Required Watching - Trojan Horse? Hardly

And these are the SUPPORTERS and the people BEHIND this push. They are the ones orchestrating it and making it happen. There's nothing "Trojan" about it - the only deception involved here is a lie directly to your face, and a laugh when you buy it.

Required Reading

A Hostile Takeover. Of the entire economy. By the government. People screeching, "That's NOT socialism!" Obama laughing as he insists "I don't want to run health care - I'm a busy guy!" as he takes over every industry in the united states. Sweeping new powers to the new titular heads of the FDA and every other bureaucracy in existence. This IS Atlas Shrugged. All that remains is the lights of New York going out.

It has been widely reported that Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson and Fed chief Ben Bernanke summoned the CEOs of America's nine largest financial institutions to a meeting on October 13, 2008, at which they were told that their banks would be required to accept TARP money and give the federal government an ownership interest in their institutions, whether they wanted to do so or not. We have it on good authority that some of the bankers, at least, were told that they would not be allowed to leave the room until they signed documents that were presented to them at that meeting.

These chilling reports have now been confirmed by Treasury documents that were obtained by Judicial Watch through a FOIA request. These were Paulson and Bernanke's "talking points" for the meeting. Click to enlarge:

Now read this. Seriously, I'll wait. It's got the link to the above quote, as well as a whole lot of other important stuff. And when you're done (which you should be now), read below (but click on the link where I got it from because I'm shamelessly stealing it.)

The Trial of Hank Rearden

For a month in advance, the people who filled the courtroom had been told by the press that they would see the man who was a greedy enemy of society; but they had come to see the man who had invented Rearden Metal.

He stood up, when the judges called upon him to do so. He wore a grey suit, he had pale blue eyes and blond hair; it was not the colours that made his figure seem icily implacable, it was the fact that the suit had an expensive simplicity seldom flaunted these days, that it belonged in the sternly luxurious office of a rich corporation, that his bearing came from a civilised era and clashed with the place around him.

The crowd knew from the newspapers that he represented the evil of ruthless wealth; and - as they praised the virtue of chastity, then ran to see any movie that displayed a half-naked female on its posters - so they came to see him; evil, at least, did not have the stale hopelessness of a bromide which none believed and none dared to challenge. They looked at him without admiration - admiration was a feeling they had lost the capacity to experience, long ago; they looked with curiosity and with a dim sense of defiance against those who had told them that it was their duty to hate him.

A few years ago, they would have jeered at his air of self-confident wealth. But today, there was a slate-grey sky in the windows of the courtroom, which promised the first snowstorm of a long, hard winter; the last of the country's oil was vanishing, and the coal mines were not able to keep up with the hysterical scramble for winter supplies. The crowd in the courtroom remembered that this was the case which had cost them the services of Ken Danagger. There were rumours that the output of the Danagger Coal Company had fallen perceptibly within one month; the newspapers said that it was merely a matter of readjustment while Danagger's cousin was reorganising the company he had taken over. Last week, the front pages had carried the story of a catastrophe on the site of a housing project under construction: defective steel girders had collapsed, killing four workmen; the newspapers had not mentioned, but the crowd knew, that the girders had come from Orren Boyle's Associated Steel.

They sat in the courtroom in heavy silence and they looked at the tall, grey figure, not with hope - they were losing the capacity to hope - but with an impassive neutrality spiked by a faint question mark; the question mark was placed over all the pious slogans they had heard for years.

The newspapers had snarled that the cause of the country's troubles, as this case demonstrated, was the selfish greed of rich industrialists; that it was men like Hank Rearden who were to blame for the shrinking diet, the falling temperature and the cracking roofs in the homes of the nation; that if it had not been for men who broke regulations and hampered the government's plans, prosperity would have been achieved long ago; and that a man like Hank Rearden was prompted by nothing but the profit motive. This last was stated without explanation or elaboration, as if the words "profit motive" were the self-evident brand of ultimate evil.

The crowd remembered that these same newspapers, less than two years ago, had screamed that the production of Rearden Metal should be forbidden, because its producer was endangering people's lives for the sake of his greed; they remembered that the man in grey had ridden in the cab of the first engine to run over a track of his own Metal; and that he was now on trial for the greedy crime of withholding from the public a load of the Metal which it had been his greedy crime to offer in the public market.

According to the procedure established by directives, cases of this kind were not tried by a jury, but by a panel of three judges appointed by the Bureau of Economic Planning and National Resources; the procedure, the directives had stated, was to be informal and democratic. The judge's bench had been removed from the old Philadelphia courtroom for this occasion, and replaced by a table on a wooden platform; it gave the room an atmosphere suggesting the kind of meeting where a presiding body puts something over on a mentally retarded membership.

One of the judges, acting as prosecutor, had read the charges. "You may now offer whatever plea you wish to make in your own defence," he announced. Facing the platform, his voice inflectionless and peculiarly clear, Hank Rearden answered:

"I have no defence."

"Do you --" The judge stumbled; he had not expected it to be that easy. "Do you throw yourself upon the mercy of this court?"

"I do not recognise this court's right to try me."

"What?"

"I do not recognise this court's right to try me."

"But, Mr. Rearden, this is the legally appointed court to try this particular category of crime."

"I do not recognise my action as a crime."

"But you have admitted that you have broken our regulations controlling the sale of your Metal."

"I do not recognise your right to control the sale of my Metal."

"Is it necessary for me to point out that your recognition was not required?"

"No. I am fully aware of it and I am acting accordingly."

He noted the stillness of the room. By the rules of the complicated pretence which all those people played for one another's benefit, they should have considered his stand as incomprehensible folly; there should have been rustles of astonishment and derision; there were none; they sat still; they understood.

"Do you mean that you are refusing to obey the law?" asked the judge.

"No. I am complying with the law - to the letter. Your law holds that my life, my work and my property may be disposed of without my consent. Very well, you may now dispose of me without my participation in the matter. I will not play the part of defending myself, where no defence is possible, and I will not simulate the illusion of dealing with a tribunal of justice."

"But, Mr. Rearden, the law provides specifically that you are to be given an opportunity to present your side of the case and to defend yourself."

"A prisoner brought to trial can defend himself only if there is an objective principle of justice recognised by his judges, a principle upholding his rights, which they may not violate and which he can invoke. The law, by which you are trying me, holds that there are no principles, that I have no rights and that you may do with me whatever you please. Very well. Do it."

"Mr. Rearden, the law which you are denouncing is based on the highest principle - the principle of the public good."

"Who is the public? What does it hold as its good? There was a time when men believed that 'the good' was a concept to be defined by a code of moral values and that no man had the right to seek his good through the violation of the rights of another. If it is now believed that my fellow men may sacrifice me in any manner they please for the sake of whatever they deem to e their own good, if they believe that they may seize my property simply because they need it - well, so does any burglar. There is only this difference: the burglar does not ask me to sanction his act."

A group of seats at the side of the courtroom was reserved for the prominent visitors who had come from New York to witness the trial. Dagny sat motionless and her face showed nothing but a solemn attention, the attention of listening with the knowledge that the flow of his words would determine the course of her life. Eddie Willers sat beside her. James Taggart had not come. Paul Larkin sat hunched forward, his face thrust out, pointed like an animal's muzzle, sharpened by a look of fear now turning into malicious hatred. Mr. Mowen, who sat beside him, was a man of greater innocence and smaller understanding; his fear was of a simpler nature; he listened in bewildered indignation and he whispered to Larkin, "Good God, now he's done it! Now he'll convince the whole country that all businessmen are enemies of the public good!"

"Are we to understand," asked the judge, "that you hold your own interests above the interests of the public?"

"I hold that such a question can never arise except in a society of cannibals."

