I wonder ... is he kicking over chairs in the Orchid Office?
Is he slapping Rahm Emanuel around, taking out the Sestak Affair as well as the BP Affair on "The Fish"?
Is Obama, like Che Guevara, about to create 'the pedagogy of El Paredón, and have a few BP execs shot?
An enraged President Obama.
Should I crap my drawers now, or wait for all those BP employees to crap theirs?
And why do I think that isn't going to happen?
Perhaps Obama should contain that rage, and simply send in Captain Ed "Slow and Dumb" Stanton?
Or maybe he should quit slapping "The Fish" around and send him down there. There ya go. A little of that "Chikaga Way" up close and personal.
You go, Barack! Hope and Change! Hope and Change!
Meanwhile, how's that Joe Sestak thing coming along?
A Gulf Coast official accused BP of shipping workers into Grand Isle, Louisiana, for President Barack Obama's visit to the oil-stricken area Friday and sending them away once the president left the region.
Early Friday morning, "a number of buses brought in approximately 300 to 400 workers that had been recruited all week," Jefferson Parish Councilman Chris Roberts told CNN's "Situation Room."
Roberts said the workers were offered $12 an hour to come out to the scene at Grand Isle and work in what he called a "dog and pony show."
But, when Obama departed, so did the workers, he said, adding that he's never seen more than 20 workers at the Grand Isle cleanup site since the effort started.
BP denies it of course, such denials also covered in the CNN article.
Roberts told CNN's Anderson Cooper the hundreds of workers who showed up early Friday wouldn't speak to local emergency management officials.
"The sheriff's office did manage to get one person to speak with them and that individual said they were hired yesterday and told to report to a staging area at 7:30 this morning," Roberts added. "It just doesn't add up."
The Sestak Drama continues.
Will Obama throw Rahm "The Fish" Emanuel under the bus?
Will Obama deny any knowledge of the deal and blame it all on an overzealous underling who has since been given the boot?
Or will they just continue on with 'business as usual'.
The whole world wonders ...
So the White House alleges that Sestak was offered a position on 'a presidential board' by Bill Clinton, who was asked to do that (allegedly) by Rahm "The Fish" Emanuel, Barack H. Obama's Enforcer-in-Chief.
White House used Clinton to keep Sestak out of Senate race
Sestak is still playing cute. He maintains that he refused this offer, since he is motivated solely by the desire to do right by Pennsylvania's 'working families'.
What a peach of a guy.
I wonder how many of his underlings Admiral Sestak screwed on his way to the top.
So meanwhile, having released this little bombshell on the Friday before a long holiday weekend (anyone ever watch 'West Wing'?) and while he is doing his major photo op down in Louisiana, Barack H. Obama is off on vacation.
The rather transparent hope is that We the People, suffering short attention spans, will forget all about it by Monday.
By the way ... Sestak is a staunch gun controller, wants to reinstitute the so-called 'assault weapons ban', has a '100%' rating from the Brady Bunch, and an 'F' from the National Rifle Association.
And Al Haig, hounded by curious, pesky reporters as to who was actually running the Federal government, announced "I'm in charge."
Well, yesterday, hounded by curious, pesky reporters ('hounded' might be a bit over the top; most of the White House press corps are neutered lap dogs these days) Obama announced that he was in charge and "I take responsibility".
After over a month of blaming BP, and letting BP do whatever BP wants to do, including ignoring EPA's instructions to quit using that toxic dispersant, after more than a month of letting BP run the show ... Barack H. Obama announced that he is 'in charge'.
After weeks of watching Ken Salazar posture and make inane comments like "We're keeping our boot on the neck of BP"; after watching weeks of Janet Napolitano's idiotically disconnected from reality commentaries; after watching that 'slow and stupid' Coast Guard captain set the stage for The Obama Moment of Truth ... we now know that Obama has been on top of the situation all along.
It ain't true, as has been suggested elseplace, that Obama and his accomplices have been letting some oil company - the oil company that cheated and lied its way to the biggest environmental disaster since Chernobyl - run his show. Nope. It ain't. Because ... Barack H. Obama ... is ... in ... charge.
Of course, he was clueless about the firing or reassignment or furloughing - which was it - of Liz Birnbaum, the head cheese of the Mineral Management Service, the outfit that oversees oil rig inspections. The same outfit where the inspectors were taking bribes from oil companies, or negotiating for jobs with oil companies while inspecting their rigs, or watching porn, or sticking street pharmaceuticals up their noses. But Obama was quick to point out that was all Bush's fault, not his. He was probably not aware that Birnbaum was one of his appointees, not Bush's, but let's not be confused with the truth.
What's the deal? The head of the agency that really got him into this mess in the first place (he takes responsibility, you see)gets canned, or resigns ... and he has no idea?
And Ken Salazar says Birnbaum was actually offered 'another post'. One presumes this post was being in charge of collecting the golf balls from the Howling Winds, Montana, golf course, for use in Obama's next Big Try: "The Junk Shot". That is the one where Obama orders BP (since he is 'in charge') to shoot a bunch of used golf balls and other crap into the well.
Anyway ... today he will be down in the Gulf, looking serious, looking ... "In Charge". And pretty much clueless.
Anyone want to bet he'll have Carville and Brazile whispering sweet nothings in his ear?
Counter-terrorism advisor defends Jihad as a legitimate Islamic tenet
The president's top counterterrorism adviser on Wednesday called jihad a "legitimate tenet of Islam," arguing that the term "jihadists" should not be used to describe America's enemies.
During a speech at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, John Brennan described violent extremists as victims of "political, economic and social forces," but said that those plotting attacks on the United States should not be described in "religious terms."
"Victims"? Osama bin Laden is a ... "victim"? Islamic fundamentalists are not motivated by religion?
Is this really the philosophy of the government, the administration, that we rely upon for our 'common defense'?
Like, wowsers. What's Obama going to do next? Appoint Ward Churchill to replace Dennis Blair?
And now James Carville, Democratic Party super-strategist, is back-pedaling from this:
and tap-dancing on his criticism of Team Obama's inability to deal with the crisis. He thinks "... you're going to see some real action' once the president sees the oiled coast.
Well, gosh, I hope Obama's little side trip to Louisiana doesn't take too much time away from his fund-raising, campaigning, and vacationing.
You'll notice that Obama is not going to Arlington on Memorial Day. He's going to be too busy vacationing in Chicago for such trivialities.
Meanwhile, Joe Sestak is still playing cutsie over his earlier claim that he had been offered a bribe - I mean 'a job', perhaps Secretary of the Navy - if he would just drop out of the Pennsylvania primary and let Specter have it.
Having made the statement, Sestak is now being cutely disingenuous and refusing to comment further; the White House attorneys, having reviewed the White House involvement, say nothing 'inappropriate' happened; Charles Krauthammer is still snickering over the idea of White House attorneys reviewing White House shenanigans for ethics violations; CongressClowns on both sides of the aisle are calling for a Special Prosecutor to investigate; Eric Holder is doing his best Stonewall Jackson imitation ...
The Sestak Stonewall
Team Obama: Bringing us 'Hope and Change'.
"I guess I'm just slow and dumb."
That sums it up.
Well, our beloved President is tearing himself away from his fundraisers, where he has been busy demonstrating his 'post-partisan' vision:
"The day has passed when I expected this to be a full partnership."
Yeah. The Federal government ceased to be a bi-partisan 'partnership' on Inauguration Day 2009. What Obama means by 'post-partisanship' is 'uni-partisanship'.
So Obama is busy running around raising money for his accomplices rather than taking on his Katrina.
And you thought Bush was in la-la land back then?
Obama stole Truman's thing about 'the buck stops here' ... yep. It sure does. It just goes into the pockets of Team Obama's re-election crew.
