Powered by TypePad

« Profiles In Gutlessness | Main | Just FYI... »

December 05, 2010



This extends to his signature issue — his fiscal and rhetorical blows against public education.

Standard left-wing hackery, probably from the Hack Manual sitting on every hacks desk and chock-full of hackish hackery.

Christie repeatedly--every speech--says he supports public education, just not the unions and the bloated administration. But hackery is what hacks do.


Never miss an opportunity to post video of ">http://www.theblaze.com/stories/blaze-mix-video-top-12-chris-christie-greatest-hits-clips/"> Chris Christie's Greatest Hits.


Still spinning over praise or Christie from the NYTimes


They are ignorant (on some matters) and willing to be led) yes that Isikoff line
still rankles after 17 years. I find Frank to be whining though, he has brought to you the mountaintop, and yet you complain about the pace of 'fundamental transformation'


The NYT praises Christie; The WaPo editors say Plame and Wilson are liars and Fitz engaged in a pointless and expensive investigation...I must be dreaming.

Today's CP
http://www.americanthinker.com/2010/12/clarices_pieces_some_things_ab.html>Some things about politics I don't understand


I think they're right to attack him from the left. You go, Frank Rich.

Obama needs to get back to talking about redistributive justice, and how flawed the Constitution is. And bashing Arizona, and now Florida.

Don't let him get away with this wishy-washy posturing stuff, Frank Rich.


Question for all: Is it fair to say that the right does similarly with it's litmus tests and RINO torts?


Nice Piece today, Clarice. It must be fun to get paid for calling someone Reaganesque. If anyone would like to pay me to call them the next coming of Ronald Reagan, please use the contact form at http://pikesrus.com/halberds. Thanks.


Clarice, you beat me to posting it. But I believe your Pieces get better week by week. People who call themselves campaign managers who believe that attacking Sarah Palin is a winning ticket have to be some sorry individuals. I truly enjoy your writing, wish we saw more of it.
----------------------------------------------It also gave me pleasure this morning to read
Pruden-turn out the lights the party is over.

"The global-warming caravan has moved on, bound for a destination in oblivion."

Melinda Romanoff

Excellent pieces, Clarice, again.


And on the Foreign Policy front HuffPo is attacking Obama in remarkably strong terms. Go to the full article for details:

Why Should Iran Trust President Obama?

In the run-up to a new round of nuclear talks between the P5+1 and Iran on Monday, Western commentators are re-hashing old arguments that the Islamic Republic is either too politically divided or too dependent on hostility toward the United States for its legitimacy to be seriously interested in a nuclear deal. From this perspective, the Obama administration has been more than forthcoming in its efforts to "engage" Tehran; the obstacles to diplomatic progress are all on the Iranian side.

But a sober examination of the Obama administration's interactions with Iran since President Obama took office in 2009 reveals a dismaying mix of incompetence and outright duplicity that has done profound damage to American interests and credibility. In light of this record, the question is not whether the United States should have any confidence it can productively engage the Islamic Republic. The real question is: why should Iranian officials believe they can trust President Obama and his administration to deal with them straightforwardly and with a genuine interest in finding a diplomatic solution to the nuclear standoff?

The recent release of the Wikileaks cables confirms the assessment we have been offering since May 2009: The Obama administration has failed to follow up on President Obama's early rhetorical overtures to Tehran with bold steps and substantive proposals to demonstrate its seriousness about rapprochement. Strategic engagement -- think Nixon and China -- is not the same as "carrots and sticks". In fact, strategic engagement requires a self-conscious effort by the United States to put "sticks" aside in order assure Iran that it is serious about realigning relations. And that is something the Obama administration has never been willing to do. (Obama's vague letters to Iran's Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei -- dispatched as Obama ignored two letters sent by Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad -- were seen in Tehran as just the latest U.S. attempt to "game" Iran's political system rather than to come to terms with it.)

Of course, this could all be characterized as the product of incompetence and political timidity -- both are surely important drivers of the Obama administration's Iran policy. But, more ominously, the administration has treated participation in nuclear negotiations with Iran primarily as a way of bringing international partners and the American public on board for more sanctions, and, eventually, military strikes against Iranian nuclear targets -- as we warned in May 2009.

