Here, you are urged and encouraged to run your mouths about something important.

Wednesday, September 30, 2009


Here is a video of Jack Kelly of the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, who claims to have two friends, one of whom is close with French president Sarkozy. Sarkozy is reportedly disgusted with Obama's leadership, calling him "incredibly naive" and "grossly egotistical".

Take note of how Kelly explains the relationship between Obama's naivete' and arrogance, referring to Sarkozy's sentiment that the latter is so strong that the former doesn't have a chance to be realized.

If the leader of France smacking an American president in the face with words like that doesn't "dent" Obama's naivete, there's likely not much else that will.

Something else to look for. As Kelly speaks, you can almost see the realization of what he's saying sinking in with him personally as well.



Even the far left needs to own up to this one. The Obama administration's stance on restoring Honduran president Manuel Zelaya is aging like a sweaty sock. The longer Roberto Micheletti holds his ground, the more Zelaya exposes himself for who he is.

On June 28th, he was removed from office and even the CONGRESSIONAL LAW LIBRARY has determined their actions to be completely constitutional, except for deporting Zelaya - a move that could arguably have been an extension of kindness by Micheletti, who otherwise would have had to arrest Zelaya and charge him with treason.

As Zelaya remains holed up in the Brazilian embassy, he has made outrageous claims that Israeli mercenaries are plotting to assassinate him and that he is being poisoned with radiation. While neither Hillary nor Obama will admit it, they've both gotta be rolling their eyes inside a face palm.

To her credit, Greta has picked up on this story in recent weeks. Here she is talking with Newt about the situation in Honduras:

Leaders in the United States needing a lesson in courage (there are many) should look to Roberto Micheletti because he provides it in spades. With each passing day, he seems to impress while Zelaya looks increasingly like someone in need of medication.

For a microcosm of what I'm talking about, look no further than the current situation. Initially, Zelaya appeared to have done an end run around Micheletti by popping up inside the Brazilian embassy. Micheletti's hard line even then coupled with Zelaya's nutty words and actions have actually served to turn up the heat on Brazilian leadership from within.

REUTERS is reporting that the longer Zelaya is in Brazil's Honduran embassy, the more domestic support Brazil seems to be losing.
Brazil's government is facing growing criticism at home over its handling of the Honduran crisis as senior lawmakers accuse it of allowing the ousted president to use its embassy as a political platform.

Manuel Zelaya, who was toppled as Honduran president by a coup on June 28, has set up camp in the Brazilian embassy with dozens of supporters and has given numerous interviews to foreign and domestic media.
That last part, about him giving numerous interviews might be part of the problem. On Thursday, the 24th, Zelaya caused many to wonder if his white cowboy hat is made of tin foil when he made the outrageous claims about Israeli mercenaries going after him in an interview with the MIAMI HERALD.

h/t to GP for the Newt video.

Tuesday, September 29, 2009


UPDATE at 9:42am CT on 9/30/09: Ok, after playing with the speed and pitch of the audio of these folks responding to the call for prayer, I am now convinced that Barack Obama's name was NOT being invoked and I think it would demonstrate a strong bias to believe otherwise. I regret posting this video on my site in the context of the original post. Even if there is a debate over what was said, the benefit of the doubt must be extended to those involved in this case, in my view. I have concluded that doing otherwise or saying that it's difficult to tell what the people were saying is nothing more than a face-saving measure and I will not go there.

UPDATE at 3:42pm CT on 9/29/09: There is now some debate about whether the crowd is saying, "GOD", "Obama", or a mix of both. In either case, it's at best hypocritical for a group of Community Organizers, including Acorn, to take taxpayer dollars and pray over a politically and ideologically divisive issue in a public place. Watch again and judge for yourselves.


Andrew Breitbart has just posted a video from December of 2008 at a Gamaliel Foundation meeting. The Gamaliel Foundation is a group that was started by a few of Alinsky's students. Also note the attire of the two individuals who are leading the prayers.

Be sure to listen for the following recitations being repeated:

"Hear our cry Obama" and "Deliver us Obama".

This makes the thrill running up Chris Matthews' leg look like a lone goose bump.

CLICK HERE and HERE to see how closely linked Obama is to the Gamaliel Foundation.



What else are we left to conclude after watching this clip of Barack in 2008 while in Afghanistan during an interview for Bob Schieffer's "Face the Nation"? The words Obama used to describe the situation there were "Precarious and Urgent". His solution at the time? More troops. His solution now? Voting "present".

If, as Obama said, that Afghanistan needed to be "our central focus" and "the central front" in the battle against terrorism, why is he not listening to his Commanding General there, Stanley McChrystal? On a related note, if Obama believed what he said in the interview below in 2008, how does he justify only talking to McChrystal one time since he was inaugurated (claim by McChrystal)?

Maybe the administration's claim that the phrase "war on terror" not be used anymore was a pre-emptive strike against the notion of needing more troops. No war on terror = no need for more troops, right?

"You Lie!"
- Joe Wilson, 9/9/09

Here is McChrystal discussing how many times he and Obama have spoken, which can be counted on a hand missing four fingers:

Watch CBS News Videos Online


Monday, September 28, 2009


As Drudge reported this morning, this news report was only aired once. Why? Because it was unflattering to the president's home town of Chicago. What does it say about the state of things when the battle for the Olympics comes down to Chicago or Rio and Chicagoans want them to take place in Rio? That'd almost be like Bears fans rooting for the Packers at Soldier Field.

So what's the deal? This morning, Drudge reported:
A local TV station that reported on Chicagoans NOT wanting the Olympics has been told NOT to run the report again, insiders tell the DRUDGE REPORT!

The Chicago Olympic Committee told FOX Chicago that its broadcast "would harm Chicago's chances" to be awarded the games.

The station's news director ordered staff to hold fire after the report aired once last Thursday morning, claims a source.

Chicago, Madrid, Tokyo and Rio are mounting strong bids for the honor to host in 2016.
The International Olympic Committee makes its decision on Friday. President Obama will lead the in-person push.
So who on earth would tell the local television station, WFLD not to air this report? Well, MICHELLE MALKIN provides some interesting context:
The president himself will now join cronies Valerie Jarrett and Michelle Obama to personally lobby in Copenhagen for Chicago’s bid.

On Tuesday, there will be a No Chicago Games protest reflecting the 84 percent opposition to the Olympics boondoggle.

Will they be accused of being an “angry mob,” too?
Hmmmmm.. So why would the citizens of Chicago be against the Olympics in their city while Barack and Michelle seem to be all for it? Is this a matter of 'follow the money'?

Malkin's entire piece below the video report...

Link: Chicagoans for Rio

Here is MALKIN'S entire piece.


Uh, pardon me for asking but...........WHAT TOOK SO LONG? On July 24th, Hillary Clinton called Zelaya's actions "reckless" when he crossed the border of Nicaragua into Honduras by foot with his tinfoil cowboy hat and a megaphone.

Last week, Zelaya sneaks into the capital of Honduras (Tegucigalpa) and takes refuge inside the Brazilian embassy. Yes, that was ONE WEEK AGO. Only now is the Obama administration making any kind of statement on Zelaya's antics. It's a shame they waited until after he made the delusional claim that Israeil mercenaries were planning to assassinate him while Israeli operatives were poisoning him with radiation. I guess you can start having visions when you have to sleep on chairs and don't have toothpaste.

Now for the real question. If the Obama administration thought Zelaya was "reckless" in July and that he's "foolish" for his latest stunt, how long will it take them to see the truth - Zelaya was removed from power legally.

