Ken Berwitz

Here are two pictures.  One is of Barack Obama, from yesterday.  The other is from 1964.

I have no comment to make.  You can supply your own.

Ken Berwitz

Imagine one tenant in an apartment, whose wild parties kept everyone else in the building up all night, threatening to leave the building.  Do you think the rest of the tenants would have a problem with that?  I didn't think so.

Now imagine one member of the Congressional Black Caucus (CBC), who is politically conservative and aligns with the Tea Party movement, threatening to leave the organization.  Do you think the rest of the CBC would have a problem with that?  I didn't think so again.

With the above in mind, please read Caroline May's blog from dailycaller.com (which is too short to excerpt, so I'm posting it all.  Ms. May can, of course, feel free to do the same with my material any time she cares to).  Please pay special attention to the section of the last paragraph I have put in bold print):

In response to recent comments made by Indiana Democratic Rep. Andre Carson and California Democratic Rep. Maxine Waters that denigrate the tea party movement, Florida Republican Rep. Allen West — a member of both the Congressional Black Caucus and the Tea Party Caucus — sent a letter to CBC Chairman Emanuel Cleaver Wednesday requesting that the body condemn such remarks.

“As Chairman of the CBC, I believe it is incumbent on you to both condemn these types of hate-filled comments, and to disassociate the Congressional Black Caucus from these types of remarks. Otherwise, I will have to seriously reconsider my membership within the organization,” West wrote. (OPINION: Andre Carson:Serial racebaiter)

The freshman congressman declared, “It is unconscionable when a fellow CBC Member, Congressman Andre Carson, comes to South Florida and claims that some in the Tea Party would love to see black Americans ‘hanging on a tree.’ It is appalling to hear another CBC colleague, Congresswoman Maxine Waters, say ‘The Tea Party can go straight to hell.’”

West added that Carson’s comments, which caricature the tea party movement as a group of racists, are “baseless” and “desperate.” West reiterated that the movement is focused on fiscal responsibility and American Exceptionalism and wrote that the the CBC should be working to end the “balkanisation” of America. (RELATED: Rep. Allen West decides against campaign for Senate)

“As a member of the CBC, I look forward to working with you to help end this practice. All of us, especially Congressman Carson, Congresswoman Waters and others who have engaged in racially-motivated rhetoric, should follow the example of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., not the example of Reverend Jeremiah Wright,” West added, concluding that he hopes to work with the CBC to bridge divides.

I can only imagine how distraught the rest of the CBC would be if Rep. West were in its rear view mirror (yes, that was a sarcasm.  A big one).

But what a great line in that last paragraph!!  Follow Martin Luther King, Jr., not jeremiah wright. 

I don't always agree with Mr. West.  But he is absolutely, 100% on target here. 

Go Allen Go!!!  You're making more sense than they are.  By a mile.

Ken Berwitz

First it was Evergreen Solar shutting its doors and putting 800 or so employees on the street - after accepting $58 milllion dollars in subsidies from Massachusetts Governor Deval "Dupe" Patrick.

Now it is Solyndra's turn -- and its $535 million in loan guarantees comes straight from the Obama administration

Excerpted from an article at NBC-San Francisco, we have this:

Solyndra, a major manufacturer of solar technology in Fremont, has shut its doors (NOTE: an update indicates it is filing Chapter 11), according to employees at the campus. 

"I was told by a security guard to get my [stuff] and leave," one employee said. The company employs a little more than 1,000 employees worldwide, according to its website.

Solyndra was touted by the Obama administration as a prime example of how green technology could deliver jobs. The President visited the facility in May of last year and said  "it is just a testament to American ingenuity and dynamism and the fact that we continue to have the best universities in the world, the best technology in the world, and most importantly the best workers in the world. And you guys all represent that. "

The federal government offered $535 million in low cost loan guarantees from the Department of Energy. NBC Bay Area has contacted the White House asking for a statement.

Some Republicans have been very critical of the loans.  "I am concerned that the DOE is providing loans and loan guarantees to firms that aren't capable of competing in the global market, even with government subsidies"  Florida Congressman Cliff Stearns told the New York Times.

Does this administration ever get anything right?  If so, tell me what.

From the failed "stimulus package", to the accordingly high unemployment rate, to ObamaCare that, according to the polls, the country does not want, to the fiasco in Egypt, which is turning from something of an ally and a peace partner with Israel into a fundamentalist Islamic state and enemy of Israel, to Libya, which appears to be on its way toward the same eventual fate, but with a bloody civil war quite possibly coming first, to the Project Gunrunner/Operation Fast and Furious debacle to......I think you get the idea.

And now the great Green Jobs disaster (read this analysis by NBC's Scott McGrew to understand what it means to Mr. Obama).

One disaster after another after another.  It is getting harder and harder not to conclude that this President is the biggest disaster of all.  And - I hope - equivalently harder for our wonderful "neutral" media to stop running interference for him. 

That tank they are in for him may be deep, but it can't be bottomless.

Ken Berwitz

On August 20th I wrote a short movie review  - a rave review - about "The Help".

In it, I mentioned what a great performance Viola Davis gave, and hoped that she would win an academy award for it - especially given that I thought she deserved one years earlier for her role in "Doubt".  I also mentioned that "she is far from the only one" who deserved oscar consideration.

But that was unfair to Octavia Spencer.

Octavia Spencer, like Viola Davis, played a maid in "The Help" - but one with a very different disposition than Ms. Davis's character.  And she was fabulous.  I apologize to Ms. Spencer for not singling her out as I did Ms. Davis.

If either woman wins - or both (it can be argued that Viola Davis should be considered for best actress and Octavia Spencer for best supporting actress) - I will be thrilled.

One other thing:  Viola Davis is a graduate of Rhode Island College and the Julliard School.  Octavia Spencer is a graduate of Auburn University.  The fact that you would never know it by the way they played their roles is a testament to the quality of their acting.  In that regard they are just like the late, great Fred Gwynne - a Harvard graduate who played Herman Munster.

Ken Berwitz

Representative Darrell Issa, a Republican from California, chairs the house oversight committee.  The committee is currently investigating Project Gunrunner/Operation Fast and Furious - which readers of this blog certainly know to be a scandal of huge dimension.

In Project Gunrunner/Operation Fast and Furious, the Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco and Firearms (ATF) intentionally sold thousands of assault rifles to Mexican drug cartels hoping to trace where the weapons went.  But it turned out that a) few of the rifles were ever traced and b) they are now being used by the cartels to pursue their drug trade. 

Worse still, two US agents so far - Border Agent Brian Terry and Customs Agent Jaime Zapata - appear to have been murdered with guns from this botched, disastrous fiasco.

Obviously a story like this deserves major investigative work.  And the New York Times decided to do just that.  So, on August 14th, its investigative reporter, Eric Lichtblau, wrote a major attack on.......................Darrell Issa. 

Yes, you read that correctly.  Lichblau did not do an investigative piece on Project Gunrunner/Operation Fast and Furious, but instead did a hit piece on the guy who was investigating it, claiming that he was using his office to make a ton of money for himself.

What a proud moment for the New York Times!!!

But wait:  this gets better.

According to Issa, Lichtblau's piece is riddled with inaccuracies and outright falsehoods. 

Does he have a point?  I'd say so since, so far, The Times has had to retract three of the article's major claims:

-One of them is that Issa's holding company had split off two multi-billion dollar companies.  In fact, they were two multi-million dollar companies (hey, that's no big deal, a billion is only 1,000 times more than a million, so what's the diff?);

-Another is that Issa's family foundation made $357,000 on the sale of a mutual fund.  However, The Times now acknowledges that, in reality, he lost $125,000 on the sale (hey, what's an error of $482,000 between friends?) 

-The third is that Issa made $6,000,000 through purchasing a property and increasing its value by securing federal funding to widen the road it was on.  But now the Times acknowledges that the difference was accounted for by a loan taken by Issa's company, thus the property's value was essentially unchanged (hey, what's an error of $6,000,000?  It's not like that's a lot of money, is it?).

I would think that would be more than enough for the Times to apologize profusely and retract the story. 

On the other hand, this is the Times of today, not years and years ago.  So, to paraphrase Rahm Emanuel, never let a good hit piece aimed at a critic of the Obama administration go to waste.  The story still stands.

But hold on to your hat:  There's even more.

Not surprisingly, Rep. Issa and his staff is dissatisfied with the Times' three retractions, and feel that the other parts of the article they consider inaccurate must be retracted as well.  To this end, they have sent a lengthy letter to the Times detailing each one. 

The letter is far too long to post here (lots of inaccuracies, you see), so just click on this link to read them all.

Although it is not the most important one, I think my favorite is where Lichtblau refers to Rep. Issa's Vista district office as "a gleaming office building overlooking a golf course".  Issa's staff literally took a video camera into his office, and shot footage out of every window.  Guess what?  No golf course.  

It turns out that Lichtblau was relying on a years-old description of the building, which a) referenced a practice range, not a golf course, that b) in any event, has not existed for years.

Let me end by suggesting that maybe, just maybe, Mr. Lichtblau would have looked a bit more professional if he wrote about the scandal Rep. Issa is investigating, rather than trying to divert attention from it with an article so full of BS that it could fertilize the entire Afghanistan-Pakistan border, and still have enough left over to stuff up the toilets in the Times' executive washroom.

Ken Berwitz

For many years I have been under the impression that the University of California - Berkeley, though a hotbed of radical leftism, was nonetheless an excellent academic institution.

Now I know better.

Excerpted from C.J. Ciaramella's blog at dailycaller.com:

Back in the day, if students wanted easy credits, they signed up for underwater basket-weaving. Now they just need a political cause.

The University of California, Berkeley is offering students college credit to work for an expressly political organization fighting for affirmative action and immigrant rights.

This semester, the African Studies department at Berkeley is offering a two-credit class called “Fighting to Learn, Learning to Fight: Building the Movement for Public Education and Equality.”

The class is sponsored by BAMN — The Coalition to Defend Affirmative Action, Integration, and Immigrants Rights And Fight for Equality By Any Means Necessary — and advertises itself to students who want “to increase underrepresented minority enrollment, restore affirmative action and overturn Prop. 209 and pass CA DREAM Act 131 and a UC-Wide DREAM Act.”

According to its website, the class will focus on four main tenants of BAMN’s program: “the promise of public education and its role in American society, the centrality of fighting racism and the ‘New Jim Crow,’ the importance of building an independent, youth-led movement and our responsibility to fight for our own liberation as leaders.”

Personally, I think underwater basket weaving is a more useful course.  It teaches students how to do something relatively useful, and doesn't compromise anyone's beliefs. 

This, however, is not a teaching course.  It is an indoctrination venue to turn students into radical left wing robots, by a group that hates anyone to its right - which is to say virtually anyone but the lunatic-left fringe it is on.

I find it amazing that parents would pay money for their children to get credit for this cliché-infested party-line mung.  But, obviously, some do. 

Tell me;  what, exactly, does a student do with this "knowledge", other than joining BAMN and trying to indoctrinate other students? 

It's like a lunatic-fringe chain letter come to life.

But, hey, given California's current state of, er, "solvency", I guess the fewer students who come out of its university system with marketable skills, the better for everyone else.......

Ken Berwitz

Did you hear about the attempt by the union thugocracy in Wisconsin to ban Republicans from marching in the city of Wausau's Labor Day parade?

That's right.  The Wausau Labor Council, headed by one Randy Radtke, disagreeS politically with the stand taken by most Republicans on public sector unions, so they want the party banned from a public parade honoring working people - not just those who are in unions; all working people.

But, as of last night morning, they have reversed this decision. 

I'd like to say they were shamed into doing so, but I'm sure that is not the case. 

The reversal apparently is because the (independent, non-partisan) Mayor of Wausau, Jim Tipple, to his eternal credit, has come out strongly against this ban and told Radtke and Co. that, despite their delusions of grandeur, other people are involved in this parade as welL.  Tipple also assured Radtke that if Republicans were banned, his group would have to pay for putting up the stage, the insurance, and other costs that normally are taken care of by the city (which may well be the real reason for the reversal).

Excerpted from an article at the Wasau Daily Herald:

Organizers of the Labor Day parade in Wausau backed away from an earlier decision to bar Republican lawmakers from participating in the event late Tuesday night.

 

In an email statement issued shortly before midnight, Marathon County Labor Council President Randy Radtke said everyone will be permitted to march in the parade "because we don't want to have community groups and school bands affected."

 

"We didn't start this fight in Wisconsin, but were responding to anti-worker positions and policies supported by local Republican politicians, including those who have complained about not being invited," Radtke's statement read. "With the track records that Pam Galloway, Sean Duffy, Scott Walker , and Jerry Petrowski have all put together this year, they should be ashamed to even show their faces at a Labor Day parade."

 

On Tuesday afternoon, one day after demanding organizers of the event allow members of all political parties to participate or lose financial support for the event from the city, Wausau Mayor Jim Tipple said the decision was intended to make the event all inclusive.

 

"I don't think the Labor Day parade was ever intended to be a political statement," Tipple said Tuesday afternoon. "It's meant to honor workers, who may be predominantly Democratic. But we've got Republican, Green and Independent workers here, too."

Gee, y'mean even some union workers are Republicans?  They're not all on the side of Radtke?  They're not all intolerant jerks who think democracy means they get theirs and everyone else can go to hell?

Please note that at no point in this reversal does Radtke admit the ban was a bad idea.  He remains just as insulting and just as intolerant as before.  Which means (you can take bets on it) that he and his pals will be sure to turn the march into an attack on any Republican who has the courage to run his gauntlet and march in that parade.  

Earth to Randy Radtke: There really are two sides to this story.  And what Governor Walker and his fellow Republicans have legislated may well save jobs.  Including union jobs. 

You disagree?  Fine and well.  But don't you dare try to ban the other side from marching in a Labor Day parade.  You don't look like hugo chavez or fidel castro; stop trying to act like them.

People like Randy Radtke shame unions and shame the labor movement.  My congratulations to Jim Tipple for standing up to him.

Ken Berwitz

After 9/11, President Bush ordered an invasion of Afghanistan, to  remove the taliban from controlling Kabul and other major cities (there is no way to secure much else in that godforsaken "country") and to clean out the terrorist training camps openly being run there by osama bin laden.

The mission was accomplished in less than a month with fewer than 10,000 troops.

When President Bush left office over 7 years later, Afghanistan remained free of the taliban and of the terrorist training camps.  We still had less than 30,000 of our troops on the ground there.

President Obama, who called Afghanistan a "necessary war" decided that wasn't enough.  So he surged the troops there to more than triple the number - around 100,000 in all.  The result? 

-The taliban remains a major force in Afghanistan and appears to be stronger now than when President Bush left office;

-There have been significantly more battlefield casualties in President Obama's two and a half years than in the entire 7+ years that President Bush oversaw the war;

-The economic cost has gone up by multiples (2011 alone was more than the entire cost from the beginning of the war in 2001 through 2006);

And now we have this, excerpted from an article in the Army Times:

KABUL, Afghanistan — August has become the deadliest month yet for U.S. forces in the nearly 10-year-old war in Afghanistan, increasing pressure on the Obama administration to bring troops home sooner rather than later.

The 66 U.S. service members killed this month eclipses the previous record of 65 killed in July 2010, according to an Associated Press tally. Nearly half the August deaths occurred when insurgents shot down a Chinook helicopter Aug. 6, killing 30 American troops, mostly elite Navy SEALs.

I do not remember an administration in my lifetime that has been more bungling and inept in foreign policy.  Not even Carter's. 

And that is before we get to the ongoing messes Obama & Co. have created with Israel and the United Kingdom - arguably our two most loyal allies on the planet.

I do not have the words to communicate how fervently I hope Barack Obama will be a one term President.

Ken Berwitz

Here, from the first page of today's New York Times, is what our months of bombing has brought Libya to.

Excerpted from article David D. Kirkpatrick and Rod Nordland's article:

TRIPOLI, Libya — Fighters from the western mountain city of Zintan control the airport. The fighters from Misurata guard the central bank, the port and the prime minister’s office, where their graffiti has relabeled the historic plaza “Misurata Square.” Berbers from the mountain town Yafran took charge of the city’s central square, where they spray-painted “Yafran Revolutionaries.”

A week after rebels broke into Col. Muammar el-Qaddafi’s former stronghold, much of its territory remains divided into fiefs, each controlled by quasi-independent brigades representing different geographic areas of the country. And the spray paint they use to mark their territory tells the story of a looming leadership crisis in the capital, Tripoli.

The top civilian officials of the Libyan rebels’ Transitional National Council — now styling itself as a provisional government to be based in the capital — are yet to arrive, citing personal safety concerns even as they pronounce the city fully secure.

There are growing hints of rivalry among the various brigades over who deserves credit for liberating the city and the influence it might bring. And attempts to name a military leader to unify the bands of fighters have instead exposed divisions within the rebel leadership, along regional lines but also between secularists and Islamists.

They were all signs, one influential member of the council said, that point to a continuing “power vacuum” in the civilian leadership of the Libyan capital. But the jockeying for power also illustrates the challenge a new provisional government will face in trying to unify Libya’s fractious political landscape.

We've discussed it over and over again. 

What happens when there is a power vacuum?   Usually the most organized group takes over. 

And who is the most organized group in Libya besides the fundamentalist Islamists?  Can't come up with another one?  Neither can I.

moammar qaddafi is a disgusting sub-human mass-murdering sack of manure.  I would be thrilled if he is dead right now, and hope that is the case.

But it doesn't change the fact that we just spent something like a billion dollars bombing Libya, to quite possibly give the country a civil war between "the rebel" factions that could dwarf what qaddafi did to them - and wind up with an al-qaeda supporting shari'a law state in the process, which would make Libya even worse than what it just got rid of.

Just like Egypt, this administration may have taken a bad situation and made it even worse.

This is a mess.  An unholy mess of the Obama administration's doing.  Exactly what you would expect when a Chicago machine politician with no qualifications to be President is given the job, and becomes Commander In Chief.

The 2012 elections cannot come fast enough.

Ken Berwitz

My pal Toy-man Bob has sent me video of Steve Bridges imitating Barack Obama.

Bridges made something of a name for himself by imitating President Bush, and was very good and very funny doing so.

You might ask how the same guy could possibly also imitate President Obama who, I think we'll agree is not what you'd call an identical twin of the previous President.  But somehow he pulls it off.

The video is about 9 minutes long.  If you are a political junkie (and why would you be reading my blog if you weren't) I'm betting you will enjoy every second.

Here it is:

Ken Berwitz

This is getting dirtier and dirtier.

Today Kenneth Melson, who heads the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (ATF) was "reassigned" to a lesser position.  Suddenly he is out of the picture.

And this afternoon the US Attorney for Arizona, Dennis Burke who got physically ill during questionning about Project Gunrunner/Operation Fast and Furious last week (which, conveniently, ended the questionning), has abruptly handed in his resignation.  Suddenly he is out of the picture too.

Add in the three other ATF officials, William G. McMahon, William D. Newell and David Voth, who were reassigned less than two weeks ago, thus also suddenly out of the picture, and - unless you are the most gullible of gullible innocents - you see a lightning-fast cleansing of people who can incriminate those responsible for giving the go-ahead for this disastrous, deadly fiasco.

It stinks to high heaven.

And the lack of almost any coverage by the vast majority of our mainstream media is an indelible stain on their integrity.  Would they have done the same if the President's name were Bush instead of Obama?  We both know the answer.

 How can they shame themselves so completely?

How can they call themselves journalists? 

How can they even look at themselves in the mirror?

Ken Berwitz

How is that much-vaunted Egyptian "Arab Spring" working out?

Excerpted from Tia Goldenberg's article for the Associated Press:

Israel sent two more warships to the Red Sea border with Egypt, the military said Tuesday, part of a military reinforcement there following warnings that militants are planning another attack on southern Israel from Egyptian soil.

Earlier this week, Israel's military ordered more troops to the border area following intelligence reports of an impending attack, days after militants crossed into Israel through the Egyptian border and killed eight Israelis in a brazen attack that touched off a wave of violence between Israel and militants in the Gaza Strip.

That, folks, is the "Arab Spring". 

President Obama worked overtime to remove Hosni Mubarak - who was at least somewhat of an ally of the USA and who kept peace with Israel for over 30 years - and now we have Egypt rapidly turning into a country heading for war with Israel.

Anyone with even the most cursory knowledge of who and what the Egyptian population is would have known this was going to happen.  Personally, I have been writing about it for a half year, ever since the protests in Tahrir Square started.  

But President Obama?  Not a clue.  His administration?  Not a clue.  And our wonderful "neutral" media?  Too far in the tank for Mr. Obama to bother noticing what was in front of their eyes.

And if we wind up seeing a war between Egypt and Israel, who will Barack Obama blame?  President Bush, the Japanese Tsunami, hurricane Irene, or the tea party?

Ken Berwitz

Can this really be true?

According to several sources (including, it is said, an AP writer), President Obama's three day "non-political" bus tour earlier this month not only was completely political (as anyone with a functioning cerebrum would have known regardless of what he claimed), but wasn't a bus tour either.

