They are a cranky bunch over there on the left. I like it!

Geez, they call us Tea Partiers racist. Have you ever paid attention to how Progressives talk about Obama when he ticks them off? The following is a comment that appeared on the Firedoglake post AFL-CIO Legislative Meeting Explodes Over Obama’s NAFTA-Style Korea Free Trade Deal:

Leo Gerard is probably in a state of shock

A lot of decent, kind loving, warm hearted, people can’t deal with the devil at first.

It is hard to attack someone that says they love you, while stabbing you in the chest at the same time. It takes a special person or persons to deal with this type of Devil.

Know Thy Enemy!

Think about it like this, OBAMA destroys the middle class of the USA, with no remorse, yes he is killing your kids, my kids, future, and laughing about it! people

Obama is not some wuzzy, weak minded, fool, he is a cold blooded tool the elites developed to destroy democrats, and their followers.

Leo Gerard is probably like most people,just trying to live a simple life. Now his simple life has change for ever, he has seen the DEVIL, and knows what the Devil is capable of doing.

Obama is no JOKE!!! Here you have a Man, who lets nothing get in his way, he sticks to his mission, which is DESTROY THE USA MIDDLE CLASS. (Obama passed the bob dole health care bill, and he has not skip one beat, 80% of the nation hated the bill, Obama said SO WHAT!)

So progressives have better develop the same will and drive Obama has to fight Obama.

Obama has no intentions of winning in 2012. Obama knows black candidates win state wide re- elections only 10% of the time. Remember Obama was the only Black Senator in the Senate in 2006.

One has to admire Obama cold blooded attitude about killing the MIDDLE CLASS, it takes a very bad man, to support a NAFTA trade deal in the middle of a depression.

I wonder what Eugene Robinson would think of that comment? Would he cut the commenter some slack or would he, as he does with members of the Tea Party, attribute the negative comment to something a bit more sinister than a mere policy disagreement:

First, I'll state the obvious: It's not racist to criticize President Obama, it's not racist to have conservative views, and it's not racist to join the Tea Party. But there's something about the nature and tone of the most vitriolic attacks on the president that I believe is distinctive - and difficult to explain without asking whether race is playing a role.

That was a total aside-I couldn’t care less what Robinson thinks. But if you read the FDL post linked above and the comments or just about any far Left site these days it becomes obvious that they have lost that loving feeling. It’s kind of like lighting a cigarette and then finding out that you are surrounded by former smokers-things turn nasty quick. It seems that the more enamored the person was with O in the beginning the nastier they are now. 

I love it. My only regret is that I don’t own stock in Orville Redenbacher.

Obama to Wavering Critters: We've Got Your Back, Coburn to Critters: When Hell Freezes Over

From Ruby Slippers:

That's not all, Senate Republicans took to the microphone to telegraph a few more warnings today as well. Senator Tom Coburn warns vulnerable Dems considering switching their no vote from the fall to a yes, "sell your vote, and we will publish it." Coburn draws a chuckle from his contingent when he warns that anyone in the House taking a dive for health care, their fabulous new job awaiting them as reward might just be hung up in the confirmation process. Wouldn't that be sad? Anyone who would sell out their constituents for a failed president on the promise of a glam job, deserves to wait at the back of the line behind all those who have lost their jobs while this administration focused on health care, health care, health care.

No doubt Obama is trying to sell nervous CongressCritters on the idea that if they are punished by voters in November for voting for health care "reform" that he will see to it that they will be rewarded in their next lives.  Fat chance.  If wavering critters can count on anything it is that a very angry public is taking names and punishment is on the menu-for November, and beyond.   Obama can nominate but no Republican who cares about their own re-election will dare to confirm.  Anyone who votes for this crap sandwich, whether it passes or not, should understand that come November they will be lucky if they can find employment as a Walmart greeter.  

The magical money tree or "What do I care? I'm not paying for it."