REUTERS reported:
The United States blasted ousted Honduran President Manuel Zelaya for his "irresponsible and foolish" return from exile before a settlement was reached in the Central American country's political crisis.

At an emergency meeting of the Organization of American States to discuss the Honduran face-off, Lewis Anselem, the U.S. ambassador to the OAS, also criticized Honduras' de facto government for its "deplorable" action in barring entry of an OAS mission and declaring a state of siege on Sunday.


I love J.C. Watts. In fact, my high regard for him as a person and a politician should exempt me from charges of racism for disagreeing with Obama on practically everything that comes out of his mouth. Watts wrote an Op-ed that appeared in the Las Vegas Review Journal that excoriates Jimmy Carter for making such unsubstantiated and egregious claims.

The first paragraph of Watts' piece is particularly telling and goes right to the heart of the hypocrisy that is so prevalent on the left.
"There is an inherent feeling among many in this country that an African-American should not be president."

That comment comes from former President Jimmy Carter, which is fascinating considering Carter once ran for governor of Georgia proclaiming himself to be a "Lester Maddox Democrat." (Maddox, a former Georgia governor, was an avowed segregationist who opposed integration under the Civil Rights Act.)
Jimmy Carter, who once considered himself to be in the mold of a segregationist, is lecturing conservatives on matters of race?

The last paragraph is good too:
Ironically, I wonder how President Carter would view things if it were President Clarence Thomas proposing tax relief, protection for the unborn, raising the troop levels in Afghanistan or exploring for oil right here in the United States.
The big meaty middle is worth reading too.


Sunday, September 27, 2009


I found this one particularly interesting in light of Bill Clinton's contention that the "Vast Right Wing Conspiracy" that Obama is supposedly facing is nothing like what Bubba had to deal with. Breitbart points out that Obama and Clinton had lunch in New York on the very day(s) that the ACORN video exposing the Brooklyn office was making the rounds.
Does anyone think the president and the former president were unaware that the city in which they were dining was mesmerized by the ACORN scandal - especially since ACORN had bragged that its employees had kicked Mr. O'Keefe and Ms. Giles out of their New York office?
Then, a few paragraphs later.....
No one in the morally superior media world has asked, why did Mr. Obama have lunch with Mr. Clinton that day? So let me take a guess, and it seems like an obvious answer. Mr. Obama, under siege by a video-a-day expose that was exposing the Democratic Party to an avalanche of consequences (ACORN defunded in the House and Senate, ACORN delinked from the census, etc.), needed advice from the last president to navigate through a major political scandal.
If any president has experience in dealing with scandals, it would be #42. Who said Barack lacked good judgment?

The real point of BREITBART'S PIECE is to shed light on former Clinton Chief of Staff and Chairman of Obama's Presidential transition team, John Podesta. Podesta, who heads the Center for American Progress has been tasked with leading an investigation into ACORN, which doesn't seem to be going the way most would expect according to Breitbart:
Since Mr. Podesta was appointed to investigate ACORN, the only thing investigated has been the investigators, Mr. O'Keefe, Ms. Giles and the publisher of the journalism behind it, yours truly.
And for those of you who at times grow weary of the fight....
The left is betting that 2009 is 1998 again and that the media will help them out like last time. Mr. Obama is betting that Mr. Clinton's 1998 strategy and his resources can extricate him from this growing mess. But 2009 has a new set of circumstances, new technologies and new citizen journalists that can now hold the mainstream media in check for its naked partisanship.
Breitbart's point that Podesta is consciously leading the media to make the story about O'Keefe, Giles, and himself is well taken considering that Podesta attended ACORN's 39th anniversary party.

Here is Podesta entering ACORN'S 39th anniversary party this past June. Also in attendance was Chuck Schumer.


Howard Kurtz came off as the defensive anchor and Christoper Andersen as the author having to defend the quotation marks he put in his book, "Barack and Michelle". Interestingly, one of the things that Andersen's book does is help to bolster the claims of writer Jack Cashill, who has been claiming since July, 2008 that Barack Obama had help from Bill Ayers in writing his 1995 book, "Dreams From My Father".

Check out Andersen's interview..

Here's some information on Cashill from SPECIAL GUESTS. Cashill is apparently doing media interviews intending to expound on the findings of Andersen, which definitely do not hurt Cashill's claims.



Count me as being in the camp of those who believe there was a Middle Eastern connection to the Oklahoma City bombing in 1995. Oh, that reminds me. Has anyone seen John Doe #2 lately? You have the extremely thorough and unrefuted evidence of Jayna Davis along with Bill Clinton's words shortly after the bombing as relayed by Oklahoma Governor Frank Keating in which Clinton expressed a strong wish that the bombing not have a Middle Eastern connection.

Notice how closely Timothy McVeigh resembles John Doe #1 and how Terry Nichols looks NOTHING like John Doe #2. Today, we have a story on NEWSMAX about an attorney who requested video tapes under the Freedom of Information Act.
Long-secret security tapes showing the chaos immediately after the 1995 bombing of the Oklahoma City federal building are blank in the minutes before the blast and appear to have been edited, an attorney who obtained the recordings said Sunday.

However, there's a small problem. Apparently all of the cameras ran out of tape moments before the bombing and came back on line moments after the bombing. Talk about bad luck!

"The real story is what's missing," said Jesse Trentadue, a Salt Lake City attorney who obtained the recordings through the federal Freedom of Information Act as part of an unofficial inquiry he is conducting into the April 19, 1995, bombing that killed 168 people and injured hundreds more.
Even the strongest skeptic has got to be scratching his head on this one:
"Four cameras in four different locations going blank at basically the same time on the morning of April 19, 1995. There ain't no such thing as a coincidence," Trentadue said.

He said government officials claim the security cameras did not record the minutes before the bombing because "they had run out of tape" or "the tape was being replaced."

"The interesting thing is they spring back on after 9:02," he said. "The absence of footage from these crucial time intervals is evidence that there is something there that the FBI doesn't want anybody to see."
Four video cameras all go blank at the same time, which just happens to be moments before an explosion that killed 168 people?

My belief is that there is little doubt that JAYNA DAVIS is right, folks.


Bubba does a lot of prognosticating in this clip with David Gregory. Says the Right wing conspiracy isn't as strong as it was when he was president in 1994 but it's just as "virulent". Note the reason he gives (the country is more diverse now than it was then - I wonder if that's a reference to the increase in illegal aliens).

Prognostication of the clip? When asked if he worries if the VRWC can make things as bad for Obama as they did for Clinton Bubba says,

"There's no way they can make it that bad." Aside from "bad" being a subjective term, Bill's making a bold statement while attempting to marginalize all of the town hall protesters.

And then the big Kahuna... "Whatever happens, it'll be manageable for the president."

Bill, have you seen Obama's poll numbers?



New York Times public editor, Clark Hoyt has admitted that his paper was late reporting on the Acorn story of a couple of young aspiring journalists (Hoyt calls them "conservative activists") exposing what very well could be a systemic problem within an organization that Barack Obama has very close ties to.

Was this a contrite act of admission or a forced admission of omission? I thought the fourth paragraph was particularly telling:
for days, as more videos were posted and government authorities rushed to distance themselves from Acorn, The Times stood still. Its slow reflexes — closely following its slow response to a controversy that forced the resignation of Van Jones, a White House adviser — suggested that it has trouble dealing with stories arising from the polemical world of talk radio, cable television and partisan blogs. Some stories, lacking facts, never catch fire. But others do, and a newspaper like The Times needs to be alert to them or wind up looking clueless or, worse, partisan itself.
That's what we call damage control boys and girls. The NYT is worried about looking "partisan". Newsflash: YOU ALREADY ARE.

