Our favorite Jersey Shore honey has some interesting commentary on Barack Obama's recent tax increases...especially the ones which hit home:
In a clip from: "Jersey Shore Season 2 Sneak Peek", Snooki's politics are revealed:
In the clip, Nicole “Snooki” Polizzi stands in the middle of her pink bedroom with her eyes closed and her hands pressed to her hairline as her boyfriend mists her face with a third coating of spray-on tan. All of this seems like normal behavior for the Jersey Shore “guidette,” but the political commentary that ensues is not.
In the interview that follows this scene, Snooki takes aim at the Obama White House.
“I don’t go tanning-tanning anymore because Obama put a 10 percent tax on tanning, and I feel like he did that intentionally for us,” Snooki says. “McCain would never put a 10 percent tax on tanning because he’s pale and he would probably want to be tan.”
Read the rest here, as McCain jumps into the fray and declares Obama's tax and spend policy as "quite The Situation".
Tax hikes such as these, while painless to the political class and its hanger-ons, are felt by the common beach slu - I mean, common man - every day, whether that new tax is on a bottle of soda, a gallon of gasoline, or on a "pale" girl's tan.
This racist tan-tax goes a bit further, as it prevents medical consumers who suffer with eczema from using a low-cost treatment system, instead forcing them to use expensive in-patient procedures that accomplish no more than a tanning booth would. But even Snookie is smart enough to know that this is what happens when you pass a bill in order to find out what's in it...
Thursday, June 10, 2010
Gulf Oil Spill Conspiracy: Blindfold the Media!
As the BP Deepwater Horizon oil spill conspiracy starts to unravel (directed by Obama? Or ordered by Rahm Emanuel, who certainly had the connections?), the administration scrambles in an attempt to make the center hold. Their latest attempt at hiding the damage done by their ill-conceived plot to force a confrontation over energy policy: Blocking media access to the disaster site.
Something out of Communist China? Welcome to hope and change...the New York Times reports:
A pilot wanted to take a photographer from The Times-Picayune of New Orleans to snap photographs of the oil slicks blackening the water. The response from a BP contractor who answered the phone late last month at the command center was swift and absolute: Permission denied.
“We were questioned extensively. Who was on the aircraft? Who did they work for?” recalled Rhonda Panepinto, who owns Southern Seaplane with her husband, Lyle. “The minute we mentioned media, the answer was: ‘Not allowed.’ ”
Journalists struggling to document the impact of the oil rig explosion have repeatedly found themselves turned away from public areas affected by the spill, and not only by BP and its contractors, but by local law enforcement, the Coast Guard and government officials.
And it's not just the average schmuck who's turned away from the muck..even Democratic Senators are getting cut-blocked:
Last week, Senator Bill Nelson, Democrat of Florida, tried to bring a small group of journalists with him on a trip he was taking through the gulf on a Coast Guard vessel. Mr. Nelson’s office said the Coast Guard agreed to accommodate the reporters and camera operators. But at about 10 p.m. on the evening before the trip, someone from the Department of Homeland Security’s legislative affairs office called the senator’s office to tell them that no journalists would be allowed.
“They said it was the Department of Homeland Security’s response-wide policy not to allow elected officials and media on the same ‘federal asset,’ ” said Bryan Gulley, a spokesman for the senator. “No further elaboration” was given, Mr. Gulley added.
What the f*ck is the Department of Homeland Security doing denying access to the site of an oil spill? This is not a battlefield with enemies roaming the perimeter, this is not the aftermath of a suicide bomb, with body parts still to be scraped up - these are beaches with oil on them! Who's security is in danger by snapping pictures of that?
A-ha. Only a few people, actually. Political folks, mostly, who would be harmed if continued negative publicity came out via pictures of oil-stained sands. The same folks who really don't seem to want people asking any questions, who were trying to muzzle scientists early on, and now are trying to muzzle the press.
Barack Obama. Rahm Emanuel. And the folks at BP, whose hands are just as dirty with Democratic money as they are with spewing oil.
Almost makes you think they have something to hide...a conspiracy, one might say....
Something out of Communist China? Welcome to hope and change...the New York Times reports:
A pilot wanted to take a photographer from The Times-Picayune of New Orleans to snap photographs of the oil slicks blackening the water. The response from a BP contractor who answered the phone late last month at the command center was swift and absolute: Permission denied.
“We were questioned extensively. Who was on the aircraft? Who did they work for?” recalled Rhonda Panepinto, who owns Southern Seaplane with her husband, Lyle. “The minute we mentioned media, the answer was: ‘Not allowed.’ ”
Journalists struggling to document the impact of the oil rig explosion have repeatedly found themselves turned away from public areas affected by the spill, and not only by BP and its contractors, but by local law enforcement, the Coast Guard and government officials.
And it's not just the average schmuck who's turned away from the muck..even Democratic Senators are getting cut-blocked:
Last week, Senator Bill Nelson, Democrat of Florida, tried to bring a small group of journalists with him on a trip he was taking through the gulf on a Coast Guard vessel. Mr. Nelson’s office said the Coast Guard agreed to accommodate the reporters and camera operators. But at about 10 p.m. on the evening before the trip, someone from the Department of Homeland Security’s legislative affairs office called the senator’s office to tell them that no journalists would be allowed.
“They said it was the Department of Homeland Security’s response-wide policy not to allow elected officials and media on the same ‘federal asset,’ ” said Bryan Gulley, a spokesman for the senator. “No further elaboration” was given, Mr. Gulley added.
What the f*ck is the Department of Homeland Security doing denying access to the site of an oil spill? This is not a battlefield with enemies roaming the perimeter, this is not the aftermath of a suicide bomb, with body parts still to be scraped up - these are beaches with oil on them! Who's security is in danger by snapping pictures of that?
A-ha. Only a few people, actually. Political folks, mostly, who would be harmed if continued negative publicity came out via pictures of oil-stained sands. The same folks who really don't seem to want people asking any questions, who were trying to muzzle scientists early on, and now are trying to muzzle the press.
Barack Obama. Rahm Emanuel. And the folks at BP, whose hands are just as dirty with Democratic money as they are with spewing oil.
Almost makes you think they have something to hide...a conspiracy, one might say....
Elton John Gets The Bum's Rush
A mini "scandal" of sorts, when it leaked out that Elton John - amazing talented, flamboyantly gay - played at the wedding of Rush Limbaugh. Or should I say, "played at the wedding of the fear-mongering, racist, homophobic, xenophobic, hate-spewing Rush Limbaugh"?
But it turns out that John's views on gay marriage are pretty much in line with America's favorite talk show host:
"What is wrong with Proposition 8 is that they went for marriage. Marriage is going to put a lot of people off, the word marriage… I don’t want to be married. I’m very happy with a civil partnership. If gay people want to get married, or get together, they should have a civil partnership… You get the same equal rights that we do when we have a civil partnership. Heterosexual people get married. We can have civil partnerships.” – Elton John
Personally, I agree with Elton 100%. Ironically, most of the gay people that I know are also opposed to gay marriage (in which they will constantly point out that one of the whole points of being gay is the lack of commitment; they fear that if gay marriage becomes institutionalized, the fun will be over, and they will wind up like every other straight guy whose girlfriend is badgering them for a ring) as well. I guess they're not activists, just....regular people. So what do they know?
But back to Elton. I think it's important to point out that Elton John has never hesitated to cross barriers in order to make the so-called "haters" understand. He played with Axel Rose, when the Guns front man was assailed for his anti-gay remarks. He did a duet with angry white rapper Eminem, when he too was under attack for his gay-hostile lyrics. This takes courage in a world full of Elvis Costellos , Los Lobos, and Pixies, performers/bands that simply refuse to play in nations/states that don't adhere to the entertainment industry's code of political correctness.
Elton has tried to bring those who don't agree with him not necessarily over to his side, but to a place of mutual understanding, respect, and kindness towards each other. And that's not easy to do. Just ask Barack Obama, who talks about bi-partisanship but fills every speech, statement, and press conference with scathing oratory and invective against his detractors, and who refuses to meet/talk with those who don't share his worldview (see Jan Brewer, the president of BP, etc.). He could learn a thing or two from Sir Elton.
Not surprisingly, for his bravery, Elton is paying the price:
"I'm flabbergasted," Aaron Hicklin, Editor-in-Chief of Out, told PopEater. "It betrays either ignorance or self-interest or both, and jeopardizes his admirable record on gay rights."
Michael Musto of the Village Voice called the Rocket Man a "whore" for his actions on Monday’s "Countdown With Keith Olbermann." And blogs like Queerty.com as well as the comment sections at websites for The Advocate and Out Magazine have been lighting up with tsks about the singer's apparent hypocrisy, according to PopEater.
Still, it seems unlikely that the Rocket Man will admit fault in his apparent support of the conservative couple....
The media wants Elton to flagellate himself for trying to reach across the aisle to promote understanding. Apparently, to liberals, that is an unacceptable and unforgivable breach of protocol. Without the hate, they've got nothing.
I urge Elton to continue his outreach; he's done more to soften people's views of the gay community than any shrieking, sign-carrying supporter of Proposition 8. Stay strong; and if I may paraphrase a certain song, the hatred will burn out before your legend ever will...
But it turns out that John's views on gay marriage are pretty much in line with America's favorite talk show host:
"What is wrong with Proposition 8 is that they went for marriage. Marriage is going to put a lot of people off, the word marriage… I don’t want to be married. I’m very happy with a civil partnership. If gay people want to get married, or get together, they should have a civil partnership… You get the same equal rights that we do when we have a civil partnership. Heterosexual people get married. We can have civil partnerships.” – Elton John
Personally, I agree with Elton 100%. Ironically, most of the gay people that I know are also opposed to gay marriage (in which they will constantly point out that one of the whole points of being gay is the lack of commitment; they fear that if gay marriage becomes institutionalized, the fun will be over, and they will wind up like every other straight guy whose girlfriend is badgering them for a ring) as well. I guess they're not activists, just....regular people. So what do they know?
But back to Elton. I think it's important to point out that Elton John has never hesitated to cross barriers in order to make the so-called "haters" understand. He played with Axel Rose, when the Guns front man was assailed for his anti-gay remarks. He did a duet with angry white rapper Eminem, when he too was under attack for his gay-hostile lyrics. This takes courage in a world full of Elvis Costellos , Los Lobos, and Pixies, performers/bands that simply refuse to play in nations/states that don't adhere to the entertainment industry's code of political correctness.
Elton has tried to bring those who don't agree with him not necessarily over to his side, but to a place of mutual understanding, respect, and kindness towards each other. And that's not easy to do. Just ask Barack Obama, who talks about bi-partisanship but fills every speech, statement, and press conference with scathing oratory and invective against his detractors, and who refuses to meet/talk with those who don't share his worldview (see Jan Brewer, the president of BP, etc.). He could learn a thing or two from Sir Elton.
Not surprisingly, for his bravery, Elton is paying the price:
"I'm flabbergasted," Aaron Hicklin, Editor-in-Chief of Out, told PopEater. "It betrays either ignorance or self-interest or both, and jeopardizes his admirable record on gay rights."
Michael Musto of the Village Voice called the Rocket Man a "whore" for his actions on Monday’s "Countdown With Keith Olbermann." And blogs like Queerty.com as well as the comment sections at websites for The Advocate and Out Magazine have been lighting up with tsks about the singer's apparent hypocrisy, according to PopEater.
Still, it seems unlikely that the Rocket Man will admit fault in his apparent support of the conservative couple....
The media wants Elton to flagellate himself for trying to reach across the aisle to promote understanding. Apparently, to liberals, that is an unacceptable and unforgivable breach of protocol. Without the hate, they've got nothing.
I urge Elton to continue his outreach; he's done more to soften people's views of the gay community than any shrieking, sign-carrying supporter of Proposition 8. Stay strong; and if I may paraphrase a certain song, the hatred will burn out before your legend ever will...
