Troll Alert

As many of you know I have a troll that has stalked me (and other conservative bloggers) for many years. She was the "manny" that was so absurdly wrong regarding my post about the other networks defending Fox News recently. Here is the comment she left at at my Chron blog:

Kathleen you have fallen yet again. Manny is me -- Michelle -- your supposed "stalker" but I am just trying to keep you honest. I love that you quoted me. Mission accomplished! In the meantime you publish my tripe while the surge in Iraq is failing. Where is you cheer for the troops? Like it helped at all. Laughable is all I can say.

Folks, remember when I said the troll comments make me laugh? This one really did. Imagine how sad one's life must be when your greatest delight is that you used a sockpuppet name to comment on the blogger that you stalk (yes, for 4 yrs she stalks me. It's pathetic). Oh wow. She really got me right? Heh. At least she admits it's "tripe." Iraq is failing? Uh, no. That would be Afhganistan. Our President "dithers" while our boys die. 16 civilians today. Over 50 soldiers dead and over a 1000 Afghan civilians. But that's ok, Obama needs a few more weeks to decide what to do.

For anyone who like to see what my troll looks like and how she uses our taxpayer money to use computers that you and I pay for to leave troll comments everywhere, go HERE (another blogger she stalked) and scroll down comments to comment 41 for her picture and comment 47 on how she uses our taxpayer money. You might want to use her work information to let her boss know. I would suggest calling since I think she runs the website and your e-mails might not get through. Feel free to e-mail the President of the school though.

This is what she does for fun. It's a sad life, isn't it? Michelle, you don't have to sockpuppet anymore. You use your real name and I will publish your comments along with your info of course.-TexasSparkle

http://proteinwisdom.com/?p=9680

Nothing In Washington Has "Changed". It Was Nice to "Hope"though....

So says.....MSNBC, First Read??????:

The more things change…: Bloomberg's Al Hunt writes a column that has been waiting to be written: All of the promise of changing the way Washington does business hasn't been turned into a reality yet by the president. One just has to look at his fundraising schedule to see that the political realities continue to creep in. While unrelated, today's Washington Post story about Dem Rep. Pete Visclosky's use of earmarks to raise money is a reminder how just how the culture hasn't changed all that much, even as the party in control did change. Just asking, but if the president had vetoed an appropriations bill that contained earmarks (which he could have done this past spring), would he be looking like more of a change agent, making it harder for the Al Hunts of the world to note how the president has spent more time promising change than delivering on it? Speaking of vetoes, anyone else surprised he hasn't found something to veto? Talk about a way to show some Washington independence at a time when the rest of the country has had it up to HERE with Washington.

Against the Establishment

Posted by BigDog

A short Sitrep: District 23 in New York is having a special election for their House seat. Its a three-way race which surprisingly includes a strong third party challenge from Doug Hoffman from the Conservative party. Recent events have shed light on and damaged the Republican candidate Dede Scozzafava. Including calling the police on a Weekly Standard journalist. Honestly, what a wimp.

Many prominant Republicans have endorsed Scozzafava, including Newt Gingrich. Gingrich's strongest argument is that we can't let the Perfect be the enemy of the Good. While I understand and agree with the concept, I don't think Scozzafava is the Good at all, therefore his premise is wrong. She says she opposes Cap and Trade and ObamaCare. Well and good. While she has signed a no new taxes pledge, I think its questionable given her later statements. She also favored the Stimulus and is endorsed by labor unions, the NEA, abortion groups like Planned Parenthood and of all people Markos Moulitsas of the Daily Kos. Huh.

(For the record, I am not anti-abortion, but imo Planned Parenthood is a radical leftist ideological group as much if not more than an abortion group.)

His other strong argument is that she was chosen by the local Republican establishment, as opposed to the national one. Fair enough. But that doesn't mean Gingrich is obligated to endorse her just because she has an (R) behind her name. IMO, Scozzafava in office as a Republican would be worse than having democrat of any political leaning.

Doug Hoffaman isn't perfect by any means. In his NY Post article he talks entirely too much about himself and he refers to the "9 trillian dollar deficit", I think he means 9 trillian dollar DEBT. Oops. Dude, have someone proofread. But Hoffman is the Good. He is endorsed by Sarah Palin, Dick Armey and Santorum, the Club for Growth and much of the Conservative base.

Its this kind of thing that proves Palin is a genuine rogue - dare I say genuine Maverick? - willing to buck her own party on principle. As opposed to a community organizer who votes Present most of the time or an old Mcfart who picks whatever position will give him the most notoriety.

Were I in District 23 and I had only the choice between the Republican Dede Scozzafava and Democrat Bill Owens, I would vote for the Democrat. Running Scozzafava is the very establishment Republican behavior which lost the 2006 and 2008 elections as well as leading to a relatively weak showing in 2004. Scozzafava is the type of candidate or elected official who would actively damage Republicans. Ours is a center-right nation, and moving center-left in hopes of capturing a minority of votes while alienating the majority is a losing strategy.

When a Hoax Is Something To Worry About

One of my commenters made me aware of Rush Limbaugh falling for a hoax regarding Obama's college thesis. I hadn't heard about it because, believe it or not, conservatives don't listen to Rush all the time. But I found it interesting because I was watching CNN this morning and Howard Kurtz (who happens to be one of the few journalist I respect on CNN) was exasperated with another hoax.

Remember back during the presidential campaign when MSNBC reported that that someone "inside the McCain campaign" had leaked that Sarah Palin didn't know that Africa was a continent? Well, the "insider" was Martin Eisenstadt, a person who actually doesn't exist. That's right. The leaks that were smearing Palin was a joke, a hoax.

Not only did David Shuster of MSNBC report the smear, but to this day people still spread that lie about Palin. Shuster even identified the non existent person in another newscast as a "McCain Policy Advisor, Martin Eisenstadt" reporting that he had come "forward today to identify himself as the source of the leaks.”

Sure, anyone can fall for a hoax. But as people delight in the fact that Rush fell for one, they might want to think about the fact that Rush is just a talk show host, and David Shuster is supposedly a journalist reporting the hard news. When a journalist is quoting a non existent person it means that they didn't bother to check out the person at all. It's called Journalism 101.

This is why people don't trust the media.

Update: Ryan tells me that Rush didn't fall for the hoax but used it as an example of how they misquoted him. That sounds more like it. But since I didn't hear it, I can't judge.

Conservative Women; Making a Difference.

Three women the left love to bash more than any that came before, are Sarah Palin, Liz Cheney, and Michelle Bachmann. Why? Because they are strong smart conservative women who embrace their roles as mothers and activists for conservative causes. There is simply nothing the left hates more. Which is why the attacks on Sarah Palin were unprecedented and the ones coming at Liz Cheney and Michelle Bachmann are starting to catch up to the smears Palin had to endure.

I cannot tell you how much I admire these women. They talk the talk AND they walk the walk. I didn't think I could admire Michelle Bachmann (a Republican Congresswoman from Minnesota's 6th Congressional District) more than I do now, But then I didn't know this about her:

"She and Marcus, a clinical psychologist, were raising their children -- they had four then; they have five now -- and, as foster parents, were raising some other people's children, 23 of them, a few teenagers at a time."

This is walking the walk folks.

Like me, she turned away from liberalism. I voted for Jimmy Carter, She and her husband danced at Jimmy Carter's inauguration. Both of us were changed by Ronald Reagan.

Sarah Palin is making an impact in politics and in political races through facebook. Truly amazing. Liz Cheney is making sure we are aware of what the White House is doing and not doing that is making us less safe. She has begun a new group called "Keep America Safe."

These political firebrands do this all while having five children each (and many more with foster kids in Bachmann's case). I may not agree on every single issue, but I know we share the same values, vision, and hope for America. Whenever I start to feel down from all that is happening politically in our country, I think of these women and what they fight for, and it makes me proud and happy once again.

whatever happens, It gives me great hope to know that these women are fighting the good fight.