I would really like to give Hoyt and the Times credit for seeing the light but this strikes as nothing more than a response to something that was so blatantly over-the-top when it comes to Acorn, that even the New York Times couldn't spin it or ignore it.

Ah, then comes the ignorance defense.
Some editors told me they were not immediately aware of the Acorn videos on Fox, YouTube and a new conservative Web site called When the Senate voted to cut off all federal funds to Acorn, there was not a word in the newspaper or on its Web site. When the New York City Council froze all its funding for Acorn and the Brooklyn district attorney opened a criminal investigation, there was still nothing.
I guess the term "immediately" is relative but at best, it can usually only be stretched to mean "same day". The problem here is that if the New York Times is "objective" as they claim, why on earth don't they know about the videos?

Apparently, "immediately" in New York Times speak is one week.
Finally, on Sept. 16, nearly a week after the first video was posted, The Times took note of the controversy, under the headline, “Conservatives Draw Blood From Acorn, Favored Foe.” The article said that conservatives hoped to weaken the Obama administration by attacking its allies and appointees they viewed as leftist. The conservatives thought they had a “winning formula,” the article said, mobilizing people “to dig up dirt,” then trumpeting it on talk radio and television.
Again, damage control and not contrition as Hoyt merely says the political tone "irritated readers". Mr. Hoyt, ever heard of the saying, "where there's smoke, there's fire"?

Anyway, the good news is the extremely biased New York Times was obviously seething about having to write this piece and it was a bit fun watching them have to admit to being inept. The bad news is that it was a "yeah, but" apology without an actual apology.

The fact that Hoyt had to write about it is a victory nonetheless.

Worth reading the ENTIRE PIECE


Yes, even the far-left has to admit that Glenn Beck has come a long way in 14 years. Look no further than this 30 second commercial in which the promo or Y95 actually includes a LIVE monkey (and it's not Beck).

Much is made about the first black president but looking how far the most influential Television personality has come ain't too bad either.


h/t to LITTLE GREEN FOOTBALLS (who apparently doesn't like Beck)


During this morning's show, I reported on a story posted on the NewsBusters website that claimed a certain Capitol Hill switchboard phone number was being used to push Obamacare by playing a recorded message that asks for your support before ringing to a live person.

NEWSBUSTERS has posted a retraction and admitted the mistake. If you decide to listen to the 9/27 program, please dismiss that portion of the show.

Saturday, September 26, 2009


How long before the leftwing whack jobs call this torture? A man walks into a bar at the VFW and orders a beer. He is declined. He then proceeds to the front lawn of the VFW, lowers the American flag, and burns it. What happened next was probably the most effective form of justice that could be levied - PEER ACCOUNTABILITY.

A veteran in the hall tracks down the man a couple days later and duct tapes him to the pole.

Finally some good news.

h/t to GP


You read that one right. There's also a handwritten letter (one simple page) from Chief of staff for the Joint Committee on Taxation, Thomas Barthold, to Sen. John Ensign (R-Nev.)who was seeking clarity on the matter. At issue was whether or not, under Obamacare, the IRS would be able to go after citizens who do not have healthcare coverage.

Made available on Friday the 25th, was a handwritten ONE PAGE note from Barthold to Ensign that confirmed Ensign's inquiry about. This one page says far more than the 1300 pages in HR 3200 in my opinion. Almost makes you wish that every bill passed be no more than one page and handwritten, doesn't it?

CLICK HERE to view an entire pdf, which includes additional notes at bottom of letter.

THE POLITICO reported on Thursday that Barthold had some pretty bold words for Ensign, who was calling this "individual mandate" a tax.
The remarks Thursday from the committee's chief of staff, Thomas Barthold, seems to further weaken President Barack Obama's contention last week that the individual mandate penalty, which could go as high as $1,900, is not a tax increase.

Under questioning from Sen. John Ensign (R-Nev.), Barthold said the IRS would "take you to court and undertake normal collection proceedings."
It would seem to me that if the IRS is going after someone for not paying them, it's a tax. If you talk to the left, to include Obama, the individual mandate is not a tax.

Now, contrast what you know to be true based on Barthold's letter with what Barack Obama said to George Stephanopolous just last week. If you don't have time to watch the entire five-plus minutes, fast forward to the three minute mark for the direct contradiction from Obama, who says the individual mandate is not a tax.

What do you call something that the IRS can throw you into jail and fine you for not paying?

George, can you hand me that dictionary?

h/t to GP for the image of the letter.

Friday, September 25, 2009


You know, if not for the music in this short 21 second clip, I don't believe I'd be so compelled to post it. One of those "watch it over and over and it's still good to watch over and over" clips. Thoroughly enjoyable and worth watching again and again.

Barack Obama's amazingly consistent smile from Eric Spiegelman on Vimeo.

h/t to FAUSTA


Remember, not only is this guy a tinpot dictator and supporter of ousted tinHAT dictator from Honduras, Manuel Zelaya (as is Obama) but he also seems to be aligned with Obama when it comes to Fox News.

The perfect 2 minute microcosm of a leftwing mind. I had no idea that Chavez was so well versed on Saul Alinsky.

Note the stages that take place in this interview.

STAGE 1: Chavez is interested in giving a television reporter an interview while attempting to portray professionalism and graciousness.

STAGE 2: After not liking the question posed by the reporter, which had to do with why Chavez viewed a Holocaust denier like Ahmadinejad as a friend, Chavez aks the reporter where he's from. After hearing, "Fox News", Chavez launches into insult mode and actually quotes Sean Penn, calling people who work for fox, "El stupido".

STAGE 3: When the insults don't intimidate the reporter, who lets said insults fly by, the reporter follows-up with another similar question about Ahmadinejad. Chavez responds by changing the subject and elevating his tone.

STAGE 4: Chavez comes unhinged while getting self-righteous about a subject that had nothing to do with anything the reporter asked.



Who'd have thought that Zelaya would unmask himself to this degree since June 28th, when he was forcibly removed from power? Just think, if current president Roberto Micheletti would have backed down, this kook Zelaya would actually be running a country.

The MIAMI HERALD reports:
It's been 89 days since Manuel Zelaya was booted from power. He's sleeping on chairs, and he claims his throat is sore from toxic gases and "Israeli mercenaries'' are torturing him with high-frequency radiation.

"We are being threatened with death,'' he said in an interview with The Miami Herald, adding that mercenaries were likely to storm the embassy where he has been holed up since Monday and assassinate him.
Micheletti has got to be laughing out loud. In fact, I understand that shortly after it was discovered that Zelaya was inside the Brazilian embassy, loud speakers were placed outside the building. I'm not sure if they're still there but a recording of Micheletti laughing on a continuous loop would be a great addition to the play list.

Somebody needs to check Zelaya's white cowboy hat and see if it's made out of tin! Hillary was close enough when she was shaking his hand. Perhaps she should have checked that out.

Then again, maybe Honduran officials are lying.
Witnesses said that for a short time Tuesday morning, soldiers used a device that looked like a large satellite dish to emit a loud shrill noise.

Honduran police spokesman Orlin Cerrato said he knew nothing of any radiation devices being used against the former president.