In his celebrated Iranian New Year message in March 2009, Obama said that U.S.-Iranian rapprochement "will not be advanced by threats". But, at the same time Obama was taping this message, officials in his administration were telling European Union member states that Washington remained committed to the "pressure" track of the "dual track" approach, see this cable. And State Department talking points, see this cable, disclosed as part of the Wikileaks documents note that "the two elements of the P-5+1 strategy -- engagement/incentives and pressure -- were always intended to run in parallel, because without a credible threat of consequences, it is unlikely that Iran will make a strategic or even tactical change in direction."

That, unfortunately, suggests there is something fundamentally dishonest about the Obama administration's approach. Such an appraisal is supported by the way in which the administration has dealt with the question of refueling the Tehran Research Reactor (TRR) -- an issue that will be on the table again next week.



That's great news, Pagar! All those no-shows at Cancun!!! All those empty hotels.


Read a Milbank column on Rangel today...A House Full of Rangels.
Ol' Rangel should have stood up after the censure & read a list of all the other Congressmen & administration members that owe taxes & got perks.
"Ich bin ein crooks"


Good morning. Just finished reading Clarice's Pieces - so true about worthless consultants.

I think you all might also enjoy another holiday YouTube video. Hannukah 2010 - Candlelight by the Maccabeats.


This is funny...from ChaCo on FB.

A global warming defender flowchart.

Sorry if it's been linked before...

hit and run

Sorry if it's been linked before...

I think you meant,"I'd like to apologize if it's been linked before. But I won't. That's how I roll."


Thanks. Now to read the links by CC and Janet.

Thomas Collins

Clarice, in your opinion, is there any national political consultant who has really added value to a primary campaign over the years by formulating strategy and tactics that led to a candidate's doing better than expected (whether or not that candidate actually captured the nomination)?


On Rangel: Were there any member of the CBC who voted for censure? I didn't think so on first glance. Peter King's vote was principled, whereas the others, no so.


Good Lord!! Now Obama is getting in trouble with his own supporters. A lack of interest in his job & the traveling around the world is more fun for him, or so it seems.

The 2012 elections are not far off & I don't think Obama can do a secnd term.

Captain Hate

When Frank Bitch complains about nobody knowing anything about Bammy, do Pinch's tiny nads hurt?


BobS - Over at Weekly Standard there is an article by Jay Cost on the Rangel vote that answers your question about the CBC.

Race and the Vote to Censure Charlie Rangel


"I'd like to apologize if it's been linked before. But I won't. That's how I roll."

LOL! Oh yeah, how soon I forget. My threats are empty, mainly because I can't remember them!


Not to my knowledge, TC. I suppose they might be valuable in some areas--for example media buys--but that's hard to say. I remember Shrum got a percentage of all the ads he placed in addition to his salary which, I think it's fair to say, creates an incentive to pump lots of dough into media buys whether or not they are effective.

In the end you (esp Republicans) cannot win without armies of committed volunteers and I never met a consultant good at creating these--Dems largely rely on aACORN and the unions for this; Reps on , well, actual committed volunteers. This distinction may explain why people like Ford and Dole who never charged up voters couldn't win.

Captain Hate

LOL Liz Cheney on FNS: "It's not surprising that Juan (Williams) and I read different polls."

Captain Hate

Is it fair to say that the right does similarly with it's litmus tests and RINO torts?

Other than not knowing what you mean by "torts": Yes.


Thanks, centralcal. I've been looking for something to link on our blog about it.

Captain Hate: Naturally, Williams took a swipe at republicans


BarryO is a hard core Alinsky Leftist, no doubt about that. So why the grumbling on the Left?
-- Because BarryO is an Effin' MUPPET (see UK slang). A joke, a knave and an incompetent fool. Most Lefties are keeping their mouths shut because he's their knave and fool, but the pixel pushing morons at the NY Times have to say something, so the grumbling begins.


I think Bishop Sanford voted for censure if my memory serves me correctly before the second cup of coffee! One CBC member only though.

Rich and Lerner et all are a snowball rolling downhill in wet snow. Its a gathering both mass and momentum. You see their real complaint is about losing power, the American people rejected them, and in their quaint little way, they have decided its the messenger ( Zero ) not the message!

Pound the table when you say the looney tunes liberal stuff and it will be seen for the shining wisdom that it is!!

Good news for the adults.


The next time Anduril posts, look and see if it's coming out of Florence, CO.


That might explain why there are no links allowed.


