"The Lives of Others" Depicts Hollywood Ideal of Stasi Snoopery Ruling USA

John Nolte has a great piece on why the pathetic retardos in Hollyweird love Chavez and other Castro-wannabes.

When you and I picture life under Obama’s vision for America, we see a dreary existence spent in breadlines, drab apartments and small jail cells with rat cages strapped to our face conditioning us to say “Herstory” instead of “History.” These Castro-lovers and Polanski-defenders see something completely different.
Watch “The Lives of Others.” Not only is it one of the best films of the decade, it also answers the opening question. You’ll see how life under fascism is the complete fulfillment of every narcissistic desire Susan Sarandon, Barbra Streisand, Oliver Stone, Sean Penn and the rest of their sorry lot has ever had.
Leftist Hollywood is not driven by wealth or artistic freedom, they’re driven by status and the insatiable need to be unconditionally adored. Unfortunately for them, as actors in America, status and adoration is tied to awards and the size of the paycheck – in other words competition and a free market – which they hate. But that’s the least of their worries. All this messy American capitalism forces our favorite artistes into the undignified position of having to beg for money in order to have the millions necessary to watch themselves be all artistic on the big screen, and all this messy American free expression allows people like you and me to criticize and ridicule their hard self-serving work.

Nolte knows that hard work and earning one's honor isn't the way the pervs and perps that comprise Tinseltown's nomenklatura operate. These stoned-slackers want it all and they think that they are entitled to unconditional adoration which they would get if they lived in, say, East Germany before 1989 or the current slave-gulags in Cuba and N. Korea. Nolte sums up the beau-ideal of the trailer-trash "intelligentsia" like high-school dropout Penn or morbidly-obese "health-care expert" Michael Moore as a dystopia where actually scrambling for capital would be unnecessary:

Not so under a dictatorship.
The way they see it, with the right dictator, the State would hand them money for film projects and jail anyone who criticized them in print or elsewhere. Hugo Chavez shutting television stations down doesn’t horrify Leftist Hollywood, it makes them giddy.
Certainly the days of the $20 million pay check and multiple homes would be over, but that would come as a relief because status wouldn’t be tied to uncontrollable market forces. There would be no more stressing all weekend hoping those idiot hicks in Middle America make it a box office hit. As long as the State was happy with the product, the State would hand out status like welfare checks in the form of dinner parties, awards, nice apartments and “important” projects.
But what about artistic freedom, you might ask…
These Leftists enjoy complete artistic freedom now and what do they do with it? They flack for the state, undermine liberty and trash religion. All any fascist dictator would have to say is, “Carry on.”

The suck-ups and libtard elites in the business of movie-making consider themselves artists, which Marlon Brando had enuf integrity to refute by refusing to accept an Oscar for what he considered was mere miming and mouthing---something a Sharon Stone hasn't even mastered to this day!

The Hollywood Blacklist of traitors like Dalton Trumbo was an appropriate response to sad sacks who despise the Constitution almost as much as right-minded citizens despise their pretensions to be "artists."

CMPA Report: Fox is the MOST Fair & Balanced

The Center for Media and Public Affairs [CMPA] has an ongoing study whose preliminary conclusions are that a close analysis of the three networks and Fox's Special Report shows that:
.

...Fox has both the most balanced and the most anti-Obama coverage... Simple. It's because the other networks were all so pro-Obama. CMPA analyzed every soundbite by reporters and nonpartisan sources (excluding representative of the political parties) that evaluated the candidates and their policies. On the three broadcast networks combined, evaluations of Obama were 68% positive and 32% negative, compared to the only 36% positive and 64% negative evaluations of his GOP opponent John McCain.

Indeed, the CMPA report shows that the three nets gave slavish adulation to Dear Leader:

In fact, Obama received the most favorable coverage CMPA has ever recorded for any presidential candidate since we began tracking election news coverage in 1988. The totals were very similar--within a few percentage points--at all three networks. (These figures exclude comments on the candidates' prospects in the campaign horse race, which obviously favored Obama.)

And although FoxNEWS was not very friendly to Obama, it matched it with a distinctly unfriendly attitude to the RINO Repug excuse for a candidate, you know, the one whose pudgy blonde bimbette daughter trashes conservatives on a blog?

Meanwhile, Fox's Special Report was dramatically tougher on Obama, with only 36% favorable vs. 64% unfavorable evaluations during the same time period. But McCain didn't fare much better, garnering only 40% favorable comments vs. 60% negative ones. So the broadcast networks gave good marks to one candidate and bad marks to another, while Fox was tough on both--and most balanced overall.

Of course, in the WH barnyard, Napoleon brooks no half-praise and has sent his sewer rats Axelrod and Emanuel out to emasculate FoxNEWS for being the only media outlet which dares to reveal its crime sprees like ACORN and SEIU which are getting fat on federal subsidies from the porkulus package---Napoleon doesn't mind even if he is a pig. Or is Fox the only culprit which dares to question Dear Leader on his aspirations to be King of the World?

Of course, all this is old news. White House staffers went after Fox because of what they perceived as the Murdoch News Network's trashing of the new Democratic administration. So what has Fox done to Obama lately? To find out, I consulted CMPA's ongoing study of the president's television news coverage, which is being conducted by scholars at George Mason and Chapman universities.

It turns out that Fox's coverage of President Obama has been even more negative than its coverage of candidate Obama: From Inauguration Day to Oct. 10, only 27% of Special Report's comments on the president were favorable. That sounds like proof positive of Fox's negative intentions. But if Fox hasn't lost its anti-Obama edge, it has certainly lost its distinctiveness. During the same period only 35% of the evaluations on ABC, CBS, and NBC were positive. So from the administration's point of view, Fox's coverage has gone from being the worst of all to merely the worst among equals.

Moreover, distressing as it may seem to a president used to unusually friendly coverage, this negativity is surprisingly normal. CMPA's earlier studies found that the broadcast networks gave almost identically negative coverage to George W. Bush (37% positive), Bill Clinton (34% positive) and Ronald Reagan (37% positive) during their first seven months in office.

These numbers are too similar for mere coincidence; instead, they represent a historical pattern. Based on the experience of the past three decades, incoming presidents should expect to receive twice as much bad press as good press and plan accordingly. In the modern era of media politics, presidential honeymoons end with the transition to power. Once they try to put their agendas into practice, Republican and Democratic presidents alike are fair game for a media anxious to tell the other side of the story.

The real reason for Obama's ridiculous coverage during the election, was, well.....

Obama differs from his predecessors mainly in the false hopes generated by sometimes fawning campaign coverage from jaded journalists who temporarily let themselves get carried away by his eloquence and the historic nature of his candidacy. When politics returned to normal, their coverage returned to form.

The only word I'd quibble about in the quote above is "fawning."

Of course Fox remains a special case among Obama's tormentors, with its stable of conservative talk show hosts singing the same discordant tune. But odds are that the next Republican president will get the same reception from Fox's liberal counterparts on MSNBC. A GOP president will also have to cope with the growing trend among entertainment-oriented cable channels to feature liberal commentators, such as Comedy Central's Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert and HBO's Bill Maher.

Across the cable landscape, reporting seems to be merging with commentary just as surely as news is merging with entertainment. In light of White House charges that Fox is "not really a news organization," it is ironic that among all the cable channels that feature political news and comment, Fox is the only one that runs an old-fashioned half hour of nightly news modeled on the broadcast networks.

To be sure, this president can expect more criticism from Fox than from CNN and MSNBC. But to single out Fox as the problem, because--unlike other television news--it has morphed from a news organization into an adversary? He should be so lucky.

Stewart and Colbert are funny, and Maher is beneath contempt. But unmentioned in Lichter's analysis is the fact that FoxNEWS is routinely outdrawing ALL FOUR of the other cable "news" [MSNBC is an agitprop corporate suck-up channel] outlets.

Remember back in the late '90s when FoxNEWS went 24-7, an atheist drunk said CNN would "crush it like a bug?" AOLTimeWarner's only smart move was to evict that diesel fanny out of its boardroom first item of business.

FBI & Feda Claim "First Amendment Rights" for Terrorist Muslims

Bernie Goldberg tells it the way Dan Rather never would or could, nor could Bob Shieffer, his witless successor:

Bernard Goldberg, a former CBS News correspondent, took the media to task for its coverage. "What's the story line they run with? Religion? Of course not. Can't do that. He's a Muslim," he said Friday on Fox News' "The O'Reilly Factor." "They run with post-traumatic stress syndrome because that gives them a chance to take a shot at a couple of wars they never liked from the get-go."

And a brave colonel instructed his subordinates to:

"Please send a message to our training centers, the (logistics support bases), and the (divisions) advising them of ...(their) responsibility to provide this command a status of their respective anti-terrorism plans."

Most media are acolytes of the cringing grandson of Socialist Norman Thomas, a Newsweak pondscum specimen of the name of Evan, who whinges:

"I cringe that he's a Muslim," said Evan Thomas of Newsweek. "I mean, because it inflames all the fears. I think he's probably just a nut case. But with that label attached to him, it will get the right wing going and it just -- I mean these things are tragic, but that makes it much worse."

But my old friend Barry Rubin, who had his wedding reception back at our home in DC some twenty years ago, sums it up:
Satirical blogger Barry Rubin of "The Rubin Report" wondered if today's New York Times covering the Lincoln assassination would overlook the fact that John Wilkes Booth shouted out a Confederate motto after the shooting and report instead that he "was psychologically unstable...frightened of the Civil War coming to an end and having to face a peacetime actors' surplus."

Great comparison, Barry, and the fishwrap tabloid of the ultra-left neo-Commie risorgimento still is Walter Duranty updated and with new traitorous flourishes.

Gladwell Rips Off Dawkins, but Won't Admit it!

Serial Confabulator and Master of the Obvious Malcolm Gladwell quite simply has made a career of taking other people's ideas and expanding on them, a la Gail Sheehy of Passages fame way back in the day. At least he doesn't overtly plagiarize, but stealing without attribution is a kissing cousin.

Nasty Gay-Baiter in Oval Office Taunts Opponents

Gay-baiter-in-Chief Taunts "Teabaggers"

The nasty cafe-au-lait creep used a sexual slur to describe his Tea Party opponents who threaten to bring down his plan to socialize America.

