The Voice in My Head

On This Date in 2008

2012-01-16T13:52:00.015-05:00

A few days ago came word that David Axelrod decided to drag Obama's former pastor and spiritual mentor Reverand Jeremiah Wright into a speech. From BigGovernment:

David Axelrod, chief political strategist for President Barack Obama’s re-election campaign and former White House political adviser, defended Jeremiah Wright on Tuesday evening in a speech in Thousand Oaks, CA.
Axelrod described the initial news reports in 2008 on Obama’s long-time family pastor and mentor as “ninety seconds of vitriol plucked from thirty years of sermons by some enterprising opposition researcher.”

The link in the quote above takes you to a March report from ABC.

However, even earlier than the ABC report, the Baltimore Sun reported on a Reverand Wright sermon . . . on this date in 2008:

Man should not put limits on what God can do, but that's what people always do, [Reverand Wright] told the crowd. Just as God made five loaves and two fishes feed thousands, God has provided liberators for blacks in the past - from Nat Turner to the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr., and now Barack Obama. But, Wright said, there were always reasons not to follow them.
Some argue that blacks should vote for Clinton "because her husband was good to us," he continued.
"That's not true," he thundered. "He did the same thing to us that he did to Monica Lewinsky."

It was 61 days from the Baltimore Sun report until Obama gave his Major Speech on Race in America -- the speech where he confidently declared, "I can no more disown him than I can disown the black community. I can no more disown him than I can my white grandmother." It was then an additional 42 days from that historic speech to Obama disowning his former pastor and spiritual mentor out of political necessity.

Barackadoodledoo!

2012-01-15T11:10:00.001-05:00

Via Hot Air Headlines, here is Mitt Romney at the January 7 Republican debate in New Hampshire:

“The president is going to try to take responsibility for things getting better. It’s like the rooster trying to take responsibility for the sun rising.”

Well. Maybe someone on Team Romney has read this, a piece I wrote at American Thinker comparing Obama to Chantecler -- the rooster who believed he made the sun rise.

Perhaps it's time to revive my efforts to get "Barackadoodledoo" added to the political lexicon.

Mitt, call me!

Goodbye 2011, Hello 2012

2011-12-31T16:13:00.000-05:00

I'm jumping the gun and making my black eyed peas today.

And since I'm not one for false modesty, let me just say that they are my world famous Beer Eyed Black Eyed Peas.

I mean, they've been featured at my favoritest sister in law's blog here, as well as at craftbeer.com here.

World famous, baby.

This year, Shiner Bock was the beer of choice in the recipe -- 12-packs were harmed in the making of this dish:

Happy New Year!

What Newt Learned On His Summer Vacation

2011-12-28T15:11:00.000-05:00

Via Hot Air headlines:

Political Wire
Gingrich: I took that vacation to Greece because I needed to see the fiscal crisis up close

This is small potatoes in the primary, really. I have no reason to dwell on Gingrich's June vacation.

But I can't not have a little fun with it, to poke at the utter convenience of coming up with that story now.

I mean, where have we heard an ex post facto politically convenient reason for a previous politically uncomfortable decision before? Oh, wait, I remember now: John Edwards saying he went to work at a hedge fund to "to learn about the relationship between making a fistful of dollars and poverty".

Christmas Vacation

2011-12-20T10:23:00.002-05:00

We flew into Jackson Hole on Sunday. My wife snapped this pic with her cell phone as we got off the plane:

That is Buck Mountain in the background. The Grand Teton is to the right, blocked by the tail of the airplane or just out of the frame. It's hard to make out from this angle, but there is a peak just below and to the left of Buck Mountain. I climbed that peak back when I was 20. That's been a few years.

UPDATE: My parents picked us up at the airport. Having arrived early, they headed toward Grand Teton National Park to kill some time. When returning to the airport my mom spotted our plane coming in for its landing -- and snapped these shots:

In that second photo, you can see Jackson Hole Ski Resort above the plane at about 1 o'clock.

Two Days, 180 Degrees

2011-12-14T08:46:00.001-05:00

Or is it 1080 degrees? Looks to me like Obama goes for the triple salchow.

Sunday, December 11, 2011, 60 Minutes:

Kroft: Did you overpromise? Did you underestimate how difficult this was gonna be?
Obama: I didn't overpromise. And I didn't underestimate how tough this was gonna be.

Tuesday, December 13, 2011, interview on KIRO in Seattle
(h/t Hot Air headlines):

President Barack Obama said Tuesday he wishes he knew the full extent of the economic crisis when he took office, if only so he could have let Americans know just how tough the coming years would be.
"I think we understood that it was bad, but we didn’t know how bad it was,” Obama said in an interview with KIRO in Seattle.

Obama sticks the landing. And his foot in his mouth. Let's hope he took the skates off first.

Romney's Media Strategy Is A Lot Like...

2011-12-05T15:37:00.004-05:00

Back in November, William Jacobson at Legal Insurrection had a post in which he asked the question, Will we ever get around to vetting Mitt Romney?

Mitt Romney has stayed away from situations where he can be questioned. As reported by The Boston Globe:
Mitt Romney has not appeared on a Sunday news program in 20 months. He has held only a handful of events in recent weeks at which the public was allowed to ask questions….
While Romney has participated in nine presidential debates and nearly 20 town hall meetings, he has stayed away from traditional campaign settings such as Sunday talk shows and avoided extended interviews with much of the national media. Instead, the campaign has sought to control its message and reach targeted audiences by using social media tools such as Twitter, YouTube, and Facebook. The strategy is designed in part to lower the odds that Romney will make the kind of gaffes that have subsumed the campaigns of other candidates.
Had any other presidential candidate pulled Romney’s hiding act, that candidate would be skewered.

Although not explicitly stated, I think it safe to assume Professor Jacobson meant any other Republican presidential candidate. Because . . . well, we'll get to that in a moment.

Today, Greg Pollowitz at NRO's Media Blog has a post entitled, Romney’s Self-Imposed Media Bubble:

Mitt Romney really needs to lighten-up with the press. If he can’t deal with Bret Baier or a behind-the-scenes reporter for the New York Times, he’s not ready for prime time. Via the New York Times:
Backstage can be something of an inner sanctum at a presidential debate: even though they are appearing on live television before millions of Americans, the candidates are used to having their clubhouse hermetically sealed from the public before and after they take the stage.
…
Mitt Romney’s campaign stood out by going into defensive mode immediately, insisting that the reporter stay far away.
…
Mr. Romney’s campaign has sought to carefully control his interactions with the news media this year as it has tried to keep a grip on front-runner status.

Sounds eerily familiar. Who in recent presidential campaign memory implemented a hide from the media strategy?

Here are a few snippets of a piece I wrote about the 2008 Obama. The thrust of the piece was how Obama would talk a big game about wanting a national dialogue -- but his real aim was to shut down debate and silence his critics. But a sizable portion of the piece dealt with how the Obama campaign was designed to limit unscripted interaction with the media -- much like Romney's is now.

The Obama Way of Ending Divisiveness

Obama's strategy has been to orient the campaign around his greatest strength and advantage -- who could deliver the best speech -- and away from his greatest weakness -- his poor ability to answer questions about how he would deliver on any of its promises.
...
Obama understands that the primary means of limiting the questions for which he would otherwise be forced to answer is to create a media environment in which those questions are not asked.
Liberals, including the media have repeatedly attacked President Bush for making himself unavailable to the media in press conferences and other Q&A formats. Yet as Howard Kurtz described back in January, the Obama campaign has been "unusually insulated":
One moment of absurdity came Tuesday, when reporters on the press bus were asked to dial into a conference call in which Obama announced a congressman's endorsement -- even though the candidate was nearby and just as easily could have delivered the news in person to the bus captives. Obama answered a few questions, but reporters are generally placed on mute after they speak so there can be no follow-up.
Obama learned the wisdom of this strategy, or rather the folly of its absence, when he made himself available to reporters to answer questions about his relationship with Antonin Rezko, who is currently on trial for corruption. Irritated with the questions and unable to satisfy persistent reporters, Obama cut the news conference short, walking out and proclaiming, "'Guys, I mean come on. I just answered like eight questions." Obama more recently went on a 10 day stretch in which he held no press conferences. Frustrated with the lack of availability, a reporter tried to break Obama's silence by asking a question while he was eating breakfast. Obama again deployed the "chagrin defense", this time somewhat fomously, "Why can't I just eat my waffle?"

Romney copying Obama’s 2008 avoid the media strategy?

Well.

It was a successful strategy for Obama. Perhaps we can credit Romney for learning from the 2008 Obama.

Mitt Romney 2012
Just As Smart As Barack Obama

Because there's no way the media might treat a Republican presidential candidate one way in the Republican primary and then differently once he has all but wrapped up the nomination and his opponent becomes the Democratic nominee. Right John McCain?

Mitt Romney 2012
Just As Smart As John McCain

It's all so reassuring

UPDATE: Yes, of course. Team Romney decided the day after I ran this post would be a good day to announce the candidate would make his first appearance on a Sunday news program since the dawn of this decade. Professor Jacobson has the details.

Also, here is an excellent video summary regarding Romney and his media strategy in the context of recent events at Newsy.com, thanks to reader Alexandra:

It's November 30

2011-11-30T13:17:00.000-05:00

It's November 30, and I have to put something up to have put something up in November.

Well. I don't have to. But I've never gone an entire month without a post, so here goes, courtesy of my dad:

FROM THE WAYBACK MACHINE: You know who likes moose? Both Obama and Palin like moose, that's who.

You Can't Spell Goldman Sachs Without a "D"

2011-10-16T10:02:00.002-04:00

As much fun as we've been having with President Goldman Sachs, let's not let Obama hog all the spotlight.

Goldman Sachs doesn't just love Obama -- they love Democrats on the whole.

From a post in April of last year:

At NRO, Robert Costa runs down the Democrats' relationship with Goldman. "An impressionistic study in cronyism", indeed. Costa concludes his piece:
Close up, it looks disconnected and blurred, but if you step back, the shape of it all falls into focus: Democrats hoard Goldman cash, Goldman hoards Democrats, and the American people lose.

You can't spell Goldman Sachs without a "D".

If Occupy Wall Street was a genuine grassroots movement genuinely outraged by the idea that banksters own the government, then they would never vote for a Democrat again.

President Goldman Sachs

2011-10-15T13:45:00.005-04:00

A special word of thanks to Instapundit for the six (so far!) times he's linked this post from 2008:

Goldman Sachs Loves Obama

That post in 2008 was based on the reporting of Sharyl Attkisson (now of Fast and Furious reporting fame) detailing how Obama was raking in more money from Wall Street, especially Goldman Sachs, than was John McCain. And it was where this logo was birthed:

The point being now -- if Occupy Wall Street was a genuine grassroots movement genuinely outraged by the idea that banksters own the government, then they would be marching on the Obama White House.

You can see all the President Goldman Sachs posts by Instapundit here.

--------------
UPDATE: Seven!

On This Date At This Point In 2007

2011-10-12T00:26:00.008-04:00

To hear some talk about it -- the next speech, debate, poll, controversy, hit piece, campaign ad, press release or gaffe will decide the entire GOP primary.
Let's take a look back to the 2008 election cycle -- specifically this timeframe during that cycle.

We should vote for a candidate based on his electability!

From November 2007 through January 2008 -- McCain was the most electable Republican against the eventual Democratic nominee. How'd that work out?

The thing is -- McCain was way back in the pack at this point in 2007.

So-and-so is the frontrunner in [insert early primary state here]! And what's-his-name is toast!

Iowa, RCP Poll Average, November 1, 2007:

At this point in the 2008 cycle, Romney's lead in Iowa was double that of eventual winner Mike Huckabee, 28% - 14.5%. McCain, who didn't put a lot of emphasis on Iowa, was at 8%. By the time the caucus votes were tallied, Huckabee more than doubled his Nov 1 poll percentage.

New Hampshire, RCP Poll Average, November 1, 2007:

At this point in the 2008 cycle, Romney's lead in New Hampshire was nearly double that of eventual winner John McCain, 29% - 16.4%. By the time the primary votes were actually cast, McCain nearly doubled his Nov 1 poll percentage, and Rudy Giuliani, who was second in the Nov 1 poll, had his percentage more than halved.

South Carolina, RCP Poll Average, November 1, 2007:

At this point in the 2008 cycle, Romney's lead in South Carolina was 7 points over eventual winner John McCain, 19.3% - 12.3%. At this point, eventual 2nd place finisher Mike Huckabee was at 6.0%. By the time the primary votes were actually cast, McCain more than doubled his Nov 1 poll percentage, and Huckabee more than quadrupled his.

But this time it's different!

Sure, and the last time was different. Except it wasn't. And the next time will be different too! Except it won't be. But this time......blah, blah, blah.

Trying to be the first one to call the race is exciting punditry, and can probably garner a person attention and hits for being provocative. But as for pundits, polls and the press being reliably predictive at this point? Blah, blah, blah.

The List of Dick Durbin's Donors Dictates Which Big Banks Get Berated

2011-10-05T14:30:00.002-04:00

So. About Dick Durbin's rant about BoA charging $5 a month for customers using a debit card...

Holding up a plastic debit card on the Senate floor this afternoon, Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., had some advice for Bank of America customers angry about the new $5 monthly fee: leave.
“Bank of America customers, vote with your feet, get the heck out of that bank,” Durbin said on the Senate floor. “Find yourself a bank or credit union that won’t gouge you for $5 a month and still will give you a debit card that you can use every single day. What Bank of America has done is an outrage.”

Via Protein Wisdom, I notice that Citi announced changes to its fees today:

NEW YORK (CNNMoney) -- The fees keep coming. Citi is the latest big bank to slap customers with a round of fee hikes. This time, on its checking accounts.
Starting in December, customers who hold its mid-level Citibank Account will be charged $20 a month if they fail to maintain a minimum balance of $15,000 in their combined accounts. Previously, account holders had to carry a minimum balance of $6,000.
At the same time, customers who have the bank's EZ Checking account will start being charged $15 a month if they don't carry a minimum balance of $6,000.
...
Citibank said it chose not to charge a debit card fee because its customers did not want it. "There's a reason why we structured it this way," said Catherine Pulley, spokeswoman for Citi.

Now, unlike Bank of America, Citi is not raising fees directly for debit card use. But they are raising fees, and the timing is undoubtedly related to the Durbin Amendment going into effect. In some ways you might say they are trying to obscure the connection.

Which is perhaps unsurprising. Citigroup Inc is the third largest contributor to Dick Durbin's campaign committee.

Also not surprising will be Dick Durbin's presumed silence about Citi as compared to his ravings about Bank of America . . . who is number 58 on the list of Dick Durbin donors.

On This Date in 2007

2011-10-04T14:11:00.003-04:00

Four years ago today, a reporter observed Obama without the traditional flag pin worn by just about every politician in America. When asked about it, Obama gave this answer:

"You know, the truth is that right after 9/11, I had a pin," Obama said. "Shortly after 9/11, particularly because as we're talking about the Iraq War, that became a substitute for I think true patriotism, which is speaking out on issues that are of importance to our national security, I decided I won't wear that pin on my chest."

The following summer (as noted in the last post) Obama gave a Major Speech on Patriotism, in large part to defend against the idea that he wasn't sufficiently patriotic. Of course, in the fashion of a true cheap political stunt he gave the speech in Independence, MO - days before the 4th of July!

And speaking of fashion, Obama was wearing a flag pin.

The Political Conveniece of Cynical Hypocrisy

2011-10-03T12:37:00.002-04:00

From Ed Morrissey’s Obamateurism of the Day at Hot Air, Obama presumes to lecture Republican candiates:

“You want to be commander-in-chief? You can start by standing up for the men and women who wear the uniform of the United States, even when it’s not politically convenient,” the president told the crowd in reference to a recent Republican debate.

Ed uses Obama’s time in Reverend Jeremiah Wright’s church as an example of Obama not standing up for what is right when it’s not convenient. He also notes that the booing was no more than a few of people out of a few thousand in attendance, not to mention that it is unlikely the candidates would have even heard the boos anyway.

Well. A little bit closer to the topic at hand – standing up for those who wear the uniform when it’s not politically convenient -- let us revisit the ”General Betray Us” episode:

When Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) cancelled a campaign trip to Rock Hill, S.C., his web site said it was “due to crucial votes in the Senate concerning the ongoing war in Iraq.”
So, why did Obama miss a key vote denouncing MoveOn.org’s recent advertisement about Gen. David Petraeus? The ad stirred outrage nationally for suggesting Petraeus was a lackey for the White House and disloyal to the country. “General Petraeus or General Betray Us?” it asked.
…
Aides to Obama had no immediate response to queries about why the senator took a pass on the Cornyn vote, but the senator made his objections clear.
"The focus of the United States Senate should be on ending this war, not on criticizing newspaper advertisements,'' Obama said. "This amendment was a stunt designed only to score cheap political points while what we should be doing is focusing on the deadly serious challenge we face in Iraq."

So Obama chose not to stand up for General Petraeus when it was politically inconvenient – Obama was in a hotly contested Democratic primary in which Moveon.org and the left/liberal faction of the party they represent was key to his prospects.

But hey, it’s not like Obama never stood up for Petraeus. Because he did. At a . . . wait for it . . . politically convenient time – during the general election:

Barack Obama yesterday landed a right hook on one of his biggest left-wing supporters yesterday - blasting MoveOn.org for labeling Gen. David Petraeus "General Betray Us."
Obama, in a patriotism speech in Independence, Mo., hit the Web site for taking out an ad in The New York Times last year that targeted Petraeus, then the top US commander in Iraq.
While not naming names, the Democratic presidential candidate - who had been heavily supported by the Web site in his primary race - said, "A general providing his best counsel on how to move forward in Iraq was accused of betrayal.
"We can no longer afford these sorts of divisions."
Many of Obama's Senate colleagues already felt the same way - and had expressed their anger at the ad back in September, when they voted to "strongly condemn personal attacks on the honor and integrity of" Petraeus.
Obama skipped the vote.

