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

Wednesday, November 10, 2010


Ok, call it another credibility test for the un-named 'White House Insider' (WHI) who's been talking to an anonymous blogger named Ulsterman since early September. He rightfully predicted the departure of Larry Summers hours before it was announced but the further removed this person is from the White House - since departing - has apparently caused Ulsterman to want a boost in the credibility of his source via another prediction.

WHI does, in fact, make that prediction in the latest interview from Ulsterman. I'll let you read it for yourself to find out who it is but the revelation does indeed come at the end. Here's another hint. If WHI is correct, the likely replacement of the individual will be far worse - as bad as that will be to comprehend - than the person currently occupying that role.

Other things discussed in the latest interview include Barack Obama's birthplace, which is NOT the percolating scandal that WHI has been talking about. WHI also gives a few clues as to where the alleged scandal will bust open. Here is the relevant excerpt:
Read the (New York?) Times. Somebody there has sniffed it out. And a guy over at the (Washington?) Post. If the Post starts to get on it, the Times will probably go ahead and break it open, loyalty to the White House be damned. I told you before, parts of the story have already been given out publicly here and there. One part will lead to another and then another. It’s underway right now. Every week a little bit more shows itself.
What scandal is out there that has been percolating for some time? The most obvious example is the New Black Panther Party (NBPP) case. In fact, Charlie Savage at the New York Times reported on it in July and the Washington Post reported on it just last month.

He says if the (Washington) Post reports on it further than it has, the New York Times may just blow it wide open. Considering the recent developments in this case - Thomas Perez likely caught lying under oath, courtesy of recently acquired emails - it would seem the most likely prospect.

If WHI is the real thing, his / her agenda is taking shape and it involves getting solidly behind a Hillary Clinton presidential nomination in 2012. Another prediction he / she makes is Hillary announcing her intention to run this spring. In fact, if Hillary wasn't planning on doing so then, it might benefit her to do as WHI suggests, even if he / she is not a credible source; it will only fuel any existent White House paranoia that does exist.

If you'd like to read Part one first, CLICK HERE.

Here is an excerpt via NewsFlavor:
Ulsterman: Ok – so you still think Hillary Clinton is thinking of running for President in 2012?

Insider: Yes.

Ulsterman: What will be the biggest factor in her final decision?

Insider: The economy. If it does not improve she is in. She will run.

Ulsterman: How long before that decision is made by her?

Insider: By spring – a few more months or so. But she won’t be the first to jump in against Obama. Word is there will be a break the ice candidate.

Ulsterman: Break the ice candidate? What is that?

Insider: Someone will step in to challenge Obama – break the ice. That will allow Hillary to come in after and not be the party crasher so to speak. The first candidate comes in and creates the chaos – she follows after to calm it all down and play up her experience. She is saving the party and saving the country. If Hillary gets into the race for president, some version of that process is how it will go down.

Ulsterman: You know this? How?

Insider: There is no real “know” in politics. Things are changing – but Hillary wants in. She wants to be president. So, now they just have to wait and plan for the right opportunity. That opportunity may come, and it may not. They are looking at deciding by spring though, that much I do know. For instance, if the scandal breaks – that would give her a prime opportunity to step in now wouldn’t it?

Ulsterman: Yes, I guess it would. If Hillary Clinton were to seek the presidency, would you support her?

Insider: Absolutely – I have said that to you already. Yes, I would absolutely support her. And I would gladly be a part of her campaign. Hey Hillary – call me! (laughs)
Read it all. You won't be disappointed.


South Carolina Senator Jim DeMint (R) is also known as Senator 'Tea Party.' He was featured as one of the candidates on a Fox News segment called '12 in 2012,' which breaks down the 12 most likely Republican presidential candidates two years from now. DeMint has consistently backed Tea Party candidates and continues to catch the ire of establishment Republicans. He is, by far and away, the best candidate for president. As a Senator, he is an anomaly and has proven that when amongst elite establishment politicians at the highest level, he does not compromise his principles. None of the other potential candidates can say that - not even Sarah Palin.