"What ... do you mean?"

"I hold that there is no clash of interests among men who do not demand the unearned and do not practice human sacrifices."

"Are we to understand that if the public deems it necessary to curtail your profits, you do not recognise its right to do so?"

"Why, yes, I do. The public may curtail my profits any time it wishes - by refusing to buy my product."

"We are speaking of ... other methods."

"Any other method of curtailing profits is the method of looters - and I recognise it as such."

"Mr. Rearden, this is hardly the way to defend yourself."

"I said that I would not defend myself."

"But this is unheard of! Do you realise the gravity of the charge against you?"

"I do not care to consider it."

"Do you realise the possible consequences of your stand?"

"Fully."

"It is the opinion of this court that the facts presented by the prosecution seem to warrant no leniency. The penalty which this court has the power to impose on you is extremely severe."

"Go ahead."

"I beg your pardon?"

"Impose it."

The three judges looked at one another. Then their spokesman turned back to Rearden. "This is unprecedented," he said.

"It is completely irregular," said the second judge. "The law requires you submit to a plea in your own defence. Your only alternative is to state for the record that you throw yourself upon the mercy of the court."

"I do not."

"But you have to."

"Do you mean that what you expect from me is some sort of voluntary action?"

"Yes."

"I volunteer nothing."

"But the law demands that the defendant's side be represented on the record."

"Do you mean that you need my help to make this procedure legal?"

"Well, no ... yes ... that is, to complete the form."

"I will not help you."

The third and youngest judge, who had acted as prosecutor snapped impatiently, "This is ridiculous and unfair! Do you want to let it look as if a man of your prominence had been railroaded without a --" He cut himself off short. Somebody at the back of the courtroom emitted a long whistle.

"I want," said Rearden gravely, "to let the nature of this procedure appear exactly for what it is. If you need my help to disguise it - I will not help you." "But we are giving you a chance to defend yourself - and it is you who are rejecting it."

"I will not help you to pretend that I have a chance. I will not help you to preserve an appearance of righteousness where rights are not recognised. I will not help you to preserve an appearance of rationality by entering a debate in which a gun is the final argument. I will not help you to pretend that you are administering justice."

"But the law compels you to volunteer a defence!"

There was laughter at the back of the courtroom.

"That is the flaw in your theory, gentlemen," said Rearden gravely, "and I will not help you out of it. If you choose to deal with men by means of compulsion, do so. But you will discover that you need the voluntary co-operation of your victims, in many more ways than you can see at present. And your victims should discover that it is their own volition - which you cannot force - that makes you possible. I choose to be consistent and I will obey you in the manner you demand. Whatever you wish me to do, I will do it at the point of a gun. If you sentence me to jail, you will have to send armed men to carry me there - I will not volunteer to move. If you fine me, you will have to seize my property to collect the fine - I will not volunteer to pay it. If you believe that you have the right to force me - use your guns openly. I will not help you to disguise the nature of your action."

The eldest judge leaned forward across the table and his voice became suavely derisive: "You speak as if you were fighting for some sort of principle, Mr. Rearden, but what you're actually fighting for is only your property, isn't it?"

"Yes, of course. I am fighting for my property. Do you know the kind of principle that represents?"

"You pose as a champion of freedom, but it's only the freedom to make money that you're after."

"Yes, of course. All I want is the freedom to make money. Do you know what that freedom implies?"

"Surely, Mr. Rearden, you wouldn't want your attitude to be misunderstood. You wouldn't want to give support to the widespread impression that you are a man devoid of social conscience, who feels no concern for the welfare of his fellows and works for nothing but his own profit."

"I work for nothing but my own profit. I earn it."

There was a gasp, not of indignation, but of astonishment, in the crowd behind him and silence from the judges he faced. He went on calmly: "No, I do not want my attitude to be misunderstood. I shall be glad to state it for the record. I am in full agreement with the facts of everything said about me in the newspapers - with the facts, but not with the evaluation. I work for nothing but my own profit - which I make by selling a product they need to men who are willing and able to buy it. I do not produce it for their benefit at the expense of mine, and they do not buy it for my benefit at the expense of theirs; I do not sacrifice my interests to them nor do they sacrifice theirs to me; we deal as equals by mutual consent to mutual advantage - and I am proud of every penny that I have earned in this manner. I am rich and I am proud of every penny I own. I made my money by my own effort, in free exchange and through the voluntary consent of every man I dealt with - voluntary consent of those who employed me when I started, the voluntary consent of those who work for me now, the voluntary consent of those who buy my product. I shall answer all the questions you are afraid to ask me openly. Do I wish to pay my workers more than their services are worth to me? I do not. Do I wish to sell my product for less than my customers are willing to pay me? I do not. Do I wish to sell it at a loss or give it away? I do not. If this is evil, do whatever you please about me, according to whatever standards you hold. These are mine. I am earning my own living, as every honest man must. I refuse to accept as guilt the fact of my own existence and the fact that I must work in order to support it. I refuse to accept as guilt the fact that I am able to do it better than most people - the fact that my work is of greater value than the work of my neighbours and that more men are willing to pay me. I refuse to apologise for my ability - I refuse to apologise for my success - I refuse to apologise for my money. If this is evil, make the most of it. If this is what the public finds harmful to its interests, let the public destroy me. This is my code - and I will accept no other. I could say to you that I have done more good for my fellow men than you can ever hope to accomplish - but I will not say it, because I do not seek the good of others as a sanction for my right to exist, nor do I seek the good of others as a sanction for my right to exist, nor do I recognise the good of others as a justification for their seizure of my property or their destruction of my life. I will not say that the good of others was the purpose of my work - my own good was my purpose, and I despise the man who surrenders his. I could say to you that you do not serve the public good - that nobody's good can be achieved at the price of human sacrifices - that when you violate the rights of one man, you have violated the right of all, and a public of rightless creatures is doomed to destruction. I could say to you that you will and can achieve nothing but universal devastation - as any looter must, when he runs out of victims. I could say it, but I won't. It is not your particular policy that I challenge, but your moral premise. If it were true that men could achieve their good by means of turning some men into sacrificial animals, and I were asked to immolate myself for the sake of creatures who wanted to survive at the price of my blood, if I were asked to serve the interests of society apart from, above and against my own - I would refuse. I would reject it as the most contemptible evil, I would fight it with every power I possess, I would fight the whole of mankind, if one minute were all I could last before I were murdered, I would fight in the full confidence of the justice of my battle and of a living being's right to exist. Let there be no misunderstanding about me. If it is now the belief of my fellow men, who call themselves the public, that their good requires victims, then I say: The public good be damned, I will have no part of it!"

The crowd burst into applause.

Rearden whirled around, more startled than his judges. He saw face that laughed in violent excitement, and faces that pleaded for help; he saw their silent despair breaking out into the open; he saw the same anger and indignation as his own, finding release in the wild defiance of their cheering; he saw the looks of admiration and the looks of hope. There were also the face of loose-mouthed young men and maliciously unkempt females, the kind who led the booing in newsreel theatres at any appearance of a businessman of the screen; they did not attempt a counter-demonstration; they were silent.

As he looked at the crowd, people saw in his face what the threats of the judges had not been able to evoke: the first sign of emotion. It was a few moments before they heard the furious beating of a gavel upon the table and one of the judges yelling: " -- or I shall have the courtroom cleared!"

As he turned back to the table, Rearden's eyes moved over the visitor's section. His glance paused on Dagny, a pause perceptible only to her, as if he were saying: It works. She would have appeared calm except that her eyes seemed to have become too large for her face. Eddie Willers was smiling the kind of smile that is a man's substitute for breaking into tears. Mr. Mowen looked stupefied. Paul Larkin was staring at the floor. There was no expression on Bertram Scudder's face - or on his wife, Lillian's. She sat at the end of a row, her legs crossed, a mink stole slanting from her right shoulder to her left hip; she looked at Rearden, not moving.

