Category: Politics

When Idolatry Ends

On By kingsjesterIn Politics5 Comments

There’s trouble in paradise.

Young Democrats are beginning to revolt against the socialist strategy of President Barack Hussein Obama (mm mmm mmmm).

ABCnews.go.com has the story:

The Obama campaign is in full damage-control mode one day after Newark Mayor Cory Booker publicly derided Democrats’ assault on presumptive GOP nominee Mitt Romney over his record at Bain Capital.

Chief Obama strategist David Axelrod today publicly rebuked Booker, a popular and high-profile surrogate for the campaign, saying he was “just wrong.”

“I love Cory Booker. He’s a great mayor. If I were, if my house was on fire, I’d hope he were my next door neighbor,” Axelrod said on MSNBC, referring to Booker’s rescue of a neighbor last month.

“I agree with what he said later. I think this was a legitimate area for discussion,” Axelrod said of Booker’s subsequent comments clarifying the issue.

As for the criticism that the Team Obama’s Bain attack is part of “nauseating” political discourse with which Booker has become “very uncomfortable,” Axelrod said, “on this particular instance he was just wrong.”

Booker is not the only Democrat to question the aggressive, negative portrayal of Romney’s work in private equity. Former Tennessee Rep. Harold Ford Jr. said today he agreed with “the substance” of Booker’s comments and “would not have backed out.”

“I agree with him, private equity is not a bad thing. Matter of fact, private equity is a good thing in many, many instances,” the Democrat said in a separate appearance on MSNBC earlier in the day.

Former Obama administration economic adviser Steven Rattner made similar comments last week, calling a new Obama campaign TV ad attacking Romney’s role in the bankruptcy of a Bain-owned steel company “unfair.”

“Bain Capital’s responsibility was not to create 100,000 jobs or some other number. It was to create profits for its investors,” Rattner said. ”‘It did it superbly well, acting within the rules, acting very responsibly. … This is part of capitalism, this is part of life. I don’t think there’s anything Bain Capital did that they need to be embarrassed about.”

Republicans have been gleeful with the apparent divide among Democrats over the portrayal of Romney’s Bain days. The Romney campaign produced a web video – “Big Bain Backfire” – highlighting the comments, while the Republican National Committee purchased ads on Twitter to play up the Booker flap.

“President Obama’s attacks on free enterprise have triggered a backlash among many, even among those in his own party,” Romney spokeswoman Amanda Henneberg said. “With no record to run on, it is no surprise that the Obama campaign has resorted to misleading attacks that have been disavowed by its own supporters.”

Very true.

However, Amanda, are you guys ready for the Obama Campaign to start attacking Mitt’s Mormonism?

Here is an example from washingtonpost.com:

On the wildflower-studded slopes of the Ozarks, where memories run long and family ties run thick, a little-known and long-ago chapter of history still simmers.

On Sept. 11, 1857, a wagon train from this part of Arkansas met with a gruesome fate in Utah, where most of the travelers were slaughtered by a Mormon militia in an episode known as the Mountain Meadows Massacre. Hundreds of the victims’ descendants still populate these hills and commemorate the killings, which they have come to call “the first 9/11.”

Many of the locals grew up hearing denunciations of Mormonism from the pulpit on Sundays, and tales of the massacre from older relatives who considered Mormons “evil.”

“There have been Fancher family reunions for 150 years, and the massacre comes up at every one of them,” said Scott Fancher, 58, who traces his lineage back to 26 members of the wagon train, which was known as the Fancher-Baker party. “The more whiskey we drunk, the more resentful we got.”

There aren’t many places in America more likely to be suspicious of Mormonism — and potentially more problematic for Mitt Romney, who is seeking to become the country’s first Mormon president. Not only do many here retain a personal antipathy toward the religion and its followers, but they also tend to be Christian evangelicals, many of whom view Mormonism as a cult.

And yet, there is scant evidence that Romney’s religion is making much difference in how voters here are thinking about the presidential election and whether they are willing to back the former Massachusetts governor.

“I think the situation right now is more anti-Obama than any other situation,” said Dave Hoover, chairman of the Carroll County Republicans.

It is impossible to know how Romney’s faith will play out in the November election. Polls point to a persistent skepticism about the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, and not just among evangelical Christians. Thirty-five percent of Americans in a Bloomberg News poll in March said they had an unfavorable view of the church, while 29 percent had a favorable view.

But it may not have a major impact on their vote: Eight out of 10 Republicans and Democrats said Romney’s faith was not a major reason to support or oppose him, according to an April Washington Post-ABC News poll. And a recent study by the Brookings Institution found that Romney’s religion may actually increase his support from conservative voters, including white evangelicals.

Indeed, many here say their political values will be more important to their vote than religion or history. A rural and deeply religious community, many cite the cultural issues of abortion and gun rights as foremost on their minds. The weak economy has deepened their dislike of President Obama, who received less than 40 percent of the vote in Arkansas in 2008.

The thing is, the Democrats and their propaganda arm, the Main Stream Media, have cried wolf on behalf of Obama so many times, the American public simply doesn’t believe them anymore….and it looks like members of their own political party are sharing America’s disbelief.

What a shame.   Sho’ ’nuff hate it for ’em.

It is too bad that you can’t see this Cheshire Cat grin I am wearing as I write this.

Disenfranchising the Dead Voter Bloc

On By kingsjesterIn Politics4 Comments

Remember J. Christian Adams?

He resigned from the Department of Justice in 2010 over the handling of the Black Panther case, then he testified before the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights that he was told “cases are not going to be brought against black defendants for the benefit of white victims.”

Well, now he writes for pjmedia.com and he has posted this story:

I have learned that Florida election officials are set to announce that the secretary of state has discovered and purged up to 53,000 dead voters from the voter rolls in Florida.

How could 53,000 dead voters have sat on the polls for so long? Simple. Because Florida hadn’t been using the best available data revealing which voters have died. Florida is now using the nationwide Social Security Death Index for determining which voters should be purged because they have died.

Here is the bad news. Most states aren’t using the same database that Florida is. In fact, I have heard reports that some election officials won’t even remove voters even when they are presented with a death certificate. That means that voter rolls across the nation still are filled with dead voters, even if Florida is leading the way in detecting and removing them.

But surely people aren’t voting in the names of dead voters, the voter fraud deniers argue. Wrong.