Excerpted from Ben Howe's blog at redstate.com:

Boasting bulletproof windows, five inch thick doors, and it’s own oxygen supply, the President has made the rounds for these speeches in a multi-million dollar bus, dubbed “The Beast” by it’s critics.  

It appears however, that this might not be the case.  According to some sources he hasn’t really been riding these buses much at all.  They say, he’s been flying them.

Apparently President Obama only rode the buses for a couple of miles at a time, spending the rest of the time flying from community to community in Air Force One. What’s more, the buses were flown from stop to stop as well. It’s normal practice for the President’s entire motorcade to be loaded up on cargo planes and flown from destination to destination. The buses were just a new part of that motorcade.

So good news America! If these reports are true, then not only do you get the pleasure of having a $1.1 million dollar bus carting the President around to “enlist” voters to fight for his reelection, but you get to marvel at the hypocrisy of an administration hell bent on destroying industries with carbon footprints too large for comfort, while they themselves are flying entire caravans of SUVs and buses in giant 747s flanked by fighter jets.

All so the president can travel a couple of miles per stop with the image that he’s on the ground with the people when in reality, he couldn’t be more detached from them, their problems, or this continually declining economy.  You couldn’t ask for a better metaphor.

If this is true, it is a scandal and a disgrace.  Two ways:

1) It is a scandal and a disgrace that President Obama pretended to be on a bus tour while doing no such thing - as well as an insult to every well-meaning dupe who believed he was on the up and up;

2) It is a scandal and a disgrace that our wonderful "neutral" media remain so deep in the tank for Barack Obama that there is virtually no coverage of this overt fraud being perpetrated on us all. 

How many millions of dollars - our tax dollars - were expended in flying those buses around, so that Obama & Co. could play lets-pretend?  How many people did he make fools of?

There is only good thing I can come up with about this:  when President Obama is occupied with getting on and off the bus and campaigning, at least for that period of time he is not overseeing our economy or foreign policy.

Ken Berwitz

So how are things going in Wisconsin these days?

Well, the public sector unions - which suddenly and unexpectedly were brought down to earth by Governor Scott Walker and the Republican (for the first time in recent years) legislature - are ramping up their hatred, and their vandalism (yeah, I know I can't prove they were the vandals, but isn't it amazing how vandalism and physical intimidation always seems to be where they are?)

These folks don't like the word "no".  They seem to think that their well never runs dry, even if the rest of the state is hurting.  Apparently they will never forgive Governor Walker and his fellow Republicans for refusing to exempt them from the economic realities just about every other Wisconsin citizen is experiencing.

Here is the latest example, which occurred when Governor Walker dared to go to Messmer Preparatory Academy, a "choice school" (which the teachers' unions absolutely hate) and read to some of the children there.

Excerpted from a report published by wisconsinreporter.com:

MILWAUKEE — The anti-Walker protest movement is kicking it up a notch.

Protesters on Friday hoisted “Recall Walker” signs and chanted outside Messmer Preparatory School in Milwaukee, where Walker was slated to read Dr. Seuss’ "Oh! The Places You’ll Go" to elementary school students.

Just hours ahead of Walker’s visit, vandals destroyed locks at the Catholic school, said school officials.

Jacob Flom, of the Milwaukee Students for a Democratic Society, told the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel that he did not know who vandalized the property, but he did say Walker opponents would bring the protest to the governor, wherever he goes.

In a statement released Friday morning to  FOX6 News in Milwaukee, Messmer President the Rev. Bob Smith said the Catholic school's mission is to educate students and instill values.

The Republican Party of Wisconsin issued a  statement attacking the vandalism and the protests as "the latest glimpse into the distorted tactics of the left."

The GOP noted Friday's incidents follow a demonstration in June, when protesters disrupted Walker during a Special Olympics ceremony. Walker's comments to Wisconsin State Fair-goers earlier this month also was disrupted by demonstrators.

The best thing you can say about this "protest" (I put that in quotes because, to me, it gives a black eye to reasonable protests) is that it gave the school's students a first-hand look at how they are taught not to behave. 

Evidently these people are quite proud of their actions.  They must be, since they act this way over and over again. 

I wonder how many voters - including a lot of voters who started out sympathetic to them - are not proud of their actions.  I guess  we'll find out in due time.

Ken Berwitz

Now this is a TSA patdown no agent would look forward to.

Excerpted from an article at CBS news in Miami:

The incident happened on August 25th when security were screening passengers with a millimeter wave advanced imaging technology machine. It was there when the TSA officials noticed a little big extra in the passenger’s pants.

 

TSA screeners found several snakes and turtles wrapped in women's hosiery at Miami International Airport (Source: TSA Blog)

 

When taken for further screening, TSA officials discovered seven exotic snakes and three tortoises held in nylon bags that were concealed inside the man’s pants.

Can you even begin to imagine what was going on inside those pants?  Do you even want to?

And how in the world did he think he would get through security with ten - count 'em, ten - creatures in there. Don't snakes and turtles take up a bit of room?  He must have looked like he had the world's single biggest....er, you know.

This reminds me of the guy who tried to get into a movie theater with a live chicken.  The theater refused to allow him in with it, so he went around the corner, stuffed the chicken in his pants, and was able to buy the ticket.

During the movie, the chicken - understandably enough - became a little restless, and somehow poked itself out the man's fly.  Two old women were sitting next to him, and the first one said "Omigod, look at what's popping out of that guy's pants!!"  The second one said "So what, you've seen one, you've seen them all".  And the first one said "Yeah, but this one's eating my popcorn". 

I have no idea what either women would have said about a tortoise or a snake.......

Ken Berwitz

I think my favorite sign from any tea party rally was the one that said "It doesn't matter what is on this sign.  You're going to call me a racist anyway".  Truer words were never spoken.

There is no evidence that the tea party, as a movement, is in any way racist.  ]

Let me say that again:  There is no evidence that the tea party, as a movement, is in any way racist. 

There is, however, considerable evidence that the Congressional Black Caucus (CBC) has lied about tea party racism.  Remember when CBC members walked through that tea party rally in March of last year, and claimed they repeatedly were called "nigger"?  Remember how it was immediately reported as immutable fact by the mainstream media, along with their cronies in the left wing blogosphere?

Well, it was a lie.  It did not happen. 

How can I be so sure?  Because countless recording devices were on throughout that walk - which was obviously concocted to try and get tea partiers to make racist comments - and not one of them picked up even one use of the word.  Zero.

But now, building on that lie, the CBC has more or less declared war on the "tea party". 

Want proof?  Here, from a blog by Pam Key of theblaze.com, is a video compilation of what CBC members are screaming about how "racist" the tea party movement is (if you have trouble seeing it, click on the link):

Why are they so terrified of the tea party movement?

Let's start with an obvious fact.  The Congressional Black Caucus is a racist group. 

That is not open to question or doubt.  The CBC specifically, intentionally, excludes from membership any congressperson who is not Black.  Even White congresspeople who vote with the majority of CBC members on virtually every issue - and the Democrat Party has dozens of them - will not be allowed in.  Why?  Wrong skin color.

Therefore the CBC complaining that anyone is racist is beyond ludicrous.  I'd call it the pot calling the kettle black, but I'd probably be accused of racism......come to think of it, simply pointing out the racism of the CBC will probably generate that attack anyway, so let it stand.

Now, why does the tea party so terrify CBC members? 

It seems evident that they are terror-stricken because the tea party, a loosely organized movement that has arisen over the last two or so years and stands for limited government and spending within our means, has grown very quickly in both size and influence. 

By contrast, most CBC members want exactly the opposite -- more and more government programs and more and more spending.  This is what the congresspeople you saw on that video are selling to their constituents. (And based on the almost monolithically Democrat voting patterns of Blacks today, they are selling it to a very receptive audience. )  Thus the bigger and more influential the Tea Party gets, the more effectively it will be able to act in opposition to what CBC members stand for. 

No wonder they're terrified. 

Regarding the low number of Black tea party members, why would this surprise anyone?  Given the voting patterns mentioned above, it stands to reason that there would be disproportionately fewer Black people in the tea party movement than there are in the general population.  Not because they are excluded;  they are not excluded, and are completely welcome.  But because, based on who and what they vote for, the vast majority of Black citizens do not support what the tea party is about. 

And that is fair enough.  People have a right to want, and vote for, anything they choose. 

But let's not pretend that this somehow means the tea party is a racist enterprise.  I emphasize again that there is no evidence it is any such thing.  The proof is that, albeit in smaller numbers, there most certainly are Black tea party members.

By contrast, there are no non-Black members of the CBC, are there?  Not a one.  And there cannot be, either, since membership is restricted only to Black congresspeople.  Whites need not apply.

And they're calling tea partiers racist?  Give me strength.

Ken Berwitz

Excerpted from an article at Agence France Presse:

TEHRAN — Iran "discreetly" provided humanitarian aid to Libyan rebels before the fall of Tripoli, Jam-e-Jam newspaper quoted Foreign Minister Ali Akbar Salehi on Sunday as saying.

"We were in touch with many of the rebel groups in Libya before the fall of (Moamer) Kadhafi, and discreetly dispatched three or four food and medical consignments to Benghazi," Salehi told the daily.

"The head of the National Transitional Council (NTC), Mustafa Abdel Jalil, sent a letter of thanks to President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad for having been on their side and helping," he added.

Translation:

"The rebels" happily accept the Obama administration's support (not the United States's support, because Obama ignored the War Powers Act and bombed Lybia on his own, without any congressional approval). 

But, at the same time:

-They refuse to give us the Lockerbie murderer, al megrahi;

-They accept aid from ahmadinejad of Iran, thank him for it, and assure him they are on the same side.

Can you not see where this is going?

Does this administration ever do anything right?

Can we move up the 2012 elections?  Please?

Ken Berwitz

If moammar qaddafi is gone, who is in charge of Libya? 

That's a question I have been asking for almost a half year, as the Obama administration spent a billion or more dollars bombing on behalf of "the rebels" - about whom we knew little other than that they had no problem recruiting members of al qaeda to fight for them.

Now we are starting to get our answer.

Excerpted from an editorial at Investors Business Daily:

Editorial: Libya's Pirates Need Lesson In Gratitude

 

Leadership: So the U.S. just spent $1 billion to liberate Libya from terrorist rule only to have Libya's new rulers thumb their noses at extraditing the Lockerbie bomber? Explain to us again what we've been doing in Libya.

 

Presumably, President Obama's slapped-together NATO mission to aid Libya's rebels was to rid that country of its mad-dog dictator, who was a one-man nexus for global terrorism.

 

But his biggest atrocity was his own: killing 270 innocent people, many of them Americans, in the 1988 bombing of Pan-Am Flight 103 over Lockerbie, Scotland.

 

Gadhafi's on the run now, but his key man on Lockerbie, Abdel Baset al-Megrahi, remains in a wealthy Tripoli neighborhood, incredibly enough because Libya's new rulers have declared they won't extradite him abroad to face justice.

 

That's some chutzpah coming from someone who'd be just another dead body in the street or a prisoner dangling from a meat hook had NATO not intervened on his behalf with airstrikes, training and aid since March.

 

It's even more ungrateful because these rebels have made it clear they expect more military and humanitarian aid from the West.

 

But with Libya's rebels willfully sheltering one of the world's worst terrorists — the latest report is he's sick, a ruse Libyan officials used to get him prematurely released from a U.K. prison two years ago — it seems they aren't interested in creating a new kind of democratic and law-abiding nation and ridding Libya of the taint of terrorism.

 

They're just interested in replacing one group of Tripoli pirates with another.

 

What's outrageous is that President Obama is standing for this.

 

Is the White House reminding the rebels that the U.S. taxpayers have just shelled out $1 billion to buy their freedom? Or that the U.S. has released several billion in Gadhafi's oil assets abroad for their use? No.

 

If the Obama administration doesn't want to be seen as Uncle Sucker, it must make the Libyan rebels face consequences for their ingratitude.

That's right.  This bungling, inept administration has just overseen the demise of qaddafi - to be replaced by "rebels" who apparently don't like us any better than he did, and won't even cooperate with us on the extradition of a terrorist responsible for the murder of 270 of our citizens - many of them college students.

And, to compound the outrage, these ingrates are now asking for more money and more support from us anyway. 

The worst part?  Knowing Barack Obama, there is little doubt that they will get it too. 

The 2012 elections cannot come fast enough.

Ken Berwitz

Why has the term "racism" ceased to have any impact? 

Here are four reasons from just the past few days:

-On August 26th, Al Gore compared climate change skeptics to racists;

-On Chris Matthews' weekend show, he mentioned a poll which showed lower approval ratings for President Obama among both White and Black voters, and concluded that it meant Whites (only) were abandoning Mr. Obama;

-Today's New York Times lead editorial compares Alabama's new immigration laws to the slave-era Fugitive Slave Act;

-Also in the New York Times, there is an op-ed piece by Patricia Turner, complaining about the movie "The Help" on the grounds that "numerous critics, including some African American commentators....to some extent...are angry that the movie is based on a novel by a White woman...".  Ms. Turner also complains that..."With one possible exception, the White women are remarkably unlikable, and not just because of their racism"  Incredibly, she is unhappy that White racist women are portrayed as unlikable (because, she explains, good people were racists too).

For years I have been writing that the term "racism" - which used to be, and still should be, an enormously significant word which describes an enormously ugly problem - is being trivialized into oblivion.

These four examples - among countless others (I have no doubt you can supply some of your own) should tell you why.

Ken Berwitz

It is hard to find a more anonymous gig than substitute-hosting the Joy Behar show.  But CNN news anchor Don Lemon (isn't he supposed to be politically neutral) did just that last week.

And, in case you are wondering whether his presence in any way elevated the show's quality, read this exchange between Lemon and "comedian" (that is in quotes because I've never heard of her until now) Sarah Benincasa:

DON LEMON: And talking about the President. He's taking heat for going on vacation with his family, Martha`s Vineyard at that. That's where he is. So, I mean, right-wing blogs even mocked him for missing a golf putt because of the earthquake. I mean, being a leader of the free world is very stressful. Shouldn't he be able to take a vacation once in a while?


SARA BENINCASA, comedian: Well you know, Don, I don't know if you know this but right-wing conservative white Republicans will only accept one black man on the golf course in the world ever. And they made that decision in the '90s with a kid from Stanford who's really great, I think. He's great with the ladies. So it's weird to them and they do not like him taking over their native sport.

Have you ever noticed how much more frequently people on the left invoke race, than people on the right?   Sometimes it seems as though every answer to every question from this bunch is a racially tinged one.

The sense I get is that, since they assume everyone to the right is a racist (a ridiculous stereotype), every answer to every issue is therefore going to be racial as well. 

That is how you get idiotic commentary like what you saw above.

It certainly is a lot easier than thinking, I'll give them that.

One last thing:  If CNN wants to retain (or, depending on your point of view, obtain), any credibility, maybe it should require its news anchors to refrain from sub-hosting on left wing rant-a-thons like the Joy Behar Show.

Ken Berwitz

I just read that hugo chavez, the dictator of Venezuela, is starting his third round of chemotherapy.

I wish him exactly the result that he deserves.

Ken Berwitz

Just how scary is the Department of Justice, under the disgraceful toady and Obama sock-puppet eric holder? 

Read this excerpt from an article at landmarkreport.com, and see:

On Thursday, the iconic Gibson Guitar Corporation issued a press release stating that government officials raided their Tennessee manufacturing facility over warrants concerning the legality of the importation of wood purchased from India that they use in their world famous guitars. The wood–which is certified and regulated by the Forest Stewardship Council–is not illegal, but rather subject to a domestic law in India frowns upon the processing of this wood by non-Indians. (Gibson uses American labor for the processing.)

 

Gibson’s press release claims that, while this incident marks the second raid of their facility in around two years, this is the first of the raids to cost the company time and resources, as they needed to shut down operations. It seems as though this was all for naught.

The release read:

 

The Federal Department of Justice in Washington, D.C. has suggested that the use of wood from India that is not finished by Indian workers is illegal, not because of U.S. law, but because it is the Justice Department’s interpretation of a law in India. (If the same wood from the same tree was finished by Indian workers, the material would be legal.) This action was taken without the support and consent of the government in India.

 

On August 24, 2011, around 8:45 a.m. CDT, agents for the federal government executed four search warrants on Gibson’s facilities in Nashville and Memphis and seized several pallets of wood, electronic files and guitars. Gibson had to cease its manufacturing operations and send workers home for the day, while armed agents executed the search warrants. Gibson has fully cooperated with the execution of the search warrants.

 

It’s worth pointing out that Henry E. Juszkiewicz, Gibson’s Chief Executive Officer, is a donor to a couple of Republican politicians.

 

When warrants as ridiculous such as these are issued and executed, there appears no other reason than because the company or individual at hand is being targeted, not because there is any sort of wrongdoing. As a company, Gibson is a legendary. They’ve done nothing wrong, except, apparently, deigning to have a Republican CEO.

 

The plot thickens, however.

 

One of Gibson’s leading competitors is C.F. Martin & Company. The C.E.O., Chris Martin IV, is a long-time Democratic supporter, with $35,400 in contributions to Democratic candidates and the DNC over the past couple of election cycles. According to C.F. Martin’s catalog, several of their guitars contain “East Indian Rosewood.” In case you were wondering, that is the exact same wood in at least ten of Gibson’s guitars.

So what do we have here?  We have a raid on the iconic Gibson guitar company - with a CEO who contributes to Republicans - for about as ludicrous, unsupportable a reason as you will ever come across, while its competitor, which does exactly what Gibson was raided for - but has a CEO who contributes to Democrats - is left untouched.

This is not what happens in free countries.  This is what happens in police states. 

When is it time for eric holder to be held accountable for acting like a tinhorn dictator's second in command - which is exactly what he is doing?

And where are our wonderful "neutral" media as this is going on, right in front of them?  How far in the tank can they possibly be for Obama & Company to ignore this?

Are at least some of them afraid that speaking out means they'll be next?

The 2012 election cannot come fast enough.

Ken Berwitz

John Mariotti has written an excellent - disturbing but excellent - analysis of why we will not get out from under the economic disaster that is crushing us until we have a different President.

Here are the first, and last, two paragraphs of his piece:

There will be no significant recovery in the United States of America while Barack Obama is President.  The evidence is overwhelming:  everything Obama has tried to fuel a recovery (with his Democratic allies in Congress) has failed.  Statistics claiming jobs saved by the stimulus package were mostly fiction, and cost American taxpayers about $275,000 each.  Nearly 2-1/2 million fewer Americans have jobs than before the stimulus.

Barack Obama has been President for 30 months—2-1/2 years. He spent the first year obsessed with passing Obamacare, a program that doesn’t create jobs, but might destroy a lot of them.  He “bailed out” GM, but many believe that his interference didn’t save GM; it merely cost taxpayers an extra $15-20 billion, and stole from legitimate investors to buy off the UAW.  His broken campaign promises are too numerous to list.  At some point, his statute of limitations on blaming Bush runs out.  The latest joke is that the White House is that named the location of East Coast earthquake near DC “Bush’s Fault.”

Whatever happens, this failed recovery and impending recession belong to President Barack Obama.  His condescending explanations of why “we Americans” don’t get it, how “this will take a long time,” this recovery, and his “class warfare” about “millionaires and billionaires” versus the “common folk” are all wearing thin.

This kind of rhetoric won’t solve America’s problems.   It takes strong, informed, and experienced leadership to get through a mess like this one. We need a fixer, not a hypocritical speechmaker in the White House.  Barack Obama is not that man.  A wise man once told me, “The person who got you into a problem is seldom the one who will get you out of it.” That’s why there will be no recovery on Obama’s watch, but there could be a double-dip recession.

As you can see, Mr. Mariotti is a very blunt, plain-spoken man.  He does not talk in flowery metaphors and he does not use clever turns of phrase.   What he does do, however, is cut through the Obama administration's BS like a knife through Crisco. 

I urge you to use the link I've provided and read his entire piece.  You may or many not agree with everything Mr. Mariotti has to say, but I have a feeling that a) you will find yourself agreeing with most of it, and b) you will walk away with a full understanding of why he feels as he does about Obama & Co.

If so, I hope that he, and you, are far from alone.

Ken Berwitz

This one is a little hard to believe. Uh...make that a lot hard to believe.

I was just reading through the newsbusters.org web site, and I came across Kyle Drennan's account of how Martin Bashir, the near-unwatchable left wing suckup of MSNBC's afternoon lineup, had interviewed former New Orleans Mayor Ray Nagin.  On what?  On how a city should prepare for a hurricane.

Holy excrement.

Here is a little slice of Kyle's blog:

Teasing his Friday 3 p.m. ET hour show on MSNBC, anchor Martin Bashir proclaimed that he would have a special guest on to discuss incoming Hurricane Irene: "Former New Orleans Mayor Ray Nagin joins us to explain what leaders must do to avoid the mistakes that were made six years ago." [Audio available here]

Bashir was "delighted" to have Nagin on the program and began by asking about the response of political leaders to the storm: "Is it your view, sir, that they are handling preparations for this hurricane in the best way possible?" Bashir followed up by wondering: "...with the benefit of your experience, what are the critical actions that you think need to be taken to ensure that Hurricane Irene, or any other act of mother nature, does not become Katrina, Part II?"

