● Tom Hanks: As you may recall, right after Team Obama released a campaign video narrated by Tom Hanks, Hanks got caught on stage playing along with a hedgefund manager in blackface. He tried to lie his way out of this by claiming that he was shocked and offended by the appearance of the man. But the tape shows otherwise. Indeed, it shows Hanks blasting Bill O’Reilly. Tom has now been forced to apologize to O’Reilly. People are also beginning to ask why this liberal school has no minority kids. Whoops.
● Solyndra Part 15: Meanwhile, yet another Obama-sponsored company is going broke. This time it’s a solar energy company called Solar Trust for America. They received $2.1 billion in loan guarantees from Obama’s Department of Energy. This is “the largest amount ever offered to a solar project,” said Energy Secretary Steven Chu back when he was handing out the cash. He called this an “historic moment in America’s new energy frontier.” And both he and Slow Joe Biden were there for the groundbreaking in Blyth, California. But less than a year later, the company is in bankruptcy. And apparently there are more solar companies planning bankruptcies as well.
Nice job Mr. President: $2.1 billion spent, no worthwhile product produced, no jobs created.
● Joe Biden: Somebody let Slow Joe out of his box the other day and he’s been gaffing as fast as he can ever since. First, after saying that Romney is consistently wrong, Slow Joe referred to Scott Community College President Dr. Theresa Paper as “Dr. Pepper.” And also he decided that Governor Romney was really Senator Romney. But that was just a warm up. Biden next said that Republicans “have a legitimate argument that the government should not be engaged health care.” Only he “strongly disagrees” with that legitimate argument. A “legitimate” argument is a correct or valid argument. Thus, what Biden has said translates to him agreeing that the Republicans are correct that the government should not be engaged in the health care market, but he doesn't care that they are correct and he will stick with what he knows to be wrong.
He then strangely added that he doesn’t want to “dictate” your health coverage. . . ignore the man behind the mandate.
Biden later said, “I don’t want to make fun of-- I’m not saying our Republican friends don’t care about people. They care about people just as much as we do.” That’s nice of Joe to say, since he routinely says the opposite. Indeed, while talking about Medicare this week, he said Republicans don’t care about people: “Look us over, look into your heart and ask . . . who do you believe is genuinely committed to preserving the dignity of people in terms of their healthcare and their basic, basic ability to live?” This, by the way, comes from a man whose healthcare reform plan stripped Medicare of $500 billion.
Biden also invited police and fire officials to an official government dinner, i.e. the kind where it is ILLEGAL to engage in politics, and he said that the Republicans favor low taxes over policies that would save the lives of police officers and firemen. In other words, Republicans want to let police and firemen die so taxes can stay low. He then attacked the rich for supposedly not being willing to pay for fire and police:
What an ass.“The first guy who’s going to have a problem is the guy whose $3 million home is on fire and you can’t get a truck out there. The first guy that’s going to have a problem is the person who has real assets and finds their house burglarized or robbed, or their Porsche is stolen.”
● Robert Reich On The Truth: Former Clinton Labor Secretary Robert Reich just made a fascinating claim about the ObamaRecovery -- 93% of the gains in 2010 went to the top 1% of earners in the country. The bottom 10% of the public saw no gain at all. In fact, most of the bottom 90% lost ground, with average income falling $127 between 2009 and 2010 and $4,843 compared to 2000. So much for Obama helping the poor and middle class. Maybe we can’t tax our way to prosperity after all?
Obama never has had teflon coating like Reagan, but he has had an MSM provided bulletproof vest to protect him from bad news. But it sounds like his vest is failing him and the bad stories are beginning to pile up. Personally, I credit the new-conservative media with forcing the MSM to take note. So it’s no wonder they want bills like SOPA to regain their monopoly on information. In any event, these are not good times at Rancho Obama.
86 comments:
NBC and CNN have started to attack the Mormon Church. The way they are doing it is describing it as a religion created for a serial adulterer, Joseph Smith. I guess they misplaced the memo that Mormons, in order for Utah to become a state, had to give up Polygamy.
Also, I am wondering about those Islam religions, which demand killing your children should they decide to get Americanized. Why isn't CNN and NBC talking about them?