Wednesday, June 09, 2010
BP Oil Spill Conspiracy: What Did Obama Know, and When Did He Know It?
Se we "established" yesterday that the key player in the BP Deepwater Horizon oil spill conspiracy/cover-up was Rahm Emanuel, who had the cash and the contacts to make the "accident" happen. Perhaps he did it to save Obama from himself, or from the hard Left, but the question still remains: Did Obama order the explosion, or was he clueless about the entire operation?
Based on this story from Rolling Stone, it appears as if he was clueless. And incompetent. And a participant in a cover-up. Remember, the oil rig blew on April 20th:
The president himself was occupied elsewhere. After returning from his vacation, Obama spent Monday, April 26th palling around with Derek Jeter and the New York Yankees, congratulating them on their World Series victory. He later took time to chat with the president of Honduras. When he put in a call to Gov. Haley Barbour of Mississippi, it was to talk about tornadoes that had caused damage in that state, with only a brief mention of the oil spill. On Tuesday the 27th, Obama visited a wind-turbine plant in Iowa. Wednesday the 28th, he toured a biofuels refinery in Missouri and talked up financial reform in Quincy, Illinois. He didn’t mention the oil spill or the Gulf.
Was his lack of concern an attempt to feign innocence, or just a result of ignorance? But things changed on April 28th, at least inside the White House:
That evening, administration officials received news that – to judge from their subsequent response – scared the shit out of them. “The following is not public,” a confidential NOAA advisory stressed. “Two additional release points were found today in the tangled riser. If the riser pipe deteriorates further, the flow could become unchecked, resulting in a release volume an order of magnitude higher than previously thought. There is no official change in the volume released but the [Coast Guard] is no longer stating that the release rate is 1,000 barrels a day. Instead they are saying that they are preparing for a worst-case release and bringing all assets to bear.” …
After he was briefed that evening, Obama told his deputies to contact the Pentagon. The following day, Napolitano declared the BP disaster, which was now approaching the size of Puerto Rico, an “Oil Spill of National Significance” – the designation required to draw on regional resources and to appoint an incident commander to coordinate a federal response. It had taken a full week after Deepwater Horizon exploded for the government to become fully engaged – a critical lapse that allowed the crisis to spiral out of control.
Again - was this a result of Obama's utter incompetence, or part of the conspiracy - let the spill become large enough to warrant the revocation of drilling permits and the imposition of oil taxes and "cap and trade" legislation?
And how long did Obama sit on the NOAA report saying things had gone from bad to worse? The Coast Guard seems to have released some info saying the spill may be "five times larger than originally believed" on April 28th, but NOAA's concerns seemed to have...lowballed a bit, to say the least. Rolling Stone alleges that Obama:
...deployed his top aides to lowball the flow rate at a laughable 5,000 barrels a day, long after the best science made clear this catastrophe would eclipse the Exxon Valdez.
Even after the president’s press conference,Rolling Stone has learned, the administration knew the spill could be far worse than its “best estimate” acknowledged. That same day, the president’s Flow Rate Technical Group – a team of scientists charged with establishing the gusher’s output – announced a new estimate of 12,000 to 25,000 barrels, based on calculations from video of the plume. In fact, according to interviews with team members and scientists familiar with its work, that figure represents the plume group’s minimum estimate....“The upper bound from the plume group, if it had come out, is very high,” says Timothy Crone, a marine geophysicist at Columbia University who has consulted with the government’s team. “That’s why they had resistance internally. We’re talking 100,000 barrels a day.”
A lot of oil. Too much to be covered with some slick, misleading information fed to a compliant media. The president can lie, but if the fish and the birds start to die, nothing will stop those pitiful pictures from reaching the public's eye...
So what did Barack know? Everything.
When did he know it? Sooner than everyone else.
What did he do about it? Passed the buck and covered up the bad news.
You would almost think he had something to hide....
Based on this story from Rolling Stone, it appears as if he was clueless. And incompetent. And a participant in a cover-up. Remember, the oil rig blew on April 20th:
The president himself was occupied elsewhere. After returning from his vacation, Obama spent Monday, April 26th palling around with Derek Jeter and the New York Yankees, congratulating them on their World Series victory. He later took time to chat with the president of Honduras. When he put in a call to Gov. Haley Barbour of Mississippi, it was to talk about tornadoes that had caused damage in that state, with only a brief mention of the oil spill. On Tuesday the 27th, Obama visited a wind-turbine plant in Iowa. Wednesday the 28th, he toured a biofuels refinery in Missouri and talked up financial reform in Quincy, Illinois. He didn’t mention the oil spill or the Gulf.
Was his lack of concern an attempt to feign innocence, or just a result of ignorance? But things changed on April 28th, at least inside the White House:
That evening, administration officials received news that – to judge from their subsequent response – scared the shit out of them. “The following is not public,” a confidential NOAA advisory stressed. “Two additional release points were found today in the tangled riser. If the riser pipe deteriorates further, the flow could become unchecked, resulting in a release volume an order of magnitude higher than previously thought. There is no official change in the volume released but the [Coast Guard] is no longer stating that the release rate is 1,000 barrels a day. Instead they are saying that they are preparing for a worst-case release and bringing all assets to bear.” …
After he was briefed that evening, Obama told his deputies to contact the Pentagon. The following day, Napolitano declared the BP disaster, which was now approaching the size of Puerto Rico, an “Oil Spill of National Significance” – the designation required to draw on regional resources and to appoint an incident commander to coordinate a federal response. It had taken a full week after Deepwater Horizon exploded for the government to become fully engaged – a critical lapse that allowed the crisis to spiral out of control.
Again - was this a result of Obama's utter incompetence, or part of the conspiracy - let the spill become large enough to warrant the revocation of drilling permits and the imposition of oil taxes and "cap and trade" legislation?
And how long did Obama sit on the NOAA report saying things had gone from bad to worse? The Coast Guard seems to have released some info saying the spill may be "five times larger than originally believed" on April 28th, but NOAA's concerns seemed to have...lowballed a bit, to say the least. Rolling Stone alleges that Obama:
...deployed his top aides to lowball the flow rate at a laughable 5,000 barrels a day, long after the best science made clear this catastrophe would eclipse the Exxon Valdez.
Even after the president’s press conference,Rolling Stone has learned, the administration knew the spill could be far worse than its “best estimate” acknowledged. That same day, the president’s Flow Rate Technical Group – a team of scientists charged with establishing the gusher’s output – announced a new estimate of 12,000 to 25,000 barrels, based on calculations from video of the plume. In fact, according to interviews with team members and scientists familiar with its work, that figure represents the plume group’s minimum estimate....“The upper bound from the plume group, if it had come out, is very high,” says Timothy Crone, a marine geophysicist at Columbia University who has consulted with the government’s team. “That’s why they had resistance internally. We’re talking 100,000 barrels a day.”
A lot of oil. Too much to be covered with some slick, misleading information fed to a compliant media. The president can lie, but if the fish and the birds start to die, nothing will stop those pitiful pictures from reaching the public's eye...
So what did Barack know? Everything.
When did he know it? Sooner than everyone else.
What did he do about it? Passed the buck and covered up the bad news.
You would almost think he had something to hide....
Anna Little: A Tea Party Win in New Jersey?
It's too early to call it, but it appears as if Tea Party fave Anna Little has defeated millionaire Diane Gooch for the Republican nomination and the right to face Democrat Frank Pallone in NJ-CD6 this November.
Little's campaign was considered to be uphill, to say the least, against Gooch (wife of wealthy businessman Mickey Gooch). But New Jersey Republicans still haven't learned - even after Christie's victory despite being outspent 3-1 by Corzine - it ain't about the money. It's about the passion. And Little and her supporters had plenty of it, while Gooch had...plenty of money. ABout 10x more than Little, apparently...
Gooch did not acknowledge Little's existence, preferring to focus on Pallone. Little challenged Gooch constantly; and made her look weak when she refused to debate or discuss. Little went out and shook hands and worked the people, Gooch spoke to millionaire's clubs and Republican insiders.
The Republican establishment wanted Gooch and her money; they figured that at the worst, she would force Pallone to drain his war chest a bit and make his potential run for Senate in two years that much tougher. Alas for the Party, the People decided they wanted to nominate someone with similar values to theirs to actually represent them in Congress.
Over in CD-12, the money won, but just barely. Millionaire Scott Sipperelle edged out the Tea Party endorsed ( and previously unknown) David Corsi by less than 1200 votes. Had tax-cutting, budget-balancing Fair Haven mayor Mike Halfacre stayed in it, he would have won the nomination cleanly. But he backed out after a convention fight, and Sipperelle winds up barely squeaking out a primary win over (Tea-Party approved) David Corsi, an underfunded unknown. How's he gonna hold up against Pelosi fave Rush Holt, who has money, the power of incumbency, and the DNC lined up against him?
The New Jersey Republican Party thinks they won big in CD-12, with Sipperelle promising to spend $750K on his own campaign. They don't get it, and it will cost us CD-12:
So we could have had a proven tax-cutting social conservative, a lifelong Republican with grassroots appeal to run against Holt. Instead, we get a johnny-come -lately opportunist, another rich guy who wants something to do, who will be eaten alive by Holt.
It ain't about the cash in 2010. It's about the passion, and the connection to the voters. Anna Little's got it, and she will put a scare into the detestable Democrat Frank Pallone. Sipperelle's got cash, but not much else. The New Jersey Republican party will learn - hopefully - but too late to save the residents of CD-12 from God-knows-how-many more years of left wing nut Rush Holt...
In the meantime...Go ANNA Go!
Little's campaign was considered to be uphill, to say the least, against Gooch (wife of wealthy businessman Mickey Gooch). But New Jersey Republicans still haven't learned - even after Christie's victory despite being outspent 3-1 by Corzine - it ain't about the money. It's about the passion. And Little and her supporters had plenty of it, while Gooch had...plenty of money. ABout 10x more than Little, apparently...
Gooch did not acknowledge Little's existence, preferring to focus on Pallone. Little challenged Gooch constantly; and made her look weak when she refused to debate or discuss. Little went out and shook hands and worked the people, Gooch spoke to millionaire's clubs and Republican insiders.
The Republican establishment wanted Gooch and her money; they figured that at the worst, she would force Pallone to drain his war chest a bit and make his potential run for Senate in two years that much tougher. Alas for the Party, the People decided they wanted to nominate someone with similar values to theirs to actually represent them in Congress.
Over in CD-12, the money won, but just barely. Millionaire Scott Sipperelle edged out the Tea Party endorsed ( and previously unknown) David Corsi by less than 1200 votes. Had tax-cutting, budget-balancing Fair Haven mayor Mike Halfacre stayed in it, he would have won the nomination cleanly. But he backed out after a convention fight, and Sipperelle winds up barely squeaking out a primary win over (Tea-Party approved) David Corsi, an underfunded unknown. How's he gonna hold up against Pelosi fave Rush Holt, who has money, the power of incumbency, and the DNC lined up against him?
The New Jersey Republican Party thinks they won big in CD-12, with Sipperelle promising to spend $750K on his own campaign. They don't get it, and it will cost us CD-12:
So we could have had a proven tax-cutting social conservative, a lifelong Republican with grassroots appeal to run against Holt. Instead, we get a johnny-come -lately opportunist, another rich guy who wants something to do, who will be eaten alive by Holt.
It ain't about the cash in 2010. It's about the passion, and the connection to the voters. Anna Little's got it, and she will put a scare into the detestable Democrat Frank Pallone. Sipperelle's got cash, but not much else. The New Jersey Republican party will learn - hopefully - but too late to save the residents of CD-12 from God-knows-how-many more years of left wing nut Rush Holt...
In the meantime...Go ANNA Go!
