The latest video in my popular "Let's Make Lefty Heads Explode" series with near interchangeable clips of Obama and Bush talking about the threat of nuclear terrorism. Meet the new boss, moonbats: more...

Posted by: Open Blogger at 01:32 PM | Comments (54)
Post contains 129 words, total size 1 kb.

Obama has been pretty clear about his desire to improve relations with Syria. He appointed an ambassador, which Bush had refused to do for a number of years, with the express idea of wooing Syria away from Iran and Hezbollah.

Baby Assad is unimpressed.

Syria has transferred long-range Scud missiles to the Lebanese Shiite militant group Hezbollah, Israeli and U.S. officials alleged, in a move that threatens to alter the Middle East's military balance and sets back a major diplomatic outreach effort to Damascus by the Obama administration.

...

The Scuds are believed to have a range of more than 435 miles—placing Jerusalem, Tel Aviv and Israel's nuclear installations all within range of Hezbollah's military forces. During a monthlong war with Israel in 2006, Hezbollah used rockets with ranges of 20 to 60 miles.

Israeli officials called Scud missiles "game-changing" armaments that mark a new escalation in the Mideast conflict. They alleged that Mr. Assad is increasingly linking Syria's military command with those of Hezbollah and Iran

...

A senior U.S. official involved in Mideast policy said Washington was uncertain why Mr. Assad would escalate tensions with Israel. But in recent months, Israeli and Syrian officials have publicly charged each other with preparing for war. The U.S. official said Syria's arms transfer could have been meant as a form of deterrence.

...
White House supporters replied that the U.S. needs close engagement with Syria all the more because of provocations like the Scud surprise, in order to be better placed to sway Syria.

"If anything, we need (an ambassador) in Damascus full time just to ensure that reality gets its day in court now and then," a senior administration official said.

Well, I'm sure our new ambassador, who was approved by the Senate Foreign Affairs committee today, will give Dr. Assad the same kind of dressing down Prime Minister Netanyahu received from Secretary of State Clinton and Vice President Biden.

And don't worry, Sen. John Kerry says Syria is committed to peace. Uh huh.

I love how the unnamed administration official idly wonders if maybe this move is defensive in nature. Damn Jews always threatening terrorists!

Back in the real world, why would Assad to this? Well, let's take a quick stroll around the neighborhood...Obama can't wait to get out of Iraq and has shown zero interest in changing Iran's political structure or dealing with their nuclear program. The only things he's shown real interest in is snuggling up to tyrants and slapping Israel around as much as possible.

Assad on the other hand is in bed with Iran and their assorted terror groups.

It's pretty clear that Iran looks at Israel as the only real threat to their nuclear ambitions, so they had their under-boss in Damascus ship some weapons to the foot soldiers in the field.

The message from the home office in Iran? "Attack us and guess what you're going to be facing 10 minutes later."

It's pretty clear that not only won't Assad pay a price for doing this with his new found friend in the White House but he will probably receive all sorts of new goodies. It will be interesting to see how long it takes for Obama to lift the sanctions on Syria or exert pressure on Israel to deal with Syria on the Golan Heights or other bilateral matters. In exchange Syria will no doubt deliver some nebulous promises of cooperation and good behavior.

Thanks to Obama's super awesome powers of diplomacy, thugs can smell America's weakening resolve. Now we see what that translates to on the ground... Israel has a new military threat to factor into their Iranian calculations and they have confirmation that Obama's willingness deep held desire to put daylight between Israel and the US is emboldening mid-level players like Syria against them.

It's almost as if a weak America invites not cooperation but more aggressive behavior form thug nations. Who knew?

Posted by: DrewM at 01:26 PM | Comments (91)
Post contains 671 words, total size 5 kb.

Is this significant? Could be. Might indicate he isn't planning on running in 2012 as he likes raking in the Fox cash more than remaining in his "home turf". Might mean he is running because he wants to claim a more electorally important/delegate rich home state. Could mean neither option.

I don't care, really. I just wanted to type that headline.

Posted by: Jack M. at 12:47 PM | Comments (96)
Post contains 69 words, total size 1 kb.

Just for the election season, mind, but there's no indication that putting this stuff on the back burner now is going to help them in November.

First, Claire McCaskill says that card-check isn't going to come back this year and she seems to realize that Democrat policies are in trouble:

"It has not come up, and believe me: If card-check, the way it was drafted, was going to come up, it probably would have come up early in 2009, as opposed to now."

Yesterday, Harry Reid noted that comprehensive immigration reform isn't a priority either.

Seven months between now and the election. Will the memory of Dem overreaching fade to soon?

Posted by: Gabriel Malor at 12:19 PM | Comments (86)
Post contains 123 words, total size 1 kb.