Captain Hate: I shorted my coffee by a scoop. I meant "taunts"

Melinda Romanoff



Danube of Thought

Good one, Clarice. I never tire of recalling all the sneering, dismissive MSM commentary about Reagan. Then before they knew it he was winning 49 states.


Gmax: Bishop was almost defeated and trailed in the polls going up to election day. I wonder if this was another example of the GOP relying on land line phones.

Danube of Thought

What, exactly, would Frank Rich take as proof that the nation has "turned to the right?"

Rick Ballard

Soros stomped his cloven hoof and uttered 'Will no one rid us of this meddlesome idiot.' on November 17th. Try and find a juice boxer or NYT progpimp writing something like this piece much prior to that date.

BOzo's use by date has passed and he's headed for the trash bin. The question remaining is whether he's smart enough (snicker) to march off with his pointy head held high as directed or whether he will further discredit himself and the party which he is destroying.

Since I don't believe he knows fetch from sic'em, I'll take a combination ticket on half of each. He'll do much more damage to the party and then he'll quit.


DOT: He'd have to move out of that upper west side cesspool of know-it-all narrow-minded liberalism



Good point. Frank Rich's Upper Westside Bubble has no room for conservatives. Listening to NPR, catching the occasional Broadway Musical or watching the Plame movie with friends from the Columbia School of Journo, Frank never sees/meets a conservative. How can the country possibly be going Right if Frank never sees it?


NK: Some have said that the insular Rich world is not dissimilar to that of Obama's. Krauthammer famously observed that Obama had lived a life of adulation and has only been surrounded by the like-minded and worse, sycophants.


John Kerry's sure throwing the partisan spin bombs this morning. "wall Street should be thanking us." "republicans willing to hold unemployment hostage."


Do you mean the bitter clinger John Kerry?

hit and run

Alternate thread title:

Following Frank Rich On The Arc From "Yes We Can" To "You Sit Thinking, 'You Know, Maybe. I Don't Know.' "

Army of Davids

+39,000 jobs on the payroll numbers.

We need to see between +125,000 to +150,000 just to stay ahead of population growth.

payroll numbers need to be in the +300,000 a month to get an recovery traction in unemployment.

We are looking at a decade until we get back down to the 4% to 5% range we had before the "new normal".

And the numbers would be worse if you consider the lower labor participation rate.


Janet: Yeah. That's the guy.


I'm back in the game!

Take that Clarice!

(going off to read CP - harummpoh!)


Bob S--

10-4 on the BarryO bubble. No question BarryO never heard of conservatives even though he met the occasion Repub in the Illinois State Senate. No doubt Barry O is getting emergency calls right now from various quarters-- The SEIU and AFSCME thugs are screaming for the bigger share of the pie they were promised; Soros and the other Lefties are screaminng for more "bold" left-wing actions-- open borders, withdraw from AfPak, close Gitmo, DADT, ban all offshore drilling etc etc -- BUT I bet BarryO hears from the Volckers and the Buffets who tell him the job market stinks and entitlements are out of control and those 2 things alone will beat him bad in 2012. So the politician self-presevation plays a role even though he is a hardcore Alinskyite. barry's in an impossible spot-- my bet, he veers further left and plays for an inside political straight running against Palin and Ryan.


Frank Rich is a great example of why we should bring back some great but currently little used words. In his case, I prefer "lackwit". Describes him to a T.

And that pic of Kerry "hunting" always just totally cracks me up. That guy used a weapon in Vietnam? Really? Did he always lap his thumb over the barrel? Moron.

Oh, and the best "campaign managers" mostly manage, in my experience, to keep potentially winning campaigns from doing something incredibly stupid. They're pretty much useless for making positive change. That comes from losing campaigns that are desperate to win. Much like the way lawyers spend so much time killing deals to keep you out of trouble.


Helen Thomas joins in the Presidential criticism.

"Obama, he puts in charge for the Arab world a Zionist like Dennis Ross…You don't put a Zionist in charge of the Muslim world in the White House."

The old anti-Semitic witch got a statue and a standing ovation from some Arab American outfit for her latest bit of unapologetic Jew bashing. ">http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20101202/NEWS02/101202052/&template=fullarticle"> Link.



Nitwit seems to work too.

Captain Hate

halfwit, quarterwit, dimwit. It's the season for giving to Lurch. Why the long face?

