Abu Wabu

Red Barchetta

For too long, Chrysler moved too slowly to adopt to the future, designing and building cars that were less popular, less reliable and less fuel efficient than foreign competitors."

So why did the Messiah who spoke those very words today own a gas-guzzling Hemi-powered Chrysler 300C back then, from 2004 until 2007, when he procured a Ford Escape (now there's a metaphorical gem if ever I saw one, hardy har) to pander to the enviro-fascists helping his presidential aspirations?

While I prefer the more honest, demanding and therefore more rewarding Corvette Z06, as an empathetic automotive enthusiast I understand the appeal of the recycled Chrysler 300C to someone like Obama. But as a guy with a brain, I reject Obama spewing this hypocritical bullshit whilst driving a Chrysler 300C:

Obama this week flew to Detroit to deliver his message that the U.S. auto industry is the villain for "investing in bigger and faster cars (such as Obama's 360-horsepower Chrysler hemi before he got caught) while foreign competitors invested in more fuel-efficient technology."

"While our fuel standards haven't moved from 27.5 miles per gallon in two decades, both China and Japan have surpassed us, with Japanese cars now getting an average of 45 miles to the gallon..."

That wouldn't be a problem, you idiot, if
1: America's great car companies weren't in reality massive pension and benefits providers saddled with dead-end union contracts, and
2: Energy companies were allowed to tap into America's massive petroleum, coal and nuclear resources to the benefit of the people and the national economy.

In addition to their little mileage-makers, Japan is producing a vast fleet of astonishing performance vehicles that horrify the meek. The Japanese pay huge for gas, and still they make and drive these fantastic and incredibly efficient cars. The lesson is clear:

1: Fuck the meek;
2: Fuck Obama;
3. Beware of Japanese mileage-makers;
4. Drive a Corvette.

Pension and benefits giant Chrysler is filing for bankruptcy after a multi-billion dollar FAILURE by Obama to rescue the company's vestigal auto manufacturing arm and make himself CEO using taxpayers' money.

Who would have guessed the Messiah could fucking FAIL in his quest to become Chairman of Everything before he even got going? It was a scant four months ago that he was rejecting bankruptcy proceedings for Chrysler and GM, opting instead to begin "reshaping America" by buying government control of the corporate sector with taxpayers' money. But that clearly (clear to everyone but Obama, that is) wasn't going to work, so now the Messiah has "reshaped" his thinking: he has finally figured out that Chrysler couldn't be rescued without private-sector investment, so he's stealing that private-sector investment and giving Chrysler to the unions:

Its ownership would be divided, with the company's union retiree health fund receiving a 55 percent stake, Fiat would claim as much as a 35 percent share and the United States would take 8 percent. The Canadian government would receive two percent.

The automaker's current majority owner, the private-equity firm Cerberus Capital Management, would have its holdings wiped out.

Of course, even after stealing private investors' money, Obama couldn't resist slagging those eeeevil capitalists who kept Chrysler afloat for four months, paying salaries and suppliers to the tune of a billion or so while He was using it as His personal entree into the Office Of The President Of All I Survey. But they're not going away quietly:

In a statement published on The Wall Street Journal Web site, the recalcitrant bondholders said they sought an accommodation with the government.

"Under long recognized legal and business principles, junior creditors are ordinarily not entitled to anything until senior secured creditors like our investors are repaid in full. Nevertheless, to facilitate Chrysler's rehabilitation, we offered to take a 40% haircut even though some groups lower down in the legal priority chain in Chrysler debt were being given recoveries of up to 50% or more and being allowed to take out billions of dollars. In contrast, over at General Motors, senior secured lenders are being left unimpaired with 100% recoveries, while even GM's unsecured bondholders are receiving a far better recovery than we are as Chrysler's first lien secured lenders," the group said.

The statement added: "Our offer has been flatly rejected or ignored. The fact is, in his process and in its earnest effort to ensure the survival of Chrysler and the well-being of the company's employees, the government has risked overturning the rule of law and practices that have governed our world-leading bankruptcy code for decades."

Rule of law? There's only one law now, folks, and that's whatever the hell Obama says it is. GM investors know all about it.

How long before investment capital completely dries up under the threat of being stolen by Obama?

On this, the One Hundredth Day of Obama, I hereby honor the Messiah by presenting the following observation from America's Anchorman:

If you ran a bank, if you ran any kind of business today that this administration thinks is a “problem”, Obama has just made it very clear: if he wants to, he can just come and claim your business, and he can fire you, and he can tell others who work in your business what they are going to make. And when things like this happen, more people than you would realize become cowards rather than standing up and fighting. They just slink away, try to go along with it, try to take care of themselves and not make any waves so as not to aggravate the beast that’s out there breathing fire and brimstone at others, because you don’t want the fire and brimstone being breathed on you. So, you don’t say anything, you go along with it. Never in my fifty-eight years have I ever had the sense that so many people are so genuinely afraid of their government, from all walks of life, as they are today. And believe me, this is being exploited by people who love us being afraid of them.

If the UAW is so fucking smart, what are they doing holding the biggest share of the losingest proposition ever to drive investors from Barack Obama's America?

Another expired Obama campaign pledge.

Feb. 23 2008:

I will make sure that we renegotiate, in the same way that Senator Clinton talked about. And I think actually Senator Clinton's answer on this one is right. I think we should use the hammer of a potential opt-out as leverage to ensure that we actually get labor and environmental standards that are enforced. And that is not what has been happening so far.

That is something that I have been consistent about. I have to say, Tim, with respect to my position on this, when I ran for the United States Senate, the Chicago Tribune, which was adamantly pro-NAFTA, noted that, in their endorsement of me, they were endorsing me despite my strong opposition to NAFTA.

