More Bidenisms: A Joe Biden Kind of Day

It’s been a Biden kind of day. In fact, it’s been such a Biden kind of day that even the MSM has noticed. What has Biden done this time? Well, two things, and one has earned him to descriptor “creepy.”

Biden’s first Biden-like act involves Mr. Biden showing his racist side one again. Recall that in the past, Biden has told us “You cannot go to a 7-Eleven or a Dunkin' Donuts unless you have a slight Indian accent. I'm not joking,” spoken of “typical whites” who have been “bred by experience” to be racist about minorities, told us that Iowa schools are better than DC schools because there are fewer blacks in Iowa, and described Obama as the “first mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy.” So he has experience saying racially inflammatory comments. But then, “he’s just Joe,” so the left lets his racism slide.

This time, during a White House anti-extremism summit, Biden started talking about Somali cab drivers. He said this:

“I might add, if you ever come to the train station you may notice that I have great relations with them, because an awful lot of them are driving cabs, and are friends of mine.”

Apparently, the audience of Muslim community leaders of African descent responded with muted, uncomfortable chuckles.

Not satisfied with just a bit of racism, Biden then turned to creepy sexual behavior. As you might recall, Joe’s wife has a doctorate degree, which he describes as “a problem,” though his “wife Jill is drop dead gorgeous” and he would “rather be at home making love to my wife while my children are asleep.” Well, apparently, Joe has eyes for more than his wife. Note the photo below.

This is Joe lecherously putting his hands all over Stephanie Carter, the wife of Ash Carter, the new Defense Secretary. Even the MSM has dubbed this creepy. Personally, it just looks like Biden as normal to me.

Thoughts?

[+] Read More...

[-] Collapse Post...

Caption This - Joe Biden Apology Tour Edition

Oh, that wacky Joe Biden. Just when we thought we were safe, he had to open his big trap. Okay, we haven't heard from Joe Biden in while. And apparently for good reason. When he opens his mouth invariably he inserts his foot.

This time he was speaking at the Harvard Kennedy School where in the course of his speech, he implied that Turkey and the other regional allies have supplied "or facilitated" the growth of ISIL and other extremists in Syria. He even went all folksy about how President Erdogan of Turkey was "an old friend" and that he admitted to Biden that Turkey screwed up by allowing foreign fighters to cross into Syria.

It is just fine to tell "the truth" however, when trying to create a coalition to help defeat ISIL and global terrorism in general, insulting entire regions probably is not a wise move. Biden is marketed as a savvy politician and an expert in foreign policy, yet he has had to apologize to Turkey, UAE, and Saudi Arabia for his remarks. At best, his diplomatic skills are just amateurish. And, as tech savvy as the this Administration is, they cannot seem to grasp that when someone from the Administration makes these kinds of statements anyplace, even at the hallowed hall of Harvard Kennedy School, it will be heard by more than just those who attend.

But they don't understand that the words they choose matter. Earlier in the month, Biden referred to bankers as "Shylocks" which got the Anti-Defamation League's backs up. Then he used the outdated imperialist term "the Orient" which got the Asian-American's backs up. [But then Harry Reid didn't help when he jokingly remarked "...I don’t think you’re smarter than anybody else, but you’ve convinced a lot of us you are" and “One problem I’ve had today is keeping my Wongs straight.” in Vegas to the Asian Chamber of Commerce.] Maybe Joe Biden just can't help himself.

So, fearing that he may have to chew on more shoe leather, let's get ahead of the game. I mean, we haven't made light of "Ol' Joe" in a while, so let's have some fun. Maybe if we come up with just the right statement he can use that will insult everyone in the world all at once, he can just make one big apology and get it over. Then just maybe the world will be a much more cooperative, happy place. Let's do this for "World Peace", People!

So, here's the photo. Do your stuff for sake of all mankind...er...humankind!

By the way, I hear from "The Management" that there may be prizes for the best caption that may (or may not) include a no-expense paid vacation to anywhere in the world you want to pay to go!

[+] Read More...

[-] Collapse Post...

The Wit and Wisdom of Joey B.

Not too long ago, the people at National Review came out with a list of 689 reasons to vote against Barack Obama. Impressive, to be sure; but there is a Reason No. 690 I feel should be added to the list. That reason is the guy on the left (so to speak), and the idea that he might spend another four (or more?) years hanging around the White House.

Let's face it, Joe Biden is an idiot. Even the late-night shows, as hands-off as they've often been where The One is concerned, have felt free to make fun of his Number Two. Conservatives will long remember such bouts of excrement from Joe as "This is a big f**kin' deal" and "They gonna put y'all back in chains!" and the dignity (or lack thereof) he has brought to the office of Vice President in general. But this has been a particularly bad week for Biden, regardless of ideology. Let's recap.

VPOTUS kicked things off on Tuesday at a campaign office in Florida, where he was asked by a woman whether he would do more to help people like her kid, who is transgendered. Who knows what she had in mind, maybe more restrictive "hate speech" legislation or something. Biden responded by publicly proclaiming that discrimination against the "T" in LGBT is "the civil rights issue of our time." Er, okay. Personally, I could think of a few others that would rank way ahead of it, but good to know the President of the Senate is on top of these things.

But the week was young. Biden followed this up on Wednesday with more idiocy, saying at a campaign rally, "I'm going to give you the whole load today." No doubt many of a vulgar turn of mind were snickering at that statement (I know I was). Then--still in Florida, mind you--he noted the Cleveland Plain Dealer's endorsement of Obama, citing it as one of the major newspapers "in this state." What? What the f**k? Is he trying to channel those corny rock band greetings or something? Has anyone checked to see if he's been jumping off the campaign bus shouting "Hello Cleveland!!!"

Then, outside of Tampa (I guess weird states attract weird politicians), Joe greeted some customers at a restaurant and had the presence of mind to ask one of them, who I assume didn't look lily-white and all, "Are you Indian?" The customer responded that he was an American, to which Biden said, "No, I mean first generation." ????? Now, based on Biden's prior experiences with Indian-Americans, I know he's not trying to be racist or stereotyping or anything with that comment, but come on. However you feel about, say, Sarah Palin, the collective intelligence of Saturday Night Live couldn't have made her out to be this moronic and unaware, and yet here it is on full display. You know, because we didn't want to risk putting idiots like her and McCain in the White House.

But perhaps the tour de force of buffoonery came later, when Biden decided to defend ObamaCare in one of the scariest ways imaginable. He told a Republican voter over the phone, "After it's all over, when your insurance rates go down then you'll vote for me in 2016." Cue collective gulp from all sane people.

Personally, I think it's a toss-up which is worse: that a guy who's been a part of the federal government for decades is so badly informed about a policy any Internet user can dig up the facts of that he believes insurance will be cheaper, or that--God help us--he's hearing the words "President Joe Biden" in his head. Now of course, Biden hears a lot of things in his head, and the chances of him actually becoming Chief Executive are about the same as those of Andrew becoming president of the Rick Santorum Fan Club. But these screw-ups just illustrate the extent to which the guy who might succeed Obama at any moment is a loose cannon. He can't even be trusted to stay on his own party's message; remember that the campaign had to pull him from the tours after his "chains" comment.

Fortunately, it looks like we may only have to put up with his inanity for a couple more months. Bad news for the comics, of course, since Vice-President Slow Joe will be replaced by a truly intelligent and competent person. But it'll be good for America and for the dignity of the office.

[+] Read More...

[-] Collapse Post...

Fact Checking Biden? Really?

I can’t believe I’m doing this. I’m going to point out some of Slow Joe Biden’s lies. Good grief. Wasn’t it enough to point out that when the man’s lips are moving he’s lying? Apparently not. There are too many whoppers. Oh well, here goes.

● Biden Voting Record Lies: Biden claimed to vote against both the Afghanistan War and the Iraq War and he claimed to vote against the Bush Tax Cuts. He then blamed the deficit on those. First of all, he voted FOR all three. So that is a blatant lie. Secondly, the deficit charge is false as the deficit can be traced to domestic spending wanted by Obama for his cronies, i.e. stimulus, TARP, jobs bills, and the increased baselines caused by that spending. In the government, once a baseline for spending is established, it grows automatically. That’s why the deficits remain about a trillion dollars and will continue.