In the complex violence of all the things he felt, he had time to recognise a touch of regret and longing: there was a face he had hoped to see, had looked for from the start of the session, had wanted to be present more than any other face around him. But Francisco d'Anconia had not come.

"Mr Rearden," said the eldest judge, smiling affably, reproachfully and spreading his arms, "it is regrettable that you should have misunderstood us so completely. That's the trouble - that businessmen refuse to approach us in a spirit of trust and friendship. They seem to imagine that we are their enemies. Why do you speak of human sacrifices? What made you go to such an extreme? We have no intention of seizing your property or destroying your life. We do not seek to harm your interests. We are fully aware of your distinguished achievements. Our purpose is only to balance social pressures and do justice to all. This hearing is really intended, not as a trial, but as a friendly discussion aimed at mutual understanding and co-operation."

"I do not co-operate at the point of a gun."

"Why speak of guns? This matter is not serious enough to warrant such references. We are fully aware that the guilt in this case lies chiefly with Mr. Kenneth Danagger, who instigated this infringement of the law, who exerted pressure upon you and who confessed his guilt by disappearing his guilt by disappearing in order to escape trial."

"No. We did it by equal, mutual, voluntary agreement."

"Mr. Rearden," said the second judge, "you may not share some of our ideas, but when all is said and done, we're all working for the same cause. For the good of the people. We realise that you were prompted to disregard legal technicalities by the critical situation of the coal mines and the crucial importance of fuel to the public welfare."

"No. I was prompted by my own profit and my own interests. What effect it had on the coal mines and the public welfare is for you to estimate. That was not my motive."

Mr. Mowen stared dazedly about him and whispered to Paul Larkin, "Something's gone screwy here."

"Oh, shut up!" snapped Larkin.

"I am sure, Mr. Rearden," said the eldest judge, "that you do not really believe - nor does the public - that we wish to treat you as a sacrificial victim. If anyone has been laboring under such a misapprehension, we are anxious to prove that it is not true."

The judges retired to consider their verdict. They did not stay out long. They returned to an ominously silent courtroom - and announced that a fine of $5,000 was imposed on Henry Rearden, but that the sentence was suspended. Streaks of jeering laughter ran through the applause that swept the courtroom. The applause was aimed at Rearden, the laughter - at the judges.

Rearden stood motionless, not turning to the crowd, barely hearing the applause. He stood looking at the judges. There was no triumph in his face, no elation, only the still intensity of contemplating the enormity of the smallness of the enemy who was destroying the world. He felt as if, after a journey of years through a landscape of devastation, past the ruins of great factories, the wrecks of powerful engines, the bodies of invincible men, he had come upon the despoiler, expecting to find a giant - and had found a rat eager to scurry for cover at the first sound of a human step. If this is what has beaten us, he thought, the guilt is ours.

He was jolted back into the courtroom by the people pressing to surround him. He smiled in answer to their smiles, to the frantic tragic eagerness of their faces; there was a touch of sadness in his smile.

"God bless you, Mr. Rearden!" said an old woman with a ragged shawl over her head. "Can't you save us, Mr. Rearden? They're eating us alive, and it's no use fooling anybody about how it's the rich that they're after - do you know what's happening to us?"

"Listen, Mr. Rearden," said a man who looked like a factory worker, "it's the rich who're selling us down the river. Tell those wealthy bastards, who're so anxious to give everything away, that **when they give away their palaces, they're giving away the skin off our backs**." "I know it," said Rearden.

The guilt is ours, he thought. If we who were the movers, the providers, the benefactors of mankind, were willing to let the brand of evil be stamped upon us and silently to bear punishment for our virtues - what sort of "good" did we expect to triumph in the world? He looked at the people around him. They had cheered him today; they had cheered him by the side of the track of the John Galt Line. But tomorrow they would clamour for a new directive from Wesley Mouch and a free housing project from Orren Boyle, while Boyle's girders collapsed upon their heads. They would do it, because they would be told to forget, as a sin, that which had made them cheer Hank Rearden.

Why were they ready to renounce their highest moments as a sin? Why were they willing to betray the best within them? What made them believe that this earth was a realm of evil where despair was their natural fate? He could not name the reason, but he know that it had to be named. He felt it as a huge question mark within the courtroom, which it was now his duty to answer.

This was the real sentence imposed upon him, he thought - to discover what idea, what simple idea available to the simplest man, had made mankind accept the doctrines that led it to self-destruction.

Link

Blabbermouth

Well, this marks 275 posts and I ain't been running this blog too long. I'm officially a blabbermouth. Yay!

Shoe on the Other Foot

And foot in the other mouth.

"I think that the only reason Barack Obama is in the White House is because he is black. I don’t believe he could have won had he been white.

Newt Gingrich

I think that the only reason Sotomayor is nominated for the Court is because she is Hispanic. I don't believe she could win if she were white. And the reason is, I think it is a cynical ploy by President Obama."

Michael Steele

"One awkward moment for Michelle Obama at the Yankee game, during the seventh inning, Malia got knocked-up by Alex Rodriguez. Later she visited Bloomingdale's to update her slutty flight attendant look."

Jay Leno

"But, Hillary Clinton to the Democrat Party, this is what I've got to say, she is very much like herpes, she's not going away."

Steven Crowder

Now why is it that you think that these comments have not been aired and screamed about by every media outlet from the New York Slimes to the Washington Compost - why aren't they all over television and radio tonight exactly? Where is the outrage? Well, I fudged them a little, that's why. The actual quotes weren't about Malia, Michelle, Obama, Sotomayor or Hillary at all. They were about Palin, Palin's 14 year old daughter Willow, Clarence Thomas, etc. And they weren't made by conservatives but Joe Biden, David Letterman, and some moron misnamed "Nice." Below are the actual quotes along with who said them.

I think that the only reason Clarence Thomas is on the Court is because he is black. I don’t believe he could have won had he been white. And the reason is, I think it was a cynical ploy by President Bush.

Joe Biden

One awkward moment for Sarah Palin at the Yankee game, during the seventh inning, her daughter was knocked-up by Alex Rodriguez.

Letterman on Willow, Palin's 14 year old daughter. The NYSlimes scrubbed the joke from their transcript of the show.

Visited Bloomingdale's to update her slutty flight attendant look.

Letterman

"But, Sarah Palin to the GOP, this is what I've got to say, she is very much like herpes, she's not going away." Chuck Nice, Today Show, unchallenged by the hosts.

Wright is up to his old tricks, only this time he makes Obama a big fat lying liar.

"Regret for what... that the media went back five, seven, 10 years and spent $4,000 buying 20 years worth of sermons to hear what I've been preaching for 20 years?

"Regret for preaching like I've been preaching for 50 years? Absolutely none," Wright said.

So much for "Well *I* never heard that kind of sermon in 20 years; musta been an off day.

Asked if he had spoken to the President, Wright said: "Them Jews aren't going to let him talk to me. I told my baby daughter, that he'll talk to me in five years when he's a lame duck, or in eight years when he's out of office. ...

Now we have one of our current heroes, Ziegler, who has been busy exposing the malpractice of the mainstream media especially in its failure to educate the public about the candidates in the last election, choosing instead the yellowest kind of journalism, on PMSNBC.

