Thursday, May 31, 2012

What Hath May Wrought? More Economic Malaise...

Sorry, small investors!

If the stock market is truly a leading indicator (and it tends to be one of the more reliable ones), then the Obama campaign had better start worrying. May has been a brutal month for the Dow. It closed May 1 at 13,279.  As it approached 2PM today, it’s at 12,390, down 29 on the day. That’s a decline of approximately 7% percent for the month, wiping out all the gains since Jan. 1.

Sorry, unemployed Americans!

New claims for unemployment benefits rose last week for the fourth straight week, which could heighten concerns the labor market recovery is softening.
Initial claims for state unemployment benefits rose 10,000 to a seasonally adjusted 383,000, the Labor Department said on Thursday.

The prior week's figure was revised up to 373,000 from the previously reported 370,000.
Claims have now risen in seven of the last eight weeks...

Sorry, small business owners looking for rising tide!

The U.S. economy grew more slowly in the first quarter than previously estimated, reflecting smaller gains in inventories and bigger government cutbacks.

Gross domestic product climbed at a 1.9 percent annual rate from January through March, down from a 2.2 percent prior estimate, revised Commerce Department figures showed today in Washington. The report also showed corporate profits rose at the slowest pace in more than three years and smaller wage gains at the end of 2011.

Sorry, semiconductor industry!

I work at a large semiconductor company who does a LOT of business with Chinese firms (odds are many is not most of the electronic devices you have that say “made in China” on it buys it’s most expensive parts from us). recently orders have dropped precipitously. We are expecting to reduce the workforce before the end of the quarter by dropping contractor (temp) labor. We are entering what for the semiconductor industry is the Christmas sales season and the orders are going DOWN! Be afraid. Be very afraid.

I'm not.  Because the job figures for May come out tomorrow, and with more and more Americans dropping out of the work force, the unemployment rate will just as likely drop as not! And Barack Obama will tell us that is because his economic plan is working, and only more of the same (taxing and spending) can keep us afloat!

It's all OK.  If you can ignore the signs all around you, of course...

Matthew Yglesias Beats His Fellow Americans Over The Head With...The San Antonio Spurs?

Since day-to-day reality tends to undermine the worldview of liberals, they tend to resort to amateur etymology and dubious dissembling in order to "prove" their pet theories were right all along, or, more frequently, to find a new avenue of attack against a political adversary (the "macaca" moment, calling Obama "skinny" is racist, etc.).  Yglesias is fond of this genre of liberal "intellectualism", and uses it here to attack his worst enemy - the American people:

The Most Ignored Dynasty in Sports

The NBA’s most successful franchise reveals that America is a nation of hypocrites.

America—at least in its own imagination—stands for certain things. For the idea that hard work and sound judgment bring success, and that success deserves celebration. That winners should be celebrated as long as they play by the rules. That teamwork, leadership, loyalty, and excellence all count for something. And that’s why the San Antonio Spurs, currently riding a stupendous run of 19 straight victories, are America’s favorite professional basketball team.

Except, of course, they aren’t. Not this year when they tied for the best record in the league, and not last year when they were the best in the West. Not in their 1999 championship run or the follow-ups in 2003, 2005, and 2007. Not for a single moment amid the glorious 15-year run with coach Gregg Popovich and big man Tim Duncan have the Spurs captured the imaginations of the American people or even its basketball fans. That’s because we are, ultimately, a nation of hypocrites that prefers drama queens, bad boys, and flukes to simple competence and success.

And while Ynglesias doesn't go on to say it, I'll dissemble a bit here and call this piece an excuse to execute the changes that Matthew believes must be imposed upon America:  A complete societal makeover, from the Constitution to the court system to the role of government in our lives and the role of the citizen in his government. The absolute rule of  liberalism,.with the imposition of socialism, the acceptance of crony capitalism along with the revival of the welfare state, and the submission of the people to such.  Any protestations about individual liberty and the rule of law are simply the caterwauling of...hypocrites.  After all, he just proved it.  And if we really believed in hard work, honesty, and loyalty as their own rewards, why, we would all be Spurs fans.  The fact that we are not gives him moral cover for his lust to rule over us like a king.

Of course, it could just be the fact that sports is entertainment as much as competition, and we tune in for story-lines, much as we do with any TV show (or professional wrestling).  And it could just be that some teams have bigger fan bases than others.

Take the New York Rangers and the New Jersey Devils. Both play a similar defense-first, sacrifice the body style of hockey.  The Rangers are beloved by their fan base and and are a draw nationwide, but Devils tickets to Game 1 of their Stanley Cup Final appearance last night were selling on StubHub for 65% of face value.

Do we hate America because we ignore the Devils, who have racked up more Cups in recent years than the Rangers have in their entire history?  Then how can you explain the love we have for a team with an extremely similar style of play?

Oh, you can explain it many ways.  Market size.  Amount of time in the league. Media coverage. Fan base.

But Yglesias would say it is because hypocritical Americans really don't like success after all, and thus secretly support the imposition of the Buffett rule, higher taxes, and income redistribution.  Oh, and ObamaCare, too.

And they call us "stupid" for not buying this....

Wednesday, May 30, 2012

Did Elizabeth Warren Whip Out Her Tit In New Jersey?

Sounds like another tall tale from Lie-awatha, but we'll report it, since she's claiming to hold some sort of a New Jersey record.  Via Legal Insurrection:

Warren, who had no public events yesterday, again refused an interview request from the Herald, responding to questions instead through a spokeswoman by email. Meanwhile, campaign officials scrambled to address another claim Warren’s made about her life’s story.

“I was the first nursing mother to take a bar exam in the state of New Jersey,” Warren told an audience at the Chicago Humanities Festival in 2011, in a video posted on the CHF website. When asked how Warren knows that, her campaign said:

“Elizabeth was making a point about the very serious challenges she faced as a working mom — from taking an all-day bar exam when she was still breast-feeding, to finding work as a lawyer that would accommodate a mom with two small children.”

Is this the bare breast of Elizabeth Warren, providing milk during the NJ bar exam?  Could be...just look at the cheekbones on that baby!

Seems to me as if the Warren campaign is tactfully admitting that when it comes to certain accomplishments that Elizabeth needs to burnish her liberal bona fides, the candidate just makes shit up, and awards herself "groundbreaking" credit.

Much like her claim to Cherokee heritage, it is fundamentally  impossible to confirm or deny Warren's latest wacky claim to fame:

Winnie Comfort of the New Jersey Judiciary, which administers that state’s bar exam, said there’s no way to verify Warren’s claim. Comfort said women have been taking the New Jersey bar exam since 1895, but she’s not aware their nursing habits were ever tracked.