Give Credit Where Credit Is Due (Update Below)

Sometimes people do the right thing when you least expect it.

Via Fausta's Blog:

Charles Krauthammer explains,

Then on Thursday, the administration tried to make them complicit in an actual boycott of Fox. The Treasury Department made available Ken Feinberg, the executive pay czar, for interviews with the White House “pool” news organizations — except Fox. The other networks admirably refused, saying they would not interview Feinberg unless Fox was permitted to as well. The administration backed down.

I think maybe the journalists understand that what goes around comes around. When a Republican administration comes back (and let's hope that is sooner than later), they could just follow Obama's lead and only give interviews TO Fox News. If the media doesn't rise up against this now, then they will have no credibility to complain if that happens (I don't think it would happen with a Republican administration, but the media is better safe than sorry).

Also, read Krauthammer's article. It's excellent. It outlines this Chicago type politics that this administration came from. Did you know that Rahm Emanuel once sent a dead fish to a pollster? I didn't know that. It's like a movie about the mafia, really.

The more we know about this administration, the more surreal it is.

UPDATE: It seems the left is spreading a certain meme to prove that (heaven forbid!) the other networks were NOT standing up for Fox News. No, no, Talking Points Memo put this out to prove it was simply a technical issue:

Feinberg did a pen and pad with reporters to brief them on cutting executive compensation. TV correspondents, as they do with everything, asked to get the comments on camera. Treasury officials agreed and made a list of the networks who asked (Fox was not among them).

But logistically, all of the cameras could not get set up in time or with ease for the Feinberg interview, so they opted for a round robin where the networks use one pool camera. Treasury called the White House pool crew and gave them the list of the networks who'd asked for the interview.

The network pool crew noticed Fox wasn't on the list, was told that they hadn't asked and the crew said they needed to be included. Treasury called the White House and asked top Obama adviser Anita Dunn. Dunn said yes and Fox's Major Garrett was among the correspondents to interview Feinberg last night'

In reference to Manny's assertion that my post and Krauthammer is inaccurate, I didn't realize at the time he was quoting The Talking Point Memo. Which is laughable in itself. Not only leftwing, but known for it's own inaccuracies. Manny's supposedly "correct" version is an unsourced post by Christina Bellantoni at the leftwing Talking Points Memo. So please. I think I'll take Krauthammer over TPM any day.

What is amusing about this is that the left does not want anyone to IMAGINE that the other networks would show integrity by doing this. The bigger story here is, of course, that the White House tried to exclude a news organization and was rebuffed, whatever the reason you want to believe, even the TPM one, this is an embarrasement to the administration for trying to manipulate the media and failing.

But if you would like to hear from someone else on this instead of the left leaning TMP and the right leaning Krauthammer, how about White house reporter from CBS?:

"And on Thursday, the Treasury Department tried to exclude FOX News from pool coverage of interviews with a key official. It backed down after strong protests from the press.

"All the networks said, that's it, you've crossed the line," said CBS News White House correspondent Chip Reid."

Nice, Talking Points Memo, but your spin didn't work this time.

Update II: Another meme TPM tried to put out there (and picked up by the associated press I might add) was that Fox News hadn't asked for an interview and THAT was why Fox wasn't included. Yeah.... That isn't true either:

Today Fox News provided more details on the sequence of events to the Huffington Post.

“Of course we requested an interview,” Fox News Senior Vice President Michael Clemente told the Huffington Post.

This directly contradicts reports by the Associated Press and Talking Points Memo, both of which reported that the White House had excluded Fox News because it did not request an interview.
........................

Clemente said that CBS News Washington Bureau Chief and current pool chairman Chris Isham — who did not respond to phone or e-mail requests for comment Saturday — received a call from the Treasury Department Thursday saying that Feinberg would be available to speak to all of the networks in the pool except for Fox News, and that Bloomberg would be included instead.

Clemente said that when Isham presented that scenario on a conference call with the other pool members — including Fox News — "they unanimously said, instantly, no, that's not gonna fly. Either Fox is in or none of us is doing it."

So, you guys who so desperately wanted to believe that the other networks wouldn't stand up for Fox News will have to accept the disappointment that they really did do the right thing and go against the Obama administration. Sorry.

HHS Sec. Sebelius Could Learn Something From Her Cancer

AP Photo/Susan Walsh

Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius appeared before a Senate panel Wednesday with a bandage on her forehead and a puffy eye.

I wondered what had happened to Sec. Sebelius so I checked the WaPo and found this:

Sebelius had a basal cell carcinoma removed from her forehead on Tuesday during a successful standard outpatient procedure, according to HHS spokeswoman Jenny Backus.

"She is back fighting to get everyone the same good health care she has," Backus said in an e-mail.

She just had to throw that in there, didn't she?

Keep in mind that Sebelius recently said that she is "all for a single payer system eventually."

A single payer system like the NHS (National Health Service of Great Britain) perhaps? I happen to find someone online who also had a similar, although more rare, cancer, Merkel Cell Carcinoma. He found a spot above his elbow. You can go here to read his journey though the kind of system where "everyone receives the same good health care." It begins in June of 2004 and was last updated in August of 2008 (check out the photos linked on the left. They will freak you out).

If you think that is just one person, you might want to check out this helpful page called "CancerHelp UK." It has all kind of information for you if you are under the UK's nationalized health care system. Like this for instance:

"There can be quite a long wait to see a dermatologist. This can be very worrying if you are concerned you may have cancer. But non melanoma skin cancer takes years to develop in most cases. Waiting a few weeks isn't likely to do any harm."

You wouldn't have minded waiting, would you Ms. Sebelius?

If you read the journal link I posted above, you might get an idea of what happens when you wait a few weeks.

Ms. Sebelius, this is the kind of care you would have received under a single payer system or a government run "public option. So why don't you inform your spokesperson to not use your cancer scare as a propaganda piece for government run health care, when it is clear that you would never have received the kind of excellent care you did anywhere else but here, and without a government system.

Dick Cheney sets us straight on Afghan war policy

Everyone is talking about Dick Cheney's speech yesterday. Here's the money quote (via HotAir):

“Recently, President Obama’s advisors have decided that it’s easier to blame the Bush Administration than support our troops. This weekend they leveled a charge that cannot go unanswered. The President’s chief of staff claimed that the Bush Administration hadn’t asked any tough questions about Afghanistan, and he complained that the Obama Administration had to start from scratch to put together a strategy.

“In the fall of 2008, fully aware of the need to meet new challenges being posed by the Taliban, we dug into every aspect of Afghanistan policy, assembling a team that repeatedly went into the country, reviewing options and recommendations, and briefing President-elect Obama’s team. They asked us not to announce our findings publicly, and we agreed, giving them the benefit of our work and the benefit of the doubt. The new strategy they embraced in March, with a focus on counterinsurgency and an increase in the numbers of troops, bears a striking resemblance to the strategy we passed to them. They made a decision – a good one, I think – and sent a commander into the field to implement it.

“Now they seem to be pulling back and blaming others for their failure to implement the strategy they embraced. It’s time for President Obama to do what it takes to win a war he has repeatedly and rightly called a war of necessity.”

This was necessary to say since White House chief of staff Rahm Emanuel had said on the Sunday talk shows that the Obama administration had had to "start from scratch" in Afghanistan because there was no policy in place.

This is the astonishing thing. The Obama administration ASKED the Bush administration NOT to make these findings public and because the Bush White House agreed, they actually decided that it was ok to go on the news and LIE to the American people about it. Did they really think that they could get away with that? The ego involved here is mindboggling.