● Catholic Lies: Biden claimed, “no religious institution, Catholic or otherwise” will be forced to provide contraception or insurance for contraception. “That is a fact. That is a fact.” Actually, that’s a lie, and the US Conference of Catholic Bishops debunked this after the debate. Under Obamacare, the Obama administration is forcing Catholic and other religious groups to provide contraception and abortion drugs through their insurance policies. Obamacare contains a “narrow, four-part exemption for certain ‘religious employees’.” But that does not apply to the organizations themselves. Basically, it’s things like priests. And the very hospitals Biden mentioned as exempt have been declared not-exempt by Obama’s HHS. That is why the Catholics and several other religious groups have all sued alleging a First Amendment religious freedom violation.

● AARP Lies: In the first debate, Obama claimed AARP supported his healthcare plans. AARP shot him down harshly, claiming they are non-partisan and saying that they don’t endorse. Despite this, Biden repeated the claim which AARP itself has debunked. Also, as an aside, it should be pointed out that AARP plans to make between $55 million and $166 million from selling private insurance when Obamacare kills Medicare Advantage, so they are hardly impartial as Biden claims.

● Millionaire Tax Distortion: Joe kept saying that the Bush Tax Cuts Obama wants to let expire are on “millionaires and billionaires.” They are in fact on anyone earning $250,000 a year. That includes small businesses. It is also not an asset tax, it is an income tax, so it gets productive people not “the idle rich” as liberals often claim.

● Medicare Lies: “What we did is we saved $716 billion and put it back – applied it to Medicare.” Wow. Totally false. Obama yanked $716 billion out of Medicare’s budget and called it savings. But no specific savings have been identified. This is simply a budget cut and Medicare has been told to find the savings. This is like saying “I’m going to spend $10,000 less on food next year” and then calling yourself frugal today for finding “food plan savings.” Also, the money was then used as an accounting gimmick to fund Obamacare by reducing the price of the government’s healthcare efforts overall. The money is gone. It is not a saving, it was not re-applied to Medicare as Biden claims. And when you cut $716 billion from a program that is already paying so little that doctors won’t take it anymore, you will destroy the program.

● Palin Prognostication Fantasy: Joe claimed that he and Sarah Palin argued over “death panels” in their 2008 VP debate. The “death panels” weren’t first mentioned until 2009, a year later.

● “Death Panel” Lies II: Joe categorically said that the 15 member “death panel” would in no way cut people’s care. He tried to call them a “best practices board.” However, their function is to impose cost controls, not raise practice standards. That means they will cut types and quantities of care.

● Benghazi Lies: Biden claimed the administration wasn’t told that the Embassy in Libya wanted more security. This was debunked at Congressional hearings the day before the debate. The State Department repeatedly turned down requests for more security. When asked to “clarify” Biden’s comments, Deputy National Security Adviser Ben Rhodes said that Biden wasn’t speaking for the administration. So who was he speaking for?

● Ryan Record Lies: Biden claimed that Ryan “cut embassy security in his budget by $300 million below what we asked for.” First, the Ryan budget never became law. Secondly, Ryan’s budget never addressed embassy spending, it called for a 19% cut in non-defense discretionary spending. To get the $300 million figure, Biden assumes an across-the-board cut even though the cuts would in reality be targeted on other programs, like stimulus and green loan programs.

● Iranian Fantasies: Somehow, Biden claims that even though Iran is working on the fizzle material for a bomb (the most important part) they somehow “aren’t working on a bomb.” This is ridiculous. This is like saying you aren’t working on a car just because you haven’t started buying tires while you complete the engine. Secondly, there is no reliable intelligence to support this claim. Third, they can get the bomb itself from North Korea by AllahFedEx overnight. Fourth, they don’t even need a “bomb” if they make a dirty bomb. Biden is acting like you need an ICBM to deliver an atomic nightmare, he’s lying.

● Syrian Fantasies: When it came to Syria, “foreign policy” expert Biden first wrongly claimed that Syria is five times larger than Libya (Syria is actually ten times smaller), that the US has not tried to work through the UN (which is a total lie – Turkey even blasted the UN yesterday for moving too slowly), and he bizarrely claimed that the Obama Administration has been training Syrian rebels, something which is not only emphatically not true, but also highly provocative. If Romney had made such a stupid statement, Team Obama would be screaming bloody murder.

● Ryan’s Entitlement Reform Lies: Biden claimed that “not one Democrat” endorsed Ryan’s entitlement plan. The plan was create with Democratic Sen. Ron Wyden of Oregon and Clinton budget director Alice Rivlin. Both now claim they don’t support it, but they did at the time.

● Obama Record Lies: Biden scoffed at anything Ryan said about Obama’s record, from the unemployment rate to the size of the deficits. He never specifically called these lies, but he did so generally twice when he said that nothing Ryan had said was true. He also said “not a single thing he said is accurate” when Ryan pointed out that Obama failed to speak up for Iranian protestors in 2009 and that they called Syria’s Assad a “reformer,” both of which are true.

● Military Cut Lies: In one of the more bizarre moments, Biden claimed the Republicans (Paul Ryan specifically) want to cut $1 trillion from the military, while simultaneously claiming they want to spend $2 trillion more. Neither claim is true. The automatic spending cuts were the idea of Harry Reid and were adopted by Obama – the Republicans opposed those. Obama has refused every attempt to change those and has now been forced to go into damage control, illegally claiming he will compensate defense contractors if they wait until after the election to lay people off.


Finally, it is interesting to note that Joe interrupted Ryan 85 times during the 90 minute debate (and that doesn’t count the smirks). If you factor out the time the moderator spoke and the roughly ten minutes for opening and closing statements, you are looking at more than one interruption a minute. It’s no wonder his bad manners became the takeaway... and that the MSM would rather focus on that than his lies. But what do you expect from a man who regularly uses racist and sexist quips, who regularly exploits his wife’s death for political sympathy, and who not only lied about his own personal background but who plagiarized it from another politician, see Bidenisms.

[+] Read More...

[-] Collapse Post...

The Ryan and the Jackass

Joe Biden is a vile human being. He’s a liar, a fool and he won’t stop exploiting his dead wife. And last night, his plan was to lie and throw as much fake mud as needed to make the entire debate incomprehensible. In that, he was successful. Nothing of substance will be remembered from this debate. Sadly for Joe, what will be remembered is his crapulence.

● Likeability: Between his constant interruptions and the whirlwind of bullsh*t he unleashed, Joe Biden basically made it impossible to take away any substance from this debate. Unfortunately for him, his performance was a disgrace. He smirked, snarled, scoffed, interrupted and condescended all night. He came across like a jackal. I have never seen a debate where one participant acted this shamefully. His behavior was honestly beneath the dignity of the office.

What’s even more bizarre are the things he laughed at. He laughed at Iran getting a nuclear bomb. He laughed at Ryan talking about Romney helping a family in need and giving money to charity. He even abused the moderator the one time she asked him a hard question and basically accused her of bias: “you be straight with me.”

His bad manners was all the talking heads talked about, and early polls suggest that it cost Biden the debate. CNBC has Ryan winning 56% to 36%. CNN’s poll has Ryan winning 48% to 44%.

● Ryan’s Failure: I don’t see Ryan as the winner however, so much as he’s just not the loser. Ryan’s made four mistakes. First, he essentially brought a textbook to a “yo’ mama so fat” contest whereas he needed a strategy to call out Biden on his lies and his disgraceful behavior. Secondly, he let the biased moderator push him around. He needed to stop letting her cut off his good answers mid-stream. Third, he lacked a unified theme to give the audience something to take home. Fourth, he needed to connect more dots to exploit his victories. For example, when Biden lied about Catholic hospitals being happy with Obamacare, Ryan countered with “then why are they suing Obama?” This was excellent, but he failed to press this point and explain it clearly. Never make the audience think!

● Stop Criticizing Jim Lehrer: I saw virtually no bias out of Jim Lehrer. Raddatz, on the other hand, was bias incarnate. She gave Joe free rein of questions, tossed him softballs, and advocated for Obama while throwing harsh, biased questions at Ryan. More importantly, she interrupted Ryan every single time he got on a roll. She also took attacks Biden made and demand Ryan answer those, but never once questioned Joe about anything Ryan alleged. This was an unbelievably prejudiced performance.

One particularly amazing example of a biased question was when she started her question on Afghanistan by claiming that Obama had succeeded in defeating al Qaeda, had all but wiped out the Taliban, had stabilized the country, and had basically won the war. Then she asked Ryan why he wanted to keep troops there indefinitely in light of that. The problem is, none of that is true, nor is Ryan advocating keeping troops there.

● Some things Slow Joe said: If Joe’s lips were moving, he was lying, and I mean that. He used fake numbers. He invented events. He claimed personal knowledge of things that didn’t happen and denied things that are on tape. He invented policy positions for Romney and attacked his own straw men. Here is what he said:

● Joe scoffed at the idea that the Democrats ever controlled both the White House and the Congress.