[Unintentionally] Funny Jon Klein Explains CNN's bottom status in Cable News

Jon Klein is himself the real reason CNN is at the bottom of the pack in the cable news race, but he can't say that and keep his job, so instead he does a comic turn with the LATimes.

Lamestream Media Blames PTSD for Terrorist Major

Bernie Goldberg blames the "Lamestream Media" for many ridiculous assertions in NYT, Time, Newsweak and other creepy misfits pretending to be journalists.

Bill O'Reilly and FoxNEWS now routinely outdraws ALL other cable news in competing time slots as do his fellow FoxNEWS cable colleagues. Indeed, as I noted in a previous blog, the number of DEMOCRATS watching FoxNEWS from 8-11PM outnumber the collective number of Demo-rats watching CNN, MSNBC, & HLN.

No wonder SNL, Jon Stewart, and unintentionally comic [Wolfie Blitzer, Davey Shuster, and the Shemale] newsies now make Fox-bashing one of their major segments almost every weekend/night. Of course, being terminally stupid [as Wolf proved in Jeopardy! when he went more than $4000 in the hole!], these unintentionally funny lamestream media freaks of nature are simply making their own dwindling audience wonder what all the fuss is about, driving up FoxNEWS numbers as more than a few find that the libtard liars are actually one-sided and Fox by comparison actually "fair and balanced."

The circulation/viewership of the libtard left is cratering/plummeting/diminishing [pick your verb] at about a 7% average every SIX MONTHS as Editor & Publisher notes every half-year, except for the Wall Street Journal, which actually gained a half-percent while USA TODAY lost close to 10% to cede highest circulation to the WSJ---a fact the far left E&P noted in neither the headline, nor even in the first three paragraphs, but HALFWAY THROUGH the FOURTH para. As a former editor at a daily, this is the kind of journalistic crime that only libtard lying tabloids, of which the NYT and WaPo are two, commit on a frequent basis.

The funniest comment about all this from the witless, clueless, airhead Chief Editor of the NYT, a moron named Keller, noted that "nobody watches "Drudgereport" any more." Keller, of course, is unaware that Drudge recently moved about three rungs up the ladder of mos-viewed sites on the web, while the donkey squat fishwrap NYT website fell two rungs the same period---with Drudge passing the NYT like the benighted ship that it is.

Pinch Sulzberger better sell what remains of his family legacy, as he is becoming the Jeff Immelt of the newspaper world.

Obama Numbers Plummet Almost as fast as Keith Odorboy's & MSNBC's

Dear Leader losing "Dearness"

American Thinker has a nice graph on how rapidly the American people are realizing what a complete mistake they made last year in electing a clown.

And there's a graph from TVNewser demonstrating on how FoxNEWS has CRUSHED the competition over the last 12 months in a steady increase in viewership. Of special interest is a Pew report mentioned by one commenter:

FNC: 39% Republican, 33% Democratic, 22% Independent
CNN: 18% Republican, 51% Democratic, 23% Independent
MSNBC: 18% Republican, 45% Democratic, 27% Independent

This would indicate more democrats are watching fox than MSNBCs total audience. Cant get anymore fair and balanced than that.

Lets see the libs here spin that…HOBO

And of course, the libtards always profess that "only old people" watch Fox. Study the chart and you'll find that the coveted 25-54 viewership slice for O'Reilly is around 900,000 which is more than three times as many as the less than 300K viewers who watch Odorboy. And basically Nancy Grace ties Keith-O while Campbell B is less than 200K---always great to mention when you remember that chronic drunk atheist Ted Turner said he would "CRUSH FoxNEWS like a bug" back 13 years ago when the cable news outlet announced it was challenging [Corrupt]NN around the clock. Now in the prime 8PM slot, :FoxNEWS has almost FIVE TIMES the viewers that CNN has, and imbecile-in-chief Jonathan Klein refuses to replace nitwit Brown with Lou Dobbs, who actually draws better numbers than the non-journalist Brown. Nor will Zucker replace the Odorboy show which is obviously on life support.

The GE prostitute-in-chief Jeff Immelt is hoping for a government subsidy, I guess. NBC's ratings are down across the board and not even SNL & 30Rock can keep that scow barge above the waterline.

Unraveling Begins For Obama as NBC Chicago Affiliate Scores Him on Fort Hood.

NBC Chicago may be different than the suck-up affiliate in S.Florida, but this was on its website:

After news broke out of the shooting at the Fort Hood Army post in Texas, the nation watched in horror as the toll of dead and injured climbed. The White House was notified immediately and by late afternoon, word went out that the president would speak about the incident prior to a previously scheduled appearance. At about 5 p.m., cable stations went to the president. The situation called for not only his trademark eloquence, but also grace and perspective.
But instead of a somber chief executive offering reassuring words and expressions of sympathy and compassion, viewers saw a wildly disconnected and inappropriately light president making introductory remarks. At the event, a Tribal Nations Conference hosted by the Department of Interior's Bureau of Indian affairs, the president thanked various staffers and offered a "shout-out" to "Dr. Joe Medicine Crow -- that Congressional Medal of Honor winner." Three minutes in, the president spoke about the shooting, in measured and appropriate terms. Who is advising him?
Anyone at home aware of the major news story of the previous hours had to have been stunned. An incident like this requires a scrapping of the early light banter. The president should apologize for the tone of his remarks, explain what has happened, express sympathy for those slain and appeal for calm and patience until all the facts are in. That's the least that should occur.

This guy is beginning to wear very thin, and his insane Speaker of the House is going to get him diselected in 2012.
Kimberley Strassel at the WSJ has a more long-term view. She calls this November poll a "tipping point:"

Gerry Connolly? The freshman Democrat last year won the 11th congressional district, a Northern Virginia suburb of Washington that has trended blue. Mr. Obama cleaned up 57% of voters, and the district was hailed as an example of a new tide toward Democrats. Mr. Connolly, feeling safe, has supported every aspect of the Democratic agenda, from stimulus to health care.

Tuesday, those suburban voters came swinging back. Mr. McDonnell won 55% of the vote, improving John McCain's number by 13 points. Two more Democratic incumbents on the local ballot went down to GOP contenders. Local businessman Keith Fimian has already announced a rematch against Mr. Connolly; he outraised him by $100,000 in his first fund-raising quarter.

Forget the freshmen—how about Virginia's ninth district, home to 27-year-incumbent Rick Boucher? That's coal country, though Mr. Boucher, confident in incumbency, has been playing a dangerous game of shepherding through his party's climate bill. Will Morefield, a little-known Republican running for the Virginia House of Delegates, centered his campaign against that legislation. He beat the Democratic incumbent by 14 points. Mr. McDonnell? He won a devastating 66% of the district vote.

These are the numbers the 49 Democrats who sit in McCain districts are dissecting. The mass defection in the independent vote, the uptick in the angry-senior vote, the swing in suburban voters, the drop-off in Democratic turnout—the figures have even hot incumbent blood running cold. The White House can shout that this is not a referendum on the president's policies. What vulnerable Democrat wants to take that chance?

The White House and the congressional leadership saw this coming, and it is why Speaker Nancy Pelosi is force-marching her health bill to a vote tomorrow. She's not about to give her members time to absorb the ugly results, or to be further rattled by next week's Veteran's Day break, when they go home for a repeat of the August furies. If not now, she knows, maybe never.

Look for it, nonetheless, to be a squeaker. A lot of Democrats are getting a sneaky suspicion Mrs. Pelosi is willing to sacrifice their seats on the altar of liberal government health care. Combined with the election results and Mr. Obama's falling poll numbers, this is no recipe for loyalty. Hello, tipping point. Hello, even crazier Washington.

Into the Valley of Death rode the 218, more or less.....

Berlin Wall Twentieth Anniverrsary: No Dear Leader Brobambi---Too "Busy!"

The USA has abandoned any pretense at leadership in international affairs as the cafe-au-lait "Tween" wavers on the far edge of pre-pubescence in foreign affairs and decides the water is too chilly!

The Red Queen: Off With Their Heads!

John Fund of the WSJ has a few choice quotes of Speaker of the House Pelosi's Dem minions who believe that advanced dementia has set in on her 1990-page dog's breakfast of lunacy. Of course, the AARP cadres and a rump-parliament of AMA also says they support it, but this is simply another indication that swine-flu encephalitis is rotting the DNC from the top down. And unlike libtard fabulation artists like Jonathan Allen who pulls out "quotes by sources who wish to remain anonymous" from his nether regions at the drop of a hat, John Fund quotes Democrats WILLING TO GO ON THE RECORD:

That's not how many of her own troops see it. Democratic Rep. Parker Griffith of Alabama told Politico.com that members are "very, very sensitive" to the fact that the agenda being pushed by party leaders has "the potential to cost some of our front-line members their seats" On health care, added New Jersey Democrat Bill Pascrell: "People who had weak knees before are going to have weaker knees now."

So those "anonymous" quotes from JournoList lying libtards [excuse tautology] don't register any more. Ben Smith tries to equal fake "quotes" without attribution if Allen gets too far ahead of him. Here's Fund's summary of the Madness of Queen Nancy:
T

hat the bill would be a job killer isn't the only concern. Democrats worry about a backlash from the one-fourth of seniors enrolled in Medicare Advantage -- a program that faces steep cuts in both the likely Senate and House bills.

But Speaker Pelosi isn't about to step back. In fact, she plans to force her troops to vote on health care just one day after Friday's jobless numbers are due, which are likely to show unemployment still growing. "When I take this bill to the floor, it will win," she proclaimed earlier this year.

One Democratic House moderate says the leadership has mislearned a lesson from the 1994 collapse of Hillary Clinton's health care bill. "They believe they lost the elections that year because they failed to pass anything," he says. "But they forget it might have been even worse if they'd passed the wrong bill."

The obsession with passing a clearly flawed and overly complex health care bill does indeed recall the classic movie in which Major Nicholson (played memorably by Alec Guinness) convinces his fellow British POWs in Thailand to build a railway bridge for their Japanese captors -- losing touch with the larger reality that the bridge would be used by the enemy against his own people.

