Updates from Mary Sue Toggle Comment Threads | Keyboard Shortcuts

  • Mary Sue 11:47 AM on 07/17/2010 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , blame game,   

    Obama’s Promise to Unemployed “I expect to be held accountable” Reaches Expiration 

    A scant two days ago Obama gave his assurance to the unemployed he expects to be held accountable for their continued joblessness:

    “We are going to be doing everything we can to create the environment where the private sector can come in and start creating jobs. But, I’m not any more satisfied than they are and until they can find a job, I expect to held accountable.”

    As with all of Obama’s promises, his assurance had an expiration date.  In the scheme of things, this promise was particularly short-lived as Obama used his weekly address to point fingers at Republicans for filibustering recovery and obstructing progress:

    “But again and again, a partisan minority in the Senate said “no,” and used procedural tactics to block a simple, up-or-down vote. Think about what these stalling tactics mean for the millions of Americans who’ve lost their jobs since the recession began. Over the past several weeks, more than two million of them have seen their unemployment insurance expire. For many, it was the only way to make ends meet while searching for work – the only way to cover rent, utilities, even food.”

    Obama  doubles down on the counsel of Nancy Pelosi that unemployment insurance will jumpstart the economy:

    “The fact is, most economists agree that extending unemployment insurance is one of the single most cost-effective ways to help jumpstart the economy. It puts money into the pockets of folks who not only need it most, but who also are most likely to spend it quickly,”

    There you have it folks, the entire recovery is hinged on those unemployment extensions.  Who knew?  Those nasty Republicans are filibustering and obstructing all the hope out of Obama’s “Recovery Summer 2010.”   Never mind the fact that  every blessed aspect of Obama’s agenda has stifled private sector investment and job growth; it is all about Republican efforts to give tax cuts to the rich, take food from the poor and kick a few kittens while they’re at it.

    That Obama repeats Nancy Pelosi’s laughable economic construct  “unemployment insurance will jumpstart the economy” should be all the proof anyone needs Obama hasn’t a clue about the economy or job creation.  Nevertheless, it serves as a useful deflection from his short-lived promise he “expects to be held accountable.”  Rest assured Mr. President, accountability is coming –  like it or not.   I can see it from my house.

    • Quite Rightly 12:53 PM on 07/17/2010 Permalink | Reply

      Unemployment will jumpstart the economy until we’re all unemployed!

      Then what?

      Oh, I remember now. Using carbon credits instead of money.

    • Teresa in Fort Worth, TX 4:54 PM on 07/17/2010 Permalink | Reply

      One would think that if “Unemployment will jumpstart the economy”, that it would be positively SURGING by now – after all, some folks have been on it for almost 2 years……

    • Obi's Sister 1:44 PM on 07/18/2010 Permalink | Reply

      That was quicker than a gallon of milk. How much longer before he turns into the stinky cheese from the moldy caves?

  • Mary Sue 1:56 PM on 06/22/2010 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , drilling moratorium, ,   

    Judge Rules Against Obama’s Offshore Drilling Moratorium 

    Thus Obama’s “annus horribilis maximus” got just a tad worse while giving an unexpected break in favor of an ailing economy in the Gulf:

    A federal judge in New Orleans has blocked a six-month moratorium on new deepwater drilling projects that was imposed in response to the massive Gulf oil spill.  Several companies that ferry people and supplies and provide other services to offshore drilling rigs had asked U.S. District Judge Martin Feldman in New Orleans to overturn the moratorium.

    President Barack Obama’s administration has halted the approval of any new permits for deepwater drilling and suspended drilling at 33 exploratory wells in the Gulf.

    Feldman says in his ruling that the Interior Department failed to provide adequate reasoning for the moratorium. He says it seems to assume that because one rig failed, all companies and rigs doing deepwater drilling pose an imminent danger.

    The 22-page ruling is online though I haven’t had the chance to read through the whole thing yet.  I can tell you that you don’t have to go further than page 3, however, to find the Court calling out the “misrepresentations” in the Executive Summary issued by Secretary Salazar’s office:

    In the Executive Summary to the Report,the Secretary recommends “a six-month moratorium on permits for new wells being drilled using floating rigs.” He also recommends “an immediate halt to drilling operations on the 33 permitted wells, not including relief wells currently being drilled by BP, that are currently being drilled using floating rigs in the Gulf of Mexico.” Much to the government’s discomfort and this Court’s uneasiness, the Summary also states that “the recommendations contained in this report have been peer-reviewed by seven experts identified by the National Academy of Engineering.” As the plaintiffs, and the experts themselves, pointedly observe, this statement was misleading. The experts charge it was a “misrepresentation.” It was factually incorrect. Although the experts agreed with the safety recommendations contained in the body of the main Report, five of the National Academy experts and three of the other experts have publicly stated that they “do not agree with the six month blanket moratorium” on floating drilling. They envisioned a more limited kind of moratorium, but a blanket moratorium was added after their final review, they complain, and was never agreed to by them. A factor that might cause some apprehension about the probity of the process that led to the Report.

    In other words the fact the executive summary played fast and loose with the facts there was little proof the recommendations of the report had any merit.  Michelle Malkin also notes the Court’s attention to the obvious duplicity in the report and adds:

    Takeaway from decision: “After reviewing the Secretary’s Report, the Moratorium Memorandum, and the Notice to Lessees, the Court is unable to divine or fathom a relationship between the findings and the immense scope of the moratorium.

    More to come I am sure.  Administration vows to appeal, what a surprise.
    H/T: Memeorandum

    Cross posted at Ruby Slippers

    • Quite Rightly 2:53 PM on 06/22/2010 Permalink | Reply

      Fantastic. A judge that still believes in “probity.” Whew.

      I wonder what administration strong-arm tactics are to follow.

      • rubyslipperblog 3:01 PM on 06/22/2010 Permalink | Reply

        “Probity” is a lovely word. I am sure the administration will pull a few strong-arm tactics from their bag of tricks.

    • Obi's Sister 5:48 PM on 06/22/2010 Permalink | Reply

      This is music to my ears – like the ice cream truck going down the street.

      • Jill 6:45 AM on 06/23/2010 Permalink | Reply

        One of my kids commented, “I guess Obama can’t do anything he wants.”
        But they haven’t given up. They’re coming up with a new moratorium order.

        • rubyslipperblog 12:29 PM on 06/23/2010 Permalink | Reply

          They didn’t even take the time to read the ruling – but why break a streak of ignorance.

    • Janelle 1:05 PM on 06/23/2010 Permalink | Reply

      It appears that the only answer to any problem that this administration and congress have is to throw lawyers and money at it. Time to throw them out.

    • nicedeb 3:01 PM on 06/23/2010 Permalink | Reply

      Prediction: They’ll produce some new “experts”, and convince the judge that the moratorium is needed.

    • Obi's Sister 7:00 PM on 06/24/2010 Permalink | Reply

      According to Jim Hoft, Judge Feltman is now getting death threats.

  • Mary Sue 1:54 AM on 06/17/2010 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , ,   

    Democrats Plan to Pass Energy Bill in Lame-Duck Session 

    Via Jay Cost who writes in a piece titled, “The Pulpit of a Bully,” comes this startling bit of information uncovered in a report at Politico:

    EXCLUSIVE: Phil Schiliro, the White House congressional liaison, has told the Senate to aim to take up an energy bill the week of July 12, after the July 4 break (and after the scheduled final passage of Wall Street reform). Kagan confirmation will follow, ahead of the summer break, scheduled to begin Aug. 9. The plan is to conference the new Senate bill with the already-passed House bill IN A LAME-DUCK SESSION AFTER THE ELECTION, so House members don’t have to take another tough vote ahead of midterms.