April 20, 2009

The Obama administration said on Monday that it had no plans to reopen negotiations on the North American Free Trade Agreement to revise its labor and environmental provisions, as then-Senator Barack Obama promised to do during his presidential campaign. 'The president has said we will look at all of our options, but I think they can be addressed without having to reopen the agreement,' said Ronald Kirk, the United States trade representative.

"We will look at all of our options." The president actually said that. Wow. What vision. What Gigantic Presidential Cajones. "We will look at all of our options." Think about that. Now THAT is Awesome with a capital "O".

Obama. Only Obama.

Do you smell unicorns? Too?

The Armenians sure do.

In the same spirit as the previous post, Noemie Emery demands that Democrat-led Congressional hearings begin on the enhanced interrogation issue, and let the chips fall where they may. Let's have the truth:

Also dropped down the memory hole — along with the names of all the Democrats who thought Saddam was a menace who cried out for removal — is what the ambience was like in late 2001 and 2002, when fears of anthrax and suitcase bombs ran rampant, and people on all sides tried to seem tough. Let's tell the truth about all the liberals who went on record supporting real torture, not to mention the Democrats in Congress, when it was cool to want to seem tough on our enemies, who couldn't be too warlike. Then war and tough measures stopped being cool, and "world opinion" became more important. Nothing like statements under oath to revive ancient memories! And rewind the tapes.

Let's get at the truth too about the word "torture," which to different people, means different things. Some think "torture" means standing on the 98th floor of a burning skyscraper and realizing you have a choice between jumping and being incinerated. Some think torture is being crushed when a building implodes around you. Some think torture is not thinking you might drown for several minutes, but looking at burning buildings on television and knowing that people you love are inside them. They remember that being crushed, incinerated, or killed in a jump from the 98th story happened to almost 3,000 blameless Americans (as well as a number of foreigners), and that 125 Pentagon employees were killed at their desks, while many survivors suffered terrible burns. They think the choice between stopping this from happening again by slapping around or scaring the hell out of a cluster of brigands, or leaving the brigands alone and letting it happen again, is a no-brainer.

Not much polling has been done to date about attitudes on waterboarding and torture held by the general public (as opposed to MoveOn.org and the Washington press corps), but it would surely be done in the event of hearings and trials. Not many people think being slapped hard is the same thing as having to jump from a building. Democrats might find the truth about this to be inconvenient indeed...

...Barack Obama promised to be a nontraditional leader, and in some ways he is. He is the first president to have gone abroad and apologized so much for his country's supposed sins, the first to sit calmly by while his country was savaged by the likes of Nicaragua's Daniel Ortega without making a protest, the first to try to persecute a past administration for its political judgments, and the first to investigate a predecessor and his administration for having been a success.

The first job of a president is to safeguard his country and fellow citizens, which Bush did, to the apparent dismay of the opposition. Usually, an investigation takes place after someone has failed in his duty, to find out what went wrong so that it can be changed and improved on. But no attacks on U.S. soil in the seven-plus years between September 11, 2001, and January 20, 2009, is a record of success. Do the Democrats want to find out what went right, and then change it, to avoid repetition? The way that they're going, they probably will.

It's easy being an idiot: all you have to do is pretend that your beliefs make you virtuous and that they don't have disastrous consequences to the very society that, at least for now, tolerates your idiocy. And your hypocrisy- Andrew McCarthy:

By the way, on Noemi's point about the liberals who supported real torture after 9/11 (y'know, back when Nancy Pelosi was green-lighting waterboarding), I recounted in my article yesterday that among them was none other than Bill Clinton — and I could have added that they included Hillary, too, until the realities of a presidential nomination process controlled by the hard Left had her doing a quick 180. After all, with Barack Obama wowing them by his support of infanticide, she couldn't afford to say we might have to harm a hair on the head of an occasional terrorist.

By Liz Cheney:

"This much is clear: Whether dealing with the Wall Street mess, shifting troops from Iraq to Afghanistan or fumbling to fill his Cabinet, Obama leans heavily on personal panache to push political policies. Truth be told, his style is rooted in something elusive and hard to define. Pure and simple, it’s hip."

Sounds like this slavering moron.

The difference between a brown nose and ring around the collar is the level of commitment, yo.

Gigantic Cajones.

Yay-yuh.

Michael Goldfarb on Obama's Iraq:

On the front page of today's Washington Post we can see the outline of what may become a devastating narrative for the Obama administration and the left. Yesterday's brutal attacks in Iraq, which left more than 80 dead, are tied directly to President Obama's push for a hasty withdrawal.

Obama's insistence that a rapid withdrawal would galvanize the Iraqis against an enemy he knew was waiting for the U.S. to leave is now having its inevitable effect, and I am deeply concerned for Iraq's future on this fool's watch.

BACKGROUND
Gateway Pundit looks at some relevant numbers.

Just Another Day In Obama's Flip-Flop World

The picture continues to fill in. President Gigantic Cajones takes three positions in the course of 72 hours.

You can't make this stuff up; it's so warm and creamy rich, I think I will dip my toes in it.

The Washington Post explains:

Mark down the date. Tuesday, April 21, 2009, is the moment that any chance of a new era of bipartisan respect in Washington ended. By inviting the prosecution of Bush officials for their antiterror legal advice, President Obama has injected a poison into our politics that he and the country will live to regret.

Policy disputes, often bitter, are the stuff of democratic politics. Elections settle those battles, at least for a time, and Mr. Obama's victory in November has given him the right to change policies on interrogations, Guantanamo, or anything on which he can muster enough support. But at least until now, the U.S. political system has avoided the spectacle of a new Administration prosecuting its predecessor for policy disagreements. This is what happens in Argentina, Malaysia or Peru, countries where the law is treated merely as an extension of political power.