John Feenery, who worked for then-House Minority Leader Bob Michel, sees many similarities with Congress's ill-fated rush to pass "catastrophic" health coverage for seniors in 1988. "Like the catastrophic bill, the Democrats' health care bill frontloads the pain and backloads the gain," he told CNN last month. Because Democrats wanted to avoid a negative deficit score from the Congressional Budget Office, taxes went up immediately while benefits were phased in. But seniors revolted. House Ways and Means Chairman Dan Rostenkowski was famously chased down a Chicago street by an angry mob. In November, 1989 -- almost exactly 20 years ago -- Congress took the extraordinary step of repealing the catastrophic health care law.

Should the far more complex health care bill now being debated pass, no one expects it could be fully repealed. But Democrats surely would pay a political price for passing a liberal bill with no bipartisan support. Like Major Nicholson on the River Kwai, they may wake up to find they built a monument to a set of presumptions that were really a form of madness.

Speaker Botox will have to tell her galley slaves to "let them eat cake" and I just can't wait for the avalanche of sh*t to begin rolling downhill while the jobless numbers go through the roof.

Barone Berates "Gangster Government" and SEIU is BIGGEST Loser on Tuesday.

Michael Barone used to put out an amazing encyclopedia of Congressional districts every session with a fellow named Grant Uffisa [sp?] that micro-analyzed each CD and gave its past electoral history for a generation or so. Michael is sane and sober and intelligent, so he gets little air time on the rant shows filled with the Keith Overbites & DUI unconvicted killer Rick Sanchez---he is certainly glad about that! Here is his insight on Tuesday:

[Tuesday night on TV] you missed seeing the guy who may have been the biggest loser of all—a man who according to recently released White House logs has been a guest in the White House 22 times since Barack Obama became president, more than any other single individual.

That man is Andy Stern, who has boasted that the Service Employees International Union, which he heads, ponied up something like $60 million for Barack Obama and other Democrats in the 2008 campaign cycle. Altogether, Mr. Stern and other labor union leaders reportedly gave Democrats some $400 million last year.

This was, to borrow a word from Mr. Obama, an audacious gamble. Unions these days represent only 8% of private-sector employees (and that's counting General Motors and Chrysler as private sector) and some unions went into debt to make these contributions. Public employee unions of course are financed by taxpayers, who pay the salaries from which dues are extracted, but even so their resources are ultimately limited.

What have the unions gotten in return? Some not insignificant things. The Obama administration bludgeoned General Motors and Chrysler bondholders, in what I called an episode of "gangster government," and effectively turned over the two auto companies to the United Auto Workers. The building trades got project labor agreements—i.e., plenty of dues money flowing to their coffers—in the $787 billion stimulus package.

A lot of that stimulus money went as well to state and local governments. The goal was to spare public employee union members from the vicissitudes of the recession to which the rest of us are subject—and to keep that dues money flowing in.

But the union leaders have been frustrated on their No. 1 goal, the card check bill that would effectively abolish the secret ballot in unionization elections. A couple of bulky guys in varsity jackets visit your home and, um, persuade you to sign a card, and later the union—with the help of a mandatory arbitration clause—impose contracts on employees and rake in the dues money.

Republican National Committee Chairman Michael Steele (left) stands with Virginia's Governor-elect Bob McDonnell on Nov. 3.
Just about every House Democrat voted for the misleadingly titled "Employee Free Choice Act," and every Senate Democrat cosponsored it when George W. Bush was president and it had no chance of becoming law. As Barack Obama was inaugurated, Atlantic blogger Marc Ambinder was speculating on how many Republicans would come on board.

Instead, support evaporated as Democrats from places as dissimilar as Arkansas and California thought hard about what life would be like with card check. Today the bill looks dead no matter how many Democrats are elected to Congress.

And after Tuesday's elections, it looks like fewer Democrats will be elected to Congress in 2010 than in 2008. In the election results and the exit polls there are clear signs that the Obama majority coalition has splintered.

Barone has another group of analytical gems about the 2008 election that bears a lot of reflection:

Mr. Obama benefited last year from a big turnout of young voters, who backed him by a 66% to 32% margin. This year young voters formed only about half as large a percentage of the electorate in Virginia and New Jersey as they did in 2008, and in Virginia they voted about as Republican as their elders.

The big-government programs of Obama Democrats evidently have less appeal than those trendy posters and inspiring rallies and cries of "We are the change we are seeking." I have yet to see survey research showing that young Americans want to work under union contracts, with their 5,000 pages of work rules and rigid seniority systems. That doesn't sound like a tune that appeals to the iPod generation.

Economically, the Obama majority was a top-and-bottom coalition. The Democratic ticket carried voters with incomes under $50,000 and over $200,000, and lost those in between. As the shrewd liberal analyst Thomas Edsall has noted, there's a tension between what these groups want. High earners in non-Southern suburbs have been voting Democratic since the mid-1990s largely because of their liberal views on cultural issues; low earners vote Democratic because they want more government money shoveled their way.

And it's clear that the high-end "culture-vulture" elitists on the metaphorical Upper West Side of the country may be making an agonizing reappraisal of where their true interests lie:
T

uesday's elections suggest those whose money gets shoveled are having second thoughts about this odd-couple coalition. In Virginia, Republican gubernatorial candidate Bob McDonnell carried affluent and immigrant-heavy Fairfax County, which Barack Obama carried by 21%. In New Jersey, Republican Christopher Christie cut Democrat Jon Corzine's margin in demographically similar Bergen County from 16% in 2005 to 1%. A Republican was elected county executive in Westchester County, New York, and the Republican candidate for state Supreme Court in Pennsylvania carried the four-county suburban Philadelphia area—turf that voted 57% for Barack Obama in 2008.

A health-care bill financed by either higher taxes on high earners or on those with generous, employer-provided health insurance, looks like a hard sell in high-earner constituencies. It looks politically risky especially for newly elected Democrats.

Mr. McDonnell carried nine of Virginia's 11 congressional districts, and the three districts that Democrats captured from Republicans last year voted 62%, 61% and 55% for the Republican this time. No wonder Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid is talking about postponing health-care votes until next year.

The unions' unprecedented political push in 2008 has not been unnoticed by the voters. Mr. Corzine's cozy relationship with public employee union heads proved a liability in New Jersey, and in Virginia Mr. McDonnell campaigned hard against card check and the Obama agenda. The Gallup organization reports that Americans are less pro-union than they have been at any time since it first started asking the question in 1936. Maybe around the country union members will start asking their leaders what they have gotten for all the money they've spent on politics.

As a former COPE organizer in Barone's native Michigan and a member of other unions, I can only guess how a lot of the hard-working types in real unions like AFL-CIO & UAW will look on the flaketard SEIU social activists who promised them money and got them zilch.

Michele Bachmann Gets the JournoList CABAL Kiddies Knickers in a Twist!

It appears that a silly pseudo-journalist named Jonathan Allen fashions himself the TMZ of Politico
The JournoList CABAL of little nasty Ivy-leaf dudes like Jonathan Chait and several other MSM houseboys on the ultra-left posing as journalists? It seems as if Glenn Beck and Rush and Michele are more important than the scatterbrained specimen of dementia now doing a zombie-walk as Speaker of the House. As the snotty little Jonathan [Allen] quotes the usual "anonymous" source:

A conservative Republican House member, speaking on the condition of anonymity, suggested that Bachmann’s views — and her willingness to state them — make it hard for her to keep staff. “When your captain’s crazy, it’s time to find a new ship,” the lawmaker said

Jonathan uses the usual pre-pubescent anonymous quotes that can be used for dozens of Hill denizens. I heard the very same quote concerning Senator Barbara Mikulski of MD about two decades ago when she would have tempestuous tantrums due to her absurd [lack of] stature, she's four-ten in heels, and her deviant sexual tastes. At least Michele is an attractive female, something Democrats fear more than conservative blacks. Maybe Jonathan should concentrate on what are traditionally REAL newsmakers.

You know, the botox-poisoned airhead ditz named Nancy? I guess it isn't news when you have a cowering craven hem-kissing lap-puppy to dictators [Chavez, Ahmedinejad, Putin, Ortega...] inhabiting the Oval Office, the one who answers non-stop insults to the US from Iran with more simpering step-and-fetch-it yes-sir, please-sir responses.

We have a dysfunctional House, Senate, and Executive Branch and lil Jonathan Allen and his bunkmate Ben Smith can only yammer about Michele, Glenn, and Rush. And don't forget about Mark Lavin, who sold more books last year than any lefty has for the last decade!!!

Why not take the focus off a floundering collection of Demwit imbeciles by doing the old Saul Alinsky trick of demonizing, as the CABAL of JournoListers appears to do?

It sure takes the pressure off that task of being a REAL journalist!

Brainless Unread Ditz Drools Over Rush Limbaugh

MoDoDo of the NYT has another ignorant screed against Rush Limbaugh, and it may be because Rush gets about 20 times the attention that this barren hag gets with her NYT "columny." [I'm sure illiterate libtards will consider her Oh So Clever for that!]

She can remember the wine he ordered about 20 years ago, but can't lay a glove on him with her Airhead attempts at sucker-punching putdowns.

...the tactics of Limbaugh, Palin, Cheney & Fille are more cynical: They spin certainty, ignoring their side’s screw-ups, and they exploit patriotism, labeling all critics as traitors.

In an interview on “Fox News Sunday With Chris Wallace,” Limbaugh accused the president of trying to destroy the economy — yes, the same economy that W. came within a whisker of ruining.

“I have to think that it may be on purpose,” Limbaugh said, “because this is just outrageous, what is happening — a denial of liberty, an attack on freedom.”

Asked about Afghanistan, another W. cataclysm that has left Obama agonizing, Limbaugh stated, “I also don’t think he cares much about it.” Again suggesting that the president is an unpatriotic fop, the radio ranter averred: “He wants to manage this rather than achieve victory.”

So it's wrong to have strong beliefs in America. Elsewhere this childless has-been reverts to name-calling {"narcissist," "ranter," and "chickenhawk," among other epithets] while presuming to defend a witless Dear Leader with small-caliber ammo in her tiny brainpan-cavity.