"I was there because I thought it was important for me to be there," Rep. Waxman said. "I didn't look at it as a pleasure trip."

So spake Rep. Waxman, (D) Ferengi, of his trek to Copenhagen where he attended the Climate Change conference courtesy of the taxpayers.  One must assume I suppose that Waxman is unaware that the taxpayers believe that  Climate Change, or whatever fashionable alias the fake and faked science is travelling under these days, is bluntly, a tall pile of crap.  I further assume that Waxman is not illiterate so his lack of knowledge is probably the result of some staffer removing all unpleasant news from his morning paper leaving him with nothing to read but the lingerie ads and dozen or so Letters to the Editor all written by some chick named Ellie Light.

When Pundette asks What would you pay for two days in Copenhagen? she is assuming that the person answering is paying for the trip out of their own pocket. But politicians don't pay out of their own pockets, they pay out of ours.  I take Waxman at his word when he claims he had no idea the two day trip cost $1.1 million dollars.  Why should he care, it wasn't his money.  We still don't know what it cost for Obama and sixty of his closest friends to jet to Copenhagen but a good guess is that it will make the $1.1 million look like chump change.  Sadly, we are the chumps and before the government got hold of it, it was our change.

Enough.

Yo, You! Yeah You, Mister Voter Chump. Screwwww Yewwwww!

Allahpundit:

Imagine the contempt you’d have to have for voters’ intelligence to spin a Republican win — in Massachusetts — as some sort of business-as-usual victory for entrenched interests. Hey, champ? In case you haven’t heard, Republicans don’t win in New England anymore. Or at least, they didn’t until you launched Project Never Let a Crisis Go to Waste. This victory belongs to you as much as it does to Scotty B; take credit for it.

Obama really is the gift that just keeps on giving.  Who knew?  So Obama looks at what is turning out to be a major debacle (his administration) as evidenced by an election in Massachusetts in which a Republican may actually win, and he thinks to himself time to double down.  Well alrighty then.  Look, I'm getting tired of using the word "delusional" over and over again when describing the current administration.  Can they please do something, anything, that it is grounded in reality?

The White House's Gift to Terrorists: Our Weakness

Obama is in trouble and he knows it. Consider this from the Telegraph:

In his weekly radio address yesterday, President Barack Obama patted himself on the back for having "refocused the fight - bringing to a responsible end the war in Iraq, which had nothing to do with the 9/11 attacks".

He then told people to remember that "our adversaries are those who would attack our country, not our fellow Americans", before decrying "fear and cynicism" and "partisanship and division" - the code phrases for horrid Republicans used during his 2008 election campaign.

Complacency, faux moralising and partisan shots at Republicans. It was a neat summary of where Obama is going wrong after the Christmas Day debacle when the Nigerian knicker bomber managed to waltz onto a Detroit-bound flight. (emphasis added)

For a man who campaigned denouncing the politicization of national security under President George W Bush, it is worth noting how intensely political Obama's treatment of what might henceforth be known as Underpantsgate has been.

His White House recognized its political vulnerability more readily than it comprehended the level of danger faced by Americans. (emphasis added)

That last sentence should read: His White House cares more about its political vulnerability then it is concerned about the level of danger faced by Americans. Almost immediately after the Christmas day attack we learned of the bomber’s ties to Yemen and Anwar al-Awlaki, we learned that Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab’s father had warned of his son’s radicalization and we learned of Al Qaeda’s involvement. But for all we had learned, the most important lesson was that when our country was attacked on Christmas it took our President three days to speak out and then he did such a weak job of it that he had to come back the next day for a mulligan. But there is no “do-over” when the American citizens learn that the White House had been given the information necessary to stop this attack and they did nothing.

Meanwhile, the White House was working overtime to build a case against Bush. A source in the White House counsel's office told The American Spectator of memos frantically seeking information that would "show that the Bush Administration had had far worse missteps than we ever could".