    A White House aide has the official word: “President Obama reiterated his call for comprehensive energy and climate legislation to break our dependence on oil and fossil fuels. In the coming weeks he will be reaching out to Senators on both sides of the aisle to chart a path forward. A number of proposals have been put forward from Members on both sides of the aisle. We’re open to good ideas from all sources, and will be working with Senators on a comprehensive proposal. The tragedy in the Gulf underscores the need to move quickly, and the President is committed to finding the votes for comprehensive energy legislation this year.”

    FACTS OF LIFE: How many crises of historic proportions are going to require unprecedented government action? Stimulus, Wall Street, health care, troops, energy: These are all big issues, but at what point will people think the president is just trying to spook people into massive government action?

    Cost notes the 51st Congress was known as the Billion Dollar Congress, after the Republican-run legislature “raided the Treasury in an effort to pay off all its supporters.” Cost suggests the 111th deserves the moniker the Trillion Dollar Congress.  After passing an enormously unpopular health care bill despite the protestations of the American people, the Trillion Dollar Congress intends on pulling the same shenanigans by passing a huge energy package in the lame-duck session before the 112th Congress is convened . Wither the will of the people who would have rendered their verdict on this Congress during the November midterm elections.  We all know how they value the will of the American people.

    President “Never Waste a Crisis” Obama set the stage for this in his widely-panned speech from the Oval Office Tuesday night.  Though the speech is replete with references to the urgent need to transition from fossil fuel, this section seems excerpted from his many health care speeches with only the subject changed to energy:

    Now, there are costs associated with this transition.  And some believe we can’t afford those costs right now.  I say we can’t afford not to change how we produce and use energy – because the long-term costs to our economy, our national security, and our environment are far greater.

    Read the rest if you have trouble remembering the formulaic speeches Obama used to set the stage before Congress pulled every single trick imaginable to pass the health care law.   All the pieces are in place just as they were for health care: a House-passed legislation that won’t be deemed dead until a new Congress convenes in January 2011, a Congress led by the likes of Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi and a band of merry thieves in Congress intent on imposing a New World Order whether the American people like it or not.  Damn the law – let the peasants shout Viva il Duce.

    Doug Ross suggests we commit this bit of advice from Jim Geraghty to memory:

    Every Republican challenger ought to be demanding that their Democrat incumbent opponent pledge in writing that they will not pass an energy bill in a lame-duck session if they are defeated.

    Cost warns such bullying will haunt Obama in the 2012 presidential election.  That is all well and good, but heaven knows the extent of the damage he will have inflicted until he finally usurps Jimmy Carter’s place in the annals of failed One-Term Presidents.

    Cross posted at Ruby Slippers

    • Robert Putnam 3:09 AM on 06/17/2010 Permalink | Reply

      One thing that I have not heard much is exactly how many hits can an economy withstand and survive?
      We are still in the middle of the 2nd worse economic crisis we have ever experienced: a combination of failed humanitarian policy, economic excessiveness, investment loopholes and failed political response – blow to the legs. . .
      Throw in an attempt to provide free health care to millions people on the backs of those who still have jobs – slug in the gut. . .
      Then the worse ecological disaster we have known threatening the property and lively-hood of millions in the Gulf Coast – roundhouse to the head. . .
      Now let’s press all businesses (those that have not gone bankrupt during this depression) to manage and pay for cap and trade and energy legislation that god and everyone else who thinks knows will cripple our GDP for some period, at least, until the market adjusts to the change: perhaps years. . .
      We are leaking money in Iraq. . . money in Afghanistan, the UN, NATO, NAFTA, CAFTA and everywhere else the government can find a good cause, and no one even wants to talk about the deficit that is so mind-boggling a number that we cannot relate to it. . .

      I believe that one of three possibilities exist for the future of America: 1) It will legislate itself into non-importance and destroy the economic gain that has developed since the 80s; 2) It’s economy will bleed out by trying to save the world and everyone in it within 4 years of economic boondoggle; or 3) we will watch as China becomes the only world power and learn to accept our place as second.

      Do you really think that America is invincible economically? Do you think that taxing business will be paid by business profit margins and not come out of our pockets as prices are adjusted for the additional expense margins? Do you think that coddling 10-15 million illegal aliens will not have serious affect on our economy. By the way. . . our work force is shrinking, and there will not be as many wage earners and taxpayers in the future. I have a good idea! Lets open our borders to millions and millions of people in the name of humanity and then hope that our welfare system doesn’t collapse. It will never collapse, you say! Why is congress cutting off the unemployment benefits of those who still have not been able to find jobs? Because they cannot afford it! Oh by the way, look for the jobless rate to decrease shortly, as the ones who are dropped from employment security are no longer counted. That information should come out just before election time in October. . .

      I think those in office are scared. . . they have not had the superior voting capability they have now for years and they are afraid they will not have a chance for some time in the future, so they are pulling out all the stops and trying to enact every socialist institution they can while they still can spend our money. The question is: will we survive it. Alarmist, you say? I say, pragmatist. America cannot take many more punches; it’s already on its knees.

      • Quite Rightly 7:44 AM on 06/17/2010 Permalink | Reply

        Robert, you ask, “Do you really think that America is invincible economically? Do you think that taxing business will be paid by business profit margins and not come out of our pockets as prices are adjusted for the additional expense margins? Do you think that coddling 10-15 million illegal aliens will not have serious affect on our economy.”

        I know many people who believe these things wholeheartedly. They live in a mythical world in which the United States is invincible at the same time that, in their minds, most Americans (themselves excepted, of course) are backward and stupid. They firmly believe that their desire to use a non-existent, futuristic green energy system absolves them from bearing responsibility for their actual, real-world participation in a post industrial-revolution economy. The disconnect is so complete that many of them cannot grasp the idea that the weakening of the United States threatens their own individual dreams, goals, and lifestyles and the health and well-being of their own families.

      • Yukio Ngaby 7:12 PM on 06/17/2010 Permalink | Reply

        Don’t put too much stock in the “rise of China” theory. China has a ton of economic, soical and political problems, any one of which would be crippling. Should America collapse, China would go with it, should America be a “second-class nation” China could not replace it. In the 80s it was Japan taking over economic supremacy, now it’s China… Both are short-sighted views without knowledge of the fragile nature of their economies– and in this case China’s govt.

        The US has been through worse economic crisis in the past– not merely the Great Depression. This recession is unpleasant and Obama and Congress are working mightily to make it worse, but the US and other less economically resilient countries have been through much worse. The Health Care Law will have to be repealed, and probably will be either through a GOP Congress, or thru legal challenges. One can only hope that it happens before it wrecks the American health care system.

        Debt is the main issue. Curbing spending and the bribes which both parties have heaped upon the public to win votes (on top of graft, useless spending etc.) needs to stop.

        • fuzislippers 10:32 PM on 06/17/2010 Permalink | Reply

          Yay! You make things seem better. And yes, the careless and useless spending and bribes and pork have GOT to stop. A little free market principle needed here, no? If that crap fails to win votes, they’ll stop doing it. That takes time to sink in, of course, so in the meantime, we don’t vote for people who promise the moon and stars . . . for free. That’s all got to stop both in the political arena AND in the voting population.

          • Yukio Ngaby 8:51 AM on 06/18/2010 Permalink | Reply

            The problem is so much of it is now part of our political character. Every Congressiona Rep. that has ever represented me, constantly waxes on about everything they’ve done for California or Oregon. What they always mean is how much fed. money they’ve ushered into the state by cutting political deals, voting a certain way, etc.

            Representation in this day and age has come to basically come to mean elected lobbyist and often party shill.

