Steve Schmidt Meet George Costanza

There came a point in George Costanzas life when he realized that every instinct he ever had was wrong. This is the world in which Steve Schmidt currently lives. Lets take a look at the tale of the tape.

Hair

Costanza- Bald

Schmidt- Bald

Employment
Costanza- Unemployed

Schmidt- Unemployed

Doesnt understand

Costanza- the Penske File

Schmidt- Math

Brilliant Ideas
Costanza- cotton baseball uniforms

Schmidt- suspending a campaign

Architect of

Costanza- Vandalay Industries

Schmidt- 5 losing campaigns

Blames his shortcomings on

Costanza- the pool

Schmidt- Sarah Palin

Holds the record for

Costanza- the game of frogger at Marios Pizza

Schmidt- anonymous leaks to left wing media

Once declared

Costanza- the "summer of George" (ended up paralyzed)

Schmidt- a Palin nomination "catastrophic" (ended up a jackass)

So it's safe to say that any and all advice from Steve Schmidt should be given the Costanza treatment for the foreseeable future. Which means whatever advice he gives, do the exact opposite.

UPDATE- Check out Texas4Palin for a photo of what Steve Schmidt has in store for himself come Nov. 17

How Dare You!!

This country fell to a new low last night when a mere Congressman spoke in defiance of Dear Leader. Yes of course this has happened in the past when a Republican president was speaking before congress, but that President was not Dear Leader. You see there are two very simple rules that come into play when you are so honored to be able to sit and listen to Dear Leader.

1) No backtalk, defiance, or disagreements with Dear Leader... for he is Dear Leader.

2) Always follow rule #1

What made last nights situation even worse was this peasant Congressman called Dear Leader a liar (his words, not mine Dear Leader) just as Dear Leader had finished calling Sarah Palin a liar. There is only person who is allowed to call people liars, get a standing ovation from his political party, and not be asked to apologize, and that is Dear Leader. How dare you Joe Wilson!

In Case You Forgot Why Republicans Had No Chance In The '08 Election

So Obama stood in front of the country and again campaigned by promising everything to everybody. He's going to magically cover tens of millions of new people without it costing us a cent. The big story coming out of tonights speech though is that Congressman Joe Wilson called him out as a liar when Obama said his plan would not cover illegal aliens. Whether you think it was right or not for him to do this, lets look at the claim. As Hot Air points out

CRS also notes that “undocumented aliens” who have a “substantial presence” in the US would be required to buy health insurance (page 4) through the exchanges in HR3200. They would also become eligible for “emergency Medicaid,” although not normal Medicaid (page 6) for up to five years.

So Obama was in fact lying. Wilson called Obama a liar literally 30 seconds after Obama had finished saying that Palin was lying (using the exact same word as Wilson, "lie") about "death panels."

Now take a guess at what John McCain did right after the speech finished? Did he:
A) call on Obama to apologize for calling Palin a liar
B) call on Wilson to apologize for calling Obama a liar
C) call on both Wilson and Obama to apologize for calling people liars

If you guessed B you were paying attention during the campaign and know exactly why Republicans didnt have a prayer. His own former running mate is trashed by his former opponent and he is silent. His former opponent is trashed and he speaks out IMMEDIATELY in his defense.

Legislature-in-Chief?

Finally! It's about damn time already!

That's all I've heard from the liberal pundits regarding President Wee-Weed drafting his own version of a health care bill.

I'm a bit perplexed that the discussion has been: "Will this help?" "Has he already lost the message and can he get it back?" Or "Will anyone tune in to hear him on the tv...again?"

Yet, no one is asking the most pertinent question: Does President Wsquared even have the legal authority to create his own bil?

No. Possibly a Chris Tucker heeeeeellll no. Perhaps a Whitney Houston "hell to the naw!" Then again I'm a strict constructionalist so de facto, I'm can't possibly have an argument here, right?

Art. I of the Constitution says, "All legislative powers herein granted shall be vested in Congress"...

So I guess the word "all" is vague and when they said it was to be "vested in Congress" that kinda/sorta/maybe meant Congress but maybe only every other leap year that ends in the number two. All other years, yeah, just make shit up.

But if someone can make the case that he does have the authority, feel free, explain. I know he's involved in the legislative process up to a point--I mean we all saw West Wing until Sorkin went apeshit on peyote, right? Deals are brokered. The executive branch does have a say, but how much? An entire bill's worth of say? I think it's an awfully big leap.

But let's assume for the sake of argument he does have the authority. I find it interesting that this President, who spent so much time railing against "George Bush" (despite what the nutroots think--he earned the title of President--try using it. Ass. But I digress...) for issuing signing statements, is applauded for drafting his own bill.

Signing statements are a controversial procedural tool, implemented first during the Reagan years to circumvent the legislative process as they are only added after Congressional debate has ended. They allow a President to approve of specific sections of a bill that's already drafted. The President can then modify those section to which he disagrees.

So what does President Wsquared think about these?

Let's visit a fun clip from the campaign trail back in May of 2008.

Questioner: When Congress offers you a bill, do you promise not to use presidential signage to get your way?

Obama: Yes...We've got a government designed by the founders so that there'd be checks and balances. We don't want a President too powerful, a Congress too powerful, or a court too powerful. Everybody's got their own role. Congresses' role is to pass legislation. The President can veto it or sign it. But what George Bush has been trying to do is part of his effort to accummulate more power in the presidency, he's been saying, well I can change what Congress passed by attaching a letter saying I don't agree with this part or that part. I'm going to choose to interpet it this way or that way. Ugh, that's not part of his power. But this part of the whole theory of George Bush--that he can make laws as he's going along. Ugh, I disagree with that. I taught the Constitution for ten years. I believe in the Constitution and I will obey the Constitution of the United States. We're not going to use signing statements as an end-run around Congress. Alright."

So to recap: signing statements used during GWB's two terms in office--bad--very bad. I'm like a constitutional scholar and stuff-so I should know, Wee Weed says. (Note: he's already backtracked on the signing statement issue himself by issuing five already since taking office).

But drafting entire legislation from 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, eh, I had to!! I prefer to keep a light touch, but you people just don't know what's good for you already? Andrea Mitchell agrees with me on that point!!

If signing statements are an end-run around Congress, what the hell is drafting an entire health care bill?

I'll put MSNBC on that task. They spent the better part of the last eight years patting themselves on the back as constitutional scholars. Keith Olbermann, I'm sure has a special comment or two on the dangers of imperialistic Presidents.

Just To Be Clear

The Obama justice department will drop charges against the Black Panthers that intimidated American citizens at polling places, but will investigate CIA interrogators that intimidated Al Qaeda terrorists??? I guess when you're the President of the United States, with an overwhelming majority in the House and Senate and you're getting your ass kicked on health care by a lady with a facebook account you'll do anything to change the subject, including damaging this countries national security.

Wake Up With Some Reagan Jokes

This lady will give you nightmares

There has never been a person on earth who has deserved to have their breath stolen by a cat more than this lady. Was anybody else rooting for that tiger to come alive and bite her hand off???

In all seriousness, how much would you have to be paid to spend a night in the same house with this lady? If you make it out of there without being cooked and eaten, chalk it up as a win.

Clip of the day

h/t hotair

You might want to rethink that post office analogy Barack

Todays Wall St Journal tells you why.

Whatever possessed President Obama to mention the travails of the post office while discussing health care the other day, his timing was certainly apt. The Postal Service is headed toward a loss of $7 billion this year and another $7 billion in 2010. Naturally, Congress is planning another bailout rather than the kind of reform that would recognize how technology has transformed modern communications.