New Jersey CD-6: Anna Little Leads By a Tea Leaf
Nothing left now but the recount:
Little, Anna GOP 6,725 50%
Gooch, Diane GOP 6,662 50%
This is w/"99%" of precincts reporting. Big Tea defeats Big Money? More on this later...
And if Frank Pallone thinks he dodged a bullet here, he's kidding himself...
Little, Anna GOP 6,725 50%
Gooch, Diane GOP 6,662 50%
This is w/"99%" of precincts reporting. Big Tea defeats Big Money? More on this later...
And if Frank Pallone thinks he dodged a bullet here, he's kidding himself...
Tuesday, June 08, 2010
New Jersey Primaries: CD-6 and CD-12 still too close to call
With 86% of the vote in CD-6, only 300 votes separates the two potential Republican nominees:
Little, Anna GOP 6,171 51%
Gooch, Diane GOP 5,866 49%
And in CD-12, Sipperelle looks like he may - may - pull off a squeaker. With 78% of the precincts reporting:
Sipprelle, Scott GOP 6,931 52%
Corsi, David GOP 6,409 48%
Constantly updated results here .
Little, Anna GOP 6,171 51%
Gooch, Diane GOP 5,866 49%
And in CD-12, Sipperelle looks like he may - may - pull off a squeaker. With 78% of the precincts reporting:
Sipprelle, Scott GOP 6,931 52%
Corsi, David GOP 6,409 48%
Constantly updated results here .
New Jersey results start to trickle in...
....and we got one nominee locked down:
Former Philadelphia Eagles lineman Jon Runyan is the Republican nominee for the 3rd Congressional District, where the GOP has high hopes of regaining a seat in November.
Runyan will face freshman U.S. Rep. John Adler (D-3rd Dist.) in the November general election. It is expected to be the most competitive congressional race in the state this year
Meanwhile, the Republican primaries in CD-6 and CD-12 show early strength for the insurgents:
With 183 of 215 districts, 85%, in CD-6, Monmouth County, Anna Little is leading Diane Gooch 4622 - 3798.
In CD-12, Monmouth County, with 110 of 125 districts reporting, 88%, David Corsi is leading Scott Sipprelle, 2852-2342.
In Mercer County, with 121 of 139 districts, Sipprelle is leading Corsi 1594-777. Mercer County is saving Sipprelle's hide.
I came out early in CD-12 in favor of the hard-working Mike Halfacre and bemoaned his graceful "stepping aside" for the barely-worthy Sipperelle...and took a lot of heat for it here. Let's hope whoever the candidate is can get his sh*t together and seize the rare opportunity to run Holt out of office...
(more results here)
Former Philadelphia Eagles lineman Jon Runyan is the Republican nominee for the 3rd Congressional District, where the GOP has high hopes of regaining a seat in November.
Runyan will face freshman U.S. Rep. John Adler (D-3rd Dist.) in the November general election. It is expected to be the most competitive congressional race in the state this year
Meanwhile, the Republican primaries in CD-6 and CD-12 show early strength for the insurgents:
With 183 of 215 districts, 85%, in CD-6, Monmouth County, Anna Little is leading Diane Gooch 4622 - 3798.
In CD-12, Monmouth County, with 110 of 125 districts reporting, 88%, David Corsi is leading Scott Sipprelle, 2852-2342.
In Mercer County, with 121 of 139 districts, Sipprelle is leading Corsi 1594-777. Mercer County is saving Sipprelle's hide.
I came out early in CD-12 in favor of the hard-working Mike Halfacre and bemoaned his graceful "stepping aside" for the barely-worthy Sipperelle...and took a lot of heat for it here. Let's hope whoever the candidate is can get his sh*t together and seize the rare opportunity to run Holt out of office...
(more results here)
Gulf Oil Spill Conspiracy: Rahm Emanual As The "Bag Man"?
OK, so we all know that the BP oil spill was no accident, it was a politically-driven conspiracy by the Obama administration to help push it's energy policies and punish conservative-leaning states (what? you disagree? See here, here, here, over here, and here, definitely read this, and this is somewhat related as well. Convinced yet?).
But what we haven't figured out was who the inside man was; which person inside the administration had the ability to work the BP angle and make this happen.
Until today, when we learn the fixer was Obama's butt-buddy...Rahm Emanuel. World Net Daily reports, we read between the lines:
White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel, WND has learned, lived rent-free in Washington, D.C., for years, thanks in part to a friend under contract with oil giant BP.
WND's research further raises the question of whether the White House was compromised by Emanuel's financial ties to the company. Emanuel lived for five years rent-free in an apartment owned by Rep. Rosa DeLauro, D-Conn., and her husband, Stanley Greenberg, whose consulting firm was a prime architect in BP's efforts to recast itself as a "green" corporation and recipient of hundreds of thousands of dollars awarded through a committee chaired by Emanuel.
Critics have characterized the BP advertising campaign prompted by Greenberg Quinlin Rosner research as "greenwashing," a process in which corporations disingenuously portray their efforts as fitting into a politically correct, "green," environment-oriented sensitivity to alternative energy.
Dick Morris and Eileen McGann further commented in the New York Post that Emanuel "also served as chairman of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee – which gave Greenberg huge polling contracts."
"[The DCCC] paid Greenberg's firm $239,996 in 2006 and $317,775 in 2008," Morris and McGann wrote.
Last year, the Associated Press reports, the federal Minerals Management Service, a part of the U.S. Department of the Interior, heralded the BP Deepwater Horizon rig as a model of safety, according to a May 16 Associated Press report.
So how tightly tied in was the Obama administration to BP? Shit, Obama's #1 man was living rent-free in a key BP advisor's apartment while funnelling over half a million dollars to said adviser's firm! In other words, Greenberg was Rahm's bitch, and when Rahm told him that a BP rig had to go down, Greenberg simply asked, "Which one, boss?"
That's why it wasn't an Exxon or Shell or Hess rig that went down in flames just in time to reverse an apparent softening in Obama's offshore drilling position. Rahm Emanuel, the president's fixer, had his best contacts inside BP. Who did Greenberg pressure when Rahm leaned on him? We may never know, but since Rahm controls Greenberg's purse strings - essentially his livelihood - I'll bet Greenberg did whatever was asked of him, and did it ruthlessly.
I guess the question now is, did Obama know of this plot, or was he just a clueless dupe? Was it Rahm who saw the danger from the Left over Obama's willingness to expand drilling (well, to to expand the amount of people allowed to consider thinking about possibly drilling for oil some day far in the future , far off the coastline), and thus, via a tight conspiracy, machinated the BP Deepwater oil rig explosion? Was Rahm trying to save Obama from himself?
Or was this planned from the day that Obama announced his energy policy, knowing he could appear momentarily bi-partisan since the future held a "disaster" that would give him the excuse to roll back offshore drilling to the dark ages?
It seems as if the Gulf Oil Spill Conspiracy is falling apart before our eyes. Let me throw one more twig onto this fire, for the non-believers...
Rahm Emanuel: Jew. Stanley Greenberg: Jew.
A Zionist plot by Israel-firsters looking to destroy America's domestic energy supply, thus making us more dependant on Mideast oil and more involved in the region's - and Israel's - security? Where is Helen Thomas when you need her? Oh yeah, conveniently silenced just before things started to unravel.....
But what we haven't figured out was who the inside man was; which person inside the administration had the ability to work the BP angle and make this happen.
Until today, when we learn the fixer was Obama's butt-buddy...Rahm Emanuel. World Net Daily reports, we read between the lines:
White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel, WND has learned, lived rent-free in Washington, D.C., for years, thanks in part to a friend under contract with oil giant BP.
WND's research further raises the question of whether the White House was compromised by Emanuel's financial ties to the company. Emanuel lived for five years rent-free in an apartment owned by Rep. Rosa DeLauro, D-Conn., and her husband, Stanley Greenberg, whose consulting firm was a prime architect in BP's efforts to recast itself as a "green" corporation and recipient of hundreds of thousands of dollars awarded through a committee chaired by Emanuel.
Critics have characterized the BP advertising campaign prompted by Greenberg Quinlin Rosner research as "greenwashing," a process in which corporations disingenuously portray their efforts as fitting into a politically correct, "green," environment-oriented sensitivity to alternative energy.
Dick Morris and Eileen McGann further commented in the New York Post that Emanuel "also served as chairman of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee – which gave Greenberg huge polling contracts."
"[The DCCC] paid Greenberg's firm $239,996 in 2006 and $317,775 in 2008," Morris and McGann wrote.
Last year, the Associated Press reports, the federal Minerals Management Service, a part of the U.S. Department of the Interior, heralded the BP Deepwater Horizon rig as a model of safety, according to a May 16 Associated Press report.
So how tightly tied in was the Obama administration to BP? Shit, Obama's #1 man was living rent-free in a key BP advisor's apartment while funnelling over half a million dollars to said adviser's firm! In other words, Greenberg was Rahm's bitch, and when Rahm told him that a BP rig had to go down, Greenberg simply asked, "Which one, boss?"
That's why it wasn't an Exxon or Shell or Hess rig that went down in flames just in time to reverse an apparent softening in Obama's offshore drilling position. Rahm Emanuel, the president's fixer, had his best contacts inside BP. Who did Greenberg pressure when Rahm leaned on him? We may never know, but since Rahm controls Greenberg's purse strings - essentially his livelihood - I'll bet Greenberg did whatever was asked of him, and did it ruthlessly.
I guess the question now is, did Obama know of this plot, or was he just a clueless dupe? Was it Rahm who saw the danger from the Left over Obama's willingness to expand drilling (well, to to expand the amount of people allowed to consider thinking about possibly drilling for oil some day far in the future , far off the coastline), and thus, via a tight conspiracy, machinated the BP Deepwater oil rig explosion? Was Rahm trying to save Obama from himself?
Or was this planned from the day that Obama announced his energy policy, knowing he could appear momentarily bi-partisan since the future held a "disaster" that would give him the excuse to roll back offshore drilling to the dark ages?
It seems as if the Gulf Oil Spill Conspiracy is falling apart before our eyes. Let me throw one more twig onto this fire, for the non-believers...
Rahm Emanuel: Jew. Stanley Greenberg: Jew.
A Zionist plot by Israel-firsters looking to destroy America's domestic energy supply, thus making us more dependant on Mideast oil and more involved in the region's - and Israel's - security? Where is Helen Thomas when you need her? Oh yeah, conveniently silenced just before things started to unravel.....
Monday, June 07, 2010
Why was the White House so quiet on Helen Thomas?
I mean, Obama is the guy who passed judgement on the entire Cambridge Police department based strictly on media reports, and his Administration could not wait to jump all over Arizona's crackdown on illegal immigrants, calling it racist and regrettable (orwas it regrettably racist?) before even reading the damn bill. So why so quiet when a high profile White House correspondent - a favorite of the president, no less - spouts such vicious anti-Semitism?
Jennifer Rubin, on another subject, hits close to home - she quotes Desmond Tutu, speaking at Ford's theatre:
“We cannot accept, unless we want to destroy ourselves . . . the blockade of Gaza,” Tutu said in an invocation calling for peace and recognition of human rights across the world “but especially that critical part of the world, the Middle East.”
...and she brings it right back to Helen Thomas:
It is the Mary Robinson-Desmond Tutu-J Street mentality that finds great favor with this president, who showers attention on and doles out accolades to those who share his view of Israel as oppressor, victimizer, and obstructionist.
And that answers the rhetorical question that the title of this post asks. Why was Obama silent on Helen Thomas' anti-Semitism?
The same reason he never felt a need, until politically expedient, to disavow his mentor's (the despicable Reverend Wright) numerous anti-Semitic and anti-Israeli remarks.
Because he agrees with them.
You see? Barack Obama does have principles he will not sell out, after all...they just weren't the same ones he highlighted during his campaign...