            I don’t to make things sound rosy, but cruddy economies and bad laws like this have happened in the past and in other countries. It’s not unprescedented.

  • Mary Sue 5:17 PM on 06/14/2010 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , Daniel Hannan, ,   

    Daniel Hannan: I was wrong about Obama 

    H/T: Allahpundit on Twitter

    I will admit I found it puzzling that Daniel Hannan could have rationalized supporting the election of Barack Obama.  Hannan supported Obama despite the protestations of his wife who Hannan describes as a far better conservative than he.   Those who have seen the movie The Big Chill may recall the power of rationalization.  Ahem. While Mrs. Hannan failed to convince her husband,  Daniel is no longer able to deny the reality of the failure that is the Barack Obama presidency:

    I was wrong. Not that Obama is without his good points, obviously. His commitment to school choice is unfeigned. His foreign policy has been a jolly sight cheaper than McCain’s would have been. The election of a mixed-race president who opposed the Iraq war has made the USA slightly more popular.

    None of these advantages, however, can make up for the single most important fact of Obama’s presidency, namely that the federal government is 30 per cent larger than it was two years ago

    This is not entirely Obama’s fault, of course. The credit crunch occurred during the dying days of the Bush administration, and it was the 43rd president who began the baleful policy of bail-outs and pork-barrelstimulus packages. But it was Obama who massively extended that policy against united Republican opposition. It was he who chose, in defiance of public opinion, to establish a state-run healthcare system. It was he who presumed to tell private sector employees what they could earn, he who adopted the asinine cap-and-trade rules, and he who re-federalised social security, thereby reversing the single most beneficial reform of the Clinton years.

    These errors are not random. They amount to a comprehensive strategy of Europeanisation: Euro-carbon taxes, Euro-disarmament, Euro-healthcare, Euro-welfare, Euro-spending levels, Euro-tax levels and, inevitably, Euro-unemployment levels. Any American reader who wants to know where Obamification will lead should spend a week with me in the European Parliament. I’m working in your future and, believe me, you won’t like it.

    Read the rest, Daniel starts slow then works himself into a lather over Obama’s faux-outrage at “British Petroleum” then moves on to the snubs against American allies.  It appears the proverbial straw was  the fact the administration “is backing Peronist Argentina’s claim to the Falkland Islands – or, as Obama’s people call them, “the Malvinas”.

    Word to the normally-wise Daniel Hannan – resist the power of rationalization and listen to your wife.

    • Jill 6:04 PM on 06/14/2010 Permalink | Reply

      Er, I think I was wrong about Hannan. How could he not have sniffed out that Obama was a Euro-socialist?

      I don’t think we can say that O is committed to school choice, either. Far from it. And is America “slightly more popular”? Seems to me we’re held in contempt for our weakness or despised for our betrayals.

      • rubyslipperblog 6:56 PM on 06/14/2010 Permalink | Reply

        He has a hard time letting go of some rationalizations. I saw him on Hannity when he first became popular here explaining his decision to support Obama. He generally believed Congress held the power and Obama would be an inconsequential leader who might help America’s image. He did support Republicans for Congress but as many didn’t know who even controlled Congress his support seemed to me wasted.

        I do agree with him that Congress can be more powerful than the presidency. I tend to doubt that Obama would have pushed for passage of ObamaCare had he not been encouraged by Pelosi’s assurance she would do anything to get it passed. Obama would be far less powerful without her. Nevertheless he can still do quite a bit of damage without a Democratically controlled Congress. Hannan missed that along with Obama’s Euro-socialist tendencies. I think he thought he would be the passive “present” vote as President.

        I am not rationalizing Hannan’s willful disregard of Obama’s blatant flaws but I do think his admission is significant. Voters who did the same will take the same path in their awakening that Obama is a Euro-socialist who presented himself falsely as a pragmatic problem-solver who tended to lean “slightly to the left.” People who voted this way will first blame Congress and then with overwhelming evidence admit that they were wrong about Obama. I have had this feeling for a month or so the tide has turned for Obama. Barring some miraculous return of a booming economy, Obama is wasting away in Carteritaville. I am not sure it will even require the emergence of another Reagan to stick a fork in this presidency.

    • Quite Rightly 9:15 PM on 06/14/2010 Permalink | Reply

      I like Hannon, but I think many of his statements reveal that he doesn’t understand how Americans think. As Jill points out, he has no commitment to school choice, and I am hard put to imagine the “advantage” gained from his foreign policy, such that it is. However, fallen away Obamatons will have to hang their disaffection on something, and it can hardly be on agreement with conservatives. We’ll be seeing some pretty bizarre criticisms of Obama, I’m thinking, as liberals and progressives scratch around for a one-size-fits-all criticism of Obama that is easy to market to most of their group-think customers. That will take a while. The turn-around should be much easier to accomplish in the UK, which is the obvious object of Obama’s scorn.

      • pjMom 9:51 PM on 06/14/2010 Permalink | Reply

        Ditto. I like Hannon but you’re both right concerning school choice as the kids in DC can attest. I think the head-scratching among uber-liberals has already begun, hence the 14% of liberals who think the Democrats are “too conservative” from the Gallup that came out today. They’re peeved that he didn’t push for single-payer up front, trojan horse or no trojan horse.

  • Mary Sue 2:48 PM on 05/25/2010 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , Rasmussen   

    Obama Approval Hits Another New Low 

    Rasmussen has Obama at a historic low in his 16 month Presidency.  Obama currently has a 42% approval with 56% disapproving.  Obama’s passion index is at a -20, reflecting a mere 24% who strongly approve while with 44% strongly disapprove.  He appears to be on a downward trend again:
    Rasmussen Presidential Tracking Poll
    Americans appear to have found Obama wanting as a leader and have all but abandoned thoughts a political newcomer could bring hope and change to Washington:

    Forty-four percent (44%) say the president is doing a good or excellent job on national security issues while 39% give him such positive marks on the economy. See other measures of the president’s performance at Obama By the Numbers. Thirty-four percent (34%) say the president is doing a good job handling the Gulf oil spill while 33% give him poor grades on that topic.

    Most Americans have “come to believe that the political system is broken, that most politicians are corrupt, and that neither major political party has the answers,” observes Scott Rasmussen. Just 27% believe Congress knows what it’s doing when it comes to the economy and 41% say that a group of people randomly selected from the phone book would do a better job than the current Congress. In his new book, Scott adds, “Some of us are ready to give up and some of us are ready to scream a little louder. But all of us believe we can do better.”

    While most of us knew Obama was just another corrupt politician, it is high time the rest of the electorate wakes up and smells the coffee.   The question remains what exactly set Obama’s numbers on a downward trajectory once again.  Ed Morrissey points out the poll doesn’t suggest the public is quite ready to declare the Gulf oil spill Obama’s Katrina, at least not yet anyway.  Though Obama may get a bump after he finally holds another presser Thursday hoping to contain the damage on the Gulf, the bump isn’t likely to last.  His base is not with him on the decision to continue to allow more drilling and the disaster in the Gulf has no apparent end in sight.

    Recent predictions that the economy may hit yet another downturn spell disaster for this President.  The internals for this Rasmussen poll show a mere 26% trust Obama on an economic crisis while 27% trust Congress to handle an economic crisis.  Another economic crisis will leave Obama and his Democratic Congress with few alternatives for intervention after their stimulus proved such a failure.  The combination of the Gulf oil spill along with projected downturns for the economy may leave Obama hoping for approvals Bush experienced post-Katrina.

    Cross posted at Ruby Slippers

    • Jill 3:43 PM on 05/25/2010 Permalink | Reply

      I think the publicity our border problems have gotten haven’t helped him, either. And his over-the-top state dinner, with the extra helpings of glitz, was proof that he’s not exactly a man of the people.

