Plug The Damn Hole !!

`

Failed "blowout preventer", "top hat", "top kill" . . .

and the President is voting "present" with a press conference but only after hitting enough golf balls for a "junk shot" of his own, and yet . . .

the arrogant, narcissistic oblivious blowhard believes that his words a la a rare press conference today are going to be sufficient to remedy this catastrophe. The two things most needed by Mr. Obama to actual fix the problem are always in short supply in his trick bag: an ability to listen and an ability to take action.

Before he can plug the hole spewing oil out of the bottom of the Gulf of Mexico he needs to plug his own damn hole.

Open Letter to Neil Cavuto

Neil Cavuto ended today's broadcast by downplaying the significance of CT Senatorial candidate Richard Blumenthal who lied openly and repeatedly about his military service during the Vietnam War. Blumenthal claimed to have served in Vietnam when he didn't.

We have learned something important since the days I served in Vietnam. - Connecticut AG Richard Blumenthal in 2008.

Neil,

I like your show. I like your perspectives but if I was hearing you correctly at the end of today's broadcast I think you got it dead wrong. I could talk about the death of a thousand cuts and the persistent campaign on the left to lower our expectations and standards but these are not the most important reason you are wrong on this one.

This is much bigger than you think it is. Lies about military service are unacceptable. I served in the military with Reagan as my Commander-in-Chief and although we came close two or three times, thanks in no small part to a strengthened U.S. military presence and a resolute President I was never deployed as part of a hostile mission. I never faced the enemy on the battlefield and the reason military veterans who have been on battlefields respect me is because I don't belittle the significance of their service by telling lies about mine. And it's not something you do by accident either, getting caught up in the emotion of giving an extemporaneous speech. Trust me, it is just not done, EVER. Perhaps only those who are part of the military fraternity and have been touched by the traditions and held themselves to that same code of honor can fully understand. Richard Blumenthal apparently cannot.

Neil, this speaks to character and that should matter even for someone wanting to represent the people of Connecticut. Anyone from any party affiliation running for elected office from the county dog catcher to U.S. Senator is asking for the people's trust. Someone who violates the trust of his own brethren from that sacred military fraternity just to score political points has demonstrated that he can and will violate the trust of voters and constituents for his own comfort, convenience and personal gain.

You may find this kind of personal defect acceptable in our elected officials. I most certainly do not.

Neil, you are to the left of Newsweek on this one . . . NEWSWEEK!
http://blog.newsweek.com/blogs/thegaggle/archive/2010/05/19/why-blumenthal-s-vietnam-lies-matter.aspx

George Hackett nails it when he calls Blumenthal's lie "uniquely heinous".

James L.
Austin, TX
3/505th P.I.R. '86-'89

P.S. I can think of a few others already on Capitol Hill using a falsified personal narrative to advance their agenda.

The Hits Just Keep Coming

On his way into Buffalo to talk a lot and do nothing that is a proven to actually stimulate jobs the President was greeted by a billboard.

The sign reads:

Dear Mr. President.
I need a freakin job.
Period.
Sincerely,
?inafj.org

But as vexed as the President may have been by this he still is running in second place for the "Worst Week" award.

Eric Holder is caught flat footed . . . AGAIN. And if he had any shame or humility he would resign before Monday.




And that doesn't even get to the "fact" that he admits not having read the 10 page piece of immigration legislation; the Arizona law that he has already vowed to challenge. A challenge with no basis if he has only skimmed the language of the bill.

Other than an Obama liberal I can only think of one other animal that attacks without reason, a rabid one. The rabid animal would probably score higher on the state bar exam

I Got Your Traglodyte . . . Right Here

So here's the link to the news story.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/05/10/obama-targets-ipods-video-games-commencement-address/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+foxnews%2Fpolitics+%28Text+-+Politics%29&utm_content=My+Yahoo

You might think I am being surreptitious, hiding the story in a web link so the President can't find it but I hear he's got people.