Captain Hate

Somebody in the NRA (assuming they haven't completely jumped the shark with some of their endorsements) should make a poster out of the pic Janet ran stating "This is somebody who never attended a gun training session".

Captain Hate

How can the country possibly be going Right if Frank never sees it?

The day after McGovern got destroyed in 1972 I was sitting on the Shaker rapid and overheard two lawyers sitting in front of me stating they were encouraged that Massachusetts voted for him. I just rolled my eyes and felt embarrassed that I had voted in a similar manner to those dumbasses, and never repeated that mistake. Not that Nixon was any prize...


Well I continue to be amazed how Eleanor Clift is able to hold a job. She is simple a low watt bulb yet she still managed to get asked her opinion on talk shows and in writing. How to explain?

Nevertheless Eleanor joins the chorus of lefties screeching for Obama to stand on his hindlegs and light himself on fire for their enjoyment. She even tells him to pound the table more! Amazingly stupid advice. Newsweak allows her the platform and he is a link:



OOPS forgot here to use either HTML or LUN

Here it is in LUN format

Danube of Thought

In Kerry's first "firefight" in Vietnam (the one where no Viet Cong were present and he got wounded by a sliver of shrapnel from his own M79), according to his own account his M16 "jammed" almost immediately when he started firing. How in the hell...?

hit and run

http://www.newsweek.com/2010/12/03/why-obama-needs-to-reclaim-his-convictions.html>Following Elanor Clift On The Arc From "Yes We Can" To "You Sit Thinking, 'You Know, Maybe. I Don't Know.' "

During the campaign, Obama would look out at the huge crowds clamoring to see him and muse to aides that people were projecting too much on this guy named Obama, and he would wonder whether he could possibly be that guy. An adviser who worked on the campaign e-mailed me recently about his disappointment with Obama, saying that the president is ill-equipped psychologically for what it would take to be a hero, namely to slay a dragon: “He can’t slay anything, sadly, except the legacy of FDR.”

Her solution to Obama's problems? Recapture the magic of the Obama major speech on race because Jeremiah Wright had come home to roost. This is funny:

When his campaign was going off the rails because of statements made by his pastor, the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, Obama delivered a bold speech about race in February ’08 in Philadelphia . . . that speech rallied nervous Democrats behind his candidacy and will be remembered for its timely eloquence long after Obama leaves office.

Ask the next 10 people you see if they remember that speech. Then ask them what they remember most about it. Those who do remember the speech,and who recall anything specific about it,will most likely come up with something along the lines of: "I can no more disown Reverend Wright than I can my typical-white-person-racist grandmother".

And typical white person wasn't even in the speech,and Obama disowned Reverend Wright just a few weeks later.

(I see Gmax beat me to the Clift article while I was composing this...)

Looking for a candidate in 2012

I never heard a negative word about GWB from anyone here, but I am ready (after 2 years of
reticence) to declare Obama Bush, III.

What the democrats need and want is a mean
sumbitch like HST. What we have is a rabbit.

At least a donkey has stubborn conviction. The new party symbol is a vegetarian with a disdain for red meat which shivers at the mention of predators like the Republicans. whose appetite for flesh is unmatched in the political world.

Republicans love America like a glutton who loves his lunch.

Rick Ballard

"We need to see between +125,000 to +150,000 just to stay ahead of population growth."

No. We don't. Not for the "natural" increase in population of around 1.8 million. Applying a healthy 66% participation rate to the population increase returns 99K jobs per month.

Another way of looking at the "needed increase" is to set the annual entry cohort level at 4 million, use 75% as a healthy participation rate and subtract either 2.4 million deaths (per the BLS definition) or the 2.6 million beginning retirement. That returns either 50K or 34K per month "needed" for natural increase. The headcount on Legal Permanent Residents (immigrants) is dropping and therefore not a factor pertinent to the discussion.

Participation rates are a bit more complicated than the simplistic analysis above suggests but the 125-150K per month canard has a broken wing and should no longer attempt to fly while the retirement cohort is in the process of exploding.

Captain Hate

Well I continue to be amazed how Eleanor Clift is able to hold a job. She is simple a low watt bulb yet she still managed to get asked her opinion on talk shows and in writing. How to explain?

John McLaughlin is even dumber than she it.

Looking for a candidate in 2012

I don't recall anyone here decisively criticizing GWB, but I am now (after some reticence) to declare Obama, Bush III.