The Wall Street Journal now has more than double the circulation of the NYT and is rising while the NYT continues to hemorrhage readership because of second-rate verbiage from a superannuated hack. As well as being absolutely clueless about the true intent of the Chicago Mafia.

Pelosi 2K Page Monstrosity Headed for Dead-Tree Cemetery?

Speaker of the Asylum Pelosi has demonstrated the restraint needed to keep her health plan to merely 1990 pages, thus avoiding the convenient 2K moniker I used above.

The generalized insanity of Dear Leader, Dingy Harry, and Botox-Brainiac SanFranNan all combine to make what the WSJ calls a "runaway train." And tonight, just to check in on one of the inmates' little helpers, a creature named Maddow on [P]MSNBC, this permanent substitute for a talk show host was opining on the great Republican disgrace that Bloomberg was only winning his mayoral re-election job by a margin of 5%! Then she checked in with a creature from Hollyweird about Joe Lieberman, whom said creature had led a "people's rebellion" against two years ago, and how it was "impossible" for Lieberman to hold up the HealthCare Bill's passage---but I had to switch to ESPN for the latest LeBron dissing of Dwight, or was it Allen Iverson dissing the bench he sat on for much of the game while watching the Grizzlies up front and personal....

Wolf Blitzer, after effing up so much on "Celebrity Jeopardy" that he attained a record $4000 IN THE HOLE, has demonstrated similar lack of knowledge and other skill sets normally required to host a News/Talk program, but he's on for several hours daily, a sort of Dan Rather for the terminally stupid. After Wolf critiqued SNL's skit ridiculing Dear Leader Brobambi for "factual accuracy." this candidate for the world's ugliest dog had three possible contenders, including the witless Anita Dunn, on yesterday to explain WH communications skills, or lack of same.... They couldn't or didn't, take your pick.

But Wolf will remain as long as C[orrupt] News Network has a cretin named Jonathan Klein, or is it Ezra, or is it some other Klein, calling the shots.

Remember when terminal drunk atheist Ted Turner said in 1996 that C[orrupt] News Network would "squash" FoxNEWS like "a bug?"

Where's Ted now and why was he kicked out of the CEO job of the network he himself founded and owns?

Check your local asylum....

Happy Days May be Just a Year Away!

The NYT has an article that even the retarded ruminants in Iowa are having second "thoughts" [sort of] about Our Dear Leader.

In few places did people get a longer and closer look at Mr. Obama than in Iowa, a swing state home to deep strains of both conservatism and liberalism. Mr. Obama was a constant presence here during the formative months of his candidacy. Many voters have pictures of him on their mantels, looking him in the eye as they took a measure of the man and the politician before giving him a crucial victory in the caucuses. A social studies teacher who saw Mr. Obama on his maiden visit here wonders whether momentum from the election is gone forever. A retired electrical engineer who became a Democrat to support Mr. Obama believes that the president too often blames others for his troubles. And a teacher who voted for Mr. Obama because she was fed up with President George W. Bush does not trust this administration any more than the previous one.

ABC-TV may have encapsulated the feelings of more sophisticated Americans with its new much-hyped scifi series called "V." White House aides say that Dear Leader wasn't watching election returns tonite and that might be because he was glimpsing what a lot of people think happened to the USA when they bought into his vapid vaporous twaddle:

a message of hope and reconciliation based on compromise and promises to marshal technology for a better future that will include universal health care.

The news media swoons in admiration -- one simpering anchorman even shouts at a reporter who asks a tough question: "Why don't you show some respect?!" The public is likewise smitten, except for a few nut cases who circulate batty rumors on the Internet about the leader's origins and intentions. The leader, undismayed, offers assurances that are soothing, if also just a tiny bit condescending: "Embracing change is never easy."

So, does that sound like anyone you know? Oh, wait -- did I mention the leader is secretly a totalitarian space lizard who's come here to eat us?

Yes, that was a custom among Obama's recent ancestors on his Drunken Bigamist Daddy's side of the family until just recently, perhaps, although they were just ordinary primates who didn't fly in from outer space.

The Chicago Tribune [remember when a "tribune" in Roman Republic days actually spoke on behalf of the people? Not the dictatorship of the patrician elites condescending to those mere plebeians?] goes on with its review as it ridicules the majority of its readership who voted in this Chicago Style Deep-Dish Cannibal-fest with a dissident Catholic priest:

A handful of dissidents hold out against the rapturous reception given the V's. Some are simply uneasy, such as the youthful priest Father Jack (Joel Gretsch, "The 4400"), who sharply criticizes the Vatican's embrace of the V's as divine creations: "Rattlesnakes are God's creatures too."

I am thinking that the Tea Party people are those brave souls who didn't buy into the mass hysteria. And the atheist press will surely hate it that a priest is among the leaders of the resistance.

Don't the Tea Party and Christian proles know what's good for them? Worcester Sauce and other condiments, perhaps, as the "V" types search for a special "mineral water."

Evian, or perhaps Pelligrini, to make the internal organs wash down those ACORN-lizard throats!

Fox TV Network Now Begins to Dominate; WSJ Another Murdoch entity Now on Top; And Beck, Lavin Should both get a Shot at Prime Time!!& ???

Fox TV is getting a hot World Series and NFL football lineup that might allow it to pass up CBS on total viewers. The Wall Street Journal just climbed over USA Today to become the biggest US newspaper in circulation. And Keith Olbermann's obnoxious rants are finally dragging [P]MSNBC's cable news operation down to CNN's subbasement level just where it belongs. CNN is merely corrupt and one-sided. Olbermann's rantfests are mean-spirited demonstrations of an active mental illness beginning to surpass itself in vicious dishonesty.

Which got Keith-O an invitation to a closed session with the retarded moron the country has to constitutionally accept, barring impeachement, as the C-in-Chief of the [formerly] Greatest Nation in the world---Dear Leader Brobambi. Baghdad Bob Gibbs shows that Scott McClellan can be exceeded in vapid moronic stupidity in the WH Spokesman job.

Finally, as I noted recently, FoxNEWS has got to do something with Glenn Beck because his 3,111,000 viewers at 5PM exceed the combined viewership of K-O & his "sport-of-nature" sidekick Maddow cume in all four hours. And Mark Lavin, who has sold a million copies of "Liberty & Tyranny," should be given a shot on FoxNEWS at some point to see if his linebacker body in a tiny voice might work on cable talk shows.

WSJ Passes USAToday as Top Circulation US Newspaper

Editor & Publisher buried the lede down to the fourth para, second sentence in the article linked above. Here's the bad news for the Old Grey Lady Tabloid Streetwalker & the rest of the Lefty Fishwrap Birdcage bottom dead-tree @ss-wipe material:

Circulation at many of the country's largest newspapers continued a steep slide as the Audit Bureau of Circulations Monday morning released the latest figures for the six months ending September 2009 -- proving yet again that the industry can't shake the dramatic declines that have taken hold over the past several years.

On a comparable basis, ABC reported that for the 379 newspapers filing with the organization, average daily circulation plunged 10.6% to 30,395,652 -- one of the most severe drops in overall circulation. Sunday circulation for 562 reporting newspapers was down 7.4% to 40,012,253.

Check out E&P's list of the top 25 daily papers in the nation by circ, here. Go here for a list of the top 25 papers on Sunday. And For a list of the top 10 gainers this time around, go here.

USA Today had earlier announced a 17% hit. The Wall Street Journal overtook USA Today as the No. 1 daily in the country, according to ABC. Circulation at the Journal was up slightly, 0.6% to 2,024,269.

Here are the top ten gainers:

YORK (PA.) DAILY RECORD -- 55,370 -- 16.45%
WOMEN'S WEAR DAILY -- 53,142 -- 14.31%
THE OAKLAND (MICH.) PRESS -- 68,067 -- 7.26%
LAS VEGAS REVIEW-JOURNAL -- 175,841 -- 6.56%
CHATTANOOGA (TENN.) TIMES FREE PRESS -- 69,569 -- 2.18%

OGDEN (UTAH) STANDARD-EXAMINER -- 62,062 -- 1.89%
NEW HAVEN (CONN.) REGISTER -- 70,559 -- 0.79%
MOBILE (ALA.) PRESS-REGISTER -- 92,849 -- 0.75%
THE WALL STREET JOURNAL -- 2,024,269 -- 0.61%
THE FORUM, FARGO, N.D. -- 50,131 -- 0.39%

Only a dishonest libtard blog like E&P would not note that the amount the WSJ gained was probably more than all the rest of the tiny publications listed combined, if counted in numerical rather than a percentage basis.
Here are the top 25 LOSERS:

USA Today had earlier announced a 17% hit. The Wall Street Journal overtook USA Today as the No. 1 daily in the country, according to ABC. Circulation at the Journal was up slightly, 0.6% to 2,024,269.

Compared to the same six-month period ending September 2008, daily (Monday-Friday) circulation at The New York Times is down 7.2% to 927,851. Sunday fell 2.6% to 1,400,302.

The Los Angeles Times reported its daily circ is off 11% to 657,467 and 6.7% on Sunday to 983,702.

Daily circ at The Washington Post fell 6.4% to 582,844 while Sunday was down 5% to 822,208.

Daily circ at the Chicago Tribune decreased 9.7% to 465,892. Sunday was down 7.1% to 803,220.

The San Francisco Chronicle lost more than a quarter of its daily circ, down 25.8% to 251,782. Sunday was off more than 22% to 306,705.

Daily at The Star-Ledger in Newark, N.J., dropped 22.2% to 246,006 and 18.5% on Sunday to 371,060.

The Boston Globe's daily circ decreased 18.4% to 264,105. Sunday lost 16.9% to 418,529.

Daily circulation at the Chicago Sun-Times dropped 12% to 275,641. Sunday circ at that paper fell 1.8% to 251,260. In a statement released this morning, the Sun-Times noted a price increase to 75 cents from 50 cents. Single-copy sales are down while daily home-delivered papers grew 5.5%.

The Miami Herald reported a daily circ decline of 23% to 162,260. Sunday fell 14.6% to 238,613.

Daily circ at The Plain Dealer in Cleveland was down 11.2% to 271,180, while Sunday was down 4.9% to 390,636.