Here is the former Vice President of the United States clearly calling out this administration in a lie so egregious that it demands our full attention. I don't remember anything like this before. Will the MSM (other than Fox News) cover it? At 6:54 am central time I take a look at CNN.com and see nothing at all about Cheney's speech. MSNBC? Nada. ABC News? If you click on Jake Tapper's page you will read about it. Why? Because Jake Tapper is one of the last great journalists who never lets his own politics effect his reporting. George Stephanopoulos mentions that Cheney "took a swipe" at the Obama administration. A swipe? Really? The Obama administration is lying about our war strategy and it's just "a swipe?" Seems the last time a White House was accused of lying about a war strategy, we couldn't pass by a newspaper or a news program without that point of view screaming at us. CBS news has zero about it in their "Top Political News," but thank goodness they have the important story of Michelle Obama hula hooping there.

I am beginning to wonder how much the msm is willing to ignore about this White House until they find their journalistic integrity again. That is, if they have any left.

Fox News Unhurt By White House Boycott

If you were wondering if Fox News has been damaged by the attacks of the White House, wonder no more.

For the week of October 12-18, amid MLB playoffs and "Monday Night Football" on ESPN, Fox News was the #4 cable network in primetime, averaging 2,098,000 total viewers — placing it behind only ESPN.

Just to compare.

MSNBC ranked #27 in primetime with 696,000 total viewers, while CNN came in at #28 with 674,000. In total day, CNN ranked #25 with 511,000 total viewers, while MSNBC did not place in the top 30.

Does anything this White House does ever work?

Obama's Enemies List

One of the reasons many people voted for Obama was because he promised a more civil tone in Washington. People believed that his friendly charismatic demeanor would mean a more bi-partisan cordial way of politics. Remember the "No red states, no blue states, only the United States" rhetoric? Well it seems it was only rhetoric. In nine short months the opposite has occurred.

As far as reaching across the aisle, Obama makes George Bush look like Gandhi in that regard.

Republicans have all but been shut out of the health care reform process. Obama is using Chicago type politics to "neuter" the U.S. Chamber of Commerce from its traditional Washington role as the chief representative for big business because it disagrees with the White house on Cap and Trade and the public option for health care reform. And most disturbing of all, he now uses the office of the Presidency to shut out a news organization.

This is beginning to be called what it is....an enemies list. Sen. Lamar Alexander, familiar with the Nixon enemies list, being a 29 yr old staff aide in the White House at the time, is warning Obama that this is a very bad idea.

Alexander remembers back in 1971 that Nixon had a list of what he called “persons known to be active in their opposition to our Administration” and to "use the available federal machinery to screw our political enemies.” Many on that list were news organizations.

Is this sounding chillingly familiar?

Is Obama using the federal machinery to "screw political enemies?" You decide. The Obama administration, through The Department of Health and Human Services, imposed a gag order on a health care company, Humana, who had sent its Medicare Advantage customers warnings that their benefits might be reduced in Democratic health care reform proposals (the gag order has since been removed thanks to Republican Senator Mitch McConnell). The White House has also been reportedly "taking names” of bondholders who resisted the GM and Chrysler bailouts." Remember when Sen. Jon Kyl of Arizona, said to ABC that the stimulus plan wasn’t working? The White House then writes to the governor of Arizona and said, “If you don’t want the money, we won’t send it.”

One would hope that if Nixon taught us anything, it was that bullying and wielding power over the heads of those you are suppose to serve, only ends in humiliation and defeat.

The Obama administration would do well to learn from history and not repeat it's mistakes.

Commentary from the Rush Limbaugh Show's Official Obama Criticizer, Bo Snerdley

Why Rush Limbaugh and Fox News Are So Popular

I can't get this video to embed here for some reason. But check out HotAir that has a CNN video explaining why people listen to Rush.

Here CNN attempts to explain why people listen to the likes of Rush Limbaugh. This is the usual absurdity from the "real" news channel that facts checks SNL skits.

If anyone is really interested, I thought I might explain why I think Fox News is the number one rated cable news, and why Rush is so rich and talk radio so popular. And it has nothing to do with us going along with the so called "bully." If anything, Rush is the kid on the playground keeping the bully (govt) from beating up us.

In the early 80's I couldn't wait to get my issue of National Review. I would sit down and read it cover to cover. I knew that I would get "the other side of the story" there. I was just becoming a conservative and I was young. But I knew already there was a liberal slant to the news because I used to believe in that slant. When I read the National Review, I just couldn't believe what the mainstream media had left out of any given story.

During the Reagan years the media turned even farther left. Reagan had the communication skills to overcome that, but for conservatives and libertarians watching the news became downright painful.

This, quite simply, is why Rush began his incredible rise to the top of talk radio. Finally someone was speaking to the conservative values that we embraced. It's almost like when someone lives in a foreign country and you miss America terribly. Then you find a radio station that is American based. You turn it on every day to hear your native language and hear the news from where you grew up. You didn't feel so alone. That is what listening to Rush was like in the '80's.

But even with talk radio, the evening news and CNN still drove us crazy. We would listen to a news story, and we knew the rest of the story that was being left out. We would yell at the TV, "Show some objectivity for heaven's sake! Tell us both sides!"

Then came Fox News, who promised "fair and balanced." And that is what they gave us. The hard news at Fox is as fair and objective as it gets. It doesn't get better or more objective than Brett Baier, Major Garrett, Shepard Smith, and Bill Hemmer to name just a few. The left and the White House sees it as right leaning simply because the news had never shown the right side AT ALL. So naturally hearing it as well drove them insane. Which is where you find the White House today, stomping their feet like a toddler with a temper tantrum, and refusing to go on Fox News. It's petty and it diminishes the office of the Presidency.

The White House's fight with Fox News is also a warning to the other news organizations. In the interviews with the rest of the mainstream media on Sunday, the White House chief of staff Rahm Emanuel told CNN that President Obama does not want “the CNNs and the others in the world [to] basically be led in following Fox." In other words, don't pick up their stories that make us look bad. As Greta Van Susteren points out, it's not like the White House has been sending people to Fox News and now suddenly stopped. She says they haven't sent people sent January and obviously it hasn't effected their ratings or how they do their job.

But there is another reason Fox News is so popular. Obviously it isn't just conservatives watching Fox News. So why do people watch Fox News more than the others? Every day news organizations have editorial meetings. They get together and they decide which stories are interesting and important and should be on the air. Fox News is genius at this. While ABC, CBS, NBC, MSNBC and CNN dismiss stories because they let their political bias get in the way, Fox News seizes upon them, and Fox is always right on the money. They are the stories that people want to see. That is why their ratings are so high. Many times the other news organizations are forced to follow because of the obvious interest in the story, like the Rev. Wright story. Other times they refuse to follow Fox News and get embarrassed. For example, when Van Jones resigned over his controversial past. They had to report that one of Obama's Czar's had quit over stories that they had never even bothered to cover.

We on the right have no problem with the left's point of view. We have never been afraid of debate. What we had a problem with was having our point of view ignored. With Fox News and talk radio, it isn't ignored anymore. And that is why they thrive.

Obama and The Black Urban Family

You might remember my post from a few days ago called "Emotional Adoption." Basically saying that if we don't step in and fill the void of fathers in the inner city, we will continue to see the drugs, violence, and crime we see now.

The WaPo has an excellent article up by a high school teacher who finally asked the children why they didn't try. They answered honestly:

Why don't you guys study like the kids from Africa?"

In a moment of exasperation last spring, I asked that question to a virtually all-black class of 12th-graders who had done horribly on a test I had just given. A kid who seldom came to class -- and was constantly distracting other students when he did -- shot back: "It's because they have fathers who kick their butts and make them study."

Another student angrily challenged me: "You ask the class, just ask how many of us have our fathers living with us." When I did, not one hand went up.

This is one issue that Obama and myself agree. And Obama has said the right things (even to the point where he riled up Jesse Jackson, always a sign you are doing something right)

Here are a few excerpts from his speech to the NAACP:

"...more than half a century after Brown v. Board, the dream of a world-class education is still being deferred all across the country. African American students are lagging behind white classmates in reading and math -- an achievement gap that is growing in states that once led the way in the civil rights movement. Over half of all African American students are dropping out of school in some places."