What the Dems want and need is a mean sumbitch like harry Truman. What we have is a rabbit.

Even a donkey has the stubbornness of his convictions.

What I propose is the displacement of the current Dem symbol with a vegetarian animal with passive instincts which shivers at the mention of predators. The Republican appetite for the flesh is unmatched by any animal in the Kingdom, except perhaps the shrew.

Republicans love America the way a glutton loves his lunch.

Captain Hate

I never heard a negative word about GWB from anyone here

The only reason you're not a 100% lying POS is because nobody hears the written comments.

Looking for a candidate in 2012

Typepad. blecch !

From inside the elephant, it's hard to see the light.

Thanks, Pagar, for your 9:01 links.

You don't hear the written word, asshole

"nobody hears the written comments."

Try reading aloud, moron.



Re: Pieces. I was watching the Fox special on conservatism - the chapter on the rise of Ronald Reagan, and I swear it reminded me of Palin. Dick, who was cooing about the Rollins piece on the radio this week (and who used to love Palin) laughed at my comparison. I wasn't comparing President Reagan to Sarah Palin, but rather her status now to his status then.

And I have no doubt she could be as great as him, except Liz Cheney will do it first.


From Sean Bielat's FB thread - Did Barney Frank’s Financial Services Committee Conceal Information from Ethics Investigators?


OT but a concern my better half and I share is this forecast by Doug Kass:


This one's the jaw-dropper.

Kass thinks terrorists send investors scrambling – not with guns or bombs but using the Internet as a weapon. He tells the desk “I believe cyber crime is going to explode exponentially next year as the web is invaded by hackers.”

And he thinks they target the foundation of capitalism.

”I think we see a specific attack on the NYSE,” he says. “The aftermath will have a profound impact and cause a week-long hiatus in trading as well as a slowdown in travel.” Yup, you read that right – a week long hiatus in trading.

How do you prepare for something like that?

”I’d make sure to have a large amount of cash in my portfolio,” he says.



So the politician self-presevation plays a role even though he is a hardcore Alinskyite. barry's in an impossible spot-- my bet, he veers further left and plays for an inside political straight running against Palin and Ryan.

So he will campaign against a private citizen and the #3 in the US House for the next two years while looking for feel-good, poll-tested, leftist initiatives for international and domestic policy. Yeah--V-chips for Russia.


--"nobody hears the written comments."

Try reading aloud, moron.--

Whether we have to 'sound out' the big words like you cleo or simply read it silently it's still a lie, asshole.


I wasn't comparing President Reagan to Sarah Palin, but rather her status now to his status then.

Jane--when I saw that program I sure had similar thoughts.

Rick Ballard

Although I remain firmly convinced that the President is as cowardly as he is clueless, I see no reason not join the progpimp chorus and demand that he add more cowbell to the progtwaddle prior to quitting.

Greater exposure to progtwaddle is precisely what the electorate needs in the run up to the '12 election. The concurrent collapse of the welfare state will provide the opportunity for the electorate to choose between their lying eyes and the Great Gilded Turd.


Jane, I'm sure the Time article was just a sampling. I remember the only coverage here was of the Bedtime for Bozo ilk and how surprised I was when a friend predicted that Reagan was going to win.

You might have fun with Dick my pulling out one or two of those quotes (and stuff about GWB or Goldwater or Eisenhower) talking about how dumb and extremist they were and and asking him to guess the pol being slammed.

Goldwater was probably the most reviled. I ws a student in Madison at the time whose only sources of info were the NYT and the local red rags. I believed that carp. In retrospect he was a most tolerant, freedom loving and smart fellow.


What the democrats need and want is a mean
sumbitch like HST.

If you had him, you'd be complaining he wasn't Progressive enough. Too centrist. Fought a war, and stuff.

I do note the goalpost shifting from FDR, though.

Palin in 2012

Dr Melissa Clouthier;

" Most Americans who read America By Heart will find little to object to therein. The Smarty Pants Set™, on the other hand, will despise the book. Sarah Palin takes aim at their cherished premises and counters them one by one.

In addition, Sarah Palin manages to write a highly philosophical book without sounding stridently ideological. Indeed, she says what most Americans believe but don't say because they have been brow beaten into politically correct silence.

