Archive for the ‘leftist’ Category

Barack Obama’s biggest critic: Charles Krauthammer

May 20, 2009

The dinner guest that night at George Will’s house in Chevy Chase was intellectually nimble, personally formidable and completely baffling, recalled columnist Charles Krauthammer – who was getting his first up-close look at President-elect Barack Obama.

“We sat around and said, ‘Does anybody really know who he is and what he wants to do, now that we’ve had this?'” Krauthammer recalled of Obama’s January sit-down with conservative columnists. “And the answer was no. We don’t know.”

By Ben Smith
Politico

Conservative columnist Charles Krauthammer sits in his Washington office.

Conservative columnist Charles Krauthammer sits in his Washington office.

“I didn’t understand what he was up to until he just unveiled it openly, boldly, unapologetically and very clearly within two weeks of his inauguration,” Krauthammer told POLITICO in an interview in his corner office off Dupont Circle. “That’s what was so stunning.”

Since then, Krauthammer has emerged in the Age of Obama as a central conservative voice, the kind of leader of the opposition that that economist and New York Times columnist Paul Krugman represented for the left during the Bush years: A coherent, sophisticated, and implacable critic of the new president.

Obama, he has written in his syndicated Washington Post column, is committed to “radical health-care, energy and education reforms,” central to a “social democratic agenda” that promises deep – and ominous – transformations to American life. The columnist has offered, in five installments, a “unified theory of Obamaism.”

At a moment when the right is decimated and divided, and unsure what to think of the new administration, Krauthammer’s confidence is much in demand. His columns circulate widely on conservative e-mail lists and blogs, and even his utterances on Fox News are received as gospel: National Review Online’s group blog, The Corner, posts long transcripts of his remarks without comment, under the heading, “Krauthammer’s Take.”

“He’s the most important conservative columnist right now,” said Times columnist David Brooks.

Read more: http://www.politico.com/ne
ws/stories/0509/22743.html#ixzz0G3O9v7cf&B

Obama’s rich supporters fear his tax plans show he’s a class warrior

May 10, 2009

Some of Barack Obama’s richest supporters fear they have elected a “class warrior” to the White House, who will turn America’s freewheeling capitalism into a more regulated European system.

By Leonard Doyle in Washington
Telegraph (UK)

Barack Obama's rich supporters fear his tax plans reveal him as a class warrior
Barack Obama: some of his rich supporters fear he is becoming a class warrior Photo: AP

Wealthy Wall Street financiers and other business figures provided crucial support for Mr Obama during the election, backing him over the Republican candidate John McCain as the right leader to rescue the collapsing US economy.

But it is now dawning on many among them that Mr Obama was serious about his campaign trail promises to bring root and branch reform to corporate America – and that they were more than just election rhetoric.
.
Related:
Wealthy Democrat Supporters Dumbfounded… Realize Obama Will Take Their Money

A top Obama fundraiser and hedge fund manager said: “I’m appalled at the anti-Wall Street rhetoric. It was OK on the campaign but now it’s the real world. I’m surprised that Obama is turning out to be so left-wing. He’s a real class warrior.”

Chris Edwards of the Cato Institute, a free enterprise think tank, said Democrats in Congress were unnerved by the president’s latest plan to raise $210 billion over 10 years from multinational corporations.

The money is needed to pay for a national debt that will double over the next five years; and triple over the next 10 years to $17.3 trillion. But the crackdown already faces fierce Democratic resistance.

“These big companies are based in New York Boston, Seattle and Silicon Valley, where Democrats dominate,” Mr Edwards said. “Obama’s tax plan is already cleaving him from his big corporate supporters,” he said.

Mr Obama made no secret of his plans to raise taxes on the “working rich” (individuals earning more than $200,000) by imposing a top income tax rate of almost 40 per cent, and there is little surprise that those plans remain on track, even during the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression.

But Democratic opposition is building in Congress to many of the President’s proposals. A plan to reduce tax deductions for charitable gifts by richer people may have to be scrapped, because the charitable sector – which includes hospitals, museums and voluntary service groups – depends heavily on tax-deducted donations.

Charles Rangel, the New York chairman of the Ways and Means Committee, which drafts tax legislation, raised a red flag about the proposal last week. “I would never want to adversely affect anything that is charitable or good,” he said.

Mr Obama also wants to “cap and trade” carbon emissions – seen by business as effectively yet another tax – to tackle global warming.

The president’s plans are direct repudiation of the model of light touch regulation credited with creating economic growth and wealth in America in recent decades.

Setting out his thoughts on the economy, Mr Obama told the New York Times magazine last week: “There was always an unsustainable feel about what had happened on Wall Street over the last 10, 15 years, and it’s not that different from the unsustainable nature of what was happening during the dot-com boom – where people in Silicon Valley could make enormous sums of money, even though what they were peddling never really had any signs it would ever make a profit.”

A senior Wall Street executive who remains an admirer of Mr Obama, told The Sunday Telegraph that the reforms were necessary after years of excess. “I think its refreshing that he has the chutzpah to deal with the previously untouchable abuses of the system like tax dodging and excessive executive pay,” he said.

“We badly need some European style social democracy, and Obama might as well start with health care reform.”

Read the rest:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/nort
hamerica/usa/barackobama/5301078/Barack-
Obamas-rich-supporters-fear-his-tax-plans-sh
ow-hes-a-class-warrior.html

From Obama’s Side: Why All The Hate, Bile, Anger?

May 5, 2009

With Barack Obama in control of the House, Senate, Media, Banks and a growing number of other things — why does the left need to act in such an ugly way and attack guys like Senator Jeff Sessions?

***********************

Commentary by Amity Shlaes; May 5, 2009, Bloomberg

So Michele Bachmann’s version of history is “from another planet.” Bobby Jindal, the Republican governor of Louisiana, is “chronically stupid.” And Eric Cantor of Virginia, the second-ranking Republican in the House, is “busy lying constantly.”

