The Real Buzz

There is a website named HillBuzz (HillBuzz.org) that was purportedly set up to promote Hillary Clinton's presidential run in 2008. The website owners say they are two openly gay men who live in Chicago and frequent "Boystown"- not that there's anything wrong with that. When it became clear that Hillary was going to lose the primary to Obama they became virulent anti-Obama people and labeled themselves as "Puma's" ("Party Unity My Ass") and had many people convinced that there would be groundswell of Hillary supporters who would vote for McCain instead of Obama. I blogged about it here.

But that didn't happen - or happen enough. And their website went silent for a while. Then it came back with conservative musings and developed a following of "conservative" housewives and, it seems, right-leaning folks who don't get out much (many who participated in the recent totally- politically-motivated vote for Bristol Palin on Dancing With The Stars had never even seen the program, now just completing its 11th successful season).

Then the website did something interesting - it all of a sudden embraced Sarah Palin as something as an heir to Hillary's message and program and started becoming one of her biggest cheerleaders. This seemed odd to me - these two women are hemisphere's apart in ideology and pedigree - but the gay guys from Boystown now embraced both as their own. And so did the housewives that followed them. A handful of Sarah followers are now devoted posters to this site and I imagine even pay to keep it running.

Meanwhile the main organizer of the site has just managed a get-out-the-vote during Dancing With the Stars to keep Bristol Palin on the show -even though she can't dance, nor exudes any type of personality (to even want to root for her even if she can't dance). Kelly Osbourne filled that roll admirably two seasons ago as someone who started unsure but blossomed during the show and more importantly let her infectious enthusiasm fill the ballroom. This was not the case with Bristol. While giving it all she had, she simply does not possess one one-hundreth of the personality of her mother. The only reason people voted en masse for her was because suspect websites convinced unthinking followers to waste time voting multiple times with multiple e-mail addressses because of vague political ideals such as voter fraud. (And that's okay - I really have no problem with the method - but what's the motive?). Because, now, Sarah Palin is even more connected with a sibling, and notion, of "hey you're not qualifed but a bunch of kooks vote like hell for you". That's not a good thing to base a presidential election on. But the site seemed hellbent on purveying it.

And that's what I think HillBuzz was trying to do. Wreck Sarah with her own constituents by tricking them into zealous ventures that will ultimately just damage her brand. I don't trust that site. In 2008 they told browsers that they were convinced that "they" had the votes to beat Obama - but they didn't. I have long viewed this as an example of internet voter suppression. I smell a rat.

Even now when you go to the site and post an opposing view they will not post your post. Do the frequent posters at Hill Buzz understand this? That the entire site is censored? You probably think everyone that goes there agrees 100% with you - they are censoring the entire site!! As a conservative and Republican it pains me to see fairly good souls reduced to blind lemmings, who in their zeal for Bristol, crafted some of the most hateful speech directed at Jennifer Grey and others - and for what? This is what conservatives should aspire to? Hateful spiteful people? I've been to many far left websites but I fear the "conservative" HillBuzz may top many of them in deranged and misplaced anger. I'm afraid the boys at Boystown are playing you big time. Go look that up if you don't understand it buzzers. And if that's not it - then its just a bad website with misguided goals that is not helping the conservative cause.

Whatever the reason, its shameful and ultimately dishonest.

Don't Back Baby in a Corner (or, Bristol, the Pistol, Should Shoot Herself in the Foot)

Let's make a few things clear for the record. I am a big fan of the ABC hit show Dancing with the Stars. And as noted to the right I am a rock 'n roll Republican. And I'm an admirer of Sarah Palin.

But I hate her daughter. And I always thought it was a bad, bad idea that she was put on this show. Why? Because of exactly the situation we are in. Dancing with the Stars is a great show - it combines reality show concepts, competition, celebrities (not necessarily stars) from all walks of life, has a good bit of good humored schmaltz and has almost singlehandedly (along with American Idol a bit) brought back the one-hour variety show back to U.S. TV. We even attended last season's finale and had a wonderful time (hmm, something that I even forgot to blog about so far).

But by bringing Bristol on the show - and even during the national mid-term elections no less - ABC has left themselves open to some second guessing and blow back that I hope the show can survive from. Because what is obvious to me is that certain parts of the right-wing (of where I definitely reside) have decided that voting for Bristol will show America "something" - what that will show I have no idea - and, for the record, I am steadfast against it.