The Betray Us ad was September of 2007, Obama’s speech denouncing moveon.org was July 1, 2008.

It is classic Obama – leading from behind.

And Obama self-righteously lecturing Republicans on standing up for men and women who wear the uniform when it's not politically convenient, even as his own history shows that it is something he himself is not willing to do is another bit of classic Obama – cynical hypocrisy.

It’s who he is, it’s what he does.

Intercontinental Trainspotting

2011-09-23T10:10:00.000-04:00

Via Instapundit:

WHOEVER’S PROGRAMMING HIS TELEPROMPTER MUST BE A GOP MOLE: L.A. Times: New gaffe: Obama hails America’s historic building of ‘the Intercontinental Railroad’.

Let's include a partial quote from Andrew Malcolm at the link:

“A railroad between continents? A railroad from, say, New York City all the way across the Atlantic to France? Now, THAT would be a bridge!"

Indeed. But this was no one-time slip up.

A trip down memory lane based solely on searching whitehouse.gov...

February 10, 2009:
We always had the best infrastructure. We were always willing to invest in the future. You know, somebody -- Governor Crist mentioned Abraham Lincoln. In the middle of the Civil War, in the midst of all this danger and peril, what did he do? He helped move the Intercontinental Railroad. He helped to start land grant colleges. He understood that even when you're in the middle of crisis you've got to keep your eye on the future. (Applause.)
January 22, 2010:
When we passed the Recovery Act, these aren't all a bunch of government jobs. These are jobs that private contractors contract with the state or the city or the county to build roads and highways, the same way that we built the Interstate Highway System and the Intercontinental Railroad System.
May 1, 2010:
It was the first Republican President, Abraham Lincoln, who said the role of government is to do for the people what they cannot do better for themselves. He would go on to begin that first intercontinental railroad and set up the first land-grant colleges.
March 4, 2011:
I mean, think about it. My favorite Republican, Abraham Lincoln -- happens to be from my home state, but he was a pretty good President, last I checked. (Applause.) He was a guy who invested in the interstate -- in the intercontinental railroad, and in land grant colleges, and in the National Academy of Sciences -- in the middle of the Civil War.
September 22, 2011:
We used to have the best infrastructure in the world here in America. We’re the country that built the Intercontinental Railroad, the Interstate Highway System. We built the Hoover Dam. We built the Grand Central Station. So how can we now sit back and let China build the best railroads?

I like the theory of a GOP mole. I want to believe the theory of a GOP mole. However, simple ignorance seems sufficient as an explanation for the oft-repeated and never corrected gaffes.

"Pass This Bill" Is A Bill Of Goods

2011-09-09T21:17:00.000-04:00

You may want to sit down for this, because it may come as a shock. President Obama did not take my advice on his Jobs³ speech last night to a joint session of Congress.

I can't begin to tell you how disappointed I am.

Instead, Obama went green. That is, he recycled almost the entire speech from stuff he's said before.

The main thrust of the speech? "Pass this bill!"

First we must ask, what bill? The idea that there is a bill waiting on Congress to pass that Obama and the White House have crafted is as imaginary as the 3.5 million jobs the first stimulus created or saved. As imaginary as the strawmen Obama builds and burns in every speech he gives.

Second, just as the speech itself is recycled, so too is the demand to "pass this bill". Obama did the same thing with the first stimulus bill -- the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA). Back then we saw headlines like this:

Obama demands 'immediate' action on stimulus

So after such strident demands back then, how did things shake out once ARRA was passed? I'm glad you asked.

ARRA made it out of Congress on Feb 13, the same night Obama and the First Lady hosted a concert honoring Stevie Wonder at the White House and one day before Obama and the First Lady had a wonderful Valentine's Day dinner in Chicago. It was four days before Obama signed the act into law.

That's how important it was to pass that bill now! Concerts and dates took precedence over actually signing the bill into law.

We can be assured that the disconnect between his words and reality are every bit as true now when it comes to passing this (heretofore non-existent) bill as it was in 2009.

The Joint Session of Congress Speech Obama Should Give

2011-09-08T07:28:00.002-04:00

Obama gives his After Labor Day Special Pivot to Jobs, Jobs, Jobs Speech tonight in front of a joint session of Congress. It took a little wrangling between the White House and Speaker of the House Boehner's office to agree to a date. Obama originally preferred to speak last night, during the Republican presidential debate, but was suaded by the fact that he was powerless to make that happen to move it to tonight.

Of course, tonight is also opening night for the NFL, so Obama made the lead from behind decision to move his speech to 7pm Eastern so as only to interfere with the pre-game festivities and not the game itself.

One might say that Obama kinda stepped in it with the whole scheduling thing.

If I were advising the president, here's the speech I would suggest he give. It's 25 seconds from beginning to end -- only 6 seconds if you exclude the formalities of the intro and ending. It never once uses the words "I" or "me", it never once tries to blame Bush (or Congress or DC or natural disasters or some vague, anonymous "they") for the problems he has created, it uses no meaningless platitudes nor offers grand but vacuous promises. In other words, it's unlike any speech Obama has ever given.

I think if Obama gave this speech, he would go up at least 5 points in the polls.

Old and Busted: End Tax Breaks For Corporate Jet Owners New Hotness: Extend Tax Breaks For Corporate Jet Owners

2011-09-07T11:08:00.003-04:00

It seems like it was just yesterday that Obama was decrying "tax breaks for corporate jet owners". It wasn't. It was the end of June.

But it was just yesterday that news leaked about what would be in Obama's prime time Thursday pivot speech to jobs, jobs, jobs (h/t Ace).

You know what's reported to be part of his plan?

Extending the tax break for corporate jet owners:

Obama also is expected to continue for one year a tax break for businesses that allows them to deduct the full value of new equipment. The president and Congress negotiated that provision into law for 2011 last December.

Here's a reminder of Obama's old and busted view on "tax breaks for corporate jet owners":

Now that's ~~Change~~ Pivot You Can Believe In!

Obama Takes Charge

2011-08-28T16:40:00.002-04:00

President Obama cut his vacation short by a day because of Hurricane Irene.

The article by AFP gave us this headline:

Obama takes charge at hurricane command center

Here's a photo of his appearance:

President Obama takes charge at the National Response Coordination Center (NRCC) set up at the Federal Emergency Management Agency's (FEMA) headquarters in Washington. To lead the discussion, President Obama asked if Irene was a Category Fore.

On This Date In 2007

2011-08-26T14:51:00.003-04:00

Today a powerful and dangerous Hurricane Irene is making its way up the Atlantic coast.

Four years ago today, interestingly enough, then-Senator and presidential candidate Barack Obama was in New Orleans castigating President Bush from the pulpit for the way the government had responded to Hurricane Katrina two years prior.

August 26, 2007:

Obama began his visit to New Orleans, his fourth since the storm, at a service at First Emanuel Baptist Church on Carondelet Street. The crowd warmed to him as he alluded the Sermon on the Mount, with its admonition to Christians to build on a rock of faith in order to withstand life's storms.
Obama said the federal government needs to rebuild New Orleans on a new foundation [...]
He said Hurricane Katrina exposed the Bush administration's failure to focus on domestic problems as it pursued an expensive war in Iraq. He said the storm was a call to correct historical social inequity.
"For all our wealth and power, something was not right in America," he said. "Our foundation was not built on a rock."

It is easy to criticize when someone else is in charge - easy to say that you would be better than that person if you were in charge. Obama took that easy route four years ago.

I truly hope Obama has it easier now than President Bush did during Katrina, and that Irene weakens or changes course such that it does much less damage than many are currently predicting. I hope no one is in any position to use Obama's response to Irene in as politically motivated a way against him as he did against Presdident Bush.

Obama: "You Know What, We Really Screwed Up"

2011-08-13T11:38:00.000-04:00

Not every word that comes out of President Obama's mouth is a lie:

Obama's New Clothes

2011-08-09T22:48:00.002-04:00

Obama delivers statement on the S&P downgrade:

The Emperor realized that the people were right but could not admit to that. He though it better to continue the procession under the illusion that anyone who couldn't see his clothes was either stupid or incompetent. And he stood stiffly behind his podium, while in front of him and behind the cameras a page held steady his teleprompter.

Grouper? I Hardly Even Know Her

2011-07-31T15:25:00.001-04:00

Today's delicacy -- fried grouper (from the same fishing trip that produced the amberjack tacos). Plus a fried jalapeno from the garden.

It really doesn't get any better than that.

Obama Has A Plan And It Mostly Involves Others Getting Down In The Ditch

2011-07-28T22:39:00.006-04:00

Instapundit:

ROGER SIMON: THE MAN WITHOUT A PLAN:
President Obama’s been taking a lot of flak lately for not having a plan. First it was about Libya, but now — even more importantly because, as we know, all politics is local (until it’s not) — about the budget.
The latest White House porte-parole Jay Carney has consequently been taking all kinds of in-coming himself about “where’s the President’s budget plan,” “why doesn’t he have a plan,” etc.

Not having a plan? The reason Obama is left as a spectator as Boehner and Congress gets down in the mud and ...well... dig this thing out of the ditch?

Because this is his plan:

Slurp.

Widespread Panic Gets Spread Wide By Someone

2011-07-23T09:20:00.000-04:00

Prof. Jacobson at Legal Insurrection:

John Podhoretz notes that Obama is trying to talk the markets into a panic
as part of Obama’s political strategy (emphasis mine):
An enraged Barack Obama just took to the nation’s airwaves to announce his effort to strike a deal with Republican Speaker of the House John Boehner has fallen apart. Perhaps for the first time in American history, this president is literally using this press conference to create a financial panic over the weekend about the opening of the markets on Monday. He is warning of disaster on Monday. Clearly, he wants to use this as leverage to frighten the GOP into passing the plan proposed by Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, which will push the debt ceiling problem into 2013, but it’s still an entirely new and astonishingly reckless gambit.
I agree with the analysis with one big exception, the use of the terms “first time” and “entirely new.”

Jacobson then recounts Obama's efforts during the stimulus discussions in early 2009, and his reaction at the time.

Let me recount 2008 -- and while it is certainly not a president doing so, but rather Senators Harry Reid and Chuck Schumer -- Democrats have before used talking the markets into a panic as part of their political strategy.

Thursday, June 26, 2008:
Schumer, a senior member of the Senate Banking Committee, who used his position of authority to communicate to the OTS and the FDIC that he was "concerned that IndyMac's financial deterioration poses significant risks to both taxpayers and borrowers," and that IndyMac "could face a failure if prescriptive measures are not taken quickly."
Everything might have been fine had Schumer stopped there, but Schumer (being Schumer) took the additional step of releasing the letter to the press.
Friday, July 11, 2008:
IndyMac Regulator, the Office of Thrift Supervision: "The OTS has determined that the current institution, IndyMac Bank, is unlikely to be able to meet continued depositors’ demands in the normal course of business and is therefore in an unsafe and unsound condition. The immediate cause of the closing was a deposit run that began and continued after the public release of a June 26 letter to the OTS and the FDIC from Senator Charles Schumer of New York. The letter expressed concerns about IndyMac’s viability. In the following 11 business days, depositors withdrew more than $1.3 billion from their accounts.”
Wednesday, October 1, 2008:
Senator Reid: "a major insurance company -- one with a name that everyone knows -- that's on the verge of going bankrupt,"
Thursday, October 2, 2008:
But with investors already on high alert after the Federal Reserve's rescue of insurance titan American International Group Inc. on Sept. 16, and with the credit crunch still making funding difficult for even the largest U.S. financial companies, Reid's comments were the equivalent of pouring gasoline on a grease fire. MetLife plunged $7.19, or 15%, to $40.96; Hartford dived $12.20, or 32%, to $25.91; and Prudential slid $7.15, or 11%, to $57.65.

Oh Deer

2011-07-16T19:04:00.002-04:00

My last post was amberjack tacos. Tonight's menu? Venison backstrap.

Simple recipe. Simply delicious.

Cut backstrap into 1 inch thick medallions and marinade in beer for four hours.

Ok, sure, add some extra virgin olive oil, a little soy sauce, a few cloves of roughly chopped garlic and a ton of pepper of the black, white and red variety.

Heat the grill until it's pegged.

Slowly place each of the six medallions on the grill. Slowly.

By the time you have ...slowly... placed each medallion on the grill, it is time to turn them -- again, slowly -- one at a time. Once each has been turned, you have enough time to take the bowl in which they were marinading to the kitchen for a quick rinse. But that's it. A quick rinse and get back quickly to take the medallions off the grill. We're going for a sear on the outside and not much more*.

Take the medallions off the grill and put them on the plate. Top each one with a slice of goat cheese and let rest for as long as your itchy fork hand can take it.

Place plate next to laptop on the table out on the deck for continuous blogging.

E a t.

Please don't ask if I ate all six medallions in one sitting.

-------------------------
*Please understand I have a constitution that tolerates food cooked rare/raw to a greater extent than most. I am describing how I cooked my meal, not prescribing how someone else should cook his. I would strongly recommend anyone else letting the medallions cook for several minutes more per side than I describe here.

Give a man a fish . . . teach a man to fish

2011-07-10T17:39:00.001-04:00

Let's update the old proverb for today.

"Give a man a fish and he'll eat today. Teach a man to fish -- and take him fishing -- and he'll still be eating fish in July."

There are few things in life better than eating fish you caught yourself. I made some amberjack tacos today:

We caught this fish and many, many others during our spring break trip in April to celebrate my wife's parents' 50th anniversary. Good times, good times.

Still paying dividends.

By the way, forget my pic above, if you're interested in real chef-ery, please visit my sister in law's blog TheChefinMyHead.

And specific ChefinMyHead post from spring break HERE. One of the amberjacks in those photos was in my tacos and is now in my belly. Probably the one with the biggest smile.

Obama's Political Rhetoric Rings the Doorbell, Gets Let In

2011-07-07T19:45:00.003-04:00

Via Jim Geraghty, Obama exhorts others to "leave our political rhetoric at the door" one day, says Republicans are holding a gun to the head of the American people the next.

Here it is:

Michelle Obama Channels Her Inner CheChe

2011-07-03T10:48:00.000-04:00

Reading Clarice's Pieces this morning over at American Thinker reminded me of a comment MayBee had left at Just One Minute.

First, let's take a look at the story MayBee was commenting on:

First lady Michelle Obama gave a fascinating insight into just how heavily the weight of office rests on her husband's shoulders and how the job of president has taken it's toll.
Speaking at a fund-raiser for the Democratic National Committee in Massachusetts she told of his total dedication to the job and told how she worries about the increasing number of lines on his face.
She said: 'I see the worry creasing his face. I hear the passion and determination in his voice.
''You won’t believe what these folks are going through;' he told me that last night.
''Michelle, it is not right. We’ve got to fix this. We have to do more,'
'Barack always reminds me that we are playing a long game,
'He reminds me, as I said to you, too, that change is slow.
'He reminds me that change doesn’t happen all at once, but that if we keep showing up, if we keep fighting the good fight, doing what we know is right, then eventually we will get there, because the truth is we always have in this country. We always have.'

Heavy stuff. MayBee went on to write in response:

It's also pretty funny to picture them, actually sitting on a sofa in the WH residence, her in a designer dress with her Jimmy Choos kicked off in the corner, him with his WH brewed honey ale, reading the 10 letters for the day and saying, 'Michelle, it just isn't right, what people are going through.' 'Why, what do you mean Barack?' 'We have to fix it. I am tired, but I can't rest until this is fixed!'

Anyone remember Che Che? At the time, John Podhoretz called CheChe's writing "The Greatest Kos Posting Ever!" and concluded: "To paraphrase Oscar Wilde: It would take a heart of stone not to laugh at the grief of Little CheChe."

Well. CheChe turned out to be the work of a parodist. But a parody perfectly executed.

Let's reprise CheChe's work in the form of Michelle speaking, building upon the scene MayBee gave us. Off we go!

I don't think I've ever seen such a look of misery and dejection on the face of Barack as I just did a moment ago.
He sat down with me on the sofa and (as calmly as he could) tried to explain to me why the Republicans want to starve little children and take Social Security away from the elderly in order to give coporoate jet owners wads of cash. He tried to keep his voice steady, but it became increasingly difficult - the rage and feelings of helplessnes were just too much. I could tell something was wrong. I found myself at such a loss for words - nothing made any sense; nothing makes sense anymore. I finally had to admit, "Barry, I just don't know - I don't know what's going on in this country anymore..."
When he finished my lower lip started to tremble and my eyes began to fill with tears, "Michelle" he said, "why are the Republicans doing this to the country?" Well, that was it for me: I finally fell apart. I just fell into his arms and we both began sobbing for several minutes.
He had to comfort me and get me back on my feet. Sometimes I just think it’s too much, but seeing the strength in Barack's voice helped me to get through.

To paraphrase Podhoretz paraphrasing Wilde: It would take a heart of stone not to laugh.

Obama Targets Corporate Jets

2011-07-02T08:24:00.002-04:00

At his press conference on June 29, 2011, Obama went after corporate jets and corporate jet owners. Six times. Obama says that they needed to pay more in taxes.

Don't get him wrong though -- Obama thinks having his own plane is . . . awesome.

It's not that he wants to "punish your success."

He just needs more of your money to operate his plane.

MORE: Whaddya know, Obama continues the corporate jet fetish in his weekly address this morning (h/t Don Surber):

See full weekly address here

Obama's Promise of Change Has Been Painful

2011-06-30T22:57:00.003-04:00

Hey that's Obama's characterization of "change" in the Obama era, not mine.