The reporter TRIES to ignore the rape joke about little Willow Palin and instead focus only on the slutty comment about Sarah Palin. He doesn't let her get away with that, though, and brings up the comment about the little girl. Not to be outdone, the reporter shows her true colors by saying that Palin shouldn't be offended by the jokes, then turning around and claiming SHE is offended that he said MSNBC anchors have less class than Palin. Rape jokes about little girls = not offensive. Slutty stewardess jokes about the governor of a state = not offensive. Saying a network has less class than said governor? = offensive. Got it. Huh?

Reality in the Age of Plenty

moar funny pictures

H/t to the Emperor. So all this money we spent did the predictable - it didn't go to the poor, it didn't go to mortgage holders, it didn't go to ANYTHING - it's just gone. All it did was kill jobs and kill business and buy corporations to be owned by the federal government to Obama could run them as Chief Executive and fire their leaders. He's taking the economy by storm - literally TAKING it. And this Teleprompter Jesus really thinks he can convince us to LIKE sacrificing our lifestyles and our jobs in the name of his socialist utopia - now he's telling them they're going to run out of political capitol by the end of the year so they have to push through the legislation on socialist health care by the end of August or they'll never get it. Gotta give him credit for knowing people aren't going to STAY in love with him when they're in soup lines and bread lines and gas lines, shivering in the winter because he's bankrupted the oil and coal industries as he promised to. The media will stay in love with him but the public tide will turn; in fact it already is. Not that I have a drop of sympathy for anyone who voted for this abortion, no matter how sorry they may be now. They are to blame for this mess and I won't let them forget it, nor forgive. Not when we tried SO HARD to warn them. No dice.

Anwyay, that graph is something, eh? Obama's numbers in blue - telling us how unemployment would be without his plan and with his plan. We pushed through the emergency plan and the real numbers? Through the roof. We're almost into double-digit unemployment now; nice, huh? So much for "saved or created". (I didn't go to McDonald's today - I saved or created 10 chicken nuggets and a soda!) Welcome back, Carter. We haven't missed you.

In case you think I'm exaggerating the media's complicity and over-the-top with the Teleprompter Jesus, remember, the media asserts that Obama is God - literally. Here are some clips for you to enjoy on that score.

Work. Wander. Rest When I Can.

And wrap cords around my throat and balls in Bangkok. Sucks when your childhood heroes die in embarrassing ways, don't it? Well, I still think I'll watch the Kung Fu pilot tonight - it's still great stuff. Maybe the episode with Jodi Foster - "Althea". Caine, the ultimate pacifist who can kick ass when he has to.

RIP you crazy old bastard.

The Gunslinger's Journal

I'd like to welcome the Gunslinger's Journal to my blogroll. Linked is the post that spurred my interest, but so far I likes what I sees! Good stuff!

It's "Historic."

If today's speech were 100 times shorter, and not so coy. Basically it amounted to,

Ladies and gentlemen, I'm declaring an official holiday for terrorism and terrorists - SMOKE 'em if you got 'em - hahaha, I mean jihad 'em. The smoke comes afterwards. Rim shot. No need to worry about being caught, apprehended, punished or pumped for information. And if you're in a party here in Arab land that's fighting for liberty or justice? Forget it, 'cause we ain't helping you with THAT noise. Our brave men and women in Iraq - don't make me laugh. What a waste of money that should be spent on Wagyu beef and arugula. Fuck those servicepeople. Israel? Fuck Israel, too. The wolves can have 'em. (Or, you know, you guys 'wink wink, nudge nudge.') What? This IS diplomacy, isn't it? Well it's my definition of diplomacy anyway.

He only got cheap applause when he either attacked the US or Israel. The US media is cumming in its collective pants over the eloquence of this treason and evil. Predictably, Palestinian (ptui) leaders here have already said that if he's not gonna do anything about it, they see no reason to compromise with Israel AT ALL. In fact, the Great One is promising to drive them back and give over Jerusalem to the Islamofascists, right? Holy hell - I have never been ashamed of my country until this day. My son is wondering how to join the IDF instead of the US Navy - at least he knows then what and who he's fighting for and answering to. Netanyahu, my prayers and goodwill are with you. To my Israeli friends, I will go down with you because never again. I can't tell you how sorry I am that such an evil man could rise to power here - though the Jews bear their fair share of blame - the Americanized leftist Jews who voted so heavily for him. Israelis seem to be another animal. This is the most sickening thing I've heard about since I can remember, and there's been plenty of sick to go around.

Osama Hates Obama

Al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden, in an audio recording aired on Wednesday by Al Jazeera television, said Obama had planted the seeds of "revenge and hatred" towards the United States in the Muslim world and he warned Americans to prepare for the consequences.

A day earlier, the militant network's second-in-command Ayman al-Zawahri urged Egyptians not to be seduced by Obama's 'polished words' when he makes a major address in Cairo seeking to repair ties with the Muslim world.

Funnie, that. Of course Reuters insists that shows Al Qaeda is cracking under the strain...odd how 7 years with no attacks (despite plans) on us showed a LACK of strain. Wonder when people will cotton to the fact that we didn't MAKE these psychos hate us; THEY. JUST. DO. And no amount of bowing with your head to the floor for Saudi Princes and speeches on Al Jazeera or wherever the hell is going to change that.

But Abdel-Bari Atwan, editor of London-based daily al-Quds al-Arabi, said Zawahri's words showed al Qaeda was panicking. But Abdel-Bari Atwan, editor of London-based daily al-Quds al-Arabi, said Zawahri's words showed al Qaeda was panicking.

"They know Obama is popular in a huge part of the Arab and Muslim world because the man is actually trying to address America's record in the region," he said."Zawahri is desperate. There is no substantial argument in his piece: He cannot say like he did with Bush that 'this is the man who killed a million Iraqis and supports the Israelis'. Everybody knows Obama is at odds with the Israelis."

Have you informed Obama of this? More importantly, have you informed the American people? The Jews? Israel? 'Cause shhhhhh - he's TWYING to keep that a SEEKWET right now, fool!

Moron leftist quote of the day - multiple stupidity all in one quote!

"To uphold the integrity of our Constitution for ourselves and for the world, it is important" that the U.S. close the Guantanamo prison, said Diana Jones, 68, a Democrat from Timonium, Md., who has faith in Obama's terror-battling abilities. "We need to treat other counties as we would want them to treat us." Plus, she added, keeping the prison open puts U.S. troops overseas at risk.

Yeah, they aren't already at risk. And treating terrorist supporting countries like we want to be treated - that works. A lot. And terrorists are really concerned whether we uphold our constitution - they don't even understand it LOL. By the way, dipshit, that's not "terrorism," that's "man-caused disaster" to you! How soon they forget...

Literal Video

Great concept. Search it on youtube. Here's a couple to get you started:

My Final Word on Tiller

About Tiller. Meh. What Misha said. What Gonzman said. The left claims the right is celebrating - uh, yeah, right. I guess universal condemnation is celebration. They're celebrating all the points they believe they've now scored against conservatives. Thatisall.

Except perhaps for a movie I'd like you to see called "22 weeks." It's a true story about a girl who went for an abortion at 22 weeks, who ended up delivering the baby in the bathroom. When she saw the baby's struggles, she lost it and begged them to call 911 to save the baby. They instead locked her in the bathroom, refusing to call 911 while she screamed and begged and pounded on the door. Her friend, hearing, called 911 and the clinic TURNED AWAY the ambulance. When the baby finally died, they let her out and called rescue services...to put her in a mental evaluation. 22 Weeks is her story, based on 911 calls and eyewitness testimony.

Dumb Moonbat Quote of the Day

From Shakespeare's Sister - who apparently doesn't have even an infinitesimal shred of the brains of the bard:

Lest you think that Steele was actually motivated by principle, he justified his admonishment by noting that the "liberal media" isn't on Republicans' side, so they'll "get painted as a party that's against the first Hispanic woman" nominated to the Supreme Court. See, it's not problematic that they are against her on the basis that she's a Latina woman, but it is problematic when the media actually frames it that way.