Meanwhile ... James Carville is vapor-locking, a couple or three parish presidents are so angry they are incoherent, Bobby Jindal is certainly giving the appearance of getting something done ... Rand Paul is defending BP and telling anyone who will listen that government needs to stay out of private business ... and Anderson Cooper is pointing out that there are miles of oil along the Lousiana wetlands ... and no sign at all of Team Obama.
On that Rand Paul thing ... can you imagine what BP and the rest of 'em would be doing if there were no government inspections and safety requirements at all? Can you imagine?
And on that government thing ... once the government decides to stick its nose into private business - safety inspections on oil rigs coming immediately to mind - then the government bears as much responsibility as does BP. Obama seems to have missed that. Meanwhile, we are finding that Obama's inspectors - he is, after all, taking responsibility, isn't he - were off taking bribes from oil companies, doing inspections while negotiating for jobs with the inspectees, sitting on their asses watching porn on your dime and mine, and generally having a high old time.
When are the heads going to roll? Might as well be now; they ain't doing much else.
At a recent White House meeting on the oil spill, the president reportedly snapped, "just plug the damn hole."
"Obviously he's frustrated as the rest of the people are, particularly along the Coast," White House energy adviser Carol Browner told Fox News. "We want this thing to shut down."
Why do I think he is more concerned about his political image more than anything else? It wasn't a Big Deal until his blame game with BP no longer deflected the anger. It turns out Obama's administration is about as inept as George Bush's, and BP is focusing the spotlight on that.
Anyone who has been around wetlands - be they in Louisiana or eastern North Carolina - understood immediately what a major oil spill means.
But Obama? Rahm Emanuel? Dave Axelrod?
The fellow they have in charge of directing the Coast Guard response down there describes himself as 'slow and dumb', when answering questions about the ineffectiveness of that response.
Yuk yuk yuk. "I guess I'm just slow and dumb." Yuk yuk yuk.
Why is he still there?
And where is the Colorado Congressional delegation in all this? It's a national disaster. There are millions upon millions of gallons of crude oil in the Gulf of Mexico. There are thousands upon thousands of gallons of toxic dispersants in the Gulf of Mexico.
The people along the Gulf Coast are well and truly screwed ... and what we get from Obama's Man on the Scene? "I guess I'm just slow and dumb".
Wait til that mess gets into the Gulf Stream and shoots up the Atlantic seaboard from the Florida Keys to Cape Hatteras.
A third of the country's going to be on welfare.
You think not?
Start looking at the economic chain reaction from this.
Those Inside-the-Beltway political opportunists just see this whole mess as an interference with their political party games. It was no Big Deal until they started taking the political heat. What do they care about about a bunch of shrimp? They can always have it sent in from Taiwan, as an exercise for that New World Order of Obama's. They can send out for it, kind of like pizza. And they can always go see a pelican and other waterbirds in the National Zoo. That would save them a trip to Louisiana.
What a bunch of pathetic losers.
All of them.
Does that mean Arizona? Does that mean Texas? Does that mean Califas?
What does it mean?
Why is he sending them? His Secretary of Homeland Security said last month that the US--Mexico border 'is as secure as it has ever been'.
Janet Napolitano is quoted in the LA Times as so stating.
And Obama, Napolitano, Holder, Pelosi, Biden, and all the rest of the Obamanian henchmen have been going on about how racist the Arizona immigration statute is.
So why is he sending 1200 troops to 'the southwest border'? What are they going to do? Support work, so as to release more agents to engage in racial profiling?
We here at Blogger Central suspect that what Obama is doing is uprooting 1200 National Guardsmen - and their families - so that he can cover his political backside by demonstrating that he 'cares' about illegal immigration. Remember, the Guardsmen have been rotating into Afghanistan and Iraq continuously.
Now, Obama is using them as political pawns. Having pandered to the Mexicans and the Latino vote in the US, he is now trying to pander to We the Citizens.
"Mr. D'Annunzio has disqualified himself by his background, his record and his behavior," said Tom Fetzer, North Carolina's Republican Party chairman. He said the GOP embraces the tea party but doesn't believe a person with such a checkered past should be the party's nominee.
In Hoke County divorce records, his wife said in 1995 that D'Annunzio had claimed to be the Messiah, had traveled to New Jersey to raise his stepfather from the dead, believed God would drop a 1,000-mile high pyramid as the New Jerusalem on Greenland and found the Ark of the Covenant in Arizona. A doctor's evaluation the following month said D'Annunzio used marijuana almost daily, had been living with another woman for several months, had once been in drug treatment for heroin dependence and was jailed a couple times as a teenager.
The doctor concluded that his religious beliefs were not delusional. A judge wrote in a child support ruling a few years later that D'Annunzio was a self-described "religious zealot" who believed the government was the "Antichrist." The judge said he was willfully failing to make child support payments.
I dunno why the GOP is trying to derail this guy. Seems to me he'd be right at home with the Otero County Republican Party conspiracy theory.
Obama presses for New World Order at West Point
Yeah, I'll bet that was a real motivator for the about-to-be-commissioned second lieutenants.
But wait! There's more! It seems that Joltin' Joe Biden, our beloved Vice President, was busy laying the foundation for that New World Order on his recent trip to Europe:
Biden visits Brussels
The U.S. vice president, opening his address in Belgium, argued that Brussels -- considering its rich history and abundance of international institutions -- could well be the "capital of the free world."
He suggested that Washington, D.C., his home, is undeserving of that title -- notwithstanding its wealth of global organizations and the countless international summits that take place there.
"As you probably know, some American politicians and American journalists refer to Washington, D.C. as the 'capital of the free world,'" Biden said. "But it seems to me that in this great city, which boasts 1,000 years of history and which serves as the capital of Belgium, the home of the European Union, and the headquarters for NATO, this city has its own legitimate claim to that title."
Here's a pretty good essay by Michael Goodwin on Obama's New World Order:
Heckuva job, Barack!
If George W. Bush's "cowboy diplomacy" was to blame for the predicament Obama inherited, who is to blame for this new world order? It's not Bush's fault that Turkey and Brazil are taking Iran's side and giving it cover to get nukes. It happened on Obama's watch because of his policies.
That was a defining moment, as was the visit of Mexican President Felipe Calderon. He blasted Arizona's anti-illegal immigrant bill as "discriminatory" and demanded Obama do something about it.
Did our president defend his fellow Americans? Nah. He simply offered that he'd like to do what Calderon demanded, but "I don't have 60 votes in the Senate."
The outrage was compounded when Democrats in Congress gave Calderon a standing ovation after he repeated his denunciation at the Capitol. It was a shocking display of anti-Americanism of the kind routine in Mexico City, but wholly inappropriate in the halls of Washington.
I'm surprised nobody thought to burn an American flag.
"Oh my God -- it's so thick!" exclaimed Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Lisa Jackson who toured delicate coastal wetlands that have been invaded by the black and orange crude.
For 34 days the BP well has been dumping hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of barrels of crude oil into the Gulf of Mexico.
For 34 days we have watched BP's inept attempts to stop the flow of oil, while Obama and Ken Salazar have postured, pandered, made useless threats about 'keeping the boot on the neck of BP' and threatening to 'push BP aside'.
And for 34 days our friends and neighbors in southern Louisiana have watched BP's inept attempts to stop the flow of oil, and waited for the mess to come ashore and kill the wetlands, and their jobs, and their way of life. Actually, they haven't been 'waiting' for that; they've been waiting for things like permits for dike construction from the Corps of Engineers. The Corps, you see, has to do environmental impact studies of those dikes. I wonder if they are doing environmental impact studies of the oil's effect on the wetlands.
And Lisa Jackson, the moron who is Obama's 'environmental chief' couldn't even find out what crude looks like. She had 34 days to come up with something reasonably intelligent, if not useful ...