"He says there are mercenaries against him? Using some kind of apparatus?'' Cerrato said. ``No, no, no, no. Sincerely: no. The only elements surrounding that embassy are police and military, and they have no such apparatus.''
When Zelaya first arrived in Honduras, it was a source of great concern for many who are in support of Micheletti but with these developments, the only radioactivity that may be inside that embassy is emanating from Zelaya and potentially keeping his supporters away.

With words like the ones coming out of Zelaya's mouth while inside the Brazilian embassy, it's quite possible he may find himself under the Obama bus soon.

Other suggestions for the playlist:
Beatles' White Album
Jewish Folk Songs
Twilight Zone Music
Continual loop of Six Million Dollar man's bionic eye in action.


h/t to DRUDGE

Thursday, September 24, 2009


Kevin Jennings used to be a teacher. He is now Obama's "Safe Schools Czar", charged with keeping schools drug-free. His official title is Director of the Office of Safe and Drug Free Schools. When it comes to protecting children from the dangers of sexual activity, calling Jennings (pictured) liberal might be an understatement.

Jennings' appointment provides a quintessential example of how government departments and positions created with good intentions more often than not, go awry over time. FOX NEWS has a detailed report on Jennings that includes how his department came to be:
The (Office of Safe and Drug Free Schools) was created by the Bush administration in 2002. According to its Web site, one of its primary functions is to "provide financial assistance for drug and violence prevention activities and activities that promote the health and well being of students in elementary and secondary schools, and institutions of higher education."
Jennings' foremost crusade seems to be increasing the amount of homosexual education in public schools as founder of the Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network (GLSEN). Incrementalism seems to be taking place faster than normal these days. An office created in 2002 to protect students primarily from drugs is being headed by a guy who is more interested in another brand of safety.

That leads to the most disturbing revelation about Jennings in the Fox article. Specifically, that Jennings was approached by a male 15 year-old sophomore for counsel about his sexual relationship with an older man:
Another controversy from Jennings' past concerns an account in his 1994 book, "One Teacher In 10," about how, as a teacher, he knew a high school sophomore named Brewster who was "involved" with an "older man":

"Out spilled a story about his involvement with an older man he had met in Boston. I listened, sympathized, and offered advice. He left my office with a smile on his face that I would see every time I saw him on the campus for the next two years, until he graduated."

The account led Diane Lenning, head of the National Education Association's Republican Educators Caucus, to criticize Jennings in 2004 for not alerting school and state authorities about the boy's situation, calling Jennings' failure to do so an "unethical practice."

Jennings threatened to sue Lenning for libel, saying she had no evidence that he knew the student in question was sexually active, or that he failed to report the situation.
Based on Jennings' apparent outrage, one would have to conclude that he knew that not reporting the under aged boy having sex with an older adult male was something egregious or illegal. Otherwise, it would be something to be proud of, right?

Interestingly, Diane Lenning appears to have been vindicated by an audio recording of Jennings that has been captured by a professor at Grove City College in Pennsylvania. Here is a link to the AUDIO RECORDING of Jennings in 2000.

Visit the site of DR. WARREN THROCKMORTON, the professor who posted the audio and get more information about the speech in which Jennings said those things.

Plenty of sick irony in the Fox story but the sickest kind is the allegation that a man who is heading an office that is supposed to protect children failed to do that when presented with evidence that a 15 year-old boy was having sex with an older man.

Way too much sick irony these days for sure.



I was watching this live and if it was fake, Beck has a career waiting for him as a magician. Truly a classic segment. Beck's genius is the use of visual aids and props to illustrate is points. Often, he literally plays out obscure metaphors. Such was the case here.

Getting PETA all fired up provided the cherry on top. By playing out the "live frog in boiling water" metaphor, Beck was trying to demonstrate that the election of Barack Obama has been more like throwing the American people into a pot of boiling water while John McCain would have been like slowly turning up the heat.

I laughed out loud when Beck threw what appeared to be a live frog into a pot of boiling water. Leftwing blogs are up in arms with some saying that even if it was fake, it wasn't funny.

Some are saying he threw a rubber frog into the pot. My take (watch closely) is that after he reaches his hand into the frog container that housed live bouncy frogs, he closes his hand around one and lets it jump out of his closed hand. When he allegedly throws the frog into the pot, nothing seems to come out of his hands.


Watch and judge for yourself.

Check out some of these BLOG POSTS

Wednesday, September 23, 2009


This one comes straight from the Unmitigated Gall department. Yes, after the Baltimore ACORN office fired both Tonja Thompson and Shera Williams for offering their help to James O'Keefe and Hannah Giles, who posed as a pimp and prostitute, they have filed a lawsuit against.......James O'Keefe and Hannah Giles.

Acorn CEO, Bertha Lewis even expressed what in hindsight was fake gratitute toward O'Keefe and Giles. Adding another perplexing dimension is that the lawsuit even cites the distress caused to both Thompson and Williams:
The two employees seen in the video were fired after it was posted online. The lawsuit says the employees, Tonja Thompson and Shera Williams, suffered "extreme emotional distress."
I have a question for Bertha Lewis. Bertha, if you're so concerned about the emotional well-being of Thompson and Williams, then why did you FIRE THEM when they were most emotionally distressed?! Did you think that would make them feel better?

Here is the AP ARTICLE

Of course, Maryland's State Attorney is a lady named PATRICIA JESSAMY, who is a huge Obama supporter. Here is a video of her at a DNC party before last year's election.

We got a hint that O'Keefe might be prosecuted earlier this month when the WASHINGTON EXAMINER reported on Jessamy's past, which included going after Linda Tripp when she exposed Lewinsky-gate.
If any of this sounds vaguely familiar, it should because back in the Clinton days, the Maryland State's Prosecutor prosecuted Linda Tripp for recording Monica Lewinsky's description of her sexual encounter with President Bill Clinton.
Let's also keep in mind (for additional irony) that Jessamy is also a supposed advocate for child abuse victims.
Among the items listed on Jessamy's extensive resume of accomplishments is that she is president of the Baltimore Child Abuse Center. She also lists her prior membership on the Governor's Council on Child Abuse and Neglect from 1995 to 1998!
If Jessamy is so concerned about abused children, why isn't she outraged over the willingness of Thompson and Williams to help a pimp and a prostitute smuggle girls from El Salvador between the ages of 13-15 into this country so they could work out of a brothel?

More at the BIG GOVERNMENT website.


New York Governor David Paterson was asked by Barack Obama not to run for re-election. Here is Paterson's wife hinting that her husband's visual impairment may have played a role in Obama not wanting him to continue to be New York's Governor.

Before you dismiss her (prepare for satire), didn't Obama mock the Special Olympics when he appeared on Jay Leno several months ago?

View more news videos at:

Here's Obama's slap at the Special Olympics. Paterson's wife forgot to mention this one.

h/t to HOT AIR


Czech President Vaclav Klaus has the kind of guts shown by a certain leader of another small country (Roberto Micheletti of Honduras). Not to fall victim to the Group Think perpetrated against clear thinking people, Klaus called out the climate change rhetoric that was in abundance at the U.N.

REUTERS reported Klaus as saying:
"It was sad and it was frustrating," said Klaus, one of the world's most vocal skeptics on the topic of global warming.

"It's a propagandistic exercise where 13-year-old girls from some far-away country perform a pre-rehearsed poem," he said. "It's simply not dignified."
What a shame that other leaders who know he's telling the truth didn't stand with him.

Recently, Glenn Beck started calling for senators and congressmen to come forward as the 56 new "RE-Founding Fathers". So far, I believe he has two. Micheletti and Klaus have the guts and mindset that Beck seems to be looking for. The last two paragraphs of the Reuters article illustrate plainly that Klaus "gets it".
Klaus published a book in 2007 on the worldwide campaign to stop climate change entitled "Blue Planet in Green Chains: What Is Under Threat -- Climate or Freedom?"