Unfortunately Obama starts out citing a dozen different way of throwing more money at the problem, which we know doesn't work. I think Obama knows that too, but has to tow the liberal line, but he goes on to say:

"Government programs alone won't get our children to the Promised Land."

Then he gets to the crux of it that he and I agree:

We've got to say to our children, yes, if you're African American, the odds of growing up amid crime and gangs are higher. Yes, if you live in a poor neighborhood, you will face challenges that somebody in a wealthy suburb does not have to face. But that's not a reason to get bad grades. That's not a reason to cut class. That's not a reason to give up on your education and drop out of school. No one has written your destiny for you. Your destiny is in your hands -- you cannot forget that. That's what we have to teach all of our children. No excuses. No excuses.

...................

To parents -- to parents, we can't tell our kids to do well in school and then fail to support them when they get home. You can't just contract out parenting. For our kids to excel, we have to accept our responsibility to help them learn. That means putting away the Xbox, putting our kids to bed at a reasonable hour. It means attending those parent-teacher conferences and reading to our children and helping them with their homework.

But where Obama really came down hard on the absent dads was in a speech in a large black Chicago Church in June of 2008:

Too many fathers are M.I.A, too many fathers are AWOL, missing from too many lives and too many homes,” Mr. Obama said, to a chorus of approving murmurs from the audience. “They have abandoned their responsibilities, acting like boys instead of men. And the foundations of our families are weaker because of it.”

Obama doesn't mince words or specifics here either: In Texas in February '08, Mr. Obama told the mostly black audience to take responsibility for the education and nutrition of their children, and lectured them for feeding their children “cold Popeyes” for breakfast.

Ouch.

Just an aside, but can someone tell me why Obama can say that with no problem, but when Michael Steele says he's going to bring "Fried chicken and potato salad" to woo African Americans, the left side of the blogosphere goes nuts?

I suggest to anyone who has a problem with people referring to blacks liking fried chicken, to go get a room at The Reality Hotel (although I honestly think it's more a southern thing, than a black thing).

Also in Obama's speech:

“But we also need families to raise our children,” he said. “We need fathers to realize that responsibility doesn’t just end at conception. That doesn’t just make you a father. What makes you a man is not the ability to have a child. Any fool can have a child. That doesn’t make you a father. It’s the courage to raise a child that makes you a father.”

Mr. Obama spoke of the burden that single parenthood was on his mother, who raised him with the help of his maternal grandparents.

“I know the toll it took on me, not having a father in the house,” he continued. “The hole in your heart when you don’t have a male figure in the home who can guide you and lead you. So I resolved many years ago that it was my obligation to break the cycle — that that if I could be anything in life, I would be a good father to my children.”

Obama may be the only one who can say the things that need to be said. If he would like a truly remarkable legacy for his Presidency, then this should be his focus. Changing a generation of inner city African Americans into successful and happy human beings that don't leave their babies, that don't turn to drugs, and don't end up in prison.

Talk about bi partisan support.

All of us, white or black, Democrat, or Republican feel sadness for what our inner cities have become. We desperately want someone to address it, to fix it, to show those living with limited means that you can make a good life for yourself.

I believe this is possible. But we have to stop wringing our hands and do something. We have to demand out leaders do something. No one has the ear of those mired in poverty and drugs more than our President right now. He can really make a difference here.

I hope he does.

"Go Back To The Porch"

via Johnny Dollar's Place

One of the things that has happened because of Obama's presidency is that we are finally talking about race more. One thing that seems to have been highlighted is how black conservatives are smeared by black liberals. In fact, you don't even have to be a conservative black, but if you disagree with the left, you are smeared as a "Uncle Tom." Here is Juan Williams, no conservative, being told to "go back to the porch" for defending Rush. Also, a close black friend of Rush's speaks out.

The left has been determined to paint Rush as a racist. They couldn't find any quote in all the hours Rush has on air, so they just made up some quotes. Vile. Just vile.

There are many things Rush could be criticized for, but being a racist isn't one of them.

Kevin at TheBlackSphere has more to say on the subject.

"Drill"

Sarah Palin has an excellent article at National Review about energy and our dependence on foreign oil.

Given that we’re spending billions of stimulus dollars to rebuild our highways, it makes sense to think about what we’ll be driving on them. For years to come, most of what we drive will be powered, at least in part, by diesel fuel or gasoline. To fuel that driving, we need access to oil. The less use we make of our own reserves, the more we will have to import, which leads to a number of harmful consequences. That means we need to drill here and drill now.

We rely on petroleum for much more than just powering our vehicles: It is essential in everything from jet fuel to petrochemicals, plastics to fertilizers, pesticides to pharmaceuticals. Ac­cord­ing to the Energy Information Ad­min­is­tra­tion, our total domestic petroleum consumption last year was 19.5 million barrels per day (bpd). Motor gasoline and diesel fuel accounted for less than 13 million bpd of that. Meanwhile, we produced only 4.95 million bpd of domestic crude. In other words, even if we ran all our vehicles on something else (which won’t happen anytime soon), we would still have to depend on imported oil. And we’ll continue that dependence until we develop our own oil resources to their fullest extent.

This is what I have never understood about environmentalist here. No matter how many energy alternatives we seek (and we should), we still have to depend on oil and gas now and in the forseeable future for our needs. Why is it somehow more environmental to buy oil and gas from other countries than from here? We are still using a resource that comes from the earth, just not our part of the earth. It really makes no sense. Especially considering that drilling here makes certain that we can over see the process. As Palin points out:

My home state of Alaska shows how it’s possible to be both pro-environment and pro-resource-development. Alaskans would never support anything that endangered our pristine air, clean water, and abundant wildlife (which, among other things, provides many of us with our livelihood). The state’s government has made safeguarding resources a priority; when I was governor, for instance, we created a petroleum-systems-integrity office to monitor our oil and gas infrastructure for any potential environmental risks.

It's also possible for different communities to have different answers:

Alaska also shows how oil drilling is thoroughly compatible with energy conservation and renewable-energy development. Over 20 percent of Alas­ka’s electricity currently comes from renewable sources, and as governor I put forward a long-term plan to increase that figure to 50 percent by 2025. Alaska’s comprehensive plan identifies renewable options across the state that can help rural villages transition away from expensive diesel-generated electricity — allowing each community to choose the solution that best fits its needs. That’s important in any energy plan: Tempting as they may be to central planners, top-down, one-size-fits-all solutions are recipes for failure.

For the same reason, the federal government shouldn’t push a single, uni­versal approach to alternative-powered vehicles. Electric cars might work in Los Angeles, but they don’t work in Alaska, where you can drive hundreds of miles without seeing many people, let alone many electrical sockets. And while electric and hybrid cars have their advantages, producing the electricity to power them still requires an energy source. For the sake of the environment, that energy should be generated from the cleanest source available.

Read the whole thing.

More Smears From The Left

I always have to laugh when people say that Glenn Beck, Rush, or Sean Hannity "spew vile." They can never give me any actual examples. Yet MSNBC's Keith Olbermann literally spews vile almost nightly. That never seems to bother the left that much.

His latest is calling Michelle Malkin a "big mashed up bag of meat with lipstick." Wow. That's the prettiest bag of meat I've ever seen.

I don't suppose it ever occurs to Olbermann that insulting a beautiful woman about her looks only makes him look ridiculous?

Beck may cry, Rush may joke, and Sean may annoy, but Olbermann has the spewing hate thing down to a science.

Speaking of Rush, I see that the left or the media can't find those racist quotes that Rush supposedly said. But the truth matters little to the left. Just as long as they get the narrative out there. Repeat a lie and all that. It's how they roll.

