Monday, December 12, 2011

Happy Yule!

I hope everyone is having a wonderful holiday season. I'm taking a break for awhile. I can't go to Hawaii for 17 days like the Obamas and spend a gob-zillion bucks, but I can enjoy the holidays just the same. God bless, and see you after the New Year.




Sunday, November 20, 2011

Photo of the Day





Photo credit: The Brigade.

Thursday, November 17, 2011

Allen West to Media: "Stop being afraid of this president"



Rep. Allen West (R, FL) made these remarks on Tuesday at a press conference in support of the TransCanada Keystone XL pipeline.

“It’s about time that I asked this from the media: Stop being afraid of this president,” said Rep. West. “Stand up to him and call him out on the shirking of his duties and responsibilities. The House Republicans are passing pieces of legislation, after pieces of legislation about jobs.”

“And here we got a president that’s gone off to Australia, playing golf in Hawaii, and you guys allow him to make this decision to shut down this Keystone XL project,” said West. “The media needs to call out this president and stop coming over here to the House Republicans and telling us what we’re not doing. We’re the ones taking action. The guy sitting at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue is destroying this country.”

West made his remarks in light of President "Present's" decision to put off the decision about the pipeline until after the 2012 election. Obviously there's nothing more sacred to Obama than his own re-election; a decision in favor of the pipeline would anger his base; a decision against the pipeline is something he would have to defend during his re-election campaign. So Obama had decided to kick this one down the road, regardless of the how often he tells people he's focused like a laser on jobs for Americans, or focused on getting this country off of its dependence on Middle Eastern oil.

Update: "President Priss," by Mark Hyman at American Thinker. Contrary to the Obama hype that was fed to us during the 2008 election cycle, Hyman asserts that Obama is of average, pedestrian intelligence; his looks, rather than "handsome," are best described as the post-adolescent Steve Urkel minus the oversized plastic rim glasses; he is of barely average athleticism, and probably not even that--no one is allowed to see him play golf or basketball, except for the well-inside-the-two-point-range jump shot; he received the Nobel Peace Prize, even though he authorized more drone strikes in a year than Bush in eight years (and don't forget Libya); he believes himself the most successful president a half century, even though our job market is worse than during the Great Depression. He can't bowl, he rides a girl's bike (the only thing missing from that bike were the handlebar streamers and woven basket), he drinks effeminately, using his fingertips to hold the glass and extending his pinky, and he's labeled a "fashionista." When he goes on "The View" instead of a hard news show, he crosses his legs just like the women on the show, etc. etc.

I'm not sure where Hyman was going with this article, but he lets readers come to their own conclusions. Some of the commenters were in a snit, their noses out of joint because Hyman assumes that a man with all of these "personality tweaks" (??) is effeminate. That obviously wasn't the point of Hyman's article. The point of it, for me, is not who or what Obama is, but who and what he was portrayed to be during the 2008 election cycle. Clearly, his biography was filled with misrepresentations and lies, and unlike what the media is doing now to one Republican candidate after another, our leftwing lapdog media wrote literally thousands of fawning articles, all about their love affair with their brown-eyed boy.

Had Obama been seen riding that bike before the election, even the sycophant press couldn't have helped him out enough to get him elected; that photo would have done for him what the tank picture did for Michael Dukakis. It's just a fact of life: Americans don't want a sissy pantywaist for a president.




And we sure as hell don't like it when he badmouths Americans when he's out of the country. (What is this, a new bowling shirt?--(h/t Michelle Obama's Mirror's Blog for the pic). Yet again, Obama is out of the country when he should be here showing leadership on the economy, and while abroad he's taking cheap shots at Americans--this time it was American kids. He just can't seem to help himself. Every time he goes abroad, he has to run down this country. There truly never has been an American president like this one.

Wednesday, November 16, 2011

"I don't talk to the press"

Chelsea Clinton hates the media--she always has. She's never given an interview, not even to 9-year-old kid reporter Sydney Rieckhoff, who asked her a question in 2009 for Scholastic News when Chelsea was out on the campaign stump for her mother.

Kid reporter: "Do you think your dad would be a good 'first man' in the White house?" young Sydney asked.

Chelsea Clinton: "I'm sorry, I don't talk to the press and that applies to you." WTF?

OK, so that would be fine, I suppose, except that now little Chelsea has a new job as a special correspondent for NBC News, no less. Seriously? "Chelsea Clinton has loathed the news media for most of her life," wrote Don Van Natta, reporter for the NYT, via Twitter. So what does she do? She takes the plumb job in prime time at NBC News--and refuses to be interviewed. Haha. No, you can't make this stuff up.