That at least is according to posts on three left-leaning blogs.

Writers who are not pro-Barack Obama are suffering character assassination as well. George Will of the Washington Post, the nation’s senior conservative columnist, has been so assaulted by bloggers that his editor, Fred Hiatt, recently wrote, “I would think folks would be eager to engage in the debate, given how sure they are of their case, rather than trying to shut him down.”

The disconcerting thing isn’t that the bloggers or their guests did this slamming. We’re used to such vitriol in campaign time. What is surprising is that the attacks are continuing after an election.

In the past, politicians and policy thinkers tended to be magnanimous in victory. They and their friends focused, post- victory, on policy and strategy — not on trashing individuals.

It ought to be especially true this time, given what wonders are befalling the Democrats. Between Arlen Specter in Pennsylvania and Al Franken in Minnesota, it looks like the Democrats are in the process of making their Senate majority filibuster-proof. Then there’s the president’s new opportunity to mold the Supreme Court, with the resignation of David Souter.

Still, somehow, the magnanimity isn’t there. Indeed, the closer the Democrats get to total power, the nastier the commentators friendly to them have become.

Wild Internet

The explanation for this perpetual venom is threefold, and starts with the Internet. Years ago, out of a sense of civics, gentle and gentlemanly newspaper editors used to allow a certain honeymoon period post-election. Winners got to bask, and losers sulk.

Internet scribes are not into civics. Most bloggers lack editors: Even as he attacked Bachmann for errors, the author on The New Republic’s Plank blog misspelled her name. Even when editors are involved, they often leave blogs alone, on the lazy premise that spontaneity outranks accuracy.

Another force at work is the relevance of history. The most recent attack on Bachmann came after she misspoke and called the 1930 tariff “Hoot-Smalley” rather than its accurate name, Smoot-Hawley. Bachmann also implied that Franklin Roosevelt signed the tariff into law, rather than its actual signator, Herbert Hoover.

Biden’s Slip

Vice President Joseph Biden made much larger slips when talking about the same period on the campaign trial. In an ecstasy of anachronism, he told Katie Couric, “When the stock market crashed, Franklin Roosevelt got on television and didn’t just talk about the princes of greed. He said, ‘Look, here’s what happened.’”

So Michele Bachmann’s version of history is “from another planet.” Bobby Jindal, the Republican governor of Louisiana, is “chronically stupid.” And Eric Cantor of Virginia, the second-ranking Republican in the House, is “busy lying constantly.”

That at least is according to posts on three left-leaning blogs.

Writers who are not pro-Barack Obama are suffering character assassination as well. George Will of the Washington Post, the nation’s senior conservative columnist, has been so assaulted by bloggers that his editor, Fred Hiatt, recently wrote, “I would think folks would be eager to engage in the debate, given how sure they are of their case, rather than trying to shut him down.”

The disconcerting thing isn’t that the bloggers or their guests did this slamming. We’re used to such vitriol in campaign time. What is surprising is that the attacks are continuing after an election.

In the past, politicians and policy thinkers tended to be magnanimous in victory. They and their friends focused, post- victory, on policy and strategy — not on trashing individuals.

It ought to be especially true this time, given what wonders are befalling the Democrats. Between Arlen Specter in Pennsylvania and Al Franken in Minnesota, it looks like the Democrats are in the process of making their Senate majority filibuster-proof. Then there’s the president’s new opportunity to mold the Supreme Court, with the resignation of David Souter.

Still, somehow, the magnanimity isn’t there. Indeed, the closer the Democrats get to total power, the nastier the commentators friendly to them have become.

Wild Internet

The explanation for this perpetual venom is threefold, and starts with the Internet. Years ago, out of a sense of civics, gentle and gentlemanly newspaper editors used to allow a certain honeymoon period post-election. Winners got to bask, and losers sulk.

Internet scribes are not into civics. Most bloggers lack editors: Even as he attacked Bachmann for errors, the author on The New Republic’s Plank blog misspelled her name. Even when editors are involved, they often leave blogs alone, on the lazy premise that spontaneity outranks accuracy.

Another force at work is the relevance of history. The most recent attack on Bachmann came after she misspoke and called the 1930 tariff “Hoot-Smalley” rather than its accurate name, Smoot-Hawley. Bachmann also implied that Franklin Roosevelt signed the tariff into law, rather than its actual signator, Herbert Hoover.

Biden’s Slip

Vice President Joseph Biden made much larger slips when talking about the same period on the campaign trial. In an ecstasy of anachronism, he told Katie Couric, “When the stock market crashed, Franklin Roosevelt got on television and didn’t just talk about the princes of greed. He said, ‘Look, here’s what happened.’”

Read the rest:
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?
pid=washingtonstory&sid=aWVgBVC0L05w

http://michellemalkin.com/2009
/05/06/smearing-jeff-sessions/

Culture of Intolerance: Miss California Joins Sarah Palin; Attacked for Faith, Sexual Photos, Beliefs on Marriage

May 5, 2009

Miss California, the beauty queen that said she favored traditional marriage between a man and a woman, is now under fire for that remark, her previous sexy photo spreads and her Christian faith.  Has the Left gone too far in criticizing everybody and anybody who doesn’t embrace the new America?  The Obama America?

Did they call you a “teabagger”?

Related:
The Donald Keeps Miss California, But Catholic Church May Boot Adultery Priest and Gay Bishop After Notre Dame Welcomes Obama

******************************

(May 5) – Miss California USA says a revealing photo of herself appearing on the Web is “quite appropriate” for a model, and she has accused the gossip site that posted it of trying to belittle her Christian beliefs.
.
“I am a Christian, and I am a model,” Carrie Prejean said in a statement. “Models pose for pictures, including lingerie and swimwear photos. Recently, photos taken of me as a teenager have been released surreptitiously to a tabloid Web site that openly mocks me for my Christian faith.”