Jennifer Rubin, on another subject, hits close to home - she quotes Desmond Tutu, speaking at Ford's theatre:
“We cannot accept, unless we want to destroy ourselves . . . the blockade of Gaza,” Tutu said in an invocation calling for peace and recognition of human rights across the world “but especially that critical part of the world, the Middle East.”
...and she brings it right back to Helen Thomas:
It is the Mary Robinson-Desmond Tutu-J Street mentality that finds great favor with this president, who showers attention on and doles out accolades to those who share his view of Israel as oppressor, victimizer, and obstructionist.
And that answers the rhetorical question that the title of this post asks. Why was Obama silent on Helen Thomas' anti-Semitism?
The same reason he never felt a need, until politically expedient, to disavow his mentor's (the despicable Reverend Wright) numerous anti-Semitic and anti-Israeli remarks.
Because he agrees with them.
You see? Barack Obama does have principles he will not sell out, after all...they just weren't the same ones he highlighted during his campaign...
Arthur Laffer Predicts Doomsday: January 2011
...and Laffer is no slouch, having drawn up the now-famous "Laffer Curve" (which states that increasing tax rates beyond a certain point will become counterproductive for raising further tax revenue because of diminishing returns, and/or that a decrease in tax rates could result in an increase in tax revenues) on a cocktail napkin during an afternoon meeting with Nixon/Ford Administration officials Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld in 1974 to help illustrate his argument...
I figure a guy that can come up with the economic equivalent of E=MC2 on the spur of the moment on the back of a dirty napkin is worth listening to, especially as we saw (during the Regan Administration) that the guy really does know what he's talking about.
So let's listen to what he has to say about unfolding economic developments and the policies of the administration now in power, and how it will affect us:
On or about Jan. 1, 2011, federal, state and local tax rates are scheduled to rise quite sharply. President George W. Bush's tax cuts expire on that date, meaning that the highest federal personal income tax rate will go 39.6% from 35%, the highest federal dividend tax rate pops up to 39.6% from 15%, the capital gains tax rate to 20% from 15%, and the estate tax rate to 55% from zero. Lots and lots of other changes will also occur as a result of the sunset provision in the Bush tax cuts.
Payroll taxes are already scheduled to rise in 2013 and the Alternative Minimum Tax (AMT) will be digging deeper and deeper into middle-income taxpayers. And there's always the celebrated tax increase on Cadillac health care plans. State and local tax rates are also going up in 2011 as they did in 2010. Tax rate increases next year are everywhere.
Now, if people know tax rates will be higher next year than they are this year, what will those people do this year? They will shift production and income out of next year into this year to the extent possible. As a result, income this year has already been inflated above where it otherwise should be and next year, 2011, income will be lower than it otherwise should be.....
When we pass the tax boundary of Jan. 1, 2011, my best guess is that the train goes off the tracks and we get our worst nightmare of a severe "double dip" recession....It has always amazed me how tax cuts don't work until they take effect. Mr. Obama's experience with deferred tax rate increases will be the reverse. The economy will collapse in 2011.
Today, corporate profits as a share of GDP are way too high given the state of the U.S. economy. These high profits reflect the shift in income into 2010 from 2011. These profits will tumble in 2011, preceded most likely by the stock market.
The result will be a crash in tax receipts once the (2010) surge is past. If you thought deficits and unemployment have been bad lately, you ain't seen nothing yet.
Thanks for the stomach-ache, Arthur...and if you don't want to hear from any Reagan-era "holdovers" or need a second opinion, try Anthony Fry, senior managing director at Evercore Partners. He was on CNBC this morning:
Fry sees three outcomes for the global economy and none of them makes very good reading.
“You can have lower rates and deflation, higher rates and higher inflation or the nightmare scenario of higher rates and deflating asset prices,” he said.
“If the nightmare scenario plays out as I suspect it may then the debt situation gets worse. There is currently no exit strategy and the reaction to the crisis of policy makers remains a big worry.”
As a result, Fry is telling investors to play it safe and buy physical assets like land.
“I don’t want to scare anyone but I am considering investing in barbed wire and guns, things are not looking good and rates are heading higher,” he said...
So between the brightest minds of yesterday and today, we get a common refrain: It's all about to go to hell. Buy land, surround it with barbed wire, and stockpile plenty of ammo. And assume your assets are about to be worthless.
But based on prior performance, I am sure Barack Obama is up to the challenge of this upcoming crisis...right?
Hello? Anybody home? Hey, where'd everybody take off to...?
I figure a guy that can come up with the economic equivalent of E=MC2 on the spur of the moment on the back of a dirty napkin is worth listening to, especially as we saw (during the Regan Administration) that the guy really does know what he's talking about. So let's listen to what he has to say about unfolding economic developments and the policies of the administration now in power, and how it will affect us:
On or about Jan. 1, 2011, federal, state and local tax rates are scheduled to rise quite sharply. President George W. Bush's tax cuts expire on that date, meaning that the highest federal personal income tax rate will go 39.6% from 35%, the highest federal dividend tax rate pops up to 39.6% from 15%, the capital gains tax rate to 20% from 15%, and the estate tax rate to 55% from zero. Lots and lots of other changes will also occur as a result of the sunset provision in the Bush tax cuts.
Payroll taxes are already scheduled to rise in 2013 and the Alternative Minimum Tax (AMT) will be digging deeper and deeper into middle-income taxpayers. And there's always the celebrated tax increase on Cadillac health care plans. State and local tax rates are also going up in 2011 as they did in 2010. Tax rate increases next year are everywhere.
Now, if people know tax rates will be higher next year than they are this year, what will those people do this year? They will shift production and income out of next year into this year to the extent possible. As a result, income this year has already been inflated above where it otherwise should be and next year, 2011, income will be lower than it otherwise should be.....
When we pass the tax boundary of Jan. 1, 2011, my best guess is that the train goes off the tracks and we get our worst nightmare of a severe "double dip" recession....It has always amazed me how tax cuts don't work until they take effect. Mr. Obama's experience with deferred tax rate increases will be the reverse. The economy will collapse in 2011.
Today, corporate profits as a share of GDP are way too high given the state of the U.S. economy. These high profits reflect the shift in income into 2010 from 2011. These profits will tumble in 2011, preceded most likely by the stock market.
The result will be a crash in tax receipts once the (2010) surge is past. If you thought deficits and unemployment have been bad lately, you ain't seen nothing yet.
Thanks for the stomach-ache, Arthur...and if you don't want to hear from any Reagan-era "holdovers" or need a second opinion, try Anthony Fry, senior managing director at Evercore Partners. He was on CNBC this morning:
Fry sees three outcomes for the global economy and none of them makes very good reading.
“You can have lower rates and deflation, higher rates and higher inflation or the nightmare scenario of higher rates and deflating asset prices,” he said.
“If the nightmare scenario plays out as I suspect it may then the debt situation gets worse. There is currently no exit strategy and the reaction to the crisis of policy makers remains a big worry.”
As a result, Fry is telling investors to play it safe and buy physical assets like land.
“I don’t want to scare anyone but I am considering investing in barbed wire and guns, things are not looking good and rates are heading higher,” he said...
So between the brightest minds of yesterday and today, we get a common refrain: It's all about to go to hell. Buy land, surround it with barbed wire, and stockpile plenty of ammo. And assume your assets are about to be worthless.
But based on prior performance, I am sure Barack Obama is up to the challenge of this upcoming crisis...right?
Hello? Anybody home? Hey, where'd everybody take off to...?
Helen Thomas Admits Her "Regret" Is Meaningless
Let's look again at Helen Thomas' non-apology for her anti-Israel, anti-Semitic rant last week:
“I deeply regret my comments I made last week regarding the Israelis and the Palestinians...."
I tried to make the point (along with many others) that to "regret" something is not to apologize for it; it's more of a disappointment that one has been caught doing something they would have preferred to have gotten away with "off the radar".
Luckily for us, Helen made the same point herself just the other day, while challenging the Obama Administration for not being tough enough on Israel for daring to protect their sovereignty (unlike us). Check out the exchange:
MR. GIBBS: ...Ms. Thomas.
Thomas: The — our initial reaction to this flotilla massacre, deliberate massacre, an international crime, was pitiful. What do you mean you regret when something should be so strongly condemned? And if any other nation in the world had done it, we would have been up in arms. What is the sacrosanct, iron-clad relationship where a country that deliberately kills people and boycotts — and we aid and abet the boycott?
MR. GIBBS: Look, I think the initial reaction regretted the loss of life as we tried and still continue to try to gather the relevant —
Thomas: Regret won’t bring them back.
Nor does regret take back the hateful words you spoke, you filthy,ugly, anti-Semitic beast. If "regret" isn't a strong enough term for the United States to use over an ally defending itself, it certainly isn't strong enough word for you to use to make amends for what you have said.
Helen knows that our "regret" over the loss of terrorist's lives is meaningless; so she uses the term as well, fully versed in its uselessness, so that she may proudly claim (later) to have never backed down from her statements.
Over at the Washington Post, Howard Kurtz has a slightly different quote from Helen:
Reached at home, Thomas, 89, said: "I'm very sorry for my remarks. I think I crossed the line. I made a mistake."
But it's all the same. She is "sorry for her remarks", but she speaks no ill of the substance of those remarks. She thinks she "crossed the line"? Thinks????? Again, apparently Helen still doubts she did or said anything wrong (and in fairness, within the liberal circles she travels, her Jew-bashing commentary is probably as common as an appetizer of lobster bisque soup).
And "I made a mistake"? Still, Thomas is unable to fully articulate the nature of her mistake. Was it the anti-Semitic remark, her own anti-Semitism, or as I mentioned above, simply getting caught espousing said anti-Semitism on camera?
We are convinced it is the latter. But I think this will all be fleshed out real soon:
Rabbi David F. Nesenoff, the man behind the Helen Thomas video, was just on Fox News, and he says Part II will be released "in a day or two."
Will it be enough for the Obama administration to finally condemn their favorite journalist? Only if she speaks ill of another ethnicity.
These days, anti-Semitism is so tightly intertwined with contemporary liberalism that it has become impossible to tell the two apart....
UPDATE: The Wicked Witch of the Far-Left has quit. Sniveling coward. After a long and storied career, all she will be remember for is her anti-Semitic outburst. I can't think of a more appropriate memorial:
Helen Thomas announced Monday that she is retiring, effective immediately.
Her decision came after her controversial comments about Israel and the Palestinians were captured on videotape and widely disseminated on the Internet.
Thomas later issued a statement: ``I deeply regret my comments I made last week regarding the Israelis and the Palestinians....
Yeah, regrets, you have a few....
UPDATE II: Best line goes to Robert Stacey McCain:
Rumors that Ms. Thomas plans to spend her retirement in Gaza serving as a “comfort woman” for Hamas terrorists could not be immediately confirmed...
“I deeply regret my comments I made last week regarding the Israelis and the Palestinians...."
I tried to make the point (along with many others) that to "regret" something is not to apologize for it; it's more of a disappointment that one has been caught doing something they would have preferred to have gotten away with "off the radar".
Luckily for us, Helen made the same point herself just the other day, while challenging the Obama Administration for not being tough enough on Israel for daring to protect their sovereignty (unlike us). Check out the exchange:
MR. GIBBS: ...Ms. Thomas.
Thomas: The — our initial reaction to this flotilla massacre, deliberate massacre, an international crime, was pitiful. What do you mean you regret when something should be so strongly condemned? And if any other nation in the world had done it, we would have been up in arms. What is the sacrosanct, iron-clad relationship where a country that deliberately kills people and boycotts — and we aid and abet the boycott?
MR. GIBBS: Look, I think the initial reaction regretted the loss of life as we tried and still continue to try to gather the relevant —
Thomas: Regret won’t bring them back.
Nor does regret take back the hateful words you spoke, you filthy,ugly, anti-Semitic beast. If "regret" isn't a strong enough term for the United States to use over an ally defending itself, it certainly isn't strong enough word for you to use to make amends for what you have said.
