel -- it might give him "some ideas."
... according to spokesmouth Robert Gibbs.
Meanwhile, Arizonans just guffawed a big "YEAH, RIGHT."
President Obama, that is. Recently he said,
We should all make more of an effort to discuss with one another, in a truthful and mature and responsible way, the divides that still exist — the discrimination that’s still out there, the prejudices that still hold us back — a discussion that needs to take place not on cable TV, not just through a bunch of academic symposia or fancy commissions or panels, not through political posturing, but around kitchen tables, and water coolers, and church basements, and in our schools, and with our kids all across the country.
Eugene Volokh reminds us (at the link above) that discussing race around water coolers would NOT be a very good idea. That is, if you valued your continued employment. Why? Potential charges of "harassment" and "hostile work environment" among other tidbits. And in our schools? Yeah, right.
As I've said many times, "progressives" like Obama do want frank discussions on race -- as long as everyone agrees with their viewpoint. Otherwise, "RACIST!!!"
Via Common Sense Political Thought:
Three months ago, Bill Phelps became a widower — he watched, helpless, as his cancer-stricken young wife Nikki’s life slowly ebbed away.Nikki, 37, a former teacher and mother of two-year-old twins, was denied the drug that might have saved her life, as it was deemed too costly by her NHS Primary Care Trust.
I wonder, then, how Mr Phelps feels after reading yesterday’s report that the NHS is happy to foot the bill for young women to have ‘virginity repairs’?
Nikki Phelps, pictured with husband Bill and her twins Harry and Jack, died after the NHS deemed treatment which could have saved her too costly How can it be right that the mother of his two little boys was condemned to death by an NHS that put women’s desire to appear ‘untouched’ before the right of a mother to live as long as she can to raise her children?
Latest figures show that there has been a 25 per cent rise in hymen replacement operations carried out on the NHS over the past four years. (Link.)
Is it a wonder that cancer survival rates are worst in Western Europe?
It sure is a "good" thing that we have Donald Berwick coming in to head the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, eh? He loves the British NHS.
Obama says "We're not that far removed from what most Americans are going through.”
"Not that far" to Obama must mean "light years." Now excuse me while I puke.
Semi-related: Cali Democrat Senator Barbara Boxer says "serving in the military is like being a member of Congress."
Today we learn that the administration is miffed that -- wait for it -- al Qaeda is acting in a racist manner:
In an interview earlier today with the South African Broadcasting Corporation to air in a few hours, President Obama disparaged al Qaeda and affiliated groups' willingness to kill Africans in a manner that White House aides say was an argument that the terrorist groups are racist.A senior administration official then followed up with "Al Qaeda recruits have said that al Qaeda is racist against black members from West Africa because they are only used in lower level operations."
"In short," the official said, "al Qaeda is a racist organization that treats black Africans like cannon fodder and does not value human life."
Newsflash, Mr. Obama: al Qaeda doesn't value human life period. Or, have you forgotten 9/11? Afghanistan?
Sheesh. You mean to tell me that now the administration will can the politically correct crap about Islamic extremism ... because there's evidence its adherents are racist against blacks?? Will we now go back and call it the "War on Terror?" Will we again refer to groups like al Qaeda as "Islamic extremists?" Will we call "terrorism" just that again -- instead of "man-caused disasters?"
The administration is demonstrating just what a color-conscious entity it is. Radical Islamic terror should be dealt with using "sensitive language" and "outreach" ... unless there's evidence they're racist. Arizona is sued for its immigration enforcement law because it will lead to, according to Obama and co., racial profiling. On the other hand, an outrageously blatant case of voter intimidation in nearby Philly is dropped by the Dept. of Justice, and a whistle-blower from that dept. has testified that it is policy not to take up cases where the plaintiffs are white and the defendants are black.
That this should come as a surprise to some people is chuckle-inducing. There's a plethora of evidence in President Obama's past that would prove this is precisely the political/cultural philosophy he'd follow, not the least of which is his 20 year association with the racist and anti-Semitic Rev. Jeremiah Wright.
I've said it before, I'll say it again: Good luck this November and in 2012, Democrats.
"Israelis suspicious of me because my middle name is Hussein."
During the interview Wednesday, when confronted with the anxiety that some Israelis feel toward him, Obama said that "some of it may just be the fact that my middle name is Hussein, and that creates suspicion."
Riiiiight. Try your policies and tone. And, of course, maybe The Messiah forgot that Israel once signed a peace treaty with a guy by the name of King Hussein?
The Messiah, in today's speech on immigration:
Today, we have more boots on the ground near the Southwest border than at any time in our history. Let me repeat that: We have more boots on the ground on the Southwest border than at any time in our history. We doubled the personnel assigned to Border Enforcement Security Task Forces. We tripled the number of intelligence analysts along the border. For the first time, we've begun screening 100 percent of southbound rail shipments. And as a result, we're seizing more illegal guns, cash and drugs than in years past. Contrary to some of the reports that you see, crime along the border is down.
Looks like Barack doesn't believe his own FBI, then. Take a gander at this chart. Sure looks like crime around the border has actually gone up quite a bit since 2000 now, doesn't it? Here's the explanation:
What we see that Arizona is broken into three categories - Metropolitan Statistical Areas, Cities Outside of MSA, and rural counties. Most people reside and most crime occurs in the MSAs. On the other hand, a glance at a map tells me that the Arizona border itself is not near what to the eyes of this former Manhattanite looks like any major city.And the stats reprinted below tell a different story - measured by violent crimes per 100,000, the non-MSA portion of Arizona has seen a dramatic increase in crime.
We also note that the non-MSA population has been declining while the state has been growing.
So, crime is "decreasing" along the southern border about as much as Obama is "doing all he can" about the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico.
J. Christian Adams, now an attorney in Virginia, "is accusing Attorney General Eric Holder of dropping the charges for racially motivated reasons."
"I mean we were told, 'Drop the charges against the New Black Panther Party,'" Adams told Fox News, adding that political appointees Loretta King, acting head of the civil rights division, and Steve Rosenbaum, an attorney with the division since 2003, ordered the dismissal.Adams claimed an unnamed political appointee said if somebody wants to bring these kinds of cases, "that's not going to de done out of the civil rights division."
Adams also accused Assistant Attorney General Thomas Perez of lying under oath to Congress about the circumstances surrounding the decision to drop the probe.
The Justice Department has defended its move to drop the case, saying it obtained an injunction against one member to keep him away from polling stations while dismissing charges against the others "based on a careful assessment of the facts and the law."
But Adams told Fox News that politics and race was at play in the dismissal.
"There is a pervasive hostility within the civil rights division at the Justice Department toward these sorts of cases," Adams told Fox News' Megyn Kelly.
Adams says the dismissal is a symptom of the Obama administration's reverse racism and that the Justice Department will not pursue voting rights cases against white victims.
"In voting, that will be the case over the next few years, there's no doubt about it," he said. (Source.)
Sounds like perfect fodder for 2010 and 2012 campaign commercials, even if Adams' allegations can't be proven. Hell, it's just plain bad enough straight up that these thugs weren't prosecuted! But, you can bet that the MSM wwill be attacking those commercials 100 times more than it ever bothered to cover this case in the first place!
Uh oh -- LOOK OUT! Obama is ANGRY! Check out the all-caps MSNBC.com headline:
The story is here.
'Ya think the MSM would be all bent out of shape about a general speaking out about George W. Bush? Or would that be "speaking truth to power"? That said, word has it that General McChrystal will get yelled at by Obama -- as soon as The Messiah gets off the golf course.
UPDATE: Knew it. Here's an example of how the MSM treated military opinion during GW Bush's tenure.
... not to mention refusing to secure the border. It wants illegal immigrants, or, wants them to become legal as quickly as possible (y'know, millions of new Democrats voters!). I mean check it -- if you're an illegal, the Obama administration is fighting for you:
Un. Real.