Asking Ray Nagin about how to prepare for a hurricane is like asking Bill Clinton how to deal with sexual repression. 

Ray Nagin, as you may remember, is the mayor who - after being warned days in advance by The National Hurricane Center, and National Weather Service and the government that Katrina was bearing down on New Orleans, did...........damn near nothing. 

Nagin ignored the city's own detailed plan for evacuation and basically just looked the other way until it was too late.  Even MSNBC couldn't avoid putting up that most telling picture, of the dozens of school busses which should have been used to transport residents out of the city, sitting unused, and rusting in several feet of water.

After the hurricane hit, Nagin's main activity was holing up in a luxury hotel and issuing whining complaints about everyone else's performance - you know, the people who actually were doing something useful. He did, however, make a point of stating, months later, that:

"We as black people, it's time, it's time for us to come together. It's time for us to rebuild a New Orleans, the one that should be a chocolate New Orleans. And I don't care what people are saying Uptown or wherever they are. This city will be chocolate at the end of the day."

In other words, aside from being useless regarding hurricane Katrina, Nagin also established himself as a stone cold racist.

And this is who Martin Bashir brings on to impart his wit and wisdom?

Maybe he can change the show's name to The MSNBC Comedy Hour".

Ken Berwitz

Tom Coburn is a right wing conservative Republican senator from Oklahoma.  Barack Obama is a left wing liberal President.  When they were both senators, Mr. Coburn said that, although their politics were different, he counted Mr. Obama as a good friend.

Last week, after being asked whether President Obama "wants to destroy America", Coburn said this:

 "His intent isn't to destroy.  It's to create dependency because it worked so well for him.  As an African American male, coming through the progress of everything he experienced, he got tremendous benefit through a lot of these programs.  So he believes in them."

Not surprisingly, many civil rights organizations are up in arms over Mr. Coburn's comment.  Illustratively, here is what the Virginia state NAACP had to say about it:

"People like Coburn attempt to create the myth that only African (Black) people receive food stamps or other forms of public assistance.  White women do as well along with Wall Street, the banks, the auto industry, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, AIG, and many others that live on the public dole to the tune of trillions of dollars over time."

"Coburn implies that the President benefited from this dependency on the government.  White males have been the beneficiaries of the greatest affirmative action program in U.S. history.  Yet, the face of government programs is the African welfare queen and now the President himself.  This kind of racist propaganda is perpetuated through those with a platform to tell their lies to the people.    The comments of Senator Tom Coburn are unconscionable, unfathomable and unacceptable.  They should be condemned by all, especially those in the Republican Party.  The Virginia State Conference NAACP condemns these remarks that are racist to the core!"

Is Tom Coburn right or wrong?  Is the Virginia NAACP right or wrong?  Do both have a point?  One?  Neither?

You decide.

Ken Berwitz

Question:  What do you get when a hard-line leftist challenges people to tell him what President Obama has done wrong?

Answer:  You get a lot of people doing just that -- and blowing him away in the process.

Jonathan Alter, the smug, snarky former Newsweek big shot, MSNBC regular (of course) who now writes for bloomberg.com, issued the challenge in his latest column yesterday.  Here are a few key excerpts:

Tell me again why Barack Obama has been such a bad president? I’m not talking here about him as a tactician and communicator. We can agree that he has played some bad poker with Congress. And let’s stipulate that at the moment he’s falling short in the intangibles of leadership.

But do these miscalculations really mean it’s time for him to go?

Most of the bad feeling goes back to the first year or so of the Obama presidency. And in hindsight, those decisions really weren’t so bad. To prove my point, let’s review a few areas where he supposedly messed up.

When Obama took office, the economy was losing about 750,000 jobs a month and heading for another Great Depression. The recession ended (at least for a while) and we now are adding several thousand jobs a month -- anemic growth, but an awful lot better than the alternative. How did that happen? Luck?

Your mission, Jim, should you decide to accept it, is to be specific and rational, not vague and visceral.

As you can see, the above excerpts include only one specific claim about what a great job Alter thinks President Obama did - that of job creation (if you read the entire column, and I hope you do, you will see a number of others as well).  I left it in because:

-His claim that the economy was losing about 750,000 jobs a month is an outright lie (that happened in one month and one month only);

-His claim that we were headed for a great depression which President Obama somehow stopped is both unprovable and utterly ludicrous, given the far higher jobless rate which occurred after enactment of his so-called "stimulus package" and continues to this day. 

I am hopeful this shows you what a ridiculously doctrinaire fraud Alter is (no wonder MSNBC loves him so much).

In any event, he issued the challenge.  And readers responded.  A lot of them.  

I am posting just two excellent responses below.  But if you use the link I've provided, you will find dozens and dozens more of them:

hmmm..

How about getting a Nobel Prize for doing nothing?

Ok, instead of blaming Obama for all the things he's done wrong. Lets look at his successes.

Closing Gitmo.
Getting us completely out of Iraq.
No new wars.
Lowering the deficit.
providing free healthcare for all.
Stepping across the isle to build bridges with Republicans like no other president before.

Oh wait, those were his promises.  He never really did those.

Yep, he's a success, in the Media's eye!

 

---------------------------------------------------------

 

Obama has not only failed the country, but also his party.  A brief overview of the Obama '08 platform:

-End the wars
-Repeal the Patriot Act
-Throw the lobbyists out of Washington
-Balance the budget/fiscal discipline
-Confront/punish corporations who off-shore jobs/profits
-End the negative discourse in Washington

These positions received the greatest applause at campaign stops, and were also the issues which then Sen. Obama seemed most passionate about.  As a libertarian, I was actually looking forward to his progress on a few, if not all of these issues.  He failed.  Miserably.  He has expanded the "War on Terror" to Libya while continuing to occupy Iraq and Afghanistan, re-authorized the Patriot Act, done nothing to curtail the rent-seeking lobbyists, exploded the budget (more debt added in a few years than Bush did in eight), forged a cozy relationship with the king of off-shoring: GE, appointed cabinet members who label the opposition as terrorists and extremists, and turned a blind eye to the escalation in mud-slinging rhetoric by his Democrat colleagues in Congress who are stirring up a witch hunt for Tea Party sympathizers.  So not only has he alienated Independents and hardened the resolve of conservatives, he has also failed by his own campaign promises.  The Barack Obama of '08 would also label this presidency as an epic failure

Again, please remember that these are just two of many.

Look, I don't doubt that Jonathan Alter is a smart guy.  But I think he has a severe case of what I call "ID":  Insularity Degeneration. 

ID means he is so used to operating within an insular world of people who do little other than nod agreement with him, that he his ability to see things objectively, if he ever had it in the first place, has severely degenerated.  

Alter is now reduced to barfing out the party line, regardless of facts or logic, and seems to have no idea of how ridiculous he sounds to anyone still serious about looking at what has actually happened during this sorry, inept, bungling administration. 

I'm surprised MSNBC hasn't offered him his own show yet.

Ken Berwitz

From my pal Office Furniture Les....with no further explanation needed:

He grasped me firmly, but gently, just above my elbow and guided me into

a room, his room. Then he quietly shut the door and we were alone. He

approached me soundlessly, from behind, and spoke in a low, reassuring

voice close to my ear. "Just relax."

 

Without warning, he reached down and I felt his strong, calloused hands

start at my ankles, gently probing, and moving upward along my calves,

slowly but steadily. My breath caught in my throat. I knew I should be afraid,

but somehow I didn't care. His touch was so experienced, so sure. When his

hands moved up onto my thighs, I gave a slight shudder, and partly closed my eyes.

 My pulse was pounding. I felt his knowing fingers caress my abdomen, my ribcage.

And then, as he cupped my firm, full breasts in his hands, I inhaled sharply.

 

Probing, searching, knowing what he wanted, he brought his hands to every part

of my body.  Although I knew nothing about this man, I felt compelled to trust him.

Compelled to do as he said. 

 

And then he did speak.  And I heard the words I had fervently been waiting for... 

 

"Okay ma'am, you can board your flight now." 

Ken Berwitz

It's is good to see that Bill Keller, the New York Times' former Executive Editor and occasional columnist, is so worried about the possible religious extremism of presidential candidates.

Here, to show the level of his concern, are the first three paragraphs of his latest piece, which will be published in Sunday's magazine section:

If a candidate for president said he believed that space aliens dwell among us, would that affect your willingness to vote for him? Personally, I might not disqualify him out of hand; one out of three Americans believe we have had Visitors and, hey, who knows? But I would certainly want to ask a few questions. Like, where does he get his information? Does he talk to the aliens? Do they have an economic plan?

 

Yet when it comes to the religious beliefs of our would-be presidents, we are a little squeamish about probing too aggressively. Michele Bachmann was asked during the Iowa G.O.P. debate what she meant when she said the Bible obliged her to “be submissive” to her husband, and there was an audible wave of boos — for the question, not the answer. There is a sense, encouraged by the candidates, that what goes on between a candidate and his or her God is a sensitive, even privileged domain, except when it is useful for mobilizing the religious base and prying open their wallets.

 

This year’s Republican primary season offers us an important opportunity to confront our scruples about the privacy of faith in public life — and to get over them. We have an unusually large number of candidates, including putative front-runners, who belong to churches that are mysterious or suspect to many Americans. Mitt Romney and Jon Huntsman are Mormons, a faith that many conservative Christians have been taught is a “cult” and that many others think is just weird. (Huntsman says he is not “overly religious.”) Rick Perry and Michele Bachmann are both affiliated with fervid subsets of evangelical Christianity — and Rick Santorum comes out of the most conservative wing of Catholicism — which has raised concerns about their respect for the separation of church and state, not to mention the separation of fact and fiction.

Mysterious and suspect churches?  Wow.  That certainly should have us all shaking in our boots.

Let's start with one of the most mysterious of all:  the evangenical Christian church of Rick Santorum, which Mr. Keller referenced in the original (and subsequently revised) version of this column.  It seems Mr. Santorum is a devout Catholic. Ooopsie-daisy. 

In fairness to Mr. Keller, however, we all make mistakes.  And at least he has corrected this one.

But what about about the campaign-long mistake he made as the Times' Executive Editor, when he virtually ignored the rabidly racist church Barack Obama belonged to, with its racist, anti-Semitic, Black supremacist reverend, jeremiah wright?

I have written many blogs about wright's sickening views, so I'm going to spare regular readers the long form version of what they are. 

But, in case you are unaware (and if you rely on the New York Times or most other mainstream media for your information you probably are unaware), wright was the long time spiritual leader of the Trinity United Church of Christ, where he was, and remains to this day, a proud, long-time adherent of "Black Liberation Theology".

"Black Liberation Theology" is a concoction of race hatred and Black supremacy cooked up by James Cone, which makes absolutely no secret of its meaning and purpose. 

Doubt me?  Try this quote for size:

"If God is not for us and against white people," writes Cone, "then he is a murderer, and we had better kill him. The task of black theology is to kill gods who do not belong to the black community."

Ken Berwitz

Barack Obama is certainly known as an effective campaigner.  But what happens when he campaigns against himself?

From Jim Treacher of dailycaller.com:

Can’t wait for his big-time jobs speech? Don’t worry, he’s said it all before:

He’s also expressed some very strong opinions on the national debt:

:

Whoops!

You keep talkin’, Barry. That’s what you’re good at.

It is hard to imagine a more effective tool against Barack Obama than Barack Obama himself. 

Count on seeing these (and other) video clips again and again, regardless of who the eventual Republican candidate will be.

Maybe Mr. Obama can blame George Bush making him say it.....

Ken Berwitz

I always thought Irene was the Greek goddess of peace.  Not floods and mayhem.

As of now, there are doomsday scenarios in which the entire east coast is swamped, large parts of lower Manhattan will be engulfed in water, and the NYC transit system will be shut down. 

Let's hope the meteorologists' models are wrong, this horrific storm veers eastward. 

Ken Berwitz

These are a few expectations (not predictions) regarding the next few months.

-Rick Perry will start to drop down in the polls as people learn about his record, his positions and what is in his book.  Perry is a more polarizing figure than a lot of people currently realize.

-I would not be surprised if Sarah Palin does or does not run.  But, Karl Rove's predeiction aside, I suspect she won't.  That would be fine with me.  The amazing body of unfair and vicious attacks on her, coupled with that overly folksy style, probably make her unelectable.

-Michelle Bachmann will drop back.  Yes, she has a few hard-right positions a lot of Republicans like.  But there is no "there" there.

-I take Chris Christie at his word that he is not coming into this race. 

-Mitt Romney will continue a "slow and steady wins the race" process.  He may not excite people during a primary season, but he is the single most electable Republican for 2012.  Simply stated, his strengths match up to Barack Obama's weaknesses - and that includes his Romneycare in Massachusetts.

-For a variety of reasons, none of the rest have a real shot.

I have limited time to blog today.  I'll try to put more up later on.

Ken Berwitz

Since I started watching baseball I have always been a big Yankee fan.  And I especially enjoy watching players who love wearing the pinstripes.

Like Nick Swisher, for example. 

Swisher, son of a major leaguer (Steve Swisher) was born to play for the New York Yankees.  He clearly loves being a Yankee, and Yankee fans clearly love him right back.

But now there is another, far more important, reason to root for Nick Swisher, and his beautiful (outside, and apparently inside too) new wife, actress Joanna Garcia.

Excerpted from an article in today's New York Post:

Speaking to us at the Yankees Unite for Tornado Relief event at Southern Hospitality Hell's Kitchen, Swisher said, "Three military officers came to the Yankee locker room and asked if any of us would like to visit the troops. My hand went straight up, I said, 'I'm in.' I knew JoAnna would want to go. It will be our first trip since we got married.

"I come from a military family ... and no matter what your views are, these men and women are out there risking everything for us. I realize how fortunate I have been, so I like to give back at every opportunity I can." [...]

Excited Garcia also told us, "We are both really looking forward to visiting the troops. Yes, it isn't a traditional honeymoon, but it is something we both feel strongly about."

Thank you Nick and Joanna Swisher for caring enough to do this.  You are a class act and then some. 

It almost makes me forgive Nick for getting a little under that 2-0 fastball last night in the 9th, and not putting it out of the park to win the game.   Almost.  (You thought the 3 run homer you hit to get the Yankees back into the game was enough?  I told you I was a big Yankee fan, didn't I?)

Ken Berwitz

Remember Michael Dukakis?  He was the guy who, in 1988, was at one point leading George Bush (the elder) by 16% in the polls.

Then there was this incredibly dumb picture of him, in an oversized helmet and a big "ain't I cute" grin, riding in a tank - just like a real soldier:

There are a wealth of reasons that Mr, Dukakis eventually lost the election, but this picture stands as one of the major ones.  To many people, it forever defined him as a ridiculous dufus.

Well, now it is 2011.  And while street fighting raged in Libya, butcher al-assad continued to kill his own citizens in Syria, Israel and Egypt continued to rage over last week's terrorist attack and an earthquake hits Virginia, with tremors from Atlanta to the Northeast, here is how President Obama got the news:

President Obama takes a break from playing golf to speak on a mobile phone at Farm Neck Golf Club, in Oak Bluffs, Mass., on the island of Martha's Vineyard, Tuesday. Obama spoke on the phone within an hour of an earthquake that was felt in many areas along the country's east coast. (Steven Senne - AP)

What incredible imagery.  The world is on fire, and Barack Obama has to be roused from his golf game - something like the 80th round of golf he has played since becoming President - to find out about it.

Is it just me, or could this picture do for Barack Obama what the tank picture did for Michael Dukakis?

Ken Berwitz

Ramesh Ponnuru, writing in the New York Post, has given us an excellent analysis of how President Obama (and congressional Democrats) are over-regulating us into oblivion.  Here are a few key excerpts:

President Obama can take credit for a boom in at least one economic sector: Since he took office, employment has surged 13 percent at federal regulatory agencies.

The regulators’ budgets are up 16 percent, according to a May report by Washington University and George Washington University. That’s before some major administration regulatory initiatives -- the financial-reform bill and the health-care overhaul -- are fully implemented.

Obama understands that a reputation for regulatory hyperactivity amid a weak economy wouldn’t help his re-election. In January, he promised “a government-wide review of the rules already on the books to remove outdated regulations that stifle job creation and make our economy less competitive.” That review led to some modest improvements: The Environmental Protection Agency pulled back a rule that would have treated dairy spills on farms like oil spills.

Overall, though, the regulatory burden is growing.

Regulations on the books provide some benefits, such as improved health and a cleaner environment; many proposed rules would presumably also yield positives. But there’s good reason to think that federal government has gone too far.

For one thing, most costs of regulation -- the Small Business Administration estimates that compliance costs in 2008 were $1.75 trillion -- don’t appear in the budget. If legislators are lax when it comes to on-budget spending, how much freer are they likely to be with outlays that don’t show up in the deficit figures?

Republicans on Capitol Hill are promoting two bills to turn back the regulatory tide. One, the “REINS Act,” would require Congress to approve any new rule with major economic effects.

Obama has challenged Congress to put country before politics. Perhaps Congress and the president should try putting recovery before regulation.

We used to compete with just a few countries around the world.  But today, in the new global economy, we compete with a great many.  Treating corporations like the enemy, and creating more and more stringent regulations on top of the dizzying array which already are in place, is killing not only our ability to compete internationally, but even to function domestically.

When does it stop?  When does President Obama start to understand? 

Or is it that he does understand, and is too agenda-driven to care?

Ken Berwitz

Illinois was hurting.  Illinois needed money.

So how does a state like Illinois get money?  By raising taxes on the people who have it.  Make them pay their "fair share".

What is their "fair share"?  Well, it's however much more money the state needs - and, this being Illinois, maybe a little something extra.  You know, for the guys.

With that brilliant, unassailable logic in mind, Here is what Illinois did (excerpted from Mark Guarino's article in the January 12th Christian Science Monitor):

The Illinois legislature has passed personal income-tax increases of 66 percent and corporate income-tax in creases of 45 percent, designed to address a $15 billion state budget deficit that lawmakers said was leading the state into insolvency.

By the early hours of Wednesday, Senate and House lawmakers had voted to raise the personal income tax rate from 3 percent to 5 percent and the corporate tax rate from 4.8 percent to 7 percent. Both rates were adjusted to carry through until 2015, when they would drop to 3.25 percent and 5.25 percent, respectively.

The Illinois tax increase, which is waiting to be signed into law by Gov. Pat Quinn (D), who supports the package, would take effect retroactively Jan. 1. The package was passed without a single Republican vote in either chamber.

Hey, problem solved.  Right?

I mean its simple math.  You add this much to the tax rate, you get that much in new taxes.  A child could figure this out. 

What's that you say?  It might affect jobs?  Employers might not hire as many people?  Companies might leave?  Oh, c'mon!  It's just a little more.  No one is going to change their way of business over that.

Here, I'll prove it.  THis chart, straight from the US Dept. of Labor, shows the great success Illinois has had since enacting these tax hikes!

Uh.......whoops. 

But wait.  Employee hiring isn't everything.  At least the companies themselves are staying.  Here, I'll show you.  Read  this article by David Mercer of the Associated Press.   Its title?  "Illinois facing job assault from other stat......"  Uh.....whoops again.

So tell me:  How did those tax hikes work out?  Has Illinois' situation improved, or gotten worse?

It's gotten worse?  Much worse?  Geez, what should Illinois do now?

Maybe it needs to raise taxes again........

Ken Berwitz

They are dancing in the streets of Tripoli.

Just as they danced in Tahrir Square when Hosni Mubarak resigned in February.

But now, 6 months later, as reported by Arutz Sheva (Israel National News):

A senior cleric in the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood has declared that ordinary Egyptians are obligated to kill 'Zionists' whom they encounter. According to Arutz Sheva Arab affairs expert Dalit Halevy, the pronouncement is part of a general wave of incitement that directly endangers Israelis who are currently in Egypt.

This follows Muslim Brotherhood calls to end the peace treaty with Egypt and threats to kill Israel's ambassador if he does not leave the country. Although there are many benefits for Egypt if it continues its relations with Israel, not the least of which is continued American aid, that is not always what counts in the MIddle East where hatred is often stronger than logic.

Dr. Salah Sultan, a lecturer on Islamic law in Cairo University and head of the Al Quds Committee in the World Federation of Islamic Scholars, declared Friday that an Egyptian citizen who encounters a "Zionist" should kill him. This should be done because Israel "killed" the Camp David Accord, he explained. Sultan said that Israel provokes Egypt by pointing its jet fighters at Egyptian soldiers.

 

Sultan spoke at a protest outside Israel's Cairo embassy, before about 200 members of the Freedom and Justice Party (a front for the Islamic Brotherhood), the Islamic Brotherhood movement, and other extreme groups.

 

In an April interview Sultan said that "the liberation of Palestine will come from Tahrir Square."

 

When the Crusaders invaded Jerusalem, the liberation began from Egypt, he said. Similarly, when Mongols reached Syria in the 13th century CE, Egyptians were the ones who organized and blocked them. "The next campaign [against Israel] will be launched from Egypt," he said. 

This, of course, comes on the heels of last week's coordinated, murderous terror attacks on Israel by Gazans, who had no problem at all entering Israel from Egypt's Sinai Peninsula - virtually unthinkable when Mubarak was in power.