Says Erik Wemple, who has an opinion blog on news media at the Washington Post: After all, you can’t say it’s not relevant — if you’re going to interview other people, it might be helpful to have spent a moment or two on the other side of the mike. . . . Now Clinton will be asking lots of questions. She just won't answer any. What a great media world we inhabit.

I'm pretty sure no one has even heard this woman speak. At least Brian Williams hasn't, since he recently said, in a "gushing defense" of her hire at NBC: "She just wants to work for us and she just wants to do our "Making a Difference" stories. . . . Most Americans haven't heard her voice. . . . I don't know her well, but what an impressive, impressive woman . . . .I can't wait to hear her voice and her viewpoint. Oh for the love of God.

Chelsea has a master's in Public Health from Columbia and a bachelor's in history from Stanford. She has lived her life off of her trust fund (daddy's money); her life experience, and Brian Williams clearly attests to this, consists of "travel." Whoo-hoo. She schmoozes with her other 1% friends on her expense account and then goes to the head of the line in prime time at NBC. I'm looking forward to hearing about the first person who stiffs her for an interview. Heh.

Rush Limbaugh said yesterday that this was being done so that Chelsea has an opportunity to get used to being in front of the camera, a skill necessary for neophyte politicians, since obviously her intent is to run for some political office at some point or another. We remember the disaster that Carolyn Kennedy made of her Senate bid, sounding like a New York Valley Girl with all of her "you know's." Wow, Chelsea Clinton for Senate. That's really something to look forward to. Although Carolyn Kennedy's "you know" disaster (repeated 142 times in one interview) came during an interview. It would seem that the skill that Chelsea really needs is talking to people, one that up to and including the present day she has consistently run from.

Update: A must-read from Clarice Feldman at American Thinker: "Secrets of the American Nomenklatura." "TV News is now officially entertainment and if you are looking for journalism turn it off and look elsewhere."

Sunday, November 13, 2011

Michelle Obama in Hawaii

Seriously. This is our First Lady?

And this. I'm sorry, but this woman has no business representing our country. I wish this woman would get a clue about the amount of her flesh that we really all would rather not see. Then she greases herself up like a skank. What is wrong with this woman? Seriously, I think she's pretty much wasted most of the time that she appears in public. Wasted on alcohol--and whatever else I wouldn't know.

This behavior is NOT APPROPRIATE. Do we really have to say this? Can they not "handle" this woman, or is she just totally out of control? You know, I get it that this woman probably doesn't get any at home. So can't her handlers do something about that--like bring someone to Big White to service her or something. And then keep her away from the ALCOHOL when she's in public like this?

This is from Michelle Obama's Mirror's Blog--one of the commenters.

I do not want to be walking thru a heavily flora'd area and see a very large, bent over something coming toward me. That stance is agressive, threatening, precharge mode.

Who is that man locked in mortal combat with her? His hands are restraining her arms while she is heaving to pull  him in to grind her breasts against him; and he isn't even wearing medals.

The Russian is terrified.
Can anyone blame him?

A quote from Dolly Parton: "You'd be surprised how much it costs to look this cheap." Michelle Obama needs to get a grip and realize that she's not 20 years old. . . she's not even 30 years old. As FLOTUS, showing off all that skin and backfat is inappropriate.



Update. While touring an organic farm in Hawaii, Mrs. Obama suggested that poor children need to learn to eat--need to "get their palates adjusted." Evidently the reason they aren't eating vegetables is because "there are no grocery stores." If they would only learn to eat arugula (and steak--her favorite meal) then they wouldn't grow up obese. This woman is walking, talking proof that affirmative action is a really bad idea--it just doesn't work.

Thursday, November 10, 2011

Is the Tide Turning for Herman Cain?

Updates below.

Read the article by Ann Coulter, "David Axelrod's Pattern of Misbehavior." No matter what you think of Ann Coulter, if you've read any of her books, you know that one of her skills is research. I'm so glad to see that someone is interested in these questions that don't seem to bother the heads of anyone in the mainstream media.

How did Politico, the blog that broke the Cain story with 96 stories in six days, get their hands on Herman Cain's personnel records from the National Restaurant Association (NRA)? Well, Coulter thinks she knows. It seems that a woman named Sheila O'Grady, who is a close friend of David Axelrod, went straight from being former Chicago mayor Richard M. Daley's chief of staff to president of the Illinois Restaurant Association (IRA). O'Grady has issued a denial that she had anything to do with obtaining the records. [Prove you didn't, Sheila. Oh, that's right, it's really tough to prove a negative, isn't it?]