Daily circulation at the Star Tribune in Minneapolis fell 5.5% to 304,543. Sunday was off 8.3% to 477,562.

In Houston, the Chronicle's daily circ declined 14.2% to 384,419 while Sunday fell 6.3% to 547,387.

Daily circ at The Arizona Republic in Phoenix fell 12.3% to 316,874. Sunday was almost flat (-0.8%) to 458,992.

The Baltimore Sun's daily circ dropped 14.7% to 186,639. Sunday declined 8% to 322,491.

The Orange County Register lost 10.1% of its daily circulation to 212,293. Sunday fell 3.4% to 288,174.

McClatchy and the NYT Co. claimed their revenues both gained at a rate of 6.7%, but anyone who believes anything coming out of Pinch Sulzberger's collapsing disinformation apparatus must have a bucket of hair perched on the top of their necks.

A mental defective "editor" of E&P named Greg Mitchell has a hilarious E&P article

concerning leaks about the Plame movie sponsored by serial movie loozer Sean Penn, another libtard high-school dropout who is making movies that lose more money than ever, but who keeps getting Oscar nominations from an industry that like its dead-tree counterpart in the news business, won't be around much longer.

The flick will be another platform for disseminating the libtard lies and urban legends the DNC RICO churns out to bamboozle the half-wits that call themselves the "reality-based community."

Like Pinch Sulzberger, Harvey Weinstein and the other ultra-left Hollyweird retardos are committing some sort of elaborate public suicide ritual which amuses people unable to appreciate the subtle nuanced "reality-based copmunity's" pathetic propagation of hoaxes and support for criminal organizations like ACORN & MediaMutters & other polymorphous perversions of the political scene in the US.

Russians Violate Missile Treaty, Obama Pulls Missile Defense Out of Poland & Czech Republic: Tit for What?

The Washington Times has an article on Russian violations of the START treaty, which is due to end this year. Dear Leader Bow-to-His-Betters already yanked the Missile Sites designed to protect Europe from Iranian missiles, albeit to soothe the Russian neo-Stalinist Putin. In return, of course, Brobambi got nothing. And Hilarious, his SecState, presented a "RESET" button to Moscow's leaders with a mistranslated term. And, of course, the missile site yanking from Poland was thoughtlessly done on the 70th anniversary of the Soviet invasion of Eastern Poland in collusion with Stalin's mirror-image Adolf Hitler.

What does the Russian leadership think of the US Vice President in Romania, preaching NATO steadfastness in the face of a neo-Soviet Russia?

Actions always speak louder than words.

Pope Invites Conservative Anglicans to Merge

The Economist has an interesting article which won't be noted in the US press, now totally encased in a secular materialist Marxist-Leninist thought cocoon, about putting the Archbishop of Canterbury, Rowan Williams, into an even more absurd position than the causes he espouses, such as Shar'ia Law for Muslims in England.

The pope’s scheme will make it even harder for the Anglican leader to sustain an already difficult balancing act. To keep his worldwide Communion together, he is hewing to a relatively conservative line on homosexuality that would involve gay-friendly Americans settling for a sort of associate status. But in his own Church, he has gone along with a liberal policy on women. Preparations are in train for the ordination of female bishops. And there is likely to be an end to the procedural devices allowing traditionalist clergy to avoid serving alongside (or, in future, under) women. That may have persuaded the Vatican to act: it had to decide how to respond to conservatives who felt the Church of England was about to make their position untenable.

Hitherto, an uneasy alliance of low-church evangelicals and Anglo-Catholics has struggled to resist liberal Anglicanism. “This will change the balance in the Church of England in favour of the liberals,” says Jonathan Bartley of Ekklesia, a think-tank. “The evangelicals won’t go to Rome and they may now be abandoned by their Anglo-Catholic allies.” Some think (or fear) that as many as one in seven Church of England priests could convert.

However, in balance, allowing large numbers of married Anglican priests to enter the RC communion will present another large reason for diocesan priests in the Catholic Church to themselves be allowed to marry.

Tom Fingar, Traitor or Obama's Butt Boy?

Iran has a secret facility that the US and France knew about for three years before outing Iran at the Pittsburgh summit, after Sarkozy, whose country had developed the intelligence had been begged by Obama not to break the news at the UN.

Recently, I was watching a half-wit female on World Focus explain, after all this, how the NIE assessment in 2007 meant the Iranians weren't developing nukes. Dallywally was the biyotch disinformation libtard who replaced a better "anchor" named Savage who was more balanced on issues. It seems only libtards can be anchors on PBS programs. So the NIE lie has a thousand rebirths, especially from the libtard lefties who repeat it, as Dallywally did, long after the NIE assessment has been proven false.

Fingar is unapologetic for being a traitor. And here is Ken Timmerman's take:

Some of the analysts who worked on the December 2007 NIE have told reporters that they felt an overwhelming sense of political responsibility in drafting their report: to make sure they didn’t give President George W. Bush an excuse for launching military strikes on Iran.

Former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger publicly chided the analysts who wrote the NIE for politicizing intelligence. They saw themselves as “a kind of check on, instead of a part of, the executive branch,” Kissinger said. He excoriated them for seeking to become “surrogate policy-makers and advocates,” instead of analysts.

The goal of the analysts writing the NIE was widely seen as tying the hands of President George W. Bush on Iran and specifically taking a military option off the table.

Former State Department intelligence analyst Tom Fingar, who coordinated the NIE, told an audience at the New Americas Foundation that the Iran NIE had been written and rewritten by June 2007, but that he and other analysts weren’t pleased with it because it repeated earlier estimates that Iran was continuing to pursue nuclear weapons.

Fingar intimated that he was afraid this conclusion would give the Bush administration an excuse to launch military strikes on Iran, so he said he held the report, hoping something would come up.

“Then we got new information — significant new information,” Fingar said. “And then a lot more information came in,” causing the CIA analysts to look at everything they thought they knew “in the light of the new information.”

The dramatically rewritten estimate now concluded that Iran had shut down its nuclear weapons program, and appeared to have been based on information that Asghari provided to the CIA during debriefings.

Sources who read the 1,500 source notes to the 140-page report said that its most dramatic assertion was based on “a single, unvetted source,” most likely Asghari.

But when Newsmax asked Asghari personally through a trusted intermediary how he felt about the way the information he had provided the CIA had been used in the NIE, his response was startling.

“That’s not what I told the CIA,” he said. “I didn’t tell them that the nuclear weapons program had been shut down, but that it was ongoing.”

Congressional Republicans are now calling on the intelligence community to review the December 2007 NIE using a “red team” of outside analysts.

An intelligence community fact sheet on the Qom enrichment facility released by the White House recently claimed that the new information on Qom “does not contradict our 2007 assessment of Iran’s nuclear program.”

It seems that the "intelligence community" has not learned from its treasonous undermining of Bush and that the White House might be happy to be fed misinformation that reinforces its own cowardly agenda.

Fingar, of course, is in think tank heaven, and Panetta cannot control the pro-Jihadist wing of his own CIA.

Granholm Gives Michigan the Canuckistan Disease

Border-Jumper Canuck Granholm thankfully cannot spread her mental disability acquired in the Great White North by running for national office. So she spreads her blight of Canadian DNA called taxation without real representation to the hapless former prosperity zone called Michigan. Whose economy resembles its NFL franchise.

The idea is to put as many as possible freeloading "faineant" worthless public employees as possible onto the relief roll known as the Michigan public sector:

Following her 2007 misadventure, Ms. Granholm promised: "I'm not ever going to raise taxes again." That pledge lasted about 18 months. Now she wants $600 million more. Among the ideas under consideration: an income tax increase with a higher top rate, a sales tax on services, a freeze on the personal income tax exemption (which would be a stealth inflation tax on all Michigan families), a 3% surtax on doctors, and fees on bottled water and cigarettes. To their credit, Republicans who control the Michigan Senate are holding out for a repeal of the 22% business tax surcharge.

As for Ms. Granholm, she and House speaker Andy Dillon continue to bow to public-sector unions. There are now 637,000 public employees in Michigan compared to fewer than 500,000 workers left in manufacturing. Government is the largest employer in the state, but the number of taxpayers to support these government workers is shrinking. The budget deadline is November 1, and Ms. Granholm is holding out for tax increases rather than paring back state government.

Looks like Michigan will be the first major state run for and by parasites and feeders at the public trough. Barnyard animals and their attendant fleas, flies, and intestinal tapeworms all members of the SEIU.

Obama Narcissism Demands Total Fealty---Or First Amendment Goes Out the Window!

Steve Huntley screams from the housetops in Chicago, a city that knows very well what a shallow pretender this cream-puff POTUS is:

Have you heard the news? President Obama inherited an economic mess from the Bush administration.
You say that's hardly news? But it's been the message sounded over and over by the White House. Top Obama adviser David Axelrod said on one of the Sunday news shows, "He walked in the door, we had the worst economy since the Great Depression." In San Francisco, Obama talked of being "busy with our mop." White House heavy hitter Rahm Emanuel used the worst-economy-since-the-Depression line on a public TV news show.

You'd think it's October 2008, the final month in the Obama presidential candidacy, rather than October 2009, nine months into the Obama presidency. Yet the Obama White House is in full campaign mode -- maybe because it needs to mask the shortcomings of the Obama presidency.

Take, for example, all the talk of inheriting the worst economy since the 1930s crisis. That came in response to the news that the federal deficit hit $1.4 trillion.

Yet just a few months ago, the Obama camp was singing a little different tune. It was under criticism for the $787 billion stimulus package it bulldozed through Congress on grounds that massive spending was needed to keep the unemployment rate from breaching 8 percent. When joblessness hit 9.5 percent in June, Vice President Joe Biden said, "We misread how bad the economy was."

They inherited the worst economy since the Great Depression, or the economy turned out to be worse than they thought. Which is it? It can't be both -- unless your brain is completely addled by the Obama charisma.

Obama is still popular, but polls show the public losing faith in his policies. Another indicator was a ''Saturday Night Live'' skit lampooning Obama for the major accomplishments of his administration -- "jack and squat." If the honeymoon is ending with the American voter, it isn't for obsequious elements of the mainstream media. CNN prostrated itself by fact-checking the ''SNL'' comedy skit.