Not that the Postal Service has ever been a paragon of efficiency. If the cost of a postage stamp had risen at merely the rate of inflation since 1950 when a stamp cost two cents, today you could send a first-class letter for 30 cents. Instead the cost rose in May to 44 cents from 42 cents.

These higher prices have corresponded with worsening service. The mailman used to deliver twice a day in urban areas, but now Postal Service Chief Executive John Potter says he wants to stop Saturday service to reduce costs. No private business in America could continually raise prices, lose billions of dollars and then hope to win back customers by promising poorer service.

Krauthammer?!?!?!

Let me first start by saying I really like reading Charles Krauthammers columns. He is one of the few "intellectual" Beltway insiders that will actually rip into Obama. That being said, his column today is as confusing as ever. It of course has to do with "death panels." Lets break it down.

We might start by asking Sarah Palin to leave the room. I've got nothing against her. She's a remarkable political talent. But there are no "death panels" in the Democratic health care bills, and to say that there are is to debase the debate.

Um Charles, you're a day late and a dollar short on this. Sarah Palin left the room on this provision over a week ago. Granted she left with something so many Beltway Republicans have never tasted, victory. Someone should let Charles know that this provision that he is so concerned about has already been stripped from the bill. To paraphrase Col. Jessup, he should "probably just thank Sarah Palin and be on his way. Either way, why does Krauthammer give a damn about a provision that is no longer in the bill!" Is it only political columnists that write about things that are already decided as if they hadn't come to a conclusion yet? Are there any sports articles in todays paper about last years Super Bowl saying that Roethlisberger should've sat out the game even though his team won and he was the MVP? The games over Charles. We actually won this battle.

The other problem with Krauthammers column is that it follows the same old tired elite Republican script. Let me criticize someone on the right so I can be taken more serious. He'll show how reasoned and well mannered he is. Nevermind that his column says it's ridiculuous to call that provision a death panel, yet the rest of his article is about how that provision could pressure people into choosing death over life. This script gets boring after awhile.

Finally lets once again look at Palins actual statement on death panels in context.

The America I know and love is not one in which my parents or my baby with Down Syndrome will have to stand in front of Obama’s “death panel” so his bureaucrats can decide, based on a subjective judgment of their “level of productivity in society,” whether they are worthy of health care.

Let me break this down real slow for everybody. The death panel being in quotes signifies it's a nickname. The rest of the sentence spells out what that nickname is for. A governement bureaucracy that will ration health care. But who would ever suggest that a panel like this would even be set up. Palin must be making things up. Oh wait...

THE PRESIDENT: Well, I think that there is going to have to be a conversation that is guided by doctors, scientists, ethicists. And then there is going to have to be a very difficult democratic conversation that takes place. It is very difficult to imagine the country making those decisions just through the normal political channels. And that's part of why you have to have some independent group that can give you guidance. It's not determinative, but I think has to be able to give you some guidance. And that's part of what I suspect you'll see emerging out of the various health care conversations that are taking place on the Hill right now.

Honestly this is too easy. I'm starting to get bored destroying Beltway Republicans.

No such thing as Death Panels????

check out Oregons gov't health plan



h/t Redstate

Cash for Cluterfarks

Cash for Clunkers a/k/a C.A.R.S a/k/a We’d have to be high to let these red-tape bureaucratic weenies touch our health care.

Here’s the skinny on this “successful” program:

You’ve heard it advertised by now: bring in your clunker if it has less that 18 miles per gallon and you can get a $3,500-$4,500 voucher on a new fuel-efficient vehicle.

Here’s what you’re not hearing: The Dep’t of Transportation’s National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) issued 136 pages of rules plus 20 pages of amendments to car dealers. Irony update: the upside, the NHTSA claims these 150+ pages are in line with the Paperwork Reduction Act). Dealers were to be reimbursed within 10 days of making their initial claim. “Computer glitches” kept that from happening. Say it with me…….of course! Glitches! Always an underlying glitch! Blaming someone/something else is line with this administration's trends. But I digress....

Now having no love for major car dealers, I do have sympathy for the independently owned dealers. We have to go with the assumption these folks understood the mounds of regulations and passed that information onto the consumers, right? How likely is that?

So since its inception some say it’s been wildly successful as evidenced by Congress dumping two billion more into the program. I suspect any program that would advertise as “hey we’ll give you shit for free!!” would be wildly popular. However, it doesn’t make it (a) just, (b) economically sound, or (c) properly managed.

Speaking of governmental clusterfarks being properly mismanaged, we’re now seeing the aftermath of this wretched concept.

Regarding reimbursement to dealers, take Maryland as an example. Three hundred dealers were surveyed, 70 responded. Less than two percent of those dealers said their claims have been reimbursed thus far. The promised turnaround time by the NHTSA: 10 days. The NHTSA in turn has said it’s all the fault of improper staffing, they can’t keep up with the paperwork and the lack of details dealers are providing when submitting their claims. Oh also, these dumbass dealers keep submitting their rejected claims which backlogs the entire process.

The answer: hiring more unqualified governmental worker to process the paperwork. How hard can that be you ask, after all, it’s just paperwork. Well tell that to the dealers that got rejections back from the NHTSA that said “Reason for Rejection: None”. Thanks for playing!

This is government inefficiency for you. And now we’re being asked to entrust our lives and the lives of our loved ones to these imbeciles when considering passing government run health insurance programs.

Think of it this way. It’s easy to loath both the insurance companies and the government. I know I do, but I have more distaste for one over another. But let’s break it down:

Idiot employee to a major corporation that processes your paperwork.
Idiot employee to a major governmental entity that processes your paperwork.

Hey, guess which one actually has accountability for their job performance and has the fear of termination lingering in the back of their head??

Two billion guesses on that answer and the first two billion don't count.

Epic clusterfark failure.

John Stossel On Death Panels

Some seniors may have been calmed when President Obama told them at a town hall meeting:

"The rumor that's been circulating a lot lately is this idea that somehow the House of Representatives voted for 'death panels' that will basically pull the plug on grandma because we've decided that it's too expensive to let her live anymore," Obama said. "I am not in favor of that."

But Mark Steyn warns unplugging Grandma isn’t what should be feared; he says getting Grandma plugged in in the first place is the problem.

Read more of Stossels post here

The National Review: We Hate Winning

This mornings editorial by The National Review says everything you need to know about Beltway Republicans. On the subject of rationing of health care, they write:

To conclude from these possibilities to the accusation that President Obama’s favored legislation will lead to “death panels” deciding whose life has sufficient value to be saved — let alone that Obama desires this outcome — is to leap across a logical canyon. It may well be that in a society as litigious as ours, government will err on the side of spending more rather than treating less. But that does not mean that there is nothing to worry about. Our response to Sarah Palin’s fans and her critics is to paraphrase Peter Viereck: We should be against hysteria — including hysteria about hysteria

The National Review in all its brilliance chose a time in which ObamaCare is in freefall, due in large part to Sarah Palin, to pick a fight with...Sarah Palin. As C4P points out:

Great. The most anti-conservative White House since, well... ever, is about to nationalize the entire American healthcare system, and Romney's cheerleaders-in-chief think this is a great time to start another round of GOP infighting. It is, to put it mildly, seriously lacking in judgement.