● Joe blamed Obama’s conflicting lies on Libya on the intelligence community. The same community he swears will tell us the precise moment Iran is ready to build a bomb.

● Joe said Iran isn’t building a bomb. Even the IAEA disagrees with this. His “logic” was that they are only making the radioactive material needed for the bomb, but not the bomb itself. That’s a logical and factual pile of crap. Joe also laughed when Ryan said that if Iran isn’t stopped, others in the area will try to build the bomb as well. This has long been acknowledged as true on both sides of the political spectrum.

● Joe said that they got the toughest sanctions ever on Iran (ignore all those tougher sanctions on Cuba and the Soviet Union). He laughed at the idea that Russia watered them down, which they did. He pretended that this would stop Iran from selling oil, even though they are selling directly to China.

● He promised Obama would get whoever killed our ambassador to Libya, which sounded extremely hollow and like fake bravado when he said it. And he actually claimed that Romney didn’t want to see Obama bin Laden killed.

● He said Israel was lying when they claimed Obama’s policies differed from theirs.

● He kept accusing Romney of wanting to start a war in Syria before claiming that Romney’s policy was exactly like Obama’s and that Romney couldn’t identify a single difference. When Ryan identified differences, Joe ignored those and falsely accused Romney of wanting to send ground troops.

● He claimed Obamacare does not force religious institutions to fund or provide contraception or abortion, even though it does and even though those same institutions have sued Obama to stop it. This was right after saying that Ryan wanted to force his views on other religions and claiming he would never do that. He also tried to attribute the comments of Todd Akin about there being different kinds of rape to Paul Ryan.

● Joe kept repeating the 47% line, which Romney has explained and disowned. He blamed Bush for Obama’s failures, and refused to address a single point in Obama’s record.

● He kept trying to scare seniors by claiming Romney wants to privatize Social Security or Medicare (something Romney is not advocating).

● He exploited his dead wife, as he shamelessly does in every debate he’s ever been in.

● He kept using long debunked claims about Romney wanting a $5 trillion tax cut. He lied about Obama’s own tax numbers, claiming Obama only wants to tax millionaires. He lied about the waste and fraud in the “green jobs” loans Obama made. He lied about Ryan passing budgets to slash education (education spending went up, not down).

● Joe kept claiming he spent his life fighting for Main Street against Wall Street, even though he used to be scoffingly referred to as the Senator from MBNA for his efforts to help big banks squeeze the middle class on fees and to make it harder to discharge credit card debt in bankruptcy.

● On the one trillion in automatic cuts coming from the military, the moderator first tried to take those off the table to help Joe, but he blundered right back into them. Then he bizarrely claimed that the Republicans asked for those (even though it was Obama/Reid), that Ryan even claimed “I’ve been looking for this moment a long time,” that Biden would never agree with those cuts and wanted to stop them, but that they were necessary and the military wants them because they want to be “smaller and leaner” and thus Joe supports them. . . but Ryan is evil for proposing them. Good luck figuring that one out. He also simultaneously claimed Ryan wanted the trillion in cuts while also wanting two trillion in new military spending. Hmm.

● Some things Ryan said: Ryan made some solid points, but I don’t think any of them will be remembered because they were buried in Biden-grade bullsh*t. Here is what he said:

● He said that we are seeing the unraveling of Obama’s foreign policy all across the Middle East. This is something even the left is admitting. Indeed, Der Spiegel had a run down of everyone making this point recently and it was a huge list. Unlike Romney, Ryan did not elaborate.

● Ryan said Obama has done nothing to slow Iran from getting the bomb. He said that taking the military option off the table, putting distance between us and Israel, allowing Russia and China to water down the sanctions the Congress wanted (fyi, a bipartisan bill), and granting 20 waivers on those sanctions has sent a green light to Iran to continue.

● He attacked Obama for letting Russia dictate policy on Syria, for waiting too long to take action and for calling Assad a reformer.

● He attacked Obama for giving a precise timeline in Afghanistan, though he and Romney agree with the general timeline, and for withdrawing American troops while still requiring those who are left to continue the same missions and level of effort. Biden countered that the Afghans are taking over those jobs, but that is not true.

● He said that Obama’s strategy of hope and change had turned into “attack, blame and defame” and he pointed out that Obama and Biden were smearing Romney because they had no record they could run on. And in that regard, he pointed out Obama’s list of broken promises, though he did not do this nearly as well as Romney: (1) no one loses their healthcare under Obamacare, even though 20 million will, (2) middle class taxes won’t go up for anyone earning less than $250,000 a year (“millionaires”), but Obamacare raises 20 taxes on the middle class, (3) healthcare costs will go down under Obama, but they are up $2,500, (4) the deficit would be cut in half, but it doubled in size, and (5) he would unite us. There’s a lot he missed here.

● He explained Romney’s tax plan, which is to lower rates across the board ($1.3 trillion in cuts) but to offset that by eliminating deductions which the rich use ($1.2 trillion) for a net change of zero dollars, with a shift of the actual tax burden up onto the rich and away from the middle class. He was going to explain how this will lead to 7 million new jobs, but let himself be cut off. He said they would not accept tax cuts that (1) increased the deficit, (2) increased taxes on the middle class, or (3) resulted in a downward shift of the tax burden.

● He pointed out that the average tax rate on business in the world is 25% and that Obama wants to raise the tax rate on small business form 28% to 44.8%.

● He pointed out the big lie in Obama’s class warfare rhetoric of “the rich paying their fair share” by noting that if we taxed the rich at 100%, it would only fund the government for 90 days. So when Obama says he will raise taxes on the rich to pay for more spending, he’s lying about the revenue source.

All in all, I think this debate will be forgotten. Joe lost because he was extremely unlikable. But that won’t hurt Obama because no one will vote on the basis of liking or not liking Joe Biden. I think the left will be thrilled at Joe’s boorish behavior and the right will be incensed, and moderates will scratch their heads and wonder why they didn’t watch the football game. The theme I would hope conservative run with from this is the lengths to which Joe and Obama will go to avoid discussing their record.

Thoughts? Anything I missed?

[+] Read More...

[-] Collapse Post...

Vice Presidential Debate Thread

As we get ready for the Bidenisms to start flying fast and furious, I'm turning the floor over to you, gentle viewer, to lend Slow Joe a hand! Tell us some of the Bidenism you hope to hear tonight! I hear he wants to be very aggressive.

(FYI, I will do my best to provide a summary tomorrow in addition to the film review.)

Also, by request, I've put the "follow" button on the bottom left of the page for those who would like to be able to follow the blog in Google reader.

[+] Read More...

[-] Collapse Post...

Things Are Looking Bad For Obama

Things are not going well for Team Obama. The debate was a debacle and liberals are now beginning to ask if Obama even wants to win. Others are joking about him using their donations to buy pot (see, e.g. Bill Maher). Early voting is sending up huge warning signs for Obama, the polls are finally starting to show movement against Obama, and Biden is on deck. Let’s discuss.

● Early Turnout Leans Romney: Turnout is key to winning elections and right now the turnout is telling us that Romney has a significant advantage. Obama won in 2008 with a +7% Democratic turnout advantage nationally. That’s the high-water mark for the Democrats. In certain critical states, the turnout was even higher for Obama. This enthusiasm advantage translated into a large advantage for Obama in early voting, which made Obama's election day job easier. This year, everything is reversed:

● In Ohio, the early voting edge went to Obama over McCain by +14% D in 2008, and Obama won by 4.6%. Right now, the early voting is only +4% D, which means Obama needs to make up around 6% on election day to win the state.

● In North Carolina, which Obama won by 0.3% in 2008, early turnout is favoring Romney by a 2-1 margin, with GOP ballots coming in 44% ahead of the pace in 2008. Again, Obama will need to make up significant ground on election day.

● In Iowa, Obama had a 150,000 advantage in early voting in 2008 and he won by 9.5%. In 2004, John Kerry had a 60,000 advantage in early voting and Bush won by 2.4%. Right now, Obama has only a 77,000 advantage. That suggests a tossup.

None of this means Obama is losing or that he’s lost. What this tells us is that Democratic enthusiasm is indeed way down and Republican enthusiasm is way up. That’s really bad for Obama because this election will depend on turnout. It also means that the Democrats are not running as good of a ground game as they have in the past and Romney is way ahead of McCain in that regard. Indeed, his campaign has already met more people face to face than McCain’s did. So what this ultimately means is that Obama is lagging.

● Polling Bump: Meanwhile the polls are showing a significant bump for Romney following his debate performance.