... and all she can do is pull a Valley Girl imitation. All that was missing was the 'gag me with a spoon', as in (squeal) "OMG! It's like, you know, like, so THICK! Gag me with a spoon! How, like, you know, yucky poo is this!"
Team Obama. In the Wiener's Circle.
That'd be Ken Salazar, our former beloved senator, and currently Secretary of the Interior.
Hey Ken. You obviously haven't noticed, but they obviously aren't doing what they are supposed to be doing. Even so, I'd like to know what Ken and his friends are going to do, short of nationalize BP so as to steal their machinery and people - because the Federal government has no technology to deal with this spill, nor the people to operate it. But most important ... if Ken and friends push BP out of the way and take over, then Ken and friends - and Barack H. Obama - own that problem. Does anyone really think they have the stones to do that?
BP does seem to be in high whine mode. In fact, one of the reasons Obama and his accomplices are dithering so much is that BP is feeding them the same line of crap that is so familiar to the Obamanians, since they spew it themselves like a BP oil spill. So they're locked into an endless loop. They ask questions of BP, BP stonewalls 'em with garbage that sounds like it might have been written by an Obama speechwriter, and they go into dither mode.
And then we have Robert Dudley, a sniveling whiner that really has missed his calling; he should be a Democratic Party 'political operative':
"All of us at BP are trying to solve the problem," Robert Dudley said on CNN's "State of the Union." "... We've been open about what we're doing."
... Dudley’s reaction was, “Hmm … well, all of us at BP are trying to solve the problem. Those words hurt a little bit because we’ve been open about what we’re doing, and what we’re doing is certainly no secret, we’ve had direct oversight and involvement from government agencies from the very first hours afterwards.”
"Nobody's more devastated ..."
Oh, get real, Dudley. You're sitting there in your suit on the telly sniveling about your hurt feelings and how 'no one is more devastated ...".
Sounds to me like we should put you in a room with Parish President Craig Taffaro and let you look him in the eye and feed him those lines.
And then Rand Paul can advise Taffaro, "Well, accidents happen ...".
Boy howdy, but these characters sure do deserve each other.
"They're [BP] not getting the job done," Reid told Gibbs. "Does the government just stand there as a spectator and hope for the best?"
"Chip, Chip, there's nothing that would denote that the federal government has stood there and hoped for the best," Gibbs said.
['Chip, Chip', Gibbs said. You can almost see the trademark little shake of head, the little bit of condescending exasperation with Reid, a benighted ignoramus who just isn't in tune with the elitist left that is running the country.]
Gibbs says the Obama administration has been aggressive, prodding BP and "asking" it for more data and information.
"Why don't you order them to do it rather than ask them to do that?" Reid asked.
"Because you can't do that from a private company," Gibbs said.
"You took over AIG," one reporter said.
"Well we -- the company is largely in receivership," Gibbs said.
Well, Bob, is it in receivership or not? That's kind of like saying someone is pretty much pregnant. Or pretty much has a dose of the clap.
Which is it, Giggles? And what about the auto manufacturers?
First, we have James Carville, who although originally was a Hillaryman, became an Obamanian after Obama and Hillary slashed and burned each other in the primary before becoming political lovemates in the ... secondary?
Heeeeeeere's Jimbo to Anderson Cooper this weekend:
"They are risking everything by this 'go along with BP' strategy they have that seems like, lackadaisical on this.
"They seem like they're inconvenienced by this, this is some giant thing getting in their way and somehow or another, if you let BP handle it, it'll all go away. It's not going away. It's growing out there. It is a disaster of the first magnitude, and they've got to go to Plan B."
For once I agree with Carville; it is indeed a disaster of the first magnitude. But we can't really see it. We can't see that sea of oil that BP's dispersants have floating under the surface of the Gulf. We don't even know for sure how much oil is in the Gulf, and I ain't talking about still in the ground. We do know that however much there is, it's a lot.
And the Obamanian administration just stands around making authoritative noises. This really makes George Bush and "Brownie" look like small potatoes ... but since people really can't see it, they don't ... well ... see it. You see.
And then, Chris Matthews, he of the tingles up the leg, the fellow who licks his lips and quivers ecstatically whenever Obama Speaks (we can only wonder what would happen if Obama appeared, with the "sun glistening off his chiseled pecs", on Matthew's uberliberal MSNBC lovefest):
[Obama's response to the oil spill] "The President scares me. He's been acting a little like a Vatican Observer here. When is he actually going to do something? And I worry; I know he doesn't want to take ownership of it. I know politics. He said the minute he says, 'I'm in charge,' he takes the blame, but somebody has to. It's in our interest."
Like Galen, I am wondering what that 'Vatican Observer' thing means. But this was on the Jay Leno show.
And then ... Donna Brazile. You remember Donna Brazile, on Inauguration Day. She was up there on the platform. Remember those blue blankets that were handed out, to help keep participants and observers warm. It seems that Obama left his when he left the platform. So Brazile latched onto Obama's blanket like it was the Shroud of Turin, and later gushed about it to Charlie Gibson of ABC when he tweaked her about taking it:
"We have a black president. This is free."
Uh huh. Since then, Brazile, a professional Democratic strategist, has been guzzling Obama's purple Kool-Aid like it was water. But here's what she had to say over on ABC's 'This Week':
"One of the problems I have with the [Obama] administration is that they're not tough enough. They are waiting for BP to say, 'oh, we've got a new plan to stop the oil leak.' They need to stop it, contain it, clean it up, and try to help us conserve our coastal wetlands."
Whatever happened to all those whitewashings and excuses and rationalizations for all of the Obamanian Chikaga Way politics?
and scroll to the bottom of the page, the last three entries under "Events".
These galleries do not include Leece's shots, which she took from a different perspective. More on that later this week
First, he had that interview with Rachel Maddow. Now, a lot of people think Maddow is a leftie liberal whackjob, and generally, they'd be correct. She is a far left version of Glen Beck.
But in her interview with Paul, she asked good questions, and Paul came up lacking. For example, as everyone in the western world must know by now, he did not do well with this one:
Do you think that a private business has the right to say we don't serve black people?
Paul dissembled greatly, tap-danced around, and provided no clear answer, other than to indicate that he didn't think the government should be involved with private business.
Well. That also explains Paul's rather interesting views on BP and the oil spill, too. He seems to think that 'accidents will happen' and well, gosh, BP is saying they'll pay for the spill cleanup. Well, he's right, to a point; accidents will happen. But here's the deal. Why did this one happen? Was it really an unforeseeable fiasco? Or was it because of shortcutting those pesky government safety regulations (government sticking its nose into private business) or some other bit of culpable negligence? Does Paul think that BP would pay for that cleanup if the government weren't holding a Big Legal Stick? Is he that naive? Does he think we are?
But he does have a point when he takes Obama and his henchmen to task for their Hugo Chavezian 'boot on the neck' of BP.
If the government is going to stick its nose into private business in the form of compliance with government-mandated safety requirement, then the government assumes a responsibility as well.
How about it, Ken Salazar? When will we be seeing your resignation?
I don't much care for unions, but people like Rand Paul are why we wear that union-made albatross around our necks today. Without unions putting the leash on the likes of Rand Paul, all we unwashed masses would still be owing our souls to a company store. But whereas unions once served a useful purpose, the pendulum has swung so far in the opposite direction that now unions are one of the main reasons why jobs are being shipped overseas; why We the People had to bail out the American automakers. By the way, UAW workers are not government employees sucking at the public tit; they are private sector employees, who having driven their companies into the ground, now expect the government to bail them out.
And Rand Paul would, it would seem, love to take us back to the days of the Molly Maguires, where that pesky government minded its own business.
I wouldn't vote for that guy any more than I'd vote for his old man.