(h/t Newsbusters.)
It seems the administration really does have a death wish:
As Hotsheet reported yesterday, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said in a television interview in Ecuador this month that the Obama Justice Department "will be bringing a lawsuit" against the controversial Arizona immigration measure signed into law earlier this year.Now a senior administration official tells CBS News that the federal government will indeed formally challenge the law when Justice Department lawyers are finished building the case. The official said Justice is still working on building the case.
A suit would likely focus on the notion that the legislation is discriminatory and infringes on civil liberties.
By "death wish," let's see: The American public has consistently favored the Arizona law, in some instances by pretty hefty margins. The administration already looks ridiculously inept in its handling of the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico, not to mention its refusal to prosecute very blatant infringements of civil liberties in certain "selected" cases. Then its various high officials get caught ripping the AZ law without having actually read it, then the head of ICE said that they might not process illegals referred to them by Arizona!
Good luck this November, and even better luck in two years.
... the environmentalists are still firmly behind him, despite the greatest ecological disaster of our time:
As the greatest environmental catastrophe in U.S. history has played out on Obama’s watch, the environmental movement has essentially given him a pass — all but refusing to unleash any vocal criticism against the president even as the public has grown more frustrated by Obama’s performance.About a dozen environmental groups took out a full page ad in the Washington Post Tuesday – not to fault Obama over the ecological catastrophe but to thank him for putting on hold an Alaska drilling project. “We deeply appreciate your decision. . .,” the ad says to Obama.
“President Obama is the best environmental president we’ve had since Teddy Roosevelt,” Sierra Club chairman Carl Pope told the Bangor Daily News last week. “He obviously did not take the crisis in the Minerals Management Service adequately seriously, that’s clear. But his agencies have done a phenomenally good job.”
Some say there’s little doubt that if a spill like the one in the Gulf took place on former President George W. Bush’s watch, environmental groups would have unleashed an unsparing fury on the Republican in the White House. For their liberal ally, Obama, they seem willing to hold their tongues.
Haha -- 'ya think?
THE WEEKLY STANDARD has learned that senior Obama administration officials have been telling foreign governments that the administration intends to support an effort next week at the United Nations to set up an independent commission, under UN auspices, to investigate Israel's behavior in the Gaza flotilla incident. The White House has apparently shrugged off concerns from elsewhere in the U.S. government that a) this is an extraordinary singling out of Israel, since all kinds of much worse incidents happen around the world without spurring UN investigations; b) that the investigation will be one-sided, focusing entirely on Israeli behavior and not on Turkey or on Hamas; and c) that this sets a terrible precedent for outside investigations of incidents involving U.S. troops or intelligence operatives as we conduct our own war on terror.
Asking the UN to investigate Israel is like Pol Pot investigating genocide.
And he's certainly had a lot of time for other things to do. Change you can believe in:
In the nearly eight weeks that the ancient oil has been escaping its subterranean imprisonment, Obama has found.......time for a couple mini-vacations with golf, a dose of party fundraisers, healthcare town halls, TV interviews, a high school graduation, a festive White House lawn picnic with members of Congress, a Paul McCartney music hoedown, an ABC July 4th TV taping and a session with a key Palestinian leader.
Thursday Obama issued important statements celebrating the 90th anniversary of the Department of Labor's Women's Bureau and King Kamehameha Day, and mustn't forget, Portugal Day.
But Obama hasn't found a few minutes to chat with Tony Hayward, the talkative CEO of BP, the petroleum protagonist in this environmental drama. Not even on the president's ubiquitous, magically-secure BlackBerry.
Almost eight weeks. What's he afraid of? It took less than two weeks to set up last summer's historic beer summit.
Now, in a confrontational letter a White House official has invited Hayward to meet there next week with Obama aides and the boss would stop by. That will be nine weeks.
Nevertheless, the faithful continue to contend that he is a "brilliant leader."
Check out the dude in the back right:
Hey -- I'm sleepy tired of his rhetoric too!
... but nary a mention of the 66th anniversary of D-Day?
The White House website has nothing posted today on the 66th Anniversary of the D-Day landing.The president had other things on his mind. He was attending his second party this week, tonight at the Ford Theatre. The President [also honored] far left Bush-basher and Jew-hater Archbishop Desmond Tutu at the gala. [Tutu said] told the party crowd: “Security is not something that comes from the barrel of a gun.”
He said this on the anniversary of D-Day? By the way… isn’t that some version of a Mao quote?
Lovely.
Delaware Governor Jack Markell, chairman of the Democratic Governors Association, said this about our president and the BP oil spill:
The President is demonstrating he is in charge. He is showing he is going to do everything he possibly can to help people get through this ordeal.(Obama) has made clear he’s going to make the full resources of the federal government available. And he has also said he is going to insist that there be accountability for BP. And I think that is exactly what the people of this country are looking for. And when he does that, when he keeps saying it and follows through on it, I don’t think there is a big effect on our races. I think that’s what people are looking for from the president and I think that’s what he’s delivering.
He's in charge and showing he's doing everything he possibly can? Really??
Via The Daily Caller:
April 22: The Deepwater Horizon drilling platform, which had been burning for two days, sinks into the gulf. President Obama, after speaking in New York about the significance of financial regulatory legislation, hosts an Earth Day celebration in the Rose Garden.April 23: The U.S. Coastguard pronounces 11 Deepwater workers dead after traveling almost 2,000 miles throughout the gulf in search of their bodies. The president and First Lady Michelle Obama travel to North Carolina for a brief vacation, where they enjoy BBQ.
April 24: Coast Guard Rear Admiral Mary Landry announces that the Deepwater wellhead is spewing crude oil into the Gulf of Mexico. The president and first lady continue to enjoy their vacation in North Carolina.
April 26: A remote sub fails to stop the leak. Just four days after the explosion, the spill covers an area the size of Rhode Island. After hosting a ceremony for the New York Yankees, Obama travels to Andrews Air Force Base for a game of golf.
April 28: The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) pegs the leak rate at 5,000 barrels a day — up from BP’s claim of 1,000 barrels a day. Obama leaves Iowa and spends the day in Illinois, where he speaks to the owner of a family farm. He then visits a biofuel plant where he picks up mechanical parts and pretends to be interested in them.
April 29: Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal declares a state of emergency, as the spill “now covers a 600-square-mile area” and “is about 16 miles off the state’s coast.” Obama delivers remarks in Washington on the importance of cybersecurity. Later in the day, he attends a FEMA meeting about hurricane preparedness.
May 1: The U.S. military lends BP two C-130 aircraft to release potentially dangerous chemical dispersants over the oil spill. Obama tells jokes at the White House Correspondents Association Dinner, including one about killing the Jonas Brothers using CIA drones.
May 2: Obama makes a quick trip to Louisiana to ”get a firsthand view of the recovery efforts.”
May 3: Alabama Attorney General Troy King demands that BP stop asking fisherman to sign complicated agreements that would severely limit the amount BP would be forced to compensate them for the loss of their livelihood. Obama hosts dinner for the Business Council, “a group of current or former chief executive officers from a broad range of companies.”
May 8: BP’s containment dome, thought by many to be one of the environmentally safest solutions, fills with ice and fails to stop the leak. Obama plays golf at Arkansas’s Fort Belvoir.
May 9: The first tar balls wash up on Dauphin Island off the coast of Alabama. Obama delivers the commencement address at Virginia’s Hampton University.
May 12: Under pressure from journalists and government agencies, British Petroleum releases a short video of the wellhead, located one mile beneath the gulf surface. Using independent analysts, NPR determines from the video that at 50,000 barrels a day, the leak rate is 10 times higher than NOAA’s estimate and 50 times higher than BP’s early claim. Obama spends the morning with Afghanistan President Hamid Karzai. After lunch, Obama retires to the Oval Office with his advisers.