Do you hear much about the so-called "Arab Spring" in Egypt anymore?   Me neither.

Maybe, just maybe, this would be a good time to reflect on the fact that we know next to nothing about "the rebels" - other than their opposition to moammar qaddafi and their acceptance of al qaeda.  So maybe, just maybe, the accolades for President Obama's months of bombing on their behalf should be held up just a tad, until we find out what happens next. 

They celebrated in Tahrir Square too -- until, as one chastened woman said "the guys with the beards started taking over".  Like salah sultan.

There are lots of guys with beards in Libya.

Ken Berwitz

It has been a while since I posted an installment of "left wing civility" - i.e. the emanations of those wonderful folks who bitterly complain that Republicans/conservatives/the right (often one and the same) are guilty of overheated rhetoric.

One of the left wing sites I follow, and occasionally post comments at, is www.crooksandliars.com.  Today it has a blog which quotes former Senator and current long-shot Republican presidential nominee Rick Santorum's attack on Rep. Maxine Waters (D-CA) after she said, among other things, that "the tea party can go straight to hell".

Mr. Santorum, during an interview with Steve Malzberg, said the following about Ms. Waters:

"She's a caricature of what's wrong with Congress.  She's vile. She's always been that way, and she's just one of these real, real nasty, you know, anti-basic traditional, fundamental values of this country."

"This is the left in America. They absolutely despise, you know, the founding principles of this country, that believes in free people, that believes in limited government. She is someone who believes she should control what's going on in America, that she knows best, and that people that stand by constitutional principles of limited government are folks who are to be condemned."

As you can see, apart from his view of Ms. Waters' general political outlook, the worst things that Santorum says are that she is "vile" and "real, real nasty".   By political standards that is pretty tame stuff.  It certainly is no worse than what Ms. Waters had to day about tea partiers, which precipitated Santorum's statement.

Now, for your delectation, I will show you the first eight comments made by those nice folks who frequent crooksandliars.com.  Let's see how they stack up against what Rick Santorum said.

Warning!  Warning!  Warning!  You may find the language, imagery and racial references used by these folks extraordinarily offensive.  If this in any way troubles you, I suggest you stop right here.

If you're willing to go on, however, here are the comments:

pssst

gump — 8/22/11 2:44pm

Rick, you have a stain in the back of your pants...sorry that was vile. Like the King of Hate has any right calling anyone vile. This man represented me for years. Let me rephrase that, this man embarrassed me for years.

---

is intended to be a factual statement

--------------------

 

hey, santorium you and the

dadams — 8/23/11 11:24am

hey, santorium
you and the gop/teabaggers have your faces in every
woman's vaginas. you want to control every moment of
the birth process and yet you want every man to have a
perpetual erection, ready for attack all day long.

don't LIE that liberals want to control the American people.

you fucking bastards want it all and make the poor and middle
class pay for your annoying shit.

--------------------

              

I just googled Ms Waters name

pissed off patricia — 8/22/11 3:14pm

I just googled Ms Waters name and nothing gross of vile came up. Sorry Little Ricky, can't say the same about your name.

How far back do the republicans like little ricky want to take the country? Are women's rights and African American's rights involved?

---

Say what you mean. Mean what you say. But don't say it mean.

--------------------

                                 

What is vile is...

daganium — 8/22/11 3:38pm

..what you get when you Google "Rick Santorum."

I would link it, but it's too vile.

BTW props to Rep. Maxine Waters for finally speaking out against this White Power movement called the Tea Party.

The Tea Party is nothing but a more friendly rebranding & media acceptable version of the Ku Klux Klan.

It's about time somebody told these white supremacist idiots to go to hell.

Naturally & predictably, Mr. Frothy Mixture is going to defend the white supremacist movement over a courageous congresswoman of color.

---

When Fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in excess body fat & carrying a misspelled sign.

--------------------

 

KKKea Party

gump — 8/22/11 3:42pm

We need to rebrand them just like they rebranded themselves. Everything these thugs want to cut hits minorities. The problem is the media is afraid to call them out. We need a Cronkite and a Morrow but we have a Chuck Todd who's afraid to call them out or he wont get an interview again.

---

is intended to be a factual statement

--------------------

 

Like the title of the radicals.

bratboy — 8/23/11 1:06pm

How about the teabaKKKer party?

--------------------

 

Rick, you are pool of pig vomit on the road on a hot summers day

LeftandLeft — 8/22/11 4:23pm

These privileged old school racist mother fuckers do not believe that a Black person ever has the right to say anything negative about them. Truth be damned.

--------------------

 

Oh really?!

GambitLB — 8/22/11 4:37pm

So Santorum thinks that Rep.Waters is vile?

Sounds like the pot calling the kettle a frothy mix of lube and fecal matter that is sometimes the byproduct of anal sex.

There you have it.  "Civility", left wing style.  I dare you to try and find anything remotely approaching this level of commentary on any right wing site. 

I wonder how many of these folks are being considered for their own show on MSNBC.........

Ken Berwitz

Gallup and Rasmussen are two major research companies.  Both do a lot of political polling.  Both measure presidential approval using a three day rolling average (i.e. every day's findings are actually an aggregate of the last three days' intervewing).

Research being an inexact science, the two companies do not always agree on how things are going.  But today?  They are in perfect harmony:

-Gallup has President Obama's approval rating at 38% (compared to 54% who disapprove).  That is the lowest rating Gallup has ever reported for Mr. Obama;

-Rasmussen has President Obama's "strongly approve" rating at 19% (compared to 45% who strongly disapprove).  That is the lowest rating Rasmussen has ever reported for Mr. Obama.

And, in case Mr. Obama thinks he is going to get a quick boost from recent events, let's remember that all interviewing was conducted after his much-ballyhooed (but, in reality, badly misconceived) bus tour, and during "the rebels" dismantling of moammar qaddafi's forces.

How can this be?  How can President Obama be doing so badly?  That, I can tell you in one word of just four letters:

J   O   B   S

That's right.  Jobs. 

After putting us trillions and trillions of dollars in the hole, with the promise that this impossibly huge debt would result in jobs, jobs, jobs, unemployment (at 8% when the so-called "stimulus package" was enacted) remains over 9% - and at one point was over 10%.

At the race track, a daily double pays off very nicely.  But in politics, a downside daily double is disastrous. 

As long as the job situation and the overall economy are down the tubes, President Obama's ratings are likely to be there as well.  And, based on what just about every economist on both sides of the aisle is saying, there is little reason to believe things will get appreciably better between now and election day, 2012.

Can things change?  Sure they can.  But don't bet what's left of your hard-earned money on it.

Ken Berwitz

Who said President Obama was presiding over a failed economy?

That's ridiculous.  Who else has ever done this - excerpted from Andrew Malcolm's piece for today's Los Angeles times:

Swallow all liquids in your mouth before reading any further.

Updated numbers for the national debt are just out: It's now $14,639,000,000,000.

When Barack Obama took the oath of office twice on Jan. 20, 2009, CBS' amazing number cruncher Mark Knoller reports, the national debt was $10,626,000,000,000.

That means the debt that our federal government owes a whole lot of somebodies including China has increased $4,247,000,000,000 in just 945 days. That's the fastest increase under any president ever.

Remember the day the Democrat promised to close the embarrassing Guantanamo Bay Detention Facility within one year? That day the national debt increased $4,247,000,000. And each day since that the facility hasn't been closed.

Same for the day in 2009 when Obama flew all the way out to Denver to sign the $787 billion stimulus bill that was going to hold national unemployment beneath 8% instead of the 9.1% we got today anyway? Another $4,247,000,000 that day. And every day since, even Obama golfing and vacation days.

Same sum for the day Obama flew Air Force One nearly four hours roundtrip to Columbus, Ohio for a 10-minute speech about how well the stimulus was working in the politically crucial Buckeye state. Ohio's unemployment rate just jumped to 9% from 8.8% anyway.

Or last week's three-day Midwestern tour in the president's new $1.1 million Death Star bus? National debt went up $16,988,000,000 while he rode around speaking and buying ice cream cones. 

There you go.  Proof positive that Barack Obama is a uniquely effective President.  

George Bush?  Eat your heart out.  You never even came close.

Ken Berwitz

I do not see Herman Cain as having any realistic chance to win the Republican presidential nomination. 

But that does not change the fact that Mr. Cain is a brilliant, successful man, who has risen from nothing to the top of the heap.  And it clearly does not mean that he is incapable of answering hate-filled, racist critics who cannot stand the thought of a Black man who doesn't think the way they "know" all Black men should think.

Here, excerpted from Jeff Poor's article at dailycaller.com, is what he had to say about two such racist critics:  janeane garofalo and keith olbermann, who, insultingly (how else do these two function) called him a paid prop of conservative puppetmasters:

“Look, if Janeane Garofalo and these other loonies believe I’m being paid, would she send me the phone number because whoever is supposed to be paying me – they are behind on their payments, OK?” Cain said. “As far as Olbermann talking about delusions of grandeur – see Sean, you know this, I know this and most correct-thinking conservatives know this: When all else fails the liberals call you names or attack your personality. I find it pathetic and hilarious that she is now resorting to this because what that means Sean is they are really concerned that I’m a threat to their beloved Barack Obama.” 

Hannity asked Cain why accusations like Garofalo’s and statements like California Democratic Rep. Maxine Waters, telling the tea party to “go straight to hell” are allowed to stand, whereas a conservative might not get by with it.  Cain’s answer: It’s a double standard and a means of last resort for the left.

 

“It exists because the liberals, including the president, the Democrats, they like a double standard. The president was the one who called for a new era of civility. And now look at what they are doing. You are right. It is a double standard because the Democrats nor the president have any positive results to run on. The American people want results. And all they can do is name-call. Their only weapon is to try and demean the tea party movement, call them names. Didn’t Joe Biden also say we were a bunch of terrorists? Look, they are so out of touch with the American people and it is starting to show. That’s all it is, Sean.”

Is Mr. Cain right? 

That can mean is he right wing, and/or correct in what he is saying.

In this case, the answer - to both, is a resounding "yes".

People like garofalo and olbermann are so self-righteous, and so pompous, and so unchallenged by most of our wonderful "neutral" media, that they never have to deal with their overt racism.  But that does not change the fact that they are racists of the first order;  stereotypers who have decided that the only way Black people should think is the way they are most comfortable with.

Here's some news for the garofalos and olbermanns of the world:  Black people are people.  They are capable of (gasp!) individual thought.  And some of them - not enough of them, if you ask me - have concluded that they do not agree with your view of the plantation they should be on.

There are a lot of reasons to like Herman Cain.  And his answer to these racist twits is just one of them.

Ken Berwitz

Most mainstream media have declared the qaddafi regime over.  They have told us that 90%, maybe 95% of Tripoli is in rebel hands.  They have reported that qaddafi's sons are in custody.

That so?  Then what about these reports, which I just drew from www.drudgereport.com?

CONFUSION IN LIBYA...
Fresh fighting erupts...
Rebels hit Gaddafi compound...
Loyalists strike back...
Son taunts rebels...
Power vacuum...

Does that look like a fait accompli victory for "the rebels" to you?

moammar qaddafi is almost certainly going to be brought down.  Probably in the next few days.  And if he dies in the process, the world will be a better place. 

But, despite the propaganda-posing-as-news by our media, which are too busy reciting their "it's over" meme to bother with actual facts, this fight is not over.  Not yet, anyway. 

That's worth remembering every time you read a story from these same media on any subject.

Ken Berwitz

As we see Egyptian, and now Libyan, "democracy" formulate (both countries will certainly be Islamic religious states and both may well wind up under shari'a law), it is useful to see how Palestinian Arabs are making out with their own version.

Excerpted from an Associated Press article:

RAMALLAH, West Bank — The Western-backed Palestinian president delayed local elections for a third time on Monday without setting a new date.

 

Palestinian democracy has been crippled since the Islamic militant Hamas violently overran the Gaza Strip in 2007, forming a rival government to President Mahmoud Abbas’ West Bank-based Palestinian Authority.

 

Abbas has overstayed his own term and is ruling the West Bank by decree. Municipal elections were initially scheduled for July 2010.

 

Abbas said Monday that he wanted to make sure elections take place in both Palestinian territories.

 

“We have decided to postpone the local elections until better conditions are available. and to enable the election commission to work in all parts of the country,” he said in a decree.

 

That is the same reason he gave for delaying the voting the last time, from July 9 to Oct. 22. .

That, readers, is Palestinian Arab "democracy".  Half the territory violently taken over, and both territories without free elections, long past the time they were supposed to occur. 

In short, no democracy at all.

Is the same in store for Egypt?  Libya?  Sadly, the odds are excellent that the answer, in both countries, will be yes.

There is one democracy and one democracy alone in the Middle East.  Israel.

What a nice neighborhood it lives in......

Ken Berwitz

Today music has lost a major legend.

Jerry Lieber, one of the most prolific lyricists of hit songs during the rhythm and blues, then rock and roll eras, died in Los Angeles today at the age of 78.  The cause of death was cardiopulmonary failure.

With his partner, Mike Stoller, Lieber wrote so many hits that I would get a finger cramp if I tried to type them all.  A very short sampling would include Hound Dog, Jailhouse Rock, Treat Me Nice and King Creole - among a bunch of others - recorded by Elvis Presley (though Hound Dog was originally recorded by Big Mabel Thornton and was a huge hit in Black areas before Elvis even got a sniff), Searchin’, Charlie Brown, Poison Ivy and Yakety Yak (among many others) for The Coasters, Stand By Me (written for, and with, Ben E. King), Chapel of Love for the Dixie Cups, and even Is That All There Is for Peggy Lee,

There were so many others that an entire hit Broadway show, “Smokey Joe’s Café, was created from them

I doubt that you can find any lyricist who had greater success from the 50’s through the 70’s – and beyond – than Jerry Lieber.

We have lost a great one.  One of the very greatest. 

May he rest in peace.

Ken Berwitz

Investors Business Daily has written another of its many excellent editorials about President Obama.  But I have to say that its last paragraph is about as good a definition of Mr. Obama as I have ever seen:

It seems all this president knows how to do is talk eloquently about problems or demagogue opponents. When he's not giving speeches, he's demagoguing. When he's not demagoguing, he's giving speeches. He doesn't know how to get much of anything done for the good of the country.

I don't know how it could have been said better.

Ken Berwitz

I just read a short but very interesting analysis by MSNBC's Domenico Montenaro and Brooke Brower, on what the apparent downfall of moammar qaddafi means to President Obama - specifically to his short term popularity and his longer term re-election prospects.

Here is the analysis in rust, with my comments in blue:

*** What Libya means for Obama:

The fall of Tripoli, and likely eventual ouster of Moammar Khaddafy It may already have happened -- a thorn in American presidents’ sides for more than a generation -- is welcome news to a White House in need of good news. Are you sure about that?  “[T]he momentum against the Qadhafi regime has reached a tipping point,” President Obama said in a statement last night, adding, “Qadhafi and his regime need to recognize that their rule has come to an end.” To be replaced by who?  What?  You may not realize it, Mr. President, but those questions are precisely what you have to sweat out for the next year and a quarter, right until election day.  The news should also serve to blunt criticism of the president for being on vacation and will make it even harder for Republican opponents to criticize him on foreign policy. Again we have the assumption that this is good news.  What happens if bloodshed erupts between the various anti-qaddafi factions – all of them armed and all of them intent on taking over the government?  Think that will blunt criticism of President Obama?  The muted response from the GOP presidential field is evidence of that. No, it’s evidence that they’re waiting to see what actually happens – something that President Obama – and you two – should be doing, but are not.  But let’s not forget that it was just over three months ago when Osama bin Laden was killed, and his supporters were calling President Obama a shoo-in for reelection in 2012.  I wonder what the left wing head-nodders at “The View” – especially Obama cheerleader Barbara Walters – are saying about that.  But he remains very vulnerable next year because of the fragile domestic economy.  You got that right.  And Democrats acknowledge that. Right again.  One supporter said, “I think it helps with the vacation attacks. Presidents are never really on vacation. Presidents are never really on vacation?  Then how come Democrats skewered George Bush for every working vacation he took in Crawford Texas?  It's another notch on the belt of accomplishments. I don't think it's more than that right now.”  Don’t carve that notch just yet. 

I strongly suggest that, if Ms. Montenaro and Ms. Brower monitor Libya over the weeks and months expecting to see a wonderful tranformation of the country into an oasis of freedom and tolerance, they remember that classic scene in Raiders of the Lost Ark when those "beautiful" angels floating around the Ark of the Covenant actually turned out to be....

....well, never mind.  We'll all find out soon enough.

Ken Berwitz

Excerpted below is Noel Sheppard's commentary on why we are in our current economic mess.  It is only a small part of his overall blog, well worth reading (Noel's blogs always are), which is mostly is involved with former American Express CEO Harvey Golub's response to "Whining Warren" Buffett's call for higher taxes on people like himself.

I don't agree with everything Noel says.  But I certainly agree with this part:

While Democrats and their press surrogates talk about "shared sacrifice," they completely ignore the close to 50 percent of the country that don't pay any federal income taxes and the small percent that pay almost all of the total collected.

When Obama and Buffett refer to the so-called rich paying "their fair share," making this happen would actually require cutting the top rates rather than raising them.

The reality is that we're largely in this predicament because spending has risen 41 percent in the past four years.

If we spent next year exactly what we did in 2007, we'd have a $200 billion surplus. If we spent what we did in 2007 adjusted for inflation, we'd have less than a $50 billion deficit.

The problem isn't that we tax too little. It is that we spend too much.

More importantly, raising taxes doesn't solve our government's desire to spend. Quite the contrary, it encourages it.

...we currently have a government hooked on spending. The Left claims the solution is to give it more money.

Isn't that like claiming you can cure a junky's problem by giving him more heroin?

Yep. 

Ken Berwitz

For months I have been writing about the very real prospect that, as disastrous as a qaddafi-led Libya has been, a post-qaddafi Libya could be every bit as bad, and even worse.

Now, as qaddafi (assuming he is alive and in the country – neither of which is necessarily true) is in his last gasps of power, we have this, excerpted from article for Reuters:

NALUT, Libya — Libyan rebel Husam Najjair seems more concerned about the possibility of rebels turning on each other as they try to gain complete control of the capital Tripoli than the threat posed by forces loyal to Moammar Gadhafi.

"The first thing my brigade will do is set up checkpoints to disarm everyone, including other rebel groups, because otherwise it will be a bloodbath," said Najjair. "All the rebel groups will want to control Tripoli. Order will be needed."

His comments pointed to the biggest question that will be asked as the endgame appears to be nearing in Libya — is there one unifying figure who can lead Libya if the rebels take over?

Right now the resounding answer seems to be no.

"There isn't one rebel leader who is respected by everyone. That's the problem," said Kamran Bokhari, Middle East Director at STRATFOR global intelligence firm.

Tensions between life-long opponents of Gadhafi and his supporters who recently defected to the rebel side may undermine efforts to choose an effective leadership.

If hard-liners prevail, Libya could make the same mistake that analysts say was made in Iraq after the 2003 U.S. invasion that toppled Saddam Hussein.

His Baath Party supporters and army officers were purged en masse, creating a power vacuum that led to instability for years as everyone from his secular backers to al-Qaida waged a violent campaign against Iraq's new U.S.-backed rulers.

Other than Reuters’ gratuitous attack on what happened in Iraq (which has functioned, more or less, as a democracy for the last 8 years – something Libya, I would think, aspires to), this story encapsulates the problem very well.

There is no one organized rebel group in Libya.  There are “the rebels” – an amorphous glob of various factions whose only point of commonality is that they did not want moammar qaddafi to continue running the show.

Which of them will come out on top?  Remember the rule of thumb:  when there is a power vacuum, the most organized group takes over. 

Now, think about which group would be most organized in Libya.  Would it be supporters of western-style democracy?  Multi-party government?  Would it be supporters of religious tolerance and freedom? 

I have a feeling that, the more you think about it, the more you will be just as worried about who will eventually take over as I am.

Ken Berwitz

So how did President Obama make out on his bus tour? 

One measure is how the social media crowd - which you might expect to be more rather than less disposed toward the President - felt about it. 

Here is their reaction, via the following excerpt from an article at thehill.com:

The Hill Hexagon: Obama bus tour ridiculed on Twitter

 

Obama's Midwest tour last week prompted more criticism and ridicule than support on Twitter, according to this week’s Hill Hexagon.

Regardless of what President Obama and his political advisers hoped for, the three-state Midwest bus tour last week prompted far more criticism and ridicule than support in Twitter comments, according to this week’s Hill Hexagon.

An analysis of Twitter traffic by Crimson Hexagon over the days of the tour showed that 72 percent of the opinions expressed were negative, while 22 percent were neutral and only 6 percent were favorable.

Among the negative comments, 21 percent were generally negative toward Obama, 17 percent called it a campaign stunt, 15 percent complained about taxpayers picking up the tab, 12 percent offered derisive names for the tour similar to GOP presidential candidate Mitt Romney’s “Magical Misery Tour,” and 6 percent that he was not in Washington working.

As you probably remember, this was billed as a non-political event; a series of neutral town hall meetings. 