The Daley-controlled IRA works closely with the NRA. And, as Ann Coulter points out: "strangely enough, Cain's short, three-year tenure at the NRA is evidently the only period in his decades-long career during which he's alleged to have been a sexual predator."

Herman Cain has never lived in Chicago, but David Axelrod has. And who lived in Axelrod's building? None other than Sharon Bailek. She admitted when she made the rounds of the morning shows that she knows Axelrod. I think she put it something like, It's a friendly building and we would "wink" when we saw each other going to the gym. This is exactly the sort of thing that ObamaTeam did to get Obama elected as an Illinois state senator and then as the Junior Senator from Illinois--his campaign was able to obtain sealed divorce records which he used against his opponents. I don't think for one second that the Chicago Machine had nothing to do with this Cain slander.

Coulter goes into great detail about the two people Obama ran against and how their divorce records were used to knock them out of the race. The entire article is worth the read.

I have the strangest feeling that there are going to be a lot of people with egg on their faces once this whole thing is over. Cain gave just about the best debate performance tonight that someone under this sort of stress and scrutiny could have given. I think we're going to be looking back on this night and saying, This is where events started to turn around for Herman Cain.

Do I think he's going to be the Republican nominee? No, I do not. But what I do think is this: Thank God Caine had the brass to fight back against this ugly sort of takedown tactic. It's about time somebody stood up to these Chicago thugs.

I hope Herman Caine is innocent, and I hope his lawyer scares the crap out of Sharon and Karen and slaps them both with a lawsuit. And Politico as well. We all know there's a higher standard for libel and defamation of character for public figures; but that doesn't mean there's no standard.

Update. I forgot to mention that last night, when the moronic CNBC debate moderator, Maria Bartiromo, asked Cain about "leadership" and being accused of "inappropriate behavior," the audience booed her and her question. Then when Cain answered, they applauded and cheered. The look on Bartiromo's face was the debate moment of the night. Priceless. These media-types don't get it. The American people are essentially decent and fair, and they don't like to see the kind of pile-on that's been happening to Cain in the media.

Update #2. This is interesting, from an article that I found at CBSAtlanta.com. Maybe it proves nothing, I have no idea, but it's interesting, nonetheless. Anyone ever heard of speech software that analyzes the stress in a person's voice? Private Investigator TJ Ward analyzed Cain's speech from his press conference: "If he is hiding something this thing would have spiked way down here," said Ward. "He is being truthful, totally truthful." During the speech, when Cain denied the claims, the detector read "low risk." According to Ward, that means Cain is telling the truth.

Ward also analyzed Sharon Bailek's speech during her press conference. During the analysis of the section where she reads that Cain grabbed at her genitals and shoved her head towards his crotch, Ward says the detector read "high risk statement," meaning Bailek was not telling the truth about what happened.

The technology being used here is called Voice Stress Analysis, or VSA. "Stressed speech" is defined as speech that exhibits a change in characteristics cause by mental stress caused by anxiety and/or fear."

Mark Levin is incensed about all of this, asking, "Have you ever heard of a presidential candidate being asked to take a lie detector test?" the way Cain was asked by a "journalist" at his press conference. Levin asks, did they ask Barack Obama to take a lie detector test, when he said that in all those years of sitting there in the Rev. Wright's church, he never heard the vile bilge that came out of that man's mouth on a weekly basis? Or how about Ted Kennedy? Did the media ever ask him to take a lie detector test? Levin sounds like he's ready to choke someone. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qGBbLRfU5MA&feature=youtu.be

Is the tide turning for Herman Cain? John Nolte at Big Journalism is reporting on the Columbia Journalism Review (CJR), leftist media watchdog, saying this: "Let's Slow Down the Cain Train," where we learn that Politico has published "144" Cain-centric stories. From CJR: "Yet, while allegtions against Cain are significant [oh, you have to love that--allegations are significant], it is irresponsible the extent to which some segments of the political press has allowed them to dominate the political news cycle for these past nine days." Ya think?

Nolte continues: "Politico and the Washington Post are using this story not only as a way to destroy Cain but also as a distraction from Obama's growing pile of failures and brewing scandals. This is all about getting Barack Obama that second term and if 'CJR' looked at the last 10 days through that prism all of the confusion would simply melt away."