With a hat tip to Jim Geraghty, on a visit to Cree Inc. in Durham, NC -- Obama summed up what Change has meant since he was elected president.

I made this video to put that summation in context.

MORE: Here's an old photoshop I did that fits in rather well here.

TheVIMH Blogging Command Center

2011-06-19T23:36:00.000-04:00

Relax.

The martini is necessary. The reading glasses, optional.

Grading Palin Vs The Media

2011-06-14T21:25:00.000-04:00

So the media went nuts over the release of Sarah Palin's emails from her time as Governor of Alaska. As an example, here's a headline from the New York Daily News (via JammieWearingFool):

Sarah Palin writes at an eighth-grade level in recently released emails, say writing analysts

I wonder if anyone has put a grade level on Anthony Weiner's tweets?

Now to be fair, the article -- unlike the headline -- is fairly balanced. In it we find this:

It turns out Palin's writing skills are still better than most educated Americans. Global Language Monitor gave Palin's emails a score of 8.2, which actually exceeds that of most chief executives.

So as chief executive of the state of Alaska, her emails scored higher than most other chief executives.

Also the name "Global Language Monitor" rang a bell. Remember the 2008 VP debate?

(CNN) -- An analysis carried out by a language monitoring service said Friday that Gov. Sarah Palin spoke at a more than ninth-grade level and Sen. Joseph Biden spoke at a nearly eighth-grade level in Thursday night's debate between the vice presidential candidates. ...
Grade level: Biden, 7.8; Palin, 9.5

Ah, those were the days.

But wait! There's more! I left off the parenthetical that followed that last part.

Because it's the kicker:

(Newspapers are typically written to a sixth-grade reading level.)

Sarah Palin writes her emails two grades higher than journalists write their articles.

The (Not So) Popular Mechanic In Chief

2011-06-03T21:37:00.000-04:00

Instapundit is nothing if not helpful with this:

SIX DRIVING TIPS to save gas this summer. At these prices, you’ll need to!

Good ideas from Popular Mechanics. And, hey, check it out:

Monitor Tire PressureKeep your tires properly inflated, because low pressure increases rolling resistance. Few drivers check and adjust their tire pressure often, but it's a good idea to do it once a week.

They say to keep your tires inflated . . . just like Obama!

Of course, Obama was talking just as much about reducing our overall dependence on foreign oil and getting to a fossil fuel free world as he was about personal savings.

Speaking of reducing fossil fuel use, one tip is this:

Avoid Ethanol When Possible
Gasoline that has been cut with 10 or 15 percent ethanol, called E10 or E15, is an mpg killer. Why? Gasoline stores more energy than ethanol (119,000 Btu per gallon vs 80,000). So it takes more ethanol than gasoline to go the same distance.

Obama wants to cost us more money at the pump by pushing alternative fuel? The deuce, you say!

Speaking of costing you more money -- I notice that Popular Mechanics didn't mention trading in your 8 mpg clunker in favor of a hybrid as an idea to save money.

Huh, I wonder why?

When Economic Conditions (And Definitions) Won't Cooperate

2011-06-02T23:35:00.002-04:00

From Jim Geraghty's Morning Jolt, we are directed to this NY Times article on how bad unemployment numbers bring discouraging news for ~~out of work Americans~~ Obama's election chances:

WASHINGTON — No American president since Franklin Delano Roosevelt has won a second term in office when the unemployment rate on Election Day topped 7.2 percent.
Seventeen months before the next election, it is increasingly clear that President Obama must defy that trend to keep his job.
Roughly 9 percent of Americans who want to go to work cannot find an employer. Companies are firing fewer people, but hiring remains anemic. And the vast majority of economic forecasters, including the president’s own advisers, predict only modest progress by November 2012.

Bold mine. Because, well, that is a poorly worded sentence.

Via Instapundit, let's turn to this AP article:

The labor force — those who have a job or are looking for one — is getting smaller, even though the economy is growing and steadily adding jobs. That trend defies the rules of a normal economic recovery.
...
By the government's definition, if you quit looking, you're no longer counted as unemployed. And you're no longer part of the labor force.

So the NY Times':

"Roughly 9 percent of Americans who want to go to work cannot find an employer."

should rather be:

"Roughly 9 percent of Americans who are actively looking for work cannot find an employer."

So the question is, how many people have given up looking for work? Back to the article:

Since November, the number of Americans counted as employed has grown by 765,000, to just shy of 139 million. The nation has been creating jobs every month as the economy recovers. The economy added 244,000 jobs in April.
But the number of Americans counted as unemployed has shrunk by much more — almost 1.3 million — during this time. That means the labor force has dropped by 529,000 workers.

In an article making the case that the current 9% unemployment rate is bad news for Obama's re-election prospects, it wouldn't appear that the NY Times is simply wishing away a half million people as a boost for the President. So, perhaps the NY Times simply does not know any better.

PSA: Don't Drink and Drive

2011-05-23T13:51:00.000-04:00

This is a reprise of a post I did back in June of 2008 (boy, those were the days!). I'm not changing the format of the post (I'm lazy like that) -- just updating the supporting images and numbers for the Obama Era.

Off we go!
-------------------------------------
So normally a really, really good sale on beer is something for which we lustily cheer. And while that is certainly the case in this case for the price of the case of beer pictured below, we feel we must issue the following Public Service Announcement:

Don't Drink and Drive

Price of Case of Beer:.....................$10 (2 12-packs/$10)
Number of beers per case:...............24
Fluid ounces per beer:..........__........12
Fluid ounces per case:..............._....288
Price per ounce:.........................$0.03472
Fluid ounces per gallon:.................. 128

Price of Beer per Gallon:...$4.44

Price of Gas per Gallon:..>..$4.79

Don't Drink and Drive.
Just Drink. Don't Drive.
It's Cheaper.

Don't Ever Think It Can't Get Worse

2011-05-21T14:42:00.000-04:00

Bryan Preston at the Tatler gives us this:

Great news: Britain’s national health service is still getting worse
Not treating people, or making them wait longer and longer for treatment, in an aging society is just another form of healthcare rationing.
Doctors are blaming financial pressures on the NHS for an increase in the number of patients who are not being treated within the 18 weeks that the government recommends.
New NHS performance data reveal that the number of people in England who are being forced to wait more than 18 weeks has risen by 26% in the last year, while the number who had to wait longer than six months has shot up by 43%.

Brings to mind a friend's post a couple years ago. For those who didn't know PUK, Peter Bocking, he was a dear friend of the Just One Minute community. He passed away in the fall of 2009. If you didn't know him and haven't seen it before -- see a few posts I did as a "Best Of PUK" series at the time -- here and here and here and here.

At one point on Just One Minute, he related his experience with Britain's NHS dealing with the death of his mother. It was a heartbreaking tale -- and one quite out of character for PUK. He delivered it, reluctantly, not to try and garner sympathy, but as a warning to his American friends of what the path toward state run healthcare would lead to. He posted that story in a series of comments. After he passed away, I collected them in a single comment at Just One Minute to record them for posterity.

Clarice Feldman took that collection and printed it at American Thinker.

I'm going to reprint his comments here, again to put a person in front of the statistics we continually read about, so we do not simply become inured to the impact such appalling treatment has on real lives. It's what PUK was trying to do for us:

--------------------------------------------------

I always used to go round to see my mother each day to make sure she had everything she needed. One morning I got the urge to ring her for some inexplicable reason,she sounded hoarse,so it seemed a good idea to pop round and check her out.She was unwell so I called the doctor out,he prescribed some antibiotics and said "keep an eye on her". Since the carers were due at that time it was possible to collect the prescription and get some shopping done. Having done that,I went home,her cleaner was there,she was also a friend.

Later that day,the cleaner phoned to say my mother had "crawled upstairs" and gone to bed. She was like that very independent.

She was in bed and having trouble breathing and could not lie down,it appeared to be heart failure,a familiar condition. I gave her ten minutes to decide on an ambulance or a cup of tea.She opted for the ambulance.

The ambulance was rapid,since they had a description of the problem,the paramedics dealt with the situation efficiently and professionally. Unfortunately I could not go in the ambulance with her,because,it was night,my money and medication were at home,all I was wearing was trousers and a T shirt.

On arrival in the ward the following morning,a doctor ushered me into a side room.

"We treated her for heart failure not knowing she had bad kidneys" "She has about a month,all I can tell you is when it happens it will be quick"

All I could think of saying was "Have you anything else to say to me"

The doctor hesitated "No", he said and left the room with his assistant,(witness)

Visiting was Hell! It was a fight to get flexible visiting times,the jobsworths fought it every inch,despite my being the only family member.

I watched my mother die alone, in a side room,the nurse was on her tea break,the pain killing drugs that had been promised, unadministered. She was eighty four.

Fuck the National Health Service!!!!

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

Kidney failure is horrendous. Victims literally die before your eyes as the salt builds up in their bodies,the faculties decay, one by one. I watched her go blind an assume the characteristics of dementia.

One sister said,when I asked her to help her move."She can do it herself"!

Whilst General Practitioners know their patients,hospitals can be on the level of battery chicken factories.

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

Terrible indeed. Medical have to be impersonal to a certain extent to stay sane,but that doesn't help the patient or their families.

A friend of mine,a philosopher,says that the moral component has disappeared from medical ethics. Everything is now distilled down to utilitarian and legal considerations

This,I think, removes the humanity from medicine,and indeed many other areas of life.

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

It wasn't about me,I just did what ever was best for my mother.If it took grovelling the so be it,if it took a temper tantrum,off we go.Plenty of schmoozing the nurses who looked after her. Whatever creates the best environment.

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

I've never talked about it before,I sense it is a more common experience.There needs to be a greater concentration on medical ethics,doctors aren't fixing clunkers,but human beings.

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

The worst was watching the end,despite promises, my mother did not die easy.She was obviously in great pain when the salt reached her heart.As she went her false teeth came out.I put them back and stroked her hair into place,gave her a last kiss on her forehead,spent some time,I know not how long,with while the nurses came and pronounced her dead.

Then I rang my lift who had gone home,not thinking it would be so quick,and walked the four miles back to her house,locked up and went home.

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

I was alone with her in the room.They always wheeled them into that side room to die.It was the absence of nursing or other staff that was appalling,that and the lack of any palliative medication.

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

She died the 8th July 2003.
********************

Not hard to keep calm.I'm neurotic about things like losing a pair of glasses,but anything serious and I go ice cold efficient. Just made that way I suppose.

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

Amazing how the human race adapts to the most cruel afflictions.That is why the "death panels" are so obscene,people can live a life even under the most difficult conditions. Who is some little Nazi like Emanuel to withhold treatment?

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

This is the story of the human race,it is all our stories,they should be taken into account in any health system.

The quality of their lives and magnitude of their losses should be factored into the equation.We should start a movement for morality and humanity in medicine.

Taxes

2011-04-15T14:37:00.000-04:00

So it's April 15th. You know what that means...

Well, nothing, actually. But it does offer an excuse to relive some old posts.

Ed Morrissey at Hot Air asks: Where’s the 5-minute tax form?

Ah, yes. Obama and tax simplification.

How about an old be-careful-what-you-wish-for post: You May Want Tax Simplification, But Are You Sure You Want Obama's Tax Simplification?

And if you're having trouble because the tax code is so complex, please avail yourself of The 1040DEM

Obama's Plan to Reduce the Deficit in Parable Form

2011-04-07T09:29:00.000-04:00

Via Instapundit, we have this gem from Obama:

"If you're complaining about the price of gas and you're only getting 8 miles a gallon, you know," Obama said laughingly. "You might want to think about a trade-in."

Let's go . . . to the back of the envelope!

Let's say you drive 200 miles per week.

Let's say that you currently get 8 mpg and are paying $3.70/gal.

200 / 8 = 25 gallons used per week * $3.70 = $92.50/week in gas.

Let's say your current car is worth $4,000 in trade-in and you own it free and clear.

Let's say the car Obama has in mind for you gets 25 mpg.

200 / 25 = 8 gallons used per week * $3.70 = $29.60/week in gas.

That's a savings of almost $62/week in gas!!! Or $250/month!!! You've hit the motherlode. Thanks Obama!

But wait. Now let's say that car costs $20,000 and after your trade-in you finance $16,000 at 6% interest for 4 years.

Your new car payment is $375/month.

Thanks to Obama, you now have monthly expenses $125 more than before he touched your life.

But the feeling you get driving around in a new, Obama-approved car means the thing pays for itself. In Obama-bucks.

Hey, I just had an idea. Let's put this Obama guy in charge of the federal budget! With this kind of brilliant grasp of economics that federal deficit will be gone in no time -- he said laughingly (in order to keep himself from crying).

Do be sure and read that Instapundit post -- the AP decided to scrub the article of this quote, but Glenn's got the screen shot and the video.

The Obama Doctrine

2011-03-23T23:30:00.001-04:00

FROM INSTAPUNDIT: Byron York gives us this:

In the last few days, Obama administration officials have frequently faced the question: Is the fighting in Libya a war? From military officers to White House spokesmen up to the president himself, the answer is no. But that leaves the question: What is it?
In a briefing on board Air Force One Wednesday, deputy national security adviser Ben Rhodes took a crack at an answer. "I think what we are doing is enforcing a resolution that has a very clear set of goals, which is protecting the Libyan people, averting a humanitarian crisis, and setting up a no-fly zone," Rhodes said. "Obviously that involves kinetic military action, particularly on the front end."

It's not a war, it's "kinetic military action". Now we know why he plays so much golf. Obama is training himself to become Kinesiologist-in-Chief.

Committees Have to be Attended By Men With Legal Pads

2011-03-23T17:09:00.006-04:00

I first put this up as a comment on Just One Minute. Then Clarice put it up on the Tatler at Pajamas Media. Might as well put here too. Modeled after Col. Nathan R. Jessup from A Few Good Men, of course. First a little context to set it up.

John Boehner's letter to Obama over on The Corner:

A United Nations Security Council resolution does not substitute for a U.S. political and military strategy.
...
it appears your Administration has consulted extensively on these same matters with foreign entities such as the United Nations and the Arab League.
...
The American people take the use of military action seriously, as does the House of Representatives. It is regrettable that no opportunity was afforded to consult with Congressional leaders, as was the custom of your predecessors, before your decision as Commander-in-Chief to deploy into combat the men and women of our Armed Forces.

And off we go!

COL. NATHAN H. OBAMA: Son, we live in a world that has committees, and those committees have to be attended by men with legal pads. Who's gonna do it? You? You, Speaker Boehner? I have a greater responsibility than you could possibly fathom. You weep for your precious Constitution, and you curse turning over military authority in the name of multilateralism. You have that luxury. You have the luxury of not knowing what I know. That sidestepping the Constitution, while tragic, probably saved a lot of effort on my part and will hopefully help me avoid blame should it all go wrong. And my existence, while grotesque and incomprehensible to you, means beautifully detailed PowerPoint presentations. You don't want the truth because deep down in places you don't talk about at parties, you want me delegating my staff to be on those committees, you need me assigning underlings to that committee. We use words like “grave concern that order be restored” and “sustainable international consensus”. We use these words as the backbone of a life spent discussing something. You use them as a punchline. I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the blanket of the very white papers that I provide, and then questions the manner in which I provide them. I would rather you just said thank you, and went on your way. Otherwise, I suggest you pick up a three ring binder over there on the conference table, pick a seat, and please put your cell phone on mute. Either way, I don't give a damn what you think you are entitled to.

Foreign Policy in a Ditch

2011-03-22T13:49:00.004-04:00

The White House

Office of the Press Secretary

_____________________________________________________________

For Immediate Release March 22, 2011

Remarks by the President at a DNC Fundraiser

12:50 P.M. EDT

THE PRESIDENT: (Applause.) Thank you. Thank you, everybody. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you, everybody. Thank you so much. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you very much. Thank you. Thank you. Everybody, please have a seat. Have a seat.

So, Democrats, it is wonderful to be here, wonderful to be among so many good friends. We live in a dangerous world. You all know this. We all are aware of what's going on. You know what I'm talking about. Protests, revolutions, dictators on the precipice. All dangerous stuff. We don’t want any part of that -- I don't want any part of that if it involves doing anything other than giving a speech.

I mean, think about it, we’re the folks who were behind the steering wheel and drove the car into the ditch. Anything to get out of being in front driving this thing. (Applause.)

But look, we had to look like we were doing something. And so we asked France to get in there and put its boots on -- it's galoshes -- and they pushed and they shoved. And NATO was sweating and we were were standing, watching them and sipping on a Slurpee. (Laughter.)

And we were pointing at them saying, "how come you’re not pushing harder, how come you’re not pushing faster?" And then when the Arab League finally got the car up out of the ditch -- and it’s got a few dings and a few dents, it’s got some mud on it, they’re going to have to do some work on it -- they point to everybody and say, "look what these guys did to their car own." After we got them to get it out of the ditch!

Well, I’m telling ya, no way we’re asking for the keys back! I don’t want them to give us the keys back. We don’t know how to drive! (Laughter.)

“We’ll come along for the ride,” we said, “but we’re definitely sitting in the back.” (Applause.)

I mean, I want everyone to think about it here. When you want to go nowhere in your car, what do you do?

AUDIENCE: N!

THE PRESIDENT: That's right, you put it in N. Neutral. You know what starts with N? That’s right. NATO. They’re going to idle in neutral, just like we want. They’ll bicker and whine and dither. This baby’s staying in neutral. (Applause.)

America, we are not going backwards. We’re not going forwards. Do we want to go back? Or do we want to go forward? I say we want to do neither. (Applause.)

Thank you Democrats. I love you! (Applause.)