Andy McCarthy takes to The Corner at The National Review to rip the editorial to shreds

I don't see any wisdom in taking a shot at Governor Palin at this moment when, finding themselves unable to defend the plan against her indictment, Democrats have backed down and withdrawn their "end-of-life counseling" boards. Palin did a tremendous service here. Opinion elites didn't like what the editors imply is the "hysteria" of her "death panels" charge. Many of those same elites didn't like Ronald Reagan's jarring "evil empire" rhetoric. But "death panels" caught on with the public just like "evil empire" did because, for all their "heat rather than light" tut-tutting, critics could never quite discredit it.

I think Palin was right to argue her point aggressively. Largely because she did, a horrible provision is now out of this still horrible Obamacare proposal. To the contrary, if the argument had been made the way the editors counsel this morning, "end-of-life counseling" would still be in the bill. We might have impressed the Beltway with the high tone of our discourse and the suppleness of our reasoning, but we'd have lost the public.

He's exactly right. It's like the scene from White Men Cant Jump when Woody Harrelson (Billy Hoyle) says that Wesley Snipes (Sidney Deane) "would rather look pretty and lose, than look ugly and win." That is exactly what the editors at The National Review have become. They are the Sidney Deane of the Republican party. Andy McCarthys point about Reagan using the Evil Empire phrase is valid. How would todays National Review have treated that comment? No doubt they'd have scolded him for his "hysteria." Whether it's true or not does not matter to them. They would like the conversation to remain "civil", take their beating from the left, walk home losers and get ready for their cocktail party that night.

In one week Sarah Palin had a portion of the bill tossed out and along with the help of townhall protesters has put ObamaCare on life support. Can anyone point me to a National Review article that has made headlines to damage this bill? Hell, can anyone show me anything they wrote that made headlines during the campaign? Actually, that's not fair. They did make headlines when Christopher Buckley endorsed Barack Obama. Oh, and when Kathleen Parker called on Palin to resign. Keep up the great work.

As RAM over at C4P notes there are some National Review writers that are worth reading (Steyn, Victor David Hanson, Thomas Sowell) but they can all be read on their own websites.

UPDATE- Check out Dan Riehl, RS McCain, Josh Painter, and Flopping Aces for their takedown of The National Review.

UPDATE II- Mark Steyn also checks in on this subject with a great comeback

Best Dog In The World

The MSM Meltdown Pattern

Few things are as predictable as the mainstream media freaking out whenever somebody reveals Obamas actual agenda. As soon as somebody questions his ridiculous plans (covering 50 million people while cutting costs) they follow an obvious pattern. Lets take a look at the accurate "death panel" claim.

First they simply said that it isn't true. From there, they move on to saying it is debunked, end of discussion. After this doesn't work they start getting really nervous and use the phrase "thoroughly debunked." How do you know they are in full freak out mode though? As soon as they call in the NYTimes. This is like Vincent and Jules calling in "The Wolf" in Pulp Fiction. For emergencies only.



Lets take a look at the NYTimes article today:

WASHINGTON - The stubborn yet false rumor that President Obama’s health care proposals would create government-sponsored “death panels” to decide which patients were worthy of living seemed to arise from nowhere in recent weeks.

If your the NYTimes and your blantantly dishonest I guess you can write that. You can write that knowing full well that this "stubborn yet false rumor" came from the mouth of Barack Obama talking to the (wait for it)...NYTimes!

THE PRESIDENT: So that's where I think you just get into some very difficult moral issues. But that's also a huge driver of cost, right?I mean, the chronically ill and those toward the end of their lives are accounting for potentially 80 percent of the total health care bill out here.

LEONHARDT: So how do you - how do we deal with it?

THE PRESIDENT: Well, I think that there is going to have to be a conversation that is guided by doctors, scientists, ethicists. And then there is going to have to be a very difficult democratic conversation that takes place. It is very difficult to imagine the country making those decisions just through the normal political channels. And that's part of why you have to have some independent group that can give you guidance. It's not determinative, but I think has to be able to give you some guidance. And that's part of what I suspect you'll see emerging out of the various health care conversations that are taking place on the Hill right now.

Hmm, so independent government bureaucrats will be making life and death medical decisions. I'm trying to think of a good nickname for that panel. I've got it. Death Panel. Brilliant.

The media knows they have zero credibility left after their coverage during the campaign, so they don't even try to hide it anymore. Todays NYTimes article is the latest example.

Miss Conservative of the Week

For the first time ever there will be two Miss Conservatives in the same family. A few months back Rochelle Veturis was named the Miss Conservative of the Week. Now we bring you her younger sister Chelsey Veturis.

1) Who is your favorite politician?

Sarah Palin is by far my favorite politician. Finally someone who can put up a good fight!

2) What is the most important issue to you?

Keeping the government out of Universal Health Care... don’t get me started!

3) Have you ever thought of about running for office?

Of course! When I was younger it was something I thought about. Now I want to be a teacher and I can make my political opinion known via Twitter.

4) Why are you a conservative?

God has blessed me with a brain.

Answer #4 couldn't have been any better. You can check out Chelsey on twitter here.

Two Must Reads On Health Care

First Sarah Palin absolutely obliterates Barack Obama in her newest message on Facebook.

President Obama can try to gloss over the effects of government authorized end-of-life consultations, but the views of one of his top health care advisors are clear enough. It’s all just more evidence that the Democratic legislative proposals will lead to health care rationing, and more evidence that the top-down plans of government bureaucrats will never result in real health care reform.

read all of it here

The only other conservative politician who has stepped up to the plate on this issue has been Newt Gingrich

How much is one additional year of your life worth?

Or one more year of life for your father or your wife? For your child?

In Great Britain, the government has settled on a number: $45,000.

That’s how much a government commission with the Orwellian acronym NICE has decided British government-run health care will pay for one additional year of life for a British subject.

Think it could never happen here? Then you need to pay closer attention to what Washington is planning for your health care.

read the rest here

But I Want A Senate Seat Now Daddy!

Lisa Murkowski (you know the lady who was appointed to the Senate by her father) is criticizing Sarah Palin again over her accurate death panel statement. Heres what Veruca Salt had to say:

"It does us no good to incite fear in people by saying that there's these end-of-life provisions, these death panels," Murkowski, said, according to the paper. "Quite honestly, I'm so offended at that terminology because it absolutely isn't (in the bill). There is no reason to gin up fear in the American public by saying things that are not included in the bill."

Now anybody with reading comprehension skills above Lloyd Christmas would realize that Palins "death panel" statement was in regards to the rationing of health care. How do I know this? It could be that Palin said so in THE SAME SENTENCE. A question some people might ask Murkowski (202 224-3121) is, does she believe universal health care will not have a government bureaucracy which rations care? Maybe she should check out this statement made by the President in April:

Obama said “you just get into some very difficult moral issues” when considering whether “to give my grandmother, or everybody else’s aging grandparents or parents, a hip replacement when they’re terminally ill.

“That’s where I think you just get into some very difficult moral issues,” he said in the April 14 interview. “The chronically ill and those toward the end of their lives are accounting for potentially 80 percent of the total health- care bill out here.”

Quite honestly, I'm offended that Murkowski seems not to be offended by such a statement. But then again it was Palin who whooped her daddys ass in an election, not Obama.

Jerry Stackhouse Gets Dunked On By High School Kid

Stackhouse better be under 24 hour psychiatric watch because I can only assume something like this is what led Stephon Marbury down the path to complete insanity.

Barack Obama: The Worst Salesman...Ever

Obama- Hey ya know how the government sucks at delivering your mail. Why dont you let us run your health care?