At any rate, if you don't have time in this busy, information laden world of 24/7 news cycles, radio talk show and Fox News "chatter" and the plethora of devices ready to deliver all that calamitous, undemocratic content to you at the push of an "on" button then let me sum it up for you:

The President claims in a commencement speech that he doesn't know how to use any of those rather ubiquitous products that have defined the culture of our current era. The unfortunate thing for the President in this gadgety, instant information age is that his own words are easily captured and quickly proliferated like in this case. Now he can't deny having said, "And with iPods and iPads and Xboxes and PlayStations -- none of which I know how to work -- information becomes a distraction, a diversion, a form of entertainment, rather than a tool of empowerment, rather than the means of emancipation."

Well, I can say at least I am entertained by his words if not truthfully informed. And I enjoyed the ease of posting this to my Facebook page to which some serious-minded Obama-loving citizen paused long enough from his game of Mafia Wars to reply "Wow. Really looking for reasons to hate" all because I suggested the President was either a liar or so inept that perhaps the mantle of world power was too much of a challenge for his self-deprecated intellect. A week ago when I took issue with the possibility of a VAT to pay for the government run Health Care program that was crammed down on us two months ago the same F'booker took a respite from his game of Farmville to post "I am tired of all the Obama hating."

On one side of the web we have thoroughly researched George Will articles on Town Hall and witty editorials by Mark Steyn and on the other side of the ether we have those who would reduce all forms of opposition to simple hatred of the individual. It's pretty clear from many of the President's other speeches which of these he categorizes as uninformed rhetoric though and if you have to guess, then guess those of us reiterating Steyn and Will.

What this news story is telling us is you can't have it both ways. As a liberal you only think you can. As the article points out, you can't be using all these technologies to get elected and then, for the convenience of controlling opinions in a free speech society claim they have no relevance beyond that of mindless entertainment. So we are left to wonder is this President lying to us in a rather lame and ineffectual attempt to deflect criticism and divert us from certain sources of media we might choose or is he telling the truth? Because if he's telling the truth we all have reason to be supremely frightened. If this 48 year old self-styled hipster really doesn't know how to operate any of these all too common and intuitive devices, should we trust him to run the most powerful nation in the world?

But we all know, even those haters of the "haters", that he's lying, and feebly so. It reminds me of elementary school friends who lied habitually about some of the least significant facets of their personal lives to make themselves seem cooler or more relatable. We are all getting a glimpse into the insecurity of the much younger Barry, thrice abandoned by parents and in desperate need of approval (his current disapproval rating must be rather maddening).

I guess there's a third possibility, that he he holds us, the American people in such low contempt that he really thinks we are so stupid as to believe him and make all his lies true in our minds.

Most of all I've found this episode to be quite entertaining. The Carvey and Hartman era SNL skits write themselves if only in my mind.



But I understand if you are yearning for real entertainment, in which case, click here: http://vodpod.com/watch/2907582-unfrozen-caveman-lawyer-video-by-hannahpittman-photobucket
and here
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-SSsgCP86HE

So What Now?

First of all I am only slightly disappointed in Scott Brown. He's not my Senator. There's isn't a snowball's chance in Austin (suspending that metaphor in the literal exception of about a month ago when we actually did get snow, or as I called it "evidence of global warming") that he'd ever be representing the majority of truly conservative minded people of Texas.

I can't say I necessarily saw it coming before the dust had settled on the special election results but in his Barbara Walters interview he denounced the Tea Party contributions of time and money that got him elected in the exact opposite way that Marco Rubio graciously welcomes their support and is honored to represent their beliefs for smaller government and reduced spending. He has apparently turned his back on the Tea Party again, refusing a recent invite and siding with the Dems (as well as Snowe and Collins) on a vote in the Senate. We'll see how well his reelection campaign is funded by the the jobless voters for whom he secured more benefits.