END

12:54 P.M. EDT

Obama (2002) vs Obama (2011)

2011-03-19T18:13:00.004-04:00

Obama in 2002 made a now famous speech about the Iraq War. That speech is updated for today in light of his decision to engage Libya, in the same cynical manner in which his 2002 speech was made.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Good afternoon. Let me begin by saying that although this has been billed as an anti-Obama rally, I stand before you as someone who is not opposed to Obama in all circumstances.

Closing Guantanamo Bay is one of the most acrimonious foreign policy debates today. And yet, it is only through the crucible of having President Obama being actually responsible for the war on terror, facing the threats of multitudes who would kill us, that some Americans could begin to understand that keeping it open helps keep us safe.

I don’t oppose all Obama policies.

After Obama escalated the war in Afghanistan in November of 2009, after hearing from friends and warriors in the battle there, I supported the mission to finish the job in that country, and I would willingly take up arms myself to prevail in that mission should it be necessary.

I don’t oppose all military engagements. And I know that in this crowd today, there is no shortage of Americans who can work in a bi-partisan fashion when the interests of America are put above party or ideology.

But what I am opposed to is a dumb Obama decision. What I am opposed to is a politically motivated Obama decision. What I am opposed to is the cynical attempt by Susan Rice and Samantha Power and other arm-chair, weekend warriors in this administration to shove their own political agendas down our throats, irrespective of the costs in lives lost and in hardships borne.

What I am opposed to is the attempt by political hacks like Hillary Clinton to distract us from the unprecedented federal deficit, the continuing high unemployment – to distract us from government scandals and a Congress that can’t pass a federal budget.

That’s what I’m opposed to. A dumb Obama decision. A rash Obama decision. An Obama decision based not on reason but on passion, not on principle but on politics.

Now let me be clear — I suffer no illusions about Muammar Kaddafi. He is a brutal man. A ruthless man. A man who butchers his own people to secure his own power. He has repeatedly defied international demands, thwarted international sanctions, developed chemical and biological weapons, and coveted nuclear capacity.

He’s a bad guy. The world, and the Libyan people, would be better off without him.

But I also know that Kaddafi poses no imminent and direct threat to the United States, or to his neighbors, that the Libyan economy is in shambles, that the Libyan military a fraction of its former strength, and that in concert with the international community he can be contained until, in the way of all petty dictators, he falls away into the dustbin of history.

I know that even a successful military effort against Libya will require US involvement of undetermined length, at undetermined cost, with undetermined consequences. I know that bombing Libya without a clear rationale and without strong international support will only fan the flames of the Middle East, and encourage the worst, rather than best, impulses of the Arab world, and strengthen the recruitment arm of al-Qaeda.

I am not opposed to all military efforts. I’m opposed to dumb military efforts.

So for those of us who seek a more just and secure world for our children, let us send a clear message to the president today. You want a fight, President Obama? Let’s finish the fight with Bin Laden and al-Qaeda, through effective, coordinated intelligence, and a shutting down of the financial networks that support terrorism, and a homeland security program that involves more than color-coded warnings.

You want a fight, President Obama? Let’s fight to make sure our so-called allies in the Middle East, the Saudis and the Egyptians, stop oppressing their own people, and suppressing dissent, and tolerating corruption and inequality, and mismanaging their economies so that their youth grow up without education, without prospects, without hope, the ready recruits of terrorist cells.

You want a fight, President Obama? Let’s fight to wean ourselves off Middle East oil, through an energy policy that doesn’t simply put faith in windmills and solar panels and rainbows and unicorns, but explores and exploits our own resources without intervention from an abusive federal government that only empowers the Middle East through its policies.

Those are the battles that we need to fight. Those are the battles that we willingly join.

The battles against ignorance and intolerance, corruption and greed, poverty and despair.

The consequences of war are dire, the sacrifices immeasurable. We may have occasion in our lifetime to once again rise up in defense of our freedom, and pay the wages of war. But we ought not — we will not — travel down that hellish path blindly. Nor should we allow those who would march off and pay the ultimate sacrifice, who would prove the full measure of devotion with their blood, to make such an awful sacrifice in vain.

In Him You Will Find Rest

2011-03-17T10:43:00.009-04:00

Obama is the hardest working man in government (at rhetorically sounding like he's the hardest working man in government). Or at least he was.

Last year a number of folks noticed the oft repeated, if not always adhered to, refrain that he "will not rest" or that he was "not going to rest" until something or other had been accomplished.

Obama used one or the other of those phrases 35 times in public comments in 2009 and 2010. That's 15 times in 2009 and 20 times in 2010.

In 2009, Obama went an average of 22.8 days between using one of those phrases.

In 2010, that average shrank to 14.2 days between telling us how much he was not going to rest.

Between his last 2010 utterance of one of those phrases and his first of 2011 -- which occured on January 7th -- 91 days elapsed.

91 days is 14 days longer than the next longest period between uses -- which occured after ObamaCare passed. It is 26 days longer than what was the third longest drought -- which occured after he plugged the damn hole.

But that one is now the fourth longest span between uses because since January 7, Obama has not again spoken either of those phrases. So his current streak stands at 69 days, 8 days shy of overtaking the period after the BP spill was contained for second place.

What does all of this mean? It means that Obama worked really hard at telling us he was not going to rest in 2009, even he did so even more restlessly in 2010. It seems he's slowing down now.

It's hard work trying to convince people that you are not going to rest. Everyone expressing dismay regarding (or mocking him for) his NCAA brackets and vacations and golf and basketball and parties is just not willing to acknowledge how hard he's worked at convincing everyone that doing those things does not constitute rest.

All the quotes after the jump.

10-Mar-09 First use! (49 days after inauguration)

And we will not rest until your parents can keep your jobs -- we will not rest until your parents can keep their jobs and your families can keep their homes, and you can focus on what you should be focusing on -- your own education

9-Apr-09 (30 days)

And we will not rest until we reach a day when not one single veteran falls into homelessness.

11-May-09 (32 days)

that's why I will not rest until the dream of health care reform is finally achieved in the United States of America

13-May-09 (2 days)

And I want the message to go out all across America, we are not going to rest until we've delivered the kind of health care reform that's going to bring down cost for families, and improve quality, affordability, accessibility for all Americans.

29-Jul-09 (77 days, second longest stretch between uses)

We're not going to rest until anyone who's looking for work can find a job.

31-Jul-09 (2 days)

And I will not rest until every American who wants a job can find one.

31-Jul-09 (Same day!)

So we're not going to rest until we have seen not just a technical improvement in GDP but until the American people's job prospects, their incomes have rebounded

8-Aug-09 (8 days)

And I will not rest until anyone who’s looking for work can find a job.

15-Sep-09 (38 days)

But I want you all to know, I will not rest until anybody who's looking for a job can find one -- and I'm not talking about just any job, but good jobs

23-Oct-09 (38 days)

We've still got huge challenges in this commonwealth and across America. We're not going to -- we're not going to rest until we solve them.

2-Nov-09 (10 days)

It's not going to happen overnight, but we will not rest until we are succeeding in generating the jobs that this economy needs.

23-Nov-09 (21 days)

And I will not rest until businesses are investing again and businesses are hiring again and people have work again.

26-Nov-09 (3 days)

But we cannot rest – and my administration will not rest – until we have revived this economy and rebuilt it stronger than before

15-Dec-09 (19 days)

And we're not going to rest until we do it.

28-Dec-09 (13 days)

And a full investigation has been launched into this attempted act of terrorism and we will not rest until we find all who were involved and hold them accountable.

14-Jan-10 (17 days)

And you should know that we will not rest until we account for our fellow Americans in harm's way.

21-Jan-10 (7 days)

And you can expect a continued, sustained and relentless effort to create good jobs for the American people. I will not rest until we've gotten there.

28-Jan-10 (7 days)

We will not rest until we build an economy that's ready for America's future.

1-Feb-10 (4 days)

Until our businesses are hiring again and jobs are being created to replace those we have and jobs are being created to replace those we have lost—until America is back at work—my Administration will not rest and this recovery will not be finished.

19-Feb-10 (18 days)

And I'm here to tell you, I will not rest -- I know Harry will not rest -- until we're not just recovering, but we're prospering.

19-Feb-10 (Same day!)

That's why I'm not going to rest. That's not -- why we're not done.

5-Mar-10 (14 days)

And that's why I'm not going to rest, and my administration is not going to rest, in our efforts to help people who are looking to find a job

20-Apr-10 (46 days)

And we’re not going to rest until those folks who are willing to work hard and put their blood, sweat and tears into achieving the American Dream have that opportunity once again.

2-May-10 (12 days)

I'm not going to rest -- and none of the gentlemen and women who are here are going to rest -- or be satisfied until the leak is stopped at the source, the oil on the Gulf is contained and cleaned up, and the people of this region are able to go back to their lives and their livelihoods.

7-May-10 (5 days)

We’re not going to rest until we’ve put this difficult chapter behind us.

12-May-10 (5 days)

My Administration and I will not rest -- or be satisfied -- until the leak is stopped at the source, the oil on the Gulf is contained and cleaned up, and the people of this region are able to go back to their lives and livelihoods.

14-May-10 (2 days)

And I’m not going to rest or be satisfied until the leak is stopped at the source, the oil in the Gulf is contained and cleaned up, and the people of the Gulf are able to go back to their lives and their livelihoods.

18-May-10 (4 days)

That’s why I wake up every morning insisting to everybody who works for me that we’re not going to rest until the future brightens for middle-class Americans all across this country, hardworking people.

26-May-10 (8 days)

And let me reiterate: We will not rest until this well is shut, the environment is repaired, and the cleanup is complete.

30-Jul-10 (65 days, third longest span between uses)

All Americans stand together in support of our citizens who are suffering through unjust detention abroad, and we will not rest until they are home.

30-Jul-10 (Same day! Making up for lost time)

And America is on the move, and I'm not going to rest until every single American worker who wants to get back to work is going to be back to work

16-Aug-10 (17 days)

And I’ve said before and I’ll say it again, my administration will not rest till every American who is willing to work can find a job, and a job that pays decent wages and decent benefits to support a family.

16-Sep-10 (31 days)

As a grateful Nation, we can never repay the profound debt to our heroes, and we will not rest until we have accounted for the missing members of our Armed Forces.

23-Sep-10 (7 days)

But we cannot -- and will not -- rest until these seeds of progress grow into a broader prosperity, not only for all Americans, but for peoples around the globe.

8-Oct-10 (15 days)

And we will not rest in our efforts to disrupt, dismantle, and defeat al Qaeda.

7-Jan-11 (91 days, longest span ever!)

We will not rest until we have fully recovered from this recession and we have reached that brighter day.

17-Mar-11 (Today, 69 days since last use)

Note: All of this according to whitehouse.gov -- and subject to my ability to search the site. I can no more disown the idea that I was 100% thorough than I can Obama's grandmother.

You Can't Even Vote "Present" If You Don't Show Up

2011-03-14T10:16:00.003-04:00

Michael Barone in the Washington Examiner:

In the Illinois legislature state Sen. Barack Obama voted "present" 129 times. Today he seems to be voting present on two major issues, Libya and the budget. National Security Adviser Tom Donilon told reporters Thursday that the United States and other nations have "taken a range of steps . . . to squeeze Gadhafi, isolate him, really turn him into a pariah."
But the steps the United States has taken may well have bolstered Gadhafi's determination to crush the rebellion against his regime.
...
Aid, not arms; a meeting, but (unlike France and Portugal) no official recognition. The president seems to be voting "present" once again.

"Voting present" is certainly intended as a slight, and it is useful as a reference to Obama's efforts to minimize his political risk in the Illinois Senate by avoiding tough votes.

But at this point I think even "present" is much too generous to Obama in the case of Libya.

From the Washington Post:

Mr. Obama, who skipped a meeting of his top aides on Libya Wednesday, may hope...

Egads. It's hard to call someone "present" when he's not even showing up anymore.

But at least the WaPo reminds us Obama's got the audacity of hope. What else can anyone possibly expect of him at this point?

A Little More Conversation and a Lot Less Action

2011-03-12T09:15:00.004-05:00

The old saw in D.C. is that if you want to look like you’re doing something on a particular issue -- without actually having to do anything – then form a commission to study it.

It’s what Obama did with his National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform. Only problem was, they came back with a number of proposals that Obama would sooner give up golf than actually implement.

Well, I hope he’s learned his lesson. Because usually he knows better.

That is, if you’re Obama and you want to do even less than form a commission, you say you want to or are going to have a conversation about an issue.

Press Conference by the President, February 9, 2009

So there are going to be a set of objectives that we have in these conversations, but I think that there's the possibility at least of a relationship of mutual respect and progress.
…
And if they're sincere about it, then I'm happy to have conversations about this tax cut versus that tax cut, or this infrastructure project versus that infrastructure project.
…
If you want it to do something, then we can have a conversation. But doing nothing, that's not an option from my perspective.
…
I think that it's important for the United States, in concert with Russia, to lead the way on this. And, you know, I've mentioned this in conversations with the Russian President, Mr. Medvedev, to let him know that it is important for us to restart the conversations about how we can start reducing our nuclear arsenals in an effective way

ROUNDTABLE INTERVIEW OF THE PRESIDENT WITH REGIONAL REPORTERS, June 9, 2009

What I wanted to do was simply to start a conversation, not just between me and the Muslim world, but within the Muslim world and within America and the West about how do we finally start being honest about some of these problems.

REMARKS BY THE PRESIDENT AFTER CABINET MEETING, September 10, 2009

I do think that, as I said last night, we have to get to the point where we can have a conversation about big, important issues that matter to the American people without vitriol, without name-calling, without the assumption of the worst in other people's motives.

News Conference by the President, February 9, 2010

The meeting did go well, and I appreciate them making the trek. We had a good and frank conversation and it's one that I hope we can continue on a more regular basis.
…
I think that we have bent over backwards to say to the Islamic Republic of Iran that we are willing to have a constructive conversation about how they can align themselves with international norms and rules and reenter as full members of the international community.

Remarks by the President on Education Reform at the National Urban League Centennial Conference, July 29, 2010

If we can have that conversation in our own lives, if we can take an opportunity to learn from our imperfections and our mistakes, to grow as individuals and as a country, and if we engage in the hard work of translating words into deeds -- because words are easy and deeds are hard -- then I’m confident that we can move forward together and make this country a little more perfect than it was before.
…
There have been criticisms from some folks in the civil rights community about particular elements of Race to the Top. So I want to address some of those today. I told you we’re going to have an honest conversation.

Remarks by the President at CNBC Town Hall Discussion on Jobs, September 20, 2010

What we have to do is make sure that we take in -- the amount of money that we’re taking in and the amount of money that we’re going out matches up. And all of us have to have a conversation.

Remarks by the President at DCCC/DSCC General Reception, September 22, 2010

And as I said before, we increased AIDS funding. Now if you want to have a conversation later about how we can increase it even more, it’s a conversation I’m happy to have.

Remarks by the President in a Youth Town Hall, October 14, 2010

And so I think there’s also a values component to this that all of us have to be in a serious conversation about. Because ultimately peer pressure can lead people to bully, but peer pressure can also say bullying is not acceptable.
…
That’s something I think we’ve got to avoid. We’ve got to be able to have a conversation and recognize we’re all Americans; we all want the best for this country.

NPR Interview, December 10, 2010

I think that Bowles-Simpson did a good job of sparking a conversation about how we need to move forward to deal with our medium- and long-term deficits.
…
And that conversation is going to be one that can't just happen in Washington; it's going to happen all across the country. And I'm looking forward to leading that conversation.
…
Well, I think we're going to have to have a conversation over the next year. And if you think about the last time we reformed our tax system back in 1986 — it didn't happen right away, by the way. It required a lot of conversations among a lot of different parties.
…
But it's a very complicated conversation.
…
So what I believe is, is that we've got to start that conversation next year.

NYT, December 22, 2010

He said he would “continue to wrestle with” the issue [of gay marriage] and added, “We are all going to have a conversation about it.”

New Conference by the President, Dec 22, 2010

And as I said, this is going to be an issue that is not unique to the military -- this is an issue that extends to all of our society, and I think we’re all going to have to have a conversation about it.
…
And so I think Democrats, Republicans, House, Senate, the White House -- all of us have to be in a conversation with the private sector about what’s going to ensure that we can export and sell our products instead of just buying exports from someplace else.
…
And how do we get all these profits that companies have been making since the economy recovered into productive investment and hiring? That's a conversation that I had with the 20 CEOs who came here, and that's a conversation I expect to continue in the months ahead.
…
And so this is going to be a debate that we’re going to be having over the next couple of years because I guarantee you, as soon as the new Congress is sworn in, we’re going to have to have a conversation about how do we start balancing our budget, or at least getting to a point that's sustainable when it comes to our deficit and our debt.
…
And that’s going to be I think part of the conversation that we’ve got to have over the next couple years.
…
And I am happy to engage with the Republicans about -- if they’ve got ideas about more on border security, I’m happy to have that conversation.

Press Conference by the President, February 15, 2011

The notion that it has been shelved I think is incorrect. It still provides a framework for a conversation.
…
I’ve had this conversation for that last two years about every single issue that we worked on, whether it was health care or "don't ask, don't tell," on Egypt, right? We’ve had this monumental change over the last three weeks -- well, why did it take three weeks?
…
What's also true is, for example, is, is that the chairman of the House Republican budgeteers didn’t sign on. He’s got a little bit of juice when it comes to trying to get an eventual budget done, so he’s got concerns. So I’m going to have to have a conversation with him, what would he like to see happen.
…
I’m going to have to have a conversation with those Democrats who didn’t vote for it.
…
This is a matter of everybody having a serious conversation about where we want to go, and then ultimately getting in that boat at the same time so it doesn’t tip over.
…
So I’m looking forward to having a conversation.
…
My hope is that what's different this time is, is we have an adult conversation where everybody says here’s what's important and here’s how we’re going to pay for it.
…
Now, in terms of what I’m doing with the Republicans, I’m having conversations with them and Democratic leadership. I did before this budget was released and I will do so afterwards.
…
But ultimately, what we need is a reasonable, responsible, and initially, probably, somewhat quiet and toned-down conversation about, all right, where can we compromise and get something done.
…
So there’s a framework there -- that speaks, by the way, again, to the point I made with you, Chuck, about the commission. I think the commission changed the conversation. I think they gave us a basic framework, and within that framework we’re going to have to have some tough conversations and the devil is going to be in the details.