And yes, the themes and ideas espoused in America By Heart feel distinctly Reaganesque. However, unlike Barack Obama who studied tape of Reagan to get the gist of the lingo and mannerisms to appeal to broad audiences so as to deceive them into believing he had centrist ideas, Sarah Palin believes the ideas and sounds and acts...well, she sounds and acts like Sarah Palin. That is to say, Sarah Palin is a wholly unique political character and unlike anyone else in the political world.

Sarah Palin's book articulates a message that stands in stark contrast to the philosophy driving current governance. The prevailing big-government, anti-American, military-diminishing, non-stop-regulating government isn't going over well with Americans these days."

I pray your cupcake dreams continue to project the Reagan/Palin paralells.....

That will give my third-party candidate a leg up against Obama.

Sara Rocks

"I do note the goalpost shifting from FDR"

For once yer right, Pooch.

What the Dems need is a hybrid; a cross between FDR and HST.

Army of Davids


That 1.8 million population growth is wrong. We have population growth of around 3 million per annum.

125 k to 150 k to stay AHEAD of population growth is about right.

Retirement assumptions will be moved back. There is no choice.

Bottom line...39K per month ain't getting it done. Not by a long shot.


Referring to Clarice's great "Pieces" article--Ed Rollins with Mike Huckabee couldn't raise the big bucks to continue on through the general election as McCain did and could.
If Palin can get the financial commitment from people she'll be OK as a contender.
As Huckabee pointed out on Hannity's show the other day--Obama is going to start out the next election cycle with a one billion dollar campaign war chest. That little fact right there is going to intimidate the heck out of any challenger.


Charlie Rangel should have read THIS article about Chris Dodd aloud.

Palin is Reagan-Reagan is Palin.

Wealthiest in Congre

" The 50 wealthiest lawmakers were worth almost $1.4 billion in 2009, about $85.1 million more than 12 months earlier, according to The Hill’s annual review of lawmakers’ financial disclosure forms.

Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.) tops the list for the second year in a row. His minimum net worth was $188.6 million at the end of 2009, up by more than $20 million from 2008, according to his financial disclosure form.

…There were a few other new faces in the Top 50, including Rep. Patrick Kennedy (D-R.I.), who received an inheritance after his late father, Sen. Edward Kennedy (D-Mass.), died in 2009. Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) and Rep. Tom Petri (R-Wis.) also made the list.

Twenty-seven Democrats along with 23 Republicans make up the 50 richest in Congress; 30 House members and 20 senators are on the list.

…Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.), with a net worth of $160.1 million, is the second-richest member of Congress under The Hill’s formula, even though his wealth declined by more than $4 million in 2009.

He is followed by Rep. Jane Harman (D-Calif.), who saw her net wealth leap to $152.3 million, a jump of more than $40 million from a year ago.

The rest of the top 10 are Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D-W.Va.), McCaul, Sen. Mark Warner (D-Va.), Rep. Jared Polis (D-Colo.), Rep. Vern Buchanan (R-Fla.), Sen. Frank Lautenberg (D-N.J.) and Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.).

Of those RICH people, I wonder which ones
are unselfishly patriotic enough to vote AGAINST THEIR OWN ECONOMIC INTERESTS?

Yup. You know the answer.

Republicans love America the way a glutton loves his lunch.

BTW; are you a promoter of the Party that votes AGAINST your best interests?

Captain Hate

Try reading aloud, moron.

Most of us don't have multiple voices screaming for attention in our head that have to be shouted over, fuckstick. Controlled substances aren't your friends.

Palin is the new Toormanator

vodka, percocet, controlled substances.....

Is there anyone here who doesn't default to
the trite, lacking substantive argument?


More on Dodd -
"Senate records show Dodd visited Connecticut just two times in 2007.

...Dodd moved to Iowa to run for President."

These politicians really need to go home. Maybe meet in DC twice a year...but otherwise just go home.



Maybe. Maybe not. Rick linked to it above, but Soros (and his followers) are closing their wallets (also note that Soros and friends lost well over 2 billion dollars getting "blue poodles" elected to get a majority then lost it in one cycle). Obama will have money and incumbency, but that sort of bankroll might not happen this time around. And a point on Clarice's pieces-political consultants gravitate to where the money is-if they were so great, why did Meg Whitman run such an awful campaign after sinking in something like $150 million of her own money into the endeavor?