Now we know where Time Magazine got the inspiration for their recent infamous cover:

But if, as is most likely, Warren was not the first woman to breastfeed while taking the bar exam in New Jersey, than once again she has appropriated the bravery, guts, and identity of another in order to further her own career by claiming the mantle of liberal heroine.

Somewhere, there is a woman reading this with a tear falling from their eye (much like the iconic Indian), knowing that she actually paved the trail for Ms. Warren, not the other way round, and has been robbed of her honor, such as it is.  Much like a certain proud Indian tribe...

But we'll be fair to Running Joke here.  I'm still calling her out for lying about her Cherokee heritage and about whipping it out in Jersey.  But there's another, equally unprovable boast that she mentions less often these days:

Elizabeth Warren is running for office in the most high-profile race in the country not involving Barack Obama. It’s a position that calls for some tact. So what does she think about the Occupy Wall Street protests that are roiling the country?

 “I created much of the intellectual foundation for what they do,” she says. “I support what they do.”

 Warren’s boast isn’t bluster..

We'll rate this claim "true".    No need to be shy, Ms. Warren, go ahead...brag on it!

Ms. Warren?  Why the sudden silence?

Worst IPO In A Decade? Really?

That's what they're saying about Facebook's initial public offering:

The social network has lost more than a fifth of its value since its faltering Wall Street debut on May 18, while its 28-year-old founder Mark Zuckerberg has been honeymooning in Rome. It is now unlikely to recover in the short term, analysts claimed.

After placing at $38, Facebook’s shares briefly peaked at $45 before sinking back to $38.25 on their first day of trading. They have fallen every day since then, and today plummeted nearly 10pc to a low of $28.84 at the close in New York

Well, that's poor performance, to be sure.  But it's part of a trend to over-value companies that don't actually do much, or actually create anything, that just...are.  One would think after the tech crash of 2000, our banking betters might have learned something.

But the worst in a decade?  Either our economic experts have the same short-term memory damage as those investing billions in yet another internet-based company, or they are selectively forgetting an even bigger stock bust on an equally hyped IPO, from less than two years back..  November 17th, 2010:

General Motors Co GM.UL pulled off the biggest initial public offering in U.S. history on Wednesday, raising $20.1 billion after pricing shares at the top of the proposed range in response to huge investor demand.

GM sold 478 million common shares at $33 each, raising $15.77 billion, as well as $4.35 billion in preferred shares, more than the initially planned $4 billion.

Including an option that would allow underwriters to sell more shares, expected to be exercised in coming days, GM looks set to raise $23.1 billion -- the biggest initial public offering ever.

The strong response to the stock sale reflects growing investor confidence that GM is moving beyond its unpopular, taxpayer-funded bankruptcy in June 2009 with sharply lower costs and higher profit potential.

The U.S. government's stake in GM will drop to about 33 percent from 61 percent if all available shares are sold.

So where is GM stock opening today?

Yeah, that's a 31% decline, greater than Facebook, with declines having reached as much as 43% when the stock dropped to $19.  The strong IPO, heralded at the time as a harbinger of GM's return to prominence and as a down-payment on the repayment of the company's debt to the American people have proven to be neither:

The stock price will need to rise by 47 percent to $48.58 for the U.S. government to break even on its follow-on stock sales.

Never going to happen.  And it's the US taxpayers, whose money allowed GM to stay afloat, who will never see a return on their investment.

Holders of vast quantities of GM stock bought at the IPO price will tell you not to worry, that the company is essentially a public trust, and will not be allowed to fail.

I'm not sure if President Romney, an expert in these matters, will feel the same way.

Sorry, Facebook haters and media naysayers.  But you've got a long way down still to go if you want to reach the failure levels of the General Motors IPO, underwritten by Barack Obama with the money of the American people....

Tuesday, May 29, 2012

Shocker: Obama's Atrocity Prevention Board Fails To Prevent Atrocities..

How's that "smart power" working out for the Democrats?  While Syrian civilians are mowed down by the thousands, Obama's failed attempts at liberal "diplomacy"  have proven to be less big stick, and  more limp dick

In April, after a speech at the Holocaust Museum, Obama announced the creation of an "Atrocities Prevention Board":

Samantha Power--who won a Pulitizer Prize for her book on genocide and now advises the Obama administration on the subject--will chair President Barack Obama's new Atrocities Prevention Board, which gets down to work Monday as Obama delivers a speech at the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum.

Like all boards, it seems like they haven't done much work at all.  The fact that Power - Pulitzer or not - is a left-wing nutjob probably is contributing to the, ah, delay in the board's reaction to the ongoing Syrian massacres.

So where's the UN, one of Obama's pillars of a New World Order? Trust don't want to know.  But if you insist, here's the response of "special envoy" Kofi Annan, after hearing of the massacre:

“I urge the government to take bold steps to signal that it is serious in its intention to resolve this crisis peacefully, and for everyone involved to help create the right context for a credible political process,” Mr. Annan said. 

Scary! I am sure Assad is shaking...with gales of hearty laughter.  What next, a very, very angry letter?

(By the way, if you want to know where the media is on this story, look no further than the headline the NYT attached to this story: "International Pressure on Syria Grows After Killings".  Really...)

So where's the personification of smart power, the woman the media now clamors for as a replacement for Joe Biden, the diplomatic dilettante herself, Ms. Hillary Clinton?

Probably still boozing it up in Columbia.  Hopefully.  Because she is utterly, completely, totally, useless:

In February Secretary Clinton said about the killings in Syria that “world opinion is not going to stand idly by.” Three months later, it is, and so is she. . . .

It's laughable, but only to a point.  When a big Texan carried a big stick and swung a big arrogant dick, people steered clear.  When a Harvard professor convenes a blue-ribbon paddle...death goes on the march:

An 11-year-old Syrian boy describes the slaughter of his family this weekend: 

 Speaking to the Guardian, the young survivor said government troops arrived in his district at around 3am on Saturday, several hours after shells started falling on Houla. “They came in armoured vehicles and there were some tanks,” said the boy. “They shot five bullets through the door of our house. They said they wanted Aref and Shawki, my father and my brother. They then asked about my uncle, Abu Haidar. They also knew his name.”

 Shivering with fear, the boy stood towards the back of the entrance to his family home as gunmen then shot dead every family member in front of him. “My mum yelled at them,” said the boy. “She asked: ‘What do you want from my husband and son?’ A bald man with a beard shot her with a machine gun from the neck down. Then they killed my sister, Rasha, with the same gun. She was five years old. Then they shot my brother Nader in the head and in the back. I saw his soul leave his body in front of me. 

 “They shot at me, but the bullet passed me and I wasn’t hit. I was shaking so much I thought they would notice me. I put blood on my face to make them think I’m dead.

Sorry, kid.  Trust not in those who label themselves "smart" to save you, look for the steely-eyed, the brawny, the politically incorrect, the fearless, to set you free....should there be any left.