News Conference by the President, March 11, 2011

But the bottom line is this. We’ve been having this conversation for nearly four decades now.
…
And what we've done is we've organized in NATO a series of conversations about a wide range of options that we can take
…
And we have been in very close contact with all members of Congress -- both parties. I’ve had conversations with Mr. McConnell, I’ve had conversations with Mr. Boehner, I’ve had conversations with Nancy Pelosi, and I’ve had conversations with Harry Reid about how they should approach this budget problem.
…
And I mentioned that I had this conversation with Warren Buffett a couple weeks ago when I was giving him the Medal of Freedom
…
And that’s why I think it’s going to be important for us to have a conversation after we get the short-term budget done about how do we really tackle the problem in a comprehensive way.

He Really Can Be That Stupid

2011-03-11T13:20:00.008-05:00

Paul Krugman:

...there are still moments when I find myself saying, “They can’t really be that stupid,” or maybe, “They can’t really think the rest of us are that stupid.”

Tell me about it. Well why don't you lay it out for us -- what stupid stuff are people saying that you want to rebut?

...you have to realize...the nation is not, in fact, “broke.”

Well then you better sit down for this, Paul, because by your calculation this is some seriously stupid stupidity.

C-Span Interviewer: "At what point do we run out of money?"
Interviewee:"Well, we're out of money now."

So Paul, do you think he said it because he's stupid? Or because he thinks you're stupid? Tough question!

Or is it?

Of course, Republicans aren’t the only cynics. As the national debate over fiscal policy descends ever deeper into penny-pinching, future-killing absurdity, one voice is curiously muted — that of President Obama.

Wait. What?

Obama? cynical? Say it isn't so!

In the end, though, it's not so much what he says, but what he does that I'm concerned about. Because Obama says we are broke and yet spends (our!) money like he thinks the stuff just grows on trees. Like kudzu.

Talk about stupid.

Update March 14: E.J. Dionne stands athwart Obama yelling "Krugman!"

What If You Ran Your Household Like the U.S. Government

2011-03-08T19:02:00.013-05:00

What if we took the current numbers being bandied about in terms of the 2011 federal budget, budget deficit and the spending cuts that Democrats are currently proposing and turned them into the equivalent of a household earning the median income in the US?

Sounds like fun.

I will use very round, very imprecise numbers. Because I can.

$2.1 trillion as the projected incoming revenue.

$3.7 trillion as the amount of the proposed 2011 budget.

$1.6 trillion as the projected budget deficit.

$10.5 billion as the proposed Democratic spending cuts.

You can check here (pdf) for President Obama's actual budget proposal, which shows our numbers to be close enough for, well, government work.

OK, ready?

Median household income in the US in 2009 (pdf): $49,777

$49,777 is 0.00000237033333333333% of $2.1 trillion.

And off we go.

Your annual income is $49,777.00

Your budget proposal calls for you to spend $87,702.33

That is, you are spending $37,925.33 more than you make.

The Democrats are proposing that you cut your spending by $248.89

And that means spending will be reduced to the much more manageable figure of merely $36,479.43 more than you earn.

And thus we see just how seriously serious the Democrats are about seriously reducing the serious deficit.

Now what if we broke the numbers down into the equivalent of a semi-monthly paycheck?

Let’s call it a Household Continuing Resolution (HCR-1).

Your gross pay would be $2,074.04

Your budget proposal would call for you to spend $3,654.26

Your would be spending $1,580.22 more than you make.

The Democrats are proposing that you cut your spending by $10.37

And by doing so your spending would precariously plummet to the unbelievably low level of a mere $1,569.85 above what you earn per paycheck.

Let’s throw up a couple of charts to illustrate the numbers above.

First, let's show the annual income and the cuts necessary to keep pace with the Democrats:

And next the semi-monthly income:

Oh, and if you are having trouble seeing the proposed spending cuts on the chart, don't worry, you are not alone. Let's blow the image up 300%:

It's the yellow strip at the bottom. No, seriously, it's there.

You know what Dick Durbin thinks of this level of spending cuts?

“I think we’ve pushed this to the limit”

Wait. What?

The limit of fiscal irresponsibility? The limit of the American public's credulity? The limit of the American taxpayer's patience? The limit of chutzpah? There are so many ways in which he could be correct, none of which he intended, of course.

Seriously.

All's Fair Game In Hate And War

2011-03-03T19:46:00.005-05:00

From the Not-Quite-Oscar-Update file.

Fair Game, the story of American heroine (well, she used to be like heroine to anti-Bush lefties) Valerie Plame (of covertiness fame) was shut out -- as in not even mentioned, let alone nominated, and in no way even close to winning -- at the Oscars.

Oh, the humanity.

Well.

According to boxofficemojo.com, Fair Game had a $22M production budget. It has grossed $21,489,117 worldwide.

It apparently was frog marched out of theater release on Feb 17, a half a million short of production costs. A net loser, if you will.

But for our purposes here, let's zero in on domestic gross, which stands at $9,540,691. To put that into perspective, the story of Mr. and Mrs. Plame has grossed less money than the 1995 movie of the same name, starring Hollywood movie luminaries Cindy Crawford and Billy Baldwin, which pulled in $11,534,477.

But to be fair to Sean Penn and Naomi Watts and director Doug Liman (of Bourne series fame), the 1995 version of Fair Game ("Max Kirkpatrick is a cop who protects Kate McQuean, a civil law attorney, from a renegade KGB team out to terminate her") didn't win any Oscars either.

But the best news of all?

Fair Game will be released on Blu-Ray & DVD March 29, 2011

Reserve your copy today! Be the first (and only?) one on your block with a copy!

Getting High On Gas

2011-03-03T09:51:00.005-05:00

From the AP:

WASHINGTON – Mississippi Gov. Haley Barbour, a potential Republican presidential contender, accused the Obama administration Wednesday of favoring a run-up in gas prices to prod consumers to buy more fuel-efficient cars.

Barbour's right, of course -- even if the WH doesn't want to cop to it.

Obama administration officials rejected the charge, saying they view rising gasoline prices as bad for average Americans and the economic recovery.

Oh, they rejected it did they? Of course they did.

Barbour cited 2008 comments from Steven Chu, now Obama's energy secretary, that a gradual increase in gasoline taxes could coax consumers into dumping their gas-guzzlers and finding homes closer to where they work.

Wait. What?

Barbour cited who? Chu? Why Chu?

White House spokesman Jay Carney said Chu made his comments before Obama assumed the presidency and has since renounced the notion that high gas prices would benefit the country.

That's fair. Entirely fair. Chu is a meh target for Barbour's charge.

Especially in place of citing The Man himself.

Like here:

CNBC’s John Harwood: So could the (high) oil prices help us?
Barack Obama: I think that I would have preferred a gradual adjustment. The fact that this is such a shock to American pocketbooks is not a good thing. But if we take some steps right now to help people make the adjustment, first of all by putting more money in their pockets, but also by encouraging the market to adapt to these new circumstances more rapidly

And here:

But to encourage a transition toward alternatives, Obama favors legislation that would make fossil fuel more expensive. Doesn't that mean more pain to come under an Obama presidency? "There is no doubt that in the short term, adapting to this new energy economy is going to carry some costs."

Barbour was right in leveling the charge. And Obama's actions since taking office speak much more loudly than any words Obama or his press secretary may use in an attempt to convince us otherwise.

UPDATE: I see that Greg Pollowitz has this too over at NRO's Planet Gore. As well, he has a previous post that points to this Heritage Foundation piece from Conn Carroll that helps support that last sentence of mine.

Expanding Paul Krugman's Imagination

2011-02-23T08:42:00.005-05:00

Remember this quote from Paul Krugman after the Gabrielle Giffords shooting?

Where’s that toxic rhetoric coming from? Let’s not make a false pretense of balance: it’s coming, overwhelmingly, from the right. It’s hard to imagine a Democratic member of Congress urging constituents to be “armed and dangerous” without being ostracized

Via Instapundit, we now have a Democratic member of Congress urging his constituents with what can only be described as toxic rhetoric:

A Democratic Congressman from Massachusetts is raising the stakes in the nation’s fight over the future of public employee unions, saying emails aren’t enough to show support and that it is time to “get a little bloody.”
“I’m proud to be here with people who understand that it’s more than just sending an email to get you going. Every once and awhile you need to get out on the streets and get a little bloody when necessary,” Rep. Mike Capuano (D-Ma.) told a crowd in Boston on Tuesday rallying in solidarity for Wisconsin union members.

Given that Capuano will most certainly not be ostracized, will Krugman expand his imagination now?

Most certainly not, of course. There is no room for reality to creep into Krugman's imagination when it interferes with the narrative.

The Fetish of Complexity

2011-02-05T13:07:00.004-05:00

Via Belmont Club, here is Secretary of State Hillary Clinton:

It goes without saying – but I will say it anyway – that this is a critical time for America’s global leadership. We have spent two years renewing our alliances, forging new partnerships, and elevating diplomacy and development alongside defense as pillars of American foreign policy and national security. Now, as we look to the next two years, it is time to build on that progress and deliver results – results that are expected from ourselves and certainly from the Congress and the American public.
We’re going to be looking to see how we can advance America’s interests and values on security, on climate change, on boosting exports and rebalancing the global economy on all of our core priorities. But I will hasten to say we face a very difficult budget climate and we face an increasingly complex, no easy answers if there ever were any, diplomatic and development environment.

OK, here we go.

"...and we face an increasingly complex, no easy answers if there ever were any, diplomatic and development environment."
--stuff Hillary said

"The fetish of complexity, the trick of making hard decisions harder to make- the art, finally, of rationalizing the non- decision, have made a ruin of American foreign policy.”
--stuff Ronald said

Reagan said that some 40 years ago.

The more things change, the more they . . . resemble Ecclesiastes 1:9.

9 What has been will be again,
what has been done will be done again;
there is nothing new under the sun.

Let's Not Make A False Pretense

2011-02-05T12:04:00.006-05:00

In the wake of the Gabrielle Giffords shooting, Paul Krugman singled out Michelle Bachmann for "eliminationist rhetoric":

The point is that there’s room in a democracy for people who ridicule and denounce those who disagree with them; there isn’t any place for eliminationist rhetoric, for suggestions that those on the other side of a debate must be removed from that debate by whatever means necessary.
And it’s the saturation of our political discourse — and especially our airwaves — with eliminationist rhetoric that lies behind the rising tide of violence.
Where’s that toxic rhetoric coming from? Let’s not make a false pretense of balance: it’s coming, overwhelmingly, from the right. It’s hard to imagine a Democratic member of Congress urging constituents to be “armed and dangerous” without being ostracized; but Representative Michele Bachmann, who did just that, is a rising star in the G.O.P.

Krugman has been taken to task by a number of folks for being the lying (yes, lying) hack that he is. Bachmann was clearly referring to arming her constituents with facts in order for them to be dangerous to those who would lie to them.

But were one to take Krugman seriously -- not as seriously as he takes himself to be sure, for that may well be humanly impossible -- what would one make of this from ABC News:

In an e-mail obtained by ABC News, a top staffer for the key Senate Appropriations subcommittee called for a meeting of lobbyists and interest groups that would be affected by expected cuts to the Labor and Heath and Human Services budget. The Jan. 24 meeting was attended by approximately 400 people, sources told ABC, and served as a "call to arms" for those determined to fight Republican budget cuts.
"One thing everyone should be able to agree on now is that a rising tide lifts all boats, and that a higher [Labor, Health & Human Services] allocation improves the chances for every stakeholder group to receive more funding," the committee staffer for Sen. Tom Harkin, D-Iowa, wrote in an e-mail inviting people to the meeting.

Well.

There seems to be little difference between "armed and dangerous" and "call to arms" on the eliminationist rhetoric scale (as defined by Krugman, if one were to take him seriously).

But I see no reason to issue a call for Krugman to denounce this particular eliminationist rhetoric since Harkin's staffer himself is not "a member of Congress", and the eliminationist rhetoric (as definied by Krugman, if one were to take him seriously) was aimed not at constituents but fatcat lobbyists -- and because, quite honestly, I can't take Krugman seriously.

But mostly because I can't take Krugman seriously.

Let’s not make a false pretense of Krugman's mental balance.

Comparing Obama With Past Presidents

2011-01-29T12:13:00.003-05:00

Time Magazine has put a photoshopped image of Obama and Ronald Reagan palling around on the cover of its latest issue.

Not a particularly original device, appropriating the image and memory of a past popular president in hopes of building up Obama's image.

A look back on some past cases...

Obama and Washington:

Obama and FDR:

Obama and JFK:

Obama and Lincoln:

But for my money, Michael Ramirez gets much closer to the real Obama -- and which past presidents he can most realistically be compared with.

Obama and Nixon:

Obama and Carter:

Of course, as Glenn Reynolds has told us, Obama as Jimmy Carter is at this point a "best case scenario".

UPDATE: Hat Tip Clarice, here is Big Fur Hat/Irony Curtain at iOwntheWorld with the flip side to that Time Obama-Reagan cover:

Reagan putting a "Rotten Marxist" sign on Obama's back .... Brilliant!

Obama's State of the Union Speech

2011-01-27T22:57:00.006-05:00

Obama gave the State of the Union speech last night.

Here's the word cloud:

Thanks Sarah Palin!

In fact, because of Palin -- and only because of Palin's WTF phrasing -- people might actually remember something about this speech in the years to come.

MEMORIES: Sarah Palin's use of WTF triggered the memory of an old post from almost three years ago. I was very confused at the time, but now it makes sense: North Carolina does not want you to "Win The Future".

Cohen-izing the Message

2011-01-21T14:08:00.004-05:00

Via Hot Air, here is part of Congressman Steve Cohen’s reaction/defense/apology for his “I so did not call Republicans Nazis” use of the term Nazis to describe Republicans:

“While I regret that anything I said has created an opportunity to distract from the debate about health care for 32 million Americans, I want to be clear that I never called Republicans Nazis. Instead, the reference I made was to the greatest propaganda master of all time. Propaganda, which is called “messaging” today, can be true or false. In this case, the message is false."

Wait. What?

“Propaganda, which is called ‘messaging’ today”

That's quite an admission for a Democrat.

How many times have we heard that virtually every problem Democrats face politically boils down to a problem with “messaging”?

Let's turn Cohen's statement around, shall we?

"Messaging today, which is really nothing more than propaganda"

Cohen's admisssion certainly puts this piece from The Hill in a new light, doesn’t it? (h/t Instapundit)

In fact, let’s go ahead and Cohen-ize it:

House Dems vow to improve ~~messaging~~ propaganda
CAMBRIDGE, Md. — House Democrats kicked off their annual retreat here with a vow to improve the flawed ~~messaging~~ propaganda that contributed to the loss of their majority last fall.
The down-sized Democratic Caucus is meeting for three days at the glitzy Hyatt Regency resort on the shores of the Chesapeake, with the goal of figuring out what went wrong in 2010 and how the party can position itself on policy and politics for the next two years.
President Obama and Vice President Biden will be in Cambridge on Friday to address Democratic lawmakers, who will also hear from economists, ~~message~~ propaganda gurus and current and former colleagues. More than a half dozen panels will be devoted or related to ~~messaging~~ propaganda, underscoring the importance of boosting the party’s communications with the public.
...
“I said Madam Speaker, the problem with Democrats is we never give the public the chance to savor our victories,” [Rep. Xavier] Becerra [D.-Calif.] said, as Rep. James Clyburn (D-S.C.), the assistant leader, nodded in agreement. “What we didn’t do was take the time to do tap-dances about what we had just done, but we did the work of the people.”
“Too bad we didn’t ~~message~~ propagandize it better,” he added.

Troubling Jobs Report

2011-01-08T09:58:00.005-05:00

Bill Jacobson:

Dig just a bit deeper, and you will see that 0.2% of that drop (or half the total drop) was from a decrease in the "participation rate" from 64.5 to 64.3 of the population. So half of the good news reflects that people have dropped out of the work force and have given up looking for work.

Business Insider:

This morning's unemployment report was a mixed bag. Yes, the unemployment rate went down. But, actually, that's because people are choosing to drop out of the work force altogether.

Geoff at Ace of Spades:

December's unemployment rate was released this morning by the Bureau of Labor Statistics. U-3 unemployment dropped from 9.8% last month to 9.4% this month. The U-6 number dropped from 17% to 16.7%. Only 103,000 jobs were added, however, which indicates that the drop in unemployment was more due to people leaving the labor force than getting jobs.

Ed Morrissey:

The nation’s unemployment rate dropped four-tenths of a point to 9.4% in December but the number of jobs added fell short of expectations. ... Also, the civilian labor force participation rate did drop to 64.3%, which indicates that people are still leaving the work force rather than rejoining it.

People are dropping out of the work force? Leaving the labor force? Giving up looking for work?

That's unpossible. Michelle Obama flatly told us:

Barack Obama will require you to work. He is going to demand that you shed your cynicism. That you put down your divisions. That you come out of your isolation, that you move out of your comfort zones. That you push yourselves to be better. And that you engage. Barack will never allow you to go back to your lives as usual, uninvolved, uninformed.

Troubling.

Attention all discouraged workers: Obama requires that you not be. Get back to work.