I have a strong feeling that this overtly phony claim gave a negative tinge to the tour before it even started.  When has Barack Obama ever done anything non-political?

And then there was the no-win confrontation in Iowa (yeah, making sure there was a stop in Iowa was non-political) with tea partier Ryan Rhodes, over Vice President Joe Biden's characterization of tea partiers as "terrorists". 

-To claim Biden didn't say it, after a neutral-leaning-democrat web site, politico.com, said he did and had several corroborating Democrats to back it up, made him look ridiculous; 

-To admit Biden either said it, or agreed with someone else who said it, meant calling his own Vice President a liar.  

Simply stated, President Obama hoped for this bus event to be a tour de force.  But, instead, it turned into a tour de farce. 

And while only 72% of the twitter commenters appear to know it,  you can bet 100% of the Obama campaign team does.

Put another way, don't count on seeing another Obama bus tour any time soon. 

Ken Berwitz

As a head of state, moammar qaddafi is over.  He is either dead, fleeing or in hiding in a place that is sure to be found, since so many of the people within his inner circle have abandoned him.

If that were the end of it, I would - figuratively, anyway - be dancing in the streets.

But that isn't the end of it.

-Who will take over.  Will the new government of Libya be more desirable than qaddafi's - or no better, maybe even worse?

-How much of a seat will al qaeda have at the table?

-Will there be a bloody civil war for power?

The answer?  No one knows.

Has Egypt not taught us that getting rid of a bad government doesn't guarantee anything other than a different one - one that just might be worse than what there was in the first place?  

So before I join our apparently jubilant media in thrilling to the end of qaddafi, you'll pardon me if I wait to see what replaces him.

Ken Berwitz

In my previous blog I mentioned that my wife and I got a great table - right on the lake - at the Central Park Boat House restaurant.

The reason?  A service union, which apparently has been trying to unionize its workers, was aggressively, intimidatingly picketing the establishment.

-It set up a a truck directly across from the entrance, which "featured" a guy banging drums as loudly and annoyingly as he could. 

-There were a group of operatives positioned at the front door verbally attacking the restaurant to anyone who wanted to come in, claiming that it had numerous health code violations. 

-Also, for a period of time, one of the operatives stood outside the area where we were seated, screaming "boycott the Boathouse" at the top of his lungs, and that, since the place was unsanitary, patrons better check to see that the wait staff's hands were clean, etc., etc. etc.. 

Needless to say, this kept a good many potential customers out - hence the easy acquisition of our table. 

Why did we run that picket line and go in anyway - especially given my strong support of unions? 

Partly it was because I resented the intimidational tactics being used.  

And partly it was because I know as sure as the sun rises in the east and sets in the west, that if The Boathouse acceded to their demands and allowed the union in, those pickets would be gone in a flash, the drums would stop, and no one from that union would give a damn about whether there were health code problems. 

Therefore the entire operation was not out of concern for anyone but the union; it was nothing more than an organizing strategy. 

Look unions are extremely important.  They serve a an invaluable purpose - i.e. giving working people leverage against the companies which employ them.  Without unions, they would certainly be exploited, underpaid and overworked.

But when a union operates in this manner, it loses my support.  So I refused to honor the picket line.

End of explanation.  Now back to politics.

Ken Berwitz

What a great day my wife and I had today!!!!

The weather in central New Jersey promised to be horrible.  Lightning, thunderstorms, the works.

So, since it certainly wasn't beach weather, and we didn't want to vegetate at a mall, we drove into Manhattan.

First we hit Lord and Taylor on 39th St.  I got a parking space within about 100 feet of the side entrance.  We picked up a couple of things, and that did it for department store shopping.

Next we headed uptown to 72nd St - where I found a parking space on Madison Avenue without breaking a sweat.  We walked through Central Park to The Boathouse, where we wanted to have a drink by its adjacent lake (one of the most picturesque parts of the park).   And, much to our surprise, we got a table immediatel; no waiting at all (I'll talk about the reason in a subsequent blog). 

We enjoyed a delicious white wine with our son, who joined us there.  Then it was back to the car and over to the west side, where we hit Zabar's - first for some (by this time) late lunch at its wonderful, informal little eatery on the corner of 80th and Broadway, then into the main store for its appetizing, specialty foods, and especially coffee (there isn't any better).  Afterwards, we dropped our son off downtown, and it was through the Lincoln Tunnel, back to New Jersey.

And the weather?  Wonderful throughout the entire day!!  Partly cloudy but mostly sunny, with a refreshing cool breeze. 

On the way home, we called friends in our neighborhood and found out that, as promised, the weather had been absolutely miserable.  Thunder, lightning and rain for hours.

Did we make out like bandits, or what?

Sorry for going on and on here.  But days like this don't come along often, so when there is one I love to tell you about it!!

Ok, back to politics (and that soon-to-be-told story about why The Boathouse was not crowded). 

Ken Berwitz

Here, from my pal Bob, are 25 notable sayings.   I can't swear every one is accurate, but `a) the ones I already had heard are (except #24 came not, as many people mistakenly believe, from Thomas Jefferson but from Gerald Ford) and b) even if they were made up, every one is worth noting anyway.

Here they are:

1. In my many years I have come to a conclusion that one useless man is a shame, two is a law firm and three or more is a congress.

-- John Adams

 

2. If you don't read the newspaper you are uninformed, if you do read the newspaper you are misinformed.

-- Mark Twain

 

3. Suppose you were an idiot. And suppose you were a member of Congress. But then I repeat myself.

-- Mark Twain

 

4. I contend that for a nation to try to tax itself into prosperity is like a man standing in a bucket and trying to lift himself up by the handle.

-- Winston Churchill

 

5. A government which robs Peter to pay Paul can always depend on the support of Paul.

-- George Bernard Shaw

 

6. A liberal is someone who feels a great debt to his fellow man, which debt he proposes to payoff with your money.

-- G. Gordon Liddy

 

7. Democracy must be something more than two wolves and a sheep voting on what to have for dinner.

-- James Bovard, Civil Libertarian (1994)

 

8. Foreign aid might be defined as a transfer of money from poor people in rich countries to rich people in poor countries.

-- Douglas Casey, Classmate of Bill Clinton at Georgetown University

 

9. Giving money and power to government is like giving whiskey and car keys to teenage boys.

-- P.J. O'Rourke, Civil Libertarian

 

10. Government is the great fiction, through which everybody endeavors to live at the expense of everybody else.

-- Frederic Bastiat, French economist(1801-1850)

 

11. Government's view of the economy could be summed up in a few short phrases: If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. And if it stops moving, subsidize it.

-- Ronald Reagan(1986)

 

12. I don't make jokes. I just watch the government and report the facts.

-- Will Rogers

 

13. If you think health care is expensive now, wait until you see what it costs when it's free!

-- P.J. O'Rourke

 

14. In general, the art of government consists of taking as much money as possible from one party of the citizens to give to the other.

-- Voltaire(1764)

 

15. Just because you do not take an interest in politics doesn't mean politics won't take an interest in you!

-- Pericles (430B.C.)

 

16. No man's life, liberty, or property is safe while the legislature is in session.

-- Mark Twain(1866)

 

17. Talk is cheap...except when Congress does it.

--Anonymous

 

18. The government is like a baby's alimentary canal, with a happy appetite at one end and no responsibility at the other.

-- Ronald Reagan

 

19. The inherent vice of capitalism is the unequal sharing of the blessings. The inherent blessing of socialism is the equal sharing of misery.

-- Winston Churchill

 

20. The only difference between a tax man and a taxidermist is that the taxidermist leaves the skin.

-- Mark Twain

 

21. The ultimate result of shielding men from the effects of folly is to fill the world with fools.

-- Herbert Spencer, English Philosopher (1820-1903)

 

22. There is no distinctly Native American criminal class...save Congress.

-- Mark Twain

 

23. What this country needs are more unemployed politicians.

-- Edward Langley, Artist (1928-1995)

 

24. A government big enough to give you everything you want, is strong enough to take everything you have.

-- Thomas Jefferson   Gerald Ford

 

25. We hang the petty thieves and appoint the great ones to public office.

--Aesop

Ken Berwitz

Charles Blow is a New York Times columnist, hater of all things Republican and, until now at least, a big-tme supporter of President Obama.  But he has raised an interesting issue in his latest column which deserves a response.

Here is an excerpt of what Mr. Blow had to say in yesterday's Times:

…one person I never thought would fall into this valley was Barack Obama, the charismatic candidate who electrified the electorate in 2008 and whom many saw as the fulfillment of the dream of the even-more-electrifying Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Yet here Obama is, down in the valley, struggling to connect with the American people and failing, increasingly coming across as dispassionate to some and outright revolting to others.

A Gallup poll released on Aug. 15 found that Obama’s approval rating had fallen to the lowest level of his presidency, and Gallup polls released a few days later found that the number of people not satisfied with the direction of the country and who disapproved of the president’s performance on the economy, budget deficit, job creation, education and foreign affairs had reached the highest levels of the administration.

The country needs the president to rise to this crisis in word, spirit and deed

 

A robotic Sustainer-in-Chief with an eerie inhumanity will not satisfy. At this moment, we need less valley and more mountaintop.

As the old Starkist tuna commercials used to say....."Sorry, Charlie". 

You got what you paid for.  A Chicago machine politician with no qualifications for the presidency, who has skated through everything right to the Oval Office.

If you think you're going to find a "mountaintop" in Barack Obama, I suggest you change your name from Charles to Sisyphus.  Because that has never happened in the past with Mr. Obama, and there is no reason to suppose it ever will in the future.

But...enjoy voting for him in 2012, as you inevitably will. 

Ken Berwitz

Maxine Waters, the queen of Fanny Mae, Freddy Mac, and lord high protector of Bank OneUnited – when (coincidence of course) she and her husband owned a ton of stock in it (we’re still waiting for the resulting charges of ethics violations to play out) has spoken about the pathetic state of California’s job market.

Excerpted from an article at the Los Angeles Times:

Rep. Maxine Waters (D-Los Angeles) came out swinging against Republicans in Congress on Saturday as she addressed the unemployed during a forum in Inglewood.

The event occurred a day after new statistics were released showing that California's jobless rate last month went up to 12%, from 11.8%.  California now has the second-highest rate of unemployment in the nation, trailing only Nevada at 12.9%, and its jobless rate is well above the U.S. average of 9.1%.

Waters vowed to push Congress to focus on creating more jobs. "I'm not afraid of anybody," said Waters. "This is a tough game. You can't be intimidated. You can't be frightened. And as far as I'm concerned, the 'tea party' can go straight to hell."

More than 1,000 people attended "Kitchen Table

A couple of questions for Ms. Waters:

-Aren’t you currently in your 10^th term as a congressperson?  Until January, didn’t your party have a huge majority in the House of Representatives and senate for four years – along with the presidency for two of those years?  What did YOU DO to create jobs for anyone -- other than making vague proclamations about focusing on jobs, and voting for the so-called “stimulus package” - which has resulted in fewer jobs and higher unemployment? 

Evidently, flapping your lip is a lot easier than accomplishing something.

-And what does the tea party movement have to do with the grotesquely high jobless rate in California?  It is not a formal party, has no specific leaders, controls nothing, and didn’t exist until about a year and a half ago.  Was the job situation in California fine and dandy until then?

Ranting about left wing bogeyman to a left wing audience is sure to get you applause every time you do it.  But it doesn’t accomplish a thing.  Sadly, that seems to define most of your activities for the past 20 years in congress:  i.e. ranting out the PC verbiage without getting anything done.....

.....unless, of course, we count the Fanny Mae and Freddy Mac debacle, or the millions of dollars pumped into a bank you and hubby owned stock in, which should never have gotten it.

In my opinion, Maxine Waters is a case study in what is wrong with congress.  She is a loudmouthed do-nothing, in a district that will not think twice (or even once, if you ask me) before electing her again and again anyway.  

Meanwhile, California sinks further and further down the tubes.

Pathetic. 

Ken Berwitz

Do Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack - and his boss, Barack Obama of Chicago, Washington DC and, currently, Martha's Vineyard - think we have so much money that we can afford to flush $112 million down the toilet for absolutely no reason at all?

Evidently, the answer is yes.

Excerpted from Tierney Smith's article for cnsnews.com:

The U.S. Department of Agriculture is paying $112 million in tax money to farmers and ranchers in 11 Western states to restore the habitat of the Sage Grouse, a bird that has not been listed as either threatened or endangered under the federal Endangered Species law because the government says there are too many of them.

 

Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack announced last week that the USDA would dedicate $21.8 million to pay eligible ranchers and farmers in the state of Wyoming to encourage conservation practices that preserve the numbers of Sage Grouse.

 

That will bring to $112 million the total amount that the USDA has distributed over the last two years to eligible farmers and ranchers in 11 states as part of its Sage Grouse Initiative. 

I read the entire article, complete with Sec. Vilsack's quotes, in the hope that there would be something more to this than what meets the eye.  But there isn't.  In fact, the idiocy of this expenditure comes across even worse when you read what he has to say (use the link I've provided and see for yourself).

Maybe this administration thinks we're rolling in dough so deep that this money isn't needed for anything else.  Or maybe it's because this administration has amassed so much additional debt that spending 112 million dollars to protect some bird that doesn't need protecting seems so small it doesn't exist. 

Either way, this is insane.  And it should be scrapped.  Right now.

Ken Berwitz

My wife and I just came back from seeing "The Help".

Terrific movie from beginning to end.  Fabulous story.  Great acting. 

Years ago, I rooted very hard for Viola Davis to win an academy award for "Doubt".  She didn't.  But her performance in "The Help" has an excellent chance of putting an Oscar on her mantel.  And she is far from the only one in this tremendously gifted cast who deserves consideration.

I don't recommend movies very often.  But I'm doing it now. 

See "The Help".  You'll be very glad that you did.

Ken Berwitz

Remember that old adage, "be careful for what you wish, you just might get it"?

It looks like moammar qaddafi may be in his last days as ruler of Libya.  No guarantees, of course, but that's how it looks right now.

And what if "the rebels" oust him?  What if he winds up in exile or dead?  Then what?

Who and what will be leading Libya then?  Do we know?  Have we thought about it?

Have we thought about the fact that "the rebels" were happy to incorporate al qaeda fighters into their ranks?  Have we thought about the reports - admittedly unconfirmed - that towns they took over were being subjected to shari'a law?  Have we thought about the fact that there are different "rebel" factions fighting among themselves, which means even they don't know who would be in charge?

We learned in Egypt that getting rid of a bad head of state doesn't necessarily mean you wind up with something better. It can be even worse.

We better hope very, very hard that this same lesson is not learned even harder in Libya.

Ken Berwitz

Did you think the Obama administration would, by now, have been shamed into ending the wholesale givaways of ObamaCare waivers? 

If you did, I would advise you to think again. 

Excerpted from Sam Baker's article at thehill.com:

The Obama administration granted another 106 waivers last month from part of the healthcare reform law — the first round of three-year waivers the Health and Human Services Department has approved.

The new approvals bring the total number of waivers to 1,472, according to HHS. Those figures cover waivers granted through the end of July.

HHS has been approving a new batch of one-year waivers at the end of each month. The department announced it would cut off applications after September, but let companies that received one-year exemptions extend their waivers through 2014. The 106 waivers approved in July will last three years.

Hey, why not?  And why stop at 1,472? 

It's not like our wonderful "neutral" media are scrutinizing this debacle, is it? 

Ask yourself:  which "journalists" are raising even the most obvious questions, like:

-What are the criteria being used to issue these waivers?

-Which companies are, being given waivers and which have been denied waivers?

-Is there any correlation between support of President Obama and who gets the waivers?

-And, in any event, if ObamaCare is so terrific, why would anyone even want a waiver?

If the so-called journalists - the ones who are supposed to report all the news, not just some of it - were doing their jobs, the questions I just posted would have been asked countless times over the past months.  And Obama administration officials - including the President himself - would have been expected to answer them.

But the truth is, we have fewer and fewer members of the media operating like professional journalists anymore.  More and more of them, instead, are operating like PR flaks for the Obama administration.

What else explains the almost complete lack of attention to this obvious scandal?

And, yes, these are the same "journalists" who will squeal like stuck pigs if you call them biased.

Ken Berwitz

Here is a proud moment for the Obama administration, which has been touting how great a triumph its resurrection of GM has been.  It comes to us via the following excerpt from a Reuters article, published in today's Chicago Tribune:

General Motors Co. is seeking to dismiss a lawsuit over a suspension problem on more than 400,000 Chevrolet Impalas from the 2007 and 2008 model years, saying it should not be responsible for repairs because the flaw predated its bankruptcy.

The lawsuit, filed on June 29 by Donna Trusky of Blakely, Penn., contended that her Impala suffered from faulty rear spindle rods, causing her rear tires to wear out after just 6,000 miles.

Seeking class-action status and alleging breach of warranty, the lawsuit demands that GM fix the rods, saying that it had done so on Impala police vehicles.

But in a recent filing with the U.S. District Court in Detroit, GM noted that the cars were made by its predecessor General Motors Corp, now called Motors Liquidation Co or "Old GM," before its 2009 bankruptcy and federal bailout.

The current company, called "New GM," said it did not assume responsibility under the reorganization to fix the Impala problem, but only to make repairs "subject to conditions and limitations" in express written warranties. In essence, the automaker said, Trusky sued the wrong entity.

"New GM's warranty obligations for vehicles sold by Old GM are limited to the express terms and conditions in the Old GM written warranties on a going-forward basis," wrote Benjamin Jeffers, a lawyer for GM. "New GM did not assume responsibility for Old GM's design choices, conduct, or alleged breaches of liability under the warranty."

Don't you just get the warm fuzzies all over?  Under the Obama-created version of GM, its new policy can be summed up in rhyme:

"Own a GM car or truck?  

Defect-wise, you're out of luck"

When does this administration do anything right?

Ken Berwitz

Several days ago, I posted a blog about "Whining Warren" (WW) Buffett, which ridiculed his demand that rich people be forced to pay more in taxes.  I pointed out that if Mr, Buffett employs tax accountants to take advantage of current tax law - which he most assuredly does - he is a hypocrite.  And, in any event, he can voluntarily pay more to the IRS any time he cares to.

One of the many venues which also reported Warren's Whine was National Review.  And it has received a response to WW's comments from, of all people, Mr. Buffett's fellow billionaire, Charles G. Koch. 

Here is what Mr. Koch has to say:

“Much of what the government spends money on does more harm than good; this is particularly true over the past several years with the massive uncontrolled increase in government spending. I believe my business and non-profit investments are much more beneficial to societal well-being than sending more money to Washington. — Charles G. Koch, Chairman and CEO, Koch Industries, Inc.

Is Mr. Koch right (I don't mean politically right, I mean correct - though some might consider these to be synonymous)?  Is he taking a reasonable position?

Your call.

Ken Berwitz

From our dear friends Myra and Bob, comes this important news about new government health services, supplied by our Homeland Security Department!

If you can't afford a doctor, go to an airport - you'll get a free x-ray and a breast exam, and; if you mention Al Qaeda, you'll get a free colonoscopy.

No thanks necessary.  Just have a nice, healthy trip....

Ken Berwitz

Sadly, one of the most logical consequences of Hosni Mubarak's removal in Egypt - a removal enthusiastically facilitated by President Obama, let's not forget - was that hostilities between Egypt and Israel would be sure to rise.

Here, from London's Financial Times, are details on the terrorist attack against Israel earlier this week - an attack that could not have taken place without Egypt's complicity:

Relations between Israel and Egypt are facing fresh strain in the wake of this week’s deadly cross-border raid by Palestinian militants, amid rising Israeli concern over what officials say is the lack of effective Egyptian security control in the Sinai peninsula.

Eight Israelis were killed and more than 20 injured by gunmen near the Red Sea resort of Eilat on Thursday. Israel has blamed the attack on the Popular Resistance Committees, a Palestinian militant group based in the Gaza Strip. However, Israeli officials also point out that the assailants travelled more than 200 km through the Egyptian Sinai before crossing back into Israel and unleashing a wave of attacks on cars and buses driving close to the border.

Seven of the attackers were also killed, as were three Egyptian soldiers caught in the cross-fire. Egypt said on Friday it had formally complained to Israel over the killing of its troops, and demanded an “urgent investigation” into their death. An Egyptian official statement stopped short of accusing Israeli soldier of the killings, but said the men died as “Israeli forces dealt” with the armed attackers.

How could the Obama administration not have seen this coming? 

Could President Obama possibly have believed that a group of starry-eyed dreamers with twitter accounts were going to take over Egypt?  Could he possibly have believed that the Muslim brotherhood and similarly disposed factions,which already were giving Mubarak a run for his money, would not move in?  And when they did, could he possibly have believed that they would maintain peaceful relations with Israel?

I wrote about this danger months and months ago, even as the protesters were parading around Cairo's Tahrir Square.  And I was far from the only one.  It was right in front of our faces.  How could President Obama missed it?

Well, he did. - Or, worse still, he realized the consequences and it was ok with him anyway. 

And who do we have to blame?  No one but ourselves.  We did this.  We elected a man with no qualifications for the presidency who we barely knew a thing about.  We, as a country, have no one to complain to but the nearest mirror.