Yet, President Bush kept this country safe for all the years following 9/11. He was honest with the American people about the threat we faced and how we were going to defeat our enemies. And we were safe until a weak and ineffectual country club manager wannabe took over as president. After Obama was elected he scrubbed the hard language terrorism and substituted pansy phrases like “man made disasters” and in doing so he telegraphed our weakness to the world. And it didn’t take long for the world to respond:

Republicans smell blood. There is a pattern in the Obama administration of dismissing Islamist terrorist attacks as regrettable random acts. In his radio address after Major Nidal Hassan's slaughtered 13 at Fort Hood, Texas, Obama made no mention of terrorism or militant Islam, instead blandly promising that the "ongoing investigation into this terrible tragedy" would "look at the motives of the alleged gunman".

Hassan was a committed Islamist who had corresponded with the fanatical Yemeni imam Anwar al-Awlaki. In June, Abdul Hakim Mujahid Muhammad, a Muslim convert being watched by the FBI and who had previously traveled to Yemen, murdered a US Army recruit in Arkansas. That rated only a tepid statement by Obama about a "senseless act of violence".

But the violence wasn't senseless, it had a calculated objective - just as Abdulmutallab was not, as Obama described him, an "isolated extremist". No wonder many Americans want to grab Obama by the lapels and scream: "It's the Jihad, stupid." Dick Cheney, the former vice-president, clearly struck a nerve when he charged last week that Obama was "trying to pretend we are not at war".

Obama can pretend that we aren’t at war but our enemies know better. And as long as the President of the United States continues to broadcast our vulnerability and our unwillingness to act our enemies will continue their holy crusade against us. In less than one year, Obama has undone everything that President Bush put in place to keep us safe. The blood that Republicans smell in the water is our own.

More at RedState: Barack Obama’s Vulnerabilities Will Get Us All Killed

The Epic Fail of No Consequences

Many years ago I dated a man who had a young daughter. One day he and I took our respective children bowling. We bowled our requisit three games and then got ready to leave. My friends daughter decided she wasn't going anywhere. My friend, I kid you not, began to count. One. Twoo. Threee... Now, my Mom counted a couple of times but she never made it past two. I knew better. There were consequences for misbehaving and they far outweighed the momentary thrill of "acting up." My friend's daughter knew that there would be no consequences and as a result she didn't budge.*

Our relationship with Iran bears a striking resemblence to my former friend and his daughter. Iran knows that we will make absolute fools out of ourselves counting to infinity but we will not act.

Legal Insurrection:

My, how the tables have turned.

It used to be that the Obama administration gave Iran deadlines on reaching agreement on nuclear fuel reprocessing. The most recent deadline was December 31.

None of those deadlines meant anything, as the Iranians figured out long ago.

That's the problem with deadlines, which Obama hasn't learned. Deadlines only mean something if the failure to meet the deadline has consequences.

Now the Iranians have given us a deadline to reach agreement on their terms, or they will simply ramp up their own nuclear fuel production:

Iran warned on Saturday the West has until the end of the month to accept Teheran's counterproposal to a UN-drafted plan on a nuclear exchange, or the country will start producing nuclear fuel on its own.

Somehow, I think the Iranians will put more weight behind their deadline to us, than we have put behind our deadlines to them.

We are the weak horse in this race and nobody respects a wuss. Iran knows this. Obama doesn't.

*The standoff at the abowling alley ended when I told my friend to take my kids out to the car. Once he was out the door I told his daughter that if she didn't get in gear I would put her over my knee and spank her in front of everyone. She hesitated, I took a step towards her and she (wisely) made for the door. She knew there would be consequences. Honestly, I don't miss him at all but I still miss her. We got along very well from that day forward.

Why O' Why Won't Dems Defend Obama?

Giggle Alert! Doofus Crossing! Hmmmm:

Are Democrats so cowed by Republican attacks on Obama’s foreign policy that they’re unwilling to defend him?

It’s now been five days since the attempted bombing of Flight 253 in Detroit, and Congressional Democrats are still turning the other cheek to Republicans who are using the incident to attack Obama’s entire approach to national security.