Yes, she's serious.

Sotomayor: "I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn't lived that life."

Like the "wise" decision to deny a dyslexic firefighter who worked his ass off to learn to read so he could study and pass his test his promotion, because no black men passed the test and he was white.

Prima facie - not fit to be a supreme court justice. I don't give a fuck what color she is or what her story is.

Rewind to Clarence Thomas and we hear the reporter Julianne dumbass saying right on the McLaughlin Group (NOT in blog comments, hello, but right on television) that "This man is on the court...I hope his wife feeds him a lot of butter and eggs and he dies, like so many black men do, of a heart attack." Could you picture if anyone said anything like that? Actually one person did - IN BLOG COMMENTS, about her diabetes. You can dig up any filth online, right? Though even his comment wasn't racist like the one about Thomas. But I'm talking about a reporter on a serious news show on television saying this right out loud. Could you IMAGINE?

People had no problem when it was Thomas, being racists on the left, because Thomas is a black man who refuses to be treated or behave as a token, or a pet - and that is how far leftists like Shakes view their people of color. Like pampered pets. It's disgusting. And it is racist as hell. See below for another black woman who would NOT be treated like a pet - for how the left treated her in print.

No, almost no one is against this woman because she's Spanish - who gives a shit about that? But we are against her because she's unfit for the office - she does not understand the division of powers and believes legislation should be made from the bench - which is not the purpose of judges, it's the purpose of legislators. Prima facie - not fit for the position.

Oddly, even her supporters have acknowledged that she is not the brightest bulb in the tanning bed - apparently when circuit judges pass around decisions for debate, she corrects their grammar and spelling instead of addressing the issues at hand, or, you know, THE LAW. But she's got a great story! That one I got from someone who LIKES her - but, you know, as Ace referenced the other day, I suppose dumb people need representation too, right? God help us.

Two Great Videos

Direct thanks to IMAO for both - I can't wait for this show to come out!

This one is part of a series on economics and American values that I am finding fascinating. Just go to IMAO and look up the "Capitalist Propaganda" series for the rest, or access the series directly here. This one touches on why minimum wage hikes are useless and counter-ptorudctive in the long run. The whole series is amazing.

Velociworld

"The worst, of course, is Life After People. This is nothing more than a thrill ride for the Earth Firsters and other ecoterrorists of the Voluntary Human Extinction Movement who think mankind should be eliminated from the biosphere. Whereas the History Channel formerly had erudite scholars discussing serious issues they now have burned out, ponytailed hippie cocksuckers with titles such as "urban ecologist" rubbing their hands together, barely able to contain their glee, as they recount what will happen when humans disappear, and the traces of humanity from buildings to monuments to sacred texts and documents to the lowliest footprint are wiped clean from Gaia's mons pubis. It's a singularly disgusting bit of theater. Everyone involved in this putrescent spectacle should be ashamed."

A thing of beauty is a joy forever. And my friends, that is beautiful. I'd like to welcome Velociworld to the blogroll because I'm dying to see what he'll say next. He's already DEMOLISHED David Attenborough's bukkakic glee over the stupid squirrel fossil that frankly, can not possibly be what they claim it is. (See the May 19th entry for why that is.) I'm crushing. And not your head. Alas, he is in love with another blogger and doesn't know I exist. :D

Countdown to Doomsday

You were worried about the Kyoto Accord? Welcome to Copenhagen. We're walking right into it, and it's going to be a lot worse than the Kyoto. I'm predicting full-scale global depression (already started thanks to Kyoto) and no defense against the coming ice age. I've included the countdown clock in my sidebar for handy reference. Mark the days until our destruction is complete.

You see that little green car? I want to smash it like the bug it is. I wouldn't even have to put my boots on.

Kneecapping Barry

Holy crap, did anyone hear any of Cheney's speech today duelling with Barry's long-winded shit about closing Guantanamo (when just yesterday they said they knew it had been a hasty pronouncement)?

Because I'm impressed. Dick is just out there positively KNEECAPPING Obama, HAMSTRINGING the guy, and it's a beautiful, beautiful thing to see. Even seeing how mad he gets and how defensive, making further hasty pronouncements to cover it all with bluster (We're closing it and that's that! HarUMPH! Neiner neiner!) is beautiful. Cheney, I don't know why you saved up all your defense for NOW but I'm not sorry you did. Talk about giving the left the rope to hang themselves with - you gave them 7 YEARS worth of rope and they're hanging out to dry now. Lovin' it in New Jersey, Cheney!

Also, did anyone notice they passed that ridiculous credit card rights bill but slipped in the thing about being able to carry guns in national parks? I thought that was pretty cool and clever, but the Brady Bunch is up in arms (er...non-arms?) about it, saying families shouldn't have to face down an AK-47 when they're on a nature hike. Because that is something that happens. Law-abiding gun owners hold families at gunpoint on their nature hikes every day. And families without guns end up dead because of that. Tsk tsk.

Weird Article About Obama - Deconstruction in F Minor

This article is called "Notes Toward a Theory of Obama. What we've learned so far about the president." Because they're just NOW trying to actually learn something about him or even formulate a theory about the guy. They didn't give a shit about that when the election was on the line.

Barack Obama began his presidency with an unusual attribute: that the country already understood him, or thought it did, from his books.

Yeah, right. The only people who read those things were the conservatives, and they didn't find much to be happy about inside them.

The story he told in Dreams From My Father and reinforced in The Audacity of Hope was about a man of multiple worlds who struggles to come to terms with his father's abandonment and a confounding racial identity. Obama resolves his rootlessness and anger by committing himself socially, religiously, and, eventually, politically. He depicts his mature self as unusually grounded, able to see other points of view and to bridge chasms.

Uh-huh. Yeah, see 'cause I sort of had the picture of a Marxist Alinsky-ite supporter of Ayers' Prairie Fire who was a third-generation communist red diaper baby radical deconstructionist along the lines of Hillary only worse. One who was raised solely by the white side of his family, learning communism at his grandmother's dear white knee, then throwing her under the bus. Of course, you could have learned all this if you'd bothered reading them or engaging in any research BEFORE it was too late, but that would have been too hard. Then Palin might have been VP and blown up the world with her stupidity! Also, I'm pretty sure Obama was also pretty committed to the pipe for a while there. You forgot to mention that. I'm sure he could bridge a chasm from the alley to the nearest crack den. If they made it into a Wii game.

The protagonist of these books is a persuasive and appealing character—so much so that he left little demand for alternative explanations.

Don't blame him, MSM. You did that all by yourselves. You put your hands on your ears and screamed "LALALALA PALIN IS STUPID HILLBILLY! BURN WITCHES!" instead of your JOB investigating this guy and his associations and what he might actually DO if he were elected. After all, he hadn't done anything in any office yet except leapfrog up to the next office...what to do when one has reached the top with no record to speak of?

As time goes by, though, Obama's Obama feels less and less satisfying.

Bwahaha! Wiping eyes. Oh. You were serious. How bizarre.

It's not that the author's projection of himself is distorted in any obvious way

Well if it isn't, then you people have a HELL of a lot of explaining to do. Why on EARTH didn't you warn the people what he is? Oh, you're Marxist? You WANT a fascist totalitarian state and liberty means nothing to you? Social justice trumps liberty? Yeah I guess so.

but rather that it leaves too much unexplained—his ambition, his aloofness, his fundamental beliefs, if any.