But at least we have a chance to rid ourselves of Barack Obama in 2012. 

By contrast, consider the nobel committee.  Nine months after becoming President, it gave Barack Obama its "Peace Prize" - though he had exactly the same qualifications for it that he had to be President:  none.  

I wonder how the nobel committee gets back its peace prize, from a man who continues to keep troops in Iraq (he promised to remove them all within 12 - 16 months of taking office), almost quadrupled the troop presence in Afghanistan to no apparent benefit, has for most of this year engaged in a ridiculous bombing war in Libya on behalf of "rebels" who may well be no better than the "man" they want deposed,  and now has facilitated a situation which could well result in war between Egypt and Israel.

Well, that's there problem.  We'll deal with ours in November, 2012.

Ken Berwitz

ObamaCare.  If you've followed the polls, you know that most people are opposed to it. 

But the Obama administration, obviously, wants it.  And this is an administration steeped in "the Chicago way" of doing things.  Put those two together and you get this, excerpted from Buck Sexton's article at theblaze.com:

In a bombshell accusation, the government watchdog group Judicial Watch announced today that the Obama administration used taxpayer money to help orchestrate an internet search engine manipulation campaign specifically promoting Obamacare.

Judicial Watch obtained 2,328 pages of records pursuant to a March 23, 2011, Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit. The FOIA information included correspondence between the Department of Health and Human Services and the Ogilvy Group, the public relations fire hired by the White House to push Obamacare on the American people.

Judicial Watch listed the following as major points of interest from the FOIA request (all bullets quoted):

• The Obama HHS launched a campaign to track Internet searches and to use online search engines such as Google and Yahoo to drive traffic to a government website promoting Obama’s healthcare overhaul. Using “pay-per-click” advertising tools, such as Google Adwords, HHS purposely targeted for influence people searching the term “Obamacare,” a word that has been described as “disparaging” by political agents of the president.
• According to a budget summary prepared by Ogilvy, from October 2010 through February 2011, the Obama administration spent $1,435,009 on these online advertisements alone, including advertising campaigns with Google and Yahoo, almost $300,000 per month.
• A number of documents address the need to target the Obamacare propaganda campaign to Hispanics, blacks, and women. For example, according to an email from Chris Beakey, Vice President of Ogilvy PR Worldwide, to HHS officials on December 16, 2010, summarizing a conference call, “You want to utilize the bulk of their paid media efforts (which would include expenditures for Radio One and Univision) on media that reaches African Americans and Hispanics. The money will go farther and these audiences continue to be a top priority.”
• A January 18, 2011, email from Ogilvy to HHS New Media Communications Director Julia Eisman notes with respect to a Spanish banner ad campaign, “I realize we really can’t use the blond mom and child for this audience.”

In other words, despite the fact that virtually every major poll ever done shows a majority of people do not want ObamaCare, Obama & Co. have used almost one and a half million dollars of taxpayer money to manipulate public opinion and turn opinion around. 

Let me say that again.  The money being spent to promote ObamaCare was not privately obtained.  It did not come from contributions provided by pro-ObamaCare constituents.  These are taxpayer dollars.

Thank you to Judicial Watch for uncovering this scandal. 

Oh, one other thing.  Remember the ruckus a few years ago when it turned out that Armstrong Williams, a pro-Bush administration columnist, was paid $241,000 by the Education Department to help promote the "No Child Left Behind" legislation?  It ballooned - with considerable justification - into a major scandal that dramatically damaged Mr. Williams' credibility, and his his writing career.

Well this is 6 times as much money from the Health and Human Services (HHS) department, to help promote ObamaCare. 

So now, of course, we can expect our wonderful "neutral" media to go into outrage overdrive, as they tear President Obama and his people apart for this misuse of taxpayer funds.  Right?

Well, right?

Uh....what's that you say?  This is the Obama administration, not the Bush administration?  Hmmm, you're right.  Sorry for my hasty conclusion.

Ken Berwitz

Mitt Romney probably wishes he had not said "corporations are people" last week, because corporations obviously have a lot more going for them than individual people - especially in the area of legal leverage.  

But say it he did. 

And since Mr. Romney's comment is perfectly justifiable if framed the right way, he has - not surprisingly - decided to frame it the right way.

Here is Romney's latest quote on the subject:

"Businesses are comprised of people. I'm talking about repair shops, and gas stations, and beauty salons, and restaurants. I'm talking about Apple computer, Facebook and Microsoft. I'm talking about businesses that employ people. It's really astonishing to me that the Obama folks would try and argue that businesses aren't people. What do they think they are? Little men from Mars?"

Well done.  I'd like to see how the Obama people will argue with that (and, no doubt, I'll have the chance).

Ken Berwitz

This will be the shortest blog of the month, maybe the year.

The following quote is from Al Neuharth, publisher of USA Today and staunch political liberal:

“When Newsweek was owned by the Washington Post, it was predictably left-wing, but it was accurate.  Under Tina Brown, it is an inaccurate and unfair left-wing propaganda machine.”

To which I reply......"yep".

Ken Berwitz

Do I begrudge President Obama and his family a vacation?  No I do not.

Do I begrudge the Obama family their choice of Martha's Vineyard - a major-league upscale destination for the rich and famous  - or his living quarters, which cost $5,000 a day?  Not as long as he, rather than we, are paying for it (though I agree with Charles Krauthammer that it is a remarkably tone-deaf move, given the state of the economy/how financially strapped people are).

Do I begrudge Michelle Obama leaving just a few hours before President Obama on a separate jet, with separate security and a separate motorcade to the $5,000 a day digs?   You better believe I do.

Wasn't it President Obama,  just a week or two ago, railing about those greedy bastards with their corporate jets, and generally talking about them as if they were some kind of enemy camp in our midst? 

Maybe he'd like to explain this thoroughly gratuitous use of one of our corporate jets.  Maybe he'd like to provide an accounting of how many tens - or hundreds - of thousands of dollars taxpayers got soaked, so that Michelle and the kids could get a few more hours of beach time.  I know I'd want to see it.  

If ever there was a "do as I say, not as I do" President, this is the one.

Ken Berwitz

This chart is for the poll lovers in the house.  And, based on the findings, it is for the Obama haters in the house as well:

President Obama and his administration, its strategists, and its many, many media pals, have spent over two years trying to convince the public that he has little or nothing to do with the state of the economy:

-It's George Bush's fault - the George Bush whose presidency ended over 2 1/2 years ago, and who had a Democrat congress writing the budgets for his last two years in office; 

-It's congressional Republicans - the ones who spent President Bush's last two years and President Obama's first two years as a minority in both houses;.

-It's the European union;

-It's the Japanese tsunami;

-It's space aliens who came to this earth to use their extrarerrestrial powers for the sole purpose of picking on Barack Obama (well, maybe this last one is a stretch, but since they've used all the others, who knows,?  It could be next).

Happily, even after all this, the public sees right through their BS and puts the blame where it should be.

Does Bush get some of the blame?  Yes he does.  Do Republicans get some of the blame?  Yes they do. 

But does Barack Obama get the major share of blame?  You're damn right he does.  As he should. 

Who was President these last 2 1/2 years?  George Bush?  The Republican congressional contingent?  Millard Fillmore?  Waldo? 

No, it was Barack Obama.

Let me put it another way:  Harry Truman, famously, said "The buck stops here".  President Obama, infamously, is saying "The buck stops there".

That's worth remembering next election day.

Ken Berwitz

Would Wisconsin Democrat Russ Feingold have been a formidable senate candidate if he chose to run again - this time for the seat currently occupied by the retiring Herb Kohl?  Of course he would have been;  Feingold is a former 3-term senator who was swept away in the 2010 Democrat disaster.

But he's not running.

Here is part of Mr. Feingold's statement: 

I am grateful for the friendship and support of so many fellow Wisconsinites who suggested I consider running for statewide office in the coming months. While I may seek elective office again someday, I have decided not to run for public office during 2012.

 

This was a difficult decision, as I thoroughly enjoyed my tenure in both the State Senate and the U.S. Senate, and I know that progressives are eager to reverse some of the outrageous policies being pursued by corporate interests at both the state and federal levels. I am also well aware that I have a very strong standing in the polls should I choose to run again for the U.S. Senate or in a recall election for governor. After twenty-eight continuous years as an elected official, however, I have found the past eight months to be an opportunity to look at things from a different perspective.

 

Teaching law during the spring semester at Marquette University Law School was a joy. The Marquette Law School is a thriving academic institution situated in a beautiful new building, Eckstein Hall. I found my time with the dean, staff, faculty, and especially the students at Marquette to be a terrific first experience in teaching law. I am pleased that I have been asked to return to teach full-time this fall and look forward to doing so.

What a stroke of good luck for Republicans!  And what a stroke of bad luck for Democrats!

This is not to say that Feingold's entry into the race would have guaranteed a win.  It is to say that he probably was the single best candidate Wisconsin Democrats could field.  But - as of now, anyway (in politics all things are subject to change) - he won't be running.

Democrats already have a more than daunting situation in the 2012 senate elections.  Of the 33 seats up for grabs, 21 are currently held by Democrats, only 10 by Republicans, and two are "independents".  But it is even worse, since both of the two - Lieberman and Sanders - align with Democrats.  In reality, therefore Democrats have 23 seats to lose, compared to only 10 for Republicans. 

And now, one of the Democrats' safest seats is suddenly very much in play. 

Herb Kohl won his last two senate races with over 60% of the vote.  In 2006, he more than doubled his Republican opponent's vote total:  67% to 29%.  Don't expect to see anything like that in 2012.

Well, at least the party has President Obama's coattails to rely on............er, never mind.

Ken Berwitz

Those are two hard questions.  But they have to be asked.

It has been over a half year since Rep. Giffords was shot in the head by the deranged lunatic, jared lee loughner. 

In a sense Ms. Giffords was the lucky one.  She is alive, despite the fact that she apparently was loughner's specific target and he shot her at close range.  Let's remember that he did manage to randomly kill 9 other people in the immediate vicinity.  But that is small consolation, given the obvious severity of her injuries.

The initial reaction of some Democrats, disgustingly enough, was political.  Rep. Giffords had expressed an interest in running for the US Senate and, after the attack, her name was quickly floated while the public's sympathy level was likely to be at its highest point. 

But, as much as it hurts to say this, it seems very clear that the shooting may well have caused long-term disabilities - disabilities that would prevent her from effectively serving in either house of congress. 

Illustratively, look at Ms. Giffords' triumphant return to the house floor last month, to vote on the debt ceiling legislation.  You could not find a warmer,more satisfying moment if you tried.  But did she speak publicly?  Is she capable of speaking?  Or of reading, digesting and analyzing legislation as she did before the shooting?

Please understand that I am rooting very hard for the answer to be "yes".  The fact that Gabrielle Giffords' politics often differ from mine notwithstanding, she is the elected house member from her district.  Period.  She deserves to be there, she earned the right to be there and she should be there. 

But if Ms. Giffords' injuries have left her too debilitated to function the way she did beforehand, the right thing to do would be for her to resign, so there could be a special election to replace her.  Otherwise her district will effectively be without representation for almost a year and a half.

Congress is in recess.  But it will be back in session soon, and there will be a very full agenda.  The time to make this decision is now.

Ken Berwitz

Excerpted from Barry Rubin's article at pajamasmedia.com:

This isn’t just another terrorist attack — it’s a major escalation, a new phase in the Arab-Israeli conflict in two ways. First, it is the bitter fruit of the U.S-backed downfall of the government of President Husni Mubarak in Egypt, opening the Egypt-Israel border as a new front in the war. Second, it is probably the first successful al-Qaida attack on Israel. (The Palestinian Popular Committees, a Gaza-based al-Qaida affiliate is the prime suspect.)

A group of up to 20 terrorists from the Gaza Strip travelled through Egypt using vehicles, then went through the Egyptian border area without any apparent difficulty. Approaching the Egypt-Israel border they fired at a regularly scheduled public bus and cars on highway 12 — a road between Beersheva and Eilat, then entered Israeli territory. Their armaments included mortars and an RPG, as well as handguns. Soldiers engaged the terrorists in a firefight. Several soldiers were wounded; seven terrorists were killed.

According to several eyewitnesses, the attackers were wearing Egyptian army uniforms, a detail which if true is going to be a major issue. Stolen or sold or provided by low-level sympathizers in the Egyptian army? And the site of the attack was near an Egyptian army outpost which — so far as we know now –didn’t do anything about it. One eyewitness said a terrorist was firing from an Egyptian army position. Again, these details will have to be checked by an investigation.

An explosive device, like the ones used in Iraq, was laid to ambush arriving Israeli troops. This is a very sophisticated and complex operation. Seven Israelis were killed: four people in one family whose car was attacked — including two children, aged four and six — and three soldiers riding on a public bus. At least 30 were wounded. For more than 30 years the Egyptian government ensured peace along the desolate border between the two countries. In the post-Mubarak phase – as I warned back in February – the successor regime is not so committed to the Egypt-Israel peace.

I would like to take this opportunity to thank President Barack Obama for his successful effort to get rid of Hosni Mubarak.  Isn't it wonderful how the "Arab Spring" he sang praises to has blossomed?  As we all can see, peace and tolerance are breaking out everywhere.

And double thanks, Mr. President, for moving so quickly to do so.  Compared to Syria, where you waited through months of butcher al-assad killing his people by the thousands before you called for his ouster, and Iran, where you never asked for it at all, Egypt was great.

Ok, enough sarcasm.  Now I'll ask a serious question. 

Will this wake up "The Lost Tribe" - i.e. the Jews who support Israel but still intend to vote for President Obama in 2012? 

In the majority of cases, probably not.  I've lived among this bunch all my life, and know that most are absolutely immune to changing what they are:  liberal/left Democrats first, Jews and everything else second. 

But maybe some of them will finally see the light.  And some is, at least, a start.

Ken Berwitz

If al sharpton weren't a career racist, anti-Semite and Black supremacist, he would be a laugh riot.

Here is his latest triumph of mindless ignorance over reality.  It comes to us via a partial transcript from the daily TV show MSNBC was kind enough to give him::

AL SHARPTON: Some of the champion(s) of the town hall meetings on health care, that the Tea Party guys really started from, now of a sudden, they don't want to have town hall meetings. They start having sessions where you've got to pay to come in, and high-level third parties [?], because they don't want Upton got. When you see Ryan appearing at a luncheon for $15, Quayle, appearing at a $35 dinner, and $30 CEO-to-CEO.  I mean, when you start seeing--it's like a pay-per-view boxing match to see the congressmen that were the great populists just a few months ago.... 

Er, al......how much did Barack Obama get at that fundraiser last week?  The cheapest of the cheap seats was $50 a pop which, last time I checked, was more than $15 or $35.  In fact, it is $15 and $35 added together. 

That, of course, is before we get to the higher priced seats.  Reports vary on whether they topped out at $38,500 or $35,800.  But, to tell the truth, I don't consider either amount very comparable to, say, $15 or $35.

You might think that, if the concept of pay-to-be-there is so distasteful to al sharpton, a $38,500-per-seat event would take a bit of precedence over the $15 variety.  But you would be wrong.  We're talking about al sharpton, remember? 

And in case you are of the mistaken impression that this is an isolated incident, on "Morning Joe" yesterday, sharpton claimed that Pat Buchanan (another of my "favorites") supported the war in Iraq.  As per usual, however, sharpton didn't know what the $^@% he was talking about.  Buchanan was emphatically against the war in Iraq from day one.

Let me get this straight:  MSNBC actually pays al sharpton to get in front of a camera and talk for an hour each afternoon?

Gee, this could be an easy money opportunity for me.  Maybe I can get an MSNBC show too.  I'll take less money, and I certainly can't be less accurate than Sharpton is. 

On the other hand, let's remember that this is MSNBC.  So maybe the inaccuracy is why he gets the big bucks.

Ken Berwitz

Does janeane garofalo ever stop attacking people based on race?  If you say yes, please provide some evidence, because every time I read one of this lunatic-fringe leftist's rants it always seems to be race-based.

The latest object of garofalo's race obsession is Herman Cain.  See, Mr. Cain is a Black Republican.  And in the ticky-tacky-box world of janeane garofalo, Black people are not supposed to be Republicans.  That means there is something wrong.  They are mentally irregular. 

Here, excerpted from an unbylined article at realclearpolitics.com, is what she had to say about Mr. Cain:

Liberal activist and actress Janeane Garofalo appeared on Keith Olbermann's "Countdown" show on the Current TV network Wednesday night. Garofalo went on several rants, one of which included accusing the Tea Party, which she calls a "fundamentalist" movement, of racism.

Garofalo also said successful businessman Herman Cain is either being paid to run or is suffering from Stockholm syndrome because he is a "person of color" running as a Republican in the party's presidential primary.

"[He's] in this presidential race because he deflects the racism that is inherent in the Republican party, the conservative movement, the Tea Party certainly. [In] the last 30 years the Republican party has been moving more and more to the right, but also race-baiting more. Gay-baiting more. Religion-baiting more," Garofalo said.

"But, Herman Cain, I feel like, is being paid by somebody to be involved and to run for president so that you go like 'I love that, that can't be racist. He's a black guy, a black guy asking for Obama being impeached.' Or 'it's a black guy whose anti-Muslim. It's a black guy who is a Tea Party guy.'"

Garofalo also had some conspiracy theories as to who may be putting Cain up to this.

"And I feel like wouldn't that suit the purposes of whomever astroturfs these things. Whether that be the Koch brothers or Grover Norquist or any anything. It could even be Karl Rove. 'Let's get Herman Cain involved so it deflects the obvious racism of our Republican party,'" Garofalo said.

"Would that be separate from his delusions of grandeur or are they just taking advantage of him?" host Keith Olbermann asked.

Ms. Garofalo disagreed but had another reason for why she thinks Cain is in the race which includes diagnosing him with Stockholm syndrome.

"He's a businessman," she said sarcastically. "Who ever pays him. And there may be a touch of Stockholm syndrome. There may be a touch of Stockholm syndrome in there because anytime I see a person of color or a female in the Republican party or the conservative movement or the Tea Party, I wonder how they could be trying to curry with the oppressors. Is it Stockholm syndrome or does somebody pay them?"

Did she miss a cliché?  Did she miss a name-brand bogeyman?  Nope, every one seems to be there.  She's got this racism deal down pat.

I would like to think janeane garofalo has a brain somewhere in that cranium.  I would like to, but she's making it harder and harder to accept the premise. 

In any event, since garofalo is so hot to trot on racism, I recommend that she read up on the life and times of al sharpton.  Then when she does the racism routine, at least she'll have a worthy subject.

Incidentally, by way of comparison:

-Herman Cain, who started from nothing, has been a hugely successful businessman, a Director of a Federal Reserve Bank (Kansas City) and a successful radio talk show host. 

-janeane garofalo, who started from plenty, has been a comedian, until she stopped being funny, a failed talk show host (Air America, need I say more), and, in the past five years, has been a supporting character on two shows:  West Wing (which barely would have been acting for her) and - ironically - on Fox during a season of "24".  These days, comedy-wise, she is most laughable for her off-the-rails political comments.  And, to the extent that I have seen them, her tattoos appear to be reasonably well spaced from one another.

Which of these two seems more worth paying attention to?  More worth taking seriously?  You decide.

Ken Berwitz

This little excerpt from MJ Lee's blog at politico.com, is for anyone who believes the above title:

The president, on day three of his Midwest bus tour, replied: “If you hear something is happening, but it hasn’t happened, don’t always believe what you hear.”

When the room broke into soft laughter, the president added, “No — and I’m serious about that.”

Huh?  Wha?

I don't know.  Maybe the people who rave about how beautifully President Obama speaks have, uh.....misoverestimated him.

Ken Berwitz

Was there any doubt that this would happen?  Hosni Mubarak is gone, the Muslim brotherhood, along with its kindred pals among the shari'a set, are taking over, and this is what comes with them. 

From a report published by Ha'aretz:

Seven people were killed and at least 26 people were wounded Thursday in a series of terrorist attacks on Israeli targets approximately 20 kilometers north of the southern city of Eilat, close to the border with Egypt. 

The first attack, at around 12 P.M., was a drive-by shooting targeting Egged bus 392 traveling from Be'er Sheva to Eilat, near the Netafim junction.

Shortly afterward, IDF forces rushed to the scene and were faced with several explosive devices that were detonated alongside an IDF vehicle.

At approximately 12:35, a mortar was fired from Egypt to Israel. No casualties were reported.

At 1:10 P.M., a terrorist cell fired an anti-tank missile at a private vehicle, wounding seven.

Minutes later, another cell fired an anti-tank missile at a private vehicle, killing six.

The IDF Spokesman reported that two to four terrorists were killed during the clashes.

According to reports, the terrorists in the car opened fire at the Egged bus, which carried a significant number of soldiers leaving their bases for the weekend

In the aftermath of the first attack, Israeli security forces launched a search for the vehicle thought to have transported the gunmen, setting up barricades in the area. A firefight erupted once the IDF troops caught up with the vehicle, in which several of the armed men were killed.

Two IDF helicopters were called to the scene in order to evacuate those wounded to Yoseftal hospital in Eilat and to Soroka hospital in Be'er Sheva.