Someone recently showed me a page of "quotes" that Rush said that proved he was racist/sexist/a hater ect. The only problem is that if you listen to Rush you know where those quotes came from and what context. You know when it was a part of satire and part of another joke. This is how they do it. They take things out of context. It's absurd.

In all the years I have listened to Rush, if he had ever said anything that even hinted at him being racist in the least, I would have turned him off and written about it. But he never has.

I'm not up on the NFL controversy (except for the lies about his "racist" quotes"), but if Rush was dropped from consideration of part owning a team just because of his political beliefs, then what has infected America and it's freedoms is worse than I thought.

Liberals Miss Hillary

And who could blame them?

Hillary is as much of a liberal as Obama, but at least we all can agree that Hillary would know what she was doing.

Clinton spent a lifetime studying the levers of power and 16 years getting ready for the top job. In fact, she was so busy preparing to be president that she let Paul Begala and the other faded glories from her husband’s political shop handle the whole getting-elected part.

.............

But had she won, there’s no doubt that she would have ground up the bones of her enemies and baked chocolate chip cookies with them. Obama, though, has proven to be the only person who could make the GOP look reasonable again after the misadventures of the Bush years.

Naturally, I disagree with that last part, but the guy has some good points. We on the right knew that Obama would be a disaster. We knew he was not ready for this job, but we never dreamed that he would prove that to the left as well in such a short time.

I find this tidbit on Hillary's view of healthcare coverage interesting:

The weight of her mandate would have crushed businesses and young workers with a vengeance, but it would have been real, honest socialism. And everyone would have been covered.

I notice that liberals are beginning to be more honest with their love of socialism. I remember when the right was excoriated for referring to Obama's policies as socialism. But the left now sees no problem in admitting that that is their vision. I like the honesty of it. At least the American people know exactly the choice they have between the parties now.

But back to Hillary. According to a new poll she is more popular than Obama for the first time ever.

I do believe that if Hillary had won the nomination, she would have won the Presidency. To me, as a conservative, Hillary is scarier because she knew how to hide her liberalism under the mask of a moderate. Obama has not honed that skill. He tries, and the media certaintly helped him do that during the campaign, but as President he just hasn't got that down. The media doesn't seem to helping him as much as they once did either.

Hillary says she will not run for President again. Back when Oprah came out for Obama, she said he was meant for a higher purpose. I wrote at the time that Obama may be the one to stop the Clintons, and that may be the higher purpose he was born for.

And for that, I will always be grateful.

The Inner City Poor, Politicians Do The Wrong Thing or Nothing

Michelle Malkin has a post up about the Chicago area where Obama was a community organizer. During the campaign no one seemed to want to focus on the fact that Obama did almost nothing to change things for the inner city poor and mostly black community that he tried to help.

But as I read the article, I realized that Chicago is really a reflection of liberal policies. I'm sure Obama thought that he couldn't effect the change he wanted to there because MORE was needed. When in fact, he couldn't effect the change he wanted, because the ideas are wrong.

Recently I interviewed Ted Cruz who is running for Attorney General here in Texas. He said that he believes that Obama wakes up every morning believing that he is fighting for a better nation and fighting to help the underprivileged. I believe that too. I believe that for many liberals it is a sincere fight. But the problem is that the policies they embrace are profoundly wrong and don't work. Cruz said that ultimately the policies of liberalism result in more human suffering and misery whenever they are implemented. Chicago is a perfect example of this.

As this Chicago Tribune article points out, there was this grand 10 yr plan plan to tear down old public housing and build new public housing that would sit besides wealthier homes, and we could all live in peace and harmony together. The public housing would be transformed and upscale homes would improve the neighborhoods and businesses would move in. It always sounds good in theory, doesn't it? Of course these new buildings cost tax payers quite a bit, hundreds of millions in fact. But this is part of the "spread the wealth around" philosophy. The only thing? It just never works.

First, some of public housing units totaling more than $300,000 to build, are more than the price of a home in many Chicago neighborhoods. I think most of the poor would rather have the money so they could buy a home in a safe neighborhood, don't you think? It would have made about as much sense. Instead most residents are still moving from one poor neighborhood to the next, waiting to go back to their old one. But the bitter truth is they will never have the home they were promised.

This "Plan for Transformation" began in February 2000, Mayor Daley's 10 yr plan would replace Chicago's public housing with 25,000 new units for the poor.

This was the largest redevelopment of public housing ever undertaken in the country and unfortunately it prompted The federal government to encourage dozens of cities across the country to try fixing their public housing in the same manner. So this bad idea spread and now other cities are suffering the same as Chicago.

What happened? Residents were given federal housing vouchers that subsidize rent payments to private landlords. All these years later they have yet to return. Many of the residents imagine that the city just wanted to get rid of them and this was the way to do it. No, it was just the usual misguided efforts of liberalism.

By now, Stateway Gardens was supposed to be a bustling neighborhood filled with new buildings, businesses and diverse families, fueling a renaissance in the South Side area.

Instead, most of the 33-acre site is vacant, with piles of dirt and pallets of bricks sitting beside unfinished sidewalks and homes.
...............

...almost nine years into what was billed as a 10-year program, the city has completed only 30 percent of the plan’s most ambitious element tearing down entire housing projects and replacing them with new neighborhoods where poor, working-class and wealthier families would live side by side
....................

The area where Obama was a community organizer isn't faring well at all:

The largest is the Altgeld-Murray Homes, a sprawling 190-acre development built on the Far South Side for black factory workers during World War II. At that development alone, the CHA plans to spend $451 million rehabbing 1,998 barracks-style apartments, with politically connected Walsh Construction doing much of the work.

Altgeld sits in one of the city’s most isolated areas. The nearest supermarket is miles away. Only one bus route serves the development. And it backs up to the Little Calumet River in an area once known as “The Toxic Doughnut” because of a long history of environmental problems.

Crime is another challenge. Open drug markets thrive at Altgeld, and shootings occur frequently enough to keep residents on edge.

What liberals seem to never learn is that throwing money at problems never works. Giving people things, when they themselves have no stake in it, never works.

The late Jack Kemp understood this. His idea of "empowerment zones' gave tax breaks to lure businesses to inner cities. Just trying to make a neighborhood prettier and hoping business will come obviously doesn't work. You have to give business a reason to want to be there. He was also was an advocate of selling public housing units to the tenants living in them. This gives them a stake in upkeep and personal pride. This is key in changing how a person feels about themselves and how they conduct their life.

No one has all the answers to our inner city problems. But it's clear that liberal answers don't work. In order to change a place, you must change the hearts the people that live there. The inner city poor are mired in drugs, violence, and a lack of hope. A new building won't change that. The saddest thing of all is that the liberal policies of welfare, no accountability, subsidizing single motherhood, and a dependency on governement is what has led to the personal despair that so many experience in the inner city.

Kemp never got his ideas implemented on the scale of Chicago's Mayor Daley boondoggle. Maybe because it didn't benefit donors, personal business associates, and political hacks. But that doesn't excuse Republicans for their lack of trying. Republicans should be ashamed of how they have turned their backs on the inner city poor. The Democrats are wrong in their ideas, but the GOP is just as wrong to ignore the problems.

It's time we had someone in the GOP step up to the plate and put free enterprise and personal responsibility ideas to work in the inner city. For too long the GOP has seen the inner city as the Democrat's problem. They figure that the population will vote Democrat no matter what, so why should we do anything?

We should do something, not because of votes, but because it's the right thing to do. And at the very least, it would stop this insane spending that helps no one, and is taken from the hardworking taxpayers to fix problems that are never fixed.

Liberal ideas may not have worked, but the Democrats will keep wasting our money if the GOP can't man up and do something ourselves.

No One Likes a Whiner

White House communications director Anita Dunn and President Obama have decided to act like kids in high school that feel they are being gossiped about, instead of what they should be, a professional and the President of the United States. It is truly pathetic. If you missed it, you can see the CNN transcript and vido here.

