Sign, Sign...Everywhere a Sign

State of the Union 2011

I'm just half way through this morose monotone speech. Obama had a moment to really leap forward here - and he has landed with a thud. Seriously - did this guy look presidential? He has a tin ear to what happened in November. What a hollow shell he is.

High speed rail? Sheesh!!!

Here's a good analysis.

Tucson Blame Game

The liberal media blame game that immediately commenced after Saturday's shootings of up to 20 people in a Tucson Safeway parking lot that centered around Democratic Representative Gabrielle Giffords has taken such a strataspheric tangent to reality that it has fueled a counter argument that has generated even more heat. The tragic gunning down of six lives at a politcal meeting in a shopping center by a 22-year old leftist communist nut-job has now spurred calls for a reduction in the "heat of rhetoric" that has apparently just "recently permeated our politics". Democrats and the mainstream media have blamed the Tea Party, Republicans, Sarah Palin, Rush Limbaugh, Glen Beck and others in creating an atmosphere which somehow spawned these attacks.

This, of course, is just pure rubbish. But it also goes to the intellectual honesty of the left - find the quickest knee-jerk explanation and that is the cause. It is laughable - but also sad. While many criticized Sarah Palin for having certain Democratic legislators in her "sites" for the mid-terms (over a year ago) they neglect that the very left wing "Daily Kos" website did the same thing.

What is even worse is the mainstream media jumping to conclusions - or let's just call it like it is - MAKING conclusions based on non-fact and their ideological view. This Newsbusters article sums it up very nicely. But shame on the media and their absolutely disgusting display of bias. In the end the shooter was a head case, pure and simple.

A Man for All Seasons

Isn't amazing how the press has already turned on Stanford Coach Jim Harbaugh? Read this trash. The guy has only been tough as nails in both his college and pro career ("Captain Comeback" when he was with the Colts as QB) to now a successful college football coach at less than a football factory like Stanford (that comes with excessive admission hurdles as well). What he has done at in Palo Alto is phenomenal. Now he has both the pros and his alma mater Michigan calling.

So what does he do? He talks to them, of course. All in individual meetings. He keeps this Monday's victorious post-Orange Bowl press conference on point about the game and dodges other questions (as does his QB Andrew Luck) . So what's a guy-in-play to do? And here we have internet reporters searching for a story making stuff up.

It appears that Harbaugh doesn't want to go "back" to Michigan (too much headache and problems there). He entertained the Dolphins because the owner is a major Michigan benefactor (and he was on the sideline at the Orange Bowl) - and he had an extensive five-hour talk with San Francisco - well because its the 49'ers, and its right up the street from Palo Alto.

What is clear to me is that Jim is now a California guy - once it gets in your blood its hard to get out. He can now stay at Stanford (now that his 2010 draft rated number 1 QB is coming back for his junior year) and make a run for a national championship - or have a great year, nonetheless (and get a handsome raise). Or go to the 49'ers - but now that Luck is staying at QB, and he's tired of all of the blah blah pro pitches, I bet he stays.

But anyway you look at it I don't think he's leaving Cali.

Read the Constitution? Bah! Humbug. Happy New Year!

As the uber liberal MSNBC cable news program channel gets ready for the new year they are discussing the ramifications of the new Republican majority in the House and how they are going to start off reiterating the benefits of the U. S. Constitution - a document that was critical to the governance and development of this nation. In this video, Washington Post writer Ezra Klein claims this founding document hard to understand "because it was written over 100 years ago". Of course that would be 1910 - not 1787 - but what's a century or two?

This is what passes as political discourse on MSNBC - note the contempt in the anchor's voice as she describes that the House may actually read the Consititution (an act that may take less time then Charley Rangel's elongated pleas for leniency in his censure hearings) aloud at the start of its first session. Read the Constitution!?? Hrmmph!

Meanwhile, enjoy this post from our friends at the much more interactive Red Eye. Happy New Year!!!

The Gift That Keeps On Giving

Changewecanbelievein....

Pretty soon he's going to look like GWB. On Monday he said that "most economists" believe keeping the "tax cuts" (meaning keeping the tax rates of the past 10 years the same) was a disaster to the economy. Two days later he's now saying "most economists say this will help the economy"! And he's attacking his own base.

Talk about flip-flops.

Calling Dr. Love

It seems everyone is starting to turn on Barry. Here is Kiss bassist and rock icon Gene Simmons wishing he had his Obama vote back.

Shout it, shout it out loud....

Drip, drip, drip....

As for the great WikiLeaks scandal, I'm not surprised by some of the name calling and other "sausage-making" eye rollers that go into our international diplomacy. Any one who thinks this is all some high brow affair has another thing coming. But the entire affair with Assange is pathetic from a national superpower perspective. And, leakwise, what is remarkable is how the entire Arab world wants us to take out Iran - and here is Obama playing pussyfoot with them. If that does not show you how powerless he is both domestically and internationally, nothing else will. And this was the guy who was going to improve our standing in the world?

And let's look at this tasty Wikileaks morsel on how the US tried to influence global warming accords. I'm not surprised - but why don't we use these tactics to stymie Iran?

HillBuzz.org

The wonderfully conservative website HillBuzz.org has now, it appears, barred me from its website since it no longer accepts any post I attempt to make there. They can talk about freedom and conservative principles all they want but don't exhibit it. And why would a site that expouses free discourse prohibit it?

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.