Of course, it's all for the children. And by "children" what they really mean is bloated teacher salaries, pension and health care plans.

Meh, close enough for government work.

The Senate's leading Democrat on education issues proposed a $23 billion bailout Wednesday to help public schools across the country avert widespread layoffs, a sequel to the economic stimulus law that has propped up teetering state budgets for the past year.

The Obama administration immediately expressed support for an education jobs bill to help states through fiscal crisis, hoping to build momentum for the proposal from Sen. Tom Harkin (D-Iowa).

In an appropriations hearing on Capitol Hill, Harkin noted that layoffs of teachers and other school personnel could exceed 100,000 before the next school year starts. The budget axe is falling in school systems from Prince George's County to Los Angeles, prompting an array of education groups to mobilize for help.

"We must act soon," Harkin said. "This is not something we can fix in August. We have to fix it now." Harkin is chairman of the Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions and chairman of the appropriations subcommittee on education.

The Democratic-led House late last year approved a measure of similar scope to help save education jobs, but it stalled in the Senate. Whether Harkin's proposal will gain traction remains to be seen. Senate Republicans, who have opposed the Democratic majority on most spending programs, can seek to block legislation through filibuster.

Education Secretary Arne Duncan seconded Harkin's assessment of the gravity of the situation facing schools. He estimated that schools face layoffs in the range of 100,000 to 300,000.

Of course the Repbulicans are shouting bloody murder about this. Well, er, not so much it turns out.

Sen. Richard C. Shelby (R-Ala.) said after the hearing that he was considering Harkin's proposal. "We cannot get ahead by underfunding education," he said.

Damn northeast RINOs. Wait a second...

A couple of things,

Kirsten Gillibrand must feel like a real cheap date only asking for $1 billion for grocery stores. What's the difference between a senior senator and a freshman? Apparently $22 billion.

The federal government doesn't actually have any money. It's broke and living on borrowing. It's in no position to bail anyone out.

People may lose their jobs? Those left behind might have to contribute to more to their own pension and health care? Welcome to the world everyone else is living in. There's no reason teachers and other government hacks should be immune for the realities of the world.

Well, there's one reason...Democrats need union voters to turn out this November if they are to have any hope of slowing down the building Republican tsunami. If they have to spend our money or the money of the next 3 or 4 generations to do it, well, that's no skin of their nose.

Posted by: DrewM at 11:06 AM | Comments (199)
Post contains 493 words, total size 3 kb.

You probably noticed my output has declined to almost nothing. I did, too.

I think I just need to take a week off to recharge. Just after ObamaCare passed I got a bad case of burnout, writer's block, and a little depression.

So, I'm thinking I just need to step away from the blog through the weekend and get my mojo back. Instead of doing this thing where I'm putting up weaksauce stuff and just waiting for the weekend.

Sorry for the weak performance the past several weeks. I'll get my head on straight.

Posted by: Ace at 10:41 AM | Comments (304)
Post contains 98 words, total size 1 kb.

Michelle's got it:

Democrat Chief Inquisitor Henry Waxman has retreated from his attempt to intimidate companies who dare speak out about the costs and consequences of Obamacare.

His April 21 witch hunt session has been cancelled, according to left-wingers. (Update: Fox also reporting same.)

Someone must have told him that publicly-traded businesses are required to publicize when they take a charge against earnings. With ObamaCare trending ever more unpopular, he must have realized that chastising CEOs for complying with the law would only make Democrats look more out of step with America.

Posted by: Gabriel Malor at 09:47 AM | Comments (102)
Post contains 106 words, total size 1 kb.

This Dana Milbank piece is pretty revealing.

...Even the Chinese president, Hu Jintao, was more talkative with the press than Obama. Michelle Jamrisko, with Japan's Kyodo News, noted in her pool report that Hu, at his session with Obama, spoke to the Chinese media in Chinese, while Obama limited himself mostly to "say hello to the cameras" and "thank you everybody."

Obama's official schedule for Tuesday would have pleased China's Central Committee. Excerpts: "The President will attend the Heads of Delegation working lunch. This lunch is closed press. . . . The President will meet with Prime Minster Erdogan of Turkey. This meeting is closed press. . . . The President will attend Plenary Session II of the Nuclear Security Summit. This session is closed press."...

Occam's razor suggests the simple answer for why Obama has been stiff arming and ducking the press with increasing frequency -- they served their purpose as "useful idiots" and he no longer needs them now that he realizes he's going to be a 1-term president. FWIW, this is textbook NPD behavior. Narcissists use people and discard them like used condoms when they're no longer useful.

To be sure, there's still legions of media out there eagerly gobbling that delicious strawberry flavored O-knob, but the realization they were played like a Steinway is slowly dawning on some and that trend can only increase.