● In Wisconsin, the famously liberal PPP poll shows Obama’s 7% lead (52% to 45%) falling to a mere 2% (49% to 47%). That’s a 5% bump for Romney. Romney’s biggest gains came among women in that poll.

● Rasmussen shows Romney with a 2% national lead (49% - 47%), for a bump of about 4%. Most other polls are showing a 3-5% bump. Gallup shows Romney with a 5% bounce.

● The Battleground Poll shows Romney winning independents 51% to 35%, Obama won them last time 52% to 44%, and it shows a 13% enthusiasm gap for the Republicans.

● Rasmussen also shows Romney only 1% behind in Ohio and 2% behind in Nevada, but 1% ahead in Virginia, 2% ahead in Florida and Colorado, and 3% ahead in North Carolina, Iowa and New Hampshire. And don’t forget, Rasmussen is mixing 2008 turnout with 2004 turnout... not 2010.

This is bad news for Obama because these polls are getting close to the point where they simply can’t be faked enough anymore to make the race appear competitive. When that happens, look for a sharp, sudden break in the race away from Obama. Moreover, this may be an indication of the beginning of momentum. If that’s true, then the race is over. The next couple weeks will be very instructive.

● Biden: Finally, they’ve hidden Joey Biden away for six days to prepare him for the debate Thursday night. Personally, I’m dreading this debate. I suspect the strategy Biden will use will be to avoid trying to meet Ryan on anything statistical or principled, and to instead keep countering Ryan’s points with “arguments” about individuals who will be hurt and with statements like, “man, you’re talking about millions of people who are going to go broke trying to pay for healthcare bills they can’t afford.” That will make for a messy, confusing debate as the two candidates basically talk past each other. Moreover, comments like that are impossible to counter because they are emotional in nature and people will either believe them or they won’t. Hopefully, Ryan will be prepared to handle this.

Personally, every time Biden tries that, I would counter with the identical attack Romney made on Obama’s record and I would phrase it in terms of:

“Talking about people hurting, how about the 23 million people who can’t find jobs, the 47 million on food stamps, the one in six Americans now below the poverty line, the two hundred million middle class families whose incomes crashed $4,300 during your administration, whose health care costs rose $2,500, who saw their gas prices double, who watched your administration double the deficit and waste the money on cronyism to nowhere, and who have no idea how their grandkids are going to pay off your debt. I think you and Mr. Obama have caused enough pain.”

Thoughts?

[+] Read More...

[-] Collapse Post...

Yet More Election News

Lots of little things to catch up on today, but nothing really big. So let’s do a news round up and whip some of these out. Then we can all move on with our lives. :)

● Issue One: Everywhere you look, the MSM is smearing Paul Ryan. The Democrats too are focusing almost exclusively on Ryan. This suggests two things. First, they know that Ryan is very important to this ticket and they are desperate to stop him. Unfortunately for them, their attacks on him have been pathetic. They’ve found no damning votes, no skeletons in the closet, and no close associates looking to make a name for themselves by turning against him. Nothing they’ve tried has touched him.

Secondly, it suggests that the Democrats really have no idea how to win this election. Poll after poll shows the public worried about jobs and the economy, and they aren’t happy with Obama’s record. But rather than defend that record or come up with some new plan the public will believe (his latest involves hiring more teachers), they are trying to smear Ryan. . . the number two guy on the ticket. This is horrible strategy. When November rolls around, Ryan won’t even be an issue in the voting both, so attacking Ryan is nothing more than a waste of time. That the Democrats don’t understand that is fascinating.

● Issue Two: Swift Boat Boogaloo. Obama really stepped in it when he tried to claim credit for killing bin Laden. Not only was it unseemly for a President to try to steal the credit which belongs to the troops who did the actual deed, but it soon became apparent that our Kenyan Overlord did little more than cower in the corner while others pushed the decision buttons. Yet, Hollywood is intent on making a pro-Obama propaganda film about the event. So it’s rather hilarious that a group of Navy SEALs is putting together an advertisement attacking Obama for his mishandling of this as well has his administration’s penchant for leaking secret documents which harm the troops in the field. Of course, the Democrats are furious about this and they are calling it another swift boat attack, but that won’t change the fact that an ad like this will prove to be highly effective against our arm-chair warrior in Chief.

● Issue Three: Gallup now shows Romney with a small but growing lead over Obama – 47% to 45%. I can’t get to Gallup’s underlying data, but you can guess it’s probably biased at least 3% to the left. That means Romney’s support may have crossed the magical 50% mark.

● Issue Four: Priorities. Last week, Gallup released a poll showing voter priorities for this election. In the top spots by far are (1) creating good jobs, (2) reducing corruption in the federal government, and (3) reducing the federal budget deficit. Each of these is a notable Obama failure – with the corruption thing being the most ironic since Obama claimed to want clean and transparent government. Obama’s main selling point, “increasing taxes on wealthy Americans” ranks last on the list with only 49% support – 43% behind the jobs issue. This tells us that Obama is in real trouble and is plan to save himself is deeply flawed.

● Issue Five: The Boston Globe has now become the first left-leaning editorial board to demand an apology from Biden for his "chains" comment. They noticed that if Romney or Ryan had said that, they would have been attacked for "racial insensitivity" and they think Biden should not be excused merely because he's on the left. Imagine that!

● Issue Six: Finally, there is this issue about appointments. You may have heard that the Congress has decided to give the president more power to get his appointments. Specifically, 170 posts which needed Senate approval in the past will no longer need Senate approval. Some people are upset about this because it gives Obama more power, but let’s get real. A President should, by and large, be able to appoint the people he wants to fill most posts. And for decades now, the Senate has done a horrible job of make decision on appointments, leave some slots empty for years after a President is elected. This decision will be a good thing for Romney who should be able to hit the ground running that much faster now, despite what I expect to be Democratic attempts to grind the Senate to a halt. It’s too bad the parties couldn’t come together to give Obama more power to restructure the Executive Branch as well because Romney could have used that very effectively.

Thoughts? Anything I missed?

[+] Read More...

[-] Collapse Post...

Replace Biden? Are You Kidding?

Seeing as how it’s Thursday afternoon and I’m feeling lazy, let’s do a short topic today. . . about the man who rides the short bus to the White House. Should Obama replace Joe O’Biden? Can Obama replace slow Joe? Who would replace Biden?

● Should Obama Replace Joe: Absolutely. Biden is a massive liability on all fronts. The man is a joke. He’s gaffe prone and his gaffes are offensive. Even when he’s speaking intentionally, as he was when he twice suggested that the Republicans want to institute slavery this week, no one takes him seriously because they assume he went off script. He adds no gravitas to the ticket. He bring no worthwhile policy experience. He’s no match for Paul Ryan. And frankly, he does very poorly against the latest Republican line: “could you imagine this man as President?” Indeed, Rudy Giuliani said yesterday that he even doubts Biden has the intellectual capacity to be President. . . and it’s not like the rest of us weren’t thinking it. Said Giuliani:

“I’ve never seen a vice president that has made as many mistakes, said as many stupid things. I mean, there’s a real fear if, God forbid, he ever had to be entrusted with the presidency, whether he really has the mental capacity to handle it.”

Personally, if I were Obama, I’d drop Joe in a heartbeat! Obama has until September 6th to push the reject button.

● Who Would Replace Joe: This is where things get tricky. Sarah Palin yesterday suggested that Obama replace Biden with Hillary; John McCain echoed this last night. That would certainly make their base happy and it might even win back a couple moderates, but I doubt it would change the dynamic ultimately. And that’s the real problem for Obama. Who could he name that would change the dynamic? Hillary... maybe, but no one else.

And if the dynamic can’t be changed, then no one in their right political mind will want to be the wingman on a losing ticket! That’s a ticket to political oblivious and no one with a future will want to risk that. That leaves only people who are past their primes, ready to retire or truly questionable choices like Jon Huntsman, who may want to prove he’s not an evil Republican.

My money is on nothing changing.

But if I had to guess, I would say that Hillary would help the most. Andrew Cuomo would be the boldest choice. And nobody else would really matter.

Thoughts?

[+] Read More...

[-] Collapse Post...

The Smell of Disaster

Ya know, you take a week off to give the world time to refill its collection of news stories and then you come back to find nothing is going on. What the heck? Did the world get lazy? . . or sane? Well, no, not quite. There are a few things worth discussing. It seems things aren't going well on the left.