Marginalizing ObamaCare

2011-01-07T16:02:00.007-05:00

March 21, 2010:
House passes health care bill on 219-212 vote

January 7, 2011:
House Votes to Repeal “Job-Killing” Health Care Law 236-181

In 2010, the Democrats passed ObamaCare by a 7 vote margin. In 2011, the Republicans passed the bill to repeal ObamaCare with a 55 vote margin.

In each case, one side of the vote was bi-partisan. In both cases, the bi-partisan vote was against ObamaCare.

Humility

2011-01-06T08:33:00.003-05:00

Via Instapundit, we get this quote from Roger Simon on the occasion of John Boehner being sworn in as the new Speaker of the House:

In his speech today, John Boehner showed himself to be among the most impressive figures on our political landscape, and he did it by being that rarest of things in politics: a humble human being.
His opening ad-lib quieting thunderous applause – “It’s still just me” – should be an instructional moment in public behavior in our celebrity culture. Can you imagine Bill Clinton, Newt Gingrich, Barack Obama or even, alas, Sarah Palin saying such a thing with the authenticity Boehner clearly had at such a moment?

I’ve had occasion a few times recently to go back and revisit my piece in American Thinker during the election of 2008 on then-candidate Obama’s ego. After reading about Boehner’s humility-laden speech and approach as described by Simon, it reminded me again about this particular part:

A campaign willing to showcase this large an ego without any evidence of modesty or shame is underway. Obama's last gasp effort at combating the notion that he considers himself more highly than he ought came in his victory speech in St. Paul upon securing enough delegates to claim the Democratic nomination:
"The journey will be difficult. The road will be long. I face this challenge with profound humility."
Give Obama points for associating himself with the word "profound" while seeming to claim humility.
But even that humility lasted all of a few seconds, when he quickly shed it with this:
"I am absolutely certain that generations from now, we will be able to look back and tell our children that this was the moment when...the rise of the oceans began to slow and our planet began to heal."

A man who brags that his humility is profound is not humble. A man who claims certainty that his nomination is the moment when the entire planet will begin healing is not humble.

Boehner, on the other hand, didn’t talk about himself being humble. Genuinely humble people rarely do. Boehner simply spoke humbly. Falsely humble people rarely do.

There are those who might claim that Boehner is the rare person to do so. And since he's a politician, I'm willing to evaluate Boehner according to his actions going forward, rather than drawing conclusions at this pont.

But as for Obama, the conclusions I may have prematurely arrived at during the campaign have since been judged correct by his actions over the past two years as president.

Why Guantanamo Is Still Open

2010-12-22T11:55:00.004-05:00

Via Jammie Wearing Fool, we get this:

The White House is preparing an Executive Order on indefinite detention that will provide periodic reviews of evidence against dozens of prisoners held at Guantanamo Bay, according to several administration officials.
…
But the order establishes indefinite detention as a long-term Obama administration policy and makes clear that the White House alone will manage a review process for those it chooses to hold without charge or trial.

JWF concludes with this question:

Is it just me or is Club Gitmo going to still be open when Obama leaves office?

Tough question, but I’ll go out on a limb and answer . . . yes!

And that leaves us where?

Well.

On his second day in office, Obama signed the Executive Order that required Guantanamo be closed in one year. Throughout the year, it became clear that the deadline was not only arbitrary, but meaningless and unenforceable. Greg Craig, former White House Counsel who was given the lead on efforts to close Guantanamo was eventually dumped back in November of 2009. His departure was accompanied by a spate of stories claiming he was to blame for Guantanamo remaining open.

Politico:

Craig fell into disfavor with other top officials over his handling of Obama’s plan to close the Guantanamo Bay prison.
...
Craig’s critics said he failed to anticipate the wave of criticism in Congress, which led to a series of lopsided votes last spring against bringing any Guantanamo detainees to the U.S. While many observers said it was a mistake to ask Congress for $80 million to close Guantanamo before being ready to announce where the prisoners would go in the U.S. and how they would be tried, Craig’s allies said the notion that he decided such issues of legislative strategy by himself was preposterous.
...
According to officials, the White House took much of the Guantanamo portfolio away from Craig earlier this year, handing most policy issues to the National Security Council, legislative issues to Obama senior adviser Pete Rouse, and communications issues to deputy communications director Dan Pfeiffer.

Marc Ambinder:

But part of why Gitmo won't be closed in January is because Craig could not -- or would not - crack skulls in the interagency process. It took the wily lawyering of Alberto Gonzales and David Addington to get Gitmo open, and it's going to take some of their skills -- wills of steel, political savvy, institutional savvy -- to get the thing closed.

Ah, it all becomes clear now, doesn’t it?

In the whole world of Democratic and liberal political/legal talent -- not one single person can match the wily lawyering and political and institutional savvy of . . . Alberto Gonzales.

Your Climate Change Forecast for Cancun

2010-12-03T20:19:00.007-05:00

OK, here we go:

The United Nations Climate Change Conference is taking place in Cancun, Mexico, from 29 November to 10 December 2010. It encompasses the sixteenth Conference of the Parties (COP) and the sixth Conference of the Parties serving as the Meeting of the Parties to the Kyoto Protocol (CMP), as well as the thirty-third sessions of both the Subsidiary Body for Implementation (SBI) and the Subsidiary Body for Scientific and Technological Advice (SBSTA), and the fifteenth session of the AWG-KP and thirteenth session of the AWG-LCA.

Yay! A conference! Nothing says "we're serious!" like a conference, especially one with LOAs (lots of acronyms).

From the unfccc.int website under the heading of Essential Background:

The Convention and the Protocol
Over a decade ago, most countries joined an international treaty -- the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) -- to begin to consider what can be done to reduce global warming and to cope with whatever temperature increases are inevitable.

Once these serious people are finished beginning to consider what might be done reduce global warming, at least using their definition of More CO2 = Increasing Global Warming, maybe they'll stop hosting these mega-galas in exotic locales inviting thousands of people.

Yeah, right. As Instapundit says, "I'll believe it's a crisis when the people who keep telling me it's a crisis start acting like it's a crisis."

Anyway, until that point (and I am not holding my breath) let's go to the Cancun ~~weather report~~ Climate Change Forecast for the duration of the conference:

The temperature will be significantly below average during this conference.

OMG! Does that prove once and for all that Global Warming is a hoax?

Of course not.

It's just further evidence that Gaia is funnier than these people are serious.

Stuff Ronald Reagan (Almost) Said

2010-11-16T10:11:00.004-05:00

Ann Althouse posts: "John Tyner, the young man who resisted the TSA's groin-grope, will now be probed" and Instapundit reacts with this:

I think it’s a metaphor — the government doing to us physically what it’s been doing to us economically and politically for years . . . .

Reminds me of this nugget from a GAO report on the stimulus last August:

Now however, the GAO report shows that the phrase ‘jobs created’ or ‘jobs saved’ is no longer the term of choice. They have decided to go with – wait for it – ‘lives touched’.

Stop touching me. Keep your damn hands to yourself.

"The ten most terrifying words in the English language are: 'I'm from the government and I'm here to touch you.'"
--stuff Ronald Reagan (almost) said

2010 Election Nationalized

2010-11-04T12:59:00.004-04:00

Anyone else wonder what the overall nationwide vote was in the 2010 elections? I did. But I did not find any sites that had already compiled the results, so I took the numbers from CNN's Election Results page and did so manually.

Interesting.

SENATE
Total Vote: 63,386,522
Republican: 32,216,814 -- 50.8%
Democrat: 29,127,382 -- 46.0%
Independent/Other: 2,042,316 -- 3.2%

Average Percentage of Votes*:
Republican: 54.1%
Democrat: 43.3%
Independent/Other**: 2.6%

GOVERNOR
Total Vote: 64,084,839
Republican: 32,120,923 -- 49.6%
Democrat: 30,934,882 -- 47.7%
Independent/Other: 1,749,034 -- 2.7%

Average Percentage of Votes*
Republican: 51.8%
Democrat: 44.2%
Independent/Other**: 4.0%

I would do the same for House races, but the manual effort involved exceeds both the time I have available for such a project and my attention span. In fact, I should also mention

UPDATE: William Galston at TNR does the work I was unwilling to do in counting up House totals...

In the midterm election of 2006, Democrats received 52.0 percent of the popular vote cast for House candidates, while Republicans received 45.6 percent. This year, projections indicate that the Republicans will end up with 51.8 percent, versus 45.1 percent for the Democrats—in short, a Republican gain of 6.2 percent and a Democratic loss of 6.9 percent since 2006.

_______________________
*Because individual large states like California or Texas can skew the total count and thus the percentages, diluting what the national numbers may show, I took the percentage of votes by party for each state and took a simple average overall.

**Notable Indpendent/Other votes: includes Write-In votes in Alaska (which made up 41.4% of the vote) and Independent Crist in Florida (who received 30.1% of the vote) in Senate races. Includes Independents Cutler and Moody in Maine (who garnered a combined 42% of the vote) and Chaffee in Rhode Island (who won with 38.9% of the vote) in the Governor races.

The Anatomy of Write-In Chaos in the Alaskan Senate Race

2010-10-29T09:43:00.004-04:00

It wasn't my idea. It wasn't my doing. But I did have a hand in the chaos up in Alaska when more than 100 people filed yesterday at the last minute to become write-in candidates in the Alaska Senate race.

Here's how it went down.

Dan Riehl at Big Government put up a post suggesting Alaskans attempt the write-in chaos efforts, giving details on how to properly file.

Ace of Spades picked it up and linked it.

Having read it at Ace's, I ran off to the comments section at Just One Minute, knowing an Alaskan who also comments there named "Daddy".

I was actually being whimsical.

But Daddy took it seriously. Not only did he file himself, he got word out on conservative radio talk show host Dan Fagan's show. That's when the whole thing took off.

I'll let Daddy tell the story as related in the comments at JOM:

What do ya' want first, the good news or the bad?
Okay, here's the bad. I will no longer be running as a Candidate for Senate from the Great State of New York, so if you were expecting to donate to my Campaign fund at McSorley's, just make sure it goes into the new fund labeled Senate Race in Alaska.
The good news. Hit's post above was about trying to get even with the Division of Elections in Alaska and the Alaska Supreme Court, for their mandating that a list of write-in Candidates for Senate in Alaska had to be presented to voters upon request when inside the Polling Place. This is unheard of and criminal, and has ferociously P.O'd folks out here, both Dem's and Repub's.
Hit's link suggested that as many registered and eligible Alaskan voters as possible immediately register as Write In candidates for Alaskan Senator, so that they would have to be included on the list presented in the Polling Place to voters, and hopefully the list would have thousands of names on it, and if in fact names were left out, then lawsuits could be brought as to why not. Heck of an inspired idea if you ask me.
Anyhow, got an address, hopped in the truck with Pup, and whizzed downtown. Had difficulty finding the place, so pulled into the Republican Party Headquarters (a relatively sad bunch) and then headed off to the proper location. It's where I have absentee voted in the past. Went in, found the proper office, and told the girl behind the counter what I wanted to do. She laughed, said I was number 11 today, and promptly and very friendly and very politely, presented me with the form, pulled up on the computer my essentials to verify my credentials, and then time stamped my form, accepting me as a Write In Candidate for Senator from Alaska.
She advised me that all entries had to be in by 5 PM today, as Write-Ins must be registered by 5 PM, 5 days prior to the Election. Then I asked, having seen how easy the process was (and free) could I take some extra forms and pass them out to friends and myself bring them back? She said that would be fine and legal.
Immediately I ran to the truck, dialed Fagan on the Radio Show, and told him what I had just done, how to do it easily (where and when) and said I had a form for him in my truck and I would hustle over and drop it off if he wanted to run for Senate. He said no, (weasel:( but then immediately after my call the next 4 or 5 calls were all excited about the idea, and as he started asking questions about the form from some others who had done it, I called back in and read some answers off the form, and he asked me to run it down to the station. I did, plus included a card from the Election Office which had a website and other info. This opened the floodgates. Calls came in from all over, the word got out, and people all over started driving like crazy over to the Office in Anchorage and Wasilla to register. By now also he had found the proper website with the official form, and had posted it and many folks were filling out the form and officially registering via FAX, and then eventually simply via website.
It suddenly turned into a huge party atmosphere, and by the 4 o'clock hour of his show, hundreds of people were flooding the Election Office, and now the news media were sending out teams to the Polling Office to see what the heck was going on. Folks were calling saying stuff like when they walked into the office there were 4 folks in line and by the time I left there were 0 guys behind me. (When I went in it was just me.)
We also had Lawyer's calling in ready to bring Lawsuits as needed to any of us new Senate Candidates not properly presented on the list etc. A wonderful day of Talk Radio up here (except the damn dog ate the back cover and last Chapter of my "History of Cook Inlet" while I was in trying to give Fagan his paperwork---rotten dog.
I also want to let you know that the State expects problems and challenges to the Absentee Ballot Process. It appears that anyone who asks to see the list in the Polling Room is having their Ballot somehow segregated from others for possible future disqualification challenges, so voters are cautioned to not ask to see the list when voting to avoid possible disqualification in future. We are now told that (at least in Anchorage) it is currently only 1 list and you cannot take it into the Polling Booth with you. Comments from some Polling guy was that they didn't know how exactly to deal with this ruling themselves, so there was a bit of "winging it."
The guy speaking now on Greta's show on FOX about how the list will be handed out is wrong from what I heard today.
Other good news is that 1 of the State Supreme Court Judges who approved this (Dana Fabe) is up for re-election in 5 days and now she has a big red target on her back. Good riddance.
So, all in all a very fun and exciting and positive day up here, all due to that Rabble-rouser Hit & Run! Was great to hear people calling in to Fagan damning him for for pushing this effort as vote tampering etc, and him exploding and going on offense. Was probably 95 % for the effort, 5% opposed, and you could tell the opposed were Lisa callers. Folks really are pissed and rightly so.
Now all I wann'a know is why wasn't I invited to the debate tonight, because I'm a Write-In Candidate just like Lisa Mercowshit.
I want a Lawyer!!!
Posted by: daddy October 29, 2010 at 01:36 AM

Just goes to show you that it's not what you know that's important. It's who you know. And I know an Alaskan Senate Candidate, that's who I know.

UPDATE: Dan Riehl links (thanks!) and gives his take on the events.

Harry Reid, When He's Faced With Being Out of Work, Tends to Become Abusive

2010-10-27T11:59:00.004-04:00

In discussing Joy Behar's response to a Sharron Angle ad, Katrina Trinko at The Corner points this out:

Think Behar’s just an honestly outraged citizen, not a partisan hack? Think again: what makes her bias evident is the fact that she doesn’t comment on the ads Reid has run against Angle — ads that depict Angle as a creep who supports wife beaters and sex offenders. “Sharron Angle voted to protect sex offenders,” is the message of one Reid commercial. The message of another Reid spot? “Sharron Angle sided with the [domestic violence] abuser, not the abused.”

Wait. What?

It was Reid who made a not-so-subtle reference to the domestic violence problems that await should he lose the election.

Our CPAADP ad from back in March:

We're still here to help.

What Harry Reid Supports

2010-10-15T10:27:00.003-04:00

I picked up this video from the Reid - Angle debate from the Hot Air headlines.

Let's transcribe part of it:

Moderator: Senator Reid, you were quoted as saying the following: "The war is lost and the surge is not accomplishing anything as indicated by the extreme violence," end quote. [...]
Reid: Mitch, I first met General Petraeus in Iraq. The statement that I made was made following General Petraeus saying "the war cannot be won militarily". He said and I said the war can only be won militarily, ecomically and diplomatically. That's why after I made my statement, and Gen Petraeus made his statements, we did the surge then, not later. And it was the right thing to do. The surge worked because we brought in the economy working with the Sunnis, we brought in diplomacy woking with...and that's how we got the Sunni awakening, so they start fighting the people who were causing all the trouble. General Petraeus has done a good job. He's my friend. I'm glad he's in Afghanistan. And I have supported the troops........

Wait. What?

Reid is really trying to play like he and Petraeus were on the same page back then? That what he said was based on what General Petraeus told him?

Really?

Reid said "the war is lost" on April 19, 2007.

But "the war is lost" is not the only statement Reid made back in April of 2007 regarding the surge. And it's not even the most relevant statement Reid made regarding General Petraeus. Let's cut to April 24, 2007:

CNN Interviewer: "General Petraeus is going to come to the Hill...and make it clear to you that there is progress going on in Iraq...will you believe him?"
Reid: "No. I won't believe him because it isn't happening."

Seriously. We've gone over this before. It was less than two weeks prior to the statement that he wasn't going to believe General Petraeus that Reid tipped his hand as to why he was pushing Iraq-as-lost so hard:

"We're going to pick up Senate seats as a result of this war," Senate Majority Leader Harry M. Reid (Nev.) told reporters yesterday. "Senator Schumer has shown me numbers that are compelling and astounding."

When Harry Reid says he supports the troops, he's lying. He supports getting himself and other Democrats elected. And that's it.

Are You Smarter Than Barack Obama?

2010-10-12T13:40:00.001-04:00

We now turn over this blog to the unparalleled humor of bgates from Just One Minute...

-----------------------------------------------

Are You Smaaarter than Ba-rack O-ba-ma?
Are You Smaaarter than Ba-rack O-ba-ma?
Are You Smaaarter than...

Jeff Foxworthy: Hey y'all. Welcome to "Are You Smarter than Barack Obama", the show where we find out whether our country's ten-year-olds are qualified to be leader of the free world, and vice versa. [laughter, applause]

JF: Our kids are ready, and they're excited, and I have to say I'm excited too, because joining us tonight is the President of the United States, Barack Obama. [moderate applause] President Obama, it's a tremendous honor for me to meet you.

Barack Obama: Yes it is, Jeff.