Right now, most of them are like a wife who found a receipt from a cheap motel across town in her husband's jacket pocket and really want to believe it was just because he was too tired to drive home after work that day he claimed he had to work late. Most are still in denial, but this will change.

Initially of course, all these "press access issues" will be blamed on his primary handlers, Axelrod and Emanuel, and Obama might even fire them as a result to buy some time -- everyone is expendable to a narcissist. Everyone.

As time goes on, and the same issues keep occurring with the replacements, the media will find it harder and harder to maintain their stock excuses for Obama's behavior. It might take well into year 3 before this final realization happens.

Posted by: Purple Avenger at 09:39 AM | Comments (117)
Post contains 443 words, total size 3 kb.

President Obama's recent pronouncements on the gays-in-the-military policy put the Department of Justice in a tight spot. DOJ is defending Don't Ask, Don't Tell in the courts right now, in keeping with its long tradition of defending all laws so long as a reasonable argument can be made as to their constitutionality, regardless of who is in the White House.

Log Cabin Republicans are the plaintiffs in one of those cases and have forced DOJ to explicitly reject Obama's statements. DOJ had resisted making a fast and sure statement, and continues to object since its attempt to get an interlocutory appeal failed, but finally had to comply when the judge ordered them to make a "yes or no" answer.

Here is DOJ's response (PDF). It's short, but I've pulled out the most relevant bits:

The Court's Order has placed Defendants in an untenable position. Counsel in this litigation represents the United States. However, the Executive and Legislative Branches have yet to express a unified position on the subject matter of Plaintiff's RFAs. For these reasons, it is Defendant's position that providing a single-word, unqualified answer in response would be inaccurate, incomplete, and inconsistent with the mandatory provisions of Rule 36(a)(4).

The President of the United States, who formulates the policy of the Executive Branch, has stated, including in his State of the Union Address on January 27, 2010, that 10 U.S.C. § 654, the statute enacting "Don’t Ask Don’t Tell" ("DADT"), should be repealed. The President has further said that DADT does not contribute to, and indeed weakens our national security, and he has stated that "[w]e cannot afford to cut from our ranks people with the critical skills we need to fight any more than we can afford – for our military’s integrity – to force those willing to do so into careers encumbered and compromised by having to live a lie."

The Court's order does not permit the United States to provide an answer that, in good faith, "specif[ies] the part admitted and qualif[ies] or den[ies] the rest," Fed. R. Civ. Proc. 36(a)(4), in view of the disagreement bewteen the Executive Branch's view as articulated in 2010 and Congress' view as articulated in its 1993 enactment of [DADT].

Given that disagreement, the United States has no choice but to deny, for the purposes of this litigation, the requests for admission noted below, while recognizing that those denials do not reflect the positions articulated by the President.

3. Admit that DADT does not contribute to our national security.

Response: Deny.

4. Admit that DADT weakens our national security.

Response: Deny.

5. Admit that discharging members pursuant to DADT weakens our national security.

Response: Deny.

In short, DOJ just called Obama a liar.

Posted by: Gabriel Malor at 09:36 AM | Comments (22)
Post contains 463 words, total size 3 kb.

Um. really?

A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey of likely voters finds Obama with 42% support and Paul with 41% of the vote. Eleven percent (11%) prefer some other candidate, and six percent (6%) are undecided.

Ask the Political Class, though, and itÂ’s a blowout. While 58% of Mainstream voters favor Paul, 95% of the Political Class vote for Obama.

But Republican voters also have decidedly mixed feelings about Paul, who has been an outspoken critic of the party establishment.

Obama earns 79% support from Democrats, but Paul gets just 66% of GOP votes. Voters not affiliated with either major party give Paul a 47% to 28% edge over the president.

Paul, a anti-big government libertarian who engenders unusually strong feelings among his supporters, was an unsuccessful candidate for the Republican presidential nomination in 2008. But he continues to have a solid following, especially in the growing Tea Party movement.

Drudge was teasing this but I thought it was going to be some wacky polling group we'd never heard of.

I imagine this is just an Anybody but Obama thing that simply has Paul's name in the "anybody" slot. I mean, if I got a call asking, "In a match up between Ron Paul and Barack Obama, who would you vote for?" I guess I'd say Paul. But even knowing I'd never face that in reality, I'd shower for awhile. A long time actually.

I don't get why Rasmussen chose to poll Paul in that slot. There's just no one in the world who honestly believes this is even within the realm of possibility which will make this poll and other ones he releases easier to dismiss.

For some context, Michael Barone explains why Rasumussen polls tend to be more Republican friendly.

Related: You know those billboards featuring George W. Bush asking "Miss me yet?" Seems the answer is, "yeah, actually we do".

Posted by: DrewM at 08:18 AM | Comments (183)
Post contains 332 words, total size 2 kb.