● Uh, Whoops (Part 52): Once again, Team Obama has stepped up to the plate with a new attack on Romney. And once again, it’s failing miserably. This attack involves calling Romney an outsourcer of jobs. The only problem? No one cares. . . if they’re even listening. Moreover, Romney has once again turned Obama’s attack back against Obama and made him look stupid. This time, Romney made the obvious counterattack by calling Obama the nation’s “Outsourcer in Chief” and pointing out that Obama’s policies have encouraged jobs to be sent oversees and resulted in taxpayer money being paid to overseas companies. Indeed, let’s not forget that the president of Obama’s President's Council on Jobs and Competitiveness, Jeffry Immelt of General Electric, sent 25,000 American jobs overseas in the two years before Obama appointed him. Whoops.

● Carolina Dreamin’: Speaking of Obama, here’s proof he’s going to lose North Carolina even though the polls show a neck and neck race. Democratic Representatives Larry Kissel and Mike McIntyre will both be joining the Republicans in voting to repeal ObamaCare this week. Neither will endorse Obama. And Kissel voted to impeach Eric Holder. Neither would be doing any of that if they didn’t think their constituents hated Obama.

● Uh. . . no: Carolina isn’t the only place either where Obama has problems. Consider this. Obama has decided to play a little class warfare before the election. Specifically, he’s calling for letting the Bush Tax Cuts expire for anyone making more than $250,000. Sounds like a no-brainer for the Democrats, right? Well, not so fast. Several House and Senate Democrats are freaking out and want to raise that number to $1,000,000. Senators from Florida, Missouri, Nevada, Nebraska and Virginia all have taken this position. Interestingly, three of those are considered “battleground” states, and apparently, Obama is losing the battle.

● Turning Up The Hate: With Democratic frustrations mounting, they and their allies are starting to turn up the hate. A former Media Matters executive just put out a racist youtube video in which he says Romney is “too white” to meet with the NAACP, something Romney is doing this week. The ad features an actor pretending to be the man who created the Willie Horton ad, and he says this to Romney about trying to meet with the NAACP:

“You are so white, you are extremely white, you make Wonder Bread look like pumpernickel.”

He then tells Romney to “get all Mormon, Martin Luther King” on the audience. Is anybody really surprised by this? I doubt it. Not when James Earl Jones became the latest celebrity to label the Tea Party “racist.” Joy Behar says it regularly. Also this week, Biden said this to minorities: “Republicans have changed the law so you get arrested if you vote.” He claims he was joking, but how is race-baiting funny? Not to mention, he also told the National Council of La Raza, a race hate group: “Romney wants you to show your papers.” At the same time, Rep. Jim Clyburn called Republican attempts to trim the food stamp program, which exploded since 2008 through an administrative change, an “abomination” and implied Republicans want to starve poor children. David Letterman joked that Romney wants to put gays back in the closet. Barney Frank said something similar. And so on.

It’s amazing how consistently the Democrats try to bait minorities with false claims of racism or other –isms. It makes you wonder how they sleep at night spreading so much hate?

● Lost Faith: Finally, the MSM has hit another all-time low. In the days of Edward R. Murrow, the MSM was the undisputed arbiter of the truth. If they said it, Americans believed it. But like anything else liberals infest, the MSM has lost its way. And as alternative methods of staying informed have become available, people have started discovering just how biased our liberal friends in the MSM have been. That, in turn, leads to a huge erosion of trust.

That brings us to Gallup. Gallup has been asking people about their level of confidence in the MSM for years now. And surprise surprise, this year’s result shows that the American public’s confidence in the MSM is at an all-time low. How low? In 1993, 46% of the public said they trusted the nightly news. In 2012, only 21% trust the nightly news. In 1979, their peak year, newspapers were trusted by 51% of the public. In 2012, only 28% trust newspapers.

A lot of this is the result of liberals, whose trust in the news and newspapers fell from 30% last year to 19% this year. But even leaving that aside, it’s clear that something is very wrong with the MSM if only one in five Americans trust them. But maybe the better question is, what’s wrong with the one in five?

[+] Read More...

[-] Collapse Post...

Political Philosophy

Let’s do a grab-bag of news issues and a philosophical question. . . oooohm. What is the sound of no hands clapping for Obama? Would it sound like panic? Are they really rights if nobody uses them? Can something that never died come back to life? What is gray? All this and not a word more. . .

1. It’s (Still) Alive!!: Dick Lugar went down in flames last night in the Indiana Republican Primary. For 36 years, this moderate Republican has been a pillar of the Republican Party in Washington and in Indiana. Last night, Tea Party upstart Indiana State Treasurer Richard Mourdock took him down. That has the MSM wondering if the Tea Party has come back to life, especially with Tea Party-backed Senate candidates Jeff Flake (AZ), Josh Mandel (Ohio), and Ted Cruz (TX) likely to join him. But how can something which never died come back to life?

2. Waive It Goodbye: Zimmerman waived his speedy trial rights yesterday in the Trayvon Martin shooting. Some have asked if this is normal. The answer is yes, almost everyone waives their speedy trial rights because nobody wants to rush into a trial because it’s too risky. So are they really rights if no one gets to use them?

3. The Sound of Panic: I mentioned the other day that Obama is having a hard time. Even the MSM is taking note. Jeff Greenfield just wrote an interesting column in which he laments “Obama’s bad week.” He notes, with a good deal of panic, that the empty stadium business has been a disaster for Obama because it has dominated the news. And that’s true. Even Politico just wrote an article whining about how unfair it was for everyone to keep harping on it. Greenfield also adds that the bigger worry should be that this is proof that college kids have abandoned Obama. He then pointed out that Saturday Night Live pulling a skit about Obama politicizing the bin Laden killing was proof that Obama did politicize the killing and that the left is really worried about it. He also mentioned that Obama’s political ads have been underwhelming.

James Carville likewise is panicking. He yelled at his stupid Democratic-voter friends to “wake the f**k up!” Heck, we’ve been telling them that for years, but for a different reason. His reason is that Obama is in danger of losing and yet the Democrats are showing no signs of enthusiasm or urgency. That’ll happen when your administration is a walking advertisement for “FAIL by Obama.”

Obama also is imploding all over the place on the gay marriage thing. Not only did North Carolina toss a lot of cold water on the dream that gay marriage would spread beyond the liberal enclaves (they banned gay marriage AND civil unions 69% to 31% last night), but Obama is being called a hypocrite on the issue by the left. Indeed, after Biden said this weekend that he’s totally thrilled with gay marriage and would have one himself if he could find the right woman, Obama continued to try to be for it and against it at the same time. This has the MSM fuming:

● CNN’s Jessica Yellin asked if Obama was trying to “have it both ways before an election” and whether he should “stop dancing around the issue.”

● ABC’s Jake Tapper: “It seems cynical to hide this prior to the election” and then attack Obama’s people for hiding behind talking points.

● NBC’s Chuck Todd: “So help me out here. He opposes bans on gay marriage, but he doesn’t yet support gay marriage?”

Sounds like they want to out Mr. Obama, doesn’t it? So what is the sound of sycophancy fading?

4. Let’s Get Philosophical: Finally, I want to bring up something we discussed yesterday in the Politics of Trek comments. For as far back as I can remember, conservatives have been accused by liberals of “seeing everything in black and white” and being unable to see shades of gray. But in my experience, the opposite is actually true. Conservatives tend to be very good at grasping how much gray there is in the world and accepting it as gray. It’s liberals who are incapable of accepting gray. Indeed, they seem to have a nearly obsessive need to define everything as black or white and to demand that all the blacks be banned or prohibited while everyone be forced to partake in all the whites, i.e. no grays will be tolerated.

The reason liberals attack conservatives as being incapable of seeing “shades of gray” is because liberals lack consistency and conservatives don’t. In other words, liberals define everything as black or white, but these extreme positions can change at a moment’s notice. Thus, liberals are simultaneously extremists, because everything must be a black or white, and unprincipled, because black and white can change at any time. However, they wrongly see their ability to flop around as a positive, which they define as being able to see shades of gray, i.e. having nuanced minds, even though they really aren’t seeing any gray at all -- just lots of blacks and whites flopping around. It would be like loving or hating everyone on the planet but then claiming you are actually indifferent about people because you can move people from the love to the hate column and vice versa.

And since conservatives rarely tend to change their minds about what they consider black and white, liberals wrongly accuse conservatives of not being able to see gray even though it isn’t really gray the liberals are talking about. . . it’s really “lack” of inconsistency which liberals are calling “incapable of seeing gray.”

Thoughts?

[+] Read More...

[-] Collapse Post...

And The Hits Just Keep On Coming. . .