But that's harmless compared to the virulent campaign against Obama critics carried out by the denizens of MSNBC. Its Obama acolytes seek to demonize opponents of Obama's policies by focusing on most marginal corners of right-wing politics like, for example, the "birthers" who deny Obama is a natural born citizen. The larger scheme is to imply Obama critics are racists.

That's the backdrop to the story of Rush Limbaugh getting booted from a group bidding to buy the St. Louis Rams. He was smeared on CNN and MSNBC with false accusations of making two racist comments. He is an abrasive critic of Obama, so he must be racist, or so goes the left-wing story line. I wouldn't defend everything Limbaugh has ever said, but lies were used to blacklist him from professional football for his political views.

Recently an MSNBC personality accused the U.S. Chamber of Commerce of lobbying for policies that amount to being "treasonous to this country." Remember how liberals roared in outrage at any hint of their patriotism being questioned for criticizing the Iraq War? Well, it's the left that doesn't shy from attacking the patriotism of those it dislikes. Recall the repulsive Moveon.org "General Betray-us" ad against Iraq commander Gen. David Petraeus. Recent opposition to Chicago's Olympic bid was cast as a sign of a lack of patriotism among Obama critics.

The MSNBC blast against the chamber appears to dovetail with what the Politico newspaper reports is a White House and Democratic effort "to marginalize" the business organization. That echoes the administration assault on the Fox News Channel: It says Fox isn't a news organization.

The White House trying to dictate who's a news organization. Democrats out to gut a business group. Obama media allies damning Americans as racist, unpatriotic and treasonous. Is this the America Obama promised when he campaigned to end the cynical and divisive politics of the past?

Baghdad Bob Gibbs should take note of this article being from the Chicago Sun-Times.

Except for CNN cretin-in-chief Klein & his houseboy Wolfie B., everyone except [P]MSNBC gets it on air.

"You don't have to be a weatherman to ......." And I guess now we know the ghost who wrote "Dreams of My Alcoholic Bigamist Daddy."

Beck-Basher Wehner Now Finds Glenn Helpful in Outing Dunn's Maoism

Peter Wehner elsewhere critiqued Glenn Beck as harmful to Conservatism, but from what I've seen of GB, methinks Peter may really be subliminally messaging that Glenn is not helping Republicans of his own ilk, you know, those compromise-seeking types like Gerson, Crist, Graham, Gingrich, and other RINOs who see the Republicans' present problems as stemming from not being accommodating enough with radicals bending the Constitution and ramming ridiculous legislation in a spasm of tyranny of the majority.

The Dems see that the 2010 elections will soon remove the DNC & Chicago Political Machine's boot from the nation's throat---now that ACORN is not handling significant parts of the census-taking which would usher in spectacular gerrymandering which might ensure a Dem House majority even in states which are predominantly conservative. Happily, Breitman's Big Government blog published the courageous underground journalism of Hannah Giles and her "pimp" carrying hidden cameras. Andrew B. & Matt Drudge have taken over FOX's job of offering real investigative journalism to the public, by the only means possible in an era of drive-by media unournalism. Not reporting over 700,000 tea party demonstrators in September to any serious extent was a monstrous demonstration of sheer bigotry by the networks and the unwatched cables. FoxNEWS did show up for that major event.

As a thought experiment, can you remember the burbling and gushing over the Million Man March, led by an anti-Semitic paramilitary generalissimo and then rationally compare that to the thundering silence over an equally large event? [This is real irony, not the Anita Dunn sophomoric silliness]

Wehner quotes Penn Scholar Arthur Waldron's summary of Mao:
“

Mao was the greatest mass murderer of the 20th century. Much of the killing was direct, as in the torture and purges at Yan’an. After the Communist seizure of power in 1949, the practice became countrywide. Mao set his numerical targets openly, and stressed the ‘revolutionary’ importance of killing.” It is said of Mao — who was responsible for the death of some 70 million Chinese — that he derived a “sadistic pleasure” from seeing people put to death in horrible ways.

1'm sure Anita could also "ironically" find a half dozen reasons to call Joe Stalin one of her favorite political philosophers, or perhaps even Adolf Hitler on the importance of an immensely overpoweringly strong central government. Sure they weren't "philosophers," as Anita now protests in contending that one, the conservatives didn't get the "joke" and two, that she was filching from Lee Atwater, where she unconvincingly claims that she found the quote.

Yeah, Anita, Mao Zedong wasn't a political philosopher and that's why hundreds of millions of Chinese were forced to carry around his "little red book" of quotations. Just like she wants the US media to fawn and grovel uncritically in front of the utterances of her Lord and Master, Dear Leader Brobambi.

I wonder if she would finds it was "ironic" from the speech footage that she appeared to be a gullible disciple of Totalitarian politics who actually bought into the Chairman & his genocidal policies. I'll see her irony and raise her with a "joke" that Mao's politics are sort of like "death panels" for the landowners and political opponents that our ObamaCare will supply to our overaged and unproductive parasites over sixty-five who perhaps should be sent to work camps or gulags to continue to be useful citizens.

Of course, already the NYT gatekeepers and media minders like the NYT's Cheryl Stolberg are scolding us uncomprehending masses for taking Dunn's lunacy seriously. The JournoList listserv agitprop serfs are at the moment preparing a combined operations counterattack to Glenn's impertinence in electronic and print circles which spanks Glenn roundly for his inability to savor Anita's deep sense of literary theater in her high school homily.

Or maytbe, just maybe, this woman is simply a freak holdover from the sixties, and an embarrassment to every Democrat with a triple-digit IQ.

Harry Stein on Liberal Fascist "Racism" of Lower Expectations

The cry of "Racism" is a conversational hand grenade thrown by Liberal Fascists when they are being proven wrong, as they invariably usually are, on any number of issues. In a brilliant article in City Journal, Harry Stein expatiates:

.....those liberals who’ve lately been issuing the racism charge so promiscuously (speaking of aberrant hearts and minds) are aiming it not at skinheads living in their parents’ basements or at would-be Klansmen, but at decent Americans with the temerity to object to presidential policies that they believe would damage both the quality of their lives and the nation itself: in short, at Americans acting in the best tradition of democratic citizenship. This is so preposterous that literally millions who’ve never before given the matter any thought are taking notice.

And what they see is what has long been true: that the charge of racism is invariably a crock; indeed, that more than simply an expression of (often contrived) liberal moral outrage, it’s intended to be the ultimate conversation stopper. Ward Connerly, long the leader of the fight against racial preferences in America, observes that he’s had the experience more times than he cares to count of speaking before an audience, knowing that 99 of 100 people agree with him. “But if there’s one angry black person in the audience who disagrees,” he says, “that person controls the room. He’ll go on about the last 400 years, and institutional racism, and ‘driving while black,’ and the other 99 will just sit there and fold like a cheap accordion.” And Connerly is black himself. For the liberal opinion makers and trend setters who’ve set themselves up as America’s racial referees, the accused racist is always presumed to be guilty of at least something.

[my emph]
Ward Connerly and Michael Steele are true gentlemen and scholars. Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson are racist pimps and shakedown hustlers. Given the present state of American politics, guess who gets the face time and fawning "respect" from pseudo-journalists like Tweety Bird Matthews and DUI hit-and-run CNN drunk Rick Sanchez? [The NFL suspends players for DUI malfeasance, CNN promotes them!] But I digress. Harry Stein implies that Obama himself is responsible for much of the toxic sewage floating at ordinary Americans from anointed gatekeepers on the Upper West Side:

Countless ordinary Americans are tired of being called racists for no other reason than that their political and social beliefs are uncongenial to those on America’s college campuses or New York’s Upper West Side. President Obama himself may have set this seismic shift in motion in July with his off-the-cuff and wholly inaccurate attribution of racism to a decent Cambridge cop for the sin of doing his job. But the latest spate of charges from his surrogates is the topper. Here’s hoping it leads to the honest conversation on race that Obama’s attorney general, Eric Holder, claims to want.

Harry follows through with a nice little disquisition on tit versus tat:

That conversation is long overdue, so let’s have at it. Let’s talk, for starters, about the shocking double standard in the way liberals and conservatives are allowed to deal with race and racism. Why is it okay for liberals to belittle Clarence Thomas endlessly as an Uncle Tom? And how does liberal cartoonist Ted Rall get away with calling Condoleezza Rice a “house nigga,” and his colleague Jeff Danziger with drawing her as a mammy in a caricature as cruelly demeaning as anything in Julius Streicher’s Der Stürmer?

Let’s talk, too, about racial profiling—and start paying appropriate attention to the statistical evidence cited by Heather Mac Donald establishing that the disproportionate arrest and incarceration rates of minorities are explained not by racism but by disproportionate rates of criminality. Let’s talk about how American business has long been subject to blackmail by Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton in the name of social justice, and about the many other ways in which the regime of racial preferences has sowed division and corruption in this country. Let’s talk about how even after the Duke rape fiasco, the media continue to give credence to every racism charge; indeed, how just this week, vicious (and transparently phony) statements about race attributed to Rush Limbaugh uncritically disseminated by mainstream outlets helped sink Limbaugh’s bid for NFL ownership. And yes, let’s talk about white liberal bigotry, the bigotry of low expectations, and how it cripples and demeans those it supposedly aims to help. Exhibit A might be the recent call by the Tucson Unified School District to revamp its disciplinary system to cut down on the suspensions and expulsions of minority students (but not white ones) so that the numbers reveal “no ethnic/racial disparities.”

Libtard Fascists like Ezra Klein get promoted to Washington Post and TV celebtard status by gatekeeper hypocrite-in-chief Charlie Rose, who never met a leftist ass he didn't want to kiss, or at least dance to each cheek. PBS Liberal Fascist convicted DUI offender [though unlike Sanchez, not a hit-and-run perp] Bill Moyers still refuses to give Robert Caro an interview about his homophobe days as LBJ's gatekeeper---when he was still a "Baptist minister" and not a con-man shill for social diseases of the mind. But that's okay for girly-man Charlie Rose, whose conservative guests are as unlikely as the proverbial Black Swan, to appear on his table of left-tilted ping with no pong. Meanwhile, Harry Stein hits the proverbial walk-off home-run when he notes:

Are such conversations possible in contemporary America? With the liberals’ racism charge losing its power to intimidate and silence, there is at least some hope. Because finally, more and more of us are getting the message that it’s the fear of having these conversations that is truly racist.