Once Obama Sees This, Defense Cuts Are Inevitable...

... because we know the way Barack governs:  Goodies to supporters, starvation for political opponents, or folks unfortunate enough to live in red states.  Just ask the victims of the Texas wildfires, Illinois tornados, the BP oil spill...

So what do you think he's going to do to the military after reading this Gallup poll?

U.S. veterans, about 13% of the adult population and consisting mostly of older men, support Mitt Romney over Barack Obama for president by 58% to 34%, while nonveterans give Obama a four-percentage-point edge.

Obama and Romney are tied overall at 46% apiece among all registered voters in this sample. Men give Romney an eight-point edge, while women opt for Obama over Romney by seven points. It turns out that the male skew for Romney is driven almost entirely by veterans. Romney leads by one point among nonveteran men, contrasted with the 28-point edge Romney receives among male veterans.

He could try them all for treason, of course...but why not just allow his liberal instincts to take over, and allow those massive mandatory budget cuts to the military that were written into the bipartisan "sequestration" deal take effect?

Defense Secretary Leon Panetta talks about that possibility:

The thing that does concern me is the sequester which involves another $500 billion in defense cuts...

...These automatic cuts that would take place that I think would be disastrous in terms of our national defense. And I would say this. I think what both Republicans and Democrats need to do and the leaders on both sides is to recognize that if sequester takes place, it would be disastrous for our national defense and very frankly for a lot of very important domestic programs. They have a responsibility to come together, find the money necessary to de-trigger sequester.

Of course, Obama has done nothing to prevent sequestration from taking place. And now, after seeing the poll above, you can bet your last buck that he's do whatever he can to poison the well, prevent any bipartisan reconciliation, and force those military cuts through.

That'll teach the military and those who served their nation so loyally to fuck with Barack Obama...!

Monday, May 28, 2012


The New York Times blog "At War"  reprints a photo (two, actually) and tells a profoundly sad tale, one so appropriate for Memorial Day:

Taken by the photographer Todd Heisler from his 2005 award-winning series for The Rocky Mountain News, “Jim Comes Home” — which documents the return and burial of Second Lt. Jim Cathey of the Marines, who lost his life in Iraq — the photo shows his pregnant widow, Katherine, lying on an air mattress in front of his coffin. She’s staring at her laptop, listening to songs that remind her of Jim. Her expression is vacant, her grief almost palpable.

....What brings the tears to my eyes is not just the bereaved young woman, but the Marine who stands behind her. In an earlier photo in the series, we see him building her a little nest of blankets on the air mattress. Sweet Lord, I cry just typing the words, the matter-of-fact tenderness is so overwhelming. So soldierly. But in this photo — the one that lives on and on online — he merely stands next to the coffin, watching over her. It is impossible to be unmoved by the juxtaposition of the eternal stone-faced warrior and the disheveled modern military wife-turned-widow, him rigid in his dress uniform, her on the floor in her blanket nest, wearing glasses and a baggy T-shirt, him nearly concealed by shadow while the pale blue light from the computer screen illuminates her like God’s own grace.

As I alluded to earlier, there is more to the story, and another photograph as well.  A precurser to the one above:

"Oh, sweetie," her friend said. "I think this is his plane." As the three young women peered through the tinted windows, Katherine squeezed a set of dog tags stamped with the same name as her unborn son:

James J. Cathey.

"He wasn't supposed to come home this way," she said, tightening her grip on the tags, which were linked by a necklace to her husband's wedding ring.

The women looked through the back window. Then the 23-year-old placed her hand on her pregnant belly.

"Everything that made me happy is on that plane," she said.

They watched as airport workers rolled a conveyor belt to the rear of the plane, followed by six solemn Marines.

Katherine turned from the window and closed her eyes.

"I don't want it to be dark right now. I wish it was daytime," she said. "I wish it was daytime for the rest of my life. The night is just too hard."

...When a young Marine in dress uniform had boarded the plane to Reno, the passengers smiled and nodded politely. None knew he had just come from the plane's cargo hold, after watching his best friend's casket loaded onboard.

On the flight, the woman sitting next to him nodded toward his uniform and asked if he was coming or going. To the war, she meant.

He fell back on the words the military had told him to say: "I'm escorting a fallen Marine home to his family from the situation in Iraq."

The woman quietly said she was sorry, Conley said.

Then she began to cry.

When the plane landed in Nevada, the pilot asked the passengers to remain seated while Conley disembarked alone. Then the pilot told them why.

The passengers pressed their faces against the windows. Outside, a procession walked toward the plane...

From their seats in the plane, they saw a hearse and a Marine extending a white-gloved hand into a limousine, helping a pregnant woman out of the car.

On the tarmac, Katherine Cathey wrapped her arm around the major's, steadying herself. Then her eyes locked on the cargo hold and the flag-draped casket.

Inside the plane, they couldn't hear the screams....

In between the beers and hot dogs today, take a moment and say a prayer for Katherine.  And baby James, too...

Sunday, May 27, 2012

Obama Returns To Iowa.... a monster. 

Here is a segment from his 2008 speech in Des Moines:

The other side knows they have embraced yesterday’s policies and so they will also embrace yesterday’s tactics to try and change the subject. They will play on our fears and our doubts and our divisions to distract us from what matters to you and your future. Well they can take the low road if they want, but it will not lead this country to a better place. And it will not work in this election. It won’t work because you won’t let it. Not this time. Not this year.

Flash forward to President Obama, who spoke in Des Moines last night almost exactly four years later.

Now, I know Governor Romney came to Des Moines last week; warned about a "prairie fire of debt." That’s what he said. (Laughter.) But he left out some facts. His speech was more like a cow pie of distortion. (Laughter.) I don’t know whose record he twisted the most -- mine or his. (Laughter.)

Quite a mutation - the man who first appeared before Iowans claiming to be the vessel of all of America's hopes and dreams (in human form), returns transformed into the very beast he vowed to slay.

And then asks to be re-elected.

I guess this time at least he's dropped the disguise, as he offers himself up in all his snide, sarcastic, divisive, polarizing glory.

Wonder how it will sell this time?

Saturday, May 26, 2012

Barack Obama, starring in: Tales From The Choom Gang

The young socialist, seeing others had weed and he had none, took the courageous step of redistributing it to...himself.  And giving back nothing more than a second-hand contact high.

Obama was known for his interceptions. This is the act of joining a circle of people passing around a joint, taking a hit and yelling, “Intercepted!

All this, and more, from a soon-to-be published biography by David Maraniss entitled “Barack Obama: The Story”.

Another, equally instructive, Tale form the Choom Gang:

 Maraniss concludes his chapter on Obama’s high school years by looking at a note Obama had written in his high school yearbook in a section reserved for students to give a line or two giving thanks to those who helped along the way.