Has Palins Facebook Page Become One Of The Most Influential Political Sites?

First she released her accurate and scathing critique of ObamaCare on Friday. She followed this with a number of links on Saturday and Sunday which all showed the flaw in either ObamaCare or Cap and Tax. I still didn't think anything of it until her latest post which is the youtube clip of Obamas "take a pill comment."



Within 30 minutes of her posting this clip it had over 1,300 comments. There aren't too many blogs that can do that. The brilliance of her using her facebook page rather than starting a website from scratch is she already has a built in following which is currently at 716,000 (an addition of about 26,000 since Friday alone). Reading through the comments of the clip she posted I saw that most of the people had never seen this clip. There was real shock at Obamas answer. Now most people who follow the blogs on the right have seen this clip over the past few weeks. This tells me she is reaching a number of people who don't follow the blogs. And because Palin is using her facebook account, they don't have to. Most people check there facebook atleast once a day to see if they have messages or any updates from their friends. Now when you check in, one of those updates on that page is from Palin. This means she already gets a huge number of views without even trying, before it undoubtedly gets picked up by other political blogs.

So basically in only 3 days she has turned her facebook page into one of the most influential political sites reaching people who otherwise wouldn't get this information.

As I post this there are currently 2800 comments on her post with the clip of Obama.

Blagojevich Singing Karaoke. I Dare You Not To Watch It

I got nothin'

Ok So A Gov't Panel Will Make Your Life And Death Decisions. Just Dont Call It A Death Panel Because Somebody Might Cry

h/t hotair

More Proof That The White House Will Look Directly At You And Lie

Answering a question from Jake Tapper on Friday about the tone of the debate over health care Gibbs replied:

I think the most important thing is we can have a discussion in our democracy about where we want to go and why or why not we want to take certain steps. The president strongly believes we can do so without yelling at each other, without pushing each other, without degrading each other, and do so in a way I think that respects the difference in all of our opinions.

Compare this to what Obama has said about getting his message out



Ok well maybe that was a one time thing where he didn't really mean to get in peoples faces and argue...Damn wait, heres a different speech

“If they bring a knife to the fight, we bring a gun,” Obama said at a Philadelphia fundraiser Friday night. “Because from what I understand folks in Philly like a good brawl."

I'm starting to think Robert Gibbs was lieing in his answer to Jake Tapper. Damn, theres more. Here's the White House deputy chief of staff describing how they will debate during the August recess on health care:

“If you get hit, we will punch back twice as hard,” Messina said, according to an official who attended the meeting.

Ok, yeah, you have to admit it. This White House will lie right to your face.

The Don Of Ghaz Main

Here is the kid who runs the streets of Baghdad. I'm not going to tell you which one it is. Within 5 seconds you'll know exactly who I'm talking about.



Recruiters haven't been this excited about a prospect since the Reggie Bush high school highlight tape came out. Only these arent't college football recruiters. Thats right, I'm talking about the scouts from SEIU. This kid has union thug in his DNA. Did you see how he broke up that mob that was around his candy? It was flawless. This kid is the Roy Hobbs of union thugs. The best there is, the best there was, the best there ever will be.

PS Nothing like a little old school Snoop to start the day.

The Reaction To Sarah Palins Health Care Statement

I always thought of liberals as the crowd that lets feelings get in the way of facts. They were the crowd that would ban dodgeball because kids might be sad for 10 minutes. They were the crowd that gave every kid a trophy even if they sucked. Basically, they were for the wussification of America. Part of the reason I liked thinking myself a conservative was we say what needs to be said whether it's politically correct or not. If it's accurate, say it. I really only started reading the political blogs a little over a year ago. I've been a little surprised by what I've seen from some pundits/blogs on the right during that time. Sarah Palins facebook note on Friday really shines a light on this.

Lets take a look at the section that was "controversial."

The Democrats promise that a government health care system will reduce the cost of health care, but as the economist Thomas Sowell has pointed out, government health care will not reduce the cost; it will simply refuse to pay the cost. And who will suffer the most when they ration care? The sick, the elderly, and the disabled, of course. The America I know and love is not one in which my parents or my baby with Down Syndrome will have to stand in front of Obama’s “death panel” so his bureaucrats can decide, based on a subjective judgment of their “level of productivity in society,” whether they are worthy of health care. Such a system is downright evil.

Seems pretty straight forward and accurate to me. Government run health care will lead to rationing of health care. A government bureaucracy will decide who gets the necessary medical treatment and who doesn't. Is anybody denying this will happen?

Here is how allahpundit, a blogger at one of the highest trafficed blogs on the right spun this on twitter:

Because I oppose Obama's plan, I'm supposed to believe he's out to euthanize the retarded?

Really, that's the interpretation you come away with from reading that. Not that the elderly and disabled will have rationed care (ya know, like she clearly writes) but that once the bill is passed they will just be euthanizing the retarded? That's embarrassing comprehension skills. I feel like I'm at Eastside High before Joe Clark took over, watching these pundits on the right fail the basic skills test. THAT MEANS THEY CAN HARDLY READ! (that's my best Joe Clark impersonation)



Listen, I was a 7 year phys ed major and I could easily comprehend her statement. This leads me to believe one of two things about those who couldn't understand it. Either they are intentionally taking her out of context or they are dumber than a 7 year phys ed major.

Allahpundit later went on to say this about her statement:

I don't give a shit about being taken seriously by the left. I care about being taken seriously by swing voters

So his plan for being taken seriously by swing voters is to put words in the mouth of Sarah Palin that she never said? Interesting strategy.

Even Mary Katherine Ham, who I do think does a better job than most of the Republican pundits, has gone soft on this issue. She wrote on twitter:

Yes, exactly. Fear is serious talk of rationing can & will be parodied, thereby weakening very strong argument. Disappointing.

Disappointing? With one facebook note Sarah Palin put the rationing of health care at the head of this debate. Of course the media and left (one in the same) is going to parody that by taking it out of context. Kind of like how Allahpundit did (again, interesting). You can do as Ham does and complain that it will be mocked or you can do as Gingrich does and point out how her statement is accurate. The fact is, rationing of health care will be a major talking point over the next week because of Palins statement. Ham should take the opportunity when asked to point out how it is true that a government panel will be making your life and death decisions, rather than worry about what the left says.

There are really only two ways you can disagree with Palins statement.

A) You don't believe a government bureaucracy will ration health care, in which case you're delusional. Or..

B) Your delicate personality doesn't like the fact that a government panel that will be making your life and death decisions has been accurately nicknamed the "death panel."

Something tells me that the people who are so hysterical about the "death panel," wont find the phrase so outrageous when their parent receives a letter in the mail telling them they'd be better off taking a pain killer, rather than the life prolonging pace maker their doctor recommended. But hey, that probably wont happen. It's not like anybody of significance in this debate has told us that will happen. Oh wait...



Republican pundits need to either step and use this opportunity Palin has given them to show how government bureaucracys will make your life and death decisions, or they need to go join the "every kid gets a trophy" crowd.

When Does The Media Find The Joker Racist?

Not Racist

Not Racist

RACIST!!!

Any questions?

Matchup Of The Century

Who's the better 7 year old car thief?