But Tom Hanks is a good actor and all, he simply can’t be held to any standard.
Don’t worry about the $2.1Billion, it’s been reported that Barry will show up, raise his hands like Moses parting the Red Sea, and wa-la the solar company will be profitable. So rest assured the problem will be solved.
B-B-B-Biiden is just getting started, Plugs may actually make a valid point before long, we will all wait breathlessly.
Robert Reeeeeich the midget Marxist, just loves to hear himself speak, just ask him.
Joel: Now they’ll get to use Tom Hanks “Big Love” I wonder who Mitt will be Bill or Alvie?
Well, gee, it's nice of Uncle Joe to admit conservatives don't want to push grandma off a cliff. Now how about you and your mindless master stop demagoguing to that effect, you moron?
Hey Andrew, what's your take on this 5th Circuit thing about the court wanting the letter from the DOJ about their official opinion on the role of the courts? What are they trying to get by asking for that?
Thanks! :)
Crispy,
The last time someone demanded a college thesis from me was a college professor. Basically the justices are demanding an explanation in written form how Holder and Company think. The public way and how they demanded this thesis is humiliating. If I were Holder, I would write one up very quickly and full of apology.
StanH,
I never really expected Romney's religion to be brought up. while we are at it, why don't we bring up Barry Sotero's religions. Starting with Islam which currently recognizes Polygamy.
I haven't been watching "Big Love". I got bored with it after the first year, and I don't remember which one was which.
LawHawk, haven't you heard? It's a lie that ObamaCare cut $500 billion from Medicare. Why, it merely reduces baseline growth by that amount.
Uh oh, that means that Democrats do understand the baseline. Funny. They never seemed to before...
Joel: Sounds like you expect fair play from the press, not likely.
“Big Love” is over, and was indeed a very strange program. You felt like a voyeur watching what would have been more aptly named “Big Mess.” But, I believe like “Game Change” with the Hollywood left has it’s uses with the dumb-masses.
StanH,
You don't understand. Obama's various religions NOW come into play. All's fair in love and war you know!
Now, WE CAN DEMAND FROM OBAMA ALL ABOUT HIS RELIGION AND WHAT HE REALLY MEANT BY "My Muslim Faith".
Joel:
Oh contraire, I fully understand what should happen, but I know what will happen. No way, no chance, no how, will the MSM vet Barry’s religion, or lack thereof. Just as when Stephanopoulos corrected Barry “my Muslim faith” …they will do the same throughout this campaign as well. That being said I’m with you, and will stand shoulder to shoulder demanding the same.
Hey, StanH, who says the MSM has the final say here? Yep, little Stephie helped B.O. but not fast enough.
Once MSM opened up this religious can of worms, they not only insulted the fourth religion in this country, they insulted Islam as well. Islam maintains Polygamy is the preferred form, don't they?
the hits do keep coming even if the "right" is the only group that truly gets it. What I have noticed recently is a bunch of comments, letters etc. from Democrat types. Basically, they take what is reported in the l.s.m. as the gospel and don't get their news from Fox or Breitbart or Commentarama. So, the real question becomes to what extent so called swing voters are able to obtain facts and separate them from politician and media spin. So far, it seems like they can.
Now, if we can only get the former Senator from Pennsylvania to act like an adult, do the right thing, and get behind Governor Romney.
Crispy, from what I understand, it's a little unusual, but it probably wouldn't have happened if Obama hadn't implicitly called the very concept of judicial review into question.
T-Rav,
I don't think that is really unusual. It is unusual that it is as public as it was, but Justices demand briefs and what not from lawyers all the time. If they get a wayward prosecutor, they might demand a written explanation as to why.
I think what is unusual is the way it was phrased.
what a lovely article for a harsh Wednesday morning...
TOTUS & BOTUS: keep up the great work! we're working on getting that "big move" set up for y'all in January!!!
Jed,
I think Santorum is hopeless. He bought into his own hype and all that is left around him now are the ones who want our country to be ran along the Old Testament lines. You know stoning adulterers and what not. I wonder if they want to replicate what Islam has done for Iran.