Consider the case of Lafayette Keaton. Keaton not only voted for a dead person in Oregon, he voted for his dead son. Making Keaton’s fraud easier was Oregon’s vote by mail scheme, which has opened up gaping holes in the integrity of elections. The incident in Oregon just scratches the surface of the problem. Massachusetts and Mississippi are but two other examples of the dead rising on election day.

Florida should be applauded for taking the problem seriously, even if Eric Holder’s Justice Department and many state election officials don’t.

On December 13, 2011, politico.com published the following story about the United States Attorney General’s opinion of the proposed state Voter I.D. Laws:

…“It is time to ask: What kind of nation and what kind of people do we want to be? Are we willing to allow this era — our era — to be remembered as the age when our nation’s proud tradition of expanding the franchise ended?” Holder said in a speech at the Lyndon Baines Johnson Library and Museum in Austin, Texas.

This year, eight states have passed laws that require voters to show identification at the polls. Two of those states, South Carolina and Texas, need so-called pre-clearance from the Justice Department or a court, which has not yet been granted. Some states are also rolling back early voting options and adding new registration procedures, while others are imposing rules that could make it more difficult for college students and the elderly to vote.

Critics complain that the measures will have a disproportionate impact on minorities and the poor and are aimed at suppressing turnout of voters who tend to support Democrats. Supporters generally cite a need to fight fraud, though some have on occasion admitted seeking to discourage voting by specific groups, such as students.

Holder suggested that the new voter ID laws are unnecessary but was vague about what action the Justice Department plans to take against them, particularly in those states free to craft election procedures without the prior approval from the DOJ or the courts required by the Voting Rights Act. Under Section 5 of that law, most parts of nine states and a smattering of other counties and towns with a history of election-related discrimination must apply to the Justice Department or a court for permission to change voting procedures.

“Since January, more than a dozen states have advanced new voting measures. Some of these new laws are currently under review by the Justice Department, based on our obligations under the Voting Rights Act,” Holder said. “Although I cannot go into detail about the ongoing review of these and other state law changes, I can assure you that it will be thorough — and fair. We will examine the facts and we will apply the law.”

Holder’s message seemed as much a public exhortation to fight voter ID laws as a vow that the Justice Department would take action to block them.

“Speak out. Raise awareness about what’s at stake,” Holder said. “Call on our political parties to resist the temptation to suppress certain votes in the hope of attaining electoral success and, instead, encourage and work with the parties to achieve this success by appealing to more voters. And urge policymakers at every level to re-evaluate our election systems — and to reform them in ways that encourage, not limit, participation.”

In his remarks, Holder addressed the question of voter fraud that has been cited repeatedly by advocates of the new state laws such as Republican state Sen. Troy Fraser, a sponsor of Texas’s voter ID law, who said at the time the bill was passed: “Voter impersonation is a serious crime, but without a photo ID requirement, we can never have confidence in our system of voting.”

Holder said he prosecuted voter fraud cases earlier in his career but that “in-person voting fraud is uncommon.”

[53,000 Dead Voters in one state is uncommon?]

“We must be honest about this,” he said.

Of course, AG Holder is just acting on orders from his boss, President Barack Hussein Obama (mm mmm mmmm):

President Obama’s reelection campaign launched a national drive Friday to counter new restrictive voter-access laws, which advisers said threaten his electoral chances in November. 

[Evidently.]

Organizers will fan out in key swing states this weekend to teach volunteers and voters how to navigate a series of laws passed by Republican-controlled state legislatures imposing stricter identification requirements, limiting early voting and making it harder to organize voter-registration drives.

It is the beginning of a months-long effort, campaign officials said, to combat what they described as a Republican effort to stifle voting among young people and minorities, two groups that traditionally tend to vote Democratic.

Republicans say the new laws are needed to protect against voter fraud and help make elections fairer.

The Obama campaign’s “weekend of action” is part of a field effort that in 2008 helped identify, register and turn out millions of new voters. Those new voters gave Obama wins in unlikely places, including North Carolina and Virginia, where young and minority voters helped make the difference. Turning out those voters again this year is key to the president’s reelection strategy, but it is also more challenging this year in part because of the new voting laws.

Up until now, Americans thought what Sam “Mooney” Giacana did in turning out the Chicago and Illinois vote to elect JFK was the height of  “shady”.

It turns out that the late “businessman” was an amateur compared to these operators…and,he will probably be voting for Obama on November 6, 2012.

Gibson Guitars, the Lacey Act, and Campaign Contributions

On By kingsjesterIn Politics2 Comments

Is the Obama Administration going to perform an impersonation of David Lee Roth and Eddie Van Halen and stop summer concerts?

Tennessee Senator Lamar Alexander certainly hopes not:

“I don’t want the musicians from Nashville who are flying to Canada to perform this summer to worry about the government seizing their guitars,” Alexander, R-Tenn., said Friday in a statement released by his office.

Why seize guitars? Because many of those instruments are made from exotic woods that were outlawed by a 2008 amendment to the Lacey Act, an amendment Alexander himself wrote.

In 2008, Alexander and fellow Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Wash., moved to protect the American forest products industry by adding wood to the century-old Lacey Act – which was passed to protect endangered birds, whose feathers were prized for ladies’ hats.

American timber companies were being unfairly undercut by foreign sources of wood, many of which were illegally logged. Environmental groups also supported the amendment for curbing illegal logging in rainforests by imposing criminal penalties for trading in endangered species of wood.

It was that same amendment that led federal agents to raid the factories of Gibson Guitars in 2009 and again in 2011 – raids in which substantial quantities of musical instrument-grade wood were seized. It also ignited a firestorm of fear among musicians that the feds could come gunning for their instruments, unless they had extensive documentation on when the guitar was made and where the wood was from.

After pointed questions from Rep. Marsha Blackburn, R-Tenn., and other lawmakers, the U.S. Department of Justice and the Fish and Wildlife Service sent a letter assuring musicians that they would not be targeted for “unknowingly” possessing instruments that were manufactured from illegal wood.

But Alexander wants to make clear that the Lacey Act “was not intended to seize instruments made of wood harvested before 2008.” He said he and Wyden plan to write a letter to the federal agencies to clarify that point.

Both senators held a roundtable discussion with representatives from the music and wood import industries – along with conservation groups — to discuss the intent and impact of the Lacey Act amendment.

Alexander said he hoped to reduce “confusion, uncertainty and paperwork for wood importers and musical instrument manufacturers through administrative regulation.” Failing that, he promised he and Wyden would move to amend the Lacey Act.