      Being too busy (vacationing) to act as president and commander-in-chief at the Gold Star breakfast and Tomb of the Unknown Soldier at Arlington this weekend won’t endear him to the little people, either.

      I don’t know how much people notice these things. But his behavior is consistent enough that at some point people might get the message.

      • fuzislippers 12:09 PM on 05/26/2010 Permalink | Reply

        I had the strangest experience this morning, almost surreal. The people on Morning Joe were actually talking about whether BO should be running around campaigning and attending fund raisers right now. One guy (I suspect he was supposed to be the conservative–it wasn’t Joe though) even said that he wondered if BO was more interested in campaigning than in governing. Granted, he preceded this with about a thousand mea culpas for what he was about to say, but he said it. Then Joe said that he thought it was really out of touch with what is going on that BO is standing in Boxer’s fund raiser talking about and joking about himself. Strange. But it did seem that everyone there agreed, even if they looked horribly uncomfortable admitting it or daring to say out loud (and on air) what most people in America are thinking.

        • rubyslipperblog 5:02 PM on 05/26/2010 Permalink | Reply

          I saw that too, I think it was Willie who said Obama was more interested in campaigning. Joe and Mika actually have been on BO over the Gulf. I have to say that there is a certain rich irony in seeing Obama get hung with a Katrina of his own.

          • fuzislippers 8:23 PM on 05/27/2010 Permalink | Reply

            The thing is that the left thinks that the government is all powerful and can control everything (thus the push to control the climate of an entire planet!). They’re completely delusional about this, so it’s not at all surprising that they are turning on BO now, as they did on President Bush. The thing is, I’m not sure that there is much more he can do, just as President Bush did all he could. Bad crap happens, and *gasp* the government is not the answer to every question, problem, or disaster. Lefties will never understand this, never. Government is their religion, BO their God. If he can’t wave his magic wand, part the waters of the Gulf, and walk out there and stop the leak, their whole world crumbles. So they’ll instead say he CAN do it, but he won’t. Personally, I don’t care or feel sorry for BO one tiny bit. He made his bed (of fluffy clouds drifting in heavenly light above the unwashed masses), let him lie in it.

  • Mary Sue 3:15 AM on 05/18/2010 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , Connecticut Senate, Richard Blumenthal, Rob Simmons,   

    CT Senate Candidate Richard Blumenthal lied about service in Vietnam 

    Via Hot Air:
    The New York Times delivered a stunning blow to the candidacy of CT Attorney General Richard Blumenthal with a bombshell report he  lied about his military service during the Vietnam War:

    “We have learned something important since the days that I served in Vietnam,” Mr. Blumenthal said to the group gathered in Norwalk in March 2008. “And you exemplify it. Whatever we think about the war, whatever we call it — Afghanistan or Iraq — we owe our military men and women unconditional support.”

    There was one problem: Mr. Blumenthal, a Democrat now running for the United States Senate, never served in Vietnam. He obtained at least five military deferments from 1965 to 1970 and took repeated steps that enabled him to avoid going to war, according to records.

    The deferments allowed Mr. Blumenthal to complete his studies at Harvard; pursue a graduate fellowship in England; serve as a special assistant to The Washington Post’s publisher, Katharine Graham; and ultimately take a job in the Nixon White House.

    In 1970, with his last deferment in jeopardy, he landed a coveted spot in the Marine Reserve, which virtually guaranteed that he would not be sent to Vietnam. He joined a unit in Washington that conducted drills and other exercises and focused on local projects, like fixing a campground and organizing a Toys for Tots drive.

    Blumenthal responded with a weak attempt at spinning rather than refuting the allegations in The New York Times report.  He has been caught on several occasions either distorting or leaving a false impression he served in Vietnam without having the decency to correct the record.  He dishonors those who served in Vietnam in his failure to note his service fell far short of those who did indeed serve.  Nevertheless, Blumenthal intends on holding a press conference today with Veterans at his side.

    Nate Silver states he could not vote for Blumenthal in good conscience. While Silver seems to believe CT Democrats have a deep bench to draw from, those challenging Blumenthal for the Democratic nomination have not had the impact in polls Blumenthal enjoyed.    Blumenthal’s advantage in the polls may have all but evaporated tonight.  Prospects for Republican Rob Simmons may have just improved immensely.

    • Jill 6:45 AM on 05/18/2010 Permalink | Reply

      Incredible. Richard Brookhiser comments:
      This is a mystery of the human heart. How can anyone lie about his military service? It is surely one of the easiest biographical items to fix with certainty. And yet it happens time and again. Who is the Republican running against Blumenthal? Unless he’s Baron Munchausen, put “Senator” before his name.

    • Quite Rightly 9:02 AM on 05/18/2010 Permalink | Reply

      Truth obviously means nothing to Richard Blumenthal. In his mind, the people of Connecticut exist as objects for him to manipulate. And he’s got a lot of company in politics. It’s sickening.

      • Sherry 3:19 PM on 05/18/2010 Permalink | Reply

        Memo to Dems and Liberals: Don’t bother to carry water for this man; it’s an insult to your intellegence to give this serial decades old liar the time of day.

        • Sherry 3:21 PM on 05/18/2010 Permalink | Reply

          Sorry for the bad spelling. Ugh. Hate when that happens.

  • Mary Sue 9:41 AM on 05/12/2010 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , , Palestine   

    David Horowitz asks a single question, eliciting a very revealing response from a Muslim student 

    H/T: The Right Scoop

    David Horowitz, Editor-in-Chief of News Real Blog, spoke Monday night at UCSD to offer balance of opinion as the Muslim Student Association(MSA) sponsored Israeli Apartheid Week: A Call to Boycott, Divest, and Sanction Israel – May 10th – May 13th, 2010 on campus. Horowitz received a question from a student Jimena Imad Musa Ahmal Bahiri, who seems intent on showing Horowitz as spreading false information about connections between MSA’s and Jihad terrorist networks.  The entire exchange, seen in the video here , is fascinating.  It is Horowitz final question to the student, however, that uncovers a profound hatred in the young woman:

    Horowitz: If you don’t condemn Hamas, obviously you support it.  Case closed.  I have had this experience at UC Santa Barbara, where there were 50 members of the Muslim Students Association sitting right in the rows there.  And throughout my hour talk I kept asking them, will you condemn Hizbollah and Hamas. And none of them would.  And then when the question period came, the president of the Muslim Students Association was the first person to ask a question. And I said, ‘Before you start, will you condemn Hizbollah?’ And he said, ‘Well, that question is too complicated for a yes or no answer.’ So I said, ‘Okay, I’ll put it to you this way.  I am a Jew.  The head of Hizbollah has said that he hopes that we will gather in Israel so he doesn’t have to hunt us down globally.  For or Against it?

    MSA member: For it.

    As you will see in the video, the young woman appears to have spent much if not all of her life in America.  She has little if any discernible accent when she speaks.  She has been taught to feel this anger and hatred.  It seems highly unlikely to me she would be interested in truly hearing Mr. Horowitz’s opinions.  Rather she uses the opportunity to reinforce her own beliefs.    Credit her with honesty for her willingness to state on the record she would support such a “goal.”  If she were a wiser person she might find a future filled with violence against the Jews solves nothing.  It will, however, assure more war and despair for future generations in the Middle East.  How very sad.

    Cross posted at Ruby Slippers

    • Jill 11:09 AM on 05/12/2010 Permalink | Reply

      Wouldn’t you like to be able to trace how this young woman got where she is today?

