Game on.

The House Oversight and Government Reform Committee has scheduled a vote for next week to consider holding Attorney General Eric Holder in contempt of Congress over the controversial Fast and Furious gun-tracking operation.

Committee Chairman Darrell Issa, R-Calif., released a 64-page memo in early May outlining the case for holding the attorney general in contempt. The chairman based his argument around Holder's failure to respond to an October 2011 subpoena for internal Justice Department documents on the operation.

The committee's vote for contempt is scheduled for June 20.

Speaker Boehner tried to work out a deal to avoid this (some think because of a worry about a backlash over going after the first black Attorney General) but "Justice" didn't budge.

Will there be cries of "Racism"? Sure there always are. And it will likely help Obama on the margins with parts of his base.

On the other hand, being tough on Obama over Fast and Furious will energize parts of the GOP base as well. We will have one other thing going for us....we're in the right trying to get to the truth about how US law enforcement agents and hundreds of Mexicans were killed by the reckless and illegal acts of this administration.

Posted by: DrewM at 07:52 AM | Comments (29)
Post contains 222 words, total size 2 kb.

I am so sick and tired of this garbage.

Former Florida Governor Jeb Bush said today that both Ronald Reagan and his father George H. W. Bush would have had a difficult time getting nominated by today's ultra-conservative Republican Party.

"Ronald Reagan would have, based on his record of finding accommodation, finding some degree of common ground, as would my dad — they would have a hard time if you define the Republican party — and I don’t — as having an orthodoxy that doesn’t allow for disagreement, doesn’t allow for finding some common ground," Bush said, adding that he views the hyper-partisan moment as "temporary."

"Back to my dad’s time and Ronald Reagan’s time – they got a lot of stuff done with a lot of bipartisan support," he said. Reagan "would be criticized for doing the things that he did."

Bush called the present partisan climate "disturbing."

Before I rip into this steaming pile of nonsense I will note Bush also went after Obama and the Democrats for their partisanship as well. Some may say that shows he's an honest critic, I maintain it's a cop out and ass covering.

There are two big problems with this standard critique of "today's GOP".

First, it ignores a simple reality...the Democrats had control of the White House, The House of Representatives and a filibuster proof majority in the Senate. Voters could have very well kept that intact during the 2010 mid-terms. Instead, they gave control of the House to the GOP and Republicans made substantial gains in the Senate.

How exactly is the message of that kind of massive power switch...compromise with Obama? If voters wanted what Obama was selling, they would have kept his power base intact. That they didn't may annoy Obama and Jeb Bush but elections can be darn inconvenient.

Second, the GOP in Congress isn't nearly as confrontational and unyielding as liberals like to pretend. You might recall we had to brow beat the GOP into keeping their pledge to cut $100 billion in spending after taking control of the House.

And almost two years later, they still don't really get it.

The Republican-led House voted Wednesday to maintain billions of dollars in planned 2013 spending by the departments of Energy and Interior and related agencies.

Members considered several amendments to the Energy and Water spending bill, H.R. 5325, in Wednesday afternoon votes, but continued to turn away GOP proposals to pare the bill down further. Several Republicans have complained for the past few days that the bill spends $87.5 million more than the current funding level — the entire bill tips the fiscal scale at $32.1 billion for the year.

The most dramatic proposal to cut spending came from Rep. Mick Mulvaney (R-S.C.), who proposed a $3.1 billion cut to all accounts other than those related to national security and defense. But his proposal was turned away in a 125-293 vote.

I suppose we could try a grand deal where we raise taxes now for spending cuts that Democrats promise to deliver later. We should ask Jeb's dad how that would work out politically and policy wise.

And as John E. pointed out...the GOP is so extreme our last two nominees have been John McCain and Mitt Romney. Fell the severe conservatism!

The theme of this election should be "Finish the job"....get rid of Obama and get the most conservative Congress possible because there's still plenty of deadweight to be trimmed there too.

One added thought: No, Ronald Reagan could not win the GOP nomination today but not for the reason the "GOP is so extreme" crowd thinks. The fact is, he'd never win two terms as Governor in California because the Democrats in that state have become so liberal they'd never elect him. Without that on his resume, I doubt he'd have won the presidency.

Posted by: DrewM at 04:53 AM | Comments (565)
Post contains 665 words, total size 4 kb.

Last week, fresh off the awful jobs report, with bad fundraising numbers just about to be released, and while President Clinton rushed around the country "helping," Obama campaign manager Jim Messina sent a special video message to Obama's supporters to reassure them that everything was going according to plan. Messina insisted that the campaign always expected the race to look so bad for Obama.

Yesterday, David Axelrod continued this desperate pleading on the morning shows. Axelrod claimed that Obama's awful week, capped by the President's idiotic and out-of-touch claim that the private sector is "doing fine," "will be of little consequence." Not even the MBM is buying that:

Taken together, the beginning of June 2012 may be remembered as a time period that shook the pillars of the Obama reelection effort. If nothing else, itÂ’s shown the 2012 landscape to be so different from 2008 as to make assumptions based on four years ago seem worthless.