If you didnt pick Latarian Milton you're racist. Deal with it

Politico Pulls A 180 When It Comes To Fighting Smears

I decided I'd go all "investigative blogger" on everyone this morning and check out how Politico covered Obamas "fight the smears" website and how it covered Palin fighting a smear. First here is Ben Smiths take on Obama:

Wired's Thomas Goetz emails to make a great point about Obama's big FightTheSmears.com rollout today:

By putting their own website out there front-and-center, and then getting everybody to link to it (starting with all the media covering the launch of the site), the result will be to drive fightthesmears.com towards the top of a Google search on, say, "obama muslim" or "michelle obama whitey." Ideally, if enough of the pro-Obama network links to fightthesmears.com, it'll drive the sites that peddle in the rumor-mongering, which are now the first results on said searches, off the top of the results list. Ideal long term result: any curious low-information voter who eventually bothers to google these pesky rumors will immediately be led to the debunking rather than the rumor.

My take: Did the Obama campaign create fightthesmears.com to game Google? If so, they're even more net-savvy than folks give them credit for.

Indeed, Obama already had a protype of this page connected to his Fact Check site, and even bought Google ads linking it. But this wave of publicity will probably push the new site to the top of Google to stay.

So not surprisingly Politico links to a story which portrays the Obama campaign as "even more net-savvy than folks give them credit for" for fighting these smears. Now when Palin fights a smear here is how Politico covers it:

Sarah Palin’s spokeswoman Saturday took the unusual step of posting a statement on Facebook denying an anonymous blog report that the former Alaska governor was getting a divorce and moving to Montana.

Um, was Martin not around during the campaign when Obama was "fighting the smears." How is that now unusual.

By having her spokeswoman repeat the charges to rebut them in a public form, Palin effectively guaranteed coverage from the mainstream media that otherwise would not report claims attributed to unnamed sources on an anonymous blog.

This would lead you to believe that Martin feels stories left on the web can't really do much damage if they're not covered by the msm. Only problem is this contradicts a story he and Ben Smith wrote on July 28,2008.

For all the media attention his historic run has attracted, not to mention the quarter-billion dollars he has already spent introducing himself to the nation, 25 percent of respondents in a recent Newsweek poll wrongly believe he was raised as a Muslim and nearly 40 percent errantly thought he attended a Muslim school while growing up abroad.

These incorrect claims have also come up repeatedly in Politico interviews with voters, including Democrats and independents.

Kathie Steigerwald, a Dearborn, Mich. businesswoman who said she voted for Hillary Clinton but now plans to support McCain, offered an especially succinct recital of a narrative on which other interviewees offered numerous variations:

"I feel John McCain is a true American and I want to support a true American," she said.

But isn't Obama a "true American?" she was asked.

"I don't know," she said after a measured pause. "I question it."

Why?

"I don't know — maybe because of his name?"

Whatever his motives, McCain’s new hit on his foe’s patriotism hints at two years of whispered, viral rumors and myths about Obama centered on his patriotism and American values, or, more to the point, his lack thereof. The e-mails —cataloged in Snopes.com's lengthy Obama section and Obama's own “fight the smears" page — often have contradictory particulars, but the thrust is clear: Obama, various false e-mails claim, is not really a natural-born American citizen, is not really a Christian and refuses to pledge allegiance to the American flag.

Not only does Martin cite a poll but he interviews a woman to prove that a viral web campaign of rumors can damage a politicians reputation. So how does he square this with his questioning of Palin squashing a rumor before it gets out of control? Could it be that Martin is just another hack "journalist?"

UPDATE- Here is yet another article by Martin and Smith which shows how hard it can be to stop rumors once they have spread across the internet.

Ironically, the smear campaign represents the dark side of the Internet’s emerging dominance in American politics — a phenomenon that has driven Obama’s unparalleled grass-roots and financial campaigns. After harnessing the Web to great advantage, Obama is now struggling to beat back the viral threat from the same uncontrollable medium.

Voters widely and repeatedly cite information that has been gleaned directly or indirectly from the e-mails to explain why they won’t support Obama.

Obama’s campaign has built a pioneering Web-based apparatus to debunk the myths, but the candidate himself has also begun to fight back against the smear in symbolic and substantive ways...

JMart exposed

Palin Squashes Rumor. Politico Doesn't Like That

It seems ole Jmart can't contain himself over at Politico when it comes to Palin. Apparently now it's absurd for her to respond to rumors that are flying across the internet. Here's part of his story today.

Sarah Palin’s spokeswoman Saturday took the unusual step of posting a statement on Facebook denying an anonymous blog report that the former Alaska governor was getting a divorce and moving to Montana.

“Yet again, some so-called journalists have decided to make up a story,” wrote Meg Stapleton on Palin’s Facebook page. “There is no truth to the recent ‘story’ (and story is the correct term for this type of fiction) that the Palins are divorcing. The Palins remain married, committed to each other and their family, and have not purchased land in Montana (last week it was reported to be Long Island).”


Actually, no journalists had reported the allegations. They were made on an Alaskan blog called “The Immoral Minority,” and then repeated on other blogs, including Gawker, a well-trafficked New York gossip site.

Actually this story caught fire this morning when it was posted at Alaskareport.com. This blog just happens to be run by Dennis Zaki who is a stringer for CNN. Ya know, the most trusted name in news. So by the third paragraph Martins story has already shit the bed. But he continues.

By having her spokeswoman repeat the charges to rebut them in a public form, Palin effectively guaranteed coverage from the mainstream media that otherwise would not report claims attributed to unnamed sources on an anonymous blog.

Again this is a story that was being pushed by a blog in Alaska run by a CNN stringer. It was a story that was all over twitter as well as being picked up by Gawker, The Daily Kos, and The Huffington Post (one of the most widely read political blogs on the planet, especially by "journalists"). Staying silent would only feed the fire.

Palin is one of the few conservative politicians that seems to understand the internet. Many people now get their news from the internet. These rumors start on the blogs, work their way into comment sections of msm news stories, and eventually get reported on. Martins line that the "msm otherwise would not report claims based on anonymous blogs" is ridiculous. Part of the deal with the msm exposing itself as journalistic frauds during the campaign is that it can no longer be given the benefit of the doubt. If this had gone unanswered MSNBC would have a countdown clock Monday morning to the supposed date of Palins divorce. By addressing this rumor it does guarantee msm coverage...ON PALINS TERMS.

Sarah saw how the McCain campaign (specifically Steve Schmidt) handled internet rumors during the campaign. The whisper campaign by the left wing blogs went unanswered, then seeped into the msm, and by then it was too late. People couldn't differentiate fact from fiction. Was she a book banner? Did she join a secession movement? Is Trig really her baby?

Jonathan Martin is straight out of the Kathleen Parker and Christopher Buckley wing of The National Review (yes he worked there shortly). He doesn't seem to like the fact that Palin has figured out how to squash rumors before they can damage her. Well sorry JMart, Sarah now knows how the game is played. Get used to it.

UPDATE- Thanks to C4P, Texas4Palin, and RiehlWorld for the links. Be sure to head over and check out their updates on this story. I'll have more in the morning...or the afternoon, depending on when I wake up.

This Guy Has A Way With Words

I've never been as close to giving up this blog as I was when I first watched this clip. I mean, I will never be the wordsmith that this guy is and I know it, so why even try. Damn you.

Porn Star Considering Senate Run Is Arrested

Metro -Porn star Stormy Daniels has been arrested after allegedly hitting her husband over the way her laundry had been done. Stormy, whose real name is Stephanie Gregory Clifford, was being held on a domestic violence battery after the ‘dust up’ with hubby Michael Mosny at their home in Florida. Mr Mosny told police the state of the laundry had upset her and her displeaure over some unpaid bills tipped her over. It came just hours before a scheduled signing at a Tampa adult book store. Stormy is something of a political star in the US and may be in the running in next year’s US Senate race.