The money quote in this interview from DeMint is when he says, "You can't be a fiscal conservative and not be a social conservative." The logic he uses to back that up is indisputable to the intellectually honest. Basically, the social programs implemented by social liberals have bankrupted our culture. Therefore, clean up the social issues, and fiscal responsibility follows.

h/t to Hot Air


Talk about twisted logic. This lowers the bar when it comes to spin. It also goes to show why the left should never be trusted or compromised with. They will never stop going on offense but staying on offense after the repudiation that took place on November 2nd is literally delusional. Remember, though, Barack Obama said the results of this election were not about his policies; they were about his inability to communicate how great they are.

We now have further indication that Obama is absolutely NOT going to move to the center; if anything, he is going to continue moving left. A George Soros funded group is actually claiming that it was progressives who won the election because so few of them got defeated. As a consequence of that, Soros' Institute for Policy Studies (IPS) is basically calling this a mandate for Obama to use as many Executive Orders as he needs to in order to further the progressive agenda.

No, really. Via Aaron Klein at WND:
NEW YORK – It was progressives who won the mid-term elections, particularly incumbents in a socialist-founded congressional caucus that emerged from last week's ballots virtually unscathed, boasted an article published by the George Soros-funded Institute for Policy Studies, a Marxist-oriented think-tank in Washington, D.C.

The article recommends that President Obama govern from executive order to push through a progressive agenda.

"Progressives won in the 2010 mid-term elections," wrote Karen Dolan, a fellow at the Institute for Policy Studies, or IPS, and director of the Cities for Progress and Cities for Peace projects based at the radical organization.

"The Congressional Progressive Caucus, the largest caucus in the House Democratic Caucus at over 80 members, emerged virtually unscathed, losing only three members," she wrote, in the piece published on the IPS website.

"By contrast, the conservative Blue Dog Democratic caucus was more than sliced in half from 54 members to only 26. Further, of the 34 conservative Dems who voted against Obama's Healthcare Reform, a mere 12 won re-election," she wrote.
This is actually something that the newly elected Republicans can benefit from. The leftwing playbook has just been dropped into their lap. This administration gets its marching orders from Soros-funded groups. Here is what this should tell Republicans:

1.) 'Reaching across the aisle' should be off the table. Any attempt to do so will only help further the progressive agenda.
2.) Congress needs to watch very closely, any attempts made by this White House to go around it with Executive Orders.
3.) The fact that so many progressives won the election should be a cue to state legislatures - which Republicans won big on November 2nd - that re-districting should be a major priority. Corrupt incumbents like Charlie Rangel, Maxine Waters, Barney Frank, and many others won by wide margins. The reason why is not because of any 'progressive ascendancy' espoused by the whack jobs over at IPS but because of gerrymandering.

Read it all.


Thomas Perez, the Assistant Attorney General for the Civil Rights Division testified earlier this year that the decision to drop the charges against the New Black Panther Party (NBPP) in the now infamous voter intimidation case was one that didn't involve upper leadership or political appointees within the Department of Justice. Both J. Christian Adams, who resigned in order to testify that wasn't true, as well as Christopher Coates, who testified despite being directed by DOJ not to, contradicted Perez's claim.

Now, courtesy of a lawsuit filed by Judicial Watch, we have a paper trail that backs up the testimony of Adams and Coates while pointing to perjury on the part of Perez as a distinct possibility. Judicial Watch, as part of its FOIA lawsuit against the Department of Justice (DOJ), has acquired emails that show communication between Tom Perrelli and Sam Hirsch, both political appointees. In fact, Perrelli held the third highest position at the DOJ at the time.

HERE is the link to the email chain.

Via Judicial Watch:
The new documents include a series of emails between two political appointees: former Democratic election lawyer and current Deputy Associate Attorney General Sam Hirsch and Associate Attorney General Thomas Perrelli. Both DOJ officials were involved in detailed discussions regarding the NBPP decision. For example, in one April 30, 2009, email from Hirsch to Perrelli, with the subject title “Fw: New Black Panther Party Update,” Hirsch writes:


I need to discuss this with you tomorrow morning. I’ll send you another email on this shortly.

If you want to discuss it this evening, please let me know which number to call and when.
Serving as an added touch of quintessential irony is that Thomas Perez is the same guy whose name is at the top of the lawsuit against Sheriff Joe Arapaio's Maricopa County over immigration enforcement. More on that HERE.

h/t to Washington Examiner
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