Without indicating how he felt about Gibson’s guilt or innocence regarding the 2009 and 2011 seizures, Alexander dipped a toe in that water, saying, “We held this roundtable because instrument makers like Gibson Guitars in Tennessee are an important part of our music industry. And if the Lacey Act as written is keeping them from being able to get the wood they need to make instruments, we need to make every effort to fix the regulation.”

That has to be music to Gibson’s ears, which has had to switch to alternative woods, even composite materials, because they have been unable to import Indian ebony and rosewood since last year’s raid. Buyers of their expensive, high-end products are picky about the type of wood that is used in a Gibson guitar. Gibson is concerned it may lose market share to other manufacturers if it can’t resupply with Indian woods.

The acknowledgement that the Lacey Act may need “fixing” is a significant development in the dispute surrounding Gibson, exotic woods and the musical instrument industry. And months after the raid against Gibson, there is still no word from the Justice Department whether the company will even face charges.

Back on August 28, 2011, I posted the following, in an article titled, “Obama’s Gibson Guitar Raid:  Punishing His Enemies”:

Wood, huh?

Sorry, tree huggers.  It was revealed yesterday, by Andrew Lawton, of landmarkreport.com, that the reason for the raids has about a much to do with wood as a buffalo nickel:

…It’s worth pointing out that Henry E. Juszkiewicz, Gibson’s Chief Executive Officer, is a donor to a couple of Republican politicians. According to the Open Secrets database, Juszkiewicz donated $2000 to Rep. Marsha Blackburn (R-TN07) last year, as well as $1500 each to Sen. Lamar Alexander (R-TN). Juszkiewicz also has donated $10,000 to the Consumer Electronics Association, a PAC that contributed $92.5k to Republican candidates last year, as opposed to $72k to Democrats. (The CEA did, however, contribute more to Democrats in the 2008 election cycle.)

When warrants as ridiculous such as these are issued and executed, there appears no other reason than because the company or individual at hand is being targeted, not because there is any sort of wrongdoing. As a company, Gibson is a legendary. They’ve done nothing wrong, except, apparently, deigning to have a Republican CEO.

The plot thickens, however.

One of Gibson’s leading competitors is C.F. Martin & Company. The C.E.O., Chris Martin IV, is a long-time Democratic supporter, with $35,400 in contributions to Democratic candidates and the DNC over the past couple of election cycles. According to C.F. Martin’s catalog, several of their guitars contain “East Indian Rosewood.” In case you were wondering, that is the exact same wood in at least ten of Gibson’s guitars.

The Gibson facility wasn’t raided over allegations of tax evasion, charges of embezzlement, or even something as drab as child labor. Not even close. It was raided over what the DOJ deems an inability to follow a vague domestic trade law in India (one that apparently the Indian government didn’t seem too concerned about enforcing) regarding a specific type of wood. Not illegal wood, just wood with obscenely specific procedural guidelines.

So, in reality, Sen. Alexander, Obama’s actions against Gibson Guitars has about as much to do with the Lacey Act as Obama himself had to do with killing Osama bin Laden.

Jar Jar Biden Stumbles Upon the Truth.

On By kingsjesterIn Politics2 Comments

Shortly after the immaculation of the leader of the Regime, as I was beginning my journey into the world of blogging, I made the statement that, in terms of Vice-President, America had gone from Darth Cheney to Jar Jar Biden.

I didn’t exaggerate.

Thehill.com reports on the latest open mouth, insert foot moment from the Gaffemeister:

Vice President Biden said he understood the frustration that led many West Virginia Democrats to vote for a felon over President Obama in the state’s presidential primary.

Asked what he made of a felon sitting in a Texas prison who won four out of 10 Democratic primary voters in West Virginia, Biden told Ohio television station WTOV that he doesn’t blame people who are frustrated and angry over the economy.

“Look, I come from a household where whenever there’s a recession, somebody around my grandpop or my dad’s table lost a job. A brother, a sister a friend, a neighbor,” Biden said. “When you’re out of work, man, it’s a depression.” [Even a blind squirrel finds a nut every now and then.]

Biden said a lot of Americans are still hurting because of the recession the Obama administration inherited.

“And so I don’t blame people. They’re frustrated, they’re angry,” Biden said.

He added that Americans would eventually decide that the path back to employment and prosperity would lead them to Obama’s approach rather than Mitt Romney’s.

You need to stop those liquid lunches, Joe.

Average Americans are drowning in a sea of debt.

Here are some depressing statistics, courtesy of the Wall Street Journal, from an article published May 7th:

Consumer credit outstanding surged by $21.36 billion, or 10.2%, to $2.542 trillion, Federal Reserve data showed Monday. That was the biggest jump since November 2001, in both dollar and percentage terms. Economists surveyed by Dow Jones Newswires had forecast an $8.5 billion increase. February’s expansion in consumer credit was revised up, as well, to $9.27 billion from an initial estimate of an $8.73 billion rise.

With consumer credit expanding at the fastest rate in the six months ending in February since late 2007–before the credit crunch caused a painful contraction–and commercial banks showing an increasing willingness to lend, Deutsche Bank analysts said earlier Monday the household deleveraging process may finally be running its course.

Still, much of the credit expansion has reflected a shift in student loans to direct borrowing from the federal government, with loans held by the Department of Education surging more than four-fold since 2008. Federal student credit outstanding rose to $460.2 billion in March from $453.3 billion the previous month.

Overall nonrevolving credit, which includes student credit as well as auto loans, rose $16.17 billion to $1.739 trillion.

Revolving credit, which includes credit-card debt, increased in March by $5.18 billion to $803.63 billion. That was the first gain in three months.

The consumer-credit report doesn’t include numbers on home mortgages and other real-estate secured loans. But the Fed data are important for the clues to behavior by consumers, whose spending helps propel the economy.

So, what sort of economic example is our Federal Government setting for us average consumers?

A horrible one, per cnsnews.com:

The White House and the congressional leaders of both parties in Congress have begun maneuvering this week over the issue of the federal debt and what to do when the government hits the latest statutory limit on that debt–$16.394 trillion—which Congress and the president agreed to when they cut a deal on the debt limit last August.

The federal debt is currently $15.709 trillion, or about $685 billion below the limit.

The first spending deal the White House and leaders of both parties in Congress made last year was on March 2. On that day, the president signed a continuing resolution to keep the government funded past March 4, when the previous continuing resolution, passed by a lame-duck Congress in late 2010, expired.