I can see where Stormy was trying to go with a scandal like this, but this is straight out of the 80's. Of course you need a scandal in order to become a politician nowadays but spousal abuse doesn't cut it anymore (even though poorly folded laundry is a heinous act). In order to get elected in the new millenium you have to think outside the box. You have to attend racist churches or slander the cops without the facts. Assaulting your spouse is the politics of the past. So as of right now I cannot endorse your bid for elected office.

The Right Still Doesn't Get It

Liberal blogs and pundits are playing chess while the conservatives continue to play checkers. Today should remove any doubt about that.

This birther story has been around for well over a year now. The issue has just taken off in the mainstream media this week. Am I birther? No. Are there conservatives out there who believe Obama isn't a natural born citizen? Yeah, so what? Ask yourself this. How much time has Limbaugh, Coulter, Hannity, Malkin, O'reilly, The National Review, The Weekly Standard, or even Beck spent on this subject recently? Almost none. So this is yet again another manufactured story that has oddly popped up in the past week.

You have to ask yourself, who is this story intended to help and why is it popping up now? Over the weekend the most accurate polling company showed Obama under 50% for the first time ever. Even with the glowing coverage in the media he has an unbelievably high 40% very unfavorable number only six months into his term. This White House has showed time and again that they don't debate the issues, they look to marginalize the opposition. What better way to do that than to brand their opposition conspiracy theorists. "hey, you don't want to be in opposition to Barack with all those kooks do you?" This is how the debate is being framed by the media this week even though this issue has been out there for OVER A YEAR. Rather than seeing through this ploy to distract from Obamas poll numbers and health care disasters, conservatives are playing right into their hands. Hot Air and the National Review have been tripping over eachother to distance themselves from birthers rather than attacking the premise that it's mainstream conservatism. How many liberal politicians were asked in the run up to the 08 election if they were "truthers?"

Hot Air currently has 6 birther stories or links up today. The one that amazes me says:

People wonder why Obama doesn’t demand that Hawaii release the original records to put an end to the Birther nonsense. The biggest reason? It wouldn’t work. The same people who believe that Obama forged a Certificate of Live Birth twice corroborated by the state that issued it will insist that Obama got someone to forge any new records produced by Hawaii as well.



If that's what you believe why are you wasting a blog post trying to convince them when you admit no amount of evidence will work. Why not fight back on the premise that is being set by the media that this has "taken hold of the Republican party." All the influential conservatives I mentioned above are either on TV, radio, or blog every day. Count up how much time they've spent this month trying to prove Obama isn't a US citizen.



The conservative side continues to believe that if they speak out against these issues it will garner them support and respect among the media, which in turn will mean better coverage so they can pick up the independents. They don't realize they're just playing right into the lefts hands. This is still the case with Republican pundits on TV. So many of them preface their criticism of Obama by saying things like, "Now he's clearly a brilliant man but..." They do this under some weird illusion that this will make their criticism seem more valid when in fact it just bolsters Obamas standing. What is clearly brilliant about him? His grades from college? Haven't seen them. Reading off a teleprompter? Not the toughest thing to do. Having an adoring press? Speaks more to the media than it does to him. Now lets flip the script on these same Republican pundits and bring up Palin. They all say, "Well she clearly needs to bone up on issues and do her homework." They're like Teddy Ruxpin dolls that are all programmed to say the same thing, just pull the string.



Now Obama is a guy who spent hundreds of billions on a stimulus that has lost jobs, crafted a health care bill that is a disaster, and wants to pass a cap and trade bill that will cause this country to lose millions of jobs and send electricity bills skyrocketing. Yet the REPUBLICAN pundits call him "brilliant" while saying Palin "needs to bone up on issues." There's something wrong with that picture. Show me all the liberal pundits who build up the conservative politician while diminishing the liberal one. You can't, but what you can find are liberal Democrats controlling the House, Senate, and White House. Coincidence? Conservatives need to stop playing by the rules that the opposition sets. It should start with this birther issue. If 9/11 truthers didn't push away independents from voting Democrat then birthers won't push them away from voting Republican. Stop fighting eachother and focus on what the White House doesn't want you to: Their agenda.

This Remix Is Legit

Can anyone tell me why this Doctor isn't in charge of reforming health care? Anyone? He flat out reformed Dont Stop Believin' like it was his job and he did it with ease. It was like he was showing off. Dr. K has bigger fish to fry. The health care industry won't know what hit it.

h/t barstoolsports

The Must Read Article Of The Day

I made the case on Sunday that the idea of Barack Obama being considered "post racial" is a myth. It has absolutely no basis in fact. Thomas Sowell lays out the case today.

Many people hoped that the election of a black President of the United States would mark our entering a "post-racial" era, when we could finally put some ugly aspects of our history behind us.

That is quite understandable. But it takes two to tango. Those of us who want to see racism on its way out need to realize that others benefit greatly from crying racism. They benefit politically, financially, and socially.

Barack Obama has been allied with such people for decades. He found it expedient to appeal to a wider electorate as a post-racial candidate, just as he has found it expedient to say a lot of other popular things-- about campaign finance, about transparency in government, about not rushing legislation through Congress without having it first posted on the Internet long enough to be studied-- all of which turned to be the direct opposite of what he actually did after getting elected.

Head on over and read the rest.

Why Was This Video Removed From Youtube?

Are the bloggers filing frivoulous ethics complaints against Palin linked to the Democratic party?

Link:

h/t freedomslighthouse

What Is In The Health Care Bill?

This is an email going around that was just forwarded to me about the health care bill. Take a look:

If you want to see
the Plan Click this:

http://edlabor.house/.gov/documents/111/pdf/publications/AAHCA-BillText-071409.pdf

you can save it. It is a PDF file.

Once you see what the gang in Washington is up to you may want to write your rep. and tell them to take this Health Care plan and shove it. Here’s where you can find your rep. - https://writerep.house.gov/writerep/welcome.shtml