At first, I thought this line of attack, pushed by Rep. Peter Hoekstra and Rep. Peter King, might fizzle out, but this is clearly not going away. Take South Carolina Republican Senator Jim DeMint’s comments to Fox News yesterday, which were featured in this morning’s lead POLITICO article on the Republican response:

“[S]oft talk about engagement, closing Gitmo, these things are not going to appease the terrorists,” he said. “They’re going to keep coming after us, and we can’t have politics as usual in Washington, and I’m afraid that’s what we’ve got right now with airport security.”

Once again, these are not just complaints about the Homeland Security bureaucracy; Republicans are calling Obama, and his strategy, weak on terrorism. While Democrats have shown a willingness to ding DeMint for putting a hold on Obama’s nominee to head the TSA, they have been completely silent in the face of these wider criticisms, even after the president articulated a defense of his foreign policy yesterday.

Yada, yada, yada. I don’t suppose anybody ever told His Verklemptness that you can’t defend the indefensible? After spending more political capitol than they process (see: Nelson, Ben) Democrats sure aren’t going to climb out on the ledge for Obama over this. Let’s face it, it took Obama three days to respond and then his response sucked. And, there is plenty of blame to go around, so it isn’t surprising that Democrats prefer to engage in a rousing game of “duck and cover.”

As far as Republicans calling Obama weak on terrorism, if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck…

h/t Instapundit

Obama Doesn't "Get" It

Related to yesterday’s post Why is Obama Silent on Iran-Again? is this post from Nile Gardiner writing in the Telegraph (emphasis added):

Now once again huge street protests have flared up on the streets of Tehran and a number of other major cities, with several protesters shot dead this weekend by the security forces and Revolutionary Guards, reportedly including the nephew of opposition leader Mir Hossein Mousavi, and dozens seriously injured. And again there is deafening silence from the Commander-in-Chief as well as his Secretary of State. And where is the president? On vacation in Hawaii, no doubt recuperating from his exertions driving forward the monstrous health care reform bill against the overwhelming will of the American public and without a shred of bipartisan support.

This is not however a time for fence-sitting by the leader of the free world. The president should be leading international condemnation of the suppression of pro-democracy protesters, and calling on the Iranian dictatorship to free the thousands of political dissidents held in its torture chambers. Just as Ronald Reagan confronted the evils of Soviet Communism, Barack Obama should support the aspirations of the Iranian people to be free. The United States has a major role to play in inspiring and advancing freedom in Iran, and the president should make it clear that the American people are on the side of those brave Iranians who are laying down their lives for liberty in the face of tyranny.

It seems to me that the only person who doesn’t get that the leader of the United States is expected to step up when freedom is threatened is Barack Obama. It is embarrassing and frustrating and disheartening that we are being led my a man who rushes to defend tyrants but remains silent when freedom is being crushed in the streets of Iran. It calls in to question Pres. Obama’s priorities and his loyalty to freedom and democracy.

Why is Obama Silent on Iran-Again?

Prof. Jacobson asks, Will Obama Remain Silent About Iran Protests Again? So far it appears that the answer is, "Yep."

It seems an obvious assumption that the President has been briefed on the protests. Surely he has seen the pictures, or at least has been told, about the protesters risking the their own lives to save their countrymen from the gallows.

As the professor notes, the White House did release a statement earlier today, but White House statements are not what the freedom fighters in Iran need. They need the President of the United States, the leader of the free world, to take ten minutes from his vacation to make a personal statement. The man is be no means camera shy and if ever there was a good time for him to take to the air this would be it.

By not making a personal statement strongly condemning the actions of the Iranian government, Obama is projecting weakness. It debases the United States in front of the Middle East and emboldens not only Ahmadineja but his imitators as well.

Obama needs to show leadership now.