The March 4 CR kept the government funded for two weeks and was approved by a bipartisan 335-91 vote in the House and a bipartisan 91-9 vote in the Senate.

Since that March 4, 2011 bipartisan continuing resolution, the federal government has been funded by a series of bipartisan deals cut between the White House and congressional leaders.

In the meanwhile, under these bipartisan spending deals, according to official figures published by the U.S. Treasury, the federal debt has climbed from $14,182,627,184,881.03 to $15,708,753,671,767.64.

That is an increase of $1,526,126,486,886.61.

Given that the Census Bureau estimates there are about 117,538,000 households in the United States, the per household increase in the federal debt since Congress enacted its March 4, 2011 bipartisan spending deal has been approximately $12,984.

So, what is President Barack Hussein Obama (mm mmm mmmm) doing about our National Debt?

Per openmarkets.org, he’s trying to add to it:

President Obama’s proposed budget is so irresponsible that even the Senate, controlled by Obama’s own political party, just rejected it in a 99-to-0 vote. Reading the proposed budget does not inspire confidence, even in liberal journalists. In February, USA Today wrote that “Obama’s budget plan leaves debt bomb ticking… The best test of a budget proposal these days is whether it reins in the national debt… The election-year budget President Obama sent to Congress on Monday fails that test.”

The Los Angeles Times noted on February 14 that Obama’s proposed budget “offers no real solution to the United States’ long-term fiscal problems.” That same day, the Washington Post wrote that “Mr. Obama’s proposed budget for fiscal year 2013 falls short. At the end of the 10-year budget window, he would have the national debt at a disturbing 76.5 percent of gross domestic product” even under very optimistic assumptions. “The final budget of his first term does not reflect the leadership on issues of debt and deficit that Mr. Obama once vowed.”

The Detroit News noted that “President Barack Obama’s 2013 budget proposal should be dismissed as a blueprint for his re-election campaign. But it’s worse than that. If passed as presented — and there’s little likelihood of that — the spending plan would lock America on an auto-pilot course for Greece.” (Editorial, “Obama Budget Shirks Off Any Pretense To Fiscal Responsibility,” The Detroit News, 2/14/12.) The Chicago Tribune called Obama’s budget the blueprint for a “debt debacle.” In March, the House rejected the Obama budget in a 414-0 vote. In 2008, Obama promised a “net spending cut,” but as soon as he was elected, he proposed massive spending increases.

While the GOP-controlled House has passed a budget plan of its own, the Democratic-controlled Senate has not passed a single budget during the Obama administration, leaving the country without an official budget for over a thousand days. Senator Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) acknowledged that “there’s no excuse” for Senate Democrats’ failure to pass a budget, and that a state governor might face impeachment for similarly failing to put together a budget.

No chance of that happening in Washington, DC.  A realistic National Budget would lead to those professional politicians actually being held accountable.  And those jokers up there have never seen a tax dollar that they did not want to spend.

Obama: Sweet Home Hawaii…or Kenya?

On By kingsjesterIn Politics7 Comments

Once upon a time….within the mythical halls of a fabled ivy-covered Law School named Hahvahd, there dwelt an ambitious young scion known as Barry Soetoro…err…I mean Barack Hussein Obama.  He was known far and wide as the Editor of the Harvard Law Review.

The young “born leader” soon signed with a Literary Agency, for the purpose of marketing an upcoming book.  The Literary Agency, Acton & Dystel, published a brochure in 1991 which included the following short biography of the young liege:

Barack Obama, the first African-American president of the Harvard Law Review, was born in Kenya and raised in Indonesia and Hawaii. The son of an American anthropologist and a Kenyan finance minister, he attended Columbia University and worked as a financial journalist and editor for Business International Corporation. He served as project coordinator in Harlem for the New York Public Interest Research Group, and was Executive Director of the Developing Communities Project in Chicago’s South Side. His commitment to social and racial issues will be evident in his first book, Journeys in Black and White.

Mysteriously, in 2007, his birthplace on that biography was changed from Kenya to Hawaii.

An explanation of this curious biography was given yesterday:

Miriam Goderich edited the text of the bio; she is now a partner at the Dystel & Goderich agency, which lists Obama as one of its current clients.

“This was nothing more than a fact checking error by me–an agency assistant at the time,” Goderich wrote in an emailed statement to Yahoo News. “There was never any information given to us by Obama in any of his correspondence or other communications suggesting in any way that he was born in Kenya and not Hawaii. I hope you can communicate to your readers that this was a simple mistake and nothing more.”

A copy of the booklet was published on Breitbart.com, under the headline: ” Obama’s Literary Agent in 1991 Booklet: ‘Born in Kenya and raised in Indonesia and Hawaii.’ It was part of the “vetting” of the president the site’s late founder, Andrew Breitbart, had promised.

Ms. Goderich still represents President Barack Hussein Obama (mm mmm mmmm).

Obama addressed the curious question of the location of his birth in April of 2011, by producing a less-than-satisfying copy of his long form birth certificate from Hawaii, which many Americans thought was a cut and paste job.

After refusing for more than two years to indulge the most corrosive of conspiracy theories questioning his legitimacy, President Obama finally decided that he’d had enough.

He was frustrated and annoyed that questions about where he was born — once the province of the political fringe and more recently fanned by showman and real estate mogul Donald Trump — had arisen even in an interview last week with ABC News anchor George Stephanopoulos.

The “birther” question had become a distraction, one that was getting in Obama’s way as he tried to sell the country on his approach to long-term deficit reduction.

On April 19, Obama ordered White House counsel Robert Bauer to find out what it would take to retrieve a longer and more detailed version of his Hawaiian birth certificate, a document not routinely released by state authorities.

That set into motion several days of intense, secret maneuvering that culminated in an extraordinary moment Wednesday. The president appeared in the White House briefing room with evidence that he had indeed been born in the United States, as the Constitution requires.

In a six-minute statement, Obama alternately poked fun at the “sideshows and carnival barkers” that had made such a declaration necessary and pleaded for the media and political world to focus on the serious challenges that face the nation.

“We do not have time for this silliness,” Obama said. “We’ve got better stuff to do. I’ve got better stuff to do. We’ve got big problems to solve.”

Some of the president’s conservative critics have pushed the theory that Obama, whose father was Kenyan, was born in Africa, as a way to question his constitutional legitimacy and even his basic American-ness. It is a falsehood that has gained remarkable currency. The most recent CBS/New York Times poll suggests that about a quarter of Americans believe it to be true. Among Republicans, 45 percent said they think Obama was not born in the United States.