JF: Y-yeah. OK. Well, let's get started, then, I'm sure you have a very busy schedule -

BO: Uhh, my tee time isn't for another 75 minutes, and I can have the highways shut down until I get there, and one of the interns is going to help Joe Biden record SportsCenter for me, so I'm good.

JF: Right. So let's meet our first fifth-grader, he's from Akron Ohio, let's have a nice warm welcome for Dave Scheissfurer. Hi, Dave.

DS: Hello, Mr Foxworthy. Mr President? It's an honor for me to meet you, sir.

BO: Yep.

JF: Yeah. Alright. Dave, here's how we're going to play. We're going to show you a video segment of something the President has said, and you're going to have to figure out if he made a mistake, and if so, what it was. Are you ready?

DS: I think so.

JF: OK, here we go.

[video clip of Obama:]

When I was young, just got out of college, I had to buy auto insurance. I had a beat-up old car. And I won’t name the name of the insurance company, but there was a company — let’s call it Acme Insurance in Illinois. And I was paying my premiums every month. After about six months I got rear-ended and I called up Acme and said, I’d like to see if I can get my car repaired, and they laughed at me over the phone because really this was set up not to actually provide insurance; what it was set up was to meet the legal requirements. But it really wasn’t serious insurance.

BO: Now, that, that is exactly what happened, just the way I read it. Said it.

JF: Dave, what do you think?

DS: Um....I kind of think that's wrong. Because when you buy real cheap insurance doesn't it just cover for when you run into other people and when somebody gets hurt and stuff? And if somebody else hits you, shouldn't their insurance have to pay?

BO: No, I read it-

JF: That's right, Dave! Congratulations! Hal, tell Dave what he's won!

***[Cut to commercial break]***

JF: And we're back. So far we've already found one fifth grader who's smarter than Barack Obama.

BO: Now, that's clearly an exaggeration.

JF: Of course, sir, it's just a game show. We know you're a very smart man.
Now let's meet our next contestant, and it's Rosalita Lider Muymal from Boulder, Colorado. Hi, Rosalita.

RLM: Hi, Jeff. Hello, Mr President. I'm very pleased to meet you.

BO: Of course you are, sweetie.

JF: OK, Rosalita - do they call you "Rosie" at school?

RLM: Oh, no! Only when they want me - when they want to say that I am fat.

JF: Rosalita it is. Rosalita, this clip goes by pretty fast, so pay attention, ok?

RLM: OK.

[video clip of Obama:]

There's a lot of -- I don't know what the term is in Austrian -- wheeling and dealing, and people are pursuing their interests, and everybody has their own particular issues and their own particular politics

BO: Now, I was there, and that young lady was from Austria.

JF: Rosalita, what do you think?

BO: I'm telling you, she was Austrian.

RLM: Si, but Austrian is like a nationality. It's not a language. They speak German in Austria.

BO: Then what do they speak in Germany, Swiss?

RLM: No, they speak German there too - and also in Switzerland some places.

JF: That's correct! In fact all of that was correct, but we can only give credit for the part connected to the video. But great job, Rosalita. We'll be right back to see if another fifth grader can join Rosalita Lider Muymal in saying....

RLM: Oh! [blushes, glances at Obama] I am smarter than Barack Obama [dissolves into giggles, covers her face with her hands]

***[Cut to commercial break]***

JF: And we're back. Our next contestant is - from Washington DC, ladies and gentlemen let's hear it for - oh, gosh - Antawn Mbaya Kion..gozi, did I do that right Antawn?

AMK: Yeah. That's good.

BO: What up Antawn.

AMK: Hey. It's nice to meet you, sir.

BO: Word. Good luck.

AMK: Thank you, sir.

JF: Now, Antawn, it says here that you go to school at Sidwell Friends - are you a classmate of Sasha or Malia Obama?

AMK: [freezes, lip quivers; a beat later bursts into tears]

JF: Oh, jeez - go to break. Go to break!

***[Cut to commercial break]***

JF: Hi, everybody. I have to apologize, and especially to Antawn, for that mixup. It seems that Antawn had a scholarship to go to Sidwell, but the government got rid of it. I'm sorry Antawn.

AMK: [listlessly] It's ok.

JF: Is the school you're going to now ok?

AMK: I guess.

BO: Probably not. Most of those schools are dumps.

JF: Well let's move things along, ok?

[video clip of Obama]

The Middle East is a problem that has plagued the region for centuries.

BO: Right.

JF: Antawn?

AMK: Um....

BO: That one's right. Just say I'm right!

JF: Let Antawn answer, sir.

AMK: Um....[starts crying] I don't know! I'm stupid! I go to a stupid school because I'm stupid! I don't know what the mistake was! That didn't even make any sense!

JF: No, Antawn - Antawn! You're right. That didn't make sense. You're right.

AMK: Yeah? [sniffles] Yeah, huh? Because the Middle East is the region. So he should have said like the problems in the Middle East region have been plaguing the world for centuries.

JF: Final answer?

BO: Look, sometimes they don't get the teleprompter set up right. That's what I meant to say.

AMK: Only that wouldn't be right either. Because the problem he was - [turns to Obama] when you said "problem" you were talking about with the Jews and the Arabs, right?

BO: Exactly.

AMK: But there wasn't even that much fighting between them in the whole time that Turkey was in charge. [turns back to Jeff] And then they didn't lose it to the European countries until after World War One. So that's only like one century.

BO: Whatever. I don't think this kid is even in the fifth grade.

AMK: [outraged, wheels on the President] Nu uh! I am in the fifth grade! But I know more stuff than they have in school because I read. I read a lot. That's how I got that-[tears up, composes himself]-that scholarship. And even before school started, they gave me a library card. They have a gooood library at that school. I think that's where I learned all about the Middle East.

I read a lot. Because my mom said? That if I did real good at Sidwell? That I could go to all the good schools. Like you. And now I can't even go to that school. And they didn't even let me keep the library card.

JF: [softly] Antawn? Maybe you cain't say you go to that fancy school. But you know what you can say?

AMK: [puzzled] Huh? [brightens] Oh, yeah! I'm Antawn Kiongonzi, [glares at the President] and I'm smarter than Barack Obama! [audience erupts in applause]

***[Show fades to black]***

Stuff Obama (Almost) Said

2010-10-12T10:23:00.005-04:00

"But the truth is, is that, our challenge is to get people persuaded that we can make progress when there's not evidence of that in their daily lives. You go into some of these small towns in Pennsylvania, and like a lot of small towns in the Midwest, the jobs have been gone now for 20 months and nothing's replaced them. And they fell through the Hope and Change of 2009, and the Ram It Down Their Throats Against Their Will of 2010, and each successive effort we've made has said that somehow these communities are gonna regenerate and they have not. So it's not surprising then that we'd make a shameless effort to play off their bitterness, hoping that if they cling to their antipathy to people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment, our cynical attacks on "foreign money" contributed to the Chamber of Commerce might make them rethink their votes, even if it's complete bull crap. Oh well. At this point, that's all we got. No, seriously. That's it."

--stuff Obama (almost) said

Stuff Obama (Almost) Said

2010-10-10T13:15:00.002-04:00

"I am absolutely certain that generations from now, we will be able to look back and tell our children that this was the moment when we could have begun to provide care for the sick and good jobs to the jobless; this was the moment when the rise of the oceans could have begun to slow and our planet could have begun to heal; this was the moment when we could have restored our image as the last, best hope on earth. This was the moment—this was the time—when we could have come together to remake this great nation so that it could have reflected our very best selves and our highest ideals. But nooooo. You Democrat voters just like to gripe and groan. You just want to stand on the sidelines. You just want to sit on your hands. You don't care enough to fight. You're lethargic. You're unserious. You people make me look bad."

--stuff Obama (almost) said

Who's They Now?

2010-10-09T09:25:00.003-04:00

You remember this, right?

“We’ve learned that we’re still living in a time and in a nation where the bar is set, right?”
“That’s right.”
“They tell you all you need to do is do these things and you’ll get to the bar — ”
“Uh-huh.”
“So you go about the business of doing those things — ”
“Yes — ”
“You start working hard and sacrificing, and you think you’re getting closer to the bar, you’re working and you’re struggling, you get right to that bar, you’re reaching out for the bar, and then what happens?”
“They raise the bar!”
“They raise the bar. Raise the bar. Shift it to the side. Keep it just out of reach.”
“Yes!”
“And that’s just what’s been happening in this race.”

That was Michelle Obama in 2008, of course.

So now we're in 2010, right? And it is the Republicans poised to win big in this year's elections.

Well.

Let's cut to Allah Pundit at Hot Air:

So assured is the GOP tsunami, it seems, that even the eminence grise of Hopenchange ’08 feels obliged to set the bar as high as he possibly can so that he’ll have some sort of “moral victory” to wheeze about on November 3.
Trying to reshape expectations for the midterm elections, David Plouffe said Thursday that the Republicans should be expected to make a full sweep of Congress – and key gubernatorial races – given the environmental advantages they have. Anything less, he said, should be seen as a disgrace.
“By their definition, success is winning back the House, winning back the Senate and winning every major governor’s race,” Plouffe, Obama’s 2008 campaign manager, said. “When you’ve got winds this strong in your favor, that’s the kind of election you need to have – or it should be considered a colossal failure.”

Seems David Plouffe has become the "they" in 2010.

Blaming Bush no longer works. Obama's trying to blame Democratic voters, but that's not likely to work.

So all that's left is to . . . well, to raise the bar, of course. Shift it to the side. Keep it just out of reach. I'll go with Ace's response:

David Piffle set us a standard of success. Fine, David: We accept. And we're going to get as close to your mark as possible.
If you want to declare victory lying bloody and toothless in an alley because you still have your shoes, fine.

It's the never-ending story: the Democrats become in the next election exactly what they decried in the last one.

Only, instead of belly-aching about "the bar", we'll just belly up to it. We own this bar.

Next round's on me.

How to Energize Your Base, By Barack Obama

2010-10-09T08:58:00.006-04:00

Geraghty points out this quote from the NYT:

Assuming that many independents are out of reach, White House strategists are counting on Mr. Obama to energize, cajole, wheedle and even shame the left into matching the Tea Party momentum that has propelled Republicans this year.

Let's look at the examples of Obama's various techniques ... energize, cajole, wheedle and shame.

Energize:

‘Well, the big difference here and in ’94 was you’ve got me.’

Not quite a Howard Dean "yeeeearrrrgggghhhh", but, um, ok...

Shame:

"When I hear Democrats griping and groaning ... I say, 'folks, wake up'."

...

"It is inexcusable for any Democrat or progressive right now to stand on the sidelines"

...

"We can't let this country fall backward because the rest of us didn't care enough to fight."

...

"People need to shake off this lethargy. People need to buck up ... if people now want to take their ball and go home, that tells me folks weren't serious in the first place"

...

"The idea that we've got a lack of enthusiasm in the Democratic base, that people are sitting on their hands, complaining, is just irresponsible"

Cajole:

...

Wheedle:

...

Well. Obama's got the complaining, whining, griping and groaning -- to people who he says are a bunch of complainers, whiners, gripers and groaners who don't care -- down pretty good. Persuading with flattery, not so much.

So get out and vote Democrats! Obama thinks you're lazy, not serious and irresponsible.

Apparently you weren't the ones you've been waiting for afterall, according to Obama.

Bummer.

Obama's More Right Direction

2010-09-05T15:44:00.010-04:00

Thanks to Jim Geraghty at National Review's Campaign Spot and to Clarice Feldman at American Thinker for picking up the chart in our last post.

(Note: You are reading Clarice's Pieces each Sunday at American Thinker, I trust. If you aren't, you must.)

Like clockwork, even after last week's numbers were roundly recognized as the very definition of non-recovery, Obama couldn't help himself:

"We are confident that we are moving in the right direction. But we want to keep this recovery moving stronger and accelerate the job growth that is needed so desperately all across the country."

Of course he said it.

If the phrase "moving in the right direction" is wrong, Obama doesn't want to be right.

Obama's Direction

2010-08-27T18:48:00.004-04:00

News is out today that Q2 GDP is a lot worse than the unexpectedly bad numbers that were reported just several weeks ago. Ed Morrissey at Hot Air:

The GDP number for the second quarter got revised sharply downward by a third today, dropping from the initial estimate of 2.4% last month to 1.6% in the intermediate revision. The number represents a hard rebuke to White House attempts to paint a rosy long-term economic picture, as the anemic growth rate may indicate even more trouble ahead for joblessness

You know what this calls for . . . an Obama speech!

Of course.

Over to you Jim Geraghty:

The White House seems really convinced that if they say “moving in the right direction” enough times when discussing the economy, the voters will give them some sort of credit, or at least not notice that the economy has mostly sputtered over the last two years, and really for the last three

Geraghty also provides a handy list of GDP growth over the past 10 quarters.

This calls for a chart!

So that's the direction Obama considers to be the right one?

Yike.

In Defense of Obama as a Movement

2010-08-27T08:14:00.004-04:00

In his nightly “Quotes of the Day” post at Hot Air, Allahpundit calls our attention to this Washington Post article:

Michael Kazin, a history professor at Georgetown University, has studied political activism for decades. But two years ago, he thought he was participating in a unique political movement, one not organized against an idea or a war – like most he has seen or been involved with – but in support of a specific candidate: Barack Obama…
But Kazin, like many other liberal activists who once shared that view, says he may have been too optimistic. As conservatives, led by talk show host Glenn Beck, prepare for a rally in Washington on Saturday – another sign of the increased activism on the right since Obama’s election – some liberals say the energy of the campaign on their side has dissipated and is not matching the energy and passion “tea party” activists have captured on the right.
In an interview, Kazin said, “I was a bit optimistic in the glow of victory,” adding that “the campaign had the aura of a movement, but in the light of day it was not a movement.”

Wait. What?

Obama *not* a movement?

I disagree!

The problem for folks such as professor Kazin is that they’re relying on their lying eyes.

I have long maintained that Obama is a movement. It was this Ace of Spades post back in 2008 that convinced me, bringing me into agreement with liberal Oliver Willis:

Obama: Smells Like a Movement

It was at that point that I ~~saw the light~~ recognized the odor:

And as lefty Oliver Willis quipped about Obama, Smells Like a Movement. Oh, yeah a big movement. A toilet-stopping, get-the-plunger, why-didn't-you-courtesy-flush, where-the-hell are-the-matches movement.

Follow your nose. The Obama Movement has been BS all along.

The Big Difference Here Is...

2010-08-01T13:48:00.006-04:00

Back in January, we had a report that certain Democrats were urging President Obama not to underestimate the surge Republicans could mount in the 2010 elections. However, Obama seemed to have little concern. He was, afterall, the unprecedented President Barack Obama. In one meeting, Marion Berry (D-AR), who is not running for re-election, recounted his visit with the President:

Berry recounted meetings with White House officials, reminiscent of some during the Clinton days, where he and others urged them not to force Blue Dogs “off into that swamp” of supporting bills that would be unpopular with voters back home.
“I’ve been doing that with this White House, and they just don’t seem to give it any credibility at all,” Berry said. “They just kept telling us how good it was going to be. The president himself, when that was brought up in one group, said, ‘Well, the big difference here and in ’94 was you’ve got me.’ We’re going to see how much difference that makes now.”

That was then, this is now. Oh how the mighty (full of themselves) have fallen:

WASHINGTON — As lunch was served in the Roosevelt Room of the White House one day last week, President Obama assured the nine Democratic members of Congress sitting around the table that he would do anything he could to help them survive their fall elections.
Even, he said, if it meant staying away.
“You may not even want me to come to your district,” Mr. Obama said, according to guests, nearly all of whom hold seats that Republicans are aggressively seeking.

Those poor Democrats heading into the fall elections. But don't fear -- Nancy Pelosi is here to save the day!

Three months before what certainly will be brutal House elections, Speaker Nancy Pelosi is again the happy campaigner, vowing to defend “every grain of sand” of what she’s built in Congress and predicting this August will prove kinder to Democrats than a year ago.

Perhaps she was channeling her inner Churchill ("we shall fight them on the beaches!"), but as James Taranto said: "Breaking News From Matthew 7:26" (and 27)

26But everyone who hears these words of mine and does not put them into practice is like a foolish man who built his house on sand. 27The rain came down, the streams rose, and the winds blew and beat against that house, and it fell with a great crash.

But verse 27 surely is evidence of global warming -- so let's Blame Bush.

[VIMH: So Bush is who we should hold responsible should the Democrats lose their majorities in Congress...]
I like the way you think. Ironic,isn't it?

President Bush Was A Community Organizer Revisited

2010-07-31T09:43:00.006-04:00

From the WaPo we find this:

"If I were to characterize the mood here, I would say it was a combination of rage and panic," said Joanne Carter, director of the anti-poverty group Results and a board member of the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria.
The rage is directed at the Obama administration, which many activists say is reneging on a commitment to continue big annual increases in global AIDS spending. The panic arises from the knowledge that in some African countries, patients who want antiretroviral treatment are being turned away and will soon start dying.
Some activists pine for former president George W. Bush, who launched a much-praised multibillion-dollar fund to fight AIDS around the world. But now, in the eyes of many, the U.S. government has replaced the pharmaceutical industry as the main impediment to progress.

I won't hesitate to say, I told you so:

And what’s the difference between Bush the Community Organizer and Obama the Community Organizer?
Results.
Bush inspires hope … AND … helps realize dreams [...]
Obama inspires hope … THEN … heads off for the next big job [...]
It is certainly politically fashionable to run against President Bush in this election. And certainly politically wise.
That’s a shame.
For while the Democratic nominee to be the next President has talked a big game about helping “the least of these” and being his “brother’s keeper”, he has loved the sound of his own voice and the trajectory of his own career more than the people he has been talking about. Contrariwise, the current President quietly went about the business of actually doing it.
Standing up for President Bush may not be popular these days – may not be fashionable.
But it’s the right thing to do.