The Democratic base, while still solidly behind Obama, has shown signs of atrophy, as the failed recall of Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker displays. Former President Bill ClintonÂ’s comments on RomneyÂ’s business record and how to handle expiring tax cuts, meanwhile, show fraying of party unity in a way Democrats find all too familiar.

On the other side, the Republican Party and its high-powered allies have clearly improved in terms of organization and focus since 2008 and even 2010. The Walker victory was a psychological boost, and it gave deep-pocketed GOP allies a chance to flex their still-flush wallets.

Plus, the speed and breadth with which Republicans pounced on Obama’s “doing fine” comments show a marked improvement on the communications front. Financially, operationally, and strategically, Obama’s Chicago team is clearly facing a formidable match in Romney’s team in Boston.

Formidable. I like the sound of that.

Posted by: Gabriel Malor at 03:40 AM | Comments (151)
Post contains 313 words, total size 2 kb.

Happy Monday.

While you were sleeping, Obama's Secretary of Commerce, John Bryson, was cited for felony hit-and-run for fleeing after hitting two cars in the San Gabriel Valley. He was later found unconscious in his car. According to reports, neither alcohol nor drugs played a role.

Here's a fairly good analysis of the possible outcomes in the Obamacare case and the U.S. v. AZ case. Oh, BTW, the Supreme Court will be handing down decisions in at least one case this morning at 10.

Oh, and Republicans are starting to believe that maybe this Romney guy is serious about kicking Obama out of office after all.

Hey, and Obama's support among Jewish voters has dropped 10 points since 2008.

Posted by: Gabriel Malor at 02:47 AM | Comments (174)
Post contains 127 words, total size 1 kb.

And we're off on a happy new week with the possibility of an improved new new comment thingy coming soon. 

The Happiness Equation

To follow up on what Ace talked about on Saturday here's a video where Dennis Prager breaks down what causes unhappiness and how you can avoid it. It's a short video (4.5 min) and well worth watching.

And here's a video where he discusses why happiness is a moral obligation we have to others. If you've ever been married to or the child of an unhappy person, you know what a lifeforce-sapping toll it takes on other people's lives.

These videos are all part of Prager University where he and others have attempted to distill key ideas and wisdom from their lives into pithy 5 minute videos.

Posted by: Maetenloch at 06:11 PM | Comments (665)
Post contains 809 words, total size 15 kb.

Anne Surrock's killer question (think about it-- how can Warren possibly answer it) gets blocked out by security, but someone's got to get her face-to-face and ask it.

The key is the innocence of it, like you're really talking to a Woman of Color and just asking her the positive, easy question if she's a good role model for Women of Color.

Just asking it without snark or sarcasm. Just as if a reporter would ask it, sweetly, of Michelle Obama.

Because Elizabeth Warren can't answer the question.

(Well, okay, now that she's prepared, I guess she could say "I guess I might be a role model for women, generally." Damnit, now that she's tipped off, she'll work on that response.

Argh!

Still, the question is effing hilarious.

I guess the follow-up, if she parries the first asking, would be, "Yes, but do you consider yourself a role model for women of color, like yourself?")

Whoopsie Daisy! Um, link fixed. The question to be asked is not Steel Panther's "It Won't S*** Itself."

Posted by: Ace at 04:36 PM | Comments (194)
Post contains 219 words, total size 1 kb.

At Nice Deb, an Romney ad (from Obama's Not Working) hammering Obama on the point.

Yesterday I asserted, and then, with help from readers, proved that this claim -- that the private sector is "doing fine" -- is no slip of the tongue, but an article of faith among liberals, including Harry Reid (making the exact same claim last October, while supporting the White House's "Jobs Bill") and Paul Krugman (continuing to insist, with the president, that the key to prosperity is more spending on government bureaucrats, government worker benefits, and more government, period).

Further proof that this is no "misstatement," but an ill-advised statement as to the president's actual belief, comes via his top political strategist, who three times refuses to say he disagrees with the statement. He simply will not answer; he keeps pushing other talking points, but will express neither agreement nor disagreement with the statement "the private sector is doing fine."

Conclusion: They believe this, and do not wish to deny it; they want to encourage people to believe this, and encourage people like Krugman to keep trying to convince a skeptical public of this.

However, they know they cannot say it. So they will continue playing this game.

Why can't they say it? Because Democratic pollster Stanley Greenberg has found that focus groups react very, very poorly when this talking point is offered to them.

One of the PresidentÂ’s weakest operative frameworks [in the most recent State of the Union] highlights recent progress on job creation. This message is potentially dangerous for Democrats. During the State of the Union, we watched the dial lines go flat, with even Democrats peaking below 70 when the President highlighted recent jobs numbers.

In post-speech focus groups, respondents explained why this part of the speech did not resonate for them: first, and most importantly, they have not seen these jobs or felt the effects of job creation. But they are also deeply concerned that these jobs are not permanent, that these new jobs belie much deeper structural problems in the economy, and that the new jobs that have been created are far inferior to the more stable, full-time, well-paying middle class jobs that have been lost over the last decade....