That number may be about to go up.

Here’s a short Civics lession from usgovinfo.about.com:

Only native-born U.S. citizens (or those born abroad, but only to parents who were both citizens of the U.S.) may be president of the United States, though from time to time that requirement is called into question, most recently after Arnold Schwarzenegger, born in Austria, was elected governor of California, in 2003. The Constitution originally provided a small loophole to this provision: One needn’t have been born in the United States but had to be a citizen at the time the Constitution was adopted. But, since that occurred in 1789, that ship has sailed.

Was President Obama “telling a story” to that Literary Agency in 1991 or to the American people when he said that he was eligible to run for the Presidency in 2008?

A 16-year-old “fact checking error”?  Gimme a break.

Letterman’s Obama Rant Plus My Top Ten List

On By kingsjesterIn Entertainment, Politics5 Comments

A headline posted on Breitbart.com, referring to the Ultra-Liberal CBS Late Show Host’s rant in defense of his messiah, Barack Hussein Obama, reads:

LETTERMAN CAMPAIGNS FOR OBAMA ON ‘LATE SHOW’: ‘WHAT MORE DO WE WANT THIS MAN TO DO FOR US, HONEST TO GOD?’

Letterman’s rant occured when NBC News anchor Brian Williams appeared on Tuesday night.

Mediaite.com summarizes the visit:

He was first asked about CBS Evening News anchor Scott Pelley, who Williams described as being suspiciously “sunny” in his disposition. “Life’s too short, if you feel like something a dog left on the sidewalk, say it,” said Williams.

Williams had great praise for the CBS and ABC News teams. Letterman, in turn, complimented Williams on his Rock Center special on the assassination of the Osama bin Laden.

Letterman drew applause from the audience when he said that he felt Obama had demonstrated “great courage and great intelligence” when he “gunned down” bin Laden and asked “what more do you want to lead your country?”

Williams said that most uniformed military personnel would tell him under the Bush administration that bin Laden himself was not a priority. “What you now find out, interviewing everyone in that picture, that of course it was a priority but it was a renewed priority when President Obama came into office,” said Williams. “He inherited a different set of circumstances – combat was winding down, arguably, at least the first if not the second.”

Letterman said that circumstances in Obama’s first term were worse than those for Bush, so “why didn’t he go after him?”

Williams outlines just how low the chances were that Obama could have been able to corner bin Laden where he was in Pakistan.

Letterman questioned why Obama should not be able to use the killing of bin Laden as a campaign tool when he believed Bush’s team would have done the same thing in that position. “Remember the Iraq war, “mission accomplished,” well holy ****, the mission was not accomplished,” said Letterman. “They put a banner up on the SS Lincoln, George flies up on the thing. He was very cute.”

“What more do we want this man to do for us, honest to god,” asked Letterman to applause.

“And there you have it,” responded Williams.

The segment concluded with a discussion on gay marriage and Letterman attempting to get to the bottom of his confusion as to why some would oppose same-sex marriage rights.

Evidently, ol’ Dave’s righteous indignation and concern only applies to Liberals, like his “messiah”.  Remember this little gem of graciousness?

From foxnews.com, posted on June 11, 2009:

David Letterman is in the hot seat for several crude jokes he made on CBS’ “The Late Show” about Sarah Palin and her teenage daughter.

Letterman, in his monologue Monday night, noted that the 2008 Republican vice presidential candidate attended a Yankees game during a trip to New York City, where she was honored by a special needs group. Letterman referred to Palin, Alaska’s governor, as having the style of a “slutty flight attendant.”

The “Late Show” host also took a shot Palin’s daughter, while poking fun at the Yankees’ third baseman.

“One awkward moment for Sarah Palin at the Yankee game,” Letterman said, “during the seventh inning, her daughter was knocked up by Alex Rodriguez.”

The backlash was almost immediate, with Palin’s supporters denouncing the CBS host for making jokes that many said were sexist and for what they called an unfair attack on the governor and her family.

“I think that calling the former vice presidential candidate a slut or saying that her daughter was knocked up by Alex Rodriguez, I think everyone can agree that’s over the line,” Washington Examiner correspondent Byron York told FOX News’ Greta Von Susteren.

But an even more disturbing fact, which Letterman may not have known, was that the daughter who accompanied Palin on her trip to New York was 14-year-old Willow — not 18-year-old Bristol, the unwed mother of Palin’s first grandchild.

Now, many critics — including the Palins themselves – are slamming Letterman for jokes that they say make light of sexual abuse of an underage girl.

In a statement to FOXNews.com, Palin accused Letterman of making “sexually perverted” and “inappropriate” comments that she doubted he would “ever dare make” about anyone else’s daughter.

“Acceptance of inappropriate sexual comments about an underage girl, who could be anyone’s daughter, contributes to the atrociously high rate of sexual exploitation of minors by older men who use and abuse others,” she said.

Palin’s husband, Todd, echoed her sentiments, telling FOXNews.com, “Any ‘jokes’ about raping my 14-year-old are despicable. Alaskans know it, and I believe the rest of the world knows it, too.”

A representative for “The Late Show” declined to offer comment for this story.

Letterman, after experiencing a huge backlash from what seemed like the entire nation, was forced to apoplogize.

Johnny Carson, he ain’t.

In honor of this long-in-the-tooth and short on humor Liberal talk show host, I came up with my own Top Ten List of answers to ol’ Dave’s question:

The Top Ten Things That Americans Want President Obama to Do:

10.  He and the Missus take the same plane to their lavish vacations.

9.   Quit Apologizing for America.

8.  Admit that Obamacare is nothing but a way to control our lives and line a bunch of local hack politicians’ pockets.

7.  Concentrate on improving our economy, instead of his golf game.

6.  Fire Attorney General Eric Holder.

5.  Write a National Budget based in reality.

4.  Publically admit that Christians comprise 78% of America’s population.

3.  Quit treating those that fervently wish to behead all of us infidels as friends of this nation and quit degrading our real friend, Israel.

2.  Stop using our Armed Forces as guinea pigs for your social experiments.

And the number one thing that Americans would have President Barack Hussein Obama (mm mmm mmmm) do…

1.  Resign.

The Obama Administration and Terrorism: Don’t Say the “I” Word.