She basically whines about Fox News not being fair, when even a search in the LexisNexis proves her completely wrong (see link above). This administration just cannot take criticism. They are, as Chris Wallace said, a bunch of cry babies. I just find it astonishing that the White House communications director would say about Fox News, " “We’re going to treat them the way we would treat an opponent."

CNN, MSNBC, ABC, CBS, and NBC all treated Bush about the way Fox News is treating Obama, and you never heard the Bush White House whine or stomp their feet and refuse to play with the big boys. Good grief. It's embarrassing.

But leave it to Fox New's Neil Cavuto to set Ms. Dun straight:



"So I'm hearing an awful lot about how the White House communications director hates Fox, really, really hates Fox. Anita Dunn saying, and I think I got this quote right, "Let's not pretend they're a news network." She just said that on CNN after saying the same to Time magazine. Lately, it's been her schtick, her game.

So, Ms. Dunn, let's continue playing it, shall we? Let's pretend you're serious. Let's pretend you're not a tad, oh I don't know, thin-skinned. Let's pretend you get your facts straight on whether we thoroughly reported Republican Nevada Senator John Ensign's affair which we did, or only trash Democrats and not Republicans, which we do not. Let's pretend you are open to criticism. Let's pretend you see alternative points of view on healthcare. Let's pretend when someone opposes your view, they might have a point and when you simply refuse to accept it, you're the one who may not have a clue. Let's pretend you have a memory and recall Fox programs like this one disparaging last year's financial rescues and whether they were pouring good money after bad. Let's pretend you know history and recall that a Republican was in the White House back then, and a Republican treasury secretary refused to come on this very show back then. Let's pretend you are aware that on Fox Business shows, in particular, this isn't about this president or the last president. This is about your money, our money, all of our money. Let's pretend you are interested in that and not dismissing that.

Let's pretend you work for the President of the United States and not some left-wing blog in the United States. Let's pretend you are as big as the historic place you work and not as petty as the less than historic words you spout. And let's pretend you care about all of our independent viewers and aren't being just careless about those viewers' cares. So let's pretend you're focused on the issues that matter and not the petty squabbles that do not, just as we should pretend you're not overwrought and snapping. Maybe you're just overworked and snippy."

Even lefty TV critic David Zurawik is disgusted:

I have been writing for several months about how thin skinned the White House has been about press criticism — especially when it comes to the Fox News Channel. I have compared the current administration to the White House of Richard Nixon and Spiro Agnew, and believe me, I did not do that lightly. Nixon-Agnew was a very dark time for the First Amendment…

This campaign by the Obama administration is dangerous to press freedom, and it should concern everyone in the press, not just Fox. If you want to get a sense of little regard Team Obama has for the press in general, check out this “Time” magazine article. You have to wonder who else is on this administration’s enemies list.

Fox News ratings speak for themselves. It simply doesn't make sense to boycott the biggest audience in cable news. If you want to make your case for your point of view, you don't get scared away because some of the opinion based shows are critical of you. You go on the news based shows and explain why those shows are wrong.

This just smacks of cowardliness.

Update: Good grief! Even The Nation is calling Obama "Whiner In Chief." When the left starts agreeing with the right on something like this, you know it's bad.

"Keep America Safe"

From Politico.com:

Former Vice President Dick Cheney’s eldest daughter Liz will launch a new group aimed at rallying opposition to the “radical” foreign policy of the Obama administration which it says has succeeded only in undermining the nation’s security.

The new group, Keep America Safe, will make the case against President Barack Obama’s moves to wrench America away from Bush era foreign policy on issues from detaining alleged terrorists at Guantanamo Bay to building a missile shield in Eastern Europe.

“The policies being proposed by the Obama administration are so radical across the board,” Cheney said. “Whether you’re a Republican or a Democrat, you want the nation to be strong and so many steps this president is taking are making the nation weaker.”

This doesn't surprise me. Liz Cheney is a force to be reckoned with. This is only the beginning for her. Have you noticed that many of the true conservatives willing to take on the tough issues lately have been Republican women? I love it.

Why is Liz doing this now?

“The policies of the Bush administration since Sept. 11 are those policies that kept us safe – there’s no turning away from that legacy at all,” she said. “I think it’s a very important one and one where we ought to be grateful for the men and women in the military and the intelligence community and the policy makers who kept us safe.”

Cheney also cited signs that Democrats, when pushed, back quickly away from Obama’s promises, like the overwhelming Senate vote in May to block moving detainees from Guantanamo to the continental United States and a recent Pew poll suggesting that a majority support military action in Iran if other paths fail to stop the country from getting nuclear arms.

“It’s clear that there’s a real grassroots fear and concern out there. Everywhere I go people are saying to me, ‘Where can I go to learn more,’” Cheney said. “People realize what a dangerous world we live in.”

How Pres. Obama should accept the Nobel Peace Prize

Peggy Noonan has an excellent article in the WSJ about the absurdity of Pres. Obama winning the Nobel Peace Prize and how it used to mean something to win it, even if it is only liberals giving liberals prizes.

But she makes a good point. It isn't Obama's fault that he won this. It was the Nobel Committee's embarrassment. But what could Obama do now? She has a perfect suggestion. When Obama accepts the prize, give a speech on behalf of America. Give a speech touting what America has done to make this world great:

"..but America has gone to Europe twice in the past century to fight for peace. This is an old concept, and has to do with killing killers so they can't kill anymore. It cost America a lot to do this, and we kept no territory, as they say, beyond the graves where our soldiers lie. America then taxed itself and gave its wealth not only to its allies but to its former adversaries, to help them rebuild. We didn't actually have to do this. We did it to make the world better. We did it to foster peace. (They should give us a prize.)

America hasn't just helped the world, it literally lit the world with its inventions, which are the product of its freedoms. The lights under which the Peace Prize judges read, and rejected, the worthy nominations? Why, those lights were invented by an American. The emails the committee members sent to each other, sharing their banal insights on leadership? They came through the Internet. Who invented the Internet? It was a Norwegian bureaucrat with a long face and hair on his nose and little plastic geometric eyeglasses? Oh wait, it was Americans. The members of the Norwegian Nobel Committee are healthy because they have been inoculated against diseases such as polio. Who invented the polio vaccine, an enfeebled old leftist academic in Oslo? Nah, it was a man named Jonas Salk. He was an American."

Not long ago Obama praised what the Muslims have given the world. Isn't it about time he reminded the world what Americans have given to it?

This would be the most outstanding thing for Obama to do.

I won't hold my breath.

Best Obama Nobel Peace Prize Cartoons~!

See Cartoons by Cartoon by David Fitzsimmons - Courtesy of Politicalcartoons.com - Email this Cartoon

See Cartoons by Cartoon by John Cole - Courtesy of Politicalcartoons.com - Email this Cartoon

See Cartoons by Cartoon by Jimmy Margulies - Courtesy of Politicalcartoons.com - Email this Cartoon

See Cartoons by Cartoon by Taylor Jones - Courtesy of Politicalcartoons.com - Email this Cartoon

See Cartoons by Cartoon by Dave Granlund - Courtesy of Politicalcartoons.com - Email this Cartoon

The Truth in Pictures

Wow. Just wow. The New York Times finally publishes pictures of fetal remains from abortion, and describes where those images came from. About 35 yrs late, but I'll take it.

The images are graphic and horrible. After all these years of seeing images like this, it still makes me cry. So much we have lost. So many have suffered.

It is America's greatest shame.

Turning our back on Honduras makes no sense...

The Obama has completely backed former Honduran Pres. Zelaya's return to power, even though he was ousted in a perfectly legal way as stated in the Honduran constitution. Their Supreme court ousted him because he was illegally trying to change the constitution to extend his term in office, trying to become another Castro, dictator for life.