May 17: While BP attempts to siphon oil into a special tube, scientists warn that the oil is headed for the Gulf Stream, which would carry it around the southern tip of Florida and into the Atlantic Ocean. Obama hosts the University of Connecticut’s women’s basketball team.
There's plenty more, too. As they say, "read the whole thing" and then ponder "Change We Can Believe In."
Good luck to the administration in November if this happens:
[Arizona state Sen. Amanda] Aguirre’s Mexican-American delegation is making the latest move against the law, appealing to the U.N. and the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR) in the name of international law.Though conservatives have criticized the move, experts say it’s unlikely to accomplish anything significant, in part because the U.S. does not recognize the legitimacy of international courts.
Ah yes, the UN -- that same entity concerned with human rights ... so much so that it recently put Iran on its Commission on Women's Rights. But it wouldn't surprise in the least if The Messiah gave weight to the IACHR, if they actually weigh in.
I was just scoping The Corner and virtually every post of the last few hours deals with this [supposed] scandal. Then I happened upon this comment from Nangelator at CSPT:
Digby explains:But here’s the thing. [snip] There is no winning with these noise machine pseudo-scandals. They have an alternate media structure that is designed to stoke scandal fever and the way they keep the mainstream media on the hook is with “smell tests” and demands that the person address the claims, apologize or make amends, none of which will be deemed adequate and all of which necessitate another round of investigations, demands etc. With every impossible requirement that isn’t met, the press will become more convinced that the person must be hiding something, is too hot to handle and will eventually agree that he has to step down or quit the race because “the scandal” is devouring him.
It seems that the law that might have been violated is sufficiently vague enough that, as Digby stated, nothing will ultimately come from this. Obama will come off looking like the typical hack politician (something he promised NOT to be -- big time), and some official may offer his/her resignation (to "spend more time with his/her family"), but what would the GOP (in this case) ultimately hope to gain? Obama's impeachment? Really??
I wouldn't even begin to attempt it.
One, the GOP is poised to gain BIG this coming November. There'd be no better way for Obama and the Dems to mobilize their base than by a Republican overreach.
Two, Bill Clinton's impeachment hurt the GOP in the long run. They lost seats in 1998 (when they were supposed to gain), and IMO led to the overconfidence and arrogance that cost them in 2006 and 2008.
Three, many many liberals still want George W. Bush impeached (and convicted) for anything from lying to war crimes. Since that can't happen now, they'll settle for the Hague trying him for whatever. Impeaching Obama for violating some law worded with typical labyrinthine legalese -- while articles against Bush got absolutely nowhere -- will backfire big time.
Four, Obama is inept enough. If he were a Republican, the press would have eaten him alive three times over already. Let him continue doing what he's doing. He shown he's no different from any other politician -- indeed, he's probably worse than a lot of them. Continuing to press for straight answers regarding this mess is sufficient, and since the MSM isn't likely to hound Obama for the truth, use this campaign hypocrisy against him in November.
The public is thoroughly fed up with the same old political crap-as-usual. Granted, the GOP isn't much different, but keep in mind Obama promised everyone "change" and swore that he was different.
He swindled us, period. It's time to remind him of this fact in Novermber.
After all, even the Kool Aid-drinking Wilmington News Journal is getting miffed with his lameness in response to the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico:
President Obama has missed an opportunity to pound a sense of urgency into the nation and the oil company. He could have called on volunteers to clean beaches, used his "bully pulpit" to explain the problem. The American people need to see more energy and a stiffer spine from their president.
But ... he's been busy campaiging for embattled Democrats like California's Barbara Boxer! Give him a break!
The Weekly Standard Blog reports on The Messiah's recent statement at a Barbara Boxer fundraiser: "Let's face it this has been the toughest year and a half since any year and a half since the 1930s."
Really?
Sure, FDR had a tough ‘30s with the economy and all, but by the time the ‘40s hit, it was smooth sailing. (What’s worse: the Nazis and the threat of world-dominating totalitarianism or the obstructionist Republicans?) And President Harry Truman really had an easy time ending World War II, and having to nuke the Japanese. President Dwight Eisenhower only had the Korean War to worry about – and who remembers that, anyway? JFK and LBJ had Vietnam – not to mention the worry that the Russians might nuke America from Cuba, or any other place in the world, etc., etc., etc.
Hey Barack -- you wanted the job, remember? No one said it would be easy. So how 'bout shutting up and getting on with it? The Gulf Coast could sure use some leadership about now.
White House big mouth Robert Gibbs scolds the press for asking too many questions about BP.
White House continues to claim supposed offer to PA's Joe Sestak not to run for Senate is no big deal.
"Change you can believe in throw up on."
17 States Now Filing Versions of Arizona's Immigration Bill SB 1070.
One of America's national organizations fighting against illegal immigration is announcing that 17 states are now filing versions of Arizona's SB 1070 law which is designed to help local police enforce America's existing immigration laws.ALIPAC has documented the following 17 states are following Arizona's lead in response to citizen pressure.
ARKANSAS, IDAHO, INDIANA, MARYLAND, MICHIGAN, MINNESOTA, MISSOURI, NEBRASKA, NEVADA, NEW JERSEY, OHIO, OKLAHOMA, PENNSYLVANIA, RHODE ISLAND, SOUTH CAROLINA, TEXAS, UTAH.
I used to get [unsolicited] e-mails from ALIPAC; I unsubscribed after the group's leader, William Gheen, made nasty remarks about Senator Lindsay Graham of South Carolina. However, this information from the group is quite interesting: It shows that, despite the Obama administration's efforts to paint AZ's law as "racist," "insensitive" and a host of other typical "progressive" platitudes, Americans are fed up with the federal government's lazy attitude toward securing the border. This attitude led to AZ's new law, and appears is now instrumental in what other states are working on.
It's now "Countering Violent Extremism."
Now, to be fair, Obama is hardly alone in using Orwellian Newspeak. Anyone remember "revenue enhancement" (ie "tax hikes") during the Reagan years? Or, less controversially, what about "enhanced radiation weapon" in place of "neutron bomb"?
Wonder why such an anti-incumbent mood around the country these days? Because people are tired of politicians speaking out their ass, that's why. Here's yet another example: The Messiah, whose visit to a Michigan high school's graduation will require all those in attendance to provide "their birthdates, Social Security numbers and citizen status to the Secret Service so background checks [could] be performed," at the same time thinks the Arizona immigration law is "unfair." (While misstating what could actually happen under it, too.)
Why's that, Mr. President? Why are you more important than the citizens of an entire state? Why have you -- and your Attorney General and your Homeland Security Chief -- opined negatively on the Arizona law ... when you haven't even read it?? YOU. HAVEN'T. EVEN. READ. IT. And, meanwhile, your Assistant Secretary of State Michael Posner apologizes to the Chinese for the Arizona immigration law, saying it is "racial profiling." I wonder -- has he read the law? If so, it would be a remarkable first! But it's doubtful -- racial profiling is specifically prohibited in the law.
UPDATE: Victor Davis Hanson nails The Messiah -- and hypocrite Mexican President Calderón -- perfectly:
How strange that the president of Mexico, while a guest on the lawn of the White House, would attack the laws of a U.S. state, while his own country's immigration laws and policies in relation to Central America have never approached American tolerance. It is unimaginable that an American president would ever travel to Mexico City and lecture that nation and its president on its treatment of both aliens from Latin America and American tourists. But, as President Obama reminded us, "we are not defined by our borders" — although apparently a million Mexican nationals a year disagree and so risk everything to be on the north rather than the south side of a supposedly imaginary line. That is the truth that we dare not speak.
First we saw the president himself misstate what the Arizona immigration law was all about by scaring people into think they could be arrested on the street when they're eating ice cream. Then there was Attorney General Eric Holder who admitted he hadn't read the Arizona law -- but had said he didn't like it anyway. Now it's Homeland Security Chief Janet Napolitano -- former governor of AZ -- who said she wouldn't have signed the law ... but guess what? She hasn't read the law either!!