Helen knows that our "regret" over the loss of terrorist's lives is meaningless; so she uses the term as well, fully versed in its uselessness, so that she may proudly claim (later) to have never backed down from her statements.
Over at the Washington Post, Howard Kurtz has a slightly different quote from Helen:
Reached at home, Thomas, 89, said: "I'm very sorry for my remarks. I think I crossed the line. I made a mistake."
But it's all the same. She is "sorry for her remarks", but she speaks no ill of the substance of those remarks. She thinks she "crossed the line"? Thinks????? Again, apparently Helen still doubts she did or said anything wrong (and in fairness, within the liberal circles she travels, her Jew-bashing commentary is probably as common as an appetizer of lobster bisque soup).
And "I made a mistake"? Still, Thomas is unable to fully articulate the nature of her mistake. Was it the anti-Semitic remark, her own anti-Semitism, or as I mentioned above, simply getting caught espousing said anti-Semitism on camera?
We are convinced it is the latter. But I think this will all be fleshed out real soon:
Rabbi David F. Nesenoff, the man behind the Helen Thomas video, was just on Fox News, and he says Part II will be released "in a day or two."
Will it be enough for the Obama administration to finally condemn their favorite journalist? Only if she speaks ill of another ethnicity.
These days, anti-Semitism is so tightly intertwined with contemporary liberalism that it has become impossible to tell the two apart....
UPDATE: The Wicked Witch of the Far-Left has quit. Sniveling coward. After a long and storied career, all she will be remember for is her anti-Semitic outburst. I can't think of a more appropriate memorial:
Helen Thomas announced Monday that she is retiring, effective immediately.
Her decision came after her controversial comments about Israel and the Palestinians were captured on videotape and widely disseminated on the Internet.
Thomas later issued a statement: ``I deeply regret my comments I made last week regarding the Israelis and the Palestinians....
Yeah, regrets, you have a few....
UPDATE II: Best line goes to Robert Stacey McCain:
Rumors that Ms. Thomas plans to spend her retirement in Gaza serving as a “comfort woman” for Hamas terrorists could not be immediately confirmed...
Sunday, June 06, 2010
Gulf Oil Spill: Obama’s War Against The South
So…the BP Gulf Oil Spill has had the following benefits for Barack Obama:
- allowed his to renege on his earlier promise to potentially expand the amount of people allowed to consider thinking about possibly drilling for oil some day far in the future , far off the coastline.
-gave him an excuse to return to his favored policies – taxing oil companies, restricting drilling, and promising a magic carpet in every garage
-allowed him to be re-embraced by the hard-left environmentalists and maintain a hard-left agenda while creating the impression of at least an attempt at bi-partisanship
-given him the opportunity to claim to have single-handedly revived the private sector, as almost 20% of the non-government jobs created in May appear to be related to the oil spill and cleanup efforts.
But there is yet another benefit to be derived from the half-million or so gallons of crude now swimming with the fishies in the Gulf: The ability to punish his political enemies.
Moe Lane asks a rhetorical question:
….seeing as it’s been clear all along to the White House that we had an ecological disaster on our hands: why did the President not act in a timely fashion to try to keep the oil off of the beaches in the five Gulf of Mexico states?
…and provides an easy-to-understand answer:
| State | Governor | Party | Election Year? | Note |
| Alabama | Bob Riley | Republican | Yes | Open race |
| Florida | Charlie Crist | Independent | Yes | Former GOP |
| Louisiana | Bobby Jindal | Republican | No | GOP leader |
| Mississippi | Haley Barbour | Republican | No | RGA head |
| Texas | Rick Perry | Republican | Yes | Re-election |
And do you wonder why I keep pushing the BP Gulf Oil Spill/Barack Obama Conspiracy theory? This storm is just a little too perfect, if you ask me….
What’s that you said? Obama would never ignore a national, life threatening disaster based on political orientation? Glenn Reynolds has an answer for that:
If that cynical analysis were correct, we’d have seen Obama ignoring the Nashville flood, Kentucky ice storms, etc…
But…but…oh, yeah…right….
(and before I hear any whining about the oily birds and dirty beaches, please read this!)
Saturday, June 05, 2010
Helen Thomas Regrets Nothing
Jennifer Rubin over at Contentions refers to this as an "apology", but to me it is nothing of the sort. Helen Thomas posted a statement today on her website referring to the vile video gone viral in which she demands that the Jews leave "Palestine", and return to Germany:
“I deeply regret my comments I made last week regarding the Israelis and the Palestinians. They do not reflect my heart-felt belief that peace will come to the Middle East only when all parties recognize the need for mutual respect and tolerance. May that day come soon.”
There is no apology there. To regret one's comments is simply the act of wishing one hadn't said what they truly felt. Helen's "gaffe" here was strictly Washingtonian in style: She got tripped up by speaking from her heart. At most, she regrets being caught verbalizing publicly what she and her cohorts say privately.
This is a carefully planned statement designed to show contrition while refusing to refute the actual sentiment behind her repulsive comments. There is no use of the word "apology" here, no discussion of the fact that she demanded Jews return to the land that had an official policy of exterminating them, and most importantly, no walk-back of her use of the phrase "Palestine" to refer to the land of Israel. That's a deliberate attempt to de-legitimize the entire existence of the Jewish state, by refusing to even call it by it's proper name, and using the term favored by those who wish to take over this nation and "drive the Jews into the sea".
You are not forgiven, you miserable, ugly, hateful, anti-Semitic bitch.
But her commentary is not surprising; as I mentioned yesterday, the trumped up flotilla incident and the feeling of security given by having like-minded liberals in power has finally broken the damn on the American Left, and the anti-Semitism and Jew-hatred is now spewing forth like pus from an exploded pimple. All the viciousness the Left has towards Israel and the Jews can now be let loose; after all, those policies have the support of the people now in power, and really, who's going to call them on it? The media? Please...
And speaking of the current occupants of the White House, what do they say about birds of a feather?
“I deeply regret my comments I made last week regarding the Israelis and the Palestinians. They do not reflect my heart-felt belief that peace will come to the Middle East only when all parties recognize the need for mutual respect and tolerance. May that day come soon.”
There is no apology there. To regret one's comments is simply the act of wishing one hadn't said what they truly felt. Helen's "gaffe" here was strictly Washingtonian in style: She got tripped up by speaking from her heart. At most, she regrets being caught verbalizing publicly what she and her cohorts say privately.
This is a carefully planned statement designed to show contrition while refusing to refute the actual sentiment behind her repulsive comments. There is no use of the word "apology" here, no discussion of the fact that she demanded Jews return to the land that had an official policy of exterminating them, and most importantly, no walk-back of her use of the phrase "Palestine" to refer to the land of Israel. That's a deliberate attempt to de-legitimize the entire existence of the Jewish state, by refusing to even call it by it's proper name, and using the term favored by those who wish to take over this nation and "drive the Jews into the sea".
You are not forgiven, you miserable, ugly, hateful, anti-Semitic bitch.
But her commentary is not surprising; as I mentioned yesterday, the trumped up flotilla incident and the feeling of security given by having like-minded liberals in power has finally broken the damn on the American Left, and the anti-Semitism and Jew-hatred is now spewing forth like pus from an exploded pimple. All the viciousness the Left has towards Israel and the Jews can now be let loose; after all, those policies have the support of the people now in power, and really, who's going to call them on it? The media? Please...
And speaking of the current occupants of the White House, what do they say about birds of a feather?
C'mon, just kiss her, Barack. After all, the enemy of my enemy is my friend...
UPDATE: Incidentally, can you imagine if Helen had said that blacks should go back to Africa, or Mexicans back to Mexico? One thing's for sure, Hearst Newspapers spokesman Paul Luthringer would not "refuse to say" whether or not Thomas would keep her job. She'd already be out on the street. But Jew-bashing is just A-OK in Barack Obama's America. Maybe -maybe - the Jews will remember this come November.
And we'll see if American Judaism is really about religious observance and the preservation of their people, or just another radical leftist cult...
Friday, June 04, 2010
"Final Solution" Friday...
...man, the masks are really coming off, aren't they?
First, you just got to love the choice of words here by the Turkish Ambassador as he discusses his vision for the Middle East:
"For a final solution, you cannot ignore Hamas. That's what we are saying," said Ambassador Namik Tan. "This is not the first time that we are trying to bring this into the discussion. We have told this to the Israelis, to our American friends, to our international interlocutors, everyone. How could you imagine a final solution without Hamas?"
He's right, of course. Hitler could not have imagined it better. And here's another great line by the Testy Turk:
"Israel is about to lose a friend ... This is going to be a historical mistake,"
How good of a friend are the Turks?
Calling the Israelis "criminals," he reiterated Turkey's call for an international investigation. "It's all criminal ...
Well, it certainly is, Mr. Turk. Especially if you are talking about your nation's part in the flotilla fiasco...
It seems like our president agrees with the Mad Turk:
Obama also acknowledged Israel's security concerns while questioning the Israeli blockade of Gaza following this week's military raid on a flotilla of ships carrying relief supplies to the Palestinian territory.
The president called the incident that killed nine people, including a Turkish-American man, a "tragic situation" that could serve as "an opportunity" to advance the Middle East peace process."
How? By forcing a "final solution" to the "Israeli problem" Well, ending the blockade on latter-day Nazis would sure help that along...
Yup. At least that's what media hag and Obama-lover Helen Thomas proposes - during a Jewish Heritage Celebration held at the White House, no less:
"Get the hell out of Palestine. Remember these people are occupied, and it’s their land.”
Where should the Jews go, Helen?
“Go home,” to “Poland and Germany.”
Riiight. Because they were treated there so well before.
Helen knows that. Helen wants that.
Well, fuck you, Helen. I think the Jews are going to stay, you ugly bitch. Almost as ugly on the outside as you are on the inside.
Almost.
I guess, with The Man in the White House, all that pent-up liberal anti-Semitism can now burst free. And like a popped pimple, the pus is spraying everywhere.
Well, my American Jews, you brought this upon yourself. When the loudspeakers start to screech, "Juden Raus!", please don't act surprised....
First, you just got to love the choice of words here by the Turkish Ambassador as he discusses his vision for the Middle East:
"For a final solution, you cannot ignore Hamas. That's what we are saying," said Ambassador Namik Tan. "This is not the first time that we are trying to bring this into the discussion. We have told this to the Israelis, to our American friends, to our international interlocutors, everyone. How could you imagine a final solution without Hamas?"
He's right, of course. Hitler could not have imagined it better. And here's another great line by the Testy Turk:
"Israel is about to lose a friend ... This is going to be a historical mistake,"
How good of a friend are the Turks?
Calling the Israelis "criminals," he reiterated Turkey's call for an international investigation. "It's all criminal ...
Well, it certainly is, Mr. Turk. Especially if you are talking about your nation's part in the flotilla fiasco...
It seems like our president agrees with the Mad Turk:
Obama also acknowledged Israel's security concerns while questioning the Israeli blockade of Gaza following this week's military raid on a flotilla of ships carrying relief supplies to the Palestinian territory.
The president called the incident that killed nine people, including a Turkish-American man, a "tragic situation" that could serve as "an opportunity" to advance the Middle East peace process."
How? By forcing a "final solution" to the "Israeli problem" Well, ending the blockade on latter-day Nazis would sure help that along...
Yup. At least that's what media hag and Obama-lover Helen Thomas proposes - during a Jewish Heritage Celebration held at the White House, no less:
"Get the hell out of Palestine. Remember these people are occupied, and it’s their land.”
Where should the Jews go, Helen?
“Go home,” to “Poland and Germany.”
Riiight. Because they were treated there so well before.
Helen knows that. Helen wants that.
Well, fuck you, Helen. I think the Jews are going to stay, you ugly bitch. Almost as ugly on the outside as you are on the inside.
Almost.