Not only has the White House backed Zelaya, It has revoked the U.S. travel visas of now President Micheletti, his government and private citizens. It’s frozen financial assistance to one of the poorest and friendliest U.S. allies in the region. And on top of all that, they are not supporting free elections set for November 29th, even though the elections will be monitored by international observers and overseen by the Supreme Electoral Tribunal, whose impartiality and independence is respected and praised.

From NRO:

Senator Jim Demint writes in the Wall Street Journal about his factfinding visit to Honduras, where Zelaya — a thuggish would-be dictator who was trying to destroy the rule of law in his country — was ousted as president in a manner consistent with the Honduran constitution. The Obama administration — which couldn't roll over fast enough when Ahmadinejad had to steal the already-rigged Iranian "election" and the regime brutally jailed, tortured and killed dissenters — is playing hardball with Honduras (at least when it's not slapping Israel and the Dalai Lama around), demanding that the thug be restored to power. But, as Sen. Demint notes, "the only thorough examination of the facts to date—conducted by a senior analyst at the Law Library of Congress—confirms the legality and constitutionality of Mr. Zelaya's ouster.

So why is the administration bullying a poor, tiny, Western democracy?

Why indeed. It makes no sense. Zelaya wants to be re-instated before the November elections. Since he can't run again himself, why is this so important? We are talking about a month and a half, after all.


Isn't there a decent reporter how there that could get to the bottom of this?

Even the Left Is Bewildered

Even liberal sites are seeing this as ridiculous. From TalkLeft:

For reasons that are unfathomable, President Obama was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize:

President Obama won the Nobel Peace Prize on Friday. [. . .] [T]he Nobel Committee announced in Oslo that it has awarded the annual prize to the president “for his extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples.” The award cited in particular Mr. Obama’s effort to reduce the world’s nuclear arsenal.
Just because the Nobel Committee wants to make fools of themselves, Obama should not have to play along. He should turn it down.

Speaking for me only

Here are some tweets from LIBERALS:

RT @ezraklein Obama also awarded Nobel prize in chemistry. "He's just got great chemistry," says Nobel Committee.

RT @harrislacewell Because he cut a deal. "Ok guys give the Olympics to Rio, but I want the Nobel." #ReasonsBHOwonNPP

RT @harrislacewell @AdamSerwer I think my Pres is great but we r still in 2 wars & just bombed the freaking moon! Desmond Tutu he aint.

RT @dmataconis: Aung San Suu Kyi is under house arrest today for the actions that won her the Nobel Peace Prize. Obama is having waffles

RT @AdamSerwer RT @baratunde: "Nobel Peace Prize Winner Barack Obama Approved More Civilian-Killing Drones In Afghanistan Today"

RT @marclamonthill Ok, now I HAVE to to start my "overrated Black people" list. A NOBEL PRIZE? REALLY?

RT @marclamonthill Am I the only one who thinks that awarding Obama the Nobel Peace Prize is ABSURD?!?!?!

Here I thought I would spend a depressing morning reading Obama gushing love and even the liberals think it's absurd. The tweets have been hilarious from both sides!

Update: Not to be a Debbie Downer here, but meet the people passed over for Obama:

Sima Samar, women's rights activist in Afghanistan: "With dogged persistence and at great personal risk, she kept her schools and clinics open in Afghanistan even during the most repressive days of the Taliban regime, whose laws prohibited the education of girls past the age of eight. When the Taliban fell, Samar returned to Kabul and accepted the post of Minister for Women's Affairs."

Ingrid Betancourt: French-Colombian ex-hostage held for six years.

"Dr. Denis Mukwege: Doctor, founder and head of Panzi Hospital in Bukavu, Democratic Republic of Congo. He has dedicated his life to helping Congolese women and girls who are victims of gang rape and brutal sexual violence."

Handicap International and Cluster Munition Coalition: "These organizations are recognized for their consistently serious efforts to clean up cluster bombs, also known as land mines. Innocent civilians are regularly killed worldwide because the unseen bombs explode when stepped upon."

"Hu Jia, a human rights activist and an outspoken critic of the Chinese government, who was sentenced last year to a three-and-a-half-year prison term for 'inciting subversion of state power.'"

"Wei Jingsheng, who spent 17 years in Chinese prisons for urging reforms of China's communist system. He now lives in the United States."

Pres. Obama wins Nobel Peace Prize

Even the White House was surprised.

Tevi Troy at NRO says it best:

I'm all for Americans winning international prizes, and especially the Nobel Peace Prize. I was also quite confident that Obama would win one as president, but I certainly didn't think he would win one so soon, with what Bloomberg calls "no concrete achievement to his credit." Similarly, Reuters describes Obama as "a president less than nine months into his first term, who has yet to score a major foreign policy success," adding that the award "came as a big surprise . . . "

One of the good things about the Nobel, especially in science and literature, but also the Peace Prize, is that they are about achievement, not promise. Even when the awards have been extremely problematic — recall Yasser Arafat — the recipients have done something, for good or for ill.

It is strange that they would give this prize out to someone for what they HOPE to do, instead of what they have actually achieved. In fact, as Allahpundit at HotAir points out, in international relations and war Obama hasn't changed much from the Bush policies:

Regarding that alleged “new climate in international politics,” which aspects of Obama’s foreign policy thus far are any different from Bush’s? He’s increased troop levels (slightly) in Afghanistan, he’s kept up the drone attacks on Al Qaeda and the Taliban, he’s broken his promise to close Gitmo by January, he’s approved “rendition lite” and indefinite detention without trial for some terrorist suspects, and he’s let himself be jerked around in nuclear negotiations with Iran.

All that being said, it is a good thing for America that our President has won this. I truly hope that he lives up to his efforts and forges peace. It is, in the end, what we all want.

Looking For The Racists!

This is hilarious. It shows the complete absurdity of the leftwing meme that tea party goers are racist. I just love Kevin Jackson of TheBlackSphere!

A Rookie Mistake

Ed at HotAir gives us a summary of this scathing WaPo story about how Obama was and is in over his head with the Afghan war and how to fight it:

For two years, Obama campaigned on changing the strategy in Afghanistan to a more effective counterinsurgency (COIN) strategy, claiming that the Bush administration had dropped the ball in the Af-Pak theater in large part by not committing the resources needed for an effective battle plan (an assessment shared by John McCain). On taking office, Obama quickly increased troop levels in Afghanistan and appointed COIN strategist Gen. Stanley McChrystal to lead the mission.

However, the Post reports that Obama and his team never understood the implications of his demand for the new strategy. McChrystal’s assessment of the needs for his COIN plan sent them into “sticker shock,” according to one Post source in the White House.


After two years of campaigning on this new strategy and eight months of ordering it as Commander in Chief, Barack Obama now has to make up his mind what he meant? It was the single most important issue on the war during the general campaign, thanks to the sharp improvement in Iraq that Obama predicted would never happen. He had hundreds of military officers and foreign-policy experts advising him on this issue — and none of them apparently ever taught the young candidate what COIN actually entailed.

I think we can rest assured that John McCain would not have made this mistake. We elect a rookie, a rookie is what we get.

And this may explain why our soldiers in Afghanistan are depressed and disillusioned.

You Gotta Love Michele Bachmann

Great interview about why strong conservative women drive the left crazy. Bachmann said it best when she said, "“It may bother them that conservative women are happy and don’t need government in order to be successful in life,” Bachmann said. “I have a great husband, great kids. I had a great career as a federal tax attorney and I don’t need government to be successful. And it seems like they have a stereotype for women and I do not fit in their stereotype.”




“You are a pretty interesting politician, congresswoman,” O’Reilly said. “You are second to Sarah Palin in far-left angst. You know, Sarah Palin leads the league, no doubt. But they’re after you now. We hear it all the time, you know Michele Bachmann, she is this and she is that. How did you get into that wheelhouse?”

Bachmann without naming the network, laid the blame on MSNBC.