Are you freakin' serious??
Isn't this the very same administration that castigated opponents of ObamaCare for "not reading the bill" (as if they did themselves, eh?) and "lying" about its provisions? The Arizona law is much thinner than the ObamaCare bill and can be read quite easily in a short amount of time. Don't you think the administration would have advised its various bigwigs (including Obama himself) to know WTF they were talking about -- especially as some 2/3 of the American public support the new law?
That would be Attorney General Eric Holder:
Attorney General Eric Holder concedes during testimony on Capitol Hill that he has NOT read the Arizona law, despite the fact that he has spoken out against it already. He says he WILL read it. (Source.)
Well hey -- he's just following his boss in ignorance, right?
Unbelievable.
Hey -- why is it The Messiah can use the term "Teabagger," yet he won't use "War on Terror," or "Islamic terrorism"??
Probably the same reason that the MSM will pour over the supposed racism of the Tea Partiers for days, even weeks, on end -- and even speculate without a scintilla of evidence that the Times Square bomber was a TPer, yet now that it's been revealed the bomber was a Muslim fundie, his actions were due to "hitting hard times" and his motive is "a mystery."
Let's first start at the top with The Messiah:
"You can imagine, if you are a Hispanic American in Arizona ..." the president said Tuesday at a campaign-style appearance in Iowa, "suddenly, if you don't have your papers and you took your kid out to get ice cream, you're going to be harassed."
LIE.
Colombian singer Shakira:
"Shakira is deeply concerned about the impact of this law on hard-working Latino families," said Trevor Nielson, the singer's "political and philanthropic adviser". "She is coming to Arizona to try to learn more about how law enforcement is reacting to this and how we can ensure that people in the state of Arizona are not being targeted because of the colour of their skin."
Because they WON'T.
"This is not in the script," he said at the ceremony in San Juan, Puerto Rico. "You are not alone. We are with you. Put a stop to discrimination. Put a stop to hate. Put a stop to racism…Long live love, long live peace."
How about ... PUT A STOP TO YOUR IGNORANCE.
GOP Florida Senator Connie Mack:
"This law of 'frontier justice' – where law enforcement officials are required to stop anyone based on “reasonable suspicion” that they may be in the country illegally – is reminiscent of a time during World War II when the Gestapo in Germany stopped people on the street and asked for their papers without probable cause," said Mack in a statement. "It shouldn’t be against the law to not have proof of citizenship on you."
LIE.
St. Paul, Minnesota, Mayor Chris Coleman:
Adding to calls to shun the state, Saint Paul, Minnesota, Mayor Chris Coleman on Wednesday banned publicly funded travel to Arizona. The state law set a "dangerous example to the rest of the country," he said, by creating a culture that made racial profiling acceptable.
LIE.
"What I think is a mistake is when we start having local law enforcement officials empowered to stop people on suspicion that they may be undocumented workers."
LIE.
Rep. Nydia Velazquez, chairwoman of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus:
"It is irresponsible for any city, state or elected official to legalize racial profiling and discrimination. That is exactly what the governor of Arizona and the Republican-controlled legislature had done," the New York Democrat said. She added: "This shortsighted law is a step backward in our nation's ongoing struggle to provide civil rights for all. This bill will not make our borders more secure, but it will open the door to discrimination and racial profiling."
LIE.
The "Rev." Al Sharpton:
"This is about the Constitution of the United States. And this is about making sure that people have equal protection under the law," said the Rev. Al Sharpton, a civil rights activist. "And if you are a Latino in Phoenix, you should not be subjected to having to ride around with citizenship papers any more than anyone else."
News flash, Al: FEDERAL LAW ALREADY REQUIRES THAT NON-CITIZENS ALWAYS CARRY THEIR "PAPERS" WITH THEM.
Rep. Jared Polis (D-Colo):
“It is absolutely reminiscent of second class status of Jews in Germany prior to World War II when they had to have their papers with them at all times and were subject to routine inspections at the suspicion of being Jewish."
LIE.
AZ Rep. Ed Pastor (D):
“Arizona is better than this. Our nation is better than this. Passage of this bill will severely set back all the civil rights we have fought for in this country. It’s embarrassing to continue to see our state legislature churn out these hate-filled measures that offer no real solutions and violate our civil rights.”
LIE.
New York Times Supreme Court reporter Linda Greenhouse:
[She] called Arizona a “police state” and said she would avoid it till the law changed. She compared the law to “the most distasteful features of life in the Soviet Union and apartheid-era South Africa.”
LIE.
Darrell Steinberg, the President Pro Tem of the Califorina State Senate:
“It’s a civil-rights issue whenever you set somebody aside because of the color of their skin or where they come from,” said Steinberg, who is a lawyer. “And that applies to both legal immigrants, citizens and undocumented immigrants. I mean, how do you define reasonable suspicion? There’s only one way under that law. And it’s somebody who looks Mexican. Period.”
LIE. And, some "lawyer." He doesn't know how "reasonable suspicion" is defined? Here's some legal assistance for Mr. Pro Tem, from one of the crafters of the AZ law -- a lawyer who KNOWS about "reasonable suspicion":
Over the past four decades, federal courts have issued hundreds of opinions defining those two words. The Arizona law didn’t invent the concept: Precedents list the factors that can contribute to reasonable suspicion; when several are combined, the “totality of circumstances” that results may create reasonable suspicion that a crime has been committed.
Let the hysteria -- and the LIES -- continue. We'll be here to shoot 'em down. (Oh, wait -- was that "inciteful rhetoric?")
... not to mention Poland's president's funeral. And where is The Messiah? Playing golf. In fact, he's played golf 32 times since taking office.
Remember the flak that George W. Bush got for playing golf, especially during the Iraq War? Well, he only played a total of 24 times. For his entire presidency.
But hey, Obama? He's The Messiah!
The Messiah at a Democratic fundraiser last night: “You would think they should be saying thank you.”
Who was he speaking to? Why, Tea Partiers at rallies across the country. He also said that the Tea Parties have "amused" him.
"Thank you?" For what, exactly? Is this The Messiah's well-established narcissism coming to the fore again? And I sure hope he continues to be amused by those Tea Partiers -- right up through November.
Via Seton Motley at the MRC (via e-mail):
President Barack Obama is now attempting to alter the terms of his central campaign promise – a pledge that families making less than $250,000 per year will not see “any form of tax increase.”
Obama now claims his pledge only applied to income taxes, as evidenced by this excerpt from his most recent weekly radio address:
“And one thing we have not done is raise income taxes on families making less than $250,000. That’s another promise we’ve kept.”
Obama broke his “any form of tax increase” pledge when he signed the healthcare bill, which contained seven tax hikes that unquestionably hit some families making less than $250,000 per year.
This is not the first time the White House has attempted to dodge the “any form of tax increase” pledge.
On April 1, 2009, when Calvin Woodward of the Associated Press (“Promises, Promises: “Obama Tax Pledge Up in Smoke”) pointed out that Obama’s increase in the federal excise tax on tobacco violated the pledge, White House spokesman Reid H. Cherlin said:
“The president's position throughout the campaign was that he would not raise income or payroll taxes on families making less than $250,000, and that's a promise he has kept.”
Compare that to Obama’s central campaign promise:
“I can make a firm pledge. Under my plan, no family making less than $250,000 a year will see any form of tax increase. Not your income tax, not your payroll tax, not your capital gains taxes, not any of your taxes.” (Dover, NH) [Transcript] [Video]
Exactly one year ago, White House spokesman Robert Gibbs was asked if Obama’s pledge applies “to the health care bill”. Gibbs replied:
“The statement didn’t come with caveats.”
The White House has some explaining to do.
From fellow Watcher's Council member JoshuaPundit comes head-shaking news: Obama's New Policy: All Israeli Nuclear Workers Now Refused US Visas.