Now, when anyone mentions to Santorum to step down and finish the process, he just hunkers into his bubble and mumbles something about brokered convention. I am also wondering if what the problem really is about Romney's religion.
I think the fear is akin to the fears about John Kennedy and Catholics.
I'm gonna miss Slow Joe...
Joel, it's unusual in that the case being discussed was not directly related to the SCOTUS hearings, but whenever you obliquely question a judge's authority like that, there's gonna be consequences. Like you say, the only really surprising thing about it was its publicity.
Oh: And speaking of which, Newsweek now has a piece saying that if ObamaCare is ruled unconstitutional, the Court ought to be impeached, because they'll be hurting the poor and the children, or something. They better hope they don't find themselves in front of the 5th Circuit anytime soon.
Morning folks! Sorry I'm late. I've been doing my taxes and they seem to have injured my brain.
Joel, Islam is a saintly religion that has never once done anything wrong. Mormons on the other hand want to kill us all.
I'm not surprised they are attacking the Mormon Church, they did it after Proposition 8 as well.
Stan, LOL! I can't wait to see Barry raise his hand and cure the solar company! :)
I have little respect for Reich, but I love the fact he's slamming Obama's recovery here. He just made the same attack against Obama that they made against every Republican since Nixon!
I think it's great that Tom Hanks is in constant trouble now. I liked him a lot before he decided to get political. But now that he's decided to become a huge Democratic hack, it's time to take him down.
Stan, I find it hilarious, that Hollywood decided to push the idea that "polygamy is ok" about five years ago and is now attacking Mormons (who aren't polygamous) for being evil because they were once polygamous.
T-Rav, Isn't it funny that it's news when Joe Biden admits that conservatives aren't like the stereotype the left uses?
By the way, OT... here's a great headline from the AP: "Santorum Slips Into Irrelevancy."
:)
Crispy, My take is that I'm laughing my rear end off! That is called judicial humor. That is a one ticked off judge who has decided to fight back against an Executive Branch that decided to play demagogue and spread misinformation about the way our courts work.
And he did it in the most effective way possible. Obama's attorney will now need to spell out that Obama was full of crap when he said it.
And that will make Obama look like a childish, petty, hypocrite who does not respect the constitution, the court, or his office.
It was a thing of beauty!
Andrew, Excellent job covering the primaries last night (with your non-coverage, coverage). You guys always make me laugh -- especially tryanmax. Good luck living to 105! :D
Joel, That's exactly what it was -- it was meant to humiliate. Judges get very upset about attacks on the judicial system and they have lots of power to fight back. Public humiliation is one of them. And as I've seen many times before with individual lawyers who have gone too far, this guy is calling out Obama for going too far.
Now Holder needs to backtrack like crazy and there is no good way to answer this question because what Obama said was just too stupid to defend.
Joel and T-Rav, it seemed like a big deal (to me) to have a judge call the DOJ attorney on the carpet like that. But it also seems to me like something Holder is just going to ignore. And then what? Is there going to be a "Million Black Robe" march on DC? ;D I'm curious what the judges are ultimately hoping to get from this.
Joel, There are good forms of polygamy and bad forms of polygamy. The bad forms are (not) practiced by people who vote Republicans. The good forms are practiced by people Republicans hate. Simple.
I stopped watching "Big Love" after the first season as well because I felt it had played out by that point. I enjoyed it, but it just felt like it had nothing more to say.
tryanmax, I think you may be reading too much into it when you conclude that the Democrats actually do understand anything.
But you are correct, Obamacare doesn't actually cut anything from Medicare because that would be bad. Those are forced cost reductions.
Someone let Biden out of his box! Hilarious! And true. I envision a huge tupperware container where he gets stored until they need him.
Stan, Never expect fair play from the press. They would be talking about how horrible it is to hate Mormons if Romney were the Democrat. But since he's not, they will push the idea that Mormonism is some strange, evil cult that needs to be voted against in the general election... until a good Democratic Mormon comes along who needs support.
Joel and Stan, I think the MSM will continue to play the hypocrisy game. Questioning Obama's religion will be seen as fringe, but questioning Romney's religion will be seen as "something we should all look into to know what we're getting." And they will say this with a straight face.