Brown is ready to produce an autobiography and that makes perfect sense. His fifteen minutes of fame will be gone in November when being #41 will no longer be significant and then he just becomes a footnote in most of the votes on the Senate floor. By 2011 he'll only be getting tea party invites from Snowe and Collins where they will actually drink tea and reminisce about their brief popularity. If he gets his book out by this summer then his second edition can contain an epilogue on what it means to be irrelevant.

I probably should have known Scott was a bit mushy in the middle when I heard Massachusetts voters calling in to a morning talk show making little rationalizations with themselves the day after the election. These were people who voted for him and it was apparent in their statements that they could never find a way to come ALL the way over to the other side. With Scott they could only get to the fence between Democrats and Republicans and look over. Like battered wives these life-long Democrats didn't want to admit to the abuse they had suffered. It was like they were standing there the day after the election with a black eye and a bloody lip pleading with the Democrat Party Police "Really, officer, he's a good man, my corrupt Democrat representative. He just loses his temper about these obstructionist Republicans he's forced to work with and sometimes he has to take it out on somebody. I voted for Scotty only because I was acting out. I didn't really mean it. I deserved to get hit for my infidelity to the party." In that sense Brown might not even get reelected. The conservative streak of Massachusetts voters is dubious to say the least.

My favorite comment made by more than one of them was that they voted for Brown because there needed to be checks and balances in our government. Because if you really agree with the Democrat's radical agenda, think they are moving in the right direction, are happy and enthusiastic about where Democrats are taking our country one's natural inclination is to . . . put on the brakes?! As a kid, when we were on our way to Disney World I could not get there fast enough. But by all means, let's slow down because I want it to take longer to get where we I'd really rather be. Oye! Only liberals can have such twisted logic and not see the contradiction in their own words. Because when you put that shoe on the other foot you'd never hear a Tea Party conservative say the same thing in the face of a conservative majority cutting government spending, reducing taxes and returning to our Founders vision of a Constitutional government. "We need to put some checks and balances on all of that. It's moving so fast. I don't know what to do with all my new found freedom!" You're just not going to hear them saying that.

Scott Brown's election had less to do with bringing some good national representation and common sense governance to the people of New England, because you can lead a horse or a Kennedy to water . . .

It had far more to do with who the elections was really about, in Scott's own words, "the people" as in "the people's seat." The election was a showcase for everyone everywhere else in this country taking political action and seeing the results play out in a manner that proves motivated and semi-organized citizens have the means to effect the outcome of an election. The left knows this too. They've only amped up their attacks on the Tea Party since January and are looking for every opportunity to vilify them and intimidate citizens willing to take political action and join their ranks. I hear reports of liberal saboteurs seeding (astro-turfing if you will) Tea Party gatherings and then shouting racial epithets so as to characterize these conservatives as racists. To me this is a true sign of desperation and fear of the Tea Party's power. Scott can say what he wants but I was on his web site the week before his election and they were not only soliciting donations from outside of the state at that time, they were actually setting up virtual phone banks from out of state supporters, and not just snowbirds from Massachusetts who were vacationing in Florida that week. He knows who got him elected and it wasn't that endorsement from John McCain either.

So that chapter has played out and the Winter of White House Discontent gave way to the Liberal Ram Through of Health Care Rationing.

So "Where's my Reagan?" seems to be the next sign of hysterical frustration. CPAC ended and I think deep down even some of the pundits expected the conservative leader for 2012 to emerge and bow his or her head ready to be anointed the once and future Reagan.

Let's start by saying Gingrich is off my list for many reasons. God forbid he becomes our only alternative to Obama in 2012. He sounds good when he knows he's in front of a conservative audience but he has demonstrated poor judgment and an over-eagerness to coalesce with the Democrats on too many occasions. I heard a replay of a commercial where he was sitting next to Nancy Pelosi saying they both agreed on the need for "urgent" action to abate Global Warming. This was before his Scozzafava blunder and it escapes me now but one more flash of liberal-think in his speeches, endorsements or actions and that becomes an undeniable trend in a direction we really don't want to go. But that appears to be where this guy is going.