Don't Put Your Faith in "Blue Dogs" When it Comes to Cap & Trade (or anything else)

Politico is reporting that Senate Democrats are trying to convince the White House to drop Cap & Trade:

Bruised by the health care debate and worried about what 2010 will bring, moderate Senate Democrats are urging the White House to give up now on any effort to pass a cap-and-trade bill next year.

“I am communicating that in every way I know how,” says Sen. Mary Landrieu (D-La.), one of at least half a dozen Democrats who've told the White House or their own leaders that it's time to jettison the centerpiece of their party's plan to curb global warming.

Call me cynical but I would sooner believe that Landrieu (D-Show me the money) is angling for another multi-million dollar deal than I would hope that she realizes that Cap & Trade is one big crap sandwich nobody outside of the watermelon crowd wishes to dine upon.

Further down in the article we treated to this gem:

“I’d just as soon see that set aside until we work through the economy,” said Sen. Ben Nelson (D-Neb.). ?“What we don’t want to do is have anything get in the way of working to resolve the problems with the economy.”

Well, we know that Nelson can be bought and sold like a cheap hooker, or as my friend Bob Belvedere likes to put it, Ben Nelson is a cheap whore. Hooker/whore aside, any supposedly “pro-life” man who would sell out our unborn children has far too much blood on his hands to ever be trusted to do the right thing.

Look, I pray that Cap & Trade disappears down the rabbit hole but I’m not counting on self-serving Blue Dog putzes for aid nor comfort. While we continue to fight the abominable ObamaCare, we must recognize that Cap & Trade, like health care “reform” is just another means of taking the American economy hostage. We must continue to fight against all government takeover programs whatever form they take.

Oh, and if you live in S. Carolina, home of Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-Sell out), get loud and tell the good senator that if he keeps pressing for Cap & Trade you will replace him with someone who gives a damn about this country.

Did Radical Islamist Dr. Khalid al-Mansour Pay Obama's Way Through Harvard?

The Daley Gator brings some astounding news:

…However, one of Sutton’s most notable moments is absent from the media hagiographies I have seen: he stated on television that he knew that an Islamic supremacist, Dr. Khalid al-Mansour, and advisor to a wealthy Saudi, had paid for Barack Obama’s education at Harvard Law School.

The details of Obama’s education have long been murky at best. Obama himself has refused to release any details of how he ended up at Harvard, how his education was paid for or what he did while he was at Harvard. Considering that a huge element of Obama’s aura is his ‘remarkable’ life, it has always seemed odd that his years at Harvard are a blank.

The video:




Read Doug’s entire piece here.

Napolitano in Denial: “The system worked.”

Jonah Goldberg writing in The Corner:

Napolitano has a habit of arguing that DHS is a first responder outfit. Its mission is to deal with "man-caused-disasters" after they occur. It appears she really believes it. If the White House wants to assure people that it takes the war on terror seriously (a term Robert Gibbs used this morning by the way), they could start by firing this patently unqualified hack.

Goldberg is being kind.

Upon learning of the attempted bombing of Northwest Flight 253, our President continued his golf game and then went to the gym. That is this administration’s idea of taking the war on terror “seriously.” Their whole “alls well that ends well” attitude would be merely frustrating if it didn’t belie how unseriously they take the war on terror and by extension, the safety of the American people. One wonders what, if anything, these people think their job is.

We did not hire these people as janitors. It is not their job to come along after the fact and mop up the mess. If Napolitano doesn’t understand that, and it doesn’t appear she does, then Goldberg is right, she needs to go.


More at:

Memeorandum
The Other McCain
The Riehl World
Michelle Malkin
Hot Air

Are Bonuses for “Fat Cats” Bad? Depends on Which “Fat Cat”

That was then:

US President Barack Obama has hit out at Wall Street "fat cats," expressing anger that banks bailed out by the government again plan huge bonuses as millions of Americans battle poverty and unemployment.

"I did not run for office to be helping out a bunch of fat cat bankers on Wall Street," he said in an interview with CBS television to be aired today.