If this analogy seems excessive, consider how Mr. Obama has framed the issue. He has absolved CIA operatives of any legal jeopardy, no doubt because his intelligence advisers told him how damaging that would be to CIA morale when Mr. Obama needs the agency to protect the country. But he has pointedly invited investigations against Republican legal advisers who offered their best advice at the request of CIA officials.

I say bring it on.

Can You Feel This Pin, Prick?

Via the Weekly Standard

The Washington Post's front page story on Obama's release of the interrogation documents claims the move was motivated in large part by Dick Cheney's very public criticisms of Obama's surrender in the War on Terror. The Post:

A source familiar with White House views said Obama's advisers are further convinced that letting the public know exactly what the past administration sanctioned will undermine what they see as former vice president Richard B. Cheney's effort to "box Obama in" by claiming that the executive order heightened the risk of a terrorist attack.

The Weekly Standard:

If President Obama and his aides were confident that the decisions they'd made regarding the detention and interrogation of high-value terrorists were correct -- that they had, in fact, made America safer and that the American public shared their disdain for the aggressive tactics approved by the previous administration -- the release of these memos would have been viewed as an unnecessary distraction. Instead, the Obama White House feared that criticism from Dick Cheney, a man the left considers so toxic as to be an albatross around the neck of the Republican party, was so dangerous that it had to be countered with the release of memos that posed not only a political risk to their own administration but also a national security risk to the United States.

In the event, the American public seems to take a Cheneyesque view of the document dump. Rasmussen reports that 58 percent of Americans "believe the Obama administration’s recent release of CIA memos about the harsh interrogation methods used on terrorism suspects endangers the national security of the United States." That means that Cheney already boxed in the Obama administration, prompting an overreaction that has turned the debate over detention policy into a runaway train. A public that seems to adore this administration is, on this issue, firmly against it.

The strategy of "boxing in" a political opponent requires that your opponent holds an untenable position -- that the only way for him to get out of the box is to move to your more responsible position, at which point he can be accused not only of being wrong, but of being naive and indecisive. Cheney is now asking for the release of additional memos showing the fruits of the harsh techniques his administration employed in it's considerably less apologetic war against al Qaeda. The box is closing even tighter.

How now will Obama get out of this hole? That's easy: he'll keep digging. But one thing is for sure: it's great to know that Big Dick is still in charge of the administration.

We all know Barney Frank is a god-damned liar, but it's important that we pause to appreciate just what a monumental god-damned liar he really is. Verum Serum has the perfect case on which to meditate:

Here's Barney Frank last week doing what Barney Frank does: lying.



And here's Barney Frank in 2005 doing what Barney Frank does: lying.



By then, of course, Frank had stopped blowing Fanny Mae chairman Herb Moses and was seven years in to blowing the world economy.

Ed Morrissey follows up:

Only a politician could lie with such a lack of conscience, but with a surfeit of sanctimony.

His “Bubble? What bubble?” performance in June 2005 should become required viewing for anyone who wants the real history of how the economy collapsed. In another addition to the Someone Left The Irony On Department, Frank scolds the people behind the dot-com bubble for not having realistic business plans while Frank protected Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac from regulators who warned that the two GSEs had the same exact problem. And Frank was right that the housing collapse wouldn’t be as bad as the dot-com pop — but in fact it was much, much worse, thanks to Congressional action that mandated the creation of mortgage-backed securities that spread the poison of bad loans throughout the global financial system. The dot-com bubble burst resulted in a mild recession, but Frank’s supposedly-impossible housing bubble collapse sent the entire world economy crashing into a heap.

Clueless? A liar? In this case, Frank qualifies as both.

More from Andrew C. McCarthy, this time on Obama's nomination for legal counsel to the State Department, Hongju Koh, who is perhaps more dangerous to American sovereignty than any outside enemy could ever hope to be.

President Gigantic Cajones knows this; that's why he nominated Koh.

Byron York gets the goods:

I asked William Anderson, a friend who is a political conservative, a medical doctor, and a lecturer in psychiatry at Harvard. "They are angry, but I think they are also scared, and I think it's because they have a sense that their triumph is a precarious one," Anderson told me. Democrats won in 2008 in some part because of the cycles of American politics; Republicans were exhausted and it was the other party's turn. Now, having won, they are unsure of how long victory will last.

"They see that they have a very small window of opportunity to do all the things they want," Anderson continued. "They see the window of opportunity as small because they know in their deepest hearts that the vast majority of the American people wouldn't go for all of the things they want to do." So they are frantic to do as much as possible before the opposition coalesces. And the tea parties might be the beginning of that coalescence.

Then there is the question of self-image. Watching Garofalo and Olbermann discuss the tea parties, it was impossible to avoid the sense that they saw themselves as two good people talking about many bad people. "One of the things about narcissism is that it looks like people who are just proud of themselves and smug, but in fact narcissism is a very brittle and unstable state," Anderson told me. "People who are deeply invested in narcissism spend an awful lot of energy trying to maintain the illusion they have of themselves as being powerful and good, and they are exquisitely sensitive to anything that might prick that balloon."

Again, the tea parties could represent a threat. What if the protesters weren't racists, weren't violent, weren't mentally defective? What if their point was legitimate, or even partly legitimate? Those are questions better batted down than answered.

Boiled down: they're frightened, unprincipled, totalitarian-minded, narcissistic liars living in a constant state of denial.

Chrissakes, Byron, I could have told you that.