In the book, Klaus said global warming has turned into a new religion, an ideology that threatens to undermine freedom and the world's economic and social order.
How many national leaders with more pull and bigger countries know the truth too and are too cowardly to join Klaus.

I think we have the perfect ticket for the 2012 U.S. presidential race.

Micheletti / Klaus 2012!

h/t to DRUDGE


I don't think I've ever in my life seen or heard a chainsaw used as a musical instrument in a Blues song (or any song for that matter) but in this video, it's masterfully done. In fact, it steals the show and even surpasses Will Ferrell's cow bell when he was with Blue Oyster Cult.

For contrast, CLICK HERE for the Cowbell video.

Here is Hannah Giles, the woman who busted ACORN by playing the role of a prostitute.



FCC Diversity Czar Mark Lloyd not only championed the cause of Hugo Chavez in 2007 but in 2005 advocated removing people from their current positions and replacing them with minorities in the name of racial justice.

This audio is from the Conference on Media Reform in 2005. Keep in mind that both Van Jones and Lloyd worked for the Center for American Progress (John Podesta's group) as Senior Fellows (Jones has been re-hired since retiring as Green jobs Czar). One of Van Jones' many audio recordings that surfaced featured him advocating incrementalism because drastic change would not be accepted by the masses.

Lloyd seems to be advocating the same type of incrementalism with Affirmative Action. Instead of viewing Affirmative Action as something no longer needed or causing unintended consequences, Lloyd seeks to put more teeth in it. I mean, what could be more racist?

The most egregious quote from Lloyd may be this one:
"Who is going to step down so someone else can have power?"
Tell you what, Mr. Lloyd. How about YOU step down and we replace you with someone who isn't so concerned about race and ideology?

It's also disgraceful, stereotypical, and racist that Lloyd pretends to know what all white people think when he says,
"There are few things more frightening in the American mind than dark-skinned black men."
In a display of more incrementalism, Lloyd says that the
"Fairness Doctrine is not enough."
Only a "progressive" could say that a retrograde and abolished policy didn't go far enough. Then he says that a policy without teeth cannot be fair.




On September 11th, 2009 the U.S. Census Bureau severed ties with Acorn, who was going to be very involved in the 2010 Census. The jettisoning of Acorn was a direct result of the videos of ACORN employees facilitating the efforts of James O'Keefe and Hannah Giles, who were posing as pimp and prostitute respectively.

So what companies / organizations are going to fill the void? One of the companies currently scheduled to do 2010 census work is Vangent, Inc., based in Arlington, VA. Should we expect them to see an increased workload as a result of the Acorn vacuum? REUTERS reported back in July that Vangent was opening up a call center in Ogden, UT and that they will be hiring approximately 1200 employees in January 2010. They even have a "Click Here to Apply" banner on their home page for anyone interested. According to Vangent Vice President of Communications & Investor Relations Eileen Rivera, there are several requirements a prospective employee must meet.
To be eligible for employment, potential candidates must:

-- Pass a security check that includes fingerprinting

-- Have at least a high school diploma

-- Be legally able to work in the United States (Two-year residency)

-- Be able to read and speak English fluently

-- Sign a sworn statement to protect Census data

-- Pass a skill assessment test for the desired position
Sounds good, right? Maybe, until you look at the experiences of Kathleen Willey, who was hired by Vangent to process Rebate voucher applications in the Cash For Clunkers program, the administration of which was overseen by the Department of Transportation.

What Willey reportedly found in working for Vangent (through a minority owned staffing company named Astyra Corp.) didn't square with the requirements Vangent has listed for anyone hired to help with the census. Working with WORLD NET DAILY, Willey took notes of all that she encountered while at Vangent working on the Cash for Clunkers rebate vouchers. Shocking to be sure but the story within the story may be Vangent working with the Census Bureau in light of what Willey discovered.
"We were not asked for any prior work history," Willey said. "The job description was listed as data entry and called for the ability to type 30 words per minute. There were no job requirements actually listed on the application."

The form requested direct deposit information, signature on a confidentiality agreement and background check, tax information and two forms of identification.

Willey said, "Some people did not have two forms, and I heard one recruiter say, 'We will work with you on that.'"
Having worked in corporate America myself, I'm not unsympathetic to the challenges of hiring a massive amount of temporary employees through an outside agency. It's not at all easy to have a large number of people who don't know your business all show up at once and put them to work without some ramp up time. Effective planning ahead of time is critical and prevents a lot of inefficiency. I cannot speak to the level of planning that took place here but there are some disturbing claims made by Willey.

She asked a woman who interviewed her what she would need to do before beginning her new position.

"When I asked if I needed to take any kind of test, the answer was, 'No,'" Willey said. "She told me to report for work the next day at 4:30 p.m. When I asked if I had to pass a background check before I started, she said, 'No.'"
Eileen Rivera is quoted as disputing Willey's claim.
"That's absolutely not true. Every single temporary employee who was hired went through a background check. If the background check did not clear, then they were released. They were not allowed to work on this program."
Two mutually exclusive and diametrically opposed claims. Calling Joe Wilson. Calling Joe Wilson.

Assuming Willey's account is accurate, this was an ineffeciently run operation at best but even giving all involved the benefit of the doubt, it is another in a long line of glaring examples of why government should not interfere with the private sector and why Cash For Clunkers was such a bad idea. In either case, based on Willey's experiences, it would seem that Vangent should be closely watched in the run-up to the 2010 census to make sure procedures are followed.

As a taxpayer-funded program, all of the people who took paychecks from Vangent / Astyra were paid with my money. As a stakeholder in that operation, I have a right to demand more transparency and accountability with future operations subsidized in similar ways.

Just an idea but perhaps the Department of Transportation and the Census Bureau may want to communicate with each other about their experiences.

Do we need to hire an outside company to coordinate that meeting?



Has the Brazilian embassy in Tegucigalpa become Hotel California for Manuel Zelaya? Perhaps a better comparison might be the roach motel. In any case, he may be second-guessing his decision. It was obviously much easier for him to enter that embasssy than it will be for him to leave.

Yes, he caught Micheletti flat-footed by showing up in Tegucigalpa but now Micheletti knows exactly where Zelaya is and will probably descend on him rather quickly the second he steps off of sovereign Brazilian land.