Well she had Mike "Iceberg" Murphy on her side, to the tune of 90K a month, who gave
the kind of sterling advice, like oppose Prop 23, against the green jobs fraud, then again
she thought Van Jones originally made some kind of sense.

Listening to excerpts of FDR, some months ago, I can see why many followed him. I can't
see people really following Obama to the corner store

Palin will be a hot Prez

Huge Nitwit got his butt kicked today on MTP
after his big interview with john Kyle on Friday.

"HH: Senator Kyl, the Democrats are trying to throw some smoke in the air on this by saying let’s let the tax hikes go through for people making more than a million a year. Is that on the table in the eyes of anyone in the Republican caucus, that so-called compromise?

JK: No.

HH: All right. In terms of the Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell repeal, will that happen in this Congress?

JK: No.

HH: Will the DREAM Act pass in this Congress?

JK: No.

Kyl and McConnell both edged to compromise
on the Sunday Runup.



"Did Barney Frank's" from Janet 12:35 link.

Two words lead me to believe they probably mislead the ethics committee.

Those two words are-- Barney Frank.

Palin will be a hot Prez

"why did Meg Whitman run such an awful campaign after sinking in something like $150 million of her own money into the endeavor?"

Because she went viral on the negativity out of the gate against her primary opponent and let her Republican hypocrisy get a daily airing.

The electorate rewards negative ads, to a point.

Palin will be a hot Prez

Carly Fiorina and Meg Whitman had the same campaign smell......metallic.


As far as money Obama will be able to raise in the next cycle will be formidable nevertheless--I'm thinking.
Guess we'll have to haunt Open Secrets for the next two years:-)


Ha. Cleo chimes in.


California is screwed.



Maybe this time, Obama will take campagin finance laws seriously. Or at least when he loses the next administration appoints a special proscutor then jails his campaign team.

Iran claims it;s disinformation

Moderate voice;

"As I have pointed out over recent days, one of the most riveting aspects of the disclosure of classified U.S. diplomatic cables is that because they touch upon local issues and local leaders around the world, there are fascinating nuances of reaction from country to country.

Below are three articles we’ve translated from Spain’s El Pais, one of the five newspapers in the consortium selected by WikiLeaks to interpret the U.S. diplomatic cables for the world.

In the first article, headlined WikiLeaks: The Assault on ‘Big Brother’ Begins, columnist Liuis Bassets forecasts that America may be the first global power to feel the pain, but countries like China, ‘where audiovisual and cybernetic hyper-control of citizens is combined with military and police controls,’ are undoubtedly next.

What a blow little David WikiLeaks has issued to the forehead of Big Brother – who knows and controls everything! It’s understood that the U.S. government has tried to minimize the damage.

The international credibility and prestige that the U.S. had recovered thanks to Obama – and that was some of the most precious political capital of his presidency – is slipping away in full view of everyone, via the open channel of WikiLeaks.

But Big Brother, constantly on the advance in the U.S and Europe, has analogues elsewhere that are much worse and more faithful to the totalitarian Cold War model inspired by George Orwell, creator of the literary character. We refer to countries like China, where audiovisual and cybernetic hyper-control of citizens is combined with military and police controls that are the tradition for dictatorships. That such a leak hasn’t reached this even-more sinister and totalitarian version of Big Brother is not to discredit the revelations about the U.S. Nor does it mean that such disclosures won’t someday reach China. Technology and globalization will contribute to this, and hopefully soon. So will, no doubt, new powers – or emerging non-state counter-powers that arise out of global and technological civil society, of which WikiLeaks is only the first and most spectacular example.

The second article from Spain, by columnist Jan Martínez Ahrens, headlined U.S. Cables Expose Nuance of Displeasure with Spanish Government, discusses what the WikiLeaks disclosure and the American interpretations of Spain that they reveal can tell Spaniards about their political leaders and Spain’s standing in the eyes of America.

The primary object of the U.S. Embassy’s work is the socialist government. The picture painted by the three U.S. ambassadors over the past six years (billionaire George L. Argyros, Cuban-American Eduardo Aguirre and, for Obama Administration, philanthropist Alan D. Solomont) in their numerous secret missives to Washington – often with a copy to the CIA – outline the ups and downs of the relationship with Zapatero and his team. The picture exposes Spanish politics at the highest levels and presents an unprecedented inside look at American interests in Spain, which are often quite different from those of Spaniards.