Oof. IF ANY, huh? Yeah, except you're full of shit. Obama put plenty in there about his beliefs, if any - how about the bit about in order not to be seen as a sellout he chose his friends very carefully, like the Marxist professors? That raised a few alarm bells to those who actually, you know, READ it. Parse that claim, by the way - is he a sellout; was it only about image or was it about belief? He chose to cultivate a reputation as a Marxist, but is he? No, I think it's worse than that. He's a megalomaniac. But I get ahead of myself.

It's too soon to offer an interpretation of our president. But after four months in office, we can see some emerging themes.

It's not too soon. The day after the inauguration was not too soon. Until Jan 21st he kept stringing us along, REFUSING to say anything concrete about what he intended to do, just sort of going along with the reassuring theme, but peppering it and souring it with more pessimism so we wouldn't be too shocked. But we had NO idea what he would do because he wouldn't say. Within days it became clear that this was full-out Alinsky Rules for Radicals Cloward-Piven Strategy and we had lived to see it. A new foreign relations nightmare, attacks on the CIA and prior administrations (something you seldom see outside those 3rd World Countries - and don't give me that "developing nation" bullshit because we're well on our way to becoming a 3rd world country ourselves with these economic plans and the squatters movement and Acorn and politicizing the census and everything else - so you'll learn the difference SOON ENOUGH.) No, it's not too soon to judge Obama by a longshot - he has committed the most HISTORIC level of spending madness and the most enormous power grab - in fact, more than any of the 40+ presidents before him COMBINED. For 200 years none of them have managed this and all within the first 3 months. Oh yeah, we can judge. Maybe you can't, but you're an MSM drone.

But no, seriously, I can't WAIT to see what you THINK are emerging themes from the Obama administration. What do you want a bet that you are NOT coming to the same conclusions I could have told you 8 months ago, 4 months ago, 3 months ago? What do you want a bet that you still don't see what's right in front of your fucking face and will continue with your inverse relationship* with the truth that the left always has?

*I have been developing a simple theory about the inverse relationship the left has with the truth and reality. I'll give you the mathematical formula soon, though I may simplify it.

He sees the middle ground as high ground. Candidates who talk about bringing people together, being uniters not dividers, or changing the tone in Washington are usually blowing happy smoke. At this point, however, Obama's focus on reconciliation is clearly more than shtick. We saw this impulse at work when he made pre-emptive concessions on his stimulus package in an unsuccessful effort to win Republican support.

Theorem proven and I haven't even postulated it yet in print! Holy hell. THAT is the middle ground?? This guy? The most radical president we've EVER had in our entire history, is the middle grounder? So Bush was blowing smoke when he talked about being a uniter, and that was a bad thing, but Obama really IS a uniter, and that's a bad thing. (You'd have to invert everything IN that sentence to make it true at all.) Um...are you people mental? So...he made some concessions in the stimulus bill and got it from a trillion down to slightly less than a trillion. You realize that's like giving me a penny out of $100,000 and telling me I should be grateful right? And I'm sorry, not a single fucking legislator got to READ the thing before they signed it - the concessions were obviously the original plan - ask for a hugely scary amount so that you can get a slightly smaller hugely scary amount because then it doesn't sound as scary - it's a tactic children know how to use, you idiot. Most of the things that were debated and taken out were put back in, you know. Like the contraception shit and what the fuck else ever. I can tell you for sure there's no help for you if you're losing your home unless you have a loan through Freddie Mac or Fannie Mae, and even then there's nothing. The whole stimulus was a huge scam and not one of us is to be helped by it, including people who needed help. Not that spending a trillion to stimulate the economy was sane to begin with. Then the guy pushes for and gets a multi-trillion dollar budget - and you call that MIDDLE GROUND? You're truly fucked in the head.

Every few days, it seems, Obama, tries for a "new beginning"—with Iran, Cuba, the Muslim world, even Paul Krugman. Engaging with opponents animates him more than hanging with friends.

First of all, we get it already. Obama wants to curry favor with and kowtow to our enemies while alienating our friends. This is nothing to be pleased about, but you don't seem to "get" why. And get serious - Paul Krugman is NOT Obama's opponent - Paul is just pissed that Obama isn't quite socialist ENOUGH for his liking and Paul is nothing but a leftard political shit-stirrer to begin with. He's no economist.

This is a wonderful instinct that is bettering America's image and making domestic politics more civil.

Uh...what? Yeah, not from this side of the aisle. I don't see anything "civil" about selling out the CIA and our national security, vilifying anyone who happens to actually be conservative, ordering fatwas against private CITIZENS who happen to be conservative (Rush Limbaugh, for example) or the way conservatives are portrayed in the media, by the left and the alleged "moderate" RINOs. I'm sure it all feels very cozy and civil to the left, but not from where I'm standing, with you all destroying national security AND trying to ban our guns and destroy the economy.

But listening is not a moral stance, and elevating it to one only highlights the question of what Obama really stands for.

You thought it was a moral stance when you CLAIMED that Bush wasn't listening to you. (Which is such nonsense - one of the first things he did was YOUR abominable education bill with Ted the Swimmer Kennedy - and then you've spent the last 6 years excoriating BUSH for what a horrible bill it was.) I know what you really mean, assmunch - you're mad that you think Obama's listening to the conservatives. Stfu and stop wringing your hands - he's NOT.

The consensus-seeker repudiates torture but doesn't want to investigate it; he endorses gay equality but not in marriage or the military; he thinks government's role is to do whatever works. I continue to suspect him of harboring deeper convictions.

Huh?

He's the decider for real. Accounts of Obama's decision-making depict him driving process as well as result. Faced with a tough call about whether to declassify additional Bush administration torture memos, Obama called a debate, listened intently, and finished by dictating the next day's press release announcing the release of the documents.

So he called a debate with 5 CIA directors including Leon Panetta all dead set against this attack on our Intelligence, and with his own people, then did exactly what his people thought he should, immediately upon this intent "listening." So your complaint that listening is not a moral stance is moot, because it doesn't matter how much he pretends he listens; he does exactly what he wants, what he intended to do from the beginning, and generally exactly the wrong thing. I'd say he has his stance pretty well fixed. Oh, except for the fact that he backed off on releasing the pictures because if he did that, Pelosi was going to go down in flames. (Contrary to popular belief, she will not melt when doused with water, but she will multiply. And who fed her after midnight anyway?)

Another insider ticktock has him personally directing the futures of GM and Chrysler.

You say that like it's a good thing.

The president's knack for deep dives into policy questions is undeniably impressive. But as quick a study as he is, his supreme self-confidence may shade into overconfidence. He shows signs of suffering from the arrogance that often accompanies brilliance. It's unlikely, for instance, that Obama can function as his own grand strategy guru on foreign policy. But he doesn't seem inclined to give that job to anyone else.

You just realized NOW he's arrogant? See, the rest of us have gotten past that a long time ago. We're just realizing it's way beyond arrogance - there's actual megalomania here. I wish you people would keep up once in a while. WE told you he was arrogant a year ago.

He was quickly bored in the Senate, where it took too long to get things done. When he was thinking about running for president, his question was whether the moment would be ripe for a great leader.

He didn't DO anything in the senate - it was a stepping stone, and in his infamous interview on Chicago radio from 2001 shows, that was the plan all along. Duh. Each step was just a rung on a ladder to get executive power with huge ground support - my God, don't you people even read what the man has SAID before you report on him? He used to be really pretty open and aboveboard about his plans, you know. It just takes a little bit of research. And the bit about the great leader made me throw up in my mouth a little. Thanks a lot. The idiot young masses were ripe for a change of any sort - every 4 - 8 years it happens; the word "change" becomes THE word, the only word, that is needed to bring all the dipshits into action. I've seen it many times and expect to see it many more.**

One day last month, he faced decisions about the fate of the auto industry, a new strategy for the war in Afghanistan, a North Korean missile threat, and a flood in Fargo, N.D.