"Just to give you an idea, we have seized 75,000 guns and assault weapons in Mexico in the last three years. And more than 80 percent of those we have been able to trace came from the United States — from the United States."
That's a quote from his speech.
Note that he did not say that 80% of the guns came from the United States. He said that 80% of the guns they have been able to trace came from the United States. You may not have noticed that. You weren't supposed to. You were supposed to link that "75,000" with that "80%" and "United States". And then you were supposed to wring your hands in support of a resurrection of the so-called 'assault weapons' ban.
But you do see the difference, don't you, in what Calderon said and what he wanted you to hear?
There is quite a bit more on this, here:
Calderon's misleading claim
The claim that the United States is the source of all those military weapons, including M16's, AK47's, RPG's, machine guns, and other highly restricted - in this country - weaponry was debunked quite some time ago.
But that isn't stopping Obama from milking it, and Calderon from milking it. If the media, who jumped on Calderon's comment like a German shorthair on a covey of quail, were really doing their jobs, they wouldn't have let him get away with it.
And in his typical 'end-run' fashion, Obama is pressuring the Senate to ratify the Organization of American States' Convention Against the Illicit Manufacture of and Trafficking in Firearms, or CIFTA.
Take a read of that to see what The Obamessiah and his accomplices are up to with the Second Amendment.
First, we had Attorney General of the United Statesz Eric Holder criticizing the Arizona immigration law.
Then we had him confessing that he hadn't even read it.
Then, we had Secretary of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano criticizing the Arizona immigration law. And then confessing that she hadn't read it, either.
But wait! There's more!
After admitting that she hadn't read it, she told John McCain that it was the kind of law she wouldn't have signed anyway.
How can she make that determination without having read it? What else is she signing or refusing to sign, as Secretary of Homeland Security, that she hasn't read?
Then we had President of the United States Barack H. Obama bad-mouthing the law, and it was clear from the ignorance of his comments that he either a) has not read the law, or b) read it but went ahead and made his ignorantly incorrect comments anyway.
And now we have John Morton, assistant secretary of homeland security for U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), saying ICE "will not necessarily process illegal immigrants referred to them by Arizona authorities."
The best way to reduce illegal immigration is through a comprehensive federal approach, he said, and not a patchwork of state laws.
Where has this guy been? On the moon? Where is the 'comprehensive Federal approach'?
Obama, Biden, Pelosi, Holden, Napolitano, the State Department ... are all so busy fawning over Calderon they can hardly swap places fast enough to plant their lips on the man's lower cheeks.
Biden and Pelosi are wearing little wristbands expressing 'solidarity' in opposition to the Arizona statute.
How about a little 'solidarity' in enforcing the nation's laws.
What's this nonsense of our elected officials expressing 'solidarity' with criminals - or as President Barack H. Obama puts it, 'law abiding illegal immigrants' - rather than the law-abiding citizens who elected them?
How about We the People exercise a little 'solidarity' by voting all of these characters out of office?
It's looking like more and more Americans are not buying into Obama's apologism and Calderonian butt-smootching.
Jan Brewer is standing her ground. I don't think Obama is accustomed to that. Here's a governor that he cannot cow, and he is in no position to throw her under the bus. Perhaps he should do that with Eric Holder and Janet Napolitano. They aren't much use anyway.
And as we are seeing, Obama is not much use to Arizona. Or the rest of the country, for that matter.
Central Falls, Rhode Island, unable to make good on all those union contracts and other debt forms, has gone into receivership. A kind of bankruptcy.
It's the easy way out:
"You’re getting rid of all the problems that have been created for generations, just by filing for receivership,” said Warwick Mayor Scott Avedisian, adding that he would never support the move for his city. “If you can wipe out an entire generation of contracts, and if Central Falls gets away with that, then what would be the incentive for other communities not to do the same?”
Well, that's one way of dealing with the likes of Obama's SEIU purple-shirted thugs and their fat union contracts.
I wonder if some day the entire nation will go that way. Obama seems bent on taking us there, don't you think?
As Mexican President Felipe Calderon ripped Arizona's new law clamping down on illegal immigrants in front of Congress on Thursday, Democrats and White House officials rose to their feet to cheer, including Attorney General Eric Holder and Homeland Security Janet Napolitano -- two officials who have confessed to not even reading the law.
And that isn't sitting well with officials from states along the border.
"It was extremely disappointing to have a foreign head of state on the floor of the U.S. Congress exhibiting willful ignorance" over the new law, Arizona House Speaker Kirk Adams told Fox News.
"But I'll tell you what's even more galling is to have members of the White House staff standing and applauding something that is absolutely wrong," he said. "Arizona's law does not introduce racial profiling. Quite the contrary."Calderon is as ignorant as is Obama and the rest of his accomplices. But that isn't stopping them from kissing Calderon's ass while he shoves America's nose into a pile of mojado crap.
Far from it. They ate it up. Every last spoonful.
These people are beyond disgusting.
And Calderon is also claiming - falsely - that his homegrown drug thugs are getting their 'assault weapons' from this country - a statement not supported by fact. The cartels are using military weapons, which come from the world-wide black market for such weapons. M16's, AK-47's, heavier machine guns, grenades, RPG's ... these are all very tightly controlled in the United States. The source of those things is not from up Norte.
So Calderon wants tighter gun laws here. He wants the so-called 'assault weapon' ban reinstituted.
Yet ... it is far more difficult in Mexico for private citizens to own firearms than here in the US. Mexico has far stricter gun control than the US.
Yep. Gun control really helps, doesn't it.
Calderon and Obama. A pair of jokers.
Once again Obama has demonstrated his arrogance and contempt for We the People. He thinks we're too stupid to do a little research. He thinks he can just spew forth stupidities and inanities, as he and his accomplices have been doing over 1070, and we're going to suck it right up simply because ... He is the One.
Here we go:Mexico repeatedly has been cited by human rights groups for abusing or turning a blind eye to the abuse of migrants from Central America. Until recently, Mexican law made illegal immigration a criminal offense -- anyone arrested for the violation could be fined, imprisoned for up to two years and deported. Mexican lawmakers changed that in 2008 to make illegal immigration a civil violation like it is in the United States, but [Mexico's] law still reads an awful lot like Arizona's.
Arizona's policy, which Calderon derided on Wednesday as "discriminatory," requires law enforcement to try to determine the immigration status of anyone they suspect of being an illegal immigrant -- provided they are already in contact with that person. They can't randomly stop people and demand papers and the law prohibits racial profiling.
The Mexican law also states that law enforcement officials are "required to demand that foreigners prove their legal presence in the country before attending to any issues."
Lying, obfuscating hypocrites. That's our president; that's the Mexican president; that's Obama's cabinet.
That's Obama's Department of Injustice; that's Obama's State Department.
Throw 'em all out.
After "skipping merrily" with the kids, Michelle Obama was treated to a Question by one of the kids:
The student told Mrs. Obama that her mother said the president was trying to put away everyone who did not have papers, apparently referring to the recently-signed Arizona law that allows law enforcement officials to detain anyone suspected of being in the country illegally and requires individuals to carry proof of citizenship or valid immigration documents.
Even that excerpt is inaccurate since the law does not 'require' citizens to carry proof of anything ... and non-citizens, legally here, have always been required to carry documentados.
But we digress ... we all know that far from trying to 'put away' everyone who does not have papers, BarryO is really trying to redefine the term 'law-abiding'.
Speaking of digression ... here's a story illustrating why carrying ID can be a good thing:
Once upon a time we all went to a bar fight down there across from Quickee's on 3rd Street. In the course of 'interfacing' with the participants and spectators, we did the usual thing with the usual suspects. We asked for ID and called 'em all in to dispatch for warrants and so on.
