HYDROGEN BARACKSIDE

I'm really going to keep the words in this post to a minimum because if ever there was a cartoon that properly caricaturized Barack Obama, this is it. I simply don't know what to say except this is pure genius.
























h/t to FREE REPUBLIC

NEW CZAR! THIS ONE IN CHARGE OF CREATING JOBS

And you thought Van Jones' departure couldn't be trumped by this White House. Before the Obama bus had completely run over Van, his team was hard at work getting another Czar to fill the void. In a blatantly laughable display of distractionism, it's been discovered that a man name Ron Bloom is being tagged by Obama to create manufacturing jobs.

Small problem. Ron Bloom is a union guy with strong connections to the SEIU. He also negotiated for the United Steel Workers (USW). Putting a union guy in charge of job creation is like putting a dog in charge of your garbage. Respectively, both jobs and garbage mysteriously vanish.

Check out what the WALL STREET JOURNAL had to say about Bloom back in February.

Both inside and outside the USW, Mr. Bloom is known as a financially savvy negotiator — with a tendency to spout profanities. In a 2007 article depicting Mr. Bloom’s role in the Wheeling-Pittsburgh Corp. takeover battle, The Wall Street Journal wrote some USW members thought Mr. Bloom is “too cozy with the moneymen.”

My personal favorite in this article is the term, "Union-friendly" when referring to a company called Esmark. Note where Esmark is from.

The USW helped block Brazilian steel giant CSN’s attempt to merge with Wheeling-Pitt by finding a more union-friendly bidder in Esmark — a Chicago upstart that got bought by Russia’s OAO Severstal in 2008.

You know it's bad when loyal union members are skeptical of their negotiator. What to do, what to do? Make him a Czar in the Obama Administration! The inherent premise behind unions is control through bully tactics and ultimately killing its members' golden goose.

Leave it to Chicago to be home to a "union-friendly" company. Doesn't such a moniker warrant further probing into why Esmark would be so "union-friendly"? Curiously though, you wouldn't know where ESMARK is located by visiting their website as they don't list a mailing address, phone number, or even an email address.

Jake Tapper over at his ABC BLOG has more on Bloom.

A former vice president of Lazard Freres & Co. LLC, Bloom was a restructuring expert for the U.S. Steelworkers. In his new position, Bloom will work with the National Economic Council, and the Departments of Commerce, Treasury, Energy, and Labor.

The U.S. Steelworkers? Can anyone point to a productive result of their endeavors? Unions are about seizing control of workers and imposing limits on management. Profit for the company is merely a secondary concern (despite Union bosses' income stream coming indirectly from those profits in the form of dues earned by its members who pay those dues directly from their earnings). Incidentally, individual workers' earnings come in return for contributions they make in the form of labor toward the efforts of the company to earn a profit. Do the math. As the economy contracts, there are less union workers available to pay dues. As company profits decrease, so do union dues. Then again, union advocates understand where money comes from about as much as Democrats do. That fact explains perfectly why they're allies.

Tapper includes an excerpt from Bloom's statement about his new position.

"A strong manufacturing sector is a cornerstone of American competitiveness and a critical part of President Obama’s economic strategy. As we meet the challenges of globalization and technological change, it is vital to have a concerted effort across the Administration to support an innovative, vibrant manufacturing sector.”

Remember that in the eyes of union bosses, a strong manufacturing sector includes union dues and limits being placed upon managers and workers. The result is decreased output and a heirarchy in which the union bosses' concerns are strongly considered by the man soon to be in charge of creating jobs.

Gee, I wonder what kind of jobs we can start expecting to see created.

HELP WANTED: Thugs needed to physically intimidate those who disagree with us. Salary comensurate with experience and paid by those you will be intimidating. SIGN UP TODAY!

h/t to GATEWAY PUNDIT

VIDEO: CNN GUEST CALLS GLENN BECK A TERRORIST

Huffington Post's David Sirota and David Brooks-type conservative David Frum square off on CNN over the Van Jones resignation. Sirota says that Jones was targeted by "political right wing terrorists" and a "right wing lynch mob". He is very disappointed that the White House would have Van Jones removed for making a small "mistake" like signing his name to a 9/11 Truther document in 2004.