Please America - stop voting for this woman? She CANNOT dance! I could possible see her get by some of the early folks on "Sarah power" and all of that but now it is ridiculous. I even lost a bet A MONTH AGO that she would be gone, but a coworker told me he was sure she would be there through the mid-term elections. Being politically astute (and a fan of the show) I naturaly scoffed at this notion, but I now owe him $20.

This abuse, yes abuse, of a very entertaining and fun show by certain folks and bloggers on the right who think this if funny - is not very funny to me. And also for the record, there have been other abuses in these reality shows. I for one don't know how this Lee guy won American Idol last year - but apparently all of Chicago voted for him. And besides this get out the vote business, there is nothing else really funny going on here as noted here by a former contestant. Please don't give me this nonsense that somehow the Tea Party jammed the lines for Brandy. Blame the judges - they're the ones that have given her inexplicably high scores given her performances.

And that's why she should have never gone on the show. The Republicans, Sarah and everyone else trying to improve the nation's governance going forward doesn't need this noise. If Bristol wins it will just foist more hysterical anti -Tea Party hate and will paint the right in a bad light. We don't need this, guys - this is not a way to prove a political point. And, of course, I'm very sorry Brandy had to go but let's face it - she couldn't even beat the kid from Disney - so she's got some other issues going on there. But please America, and Hill Buzz and Free Republic and the rest of you - cut it out. Vote for Jennifer. Don't back Baby in a corner!

Seoul Brother

Seriously...anybody listening to the President tonight as he gives a press conference in Seoul, Korea cannot give this guy glowing remarks. He can't even answer a question. Why is the President holding a press conference over there (when he has only give a few over here) when he has no answers and is clearly flummoxed by the questions.

And after he has flooded the market with cheap dollars!!!?????

Paint It Red

Yes, a call to sanity indeed. And an interesting roll call on election coverage can be seen here.

Arrogance Shrugged

What is becoming abundantly clear is that Obama's perceived approach to governing, namely Hope and Change, was never very real - because he never believed in it. What he believed was "its my way, or the highway" - which is fine if it works, but when it doesn't don't blame the other guys for not playing. Barry you set the rules - and it backfired. And even the British press understand this.

When Obama first came into office a group of Republicans came to him with a list of issues that could be used for the upcoming stimulous package. He refused them all claiming that elections had reprecussions and thus he would not even invite their participation (anyone else remember this in the health care debate?). The bottomline is that Obama created his own enemies, decided to do it on his own - and now, with disastorous results has to own it all too. Arrogance.

With every campaign stop the President, and his idiot cronies, try to blame the Republicans for his problems. But with a majority in both houses Obama could pass anything he wanted - and he did. He passed a health care program (jammed down our throat) that will eventually help no one (in fact my own corporate plan has gone up and one plan option has been eliminated).

Eventually as his policies waned even his own Democratic legislature would not vote for silly one-stop band-aid programs (his putrid small business package) that won't do anything. The man is to blame for his own inner view and unfortunate narcissim. This Tuesday will show the world how arrogant the rest of the country feels he is as well.

Lame Central

Well Comedy Central had their rally at the National Mall today - the so-called "Rally to Restore Sanity in America" and there were a few interesting issues that surrounded this event which was clearly put on to poke fun at Glenn Beck's rally - and get out the vote for the Democrats this Tuesday (oh, this rally was really non-political? yeah sure).

One point of order was the highly controlled press component. Some press members were apparently denied press credentials, even though that was impossible to do! Imagine - a rally to apparently calm the vitriol of political debate - and Comedy Central is denying access - especially since Tea Partiers and Beck allowed incredible access. I swear I couldn't even find it on TV today - it's as if it didn't even happen.

Another issue were the hate signs - you know the ones that apparently only pop up at "all-white conservative type rallies" - like the Hitler signs? These are depictions of Republicans as Hitler (Rush, Palin et al) and here is another one of Michigan Representative Eric Cantor from Michigan who is Jewish. Anti-semetic anyone? Huh? Serenity now!

And then there was Cat Stevens, who is now known as Yuslaf whatever, and he sang Peace Train in a rocking 'back and forth' with Ozzie Ozborne (who sang Crazy Train). But just one thing - he supports the fatwa and wants Salmon Rushdie, who wrote a book called the Satanic Verses, which criticises Islam, dead. Anyone remember that? And promoting a radical muslim during this rally "restores the sanity?"

And then there is the turn-out. It appears it didn't come anywhere close to Beck's turnout of 300k but you wouldn't know that by the liberal press who won't really comment on it, or try to express an opinion - and surprisingly, with the press blackout, there are no overhead shots of the Mall to show you anyway. And look at this Associated Press story of the event and the caption to the very same picture above - they label the Hitler posters as just "anti-Republican signs". What? And AP doesn't even blink an eye at this?