Many told us that these statistics were meaningless because they are still just num- bers to them. One Republican-leaning participant was incredulous: “I don’t see the kind of jobs numbers that I hear about from him.”

Greenberg notes that a couple of messages -- one about "fairness," another one making promises to the middle class -- were fairly well received by focus groups.

But another message -- that "America is back" -- did not fare nearly so well.

In the State of the Union address, President Obama began using a new framework, one that claims that “America is back” in the world. During the speech, the President’s assertion that “America is back” produced an overall flat response across the dials with independents and Republicans responding negatively.

We tested a message that says:

America is back. Anyone who tells you that America is in decline or that our influence has waned doesnÂ’t know what theyÂ’re talking about. The United States is back to leading the world in innovation, smart manufacturing, and creating the new technologies of tomorrow. After 10 years of war and occupation, AmericaÂ’s reputation has been re- stored. We are a beacon again for democracies and aspiring democracies.

Claiming that “America is back” is by far the weakest operative message and produces disastrous results. It is weaker than even the weakest Republican message and is 10 points weaker in intensity than either Republican message. Overall, less than a third of all voters said this message makes them more likely to support the President and a third said this message made them less likely to support Barack Obama. Alarmingly, this message barely receives majority support among self-identified Democrats—and even less support among all other groups....

"The private sector is doing fine" is not as forward-leaning as "America is back," but both messages are essentially the same: The economy is fixed; it's growing; people are getting back to work.

This simply does not track with people's experiences.

While it is true that about half of the private sector jobs lost have been regained, about half have not, and this "recovery" is now in its third (alleged) year -- we actually have not had a "recovery" yet, in which, over the course of a year or so, almost all jobs lost are gained back, and after which the economy enters a true expansion above previous levels.

"Doing fine" will be a sentiment the public believes when almost all private sector jobs have been regained, and/or the country enters a true recover period, adding back lost jobs a strong clip, a pace strong enough to suggest the recession (really depression) is actually over, or will soon be over in half year or so.

We're simply not there. This is a depression, not a recession, and even during the Great Depression there were in fact periods of job growth-- it wasn't always a period of job loss. What made the Great Depression greatly depressing was that every time the economy seemed to be getting better, it would turn back down a half a year later.

Despite periods of optimism and some signs of growth -- green shoots, as it were -- the economy did not recover from the Great Depression until after America's entry into World War Two.

I don't exactly blame Obama for sounding optimistic notes, but if the economy is in depression, as it seems to be, these optimistic notes are false notes, and I think the public senses that.

The private sector will be doing fine when it's adding 350,000 jobs per month. 69,000 or 77,000 or even 150,000 (which merely matches the pace of population expansion) is not "doing fine." That's losing ground, not gaining it.

With his term close to ending, Obama still has not grappled with the essential fact of the situation, and is still offering band-aid prescriptions -- political prescriptions, not real ones -- to a large and ongoing problem. And to the extent he offers any ideas at all, it's more of the same -- more money for Democratic Client groups.

He was elected to fix a problem, but all he seems to do is attempt to bribe relatively small, but politically crucial, subsets of the American public to vote for him and canvass for him.

more...

Posted by: Ace at 01:18 PM | Comments (450)
Post contains 1097 words, total size 7 kb.

This.

Jindal concluded that Obama is “the most liberal, most incompetent president in the White House since Jimmy Carter.”

Jindal is saying the right things, but leaving out the other important fact. It's true Obama is incompetent. It's also true that he's purposeful, that while his execution is clumsy because he's a fool, his results are a clear indication of his intentions. He made the mistake (as has been noted often of liberals) of saying exactly what he believes (the private sector is doing just fine) instead of buttering it up with pretty words.

Good stuff. I can't wait for November.

Posted by: Dave in Texas at 09:05 AM | Comments (289)
Post contains 109 words, total size 1 kb.

This morning, I diced up an habanero pepper for salsa, and a half hour later, I absentmindedly rubbed my left eye. Note to self: Always Wash Your Hands.

And for those of you who are done with the book thread, he's one with nothing in it. And what better picture to accompany such a null thread than one of Captain Zero himself?

Posted by: Open Blogger at 08:55 AM | Comments (236)
Post contains 78 words, total size 1 kb.

Walker Wins, Gives Gracious Victory Speech

Tap.. tap.. is this thing on?

I feel like a little kid whose parents have just had a big fight. I just want it to stop and for everything be back to normal, the way it was before.

So good morning, morons and moronettes, I hope it's OK to do this - it's the Sunday Morning AoSHQ Book Thread once again.

As you all can see from the above photograph, the events of the last couple of days on this blog have not diminished the monster, uh, engorgement given me by the results of the Wisconsin recall election.

One of the reasons it has lasted so long is that I keep watching this one video. If my enthusiasm starts to flag, even for one minute, I do a page fresh and then I find myself standing at attention once again. I think you've all seen this video but it won't hurt to see it again, and you can trust me on that. Ladies and gentlemen, I give you the new star of the conservative blogosphere, Weepy Cheese Boy:
more...

Posted by: Open Blogger at 07:10 AM | Comments (157)
Post contains 514 words, total size 4 kb.