Update #3. This is Thursday afternoon. I would have predicted this morning that the firestorm would soon die out over this Cain business. And I seem to be right. Here's what I'm thinking: that the lawyer for Herman Cain has probably by now sent around a letter or two to these people, discussing libel and defamation of character. It's Thursday afternoon, and we haven't heard a doggone word from Lawyer Joel Bennett about the circle-jerk press conference with all of Cain's "accusers." Except for this:

From CNN: "Kraushaar won't do news conference without other accusers." She says she won't do a presser if it's only going to be Sharon and Karen under the hot lights. Hilarious. The other two "accusers," according to the article, aren't returning Karen's calls. The article states that earlier this week, Kraushaar told CNN she has copies of records detailing allegations against Cain. So what is she waiting for?

It would seem that the firestorm these accusers created is fizzling. Big, big, big surprise. I still want to see Herman Cain and his attorney go after Politico. That would be worth the price of admission. I'd also like to see Karen Kraushaar lose her cushy federal job and benefits, including her retirement that my tax dollars would be paying for.


Wednesday, November 09, 2011

The Circus Continues

Now we know the identity of the woman who was awarded a cash settlement of about $45,000 when she was relieved of her job at the National Restaurant Assn. She is Karen Kraushaar, and she would like a joint press conference with Sharon Bialek in order to present a "body of evidence" against Herman Cain. So get ready for the women to show up together in front of the microphones, along with their two lawyers.

Who is Karen Kraushaar? She is the woman represented by the lawyer we heard from earlier, Lawyer Joel Bennett. The one who said she didn't see any value in coming forward, wanted to stay anonymous, and simply wanted to live her life. Evidently she's changed her mind. The National Restaurant Assn. waived her confidentiality agreement in the case so that she could come forward. As far as I can tell, although this is unclear since it's a question that apparently doesn't interest anyone in the media, Kraushaar's lawyer was the one who asked the NRA that his client be released from the confidentiality agreement--although she was obviously for at least a week before talking on background to the people at Politico, so how that didn't violate the agreement is a little bit confusing to me. Anyway, the NRA waived the agreement, so now of course the woman is talking. --Yes, there's a story that Joel Bennett, on behalf of his client Karen Kraushaar, requested that she be released from the confidentiality agreement.

Kraushaar is currently a federal employee, working as a spokesperson for the Inspector General of the IRS. She is a Brown graduate with a master's degree from the U of Michigan and has worked as a career federal government official for various federal agencies.

It might also be instructive to add that after settling the sexual harrassment complaint against Herman Cain in her job with the National Restaurant Assn. in 1999, she went on to work as spokesperson at the Immigration and Naturalization Service at the Justice Department. It was in that job, in 2002 or early 2003 and with the assistance of the same Lawyer Joel Bennett who successfully got her a five-figure settlement in 1999, she again filed a workplace grievance, this time for job discrimination. Maybe it would have seemed too much like a "pattern" to be accusing her boss of sexual discrimination two jobs in a row.

In her second job-related suit, Kraushaar was asking for thousands of dollars in a cash settlement, a reinstatment of leave she used after a car accident in 2002 (which as a federal employee would mean $$ in her pocket), promotion on the federal pay scale (more $$ in her pocket), and a one-year fellowship to Harvard's Kennedy School of Government. This was according to a former supervisor familiar with the complaint. The promotion alone would have increased her salary between $12,000 and $16,000 per year. The complaint was based on Kraushaar's supervisors denying her request to work full time from home (how exactly would you do that if you are a spokesperson for a department--just asking). Included in the complaint against her supervisors was an email, cited by Lawyer Bennett as objectionable, circulated by one of her managers, comparing computers to women and men. This was one of those joke lists that arrive in a person's email box every day: women are like computers because even your smallest mistakes are stored in long-term memory for later retrieval.

You can't blame a girl for trying, since it had worked for her ($$) at the NRA. However, this time she and Lawyer Bennett were unsuccessful, and she dropped the complaint in 2003 and went to work at the Treasury Dept.

Interestingly, Karen doesnt seem to have quite the memory for this second unsuccessful workplace lawsuit that she does for the one against Herman Cain. She says she considers the complaint "relatively minor" (really?--well, maybe she does; maybe in her world a workplace lawsuit is a normal, minor way of responding to conflicts at work); however, she said in an interview on Tuesday that she "doesn't remember" details about the complaint, doesnt remember asking for a payment, a promotion, or a Harvard fellowship. She told the AP reporter that the complaint at the immigration service was "nobody's business" because it had nothing to do with her settlement with the NRA. Lawyer Bennett declined to discuss the case with the AP reporter, citing confidentiality.