And for the record, I really don't care about Obama's religion, whatever it is, nor do I question his Christianity. To each his own.
Joel, Islam does indeed maintain polygamy.
In case I've confused anyone, the point I was trying to make about Medicare is that Dems routinely accuse Republicans of "cutting" programs when all that has been done is to limit growth.
So, using Democrats' own logic, Obama has indeed "cut" Medicare by $500 billion. But isn't it amazing how suddenly they become savvy to the distinction when it's used against them?
Jed, This stuff IS breaking into the MSM. They are actually starting to report on these things. They are still trying to put a gloss on them, but the mere fact they have to mention Obama's Putin gaffe, or Biden's constant gaffes, or the bad economy, or Robert Reich's comments.
I think that's a sea change from the past, when the MSM could simply ignore bad news. Now they need to address it. And that is keeping Obama's supporters demoralized and is driving independents away.
On Ricky, he won't quit. He thinks he's on a crusade. But he has effectively become irrelevant.
tryanmax, No, I understood you. I was just making a funny! :)
The Democrats have always played this game where they use non-increases as cuts when they want to be seen as cutting and call them evil cuts when Republicans make them.
T-Rav, It's highly unusual. That's why it's news. This typically happens maybe 1-2 an administration and it's usually in response to something a local US attorney has argued. I can't think of any time in my lifetime that a judge has actually called out a President for his own words.
Joel, It's not at all unusual that judges demand briefs. That happens all the time. BUT it comes up in response to something that was argued in the case, i.e. "tell me more about your point."
There is only one time in my life that I can recall this happening in response to something outside the case, and that was when the Attorney General (can't remember which -- Bush I or Clinton) said that DOJ attorneys were not subject to the rules of ethics and could essentially do whatever they wanted. That caused one of the courts to demand a brief supporting that claim.
So what happened here actually is highly unusual in that regard. It's also highly unusual in the sense that this was aimed at publicly humiliating a sitting President. I can't think of any time that's ever happened.
rlaWTX, Sorry to hear you're having a harsh Wednesday?!
I'd be happy to chip in a few bucks to get the movers to the White House earn!
Joel, I'm not so sure Ricky doesn't know. He mentioned Reagan in 1976 over and over last night and I think he is now trying to set himself up as the next nominee.
That's why I hope he keeps on pushing and makes a total ass of himself (as if he hasn't already), so that people are wary of him. The last thing we need is for him to ever be considered "next in line."
In terms of his real problem with Romney, I think it's obviously religious bias.
Joel, I don't think Santorum actually thinks he can win anymore. I think he's thinking about 2016. That's why he keeps talking about Reagan in 1976 rather than Reagan in 1980.
Writer X, I will miss Joel too. Of course, he will still be around... doing the lecture tour, reminding us how great we had it under Team Obama. LOL!
Nice, LOL.... thanks, Andrew!
Lawhawk, The new conservative media is what is bringing about these changes. Without that, this would just be the same as always in the past, with the MSM ignoring everything that made Obama look bad while playing up the few Republicans disasters they could find.
T-Rav, That's another reason it was unusual. As I mention above, it's incredibly unusual that a judge calls out an attorney about something which happened outside of a case. And it's really unusual that they would attack a sitting president.
T-Rav, That is not at all surprising, but it's is shocking. That tells you EVERYTHING you need to know about how much the left values the Constitution.
And keep in mind, these are the same people who (rightly) attacked Gingrich for wanting to drag in federal judges and question them for abusing their authority.
Now you have the same people flip-flopping on the issue and demanding worse because they don't like the court's decision.
That's bull!
Ed, Thanks! We had a good time. I hope more people join us in the future and share their thoughts! :)
Crispy, If they ignore it, they face possible civil contempt charges, which means they can be incarcerated by the court until they comply with the order. That would be AWESOME!
My guess, however, is that Holder will talk around it. He'll produce a memo which says that court's have limited authority and should only be exercised in GREAT deference.
Ed, That's how I see him too -- stored in the basement in a huge tupperware-like see-through box until they need him. Then they come to the basement, open the box, point him in the right direction and he just heads off.