On By kingsjesterIn Politics5 Comments

The War on Terror is still being fought by those who are sworn to protect us everyday…even if they are forbidden from publicly identifying or profiling the enemy.

Reuters News has the story:

Law enforcement and homeland security personnel face an average of 55 daily encounters with “known or suspected terrorists” named on government watchlists, officials told Reuters.

The figure – which equals more than 20,000 contacts per year – underscores the growing sweep of the watchlists, which have expanded significantly since a failed Christmas Day 2009 bombing attempt of a U.S. airliner. But officials note that very few of those daily contacts lead to arrests.

Civil liberties groups question the use of watchlists, and they have been ridiculed for ensnaring innocent citizens.

U.S. officials said the encounters, which involve airport and border security personnel as well as federal and local law enforcement officers, are reported to the Terrorist Screening Center (TSC), an interagency unit led by an FBI official based in a tightly guarded building in northern Virginia.

At its headquarters, the TSC operates a 24-hour command center, resembling something from a Hollywood thriller, complete with giant wall-screen projections and signs flashing “SECRET.”

Officials said that when a law enforcement or homeland security officer in the field stops a person whose name matches a name in the TSC’s databases, the officer is supposed to phone the TSC command center for instructions. Based on information in the databases, the TSC then will advise the officer in the field how to proceed, which could range from releasing the suspect to calling in federal officers as backup.

The command center gets between 100 and 150 inquiries a day, of which an average of 55 involve individuals who turn out to be listed on one of the federal watch lists, officials said. Of those calls, about 60 percent come from federal officers at border or airport security posts; the rest come from local police.

“There are incidents every single day,” said TSC director Timothy Healy.

The watchlists include the best known “no fly list” as well as a “selectee list” of people who the government thinks should get extra screening or questioning before being allowed to board an airplane.

…A suspect’s name is put on the “no fly” list if they are deemed by government experts to be a threat to aviation, to be planning an attack or if they are “operationally capable” and are known to be planning to attend, or to have already attended, a militant training camp.

Fewer than 500 of the individuals on the no-fly list are U.S. citizens, officials said.

Waitasec.  You mean we can start calling these jerks “terrorists” again?  I thought they were “misguided youths” creating “man-caused disasters”?  At least, that’s what we were told by newsbusters.org, back in March of 2009:

Even as President Obama compares bankers to suicide bombers, his Homeland Security Secretary is suggesting the T-word, terrorism, is too inflammatory and representative of old-fashioned “politics of fear.” She’s announced a new term: “man-caused disaster.” From an interview with the German magazine Der Spiegel:

SPIEGEL: Madame Secretary, in your first testimony to the US Congress as Homeland Security Secretary you never mentioned the word “terrorism.” Does Islamist terrorism suddenly no longer pose a threat to your country?

NAPOLITANO: Of course it does. I presume there is always a threat from terrorism. In my speech, although I did not use the word “terrorism,” I referred to “man-caused” disasters. That is perhaps only a nuance, but it demonstrates that we want to move away from the politics of fear toward a policy of being prepared for all risks that can occur.

But what if the suicide bomber is a female? Isn’t it sexist to use “man-caused disaster”?

Why did the Obama Administration forbid the use of the term Islamic Terroist” in the first place?

Perhaps a clue to the answer to that may be found in the new book written by Ed Klein, “The Amateur:  Barack Obama in the White House”.  In the book, Klein says that Rev. Wright, a former American Muslim, took Obama under his wing, becoming a father figure to him.

“Obama was steeped in Islam but knew nothing about Christianity,” Klein says.

Klein asked Wright if he converted Obama from being a Muslim into a Christian.

“He said, I don’t know about that. but I can tell you that I made it easy for him to come to an understanding of who Jesus Christ is and not feel that he was turning his back on his Islamic friends and his Islamic traditions and his understanding of Islam,” Klein says.

In an article posted at The Daily Caller on October 21, 2011…

Deputy U.S. Attorney General James Cole confirmed on Wednesday that the Obama administration was pulling back all training materials used for the law enforcement and national security communities, in order to eliminate all references to Islam that some Muslim groups have claimed are offensive.

“I recently directed all components of the Department of Justice to re-evaluate their training efforts in a range of areas, from community outreach to national security,” Cole told a panel at the George Washington University law school.

The move comes after complaints from advocacy organizations including the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) and others identified as Muslim Brotherhood front groups in the 2004 Holy Land Foundation terror fundraising trial.

In a Wednesday Los Angeles Times op-ed, Muslim Public Affairs Council (MPAC) president Salam al-Marayati threatened the FBI with a total cutoff of cooperation between American Muslims and law enforcement if the agency failed to revise its law enforcement training materials.

Maintaining the training materials in their current state “will undermine the relationship between law enforcement and the Muslim American community,” al-Marayati wrote.

Multiple online sources detail MPAC’s close alignment with CAIR.

So, to recap, our Law Enforcement officials and Homeland Security Agents handle an average of 55 “terrorist” encounters per day, consisting of people who are recorded on a government watchlist, which includes a no-fly list, which has less than 500 U.S. Citizens listed on it.

Therefore, one must conclude that the majority of these terrorists are not U.S. Citizens.   

Hmmm.  I wonder who they are and where they hail from. Mongolia?

Obama and the Media: A Love Story

On By kingsjesterIn Politics5 Comments

Yesterday, President Barack Hussein Obama blamed the Media for Americans’ lack of faith in their country’s institutions.

CNSNews.com has the story:

President Barack Obama pointed a finger at the news media today when he gave the commencement address at all-female Barnard College in New York City, attributing some of the blame for what he described as a lack of faith in American institutions on news reports that focus on “sensationalism” and “scandal” and carry “a message that change isn’t possible.”

In a survey conducted last September, Gallup discovered that 47 percent of Americans believe the media is “too liberal” while only 13 percent believe it is “too conservative.” Thirty-six percent said they believed the media was “just about right.”

“And while opportunities for women have grown exponentially over the last 30 years, as young people, in many ways you have it even tougher than we did,” Obama said.

President Obama, lost in his own hubris, has inadvertently opened a Pandora’s Box of his own making.  Yes, Americans distrust the MSM, but it’s because they are biased and are all too happy to carry the water for President Barack Hussein Obama (mm mmm mmmm) and the Democratic Party.

A Pew Research Center survey of 1,000 adults conducted in January 2012 and released the following month found a record high 67 percent of Americans see “a great deal” or “fair amount” of “political bias” in the news media. Such a widespread perception of bias is bad news for the media, since most Americans (68%) also told Pew’s researchers they prefer to get their political news from sources “that have no particular political point of view.”