I guess, with The Man in the White House, all that pent-up liberal anti-Semitism can now burst free. And like a popped pimple, the pus is spraying everywhere.
Well, my American Jews, you brought this upon yourself. When the loudspeakers start to screech, "Juden Raus!", please don't act surprised....
Gulf Oil Spill Conspiracy: Creating Jobs For Obama?
OK, so we all know Barack Obama was complicit in destroying the BP Deepwater Horizon drilling rig, in order to create the perfect "out clause" for his previous decision to expand the amount of people allowed to consider thinking about possibly drilling for oil some day far in the future , far off the coastline.
Show compromise and the strength to piss off the environmentalists, then, after the accident, thoughtfully rebuke your earlier position and return to your liberal roots, thus pleasing your base and leaving a bi-partisan after-image on a strictly partisan attack...
But here's an additional political bonus that this horrible oil-spill "incident" provides to Barack Obama that I hadn't considered before: the fact that a disaster like this would actually help create jobs:
Employment in support activities for the mining industry was up 3 percent in the month, or 8,000 workers on top of a 5,000 job gain last month. Given the otherwise flat performance of this sector prior to the start of the spill in April, it is safe to assume that much of these jobs are being created to clean up the mess. So, it could be that as much as 20 percent of the net private sector job creation in May was due to the oil spill.
You know, Barack Obama would have gotten away with this entire subterfuge, if he didn't just assume that the private sector would just pick up the slack, and "plug the damn leak" (another instance of his complete cluelessness about the free market - he just assumed there would be a solution, via BP or government, and if there wasn't one, he could bully it out of wherever it was hiding). But the oil keeps on flowing, and flowing, and Obama's brilliant plan is collapsing before his eyes...
But based on the above job numbers, maybe it is time for Barack to come clean. Admit that he had the damn rig blown up. Admit that he did it as a public service, to wean us away from oil. Then apologize, tearfully, while defiantly pointing out that his actions did not just create government jobs, but also 20% of the private sector employment growth for the month of May. Like a jobs god, he is....
The media would fall over themselves, praising his genius, his honesty, his humility. The Europeans would award him yet another Nobel Prize. And Congress could write legislation legalizing the destruction of "x" amount of oil wells per month, in order to help stimulate the economy. Make it legal - ex post facto, of course....
So Barack, what are you waiting for? The time to unmask the Great Gulf Oil Spill Conspiracy is now, before you start choking in the black goo, and no one can hear you scream...
(More on this vile conspiracy here, here, here, over here, and here, you should definitely read this, and this is somewhat related as well...)
Show compromise and the strength to piss off the environmentalists, then, after the accident, thoughtfully rebuke your earlier position and return to your liberal roots, thus pleasing your base and leaving a bi-partisan after-image on a strictly partisan attack...
But here's an additional political bonus that this horrible oil-spill "incident" provides to Barack Obama that I hadn't considered before: the fact that a disaster like this would actually help create jobs:
Employment in support activities for the mining industry was up 3 percent in the month, or 8,000 workers on top of a 5,000 job gain last month. Given the otherwise flat performance of this sector prior to the start of the spill in April, it is safe to assume that much of these jobs are being created to clean up the mess. So, it could be that as much as 20 percent of the net private sector job creation in May was due to the oil spill.
You know, Barack Obama would have gotten away with this entire subterfuge, if he didn't just assume that the private sector would just pick up the slack, and "plug the damn leak" (another instance of his complete cluelessness about the free market - he just assumed there would be a solution, via BP or government, and if there wasn't one, he could bully it out of wherever it was hiding). But the oil keeps on flowing, and flowing, and Obama's brilliant plan is collapsing before his eyes...
But based on the above job numbers, maybe it is time for Barack to come clean. Admit that he had the damn rig blown up. Admit that he did it as a public service, to wean us away from oil. Then apologize, tearfully, while defiantly pointing out that his actions did not just create government jobs, but also 20% of the private sector employment growth for the month of May. Like a jobs god, he is....
The media would fall over themselves, praising his genius, his honesty, his humility. The Europeans would award him yet another Nobel Prize. And Congress could write legislation legalizing the destruction of "x" amount of oil wells per month, in order to help stimulate the economy. Make it legal - ex post facto, of course....
So Barack, what are you waiting for? The time to unmask the Great Gulf Oil Spill Conspiracy is now, before you start choking in the black goo, and no one can hear you scream...
(More on this vile conspiracy here, here, here, over here, and here, you should definitely read this, and this is somewhat related as well...)
Rachel Corrie Must Be Destroyed
For the uninitiated, here is the late Miss Corrie's background:
...an American member of the International Solidarity Movement (a pro-terrorist organization). She was killed in the Gaza Strip by an Israel Defence Forces (IDF) bulldozer while attempting to prevent IDF forces from demolishing the home of local Palestinian Samir Nasrallah (who had one end of a smuggling tunnel in said home, that was being used by Hamas to bring weapons into the Strip that were then used to kill Israelis). The IDF has claimed that the death has been due to restricted angle of view of the D9 bulldozer driver. The New York Times said Corrie and others were acting as "human shields." A student at the Evergreen State College, she had taken a year off and traveled to the Gaza Strip during the Second Intifada...
...making her a "terror tourist", one who thought they could drop in on someone else's war, throw a few stones, and leave with burnished liberal bona fides. Alas for Rachel, she found out that war is not a child's game, and that the punishment for protecting terrorists is often death, even if accidental.
Rachel has become a martyr to the anti-Israel Left, with numerous documentaries, plays, and some 30-odd songs written in her honor. Of course, photos of her burning an American flag only made her more of a hero....
But Rachel Corrie is coming back to Gaza. In a maritime version.
The "Free Gaza" (read: "Destroy Israel") movement purchased an 1800 ton vessel in late March, named her after the fallen terrorist martyr, and prepared her to sail in the infamous blockade-busting flotilla that met an untimely end at the hand of Israeli commandos. Alas, the Corrie failed to show on time -stopping in a Turkish port after claims of "sabotage"- but is ploughing ahead nevertheless, with an expected arrival sometime this Saturday (at posting time, the ship is approximately 150 miles off of Gaza; the other flotilla ships were intercepted at the 65 mile mark).
So what does Israel do now?
Do they bend to international pressure, let the Corrie through, allow the blockade to be broken, and give a victory to Hamas, Iran, and an anti-Semitic Turkey? Or do they board again (hopefully better armed), and force the ship into an Israeli port?
I would assume the latter. But since no matter what Israel does, it will be vilified, why not go all the way?
Remove the passengers. Remove the cargo. And sink the Rachel Corrie at sea.
Rachel Corrie is a symbol of all that is wrong with Western morality. She was a useful idiot, a willing dupe, and was willing to give her life for a group of people who are hell-bent on committing a second Holocaust.
And for that, a world of useful idiots have made this angry, vicious girl into their patron saint, less to honor her miserable life than to use as a moral bludgeon against the state of Israel.
She was a moral poison. To allow her posthumous victory would inject that poison deeper into the veins of the Middle East, further warping the sense of right and wrong both within the region and within the devotees of the Palestinian's "cause" (that being the destruction of Israel). That's the challenge implied by the naming of this blockade-buster after her; that's the true mission of the Rachel Corrie.
To Israel, I say: Sink the Rachel Corrie. Force the morality that celebrates her to the bottom of the ocean, and let it's carcass rot there. Turn the symbolism around on the anti-Semitic West, and make the message thus: Those who terrorize, and support terror, will find the end of the road at the shores of Israel. Be it Rachel Corrie, or her moral descendants who attempt to honor her by trying to complete the mission Rachel so wholeheartedly skipped school for: The victory of Hamas over Israel.
The Rachel Corrie is an existential death ship. Let's sink the bitch before she completes her mission: The destruction of Israel....
UPDATE: Charles Krauthammer sums it up nicely:
The world is tired of these troublesome Jews, 6 million -- that number again -- hard by the Mediterranean, refusing every invitation to national suicide. For which they are relentlessly demonized, ghettoized and constrained from defending themselves, even as the more committed anti-Zionists -- Iranian in particular -- openly prepare a more final solution.
...an American member of the International Solidarity Movement (a pro-terrorist organization). She was killed in the Gaza Strip by an Israel Defence Forces (IDF) bulldozer while attempting to prevent IDF forces from demolishing the home of local Palestinian Samir Nasrallah (who had one end of a smuggling tunnel in said home, that was being used by Hamas to bring weapons into the Strip that were then used to kill Israelis). The IDF has claimed that the death has been due to restricted angle of view of the D9 bulldozer driver. The New York Times said Corrie and others were acting as "human shields." A student at the Evergreen State College, she had taken a year off and traveled to the Gaza Strip during the Second Intifada...
...making her a "terror tourist", one who thought they could drop in on someone else's war, throw a few stones, and leave with burnished liberal bona fides. Alas for Rachel, she found out that war is not a child's game, and that the punishment for protecting terrorists is often death, even if accidental.
Rachel has become a martyr to the anti-Israel Left, with numerous documentaries, plays, and some 30-odd songs written in her honor. Of course, photos of her burning an American flag only made her more of a hero....But Rachel Corrie is coming back to Gaza. In a maritime version.
The "Free Gaza" (read: "Destroy Israel") movement purchased an 1800 ton vessel in late March, named her after the fallen terrorist martyr, and prepared her to sail in the infamous blockade-busting flotilla that met an untimely end at the hand of Israeli commandos. Alas, the Corrie failed to show on time -stopping in a Turkish port after claims of "sabotage"- but is ploughing ahead nevertheless, with an expected arrival sometime this Saturday (at posting time, the ship is approximately 150 miles off of Gaza; the other flotilla ships were intercepted at the 65 mile mark).
So what does Israel do now?
Do they bend to international pressure, let the Corrie through, allow the blockade to be broken, and give a victory to Hamas, Iran, and an anti-Semitic Turkey? Or do they board again (hopefully better armed), and force the ship into an Israeli port?
I would assume the latter. But since no matter what Israel does, it will be vilified, why not go all the way?
Remove the passengers. Remove the cargo. And sink the Rachel Corrie at sea.
Rachel Corrie is a symbol of all that is wrong with Western morality. She was a useful idiot, a willing dupe, and was willing to give her life for a group of people who are hell-bent on committing a second Holocaust.
And for that, a world of useful idiots have made this angry, vicious girl into their patron saint, less to honor her miserable life than to use as a moral bludgeon against the state of Israel.
She was a moral poison. To allow her posthumous victory would inject that poison deeper into the veins of the Middle East, further warping the sense of right and wrong both within the region and within the devotees of the Palestinian's "cause" (that being the destruction of Israel). That's the challenge implied by the naming of this blockade-buster after her; that's the true mission of the Rachel Corrie.
To Israel, I say: Sink the Rachel Corrie. Force the morality that celebrates her to the bottom of the ocean, and let it's carcass rot there. Turn the symbolism around on the anti-Semitic West, and make the message thus: Those who terrorize, and support terror, will find the end of the road at the shores of Israel. Be it Rachel Corrie, or her moral descendants who attempt to honor her by trying to complete the mission Rachel so wholeheartedly skipped school for: The victory of Hamas over Israel.
The Rachel Corrie is an existential death ship. Let's sink the bitch before she completes her mission: The destruction of Israel....
UPDATE: Charles Krauthammer sums it up nicely:
The world is tired of these troublesome Jews, 6 million -- that number again -- hard by the Mediterranean, refusing every invitation to national suicide. For which they are relentlessly demonized, ghettoized and constrained from defending themselves, even as the more committed anti-Zionists -- Iranian in particular -- openly prepare a more final solution.
Thursday, June 03, 2010
Where in the world is...Susan Rice?
In case you don't know, Susan is the United States Ambassador to the United Nations. Well, why should you know? It's not as if she ever shows up to work:
Steal their Seoul in South Korea, make Antarctica cry Uncle,
From the Red Sea to Greenland they'll be singing the blues,
Well they never Arkansas her steal the Mekong from the jungle,
Tell me where in the world is Susan Rice?