The statement released by Jones in his last ditch effort to stem the tide was to claim he didn't read the document and has never been a truther. Lost on Sirota (and Frum) is the fact that Gateway Pundit not only uncovered the 2004 document Jones signed but also this one from 4 months after 9/11, which Jones also signed:

Frum's malleable conservatism and failure to point out Jones' 2002 advocacy of trutherism notwithstanding, he provides solid counter arguments that Sirota seems incapable of processing. In fact, when you put Frum's points up against an unyielding Sirota, it serves as proof positive that those on the left can talk themselves into believing anything by ignoring the facts.

Note also the implications Sirota is making. His point seems to include a racist Obama administration who wouldn't jettison white guys like Tim Geithner and Ben Bernanke but seems all too willing to throw a "targeted African American" under the bus. It seems as though someone should inform Sirota that Obama is black. With logic like that, who needs facts? It should be obvious why Sirota didn't bring up former Car Czar Steve Rattner, who had to resign like Jones did. The Rattner angle blows holes in Sirota's argument.



Lastly, although it would have been off-topic, I wish Frum would have broached the subject of Van Jones' record label producing an album featuring cop killing, death row narrator Mumia Abu Jamal.


h/t to GATEWAY PUNDIT

VIDEO: FCC DIVERSITY CZAR AND HUGO CHAVEZ

By now, many of us are familiar with the 2008 video of current FCC "Diversity Czar" Mark Lloyd saying some very flattering things about Hugo Chavez (video below) defeating opposition by shutting down media outlets that provided it. Now we have Reuters reporting that Chavez continues to shut down radio stations that are not in lock step with his agenda:

Venezuela will pull the plug on 29 more radio stations, a top official in President Hugo Chavez's government said on Saturday, just weeks after dozens of other outlets were closed in a media clampdown.

Infrastructure Minister Diosdado Cabello closed 34 radio stations in July, saying the government was "democratizing" media ownership. Critics say the move limits freedom of expression and has taken critical voices off the airwaves.

The powerful Chavez ally has threatened to close over 100 stations in total, part of a long-term campaign against private media that the government says are biased against Chavez's government.

"Democratizing" media ownership by silencing adversarial voices? It's easy to see that Lloyd shares very similar views of private broadcasters in America after watching him speak and reading what he's written. That makes him a walking contradiction in addition to being an ALINSKY DICIPLE.

Don't you know that Lloyd is envious of what's going on in Venezuela right now? Make no mistake. If Lloyd had his way, he would flip a switch and shut down all radio stations that carry views in opposition to Obama. Former Green Jobs Czar Van Jones would call this a "MAXIMUM GOAL". As an aside, Jones, with coaching, understood he had to push "Minimum Goals" that contained very "radical kernel(s)" but he ultimately couldn't walk the walk because his maximum goals were revealed in a slew of shocking revelations last week.

Lloyd has gone public with his intentions. While his goals run parallel to those of Chavez, his means are more covert. CNS NEWS reported on Lloyd's plans to have private broadcasters pay double their current operating costs in the form of licensing fees. These fees would then fund the Corporation for Public Broadcasting (CPB).

CHAVEZ AND AHMADINEJAD

There are additional reasons for Americans to be disturbed by Lloyd's reverence for Hugo Chavez today. An AP REPORT shows that Venezuela is exporting gasoline to Iran.

The two countries signed the agreement late Sunday during a visit by Chavez, who pledged to deepen ties with Iran and stand together against what he called the imperialist powers of the world.

The radio stations in Venezuela who would carry voices that oppose such agreements are being targeted for closing by Chavez. What does this say about Lloyd and, by extension, Obama himself, who has already aligned with Chavez in the Honduran crisis? By championing the efforts of Chavez, isn't Lloyd advocating government action that leads to agreements between Ahmadinejad and Chavez increasing in boldness and frequency while becoming increasingly unchallenged?

