Passage to India

Almost immediately after the election on Tuesday, Obama will be running out of town; and not only out of town, but out of the country. He'll take forty aircraft, including both Air Force 1 planes, six armored cars, three Marine One helicopters, enough "stuff" to establish not one but two Secret Service command centers, and as Clarice Feldman puts it, "apparently his entire staff of cooks, wardrobe masters, make up artists, dressers, hairstylists, lap dogs, sniffer dogs, food tasters, czars, his wife, two kids, and the teleprompter. It's not altogether clear whether this is a stealth invasion or a self-imposed exile."

David Paul Kuhn asks the question in his article, "After Election, Obama to Flee US": before Obama goes on his longest tour overseas this year, almost 12 days, will he face the press after Tuesday's election? "It would be stunning if Obama does not face the inquisition. It's inside baseball. It's also, however, what's done. The gravity of the moment calls for sincere comment. It would look worse to cower from the spotlight and split town."

After their midterm elections, and after speaking to the press, both Clinton and Bush left the country. Reagan didn't. He spoke to reporters, and he wrote in his diary later that day, according to Kuhn: "Did a press conference in Rose Garden re the election returns. I'm sure they were sorry I was so happy."

As Doug Powers says at Back to Basics, "The most dangerous place to be standing just after the November election will be between President Obama and the nation's emergency exit doorway."

Big Zero, voting with his feet. While he's gone, the "intellectual pragmatist" can contemplate how life is going to change for him: he will have lost his sycophantic Senate Majority Leader and his House majority. Good luck with that, Barry. Buh-bye and good riddance.

Obama: OneBigAssMistAke

Thanks to one of my favorite blogs, Seraphic Secret, for the images.

h/t for the image to The Malcontent

I hope to be first in line to vote on Tuesday.

"An Open Letter from a Democrat to
Rush Limbaugh and his listeners"

It might surprise readers of this blog that I used to be a registered Democrat; in fact, I voted for Bill Clinton--twice. There's a fascinating open letter on the website HillBuzz from a lifelong Democrat, the editor-in-chief of HillBuzz.org, who speaks of the Civil War in the Democrat ranks that's been raging since May 31st 2008, when "scores of . . . Obama flunkies took off their masks and revealed the full extent of the Leftist coup that had taken over the party. This was the day when the DNC took delegates Hillary Clinton won in Michigan away from her and handed them to Obama." Kevin DuJan, the writer of this letter, tells of millions of alienated Democrats who are mad as hell and determined to "expose the party and literally burn it to the ground for the good of the country." Who knew? Because of course, as the writer of the letter says, none of this is being reported by the lapdog Obama Leftist media.

"[W]e former Democrats saw just how insane these people [Obama supporters] really are and we are now doing everything we can, behind the scenes, to use everything we know about the Democrat Party to collapse it from within." Wow. This guy says that these former Dems who are out to destroy their (former) party are "America-loving, middleclass, Jacksonian/Clintonian Democrats" who want nothing to do with what's going on now in Obama's Democrat party. "It's crystal clear that being a patriotic American who loves this country is intellectually incompatible with being a Democrat. If you love America and want it to prosper, the Democrat Party is at absolute odds with everything we need for a thriving, successful economy."

This is a long letter, but it's worth reading all the way to the end. The part that really does my heart good is where the guy goes into his rant against ANYONE who voted for ObamaCare: "we are truly committed to making sure the Claire McCaskills out there get everything that is coming to them for all their service to Obama and his agenda. Hear that, Ben Nelson . . . voters will be coming for you. You and everyone like you. Every last one of you. If you voted for Obamacare, you are politically dead but may not know it . . . and it is your own fault. Being intensely stupid is no defense. If you were a YES on anything related to Obamacare you are going to be defeated . . . if not in 2010, then in the primaries in 2012. If you survive those, you will be taken down in the 2012 general election. Your political career is over . . . dummy."

Update. So Rush Limbaugh saw the letter to him, and he replied on his radio show yesterday. The transcript is here on his website. Here's a little bit of what Limbaugh said yesterday:

"[T]heir open letter to me is for me to understand what they think the media is ignoring and what a lot of people know and ignore. There are basically two things going on: There are scandals brewing and have been brewing in the Obama administration that the Republicans are gonna zero in on after they win next Tuesday or sworn in in January, and that the Democrat Party at large needs to be brought down--and it is--because there are Democrats in droves leaving the party. . . . I mean, we remember Ronald Reagan was a proud Democrat once. He said the party left him. Bill Bennett was a proud Democrat once. They're called 'neocons' now. A lot of them were Democrats at one point."