Tragically, this may well signal the end of 30 years of peace between Israel and Egypt.

 I am nearly 100% sure that what happened today is not an isolated event, it is the start of a series of events.  The people who want war with Israel are in their ascendancy, and Egypt - a country loaded to the gills with ignorant, destitute people who have been taught Jew-hatred their entire lives - is ripe for the effort.

I wonder how President Obama, who was a prime mover in Mubarak's ouster, feels about this. 

My guess (and fervent hope) is that, despite his obvious dislike, even disdain, for the country of Israel, he is tremendously unhappy about it.

I certainly don't think Mr. Obama wants Israel decimated.  But I do think that he dramatically misread what would happen once Mubarak fell.  If he understood as much, maybe he never would have been so hot to dump Mubarak.

But let's talk frankly.  This is what happens when we elect a President with no qualifications for the office; with not one second of foreign policy experience. 

In this world, you get what you pay for.  And Barack Obama was the United States' purchase of 2008. 

Maybe we should consider changing brands in 2012.

Ken Berwitz

After over a year of countless attacks on Tea Partiers as being violent (and racist) - with virtually no facts to back the charges up - I thought you might want to read about a group that really does engage in violence. 

Excerpted from Matthew Boyle's piece at dailycaller.com:

King Electrical Services owner John King was shot by a person who appears to be from one of the many unions who have targeted his workers, Toledo News Channel 11 WTOL reports.  King is the largest non-union electrical contractor company in the area of southeastern Michigan near the Ohio border.

 

He has a long history of being on the receiving end of union-related violence, and this case doesn’t appear to be any different. Before shooting him, the gunman etched the word “SCAB” into the side of King’s SUV.

 

Labor unions have attempted, unsuccessfully, to organize King’s employees, and he has been subjected to one legal nightmare after another in the process.

 

“Since he’s been in business, in addition to the legal battles and verbal abuse, King’s company has been vandalized and threatened on numerous occasions,” LaborUnionReport.com reports. “Unfortunately, the vandalism has never stopped. This year alone, he’s had to report three incidents of damage to police. This doesn’t include the incidents of stalking he and his men have to go through while they’re working.

These are not unfounded, dishonest charges, made for political purposes.  This ongoing violence is real.  Very real.  And it is very clear where it is emanating from.

But it took an actual shooting for at least a few media venues to report anything at all about what this business owner is being subjected to.  Even after the shooting, it remains virtually uncovered in mainstream media.  I just googled "John  King Michigan shot":  In the first three pages of google results I found plenty of conservative web sites reporting about it.  But nothing at NBC, or CBS, or ABC, or CNN.  Zero. Zilch. Nada.

And this certainly isn't the only example.  Also this week, during a Communication Workers of America (CWA) strike against Verizon, not only have there been numerous acts of disruption, even sabotage (cutting phone lines), but the CWA's Executive VP, chris calabrese issued a voice message to strikers, advising them that"

“It is open season.  Follow them safely, but when you get to a location, torture them.  Torture them with chants and noise, so that they can’t concentrate, and wish they’d never got out of bed.....Understand brothers and sisters, we can never let these (expletive) piece of (expletive) pigs break us”

Let's keep in mind that "open season" is a hunting term.  It means that now is the time when it is ok to shoot and kill.  This was so disgusting that the union finally was shamed into taking the message down.

Did calabrese specifically say CWA workers should shoot and kill Verizon people still on the job?  Nope - any more than Sarah Palin's map with 20 targetted congressional districts told jared lee loughner to go on a killing spree (not that it matters, since there is no evidence loughner ever even saw the Palin map).  But for weeks mainstream media put out a tidal wave of stories tying Palin to what loughner's killing of 9 people and shooting of Rep. Gabrielle Giffords. 

No media problem with what calabrese was saying, though.  These are the union guys.  The good guys.  So incendiary language is ok.  Nothing to report here, sheeple, just move along, move along.

I always thought that journalism was supposed to report events, and editorials were supposed to take a position. 

But, over the years, it has become clear that many media venues no longer distinguish between the two.  And it has long been clear that most mainstream media are promoting a Democrat/liberal/left story line.

Maybe that's why poll after poll shows that fewer and fewer people trust them. 

Ken Berwitz

You have a problem with that title?  Why?  After all, I got it from a perfectly credible source:  President Obama himself.

Here is what Mr. Obama told a "town hall" in Illinois, during what he described as a completely non-political bus tour of the Midwest:

“Now the fact of the matter is that the economy’s gotten better than it was when I first took office.  We’ve seen, over the past 17 months 2 million, over 2 million private sector jobs created.

Hey, how can you argue with a non-political statement like that?

But I have to admit to being a bit confused about a few things - my fault, not his, I'm sure.

-One of them is when he took office.  Mr. Obama told us that "the economy's gotten better than it was when I first took office".  But then he gave us job creation data only from the past 17 months. 

I keep thinking to myself that Barack Obama became President on January 20, 2009.  That's 31 months ago.  And that his "stimulus package", written entirely by his party and passed with virtually no votes from Republicans, was enacted February 17, 2009 - 30 months ago.  So I'm trying to reconcile the fact that 14 months of Mr. Obama's presidency, and 13 months of the "stimulus package", are somehow missing.

-Another point of confusion is the unemployment rate.  I'm sure President Obama is speaking nothing but the truth.  But - my memory must be failing me here - I keep thinking that unemployment was around 8% the day he became President, then jumped over 10%, then drifted into the mid 9's, and is currently still over 9%. 

Wait, I think I see what the confusion is.  Mr. Obama is looking at the data only from the last 17 months (unemployment 17 months ago, in March, 2010, was 9.7%).  So, by eliminating the 25% jump in unemployment during the first year of his "stimulus package", and starting when it had begun to drift downward, unemployment definitely improved.  Heck, it's all the way down to....uh, over 10% higher than when his "stimulus package" took effect.  Gee, that's great. 

-Then there is the issue of food stamps.  When President Obama took office, there were about 32 million food stamp recipients.  Now there are 44 million - with accusations flying that a large number are illegal aliens, who have no right to be here at all, let alone get free food paid for with our tax dollars.

But, to be perfectly fair, just this week President Obama's Secretary of Agriculture, Tom Vilsack, told us that the increase in food stamp usage is a boost to the economy.  So evidently this is part of his success story.

I think the confusion must be my problem.  It can't be that President Obama's statement is beyond ridiculous.  So it must be me.

I'll just have to work harder at understanding Mr. Obama's 100% non-political, 100% truthful comment about how well the economy is doing under his leadership.  Then everything will be AOK.

Or.....maybe I'll just keep wishing that there were some way to move up the 2012 election.

Ken Berwitz

Here are the first three paragraphs from Stephanie Nebehay's article for Reuters, which details the United Nations' hard-hitting action against Syria, and its mass murdering dictator, butcher al-assad:

GENEVA (Reuters) - Syrian forces have fired on peaceful protestors throughout the country, often at short range and without warning, killing at least 1,900 civilians in what may amount to crimes against humanity, U.N. human rights investigators said on Thursday.

Tanks, grenades, snipers, heavy machine guns and helicopters have been used in the assault aimed at quashing opposition to the rule of President Bashar al-Assad, they said in a damning report to the U.N. Human Rights Council. The 47-member Geneva forum is to hold a special session on Syria on Monday.

"The mission found a pattern of human rights violations that constitutes widespread or systematic attacks against the civilian population, which may amount to crimes against humanity," it said, specifically citing the Rome Statutes of the International Criminal Court (ICC).

Almost two thousand Syrian civilians dead - that we know of;  the total may well be significantly more.  Countless injured.  Their "crime?  Protesting a brutal dictator who was installed as head of state by his father - also a mass murdering butcher.

And after months of this, the UN's reaction?  Well gee, this may amount to crimes against humanity. 

Thanks guys.  And UN may stand for Useless Nonentity. 

The most effective activities of today's UN - other than keeping expense-account restaurants in midtown Manhattan busy - is raping young girls (and probably boys) wherever its troops are sent, and condemning Israel for anything it can think of, big or small.

The United Nations is morally, spiritually and ethically dead.  And this ridiculously late, ridiculously worded, absolutely meaningless pronouncement about Syria is just another proof of it.

Ken Berwitz

It has just been announced that President Obama is going to give a major speech in "early September" (no specific date has yet been set).  One of the key reasons, it is being proclaimed, is to unveil new ideas to speed up "job growth".

"Job growth"?  Interesting choice of words.  Doesn't this suggest there already is job growth, and the new ideas are going to accelerate it? 

With the above in mind, and as a prelude to Mr. Obama's "major speech", I would like to post the following excerpt from Steve McCann's article at americanthinker.com.  I am doing so in the hope that it gives you a proper background with which to digest President Obama's latest load of balone....er, significant blueprint for job-creation:

In a town hall meeting in Iowa last night Mr. Obama, while bemoaning how unkind the fates have been to him after doing so much to resuscitate the economy, claimed that over 2 million private sector jobs had been created since he assumed office but that the Arab Spring, a tsunami in Japan, the Republicans etc etc had all conspired to reverse all his hard work to save the America.

Beyond the laughable and pathetic aspect of listening to a President of the United States whining about his fate in life, he deliberately told another outright lie.  The private sector has not produced 2 million jobs since January of 2009, when he was inaugurated.

In January 2009 the Bureau of Labor Statistics, in its Employment Situation News Release showed that total employment in the United States was at 142.1million.  Of that number, 22.4 million were employed by governments at all levels.  Thus 119.7 million were in the private sector and overall unemployment rate was 7.6%.

Fast forward to June of 2011; the Employment Situation News Release for that month revealed that total employment was at 139.3 million (a drop of 2.8 million from January 2009).   Within the total employment number were 22.1 million government workers at the federal, state and local levels.  In summary there were thus 117.2 million employed in the private sector, a decline of 2.5 million.  The overall unemployment rate: 9.2%.

The reality is 2.5 million jobs in the private sector were eliminated since Obama assumed office.

The truth, as you can plainly see, is that there has not been any job growth at all under President Obama.  In fact, there has been job loss - 2.5 million private sector jobs are gone.

And, all the while, the Obama administration has been telling anyone who would listen that he has created jobs by the millions -- or "saved" them, whatever that means.  Remember the 3.5-4.0 million "saved or created" jobs?  The "recovery summer"? 

Tell me:  If President Obama, Vice President Biden, and the rest of this bunch have lied to us about job creation for 2 1/2 years, why would we believe anything he has to say about it in September?

Ken Berwitz

Here is a little speculation for you, about one of the reasons for President Obama's "Black Bus Tour" (BBT).

First, a quick remembrance.  In March of last year, there was a major protest by "tea partiers" over the health care legislation most of us now call "ObamaCare".  During that protest, a group of Democrat congresspeople declined to use the underground paths available to them, and intentionally walked through the crowd. 

Why would they do that?  It seemed pretty evident at the time - and just as evident now – that it was done in the hope that tea partiers would pepper them with racial insults, and possibly a few homophobic ones as well (Barney Frank was one of the participants).  Those insults could then be used to demonize the tea party movement as racist, and generate sympathy for the poor Democrat victims.

In reality, however, that did not happen.  No racial insults at all were made - as proved by the fact that not one of the countless cameras and video devices which recorded the march picked up any. 

But that did not change a thing.  The charges were made anyway -- and our wonderful "neutral" media were more than happy to repeat them over and over again.

Illustratively, here is an excerpt from Sam Stein's article for huffingtonpost.com, in which he willingly regurgitates the false claims, as if they were 100% true:

Abusive, derogatory and even racist behavior directed at House Democrats by Tea Party protesters on Saturday left several lawmakers in shock.

 

Preceding the president's speech to a gathering of House Democrats, thousands of protesters descended around the Capitol to protest the passage of health care reform. The gathering quickly turned into abusive heckling, as members of Congress passing through Longworth House office building were subjected to epithets and even mild physical abuse.

 

A staffer for Rep. James Clyburn (D-S.C.) told reporters that Rep. Emanuel Cleaver (D-Mo.) had been spat on by a protestor. Rep. John Lewis (D-Ga.), a hero of the civil rights movement, was called a 'ni--er.' And Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.) was called a "faggot," as protestors shouted at him with deliberately lisp-y screams. Frank, approached in the halls after the president's speech, shrugged off the incident.

 

But Clyburn was downright incredulous, saying he had not witnessed such treatment since he was leading civil rights protests in South Carolina in the 1960s.

Let's remember, again, that there was absolutely no evidence any of this took place.  All the video cameras, all the recorders of every type, and not one of them picked up even one instance of such abuse.  It was a lie.  A useful, politically exploitable lie.

But, as hitler pointed out in Mein Kampf, if a lie is big enough, it will be believed.  So since that time, in no small part because of the phony claims about this incident, the Tea Party movement has been nailed as a bunch of racists anyway.  And, reality notwithstanding, a lot of people now "know" it to be true.

Ok, now to President Obama and his Black Bus Tour (BBT).

As you know, President Obama is traveling around the country this week by bus.  The tour is being billed as a series of non-political town hall meetings - which, should tell you right from the git-go how phony this is:  OF COURSE it's political.

In any event, as I'm sure you have noticed, President Obama is traveling in a Darth Vaderish all-Black bus.  No red, white and blue, no slogans ("hope and change" is so....2008), no design of any kind, no nothing.  Just Black. 

Why in the world would they paint it this way?

Well, here's a speculation for you. 

If ever a situation was ripe for racist commentary, this is it.  A Black President in a black Bus.  There are countless opportunities for jokes, sarcasms, insults etc. that would relate Mr. Obama's skin color to the bus he is traveling in.

Just like there were when a contingent of largely Black congresspeople intentionally marched through a rally of "tea party" protesters.

I speculate that President Obama and his people are hoping - maybe desperately praying - for some number of racist comments to be made about his BBT.  (And, as noted above, even if that doesn't happen a few can be concocted).

The more President Obama's critics can be attacked as racists, the more the political narrative is diverted from his failed presidency - the high unemployment, horrific debt, and the three wars he is running, none of them successfully (weren't we supposed to be out of Iraq a year and a half ago?).

Is that the real reason for this BBT?  You decide.

Ken Berwitz

Yesterday, Democrats easily held on to both of the state senate seats that were up for grabs in the final stage of recall votes.

This means Republicans will retain control of the Wisconsin state senate, but by a razor-thin17-16 margin.

Thus ends (I think) a half year of Democrats, unions and left wing activists (often indistinguishable from one another) pulling out all stops and spending tens of millions of dollars to reverse the people's decision in last November's election.

The people elected Scott Walker Governor and gave Republicans their first senate majority in many years. But now....................

Scott Walker is still Governor and Republicans still have a senate majority.

Nice going, guys.  Well worth it, I'm sure.

Ken Berwitz

If you like your lies as blatant as possible, you must be in love with ed schultz right now

Here is what Rick Perry said in Des Moines Iowa, and the lie Ed Schultz told about it, via a transcript of the Ed Show pulled from Noel Sheppard's blog at newsbusters.org:

SCHULTZ: You know, folks, this is the same garbage with heard from Sarah Palin and all these Tea Party attack artists in this country. I think there`s an element of racism every time people claim the first black president doesn't love this country.

Perry comes from the radical country club that loves to remind white America President Obama is other, not like you.

Perry also wants you to know that he's pro-business.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

PERRY: I'm a pro-business governor. I don`t make any apologies about it, and I will be a pro-business president. Getting America back to work is the most important issue that faces this country, being able to pay off $14.5 trillion or $16 trillion dollars worth of debt. That big black cloud that hangs over America.....

(END VIDEO CLIP)

 SCHULTZ: That black cloud Perry is talking about is President Barack Obama.

"That black cloud Perry is talking about is President Barack Obama?  That right, ed?

The problem is that ed schultz intentionally left out the rest of what Rick Perry said.  Here is his whole statement -- including the part schultz was nice enough to remove so you wouldn't know about it, which I've put in bold print:

PERRY: I'm a pro-business governor. I don`t make any apologies about it, and I will be a pro-business president. Getting America back to work is the most important issue that faces this country, being able to pay off $14.5 trillion or $16 trillion dollars worth of debt. That big black cloud that hangs over America, that debt that is so monstrous."

Ken Berwitz

Would you believe that the Obama administration is selling the enormous rise in food stamp usage as an economic plus?

I swear I haven't smoked any funny cigarettes or had a few shots (make that bottles) of rotgut.  The Secretary of Agriculture, Tom Vilsack actually said this. 

Don't believe me (and I wouldn't blame you a bit)?  Here, see for yourself:

As you can see, in the world of Tom Vilsack, President Obama's esteemed Secretary of Agriculture, the fact that food stamp usage under this administration has grown from 32 million to a staggering 44 million is......a boost to the economy!!  Why?  Because when all those people who claim to be too poor to buy food use the stamps, people have to deliver it, stock it, etc.  It's a regular job bonanza!!!

Hey, I have a great idea.,  Why not have everyone stop working!!  Then we'll all be on food stamps and the economy will be in an unparalleled boom period!! 

The country will love Mr. Obama for bringing us back to prosperity, and - since none of us is working anymore - all those illegal aliens can do the delivering and stocking.  So, you see, we'll have solved two problems, not just one.

I will finish with one sentence of reality:  I am counting the seconds until the 2012 election.

Ken Berwitz

What, exactly, does Syria's murdering sack of manure, bashar al-assad, have to do for the Obama administration to demand his removal?

Evidently, murdering thousands of Syrian civilians isn't enough.  We know that because al-assad has done so and President Obama is not demanding his ouster.

Now al-assad is rounding up Syrians by the thousands and flattening their homes, while confiscating their cell phones and other communications equipment so they cannot talk to the outside world.  Will this be enough to get President Obama off the dime?

Excerpted from Borzou Daragahi's aticle, published at Jewish World Review (where did you expect to read it?  The al-assad controlled Syrian press?):

BEIRUT - (MCT) Syrian security forces cracking down on opposition strongholds in Latakia herded thousands of people into a stadium and took away their identification cards and cellphones, activists said Monday.

Forces loyal to the regime of President Bashar Assad continued hammering opposition strongholds in the country's main port city, especially in the district of Ramleh, which has been pummeled with tank, gunboat and automatic weapons fire after unusually large antigovernment demonstrations broke out there Friday.

Security forces began ordering residents of the area, which includes a refugee camp housing more than 10,000 Palestinians, to go to a soccer stadium ahead of what they described as a huge military operation, activists said. At least five people were confirmed dead.

"They were told they should leave their homes and go to stadiums because the armed forces were going to flatten the area," said an activist in the city, who asked that his name not be used. "Cellphone networks were cut as thousands of people left their houses and flocked toward the stadium. As they were gathered and directed to the stadium, their IDs were confiscated."

The latest developments are sure to heighten international concern over Syria. The United Nations agency responsible for overseeing Palestinian refugee camps in the Middle East said Monday that it was "gravely concerned" about the situation in Latakia and demanded unhindered access to the facility.

Heightened international concern?  Who cares?  Certainly not butcher al-assad, who has learned, from experience, that "international concern" equals formal warnings, which he apparently uses as so much toilet paper.

And the Obama administration?  Forget it.  No problem at all for the dung heap of Damascus.

The only thing al-assad has to worry about is if he suddenly decides to support Israel building a few residential apartment buildings in Jerusalem.  Then you can bet that the Obama administration will come crashing down on him. 

But mass murder, and rounding up over 10,000 of his own citizens in Latakia while he destoys their neighborhoods?  As Ralph Kramden would say, a mere bag of shells.

Ken Berwitz

My sister just sent me a link to Richard Serrano's absolutely appalling story in today's Los Angeles Times: - a story which, if past history is any indicator, most of our wonderful "neutral" media is going to bury on behalf of the Obama administration, espcially on behalf of the disgraceful toady and Obama sock-puppet, Attorney General eric holder.

Here are a few key excerpts.  Please pay special attention to the paragraph I've put in bold print:

The ATF has promoted three key supervisors of a controversial sting operation that allowed firearms to be illegally trafficked across the U.S. border into Mexico.

All three have been heavily criticized for pushing the program forward even as it became apparent that it was out of control. At least 2,000 guns were lost and many turned up at crime scenes in Mexico and two at the killing of a U.S. Border Patrol agent in Arizona.

The three supervisors have been given new management positions at the agency's headquarters in Washington. They are William G. McMahon, who was the ATF's deputy director of operations in the West, where the illegal trafficking program was focused, and William D. Newell and David Voth, both field supervisors who oversaw the program out of the agency's Phoenix office.

Three Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives spokesmen did not return phone calls Monday asking about the promotions. But several agents said they found the timing of the promotions surprising, given the turmoil at the agency over the failed program.

McMahon was promoted Sunday to deputy assistant director of the ATF's Office of Professional Responsibility and Security Operations — the division that investigates misconduct by employees and other problems.

Kenneth E. Melson, the ATF's acting director, said in an agency-wide confidential email announcing the promotion that McMahon was among ATF employees being rewarded because of "the skills and abilities they have demonstrated throughout their careers."

Newell was the special agent in charge of the field office for Arizona and New Mexico, where Fast and Furious was conducted. On Aug. 1, the ATF announced he would become special assistant to the assistant director of the agency's Office of Management in Washington.