You can't make this stuff up. h/t to AP Exclusive: Accuser Filed Complaint in Next Job.

Here's a newsflash for you, Karen. Like it or not, engaging in a workplace lawsuit in two jobs in a row within five years says something about how you roll as an employee. You come across as a person looking to put money in your pocket at someone else's expense. You come across as a cranky, dissatisfied malcontent. Now maybe you just had a lot of bad luck in a couple of jobs. Maybe Herman Cain really did sexually harass you. Maybe you really were treated unfairly in your next job. However, in my experience, the kinds of people who file workplace grievances are the worst sort of people to have to work with. That's just me.

Seriously, it's time for the NRA to release the non-redacted report of what Herman Cain was accused of doing and the findings of same. This he-said, she-said crap has gone on long enough.

Update. The Los Angeles Times confirms that Gloria Allred and Lawyer Joel Bennett will hold a joint news conference with their clients, time and place to be announced. Bennett says that his client will hold a joint news conference with as many of the women who complained of sexual harassment by Herman Cain who will participate. They are evidently hoping that by banning together they can establish a pattern of bad behavior. Evidently the irony of their clients' patterns of bad behavior is lost on the two attorneys. The statute of limitations has run out on any of these charges--but wait!--better than a court of law is the court of public opinion, where allegation and innuendo are the only proof needed.

Update #2. Not to be outdone by the accusers' high profile attorneys, Herman Cain has hired L. Lin Wood Jr. to advise/represent him. Wood is a libel and defamation lawyer who has represented other high profile clients. He is said to be highly respected within the legal community and very good at what he does. Frankly, I wouldn't really want to be in Karen Kraushaar's shoes, represented by ambulance chaser Lawyer Joel Bennett.

In a 2005 interview, Wood said, I believe that courts, since the 1964 decision in the New York Times v. Sullivan, have steadily eroded the ability of individuals and entities to redress false attacks on reputation by overemphasizing the need to safeguard First Amendment rights.

As usual, the media seems to have missed the real story of Cain's news conference. The fact that Cain has hired Wood, a high-powered attorney who has a reputation for competence, persistence, and aggressiveness, ought to be giving the other side pause. Herman Cain has hired one of the best libel and defamation lawyers in the country. This thing isn't over yet.

Update #3. Evidently what Karen did in her job at the Justice Dept. isn't all that uncommon for women (and I wonder if it's just women) working for the federal government. I wish we had some real journalists who were actually curious about these kinds of things who would look into how many of these sorts of suits or complaints get filed every year in the federal government. Anyway, this is from a commenter at GatewayPundit:

This is and was a common career ladder for many women in the Federal Government. Filing a complaint once or twice usually got their careers jump started and they were able to climb to their current grade level. All it takes is one or two successful attempts. If one looks really hard, they’ll probably find another complaint filed by this woman somewhere along the line.

A one-year fellowship to Harvard’s Kennedy School of Government usually included not only their full pay for the full year but also included per diem expenses for food and housing. Not a bad arrangement on the tax payers dime.

One should ask what grade level she is. I’ll bet it’s in the very high level range.

Update #4. Doubling Down. So days ago she was so media shy she wouldn't give out her name. Sometime between then and now, Karen Kraushaar found her voice, doubling down on her history with Cain, telling ABC that Herman Cain is a "monster." And this is rich. Now she says that the reason she didn't want her name to be used is because she fears "retaliation" from Cain supporters. Darlin', you have the wrong party. That would be Democrats who would retaliate. OK, Cain is a monster. Would you care to elaborate on that, Karen? I guess not. ABC evidently decided not to print whatever else, if anything, she said. I guess information from these women will continue to dribble out, bit by bit, which is the strategy. This woman is starting to tick me off.

. . . . Like I said, dribs and drabs. ABC News has printed a longer article with a few more details. The Lawyer Joel Bennett now says that the complaint about the "monster" [I added that, he didn't] involved "multiple" unwanted advances by Cain over the course of "at least a month or two." Nothing further in the article about the "monster" characterization. You know, the guy at Penn State who was sodomizing little boys--I would characterize him as a "monster." A serial killer like Ted Bundy was a "monster." If what Cain was doing to her actually came up to the standard of monstrous, then clearly there would be people who would remember such over-the-top behavior. And also, this sort of thing by Cain wouldn't be a one-off; there would be women lined up around the block with similar complaints.

Am I the only one who would like to see Cain's fellow candidates come out at the debate tonight and defend him?