Maybe the president shouldn't decide the fate of the auto industry - was that the day he fired the CEO or whatever? Yeah, real powermonger we got. There is nothing worth fighting for in Afghanistan; redoubling our efforts there is stupid and a smokescreen. And Pelousy already blew the help we had from Pakistan in dealing with terrorist cells still coming out of Afghanistan, you fools. The North Korean missile threat? He didn't give a damn. They asked if he wanted them to shoot it down and he said "Oh hell no. Kim Jong Il, Don't MAKE me have to issue a statement!" Considering his lack of response to the people who were freezing to death in Kansas I don't want to know what he didn't do about the flood. The press is never going to eat him alive like they did Bush on Katrina - blaming HIM for the weather and the city's lack of planning and competency for emergencies despite being below sea level in a hurricane zone - puhlease. Obama could preside over thousands of deaths and destruction like that, do nothing, and still won't get the same shit Bush has.

The question here is capacity, not capability. Can any one person simultaneously manage so many issues in the hands-on way Obama insists on managing them?

Two words again - Cloward-Piven Strategy. He doesn't want them taken care of; that isn't the purpose of this administration. The purpose right now is to break it all to pieces so that it can be remade in his image. The time of occupying from the inside, a la Alinsky, is complete. Now it's smashing time.

He's ruthless.

No argument there.

He's ruthless. In a recent interview with the New York Times, Obama described his economic policy as "ruthless pragmatism."

Bwahahah! I never knew reckless abandon towards the goal of utter dismantlement was pragmatic - only he could have said such a thing with a STRAIGHT FACE. Though he has been known to cackle inappropriately about the economy, I can see him in utter seriousness calling this rampant mad lunacy of a spending spree "ruthlessly pragmatic" without cracking a smile. Though he might scratch his face with his middle finger while he said it.

Interesting choice of modifiers. Obama has a healthy disdain for the overrated virtue of political loyalty. Around the nomination process, this has been slightly chilling to watch. If you're useful, you can hang around with him. If you start to look like a liability, enjoy your time with the wolves. Before the inauguration, Christopher Hitchens described Obama as feline in his demeanor. The president is catlike also in his lack of evident affection for the people who take care of him. His cracks at the White House Correspondents' Dinner about Hillary Clinton being an envious loser, Larry Summers' woman problem, and training his dog not to pee on Tim Geithner skirted cruelty. Obama's jokes about himself were about how great everyone thinks he is.

Hmm, you didn't get the hint when he threw his grandmother and Rev. Wright under the bus? As well as Ayers? Morons. And that last sentence, I've read a column about that somewhere...where did I read that? Oh, yeah, Ann Coulter wrote it a while ago. Thanks for noticing. Starting to realize we were right, juuuuust a little bit, aren't you? Except no, you can never ever allow yourself to think that, so you come up with this stupid shit. Enjoy the mess you've caused - you'll get no pity from me. Ever.

**I told my son sometime in January 2008 that I was dreading this election, because at some point the left was just going to stop talking and start screaming the word "CHANGE!" and that was all it was really going to take. I was right to dread this election, and for many moons refused to even hear a word about it from anyone, until Sarah Palin was announced. But I called it. These people are predictable as balls rolling down slopes - and there's nothing "new" or "changey" about it. It's just another word they use for leverage.

Rev. Manning on Revolution

I tend to look at things politically rather than through the lens of my faith here, but sometimes someone pokes me and I can't help but see it through my faith. This is one of those times.

Yay, A New Post!

It's possible Cheney remains a stalwart defender of conservative principle to cover for his activities leading the Dick Cheney Executive Assassination Squad. Shhhh, it's a secret.

My friends, I am just as dismayed as you at the utter GLUT of news that has continued to pile up day by day by day since November 4th, and am as overwhelmed as you are. I don't intend to stop blogging, but I surely can't cover it all - please refer to Moonbattery, Newsbusters, The Rottweiler, and various other blogs on my roll to keep up with all the happenings, all right? I am only one person, I'm busy, and I am looking to become even busier. But here's one that interested me.

Why IS Dick Cheney so chatty all of a sudden?

Off the top of my head I can think of many reasons. For one, he's finally free of the constraints of actually having to make decisions regarding national security without being a camera whore, he is finally free of the constraints of having wackos trying to handcuff him on stage (ok, so that was Rove) and screaming "BuCheneyHitler!" at him (well, ok, maybe not) every time he shows his face, and last but not least, our new administration has decided to release sensitive and important national security documents and lessen our national security - security which Cheney has worked really fucking hard to build up for the last 8 years or so. I might "chat" a little myself. I might start to defend myself for once as well, waking up and realizing "Wow, it's not all up to me anymore...but the new guy sure is fucking it up - I better speak up now."

One of the main differences between the Clinton administration and the Bush administration, was that right away you knew you weren't going to be seeing these guys on television all. the. fucking. time. They weren't big camera whores, they weren't going on Leno, they weren't doing endless photo ops, holding hands and shaking babies world without end. After 8 years of IN-YOUR-FACE, we had some peace and quiet, and we could, within limits, ignore Washington. Contrary to leftist opinion, this is a positive thing. As far as national security, I had some confidence that these people actually did have the best interests of the country at heart, DID intend to keep the US safe and free, and I felt that on that particular score at least, I had reason for confidence - reason to say, "SOME things just have to be secret. It's the nature of the beast." You don't, for example, go blabbing the location of secret Pakistani ally bases helping combat terrorism to the world at large (cough-Pelosi-cough).

With the advent of the new-style hopey changey chop suey, all that changed. This was not just going to be a transparent administration (well...transparent about certain things and not others - certainly transparent about the prior administration!) it became clear that we were once again under the leadership of megalomaniac narcissists who intended each and every day in each and every way to be IN OUR FACES. It was not going to be possible to ignore them to any degree because they are camera whores the likes of which we haven't seen since Billy-boy and his associates. These people mean to be stars, and stars they are! And in order to detract from their utter incompetence and asininity, one of their tactics has been to expose the secret intelligence of the past administration. It had the opposite of the effect they'd intended, so they're gonna try to make it into a...hehe, well, into a federal case. Tried, of course, in the popular newsmedia. Coolness counts! SWAGGA matters! (I'd like to turn a duck gun on that reporter who compared Obi-wan to Billy Dee Williams and Shaft - this guy is so whitebred, so Don No-Soul-Simmons that the very idea of him having the same kind of "cool" as Billy Dee or Shaft or Dolemite is asinine. He possesses the elite urbanite coolness that is popular with white latte-sipping leftists; not SWAGGA FFS.)

On to their speculation as to why he's talking now. First they describe with breathless pearl-clutching how busy Dick and Liz Cheney's schedules have been. Dickses and Lizzes and schedules, oh my! Those tricksy Cheneys!

Parsing Cheney — code-named Angler by the Secret Service — is a lot like fishing in dark water; there's a lot going on underneath, but you'd never know it from staring at the surface. So let's take Cheney's own stated explanation first. The former Veep says he's worried that by dismantling a controversial Bush-era terrorist surveillance program and stepping back from harsh interrogation policies, the Obama Administration is putting the nation at risk. "I think it's fair to argue," said Cheney, "that we're not going to have the same safeguards we've had for the last eight years."

Man, if I have a secret code name with the Secret Service, I hope it's something awesome like "Angler." Um, I guess it doesn't matter anymore that people know this secret code name? I hope not, since they just reported it. However, that explanation makes perfect sense and I'd say he's understating the case. Emphasis mine to show the editorialization of this article. See, it's not labeled Op/Ed, but it am anyway!