Dem to Obama: He can
"take his endorsement and shove it"

I would say that things aren't going exactly swimmingly on the campaign trail for Dear Leader. Campaigning was the one thing he was supposed to be able to actually do well, but things don't really seem to be going all that well for him out on the road. He looks like a tired piece of crap, and this is out on the campaign trail where he's supposedly the most "up" and "energized." Right.

Things didn't go so well for Big Zero in his one stop of the day, Rhode Island, of all places, which should have been a friendly place for him to land. Like Frank Caprio (did I say he was a Democrat?), who said when he heard that Obama had declined to endorse his candidacy for governor that Obama can take his endorsement and "shove it." If Caprio is successful in his election bid, he'll be the first Democrat governor in Rhode Island in 16 years. He's running against Independent candidate, former Republican Senator Lincoln Chafee.

Obama's trip to Rhode Island continued with another great moment. Later the same day, after the "shove it" remark from his fellow Democrat, Obama gave a speech in which he said this about Republicans, again pulling out his greatly overused driving metaphor: "We can't have special interests sitting shotgun. We gotta have middle class families up front. We don't mind the Republicans joining us. They can come for the ride, but they gotta sit in the back."

Is this guy SERIOUS? Did "our president" just say that Republicans have to sit IN THE BACK (of the bus)? This is a man who fundamentally misunderstands the role in which he was elected to serve: as president of all the people. It simply isn't possible that this maroon doesn't realize the image he creates with that kind of language. Rosa Parks, the "mother of the freedom movement," would be so proud, wouldn't she? I wonder when he'll call for separate drinking fountains for Republicans?

Done. This guy is done.

Update. 2 Faces of Obama: The Uniter vs. The "Let's Punish Them" Divider



Update #2. Guess whose approval rating is at 37%, an all-time low?

Update #3. Charles Krauthammer article: "Obama Underappreication Syndrome"--read about Obama's "scientific, indeed neurological, explanation for his current political troubles: The electorate apparently is deranged by its anxieties and fears to the point where it can't think straight"--and therefore votes Republican. Big Zero, you are a desperate tool.

Update #4. Charles Krauthammer has another article that's worth the read (as his stuff always is): "The great campaign of 2010." He points out that Obama urges Hispanics to go to the polls to exact political revenge on their enemies--"This from a president who won't even use 'enemies' to describe an Iranian regime that is helping kill U.S. soldiers in Afghanistan."

Obama Taking His Crutch to India,
(update) But Not His Headgear

Big Zero is incapable of speaking without the teleprompter--really. He will be taking the teleprompter with him to India where they will have completed a makeover of India's Central Hall to accommodate Zero's stunningly pathetic incompetence. What person who speaks in any public forum with even a modicum of skill can't handle a 20-minute speech without a teleprompter? The teleprompter will be used in India's Central Hall for the first time in its history.

Do we remember? This dud was sold to us as the greatest communicator evah! The earth was going to be healed, the seas were going to rise (or was that recede, I can't remember), because Obama would speak. Meh. This man is a joke, but unfortunately the joke's on us.

Update. ObamaTeam has decided that Dear Leader won't be visiting the Indian Golden Temple because he would have to wear a head covering. The headline at NPR is, "Obama To Skip Indian Temple; Aides Fear Muslim-ish Images." Really? The smartest team evah can't figure this one out? They should ask for suggestions--I'm sure someone would have an answer to Zero's headgear problem. Now he's a worldwide joke. Hooray for the U.S. of A. and all of the morons who voted for this clown in 2008.

Image credit: rediff.com

The President of All the Country?
Hell no, it's the BO & MO Show

I found this video over on Michelle Obama's Mirror's Blog: "the Homecoming King and Queen need your help to ensure that their hand chosen candidates get elected to their court." Snort.

"Hello everybody, it's Barack and pause (and I swear he almost said, "uh") Michelle."  This is stunningly inane. Is it just me, or is "Barack" looking like a piece of crap these days. Although it may just be the lighting used in the video. Someone at the the Mirror Blog pointed out that they upped the lighting to make it appear as if BO & MO are the same color.

Here is Barack, desperately trying to "connect" to the "folks." Nice try, Champ. Fail.



The commenters at the Mirror Blog are hilarious--thank God, because these days we all need a good laugh.

Wow . . . is it SUPPOSED to look as if it was shot in one of those old photo booths at Woolworths?

Introducing himself and Michelle as if no one knows who they are . . . reminds me of the Mouseketeers. Butt where are the ears?