It’s been a bad month for Obama and the Donks. Nothing seems to be going their way. The economy just won’t take off. ObamaCare is going down in judicial flames. Their race riot fizzled amid cold hard facts and demands to know why Obama doesn’t care about whites. Obama gaffed himself to the world before Putin. And the hits just keep on coming.

● Tom Hanks: As you may recall, right after Team Obama released a campaign video narrated by Tom Hanks, Hanks got caught on stage playing along with a hedgefund manager in blackface. He tried to lie his way out of this by claiming that he was shocked and offended by the appearance of the man. But the tape shows otherwise. Indeed, it shows Hanks blasting Bill O’Reilly. Tom has now been forced to apologize to O’Reilly. People are also beginning to ask why this liberal school has no minority kids. Whoops.

● Solyndra Part 15: Meanwhile, yet another Obama-sponsored company is going broke. This time it’s a solar energy company called Solar Trust for America. They received $2.1 billion in loan guarantees from Obama’s Department of Energy. This is “the largest amount ever offered to a solar project,” said Energy Secretary Steven Chu back when he was handing out the cash. He called this an “historic moment in America’s new energy frontier.” And both he and Slow Joe Biden were there for the groundbreaking in Blyth, California. But less than a year later, the company is in bankruptcy. And apparently there are more solar companies planning bankruptcies as well.

Nice job Mr. President: $2.1 billion spent, no worthwhile product produced, no jobs created.

● Joe Biden: Somebody let Slow Joe out of his box the other day and he’s been gaffing as fast as he can ever since. First, after saying that Romney is consistently wrong, Slow Joe referred to Scott Community College President Dr. Theresa Paper as “Dr. Pepper.” And also he decided that Governor Romney was really Senator Romney. But that was just a warm up. Biden next said that Republicans “have a legitimate argument that the government should not be engaged health care.” Only he “strongly disagrees” with that legitimate argument. A “legitimate” argument is a correct or valid argument. Thus, what Biden has said translates to him agreeing that the Republicans are correct that the government should not be engaged in the health care market, but he doesn't care that they are correct and he will stick with what he knows to be wrong.

He then strangely added that he doesn’t want to “dictate” your health coverage. . . ignore the man behind the mandate.

Biden later said, “I don’t want to make fun of-- I’m not saying our Republican friends don’t care about people. They care about people just as much as we do.” That’s nice of Joe to say, since he routinely says the opposite. Indeed, while talking about Medicare this week, he said Republicans don’t care about people: “Look us over, look into your heart and ask . . . who do you believe is genuinely committed to preserving the dignity of people in terms of their healthcare and their basic, basic ability to live?” This, by the way, comes from a man whose healthcare reform plan stripped Medicare of $500 billion.

Biden also invited police and fire officials to an official government dinner, i.e. the kind where it is ILLEGAL to engage in politics, and he said that the Republicans favor low taxes over policies that would save the lives of police officers and firemen. In other words, Republicans want to let police and firemen die so taxes can stay low. He then attacked the rich for supposedly not being willing to pay for fire and police:

“The first guy who’s going to have a problem is the guy whose $3 million home is on fire and you can’t get a truck out there. The first guy that’s going to have a problem is the person who has real assets and finds their house burglarized or robbed, or their Porsche is stolen.”

What an ass.

● Robert Reich On The Truth: Former Clinton Labor Secretary Robert Reich just made a fascinating claim about the ObamaRecovery -- 93% of the gains in 2010 went to the top 1% of earners in the country. The bottom 10% of the public saw no gain at all. In fact, most of the bottom 90% lost ground, with average income falling $127 between 2009 and 2010 and $4,843 compared to 2000. So much for Obama helping the poor and middle class. Maybe we can’t tax our way to prosperity after all?


Obama never has had teflon coating like Reagan, but he has had an MSM provided bulletproof vest to protect him from bad news. But it sounds like his vest is failing him and the bad stories are beginning to pile up. Personally, I credit the new-conservative media with forcing the MSM to take note. So it’s no wonder they want bills like SOPA to regain their monopoly on information. In any event, these are not good times at Rancho Obama.

[+] Read More...

[-] Collapse Post...

Primer: Obama/Holder v. Iran

I figured you might like a primer on the new Iranian issue, as it’s all over the headlines and it’s an issue which could actually lead to war if mishandled -- although that’s extremely unlikely. Here’s what’s up:

● What Happened: On Tuesday, Attorney General Eric Holder announced that the DEA and FBI had foiled a plot to murder the Saudi Arabian ambassador and blow up the Saudi and Israeli embassies. This plot was supposedly masterminded by Iran’s “elite” Quds military unit. The Quds are a special unit within Iran’s Revolutionary Guard whose job it is to “export” Iran’s Islamic revolution to other countries.

According to Holder, Manssor Arbabsiar (a Corpus Christi, Texas car salesman) was tasked by the Iranian government with finding someone to carry out the killing and the bombings. Arbabsiar turned to the nastiest of the Mexican drug cartels, Los Zetas, a group of former special forces soldiers who started their own cartel. I wrote about Los Zetas here: LINK. Arbabsiar wanted Los Zetas to do both the killing and the bombings and he wanted them to agree to funnel tons of opium from the Middle East into Mexico.

However, the person Arbabsiar contacted turned out to be a DEA informant. Whoops.

● Team Obama’s Response: The administration accuses Iran and describes this as: “a dangerous escalation of Iran's long-scale use of violence.” The reason they claim Iran did this was “the Iranians watch the Saudis roll tanks in Bahrain, and they see a key ally in Syria going down, so they step up the Quds Force.”

Joe Biden has been sent forth from the Idiotorium to take the lead on this. He described this as “really over the top” and said it was “an outrage that violates one of the fundamental premises on which nations deal with one another.” He also said that “no options have been taken off the table” for dealing with this, though the administration has already ruled out military action. Instead, they are considering sanctions, the standard response by liberals when they don’t know what to do.

● The Saudi Response: Saudi Arabia and Iran are bitter regional rivals largely because their versions of Islam consider the other to be heretics. The Saudi embassy said this was “a despicable violation of international norms, standards and conventions,” and their former head of intelligence said Iran will have to “pay the price.” They have not been more specific yet. However, Saudi Arabia does not have a military capable of defeating Iran.

● The Iranian Response: For its part, Iran denies involvement. They told the UN they are “outraged” and “strongly and categorically reject these fabricated and baseless allegations, based on the suspicious claims by an individual.” Tehran claims Obama has fabricated this to “divert attention from the Wall Street uprising.” Ha ha! They also repeated claims the US has assassinated Iranian nuclear scientists in the past two years.

For the record, the only link so far to Iran is that the car dealer apparently is a cousin of someone in the Qud and he visited Iran right before $100,000 was wired into the informant’s account by the car dealer. The FBI claims this was wired from a Qud bank account.

● The World Reaction: The world reaction has been skeptical. Iranian experts say that Arbabsiar does not fit the profile of the typical Iranian agent, who tend to be professionals. And they say it’s unlikely Iran would be behind such a plot. Similarly, an Iranian expert in Berlin said these claims would be viewed with skepticism as “everyone is extremely skeptical about US intelligence revelations” and added, “I don’t regard it as impossible but rather improbable, even if the details of the story presented by the attorney general are essentially true.”

One western diplomat said: “I don't believe Iran's regime was behind the plot. If we assume it was Iran's plot, it would seem like a group of professional gangsters hiring a careless agent for their most important project. It's impossible.”

Even a senior American law enforcement official said (on condition of anonymity) that the US isn’t quite sure what this was and it was likely a “rogue plan. . . so outside their normal track of activity.”

● Some Questions: This all leaves us with some odd questions. If we assume Holder is correct, then what will Obama do about it? Even Clinton dropped a few cruise missiles on Sudan after the embassy bombings in Africa. So Obama can’t just pretend this didn’t happen.

But if Holder is wrong, then is he simply wrong or is there more to this?

I never like conspiracies as an answer, especially when there are more likely answers -- such as this guy just being a nut job. But it is extremely coincidental that the day after Darrell Issa starts talking about subpoenaing Holder to answer for what are likely criminal acts related to Fast and Furious, that Holder manages to unveil a huge distraction involving the very elements of Fast and Furious -- DEA, drugs, Mexican cartels and cross border crime. This is one of those coincidences you can’t put in films or people will lose their suspension of disbelief.

My normal response would be to trust professional law enforcement. BUT we’ve already seen how compromised they’ve been by Democratic Justice bosses, such as when Janet Reno ordered the Branch Davidian attack to show that she was tough or the Elian Gonzalez deportation to show Castro goodwill or Holder’s actions in Fast and Furious itself, where potentially hundreds of lives have been taken or destroyed by Holder’s attempt to use the ATF for political purposes. Trust is in short supply here.