He seems to have one good idea, which is more than most politicians throughout the ages. He was at the right place and time when he authored Contract with America and exploited a needy and politically savvy Bill Clinton. Times have changed and this same little trick would not play well when the roles are reversed. He would be the Chief Executive and someone else would have to be on the other side of the aisle as the Speaker of the House. In that scenario who's giving and who's getting what?

Then you have Mitt Romney. He's another one that can't seem to stay the course. Lets just say we ignore the fact that he's the least socially conservative Mormon east, west, north or south of Salt Lake City. It is still pretty hard to ignore the rest. As Governor he signed on to bring Universal Health Care to that same messed up state full of liberal rationalizers that elected Scott Brown. He was motoring along in the campaign of 2008 when it was really only him and McCain left running with any steam (because Huckabee, playing back-up saxophone in that jazz trio wasn't going to get much closer to the White House then a woman in a red dress not on the guest list, er . . . then a . . . you get the idea). So what does Romney do? He bows out gracefully against the mushier RINO moderate. You know, that old guy who almost didn't make it out of Iowa without first going bankrupt. The guy who, let me just say to you "my friend" was clearly not prepared to go the distance against Obama. That guy, McCain, who now faces a primary challenger in his own Senate reelection.

As much ballyhoo has been made of Sarah Palin resigning as Alaska's Governor when she had some really treacherous liberal character-assassins stalking and gunning for her every day, making her life miserable and rendering her ineffectual as governor, I find it mind-boggling that Romney doesn't receive any criticism for backing out of the race against the other guy in his own party. How can he still be a "viable" candidate if she isn't? More importantly, how can he represent conservative values when he gave up the fight so quickly and easily to an obvious "moderate" a.k.a. RINO like McCain?

And although I see him blend his charisma and his economic and analytic wonkiness in a way that could deliver some good results in our current crisis, I can't overlook the choices that again point to some really flawed judgment on his part.

Both of these guys are legendary DEAL MAKERS and frankly, that's the biggest problem with the Republican party over the last 20 years. Too many compromises is what got us where we are today and what drew too many Republicans into an unprincipled middle of the road with no real ideology supporting their thought process other than "we need a bigger tent". The middle of the road is not a safe place to be this political season. You will get run over by traffic in both the left and right lanes.

If you are reading the news, even wading through the irrelevant garbage of the mainstream Media, you are probably aware that we face a series of military and economic crises on multiple fronts. The situation that the 2012 President inherits will be far worse than the supposed "Bush" mess that Obamakins have been crabbing about incessantly. We are going to need someone who has a clear vision, moral courage and an ability to lead right out of the gates. I haven't seen that person yet. And although we would all benefit from the reincarnation of Ron W. Reagan, that just isn't going to happen. It certainly didn't happen at CPAC this year and maybe not even next year for that matter.

As I read Craig Shirley's book about a small portion of Reagan's great history I am reminded that he was self-made, but he was not made overnight. He had been on the political scene at state and national level for DECADES before he finally emerged as the leader we most remember in the campaign in 1980.

But then there is another thought, do we need another strong President like Reagan? After all the Executive Branch received it's power from NOT Article I but Article II of the Constitution. Our government was designed to rely on that Executive branch in a crisis and otherwise validate Congressional activity, ie. legislation. One could argue that the Constitution and therefore the Framers' intent defines the Executive office as one of the lesser of the three branches. Article I defines the Legislature. It is Congress that must be the initiator of change. And perhaps with ethical leadership in the House and Senate doing only what is essential and Constitutionally allowed for our country and no more, coupled with a Chief Executive who knows how to get out of their way if and when they are doing the hard and good work for our nation and a Judiciary that doesn't attempt to legislate from the bench, perhaps then we can avoid the real crisis looming large and near on our horizon. Pretty big wish list, I know. One wish at a time. Let's start with the big one in November.