      • backyardconservative 11:29 AM on 05/12/2010 Permalink | Reply

        The closest thing I’ve seen to that is when I visited a Young Pioneer’s camp in the old USSR–our group played volleyball with the youths. Then we had to endure a speech–the unquestioning, hectoring, creepy zeal of the woman, assuredly a member of the communist party, has stuck in my mind for nearly 40 years.

        • rubyslipperblog 12:20 PM on 05/12/2010 Permalink | Reply

          I was asking myself the same question Jill asked, how did she get to this point. That must have been quite a speech to stay with you all these years. I am sure this woman has had hatred reinforced through such speeches and continues to have it reinforced through the MSA right on her campus. Many support a two state solution to the Israeli/Palestinian conflict but this woman undermines her cause with her answer. Would a Palestinian state be enough to assuage such anger?

    • nicedeb 12:51 PM on 05/12/2010 Permalink | Reply

      I saw that video, last night, and instantly put it on Facebook for my high school and college aged ‘friends’ to see. Most schools have folks like that, and our kids are taught to be tolerant and accepting of the even most evil and noxious ideologies for the sake of multiculturalism . I’m not saying that all Muslims are like that, but our kids should be aware of them, and not align themselves with them in any way, shape or form…

    • Quite Rightly 4:49 PM on 05/12/2010 Permalink | Reply

      Thank God for the blogosphere, for free speech, and for courageous people like David Horowitz who exercise it. Without them, we would not be able to witness this young woman’s cold-blooded admission. Jihad Watch is carrying a story about Catholic schoolchildren in the UK being required by their school and diocese to dress as Muslims for a required school trip to a Liverpool mosque, the very one that spawned the Glasgow airport bombing and the failed London bombings, which relied on car bombs similar in construction to the one planted in Times Square. Of course, the required mosque field trip was all about “promoting tolerance.” What do you think the chances are of Muslim schoolchildren being required to dress in Catholic school uniforms to visit a cathedral for a lesson about Catholicism taught by a bishop?

      Tolerance is a “nice”-sounding word, and judgment is not, but judgment ought to be consulted before we decide what we are going to tolerate and what we are not going to tolerate.

  • Mary Sue 12:19 PM on 05/05/2010 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: David Obey, retirement   

    Appropriations Committee Chair David Obey to retire 

    Uh oh, Appropriations Committee Chair David Obey (D-WI) is suddenly in need of time with his family or something:

    His office issued a statement saying he would make a major announcement in early afternoon, but disclosed no details. The Democratic sources spoke on condition of anonymity to speak frankly about Obey’s decision before the announcement.

    Obey, among a handful of veteran House Democrats who had been bracing for competitive races this fall, has routinely won re-election easily despite representing a competitive district. He won in 2008 with 61 percent of the vote. But he has never faced the level of competition as he does this year as voters sour on Washington.

    Sean Duffy, 38, a Republican district attorney, is seen as the favored candidate in the GOP primary, and his candidacy has attracted the backing of Republicans in Washington as well as the party’s 2008 vice president nominee, Sarah Palin, and tea party activists.

    My thoughts and some analysis at Ruby Slippers

    Added note: Sean Duffy has this adorable ad posted on his facebook page and website.

    • Obi's Sister 3:42 PM on 05/05/2010 Permalink | Reply

      Too bad I don’t live in Wisconsin. I’d vote for him just for that video!

    • Jill 3:53 PM on 05/05/2010 Permalink | Reply

      Obey talks very tough:

      “Obey dismissed a reporter’s question suggesting the closeness of the race may have been a factor in his decision, saying his challenger would have had a “snowball’s chance in Haiti” of beating him in November.

      “Let me put this way. I’ve won 25 elections. Does anyone think that I couldn’t win another?,” Obey said.”


      • rubyslipperblog 4:33 PM on 05/05/2010 Permalink | Reply

        Yep, I think he might not win another. Ed Morrissey talked about the race on his radio show and thought it possible Obey didn’t want to be the minority head of the Appropriations Committee. His leaving the race leaves whoever takes the Democratic nomination at a real disadvantage though so I think there is more to it than not wanting to take a step down on that Committee.

        • backyardconservative 7:46 PM on 05/05/2010 Permalink | Reply

          It’s where I grew up. I sure hope we knock this guy out. His departure may buck up the rest of the GOP field–they have a very unpopular Dem trial lawyer governor who’s not running again and Dem Sen. Feingold is being challenged by a brewery heir–talk about name recognition at home–my dad’s favorite beer–Leinenkugel’s

          • backyardconservative 8:17 PM on 05/05/2010 Permalink | Reply

            The Duffy family just had a new baby:)

            • rubyslipperblog 9:59 PM on 05/05/2010 Permalink | Reply

              They have a beautiful family. I hope they knock the lot of them out of office.

              Leinenkugel is one of those names that seems perfect for a family brewery with strong local recognition. In upstate PA the equivalent was Stegmaier’s. Beating Feingold would be such a coup.

  • Mary Sue 12:15 AM on 05/04/2010 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: ,   

    Times Square suspect arrested at JFK 

    Breaking News

    NEW YORK (BNO NEWS) — Authorities on early Tuesday arrested a U.S. citizen of Pakistani descent as a suspect in last Saturday’s failed car bombing in Times Square, according to news reports.
    NBC News reported that a man, who was identified as Shahzad Faisal, was taken into custody shortly after midnight EDT. NBC News initially reported that the arrest took place in Connecticut, but CNN reports that the man was arrested at JFK International Airport as he tried to board a flight overseas.

    Shahzad Faisal Facebook page currently being linked on Twitter. There is no confirmation this is the actual Facebook page of the suspect, however.
    Gateway Pundit has video from Fox News’ breaking news report. DOJ to hold a press conference at 1:30 AM.

    UPDATE: Details of the press conference posted at Ruby Slippers

    • richard mcenroe 12:30 AM on 05/04/2010 Permalink | Reply

      “Dear Little Miss Attila reader:

      I apologize for the fact that my weblog is offline once more. I’ve put in an inquiry with my hosting service, and assume that there’s been some sort of administrative problem. We should have this fixed by mid-morning tomorrow.


      Joy McCann”

      • rubyslipperblog 12:44 AM on 05/04/2010 Permalink | Reply

        I hope she is back online soon. I will post a note on my blog. The Lonely Conservative was offline after her blog was hacked this weekend.

      • Jill 5:26 AM on 05/04/2010 Permalink | Reply

        Tuesday morning, and she’s still offlline. What’s going on?

        • rubyslipperblog 2:15 PM on 05/04/2010 Permalink | Reply

          I was out earlier and just checked to see. She is back online citing a technical problem. I am glad it wasn’t hacked. I was starting to get a bit worried conservative bloggers were targeted.

    • Obi's Sister 8:16 PM on 05/04/2010 Permalink | Reply

      Egg meet Face. Thank heavens for the men and women who take their jobs of protecting this country seriously, as opposed to their betters who’d love to just give it away.

  • Mary Sue 9:49 AM on 04/30/2010 Permalink | Reply  

    Would Arnold run? 

    H/T: Twitter
    Via Associated Press

    Jay Leno asked Schwarzenegger on “The Tonight Show” Thursday if he would make a White House run if the law was changed.

    Schwarzenegger replied, “Without any doubt.”

    Fortunately that would require an amendment to the Constitution which would be a heavy lift to say the least..

    • richard mcenroe 10:36 AM on 04/30/2010 Permalink | Reply

      Would Arnold run? He’d better start now. Too many unemployed people in Calfornia know what he looks like and he’ll need a good lead…

  • Mary Sue 7:25 PM on 04/26/2010 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , ,   

    Rosie and Huckabee square off on gay adoption 

    Allahpundit thought this exchange between Rosie O’Donnell and Mike Huckabee was riveting but notes Huckabee failed to make the case against gay couples adopting. Huckabee failed, in my opinion, to make the more credible argument O’Donnell was never discriminated against. She and her partner adopted three children and cut to the head of the line thanks to her wealth and celebrity. She and her partner subsequently separated leaving those children to suffer the added pain of a broken home in their lives.