(Sung, of course, to the tune of "Where in the World is Carmen Sandiego?")
While a US ally is under attack at the United Nations for defending itself, and all the forces of evil gather in the darkness in the hopes that this time, maybe, they can strike the death blow against the Jewish state, where is the US ambassador?
Who the f*ck knows?
Where was she this time? The United Nations Security Council held an emergency Security Council meeting Monday on Israel's raid of a ship headed to Gaza -- and the United States was represented by the deputy at the US Mission.
Reporters, UN members and activists were mystified as to why Susan Rice, the American Ambassador to the UN, was a no-show to the roughly 12-hour negotiations which left a key ally fending off global criticism without the top American diplomat to help.
This is competence, Obama-style:
Another reporter said, "It's Memorial Day. Rice doesn't show up during a normal week, why would she show on a holiday?"
Jeeeesus flippin' Christ.....
Well she glides around the globe and she'll flimflam every nation,
She's a double-dealing diva with a taste for thievery,
Her itinerary's loaded up with moving violations,
Tell me where in the world is Susan Rice??
To paraphrase a Bush I: "Message - I don't care"
Rice's absence sends a powerful message to the UN members attending the emergency meeting, unfortunately, the message is that she is either unable to lead or afraid of the consequences that come with taking a controversial stand.
It sends another, equally powerful message: Do whatever you want to Israel, we'll just sit and watch. We won't interfere, because we don't want to hurt your feelings, but we won't help you, because that might piss off an influential voting bloc.
Kind of like watching a rape and doing nothing about it because you're friends with the assailant's brother. Morality, Obama-style.
Well she'll ransack Pakistan and run a scam in Scandinavia,
Then she'll stick 'em up Down Under and go pick-pocket Perth,
She put the Miss in misdemeanor when she stole the beans from Lima,
Tell me where in the world is Susan Rice?
Oh tell me where in the world is... Oh tell me where can she be?
Steal their Seoul in South Korea, make Antarctica cry Uncle,
From the Red Sea to Greenland they'll be singing the blues,
Well they never Arkansas her steal the Mekong from the jungle,
Tell me where in the world is Susan Rice?
(Sung, of course, to the tune of "Where in the World is Carmen Sandiego?")
While a US ally is under attack at the United Nations for defending itself, and all the forces of evil gather in the darkness in the hopes that this time, maybe, they can strike the death blow against the Jewish state, where is the US ambassador?
Who the f*ck knows?
Where was she this time? The United Nations Security Council held an emergency Security Council meeting Monday on Israel's raid of a ship headed to Gaza -- and the United States was represented by the deputy at the US Mission.
Reporters, UN members and activists were mystified as to why Susan Rice, the American Ambassador to the UN, was a no-show to the roughly 12-hour negotiations which left a key ally fending off global criticism without the top American diplomat to help.
This is competence, Obama-style:
Another reporter said, "It's Memorial Day. Rice doesn't show up during a normal week, why would she show on a holiday?"
Jeeeesus flippin' Christ.....
Well she glides around the globe and she'll flimflam every nation,
She's a double-dealing diva with a taste for thievery,
Her itinerary's loaded up with moving violations,
Tell me where in the world is Susan Rice??
To paraphrase a Bush I: "Message - I don't care"
Rice's absence sends a powerful message to the UN members attending the emergency meeting, unfortunately, the message is that she is either unable to lead or afraid of the consequences that come with taking a controversial stand.
It sends another, equally powerful message: Do whatever you want to Israel, we'll just sit and watch. We won't interfere, because we don't want to hurt your feelings, but we won't help you, because that might piss off an influential voting bloc.
Kind of like watching a rape and doing nothing about it because you're friends with the assailant's brother. Morality, Obama-style.
Well she'll ransack Pakistan and run a scam in Scandinavia,
Then she'll stick 'em up Down Under and go pick-pocket Perth,
She put the Miss in misdemeanor when she stole the beans from Lima,
Tell me where in the world is Susan Rice?
Oh tell me where in the world is... Oh tell me where can she be?
Wednesday, June 02, 2010
In Los Angeles, Bravery Can Be Counted On One Finger
Is this Daniel, walking into the lion's den? David, facing Goliath? Or just another soul who realizes he must walk a very dangerous and difficult path alone, and whispers, "though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death, I fear no evil, for You are with me; Your rod and Your staff, they comfort me..."
One courageous, Israeli-born, American high-school student stood-up for his right to publicly support Israel - and a rally of hundreds of Muslim and far-leftist, pro-Palestine demonstrators nearly turned-into the lynch-mob they sought to downplay.
Outside of the Israeli Consulate to L.A. on Memorial Day, Daniel a Jewish high-school student defiantly waved the Israeli flag through a crowd of Israel-haters - to defend what he perceives as the Israeli Marines' justified handling of the Flotilla blockade when they came under attack.
The L.A.P.D. had to establish a human wall to intervene to protect Daniel (and afterwards, a couple of other Israel supporters) who stood-up in opposition to the mob mentality of the Gaza protesters, with their version of the facts of the case and rights of expression.
Flip to 1:20 or so, to hear the hateful shrieking of a Palestinian-American woman, her face contorted with rage at the sight of the Star of David. "I'll KILL you!" she screams....
Brave Daniel points out (around 4:00?) that these folks are not just agitating against the flotilla incident, they are calling for the overthrow of the Jewish democratic state, to be replaced by an Arab terrorist state.
This brave teen gets it (and shames many of us in the process with his innocent belief and bravery). Why doesn't Barack Obama, and the Democrats?
Or maybe they do get it, and share the aim of that spitting, frothing Palestinian female - an Israel replaced by Palestine. The ultimate redistribution, as well as the most fulfilling act of anti-semitism since the Holocaust.
Would certainly make their lives easier. Lack of morality often has that effect, though...
One courageous, Israeli-born, American high-school student stood-up for his right to publicly support Israel - and a rally of hundreds of Muslim and far-leftist, pro-Palestine demonstrators nearly turned-into the lynch-mob they sought to downplay.
Outside of the Israeli Consulate to L.A. on Memorial Day, Daniel a Jewish high-school student defiantly waved the Israeli flag through a crowd of Israel-haters - to defend what he perceives as the Israeli Marines' justified handling of the Flotilla blockade when they came under attack.
The L.A.P.D. had to establish a human wall to intervene to protect Daniel (and afterwards, a couple of other Israel supporters) who stood-up in opposition to the mob mentality of the Gaza protesters, with their version of the facts of the case and rights of expression.
Flip to 1:20 or so, to hear the hateful shrieking of a Palestinian-American woman, her face contorted with rage at the sight of the Star of David. "I'll KILL you!" she screams....
Brave Daniel points out (around 4:00?) that these folks are not just agitating against the flotilla incident, they are calling for the overthrow of the Jewish democratic state, to be replaced by an Arab terrorist state.
This brave teen gets it (and shames many of us in the process with his innocent belief and bravery). Why doesn't Barack Obama, and the Democrats?
Or maybe they do get it, and share the aim of that spitting, frothing Palestinian female - an Israel replaced by Palestine. The ultimate redistribution, as well as the most fulfilling act of anti-semitism since the Holocaust.
Would certainly make their lives easier. Lack of morality often has that effect, though...
Uh-Oh! Looks Like Chuckie Schumer Will Have A Fight On His Hands...
...as former CIA officer Gary Berntsen looks set to take on the incumbent Senator this November:
In a surge of support fueled by Tea Party activists, Republicans picked former CIA officer and author Gary Berntsen as their candidate against Sen. Chuck Schumer.
In two rounds of balloting, a majority of convention delegates backed Bentsen among a field of four candidates. But Jay Townsend, a political consultant who last week was endorsed by the Conservative Party, received enough support to force a primary in September....
Let's hope Republicans aren't suicidal enough to pick a party insider with no relevant experience to run for Senate. Berntsen, on the other hand, is literally an American hero:
Gary Berntsen is a decorated former Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) career officer who served in the Directorate of Operations between October 1982 and June 2005. During his time at the CIA, he served as a CIA Station Chief on three separate occasions and led several of CIA’s most important counterterrorism deployments including the United States’ response to the East Africa Embassy bombings and the 9/11 attacks. He was awarded the Distinguished Intelligence Medal in 2000 and the Intelligence Star in 2004.
In August 1998 Berntsen led the response team to the U.S. Embassy in Dar es Salaam. The subsequent investigation led to the capture of some 21 individuals involved with the planning and execution of the attacks.
In December 2001, Berntsen served as the Commander of all CIA forces in Eastern Afghanistan and led the agency’s Jawbreaker team in Tora Bora...
Did I mention this guy joined the Air Force when he was 18, and served for four years as a Crash Firefighter in the Air Force, including tours in Alaska and Korea?
Assuming Berntsen wins the primary, he's gonna give Chuckie a tough fight. Gary's already laying down a marker:
“No one is invincible, every contest is determined by the two combatants. He’s not going to like running against me.”
More, from the NY Daily News:
He started off with the story about Schumer getting mouthy with a flight attendant and "using the B word"... said he'd use the "A word" about Schumer (no, not that one! Arrogant, of course.)
- Berntsen said he's not only a proud Republican, but a proud member of the Tea Party.
- Berntsen says he wants to lower taxes, help small businesses.
- "We should not apologize, nor should we pursue policies of appeasement..."
- "I will pursue Sen. Schumer in every town, on every street and every village. I will not allow him to sit in Washington, D.C. and send out campaign notices..."
Schumer is one arrogant SOB, now convinced, like most DC insiders, that he is, and should be, untouchable. His support of the abhorrent, free-speech curtailing DISCLOSE Act is based on the belief it will make his opponents...shut the f*ck up:
The Disclose Act's reporting requirements are redundant, burdensome and intimidating.
Opposing an amendment that would have postponed the effective date until Jan. 1, Rep. Michael Capuano (D-Mass.) said he wants people to worry about a fine or prison sentence when they dare to speak ill of him.
Similarly, Sen. Charles Schumer (D-NY), upon unveiling the bill, said "the deterrent effect should not be underestimated."
So what else has Schmuckie Schumer been up to, besides squashing free speech?
-supporting the disastrous Stimulus Bill, which did nothing to alleviate unemployment in New York whatsoever
-ignoring his constituents and supporting the loathed Obamacare legislation, which will almost certainly bankrupt New York with new taxes, fees, and requirements
- ignoring the large Jewish population of his state, and abandoning Israel in order to curry favor with the administration
-ignoring the working people and municipalities of New York by abandoning Wall Street to the wolves of the Democratic party. Hey Chuck, whose tax revenue do you think pays for most of the social services in your freakin' state, anyway?
He's a target-rich environment. And Gary Bernsten is a man who has spent a career hitting the bull's-eye.
Chuckie the Dealmaker...meet Gary the Jawbreaker:
Good luck, Chuck...
In a surge of support fueled by Tea Party activists, Republicans picked former CIA officer and author Gary Berntsen as their candidate against Sen. Chuck Schumer.
In two rounds of balloting, a majority of convention delegates backed Bentsen among a field of four candidates. But Jay Townsend, a political consultant who last week was endorsed by the Conservative Party, received enough support to force a primary in September....
Let's hope Republicans aren't suicidal enough to pick a party insider with no relevant experience to run for Senate. Berntsen, on the other hand, is literally an American hero:
Gary Berntsen is a decorated former Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) career officer who served in the Directorate of Operations between October 1982 and June 2005. During his time at the CIA, he served as a CIA Station Chief on three separate occasions and led several of CIA’s most important counterterrorism deployments including the United States’ response to the East Africa Embassy bombings and the 9/11 attacks. He was awarded the Distinguished Intelligence Medal in 2000 and the Intelligence Star in 2004.