Thank god these twits restored the "santity". Can't wait for Tuesday.

Over His Head

Sheesh. Even Time Magazine is turning. Mark Halperin has this to say in his latest column in a magazine that is a shell of its former informative self. Halperin writes "With the exception of core Obama Administration loyalists, most politically engaged elites have reached the same conclusions: the White House is in over its head, isolated, insular, arrogant and clueless about how to get along with or persuade members of Congress, the media, the business community or working-class voters."

This column is coming on the heels of some extremely desperate campaigning by the White House where they are now arguing that the Chamber of Commerce (you know, that nice civic organization that promotes local businesses) is accepting donations from foreign countries to somehow influence the election (like this is even needed). Even his outgoing PR populist campaign director David Axelrod proclaimed on Face the Nation that this a major crisis for the country to discuss three weeks prior to the election. To which, well known liberal commentator and host Bob Shieffer said "is this the best you can do?". In fact, I thought when Obama got elected "the World" was going to love us - so wouldn't this be a good thing?

Instead of campaigning on why their Stimulus Package (passed in less then 30 days after inauguration with no one reading it) has done much for the economy (it hasn't), or why the public should be embracing the national overhaul of health care (they're not), or explaining on how their stewardship of the economy has helped create jobs (it hasn't), they are instead just making stuff up! Is that the change we can believe in?

Just sad, very sad. I can't wait for November 2. Read the article.

Not Even Close

Yeah - I don't think the One America rally quite measured up here this weekend.

I'm not a Glenn Beck phobe by any measure, but I am impressed with his convictions - as are many who attended the August 28 "Restore Honor" rally at the National Mall. Estimates have the crowd at over 300,000 and there were no hate signs, or speech, and everyone behaved. There was no race riot with the nearby Al Sharpton rally that maybe had 5,000 people. The reason the Beck rally was so impressive was that it was a-political and was based mostly on folks wanting a return to certain values they hold closely. There - I said it as impassively as I could.

This weekend we had a "competing" rally - the One America rally which really was just an assemblage of various union groups, ethnic specific organizations and socialists. There signs asked for jobs, blistered Sarah Palin and Glen Beck, and begged for socialism. Not a real positive bunch - nor a patriotic one if you ask me.

Trying to explain the frustration from some of us who can't understand why people march for "jobs" while putting down the very people, and principles, that would provide them is this fine poster on the Reason Foundation page.

Nuff said.

Global Family Idiot

On tonight's anticipated Real Time with Bill Maher, he actually had two conservatives on the panel and one was Andrew Breitbart recently of Shirley Sherrod fame - so this night's show was going to be something more than the over-the-top overtly radical lib-fest it usually is (I mean seriously where does he get his audience from - the View after smoking crack?)

Besides Bill calling Sarah Palin a whack job on more than three occaisions, the panel discussed the new Republican Pledge, the woeful Health Care bill and the new Bob Woodward book. For most of these topics liberal whack job and creator of The Family Guy Seth McFarlane could offer little to defend health care or even attempt to explain the plan. While it has been much reported that Andrew B. got Bill Maher to admit that he approved of european socialism, the show's biggest gaffe occcured when they started chatting about global warming.

That bit was introduced by bringing out noted astronomer Carl Sagan's widow Ann Druyan where they discussed the topic "why no one takes science seriously". Ann then began to babble on unintelligably about the "truth" of science - frankly a real train wreck. This then of course morphed into a discussion of global warming. Scientist Seth argued that 95% of scientists agreed on the "actual science that proves" that global warming (whatever that is) is manmade - wow thanks for that definitive non-endorsement of the global warming phenomenon Seth.

While the conservative panelists refuted that their was this widespread agreement that global warming was manmade, Scientist Seth then pulled out a doozy. "We are seeing this in our own solar system right now. Studies show that the planet Venus was now incurring 900 degree temperatures and this is what could happen to Earth".

Gee Seth - is that because of all the MEN on Venus, driving their CARS and going to their FACTORIES? I don't think Venus is undergoing manmade global warming and I don't think a cap and trade policy will help them.

Typical underknowledged dilluded liberal speak.