Still is. Still is.

Obama And The Internet

2010-07-28T18:15:00.007-04:00

Mary Katharine Ham at the Weekly Standard points us to an Obama infomercial for healthcare.gov that would make Billy Mays proud. In it Obama demonstrates how easy it is to use and all the wonderful benefits it offers. MKH says:

All the techies and Obama fans will undoubtedly think it's just fab that the President himself is showing the American public the super-sweet drop-down menus on a government website, but isn't this what the Secretary of Health and Human Services or the Chief Technology Officer is for?

A valid concern, perhaps. But what struck me most was not that Obama was giving the tour -- but what appears on Obama's screen on one of the opening shots:

(click to enlarge)

That's not healthcare.gov!!!

I Have Confidence They'll Put Them To The Test

2010-07-27T20:29:00.004-04:00

A Gallup poll was making the rounds last week in which Congress was ranked dead last in confidence among the institutions included in its survey. Ed Morrissey at Hot Air covered it here. One note that Ed made got me thinking:

Gallup doesn’t chart the presidential confidence level over the same period of time it does with Congress. The highest Congressional level in the last 10 years was 30%, but it would be interesting to see how Bush fared in that same period. Something tells me it took him a little longer to get down to 26% and on a gentler slope than the 15% drop in a year Obama has had.

But instead of wondering how presidential confidence compared, I wondered how this form of Congressional "approval" was influenced by which party was in the majority. See if you detect a pattern:

(click image to enlarge)

Well. When Republicans control the Senate, Congressional "approval" rises. When Democrats control the Senate, look out below. The notable exception was Republican control from 2003 through 2006, in which the index dropped steeply -- a movement the Democrats have seen fit to continue, to unprecedented depths ahead of the elections this fall.

The FEC Messes With Joe

2010-07-23T08:06:00.006-04:00

Remember back in 2008 when Obama's claim to executive experience was that he managed a big honkin' campaign? Good times.

Well, that would make Biden's claim to executive experience that he too managed a campaign! One that was 2/3rds the size of . . . Wasilla.

In all, Biden, who dropped out of the race after coming in fifth in the Iowa caucuses and was tapped eight months later to be Barack Obama’s running mate, received $857,000 in taxpayer money for his campaign, which raised $8.2 million from individual contributions, according to the report.

The 2/3rds claim isn't mine. It's Obama's:

"My understanding is that Gov. Palin's town, Wasilla, has I think 50 employees," Obama told CNN on Sept. 1, 2008. "We've got 2,500 in this campaign. I think their budget is maybe 12-million dollars a year"

Speaking of Biden running his campaign, apparently he ran it so well that he was fined $219K last Friday for campaign violations:

The Federal Election Commission has penalized Vice President Joe Biden’s 2008 presidential campaign $219,000 for accepting over-the-limit contributions and a discounted flight on a jet owned by a New York hedge fund. His campaign was also charged with sloppy record-keeping.

Sloppy record-keeping? Accepting illegal contributions? Accepting a gift from special interests? On Wall Street? Yike!

Well, at least Obama wouldn't put Joe in charge of overseeing stimulus spending or anything.

Wait. What?

Obama And The Shadow (Puppet)

2010-07-02T21:39:00.005-04:00

Some people think all Obama does is play golf and go to parties.

Wrong. Sometimes his tee times get rained out.

And Obama really buckles down:

Obama gestures while leading a session
on the Gulf spill in the White House.

If "We're Out of Money Now" ...then... "Stop Spending!"

2010-06-28T20:15:00.003-04:00

Obama told us last year that we were already out of money.

That didn't slow him or the Democrats down one bit in their efforts to spend like drunken sailors.

Now Rick Santelli gives the only sane two word answer:

You Were Always On My Mind

2010-06-17T07:23:00.003-04:00

Obama last week:

"I have not spoken to him directly," Obama said. "Here's the reason. Because my experience is, when you talk to a guy like a BP CEO, he's going to say all the right things to me. I'm not interested in words. I'm interested in actions."

"A little less conversation and a lot more action..."

OK, tough guy.

Obama yesterday:

“I emphasized to the chairman that when he’s talking to shareholders, when he is in meetings in his boardroom, to keep in mind those individuals; that they are desperate; that some of them, if they don’t get relief quickly, may lose businesses that have been in their families for two or three generations,” the president said. “The chairman assured me that he would keep them in mind.”

See? Obama was right! BP execs just said all the right things to him.

And yet . . . Obama seems to have fallen for it.

"You're whispering in my ear...Tell me all the things that I wanna to hear...'cause that's true...That's what I like about you..."

Obama went on:

Mr. Obama said the standard he would be applying “is whether or not those individuals I met with, their family members, those communities that are vulnerable, whether they are uppermost in the minds of all concerned.”

Finally! We have specifics from Obama on how he is going to handle the crisis caused by the spill for those directly affected.

So if you are down on the Gulf coast and worried about your livelihood, fear not: Obama has extracted the assurance from those responsible for the spill, and has vowed to hold himself and all those involved to the standard that they will . . . be thinking about you.

"You were always on my mind.....you were always on my mind..."

Awwww. He’s so sweet. Who says this president can’t connect on an emotional level?

Obama Is Growing In Office -- Growing Smaller

2010-06-13T10:09:00.003-04:00

Mark Steyn has written an excellent, incisive article on President Obama. In it he says:

[Obama]'s the first president to give off the pronounced whiff that he's condescending to the job - that it's really too small for him, and he's just killing time until something more commensurate with his stature comes along.
And so the Gulf spill was an irritation, but he dutifully went through the motions of flying in to be photographed looking presidentially concerned. As he wearily explained to Matt Lauer, "I was meeting with fishermen down there, standing in the rain, talking..." Good grief, what more do you people want? Alas, he's not a good enough actor to fake it.
So the more desperately he butches up the rhetoric – "Plug the damn hole!," "I know whose ass to kick" – the more pathetically unconvincing it all sounds.

Indeed, history has now shown us that it is Obama who is too small for the job and not the other way around.

The Resolute Desk in the Oval Office provides us with a visual:

The Office of the President of the United States has revealed Obama to be small by comparison. And he appears to be steadily growing smaller.

Speaking Truth From Powerlessness

2010-06-12T19:36:00.008-04:00

Jake Tapper at ABC reports on Obama speaking truth from powerlessness at the Gulf:

“Even though I am President of the United States my powers are not limitless,” Obama said last Friday at Camardelle’s Live Bait and Boiled Seafood, “So I can’t dive down there and plug the hole. I can’t suck it up with a straw."

It's true. He has limited power. Some call it impotence.

Others say he's not doing enough. But cut him some slack here. When he says he can't suck it up with a straw, it's not like he didn't try:

President Barack Obama tries to suck tar balls
through a straw as Lafourche Parish President
Charlotte Randolf, left, looks on at Fourchon Beach
in Port Fourchon, La., May 28, 2010.

We'll give him an A for effort with the tar balls and straw.

His overall performance in the managment of efforts to plug the damn hole and contain the spill?

Easy. That's a good, solid B+.

Obama Approval Polls Overtaken By GOP

2010-06-09T18:36:00.004-04:00

Jim Geraghty highlights this graphic from Pollster.com, which represents an average of approval polls for President Obama:

Geraghty notes that the disapproval has inched well ahead of the approval.

You know what jumped out at me? What the poll visually resembles:

Obama's Mad As Hell And He's Not Gonna Take It Anymore

2010-06-09T11:08:00.007-04:00

[OVAL OFFICE]

Obama: Thank you for joining this call today. As I have always said, make no mistake, this oil spill is and has been my number one priority. There are those who say we should do nothing, but let me be clear, I am absolutely certain that generations from now, we will be able to look back and…

Muffled Voice: Excuse me, sir…

Obama: …tell our children that this was the moment when the flow of the oil into the oceans began to slow and our planet began to heal…

Muffled Voice: Sir, please, sir?

Obama: Who is that?

Muffled Voice: Sir, we can barely hear you, could you speak a little louder please?

Obama: Could you say that again, I can barely hear you. There must be something wrong with the connection.

Muffled Voice: Can you speak a little louder please?

Obama: IT MUST BE THE PHONE, I SWEAR...AHEM...AS I HAVE ALWAYS SAID, MAKE NO MISTAKE…

Muffled Voice: We got that part, sir.

[BACKGROUND: various voices laughing]

Obama: WHO’S LAUGHING? WHO IS THAT?

[BACKGROUND: laughing increases]

Obama: Stop it. I’m telling you, I’m not going to rest or be satisfied until I find out who is laughing on this call. I’m going to talk with the folks who potentially have the best answers as to who’s laughing, so I know whose ass to kick. I’m telling you right now, whoever is laughing better shut their pie hole this instant, or I swear I’m going to take this receiver and plug the damn hole.

Muffled Voice: That's much better, sir. We can hear you just fine now.

[BACKGROUND: uncontrollable laughter]

The Smartest Guy In The Room

2010-06-09T07:19:00.000-04:00

Obama Is Gonna Kick Your Ass If You Don't Plug The Damn Hole

2010-06-08T21:26:00.004-04:00

Tom Maguire:

The First Emoter finds his inner George Bush and tells us he is out looking for "ass to kick" on the BP Gulf oil spill. Gosh, its reassuring to see our President enraged and engaged.

Anger They Hope You'll Believe.

Patent Pending

2010-05-16T13:45:00.002-04:00

This level of brilliance is what happens at those 1 am parties playing darts in your neighbor's garage.

The beer bottle fits snug between the thumb and forefingers of the glove, allowing you to relax your hand. Or punch someone without putting your beer down.

Either way...

Using a boxing glove to hold your beer: An Idea Whose Time Has Come.

Filibuster Kagan . . . For The Children!!!

2010-05-11T22:08:00.004-04:00

I have almost nothing to say on the Elena Kagan nomination.

Almost.

Over at Just One Minute, we were treated to an image of a young Kagan readying herself to hit a softball.

MarkO at JOM comments:

Bat at wrong angle. It should point toward the pitcher. Bat likely to be under the ball and not able to strick the ball with any force. Basically, pushing the ball if she can hit it at all. Hands to far from body. This makes for a poor swing path. Back elbow too high. This fits in perfectly with a swing that goes low to high with no power. Front elbow prevents hitting anything inside with any force. Hips already open (don't go there). Face of watch, under. A secret sign, no doubt.

I responded at JOM to the estimable MarkO, and will reproduce it here.....

While you astutely point out all the hitting flaws of the Kagan Stance, I think you miss the fundamental lesson of the photo of Kagan At The Bat.

She's. Not. Wearing. A. Helmet.

We simply cannot confirm someone to the Supreme Court of the United States who would send such a reckless message to the youth of America.

Hell, even Obama wore a helmet when he went bike riding.

(Of course that was 2008, when he was running for president. Once in office, however, not so much...)

Further, while I am the last person to claim that photos of the nominee are dispositive, I think I am on fairly solid ground [note: that's a Boston Globe image] when I say that Elena Kagan has probably consumed more than her fair share of trans fat and high fructose corn syrup items over the years.

Let's Move? What does Michelle Obama think about this nominee?

"In Elena Kagan's America, kids will eat junk food and traipse across the ballfields of America unprotected from the dangers of hard spherical objects projected about..."

Filibuster Kagan . . . For The Children!!!

"I do think at a certain point you've made enough money"

2010-04-29T20:27:00.001-04:00

At a speech in Quincy, IL talking about financial reform, President Obama lets us know that he thinks there should be a limit to how much money a person should make when he said, "I do think at a certain point you've made enough money."

A few of his biggest supporters from Hollywood, who went to great lengths during the 2008 campaign to let the world know how much they loved him, weigh in in this video.

In many cases these celebrities make a lot more money than the big company executives Obama likes to demonize as greedy. These celebrities find themselves understandably confused.

The Obligatory Obama as Drunken Sailor

2010-04-25T19:29:00.005-04:00

I know there are problems with the analogy.

But with this photo, Obama as drunken sailor is too good to pass up.

President Obama stumbles across the White House
lawn early in the morning. Responding to reporters'
questions, Obama could only manage, "hic".

Goldman Sachs Loves Democrats

2010-04-23T20:05:00.005-04:00

And Democrats love them back.

So, Goldman Sachs is in the news. Please don't ask me to try and explain what's going on. I mean, the SEC is suing them. I know that much. About the only other thing I know is that I Question The Timing.

But the name Goldman Sachs brings back memories of the 2008 election. I did this post, highlighting how Goldman was a much bigger contributor to Obama than McCain, despite the conventional wisdom that it is Republicans in the pockets of Wall Street banks.

After the success of my Exxon logo featuring Obama, I took the opportunity to do the same with the Goldman logo:

Crazy thing is, good friend Jane over at YouTooCongress found the logo useful a few days ago. Only she didn't get it from me -- she got it from her broker. Like she says, "what a small world".

At NRO, Robert Costa runs down the Democrats' relationship with Goldman. "An impressionistic study in cronyism", indeed. Costa concludes his piece:

Close up, it looks disconnected and blurred, but if you step back, the shape of it all falls into focus: Democrats hoard Goldman cash, Goldman hoards Democrats, and the American people lose.

Let's face it, that Goldman-Obama logo was good fun for 2008. But Costa has us convinced, it's time for A New Direction.

So, without further ado, the 2010 Goldman Sachs logo:

Introducing: TheVIMH Carbon Offset Program

2010-04-22T19:19:00.003-04:00

Happy Earth Day 2010.

Are you convinced that the sea levels are rising, the polar caps are melting, species are becoming extinct, our planet is doomed because of human-induced climate change?

Are you concerned about pollution and air quality?

Are you concerned about deforestation?

Are you generally concerned about our environment?

Are you worried that your personal carbon footprint is larger than it should be?

Are you looking to reduce your carbon footprint through offsets?

And yet, are you also alarmed by fraud and abuse in large, profit-driven carbon offset programs that benefit multi-millionaires whose own carbon output in a single day is larger than yours for an entire month – those whose carbon production of the next month will eclipse your own for the rest of your life (should the earth as we know it cease to exist like they predict)? Those for whom carbon offsets are more about making their own green than making the earth green.

Now there’s a better way.

We are offering a limited number of people the opportunity to purchase carbon offsets through a simple and inexpensive program. 100% of your carbon offset purchase will be used directly to, well, offset your carbon footprint. There are no overhead costs, hidden administrative expenses or any other areas in which the money you invest into this program will be used for anything other than reducing your carbon footprint.

How do we do this?

I’m glad you asked.

With a one-time donation to the Arbor Day Foundation for as little as $10, you get to select 10 trees which they will ship to the destination of your choice. Your first choice should be your own property on which you can plant, nurture and grow your carbon sequestering trees to maturity.

However, should you not have the time or space to carry this out, we’re here to help. Have those ten trees shipped here, and we will plant, nurture and grow your trees for you.

Either way, you become a member of the Arbor Day Foundation, an organization whose mission is to “inspire people to plant, nurture, and celebrate trees”.

In addition to taking care of your trees, we will send you quarterly photos of your trees, and annual virtual tours, allowing you to “visit” your trees in their natural environment.

As your trees grow, you can breathe easier, both figuratively and literally.

It is a win-win-win scenario and one of the most rewarding investments you can make.

To find out more about the program, email today. Our representatives are standing by.

How I Spent My Spring Break, Vol. 6

2010-04-02T22:27:00.003-04:00

Have I fully and suffienciently expressed how much I love my sister-in-law?

Uh,no. I never could, even if I spent the next 365 days repeating it.

She is just simply in every way awesome:

(click to embiggen)

That's for her blog. The sand art reads:

For a good time click...
TheChefInMyHead.com

(No,the url is not embedded in the sand. But hey, thanks for asking, smart aleck.)

How I Spent My Spring Break, Vol. 5

2010-04-01T14:41:00.004-04:00

"...thanks to a benevolent arrangement the greater part of life is sunshine"

--stuff Jefferson said.

Click the image to see the full size.

JEFFERSONIAN CONTEXT (which is muy importante):

But friendship is precious, not only in the shade, but in the sunshine of life, and thanks to a benevolent arrangement the greater part of life is sunshine.

Could I love my friends any more?

Uh,no.

How I Spent My Spring Break, Vol. 4

2010-03-31T14:58:00.006-04:00

I want you to imagine the best neighbor you ever had.

No, wait. I want you to imagine the best neighbor your imagination could possibly conjure.

Now I want you to weep as you realize how much that person could never measure up to my neighbor, Doug:

(click to enlarge, that's Doug's kids who make the points in the exclamations points)

Happy Birthday Doug.

Time to celebrate.

How I Spent My Spring Break, Vol. 3

2010-03-30T15:30:00.002-04:00

"One man with liquid courage makes a majority"

--stuff Andrew Jackson (almost said).

Click image to enlarge (I'm gonna need shorter quotes!)

And have one on me.

How I Spent My Spring Break, Vol. 2

2010-03-29T12:55:00.008-04:00

"We shall write on the beaches..."

--stuff Churchill (almost) said.

Click to enlarge, should you be so moved.

(hat tip, Elliott at JOM)

CONTEXT:

Though, really, to be honest, I was introduced to British Prime Minister Winston Churchill courtesy of . . . Iron Maiden:

There's more history taught in 80s heavy metal music than in a large portion of our public schools today. But that's a debate for another day.

(You) Wish You Were Here

2010-03-28T15:08:00.003-04:00

It's spring break. We're all about spring break. My wife's sister and her husband have come in from Texas, and the bestest neighbors in the world EVAH have joined us for a beach adventure.

SHURVILLEOBBS 2010

My plan is to write a message a day in the sand. Unless I don't.