Cheney is clearly troubled both by Obama's rollback of the policies he championed and the buzz on the left that a sitting President might prosecute a predecessor who took those policies too far. Cheney has repeatedly charged the White House with proceeding with prosecutions against the Justice Department lawyers who found the legal basis for the policies and the CIA officers who executed them. But Cheney is reaching: Obama has stopped short of calling for anything more than a probe into the genesis of the Bush-era tactics. True, a probe might well lead to more questions about Cheney's conduct, but Obama has specifically ruled out legal action against the CIA officers.

No, they were satisfied with naming, publishing photos, and telling us where those officers now work. Why prosecute when you can paint a target on their heads instead? Also, who cares where Obama has stopped short? The guy's an incompetent boob so far as the nitty gritty and an evil supergenius insofar as the big picture - he also lies through his teeth. His stopping short now will mean nothing a month from now. Cheney is right to be worried.

Now here's the part that killed me - no need to emphasize anything because it's pure spin and it's...insane.

A more likely explanation is that Cheney, who championed the idea of preemptive-attack doctrine as Vice President, knows that in politics as well the best defense is often a good offense. With the White House decision to release various Bush-era memos on interrogation, and the coming disclosure of thousands more photographs from Abu Ghraib later this month, Cheney is "trying to rewrite history," says a Republican consultant who has experience in intelligence matters. "He knows that as time goes by, he will look worse. And so he's trying to put his stroke on it." (See pictures of the aftershocks of Abu Ghraib.)

Cheney obliquely conceded as much on Sunday, when he told CBS's Bob Scheiffer, "I think it's very, very important that we have a clear understanding that what happened here was an honorable approach to defending the nation, that there was nothing devious or deceitful or dishonest or illegal about what was done." That sounds like: O.K., we got a little out of hand. But we meant well. So how 'bout we just let it go?

He's trying to rewrite history by getting ALL the information OUT? Even the bit that HAS gotten out has done nothing but vindicate him, as well as to demonstrate that he was NOT in fact the prime mover to begin with (Liz Cheney's interview with Norah Dumbass a few posts ago deals with that well). Providing full documentation is REWRITING history? And by what stretch of the imagination is what he said there possibly interpretable as anything remotely like "Let it go, we fucked up"? In fact it says precisely the opposite, just as the documentation so far proves precisely the opposite. How does this idiot read that stuff and say the opposite of what it means - isn't reading comprehension a bare minimum for journalism??? How did this guy make it through school? Also, when did we switch from legal and sanctioned interrogations approved by all the legal committees and the president's men in Guantanamo - where, you know, the waterboarding took place - to Abu Ghraib? Little bait-and-switch? Do they teach that in Journalism 101? Cheney didn't approve or endorse the abuses of Abu Ghraib and you're comparing apples and garden hoses here - liar.

What's quite clear about Cheney's sudden chatty spree is that he wants to refocus the question about waterboarding and other interrogation techniques from whether they were legal to whether they worked. After eight years on the front lines of the war on terrorism, perhaps that is all a man can see. It certainly might explain why Cheney is making such a fuss about asking Obama to release a pair of after-action memos — which he says offer proof that the controversial methods produced evidence that, as Cheney claimed on Sunday, "saved thousands, perhaps hundreds of thousands of lives."

Which is clearly irrelevant. If it saved 6 million lives it would be irrelevant, right? And we already know it was legal, which is why we can move on to the question of what it accomplished. The un-uniformed, un-countried enemy combatants could have been killed where they stood and instead got a resort-like captivity - and if they didn't spill the goods we knew they had, they got a caterpillar or a walling. 2 of them got legally waterboarded and hundreds of thousands of Americans were saved. Cry me a fucking river.

A far darker explanation for the spring offensive isn't about the past but the future. Obama officials have spied something like a set-up in Cheney's latest gambit. One of the Bush team's biggest talking points in its final days in office was an insistence that its greatest accomplishment was preventing a second attack in the years after Sept. 11. By laying down the charge now that Obama has made the country less safe, the Bush team may be able to point fingers of blame if a second attack ever comes.

Irrelevant. For the next 30 years the left will blame Bush (unless someone else comes along they hate more) and the rest of us already know who is deliberately weakening us and setting us up for another attack. The message of the Bush years was that you may build democracies in the ME (wow...that's really amazing actually) but until you've built *only* democracies in the ME you can't let your guard down for a second. Our guard is being not just let down, but THROWN down with reckless abandon. Cheney's got no reason to go on a tour to set up the possible future repercussions here - he's not that vapid nor that stupid. He knows we aren't either. Hell, Biden himself told us right out that this man was going to be tested within 6 months and that it was going to look like they did exactly the wrong thing, right? Blame Biden, then.

Then they say something about maybe salvaging his reputation - I mean, yeah, I would want to as well if I were this guy. He got one fuck of a bad rap.

Cheney briefly ran for President in 1996, and though he is unlikely to make that mistake again, he may see a chance to boost his dismal approval ratings at least within the battered ranks of the GOP.

Yeah, he already has. Not sure why you care, but when your buddy released those memos Cheney's approvability shot up like a rocket. And the speaking he has been engaging in has had the same effect as well. It might have been nice if he'd done it during his tenure, but he had a damn country to run, and what good would it have done anyway?

In any case, Cheney's reappearance has delighted Democrats — "Bring it on!" quipped a White House official on Tuesday afternoon, when asked about Cheney's re-emergence

God, they're stupid.

— and dismayed Republicans. Said one: "We're trying to turn the page, and he's climbing out of the grave to haunt us."

Holy mixed metaphors, Batman! Must have been Meghan McCain. Some RINO; who cares?

The Myth of Media "Objectivity" Exposed

In other news, a graphic representation of the 100 million dollar "cut" Obama has promised to take out of his monstrous, 3.6 trillion dollar, double-your-debt-with-the-flourish-of-a-pen "budget." This is what's known as "perspective."

Remember when he said he was gonna go over the budget line by line with a scalpel? I think the scalpel is just to make sure that he can make the tiniest possible cuts out of this outlandish spending. The former yowling Obamaniacs at work have sure been quiet lately. I can't imagine why they might be embarassed, can you? He didn't tell us he was going to do this crazy spending. Not until after the inauguration. He kept it all under wraps, opposing bailouts and saying not to worry, he was gonna fix it. He's fixing us, all right.

And if I hear him say one more time that "WE" are all just gonna have to tighten our belts, I'll blow a gasket. Washington isn't tightening its belts - it's unleashing an F6 tornado of wasteful spending, taken from people like you and me. HE isn't tightening his belt (well, he did leave a shitty tip at the burger joint, maybe that's what he meant.) No, his belt is nice and loose - crank that heat up, crackers - I want it hot enough in here to grow orchids (while us peons are expected to keep the heat down to 68.) He's having pizza flown in and eating Wagyu beef and Michelle's prancing around (or lumbering) in $550 sneakers while turning over a token spadeful of ground for the garden. Their belts are doing just fine. The only people who have to tighten their belts are those who have to pay for all this - you, and me. So no more of this "we" shit, Obama - it doesn't wash. I have to say, the look on Biden's face when Obi asked for the poupon for his cheeseburger (the regular cheeseburger, medium well with cheddar, and no ketchup, just spicy dijon) was really funny. Old Plugs is the funniest thing in this administration. Even he was looking between Obi and the cashier, like "What the hell am I listening to? This guy for real or what? Are you hearing this shit?" So that was good. I mean I don't give a shit what the guy eats, but it could only have been better if he asked for arugula instead of lettuce on his "regular" cheeseburger.

For humor's sake I'll post the video - never mind Obi, watch Plugs LOL