Nah, It Doesn't Quite Add Up Barry

For some reason President Obama used his second Oval Office TV address to discuss the end of "combat operations in Iraq" (congratulations everbody) and to also discuss a few other odds and ends. Just for the record Oval Office pronouncements are supposed to be for fairly serious things - going to war, announcing new significant legislation - and also resigning (...drats, not this time). But for this event Mr. Obama, in front of hideous new green drapes installed while he was buying shrimp in Martha's Vinyard, decided to devolve this announcement into talking about economics and the "conflict at home" - in frankly what any sane person would describe as a wild stretch.

Of course one of the items pundits were looking for in this speech was whether he would praise his predecessor George Bush, for committing to a surge of troop strength in 2007 - of which he was vehemently opposed to as a Senator back then. Meaning that he is now trying to take credit for something he opposed. To his slight credit he did actually mention Bush - but he never really gave him credit (unfortunately even at a moment of purported triumph this is a man who cannot admit when he was wrong). Stay classy San Diego.

But he seriously lost me when he decided to make a major point in saying that "the seven year war cost $1 trillion" and how that "stretched our resources" such that it led to "record deficits". Then his speech wove into a blend of green jobs, putting people to work blah blah blah. And this is where he is just being intellectually dishonest - as he often is (whether he really means it or not). I frankly think he is just so above it he is oblivious.

Look, Barry. What you don't understand was one could construe the war, in itself, to be a stimulus. One could argue (as they did for World War II) that we put many people to work, supported many businesses - to the tune of $1 trillion - and in the end felled a dictator, took steps to try to develop a better country and maybe an outpost for some type of democracy in the Middle East, and established an active ally for US interests (and by the way - no one stole any oil as far as I can tell). And as you can see from the graph it didn't primarily add to the deficit (other government spending did -most of it Mr. Obama's).

Meanwhile Barry, what have you done? You spent that same $1 trillion on your ill-conceived stimulus in January 2009 that promised us great economic growth (and remember, we had to pass it "right now" - it had to be done immediately or the economy was going to crumble....), unemployment rates to not exceed 8% and now we are at 9.5% - and counting. You spent that $1 trillion on the Democrats wish list of every pet project and giving checks (not tax breaks) - actual checks to people who don't even pay taxes. What a plan! Give him a Nobel.

Do the math. Oh yeah, here's the calculator.

Risky Business

Regarding the Ground Zero Mosque issue once again - one thing I could never figure out was why New York Mayor Bloomberg was so forthright in his support for the mosque, and its location. Why would this former Republican be so out in the forefront of this issue when he must know he is alienating many New Yorkers and 9/11 families. Like the President he could have tried to stay out of the fray.

Well there is only one answer, I guess. It's bidness.

You see the Mayor runs the Bloomberg information business empire - information sharing of stock quotes, business news et al that has reaped him his current fortune. His company provides desk top sets to get on-line stock quotes and information like the big brokerage houses. Even as far back as 15 years ago I would go to the library to look things up on a Bloomberg station. Obviously promoting his business network to other regions of the world is, er...well, is his business.

Now it turns out he is trying to expand in Dubai and the rest of the United Arab Emirates as described here. This would be an amazing sales coup to be able to expand in the Middle East and thus be the leading purveyor of business and market information for the entire region. And one could guess that providing support for an Islamic cause just might further that type of platform. A quid pro quo. I mean, this is just normal business. I can understand this. Scratch my back and I'll scratch yours. Apparently this business venture has been in discussion for some time.

Look, this is certainly a bit of conjecture - maybe the Mayor feels very strongly about the constitutionality of the mosque issue (...sure he does - he certainly hasn't cared about the Greek Orthodox Church that has tried to rebuild in the past nine years in a spot right across from Ground Zero all this time) - but it doesn't really make much political sense. A plurality of the nation (70%) is opposed to the Mosque. There had to be something else. One thing I know - Guilianni would certainly not be doing this. So why would Bloomberg?

Bidness. Nothing personal - just bidness.

No Mas; No Mosque

President Obama's latest pronouncement on the controversial placement of a mosque and Islamic community center two blocks from Ground Zero again brought questions about his inherent ability to lead but also his understanding of international policy and diplomacy. Not only that - but on Friday he apparently held up the inherent principles of religious freedom at a White House dinner commemorating Ramadan - and then the next day walked back those comments saying he wasn't really opining on the merit of the placement of the facility. Yup - that's leadership alright. Waffler-in-chief.

The location of the mosque is really only significant in understanding the world that the people who killed us desire. It’s not that the people building the mosque or the place is a problem. It’s that the Taliban and our enemy would see it as a trophy. They would see it as the place Allah gave to them during a great victory. They would see it as a place that they wanted to worship (the worst of the worst terrorists would want to worship there as much or more than Al Aqsa).