• Page 22: Mandates audits of all employers that self-insure!
• Page 29: Admission: your health care will be rationed!
• Page 30: A government committee will decide what treatments and
benefits you get (and, unlike an insurer, there will be no appeals
process)
• Page 42: The "Health Choices Commissioner" will decide health
benefits for you. You will have no choice. None.
• Page 50: All non-US citizens, illegal or not, will be provided
with free healthcare services.
• Page 58: Every person will be issued a National ID Healthcard
• Page 59: The federal government will have direct, real-time access
to all individual bank accounts for electronic funds transfer.
• Page 65: Taxpayers will subsidize all union retiree and community
organizer health plans (read: SEIU, UAW and ACORN)
• Page 72: All private healthcare plans must conform to government
rules to participate in a Healthcare Exchange.
• Page 84: All private healthcare plans must participate in the
Healthcare Exchange (i.e., total government control of private
plans)
• Page 91: Government mandates linguistic infrastructure for
services; translation: illegal aliens
• Page 95: The Government will pay ACORN and Americorps to sign up
individuals for Government-run Health Care plan.
• Page 102: Those eligible for Medicaid will be automatically
enrolled: you have no choice in the matter.
• Page 124: No company can sue the government for price-fixing. No
"judicial review" is permitted against the government monopoly. Put
simply, private insurers will be crushed.
• Page 127: The AMA sold doctors out: the government will set wages.
• Page 145: An employer MUST auto-enroll employees into the
government-run public plan. No alternatives.
• Page 126: Employers MUST pay healthcare bills for part-time
employees AND their families.
• Page 149: Any employer with a payroll of $400K or more, who does
not offer the public option, pays an 8% tax on payroll
• Page 150: Any employer with a payroll of $250K-400K or more, who
does not offer the public option, pays a 2 to 6% tax on payroll
• Page 167: Any individual who doesn’t' have acceptable healthcare
(according to the government) will be taxed 2.5% of income.
• Page 170: Any NON-RESIDENT alien is exempt from individual taxes
(Americans will pay for them).
• Page 195: Officers and employees of Government Healthcare
Bureaucracy will have access to ALL American financial and personal
records.
• Page 203: "The tax imposed under this section shall not be treated
as tax." Yes, it really says that
• Page 239: Bill will reduce physician services for Medicaid.
Seniors and the poor most affected."
• Page 241: Doctors: no matter what specialty you have, you'll all
be paid the same
• Page 253: Government sets value of doctors' time, their
professional judgment, etc.
• Page 265: Government mandates and controls productivity for
private healthcare industries.
• Page 268: Government regulates rental and purchase of power-driven
wheelchairs.
• Page 272: Cancer patients: welcome to the wonderful world of
rationing!
• Page 280: Hospitals will be penalized for what the government
deems preventable re-admissions.
• Page 298: Doctors: if you treat a patient during an initial
admission that results in a readmission, you will be penalized by
the government.
• Page 317: Doctors: will be prohibited for owning and investing in
healthcare companies!
• Page 318: Prohibition on hospital expansion. Hospitals cannot
expand without government approval.
• Page 321: Hospital expansion hinges on "community" input: in other
words, yet another payoff for ACORN.
• Page 335: Government mandates establishment of outcome-based
measures: i.e., rationing.
• Page 341: Government has authority to disqualify Medicare
Advantage Plans, HMOs, etc.
• Page 354: Government will restrict enrollment of SPECIAL NEEDS
individuals.
• Page 379: More bureaucracy: Telehealth Advisory Committee
(healthcare by phone).
• Page 425: More bureaucracy: Advance Care Planning Consult: Senior
Citizens, assisted suicide, euthanasia?
• Page 425: Government will instruct and consult regarding living
wills, durable powers of attorney, etc. Mandatory. Appears to lock
in estate taxes ahead of time.
• Page 425: Government provides approved list of end-of-life
resources, guiding you in death.
• Page 427: Government mandates program that orders end-of-life
treatment; government dictates how your life ends.
• Page 429: Advance Care Planning Consult will be used to dictate
treatment as patient's health deteriorates. This can include an
ORDER for end-of-life plans. An ORDER from the GOVERNMENT.
• Page 430: Government will decide what level of treatments you may
have at end-of-life.
• Page 469: Community-based Home Medical Services: more payoffs for
ACORN.
• Page 472: Payments to Community-based organizations: more payoffs
for ACORN.
• Page 489: Government will cover marriage and family therapy.
Government intervenes in your marriage.
• Page 494: Government will cover mental health services: defining,
creating and rationing those services.

Thanks to Lorna Badeo for forwarding this to me

Ladies and Gentlemen, Your Commander In Chief

NY Daily News- Seven months after she poured out her heartbreak in a wrenching letter to then President-elect Obama, the mother of murdered Brooklyn Marine Sgt. Jan Pawel Pietrzak finally got a response - a form letter.

"Thank you for contacting President Obama," the note to Henryka Pietrzak-Varga begins. "We hope the issue you brought to the President's attention has been resolved."

"This is a standard response, something that can be sent out to anyone for any matter," the disappointed mom told the Dziennik Wschodni newspaper.

"What am I supposed to make of, 'We hope the issue has been resolved?' What does this mean? That somebody will give me my son back?"

Apparently you have to be a race baiting Harvard professor before the President of the United States gives you the time of day.

Another Campaign Promise Broken By Obama

The White House dumped this information on lobbyists Friday night in the hopes that it would go unnoticed. The Hill reports

In a significant change, the Obama administration will now allow lobbyists to meet and have telephonic discussions with government officials regarding economic recovery projects.

The lifting of the ban comes after K Street has cried foul for months and has challenged the White House on its restrictions.

Now, the just-revised rules will allow government personnel to accept meetings and calls from federally registered lobbyists on the implementation of stimulus projects. The head of the Office of Management and Budget, Peter Orszag, issued a new guidance late Friday regarding the administration's communications with registered lobbyists about economic recovery funds.

You can understand why they would release this late on a Friday. After all this decision sounds a whole lot different from this speech



Just words

The Audacity Of Barack Obama

I gotta hand it to the guy. Nobody can look directly into a camera and be as hypocrital as Barack Obama. To do what he does takes one of two things. A) Balls (which anyone whose watched him deal with foreign leaders, knows he doesn't have) or B) a lovestruck media. I think we may be onto something with that second one.

Let's hop in the DeLorean, crank it up to 88mph, and travel back in time to when I first saw the hypocrisy from Obama and a more than willing cover up from the press. We have to go back to the days of the Rev Jeremiah Wright. The Conservative Comeback was nowhere close to being a blog then (I know. It's hard to imagine life before this blog). Barack had already thrown his grandmother under the bus in hopes of covering for the good Rev. Political pressure was still building though. He had to do something. So what did the man who sat silently in a racist church for 20 years do? He gave a speech lecturing us on the races coming together. Yeah, you read that right. The guy who willingly spent his Sundays listening to a racist Anti American preacher rant and rave was lecturing us on bringing the races together. Did the media scoff at such a ridiculous speech? No. They compared it to Lincoln and Martin Luther King. What would the medias reaction be if Mark Sanford gave a speech this week lecturing the country on the importance of being faithful to your wife. If you're looking for the exact day that the media died, it was the day Obama read that speech off his teleprompter.

Now let's fast forward to this week. Barack is asked a question in a press conference about Henry Louis Gates. Without the facts Obama injects race into the controversy. A firestorm starts over this and political pressure once again forces him to make a statement. Does he apologize? Of course not. Once again he lectures us that this can be a "teachable moment" and talks about the history of racial profiling, even though there is no evidence it exists in this case. He acts as if none of this is his doing and instead he is just the peace maker in the process. Make no mistake, the press is already tripping over itself to report the story that way. Check out Ben Smith at Politico:

The story of black professor and Irish cop sitting down for beers at the White House with the president -- now that's Obama's narrative.

This is Obamas narrative because the press refuses to report the story as it is. The two incidents above suggest Obama isn't nearly as "post racial" as the press makes him out to be. While it's certainly the talking points the White House would like people to believe, one day we might have a profession where peoples jobs are to actually cut thru the spin of politicians and bring you the facts. I wonder what we would call that job?

The only reason Barack is able to get away with this is because the media still has a crush on him. Have you watched these press conferences? They are so timid to question this guy. It's like watching a nervous Kevin Arnold ask Winnie Cooper out on a date. It's embarrassing, but it's also the reason Obama can afford to say one thing while doing the other.

Now just a reminder. Here is the guy Obama sat and listened to for 20 years before he lectured us.



And here is a reminder of what Obama said about Gates-gate before political pressure forced him to pivot and pretend to play peacemaker



He's post racial?

Dog Rides Bike In Japan

Take off the training wheels, pussy

How Do You Know This Has Been A Bad Day For Obama?