And this is now:

The Obama administration pledged Thursday to provide unlimited financial assistance to mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, an eleventh-hour move that allows the government to exceed the current $400 billion cap on emergency aid without seeking permission from a bailout-weary Congress. (emphasis added)

The Christmas Eve announcement by the Treasury Department means that it can continue to run the companies, which were seized last year, as arms of the government for the rest of President Obama's current term.

But even as the administration was making this open-ended financial commitment, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac disclosed that they had received approval from their federal regulator to pay $42 million in Wall Street-style compensation packages to 12 top executives for 2009. (emphasis added)

Let’s see, the “fat cats” who are paying back the taxpayers are undeserving of bonuses but the crooks at Fannie and Freddie who were instrumental in causing the housing bubble and are permanently living off the taxpayer dime, now they deserve bonuses of up to six million dollars each. Gotcha.

While President Obama has been demanding accountability of Wall Street he sets a different standard, a lower standard, for himself and his administration.

India's Prime Minister was Teaching but was Obama Learning?

Doug Ross:

The Calcutta Telegraph offers a compelling and detailed view into the diplomatic machinations of Copenhagen. We're forced to turn to India's media outlets because state-run media in the United States continues to ignore the week's biggest stories from the climate summit (e.g., "Obama snubbed by Chinese premier at meeting", Economic Times of India).

In a last ditch effort to salvage a deal, Obama walked into a room unannounced where the leaders of China, India, Brazil and South Africa were meeting.

When Obama entered the room, there was no chair for him. Obama himself was reported as saying that there weren’t any seats......At the “accidental” five- nation meeting, Prime Minister Singh told Obama that international review of voluntary mitigation action was unacceptable as he was answerable to Parliament. Any international review of India’s voluntary mitigation actions would go against public opinion, he said.Wen also had similar views, while Lula voiced concerns over imposition of trade barriers on developing countries under the garb of environment protection... The group stuck to its stand on review of voluntary mitigation action, which it said would be an intrusion on members’ sovereignty.

In short, India's prime minister gave Obama the "Acting Presidential 101" class: leaders of democracies are accountable to the people.

It is a shame that leader of the free world needs to be schooled by the Prime Minister of India. You would think it self evident that politicians are accountable to the people who elected them. But accountability doesn't appear to be one of Obama's strong points and I've seen no indication that he gives a flip about the will of the people.

We could have avoided all of this had so many people not have been willing to elect a complete unknown who had never done or accomplished anything simply because they believed that his election would be "historic". They may in the end be right, but for all the wrong reasons.

A B+? What's He Smoking?

Obama tells Oprah that he gives himself a B+ for his first year as president. Let's review. In his first year he has added more to our national debt than all previous presidents combined. The "stimulus" hasn't stimulated a thing and the eight percent unemployment he said we would hit if he didn't get his way is now ten percent.

I give him credit for finally making a decision on Afghanistan but he left our troops hanging forever before deciding to give his generals less than they asked for.

Obama claims that we have made progress at halting Iran and N. Korea's development. Citation, please Mr. President. From where I stand, all of President Obama's "pretty pleases" have resulted in a resounding "pound sand."

Unbelievably, the president claims that passing health care reform will raise his grade to an A-. Puppy please. Fifty-six percent of Americans are against ObamaCare.

Consider the current Rassmussen daily tracking poll. Forty-four percent of the population somewhat approve of the president while forty-two percent strongly disapprove and overall, fifty-five percent disapprove.

Doesn't sound like a B+ to me.

That "Inherited" Shtick Ain't Working

Via Memeorandum:


Forty-four percent say I want George Bush back. If that isn't a kick in Obama's pants I don't know what is. It is now Obama's deficit, Obama's unemployment, Obama's war and a healthy percentage of Americans thinks he's flubbing it.

Obama has gone to great lengths to avoid ownership of his failed policies. Looks like the American public is no longer buying it.