 Obama had written this: “Thanks Tut [his grandmother], Gramps, Choom Gang, and Ray for all the good times.”

 Maraniss notes: “Ray was the older guy who hung around the Choom Gang, selling them pot. A hippie drug dealer made his acknowledgements; his mother did not.”

Well, in all fairness, she was white...

The Rumble You Feel Under Your Feet? It's A "Preference Cascade"...

...and yes, it does sound and feel exactly like the beginnings of a landslide. You may have noticed it subconsciously first - a few negative stories in the media about the president, primaries where Obama cannot reach 60% while running uncontested,  fixed national polls that still can't get Obama to a 50% approval rating.  Little events, any one of them.  But like one falling rock dislodging another, which dislodges two more...

John Hayward at Human Events:

What I believe we are seeing here is the beginning of a “preference cascade,” a term made popular by Glenn Reynolds of Instapundit fame. It’s a fascinating concept, applied originally to the process by which oppressive governments fall.

A large population can be dominated by a small group only by persuading all dissenters that they stand alone. Most of their fellow citizens are portrayed as loyal to the regime, and everyone around the dissident is a potential informer. A huge dissident population can therefore be suppressed, by making them believe they’re all lonely voices in the wilderness… until the day they begin realizing they are not alone, and most people don’t support the regime. The process by which dissent becomes seen as commonplace, and eventually overwhelming, is the preference cascade.

That’s what began happening over the past couple of weeks: a large number of people discovered it’s okay to strongly disapprove of Barack Obama. His popularity has always been buttressed by the conviction – very aggressively pushed by his supporters – that disapproval of his personal or official conduct is immoral. You’re presumptively “racist” if you disagree with him, or at least a greedy tool of the Evil Rich, or a “Tea Party extremist.

...I should add that the most powerful cascades occur when an artificially imposed sense of isolation crumbles. That's very definitely what is happening here. Widespread popular discontent with the Obama presidency has been suppressed by making the unhappy campers feel marginalized. The failure of that strategy is akin to watching a dam burst under high pressure...

Ironically, it is the media, not the Obama Administration, that has done their very best to suppress all dissent of the president, and affix hateful labels upon his opponents.  A far cry from what the Founders envisioned; never in their darkest dreams did the imagine that the free press, whom they fought to protect, would willingly give themselves up into servitude to the government, and so actively seek to squash debate, withhold information, and distort the truth in order to protect an increasingly un-Constitutional leadership.

The metaphorical dam, built by the media, may in fact cause the resulting landslide to be even more catastrophic for the party in power than might have been the case otherwise.

Just desserts taste the best, I'm told...

Friday, May 25, 2012

Bad Primaries For Obama A Bad Omen For Autumn...

This should make the beer and barbecue go down all that much smoother this weekend.  James Taranto, yesterday:

"There are only seven sitting presidents who have ever received less than 60 percent of the vote in any primary: Taft in '12; Coolidge, '24; Hoover, '32; LBJ, '68; Ford '76; Carter, '80; and Bush '92. All of these presidents, with the exception of Coolidge, were not re-elected."

Actually, there's an eighth sitting president who received less than 60% in a primary--in more than one, in fact. That would be Obama in '12, who, as Trende points out, received just 58.4% in Arkansas, 57.9% in Kentucky, 57.1% in Oklahoma and 59.4% in West Virginia. In Kentucky, his main opponent was "Uncommitted," another name for Nobody.

Nobody is challenging Barack Obama in the Democratic primaries this year--and is doing surprisingly well...

If the trend is predictive--admittedly, a big if--Obama is much likelier than not to lose in November.


 And cue the face-palm:

Thursday, May 24, 2012

Barack Obama, Mocking The "Real World" Experience Of Others? Are You F*ck*ng Kidding Me?

This, coming from a guy who spent one year in the private sector (and hated every minute of it).  Who then went on to be a "community organizer", where he was the recipient of tens of thousands of dollars in grants he did not have to work for. Who then went on to be a Sate Senator, where he handed out tens of millions of dollars in grants (all other people's money, of course).  Who then went on to become a Untied States Senator, where he handed out tens of billions of dollars in grants.  Who finally fell up to the position of President, where the amount of other people's money he doles out reaches into the trillions.

Who somehow feels qualified - based on a lifetime of not earning a single dime he has received or passed along -  to discuss and define what "real world" experience is:

Well, those of us who’ve spent time in the real world — (laughter) — know that the problem isn’t that the American people aren’t productive enough — you’ve been working harder than ever. The challenge we face right now, and the challenge we’ve faced for over a decade, is that harder work has not led to higher incomes, and bigger profits at the top haven’t led to better jobs.

All this explains why Obama's economic policies as president amount to no more than taking other people's money (now, "the rich") and offer them out to favored groups, as...grants.  He's never earned a dime, nor created one -  he's only taken and redistributed that which was created by others.

Obama's "real world" is a lot different from mine, I can say that.

So is Michelle's, apparently:

It would probably be rude of me to think about Michelle Obama’s work, where her salary jumped from $121,910 to $316,962 per year after her husband became a U.S. senator, a job that was strangely left unfilled after she stepped down to focus on her husband’s campaign.

Such positions are quite challenging to find in the… real world.

Barack Obama: Dumber Than Dubya?

The UK's Daily Mail leads their story with three bullet points with a quod erat demonstrandum feel:

*Average SAT score of Obama's 1981 transfer group to Columbia was 1,100

*Bush got into Yale with score of 1,206 out of 1,600

*Obama refuses to release his academic record

Not that this is further proof, but...note that Obama eventually released his birth certificate after the "citizenship" controversy reached a level where it was no longer counter-productive to the Right, but instead was seeping into the mainstream consciousness. 

With Barack Obama now looking less like a philosopher-king, and a lot more like Evita Peron, one wonders why he hasn't finally "proven" his intellectual bona fides by allowing the release of his college transcripts.

Unless, of course...they were a bit subpar, and perhaps the final proof that Obama was, and still is, the ultimate affirmative action baby.

Sad times too - as I mentioned yesterday - that in order to get any investigative journalism on Democratic politicians, Americans need to look overseas...

Wednesday, May 23, 2012

Catholics March To Court; Media Ignores Them

It just might be one of the most significant First Amendment cases in...oh, ever.  Refusing to bow down to the browbeating of Barack Obama, Kathleen Sebelius, and the Democratic party, 43 different Catholic dioceses, colleges, and other organizations have filed suit against the Obama administration claiming the HHS contraceptive mandate is unconstitutional.

One would think that with the media pushing the administration's claim of a Republican "war on women", they would be all over this, if not as a possible landmark religious rights case, then as proof that those over-zealous Catholics are trying to force women to remain barefoot and pregnant in the kitchen.