    There is no doubt that children do best in a stable home with both a father and a mother present.   Candice Bergen conceded the point after her famous feud with Dan Quayle.  Would Rosie concede her wealth and fame denied a heterosexual couple in a stable relationship their “right” to love a child?

    HUCKABEE: Well, I certainly don’t intend to disparage you as a person.

    ROSIE: It hurts. But Mike, it hurts.

    HUCKABEE: And that’s not my intention, Rosie. I have great respect for you. I respect your choices. And I respect the choices that people make that aren’t my choices. I think it’s a matter of when people say that I have to somehow accept all values and all view points as the same as mine. I don’t. That’s what we have in our culture, the capacity say that we disagree.

    ROSIE: Right, but you’re trying to legally discriminate against my ability to parent in your state. You’re supporting legally preventing me from the same rights as my sister, who is heterosexual.

    HUCKABEE: Well, I think if what you’re asking me, do I believe that all people who adhere to a Biblical practice of one man, one woman for life, not only creating the next generation but training their replacements – that’s going to still for me be the ideal relationship.

    Full audio available at Hot Air. Transcript via Mediaite

    • p. miller clay 7:30 PM on 04/26/2010 Permalink | Reply

      i know kids who do better with single parents than with both a mom and dad.
      what do you have to say to that?

      • rubyslipperblog 9:47 PM on 04/26/2010 Permalink | Reply

        Let me just clarify because you raise a good point. I believe it shouldn’t be a matter of someone’s right to love a child but for the child to have a right to be loved in the most stable home available to them. Of course there are many many variations to what that best home might look like. Would a child be better off in a home where a strong single parent is available over a dysfunctional couple? Yes, of course. I know single parents who are doing an amazing job raising children. No doubt it is much harder to do though.

    • Maggie M. Thornton 6:38 PM on 04/28/2010 Permalink | Reply

      First, to all the ladies here, I want to thank you, so very much, for adding me to your blogroll, and Potluck is on mine as well.

      I didn’t see this exchange between Huckabee and Rosie. You make the point, that she surely cut to the front of the line due to her celebrity. Rosie is far from stable. If she is “hurt,” think of the hurt felt by who she has attacked. God help her children. They will be a mess, and it has nothing to do with the fact that she is lesbian (just my opinion).

  • Mary Sue 8:59 AM on 04/23/2010 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: General Motors, TARP   

    Shell Games at General Motors 

    While Democrats do their best to ignore their fiscal fiasco we’ve come to know as ObamaCare, Larry Summers is all aglow with news of GM’s miraculous turn to profitability. Mickey Kaus is disappointed in Summers, calling the boasting of loan repayments by GM, “Chevy Kabuki.”  Kabuki is one word to describe the ruse that is used to pretend GM is so successful they can now repay their loans years in advance.  Shell game is another term that comes to mind:

    The issue came up yesterday at a hearing with the special watchdog on the Wall Street Bailout, Neil Barofsky, who was asked several times about the GM repayment by Sen. Tom Carper (D-DE), who was looking for answers on how much money the feds might make from the controversial Wall Street Bailout.

    “It’s good news in that they’re reducing their debt,” Barofsky said of the accelerated GM payments, “but they’re doing it by taking other available TARP money.”

    In other words, GM is taking money from the Wall Street Bailout – the TARP money – and using that to pay off their loans ahead of schedule.

    “It sounds like it’s kind of like taking money out of one pocket and putting in the other,” said Carper, who got a nod of agreement from Barofsky.

    “The way that payment is going to be made is by drawing down on an equity facility of other TARP money.”

    Translated – they are using bailout funds from the feds to pay off their loans.

    For you and me, that might be like using one credit card to pay off another, eh?

    “When do you think we’ll have really good news from GM?” Carper asked.

    “I don’t have a crystal ball on that Senator,” Barofsky replied.

    UPDATE: Ed Morrissey has text of  a letter sent from Senator Grassley to Tim Geithner calling out GM and the administration for the charade. Here is an excerpt:

    Therefore, it is unclear how GM and the Administration could have accurately announced yesterday that GM repaid its TARP loans in any meaningful way. In reality, it looks like GM merely used one source of TARP funds to repay another. The taxpayers are still on the hook, and whether TARP funds are ultimately recovered depends entirely on the government’s ability to sell GM stock in the future. Treasury has merely exchanged a legal right to repayment for an uncertain hope of sharing in the future growth of GM. A debt-for-equity swap is not a repayment.

    Be sure to read the rest of the letter, it’s a doozy.

    • Jill 9:06 AM on 04/23/2010 Permalink | Reply

      And GM is advertising this fraud in a new commercial. Saw it last night.

      • rubyslipperblog 9:13 AM on 04/23/2010 Permalink | Reply

        I’ve seen the ads several times and thought initially something doesn’t smell quite right about that. Sure enough it is all a sham.

    • roland 9:10 AM on 04/23/2010 Permalink | Reply

      What a ripoff scam, which ios nothing new for this administration

    • fuzislippers 9:18 PM on 04/23/2010 Permalink | Reply

      Borrowing from Peter to pay . . . Peter? Lovely.

    • One Ticked Chick 9:16 AM on 04/24/2010 Permalink | Reply

      When I saw the ad I thought it was odd that GM, which continues to hemorrhage money, had the resources to pay back any bailout funds. I’m not surprised to learn that this is more of the sleight-of-hand I’ve come to expect from this administration.

  • Mary Sue 2:48 PM on 04/19/2010 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: ,   

    Reactions from the left to Pew: Obama wasting his time trying to appeal to 80% who don’t trust big government 

    Yes Adrienne there are people who are unaware of the shenanigans in Washington. These are the folks who generally take themselves to the polls every four years and vote without the slightest clue of the issues, let alone who controls Congress. They are the most likely to have no idea who Nancy Pelosi is let alone know that Obama won his first election by getting his opponents kicked off the ballot. These are the clueless folks who actually think Barack Obama might slow the rise of the oceans and heal the planet.

    While the results of the latest Pew survey prove what conservatives and most independents know intuitively, the true believers on the left are in deep denial. Sadly, these are not the people who can be dismissed as uneducated. They know full well who Nancy Pelosi is and probably have rationalized Obama’s propensity for disclosing divorce details of his opponents as giving the religious right their just desserts. I found the reaction from the far left to this survey stunning. Far from thinking they have overreached, the left believes they are really only losing the messaging war:

    One, Republicans are simply more authoritarian than Democrats. For all their talk about individual liberty and personal freedom, they’re ready and eager to goose-step behind whatever Republican Daddy figure that comes along. Think back at the cottage industry of sickeningly fawning books about Bush during his first term and you get the picture. This is why right-wingers saw black helicopters in the skies when Clinton was President, but cheered on every egregious executive overreach — from domestic spying to torture — when Bush was at the helm.

    Paraphrasing Truman, Republicans have leaders and Democrats have bosses.

    It’s also pretty self-evident from these results that a Democratic President trying to appeal to Republican (or Teabagger) voters is completely wasting his time. So Barack Obama can escalate in Afghanistan and cut taxes and he’s still considered a communist pacifist by the right.

    Finally, look at the steady decline of trust in government among Independents. That’s the result of 30+ years of “government is the problem” Reaganism. The Democrats and Barack Obama must make an affirmative case for government or this trend will continue.