Obama Finally Pisses Off the Europeans

I have to give credit where credit is due-Obama is the only person I know who manages to embarrass the hell out of me and make me giggle at the same. The Daily Beast on Obama's latest misfire:

A day before President Obama receives his Nobel Peace Prize in Oslo, the president’s treatment of his Norwegian hosts has become hot news across Scandinavia.

News outlets across the region are calling Obama arrogant for slashing some of the prize winners’ traditional duties from his schedule. “Everybody wants to visit the Peace Center except Obama,” sniped the Norwegian daily Aftenposten, amid reports the president would snub his own exhibition at the Nobel Peace Center. “A bit arrogant—a bit bad,” proclaimed another Aftenposten headline.

Arrogant? Obama? Naw, say it isn't so. It continues:

“It’s very sad,” said Nobel Peace Center Director Bente Erichsen of the news that Obama would skip the peace center exhibit. Prize winners traditionally open the exhibitions about their work that accompany the Nobel festivities. “I totally understand why the Norwegian public is upset. If I could get a few minutes with the president, I’d say, ‘To walk through the exhibition wouldn’t take long, and I’m sure you would love the show. You have no idea what you are missing.’”

Meanwhile the Swedish daily Svenska Dagbladet is reporting that the president has declined an invitation to lunch with King Harald V, an event every prize winner from the Dalai Lama to Al Gore has attended. (The newspaper’s headline: “Obama disses lunch with King Harald.”)

Also among the dissed, according to news reports: a concert in Oslo on Friday that was arranged in his honor, and a group of Norwegian children who had planned to meet Obama in front of City Hall.

Obama dissed the king and children? Mercy! But on to my favorite part of the article:

But some news outlets are cutting him a bit of slack, noting that he is dealing with two wars and soaring unemployment back home and a new war, and that his main focus this week should rightly be on the climate-change summit in Copenhagen. Taking part in all the activities surrounding his Nobel Prize could send the wrong message. (emphasis added)

Yeah, far be it for Barack "let them eat cake" Obama to party down while the rest of us swirl around in the toilet bowl. Obama brings to mind the old saying, you can dress him up but you just can't take him out. Look, Obama being awarded a Nobel prize is a joke, but that is no excuse for him to go to Norway and act like a jerk. If he can bow to a Saudi king he can damn well eat lunch with the Norwegian king and let the kiddies sing for him. That would the least offensive thing he has done on an overseas trip.

Obama should reminded that he represents the United States to the rest of the world. A little class would be appreciated.

The EPA Strikes a Blow for Obama and Against the Economy

From Fox News:

The Obama administration is warning Congress that if it doesn't move to regulate greenhouse gases, the Environmental Protection Agency will take a "command-and-control" role over the process in a way that could hurt business.

The warning, from a top White House economic official who spoke Tuesday on condition of anonymity, came on the eve of EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson's address to the international conference on climate change in Copenhagen, Denmark.

Jackson, however, tried to strike a tone of cooperation in her address Wednesday, explaining that the EPA's new powers to regulate greenhouse gases will be used to complement legislation pending in Congress, not replace it.

"This is not an 'either-or' moment. It's a 'both-and' moment," she said.

But while administration officials have long said they prefer Congress take action on climate change, the economic official who spoke with reporters Tuesday night made clear that the EPA will not wait and is prepared to act on its own.

And it won't be pretty.

"If you don't pass this legislation, then ... the EPA is going to have to regulate in this area," the official said. "And it is not going to be able to regulate on a market-based way, so it's going to have to regulate in a command-and-control way, which will probably generate even more uncertainty." ( emphasis added)

I believe that is what we call “a threat.” The EPA is telling Congress that if they don’t regulate emissions that the EPA will do it for them, the economy be damned. This move by the Jackson and the EPA didn’t come out of the blue though the timing, Jackson’s protestations aside, is suspect. Back in February, the New York Times wrote:

If the environmental agency determines that carbon dioxide is a dangerous pollutant to be regulated under the Clean Air Act, it would set off one of the most extensive regulatory rule makings in history. Ms. Jackson knows that she would be stepping into a minefield of Congressional and industry opposition and said that she was trying to devise a program that allayed these worries.