One of our stalwarts came back with a warrant out of Denver. The description was dead on, the DOB was a little off but that isn't - believe it or not - unusual in these types of 'interactions', and a number of tattoos were in the right places and described pretty much right on.
"But it's my primo, my cousin" the fellow protested. Umhmmmm ... sure. How many times do you think that story's been milked?
So he was shipped off to Denver County jail, where the jailers couldn't tell the difference between this guy and his cousin by photograph or description ... and had to finally rely on fingerprint analysis.
Later on the lad proudly showed me his State of Colorado ID card, which helped considerably in preventing such misfortunes.
Citizens in Colorado are not required to carry identification. They aren't. Take a look at 16-3-103, CRS, "Stopping of suspect". For arrests, see 16-3-102, CRS. Note the use of 'reasonable suspicion' and 'probable cause'. Arizona's laws include the same phrases. It has to do with those Constitution and 4th Amendment thingies.
But you can see where sometimes, an ID card can be a good thing.
Note also that the 'interaction' described above was lawful; we were 'interacting' for a legitimate reason. It's called a "Terry stop", or in Colorado sometimes a "Stone stop", based on case law.
You'd think our Constitutional scholar in the Orchid Office would know about that.
A new political strategy?
Wherein he notes:
Failure by members of President Obama’s administration to read the four page text of Arizona's law is no a small matter, since some on his team managed to create quite a stir in various appearances on Sunday talk shows by bringing up concerns about racial profiling and racism.
Take, for example, Ms. Napolitano's warning on "This Week" on May 2: "Unfortunately, I think it [the law] does and can invite racial profiling." If these various "news" shows had been doing their job, they would have challenged Napolitano and other officials on these claims. Even just reading parts of the law -- verbatim -- to Ms. Napolitano or other administration officials during their appearance on the program would have been enough to force them to admit their ignorance.
... One gets a sneaking suspicion that the administration might just be feigning ignorance about the law rather than admitting to knowingly making outrageous statements about racism ...
Another one of those tinfoil hat conspiracy theories, or just a reasonable view?
It reminds me of the old saw about the CEO of a corporation who told his account managers, "When you're at lunch with our clients, feel free to drink as much as you like, so long as it is not vodka."
When one of the account managers asked why, the CEO said - "I'd rather our clients smell the booze and think you drunk rather than simply stupid."
In the case of Obama's accomplices - and Obama himself for that matter - perhaps they would rather we thought them simply stupid rather than simply liars. For if they read the law, and went ahead with their ignorant comments, then they are indeed liars.
But then, if you consider illegal aliens to be 'law abiding persons', I guess anything goes.
Please see the article:
Kalamazoo and Obama too
"We're examining any implications especially for civil rights because in the United States of America, no law abiding person -- be they an American citizen, illegal immigrant, or a visitor or tourist from Mexico -- should ever be subject to suspicion simply because of what they look like."
Please tell me how an illegal immigrant - one who is in the country in violation of US federal law - is a "law abiding person."
That ignorance did not stop them from roundly criticizing the statute and making preposterous comments about how it allows police officers to stop people for no reason other than skin color.
Obama has made similarly asinine statements.
And back on Cinco de Mayo, that farce of 'Mexican' holiday, Andrew Romanov made similarly asinine statements.
First: "I am not a politician."
Oh puh-leeze. The man is a professional politician. It's what he does.
Second: His criticisms of the Arizona law were as ill-informed as those of Holder, Napolitano, and Obama.
His ignorance resonated well with the local population, which is about half Hispanic.
Andrew Romanov, professional politician, professional panderer. He'll fit in well with the Washington crowd.
He also is fond of that "Let me be crystal clear ..." before he obfuscates with his BS and self-serving drivel.
Arlen Specter got the boot yesterday, despite Joltin' Joe Biden's characterization of Specter as "... one of the most principled guys I have ever known ...". Our beloved Veep said that, despite Specter clearly being a weasel of an opportunist, a waffler, and a pathetic whiner. Wayda go, Joltin' Joe ... that says a lot about your principles ... if we can find them to compare.
The Obamessiah stayed away from Pennsylvania, instead choosing to make a whistle stop in Ohio. He doesn't want the Specter Stench sticking to him, but after that "I love Arlen Specter" nonsense, I'm afraid The One is up to his neck in the stink.
Tea Party candidate Rand Paul won in Kentucky. That's a 'teachable moment' not only for Obama and his accomplices, but also for the Republican machine. Is anyone listening?
DeeCee Morrison seems to have 'spoiled' Blanche Lincoln's run for re-election in Arkansas, so now a run-off is necessary. None of the candidates got at least fifty percent of the vote.
And the Dems managed to hold on to Murtha's seat in Pennsylvania, but only until November.
Hey, Mr. President ... is this 'teachable moment' crystal clear to you?
# In Connecticut, U.S. Sen. Chris Dodd (D-Ct) became so toxic (even though he is still beloved among Democrats on Capitol Hill in Washington) that earlier this year he had to announce his retirement rather than suffer the ignominy of losing the seat he has held since 1980.
# With Dodd running for re-election, Connecticut was, at worst, a toss-up and, at best, leaning Republican. When Dodd bailed, the Democratic Attorney General Richard Blumenthal announced he would run for the U.S. Senate and moved the race back into the Democrat's column.
# There is a theory in politics that the best attack is a third-party attack. The best third party is a grand jury. The next best third party is the New York Times.
# The second-best attacker attacked Blumenthal by investigating his statements, inferences, suggestions, insinuations, and hints that he had served in Vietnam as a member of the United States Marine Corps.
# Turns out that Blumenthal, in his words, "misspoke." In my words, "lied."
# The NY Times found and reported example after example where Blumenthal either stated, or implied, he had served in the war zone. Forty-seven thousand Americans were killed in combat in Vietnam, another 153,000 were wounded. There are 7.3 million living Vietnam veterans.
# Richard Blumenthal is not one of them because he was never there.
# The closest Blumenthal ever got to Vietnam was the Washington, DC armory where, as a member of the Marine Corps Reserves, he wrapped toys-for-tots presents.
# Let me tell you a story.
# In Washington, at many major dinners, the band will play a medley of services marches. The order is generally Army, Navy, Air Force, Coast Guard, with the finale always the Marine Corps hymn.
# The tradition is for people who have military experience to stand when the march of their service is being played.
# As you may already know, during the Vietnam era I had a student deferment for about 12 minutes before I flunked out of You-Know-Where, Marietta, Ohio 45750 and got thrown into the deep end of the draft pool.
# I was called to take my draft physical which, in spite of my best efforts feigning facial tics, a weak stomach, a variety of speech impediments, and a general inability to focus on even the simplest tasks ("Stand in that line"); I passed, and I was determined to be 1-A. Stamped U.S. Prime Military Beef.
# The second I had returned home to New Jersey, I had signed up at the local National Guard armory to get on the waiting list. I was called to join the New Jersey Army National Guard mere seconds before I was drafted.
# Over the next six years, splitting my time between the New Jersey and Ohio National Guard, I successfully avoided service in Vietnam because my units were not deployed.
# As the decades have gone by, a sense of buyer's remorse took hold because Vietnam was the seminal event for males of my generation and I not only missed it, I had used fancy footwork to avoid it.
# At those dinners, when those bands played those marching tunes, I kept my seat. I never stood during the Army march because I had not earned the right.
# Then came six months Iraq. I got e-mails from guys my age, who had also missed serving in Vietnam, asking if they could come and work with, for, or around me. They understood as I did, that I had been given the opportunity to at least partially repay a 30-year-old debt to my country and I had taken it.
# They also understood they would likely never have the chance to pay down on their debt to America.
# Now, and ever since I returned, when the band plays "As the Army Goes Rolling Along" I stand. Not for myself, but in honor of the men and women of Army Reserve and National Guard who have been deployed time and time again to Bosnia, Iraq, Afghanistan and God knows where else.