KEY FINDINGS: 

Pew found that “the number saying there is a great deal of political bias in the news has risen to a new high, with the most intense criticism coming from Tea Party Republicans.” A record high 67 percent of Americans see “a great deal” (37%) or “fair amount” (30%) of political bias in the news media, up from 63 percent just four months earlier.

Among self-described Tea Party Republicans, 74 percent saw a “great deal” of political bias in the media. Among all Republicans, 49 percent saw a “great deal” of bias in the news, vs. 35 percent of independents and 32 percent of Democrats.

“Men (41%) are somewhat more likely than women (33%) to see bias in the news,” and “higher-earning and better-educated Americans [are] more likely to say there is a great deal of political bias in the news.”

“Among news audiences, those who cite the Fox News Channel or the radio as their main source of campaign news are the most likely to say there is a great deal of bias in news coverage.”

Despite the widespread perception of a biased media, Pew found “most Americans [68%] say they prefer to get their news from sources that have no particular point of view than from sources that share their political view [23%].”

How about some examples of the Main Stream Media’s adoration of their “messiah”?

“Getting Chills” Upon Hearing Obama’s “Historic Words”

Co-host George Stephanopoulos: “What a watershed moment. You know, whatever people think about this issue, and we know it’s controversial, there’s no denying when a President speaks out for the first time like that, it is history.”

Co-host Robin Roberts: “And let me tell you, George, I’m getting chills again. Because when you sit in that room and you hear him say those historic words — it was not lost on anyone that was in the room.”

— ABC’s Good Morning America, May 10.

Too Obvious to Deny: Media “Uniformly” Back Obama on Gay Marriage

“So many people in the media seem to uniformly support same-sex marriage. Do you think that this dialogue we’re having nationally doesn’t adequately recognize that for many people, this is an issue that they struggle with and don’t believe in?”

— Savannah Guthrie on NBC’s Today, May 10.

“I think that the media is as divided on this issue as the Obama family — which is to say not at all. And so he’s never going to get negative coverage for this….When you have almost the entire media establishment on your side on an issue in a presidential campaign, it’s very hard to lose politically.”

— Mark Halperin on MSNBC’s Morning Joe, May 10.

Watch Out for Evil “Wolves… Giggling With Delight”

“It is a pretty profound statement by our President. I don’t want to get past that too quickly. That’s the good news for everybody in the country in terms of freedom and the long march towards liberalism in the country…. But there has always been another army out there that feeds on those who resent it. That army has been out there during Jim Crow. It was out there during abolition, during suffrage. There’s always an army that feeds on change and feeds against it — the wolves, and they’re being released right now and they’re probably giggling with delight at how they’re going to use this.”

— Chris Matthews during MSNBC live coverage during the 3pm hour, May 9, shortly after ABC released clips of Obama’s statement on same-sex marriage.

So, Mr. President, you were half-right.  Yes, the media is corrupt.  However, you and your cronies are the ones benefiting from their corruption.

Look, three love affairs in history, are Abelard and Eloise, Romeo and Juliet and the American media and this President at the moment. But this doesn’t matter over time. Reality will impinge. If his programs work, he’s fine. If it doesn’t work, all of the adulation of journalists in the world won’t matter.
George Will

Andrew Sullivan: Being Gay is like Being Black…or Something

On By kingsjesterIn Politics6 Comments

This week’s edition of Newsweek Magazine will feature a very “special” article in it by self-proclaimed Gay Conservative Andrew Sullivan (and if this guy is a “Conservative”, I’m a blonde 22-year-old Dallas Cowboy Cheerleader named Buffy).  In the article, Sullivan equates Obama’s Black Experience to being Gay:

Last week he did it—in a move whose consequences are simply impossible to judge. White House sources told me that after the interview with ABC News, the president felt as if a weight had been lifted off him. Yes, he was bounced into it by Joe Biden, the lovable Irish-Catholic rogue who couldn’t help but tell the truth about his own views on TV (only to be immediately knocked down by David Axelrod on Twitter). But Obama had been planning to endorse gay marriage before his reelection for a while. White House sources say that if Obama had been a state senator in New York last year when the Albany legislature legalized gay marriage, he’d have voted in favor. But no one asked. The “make news” reveal was scheduled for The View. In the end, scrambling to catch up with his veep, he turned to his fellow ESPN fan, Robin Roberts, a Christian African-American from Mississippi, to quell the sudden kerfuffle. Even this was calculated: to have this moment occur between two African-Americans would help Obama calm opposition within parts of the black community.

The interview, by coincidence, came the day after North Carolina voted emphatically to ban all rights for gay couples in the state constitution. For gay Americans and their families, the emotional darkness of Tuesday night became a canvas on which Obama could paint a widening dawn. But I didn’t expect it. Like many others, I braced myself for disappointment. And yet when I watched the interview, the tears came flooding down. The moment reminded me of my own wedding day. I had figured it out in my head, but not my heart. And I was utterly unprepared for how psychologically transformative the moment would be. To have the president of the United States affirm my humanity—and the humanity of all gay Americans—was, unexpectedly, a watershed. He shifted the mainstream in one interview. And last week, a range of Democratic leaders—from Harry Reid to Steny Hoyer—backed the president, who moved an entire party behind a position that only a few years ago was regarded as simply preposterous. And in response, Mitt Romney could only stutter.

…This is the gay experience: the discovery in adulthood of a community not like your own home and the struggle to belong in both places, without displacement, without alienation. It is easier today than ever. But it is never truly without emotional scar tissue. Obama learned to be black the way gays learn to be gay. And in Obama’s marriage to a professional, determined, charismatic black woman, he created a kind of family he never had before, without ever leaving his real family behind. He did the hard work of integration and managed to create a space in America for people who did not have the space to be themselves before. And then as president, he constitutionally represented us all.

I have always sensed that he intuitively understands gays and our predicament—because it so mirrors his own. And he knows how the love and sacrifice of marriage can heal, integrate, and rebuild a soul. The point of the gay-rights movement, after all, is not about helping people be gay. It is about creating the space for people to be themselves. This has been Obama’s life’s work. And he just enlarged the space in this world for so many others, trapped in different cages of identity, yearning to be released and returned to the families they love and the dignity they deserve.