NRG/Maariv reported today that the Israeli government was stunned when every nuclear technician at Israel's Dimona reactor who had submitted visa requests to visit the United States for ongoing university education in Physics, Chemistry and Nuclear Engineering had their visa applications summarily rejected, specifically because of their association with the Dimona reactor.This is a new policy decision of the Obama administration. Up until now, it was routine for Israeli nuclear scientists and technicians to receive such visas and to study at US universities.
Israeli security officials have confirmed that these technicians are being denied visas solely because of their employment at the Dimona reactor.
Not only are employees at Dimonas taboo, but reportedly the US has an unofficial embargo on selling anything to be used at the site.
Professor Zeev Alfasi, the head of Nuclear Engineering at Ben-Gurion University in the Negev stated that "the United States doesn't sell anything nuclear-related to the Dimona reactor, and that means absolutely nothing. Radiation detectors, for example have to be purchased now in France because the USA refuses to sell these to Israel."
Do people still think that Obama is a friend of Israel? I mean, are they out there??
Maybe The Messiah had a recent pow-wow with his old "spiritual mentor" Jeremiah Wright and his former campaign advisor Tony McPeak. We all remember how they feel about the Joooooos.
Which is lamer? This, or last year's All-Star Game first pitch?
UPDATE: The Weekly Standard Blog asks quite a few good questions about The Messiah's basketball abilities -- are they really as good as we've been led to believe?
1. Why wear shorts on Air Force One in Europe -- and regularly not wear ties at events of a somewhat formal nature -- and then wear a tie to play hoops?2. Has President Obama ever played basketball on a team in a meaningful way? Sports Illustrated describes his having been on the "jayvee as a sophomore" at his high school in Hawaii, having made "second varsity" as a junior -- SI explains that the "school fielded multiple teams in some sports" -- and having finally made the varsity during a season spent "largely on the bench" as one of the "pine-riders." (And this is Hawaii -- hardly a rival of Indiana or North Carolina when it comes to hoops hotbeds.)
3. As a lefty, why release your jump-shot from the right side of your head?
4. Can the president dribble with his right hand at all (and I'm not speaking figuratively)?
5. Why was it that Clark Kellogg, whose shots were repeatedly flicking the bottom of the net as he built up a P-O-T-U (H-O-R-S) lead -- much of it off-camera -- barely able to draw iron after that? (This is not a tough question.) Relatedly, has President Obama recently played in a basketball game, or even a shoot-around, in which someone actually tried to beat him? I would love to see such a game take place.
Henry Payne at Planet Gore:
On April 1, the Obama administration’s EPA issued final rules forcing automakers to increase their vehicles’ fuel economy by 40 percent in five years. The next day, the very same EPA favorably reviewed an ethanol fuel mandate that would force autos to get up to 5 percent worse fuel economy.You can’t make this stuff up.
Follow us here. By the same date — 2015 — that the new 35.5 mpg EPA mandate is due to go into effect, oil companies are also mandated by Congress to double the amount of corn ethanol use (from 2007 levels) to 15 billion gallons. The current mandate of a 10 percent ethanol mix in fuel won’t get us there, so the powerful corn lobby is demanding EPA increase the mandate to a 15 percent ethanol mix.
Trouble is, a gallon of ethanol is 30 percent less efficient than a gallon of gas meaning that the more ethanol you mix in, the worse your gas mileage. Department of Energy studies show steadily decreasing fuel economy as ethanol blends rise from so-called E10 (fuel composed of 10 percent ethanol and 90 percent gas) up through E15 and E20 — with E20 suffering a 7.7 percent fuel efficiency loss.
Energy Secretary Steven Chu, knowing all this, still favors the use of ethanol.
Uh huh.
Jim Geraghty has 'em all, and well worth your time!
Well, it seems as if the "special relationship" the US has enjoyed with the UK since time immemorial is now dead -- but it ain't just the Messiah's fault:
BRITAIN’S special relationship with the US — forged by Winston Churchill and Franklin Roosevelt in the second world war — no longer exists, says a committee of influential MPs.Instead, America’s relationship with Britain is no more special than with its other main allies, according to a report by the Commons foreign affairs committee published today.
The report also warns that the perception of the UK after the Iraq war as America’s “subservient poodle” has been highly damaging to Britain’s reputation and interests around the world. The MPs conclude that British prime ministers have to learn to be less deferential to US presidents and be “willing to say no” to America.
Meanwhile, the current administration is taking naïveté to a whole new level:
The Obama strategy on Iran is working, Valerie Jarrett, senior adviser to the President, said this morning in an exclusive This Week interview. She insisted that “Iran will back down.”Asked about reports this morning that Iran is “is preparing to build” new nuclear facilities, Jarrett said the administration would continue to use diplomatic tools to push Iran into compliance with United Nations resolutions.
And we've already seen how The Messiah is oh-so vigorous in thrashing a close ally.
Surprised? Hah:
Three airports in the district of infamous fence-sitting and ultimately kowtowing Democrat Bart Stupak were awarded $726,409 in grants by the Obama Administration just two days before a vote on Obama and Pelosi’s government takeover of healthcare.Did Stupak compromise his supposed principled stand against taxpayer funding of abortion in exchange for taxpayer dollars for pet projects?
Oh, I dunno. Does a bear sh** in the woods?
A must read. An excerpt:
I wish this administration had at least said something as curt to the Syrians or Iranians for their past support for chronic infiltrations across their borders into Iraq to kill American soldiers, rather than pondering whether to build apartment buildings in Jerusalem endangers American soldiers. Whether Israel and the Palestinians, or the British again in the Falklands, or the Columbians, or the Hondurans, or the Poles and Czechs, there is no particular advantage in being a pro-American democratic ally; attention and outreach instead come from being our antithesis.
(Nit: Hanson habitually spells "Colombia[n]" wrong.)
... the Obama administration has denied Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests 466,872 times during the 2009 budget year, up from 312,683 under Bush's last full budget year in 2008. More specifically, federal agencies have denied 70,779 FOIA requests under an exemption that allows the government to hide details of its decision-making process, despite public directives from Obama that agencies cut back on the use of that exemption. During the last year of the Bush administration, the exemption was used just 47,395 times.
"Hope" and "Change."
Joshua Dunn notes why Education Secretary Duncan's proposed civil rights "reinforcement" is not only misguided, but will ultimately lose in the courts if it comes to that:
This is the same Department of Education that can’t support a voucher program in Washington DC to help minority children escape the grinding incompetence of the DC school system. Now it wants to spend its resources determining whether schools in Fairfax County or Westchester have a disproportionate number of white kids in college prep classes. Someone’s priorities seem misplaced. Even Nixon would blush.Second, it’s hard to see how Duncan can do this without running into headlong into the Supreme Court’s 2007 decision in Parents Involved v. Seattle School District No. 1. Duncan plans on relying on “disparate impact” analysis to show for instance that school districts with a disproportionate number of white students in advanced placement classes are guilty of discrimination. The cure for that disparate impact will be “robust remedies” like early intervention programs. But if (white) parents discover that their children have been denied access to an AP class to ensure racial balancing, they will likely bring suit just like the parents from Seattle in Parents Involved. And chances are, they will win. After all, Justice Kennedy, in his controlling opinion, singled out identifying students based solely on race as unconstitutional.
Of course, you might wonder "Well, why not just add more AP classes instead of denying some kids access (for balance)?" A legitimate query. However, now consider if your school district/state has the funds to add more teachers. Dunn then notes "One can easily envision school districts putting unprepared students in AP classes simply to satisfy the Department of Education." This is precisely what I wrote yesterday. Which is the bigger educational tragedy -- lack of minority faces (except Asian, of course) in AP classes, or putting more minorities in those classes and watching them fail at high rates because they're not adequately prepared?
In Missouri v. Jenkins, when the court and its self-appointed experts tried to improve the quality of education for African American children in Kansas City they structured their reforms around what they thought middle-class white children would want. As a result, after spending more than $2 billion, educational outcomes declined and African American parents became outraged and actually led the effort to end the court’s attempt to help them. Focusing on college prep classes when many minority children are trapped in dysfunctional and failing urban school system will likely be met with a giant “huh?” from many parents.