So I think we should keep an open mind at this point and not assume anything unless and until strong, verifiable, independent proof is provided.

[+] Read More...

[-] Collapse Post...

I'm Not Second Guessing Your Repugnance!

Slow Joe is at it again. Last time he was calling Tea Party supporters terrorists. Before that he was calling women lacrosse players “gazelles” and complaining that “the wrong people end up collecting the women” in the financial crisis. Now he's praising China’s “repugnant” forced abortion policy.



Starting in the 1970s, China introduced a policy that limits families to one child per couple. This includes criminal sentences and forced abortions for parents who violate the policy. Ostensibly, this was done because China was facing an over population problem -- although China’s population was actually declining at the time the policy was put into place.



As an interesting consequence of this policy, China is now facing two of the world’s most extreme demographic problems. First, the elimination of several generations of young has left China with the world’s worst retirement problem, as China’s elderly population far outweighs its productive population (4 retirees per worker) -- this is much worse than in the United States (3 workers per retiree). Secondly, because the Chinese prefer boys over girls, this meant that mostly girls were aborted or killed as infants. Thus, China is about to face the problem that there are 40 million more eligible bachelors than there are wives. To get a sense of how large this problem is, consider that this is the same number of marrying age males in Britain, France and Germany combined. It is also the entire population of California.



China’s single-child policy is largely responsible for both of these problems and there is serious pressure to end the policy. Even China’s official press is questioning the policy, which is highly unusual. Moreover, last month, one entire province demanded a waiver of the policy. It seems that the policy will soon end.



So what does this have to do with us?



American liberals were initially big fans of China’s one-child policy. Why? Well, the 1970s was the age of the next Global Ice Age, the Population Bomb, and fantasies of global famine. We were all going to starve by 1992. And let’s face it, liberals have always loved Eugenics.



But at some point, most liberals realized that forced abortion was not a very defensible thing. So they decided that China’s policy was not something they could publicly praise, even though many continue to support it in private. Indeed, even now, you will occasionally find liberals who openly defend the policy. For example, there was a laughable AP article last month that claimed that girls had it better under the one-child policy than they did before. Of course, that’s only the girls who aren’t killed as children or fetuses and aren’t imprisoned or forced to abort their own children. Moreover, the article failed to grasp that economically, the whole premise of its argument was crap. But hey, these are liberals, what do you expect?



Enter Slow Joe Biden.



Biden is in China for reasons unknown, possibly to get him out of town until the election or maybe as collateral for our bonds or maybe he just got lost on his way to see Santa? And let me tell you, the Chinese are not pleased. They have already had to cut off one of his speeches because it was too idiotic to be translated. Then they asked him what he thought about China’s one-child policy. Here is what Joe said:

“The Obama administration strongly opposes all aspects of China's coercive birth limitation policies, including forced abortion and sterilization. The vice president believes such practices are repugnant. He also pointed out, in China, that the policy is, as a practical matter, unsustainable. He was arguing against the one child policy to a Chinese audience.”

Oops, sorry, that’s what Biden’s spokeswoman Kendra Barkoff said (and no, I did not make that name up). Here’s what Biden actually said:

“Your policy has been one which I fully understand--I'm not second-guessing--of one child per family.”

Feel free to compare the quotes, you may find a slight discrepancy. Either Barkoff is lying or Biden is “not second-guessing” China’s “repugnant” policy. . . or both. Who keeps letting this idiot out of his rubber room? Seriously, if I were Obama, I would have Biden shot to the moon and then get Huntsman to run as my VP.



[+] Read More...

[-] Collapse Post...

The Most Interesting Man In The Administration

People want him hung for his every word, even the prepositions.
He can speak idiot, in gibberish.
His incompetence is expanding faster than the universe.
He lives vicariously through Neil Kinnock.
He once had a non-awkward moment, just to see how it feels.
He could dismember you with his motorcade or his policies.
He is a big f*cking deal.
He is the most interesting man in the administration.

“I don’t always get to drink at beer summits, but when I do, I prefer Kool-Aid.
Stay Thirsty my friends.” [+] Read More...

[-] Collapse Post...

The Weekly Bidenism

The Israeli/Palestinian issue is perhaps the most complex diplomatic issue the world has to offer. So why not send the world’s most complex thinker? Oh yes. Get ready for. . . The Weekly Bidenism.

Believe it or not, President Obama just announced that he is sending Slow Joe to Israel to “save” the failing Middle East Peace Process. Move over George Mitchell, make way for Slow Joe. And I mean that literally, considering Joe’s recent success in striking down pedestrians with his motorcade.

In fact, before we discuss the “merits” of handing this issue to Joe, let me extend this warning to my Jewish and Arab friends: get off the streets. Biden is coming! So far, in just one year, his motorcade has managed to scratch four pedestrians. He’s looking for five. He’s the Darth Vader of motorcaders! In fact, his motorcade has become such a sign of terror that they’re making a movie about it, they’re either calling it “Terror at 40 mph” or “The Cading.” Run!!!

Let’s get back to the issue. When you appoint someone to act as a negotiator, you typically look for someone who is considered impartial and who both sides can respect. That ain’t Joe.

Indeed, the Palestinians may wonder about Joe’s impartiality, as he famously said in 2007: “I am a Zionist. You don’t have to be a Jew to be a Zionist.” But hey, why should this be a problem for the Palestinians. Aren’t we all Zionists now. . . and Berliners? That doesn’t mean you aren’t impartial?

Of course, he also called Israel “the single greatest strength America has in the Middle East,” which kind of implies American ownership or at least partnership, so maybe. . . just maybe the Palestinians might not see him as entirely impartial? But then, his reasoning was a little strange, so maybe they’ll just write this off as typical Joeffoonery:

“Imagine our circumstance in the world were there no Israel. How many battleships would there be? How many troops would be stationed?”

Uh. . . what? Why would we be sending troops to protect the non-existing Israel? And what do battleships have to do with this? As you saying Israel keeps Arab navies from the high seas? Or are you calling Israel a proxy army for the United States? I think you might want to stop talking now Joe. How about just saying they’re the only legitimate democracy in the region and have been a good friend?

At least the Israelis will be happy to have him as a negotiator, right? I mean, heck, he told the Israeli’s that: “Israel’s decisions must be made in Jerusalem.” Thus, proving that he knows where Israel’s capitol is located. And he said, “Israel has the right to defend itself and it doesn't have to ask, just as any other free and independent country.” Good, Joe understands the concept of national sovereignty. Then he said that Israeli is “entitled” to launch a military strike against Iran:

“Israel can determine for itself -- it's a sovereign nation -- what's in their interest and what they decide to do relative to Iran and anyone else. Whether we agree or not. They're entitled to do that. Any sovereign nation is entitled to do that. . . . If the Netanyahu government decides to take a course of action different than the one being pursued now, that is their sovereign right to do that. That is not our choice.”

Whooops. That one didn’t play so well in the press, but the Israelis were thrilled when he said it, especially when he added that the United States will “always stand by Israel, without telling Israelis what they can and cannot do.” What’s not to like, right?

Well, Joe giveth, and Joe taketh away too, like when said:

“Israel will have to reconcile itself with the nuclearization of Iran.”

He also told them that they “must” stop building settlements, must dismantle existing outposts, must work toward a two state solution with the Palestinians, and must allow free movement of Palestinians. So we can’t tell Israel what to do, but they better accept the fact that we’re going to tell them what to do? Oh, and wash behind your ears before you go to bed.

Of course, on the nuclear issue, the Israelis might take comfort from the idea that Joe might be exaggerating about Iran going nuclear. Indeed, Joe recently said:

“[Iran’s] not a nuclear power. I can understand why Ahmadinejad would make that assertion to divert the world's attention from the abuse of the civil liberties and civil rights of the people of Iran. The progress that Iran has made on the nuclear front is greatly exaggerated in my view.”

Excellent, so there’s nothing to worry about? Except that the International Atomic Energy Agency, and everyone else, disagrees. But that’s Joe, always the maverick.

At least Joe and Obama have a plan. That should put the Israelis at ease. Joe says to give sanctions time. He even assures us that Obama “has” (read: “might soon have”) China on board with sanctions, and that will solve the crisis. Let’s just hope the Israelis didn’t hear Biden when he said:

“It’s doubtful if the economic sanctions will be effective, and I am against opening an additional military and diplomatic front.”

Is this really the best choice for a negotiator for the Middle East Peace Process? This is a region that lives on a knife’s edge with war possible at any moment for the slightest of slights. And into this combustible mix, Obama now throws Simple Joe? Perhaps we have more to fear than just his motorcade. . .