In August 1998 Berntsen led the response team to the U.S. Embassy in Dar es Salaam. The subsequent investigation led to the capture of some 21 individuals involved with the planning and execution of the attacks.
In December 2001, Berntsen served as the Commander of all CIA forces in Eastern Afghanistan and led the agency’s Jawbreaker team in Tora Bora...
Did I mention this guy joined the Air Force when he was 18, and served for four years as a Crash Firefighter in the Air Force, including tours in Alaska and Korea?
Assuming Berntsen wins the primary, he's gonna give Chuckie a tough fight. Gary's already laying down a marker:
“No one is invincible, every contest is determined by the two combatants. He’s not going to like running against me.”
More, from the NY Daily News:
He started off with the story about Schumer getting mouthy with a flight attendant and "using the B word"... said he'd use the "A word" about Schumer (no, not that one! Arrogant, of course.)
- Berntsen said he's not only a proud Republican, but a proud member of the Tea Party.
- Berntsen says he wants to lower taxes, help small businesses.
- "We should not apologize, nor should we pursue policies of appeasement..."
- "I will pursue Sen. Schumer in every town, on every street and every village. I will not allow him to sit in Washington, D.C. and send out campaign notices..."
Schumer is one arrogant SOB, now convinced, like most DC insiders, that he is, and should be, untouchable. His support of the abhorrent, free-speech curtailing DISCLOSE Act is based on the belief it will make his opponents...shut the f*ck up:
The Disclose Act's reporting requirements are redundant, burdensome and intimidating.
Opposing an amendment that would have postponed the effective date until Jan. 1, Rep. Michael Capuano (D-Mass.) said he wants people to worry about a fine or prison sentence when they dare to speak ill of him.
Similarly, Sen. Charles Schumer (D-NY), upon unveiling the bill, said "the deterrent effect should not be underestimated."
So what else has Schmuckie Schumer been up to, besides squashing free speech?
-supporting the disastrous Stimulus Bill, which did nothing to alleviate unemployment in New York whatsoever
-ignoring his constituents and supporting the loathed Obamacare legislation, which will almost certainly bankrupt New York with new taxes, fees, and requirements
- ignoring the large Jewish population of his state, and abandoning Israel in order to curry favor with the administration
-ignoring the working people and municipalities of New York by abandoning Wall Street to the wolves of the Democratic party. Hey Chuck, whose tax revenue do you think pays for most of the social services in your freakin' state, anyway?
He's a target-rich environment. And Gary Bernsten is a man who has spent a career hitting the bull's-eye.
Chuckie the Dealmaker...meet Gary the Jawbreaker:
Good luck, Chuck...
Tuesday, June 01, 2010
A Tea Party Grows in Manhattan...
...so I'm walking down a sweltering 7th avenue, looking to grab a slice and a Coke (no Pepsi, not ever, since their tie-in w/Barack Obama), when I see on the shimmering horizon...the Gadsden flag. More than one, apparently.
I get to the scene, in front of the Sheraton Hotel on 7th off of 53rd. And there stood a hardy band of some fifty to sixty Tea Partiers, fighting the good fight against...the New York GOP.
More from the Nassau Tea Party:
Gary Berntsen, American Hero and Tea Party candidate, is pushing the Republican party to nominate him to run against the incumbent statist Charles Schumer.
Gary, who had previously been endorsed by Tea Party groups on Long Island to run against congressman Tim Bishop, decided to take on the bigger challenge when it became apparent that the Republican party had no candidate with the visibility, credentials and popular support to take on the Schumer machine.
Bernsten is more than qualified:
He took on the Taliban as a clandestine C.I.A. officer, and was one of the first into Kabul during the American invasion in 2001...
Seems like Gary enlisted in the Air Force when he was 18, and served in the CIA from 1982-2005. He is a well-known National Security and Counter-Terror expert who received medals from both presidents Clinton and Bush for his clandestine service.
I don't know, but given that New York is constantly under the threat of terror, one would think nominating a man who will stand up to the president's insane policy of trying terror suspects in New York (Schumer is more concerned about his career than his constituents, and has already sacrificed them and their safety in order to gain brownie points with the Obama administration) is a complete no-brainer.
But based on the NY GOP's success rate, and their incredibly weak candidate recruitment in what is shaping up to be a wave year (is there anyone going up against the widely disliked waif Kristie Gillibrand yet? Unbelievable...), maybe "no-brainer" is an accurate description of the state's GOP leadership.
It was a enthusiastic, highly informed crowd which was more than pleased to talk to me (and any onlookers) on a day where the sidewalks are shimmering with summer heat:
Best of luck to them. If the Tea Party can spread roots in the Big Apple, it can flower and thrive anywhere...
I get to the scene, in front of the Sheraton Hotel on 7th off of 53rd. And there stood a hardy band of some fifty to sixty Tea Partiers, fighting the good fight against...the New York GOP.
More from the Nassau Tea Party:
Gary Berntsen, American Hero and Tea Party candidate, is pushing the Republican party to nominate him to run against the incumbent statist Charles Schumer.
Gary, who had previously been endorsed by Tea Party groups on Long Island to run against congressman Tim Bishop, decided to take on the bigger challenge when it became apparent that the Republican party had no candidate with the visibility, credentials and popular support to take on the Schumer machine.
Bernsten is more than qualified:
He took on the Taliban as a clandestine C.I.A. officer, and was one of the first into Kabul during the American invasion in 2001...
Seems like Gary enlisted in the Air Force when he was 18, and served in the CIA from 1982-2005. He is a well-known National Security and Counter-Terror expert who received medals from both presidents Clinton and Bush for his clandestine service.
I don't know, but given that New York is constantly under the threat of terror, one would think nominating a man who will stand up to the president's insane policy of trying terror suspects in New York (Schumer is more concerned about his career than his constituents, and has already sacrificed them and their safety in order to gain brownie points with the Obama administration) is a complete no-brainer.
But based on the NY GOP's success rate, and their incredibly weak candidate recruitment in what is shaping up to be a wave year (is there anyone going up against the widely disliked waif Kristie Gillibrand yet? Unbelievable...), maybe "no-brainer" is an accurate description of the state's GOP leadership.
It was a enthusiastic, highly informed crowd which was more than pleased to talk to me (and any onlookers) on a day where the sidewalks are shimmering with summer heat:
Best of luck to them. If the Tea Party can spread roots in the Big Apple, it can flower and thrive anywhere...
Israel vs. the world: The UN Security Council springs into action!
Sure, when Arab terrorists kills scores of Israeli civilians, or while Iran builds a bomb and swears that the Jews "ain't seen a Holocaust...yet", the UN Security Council sits on its hands or - at best - puts out a mealy-mouth resolution blaming both sides for dead Jews.
But should Israel seek to defend itself from Hamas affiliates claiming to be "peace activists" who were attempting to run a blockade of a terrorist state, well, that's when your trusty Security Council springs into action!
The U.N. Security Council called early Tuesday for an "impartial" investigation of Israel's deadly commando raid on ships taking humanitarian aid to the Gaza Strip and condemned the "acts" that resulted in the loss of at least nine lives.
Are these the acts that are being condemned? Let's take a look at what the IDF's video cameras recorded (although the truth is but a trifle in a case like this):
Jeez, what types of "peace activists" attack soldiers who board their ships unarmed? (the Israeli commandos were only carrying paintball guns). Maybe these types:
Prominent among the coalition organizations participating in the aid flotilla scheduled to arrive in the Gaza Strip ....is is the Turkish IHH (Insani Yardim Vakfi, IHH, “humanitarian relief fund”). It is a radical Islamic organization which was established in 1992 and formally registered in Istanbul in 1995. It is headed by Bülent Yildirim. …
In practice, besides its legitimate humanitarian activities, IHH supports radical Islamic terrorist networks. In recent years it has prominently supported Hamas (through the Union of Good). In addition, the ITIC has reliable information that in the past IHH provided logistical support and funding to global jihad networks.
IHH’s orientation is radical-Islamic and anti-American, and it is close to the Muslim Brotherhood(Hamas’ parent movement). IHH supports Hamas and does not hide the connection between them. Hamas also considers its links to IHH and Turkey to be extremely important, and regards Turkey as a target audience for its propaganda network (Palestine-Information, Hamas’ main website, has a Turkish version, and as of the end of 2009, the website of its military wing, the Izz al-Din al-Qassam Brigades, has also appeared in Turkish).
And here's where it went wrong for Israel - in their efforts to show the world they were being "gentle" with "peace activists", they had their commandos board these ships for the most part unarmed. Had they boarded them while armed to the teeth, most likely there would have been no offensive action against them , and few if any would have died (the first would have been the last). But the terrorists, filled to the brim with hatred, saw weakness, and attempted to exploit it, as they always do.
Israel should know better. The world hates them, no matter what they agree to, no matter what concessions they make, regardless of what portions of their national security they sacrifice. Next time there's a "peace flotilla" with know terrorists on them, greet 'em with a barrel of an Uzi. Given the craven cowardliness of most jihadis (brave when bombing civilians, and excellent at hiding behind them in a firefight), I doubt they would put up much of a struggle. Held after the fact, they might be worth a "diplomatic ransom" of some sort as well...
When it's you against the world, there is no scorecard, and no points given for gentlemanly behavior. Especially when the ref - in this case, the Security Council - is already bought off...
But should Israel seek to defend itself from Hamas affiliates claiming to be "peace activists" who were attempting to run a blockade of a terrorist state, well, that's when your trusty Security Council springs into action!
The U.N. Security Council called early Tuesday for an "impartial" investigation of Israel's deadly commando raid on ships taking humanitarian aid to the Gaza Strip and condemned the "acts" that resulted in the loss of at least nine lives.
Are these the acts that are being condemned? Let's take a look at what the IDF's video cameras recorded (although the truth is but a trifle in a case like this):
Jeez, what types of "peace activists" attack soldiers who board their ships unarmed? (the Israeli commandos were only carrying paintball guns). Maybe these types:
Prominent among the coalition organizations participating in the aid flotilla scheduled to arrive in the Gaza Strip ....is is the Turkish IHH (Insani Yardim Vakfi, IHH, “humanitarian relief fund”). It is a radical Islamic organization which was established in 1992 and formally registered in Istanbul in 1995. It is headed by Bülent Yildirim. …
In practice, besides its legitimate humanitarian activities, IHH supports radical Islamic terrorist networks. In recent years it has prominently supported Hamas (through the Union of Good). In addition, the ITIC has reliable information that in the past IHH provided logistical support and funding to global jihad networks.
IHH’s orientation is radical-Islamic and anti-American, and it is close to the Muslim Brotherhood(Hamas’ parent movement). IHH supports Hamas and does not hide the connection between them. Hamas also considers its links to IHH and Turkey to be extremely important, and regards Turkey as a target audience for its propaganda network (Palestine-Information, Hamas’ main website, has a Turkish version, and as of the end of 2009, the website of its military wing, the Izz al-Din al-Qassam Brigades, has also appeared in Turkish).
And here's where it went wrong for Israel - in their efforts to show the world they were being "gentle" with "peace activists", they had their commandos board these ships for the most part unarmed. Had they boarded them while armed to the teeth, most likely there would have been no offensive action against them , and few if any would have died (the first would have been the last). But the terrorists, filled to the brim with hatred, saw weakness, and attempted to exploit it, as they always do.
Israel should know better. The world hates them, no matter what they agree to, no matter what concessions they make, regardless of what portions of their national security they sacrifice. Next time there's a "peace flotilla" with know terrorists on them, greet 'em with a barrel of an Uzi. Given the craven cowardliness of most jihadis (brave when bombing civilians, and excellent at hiding behind them in a firefight), I doubt they would put up much of a struggle. Held after the fact, they might be worth a "diplomatic ransom" of some sort as well...
When it's you against the world, there is no scorecard, and no points given for gentlemanly behavior. Especially when the ref - in this case, the Security Council - is already bought off...
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)