The Islamic world is increasingly anti-American, if its media are a reflection of sentiment. Despite the alleged healing abilities of Obama, the Muslim world sees him as either (a) a failure and/or (b) weak. For them -- radical or moderate -- the erection of a mosque near Ground Zero isn't about tolerance; it's about submission - and its a very visible provocation.

And, hey, that's what the West is saying, too. Look at recent policies in France and the Netherlands -- they're moving away from concessions to non-assimilating Muslims in their countries. Their media paints Obama as either (a) a disappointment/failure and/or (b) weak. You can bet France would never let a mosque be built near the site of a major Muslim attack, and Sarkozy wouldn't utter the statement Obama has.

It’s good to hear Obama opine about the importance of ‘freedom of religion’. While I appreciate the leader of the free world's opinion on the first amendment, I wish Obama would use his new found appreciation for freedom of religion to encourage other nations to adopt the same policy.

In other words, instead of apologizing to the Muslim community, he should have said, this is what real freedom is. When people aren’t allowed to worship as they please, they are not free. In Pakistan, Afghanistan, Saudi Arabia where they do not allow freedom of religion (or even freedom to escape religion), their people are neither good Muslims (they are forced to be Muslims), nor are they free.

This actually could be a "teachable moment". All Obama did Friday was come out and say that he agrees with the 1st Amendment. Suddenly the MSM calls this "courageous" and "great leadership". The Sunday shows trumpeted his leadership. But here would have been a perfect opportunity to add that he thought the Muslim backers of this mosque "acted stupidly" in picking that site.

Obama would then unfortunately have a problem in teaching the countries he has groveled in front of on our behalf. Yes Obama, freedom of religion is important - leadership is even more paramount. Ask the Muslim nations if they agree.

And, then, of course, the next day he flipped flopped anyway.

A Real Commander-in-Chief

President Bush and former First Lady Laura Bush suprised homecoming troops at Dallas-Fort Worth airport last week. It was a total surprise for the incoming troops and a common selfless act by a true patriot. From the time President Bush first made his surprise visit to Iraq on the first Thanksgiving of the Gulf War he has shown an overriding endearment for our men and women on the battlefield.

Here are some more pictures of this happy and classy homecoming. Thank you Mr. President.

She Did - Of Course

Sarah put it as plain as day as anyone could. (See below)

Well Said. By The Way - Who Did Say This?

This is a recent speech/comment from a leading political comentator reacting to President Obama's most recent campaign speech again blaming everything on his predecessor. To me, this piece quite succinctly frames one of the most frustrating aspects of this administion. The author reminds us that Obama just didn't show up from a neighboring planet 20 months ago:

"Barack Obama was part of the problem while in Congress. Senator Obama pushed the fiscally irresponsible measures that Democrats, who held the majority, advanced while holding the government’s purse strings. And now, as President, he’s not just one of the pack anymore as a mere contributor to the problem – he now leads the problem. We are sick and tired of President Obama pointing his finger and screeching through his blame game about what he “inherited.” Up until 18 months ago he was fully engaged in that Congressional herd mentality of the Left as he just went with the flow, adding to the debt and deficit, instead of bucking his party’s leadership to stop the recklessness. (Did you ever hear him as an independent voice standing up and speaking out against his Democrat party’s overspending and over reach? Come to think of it, did you ever hear of his congressional record at all? For the life of me I can’t think of any time he used his bully pulpit as a sitting U.S. Senator to lead free market, equality-respecting pro-private sector efforts, nor to change up actions he now conveniently condemns. He could have refudiated them all.)…

Regardless of what the Democrats want you to believe, this is a tax increase on every American who pays taxes. Families will suffer because the Democrats’ tax hike will reinstate the marriage penalty, cut the child tax credit in half, abolish various personal exemptions, and impose limits on itemized deductions like home mortgage interest and charitable contributions. Investors and savers would suffer through increases in the top rates in long-term capital gains and qualified dividends. And the Alternative Minimum Tax would end up hitting 15 million taxpayers – up from 4 million in 2009.

We’ll all be feeling the pinch, but the ones who will be hit hardest by this massive tax hike will be America’s small business owners – the businesses that create up to 70% of all jobs in this country. According to a recent report by the Congressional Joint Committee on Taxation, small business owners will pay over half the taxes raised when the Democrats increase the top two tax brackets. In an already anemic jobless recovery, the last thing government should do is to impose even higher tax burdens on job creators. Instead of hurting “the rich,” such measures would end up hurting the unemployed."

Well said. So who did say this?