I just read Jeff Goldstein's Brave New Worlds, in which he eloquently describes the confiscation of the language in service to Obama's "plans to shore up progressive Democratic power by building a permanent client state." I do my best not to begin with the conclusion when quoting from someone else's post, but I believe it fits here, with apologies to Mr. Goldstein:

To make progressivism work the way it is designed to work (and I’ve long pointed out that progressivism moves inexorably toward totalitarianism by virtue of its foundational assumptions), it is necessary to control language. One way to do that is to provide yourself the (philosophical) means to define terms and frame narratives (and post-structuralism and reader-response theoretics, along with a healthy dash of Said’s Orientalism, has provided just that, as the linguistic turn has become increasingly institutionalized). Another way to do that is to circumscribe speech — using inverted ideas of “tolerance” and “hate” to effectively turn the First Amendment into a stepchild of government-sanctioned speech.

Here, Obama sees a way to connect “torture” (ill-defined) to conservative legal thought (criminal and extreme) in order to taint all conservative thought by proxy.

This is all about perception, on one level — and about the rewards that creating a certain perception will reap in the long term.

So. What to do?

Refuse to comply. This will never happen — and even if it did, we’d be treated to endless “conservative” tut-tutting about rule of law and honor, etc, in addition to the predictable media spin about the Bushies being lawless and having something to hide, blah blah blah.

But at this point, I’d rather that come to pass than to lend legitimacy to such a pure political power play.

Arrest us or get bent, the answer should be. But they’ll be no public commission hearings where conservatives are required to prove they aren’t extremist criminals.

And fuck you for even trying.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's government is forcing the President's Gigantic Cajones on two fronts, declaring that if Opey won't take any concrete (or concrete-busting) action to temper Iran's nuclear threat, Israel will not engage in peace talks with the Palestinians, whose leaders want to destroy Israel as much as the Iranian mullahs do but lack Iran's burgeoning nuclear capabilities for now and use randomly-fired Iranian rockets instead.

This puts President Cajones in the difficult position of having to vote something besides "present." He has to be a Decider. Like any good leftist, his decision will be based on one simple question: who to sell out? Also like any good leftist, the answer will be easy: Israel. There's simply no other possibility: as Gigantic as the President's Cajones are, and don't doubt for a minute that those badboys are deliciously huge (and hugely delicious!), they are mysteriously AWOL when it comes to acting against Iran, whereas they re-appear tanned, rested and ready when it comes to promising Palestinian statehood on behalf of Israel (this is essentially what Obama does; it is in fact what he is and how he was made: an "Obama" is a fascile narcissist who makes promises on behalf of other people, the vast majority of whom it turns out haven't even been born yet).

I'm pretty sure Netanyahu has figured this out already. He knows Obama must rely on Israel to cash any checks he writes to the Palestinians, and he knows Obama knows it. Since Obama has already demonstrated his instincts run not to the best interests of America and her allies but to the best interests of Obama, he will make another predictable decision, which is to attack America's ally rather than its enemy and try to drive Israeli public opinion against Netanyahu (watch for it: townhall meetings starring you-know-who, apologizing for Israel's arrogance, broadcast live on al Jazeera).

There are any number of ways President Cajones could pressure Netanyahu. Who knows: he may threaten to reduce American aid to Israel, or to bring on the Palestinian pitchforks, perhaps, courtesy of Hamas (which is really only a slightly edgier version of ACORN).

Now. Maybe President Cajones is used to having people fawn over him, open every door, mouth "I love you- call me!", spread fragrant petals in his path and all the other niceties that come with being the leader of a political cult. But I'm guessing he hasn't tried his act on Benjamin Netanyahu, who understands that he bears the responsibility not of stroking President Cajones' Gigantic Ego or paying his Gigantic Bills but of protecting Israelis from another Holocaust.

In essence, Netanyahu has sent to the White Castle, in subtle diplomatic prose, the same message then-candidate Cajones communicated to both Hillary Clinton and John McCain via a sophomoric middle finger to the cheek.

Except Netanyahu isn't a sophomoric Chicago pol moron.

That's Gonna Hurt
Kevin Jackson took the same view most adults did after hearing no-talent failed-everything Garafalo's latest elitist idiocy:

Democrats have done nothing, repeat nothing for blacks, except to exploit blacks for Democrats' own racist agendas. If you don't believe me, look at, well…Janeane Garofalo!

Garofalo is a failed comedian, a hack of an actress, a failed radio talk-show host, and essentially has been out of the mainstream since making B-movies that had the viewership of an Olbermann segment on MSNBC! I get more views on my YouTube videos of racist Democrats picking lint from their navels and eating Cheetos. Admittedly those are funny, and the hit count is rising.

In typical racist Democrat elitist fashion, Garofalo feels the need to meddle in the black community. I can't imagine a life where I wake up in the morning and say something like, "I think today I will read an article on [insert oppressed here], and then go on [insert oppressed here] TV to protect those pitiful, stupid, weak [insert oppressed here]. Kevin…you are a wonderful man for caring about these people who obviously have no spokesperson, and can't protect themselves! I love me some ME!" Such is the life of a racist Democrat elitist. Protectors of the World…oh, and their own agendas!

No-one better knows the implications of Obama's politically-motivated and dangerous release of the interrogation memos than Andrew C. McCarthy, who is also deeply familiar with the tactics of the terrorist assholes to whom the Idiot-in-Chief is now releasing valuable information. McCarthy explains the consequences of the president's breathtakingly irresponsible decision, and the vapidity of Obama's lie that enhanced interrogation has no place in the War on Terror:

The revelations will make al-Qaeda a more efficient killing machine: better able to resist our efforts to thwart its attacks. Worse, they will paralyze our intelligence community, which now knows that even a presidential assurance complemented by Justice Department guidance and congressional encouragement will not protect agents from second-guessing and possible legal jeopardy a few months or years from now, when vigilance is no longer in fashion and political power has changed hands. To complete the triple play, the disclosures demonstrate to intelligence agents that the commander-in-chief is not to be trusted: He claimed that coercive interrogation tactics beyond the anodyne Army Field Manual measures were being studied to determine whether their authorization might be appropriate; but the revelations make the “study” a hollow gesture — there is nothing to be gained from authorizing tactics the enemy has already been armed against.

...President Obama and Attorney General Eric Holder are within their right to claim, however implausibly, that their national-security obligations can be satisfied without resorting to enhanced interrogation tactics. But they should forthrightly admit, then, that they are willing to lose the thousands of lives their policy decision may cost. They shouldn’t get to continue spouting the nonsense that tradeoffs between our security and “our values” present “a false choice.” In fact, it’s the choice we’ve trusted them to make, for better or worse.

If Obama wasn't lying through his teeth about his motivation for releasing the memos, they would not have been so heavily redacted to exclude any information about the attacks that were prevented as a direct result of using enhanced interrogation in certain cases. But Obama is lying : it's clear he is setting the table for persecution of Bush Administration officials. It's a classic totalitarian tactic the likes of which have formerly been reserved, as Karl Rove has pointed out, for tin pot dictators and Chicago political thugs, the latter which Obama has already proved to be and the former which he appears determined to emulate.

This president is quickly revealing himself as the prototypical political thug, whose first order of business after taking power is to ruthlessly wipe the field clean of any and all opposition, without regard for the consequences.

The Phillie Bulletin chronicles the story of Earth Day co-founder and Philadelphia native son Ira Einhorn, who took cleaning up his personal environment to a whole new and deliciously ironic level.

A left-wing environmental extremist (really, is there any other kind?) makes the FBI's Most Wanted Terrorists list, which so far still does not include any returning Iraq or Afghanistan war veterans or other patriotic Americans.

Investors.com: Save capitalism, save the environment; the Environmental Protection Agency agrees.

It causes rising food prices, massive Third World hunger and more pollution than fossil fuel. Is there anything corn ethanol can't do?

Prosperous, advanced democracies are greener, says the NYT. Proving once again the old saying that even a stopped clock is right twice a day, even on Earth Day!

Ladies and gennemun, consider Perez Hilton, who demands ideological submission to gay marriage, elsewise he will make a pathetic ass of himself on YouTube. You see, for Miss California Carrie Prejean and the majority of voters in her home state, there's no such thing as gay marriage because marriage is a sacrament between a man and a woman which, thanks to the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, is Miss Prejean's God-given right to decide, Hilton's intolerant and hateful attacks notwithstanding.

Hilton is a self-serving and dishonest bully(in other words, a leftist). How else to describe someone who asks this young woman an overtly political question in front of a national audience in hopes of extorting the answer he wants from her and then, because he doesn't get it, bitches that she should leave politics out of it?

What a dishonest, vengeful, maladjusted little baby (in other words, a leftist).

All of which is a microcosm for the difference between right and left:

On the right: adherence to a set of principles, come what may;

From the left: anger, libel, defamation, slander and vengeance on those who refuse to fall in line with their latest intrusions on freedom of choice and personal liberty.

Not Good.

Jay Nordlinger on the ongoing moral failures of President Cajones' vacuous, self-aggrandizing and dangerous foreign policies, all according to a tried and true measure:

I imagine that, if they know, they are demoralized. What’s next? Necking with Kim Jong Il? Reagan and Bush rocked the boat, to a degree. And that was extremely heartening to political prisoners. Natan Sharansky (then Anatoly Sharansky) writes about this in his book Fear No Evil. Many others have testified to it as well.

Funny how the parties have flipped. Time was — not so long ago — the Republicans were the party of a crude, cold “stability,” in which dictatorships were propped up or schmoozed; it was the Democrats who intruded principle and that jazz. My, my.

Whoever is in charge, this much is true, I think we can say: In order to be effective, and safeguard the national interest, American foreign policy does not have to be morally sickening.

For those who couldn't attend, here's what you didn't miss. #10 was busy at the White Castle.

Why, just look at today's WaPo; it'll take yer breath away, they're so deliciously huge (and hugely delicious!):

President Obama plans to convene his Cabinet for the first time today, and he will order its members to identify a combined $100 million in budget cuts over the next 90 days, according to a senior administration official.

Although the budget cuts would amount to a minuscule portion of federal spending, they are intended to signal the president's determination to cut spending and reform government, the official said.

Well. They certainly do. In fact I'd venture to say that this towering example of monumental fiscal leadership signals President Gigantic Cajones' "determination to cut spending and reform government" with admirable precision.

So magnificent is President Gigantic Cajones' Fearless Leadership that I'm leaping on the bandwagon immediately and making the same measure of sacrifice in my own personal annual budget. That's right: tonight I'm passing on that second cup of coffee. Tonight, and every other night.

Why, by the end of the fiscal year, I will have made over 260 budget cuts and slashed my spending by a Messianic .0029 percent!

Now that is Change You Can Believe In!

UPDATE
Brian Reidl offers perspective, points out President Cajones' preference for theatrics over substance, and shows us the only real budget solutions coming from Capitol Hill.

UPDATE
Allahpundit: Painfully stupid. Poor Microsoft Man:

I'm being completely sincere. Only in Washington D.C. is a hundred million dollars not a lot of money. It is where I'm from; it is where I grew up. And I think it is for hundreds of millions of Americans.

Really? A hundred million dollars for hundreds of millions of Americans is chump change, you dummy. 100 million divided by hundreds of millions? Let's go easy on the hapless Robert Gibbs, who is so fucking hopeless as President Jugears' press sec he is overmatched by the D.C. press pool, ferchrissakes; let's allow that he was referring to only two hundred million of three hundred million in America.

Fitty cents apiece? Big woop. I believe President Gigantic Cajones (will I ever tire of this magnificent jewel of idiot irony? Not as long as it sends a chill up my leg, hardy har.) used the term "chump change" not too long ago in reference to much loftier sums.

But we're talking a hundred thousand times that much over the next ten years for every man, woman and child as their personal debt to Chimpy McJugears' incandescent economic brilliance. And that ignores every other monetary confiscation this walking, bullshitting disaster is going to foist onto American taxpayers' backs.

Will you pay for all this stupidity?

Oh, yeah.

Ohhhhh, yeah.

"Master Sgt. John Hatley has been convicted of four counts of murder and has been sentenced to life in prison."

So begins a Confederate Yankee post chronicling how the idiot left pounces on the Hatley decision in their desperate rush to absolve serial fantasist Scott Beauchamp of his litany of slanders against his brothers in arms. Sorry, idiots: Scott Beauchamp is still Scott Beauchamp. Always has been, always will be.

John Hatley is paying for his crimes. But it takes a special kind of goulish fuck to claim idiot-blog points on the backs of Hatley's Iraqi victims to salvage something, anything, from the mindless stupidity of investing in Scott Beauchamp's well-chronicled lies.

Preening on the backs of murdered Iraqis is no way to go through life, son.

Yuck.

Achtung, achtung: this just in from Idiot Central (No link- not now, not ever)- the jug-eared child-moron who pretends to understand his predecessor's job has "gigantic Presidential cajones."

"In fact, Obama even cut W down at the inauguration, while the petulant one was sitting just a few feet away. That's someone in possession of gigantic Presidential cajones."

Actually, Vanessa, that's the very definition of petulant. But hey- you go girl!!!

"Gigantic Presidential Cajones." Wow. I love that; I am on that like a fucking lamprey. I will dine out on that with my evil right-wing friends for months. That's the kind of fawning sucker drivel I can believe in. Can you not just feel the vibe happenin' there?

Speaking of suckers: what with the popularity on the left these days of this whole tea-bagging thing, how do the Gigantic Presidential Cajones taste? Salty? Sweet? Unicornish? Rainbowy?

Must be good, judging by all that Obamagoo on your cheeks.

Ooh. Got some in your hair, too.

Just sayin'.

Oh: that burning sensation in your cheeks? That's the heat generated by your brain realizing its own stupidity.

HT: Red Forman

Via Ace
In a nutshell:

I know for a fact that when 50 or so professional leftist protesters congregate to protest, say, the Asian Dawn ("I read about them in Time Magazine"), the MSM covers the story, often prominently. CNN's top headlines never fail to include some small potatoes lefty protest. And yet when millions of amateur protesters get together, the MSM deems it unworthy of mention.

While the MSM makes crude, disrespectful jokes about the the protesters being enthusiasts for the deviant sexual act of lowering one's testicles into another's mouth. That's blog type snark -- and fine for blogs. But for CNN?

Let me ask MSNBC and CNN -- if a FoxNews reporter, covering a pro-choice rally, should look at a group of woman and remark, "Well, I guess we know the right place to be if you want to get laid," how would they react?

Would it be termed some harmless joke? Or would it be taken as crude, demeaning, and absurdly unprofessional?

Anyone who wants the real story can get it thanks to the intertubes. Anyone who doesn't can watch CNN or gobble my junk.

That's okay now that CNN says so, right?

If that's what idiots want for a metaphor, I'm sure we adults can dish it up. Care for a sample?

Michelle Malkin has been poking around the fresh new Obama-ized Department of Homeland Security and found a gathering storm of persecution against opposition to The One. This is at my first reading the most alarming thing I have ever seen come from an American administration:

Yesterday, Roger Hedgecock and the Liberty Papers posted an unclassified DHS Office of Intelligence and Analysis report titled: Rightwing Extremism: Current Economic and Political Climate Fueling Resurgence in Radicalization and Recruitment.

The “report” (PDF file here) was one of the most embarrassingly shoddy pieces of propaganda I’d ever read out of DHS. I couldn’t believe it was real.

I spent the day chasing down DHS spokespeople, who have been tied up preparing for a very important homeland security event later today: The First Lady is coming to visit their Washington office. Priorities, you know.

Well, the press office got back to me and verified that the document is indeed for real. They were very defensive — preemptively so — in asserting that it was not a politicized document and that DHS had done reports on “leftwing extremism” in the past. I have covered DHS for many years and am quite familiar with past assessments they and the FBI have done on animal rights terrorists and environmental terrorists. But those past reports have always been very specific in identifying the exact groups, causes, and targets of domestic terrorism, i.e., the ALF, ELF, and Stop Huntingdon wackos who have engaged in physical harassment, arson, vandalism, and worse against pharmaceutical companies, farms, labs, and university researchers.

By contrast, the piece of crap report issued on April 7 is a sweeping indictment of conservatives. And the intent is clear. As the two spokespeople I talked with on the phone today made clear: They both pinpointed the recent “economic downturn” and the “general state of the economy” for stoking “rightwing extremism.” One of the spokespeople said he was told that the report has been in the works for a year. My b.s. detector went off the chart, and yours will, too, if you read through the entire report — which asserts with no evidence that an unquantified “resurgence in rightwing extremist recruitment and radicalizations activity” is due to home foreclosures, job losses, and…the historical presidential election.

In Obama land, there are no coincidences. It is no coincidence that this report echoes Tea Party-bashing left-wing blogs (check this one out comparing the Tea Party movement to the Weather Underground!) and demonizes the very Americans who will be protesting in the thousands on Wednesday for the nationwide Tax Day Tea Party.

There's much, much more that will delight the smug idiots mindlessly singing "Oh Yeah" to their Lord Obama. It's all here.

"I think this is the most extraordinary collection of talent and of human knowledge that has ever been gathered together at the White House – with the possible exception of when Thomas Jefferson dined alone."

Also Kill 3 Skinnies

Captain Phillips jumped overboard. Again.

Back to yer pizza, Opie...

Mark Steyn, able to read idiots' minds:

Obviously, if the United States Navy hanged some eyepatched peglegged blackguard from the yardarm or made him walk the plank, pious senators would rise to denounce an America that no longer lived up to its highest ideals, and the network talking-heads would argue that Plankgate was recruiting more and more young men to the pirates’ cause, and judges would rule that pirates were entitled to the protections of the U.S. constitution and that their peglegs had to be replaced by high-tech prosthetic limbs at taxpayer expense.

John Hinderaker surprises me:

Whatever happens to Captain Phillips, when the immediate crisis is over President Obama should lead an international effort to rid the Indian Ocean of pirates.

I am praying for Captain Phillips, but it would never even occur to Obama to consider what John Hinderaker suggests. President Bush would never have put up with pirates kidnapping Americans, which is why it has never happened until now. In contrast, the Somalis have made Obama their bitch.

Let's hope Captain Phillips doesn't have to pay the price for that.

Wonder how long Americans will put up with a President who surrenders to pirates? Thomas Jefferson, anyone?

Actually, they just go "Obama".

Translation: they don't "go" at all. They just wait while President Pantywaist dithers like Neville Chamberlain channeling Jimmy Carter pooing his pants.

This can only be racism:

Watch out, France and Co, there is a new surrender monkey on the block and, over the next four years, he will spectacularly sell out the interests of the West with every kind of liberal-delusionist initiative on nuclear disarmament and sitting down to negotiate with any power freak who wants to buy time to get a good ICBM fix on San Francisco, or wherever. If you thought the world was a tad unsafe with Dubya around, just wait until President Pantywaist gets into his stride.

The Two Greatest Obama Quotes Evah

1. "We can’t drive our SUVs and eat as much as we want and keep our homes on 72 degrees at all times… and then just expect that other countries are going to say OK. That’s not leadership. That’s not going to happen."

2. "Hey! err anyone else feel like some pizza?"

Via the appropriatelynamedinthiscase Hot Air:
A baby teleprompter for those little jobs.

"You should not exaggerate and lie like this when you are the Vice President of the United States."

"Let Me Explain That 'Pitchfork' Thing For You. Not That You'll Like It Or Anything ."

Putting Obama's Stalinist stylings in perspective:

To get the full flavor of the president’s implication we must remember that in Obama’s code language, the word “pitchforks” means “a vigorous campaign of threats and intimidation perpetrated by Obama-sponsored ACORN and union activists in conjunction with theatrical outrage from government officials, amplified by the complicit media, and coordinated from one political center, which has now moved to the White House.”

They told me if I didn't vote for Obama America would be overrun by fascist thugs, and they were right.

"Freedom of speech is an American concept, so I don’t give it any value”.
How's that for pure, unadulterated stupidity?

That bigoted trash was spit out by no less a force for freedom than Canadian Human Rights Commissioner Dean Steacy, as chronicled in Canadian poet and essayist David Solway's "The Jihad of the Word" published by Pajamas Media.

Included are the very real kangaroo court trials of Canadian journalists Ezra Levant and Mark Steyn - and a plug for Ezra's important new book, Shakedown: How Our Government Is Undermining Democracy in the Name of Human Rights.

Come on, Ezra: it's always in the name of human rights.

The Office of the President Trainee continues his Apology Tour in Turkey. Power Line's John Hinderaker explains the extent of Obama's ignorance, which can only be termed extraordinary if you aren't familiar with the inherent ignorance of the leftist idiot mindset:

As we've seen before, Obama appears to betray a surprising lack of knowledge of American history. It seems that instead of actually having studied his own country's history, Obama has merely absorbed the ignorant, left-wing narrative that is peddled by Jeremiah Wright and others of his ilk. As a result, Obama not only confesses his country's sins overseas, he confesses wrongly.

Surely it will occur to Americans at some point that the Apology Tour is not about the United States' role in the world; this is purely about Obama. This is all driven by his monumental narcissism and his radical left-wing world view that manifested itself in his books as an innate loathing of America.

Obama's seemingly compulsive need to apologize to foreign audiences on behalf of the United States cannot be explained as a rational approach to diplomacy. As Paul suggested here, the roots of Obama's America-bashing seem to lie in a combination of ideology and psychology.

The Kind Of Change America-Hating Europussies Can Believe In
Gabriel Malor and the Power Line crew vent on The Office Of The President Trainee's latest attack on his former President and his own country:

[This] latest speech was planned and plotted, a neon-lighted "Fuck You" directed right at us while he campaigns for European Suck-up of the Year. And that is something to get angry over, the quisling fucker. The Powerline Guys use words like "contemptible", "reprehensible", "slanderous." All true, but it doesn't go far enough.

This guy is going to stand up Over There and badmouth Americans and President Bush? He's a coward with an inferiority complex, a desperate desire to win the approval of his perceived European betters. What an ass.

It's barely three months into his term, and already I wonder how much more self-respecting Americans will take of this preening jackass poseur who shits on them every chance he gets. Four years looks like a mighty long time from here.

Power Line's follow-up post Why Does He Bash Us? contains this central observation:

One doesn't attend the sermons of the America-hating Rev. Jeremiah Wright year in and year out if you think well of the United States.

An idiot once recommended to me a website named "Daily Kos" for deep thinkers like his own special and precious self. Turned out the guy who runs Daily Kos is a hateful little weasel who suggested it would be splendid if Michelle Malkin was killed when she visited Iraq in December 2006. Kos' legion of deep thinkers, towering intellectuals and moral giants that they are, whooped their approval, just as they whooped it up when four American military contractors were murdered, set on fire, ripped apart and their charred bodies were hung from the bridge to Fallujah in Iraq, all before our aforementioned idiot sang Daily Kos' praises to me. So the idiot knew about the slaughter at Fallujah and Kos' sickening dismissal of the desecration of those poor American souls before he fawningly pointed me to his beloved Daily Kos website.

I just want to be painstakingly clear about all that.

Me? I found it all vile and despicable, but I'm the simple, clinging, hateful, thoughtless sort and so must have missed the nuance that imbues deep thinkers with a knowing that I can apparently only dream of comprehending.

Anyway, now that same idiot can fawn over a delightful new screed from his beloved hero Kos, who cavalierly jokes about the deaths of three police officers and accuses conservatives like me of approving. All while ignoring similar atrocities in his own back yard.

How very nice.

Treacher has preserved this for posterity:



"Stupid underhanded creep."

You know who you are.

"Il Duce Redux"
Quinn Hilyer in the American Spectator.

RedState.com answers but one example of the idiot left's sweeping hypocrisy:



Note to Obamatons: that burning sensation in your cheeks? That's the heat generated by your brain realizing its own stupidity.

HT: Red Forman

Like Flipping Hillary The Bird On National TV, Minus The Practiced Subtlety
So The Office Of The President Trainee pays his first visit to Queen Elizabeth II and what does he present her with as a gift on this special occasion? What else: Himself. Specifically, a mix tape of Broadway show tunes and a Special Bonus: his junior senator and inaugural speeches. On an iPod. A Special iPod, according to CNN. Wow.

Ninety-nine cents a cut from I-Tunes, plus some self-aggrandizing personal shit.

Big whoop. Pretty sure if she wanted one she'd already have it, y'know?

Oh wait: she does already have an iPod as of four years ago, and it's already special. You know why? Because it's the Queen's fucking iPod.

Even had she not had fair warning, to say nothing of a few guffaws with The Office Of The President Trainee's "gift" to Prime Minister Brown, I've no doubt Her Majesty already has the full measure of this bush-league punk; a lifelong equine enthusiast, she certainly knows a horse's ass when she sees one.

Update:
"In return, the Queen gave the President a silver framed signed photograph of herself and the Duke of Edinburgh - a standard present for visiting dignitaries."

Proving that Her Majesty also knows how to flip the bird.

Rush Limbaugh declares for the individual, the one free man, in a memorable intervention:

The smallest minority on earth is the individual. We are all different. We are all individuals. We are being told to sacrifice our individuality. We're being told we must assemble in other groups of victims. Well, not all of us because some of us are the victimizers. The smallest minority on earth is the individual and thus those who deny individual rights cannot claim to be defenders of minorities. This administration claims to be a minority administration, first black president, historical nature. This administration is out to destroy the whole concept of individual rights under the guise of sacrifice, pay equalization, equalization of outcomes in other areas. But the smallest minority on earth is you, as an individual. You have individual rights, as granted by God, who created you, and our founding documents enshrine them: Life, liberty, pursuit of happiness. Those rights don't come from other men or governments or women. They come from our creator, God. Higher power, whatever, however you want to look at it.

The smallest minority on earth is the individual, and I dare say that in this country today there's no one looking out for the individual, other than me. Nobody is looking out for the individual. In fact, in this country, just as it happened in Soviet Russia, just as it happens in North Korea, as it is happening in Venezuela, and as it happened in Cuba, the individual must be stamped out, the individual must be stomped upon, the individual as a concept must be done away with, and, as such, there go individual rights. You don't have individual rights nearly to the degree that you once did, not when you have been forced by either guilt or stigma to buy a car that you don't really want. When you're buying a car because you think it will get you less criticism, when you buy a car because you think people will think you're wonderful, but not because you want that car, you have sacrificed your individual rights. You have said, "My worth as an individual, my worth as who I am doesn't count anymore. I am going to define my worth by what somebody thinks of me. I'm going to define my worth by how little criticism I will get. I'm going to define my worth by how much I can make people think I care," based on the tug of popular sentiment each and every day.

When any of you decide to do away with pursuing what you want in your best self-interest, you are sacrificing who you are. You are giving up control of your essence, and you are saying, I would rather be a member of a group that is approved by people so that I don't get criticized or so that I'm thought of as enlightened or so that I'm thought of as advanced. In the process, you are helping to destroy the very foundational building blocks of the greatest country on earth, the country in which you happen to be born and the country in which you happen to live. So giving up your individual identity, giving up who you are, sacrificing your passions and your desires and your own self-interests for the so-called common good, who gets to define the common good? I would define the common good as everybody acting as an individual, born as he or she is, pursuing self-interest. That's the common good. That built cities; that built a great country; that built railroads and engines. It built airplanes. It built everything. People denying who they are did not.

When you deny your individuality, when you give it away for acceptance into a subgroup of people, you are harming the country; you are letting the country down; you are not pulling your weight. You are seeking approval, self-love and acceptance from all of the wrong sources. You're giving up the greatest gift you ever had, and that's who you are. And we have an administration that wants you to willingly and excitedly, eagerly give up who you are for a common good they define, a common good that requires you to deny who you are, your individuality, what makes you different from everybody else, whether you're not as good or whether you're much better at certain things. You will become a number. You will become a robot who can be programmed and inspired and motivated to behave in approved ways, and you will be taught to think you are virtuous when doing so, when all you've done is sold yourself and your country out. You give up your individuality, you sacrifice who you are, you allow that to be taken away for some mythical status as a member of a group, you are giving up your passion to become a moderate, or worse. People without passion never built anything. People without passion never got one thing done. People without passion are drags on achievement and accomplishment. That's what this administration wants you to become.