And yet we literally hear...nothing:

Media Research Center founder Brent Bozell has seen a lot of media abuse in his time as the master monitor of the liberal press. Now, he’s seen the very worst: The broadcast networks “all but spiked the largest legal action in history to defend our constitutionally protected religious freedom,” the analyst says, citing CBS, ABC and NBC for skimming over news that 43 Catholic dioceses and organizations filed a lawsuit Monday against the Obama administration.

CBS managed to air 19 seconds on the subject. But that was it, between all three networks.

“This is the worst bias by omission I have seen in the quarter-century history of the Media Research Center,” he says, insisting that the networks fear the lawsuit could compromise President Obama’s popularity with voters.

“This is not a mistake, nor is it an editorial oversight by the broadcast networks. This is a deliberate and insidious withholding of national news to protect the ‘chosen one’ who ABC, CBS and NBC have worked so hard to elect.”

Lead stories and in-depth reports are in order, he suggests, following revelations that the Catholic Church unleashed “legal Armageddon” on the White House, promising not to comply with health care reforms that would require religiously affiliated institutions to offer birth control to employees.

“Instead, these networks are sending a clear message to all Americans that the networks will go to any lengths — even censoring from the public an event of this historic magnitude — to prevent the release of any information that will hurt Obama’s chances of re-election,” Mr. Bozell concludes.

Sorry times in which we live.  Like in Soviet Union, we must look to foreign sources of news to get the truth about what is happening around us.

Our media dropped the mask and jumped the shark some time ago...

Tuesday, May 22, 2012

Obama Goes Negative On...Joplin High School Grads?

When negative is your default position, it is very hard to up-shift, even when your job is to uplift, especially when you are speaking at a high-school graduation in the tornado-ravaged city of Joplin, Missouri.

But our Barack Obama cannot miss any opportunity to rage against the machine.  Like a Third World dictator (perhaps his true calling), there is no public gathering of three or more than is not seen as an opportunity to propagandize on behalf of the regime, and to exhort the naive to join the revolution:

President Barack Obama’s high school commencement speech in the tornado-stricken town of Joplin, Mo., pushed a sharply ideological message and included partisan jabs and a call for military-style community action during crises.

“You are from America. No matter how tough times get, you will be tougher,” he told the students and parents May 22. “The road has been hard. The day has been long. But we have tomorrow, so we march. We march together,” he said on the first anniversary of the deadly tornado strike.

“As you begin the next stage in your journey, you will encounter greed and selfishness; ignorance and cruelty. … You will meet people who try to build themselves up by tearing others down; who believe looking after others is only for suckers,” he said.

Does this guy hate his countrymen, or what?  Seems as if the vibe is getting through to the kids, who seemed to give him a less-than-enthusiastic welcome:

The jab [mocking Congress] was one of the few that got any response from the audience, which was muted in comparison to Obama’s usual audience of college students in Democratic districts. Before the speech, Obama shook hands with a group of students who swarmed to him in the gym where they waited for the ceremony to begin.

But a press pool report noted that “about half the seniors, all wearing burgundy caps and gowns, remained back.

Is there any better indicator that Barack Hussein Obama has "lost his cool"?

Or maybe the kids were just afraid for the safety of their as-yet-untaxed graduation gifts, tucked neatly in an inside pocket, underneath their graduation gowns...?

The Incredible Shrinking Sample Size of Republican Voters In MSM Polling

If people don't like the president or his policies,  just...don't poll them.

The Washington Post gives us this headline, which no doubt they believe is a negative for Romney:

Poll: Obama, Romney in dead heat on economy 

 The parity on economic issues foreshadows what probably will continue to be a tough and negative campaign. Overall, voters would be split 49 percent for Obama and 46 percent for Romney if the November election were held now. On handling the economy, they are tied at 47 percent... ...

One key indicator has hardly budged this year: Asked where they stand financially compared with when Obama took office in January 2009, 30 percent say they are worse off, and only 16 percent say they are better off.

With a 3.5+/- margin of error, it seems as if the boys are deadlocked.  But only if you don't look at the sampling used by the WaPo pollsters to come up with these less-than-stellar results for the incumbent.  Hot Air:

Today’s D/R/I is 32/22/38, which means this model would only be predictive for a turnout model where only 22% of voters are Republican. Just to remind readers, the 2008 turnout split from exit polls showed a 39/32/29 split, and that was considered a nadir for Republican turnout. In the 2010 midterms, the split was 35/35/30.

Take a close look at the Republican representation in WaPo/ABC polls this year. Starting in January, that has been 25%, 23%, 27%, 23%, and now 22%.

Even with this poor sampling, though, Obama can’t gain any momentum. His job approval dropped in this series from 50/45 to 47/49. His rating on the economy sank to 42/55, not as bad as March’s 38/59 but slipping from last month’s 44/54. Among all adults (as in the preceding figures), Obama only leads Romney by 4, 49/45 — and a Democrat who can’t get to 50% among general-population adults is in serious trouble. The 49/46 comes from registered voters, with its substantial handicap among Republicans.

So while in reality the Republican turnout figure on election day has increased over 20% from 2008 to 2010, the WaPo pollsters have decreased their numbers by 37% in their sample.  And they still get a president who can't break 50% in their polls, and whom respondents claim has not helped improved their lives by a freakin' smidgen of the last 3+ years...

Maybe the media should just drop the charade, and  simply interview only Democrats and claimed "independents" for their polling purposes.  Maybe then you'll see Barack Obama surpass a 50% approval rating, and take some sort of a real lead on Mitt Romney.


(More from The Weekly Standard and NRO's Campaign Spot on the oddities of this poll...)

Monday, May 21, 2012

What does Warren Buffet want with 63 newspapers, anyway?

Warren Buffett made good Thursday on his promise to buy more newspapers, agreeing to buy 63 daily and weekly newspapers in the Southeast for $142 million from financially troubled Media General Inc. of Richmond, Va.

And Buffett said Thursday he may buy more newspapers. “Any time we can add properties we like, to management we like, at a price we like, we're ready to go.”

 What an odd purchase. It's obvious to even the most hardcore Luddite that newspapers are a thing of the past, about to be buried by the avalanche of ever-more-convenient portable digital devices. It's like buying up 63 buggy factories in the early 1900's. Sure, you might want one or two to have a monopoly on the buggy market - there's always the Amish. and those romantic rides through Central Park  - but you'd likely need no more than that.

Warren Buffett is no dummy; he's supposed to be the savviest investor in the universe.  Does he really believe the daily is going to make a huge comeback?  Or is he planning on parlaying this purchase into more...tangible benefits?

The newspapers, in Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, Alabama and Florida, would be combined with the Omaha World-Herald Co. into a new Berkshire Hathaway Inc. division called BH Media Group. They would be managed by World Media Enterprises, a new sister company of The World-Herald...