Lloyd's writings carry an air of backward thinking and contradictions. In fact, he reminds me of a character from a Gilligan's Island episode - Wrong Way Feldman. Quoting from the AP report, here is an example of how Lloyd's proposed policies would actually serve to help Iran:

Western leaders have threatened to impose further sanctions against it should Iran refuse to bend to deadlines for talks aimed at curbing Tehran's nuclear activities. One idea that has been touted, though not yet formally proposed, is to cut off exports of gas station-ready fuel to Iran.

By showing admiration for Chavez and his aggressive policy of shutting down opposing voices, Lloyd is espousing a weaker stick when it comes to imposing further sanctions on Iran since Chavez is thumbing his nose at the notion and wants to make it even easier by silencing any remaining vestige of an adversarial press.

OLIVER AND HUGO

Isn't this special? Oliver Stone's favorable documentary of Chavez is being screened in Venice as the deal between Hugo and Mahmoud is revealed, a deal that helps to alleviate a huge bottleneck for the Iranian leader - refinery capabilities amid a sea of oil.

DRUDGE has links to stories about the Stone documentary. If there is good news in these very troubling times, it may just be that a substantial number of far leftwingers who like to portray themselves as either apolitical or objective fence-sitters are unmasking themselves. Oliver Stone appears to be overtly choosing sides in the left/right debate these days as REUTERS is reporting that Stone views Chavez as a victim.

Stone no doubt thinks he's doing important and daring work. The irony is that he seems to be suffering from the same delusion that afflicted the likes of Cindy Sheehan, who also embraced Chavez. When you're sympathetic to dictators, you're in no real danger as long as you are useful. Jane Fonda certainly comes to mind.

Director Oliver Stone says the U.S. media and government have demonised Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez and other leftist South American leaders, and argues in a new film that they were right to stand up to Washington.

Here's where Stone confounds in a way similar to Lloyd when one takes a look at another film Stone is responsible for - JFK (the left's hero). If memory serves, that film outed communists and implicated Castro's Cuba. Aren't the Castros and Hugo close allies? It should be no surprise why those on the left seem to share a trait of rampant confusion.

Before reading these quotes from Stone, take another look at the one of countless photos above showing Chavez and Ahmadinejad embracing.

"I think the movie, if you've seen it, shows very clearly the level of stupidity in the kind of broad statements that are made about Mr. Chavez," Stone told reporters in Venice, where South of the Border has its world premiere on Monday.

"But I didn't want to make a movie only about the American media's attacks. I felt that that was too small for what this man is about. This man is a big phenomenon.

"So we travelled in a road trip kind of movie to visit these other presidents and we saw the positive side of what is going on, the sweeping change in this region. It's a very important historical phenomenon that is ... ignored in America."

Just curious but how soon will it be before Stone does a glowing documentary on the leader of Iran? As he and Chavez yuk it up in Venice, what's the possibility Chavez drops the idea in Stone's lap in much the same way he handed a book to Obama in front of the cameras?

In summary, as Chavez wheels and deals with Ahmadinejad, he's closing down radio stations that might have opposing voices to that kind of thing. FCC Diversity Czar Lloyd is on video extoling the virtue and courage of Chavez while filmmaker Oliver Stone is screening a glowing documentary of the communist dictator that identifies him as a victim.

Is Stone's film the kind of thing Lloyd would find acceptable for airing on the public airwaves he wants to control one day?

Here is Lloyd in 2008. Judge for yourself.

VIDEO: SOMEBODY IS LYING ABOUT LOCKERBIE BOMBER

More fallout from the Daily Mail story that came out this weekend. They reported that British officials struck back at the Obama administration, saying that the outrage displayed over the release of the Lockerbie Pan Am bomber by the likes of Attorney General Eric Holder and Secretary of State Clinton was 'disingenuous'.

Someone is lying and I never bet against Hillary Clinton if she's involved.

The DAILY MAIL reports that British officials are accusing the Obama administration of manufacturing outrage in response to real outrage and believes they are being thrown under the bus as a result (This White House? Nawww).

Keeping the Mail's report in mind, take a look at both Eric 'America is a nation of cowards' Holder and Hillary Clinton feign righteous indignation after it became public that Abdelbaset Al Megrahi would be released.



I reported on this story EARLIER.

h/t to GATEWAY PUNDIT for the video link.