[+] Read More...

[-] Collapse Post...

The Weekly Bidenism

After last week's stunning claim that Bush’s surge in Iraq would be Obama’s greatest policy achievement, Joe felt ready for the big leagues. So he took on Dick Cheney, the boogey man. He lost. But in his defense, he was sabotaged by. . . himself. Get ready for. . . The Weekly Bidenism.

You may or may not have heard that Dick Cheney accused the Obama administration of not taking terrorism seriously. Cheney had some reasons, though no one apparently told Joe what they were, because Joe’s defense was summed by Joe as such:

“I just think he’s wrong. He thinks I’m wrong. I think he’s wrong.”

Now that is one compelling argument. It’s logical, it’s laid out so anyone can see that Joe is right, and oh! the command of facts! I must admit, I’m almost convinced. If only Joe could give me one more reason to think that Cheney might be wrong. . . perhaps impugning Cheney’s motives? Let’s ask Joe:

“I’ve never questioned another man’s motive.”

Oh come Joe, pretty please?

“I mean, it’s almost like he forgot he left us a $1.3 trillion debt. There were two wars going on, one that was ignored, one was -- wasn’t going all that well.”

Thanks Joe, I knew you could come up with a reason that Cheney must be lying, he must be trying to cover up that horrible Bush record. . . wait a minute. What’s this about a $1.3 trillion debt? The debt under Bush was $9.9 trillion, the deficit was $200 billion. I wonder what Joe could be talking about? Maybe Joe was just angry when he said this -- Joe has admitted that, kind of like the Green Hulk, he exaggerates when he gets angry.

Oh wait, I know! He’s talking about the $1.3 trillion deficit (not debt) that Obama racked up last year (or maybe he means the $1.6 trillion deficit he’s planning for this year -- you never know with Joe)! So if a $1.3 trillion deficit discredits a man, then Joe has just discredited Obama. Nice Joe, truth suits you. . . you should try it more often.

And what’s this about one war being ignored and the other not going so well? Didn’t you tell us last week that Obama’s biggest achievement was Bush’s 2007 surge? How could Iraq not be going well? As for ignoring Afghanistan, I seem to recall one simple Senator from Delaware swearing that a surge wouldn’t work in Afghanistan. . . of course, that was before Obama implemented an Afghan surge.

But it wasn’t just Biden’s blasting of Obama/Cheney that caught my attention last week, no, no, no, no. What I found truly interesting was Joe’s attempt to assure us that Obama has made the country safe from terrorism. Let’s listen to Joe, as he soothes our fears:

“We have made more progress in dismantling the hierarchy of Al-Qaeda central [nah nah nah, we killed more bad guys than you did]. . . and evidence of that is, now they’re going to lone bombers as the means to get there [you mean like the suicide bombers they’ve used in every attack other than 9/11?]. … I'm more worried about, and harder to detect, and I'm very concerned about a terrorist attack in the United States along the lines of the 'Christmas Day bomber.' You get a disgruntled student, someone who has some relationship with the United States who is -- able to be recruited quickly, able to be indoctrinated quickly. And they say, basically, 'Here's a bomb. Go do it,' as opposed to the kind of planning that's needed to pull off -- a very complicated 9/11. Am I less worried about an attack? No, I'm worried. Am I less worried about a catastrophic event? Yes.”

Because planes blowing up is not a “catastrophic event” unless there are several at once? And did Joe just say that by succeeding against Al Qaeda, Team Obama has made them more dangerous? And is it really smart for Joe to assure us that this administration is on top of the terror issue by telling us how worried he is about this “new” (read: ancient) threat of single bombers? Maybe we should avoid planes and other public transport, just as he suggested during the swine flu faux-crisis:

"I wouldn't go anywhere in confined places now… When one person sneezes it goes all the way through the aircraft. That's me. I would not be, at this point, if they had another way of transportation, (be) suggesting they ride the subway."

Ah Joe, you make scaremongering an art form, even when you aren’t trying.


[+] Read More...

[-] Collapse Post...

The Weekly Bidenism

With Dodger Joe Biden headed to Canada to woo vital Canadian voters for the Democratic Party, and his motorcade having their fourth accident in a year (why do they let him drive?), you’d think we wouldn’t have anything to write about. . . you’d be wrong. Because like rust, Joe’s mouth never sleeps, and this week, his mouth was talking about Iraq. Get ready for. . . The Weekly Bidenism.

This week, Prognosticator Joe went on Larry King to explain why things will look good for the Democrats in November. Apparently Joe thinks Obama’s “greatest achievement” will see them through. What is Obama’s greatest achievement? Iraq.

"I am very optimistic about -- about Iraq. I mean, this could be one of the great achievements of this administration. You're going to see 90,000 American troops come marching home by the end of the summer. You're going to see a stable government in Iraq that is actually moving toward a representative government. . . I've been impressed how they have been deciding to use the political process rather than guns to settle their differences."

That’s Obama’s “greatest achievement”? Ok, let’s look at the two things Biden says he’s achieved. First, bringing home the troops. As with the Nobel Prize, this isn’t an achievement yet, it’s a promise of an achievement. Those don’t count. Moreover, despite the claim that these troops would be home by the end of the summer, Joe later downgraded this certainty to “likely” on Sunday’s Meet the Press.

Also, we would be remiss if we didn’t point out that this will leave around 60,000 troops in Iraq. Compare that to Obama’s original promise that he would remove ALL troops from Iraq by August 2010, and this “achievement” starts to sound a little fake. But hey, what’s 60,000 troops among friends!

At least Joe is right that Iraqis have put down their guns and are using the political process to settle their differences. Unless you count the daily bombings that continue to kill hundreds of Iraqis each month, including, for example, twin blasts on February 5 that killed 40 pilgrims, or the three explosions at Shiite shrines yesterday, or the fact that December was the deadliest month in Iraq in almost a year (on the worst day, December 8, 121 people were killed in a series of car bombs). But perhaps we are being too critical, after all, daily bombings are just part of the political process in every country, right?

What’s more interesting, is that Joe went on to claim that the Iraq war hasn’t been worth “it’s horrible price,” which he blames on the war being “mishandled from the outset” and on the United States taking “its eye off the ball” by invading Iraq instead of finishing the fight in Afghanistan. Does Joe have a point? I don’t know, let’s ask an expert:

The year was 1998 when Sen. Joe Biden first called for an invasion of Iraq. Said ChickenHawk Biden when U.N. inspectors told him they had no evidence that Saddam had WMDs:

"As long as Saddam’s at the helm, there is no reasonable prospect you or any other inspector is ever going to be able to guarantee that we have rooted out, root and branch, the entirety of Saddam’s program relative to weapons of mass destruction."

"The only way we’re going to get rid of Saddam Hussein is we’re going to end up having to start it alone."

But the evil President Clinton wouldn’t listen to Joe’s bellicose dreams. No, Joe would have to wait until after September 11, 2001 for his hopes to be fulfilled. With the run up to the war just starting, Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman Joe Biden again called for war:

"One thing is clear: These weapons must be dislodged from Saddam, or Saddam must be dislodged from power."

When others cautioned Joe that there was no actual proof that these “weapons” existed, Joe fired back:

"If we wait for the danger from Saddam to become clear, it could be too late."

Added Joe about Saddam Hussein:

"[He is] a long term threat and a short term threat to our nation security [and an] extreme danger to the world."

When Joe was asked as late as 2007 if he stood by those comments, he said he did: “That’s right, and I was correct about that.”

Bellicose Joe then warned us that we must be prepared for the long term:

"I do not believe this is a rush to war. I believe it is a march to peace and security. I believe that failure to overwhelmingly support this resolution is likely to enhance the prospects that war will occur. We must be clear with the American people that we are committing to Iraq for the long haul; not just the day after, but the decade after."

He then shepherded the war resolution through the Senate.

But that was before it became more popular to oppose the war. Soon, he and Obama were calling the war immoral, and they insisted that we never should have invaded in the first place. When others suggested the surge, Biden screamed that we should cut the country into three parts and run away. Indeed, Biden not only insisted that the surge “would fail,” he vehemently opposed it, assuring us the surge will “worsen sectarian violence.”

Of course, the surge worked, and Obama won the election. Suddenly, Biden was the surge’s biggest fan. And now he’s claiming that the effects of the 2007 surge are somehow Obama’s greatest achievement. Think about that. . . Obama’s greatest achievement was something Bush did in 2007.

You know what? Maybe for once, Biden’s right?

[+] Read More...

[-] Collapse Post...