FILE - Miss California Carrie Prejean listens to a question ....

A photo of Prejean wearing only pink panties with her back turned to the camera appeared Monday on the gossip blog TheDirty.com.
.
The site claimed it had six pictures of the beauty queen, but one had been posted.
.
“I can assure you they were quite inappropriate, and certainly not photos befitting a beauty queen,” Alicia Jacobs, a judge at the April 19 Miss USA pageant and a reporter for an NBC affiliate, told NBC News.
.
Prejean, 21, also said in her statement that attacks on her and others who “speak in defense of traditional marriage” are intolerant and offensive.
.
The Miss USA runner-up garnered more media attention than the winner of the pageant for her response to a question about legalizing same-sex marriage and the dispute with openly-gay judge Perez Hilton that followed it.
.
Her response may have cost her the title, which went to Miss North Carolina.
.
During the interview portion of the competition, Hilton, a celebrity blogger, asked Prejean about her views on legalizing same-sex marriage.

Read the rest:
http://news.aol.com/article/miss-california-rac
y-photos/463785?icid=main|hp-desktop|dl1|li
nk3|http%3A%2F%2Fnews.aol.com%2Farticle
%2Fmiss-california-racy-photos%2F463785

.
http://michellemalkin.com/2009/05/05/cultu
re-of-corruption-murthas-nephew-got-4-mil
lion-in-defense-contracts/

Political correctness is torture

May 4, 2009

Here we go again. The latest poster conservative for political-correctness-run-amok in a country careening downhill on left-wing, Democratic cruise control is Republican congresswoman Virginia Foxx.

Mrs. Foxx’s impropriety: The thought crime of arguing against “hate crime” laws by pointing out that Matthew Shepard – the tragic icon attached to the legislation – represents a salient argument against enacting them.

By Andrew Breitbart
The Washington Times

Mr. Shepard, the gay Wyoming teenager robbed and savagely beaten to death by drug-addled thugs in 1998, is the emotionally charged posthumous force behind the movement to pass hate crime laws. He got that way after a relentless, decadelong mainstream media, Madison Avenue and Hollywood propaganda campaign to make his death a symbol of just-beneath-the-surface sadistic intolerance toward homosexuals.

Three films, a documentary, a play and songs by Melissa Etheridge, Tori Amos and Elton John have made the gay-martyr case a high truth of pop culture. The thematically related “Boys Don’t Cry” and “Brokeback Mountain” reinforced the narrative that gays like Mr. Shepard are regularly isolated for cruel and unusual attacks.

But the congresswoman is not buying the Hollywood hype. “The hate crimes bill was named for [Shepard], but it’s really a hoax that continues to be used as an excuse for passing these bills,” Mrs. Foxx said on the House floor last week. Immediately, Democrats sought out their unapologetic allies in the media to force Mrs. Foxx into a perfunctory, skin-saving apology.

“The term ‘hoax’ was a poor choice of words used in the discussion of the hate crimes bill,” she said. “Referencing these media accounts may have been a mistake, but if so, it was a mistake based on what I believed were reliable accounts.”

Read the rest:
http://www.washingtontimes.com
/news/2009/may/04/political-c
orrectness-is-torture/

On Obama’s Nightstand? The Idiot’s Bible; Politics of Victimhood

April 27, 2009

Just days after Hugo Chávez gave President Barack Obama a copy of “Open Veins of Latin America” in Trinidad last week, the English-language version of the book shot to the No. 2 slot on Amazon.com.

By O’Grady
The Wall Street Journal

Americans seemed to be curious about Mr. Chávez’s reading tastes. But in Latin America, “Open Veins” is a well-known rant by Uruguayan Marxist Eduardo Galeano. And it also has another distinction that Mr. Chávez may be less inclined to publicize: It is widely regarded in free-market circles as “the idiot’s bible.”

The book was tagged with that moniker in the 1996 best seller, “The Manual of the Perfect Latin American Idiot.” Penned by three Latin American journalists — Plinio Apuleyo Mendoza, Carlos Alberto Montaner and Alvaro Vargas Llosa — the “manual” is a witty assault on the populist, militarist, caudillo mentality that has dominated the region for hundreds of years.

Chapter three is dedicated to explaining the importance of Mr. Galeano’s book for the idiot: “For the past quarter century the Latin American idiot has had the notable advantage of having at his disposal a kind of sacred text, a bible filled with all the nonsense that circulates in the cultural atmosphere that the Brazilians call the ‘festive left.’ Naturally we refer to Open Veins of Latin America.”

Open any page of Mr. Galeano’s book and you will learn that Latins are losers. Not on their own account, mind you. It’s all because Europe and the U.S. (the world’s winners) buy raw materials from them and don’t pay a fair price. In this way the haves of the world exploit the have-nots. “The history of Latin America’s underdevelopment is, as someone has said, an integral part of the history of world capitalism’s development.”

Read the rest:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB12
4078829185157449.html

One Hundred Days of Obama: 100 Mistakes

April 26, 2009

1. “Obama criticized pork barrel spending in the form of ‘earmarks,’ urging changes in the way that Congress adopts the spending proposals. Then he signed a spending bill that contains nearly 9,000 of them, some that members of his own staff shoved in last year when they were still members of Congress. ‘Let there be no doubt, this piece of legislation must mark an end to the old way of doing business, and the beginning of a new era of responsibility and accountability,’ Obama said.” — McClatchy, 3/11

2. “There is no doubt that we’ve been living beyond our means and we’re going to have to make some adjustments.” — Obama during the campaign.