For the locals that may be reading this, does this sound familiar? As in New Castle County desegregation from 1978-1996? After almost 20 years of federally-enforced busing, the results were virtually identical to those seen in Kansas City -- no net improvement in minority academic achievement, and many [black] parents lamented the disintegration of the Wilmington School District and the corresponding local control of schools.
As mentioned yesterday, the Obama administration is going to begin looking "more intently" at civil rights in our public schools, notably disproportionate discipline rates, [lack] of access to college prep courses, and that 'ol "disparate impact" nonsense. Roger Clegg, who's usually dead-on about the effects of ... stuff like this, notes:
...the easy way out for schools -- and what school bureaucrat won't prefer the easy way out -- is to make sure the numbers pass muster, i.e., to make discipline decisions based not solely on the merits, but also on the basis of race. And since administrators aren't likely to mete out punishment just to balance the numbers, they will balance them by going easier on black students because they are black.As a result, school discipline will be further eroded, making it increasinigly difficult for students of all races to learn.
Maddeningly, Secretary of Education Arne Duncan gave an address about all this at the Edmund Pettus Bridge in Selma, Alabama, "scene of the 'Bloody Sunday' civil-rights confrontation 45 years ago." As Power Line's Paul Mirengoff says, "... did the civil rights protesters of the 1960s really march so that school administrator's would be intimidated into not disciplining black students who violate the rules?" Highly unlikely. Which just goes to show you how preposterously the civil rights movement has been altered. The right to attend the same schools as everyone else has now been transformed to the "right" to equal discipline rates (despite the number and severity of offenses). The right to equal educational opportunity has been transformed into the "right" to take, for example, Advanced Placement classes (even if you're in no way prepared for the rigor of such classes).
Regarding the latter, I (and hopefully everyone else) sincerely want more minorities (that would be sans Asians, who're already well represented) in such courses; however, much like universities, which almost stop at nothing to recruit minorities to "show" that they care about "diversity," how is it beneficial to these students to be put in classes/situations for which they are woefully prepared? And then they fail (or drop out)? Bean counting administrators feel good about themselves for "propping up their numbers;" no one really counts the successes of this bean counting, however.
And who was it recently that was complaining about groups suing public entities -- and the prohibitive cost of a defense? See what Clegg says above. Not only will school districts "fudge their [discipline] numbers" to avoid a costly lawsuit, but the spectre of being labeled "racist" is, of course, destructive PR. And the inevitable result -- deteriorating building discipline -- will result in families, of ALL races, fleeing public schools for private and parochial.
John Rosenberg [rightly] ponders: "Does anyone really believe that 'one of the largest' problems of American education today is rampant, pervasive discrimination against minorities?"
2005: The year the Democrats couldn't believe the GOP would use the so-called "nuclear option" to get their agenda through Congress:
Note what Obama says at the beginning of the vid: "Majoritarian, absolute" rule and that's "not what the Founders intended."
Y'know, despite voting against the surge, and telling supporters in 2007 that “preventing a potential genocide in Iraq isn’t a good enough reason to keep U.S. forces there.” (Link.)
I mean, this takes balls:
DE's own Joe Biden uttered similar hilarities.
Hey, look fellas -- I was against the war and all too, but if I voted [how] and said [what] I did like our two top guys did, I wouldn't be as brazenly shameless as to claim credit for the success the situation now seems to have become ... y'know, in spite of my actions.
Unreal.
MSDNC and its MSM buddies would be hammering this for weeks as yet another "constitutional violation" by that "democracy-hating" George W. Bush.
You know it. I know it.
Remember the maxim: If a Republican makes a grammatical goof, it's MSM fodder forever, and proof that he/she is stupid. If a Democrat makes one, well, there must be some excuse (like being tired, overworked, etc.). This holds especially true if you're Barack Obama. Because everyone knows that he is so intelligent, there must be some reason why he mispronounced "corpsman" not once, but twice. (Video at link.)
OK, sure, Obama was never in the military. Well hell, neither was I, but even I knew how to pronounce "corpsman" if only by watching freakin' M*A*S*H! And you know what? You'd never have known Obama even made this goof 15 or 20 years ago. Because then, all we had was the mainstream media.
You know we're dealing with a "progressive" administration when we see stuff like this in a job posting for a lawyer at the Dept. of Justice:
The U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Rights Division is seeking up to 10 experienced attorneys for the position of Trial Attorney in the Voting Section in Washington, D.C. The Civil Rights Division is primarily responsible for enforcing federal statutes and executive orders that prohibit, among other things, unlawful discrimination in voting, education, employment, housing, police services, public accommodations and facilities, and federally funded and conducted programs. The Voting Section enforces federal statutes designed to safeguard the right to vote. These statutes include the Voting Rights Act, as amended; the National Voter Registration Act; the Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting Act; and the Help America Vote Act.Trial attorneys are responsible for conducting investigations, litigation, and other activities addressing all aspects of the Voting Section's enforcement duties. These positions may require extended hours and some positions may involve significant travel.
The Civil Rights Division encourages qualified applicants with targeted disabilities to apply. Targeted disabilities are deafness, blindness, missing extremities, partial or complete paralysis, convulsive disorder, mental retardation, mental illness, severe distortion of limbs and/or spine.
The U.S. Department of Justice is an Equal Opportunity/Reasonable Accommodation Employer, and encourages qualified applicants from all backgrounds to apply. Except where otherwise provided by law, there will be no discrimination for or against an applicant because of color, race, religion, national origin, politics, marital status, disability, age, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, status as a parent, membership or non-membership in an employee organization, or on the basis of personal favoritism. The Department of Justice welcomes and encourages applications from persons with physical and mental disabilities.
OK, now while I certainly understand that "mental illness" is a broadly defined attribute (depression, for instance, is classified as a mental illness, and surely a person can be a damn good attorney whilst taking Prozac or some other anti-depressant), WTF is the deal with "encouraging 'qualified' applicants" who are ... mentally retarded?? (I believe there are degrees are retardation; however, the very term itself denotes an intellectual disability! How does one get through law school with such?) Even if there actually are practicing, qualified attorneys out there who are mentally retarded, why encourage them to apply?
Pardon the "insensitive" slap, but it's kind of ironic that this advertised position deals with voting rights, because based on how the DOJ has handled instances like the New Black Panther intimidation case in Philly, it seems the dept. already has a few of these desired applicants on the payroll.
The Messiah demagogues the Supreme Court (whose members just happened to be seated in front of him):
[The recent SCOTUS decision in Citizens United v. FEC] "open[ed] the floodgates for special interests — including foreign corporations — to spend without limit in our elections. Well I don't think American elections should be bankrolled by America's most powerful interests, or worse, by foreign entities."
This is totally false:
The Court held that 2 U.S.C. Section 441a, which prohibits all corporate political spending, is unconstitutional. Foreign nationals, specifically defined to include foreign corporations, are prohibiting from making "a contribution or donation of money or ather thing of value, or to make an express or implied promise to make a contribution or donation, in connection with a Federal, State or local election" under 2 U.S.C. Section 441e, which was not at issue in the case. Foreign corporations are also prohibited, under 2 U.S.C. 441e, from making any contribution or donation to any committee of any political party, and they prohibited from making any "expenditure, independent expenditure, or disbursement for an electioneering communication... ."
Maybe the best part about this nonsense is Justice Sam Alito mouthing the words "not true" after Obama's lie. Maybe he should've yelled out "you lie"? Hell, why not? The moonbats are already likening Alito to Rep. Joe Wilson anyway, even though the two instances are only remotely similar. (That's why we call 'em the "Local Gaggle of Moonbat Bloggers," after all.)