The AP reported on the events surrounding Zelaya's arrival at the embassy.
Zelaya, forced out of his country at gunpoint June 28, triumphantly popped up in the capital Monday, telling captivated supporters that after three months of international exile and a secretive 15-hour cross-country journey, he was ready to lead again.
Now that it's been more than 24 hours since his arrival, I wonder if Zelaya is having an "uh-oh" moment. It's becoming clear that at best, Zelaya is a narcissist, making everything about him while showing no regard for the consequences of his actions. At worst, he's the would-be tyrant he's suspected of being. Even Hillary Clinton called his actions "reckless" when he crossed into Honduras briefly back in July. Now, as then, Micheletti appears to be the one showing restraint. Zelaya's latest stunt has enflamed tensions as well, shutting down businesses in the city and causing government resources to be focused in one tiny area (the Brazilian embassy).
The entire country was largely shut down, with almost no cars or pedestrians in the streets and few businesses open under a nearly round-the-clock curfew decreed by the interim government that ousted Zelaya in June. It accused Zelaya of sneaking back into the country Monday to create disturbances and disrupt the Nov. 29 election scheduled to pick his successor.
Now we have even further evidence that would indicate that Micheletti's government has shown respect for the rule of law while excercising controlled restraint in dealing with these situations. Despite the brazeness of Zelaya, Micheletti is honoring (for now) the sovereignty of Brazil, even after its government obviously helped exacerbate Micheletti's problems with Zelaya.
Foreign Minister Carlos Lopez said the government would not try to enter the embassy to arrest Zelaya, but he also said Honduras' interim leaders had no intention of yielding on the central point demanded by the international community: the reinstatement of Zelaya to serve out the remaining four months of his term.
Micheletti has continued his hard stance on Zelaya's fate if he returns to Honduras. He will be arrested, charged, and likely sent to prison.
Later in the day, Lopez, the foreign minister, quoted Micheletti as saying that "I will talk to anybody, anywhere, any time, including ex-president Manuel Zelaya." But Lopez said the offer did not include allowing Zelaya to serve out his presidential term or avoid arrest on a Supreme Court warrant charging the ex-leader with treason and abuse of authority.
It will be interesting to see how this all plays out but unless international bodies are willing to forcibly install Manuel Zelaya, thereby showing complete disregard for the Honduran constitution, Zelaya could end up second-guessing his decision to take that piece of cheese perched on the rat trap.

Here is Hillary on July 24th, calling Zelaya "reckless" for crossing the Nicaraguan border into Honduras.

So Hillary, if venturing across the border is "reckless", what do you call sneaking in to the nation's capital under cover of darkness and finding refuge in a foreign country's embassy?

Micheletti continues to hold his ground and show true courage. Keep it up, Roberto!

Tuesday, September 22, 2009


I'm really struggling to understand something here. In July, when the deposed (and annoying) Honduran president Manuel Zelaya walked across the Nicaraguan border into Honduras donning a white cowboy hat and a megaphone, U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton called such actions "reckless".

Now we learn that Zelaya (with at least some level of international support) has made his way into the Brazilian embassy that sits in the Honduran capital, Tegucigalpa. Riots have already begun. Considering that sitting president Roberto Micheletti is willing to step down if Zelaya agrees not to pursue a return to power, we're seeing who is the more power hungry of the two. So far, the U.S. State Department, through spokesman Ian Kelly, is urging that violence be prevented.

Help me with this one. Hillary called Zelaya's half-cocked actions "reckless" in July. Yet, ever since Zelaya was removed on June 28th, the official American stance has been to support his return to power. Now we learn that the "reckless" behavior Zelaya engaged in this past July by walking into Honduran territory has been escalated to the point that he is literally the source of unrest in the country he claims to hold so much love for.

With each passing day, Zelaya is exposing himself as the power-hungry thug and leader he was removed for being. Yet, our nation's leaders continue to support him while the leader of our State Department seems less willing to confront Zelaya the more "reckless" he becomes.

Micheletti' stalk continues to rise with me and he didn't fail to disappoint when, while talking to Reuters, he made reference to how welcome Zelaya is in Honduras by using terms that obviously referenced prison time:
Micheletti assured Zelaya that he can stay in Brazil's embassy for "five to 10 years" if he chooses. Micheletti said he has no intention of confronting Brazil or entering its embassy to go after Zelaya.
Did I mention that Micheletti's stock is rising with me?


Joe Scarborough may have totally succumbed to the MSNBC bubble that surrounds him. Maybe he's been attacked by liberal spores. If you'd like a microcosm of what happened to the mainstream media over the years, look at what's happening to Scarborough at MSNBC. When you put one conservative in an outfit like MSNBC, he is going to change. You're either part of the Chris Matthews inspired leg thrill pack or you're alienated. Maybe Mika is having an effect on him that he's unaware of.

In any case, Scarborough seems all too willing to buy into the anti-Glenn Beck fervor that is raging on the left instead of looking at the facts.

Scarborough is officially a disappointment.




Folks, welcome to the slippery slope. If you post a poster of Obama as the Joker (like the one below), you might be arrested if you do it in Houston. I don't know what Houston law is but this definitely seems a bit extreme.

Perhaps you're only allowed to post Obama posters approved by the NEA in Houston?



It may be that the way to expose / defeat Community Organizing tactics is to turnover their rocks from underneath. That's what James O'Keefe and Hannah Giles did with Acorn. It's also what Patrick Courrielche did with the NEA, joining a conference call and reporting on it.

Now we have an unlikely mole penetrating the debacle that is the Cash 4 Clunkers bureaucracy, which comes under the purview of Department of Transportation. None other than Kathleen Willey entered that bureaucracy and reported back to WORLD NET DAILY.
After the federal "Cash for Clunkers" program ended Aug. 24, the Department of Transportation reported that nearly 700,000 clunkers were taken off the roads and replaced by more fuel-efficient vehicles. Rebate applications worth $2.877 billion were submitted by the 8 p.m. deadline. The Transportation Department hired federal employees and private contract workers to process the rebates vouchers so car dealers would be compensated.
One of those private companies, Vangent, based in Arlington, VA provided Willey with a job working on the Dealership Rebate Vouchers. Interestingly, when you go to the VANGENT website, you'll see that they are somehow involved with the 2010 Census and are asking for volunteers to help administer it. When you click on the census application link from the website, you are directed to THIS PAGE.

Back to what Willey uncovered. If her experience is common then the administration of this program was weak at best. Aside from mentioning the extremely unprofessional appearance of job applicants (some not wearing shoes), Willey maintains that there didn't seem to be background checks done or relevant job history taken into account.

Willey processed the Cash for Clunkers vouchers at her position in Chester, Va. She attended a job fair on Aug. 31 and was hired through Astyra Corp., a minority-owned staffing company.

"We were told that we would be working on the Cash for Clunkers programming, examining all of the documents that the government had received from dealers all over the country," Willey told WND.

She said many of the applicants had never even heard of the Cash for Clunkers program.

"We were not asked for any prior work history," Willey said. "The job description was listed as data entry and called for the ability to type 30 words per minute. There were no job requirements actually listed on the application."
Aside from having a lot of down time and getting virtually no supervision, perhaps one of the most egregious examples of why government should never be in charge of running a business is shown in its level of concern for payroll management. Willey not only reported that there was little to no supervision but that she was significantly overpaid.
During a 37.5-hour work week, Willey reported actually working only 14 hours – but she was paid for more than 37 hours of work.

"Two of those nights, I had no work at all," she said. "On those two evenings, when I left, I complained to two different supervisors and I got two different responses: 'Milk it, baby!' and 'Free money!'"
Just like ACORN and the White House's alleged dealings with the NEA, we are again looking at quintessential Saul Alinsky. In particular, Rules #6 and #7 from "RULES 4 RADICALS" seem to apply:
Rule 6: A good tactic is one your people enjoy. “If your people aren’t having a ball doing it, there is something very wrong with the tactic.”
Employees working on this C4C debacle were allegedly told they would be helping the environment, given no supervision, and paid (or overpaid) for doing little or no work.
Rule 7: A tactic that drags on for too long becomes a drag. Commitment may become ritualistic as people turn to other issues.
Cash 4 Clunkers was a short-lived program, as was the administering of the Rebate Voucher Applications. The tactic (if that's what it was) didn't drag on too long and it was one its people enjoyed.

ACORN, the NEA, and C4C are all taking massive hits as a direct result of infiltration. These are having an effect and should be stepped up.

Be sure to read the entire article on WILLEY'S FINDINGS at WND.