# Have I now earned the right to be offended by someone like Richard Blumenthal who pretends to have served in a war zone when he had not? No.
# Nevertheless, I am.
# On the Secret Decoder Ring page today: A link to the NY Times investigation into Blumenthal's lies about his military service. Also a really geeky Mullfoto and a silly Catchy Caption of the Day.
Another heroic weasel
This guy is a piece of work.
He ... 'mis-spoke'?
No. He lied. He lied through his teeth. He's a liar.
Listening to this sniveling, self-serving piece of crap try to obfuscate and lie his way out of his phony claims was like listening to Bill Clinton's "I did not have sex with that woman", while waggling his finger in the face of America. It was like listening to Bill Clinton try to redefine 'is'.
It was the same self-serving, condescending arrogance.
I will not allow ...
“But I will not allow anyone to take a few misplaced words and impugn my record of service to our country.”
What record? A few months at Parris Island and six years in the reserves?
Which brings us to an interesting point.
The talking heads are making much of the fact that Dickie had five deferments.
So what. If they crucified everyone who took deferments back then, they'd have no room on Calvary for Christ and the two thieves. That's the way it was. I find it interesting that so many people don't remember so many people desperately trying to find a way to get out of going Over There.
I remember guys lining up down the block to get into the Coast Guard, "... because the Coasties ain't goin' to Veeyit Nam."
But they did. Ooops. The Brown Water Navy, it was called.
It wasn't any different for deferments.
So what if Dickie had 'em for school.
And so what if he was in the reserves rather than the regulars. And so what if he served his six months active duty at Parris Island.
He wasn't the only one by a long shot. So what. He wore the uniform, and he served, and so far as I can see, he served honorably. When you start that comparing service thing, you cheapen the service of the millions who served during war and peace, who never heard a shot fired in anger.
But they served the nation well.
So did Dickie. Back then.
He should have kept his mouth shut and left it at that. Now he has screwed the pooch.
The Rev. Jeremiah Wright, Barack Obama's controversial former pastor, said in a letter obtained by The Associated Press that he is "toxic" to the Obama administration and that the president "threw me under the bus."
In his strongest language to date about the administration's 2-year-old rift with the Chicago pastor, Wright told a group raising money for African relief that his pleas to release frozen funds for use in earthquake-ravaged Haiti would likely be ignored.
"No one in the Obama administration will respond to me, listen to me, talk to me or read anything that I write to them. I am 'toxic' in terms of the Obama administration," Wright wrote the president of Africa 6000 International earlier this year.
"I am 'radioactive,' Sir. When Obama threw me under the bus, he threw me under the bus literally!" he wrote. "Any advice that I offer is going to be taken as something to be avoided. Please understand that!"
The White House didn't respond to requests for comment Monday about Wright's remarks. Several phone messages left by the AP for Wright at the Trinity United Church of Christ, where he is listed as a pastor emeritus, were not returned. Wright's spokeswoman, his daughter Jeri Wright, did not immediately comment on the substance of the letter.
I don't know what he expected. Obama tosses people like so much trash when he perceives they are no longer of value to Him.
It's the Chikaga Way.
I really don't want to be a musician. I think I'll quit and become involved in ... oh ... interpretive dance. Yes. I'm going to prance about in pink tights with a rose in my teeth ... and you guys can all pay for my health insurance!
Thank you Nancy Pelosi, Speak of the House!
Thank the Lord we have such insightful, far-seeing visionaries leading us in Washington.
Pennsylvania's Democratic primary is tomorrow. Arlen Specter, the wishy-washy weasel who jumped the Republican ship when he figured - correctly - that he had no way of surviving a Republican primary, is now facing a loss in the Dem primary tomorrow. He is facing Congressman (PA-7) Joe Sestak, and Specter's once comfortable lead is now ... a specter of the past.
Here's hoping Pennsylvania hold's Specter's head in the political toilet for a long, long flush.
BTW ... Joe Biden says that Specter is "one of the most principled guys I have ever known."
Doesn't say much for our beloved Veep, does it.
Watch Arkansas and Kentucky for more drama tomorrow.
Don't they know how to read?
They pass bills that commit billions upon billions of tax dollars to the fiscal toilets ... without having read those bills.
And they feel free to expound upon those bills, to pontificate, as though they are filled with worldly knowledge of the cause and effect of those bills. Yet, they are clueless.
And 'clueless' best describes US Attorney General Eric Holder, who despite going on rants about the impropriety, the unconstitutionality, the unfairness, the 'un-American-ness' of the Arizona immigration law ...
has not read it.
Yup. The Attorney General of the United States, having worked himself into a lather over the law, having threatened to take it to court ...
has not read it.
He hasn't even read it.
And it's only ten pages long.
Despite repeatedly voicing concerns about Arizona's new immigration enforcement law in recent weeks and threatening to challenge it, Attorney General Eric Holder said Thursday he has not yet read the law -- which is only 10 pages long.
"I have not had a chance to -- I've glanced at it," Holder said at a House Judiciary Committee hearing when asked had he read the state law cracking down on illegal immigrants.
Holder told reporters last month that he fears the new law is subject to abuse and that the Justice Department and the Homeland Security Department are in the midst of conducting a review.
That's the only thing that explains the dumb things coming out of the mouths of our elected officials about this law.
And yes ... we know. Holder is appointed, not elected. But ... he's an Obamanian appointee. And does anyone believe that Constitutional Scholar and Lawyer Obama has read it, when he goes on about how the law allows cops to stop anyone for any reason - including, ' ... just because you have brown skin ...' and instead, plays the laughing fool over it all?
Arizona governor fires back at Obama
and it is 'crystal clear' that the president speaks from ignorance ... and highly selective ignorance at that:
Obama rips 'poorly conceived' Arizona law'
Can we all say 'panderers'?
He really doesn't want to go anywhere near it ...
... but he eventually has to. Reluctantly. Apologetically. Reluctantly and apologetically, despite all the evidence.
Well ... we're seeing a whole lot of politicians pandering to the Hispanic or Latino vote.
The Arizona law clearly does not encourage 'unconstitutional' behavior on the part of police. The law requires that the police have a legitimate reason for making a detention or stop in the first place.
The Arizona law is not going to encourage 'racial profiling' any more than any other criminal or traffic statute.
The Arizona law closely parallels Federal law. There has never been any prohibition on local cops enforcing Federal laws. But Arizona has its own, now, modeled after Federal immigration statutes. This is because the Federal government - the Congress, primarily, and the executive - have abdicated their responsibilities to We the People to keep a lid on illegal immigration.
Why? Because of the Latino vote. They gotta have it. If you clamp down on illegal immigration you lose the legitimate Latino vote.
Why? Because the Latino population generally has no problem with ignoring immigration law. Oh, it isn't a universal truth, but look at how the Los Angeles City Council has peed its collective pants in voting to boycott Arizona.
And look at how that Illinois school is crapping all over the kids to pander to the Latino vote. They claim it's for 'safety'. Yeah. It is. 'Safety' in keeping their elected positions. Illinois has a pretty sizable Hispanic population. But is it big enough to offset the additional anger over the pandering on top of everything else with which the politicians are shafting us?
Polls are showing that popular support for Arizona is growing. Yesterday polls were showing nearly 75% of Americans - citizens - support Arizona.
There's a message there, but like every other 'message', our beloved political whores aren't getting it.
Meanwhile, we have hordes of idiots running amok in LA and other cities, waving their Mexican flags; we have kids being sent home because they dared to wear tee shirts showing American flags on Cinco de Mayo; we have the Mexican government warning its citizens about Arizona - when they should be warning their citizens to get out of Mexico before they're murdered by corrupt cops and other drug lords and bandits in general.