And then there were these usual Messiah rhetorical devices:
1) He trotted out the usual straw men: “I was told by some,” “Washington has been telling us,” etc. And once these awful straw men are set up, our hero Obama answers defiantly, “I don’t settle for second place!” The straw-man ploy is now stale.2) The “I didn’t ask for” trope: Obama acts as if he bravely endures persecution on our behalf, rejects the easy path, and presses ahead on the difficult path.
3) The “they did it” trope: So when Obama talks of “lobbying” and “horse trading” on health care, apparently some right-wing nut in the Senate started buying votes at $300 million a clip? The Washington insider who has the White House and Congress blames . . . Washington!
4) The “Bush did it” trope: So Obama’s deficits are the result of Bush’s spending and weak economy — but is a relatively quiet Iraq due to Bush’s successful surge? No. Obama himself will bring the war in Iraq to a close. He did not offer one word of praise for Bush in a speech calling for unity.
5) The meaningless token: So after piling up the two largest budget deficits in U.S. history, Obama promises fiscal sobriety and spending freezes — but only in 2011, after we pile up yet another year of trillion-dollar-plus red ink.
6) The above-it-all lecturing: After blaming Bush for 30 minutes and castigating the Republicans for “just saying no to everything,” Obama lectures on Washington’s partisan bickering. And after a year of hardball Chicago politicking, a politically weakened Obama calls for bipartisanship and a new tone. That will go over really well.
7) The meaningless deadlines and promises: No speechwriter should invoke Iran and a deadline to comply on nonproliferation; no one believes Obama after the past four failed deadlines, and he should give it all a break.
8) The final hope-and-change flourishes: The emotional end of the speech, which used to set crowds afire in 2008, seemed more rote.
That's the title of a short story by Hal Colebatch in Man-Kzin Wars VII, the popular series based on master scifi author Larry Niven's superb "Known Space" characters.
In a nutshell, in the period (roughly) between the mid-22nd century until the end of the 24th, Earth has enjoyed a "golden age" -- a time of peace and plenty, all the while it has settled worlds orbiting nearby stars. Earth history -- especially anything about wars and violence -- is suppressed among the general public by the ARM, the Amalgamated Regional Militia, the enforcement branch of the UN (yeah, go figure!). Tendency to violence is treated as a mental disease, and can be cured chemically. Those who stumble upon any historical info about past Earth conflicts can face a memory wipe. In 2360, one of our ships en route to one of these colonies, the Angel's Pencil, encounters an alien vessel in interstellar space. The ship belongs to the Kzin, a race of carnivorous humanoid felines that resemble huge tigers. They're pure warriors, and want nothing more than to conquer other species.
The crew of Angel's Pencil eventually (out of survival's necessity!) get over their disbelief that the Kzin vessel is trying to harm them, and turn their laser-drive against the ship, destroying it. (This is all detailed in Niven's first-ever Kzin story from 1966, "The Warriors.") They eventually beam back all the evidence of their encounter to Earth -- to warn them of this horrible threat. But since their message travels at the speed of light, it takes years for it to arrive.
In "The Colonel's Tiger" two ARM agents ponder the Pencil's message, and conclude that, despite all the photographic and visual evidence presented, the crew of the ship is mad -- suffering from some sort of delusions brought about by extended space travel. How can aliens, which have superior technology to humans, be aggressive and war-like? Impossible!! And the crew's "madness" must indeed be severe, as they've "come up with" weapons (via their photographic evidence of the Kzin vessel) that have LONG since been outlawed by the nations of Earth; indeed, 99.9% of the population now hasn't even heard of things like fusion bombs, missiles, particle beams, and the like.
One of the ARM agents discovers evidence from the 1800s of a "tiger man" that was eventually killed by an army colonel ... a creature that was such an anomaly as to defy description. The ARM conclude that the crew of the Angel's Pencil probably concocted an elaborate hoax for some as-yet unknown reason -- perhaps to thwart further space travel, or create a panic on Earth, probably for prodigious monetary gain. Again, what the Pencil sent back to Earth just can't be true!! It just can't!
Can it?
Colebatch scatters throughout "Tiger" appropriate passages from past literary works to drive home his point. For instance, there's this from The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire:
It was scarcely possible that the eyes of contemporaries should discover in the public felicity the latent causes of decay and corruption. The long peace, and the uniform government of the Romans, introduced a slow and secret poison into the vitals of empire. The minds of men were gradually reduced to the same level, the fire of genius was extinguished, and even the military spirit evaporated.
Then there's this, from Where Ignorance Is Bliss:
One of the largest of all British local council libraries, at Brent, lately destroyed apporximately 66,000 of its 100,000 books. The explanation which the council gave for this destruction was that the offending books were "books on war, history books and other books irrelevant to the community.
Backtrack about 400 years from the time of the Angel's Pencil and what do we find?
In the end, the two ARM agents in Colebatch's story realized that the crew of Angel's Pencil could not have created the hoax in which the agency so fervently believed. (The hoax, that is.) The cold reality was that fierce, war-like aliens were indeed out there in space, and we were going to be their next target. Humanity would surrender without a shot unless the ARM acted -- and acted swiftly. Humans would have to be made aware of their past, and be made aware of what they were capable of doing, if they wanted to survive.
September 11, 2001 was supposed to have been our -- not just the US's, but the entire civilized world's -- wake up call. We've already forgotten a mere eight years later. And before that -- what, World War II? How long did it take before we forgot its lessons?
In closing, and in keeping with the scifi analogy, it's best to keep Jean-Luc Picard's words in mind at the end of the superb episode "The Drumhead":
We think we have come so far ... the torture of heretics and the burning of witches is ancient history... and then ... before you can blink an eye ... it threatens to start all over again.Villains who wear black hats are easy to spot. Those who clothe themselves in good deeds are well camouflaged.
She [Admiral Satie] -- someone like her -- will always be with us... waiting for the right climate in which to flourish...spreading disease in the name of liberty. Vigilance, Worf. That is the price we must continually pay.
The Messiah (using a teleprompter, by the way) to a group of DC area 6th graders:
We're going to raise the bar for all our students and take bigger steps towards closing the achievement gap that denies so many students, especially black and Latino students, a fair shot at their dreams.
Obama was speaking in reference to the "Race to the Top" initiative, which grants federal cash to states that make worthy educational reforms. (Be sure to check out Kilroy's superb coverage of Delaware's efforts in Race to the Top.) But ... what precisely does Obama mean by that statement? By saying that the achievement gap "denies" students a fair shot at their dreams, the implication is that the gap is purely -- or mostly -- a result of poor teaching and schooling.
Such a mindset (Obama's) should not come as a big surprise, given his far-left politics. "Progressive" educrats have for years blamed things like white teacher racism and/or "white privilege" for the poor academic performance of minority students. Poor funding [of inner-city] schools is another reason. Unfortunately, unless a lot more emphasis is placed on the enormous problem of fatherlessness, and on the violence that plagues way too many city schools, it will extremely tough to fully close that gap (unless schools do what Obama and co. have done with job figures a la the stimulus package, etc.!).
Alas, it just is not politically correct to mention these things. Especially without someone invoking the dreaded "R" word ...
ONE YEAR LATER, the prison in Guantánamo, Cuba remains open.
Who wants to place bets that it'll still be open in January 2011?
C.I.A. deaths prompt surge in U.S. drone strikes.
Beginning the day after the attack on a C.I.A. base in Khost, Afghanistan, the agency has carried out 11 strikes that have killed about 90 people suspected of being militants, according to Pakistani news reports, which make almost no mention of civilian casualties. The assault has included strikes on a mud fortress in North Waziristan on Jan. 6 that killed 17 people and a volley of missiles on a compound in South Waziristan last Sunday that killed at least 20.
Suspected?? If they are "suspects," why aren't we "arresting" them, reading them their "rights," giving them a taxpayer-funded lawyer, and then granting them a civilian trial, hmm??