The sale would close June 25, subject to Federal Trade Commission and anti-trust reviews.

Interesting list of locations.  Swings states all, save South Carolina.

With a closing date of 6/25, that leaves plenty of time for Warren to install compliant editorial boards prior to the  2012 election. Shoot, he can have them in place by the time the Democratic convention opens in NC in early September.

Is  this purchase of 63 newspapers at a realitively piddling sum really an investment in...Barack Obama?

Would be Buffett's second in a week, actually.  On the very same day he made his massive press purchase:

The investment by Warren Buffett's investment company in General Motors gave the automaker's stock at least a short-term bump.

Omaha, Neb.-based Berkshire Hathaway's purchase of 10 million shares for $256.6 million, revealed in a U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission filing, energized investors.

GM shares rose 2.29% to close at $21.91 on Wednesday, the first day of trading after the investment was made public. At one point, shares were up more than 4%.

"Just having the Berkshire name attached to it gives it a nice little bounce," Morningstar analyst David Whiston said.

Any bounce helps for a government-owned company that had its IPO at $33 a share, but needed $50 per for the taxpayers to break even, and is currently sitting below half of that figure.

And we know that Obama has helped Buffett before - the president's bizarre refusal to build the Keystone Pipeline turns out to have turned quite the profit for the "Wizard of Omaha".

Quid pro quo, Mr. Buffett?

Or just a savvy investment for a man who feels he can make more money as a crony of  the corrupt and economically illiterate Barack Obama, than he can working with a hard-headed capitalist like Mitt Romney?

Should be interesting to see the editorial pages of those former Media General properties come the heat of election season...

Sunday, May 20, 2012

RFK Jr: Another Kennedy, Another Female Corpse, Another Excuse

RFK Jr, speaking at the funeral yesterday for his estranged wife, exonerated himself for her suicide:

Robert F. Kennedy Jr. shamelessly told a crowd of mourners at tragic wife Mary Richardson Kennedy’s funeral yesterday that her suicide was not his fault.

“I know I did everything I could to help her,” Kennedy said in his eulogy at St. Patrick Church in Bedford, where attendees included Chevy Chase, Larry David, Glenn Close and Susan Sarandon.

Mary, 52, hanged herself Wednesday in the barn of her Westchester mansion. Kennedy spent most of his eulogy lavishing praise on his wife — although he noted that she harbored a grudge against him.

“She was a SoHo girl . . . She blamed me for taking her away from her profession [to raise a family],” he said, referring to her former career as an architectural designer in Manhattan.

Sound familiar?  Reminds me of a different Kennedy who deflected blame for a damsel's death:

In his 532-page book, True Compass, the late Ted Kennedy admitted to "inexcusable" behaviour after the Chappaquiddick car crash, saying that he was dazed, scared and panicked following the 1969 accident in which he drove off a bridge and left his passenger to drown.

He said he made "terrible decisions" in leaving the scene with Mary Jo Kopechne still in the car although he continued to be vague – as he was at the time – over why it took him 10 hours to report the accident on an island off Massachusetts.

Which leads us to WIlliam Kennedy Smith, who - after a night of pounding drinks with Uncle Teddy - decided to have some good old-fashioned Kennedy fun, even if the participants were unwilling:

The incident began on the evening of Good Friday, March 29, 1991, when Smith, then 30 years old, was in a bar in Palm Beach, Florida, with his uncle, Senator Ted Kennedy, and his cousin Patrick Kennedy.

Smith met a 29-year-old woman, Patricia Bowman and another young woman at the bar. The four then went to a nearby house owned by the Kennedy family. Smith and 29-year-old Bowman walked along the beach. 

Bowman alleged that Smith raped her; Smith testified that the sex was consensual. Although three women were willing to testify that Smith had sexually assaulted them in incidents in the 1980s not reported to the police, their testimony was excluded. Smith was acquitted of all charges.

Teddy gets away with murder, William with rape...and RFK Jr.?  Accused of nothing, he gets defensive - at his wife's funeral, no less.  Not a criminal, just a cad, and likely a poor excuse for a husband.

Lesson for the ladies:  Frolic with a Kennedy, and you wind up dishonored and/or dead.  And blamed for it at your funeral...

Saturday, May 19, 2012

Why Does Elizabeth Warren - 1/32 Cherokee - Continue To Enslave Native Americans?

Well, I'll get to that in a moment.

Wanted to share this piece from Jonah Goldberg's free subscription-only email, the G-Files.  Usually inane ramblings -  more of a conservative stream-of-consciousness than anything else - he hits the nail on the headdress here when it comes to American victims of socialized medicine:

Life expectancy for the Oglala Sioux is according to some estimates as little as 48 years and the infant-mortality rate is 300 percent the U.S. average. That's horrific (and one reason we should have some humility before we condemn tribal leaders for advocating prohibition). But it's also worth noting that Oglala Sioux have long benefited from the one thing liberals insisted above all else would raise the national life expectancy rate in the U.S.: socialized medicine, in the form of the Federal Indian Health Service. And yet things are not all going well in South Dakota. How could that be?

Well, Native Americans have other contributing issues as well - poverty, alcoholism, and the hopelessness of  bleak life prospects are pretty rampant through their society, for openers.  But it is interesting that socialized medicine has done nothing to help rescue them from having one of the lowest life expectancies of any cultural subgroup within the United States.

Neither, incidentally, has forced segregation.  We give them land, limited self-government, and food stamps as long as they self-identify as an oppressed indigenous group.  And there they stay, going nowhere, accomplishing little, and not living up to their potentials.

 Maybe the best thing to do is to encourage them to get off their reservations and intermingle & intermix with the rest of American society, where they can maintain their heritage and still partake in the everyday comings and goings of American life, culture, and morality. I can't imagine anything can be worse than being a frozen-in-time monument to the White man's guilt, yet cursed to live a short, painful life in order to somehow assuage it.  An eternity spent paying penance for the sins of another...

So here's where Elizabeth Warren comes in.  She pushes for ObamaCare, an offshoot of the very program that is condemning fellow tribes to an early grave.  She is in favor of minority set-asides - shoot, she even uses them herself - yet by "setting aside" the Indians on reservations, she is condemning them to a short and painful life.

So why does Elizabeth Warren support polices that harm the remaining descendants of the original Native Americans?  Is she some sort of"self-hating Indian", perhaps?

Or is she just an immoral fraud, using the language of liberalism and political correctness to advance her own career and increase her own power, while knowingly destroying the very people she claims as forefathers?

You claim Cherokee legitimacy, Ms. Warren?  Fine.  Then let your people go to enjoy the fruits of the American system.  Get them off of their hopeless reservations, away from government doctors, and out of a never-ending cycle of self-pitying victim status.