It's time to boycott California. Who really needs a trip to Disneyland anyway? And who really needs Califas lettuce and other produce. Ditto for trips to Cozumel; ditto for anything hechoed in Mejico.
Wake up, Obama. And wake up, Brother John and the rest of your sycophantic collection of smoochbutts that make up the Colorado Congressional delegation.
How Obama is bringing real education change to Colorado
In brief, the bill would replace the current system of gaining tenure (work three years without getting fired) with a requirement for three consecutive years of teaching success. Tenure could be lost, however, based on two consecutive years of teaching failure. After that, a school district could choose not to rehire a teacher for the next school year, but if so, the teacher would be entitled to an appeals process. The appeal amendment was added yesterday, and was the price of getting the bill though the Colorado House.
Here's another view:
SB 191 and education accountability in Colorado
Just what is the intent of SB191? The Denver Post has called it the "reform bill." If this bill passes does that mean that we have reformed education in Colorado? I didn't realize that there were that many bad teachers in Colorado who have over the years brought education to the low level that it now is thought to be. And the CEA gets the blame for the low level and the Post says "the CEA is attempting to torpedo Race to the Top funding".
If the evaluation of teachers is so heavily geared to the scores of the CSAP then the CEA is only fulfilling it responsibility to the teachers to protect them from such a flawed approach. Okay. Let's change the teacher tenure law, but let's find a better way to evaluate the teacher.
The Congressional Budget Office is now telling us that ObamaCare is going to cost $115 billion - more or less - over their estimates, the estimates that the Obamanians and our friends in the Democratic Party used to shove this crap sandwich down our throats.
Here's another one: If you have health care now, through your employer, you can expect about a 1% hike in rate - because the Democrats think you should have the young adults in your family on your health insurance. Yup. It's that provision for keeping up to 26 year olds on your policy. Keep in mind this has nothing to do with young adults who are off to college. Being in school is no longer a requirement.
So you're going to get hit with the billions and billions of additional money in the form of taxes - and you've got to be a naive fool if you think 'only the rich' are going to pay for this - and you're going to get hit with a rate hike when that provision for older 'kids' goes into effect.
Somebody's gotta pay for it.
The Democrats don't seem to understand that. They just don't get it.
It ain't 'free'.
there is that pesky Hatch Act, and the Hatch Act applies to census workers.
But what do I know? I'm sure our local Democratic activists and committee members are just being ... you know ... good citizens, taking an interest in government.
But in the primary the other day, he got shown the door in no uncertain terms.
Of course, as we saw with Bob Bennett in Utah, the Republicans are telling their incumbents the same thing. Of course, Bennett standing up there and whining that the electorate can't take a chance with someone new because there's too much at stake didn't help. Of course, it's precisely because there is too much at stake that we cannot afford to keep these Clowns of Congress around any longer. Of course.
"Thank you for your service, now get the hell out and don't let the door bop you on the backside on the way."
The democratic process.
You gotta love it.
Meanwhile, about 17 Dems have jumped ship. I think that's a correct figure, after Obey bailed. About 20 Republican incumbents have also jumped.
But here's the thing. The Republicans jumped in fairly safe Republican districts. It's highly likely, even with the electorate being more or less in a bit of a rage, that Republicans will hold those seats. Just take a look at them.
OTOH, most of the Dems that jumped have done so in districts where the fight promises to be bloody and nasty. Maybe even literally.
It's going to be a very interesting process, this upcoming election cycle.
It was ... the census takers.
Among the census takers, helping - so it appeared - to organize the day's activities, were several Democrats. What might be called 'political activists', except we don't have any of those around here.
Jake Klein was there, and Diane Rikhof. What might be called 'prominent Democrats'.
So I asked Jake, "Where's the Republicans?"
He told me there were a couple of them around. Somewhere.
I kind of snickered at that. You aren't going to find a lot of Republicans out canvasing with the census takers here in Otero County. Or anywhere else for that matter.
Jake said, "The Census is bipartisan ...".
I kind of snickered at that. "No it isn't," I replied. And I went about my business.
What are the Democrats doing? The same thing they did before the last presidential election. They're getting out there and burning up shoe leather, whipping up not the vote this time, but making sure the people most likely to vote Democrat are counted. On the last election eve, Rikhof was telling me how they had been out getting felons registered. While that concept may stick in the craw a bit, the fact is, a lot of felons are eligible for re-enfranchising. And most felons are not likely to vote Republican, where they could easily be persuaded to vote Democrat. And sometimes, every vote counts. We all know the primary purpose of the census, upon which Congressional representation is based. We also know that a good bit of Federal money is doled out based on census returns. The census is very important for the redistribution of wealth that our Democrat friends are so fond of.
So are they doing anything wrong?
Absolutely not. In fact, you have to admire them for having the energy and the commitment to get out there and drum up the support, even if they have to drag it out of hiding.
I don't think our local Democrats are planting any ACORNs.
One might ask why the Republicans aren't doing the same thing. I suspect it is a combination of arrogance - after all, Otero County tends to vote Republican in the Big Elections - and a realization that they don't have anything to offer the kinds of people who hide from or ignore the census. And as most of us have figured out, the Republicans are way out of touch with We Little People. The Republicans are not my party; they have no interest in my views, my inputs ... and consequently, I have no interest in voting for them. But in my case, the same thing applies to the Democrats. So where do I go? Aye. There's the question, ain't it.
And so once again, the Democrats are working overtime to hand the Republicans their collective heads, and because they are willing to do that, more power to them.
Quite literally, more than likely, wouldn't you say?
She wrote that in response to a written question from John Conyer.
She also wrote, in a letter last year to Arlen Specter:
“Constitutional rights are a product of constitutional text as interpreted by courts and understood by the nation’s citizenry and its elected representatives. By this measure, which is the best measure I know for determining whether a constitutional right exists, there is no federal constitutional right to same-sex marriage.”
So the burning question of the moment is this:
Is that what she really believes, that there is no constitutional right to gay marriage? Or is she saying that under current law there is no such right?
Pundits across the board are going slightly nuts interpreting the statements both ways.
She also is not 'morally opposed' to capital punishment.
She may be a liberal, but she is not coming across as a liberal moonbat. In fact, some of the liberal moonbats are gnashing their teeth over the fact that she has supported positions taken by the Bush administration regarding treatment of terrorists.
But then there is that bit of whackjobbery over the Solomon Amendment, wherein she and her fellow academics got their heads handed to them by the Supreme Court.
I think these will be some very interesting confirmation hearings.
Remember his Blackberry? He didn't want to give it up, so all kinds of new security had to be set up to deal with it.
And then ...
It turns out that he might not be all that hip. He hopped, so to speak, the other day, at Hampton University. He confessed that he really doesn't know how to use all that stuff.
And he got testy over the effrontery of those who refuse to rely on Obama-approved news sources:
"And with iPods and iPads and Xboxes and PlayStations -- none of which I know how to work -- information becomes a distraction, a diversion, a form of entertainment, rather than a tool of empowerment, rather than the means of emancipation."
Going on to condemn less-than-mainstream media. So ... as long as you stick to approved Obama news sources - CNN, MSNBC, CBS, etc - you're on his Favorites list.
But wait! What about this:
He also owns an iPod, meaning that he knows how to use one -- unless he depends on the Secret Service to hit the shuffle button while he's out jogging.
He told The Associated Press after Michael Jackson died that "I still have all his stuff on my iPod." During the campaign, he revealed his playlist to Rolling Stone, which at the time included a lot of Jay-Z and Bob Dylan. And he once found the iPod a device befitting royalty. He gave one to Queen Elizabeth II as a gift when he visited London last spring.
So what's up wit dat? Does he have one or not? Does he use one or not? Is his speech just so much Obamanian BS? It seems so. But why?