Voth was an on-the-ground team supervisor for the operation, and last month he was moved to Washington to become branch chief for the ATF's tobacco division.

Skills and abilities?  Like what?  Arming murderous Mexican gun cartels so that they can kill US border agents like Brian Terry -- and, although it is not mentioned here, let's not forget the murder of customs agent Jaime Zapata as well.

It is hard not to conclude that Kenneth Melson was told to shut the eff up and play ball -- which appears to be exactly what he is now doing.

This scandal is huge beyond belief; a political game-changer.  But only if media report it.  And - with full credit to the Los Angeles Times for breaking with their pals today - the media are instead burying it. 

For who's benefit?  That isn't very hard to figure out, is it?

And, yes, these are the same media who squeal like stuck pigs if you call them biased.

Ken Berwitz

Two days ago, Gallup showed President Obama at 39% approval;  the lowest he has ever been in that poll (yesterday it moved back up a bit, to 41%).

Today the Rasmussen poll shows Mr. Obama with 19% who "strongly approve" of his performance as President;  the lowest "strongly approve" rating of his presidency.

But, awful though that 19% rating is, it isn't the worst news for Mr. Obama.  According to Rasmussen:

While 45% of Democrats Strongly Approve, just 4% of Republicans and 8% of unaffiliated voters share that enthusiasm.

Let's think about what this means:

-On the positive side for Mr. Obama, the fact that less than half of Democrats strongly approve of his performance looks worse than it is.  In reality, a vast majority of them aren't going anywhere, and will vote for Mr. Obama's re-election anyway. 

-Similarly, the 4% "strongly approve" level for Republicans is entirely expectable.  Why would a Republican approve of a left wing Democrat? 

-But the "unaffiliated"?  Now that is a problem. You would think that they would be somewhere in between the two partisan extremes, wouldn't you?  But they are almost exactly where Republicans are.

If these data are accurate, they tell us that unaffiliated voters - read that "independents" - have fled Barack Obama like mice running from a cat.  And if Mr. Obama loses the independents, he loses the election.

Importantly, let's keep in mind that a) this is just one day's polling, b) polling can be, and often is, inaccurate, c) even if this polling is accurate events can quickly change people's voting decisions, and d) there is well over a year to go before the election.

But if you are President Obama, this is, to say the least, not where you want to be at any time under any circumstances.

To be continued........

======================================================================

UPDATE:  Today's Gallup data are in, and President Obama has dropped right back to the 39% approval level.

Ken Berwitz

(NOTE:  This blog has been revised, based on my ability to watch the video and see/hear more of the report it describes).

My wife had the Today show on this morning.

I walked into the bedroom just now, and caught part of a report, by NBC chief White House Correspondent Chuck Todd, about President Obama's bus tour.  Todd stated that Mr. Obama was questionned over "unsubstantiated reports" that Joe Biden referred to Tea Partiers as terrorists.

That is a lie.  The information about Biden came from Jonathan Allen and John Bresnahan's article at politico.com, which is a decidedly Democrat site, and, according to them, was confirmed by "several Democratic sources".

Does that come across as "unsubstantiated" to you?

The "unsubstantiated" claim is another lie, on behalf of the Obama administration, from the Today Show.

Further, Todd started the report by stating that "The White House insists this bus tour has nothing to do with politics.  But with three of the five town halls in the state of Iowa, where Republicans are constantly crisscrossing the state".............

You would expect the end of that sentence to be something like ".....it obviously has a lot to do with politics", wouldn't you?  Well, forget it. This is Chuck Todd and NBC.  The entire sentence was:

"The White House insists this bus tour has nothing to do with politics.  But with three of the five town halls in the state of Iowa, where Republicans are constantly crisscrossing the state, it's hard to avoid it". 

In other words, Todd did not at all challenge the obviously nonsensical claim that Mr. Obama's bus tour is not political.  Instead, we are supposed to believe that poor Mr. Obama just couldn't avoid politics because - by some amazing coincidence - his itinerary took him exactly where he would talk politically.  The devil made his staff do it.

That's the Today Show and NBC for you.  Business as usual.

Ken Berwitz

President Obama picked an unbelievably bad time to take a bus tour and talk up his record.

Why?  Because one of the so-called "stimulus package's (and Massachussets Governor Deval Patrick's) highest-profile showcase companies, Evergreen Solar of Marlboro Massachusetts, has gone bankrupt -- after shutting its doors months ago, tossing 800 workers out into the street and moving most of its operations to China.

Mr. Obama had better hope his advance men made good and damn sure the only people with any chance to ask a question are his supporters.  Because - call me an incorrigible pessimist - the issue of Evergreen Solar just might come up. 

Companies that take tens of millions in government funds, then close shop, outsource their operations to China, and finally go bankrupt, have a tendency to be noticed - at least by people like you and me. 

I wonder, however, if this unbelievably ironic turn of events will be "noticed" by any of our network news shows tonight, or on the morning shows tomorrow.

We'll see.

Ken Berwitz

William Blake once said you never know when you've had enough until you've had more than enough.

Ruth Madoff, wife of bernard madoff, and partner in everything - until he got caught, that is - has spent many years having more than enough - of every creature comfort stolen money could buy, that is.  Now she's had enough - of jailbird bernie, that is.  And she is dumping him.

(Big deal, he's in prison for the rest of his life.  All this means is that she saves herself the humiliation of going there to see him.)

Excerpted from an article at the web site for CBS News, New York:

First, he was busted for orchestrating a multi-billion dollar Ponzi scheme. Then he was jailed for 150 years. And, now it seems that his wife of 52 years, Ruth, is calling it quits, according to a report in the U.K.’s Daily Mail.

According to Madoff biographer Diana Henriques, Ruth, 70, has not visited her husband in prison since the December suicide of their eldest son, Mark.

Henriques, the first reporter to interview Madoff in prison and author of “The Wizard of Lies: Bernie Madoff and the Death of Trust,” appeared on CBS’ “The Early Show” this morning and told host Chris Wragge that Ruth stayed with her husband because, her friends say, she had so much compassion for the schemer.

Compassion for the schemer?  Or concern that he'd rat her out?

I think what is supposed to happen is that we're supposed to conveniently forget she was at his side for everything.  Ruth Madoff was no stranger to that office any more than his children were.  If ever there were a family affair, this was it.  

I cannot prove it in a court of law.  But I am about as close to 100% certain as I can be that every member of this family, along with madoff's personal secretary and who knows who else, was fully aware of what was going on.  God knows, they all benefitted from it.

So you'll excuse me if I am not moved by Ruth Madoff's "compassion for the schemer".  I'll worry just a bit more about the people they screwed over.

Ken Berwitz

Based on the dearth of media attention to it, you would barely know that Round II of the Wisconsin recall elections is taking place tomorrow.

In fairness, last week's recall election was more significant.  That was when the only state senate seats up for grabs belonged to Republican incumbents and, if 3 or more of them lost, the state senate (until tomorrow, at least) would have flipped over to the Democrats.

But since Republicans retained control last week, tomorrow's recall elections - in which two Democrat seats are up for grabs - will only determine how much of a majority Republicans will have.  Ironically, if both seats change hands the Republican state senate majority will be right back where it started. 

Wouldn't that be something?  Well, it just might happen.

So what is the real story here?  It seems to me that the story - and it is a huge one - is how much time, effort and money the left - i.e. the political left, the activist crowd especially from the U of W-Madison and the public sector unions -  put into stopping Governor Scott Walker/his Republican senate majority, and how little it accomplished.

All those hours.  All those tens of millions of dollars.  All that support from similar-minded leftists and various unions from all over the country.  Resulting in ................  nothing. 

Governor Walker is still there.  The Republican state senate majority is still there.  And, as noted earlier, it may well wind up with the same 19 - 14 majority as it was at the beginning of this political wild goose chase.

Now that is news.  That is something worth reporting on.  Worth writing about.  Worth doing features on the cable news shows, the morning shows and the network news about.

Let's see how much coverage there actually will be.........

Ken Berwitz

From my pal Bob who, as you might gather, is less than taken with the current administration:

At last a prayer I can say for the president.

 

PRAY FOR OUR PRESIDENT !

 

----- Psalm 109:8
My wife and I were in slow-moving traffic the other day and we were stopped behind

a car that had an unusual Obama bumper sticker on it.

It read: "Pray for Obama. Psalm 109:8".

When we got home my wife got out the Bible and opened it up to the scripture.

She started laughing & laughing. Then she read it to me.

I couldn't believe what it said. I had a good laugh, too.

Psalm 109:8 ~ "Let his days be few and brief; and let others step forward to replace him."

At last -- I can honestly voice a Biblical prayer for our president!

Look it up -- it is word for word! Let us all bow our heads and pray.

Brothers and Sisters, can I get an AMEN?

 Well, Bob, if these poll data are correct, an awful lot of people are currently joining you in that "amen". 

As for November, 2012?  Who knows..........

=======================================================

UPDATE:  I just read that the next line of this psalm is "Let his children be fatherless and his wife a widow".  

Please rest assured that I had no knowledge of this when I wrote the above blog, and do not in any way mean to suggest that I want President Obama to die.  I obviously dislike Mr. Obama's politics.  But that's where it ends. 

I wish Barack Obama and his family happy, healthy, full lives.

Ken Berwitz

Whining Warren (WW) Buffet  has written an op-ed article, which appears in today's New York Times. 

Here is as much of it as I have the stomach for showing (if your capacity for whining is greater than mine, you can read the rest by clicking here):

OUR leaders have asked for “shared sacrifice.” But when they did the asking, they spared me. I checked with my mega-rich friends to learn what pain they were expecting. They, too, were left untouched.

While the poor and middle class fight for us in Afghanistan, and while most Americans struggle to make ends meet, we mega-rich continue to get our extraordinary tax breaks. Some of us are investment managers who earn billions from our daily labors but are allowed to classify our income as “carried interest,” thereby getting a bargain 15 percent tax rate. Others own stock index futures for 10 minutes and have 60 percent of their gain taxed at 15 percent, as if they’d been long-term investors.

These and other blessings are showered upon us by legislators in Washington who feel compelled to protect us, much as if we were spotted owls or some other endangered species. It’s nice to have friends in high places.

Last year my federal tax bill — the income tax I paid, as well as payroll taxes paid by me and on my behalf — was $6,938,744. That sounds like a lot of money. But what I paid was only 17.4 percent of my taxable income — and that’s actually a lower percentage than was paid by any of the other 20 people in our office. Their tax burdens ranged from 33 percent to 41 percent and averaged 36 percent.

I have a few questions for Whining Warren:

-Who or what is stopping WW from paying the highest tax bracket?  No one and nothing.

-Does WW have one or more tax accountants working on his behalf, whom he pays to get the most he can from his profits - i.e. pay the least amount of taxes?  If so (and you can bet your backside he does), WHY?  Does that not make him a hypocrite of the first order?

-Those poor souls in his office who pay a greater percent in taxes than he does (we're taking Buffet at his word here):  Do they make a lot of money?  Based on their tax brackets, it sure looks like they must. 

This means a) they're also very well to do, just not as well to do as Buffet is, and b) the difference in their relative tax brackets is either because they voluntarily pay top tax dollar (which WW does not) or that they cannot afford the kind of tax accountants he has.  Maybe Mr. Buffet should stop whining long enough to offer their services to his poor downtrodden underlings.

Spare me the hypocrites - Whining Warren chief among them - who demand that all well to do people be taxed more, even as they find ways of being taxed less.

Ken Berwitz

“I think there's a lot of time on radio and television and on the Web that actually is conservative points of view. There's not a lot of time for the left”

Stopped laughing yet?  Ok, I'll give you a little more time.

Now you're good?  Ok.  That quote came from David Bohrman, the President of Current TV.

In case you are unaware (which certainly might be the case, given its ratings), Current TV is Al Gore's brainfartstorm.  And, befitting its status as a further-left version of MSNBC, the network's best known personality is the inimitable (no matter how hard Chris Matthews and Ed Schultz try) keith olbermann.

Personally, I'm relieved that, finally, there is a left wing news venue offering a little counterbalance to that surfeit of right wing material we are inundated with from NBC, CBS, ABC, CNN and MSNBC...........

Ken Berwitz

This blog, from "Directorblue" at www.hotair.com, is too important to pass on, and too short to excerpt.  So here it is:

Media Unearths Rick Perry’s College Transcripts In Nothing Flat, But Still Unable to Find Any Trace of Barack Obama’s Existence

 

You may have missed the Left’s preemptive attack on Rick Perry. The GOP candidate’s transcripts were “mysteriously released” a few days ago, which smacks of another odd disclosure.

(See the transcripts by clicking here)

In 2004, Barack Obama’s GOP opponent for Senate — Jack Ryan — “mysteriously” had his sealed divorce records un-sealed.

 

But I’m sure that’s just coincidental.

 

You know, I find the media quite honest and diligent. It mocks and vilifies Rick Perry’s college transcripts, yet somehow forgot about checking Barack Obama’s:

1. Occidental College records and transcripts — Not released
2. Columbia University records and transcripts — Not released
3. Columbia Thesis paper — ‘not available’
4. Harvard University records and transcripts — Not released
5. Medical records — Not released
6. Illinois State Senate schedule — ‘not available’
7. Illinois State Senate records — ‘not available’
8. Law practice client list — Not released
9. Certified Copy of Original Birth certificate — Not released
10. Harvard Law Review articles published — None
11. University of Chicago scholarly articles — None
12. Record of Baptism — Not released or ‘not available’

But I’m sure that’s just an innocent oversight.

Anyone who thinks our wonderful "neutral" media are not doing everything they can to protect Barack Obama from any kind of scrutiny needs his/her head examined.

And, yes, that includes the circumstances of his birth.

Ken Berwitz

The latest Gallup three day moving average data are in.  And, as of today, President Obama's approval rating stands (well, kneels is more like it) at 39%, with 54% disapproving. 

This is the worst showing Mr. Obama ever has had in Gallup.  And he is almost at his all-time worst showing in the Rasmussen's three day rolling average as well, with just 20% strongly approving of his job as President compared to 42% strongly disapproving.

I have two questions:

1) If this is where Barack Obama's poll data have gone over the past several weeks, would it not stand to reason that whatever he has been doing over these weeks has not been well received by voters?

2) Didn't his activity (inactivity is more like it) on the so-called "debt ceiling crisis", and his strategy of blaming Tea Party Republicans for the credit downgrade, occur over the past several weeks?

I would think there are one or two folks in that administration who might notice such a confluence of circumstance.  But, as of right now, the Democrat strategy remains intact.

Can they possibly be this dense?  Who do they think they are, Republicans?

Ken Berwitz

I watched Jonathan Alter this morning, on, I'm pretty sure, MSNBC.

Mr. Alter, who is decidedly to the left, was discussing Rick Perry's entry into the Republican presidential sweepstakes.  And I found two of his statements particularly interesting.

-One is Alter's assesment of Rick Perry as a potentially formidable candidate, because Texas has had so much job growth during his ten years as Governor.  But, says Alter, in a general election Perry would be attacked on this issue because so many of the jobs were either for minimum-wage, or were related to the oil industry, which Perry himself had little or nothing to do with.

Those are very fair points.  However:

...Jobs are jobs.  And that includes minimum wage and oil jobs.  In these times of high unemployment, any Governor would take at least some credit if his/her state were one of the few where employment was on the increase -- even (gasp!) Democrat Governors.  Though he didn't say it, I'm sure Mr. Alter understands that Governor Perry will be far happier defending his record on jobs than Mr. Obama will be;

...I also wonder if Mr. Alter said the same thing about President Clinton, whose so-called "budget surplus" was so tied to the IPO house of cards that fell apart during his last year in office, when the economy reversed, and turned dead south.  I wonder if he was blaming Mr. Clinton for what Bush inherited, or - 100% dishonestly - calling it the "Bush Recession".  I don't recall, but have a pretty good idea of which it was.

-The other is Alter's comment that, while "Bush fatigue" is not a factor in the Republican primaries, it would be in the general election.

I almost fell off my chair on that one.  "Bush fatigue"??????   I don't know how to break it to Mr. Alter, but George Bush is not in politics anymore and hasn't been for the past 2 1/2 years.  If Alter or Obama think this country is currently suffering from "Bush Fatigue", they probably are also rooting for Lindy to make it across the Atlantic.

Jonathan Alter spent 19 years as a senior editor for Newsweek.  He is now a columnist for Bloomberg Review and a contributor to NBC and MSNBC.  I think I'm going to chalk this up to his political partisanship superseding his analytical capabilities.

There is over a year to the next election.  During that time, I hope he can do better than he showed this morning.

Ken Berwitz

With regret, I note that Tim Pawlenty has dropped out of the Presidential race.

Excerpted from Jonathan Martin and Marin Cogan's article at politico.com:

AMES, Iowa - After spending much of his money to finish a distant third in the Ames straw poll, Tim Pawlenty ended his presidential bid Sunday.

“We needed to get some lift to continue on and have a pathway forward and that didnt happen, so I’m announcing on your show that I’m ending my campaign for president,” the former governor said on “This Week.”

That's too bad.  All that happened in Iowa was that Tim Pawlenty lost a straw poll - among political operatives, not rank and file voters - to two candidates who almost certainly will not wind up heading the Republican ticket. 

If, on the other hand, the reasons were more substantial -  e.g. Pawlenty dropped out because he felt Rick Perry would draw away too much of his support, and he couldn't compete $$$-wise -  I understand. 

Either way, the lineup of candidates is diminished by his loss.  I wish Mr. Pawlenty well.

===========================================================

UPDATE:  There is now talk that Mr. Pawlenty will be recruited to run for the US Senate next year versus Democrat Amy Klobuchar.  I hope he says yes.

Ken Berwitz

Sometimes you read an article and wonder what planet it came from.

With that in mind, here is the beginning of Helene Cooper's article, in yesterday's New York Times, which details President Obama's take on the mood of the country:

HOLLAND, Mich. — In the seven days since Standard & Poor’s downgraded the country’s credit rating, political observers and frustrated Americans alike have asked this same question: Why doesn’t President Obama haul lawmakers back to Washington to deal with the worsening economic woes?

 

On Thursday, Mr. Obama gave his answer. “The last thing we need is Congress spending more time arguing in D.C.,” he said in an angry speech before workers and executives at a battery plant here.

 

Rather, the president said, echoing what his aides have been saying privately for days, “What I figure is, they need to spend more time out here, listening to you, and hearing how fed up you are.”

Well, there you have it.  Our credit rating does not necessitate any actual work by congress.  It necessitates getting tongue-lashings from their constituents -- while President Obama stays unscathed, above the fray. 

After all, what did Barack Obama have to do with the deficit?

What an amazing imperiousness.  What an amazing ego level.

The article goes on to say that voters "are deeply disgusted with Congress, but not exactly thrilled with him either", the implication being that whatever his problems, they are much less than those of the congresspeople he wants to be reamed by their constituents. 

But that is not at all the way things are.  That is a way of covering up the very real trouble Barack Obama is in for 2012.

Ask yourself:  if congress's approval ratings are so low (the last poll I saw put them at an ugly 17%), why is it that a vast majority of them are re-elected every two years by the same people voicing all that disapproval?

Look at the last election. Just about every political analyst agreed that the turnover in the house of representatives - almost all from Democrat to Republican - was huge.  Yet, percentage-wise, only about 15% of the seats changed hands:  85% did not.

The reason, of course, is that when people are asked about congress, it gives them a chance to vent.  The anger is not necessarily directed at their individual congresspeople, just at Washington in general. 

By contrast, when people are asked if they approve or disapprove of the President, they are not talking in general.  They are talking about the President specifically.  .

That is why President Obama's approval ratings, which most major polls now show in the low and mid 40's  -- with a disproportionate part of the drop among key independent voters -- should be far more worrisome to him than generic congressional approval is to any individual congressperson.

And if Mr. Obama thinks he can win the 2012 election by putting on those imperious airs, and acting as if the economic damage done during his administration will be blamed 100% on congress and 0% on him?  He better reconsider.  Fast.

Ken Berwitz

I was going to write about the meaninglessness of the Iowa straw poll vote, but John Hinderaker at powerlineblog.com said it so perfectly that there's no need:

That the Iowa straw poll is accorded political significance is ridiculous. Not a single delegate is at stake, and the straw poll is even more laughably unrepresentative than an internet poll. The number of participants is absurdly small; the event can be won with fewer than 5,000 supporters. And everyone acknowledges that the straw poll is mostly an exercise in bus logistics and party-planning.

Of course, the Iowa straw poll is one of a number of events in the political cycle whose importance seems disproportionate. Why, exactly, do Iowa caucus-goers and New Hampshire voters play such an outsized role in our political life? Because they come first. And, likewise, people pay attention to the Iowa straw poll because it is the first test of strength on the calendar, no matter how silly a test it may be.

Thank you John.

Oh, by the way, Michele Bachmann "won" the vote, Ron Paul finished second, Tim Pawlenty (the first worthwhile candidate I've mentioned so far) was third, Mitt Romney didn't compete and Rick Perry wasn't even a candidate until the end of the "campaign", if you want to call it that.

Can we now get a bit more serious?  Ok, thanks.