Doc, I had the same thought! I think Santorum thought he could win for a while, but he'd have to be truly insane not to grasp the math. And I think his constant appeals to being Reagan 1976 (not Reagan 1980) tell us he's now trying to set himself up as the future. Blech.
You're welcome Crispy!
I know what you mean about Hanks. He (and Spielberg) are representative of where I am with movies and Hollywood. I used to love the stuff those guys did. But when they become obnoxiously political, I draw the line. I cannot bring myself to directly or indirectly put more money in his pocket. In the case of Spielberg, I don't know whether it is any good or not, but I just can't bring myself to do anything that helps him.
Let me contrast that with, say, Reese Witherspoon. I don't know whether she is a true believer liberal or one of the many "moderates" who goes along to get along out in tinsel town. I know whe has been to the WH and given a small amount to Democratic fund raisers. She did get sucked into that shitty anti-war film, but seems to have gone back to her romantic comedy roots. But I don't see her out there ranting spew like an Ashley Judd. So I'll see Witherspoon, but not Judd. And one of the problems is, the bigger the political a-hole, the better the role. Thus, I'm in the position of having to see fewer and fewer movies without feeling crappy about it, and it pisses me off. Sorry--rant over :)
Jed, There are only a couple actors who have turned me off with their politics to the point that I won't see them.
BUT there is another level as well, and Hanks falls into that. At one point, I liked Hanks a lot. He struck me as a very decent, normal guy and I liked the characters he played. But since he's gone full political, I now see him as a leftist jerk and I see the "boy next door" roles as fake. So while I don't yet refuse to watch his stuff, his behavior has harmed my enjoyment of his films and I would rather not watch them.
Actors need to learn to shut the heck up. The less I know about them personally the better.
yeah, I suppose it's just a matter of level of dislike. Honestly, I don't feel like I have to do business with only people who share my politics. The problem for me is that these people use their special priviledge of "celebrity" status to get snarky about those that disagree with them. My feeling is, I'm trying to be true to myself. If it pisses me off that Hollywood is the least diverse communities on earth, and I want to change it, the ONLY thing I really can do as an individual is to vote with my wallet. If enough people who feel this way don't patronize Tom Hanks, he becomes a hell of a lot less celebrated. I would actually love to see a liberal political activist Hollywood type watch their career whirlpool down the toilet. My heart would fill with gladness :)
Jed, I'm the same way. I used to be able to take these guys with a grain of salt, but I can't anymore. I don't want to support them.
Jed, I agree with you. I don't care what someone's politics are UNTIL they decide to wave them in my face and tell me how stupid I am. Then I care, and then I don't want to do business with them. And like you, it would do my heart good to see the careers of a bunch of liberal Hollywood types go down in flames -- I actually think that's happening, and I think they are starting to realize it because many of them are trying to back off now.
I'm not at the point yet where I avoid too many films, but the number is increasing. I won't watch the films that I know are liberal sucker punches, I won't watch anything political from the liberals (even when they claim they are being unbiased -- as Clooney laughably tried), and there are actors I simply won't see.
Doc, It is admittedly getting much harder to look past the words and deeds of many of these people.
thanks Andrew and Doc - lest you think I'm completely senile, I realize I left out part of a sentence above. Basically, I was using the example of Spielberg's movie "War Horse." Now I don't know if that movie is actually any good or not. There was a time when it would be an automatic "must see" for me. Now, I don't want to give the bastard a nickel of my money. And, I blame him for ruining the movies for me so that I have to check to see whose in it, bring a close pin for my nose, and feel like I'm making a contribution to re-elect the worst president in the history of our country.
Jed, I agree. I used to be excited to see Spielberg films. I now am not. But with him, it's not political so much as I think he's lost his touch. He hasn't offended me enough yet politically that it bothers me.
new topic: I was reading an article at PJMedia about VP choices. The topic became why Rubio is bad - apparently he is a RINO and not a citizen.
I posted a response with a link that I found, but then realized I should have run it by my experts:
http://www.usconstitution.net/consttop_citi.html
This basically says that the Rubio Birthers are full of non-unicorn manure - right?
rlaWTX, Yes, they are full of non-unicorn manure. Rubio qualifies under the Constitution.