Monday, September 21, 2009


Andrew Breitbart seems to be doing on the internet what Glenn Beck is doing with Fox. Both are stepping up and raising the bar for their mediums. Breitbart's Big Government site has served as a clearinghouse for the Acorn videos done by O'Keefe and Giles. Now, his BIG HOLLYWOOD site has exposed the NEA in a big way.

As bad as the Acorn scandal is for Obama, this one seems to implicate him more directly. The voices (and what they said) on an August 10th conference call is at the heart of the matter. Like Acorn, the National Endowment for the Arts (NEA) receives taxpayer dollars. Unlike Acorn, the NEA appears to have spokespeople on tape saying they're taking direction from the White House.

According to Big Hollywood:
The NEA and the White House did encourage a handpicked, pro-Obama arts group to address politically controversial issues under contentious national debate. That fact is irrefutable.
What? That would mean that a group subsidized by taxpayer dollars is actively promoting the agenda of a president who is fighting tooth and nail to keep a 50% approval rating. That would almost necessarily mean that 50% of the people in this country would disapprove of their tax dollars going toward pushing that agenda, right?

Key person in the conference call is named Buffy Wicks (pictured), Deputy Director of the White House Office of Public Engagement (whatever that is).
Much of the talk on the conference call was a build up to what the National Endowment for the Arts (NEA) was specifically asking of this group... Buffy Wicks, Deputy Director of the White House Office of Public Engagement, clearly identifies this arts group as a pro-Obama collective and warns them of some “specific asks” that will be delivered later in the meeting.
Not specific "acts". Specific "asks" (I guess there's no real difference) but here is part of what she said.
“I’m actually in the White House and working towards furthering this agenda, this very aggressive agenda.”
So she's working in the White House, getting my money and working toward forwarding an agenda I completely disagree with?!

There's more....
Later in the call, “specific asks” were delivered by Yosi Sergant, then Communications Director of the National Endowment for the Arts. What were the “asks”? They were for this pro-Obama arts group to create art on several hotly debated political issues, including health care.
So not only are my tax dollars going toward an agenda I fundamentally disagree with but they're going to an agenda that is using those dollars to fight an agenda I support - namely, defeating the one I'm funding!

Here are some of Yosi's asks:
“I would encourage you to pick something, whether it’s health care, education, the environment, you know, there’s four key areas that the corporation has identified as the areas of service.”
“And then my ask would be to apply artistic, you know, your artistic creative communities utilities and bring them to the table.”
“Again, I’m really, really honored to be working with you; the National Endowment for the Arts is really honored.”
“You’re going to see a lot more of us in the next four and hopefully eight years.”
Hey Yosi, what exactly gives you the right to use my money for your causes?
Rock the Vote, another participant on the call, announced a health care design contest. “We can’t stand by and listen to lies and deceit coming from those who are against reforming a broken system,” they stated in their announcement. “Enough is Enough. We need designs that tell the country YES WE CARE! Young people demand health care.”
Again, there's something fundamentally wrong with Yosi's indignation when he is using my money to fight the source of that indignation which actually happens to be me. This is personal when my dollars are used to fund my own defeat. I'm not saying that's what is happening but it sure looks like it.
This practice has never been the historical role of the NEA. The NEA’s role is to support excellence in the arts, to increase access to the arts, and to be a leader in arts education. Using the arts to address contentiously debated issues is political subversion. And the fact that the White House played a role in encouraging the arts to address contentious issues should also be considered a government overreach.
Be sure to read the entire BIG HOLLYWOOD report, which also includes the audio from Buffy, Yosi, and Skolnick.

By the way, regarding the audio, once you understand the Alinsky model that your people must enjoy any tactic you choose to implement, you'll understand that Buffy, Yosi, and Skolnick are being played. As Alinsky said, "if your pepole aren't having a ball doing it, there's something very wrong with the tactic."

As you listen to the exuberance in the voices of the conference call participants, it becomes readily apparent that they LOVE the tactic Obama appears to have chosen - using them to further his agenda.

h/t to DOUG ROSS


UPDATE AT 6:17PM CST. Well, it now appears that Manuel Zelaya is in fact in Honduras according to multiple sources. Specifically, he is said to be camped out inside the Brazilian embassy and this stinks to high heaven. The U.S. State Department appeared to know Zelaya was back before the U.N. did if reports are accurate.

THE AP is reporting that while Zelaya is inside the Brazilian embassy, neither Brazilian leadership nor the OAS seems willing to claim responsibility for Zelaya's arrival.
OAS Secretary General Jose Miguel Insulza called for calm and warned Honduran officials to avoid any violation of the Brazilian diplomatic mission, saying "they should be responsible for the safety of president Zelaya and the Embassy of Brazil."

Brazilian Foreign Minister Celso Amorin said neither his country or the OAS had any role in Zelaya's journey before taking him in.
This is really a despicable development. The current Honduran government did nothing more than defend its constitution and foreign nations seem to be attempting to force Zelaya back into power. The United States' continued support of Zelaya also calls Obama into question on these developments.

In July, Hillary Clinton called Zelaya's crossing into Honduras by foot, "reckless". His arrival in Tegucigalpa via the Brazilian embassy seems to be a bit more reckless than that. So far, I haven't heard a peep from Hillary.

Lesson for sitting president, Roberto Micheletti... When a thug in pajamas is in your custody, don't let him go.

Be sure to check out FAUSTA'S BLOG for granular details.
El Tiempo reported earlier that former Minister of the Presidency Enrique Flores stated that Zelaya was returned “thanks to a coordinated international operative”.
A coordinated international operative? If there's one thing we're learning about Obama it's that when he's on the wrong side of an issue, he ignores it. Has anyone seen him speak out about Honduras to any degree recently? The last time I remember him doing so included something about an illegal "coup" on the part of the Honduran government, which did nothing but protect and defend its constitution.

I particularly like how State Department spokesman Ian Kelly says he can confirm Zelaya is in Honduras but that he doesn't know where. Here's a partial transcript of a state department press briefing on the matter today:
QUESTION: How did he come in, and where is he? What –

MR. KELLY: Don’t know.

QUESTION: When did it happen?

MR. KELLY: Like I say, the Embassy is trying to find out these details. But I do know that we have confirmed that he’s in Honduras. Where exactly he is, I don’t know. And we’re just trying to find out more details.

QUESTION: Last time we tuned in, he was under threat of arrest if he came home. Is that still what’s in play right now?

MR. KELLY: I’d have to refer you to the de facto regime in Tegucigalpa. Of course, we believe that he’s the democratic – democratically elected and constitutional leader of Honduras.
Call me crazy but I don't believe for one second that Kelly doesn't know where Zelaya is.



Either former Honduran president Manuel Zelaya is lying or current president Roberto Micheletti is wrong (or lying). Based on what I've seen since June 28th, when Zelaya was forcibly removed, my money is on Micheletti telling the truth and being right.

REUTERS is reporting that Zelaya is claiming he's in the capital of Honduras right now (Tegucigalpa). Micheletti is on record saying Zelaya is not in Honduras at all.
"I am here in Tegucigalpa. I am here for the restoration of democracy, to call for dialogue." Zelaya told Honduras' Canal 36 television network.

A close aide said Zelaya, a close ally of Venezuela's socialist President Hugo Chavez, was in a U.N. building in the capital Tegucigalpa.

But Roberto Micheletti, a bitter rival of Zelaya who has run Honduras since the June 28 coup, denied that the president had returned, saying he was still in exile in neighboring Nicaragua.
At one point this past summer, Zelaya crossed into Honduras by foot from Nicaragua with a white cowboy hat and a megaphone, nearly setting off an international incident. Even Secretary of State Clinton called the move, "reckless".