3. This year’s budget deficit: $1.5 trillion.

4. Asks his Cabinet to cut costs in their departments by $100 million — a whopping .0027%!

5. “The White House says the president is unaware of the tea parties.” — ABC News, 4/15

6. “Mr. Obama is an accomplished orator but is becoming known in America as the ‘teleprompt president’ over his reliance on the machine when he gives a speech.” — Sky News, 3/18

7. In early February, the 2010 census was moved out of the Department of Commerce and into the White House, politicizing how federal aid is distributed and electoral districts are drawn.

8. Obama taps Nancy Killefer for a new administration job, First Chief Performance Officer — to police government spending. But it surfaces that Killefer had performance issues of her own — a tax lien was slapped on her DC home in 2005 for failure to pay unemployment compensation tax on household help. She withdrew.

9. Turkey tried to block the appointment of Anders Fogh Rasmussen as new NATO secretary general because he didn’t properly punish the Danish cartoonist who caricatured Mohammed. France’s Nicolas Sarkozy and Germany’s Angela Merkel were outraged; Obama said he supported Turkey’s induction into the European Union.

10. . . . and he never mentioned the Armenian genocide.

11. The picture of Obama and Hugo Chavez shaking hands.

12. Hugo Chavez gave him the anti-American screed “The Open Veins of Latin America.” Obama didn’t remark upon it. At least it wasn’t DVDs.

13. Nicaragua’s Daniel Ortega went on a 50-minute anti-American rant, calling Obama “president of an empire.” Obama didn’t leave the room. “I thought it was 50 minutes long. That’s what I thought,” he said.

14. Executives at AIG get $165 million in bonuses, despite receiving an $173 billion taxpayer bailout.

15. “For months, the Obama administration and members of Congress have known that insurance giant AIG was getting ready to pay huge bonuses while living off government bailouts. It wasn’t until the money was flowing and news was trickling out to the public that official Washington rose up in anger and vowed to yank the money back.” — Associated Press, 3/18

16. “After pushing Congress for weeks to hurry up and pass the massive $787 billion stimulus bill, President Obama promptly took off for a three-day holiday getaway.” — New York Post, 2/15

17. SARAH PALIN ON: “I WON” AND THE DEATH OF BIPARTISANSHIP

“Obama soared to victory on the hopeful promise of a new era of bipartisanship. During his inaugural address he even promised an ‘end to the petty grievances and false promises, the recriminations and worn-out dogmas, that for far too long have strangled our politics.’

“Too bad it took all of three days for the promise to ring hollow.

“Start with Obama’s big meeting with top congressional leaders on his signature legislation — the stimulus — on the Friday after his inauguration. Listening to Republican concerns about overspending was a nice gesture — until he shut down any hopes of real dialogue by crassly telling Republican leaders: ‘I won.’ Even the White House’s leaking of the comment was a slap at the Republican leadership, who’d expected Obama to adhere to the custom of keeping private meetings with congressional leadership, well, private.

“It’s only gone downhill from there. The stimulus included zero Republican recommendations, and failed to get a single House Republican vote.

“It’s not just the tactic of using Republicans for bipartisan photo-ops, and then cutting them loose before partisan decisions, that irks Obama’s opponents. The new president wasted no time rushing forward with policies and legislation guaranteed to drive Republicans nuts. The first bill he signed into law was the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act — a partisan hot-button that drew all of eight Republican supporters in the entire Congress. Then there was the swift reversal of Bush policies on abortion and embryonic-stem-cell research — issues dear to the Republican base.

“And when Obama and the Democrats in Congress took up SCHIP — the children’s health-insurance bill that Republicans say vastly expands government’s role in health care — they had an easy chance for real bipartisanship. After all, the bill had been hashed out in the previous Congress, and a bipartisan accord was reached before President Bush responded with a veto. Did the Obama team push for the compromise version in the 111th Congress? Nope. They went back to the drawing board, ramming through the Democrats’ dream version.

“Of course, the lack of bipartisanship isn’t limited to Capitol Hill. Obama has taken gratuitous swipes at the Republicans who recently decamped Washington, blaming President Bush for everything from the economy and the war to the lack of sufficient puppies and rainbows. And who could forget the Rush Limbaugh flap — in which Obama’s top advisers, including chief of staff Rahm Emanuel, orchestrated a public relations campaign meant to undermine the Republican National Committee chairman, Michael Steele, by framing talk-radio personality Limbaugh as the real head of the Republican Party.

“For now, Obama’s back-pedal on the bipartisanship promise just makes him look insincere. But the real consequences of the mistake will be felt soon enough. As Presidents Bush and Clinton could tell him, congressional majorities do change — and at some point, Obama will need Republicans on his side. He’d be smart to spend his second 100 days making up for the serious snubs of his first.”

— Sarah Palin is the governor of Alaska

18. “The willingness of a small percentage of military personnel to join extremist groups during the 1990s because they were disgruntled, disillusioned or suffering from the psychological effects of war is being replicated today.” — Department of Homeland Security intelligence report

19. Nixes a “buy American” provision in the stimulus bill.

20. “Yes, Canada is not Mexico, it doesn’t have a drug war going on. Nonetheless, to the extent that terrorists have come into our country or suspected or known terrorists have entered our country across a border, it’s been across the Canadian border. There are real issues there.” — Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano. The 9/11 hijackers did not come across the Canada border

21. “The Obama administration is signaling to Congress that the president could support taxing some employee health benefits, as several influential lawmakers and many economists favor, to help pay for overhauling the health care system. The proposal is politically problematic for President Obama, however, since it is similar to one he denounced in the presidential campaign as ‘the largest middle-class tax increase in history.’ ” — New York Times, 3/14

22. JOE SCARBOROUGH ON: PROMOTING FEAR

“During his historic inaugural speech, Barack Obama promised to usher in a transformational age where hope would replace fear, unity would overtake partisanship, and change would sweep aside the status quo. But early in President Obama’s first 100 days it is obvious that the only thing that is changing is the Candidate of Change, himself.

“The same politician who proclaimed during his inauguration that ‘on this day we have chosen hope over fear’ soon warned Americans that the US economy would be forever destroyed if the stimulus bill was voted down.

“Why was it that same man who promised to put Americans’ interests ahead of his own political ambitions chose instead to use the suffering of citizens to advance his agenda?

“Maybe he was following the guidance of Rahm Emanuel, who famously said, ‘You never want to waste a good crisis.’

“They didn’t.

“The White House’s warnings were so over-the-top that Bill Clinton felt compelled to warn the new president against making such grim pronouncements. Americans would quickly warn that the White House would not channel FDR’s eternal optimism but rather embrace the gloomy worldview of Edgar Allen Poe.

“The Candidate of Hope also quickly adopted the Nixonian worldview that Americans voted their fears rather than their hopes. Over Mr. Obama’s first 100 days, that cynical calculation paid off politically for a White House that seemed most interested in appeasing the most liberal members of his Democratic Party.

“I expected more from Barack Obama. For the sake of my country, I hope I get it from the new president over the next 100 days.”

— Joe Scarborough, host of MSNBC’s “Morning Joe” and author of “The Last Best Hope: Restoring Conservatism and America’s Promise” (Crown Forum), due out June 9.

23. Sanjay Gupta was in discussions to become Surgeon General, but the TV personality withdrew after he was criticized for his flimsy political record.

24. Rasmussen finds 58% of Americans believe the Obama administration’s release of CIA memos endangers the national security of the United States.

25. Only 28% think the Obama administration should do any further investigating of how the Bush administration treated terrorism suspects.

26. “Obama thanked CIA employees for their work and said they’re invaluable to national security. He explained his decision to release the memos, then told everyone not to feel bad because he was now acknowledging potential mistakes. Theirs, not his. ‘That’s how we learn,’ Obama said, as though soothing a room full of fourth-graders.” — The Oklahoman, 4/23

27. By releasing the torture memos, Obama opened American citizens up to international tribunals. A UN lawyer said the US is obliged to prosecute lawyers who drafted the memos or else violate the Geneva Conventions.

28. In their first meeting, British Prime Minister Gordon Brown gave Obama a carved ornamental penholder from the timbers of the anti-slavery ship HMS Gannet. Obama gave him 25 DVDs that don’t work in Europe.

29. TIM CARNEY ON: PICKING BILL RICHARDSON AS SECRETARY OF COMMERCE

“Richardson’s value in Obama’s Cabinet had everything to do with appearances. First, he was the Hispanic pick. Second, because Richardson had run against Obama for President, tapping him for the Cabinet helped the media write the Obama-Lincoln comparisons by burnishing the ‘Team of Rivals’ image.

“But Richardson withdrew before Obama was even inaugurated when news came out about a criminal investigation involving David Rubin, president of a firm named Chambers, Dunhill, Rubin & Co. (although there was no Chambers or Dunhill), who had donated at least $110,000 to Richardson’s campaign committees and had also profited from $1.5 million in contracts from the state government.

“This was an early warning sign about Obama’s vetting process (various tax problems and the Daschle problem would reveal this as a theme), but picking Richardson to run Commerce also highlighted that Obama and Richardson’s promise of ‘public-private partnerships’ — such as Detroit bailouts, Wall Street bailouts, and green energy–was an open door for corruption and was at odds with Obama’s promise to diminish the influence of lobbyists.

“The Richardson mistake was one of Obama’s first, and it was emblematic. Richardson embodied Obama’s attention to self-image and the problems inherent in his vision of an intimate business-government connection.”

— Tim Carney is a Washington Examiner columnist

30. Timothy Geithner nomination as Secretary of Treasury was almost torpedoed when it was discovered he had failed to pay $34,000 in Social Security and Medicare taxes. He also employed an illegal immigrant as a housekeeper. He was confirmed anyway.

31. . . . Not so lucky, Annette Nazareth, who was nominated for Deputy Treasury Secretary. She withdrew her name for undisclosed “personal reasons” after a monthlong probe into her taxes . . .

32. . . . or Caroline Atkinson, who withdrew as nominee for Undersecretary of International Affairs in Treasury Department, with a source blaming the long vetting process. Geithner still has a skeleton crew at Treasury, with no one qualified — or willing — to take jobs there.

33. “Barack Obama has been embroiled in a cronyism row after reports that he intends to make Louis Susman, one of his biggest fundraisers, the new US ambassador in London. The selection of Mr. Susman, a lawyer and banker from the president’s hometown of Chicago, rather than an experienced diplomat, raises new questions about Mr Obama’s commitment to the special relationship with Britain.” — Telegraph, 2/22

34. Obama’s doom-and-gloom comments and budget bill push the Dow below 7,000, from which it’s only recently recovered.

35. “You’re sitting here. And you’re — you are laughing. You are laughing about some of these problems. Are people going to look at this and say, ‘I mean, he’s sitting there just making jokes about money–‘ How do you deal with — I mean: Explain. Are you punch-drunk?” — Steve Kroft, “60 Minutes,” 3/22

Read the entire article from the New York Post:
http://www.nypost.com/seven/0425200
9/postopinion/opedcolumnists/100_day
s__100_mistakes_166177.htm?&page=0

Torture? Say It’s Osama. Nuclear Attack On The U.S. Is Certain. He Knows. What If He Won’t Talk?

April 26, 2009

In surprisingly good English, the captive quietly answers: ‘Yes, all thanks to God, I do know when the mujaheddin will, with God’s permission, detonate a nuclear weapon in the United States, and I also know how many and in which cities.” Startled, the CIA interrogators quickly demand more detail. Smiling his trademark shy smile, the captive says nothing. Reporting the interrogation’s results to the White House, the CIA director can only shrug when the president asks: “What can we do to make Osama bin Laden talk?”

Americans should keep this worst-case scenario in mind as they watch the tragicomic spectacle taking place in the wake of the publication of the Justice Department’s interrogation memos. It will help them recognize this episode of political theater as another major step in the bipartisan dismantling of America’s defenses based on the requirements of presidential ideology. George W. Bush’s democracy-spreading philosophy yielded the invasion of Iraq and set the United States at war with much of the Muslim world. Bush’s worldview thereby produced an enemy that quickly outpaced the limited but proven threat-containing capacities of the major U.S. counterterrorism programs — rendition, interrogation and unmanned aerial vehicle attacks.

Now, in a single week, President Obama has eliminated two-thirds of that successful-but-not-sufficient national defense troika because his personal ideology — a fair gist of which is “If the world likes us more we are more secure” — cannot tolerate harsh interrogation techniques, torture or coercive interviews, call them what you will. Surprisingly, Obama now stands alongside Bush as a genuine American Jacobin, both of them seeing the world as they want it to be, not as it is. Whereas Bush saw a world of Muslims yearning to betray their God for Western secularism, Obama gazes upon a globe that he regards as largely carnivore-free and believes that remaining threats can be defused by semantic warfare; just stop saying “War on Terror” and give talks in Turkey and on al-Arabiyah television, for example.

By Michael Scheuer
The Washington Post
Sunday, April 26, 2009

Read the rest:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/c
ontent/article/2009/04/24/AR2009
042403459.html?hpid=opinionsbox1

***************************

Editorial, April 20, 2009
New York Post

If nothing else, President Obama’s decision to overrule his own intelligence officials and release Bush-era legal memos justifying what The New York Times sanctimoniously described as the CIA’s “brutal” interrogation techniques proves what a bunch of pushovers we Americans are.

Al Qaeda kidnaps Americans, tortures them, then decapitates them on TV.

We deprive captives of sleep, push them into walls and put harmless caterpillars that we say are poisonous in their cells.

Then we’re the ones who are condemned as the worst human-rights violators on the planet.

To be sure, Obama did promise that no one who undertook such practices would be prosecuted — though he pointedly refused to make such guarantees for those who authorized the work.

It took literally minutes before Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Pat Leahy (D-Vt.) was demanding a South Africa-style “truth commission” to probe such techniques. And the ACLU, whose lawsuit provoked the memos’ release, wants a special prosecutor appointed.

The White House insisted Obama “thought very long and hard” about releasing the memos as he tried to balance “the impact on national security” with “his belief in transparency.”

Sad to say, national security lost out.

Or, as former Attorney General Michael Mukasey and ex-CIA Director Michael Hayden argued in a Wall Street Journal op-ed piece, the net “effect will be to invite the kind of institutional timidity and fear of recrimination that weakened intelligence gathering in the past, and that we came sorely to regret on Sept. 11, 2001.”

In fact, as they also noted, these techniques worked — and yielded information that not only led to the arrest of al Qaeda leaders Khalid Sheik Mohammed and Ramzi bin al Shibh, but also disrupted numerous terrorist plots aimed at both America and Europe.

So why did Obama feel the need to release these memos, which spell out in excruciating detail the limits of past US resolve to protect the homeland?

As National Intelligence Director Dennis Blair tellingly noted, the memos were written as the CIA was trying to prevent a repeat of 9/11 — a task at which the Bush administration notably succeeded.

Still, he added, “those methods, read on a bright, sunny, safe day in April 2009, appear graphic and disturbing.”

There you go: The dark post-9/11 days are gone and everything is “bright, sunny [and] safe.” America no longer needs such techniques because there is no more threat, no more terrorism.

We hope and pray that Obama & Co. will not be forced to eat those words.

Obama Administration Filled With Far-Left Extremists…. and a Lot Of Amateurs or Inexperienced People Like Obama Himself

April 25, 2009

Longtime conservative leader Morton Blackwell, a Reagan administration alumni and once the youngest Goldwater delegate at the GOP convention, is perhaps best know as the originator of the phrase “Personnel is policy.”

Blackwell’s observation speaks a great truth about American government.  Since no one man or woman can do it all, alone, we have followed the French in the development of bureaucratic systems that allow for power and authority to be delegated to subordinates who are responsible, on a daily basis, for the administration of public policy.  It is these people, even more than the president, who directly impact the way policies are developed and carried out.

Almost everywhere you look in the Obama administration you can find appointees whose beliefs are clearly outside the mainstream.

The people chosen to fill positions within an administration, no matter how minor those positions might be, matter; they matter because they are being handed the tools with which to make real decisions that have an effect on the American people, the American economy, our legal system, our national defense and just about any other issue you can name on a day-to-day basis.

By Peter Roff
For Fx

Throughout the 2008 presidential campaign, Barack Obama presented himself to the American people as a change-oriented centrist, slightly to the left of the middle of the road.  The way he has governed over his first 100 days, however, shows him to be anything but the image he projected, particularly where many of his appointments are concerned.  And it is these appointments that will determine the direction of policy in his administration over the next four years.

Some of the names and some of the circumstances are already familiar.  Obama may have a Cabinet that, to borrow a phrase from Bill Clinton, “looks like America.”  But they certainly don’t pay taxes like the rest of us.  Several of his most high level appointees, chief among them Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner, have been exposed as having failed to pay the taxes they owed at the time these should have paid them.

Then there is Attorney General Eric Holder, who prior to his appointment may have been best known for helping fugitive financier Marc Rich obtain a pardon in the waning days of the Clinton administration.  Since coming into office, however, he shocked the nation when, during a presentation to mark Black History month, he called America a “nation of cowards” on the issue of race.  Writer Joe Klein, who is generally sympathetic to the liberal point of view, denounced Holder for his remarks, saying they provided “absolutely no acknowledgement of the incredible progress that has been made over the last 40 or 50 years.”

Janet Napolitano, who leads the Department of Homeland Security, similarly came under fire after her department released a report on so-called rise of right-wing extremism in America that lumped returning veterans and anti-abortion activists into the same group as white power organizations and Timothy McVeigh, who helped mastermind the 1995 bombing of the Murrah federal building in Oklahoma City.  Embarrassed, she met with veterans groups in Washington on Friday and gave what an American Legion representative characterized as a “heartfelt” apology.

But it’s not just the apples at the top of the barrel that are reason to be suspicious that a leftward drift is underway.  There are plenty of secondary appointments, not all of which are subject to the Senate’s advice and consent, which make up the new administration’s gallery of liberal rogues.

White House Science Advisor Dr. John P. Holdren is a noted alarmist where the idea of global catastrophes is concerned.  In 1971, he predicted that “some form of eco-catastrophe, if not thermonuclear war, seems almost certain to overtake us before the end of the century.” That same year Holdren also claimed that “population control, the redirection of technology, the transition from open to closed resource cycles, the equitable distribution of opportunity, and the ingredients of prosperity must all be accomplished if there is to be a future worth living.”

More recently, in 2006, Holdren suggested that global sea levels could ….

Read the rest:
http://foxforum.blogs.foxnews.com/
2009/04/24/roff_obama_appointments/


John McCain was too much the gentleman to suggest that one’s associates sometimes tell us who that person really is….

http://michellemalkin.com/2009/04/2
5/hey-maybe-well-finally-get-serious-a
bout-borders-now/

*******************************

Containment of The Bird Flue In Mexico “Beyond Containment, May Be Pandemic”
.
Mexico is now certain it has a widespread outbreak of a swine flu that is deadly to humans unless treated rapidly and correctly.  Several cases are already reported in the United States.

We at Peace and Freedom have some experience in widespread diseases going back to the SARS outbreak that started in China and spread rapidly to Canada, Vietnam, Singapore and other nations in 2002.

Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS) was first diagnosed in 2002 in Guangdong Province, China. Guangdong is the province surrounding Hong Kong. It is the most densely packed province in China and people there tend to live right on top of their farm animals.

In Hong Kong, for example, when you go to buy a chicken, a duck, or a pig for the family dinner, you get a live animal and it comes from a cage filled with 20 or 30 other animals. You can imagine the sanitation in this situation leaves a lot to be desired.

Some doctors are now thinking the first signs of SARS developed in the farm animals and then spread to the people.

Before “containment” could be put into use in 2002, the disease had widely spread and had even crossed international borders.

This is likely what has happened in today’s swine flu that apparently started in Mexico.  International airline flights probably already carried people with the disease to far corners of the globe and the border — if it can be called that — between the U.S. and Mexico is so wide open to drugs, guns, people and cash that it also seems likely that the disease crossed into the United States well before the Mexican government knew it had a problem….

**************************

By MARK STEVENSON, Associated Press Writer

But experts at the WHO and the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention say the nature of this outbreak may make containment impossible. Already, more than 1,000 people have been infected in as many as 14 of Mexico‘s 32 states, according to daily newspaper El Universal. Tests show 20 people have died of the swine flu, and 48 other deaths were probably due to the same strain.

The CDC and Canadian health officials were studying samples sent from Mexico, and airports around the world were screening passengers from Mexico for symptoms of the new flu strain, saying they may quarantine passengers.

But CDC officials dismissed the idea of trying that in the United States, and some expert said it’s too late to try to contain spread of the virus.

They noted there had been no direct contact between the cases in the San Diego and San Antonio areas, suggesting the virus had already spread from one geographic area through other undiagnosed people.

“Anything that would be about containing it right now would purely be a political move,” said Michael Osterholm, a University of Minnesota pandemic expert.

Mexican President Felipe Calderon said his government only discovered the nature of the virus late Thursday, with the help of international laboratories. “We are doing everything necessary,” he said in a brief statement.

But the government had said for days that its growing flu caseload was nothing unusual, so the sudden turnaround angered many who wonder if Mexico missed an opportunity to contain the outbreak.

Read the entire essay from:
The Associated Press:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090425/ap_on_re_la
_am_ca/med_swine_flu;_ylt=ArNzAUFnwFfm02L5C
oI6jYes0NUE;_ylu=X3oDMTJlbTVjN2QwBGFzc2V0A2
FwLzIwMDkwNDI1L21lZF9zd2luZV9mbHUEY3Bvcw
MxBHBvcwMyBHNlYwN5bl90b3Bfc3RvcnkEc2xrA21
leGljb2ZpZ2h0cw

****************************

Ten Of The Biggest Amateur Mistakes By the Obama Administration So Far

From Right Wing News
http://rightwingnews.com/

During the 2008 presidential campaign, people speculated whether someone like Barack Obama, who has never really run anything or had any major achievements other than winning political office, could handle a three AM crisis call. Well, as it turns out, Obama has been such a bumbling incompetent that he probably couldn’t handle a trip through a Wendy’s drive-in window without a teleprompter telling him what to order and whether he wants a Coke or a Mountain Dew. Even though Obama has been in office less than two months, he has already made more boneheaded errors than most Presidents do in an entire term.

10) After doing the “We’ve got to have this stimulus package passed right this second or the economy is going to explode” routine so convincingly that not one single soul in Congress actually had time to read the entire bill before it was signed, Barack Obama then promptly went on a three day vacation to celebrate before he signed it. If the bill was so important that no one could even have time to read it before it was passed, then why wasn’t it important enough for Obama to skip dinner at Table Fifty-Two in Chicago to immediately make it a law?

9) In a juvenile stunt, reminiscent of something a third grader might come up with, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton handed Russian foreign minister Sergei Lavrov a button that was supposed to say “reset.” However, incredibly, the word on the button translated to “overcharge,” not “reset.” Apparently, despite the enormous deficit the government is going to run up this year, Team Obama forget to budget enough money to hire someone who speaks Russian for the State Department. If only America could just press a button and reset the entire Obama presidency so far and start over.

8) When Barack Obama was trying to sell America his stimulus bill that will put the country more than a trillion dollars in debt, he alerted America that, “Caterpillar’s chief executive…told him the company will rehire some laid-off workers if the stimulus bill passes.” But, when he was asked about Obama’s statement, Caterpillar CEO Jim Owens said, “I think realistically no. The truth is we’re going to have more layoffs before we start hiring again.”

7) A large part of Barack Obama’s appeal was the idea of racial reconciliation. The implicit deal was that by putting our first black President in office, America would prove once and for all that it wasn’t racist, and we could put all this silly squabbling about race in the rear view mirror once and for all. However, not only has it failed to work out that way, Obama’s Attorney General Eric Holder issued an an insulting challenge on the topic to the American people,

 

“Though this nation has proudly thought of itself as an ethnic melting pot, in things racial we have always been and I believe continue to be, in too many ways, essentially a nation of cowards.”

 

Maybe someone should ask the poor guy who did an innocent cartoon for the New York Post that made fun of the stimulus bill and the rampaging monkey that was in the news why people might be afraid to get dragged into a debate about race.

6) Typically, Presidents don’t pick fights with pundits and talk radio hosts for obvious reasons. It draws more attention to their criticisms, elevates their status, and comes across as thin skinned and a little creepy, much like Richard Nixon’s “Enemies list.”

But, the Obama Administration hasn’t figured this out — yet. They’ve launched attacks at Rick Santelli, Jim Cramer, and most prominently, Rush Limbaugh. Ratcheting up the creepiness factor a couple of notches in Limbaugh’s case, the President of the United States, members of the mainstream media, and liberal interest groups are all coordinating an attack on a private individual for daring to criticize Barack Obama. That sounds more like something that would happen in the old Soviet Union than in the United States.

But happily, if you look at the results of the White House campaign, it has backfired in every instance. Rush Limbaugh is on pace to make more revenue by the end of March than he made all last year, there are Santelli inspired “Tea Parties” popping up all across the country, and every criticism of Obama that Jim Cramer utters is now linked by the Drudge Report.

5) The first task a new President engages in is bringing a staff on board. After choosing Joe Biden, who has behaved like he was kicked in the head by a horse as a child, things have really gone down hill from there. Bill Richardson quit as Commerce Secretary after coming under investigation. Republican Senator Judd Gregg accepted, then declined Obama’s offer to be his Commerce Secretary over irreconcilable differences. Tom Daschle quit after having tax problems. So, did Nancy Killefer. Ron Kirk also has tax problems, but he’s trying to hang in there like Hilda Solis and another cabinet member who gets his own special entry — and keep in mind, Obama has a considerable number of positions left to fill. Hey Barry, the word of the day is “vetting.” You should look into it.

4) George Bush spent a lot of time strengthening our ties to Eastern European nations like Poland and the Czech Republic during his two terms in the White House. Yet, it took Barack Obama less than two months to undo much of Bush’s good work with those nations.

Obama wrote a “secret” letter to Dmitri Medvedev offering to leave Poland and the Czech Republic twisting in the wind on missile defense in return for Russia’s help in stopping Iran from getting nukes. The problem was that the letter went public even as Russia turned down the deal. So, in other words, our friends in Eastern Europe were publicly alerted that we were willing to sell them down the river to the Russians, who they were already afraid of, and yet we got nothing out of the deal. That’s a real “welcome to the Big Leagues” maneuver from the Russians for our naive, rookie President.

Read the rest:
http://rightwingnews.com/mt331/200
9/03/my_latest_townhall_column_the_17.php

The nation’s largest left-wing newspaper is counting its last days

April 25, 2009

“The Internet is a wonderful place to be, and we’re leading there,” said Arthur Sulzberger, owner, chairman and publisher of the New York Times in February 2007.  “I really don’t know whether we’ll be printing the Times in five years, and you know what? I don’t care either,” he said.

Good thing Mr. Sulzberger doesn’t care because “print” editions of many newspapers seem to be living on borrowed time….and money….

Related:
White House Works To Bury Pelosi-CIA Story, New York Times Complies

PelosiTruthGate: Did CIA Lie About Torture To Congress? Time To Find Out Or Fire Pelosi

NYT: Pelosi Accusations of CIA Lying on Page A18; Wash Post Makes Special Editorial; White House Dodges Questions
********************************

By Bill O’Reilly
Fox News

The nation’s largest left-wing newspaper and the bible for network news producers and bookers may be going under. This week, The New York Times announced more staggering losses: nearly $75 million dollars in the first quarter alone. The New York Post is reporting that the Times Company owes more than $1 billion and has just $34 million in the bank. A few months ago, the company borrowed $250 million from Mexican billionaire Carlos Slim at a reported 14 percent interest rate. With things going south fast, pardon the pun, Slim might want to put in a call to Times publisher Arthur Sulzberger Jr.

The spin from Sulzberger is that the Internet is strangling the newspaper industry, and there is some truth to that. Why read an ideologically crazed paper when you can acquire a variety of information on your computer? But other papers are not suffering nearly as much as the Times, so there must be more to it.

There is no question that the Times has journalistic talent. This week the paper won five Pulitzers. It’s true that the Pulitzer people favor left-wing operations (the past eight Pulitzer Prizes for commentary have gone to liberal writers), but New York Times journalists often do good reporting.

Read the rest:
http://townhall.com/columnists/BillOR
eilly/2009/04/25/the_end_of_times