Campaigner-In-Chief

I guess he doesn't have anything better to do in Washington, although maybe the country is better off when this guy is campaigning rather than working as POTUS. They're calling this the "pump-up nervous Democrats tour." There were pictures of Obama yesterday out on the campaign tour posted on the Drudge Report. They're gone this morning, but Rush Limbaugh has them. Wow, The One is a freak. He's angry and confused and can't figure out why he's getting criticized. We know that narcissists do not deal well with criticism, but wow, this is must have been freaky photo day--he looks like he's frothing at the mouth. As Limbaugh said, "I have never seen a picture of an American president look like that. . . . It is strange that these pictures would be released." Wow. "Strange" doesn't quite cover it.

Over at American Thinker, Clarice Feldman suggests that Obama inhabits a "dream world" since he's suggesting out on the campaign trail that if the Dems lose their congressional majority, the Republicans will have to work with him. Oh, hahaha, did the Dims "work with" Bush when they took over in 2006? I don't think so. She also posts the hilarious history of Obama's comments about "shovel-ready" projects, which of course he recently said he now does not believe in--"there's no such thing as shovel-ready projects." Way to figure that one out, Champ. Our most intelligent president evah!

The Weekly Standard has posted an interesting article by Noemie Emery--"Fault Lines: The president's apologists look for scapegoats." Things were bad, and one had to admit it, but at the same time one couldn't blame him. He was in charge, but not really responsible; he was around, but somehow apart from his government. So the effects of his actions--recession, malaise, distress, unemployment--could never be traced to their source.

The Washington Times has an article about where Obama is taking his campaign: "Obama campaign trail shuns hostile areas, picks only 9 friendly states." Most of the places he'll be campaigning are states that he won by at least 10 percentage points. He'll stay away from Indiana and West Virginia, where a visit from him "would probably ensure the defeat of Joe Manchin," Democrat governor who is seeking the Senate seat of the late Robert Byrd. One guy posting over at hillbuzz writes that has never seen so many billboards and homemade signs in yards. Even in a district that is heavily union, the yard signs for the Republican hugely outweigh those for the Democrat. Instead Obama will go to Washington State and California where his approval ratings, unlike the rest of the country, are just above 50%, which contrasts to his national approval rating which is somewhere around 44%.

Seriously, Big Zero is losing it, in more ways than one. Gateway Pundit is reporting that out on the campaign trail on Monday Obama implored his supporters to hand over more $$ (has he seen the recent unemployment figures?) to help the 15 Senate seats that are "up for grabs" on November 2. If Republicans pick up 10 Seats on election day, they will win back the majority. Fifteen Senate seats up for grabs? Predictions at this point would say that the Dems will probably keep their majority in the Senate. The Wall Street Journal has a map of the House, Senate, and governors' races that are considered closest in their article, "Democrats Retrench as GOP Pulls Away." Democrat strategists acknowledged they are abandoning a dozen House seats the party now holds, as they try to salvage their majority by shoring up candidates with better chances. The Republicans need a net gain of 39 seats to win a majority in the House. In October the NYT was reporting that Republicans could pick up as many as 78 House seats, although a net gain of about 50 seats seems more likely.

Update. Oh, excuse me. Politico is reporting this morning that 99 Democrat-held House seats are in danger of turning Republican. According to the article, more than a quarter of those facing competitive races are Freshman Democrats. Flyover country seems to be a particular problem for the Dims: "If there is a particular trouble spot for Democrats, it is the Midwest, where 31 seats are at risk." Oh those damn bitter clingers!

Meltdown

The New York Times Magazine has an interesting article on the Obama presidency: "Education of a President." It's worth the read. The article's author, Peter Baker, writes: "this is an administration that feels shellshocked. Many officials worry [that is, White House officials] that the best days of the Obama presidency are behind them. They talk about whether it is time to move on."

And evidently it is--time to leave, that is. Team Obama knows which way the wind is blowing for Big Zero, and they're getting out while the getting is good. The rats are leaving the sinking ship: Leaving or already gone are General James Jones, the national security advisor, Rahm Emmanuel, chief of staff, almost the entire economics team, including Christina Romer and soon Larry Summers. Axelrod will go. Robert Gibbs may go. Defense Sec'y Robert Gates is leaving. Where's Hillary Clinton with her Reset button when they need her?

Even the campaign trail isn't going so well for Our Hero. Normally campaigning is something Obama knows how to do. Instead he brilliantly decides to go out and tell his supporters to stop sulking, and 36 attendees at a Maryland rally collapse from illness--a far cry from the days when Obamabots used to swoon at his feet. He's actually getting less-than-softball questions from--people who voted for him, questions like, "Why should we vote you back in?" That question came from an MTV crowd. Ouch.