All of that aside, when it comes to Zelaya's whereabouts right now, regardless of who is right, Micheletti is in the right. If Zelaya is in Honduras right now, he is continuing his reckless behavior. Micheletti has said on multiple occasions that Zelaya would be arrested if he returned to Honduras. If Zelaya isn't in Honduras, then he is lying for no productive reason.

In Iraq, Baghdad Bob denied that American troops had entered Iraq as they were in the background of Bob's camera shot. With Zelaya, he appears to be doing that in reverse, claiming he is in Honduras when he really isn't.

If Zelaya is lying, what does it say about how badly he wants to return? Perhaps he wants to return so badly that he's begun lying to himself while believing it.

h/t to DRUDGE


I had to watch the part in question twice just to make sure I got it right. The money lines come toward the end when Obama dismisses Merriam-Webster's definition of a word that he apparently thinks means something else - that word is, "tax". But start paying close attention at the 1:00 mark.

The underlying theme of this exchange is what I found interesting. George Stephanopoulos' question is about whether or not mandating that every person get health insurance would be a tax. In "Obama-speak", a tax is something you do but rarely admit to, which may be why he expresses disagreement with Merriam-Webster when he's calling for one.

In defense of his insistence that everyone should have health insurance, Obama says,
"We're not going to have other people carrying your burdens for you."
Uh, whatever happened to,
"When you spread the wealth around, it's good for everybody"?
It would seem a bit inconsistent until you peel back enough layers. Obama told Joe the Plumber he wanted income redistribution. What he told Stephanopoulous is that he doesn't want income re-distribution while advocating a mandate that says everyone will have to pay into the system. The only thing missing there is the distribution part.

Obviously, he's learning that the majority of the American public sides with the fundamental belief expressed by JTP last year. Instead of heeding that advice, he appears to be trying to leverage it in order to impose the individual mandate (tax) while championing individual accountability.

On its face, Obama's analogy using car insurance is valid (everyone is required to have auto insurance so everyone should be required to have health insurance). However, two facts render it invalid.

One: he's saying that if you can't afford health insurance, you won't be penalized because it would be "piling on". As that relates to his auto insurance analogy, people who can't afford to insure their vehicle would still be allowed to drive.

Two: At least for now, the auto insurance industry is a private sector animal. You either buy insurance and drive or you don't. To use that industry in a comparison when you're arguring for a government option is apples and oranges.

The implication here is that everyone needs to be accountable not to themselves but to the government.

Be sure to watch all the way to the end as Obama gives Merriam-Webster the big smackdown. Oh, and if you run the Merriam-Webster website, don't be surprised if you get a call about the verbiage you use in your definitions.


Sunday, September 20, 2009


And you thought it was Joe Wilson who interrupted Obama at the September 9th Joint Session of Congress. Your ears were apparently deceiving you. Pelosi might say your ears weren't balanced. In either case, if you have 15 seconds to kill, this is just the way to do it.



Former Jimmy Carter National Security Adviser and current Barack Obama foreign policy adviser Zbigniew Brzezinski gave an interview to the Daily Beast and intimated that if Israel attempts to take out Iran's nuclear facilities, the United States should take down their planes.

Q: How aggressive can Obama be in insisting to the Israelis that a military strike might be in America’s worst interest?
A: We are not exactly impotent little babies. They have to fly over our airspace in Iraq. Are we just going to sit there and watch?

Q: What if they fly over anyway?
A: Well, we have to be serious about denying them that right. That means a denial where you aren’t just saying it. If they fly over, you go up and confront them. They have the choice of turning back or not. No one wishes for this but it could be a Liberty in reverse. [Israeli jet fighters and torpedo boats attacked the USS Liberty in international waters, off the Sinai Peninsula, during the Six-Day War in 1967. Israel later claimed the ship was the object of friendly fire.]
Based on the fact that Brzezinski is advocating intentionally attacking Israeli planes, does he believe the attack on USS Liberty was not the result of friendly fire?

Personally, I find it interesting how Brzezinski so willingly identifies Iraqi airspace as U.S. airspace when it suits the purpose of shooting down our ally's war planes.

According to the WASHINGTON NOTE, Brzezinski detested our going into Iraq. He was quoted as saying:
The war in Iraq is a historic, strategic, and moral calamity. Undertaken under false assumptions, it is undermining America's global legitimacy. Its collateral civilian casualties as well as some abuses are tarnishing America's moral credentials. Driven by Manichean impulses and imperial hubris, it is intensifying regional instability.
Wouldn't using land / air space obtained in a morally calamitous war only serve to exacerbate any problems that exist? If going into Iraq undermined our global legitimacy, how does piling on by using Iraqi airspace to attack Israeli planes restore that legitimacy?

The WEEKLY STANDARD BLOG puts this insane scenario into perspective:
...conjure the image -- the Obama administration sending U.S. aircraft up to protect Iran's airspace and it's nuclear installations from an attack by a democracy that is one of America's closest allies. Unfortunately, this may not be so hard to imagine in Israel, where the number of people who believe Obama is pro-Israel is at just 4 percent -- and falling. And given Obama's (literally) submissive posture to the Saudis, his indulgence of the Iranians, and his simultaneously hard-line approach to Israel, it seems even some of Obama's supporters can savor the possibility of a "reverse Liberty."
Based on the preponderance of less-than-stellar associates Barack Obama has chosen to affiliate himself with almost for as long as he's been alive, this shouldn't be all that shocking.

Here's the ENTIRE INTERVIEW at the Daily Beast.



This may be the most egregious lie yet from Barack Obama. The money quotes come shortly after the 4:00 mark. Stephanopoulos asks Obama about ACORN getting its funding cut off. His response is obviously deliberate ignorance but plausible deniability is more than just a stretch. When asked about the de-funding of Acorn Obama says,
"Frankly, it's not something I've followed closely. I didn't even know that Acorn was getting a whole lot of federal money."
Shortly after that, he makes reference to seeing one of the videos that exposed Acorn, saying it was "certainly inappropriate".

Considering Obama's extensive ties to Acorn, it is simply not believable that he hasn't been following it very closely. Even giving him the benefit of the doubt, he should be following it closely based on what he saw on the "video" considering his extensive ties to Acorn.

Next, he expects us to believe that he didn't know Acorn was getting "a whole lot of federal money". Not only is that COMPLETELY unbelievable but if we were to give him the benefit of the doubt on that one, why on earth would he sign a bill that grants Acorn billions of dollars without knowing that's in the bill?

Taken further, if he is so willing to sign a bill that grants an organization like Acorn billions of dollars (unbeknownst to him), why on EARTH should he be trusted when he says he will not sign a health care bill that adds to the deficit.

To quote Joe Wilson, "YOU LIE".

Here's the entry on STEPHANOPOULOS' BLOG
Accuracy in Media
American Spectator
American Thinker
Big Government
Big Journalism
Doug Ross
Flopping Aces
Fox Nation
Fox News
Free Republic
The Hill
Hope for America
Hot Air
Hot Air Pundit
Jawa Report
Jihad Watch
Michelle Malkin
Naked Emperor News
National Review
New Zeal Blog
News Real
Pajamas Media
Red State
Right Wing News
Say Anything
Stop Islamization of America
Verum Serum
Wall Street Journal
Washington Times
Watts Up With That
Web Today
Weekly Standard
World Net Daily

Blog Archive