Back on December 31, 2004, Dr. Thomas Sowell, the respected Black Economist, wrote the following in an article titled, “Gay marriage ‘rights'”, published at townhall.com:

Of all the phony arguments for gay marriage, the phoniest is the argument that it is a matter of equal rights.Marriage is not a right extended to individuals by the government. It is a restriction on the rights they already have.

People who are simply living together can make whatever arrangements they want, whether they are heterosexual or homosexual. They can divide up their worldly belongings 50-50 or 90-10 or whatever other way they want. They can make their union temporary or permanent or subject to cancellation at any time.

…The time is long overdue to stop word games about equal rights from leading to special privileges — for anybody — and gay marriage is as good an issue on which to do so as anything else.

Incidentally, it is not even clear how many homosexuals actually want marriage, even though gay activists are pushing it.

What the activists really want is the stamp of acceptance on homosexuality, as a means of spreading that lifestyle, which has become a death style in the era of AIDS.

…There is no limit to what people will do if you let them get away with it. That our schools, which are painfully failing to educate our children to the standards in other countries, have time for promoting homosexuality is truly staggering.

Every special interest group has an incentive to take something away from society as a whole. Some will be content just to siphon off a share of the taxpayers’ money for themselves. Others, however, want to dismantle a part of the structure of values that make a society viable.

They may not want to bring down the whole structure, just get rid of the part that cramps their style. But when innumerable groups start dismantling pieces of the structure that they don’t like, we can be headed for the kinds of social collapses seen both in history and in other parts of the world in our own times.

I have no desire to destroy somebody’s happiness.  

That being said, I don’t want 5% of America to have the “right” to re-define a word that has meant one thing since time immemorial, simply because they believe that it brings to their lifestyle the label of “normalcy”.

Another Saturday Morning With Bubba

On By kingsjesterIn Politics1 Comment

Well, howdy, Mr. President. Good to see you. Please…have a seat.

Waitress, one Rooty-Tooty Fresh ‘n Fruity Breakfast for President Clinton, please, with a large sweet tea to drink.

Wow, Mr. President. Did you see this article in the New York Post yesterday? You didn’t? Here’s, let me read some of it for you:

The title of Klein’s explosive, unauthorized bio of Obama, “The Amateur” (Regnery Publishing), was taken directly from Bill Clinton’s bombshell criticism of the president, the author said.

“Barack Obama,” Bill Clinton said, according to book excerpts, “is an amateur.”

The withering criticism is incredible, given the fact that Bill Clinton is actively campaigning for Obama’s re-election.

But according to the book, Bill Clinton unloaded on Obama and pressed Hillary to run against her boss during a gathering in the ex-president’s home office in Chappaqua last August that included longtime friends, Klein said.

“The economy’s a mess, it’s dead flat. America has lost its Triple-A rating . . . You know better than Obama does,” Bill said.

Bill Clinton insisted he had “no relationship” with Obama and had been consulted more frequently by his presidential successor, George W. Bush.

Obama, Bill Clinton said, “doesn’t know how to be president” and is “incompetent.”

But Hillary resisted the entreaties, according to two of the guests interviewed for the book.

“Why risk everything now?” a skeptical Hillary told her husband, emphasizing that she wanted to leave a legacy as secretary of state.

“Because,” Bill replied, his voice rising, “the country needs you!”

“The country needs us!” added Bill.

He later even joked about the prospect of having two Clinton presidential libraries — about the only time that Hillary cracked a smile.

“I want my term [at the State Department] to be an important one, and running away from it now would leave it as a footnote,” Hillary argued.

She said she had the option of running again in 2016.

But Bill wouldn’t let go.

“I know you’re young enough!” Bill said, his voice booming. “That’s not what I’m worried about. I’m worried that I’m not young enough.”

“I’m the highest-ranking member in Obama’s Cabinet. I eat breakfast with the guy every Thursday morning. What about loyalty, Bill? What about loyalty?” she responded.

“Loyalty is a joke,’’ Bill shot back. “Loyalty doesn’t exist in politics.”

Bill’s verbal battle with Hillary over the presidency, if anything, intensified when daughter Chelsea showed up with her husband, Marc Mezvinsky.

“You deserve to be president,” Chelsea said.

Bill was clearly pleased that Chelsea was on his side and vowed to have allies commission polls on a Hillary-Obama matchup.

“What are you trying to do — force my hand?” Hillary said.

“I want everyone to know how strong you poll,” Bill said.

Hillary said, “Go ahead and knock yourself out.”

Well, Mr. President, the publishing of this book about you certainly isn’t going to help the Missus’ relationship with “The Lightbringer”, is it?

But, in reality, you’ve felt this way for a while, haven’t you?

Remember back on that Friday afternoon in December 2010?  No?  Well, Jon Ward of The Daily Caller described it this way:

In terms of Washington political drama, Friday was an instant classic.

President Obama ushered former President Bill Clinton to the White House briefing room late Friday for an impromptu press session, then abruptly left the wonky and winsome Arkansan at the podium by himself to defend the Obama administration’s tax deal.

“I’ve been keeping the first lady waiting for about half an hour, so I’m going to take off,” Obama said.

Clinton chuckled, joking, “I don’t want to make her mad. Please go,” and then quickly turned back to the microphone and began taking questions from the White House press corps, which had been given no advance notice of the two presidents’ trip to the briefing room.

At the same time on Capitol Hill, Sen. Bernie Sanders, Vermont independent, was in his sixth hour of speaking on the Senate floor in a real life filibuster of the president’s tax deal. He began talking shortly before 10:30 a.m. on Friday and was still speaking at 6 p.m.

“I think that the American people don’t like this agreement,” Sanders said, predicting that if the deal to extend the 2001 and 2003 Bush tax cuts for two years were to pass, all cuts – even those for the top brackets, which he opposes – would be “extended long term.”

Despite Sanders’ filibuster, the real obstacles to the deal’s passage are in the House, where Democrats are incensed at the deal, in some ways on substance but also in large part because it was brokered directly with Republicans and without their input.

Clinton’s main purpose in appearing before the press was to lobby the public, but even more so House Democrats, to accept the deal.

“A lot them are hurting now, and I get it,” Clinton said. “I have an enormous amount of respect for the Democrats in the House … I regret that so many of them lost.”

And, just think, Mr. President, thanks to this “amateur” in the White House, more of your Democratic friends are going to lose their jobs this November.  

And, if we’re lucky, the guy you rightly pegged as an amateur will, too.