Let your people go, Ms. Warren.  Or be forced to admit what the liberal agenda is really about...

Friday, May 18, 2012

Hmmm....Menendez Seat Now Only "Leans" Democratic?

And that's from the New York Times, no less. Via MMM, we see that Nate Silver now classifies Bob Menendez's (D-La Raza) Senate seat as one of two races nationally that have shifted in favor of Republicans:

In New Jersey, Robert Menendez, a Democrat, has middling approval ratings and is below 50 percent in the polls against the most likely Republican nominee, State Senator Joseph Kyrillos. Mr. Kyrillos would need to catch some breaks to win the race — his fund-raising has lagged Mr. Menendez’s so far, and he might need Mr. Romney to be more competitive in New Jersey than Republican presidential candidates have been in recent years. Still, there is a plausible path to an upset, and so we now classify the race as Likely Democrat rather than Safe Democrat.

Some commentary from the polling:

Democratic incumbent U.S. Sen. Robert Menendez leads State Sen. Joseph Kyrillos, the Republican challenger, 45 - 35 percent...
Independents back Menendez 39 - 33 percent...
Menendez gets a 44 - 30 percent job approval rating... 
New Jersey voters have a 37 - 26 percent favorable opinion of Menendez, while 36 percent don't know enough about him to form an opinion. For Kyrillos, 75 percent don't know enough to form an opinion.

Points to ponder:

-A 44% job approval is well "below 50%"...and this in a state with a 600K+ Democratic registration advantage, no less

-only  37% of New Jersey residents have a "favorable opinion" of Menendez?  Sweet Zombie Jesus, even Newt Gingrich laughs at those numbers!

-after two terms, 36% of those polled don't know enough about Menendez to form an opinion?  Talk about a lack of marketplace penetration, one that can be easily exploited by a canny opponent...

-75%o of the locals have no idea who Joe Kyrillos is.  Which means he can, given enough time and money, shape that opinion, assuming he moves faster than Menendez

-Chris Christie is a powerhouse political figure in New Jersey.  He will stump for Kyrillos, and help raise money for him ($600K so far).  Another guy who knows a bit about money is helping out Kyrillos. Goes by the name of Mitt Romney....

And we haven't even gotten into the stench of cronyism and corruption that surrounds Menendez like dirt follows Pig-pen...(much more here)

"A plausible path to an upset"?

Nate, I reckon you understate the case...this is gonna be one to watch...

IOC Officials: What's A "Munich Massacre"?

Oh, they remember it, all right - but because it shows both their utter incompetence in face of terror, and the true face of the Palestinian movement - they don't want you to.

From the New York Post:

This year marks the 40th anniversary of the massacre at the 1972 Olympic Games of 11 Israel athletes and coaches by Palestinian terrorists. As a reminder of the atrocity, the Israeli Olympic Committee asked that there be a moment of silence to honor the victims at the commencement of the Games.

The International Olympic Committee has refused to agree. The best IOC President Jacques Rogge could do was to promise to attend the Israeli delegation’s traditional tribute to the victims.

Rogge also told the Israelis to “rest assured that, within the Olympic family, the memory of the victims of the terrible massacre in Munich in 1972 will never fade away.”

Yeah. "Within the family".  Lots of ugly things can be hidden there.  But the moral cowardice of the IOC cannot.  They'd rather side with the Muslim world and the anti-Semites of Europe (both of whom would no doubt call for a competing show of solidarity for the "victims" of the Israeli "occupation")  than remind the world of the fact that Jew-hatred has no boundaries, and that some of the greatest current proponents of this poisonous philosophy are competing in the 2012 Olympics.

The Israelis are not fooled by the IOC's "solidarity in a closet":

As Israeli Deputy Foreign Minister Danny Ayalon said: “This rejection told us as Israelis that this tragedy is yours alone and not a tragedy within the family of nations.

None will mourn.  A few, however, will can bet on it.

For what it is worth...never forget:

Thursday, May 17, 2012

FOX Poll Showing Romney Behind An Outlier?

Seems as if the the dam was about to burst and panic was about to ensue when the New York Times published a poll showing Romney with a two-point lead over the incumbent president.  The fact that it was skewed Democratic, and buried at the bottom of page A17, gave all the more credence to the belief that even in liberal-land, the signs of impending doom could not be ignored (only desperately hidden).

The lo and behold comes a FOX poll yesterday, showing Obama leading Mitt Romney by seven points nationally, 46% to 39%.

So which poll is the outlier?  Ironically, it seems as if FOX is off the mark this time, as a few other polls have been released today mimicking the NYT  results:

Via Political Wire:

A new Washington Times/JZ Analytics poll find Mitt Romney edging President Obama nationally, 44% to 43%. Key finding: "Obama is doing fine in most categories except young voters -- those under 30 -- with whom he only has a 5 percentage-point advantage over Mr. Romney."

 Meanwhile, a YouGov/Economist poll finds Romney ahead 46% to 42%.

The Washington Times poll was conducted by John Zogby, who - like the NYT -  is known to lean a bit left, to say the least.  An interesting takeaway:

Voters also overwhelmingly think the news media is on Mr. Obama’s side, with 56 percent of them saying the media wants to see him re-elected. Strong majorities of both independents and Republicans suspect the press is rooting for Mr. Obama, and even a plurality of Democrats think reporters and editors want to see the president gain another term.

Beware, Barack:  The American people are paying attention, after all...

The YouGov poll, showing Romney with an even bigger lead, had a survey sample of 53% women and, with "leaners" included, skewed 45%-37% Democratic.  And even so, Obama only polled 42% here....

So - for the moment - ignore the FOX poll, and sit back and laugh as the Obama administration attempts to de-legitimize the Times - virtually a house organ - while pumping up the methodology of their greatest foes...

UPDATE:  The FOX poll seems to have had a heavy Democratic bias, but it points to a specific danger - and an obvious opportunity:

A newly released Fox News poll includes 42 percent Democrats and only 34 percent Republicans — an 8-point Democratic edgeand shows President Obama leading Mitt Romney by 7 points (46 to 39 percent)... 

 In 2008, back when Rasmussen’s polling on party affiliation showed Democrats outnumbering Republicans by 7 percentage points (40 to 33 percent), Democratic turnout in the election exceeded GOP turnout by 7 points (39 to 32 percent) — and Obama won by 7 points (53 to 46 percent)....Now, after nearly three and a half years of Obama, Rasmussen shows party affiliation favoring Republicans by 2 points (35 to 33 percent) — a 10-point swing since the week after Inauguration Day.

 But surely the Fox News poll is right: If the Democratic party has not lost any support since 2008 (and perhaps has even gained some), Obama will win.

But it has lost support.  So...

Wednesday, May 16, 2012

The Most Important Thing To Take Out Of Deb Fischer's Nebraska Win....