But never fear, the perpetual Obama Campaign Machine has finally brought out its secret weapon: Lady Michelle joined the midterm campaign trail on Wednesday. Although--oops--by Thursday she had already violated Illinois law with some illegal electioneering when she stopped off to vote in ChicagoLand. But come on, can we really expect a Harvard-trained lawyer to understand every tiny nuance of the law? Moo-chelle is scheduled to continue campaigning in Colorado, Connecticut, New York, Washington state, and California, plus this weekend she will appear with The Won in Ohio. Be still my heart.

Not sure what happened to those toned arms--those "guns"--we used to hear so much about. Ick. Won't any of the 27 people on her personal staff tell her that the bare armed thing isn't merely unattractive--in this case it's just totally gross. But I guess when you've been named the MOST POWERFUL WOMAN ON EARTH, if you want to flash your ugly pits, you can. 

Evita Peron she's not, but I guess no one around her will tell her that. Put on a jacket, woman.

Follow Evita Michelle's exploits on the campaign trail along with Michelle Obama's Mirror, aka MOTUS (Mirror of the United Status) at RightNetwork: "FLOTUS hits the road for POTUS."

Update. Michelle Obama electioneering in polling place. HotAir says Gibbsy was asked it about it yesterday, and in characteristic smart-guy fashion ended up laughing it off. Gibbs said something like, Come on, she's well liked and she probably didn't know what she was doing. When did "she didn't know what she was doing" and "she's well-liked" become a defense for breaking the law? Although I'm thinking she'll rip his head off the next time she sees him. So here's what it is, Moo-chelle: Polling places are off limits for campaigning on election day. Period. But we all know the attitude: "Those laws are for thee butt not for me."

"Have these people no shame?"

Updates below.

Evidently not. That's a quotation from Karl Rove, responding to the Dems unsubstantiated claims that the Chamber of Commerce is taking money from foreign interests and using it to "steal our democracy." The Dems have offered no evidence that the Chamber is using foreign money to influence the elections, according to the NYT. But why would they let a silly little thing like the "truth" get in the way at this point. Said David Axelrod, senior advisor to Obama, on one of the Sunday news shows, when asked if he has any evidence of secret foreign funds being used to influence the election: "Well, do you have any evidence that it's not, Bob?" Other Dem officials are suggesting that "if the chamber wants to clear this up" they can open their books. So you level a charge at someone, and then put the burden of proof on them to prove it's not true? Are you kidding me?

Can Obama get any more pathetic? The Dems can't run on what the Obama administration has done with the economy or with health care or with foreign policy. So instead they come up with an accusation about Republicans and foreign money, as Big Zero told a Philadelphia crowd of predominantly African-Americans: "Don't let them hijack your agenda. The American people deserve to know who's trying to sway their elections, and you can't stand by and let the special interests drown out the voices of the American people." Is this really appropriate rhetoric for the President of the United States? Will someone please tell him he's not CANDIDATE Obama anymore? This is a guy who really, fundamentally, doesn't get the job he's supposed to be doing.

Evidently Obama has nothing better to do in his day job as POTUS, so for the next three weeks, according to Politico, he will be spending much of his time on the road campaigning, spending a boatload of our tax money flying around on Air Force (We) Won.

Here's the newest attack ad from the DNC. This is a pathetic new low, even for this crowd.



Oh, and P.S. How's the investigation coming on where all of Obama's money came from in the 2008 election? Oh, there is no investigation on that? My bad. The very idea that the Dims would attack the Republicans for doing exactly what they did to win the 2008 presidential election is just deliciously funny. Michael Barone at the Washington Examiner has an article on this very topic: "Pot calls kettle. . . ."

This looks like a matter of projection, since it's well documented that the 2008 Obama campaign did not put in place address verification software that would have routinely prevented most foreign donations. In effect they were encouraging donations by foreign nationals.

P.S. #2. I thought everyone around the world LOVES Big Zero and his policies. So why are the Dims accusing "foreigners" of stealing this election for the Republicans? The video implies that money is coming from China to steal our democracy. China loves Obama and what he's done for this country's debt. If anything, foreign money should pour into the Dem coffers. And why in the world would the White House alienate the Chamber of Commerce. I'm really not getting the logic of the argument and the strategy here, not even a little.

Here's something from one of the commenters at HotAir:

Obama is a Muslim – hey Axelrod, prove that he isn’t!
Obama is not a natural born American citizen – hey Axelrod, prove that he isn’t!
Obama was a C student at best in college – hey Axelrod, prove that’s not true!
Obama was accepted into college as a foreign student – hey Axelrod, prove that’s not true!
We could do this all day…

And here's a quote from Andrew Breitbart's Big Government: "You are having a really bad election cycle if you are a Democrat and the NYT isn't buying your spin."

My friends at Missourah.com have a nice post on the same topic.

Update. It's the McCarthyism, stupid--and it's not going to work. HotAir has an update: "Obama's attack on Chamber of Commerce backfiring."

This is an administration that apparently has never learned the difference between being a political campaign and serving in the government.  In the former situation, this would constitute slander, which is bad enough.  When it comes from the government, it’s a form of tyranny — an attempt to use the power of government to silence dissent.

Update #2. A must-read--Rich Lowry's article in the National Review Online: "Obama's McCarthyite Moment." Lowry: "Obama has become a master in the art of self-diminishment. He started at George W. Bush (who is out of office but at least a former president), descended to John Boehner (the House minority leader people have barely heard of) and finally alighted on Karl Rove (who is a political operative and pundit).

Update #3. "Obama's Un-Presidential Despicable Race Baiting," by Lloyd Marcus at American Thinker. At Sunday's Philadelphia rally, in front of an African-American crowd (cynical demographics, but I digress), Obama said that the Republicans are "counting on black folks staying home."

Or how about this one by Stuart Schwartz--"Obama: Our First Post-Racial Failure." Schwartz says, "Failure is no longer the sole preserve of white presidents and Caucasian New York Times publishers." He says that Obama is the nation's first post-racial failure "and we are all the stronger for it." A great read.

Repeal ObamaCare

Remember when Nancy Pelosi said, "You have to pass the bill to find out what's in it"? Well, they did and we are. What a clusterf**k of "unintended" consequences this thing is turning out to be. Every day, it seems, we hear some new disaster in the making coming our way because of this crap bill.

Just yesterday we heard that the 3M Company is planning to dump retirees from their existing medical coverage. 3M has 23,000 retirees, many of them likely living in Minnesota. Gee, do you think these people are going to be motivated to vote in the upcoming midterm election? Unintended consequences bite, baby.

Then of course last week the WSJ reported that McDonald's has warned federal regulators that it could drop its health insurance plan for nearly 30,000 hourly restaurant workers. Subsequently, the world's largest hamburger chain has denied the report that they will drop health care coverage, and of course the lapdog media like ABC News is reporting that McDonald's and the Obama administration are "firing back" at the report as being untrue.

What is true is what was in the memo from McDonald's that was sent to federal officials:

“Having to drop our current mini-med offering would represent a huge disruption to our 29,500 participants,” said McDonald’s memo, which was reviewed by The Wall Street Journal. “It would deny our people this current benefit that positively impacts their lives and protects their health—and would leave many without an affordable, comparably designed alternative until 2014.”

Then there's the "unintended" consequence of insurance premiums going up with the passage of ObamaCrap, some going up as much as 16%. Big Zero is going around the country boasting that ObamaCare will provide "free" preventive care such as mammograms and colonoscopies. Free? Only children believe that you can get anything for free. So whether you use it or not, you'll now be paying for things like smoking cessation programs.

ObamaCare is a looming train wreck, even worse, says an editorial in the Washington Examiner, than critics thought. And what we're seeing is that politicians are running away from this crap bill as fast as they can. According to the Weekly Standard, nearly half (48%) of all independent voters said that even if a candidate otherwise held perfect views (in the eyes of the voter), they still wouldn't vote for them if they disagreed with them on health care reform. "Health care reform," is the most important issue to independents. And 83% of the respondents said the candidate's position on health care reform must be to oppose ObamaCare. "So if you support ObamaCare, you've just lost 40% (83% of 48%) of the independent vote--before any other issue is even addressed."

Congressman Joe Barton (TX, Republican) member of the House Energy and Finance Committee, will likely be that committee's chair after the midterm elections when the GOP takes over the House. He has said that repealing ObamaCare is at the top of his agenda and has outlined a no holds barred strategy for repealing and defunding the destructive aspects of ObamaCrap, specifically mentioning employer mandates.



Obama has said he welcomes this fight. Well, bring it, buddy. The American Thinker has a piece about ROCPAC, which stands for "Repeal ObamaCare PAC," a federally registered PAC that supports only candidates for U.S. Congress who pledge to use their vote in Congress to repeal the monstrosity known as ObamaCare. To learn more about ROCPAC, go to repealobamacarepac.com.

Bye, Rahm

William Kristol eviscerates Rahm Emanuel in his recent editorial in the Weekly Standard, "The Chief Water Bug Departs." Writes Kristol, "Emanuel is a tough guy who wasn't mature enough to bring good judgment to Obama's [White House]." Ouch. Kristol says that Emanuel's "only memorable comment," --"You never want a serious crisis to go to waste"--"may well go down in history as the most foolish and damaging pseudo-clever statement ever made by a chief of staff." Heh.

Signs of Change in Europe

Update: Link to Geert Wilders' speech in Berlin.

I like to keep track of what's going on in the Netherlands, since that's where my father's family is from--that's where the "Roorda" comes from in "roordawrite." I have family who live there still, and as one cousin told me, most of them "vote left."

However, there does seem to be a new resurgence of the right in the Netherlands. Islam critic Geert Wilders (in photo) has just announced his approval of a new Right leaning Dutch coalition government that will include his Freedom Party as a member. Essentially that means the center-right has agreed to a coalition with the far-right.

The Freedom Party has called for stricter control of immigration along with an end to policies that have resulted in what are essentially Muslim "no go" ghettoization of complete neighborhoods and increased youth violence in the Netherlands. "A new wind will blow in The Netherlands," declared Wilders. His party would ban the burqa; he also campaigns on putting an end to the building of new mosques. "The immigration policy . . . is aimed at limiting and reducing the arrival migrants with few prospects."

Wilders is putting together an international campaign to stop the Islamization of the West called the International Freedom Alliance. Says Wilders, "It is not just a Dutch problem that our freedom is being curtailed and Islam is advancing, it is a problem for the entire free West. . . ." He says that in many countries, this campaign will not be applauded, "but that must not be a reason not to do this."

Wilders will take his Freedom Alliance to Berlin on October 2. A website called Tundra Tabloids has more information about Wilders in Germany here. An anti-immigrant wave seems to be sweeping across Europe: Europen Post-WWII "tolerance" seems to have passed its peak in places like Germany, France, and Italy. The Swedes are calling it a "common sense" aversion to Muslim immigration.

There are also signs in other places in Europe that the people have had it with the socialists. Sweden's long-ruling Social Democrats recently went down to their worst defeat since 1914, with the entry of the "hard-right anti-immigrant" party into Swedish parliament.

Another must-read: the Obama Rolling Stone interview

Here's the link to the article in Rolling Stone that will be in the 15 October issue. The article was written by Jann S. Wenner, the magazine's editor and publisher.

I haven't read this thing yet, but the very first question reveals pretty much everything I need to know about Jann S. Wenner: When you came into office, you felt you would be able to work with the other side. When did you realize that the Republicans had abandoned any real effort to work with you and create bipartisan policy? What pathetic crap, the sort of puffball-type question that's on an intellectual par with, "How awesome is it to be so awesome?"

Ed Morrissey at HotAir has an analysis of the interview: "Rolling Stone's tongue-bath interview with President Obama." Morrissey writes that Jann Wenner "obviously feels a need to intervene in Obama's failing fortunes."

Morrissey points out that Wenner doesn't even ask Zero about the Gulf spill and the lack of response from Obama and his administration that Wenner's own magazine clearly documented. Instead, he asks only why Ken Salazar still has a job. Says Morrissey, "Imagine if Wenner had an exclusive interview with George Bush five months after Katrina and had only asked about Michael Brown being fired." Sigh.

Here's a fitting response to Wenner's "interview" from Op-Toons Review: "Network News EXCLUSIVE: President Obama's Shoes Taste Like Ambrosia." heh

Update on the Rolling Stone interview. Peter Wehner has an article at contentions--"Obama: Embattled, Embittered, and Lashing Out." President Obama is a man of unusual vanity and self-regard. He considers himself to be a world-historical figure who deserves treatment bordering on reverence. . . . When a powerful man like this is successful, it can make him impossible to live with. When a powerful man like this is failing, he can become dangerous.

Bob Woodward's New Book

Bob Woodward's latest book is an expose of the infighting and discord in the West Wing over how to handle the Afghanistan war. There's an article at Andrew Breitbart's Big Government by Jeff Dunetz: "Why Bob Woodward's New Book Should Scare the Hell Out of All Americans."

The revelations about Obama’s naive views on terrorism and his lack of a firm commitment to the Afghan War  was nothing really new, they simply confirmed many of the worst fears about our President and the War on Terror. But Obama’s priorities, his desire to place politics before victory, was both surprising and upsetting.

The book details how Obama is not trying to win the war as much as he was desperately trying to placate his progressive base, regardless of the safety of American citizens. At one point the POTUS tells Woodward directly:

“We can absorb a terrorist attack. We’ll do everything we can to prevent it, but even a 9/11, even the biggest attack ever . . . we absorbed it and we are stronger.”

Dunetz says that one of the reasons for the snail-like pace last fall of the Obama administration for reviewing the Afghanistan strategy was because "Obama seemed more interested in mapping out an exit plan than winning the war." Read the article (and the book) and weep.

Another quote from the book that tells us all we need to know about Obama as commander-in-chief comes from an exchange he had with Senator Lindsey Graham (R-SC): Said Obama, "I can't let this be a war without end, and I can't lose the whole Democrat Party." And Afghanistan, as we remember from the endless campaign rhetoric, was Obama's "good war." So he's worried about losing his Democrat base; any indication he has even similar worries about losing American soldiers?

What's truly unbelievable is that the people surrounding Obama either believe, or think they can spin it to look as though they believe, that Obama comes across in this book as "thoughtful and reflective." This is how Steve Luxenberg of the Washington Post spins the "we can absorb another attack" quote: "It shows the reality of being the President of the United States, receiving a stream of intelligence and being responsible for the security of the country." Wow, that's really some mind jujitsu.

The other thing the Left will surely do is shoot the messenger, a la Kathleen Parker's article this morning: "Can a president lead with Woodward watching." She calls Woodward a "human tape recorder," one who "issues history's first draft even as history is still tying its shoes." Well, it seems pretty clear to me that with 16 books to his credit, the Obama administration should have pretty clearly known what they were going to get with Woodward when they gave him access to the "process" going on in the Oval Office.

Christopher Coates Takes the Stand

One day after Congress was disgracing itself with the Colbert clown testimony, former Dept. of Justice voting rights section chief Christopher Coates, a veteran Justice Department attorney, was testifying about the Justice Department's racism scandals. Although Coates was instructed by his superiors not to testify, he did so anyway, claiming whistleblower protection for his testimony.

Coates testified that the Department of Justice maintains a "hostile atmosphere" and "deep-seated opposition to race-neutral enforcement" of the Voting Rights Act.



There's some speculation around the blogosphere that the Stephen Colbert testimony was intended to distract from coverage of Christopher Coates. Quoting from Instapundit: Front page of Daily Caller: Colbert. Drudge led with Colbert until the news of the Klein & Zucker firings came out. Limbaugh led off today talking about Colbert. NRO has covered Colbert at The Corner, but not Coates. Washington Examiner headline: Colbert. Looking around other sites, I see more about Colbert than Coates.

Personally, I don't think these people in Washington have enough on the ball to think up something like that and pull it off. Also, it "explains" why they would do something so infinitely stupid as to invite Stephen Colbert to testify in character as an expert witness. Nope--I think they're just infinitely stupid, no explanation needed, and the two testimonies had nothing to do with one another.

Update. Jim Treacher at The Daily Caller has the news of one of the highlight quotes from the Christopher Coates testimony. He testified that Obama appointee Loretta King, acting head of the Civil Rights Division, ordered Coates to stop asking applicants whether they supported race neutral enforcement of the Voting Rights Act. It would see that if you are WHITE, then you really have no civil rights. Coates said he went to Mississippi to take action under the VRA on behalf of white voters in Noxubee County, MS.

Said Coates, "What I observed on that election coverage was some of the most outrageous and blatant racially discriminatory behavior at the polls committed by Ike Brown and his allies that I have seen or had reported to me in my thirty-three plus years as a voting rights litigator."

We remember the breathless, endless media coverage of the alleged "political" hiring practices at the Department of Justice in the Bush administration. Well, evidently the Obama administration gets a pass on illegal, racist hiring at the DOJ. This Loretta King is a flat out piece of work. Reportedly she is hiring only confirmed liberal attorneys. "Insiders" (read, members of left wing profits like those sponsored by George Soros) only need apply. She is the woman at the DOJ who, along with Asst. Deputy Attorney General Steve Rosenbaum, dismissed the charges of voter intimidation during the 2008 election in Philadelphia in which two members of the New Black Panther Party stood outside the polling place in military-style fatigues and berets, one carrying a nightstick. Michelle Malkin has more about Friday's hearing.

Who the Hell Is Zoe Lofgren?

Last Thursday, proving that Washington, and Congress in particular, really is a clown show that can't be taken seriously, Congresswoman Zoe Lofgren (D-CA, so what do you expect) invited comedian Stephen Colbert to testify as an "expert witness" before the subcommittee she chairs, the House Judiciary Subcommittee on Immigration, Citizenship, Refugees, Border Security, and International Law. The hearing was titled "Protecting America's Harvest." Someone needs to think about protecting our government from idiots like Lofgren.

Quoting from the Washington Examiner: Colbert began his testimony, which was an in-character schtick based on a one-day visit to an upstate New York farm. "This is America," Colbert said. "I don't want a tomato picked by a Mexican." As the hearing went on, Colbert said things like, "I was a cornpacker…cornpacker is a derogatory term for a gay Iowan."

Not all of the subcommittee members were happy with having Colbert testify. Said Rep. Steve Cohen (D-TN), "I think using an actor in character to give testimony makes a mockery of the committee process."

The Examiner reports that at the end, Lofgren proclaimed the hearing "helpful." Are you kidding me? Are you kidding me? Who the hell is this woman and WHY is she chair of ANYTHING in Congress? Lofgren, 63 years old, has represented the 16th district of California (San Jose) since 1995. She is only the second person to represent the district since its creation in 1963, and has been reelected six times with no substantive opposition.

So what I want to know now is this: who is running against this woman who makes a mockery of Congressional hearings and our American government? Ed Gonzalez, a Marine Iraq vet, is Lofgren's principal challenger in the 2010 elections. Says Libertarian/Republican Gonzalez, "Zoe Lofgren has been in Congress for 15 years and our immigration problems have become worse each year. I think it is time for her to admit failure and retire." Find out where Gonzalez stands on the issues and support his candidacy here.

Drain the swamp, baby. If you feel so inclined, and would like to contact anyone on the House Subcommittee on Immigration, Citizenship, Refugees, Border Security, and International Law, the website with information about the committee and their contact information is here.

The TEA PARTY. Any Questions?



h/t Liberty Pundits

Update. Doctor Zero at HotAir has an excellent article, "We are paying attention."

This is the last desperate attempt of the Democrats to frighten independents away from the Tea Party movement.  Slandering them as nuts or haters didn’t work – it’s too obviously false, and even the Democrats’ media allies were becoming nervous about throwing bombshell charges without evidence.  The ignorance smear is a logical choice for a Hail Mary pass, just weeks before the election.  It only requires the Left to convince independents that our economy is crumbling due to forces beyond their comprehension, and the rubes waving copies of the Constitution at Glenn Beck rallies don’t understand it, either.

The Tea Party is a large and growing movement that rejects the premise that a morally and intellectually superior government should be given endlessly expanding power over every aspect of our lives.  We reject a media-approved narrative that holds the State blameless for its misdeeds, or gives it unlimited credit for its good intentions.  We are competent and compassionate enough to manage our own lives, and address our problems through willing cooperation with our neighbors.

"Is there a single person here willing to back up what their sign says?"

Andrew Brietbart is a hero. In this video, he wades into the paid, staged mob of uninformed Leftist protestors outside the Right Nation event in Chicago last weekend.

We have a president who doesn't get it
. . . on so many levels



Let me close by saying this. 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.

Well, there he goes again. . . . spewing nonsense and rewriting history, this time at the Congressional Hispanic Caucus Institute. Obvisouly facts don't matter to the Professor. We know from his previous speeches that Zero has a fuzzy view, at best, of history. The British and the French "shared" the same land? Seriously? Along with "countless" Indian tribes? I guess our esteemed president has never heard of the French and Indian War. They didn't fight that war because they were all "sharing" the same land, but instead because the couldn't co-exist peacefully. I honestly wonder, did they even teach American history in Hawaii in the 1970s? And "long before America was even an idea"? Barry, the French and Indian war went on from 1754 to 1763. Do you even know, Barry, when America "became an idea"?

And Mexicans? He emphasizes the word "Mexicans" in the speech (to goofy partisan screaming--oh grow up), but "Mexicans" didn't exist until the formation of the nation of Mexico. But my guess is that if you asked Professor Obama when that happened, he couldn't come within 500 years of the correct date. FYI, Barry, Mexico first became a state independent of Spain in 1821--clearly, "long before America was even an idea," in your mind at least.

Does this maroon have no fact-checkers on his staff? Beyond that, what is the point of such silly rhetoric?

And yes, this is the same speech where he recited a line from the Declaration of Independence, leaving out "endowed by their Creator." Not only did Obama leave out the phrase in his spoken remarks, but the phrase is also left out of the written transcript at whitehouse.gov. Those of us who learned these lines as school kids immediately recognized what he left out. Did Obama himself even know? I'm willing to bet he didn't--or he thinks it's just completely irrelevant. Or he wants to throw red meat to the Right. I can't even guess anymore.

And as someone who has people in her family tree who actually fought in the French and Indian War, I appreciate this quote from one of the commenters at HotAir:

I don’t know that “we” shared much of anything back then. Before “America was even an idea,” life was brutish and short. If you didn’t die from a disease, you died in an Indian attack (even if you were an Indian), from exposure, from starvation or from being eaten by bears. And that’s if you survived being born. This land was settled by people either motivated enough or oppressed enough to get off their asses and leave Europe. Perhaps Kenyan-Indonesians don’t quite understand that.