[my emph]

Steyn on Dying Monodailies' Support of Fake Quotes

Mark Steyn quotes The Daily Telegraph which bodyslams an MSM socialist/communist creep in the defunct-to-be St. Louis P-D:

Even those who have been primary movers in spreading these malicious falsehoods – which would lead to payouts of hundreds of thousands in British libel courts if lawsuits were ever filed there – are brazenly unapologetic. Thus, St. Louis Post-Dispatch columnist Bryan Burwell pens this column containing the slavery quote and then follows up with another column with a kind-of-sort-of-well-not-really-at-all mea culpa in which he states that the quote seemed “so in character with the many things that Limbaugh has said before that we didn’t verify it beyond the book”.

OK, so it sounded right and it was on the internet or in a book or something so it was fine to just go ahead and print it as stone-cold fact without any attribution? I wonder which journalism school teaches that?

And Burwell caps it off by implying – nudge, nudge, wink, wink – that Limbaugh’s really lying: “Fine, let’s play along for the time being and take him at his word that he was inaccurately quoted in the Huberman book.” I’m no fan of British libel laws but, again, if that had been printed in the UK it would have led to a hefty payout for aggravated damages.

Slime-sucking pond-scum specimens like Burwell are addicts to sniffing their own flatulence for fart-high exuberance and no libel laws to curb their sick perversions. But Mark bids a fishwrap, bird-cage bottom rag like the SLPD adieu with no respect, and he accords scorn to the Soros-financed agitprop garbage dump Media Mutters thusly:

Meanwhile, the geniuses at Media Matters say: You want chapter-and-verse on those "Slavery was great/Give James Earl Ray the Medal of Honor" quotes? Okay, here's some stuff Limbaugh has said about Obama . . .

The race deck is all trump cards:

Step One: You can't say that. It's racist.

So you don't. Next:

Step Two: You're using "code language".

As I always say, "code language" is code language for "I’m inventing what you really meant to say because the actual quote doesn’t quite do the job for me." Still, you steer clear of "code language." So then:

Step Three: We'll just concoct it out of whole cloth, and, after running for a week with "Slavery Advocate Wants Medal of Honor for MLK Killer", our fact-checkers will confirm the accuracy of that statement by citing something you said about Donovan McNabb or Obama's economic policy. Close enough.

PS Can Rush buy the St Louis Rams if he gets Roman Polanski to front the deal?

David Brock and his Cornhole Queenies at M&M deserve a good libel suit in the UK. I'd love to see Soros, regarded as a criminal like Bernie Madoff in London, get his pet boytoys sued out of their knickers, something these pervs would probably enjoy!

Sugar Daddy-in-Chief Obama Uses Rush Limbaugh as Distraction, Jukes & Jives on ObamaCare

Karl Rove reminds us of the basic rule of politics:

Your arguments have to be clear and credible if voters are to believe them.

and Karl goes on to note that:

His attempt to sell health care is neither. He still may win passage of a bill, but he's lost the public's enthusiastic backing.

The Drive-by Media will continue to pump helium into this vacuous talking machine, but the air keeps leaking out of his tires because his now you see it, now you don't jukes and jives and jinking [sorry to mix music & athletic metaphors!] don't impress intelligent voters. Especially the Independents who are deserting this clown in droves. Karl points out the legislative and budgetary prestidigitation Baucus & Schumer & other raiders on the US Treasury are employing to generate numbers that don't raid the deficit.

One trick is easily explained. The bill imposes tax hikes and benefit cuts right away, including $121 billion of Medicare reductions between 2011 and 2015. But new spending really doesn't start until five years out (2015) and isn't fully operational until 2017. The bill uses 10 years worth of tax hikes and benefit cuts to fund a few years worth of benefits.

and

...that's just the start. For example, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) released a report last week claiming the bill won't add to the deficit. But this assumes that employers who dump employee coverage under the Baucus bill will then increase worker paychecks by an amount equal to what they had spent on health care. This replaces a nontaxable event (providing health insurance) with a taxable one (increasing worker paychecks), magically producing $83 billion in revenues. Without this windfall, the Baucus bill adds billions of dollars to the federal deficit in the first decade.....Of course, why would a company drop employee coverage just so it could pay more (in fines, taxes and wages) than it did before?

and

The CBO report also estimates that receipts from the 40% excise tax the Baucus bill would levy on "Cadillac" insurance policies "would grow by roughly 10 percent to 15 percent" a year after 2019.....That's nonsense. If you tax something heavily you'll get less of it. If this tax is enacted, there will be fewer Cadillac plans—and hence less revenue.

Finally,

Under questioning at a Senate hearing Tuesday, CBO Director Douglas Elmendorf admitted that the $500 billion in tax hikes in the Baucus bill would be passed onto consumers, jacking up insurance premiums. That undercuts the argument that Democratic reforms will make health care more affordable.

The governors have reason to pause:

Some governors are also figuring out that the proposal in the Baucus bill to expand Medicaid will shift a big chunk of the federal health-care tab to states. States, after all, pick up an average of 47% of Medicaid's costs—and expanding it will force states to spend more.

As do the elderly & medical doctors specializing in geriatric medicine:

Then there are $400 billion in benefit cuts that are frightening seniors. Jeffrey A. Anderson of the Pacific Research Institute has pointed out that the Baucus bill cuts Medicare payments to physicians by 25% within two years and keeps payments at that level forever, without adjusting for inflation. If this becomes law, doctors who take Medicare patients will see their real income decline each year.

Rove sums up the political cost to the Democrats who are being railroaded by fast and loose botox-brains [House] and crooked lobbyists [Senate] into a suicidal final bill:

Democrats who support any final bill are at risk. They'll be held responsible for the mess that quickly emerges as premiums rise, taxes balloon, deficits soar, mandates expand, and government power grows.

Mr. Obama's problem is that his Magic Kingdom Health Care World is colliding with reality. There is a big cost to any large government expansion—and the ways to cover the cost of Mr. Obama's plan are limited, unpopular, and sure to anger Americans once they are fully understood.

The sophomoric Sugar Daddy in Chief meanwhile sics his media go-fers in the cable & net DNC MSM to attack Rush Limbaugh whose audience now is greater than all the net & cable watchers combined, at least the commentary versions---creepy toads like Matthews and the drunk DUI hit-and-run CNN freak Sanchez have to bait and taunt Rush-bo with lies about fake quotes, etc.... just to generate attention---AWAY FROM OBAMACARE's RIDUNKULOUS FABRICATIONS on health care.

Like Clinton, Brobambi is an eternal campaigner. Like Carter, he is a total eff-up.

Why GWB reads more and was more qualified for a Nobel than the Simpleton in the Oval Office at the Moment

John Lewis Gaddis is America's greatest living historian and read the above for an interesting piece on why this is true.

Girly-Man Obama Afraid to Bring Up Iran Sanctions with Russia?

The four-women-out-of-five Nobel Panelists in Oslo probably gave Obama that Faint Praise Peace Prize for cowering again in the face of opposition, this time in New York after Medvedev of Russia opined that sanctions against Iran are not very "effective," spurring Obama not even to bring them up with the Russians. This according to veteran Russia-watchers Dimitri Simes and James Collins in the link above.

So taking away the missile sites from Poland and the Czech Republic [in the process insulting Poland in a stupendously stupid anniversary boo-boo on the 70th year to the day after Stalin invaded Poland from the East] has had no effect on Russia vis-a-vis Iran, against which the missile sites were to protect the EU---themselves a cowering group of libtards eager only to avoid strife even if it means ethnic takeovers from illegal immigrants.

And Hilary Clinton will not be meeting PM Putin in Moscow today, as after the "reset" button mishap, he probably thinks she's as stupid as her boss Obama is cowardly.

I hope the Israelis bomb the s**t out of Iran and throw this pipsqueak POTUS of ours into a real girly-man hissy-fit.

A major blogress [who voted for Obama] called him "pussy-whipped."

After seeing the FRONTLINE piece on Afghanistan & Pakistan tonight, I don't think this cowardly specimen of metrosexuality hs a future in foreign policy that he'll be proud of.

Obama a Deer in Headlights Earns Nobel Peace for Cowering as Iran, North Korea Resemble "Axis of Evil" All over Again

Two Giants Confer on Nobel Peace Prospects! 

The two planners above were overruled and Arafat was also a recipient along with Shimon & Yitzhak Rabin while a cowering Brobambi has done nothing except insult constitutional governments by reversing himself in the missile site promise which he proffered in April on the very anniversary 70 years later of the Soviet invasion of Eastern Poland, along with Stalin's mirror-image friend at the time Adolf Hitler.

You have to give it to this clownish pretender of a POTUS for timing, as he is simply impervious to irony or reality.

Megan McArdle Fisks the New Health Plan's Bogus Numbers

The Atlantic's Megan McArdle sticks up for truth, justice and the American Way, sort of, in exposing what one commenter calls ""technical refinements in their estimating procedures = Baucus and Rahm Emmanuel taking CBO to the woodshed until a more favorable number is produced."

When I saw a cretinous grin on the prognathic mug of a shortish CNN WH correspondent named Dana [What Mike Tyson Did to MY FACE!] while she intoned "there are VERY IMPORTANT changes in the CBO estimates, I knew that the RICO scammers in the WH had put the fear of God in the petty functionaries of the CBO, and James Taranto puts it in his roundup of the Afternoon Follies

"So Congress is going to reduce the deficit by increasing spending $829,000,000,000.00? Doesn't this sound like--well, a joke? Too good a joke to check, evidently.
Through what voodoo exactly does the CBO surmise Congress will cut the deficit while spending close to a trillion dollars? CNN does not even attempt to detail the argument:Instead we have to turn to Megan McArdle of The Atlantic::

most of the major components of the program are scheduled to either cost more, or raise less revenue . . . but overall, it's generating a bigger surplus. It's the healthcare economist's version of "We're losing money on every unit, but we'll make it up in volume!"