And what about this:
And as for Obama's supposed distaste for video game consoles, Obama's campaign bought ad space shortly before the 2008 election in 18 video games. Anyone burning rubber through the Xbox Live version of "Need for Speed: Carbon" at the time would have come across a digital billboard telling them about early voting.
The day after Obama told Hampton University grads to watch out for technology, the White House used Flickr, Twitter, Facebook and WhiteHouse.gov to promote his nomination of Solicitor General Elena Kagan to the Supreme Court.
Methinks our beloved President speaks with his usual forked tongue ... out of both sides of his mouth.
Buried within that article we have a link to this article from the Washington Examiner:
Arizona's widely misquoted immigration law
We here at Blogger Central have been saying this all along.
And ... just because any number of talking heads - including FoxNews' Judge Napolitano, who really should know better - are claiming differently, doesn't make them right. It just makes them loud and obnoxious - and wrong.
She has endorsed Carly Fiorina as the GOP candidate as a Republican candidate as California's US Senate race.
"Carly Fiorina" rang a bell with me, and it was a dull thud of a ring. I remembered Fiorina being involved with HP, and not in a good way. So I looked it up.
During her tenure as HP CEO, the company's stock lost 60% of its value.
She is the brains (using the term pejoratively) behind the HP/Compaq merger, which was roundly criticized at the time. I remembered that. I also remember that it turned out OK, despite the gnashing of teeth by the then board of directors of HP. That board of directors has since been roundly criticized itself, the kindest term about it being 'dysfunctional'. So was Fiorina part of the HP problem, or did she have the solution but could not get past a collection of slugs on the board? That's a question that does not seem to have a clear or easy answer.
Fiorina was also listed as one of America's Twenty Worst CEO's on the Condé Nast Portfolio.Com website, yet on that same website you will find quite a few positive comments.
So is the nay-saying about Fiorina really justified? Was she that bad? Is she that bad?
Palin is getting beat up rather badly over the Fiorina Pick.
She is also getting beat up rather badly over the McCain Pick. That 'beating up' at this point seems justified, given McCain's waffling, tap-dancing, and wandering all over the right and part of the left sides of the political spectrum.
So far, we are continuing to see a serious lack of leadership within the Republican Party, and the Tea Party continues to wander rudderless across the political seas.
Meanwhile, GOP incumbent Bob Bennett, one of Utah's senators, got handed his head by the party at the state convention.
Said Bennett to the delegates during the voting rounds:
"Don't take a chance on a newcomer, there's too much at stake."
He clearly doesn't get it. We the People cannot afford to let these incumbents stay in office.
Bennett is right about one thing.
There's too much at stake.
Now, he's taking a different approach.
This is consistent with the Obama's "Chickaga Way" approach to government.
The FCC goes for the nuclear option
In its effort to imposing crippling net neutrality regulations on the Internet—an idea with very little support from the American public or Congress—the Obama administration first turned to the FCC simply to pretend Congress has given it authority to regulate.
That effort suffered a major setback when the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals emphatically smacked down the FCC’s regulatory proposals in Comcast v. FCC. President Obama and his close friend and FCC chairman Julius Genachowski, however, refuse to back down. Instead they’re escalating to the regulatory equivalent of a nuclear attack on the free-market Internet: Chairman Genachowski will announce today his intention to reclassify broadband Internet as an old-fashioned telephone system as a pretext for pervasive regulatory control.
Broadband Internet service has never been regulated like old-fashioned telephone lines -- classified as “Title II” under the Telecommunications Act. The FCC settled the matter definitively in 1998, when Clinton-appointed FCC Chairman William Kennard demolished the same reclassification arguments being made today in that year’s Report to Congress:
Our findings in this regard are reinforced by the negative policy consequences of a conclusion that Internet access services should be classed as “telecommunications” … Classifying Internet access services as telecommunications services could have significant consequences for the global development of the Internet. We recognize the unique qualities of the Internet, and do not presume that legacy regulatory frameworks are appropriately applied to it.
And where is Congress as Obama and his henchmen, his accomplices, try to do yet another end run, and screw up yet another segment of the American economy?
However ... taking another look at Standring's essay ... we see that she makes a quantum leap with the judge's ruling.
The judge says [The National Day of Prayer is unconstitutional because it is] "an inherently religious exercise that serves no secular function".
I agree. The judge is talking about a National Day of Prayer, a designated-by-the-government event with clear religious overtones. Its one saving grace all along has been that it has been 'ecumenical'. Despite that, it is clear that the more fanatical supporters of this National Day of Prayer see it as a Christian ... or at worst a Judeo-Christian celebration. There is no room for the prayers of America's non-Christian citizens. A perfect illustration of this may be found in the 'Islam is an evil religion' rant of Franklin Graham.
but Standring then goes astray ...
"To say prayer "serves no secular function" is to dismiss the fact that faith-based organizations are often among first responders to disasters, such as Hurricane Katrina or to the earthquake victims in Haiti."
The judge did not say that 'prayer serves no secular function'.
The judge said the National Day of Prayer, a government-designated-event, does not serve a secular function.
There is a big difference. Apparently this is a difficult point for "Christians" to grasp.
Standring then writes:
"Though Judge Crabb will let the issue be resolved on appeal, she respects the power of prayer when she wrote: "It bears emphasizing that a conclusion that the establishment clause prohibits the government from endorsing a religious exercise is not a judgment on the value of prayer or the millions of Americans who believe in its power."
It's also interesting to note that most of the Founders also possessed a respect for prayer ... but nonetheless, they included the Establishment Clause in the First Amendment. That's because they understood very well that government has no business designating 'prayer days'. Nor does government have any business telling anyone they cannot have a prayer day ... and government has not done that, despite Tony Bolen's rather fevered and feverishly inaccurate interpretation of Judge Crabb's ruling today at ... the National Day of Prayer event at Santa Fe Plaza. Mr. Bolen has demonstrated once again that he cannot read very well, or that he reads very selectively. That isn't a very good combination for one who claims to be a bearer of Christ's message. Whenever I hear Bolen utter a Scriptural reference, I first check to make sure my wallet's still there, and then I go take a look at a reputable source. You know, like Matthew Henry or The New Interpreter's Bible.
We'd also like to thank Pastor Skorick for once again demonstrating a sense of True Christian Love with his 'prayer' (if that's what it was) for the media. I felt like collapsing in quiveringly repentant supplitude, right then and there. I'm not sure if 'supplitude' is a word, but perhaps Bolen can run with it.
Note that the National Day of Prayer was brought back in 1952, at the height of the McCarthy Congressional witchhunts. In those days, if you didn't pray in a good Christian manner, loudly and frequently, and you didn't beat up on JW's for refusing to recite the Pledge of Allegiance, you stood a good chance of being accused of being a godless communist and lynched, figuratively if not literally, by Good Red-blooded Americans. I tend to look with considerable skepticism at any 'acts of patriotism' or 'professions of faith' coming out of those times. Patriotism that is forced upon us is worthless; faith extorted is an abomination before God.
Supporters of the NDP are fond of quoting Abe Lincoln, who wrote, among other things on the subject: "... that the awful calamity of civil war, which now desolates the land, may be but a punishment, inflicted upon us, for our presumptuous sins" ...
If you buy that line, then you have to buy the line by Pat Robertson that the Haitians brought on the earthquake themselves, as a punishment from/by God. It's the same logic and thought process. I think I will have to disagree with Abe on this one. You can do that, you know. It's called 'thinking for yourself'.
So. I think I'll skip next year's Prayer Day, despite rather nice prayers by a couple of other pastors and Debbie Hansen, and some excellent music. If I want to attend a political rally or suffer insult, or listen to mindless prattle disconnected from reality there are local 'conservative' political events I can visit.
There isn't a whole lot of "Christian love" to be seen or felt at these local prayer days.