When Deval Patrick distances himself from you... it's a bad day.

“If you’re asking me to comment on the president’s comments, I think the president is capable of speaking for himself.”

Deval, who is straight out of the Chicago machine, used the more Axelrodian phrases "troubled" and "upsetting"

UPDATE- The hits keep coming for Barack. This time from the Cambridge Police Commissioner:

The Cambridge police commissioner said today his department is “deeply pained” by the president’s comments about the arrest of a prominent Harvard professor.

“It deeply hurts the pride of this agency,” said Commissioner Robert Haas. ‘’This department is deeply pained.”

Obama: "I Dont Know The Facts But Let Me Give You My Opinion" UPDATE- Police Officer Responds To Obama In New Interview On WEEI This Morning

This has been a big story up here in Boston and now because the President feels he needs to inject himself in everything, it's now the only story up here. The morning sports radio show is doing 4 hours on THIS story. For every 10 calls, 9 are ripping the President. So Barack, here are the facts.

Here is a breakdown of the police report via newsbusters

- 12:44 police receive a broadcast of a possible break in on Ware St. (Gates house)

- Police respond to the scene and speak to the woman who made the call. She said she saw two black males with back packs, one who seemed to be jamming open the front door with his shoulder.

- Sgt Crowley then noticed Gates in the foyer through a pane glass door. He asked Mr. Gates if he would step outside. Gates replied "no I will not." He then demanded to know who the officer was. The officer identified himself and said he was investigating a break in.

- While making that statement Gates opened the door and said "why, because Im a black man in America. (um, actually it could be because a call of a break in was made. How much do you want to bet if Gates house had been broken into and the police took their time responding, he'd complain about that?)

- Crowley then asked if there was anyone else in the residence. While asking this Gates was yelling "it's none of your business" and accused him of being a racist cop. The officer assured him he was simply responding to a citizens call of a possible break in.

- As this happened Gates picked up a phone and dialed an unknown number

- At this time Crolwey radioed that he was with someone who appeared to be the homeowner but who was uncooporative.

- Gates could be heard on the phone saying "get the chief" "whats the chiefs name"

- Gates was telling the person on the phone he was dealing with a racist cop and then tuned to the cop and said he had no idea who he was "messing" with.

- Crowley asked Gates to just provide a photo id to prove that was his residence. Gates initially refused but then produced a Harvard photo id (where else would you find this big of an asshole?)


- The officer then radioed for the presence of the Harvard police.

- With the Harvard ID in hand Crowley radioed his findings in and prepared to leave.

- Gates then demanded again to know who the officer was. Crowley again went to id himself. Gates interrupted by yelling he was a racist officer and saying he wasn't someone to mess with. At this point Crowley noticed another officer (Figueroa) standing behind him.

- Gates asked a 3rd time for Crowleys name at which point the officer said Ive repeated it twice and I'm going outside. If you'd like to continue the conversation I'll be outside.

- While walking in the foyer toward the door Gates was again demanding Crowleys name. He told Gates he would speak to him outside. Reason for that was due to the yelling of Gates and the acoustics of the foyer which made it difficult for Crowley to use his radio.

- Gates reply to being asked outside was, "ya, I'll speak to your mama outside"

- At this point several other Cambridge police and Harvard police were now on the side walk along with the person who made the breaking and entering call and some other citizens.

- Gates continued to follow Crowley outside again yelling that he was a racist. Crowley warned Gates that he was being disorderly. Gates ignored the warning and continued to yell. Again Crowley warned him while this time taking out his handcuffs. Gates continued to yell and at that time was placed under arrest.

- Crowley then asked Gates if he would like an officer to take his house key to secure the front door. Gates said it was unsecurable due to a break in attempt.

Is that not unbelievable. This guys house had been broken into in the past, the police respond to a break in call this time and they're IMMEDIATELY accused of being racist. Only a Harvard elitist scumbag would act the way this guy did. Is it any surprise the President is friends with this clown.

Now with all the attention that the President brought to this last night, why would the Boston Globe (a liberal rag) choose to scrub this report from their website. Could it be this clearly makes Obama and Gates look like fools. Lets be honest, if you or I acted like this towards a cop we'd be arrested. Race had nothing to do with it.

It's absolutely disgusting that the President, admitting he doesn't have the facts, would state this is a remider that racism still exists. No, this is a reminder that pompous Harvard assholes like yourself still feel they're above everyone else. It's not like the police were driving by and saw a black guy walking into his house and got suspicious. They were RESPONDING to a breaking and entering call. All Gates had to do was say, "sorry there must be a misunderstanding. I live here. Heres my id that proves it. Thanks for responding officers." Instead he acts like a complete piece of shit and the President of the United States takes his back and slanders a cop, in front of millions of people in a primetime press conference.

UPDATE - 10:18am Brand new interview from the police officer just done a half hour ago on WEEI sports radio in Boston

Stg. James Crowley, Cambridge Police

Shared via AddThis

UPDATE- Union, other cops weigh in against Obama

I think he was way off base wading into a local issue without knowing all the facts as he himself stated before he made that comment,” Cambridge Sgt. James Crowley told WEEI-AM today.

Union members say they are backing Crowley.

“I was actually shocked that the president of the United States, during a nationally televised news conference on one of the most important issues facing us, healthcare, weighed in on this,” said Harold MacGilvray, president of the Massachusetts Municipal Police Coalition, an umbrella organization for Crowley’s union.

“I think it’s regrettable that he made those comments about the Cambridge Police Department without, in my opinion, having full knowledge of the facts of the case. They are professionals and they do an outstanding job serving the citizens of Cambridge,” said MacGilvray.

MacGilvray, a Medford patrolman, said officers nationwide are writing to the MMPC’s Web site.

“They are expressing outrage over the president’s comments,” he said. “We appreciate the support we’re getting.”

The Obama Press Conference Drinking Game

If your going to watch an Obama press conference you might as well drink.

- Baracks opening speech goes beyond 10 minutes- 2 drinks

- "let me be clear" - 1 drink

- umm - 1 drink

- ahh- 2 drinks

- "the status quo" - 2 drinks

- "old way of doing things in Washington"- 2 drinks

- mentions a person he met that is uninsured - 1 drink

- this person cried or had tears in their eyes- 2 drinks

- answer to a question goes beyond 7 minutes- 2 drinks

- answer had nothing to do with the question- 3 drinks

- "it's not about me" - 2 drinks

- mentions a family members health insurance problem- 2 drinks

- "if you like your health plan you can keep it" - 1 drink

- "Im not familiar with that part of the plan" - 2 drinks

- teleprompter commits suicide- 3 drinks

- instead of teleprompter, odd giant movie screen in the middle of the room- 2 drinks

- "people are sick of partisan politics" 2 drinks

- attacks Republican opposition - 3 drinks

- makes this gesture with his finger and thumb - 1 drink (be careful)


- "skyrocketing health care costs" - 2 drinks

- abortion is a distraction- 2 drinks

- Blue dog - 1 drink

- Waterloo- finish your beer

- Chuck Todds Goatee asks a question - 2 drinks

- Helen Thomas looks angry- 1 drink

- She mentions Nixon- 3 drinks

- "$250,000 and under"- 2 drinks

- enchanted- 1 drink

- "budget neutral"- 2 drinks

- "Now hold on a second"- 2 drinks

- "deeply concerned"- 3 drinks

- "deeply troubled"- 3 drinks



surgeon general warning. participating in the Obama drinking game is the leading cause of death among people ages 18-94