“You know, it is an interesting phenomenon,” Bachmann said. “I think it happened with a competing cable network that took an interest in me and it has only grown. So now, it’s almost like I have personal stalkers, only they have TV shows.”

O’Reilly pressed on, asking if the negative attention bothered her (the Minnesota congresswoman told the Culture & Media Institute days before that it didn’t).

“Does it bother you that NBC News is using its cable arm to make your life difficult? Does that bother you?” O’Reilly asked.

“You know, not really,” Bachmann replied. “I grew up with three brothers and that is the best preparation for politics anyone could possibly have. I am just here doing my job, working on behalf of the people of Minnesota and it’s great to be able to get my message out. And if I get under people’s skin, so be it.

“OK, but why -- why are you getting under their skin?” O’Reilly asked. “I mean, you seem like a nice woman. We had you at the correspondents’ dinner as a guest at our table. You did not throw spaghetti on anyone. You did not use any bad language … to me you are a conservative Republican from an upper Midwestern state who speaks her mind articulately and does her job. Why are they coming after you? I do not get it.”

Bachmann believed that just being a successful conservative woman was enough.

“It may bother them that conservative women are happy and don’t need government in order to be successful in life,” Bachmann said. “I have a great husband, great kids. I had a great career as a federal tax attorney and I don’t need government to be successful. And it seems like they have a stereotype for women and I do not fit in their stereotype.”

However, O’Reilly had his own theory.

“You think it – and this is an off-the-wall question – it is just something that occurred to me,” O’Reilly said. “Both you and Sarah Palin are good-looking women. I mean, you are attractive, relatively young women, who other women can identify with. You are a mom, you are a wife. You had a private-sector job. I think that’s it. I think that the success of Sarah Palin and Michele Bachmann drives the far left crazy because you don’t fit – they don’t like what you believe in, but you can attract others to listen to you. I think that’s what’s going on.”

Bachmann said that does indeed make her a threat – especially when it comes to going head-to-head with Democratic Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi.

“Well, and if we pull away votes from them, especially in a block, a woman block, a middle American woman block, that makes them very upset about that,” Bachmann said. “And so consequently, I’m public enemy number one for Speaker Pelosi.”

via CMI

Sarah proven right...again

I didn't want to comment on the Letterman scandal because it has nothing to do with politics until I read that the National Organization of Women has criticized him for promoting a hostile work environment. Gee, I wonder where they were during the Lewinsky scandal?

This got me to thinking about how Palin managed to get a hugely popular late night show comedian to apologize to her TWICE for jokes he made about her daughters. Sometimes Karma is a b*tch. Now it seems clear that Sarah was right when she said you wouldn't want your daughter around Letterman.

Emotional Adoption

The recent murder and violence in Chicago got me to thinking about what could possibly be the solutions to inner city gangs and violence? How can we turn this around?

There is no doubt in my mind that liberal policies have led us to this vicious cycle of poverty and dependency, where men are pushed out of the picture as government becomes the "daddy." So solutions have to be far away from that.

The young men who were in involved in the killing of that honor student will have, and probably already have, children. They will go to prison, if not now, then later for some other crime. That is almost a given. Then, once again, their children will have no father. The cycle continues.

It has to end with those children. How?

Whatever happened to The Promise Keepers or The Million Man March? Where are those men who promised better things? Could someone call them with my idea?

This is my idea. Emotional adoption.

It's time for the good men in our society to step up to the plate and mentor and be father figures to these children. White, black, or hispanic. It doesn't matter. Your color doesn't matter. What matters is your commitment.

Leave the legal stuff out of it. Let this be taking a man at his word. Let these good men "emotionally" adopt a child with no father in his life. The man would promise to be there emotionally for that child until he is grown. That means spending time with him. Helping with school, taking him to ballgames, taking him to church, letting the child know that you care.

More than a "Big Brother" program, this would take a firm commitment for a lifetime.

The thing about this idea is that I know that the men involved would get more out of it than the child. A child gives us so much more than we give them. They fill our world with things we never imagined.

This would be a win/win. Emotional adoption. It wouldn't be easy. But it would be cheap. Jesse Jackson? Al Sharpton? Anyone? Take my idea and run with it. You guys want to change the world, right?

I can think of no better way.

Good Grief!

No matter what the issue, healthcare or othewise, it's still all about theatre. Obama makes sure everyone has their costumes.

CNN Fact Checks SNL

Can one even imagine CNN fact checking any of the skits SNL on President Bush or Sarah Palin?? Heaven forbid SNL finally make fun of President Obama. CNN couldn't help themselves. They actually fact checked the jokes.




crossposted at Newsbusters

The Decision on Afghanistan

The Obama administration isn't too happy with General McChrystal's recent remarks on Afghanistan. I suppose the General is tired of not being listened to.

In London the General said that he "flatly rejected proposals to switch to a strategy more reliant on drone missile strikes and special forces operations against al-Qaeda.

He told the Institute of International and Strategic Studies that the formula, which is favoured by Vice-President Joe Biden, would lead to "Chaos-istan".

When asked whether he would support it, he said: "The short answer is: No."

He went on to say: "Waiting does not prolong a favorable outcome. This effort will not remain winnable indefinitely, and nor will public support."

So Pres. Obama finds himself in a bad position that may get worse. I've said recently that we need to bring our boys home until we get a President who is interested only in winning. Now Obama is basically going to have to decide whether to listen to the General there on the ground or Joe Biden on strategy.

This decision will tell us whether Obama is a serious President or a naive one.

I think we know the answer to that one.

I would be very happy to be wrong though.

via GOC

Oops!

We are all used to politicians elaborating a bit on stories (Joe Biden is the king of this), but who would have guessed that Michelle Obama would manage such an embarrassing display:

From Michelle Obama’s failed pitch to the International Olympic Committee:

“Some of my best memories are sitting on my dad’s lap, cheering on Olga and Nadia, Carl Lewis, and others for their brilliance and perfection.”

Um. Ew. Oof.

Mrs. Obama was 20 years old when Lewis first competed in the Olympics in 1984.

Good grief. How hard would that have been to check? It's simple math.

I don't know about you, but I miss Laura Bush.

It's Not Working Out For The Left Either

This week's Saturday Night live skit on Obama a is making the rounds, not because it's that funny (It's ok), but because they are FINALLY making fun of Obama and not in a backhanded way.

The skit basically makes fun of Obama in not accomplishing anything in his first year. But the interesting thing about the checklist is that it's all leftwing stuff. Let's face it, none of us in the center, center right, or far right expected anything out of Obama except for things that we would have to fight against (and we are). But what is illustrated in this skit is that the left is getting nothing that it expected, and this is with all the power on Obama's side.

As The Corner at NRO points out, even Frank Rich, the NYT lefty columnist has about had it with Obama for different reasons:

Obama’s promise to make Americans trust the government again was not just another campaign bullet point; it’s the foundation of his brand of governance and essential to his success in office. At the first anniversary of the TARP bailout of the banks, we can see how far he has to go. Americans’ continued suspicion that Washington is in cahoots with powerful interests in joints like Tosca is contributing to their confusion and skepticism about what’s happening out of view in the battle over health care reform.

The public is not wrong. The administration’s legislative deals with the pharmaceutical companies were made in back rooms. Business Week reported in early August that the UnitedHealth Group and its fellow insurance giants had already quietly rounded up moderate Democrats in the House to block any public health care option that would compete with them for business. UnitedHealth’s hired Beltway gunslingers include both Elmendorf Strategies and Daschle, a public supporter of the public option who nonetheless does some of his “wink, wink” counseling for UnitedHealth. The company’s in-house lobbyist is a former chief of staff to Steny Hoyer, the House majority leader. Gephardt consults there too.

The checklist given in the SNL skit is good news for us on the right (and for the country actually). I say to Pres. Obama, "keep doing jack squat" and maybe things won't go from bad to worse.

We can only "hope."