    The party of “government sucks — vote for us” is still winning the messaging war.

    In other words, why don’t we just say thank you to our big government overlords and shut up already. Did they notice they still need to convince 80% of us big government is the answer?

    • fuzislippers 9:51 PM on 04/19/2010 Permalink | Reply

      Unreal. Reminds me of that old saw about how when everyone is against you, there may be a problem with you and not with everyone else.

      Not that I’d expect any honest self-assessment from the left; they clearly have all the answers and don’t care or understand that their idea of progress is the worst form of regression, and that it’s always failed, always. Nope, they know best. EVERYONE ELSE is stupid. That has to be it.

  • Mary Sue 2:00 AM on 04/16/2010 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , NRSC,   

    Crist Campaign Source: Crist will announce independent run today 

    Via Dan Riehl
    All signs today pointed to the possibility on Thursday, now Fox News 35 is a reporting a source inside the Crist campaign has said Crist will announce on Friday he will run as an independent:

    Dr. Rick Foglesong is the President of the faculty at Rollins College, one of our political analysts who has time and time again predicted a run by the governor as an independent. And now, he says he has a source inside the Crist campaign staff.

    Dr. Foglesong said, “A person I know in the Charlie Crist campaign has told me Charlie Crist would veto the merit pay bill, and he did. Further, he said he would announce tomorrow, that’s Friday, that he would run as an independent.”

    Fox 35’s Tracy Jacim asked, “Where is this supposed to happen?” Dr. Foglesong said, “South Florida.” Jacim asks, “Miami?” Foglesong said, “Yes.” Jacim asks, “How reliable is this source?” Foglesong replied, “I trust the source.”

    Fox 35 contacted the Crist campaign staff by e-mail, and they would neither confirm nor deny this claim, and expressed surprise we were asking.

    But a new Quinnipiac poll of 1,250 registered republicans offers support to the theory. It shows the governor badly trailing former Florida House Speaker Marco Rubio in the GOP primary with only 33 percent of the vote to Rubio’s 56 percent.

    Fox News was not able to find a campaign event for Crist in Miami today, nor did that seem to be the most convincing portion of Dr. Foglesong’s statement.    Senator John Cornyn commented on the potential for a Crist independent run saying, I would think that would be the end of his political career as a Republican, so I doubt that will happen. Whether Crist will attempt a career-ending run as an independent remains to be seen. Senator Cornyn and the NRSC own this fiasco, however.   If Crist runs as an independent, he won’t be the only one facing the backlash of an angry mob.

    • fuzislippers 2:02 PM on 04/16/2010 Permalink | Reply

      Haven’t been following this one closely, but it sounds like polls show Crist winning as an indie? If so, and as he can’t win as a rep, it’s not that surprising that he’d go for it to keep his job. I still hope that the polls are wrong/things change and Rubio wins. The very last thing we need is a successful indie in 2010 giving stupid third party ideas to others and ensuring democratic majorities for the last days of our republic (ushered in, of course, by that very extended dem control). In other words, I could care less about Crist and wish he’d just go away quietly now that it’s clear reps don’t want him, like a decent human being and patriot. That he won’t speaks volumes.

  • Mary Sue 8:30 PM on 04/15/2010 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , Justice Breyer,   

    Justice Breyer Expects Many Cases From a Law of 2400 Pages 

    CNN buries the lede in this article titled, “2 justices discuss next nominee to high court.” Justice Breyer and Thomas do discuss qualities they hope to see in a potential nominee to the high court but the real news is buried at the bottom of the post quoting Justice Breyer in response to a question about the light caseload enjoyed by the Court:

    Breyer predicted to House lawmakers the recent, massive health care reform law passed by Congress will someday reach his court.

    “Now you, I gather, have passed a law with 2,400 pages,” he told panel members, referring to the health care bill. “If you had passed a law with 2,400 pages it probably has a lot of words. And I would predict as a test of the theory that three or four years today no one is every going to ask us again why we have so few cases.”

    Breyer had been asked why the Supreme Court’s caseload had been relatively light in recent years. The 71-year-old justice explained his colleagues usually only accepts cases where lower courts have disagreed over a particular issue, giving the Supreme Court a chance to offer the final word. A Democratic White House and Congress promoting and passing laws may now have a greater chance of being overturned in coming years by federal courts that have a majority of Republican appointees. Six of the nine current justices on the Supreme Court were named by GOP presidents.

    In that vein, Breyer offered a humorous “reality check” on court challenges, citing the example used by the renowned French writer Michel de Montaigne in 1584.

    “This king, he wrote, was so stupid he thought by writing a lot of laws he was going to reduce the number of lawyers because he’s explained everything,” said Breyer. “Doesn’t the king know every word in a bill is the subject for an argument in court in a decision?

    Video available here for those who are interested. I find Breyer’s unprompted comments to be extraordinary and the reference to Michel de Montaigne was the piece de resistance. Any thoughts?

    • Jill 5:56 AM on 04/16/2010 Permalink | Reply

      That’s very interesting. Is he hinting that the bill is unconstitutional on multiple grounds?

      Passing the Senate bill, a messy rough draft, was a brutish power grab to get a foot in the door, no matter how crudely. These clods in Congress can’t pretend they were trying to write good law. They really disgust me.

      • rubyslipperblog 10:19 AM on 04/16/2010 Permalink | Reply

        I don’t know whether he suggests the law might be unconstitutional on multiple grounds or that he expects lower courts to disagree on interpretations perhaps. I would expect some combination but you are exactly right there can be no pretense that anything of this magnitude is going to prove to be good law. They barely knew what they wrote themselves. Look at all the problems that have come to light in this short time since it has passed.

  • Mary Sue 8:56 PM on 04/12/2010 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: Andy Stern,   

    Andy Stern Resigns SEIU – Where is he headed? 

    Politico reports the news with little else but Stern’s purple-pleasing accomplishments:

    The SEIU has emerged as a central political player and has grown rapidly under Stern’s tenure, and some close to him had expected him to resign during the first term of the president he helped elect. But he’s also waged a series of bitter battles inside the labor movement, one of the nastiest of which turned in SEIU’s favor with a California court ruling last week. Stern also won a victory when Obama named his union’s lawyer, Craig Becker, to the National Labor Relations board over Republican objections in a recess appointment last month.

    Stern, even without the union presidency, would remain on, among other things, the board of President Obama’s deficit commission, to which he was appointed in February.

    It makes me physically ill to think he will sit on the deficit commission. This alone confirms the domestic agenda is not an accident. So, who has a theory about this resignation?

    • backyardconservative 9:47 PM on 04/12/2010 Permalink | Reply

      Maybe he’s going underground along with ACORN to launch the next Obama re-elect machine.

      Or maybe he’s been caught committing a crime–now wouldn’t that be wonderful–how about check kiting, cooking the books on their underfunded pension funds.

      • rubyslipperblog 10:03 PM on 04/12/2010 Permalink | Reply

        I was just reading Michelle Malkin’s post and she seems to be smelling the familiar odor of bus tires. HuffPo seems to support that with this:

        “But those close to him say he wanted to tackle different, more personal activities at this stage in his career. The passage of health care reform presented a sound achievement from which to depart from his presidential post. And while he was currently in the process of launching a third-party initiative in North Carolina — to challenge those House Democrats who voted against health care reform legislation — he was also growing tired of the daily grind, a source close to Stern says.”

        Maybe he has been caught at one of his many crimes.

    • richard mcenroe 9:34 AM on 04/13/2010 Permalink | Reply

    • Obi's Sister 12:17 PM on 04/13/2010 Permalink | Reply

      Five bucks says the White House.