Jen Rubin has a list of ten interesting aspects of Deb Fischer's upset win in the Nebraska Republican primary for Senate yesterday.  Since we are pressed for time at this busy blog, I'm only going to point out one.  The one that Jen put last, which I believe should have been first:

Money is overrated. Fischer was outspent $440,000 to Bruning’s $3.6 million.

That's a 9-1 ratio, more or less. Now I'm not sure if that counts PAC money, which may have added $200K to the kitty.  Nevertheless, I will quote from 300:

When muscle failed, they turn to their magic. When hundred nations descend upon us, the armies of all Asia, funelled to this narrow corridor, their numbers count for nothing.

Obama is selling what soul he has to any interest group that can fund his campaign.  His hundreds of millions of dollars, funneled through the narrow corridors of media, will count for nothing against a rotting economy, a de-fanged military, a morally corrupted society, and a population who does not believe a word this president says.

Not saying we shouldn't be contributing what we can to those whom will need our help.  But let the media beat off to Obama's fundraising prowess.  With the American people ready to man the Hot Gates of freedom, Obama has no hope of making it through to a second term...

Media Narrative Coming Off Desperate...

...when you see headlines like this from the AP:

Shift on marriage energizes immigration activists

President Barack Obama's shift to support gay marriage is energizing young Hispanic voters who have been working side-by-side with gay activists in their push for immigration reform. The alliance has been growing nationwide and helping dispel what many say is an outdated notion that Hispanics are less tolerant of gays than the general public...

Forget about the Tea Party - the force to be reckoned with in American politics is the radical gay/radical Hispanic (the article uses the reprehensible La Raza as their key source) alliance !

Sheesh - what next?

Williamsburg, Brooklyn - Three hipsters, drinking Pabst Blue Ribbon at a local dive bar, agreed that Obama's new stance on gay marriage might be enough to rouse them to register to vote for the 2012 elections. Pundits, including the hot angry hippie chick that is often seen at the local Two Boots pizzeria, agree that this movement may signal a turning point for the Obama campaign...


Tuesday, May 15, 2012

Obama hacks White House biographies, inserts himself into the past....

No, that title is not a joke.  But it is as sick as it sounds.

Believing his own side's endless rants about the stupidity of the average American, Obama has gone back and altered the official biographies of multiple presidents to include himself in their actions, figuring no one would know any better:

The Heritage Foundation’s Rory Cooper tweeted that Obama had casually dropped his own name into Ronald Reagan’s official biography on, claiming credit for taking up the mantle of Reagan’s tax reform advocacy with his “Buffett Rule” gimmick. My first thought was, he must be joking. But he wasn’t—it turns out Obama has added bullet points bragging about his own accomplishments to the biographical sketches of every single U.S. president since Calvin Coolidge (except, for some reason, Gerald Ford)

Some examples below. As embarrassing as a Rocky & Bullwinkle cartoon, or a North Korean news dispatch:

On Feb. 22, 1924 Calvin Coolidge became the first president to make a public radio address to the American people. President Coolidge later helped create the Federal Radio Commission, which has now evolved to become the Federal Communications Commission (FCC). President Obama became the first president to hold virtual gatherings and town halls using Twitter, Facebook, Google+, LinkedIn, etc.

In a 1946 letter to the National Urban League, President Truman wrote that the government has “an obligation to see that the civil rights of every citizen are fully and equally protected.” He ended racial segregation in civil service and the armed forces in 1948. Today the Obama administration continues to strive toward upholding the civil rights of its citizens, repealing Don’t Ask Don’t Tell, allowing people of all sexual orientations to serve openly in our armed forces.

On August 14, 1935, President Roosevelt signed the Social Security Act. Today the Obama administration continues to protect seniors and ensure Social Security will be there for future generations. In a June 28, 1985 speech Reagan called for a fairer tax code, one where a multi-millionaire did not have a lower tax rate than his secretary. Today, President Obama is calling for the same with the Buffett Rule.

The last one is somewhere between a sacrilege and a desecration.  Claiming Reagan would support a wealth confiscation scam, while inserting the bullshit story about Buffet's secretary, is blasphemous, especially coming as it is from the office of the president.

Is he trying to disguise himself as a mainstream president here, claiming his radical agenda is a mere minor extension of the policies of previous presidents?  Or is he so desperate to create a legacy for himself that he needs to alter history in an attempt to show that anything a great president has done, he can do better?

Or are there darker machinations at work here?  Perhaps he has decided that it is time we understood that  there was, is, and always will be....Barack Hussein Obama.

And we'd better get used to it...

Barack Obama: Gayer by the Day!

Oh, the president is having a grand old time, beating his chest about how brave he is to declare his support for gay marriage, while milking every sexual confused celebrity for a donation to his re-election campaign.

He's making cash hand-over-fist, to be sure, but if his economic history is any indicator of future events, he'll probably just waste it anyway.  Bottom line is, the American people are tolerant of homosexuality, but they don't want the lifestyle rubbed into their faces.  So headlines like these are not helping matters:

Gay old time for Obama in Big Apple - Joined by $tars days after same-sex nuptials stance

Only days after his controversial declaration of support for same-sex marriage, President Obama was livin’ la vida loca in Chelsea yesterday at a star-studded fund-raiser hosted by singer Ricky Martin and attended by other prominent gay and lesbian donors.

Obama told the crowd, “I think the American people are on our side on this.” The president hauled in more than $3 million yesterday — starting with $1 million at the Chelsea event.

And then there's this one:

Obama, touting gay marriage stance, calls for repeal of Defense of Marriage Act

President Obama openly spoke of repealing the Defense of Marriage Act at a fundraiser Monday, as he defended his personal view that gay couples should have the right to marry. While his administration has put out statements on the idea of repealing the 1996 federal law defining marriage as between a man and a woman, it's unusual for Obama to call for its repeal.

Which makes this headline no surprise:

Obama’s Switch on Same-Sex Marriage Stirs Skepticism

Most Americans suspect that President Obama was motivated by politics, not policy, when he declared his support for same-sex marriage, according to a new poll released on Monday, suggesting that the unplanned way it was announced shaped public attitudes.

Sixty-seven percent of those surveyed by The New York Times and CBS News since the announcement said they thought that Mr. Obama had made it “mostly for political reasons,” while 24 percent said it was “mostly because he thinks it is right.” Independents were more likely to attribute it to politics, with nearly half of Democrats agreeing.

The results reinforce the concerns of White House aides and Democratic strategists who worried that the sequence of events leading up to the announcement last week made it look calculated rather than principled...

Now why in the world would anyone think that?

Oh yeah...right:

But as is always the case, Obama has a ready-made excuse should his personal gay pride march fail him....blame the racist and  homophobic American people!

You this guy: