Bold words from Baghdad Bobby Gibbs:

"We'll have the votes when the House votes, I think, within the next week," Gibbs said on "Fox News Sunday."

Gibbs added that those on next week's Sunday talk shows "will be talking about healthcare not as a presidential proposal but I think as the law of the land."

President Barack Obama will look to campaign on the new healthcare law in midterm elections, Gibbs said.

"We believe healthcare reform is going to pass, and once it passes we're happy to have the 2010 elections be about the achievement of healthcare reform," Gibbs said.

I suppose there's no other spin he can put on it, since his masters demand that he stand in front of the cameras and smile every day. But Gibbsy is simply out of his mind if he thinks that passing the Democrats' healthcare bill is going to be good for his team in the 2010 elections.

This "projection" of the White House is so far from reality, it can only mean that they're still trying to pressure reluctant congressmen into voting for it. The thinking is that if they repeat and repeat that this will be good come November, maybe a foolish congresscritter or two will actually believe it.

I wouldn't get too worked up about his claim that healthcare reform will pass within the week either. First, he's just repeating the White House deadline in other language. Remember, first the deadline was March 18. Then, when that clearly wasn't happening, the President delayed his trip to Australia until March 21...seven days from today. Also known as a week.

Second, Gibbsy is credibility-challenged (and how!) as a general matter. But even within his statement this morning, he's not given us any reason to believe him. His delusional "this is good for us in November" statement has no connection to reality. Nor does his claim that the president will campaign on it during the midterms. Not with every Dem candidate fleeing from him after his disastrous performances in Virginia, New Jersey, and Massachusetts.

So, why should we believe Gibbs' simultaneous claim that "this will pass within a week?"

Posted by: Gabriel Malor at 08:23 AM | Comments (143)
Post contains 373 words, total size 2 kb.

Hey, hey, it's Saturday night. And don't forget to flip your clock forward at 2am EST for Daylight Savings Time well unless you're NCJ or a Zonie. Don't worry you'll get your extra hour of ONT back in November.

The Many Moods of Chewbacca
He's more than a walking rug you know. He's got feelings. And he wields a crossbow.

Posted by: Maetenloch at 05:37 PM | Comments (687)
Post contains 410 words, total size 6 kb.

It's the twice-annual time change for everyone except you lucky dogs in Arizona. I'm always groggy for a week after one of these (groggier than usual, I mean).

It's "spring ahead", right? Which means we lose an hour? But that means I need to flick my clocks ahead an hour, right? How about somebody just call me and make sure i"m up before church tomorrow, okay?

Another UK tune I've been listening to lately under the fold: more...

Posted by: Gabriel Malor at 05:11 PM | Comments (134)
Post contains 112 words, total size 1 kb.

Perfidy! Lies and scum and bad faith and treachery and deceit! The false, tricksy, faithless KNAVES! DEMOCRATS!

Oh, whatever. Like anybody is surprised at another broken promise from Democrats in Congress. Hell, no one is surprised at the kid glove treatment that CNN is putting on it either:

House Democrats appear to be softening their pledge to allow the public 72 hours to review the health care reform package online before a House vote. "We will certainly give as much notice as possible, but I'm not going to say that 72 hours is going to be the litmus test," said Majority Leader Steny Hoyer on Friday.

"I'm a little bit taken aback that now that 72-hour rule has been completely cast aside, since nobody in the House has seen what's in the reconciliation bill," said Rep. Eric Cantor, R-Virginia. Speaker Nancy Pelosi promised earlier this year Democrats would make the final health care bill public at least three days before voting.

Ramming it through. No time to waste. Gosh, what if people actually knew what Congress was doing?

Posted by: Gabriel Malor at 04:26 PM | Comments (107)
Post contains 200 words, total size 1 kb.

Seriously, while CNN and the NYTimes have studiously been avoiding the astroturfed origins of the "Coffee Party", reporter George Bennett has been laying it all out in south Florida paper the Palm Beach Post.

Now, you don't get credit for doing the right thing. But I give George a heckuva pat on the back for his follow-up reporting from the Coffee Party event this afternoon. As my twitter-pal @OneFineJay says, it truly deserves a "Not on the Onion" label for its humor, irony, and overall tone. I give it a B-plus.

This is not an auspicious beginning to a political movement:

Venting about the conservative tea party movement and talking — at times heatedly — about the need for civility in public discourse marked the debut meeting of a local "coffee party" group today.

"Frankly, we are petrified by the tea party and what they stand for and what they're talking about," said Monte Carmel, a retired business executive from West Palm Beach.

"I'm tired of all the misinformation, the cute little labels the fright-wing has thrown on everything," said a man named Russ.

"We have to stop the mantra of no taxes, no taxes, no taxes," said Marcia Halpern of Palm Beach Gardens.

Brownstein, who is white, said "white southerners in this country are going nuts" because of the popularity of black figures like President Obama and Oprah Winfrey. He said he raised the issue because "you have to know who your enemy is."

[...]

Mary Castronuovo of Palm Beach Gardens said she doesn't want the coffee party to be defined by its criticism of the tea party.

"I would be discouraged if this group became just a counter to the tea party," she said. "We can't make them the enemy."

Don't worry, sister. There's already a group counter to the Tea Party: Democrats.

Via Allah.

Posted by: Gabriel Malor at 04:04 PM | Comments (213)
Post contains 324 words, total size 2 kb.

Yes, an empty, open thread. Bring it on.

The British are freakin' weird, but I seem to be listening to a lot of their stuff lately.

more...

Posted by: Gabriel Malor at 03:38 PM | Comments (133)
Post contains 43 words, total size 1 kb.

Two links that don't have anything we didn't already know, but get the "I give it a B-plus" AOSHQ stamp of approval for gratuitous snark.

Have you ever seen the "Paper Recycling" Truck, the "Glass Recycling" Truck, the "Plastic Recycling" Truck, and the "Green Waste" Truck? Or do you just see the same old garbage truck coming for your carefully sorted recyclables?

First, a rant on just how wasteful, in terms of money and man-hours, recycling is. Which isn't to say that some recycling isn't worth it. Just that a lot of the time, all that meticulous sorting isn't really doing a lick of good. Not to mention, those recycling nazis that wander around harassing people for not putting the trash in the right bin.

Second, a follow-up with helpful links to just-the-facts-ma'am news articles on the subject.

Posted by: Gabriel Malor at 08:48 AM | Comments (783)
Post contains 150 words, total size 1 kb.

Three weeks ago, Representative Joe Sestak said that the President had offered him a political appointment if he wouldn't run against Senator Arlen Specter. This should have been a bombshell, but it has gone largely unremarked because the White House is successfully avoiding the issue.

Sestak is sticking by his earlier statement, though he's chosen not to expand on it. The White House's silence on the issue—the Administration is not even denying the charge—is beginning to look like guilt. So what could the President be guilty of? This is not my area of law, but there are a few options:

18 U.S.C. § 211 Acceptance or solicitation to obtain appointive public office

Whoever solicits or receives, either as a political contribution, or for personal emolument, any money or thing of value, in consideration of the promise of support or use of influence in obtaining for any person any appointive office or place under the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both.

Whoever solicits or receives any thing of value in consideration of aiding a person to obtain employment under the United States either by referring his name to an executive department or agency of the United States or by requiring the payment of a fee because such person has secured such employment shall be fined under this title, or imprisoned not more than one year, or both.

The sticking point is whether dropping out of the primary is "any thing of value." Some states define the term. Federal statute does not.

The next one is more likely:

18 U.S.C. § 600. Promise of employment or other benefit for political activity

Whoever, directly or indirectly, promises any employment, position, compensation, contract, appointment, or other benefit, provided for or made possible in whole or in part by any Act of Congress, or any special consideration in obtaining any such benefit, to any person as consideration, favor, or reward for any political activity or for the support of or opposition to any candidate or any political party in connection with any general or special election to any political office, or in connection with any primary election or political convention or caucus held to select candidates for any political office, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both.

That sounds just like what happened here, if Sestak's claim is true. Obama promised an appointment as a consideration for political activity, including support for Arlen Specter, in a primary election.

And then there's the long-shot, which I will clean up a bit because it's a gobbledy-mess. The sticking point here is whether the President can be considered to be "employed in any administrative position." The statute seems aimed at hiring officials:

18 U.S.C. § 595. Interference by administrative employees of Federal, State, or Territorial Governments

Whoever, being a person employed in any administrative position by the United States, or by any department or agency thereof...uses his official authority for the purpose of interfering with, or affecting, the nomination or the election of any candidate for the office of President, Vice President, Presidential elector, Member of the Senate, Member of the House of Representatives, Delegate from the District of Columbia, or Resident Commissioner, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both.

The White House owes us answers. There may be a criminal living in the West Wing.

Posted by: Gabriel Malor at 08:16 AM | Comments (94)
Post contains 591 words, total size 4 kb.

The Department of Commerce just release some new lies to replace the old and stale lies.(PDF doc)

The U.S. Census Bureau announced today that advance estimates of U.S. retail and food services sales for February, adjusted for seasonal variation and holiday and trading-day differences, but not for price changes, were $355.5 billion, an increase of 0.3 percent (±0.5%)* from the previous month and 3.9 percent (±0.5%) above February 2009. Total sales for the December 2009 through February 2010 period were up 4.5 percent (±0.3%) from the same period a year ago. The December 2009 to January 2010 percent change was revised from +0.5 percent (±0.5%)* to +0.1 percent (±0.3%)*.

Posted by: Purple Avenger at 05:27 AM | Comments (139)
Post contains 173 words, total size 2 kb.

A recent convert to the "religion of peace", working on her mission trip I suppose.

Authorities in Ireland are investigating whether a second American woman was involved in an international plot to kill a Swedish cartoonist for mocking the Prophet Muhammad, the Wall Street Journal reported.

Jamie Paulin-Ramirez, a 31-year-old mother from Leadville, Colo., was one of seven people detained in Ireland Tuesday, according to the newspaper.

I don't know why islamo-terrorists would bother with recruiting blondes. That would be a response to our willingness to profile actual terror-suspects. Bringing in blondes before you really need them is an act of desperation.

Also she needs a little work on the hair.

Just sayin. It's not a good look for her.

Posted by: Dave in Texas at 05:27 AM | Comments (75)
Post contains 124 words, total size 1 kb.