In a report prepared by Ambassador Eduardo Aguirre and sent to Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, it is stated that, “Zapatero is playing a game for the benefit of his leftist and pacifist electoral base, and uses foreign policy to score points in Spanish politics, rather than to address to key priorities of foreign policy or broader strategic objectives (…) This has led to a bilateral relationship that is zig-zagging erratically.”

This one-sided balance of power is reflected in the treatment dispensed to Spanish politicians. Not one of them is met with enthusiasm, except for the King (there is even advice on how to make oneself agreeable to him), and perhaps the military. Much more unfavorable is the description of the prime minister. From the beginning of his term, he is considered a problem for certain major aspects of U.S. foreign policy. He is defined as a short-term politician who puts electoral calculation ahead of the common interests of the nation.

Finally, in an article headlined Thanks to WikiLeaks’ Disclosure, Classical Diplomacy is Dead, columnist Jose Ignacio Torreblanca writes that the way diplomats work – and even their job descriptions, may never be the same:

Delving into the power struggles within a government, knowing who really commands or has influence, getting a sense of elite opinion, guessing what their real priorities are and their possibilities of success, all require talking to lots of people, here and there, to compose a picture that has some value. In this way, diplomats are like journalists and telegrams are like news items – only more sensitive. But with the difference that up to now, the rules of the game didn’t exist.

Now, with subjects knowing that their comments and opinions can be literally attributed to the source, and that embassies cannot preserve or protect their identities, diplomats will find a huge vacuum around them when they want to set aside their ceremonial and representational roles and get into matters of substance. After the disclosure by WikiLeaks, embassies will have to change the way they work if they want to survive. Most likely, WikiLeaks has hammered the final nail in the coffin of classical diplomacy."

Transparency is a good thing.

Evil hides. Good loves the light of day.

Sowing pearls before Swine

"the next administration appoints a special proscutor then jails his campaign team"

Wikileaks reveals Obama pressured Spain
to NOT seek prosecution of the Bush Gang.

When I see comments like Rich advocating
special prosecution against Obama I'm reminded of the parable of the scorpion and the tortoise..

The scorpion asked the tortoise to help him across the road. The tortoise fearing for his safety asked 'if I do, will you sting me?" "of course not:, the scorpion replied.

After reaching the other side of the road, the scorpion stung the tortoise, who while dying asked "why did you sting me?".

"You knew what I was" was the scorpions reply.


Got some more clichés and conventional wisdom cleo or are you just going to cut-and-paste for the rest of the day.


Pistolas! Where are the pistolas!

In the mean time, do not feed the troll.

Sowing pearls before Swine

"Got some more clichés and conventional wisdom cleo or are you just going to cut-and-paste for the rest of the day."

Yes, Rich. Your ideas are so original and stimulating you don't need to cut-and-paste.

BTW; Mr Scorpion, any substantive comments?

Sara  makes me quiver with delight


" Meanwhile, June fund-raising for Sen. Obama appears to be falling below the expectations of some supporters. The campaign hasn't released its June numbers, but people close to the fund-raising operation say the total will likely be just over $30 million. While this isn't a poor showing, it is an underwhelming haul for a campaign that has ballooned in recent months, has promised a true, 50-state electioneering effort and has told its biggest fund-raisers that it wants to collect $300 million in general-election cash by mid-October.

The reason for the lower-than-expected numbers for Sen. Obama, fund-raisers said, was his continuing difficulty in getting former supporters of Democratic rival Hillary Clinton to open their purses for him, following a protracted, bitter primary battle. Sen. Obama has also tacked to the middle on some recent policy issues, annoying many in the left wing of the Democratic Party. These more liberal-leaning supporters make up a large proportion of his small-donor cadre. The campaign says that some 1.7 million people have given $200 or less, making up 45% of Sen. Obama's total."

Soros has closed his checkbook, as well.

Saving up for 2012


Hummm make believe crimes, of make believe law, in a make believe forum. The Spainish judges are an embarrassment.

The Obama campaign violated campaign finance laws (that would be US law, not make believe international law) and will again. Either repeal the laws if they are not to be enforced or proscute the offenders

Sara for Presidunce

"The Obama campaign violated campaign finance laws (that would be US law, not make believe international law) and will again. Either repeal the laws if they are not to be enforced or proscute the offenders"

Well, that certainly IS an opinion.

The comments to this entry are closed.