    • nicedeb 1:50 PM on 04/13/2010 Permalink | Reply

      I heard Breitbart reference the other day, a breaking story about how the SEIU was funneling money to Media Matters to run interference for them. I haven’t heard any more about it. But Stern and the SEIU are up to their eyeballs in all sorts of shady schemes. http://biggovernment.com/libertychick/2010/04/12/breaking-news-seiu-president-andy-stern-to-resign/

  • Mary Sue 9:04 PM on 04/11/2010 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , ,   

    SEIU Executive VP Advises: “Black people get scared” 

    H/T: Breitbart

    SEIU Executive VP Gerry Hudson lays out a sure-fire plan in this video clip from Naked Emperor News to scare their black membership so they no longer oppose immigration reform. Surely they can’t have the concerns of their own members messing up the opportunity to have a slew of newly legalized immigrants to fill the union coffers. Hudson isn’t really worried about opposition from the black community though, “it doesn’t take a whole lot to argue African-American workers to another place.” Essentially the plan involves telling them pay no attention to these immigrants who might take your jobs look over there at those “f’ing rabid racists.”  Nice plan, shows great respect for the African-Americans he represents doesn’t it? Video at the link, language warning applies as you may have already guessed.

    • backyardconservative 9:39 PM on 04/11/2010 Permalink | Reply

      Who are the real racists. We know the answer.

    • nicedeb 12:26 PM on 04/12/2010 Permalink | Reply

      Racist in this context meaning – people who think folks should come to this country legally, and should be penalized if they don’t. Rabid stuff like that.

  • Mary Sue 12:40 PM on 04/10/2010 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: crash, Katyn, Lech Kaczynski, Poland   

    Thoughts and Prayers for Poland 

    Very much by chance, I happened upon the story of the tragic plane crash in Poland as it was breaking early today. I gathered early reports of the news as it was breaking here. Nearly as fast as the news was breaking, suggestions of foul play or conspiracy sprang up as well. Given the long-standing tensions between Poland and Russia such questions seem quite natural, perhaps even prudent, though it appears the cause was accidental:

    The symbolism of the tragedy to many Poles is almost unbearable. In 1943 General Wladyslaw Sikorski, the leader of the Polish wartime government, died in a plane crash in Gibraltar. No foul play was proved there, but many Poles believe that he was murdered because of his resolute determination to expose the Katyn massacre—which the Soviet Union blamed on the Germans. Now another Polish president, closely involved in the same issue, has died in an all too similar manner.

    Polish historical sensitivies about Russia mean that many see the coincidence as sinister rather than tragic. But the plane tried to land four times, in bad weather. Accident is the overwhelmingly likely cause.

    Yet like Katyn, which eliminated the flower of the pre-war Polish elite, the plane crash also seems like a decapitation of Polish society. Among the 96 people who died were the chief of the Polish general staff, the head of the central bank, the director of the Institute of National Remembrance (which investigates and documents crimes such as Katyn) and many other of the country’s top public figures. Many politicians from the opposition Law and Justice Party, which is led by Jaroslaw Kaczynski, the late president’s twin brother, were among the delegation.

    Professor Jacobson notes the tragedy upon tragedy this loss represents for the people of Poland who have been unwavering allies to the United States. Immediately after hearing the news, I contacted a friend in Poland who confirmed the people of Poland “are frozen with grief.” My friend seemed almost surprised but also quite touched the world has noticed and acknowledged the great loss the people of Poland have experienced. No doubt this deep wound experienced by our friends in Poland will take time to heal.  My thoughts and prayers are with our brave, noble friends in Poland.   “Blessed are those who mourn, for they will be comforted” (Matthew 5:4)

    • fuzislippers 12:45 PM on 04/10/2010 Permalink | Reply

      I’m so glad you posted this. I just heard the news and am shocked and deeply saddened for our Polish friends. My prayers and thoughts are with the people of Poland on this day and in their grief.

    • Quite Rightly 1:31 PM on 04/10/2010 Permalink | Reply

      Beautifully put. The tragedy of this event is incomprehensible.

  • Mary Sue 8:08 AM on 04/09/2010 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: ,   

    Stupak Retiring 

    CBS is reporting the breaking news of the day. Press conference at 12:30:

    Stupak negotiated with Democratic leaders down to the eleventh hour for stricter abortion language in the health care bill, but he ultimately voted for it after President Obama agreed to sign an executive order assuring the new laws will keep taxpayer dollars from funding abortions.

    That prompted the conservative Tea Party Express to launch a $250,000 ad campaign against Stupak this week. The group also scheduled a handful of stops on its bus tour in Stupak’s district.

    On the left, the abortion rights group NARAL Pro-Choice America has been working to defeat Stupak and instead elect his Democratic primary challenger Connie Saltonstall.

    That will be a tough seat for Democrats to fill at this point. I hope Stupak has plenty of time to reflect and that vote and the pre-born lives he sold out for health care.

    • No Sheeples Here 10:20 AM on 04/09/2010 Permalink | Reply

      I can’t wait to see what’s up his sleeve now. We need to watch his actions following his announcement. He’s not leaving without something from this Trojan Horse Administration to make it worth his while.

      • Quite Rightly 4:10 PM on 04/09/2010 Permalink | Reply

        I was thinking the same thing. There will be a lot of eyes following the progress of the slime trail, no doubt.

  • Mary Sue 5:51 PM on 04/03/2010 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: ,   

    “Regrets, they’ve had a few” 

    Seems they are not too few to mention. CNN is reporting a bit of an upsurge in Democrats who have regretted their vote for Barack Obama and are finding an outlet for their disappointment in the tea parties:

    A lawyer and lifelong Democrat, Ducket made her political leanings clear: She said she was a campus community organizer for Democratic Sen. George McGovern’s 1972 presidential campaign, voted for Jimmy Carter and Al Gore, and previously ran for elective office in Colorado as a Democrat.

    “I was a card-carrying member of the ACLU, and I probably did inhale in college,” Ducket said.
    Ducket, who is now an independent and did not vote for Obama, said the president has “carried things to an extreme.”

    “I think we’ve gone too far on the side of government doing too much,” Ducket said. “The Democratic Party is wanting to take care of everyone, instead of helping everybody stand on their own two feet.”
    Roxanne Lewis expressed a similar point of view. A small business owner in Grand Junction, Lewis described herself as a lifelong Democrat and called the president a “phenomenal speaker.” She voted for him because she “believed in what he was saying: change.”

    But, Lewis added, “I should’ve listened a lot closer when he talked about ‘spreading the wealth.’ ”
    Asked how she feels about having voted for the president, Lewis said “I feel lied to, cheated and raped.”

    It’s debatable whether they were lied to, Obama telegraphed where he was headed pretty clearly for those who chose to listen closely. Nevertheless, when someone wakes up with a hope and change hangover, it’s probably not the time to lecture them. Let them speak to those who haven’t given voice to their disappointment because there must be many more of them we aren’t hearing from yet.

    That there are disgruntled Democrats, who realize now Obama was not the pragmatic post-partisan messiah some pretended he would be, seems less stunning to me than CNN’s admission they exist.   Is this atonement or the start of something new at CNN?

    • Jill 6:04 PM on 04/03/2010 Permalink | Reply

      Wow – lied to, cheated, and raped. But tell us how you really feel, Roxanne.

      And Anderson Cooper drew the line with that vile weasel, Grayson. Amazing. Maybe CNN is trying to get some viewers back.

    • Janelle Humbert 12:20 AM on 04/04/2010 Permalink | Reply

      The democrats always want to take care of “everybody”, with anybody’s money other that their own.

Compose new post
Next post/Next comment
Previous post/Previous comment
Show/Hide comments
Go to top
Go to login
Show/Hide help
shift + esc