Representative Mike Pence doesn't even want to move out of what is about to become a majority leadership position in the House to make a run at Evan Bayh's open Senate Seat. I see Congressman Paul Ryan and Eric Cantor more than I see Senators from my own state. Conservatism is back on the ascendancy. There are nearly 500 leadership positions in the Federal government and we need a majority of conservative and Constitutional leaders in those positions. 2010 can start to set that stage.

THE PENNSYLVANIA EVENING POST

"Boston * Friday, December 17, 1773

Last night in Boston Harbor after officials in Boston refused to return three shiploads of taxed tea to Britain, a group of colonists boarded the ships confiscated the tea in an unlawful manner and destroyed the shipment by throwing it overboard into the harbor waters. There are eye witness accounts that some of the perpetrators were most dishonorable, disguising themselves as noble native Americans from the local Mohawk community college. I believe this is what the governor's wife, Francine Pelosi calls "astro-turfing" but we are still waiting for clarification on this verbiage, our research department as yet being unable to locate these words in any of the more commonly used reference texts.

British Parlement and the media office of the British East India Company could not be reached for comment at the time of this printing so let your humble reporter and editor in chief, K. Olberman Esq., take it upon himself to say what must be said about the coarsening of this debate on taxes and the descent into random and meaningless acts of hooliganism by petty vandals.

Sometimes when I am at the local public houses near Harvard I hear some patrons suggesting that similar acts of defiance have been a matter of righteous indignation. I hear the same tired rhetoric about taxation without representation, about how the local governors are bowing to the Crown's agenda and not representing the will of the people. To all that traitorous dialogue I see 'go hang.'

If you allow yourself to be drawn further into this baseless and reasonless debate you will even hear claims of trade protectionism intent on creating a British monopoly on tea. Of course these claims are often made with a thick Dutch accent but this only serves to emphasize the minority nature of this lowly mob that cannot for a moment be taken seriously. Oh, how this makes me yearn for the more intellectual discourse back in my beloved Ithica. This Boston rabble could take a lesson or two from my townsmen.

Before you know it these so called, Sons of Liberty will be casting eggs at the carriages of his Majesty's officials and perhaps even papering the trees in front of the Governor's house. Then what becomes of civility?"

Then what, indeed, Mr. Olberman.

Today's Tea Party has it's roots in the gathering led by Samual Adams that historic night in 1773. And just like those patriots, working hard, putting health and welfare at risk to make a better life for their families, but playing by the rules only to have the rules changed by a distant leadership class intent on manipulating the outcome and ignoring the will of the people . . . patriots then and now felt their frustration mounting. Their peaceful appeals were disregarded, even ignored. Such feelings of futility naturally give way to irrational and even violent impulses. This 111th Congress should feel fortunate that the situation today, fomented by the Democrat's arrogance, has not devolved to that level yet and that this Tea Party still expects a civil and peaceful redress of their grievances beginning in November of this year of our Lord 2010.

"Victory" They Say

. . . well let them taste the mouthful of ash from their victory.

The definition of a Pyrrhic victory: costly to the point of negating or outweighing expected benefits (health care reform, historical legacy or otherwise).

After a year of fighting freedom loving, Constitutional minded patriotic Americans at every turn these radical liberals may have won the battle over Government Controlled Health Care Rationing but throughout history lost battles like these have marked the turn of the war tides. At Thermopylae and the Alamo the defeat became a rallying cry for the ultimate victor.

"This weekend will mark the beginning of the end of liberal ascendance here in Washington, D.C.," Rep. Mike Pence (R-Ind.) declared Saturday, March 20th. "I don't know if our victory will come on the third Sunday in March or the first Tuesday in November, but our victory will come.”