I brand the Obama administration WAR CRIMINALS and demand an investigation!!
Check out The Messiah's response to what his biggest boo-boo was in his first year in office:
If there's one thing that I regret this year is that we were so busy just getting stuff done and dealing with the immediate crises that were in front of us that I think we lost some of that sense of speaking directly to the American people about what their core values are and why we have to make sure those institutions are matching up with those values.
Really? According to CBS News, Obama "delivered 'speeches, comments, and remarks' 411 times (including 52 times specifically on health care) and also gave 158 interviews" -- "far more than any of his recent predecessors in their first year."
But here's the best part -- and the main reason for this post's title:
The president said he made a mistake in assuming that if he focused on policy decisions, the American people would understand the reasoning behind them."That I do think is a mistake of mine," Obama said. "I think the assumption was if I just focus on policy, if I just focus on this provision or that law or if we're making a good rational decision here, then people will get it."
In other words, we're all just too freakin' stupid to appreciate what he's trying to do for us peons.
Of course, those in the MSM are pretty much parroting similar sentiments. Here's the WaPo's E.J. Dionne:
By avoiding arguments over philosophy and ideology — by failing to offer a pointed and running explanation of why he was reversing the policies of the previous administration — Obama left independent voters confused about his goals.
(h/t: The Corner.)
After all, when did these suspects have their rights read to them??
Bush = "war criminal" for housing terror suspects in Gitmo, desiring military tribunals for them and engaging in enhanced interrogation with three of the most wanted of them; however ...
Obama = "The Messiah" for sending in unmanned drones to kill terror suspects -- not to mention nearby civilians.
The Messiah's latest bit of asininity:
President Barack Obama told banks Thursday they should pay a new tax to recoup the cost of bailing out foundering firms at the height of the financial crisis. "We want our money back," he said.In a brief appearance with advisers at the White House, Obama branded the latest round of bank bonuses as "obscene." But he said his goal was to prevent such excesses in the future, not to punish banks for past behavior.
The tax, which would require congressional approval, would last at least 10 years and generate about $90 billion over the decade, according to administration estimates. "If these companies are in good enough shape to afford massive bonuses, they are surely in good enough shape to afford paying back every penny to taxpayers," Obama said.
Advisers believe the administration can make an argument that banks should tap their bonus pools for the fee instead of passing the cost on to consumers.
They would have to pay up even though many did not accept any taxpayer assistance and most that did have repaid the infusions.
Hey Barack -- what about the "obscene" amount of money that GOVERNMENT flounders EACH AND EVERY DAY, huh?? And I also love the "argument" that the banks got "low-interest" loans. Really? What about the NO-INTEREST loans that GOVERNMENT gets EACH AND EVERY DAY from people's overpaid taxes (given back -- INTEREST-FREE -- after April 15th)??
And how will banks NOT pass on the cost to consumers, huh?
And how does your "argument" hold water when "many did not accept any taxpayer assistance and most that did have repaid" the loans???
And meanwhile, we see THIS.
And people wonder why this empty suit's poll numbers are sinking like a stone?
The AP via the Philly Daily News:
The Justice Department has accused a Huntingdon Valley swim club of race bias in a lawsuit, six months after the club barred a group of mostly black day-campers from their pool.The civil-rights suit filed yesterday charges that the Valley Club engaged in a pattern of racial discrimination in canceling its $1,950, eight-week contract with the Philadelphia-based Creative Steps program after the children's first visit.
The suit, while most seemingly warranted, is probably moot anyway because the club filed for bankruptcy after the media uproar over the incident.
Meanwhile, the incredibly obvious instance of voter intimidation by members of the New Black Panther Party continues to cause the same Feds to shrug their shoulders:
The U.S. Commission on Civil Rights last month propounded interrogatories and document requests to the Justice Department seeking answers as to why the New Black Panther Party case of voter intimidation was dismissed, who was involved, what outside groups participated in the decision, and what this portends for the enforcement of federal civil rights laws. The Justice Department has responded, I have learned.In a letter to the commission’s chairman, Joseph Hunt, director of the Federal Programs Branch, contends that the department is limited in what it can provide out of concern for its “deliberative processes” and so as not to “undermine its mission.” He doesn’t invoke “executive privilege” per se, but he does assert attorney-client privilege (which some legal gurus tell me doesn’t really “work” between government entities and agencies as a valid objection).
In short, the commission is being stiffed.
Maybe The Messiah will come out and say that the Justice Dept. "has acted stupidly"?
A musical about Barack Obama's "Yes we can" election campaign premieres in Germany this weekend, including love songs by the president to his wife Michelle and duets with Hillary Clinton.In all, 30 singers, actors and dancers are to perform in the musical "Hope — the Obama Musical Story" when it opens at the Jahrhunderthalle concert hall in Frankfurt in a bilingual mix of English and German. The audience may recognize that many songs quote from the politicians' stump speeches during the 2008 U.S. presidential campaign.
Word is that upcoming Obama musicals are:
Hilarious bit on ABC's "Good Morning America" news segment this a.m. where the Obama administration's failure in the recent Christmas Bomber incident was compared to ... JFK and the Bay of Pigs??
Well, like another young president almost 50 years ago, Barack Obama found the so-called intelligence professionals, the veterans, the old hands, failed him and failed the country.And as John Kennedy did when the CIA blew an invasion of Cuba in 1961, President Obama took responsibility for the failure to stop and spot the underwear bomber.
John Kennedy after the Bay of Pigs. Huge intelligence failures at the Bay of Pigs. The President took responsibility, his popularity shot up."
Let's see -- how many MSM types claimed that "so-called intelligence professionals, the veterans, the old hands" failed George W. Bush after 9/11? Any? Or, like many "progressives" during the months following the attacks, did they complain that Bush and co. ignored that PDB that said "bin Laden determined to attack US"?
And WTF is up with comparing a radical Islamist terrorist act against the US, with what was quite arguably a US terrorist act against another nation (JFK and the Bay of Pigs)? (Not to mention, as Newsbusters' Scott Whitlock points out, "it was Kennedy who pulled air support for the Bay of Pigs invasion" which might have led to a quite different outcome.)
What was it that I said yesterday -- that "progressives" are so ridiculously predictable? Bill Clinton shouldn't be blamed for the failure to thwart terror acts on the Trade Center and elsewhere during his eight years (not to mention a golden opportunity to kill bin Laden), and now Obama shouldn't be blamed for any failures either (despite the latter supposedly "stopping the buck"). OTOH, George Bush is entirely cuplable for the 9/11 attacks because he supposedly failed to take action on the intel that bin Laden "was determined" to strike against the US. (Well duh -- like, of course he was. When was he not?)
UPDATE: A friend e-mails this link to a Limbaugh segment from yesterday which [partly] illustrates the above. Not only is Bush responsible for Obama's first YEAR in office, we still cannot put any blame on The Messiah:
DEFAZIO: We set up the terrorist information center to overcome the failures of the Bush/Cheney administration.SHRUM: These procedures were put in place by the Bush administration.
COOPER: The problems that existed now which are, the president says he's trying to fix today, did they exist years ago and we just didn't know about them?
GERGEN: We've been hearing from the government that they're going to close these gaps now for over eight years.
OLBERMANN: Bush's reforms of the intelligence system might not have changed things for the better.
RICE: The Bush team has made it much worse.
SHUSTER: The Bush administration let guys go from Guantanamo. These were the guys who helped Abdulmutallab in Yemen.
PAGE: Certainly things that the Bush administration did are affecting what's happening now.
FUENTES: Systems have been put in place in the previous administration.
MACCALLUM: This is pretty much a holdover from the previous administration.
MCMAHON: Let's not lay this at the feet of a guy who's been there for 10 months and not at the feet of the people who built this security apparatus. It was Bush bureaucrats.
TUCKER: We saw a lot of belligerence from Dick Cheney. We saw a lot of swagger from George Bush. Where did that get us?
And so it goes ...