Going by the fairly sketchy description, virtually all of the extra benefit appears to come from estimating that employers will see their health care costs fall, mostly because they put those workers into federally subsidized programs, pass the resulting savings along to their workers in the form of higher wages and salaries, and that the Treasury will thereby gain, at a rough guess, about $12-15 billion a year in tax revenues.

This is somewhat confusing to me. The CBO seems to be assuming it will get just about 20% of the amount spent on subsidies back in the form of tax revenues. But the effective income tax rate on the quintiles covered by the subsidies, according to the CBO, is less than 5%. Perhaps the savings comes from the payroll tax, but even including the payroll tax, it's less than 15%. And the tax rates are directly proportional to the size of the income, while the subsidies are inversely proportional. I'm sure I'm missing something that would make the math work, but I can't figure out what.

Perhaps the 6'3" Megan should ask the 4'10" Robert Reich for an explanation based on his viewpoint from the rarified atmosphere of cloud-cuckoo-land, where he and econometric other giants like Enron Advisor [ret.] Paul Krugman breath the nitrous oxide that gives them the Olympian understanding to impart to us innumerate unwashed plebeians below that James Taranto refers to when he says:

Aw, c'mon, Megan, it's a joke! It isn't funny if you have to explain it!

Meanwhile, one poll has the American voter against ObamaCare, or the five versions of it, by a margin of 47-40%.

And a White House Press dude named Gibbs blames the press for Obama's negative image.....this guy actually makes the turncoat cretin Scott McClellan look competent in comparison.Yet another joke on Obama's unendiing campaign to win the hearts and minds of the American people. A double-digit IQ simpleton named Gibbs attacks the press for being anti-Obama. Who writes his stuff!?

Obama "Wobbly" is a Good Moniker for this Coward

Obama took six months to reverse his committment to the Czech Republic & Poland on missile sites, and fewer than that to reverse his statement that there would be no investigation of CIA interrogation techniques. Now Gen. McChrystal is finding that this scaredy-boy joke of a POTUS elected by stupid women and gay men took only three months to reverse on Afghanistan:

Though a decorated Army four-star officer, the General's introduction to Beltway warfare is proving to be brutal. To be fair, Gen. McChrystal couldn't know that his Commander in Chief would go wobbly so soon on his commitment to him as well as to his own Afghan strategy when he was tapped for the job in AprilWe're told by people who know him that Gen. McChrystal "feels terrible" and "had no intention whatsoever of trying to lobby and influence" the Administration. His sense of bewilderment makes perfect sense anywhere but in the political battlefield of Washington. He was, after all, following orders.

But the Boy-Child in the Promised Land got the jitters and lost what little nerve he ever had:

Recall that in March Mr. Obama unveiled his "comprehensive new strategy . . . to reverse the Taliban's gains and promote a more capable and accountable Afghan government." The Commander in Chief pledged to properly resource this "war of necessity," which he also called during the 2008 campaign "the central front on terror." The President then sacked his war commander, who had been chosen by Defense Secretary Robert Gates, in favor of Gen. McChrystal, an expert in counterinsurgency.

Upon arriving in June, Gen. McChrystal launched his assessment of the forces required to execute the Obama strategy. His confidential study was completed in August and sent to the Pentagon. Chairman of the Joint Chiefs Michael Mullen told Congress that more troops would be needed, and a figure of 30,000-40,000 was bandied about.

The figure has clearly spooked the Administration. Soon after, Gen. McChrystal's confidential report was leaked to the Washington Post by, well, you'll have to ask Bob Woodward. The report said that the U.S. urgently needs to reverse a "deteriorating" security situation. Soon the full retreat began in Washington, led by a vocal group within the Administration that wants to scale back the mission. The White House told the Pentagon to hold off asking for troops and Gen. McChrystal not to testify to Congress. Remarkably, President Obama mused on the Sunday talks shows, "Are we doing the right thing?"

This gutless Boy-Child is now sending the MSM lackeys and suck-ups after McChrystal, while America's allies scratch their heads and Putin and other enemies of our country snicker into their cuffs at the arrant cowardice of the US C-in-"C. When it comes to a choice between national security and the political career of this Boy-Child, there's a littler hesitation, but not for long. Of course, it's Pakistan that is the keystone to stopping the Taliban and Al-Qaeda, and Neville Obama doesn't seem to care any more if he loses Robo-Botox as Queen of the House:

The sudden Afghan rethink also jeopardizes progress in Pakistan, the world's leading sanctuary for al Qaeda. The Pakistani willingness to expand American drone strikes and launch a military campaign in their tribal regions dates squarely to the Administration's recommitment to the region. Now that Mr. Obama is having second thoughts, so might the Pakistanis.

The President's very public waver is already doing strategic harm. The Taliban are getting a morale boost and claiming victory, while our allies in Europe have one more reason to rethink their own deployments. Such a victory, as the head of the British army Sir David Richards warned on Sunday, would have an "intoxicating effect" on extremist Islam around the world.

Commanders in Chief can change their minds. George W. Bush waited too long to embrace the "surge." He had private doubts when the casualties also surged in 2007, but he gave the new approach a chance to succeed. Mr. Obama is blinking even before all the additional troops he ordered to Afghanistan have had time to deploy to the theater.

Pre-emptive blinking is the case with this gutless Narcissistic prettyboy. And then there's empty-headed Biden:

Gen. McChrystal's liberal critics also have very short memories. In 2003, Army Chief of Staff General Eric Shinseki clashed with his superiors by saying many more troops were needed to pacify Iraq. He became a Democratic hero and is now Mr. Obama's Veterans Secretary. In this case, Gen. McChrystal has become a political target merely for taking at face value Mr. Obama's order to fight the war properly. His superiors, the Central Commander David Petraeus and Adm. Fallon, back him, but can hardly be said to question civil control of the military.

In an interview with Newsweek, Gen. McChrystal said he wouldn't resign if the President rejects his request for more troops. If he were really trying to dictate policy, he'd have given a different answer. But we don't think Gen. McChrystal should stay to implement a Biden war plan either. No commander in uniform should ask his soldiers to die for a strategy he doesn't think is winnable—or for a President who lets his advisers and party blame a general for their own lack of political nerve.

You can't say that Wobbly Chamberlain Obama is throwing McChrystal to the dogs when the dog in question is Biden, a complete moron who remembered reading about FDR announcing on TV that "the only thing we have to fear is fear itself." and congratulated Lebanon for ousting Hezbollah as Hezbollah tries to take over Lebanon's democratic system by a "coup de pouce."
Why should Pakistan allow drones to be launched if a cowardly POTUS isn't getting on-the-ground feedback for the intell needed to launch them and Bhutto's half-wit husband will predictably fold before the pressures of Pak political infighting and restrain American forces already there while seeking a "middle way." Biden is too stupid to figure that out and as for Wobbly Obama, recall that Jimmy Carter had seven Secretaries of the Treasury in 3 & a half years. lt takes between three and six months for the Boy-Child to reverse field on any given issue.

Seems like Barack The Wobbly is stuck on stupid.

UPDATE:
The WSJ delineates the cowardice of Obama choosing a political CYA route versus following the advice of how the surge worked. A Better War seems to have avoided the coward's reading desk and a book on Vietnam in 1965 [and his own CYA cowardice] have influenced Neville Jr. greatly.

Nasty Letterman had Rape Room Above Stage

David was insulting a conservative recently about her looks until someone put up a picture of his "wife," a woman named Lasko, who looks like a truck ran over her face. Now it is becoming clear that Lasko was married off to him to provide cover as a bunch of exes started to get restive---at the moment this hypocritical p.o.s. is beginning to feel the karma that years of phoniness have piled up over his head like a mountain of pigsh*t now sliding downward on him in full living smellovision.

This garbage and lie specialist used to dump on Palin---probably wanted to invite her to his rape room above the stage if he ever could get her on his unfunny evening show.

Next, I'm waiting for Julia Roberts and the other skag-piles he regularly invites as guests to "stick up for" Dave---which is what I'd like to do to with a broomstick up his most productive orifice.

AP Blames Obama Unemployment on Reagan?

James Taranto lays bare the transparent attempts at the MSM to make the current bad economic news look okay. Charlie [What's ACORN?] Gibson, the guy who ponied up furiously to learn the "Bush Doctrine" in order to bushwhack Sarah Palin, is the phoniest [leaving out Dan Rather, who long ago retired the lifetime achievement merde-pour-cerveau English language award for lying through one's teeth] example in James' recent survey. Reason: Phony Charlie pops up both in '83 & '09 spreading disinformation to two separate generations, and may well yet be the new eponymous "Rather Blather" record holder for length of time between fervent lies to advance the libtard cause. Here is living fossil Gibson in both incarnations:

...Charles Gibson illustrated how dramatically different the network coverage of Reagan and Obama really were.
Gibson, who was a Capitol Hill correspondent for ABC in 1982, told viewers May 7, 1982, "There really isn't any good news in the statistics. All the numbers are bad." He then quoted two Democratic attacks on Reagan including Rep. Henry S. Reuss, D-Wis., who charged that Reagan's "policies aren't just mistaken, they're wicked."
But as an ABC anchor in 2009, Gibson was full of hope. He introduced that night's story saying "sometimes a bad jobs report can look good."
"345,000 Americans lost their jobs in May, a big number to be sure. Traumatic if you are one of the 345,000. But the number was smaller than economists had predicted, and that's good news," Gibson said before admitting that the unemployment rate of 9.4 percent was "pretty bad." Neither Gibson, nor reporter Betsy Stark mentioned President Obama at all that night.
On Aug. 7, 2009, Gibson suggested "the economy may be finally turning the corner."

Diane Sawyer will be a welcome replacement, as Charlie wore out my BS detector more frequently than Katie C., but not as often as Champ Chump Bri-boy Williams, who has an inside track as he works for the most venal TV outlet of all, one so badly run that it is hoping that GE will be the next GM, and be taken over by the Govt to get it out of debt.

In the meantime, enjoy the bad times an d keep telling yourself that "si, se puede" works for dumb venal business types too.