Well, Jackson has stepped in to the minefield and she is firing a peremptory shot across the Congress’s bow. Further in the Times story:

…many Democrats from states dependent on coal-generated electricity and manufacturing jobs, where such regulation could significantly increase costs. Representative John D. Dingell, the Michigan Democrat who has long championed the interests of the auto industry, said that the regulation of carbon dioxide emissions by the E.P.A. would set off a “glorious mess” that would resonate throughout the economy.

Senator John Barrasso, Republican of Wyoming, warned Ms. Jackson during her January confirmation hearing that she should not undercut Congress’s authority by using the agency’s regulatory power to address global warming. Mr. Barrasso called the use of the Clean Air Act to regulate carbon “a disaster waiting to happen.”

This move provides Obama with political cover. Just as he has distanced himself from unpopular decisions by the Justice Department by claiming that Holder is working independent of the White House, he will be claim that the EPA is also working on its own. Granted, this is the EPA’s end run, but it is purely for President Obama’s benefit.

Free Falling

Via Memeorandum:

The Quinnipiac survey is in and the news is not good for the Obama White House. Ed Morrissey:

Hide the decline! Barack Obama’s job approval rating dropped to a new low in yet another survey, this time in the respected Quinnipiac survey. Obama can only muster an anemic 46% approval overall, with 44% disapproving and 10% on the sidelines. His domestic-agenda priority now has even lower support, and Obama is seriously underwater on a number of issues:

American voters give President Barack Obama a split 46 – 44 percent job approval, his lowest ever, and both the health care reform package that he wants Congress to pass and his personal rating on handling health care now win support from less than four in 10 Americans, according to a Quinnipiac University poll released today.

Voters disapprove 52 – 38 percent of the health care reform proposal under consideration in Congress, and they disapprove 56 – 38 percent of President Obama’s handling of health care, down from 53 – 41 percent in a November 19 survey by the independent Quinnipiac (KWIN-uh- pe-ack) University. …

“It’s a good thing for those pushing the health care overhaul in Congress that the American people don’t get a vote. At this time, supporters are down 14 percentage points,” said Peter Brown, assistant director of the Quinnipiac University Polling Institute.

To provide a little more context for that, Obama won his election in November by half of that spread. That was not considered a close election, either.

The downward decline has picked up speed, too. It may be hard to recall this, but just six- months ago, Obama had a 59% approval rating, with only 31% disapproving. Two months ago, he still had a 50/41 split. It’s worse among independents, though. He’s underwater by 14 points, 37/51, an eleven-point plunge from last month’s 43/46. Six months ago, independents gave Obama a 27-point gap to the good, which means he’s flipped 41 points in just six months among this key group.

I don't imagine that it would occur to Obama that most Americans think that his agenda sucks. Common sense would dictate that the President take a few steps back but common sense be damned. Obama seems inclined to push his unpopular policies through and worry about the consequences later. Definately not an attractive quality in a leader.

Justice Delayed is Justice Denied

Via Don Surber:

Where the Hell is our Commander in Chief? Sorry, but court martialing Navy Seals because they may have punched a terrorist in the face after capturing him is asinine beyond all belief. This scumbag captured, killed, burned and mutilated American citizens and then hung their bodies from a bridge. The video is of Republican (naturally) Congressman Dan Burton standing up for these Seals. I appreciate his support but shouldn’t it be the Commander in Chief who stands up for our brave fighting men and women? Shouldn’t the Commander in Chief be pinning a medal on these guys as we speak? God bless the people who put their lives on the line for my freedom every single day. God damn a spineless wuss of a Commander in Chief who doesn’t have the balls to back them up.



By the way, I would have aimed my punch considerably lower.