In fact the whole Rubio-birther thing has been traced to an obsessed leftist and his "evidence" has been debunked.
Also, Rubio is hardly a RINO. But then, everyone is a RINO these days apparently.
thanks!!! That's what I got from my reading, but I thought I'd double check.
Goofiness abounds Right, Left, and Center!
You're welcome! We are awash in goofiness these days from all sides. There must have been a sale somewhere on goof?
it's easier to find than unicorn manure, but generally seems to cause as much mayhem.
[speaking of mayhem - I really like those Allstate commercials.]
rlaWTX, True, unicorn manure is rather difficult to come by these days!
Some of those have been pretty good. I like the training center the one company uses too... although I can't name the company!
you mean Farmers bump ba dum bum bumbumbum?
Hmm. Yes. What a coincidence! LOL!
Andrew, Rubio is absolutely a RINO, and not even a U.S. citizen. World Net Daily told me so.
T-Rav, Then I stand corrected! I shall add him to the pile with the other RINOs. Of course, we are getting a little RINO heavy at this point and we are in danger of having no true conservatives left. But hey, whatever!
We should start our own preserve for these so-called RINOs so when we run out of the other kind of conservatives, we have a back-up plan. ;)
And "they" said that the Rino was going extinct! Oh, and btw, there's plenty of unicorn manure in NYC if you need any. Fairy dust and elf magic is easy to come by too. You just have to know where to look.
BTW, who came up with the concept that in order to run for President you must be a "natural born citizen" meaning that both of your parents must be natural born citizens too?
rlaWTX, That's good thinking because I suspect we're going to need RINOs like Ann Coulter, Marco Rubio and Paul Ryan when the purists finally realize there are only five people in their "Real Conservative" club. . . and they can't stand each other. :(
Bev, To hear some bloggers tell it, the RINO is breeding like rabbits and will soon encompass the earth.
I've heard there's a lot of fairy dust in NYC, I guess you all are using it instead of salt now?
On the NBC thing, that's people who don't know what they are talking about spouting off legal opinions with no basis.
Ssssshhhhhh, we don't talk about the "s" word in NYC anymore. It's dangerous and can kill you. Did I hear footstep on the stairs? Got to go hide the....
Bev, Do they know about the effects of sugar? And of course, sugar substitutes are worse. Perhaps it's time to ban eating?
NO, not that other "s" word! The walls have eyes! Not only has Bloomberg tried to stop us from eating our sugary snacks, we may not even be able to TALK about them either!
Bev, I'm surprised Mayor Chavezberg hasn't been deposed yet.
I still can't believe he tried to (or did) ban food donations to homeless shelters. What a nutjob!
Yes, Andrew, he is concerned about the salt and sugar content of food donated to the homeless...seriously. People who sleep under bridges during the winter and could eat out of trashcans, should not be fed REAL food because it might harm their health. It boggles the mind. Only someone who is a billionaire could think something like that.
Unfortunately we must wait until next year to rid ourselves of Michael Chavezberg. Well, that's if he doesn't think he should get a 4th term.
Bev, I wish you luck replacing him, but I suspect the next one won't be much better.
Andrew, sadly there is actually no one better right now who wants to run. I've been trying to write an update of happenings in NY, but it's just so absurd that I get depressed...
That's amazing. You would think good people would be lining up by the hundreds to run NYC? Of course, you could say the same thing about being the Republican nominee. Yet, apparently, all the good people have something better to do? That is depressing.
Andrew,
Here is something to Ponder. If a conservative gets elected in a liberal enclave, does that mean he is a RINO? Remember, he had to misrepresent himself as "liberal" in order to get elected and then ran the state as a conservative which lost him his second term. Could he be considered a stealth conservative?
Joel, I think the term RINO has no meaning anymore. At one point, it really meant -- a Republican who is both more liberal than the majority of the party and also disloyal, i.e. would endorse Democrats.
But in the past couple years, lots of conservatives have used the term RINO against anyone they don't like for whatever reason.
On your question, I think that's good politics. Why not do the same thing liberals do to win in conservative districts?
Post a Comment