Van Jones Is A Truther

I know this clip must be all over the right blogospere. But I think this is on that small list of things that cannot be said too often.
*******************************************************************************


h/t: Hot Air.com

Obama Looks at Death Panels and Says, "I See Dead Republicans."

h/t: The Virginian

Dramatization of Obama/DNC Tactics

**********FOUL LANGUAGE ALERT*************************
******************************************************


h/t: JammieWearingFool

Cavuto Lectures Obama: Counsels More Mature and Civil Behavior

President Obama's Ignorance About The Basics Of Health Care Is Eroding The Public’s Trust

For many years now Americans have had to become more informed consumers of health care. It is more difficult to get insurance companies to pay for treatment so people do more research to find out which tests, treatments and medications are necessary. With the wide dispersion of the internet it has become easier to do the necessary research. This might not be such a good thing for Barack Obama’s health care goals.
By now many Americans know that they might need to take some personal responsibility to see that test results move with them from doctor to doctor. They know that doesn’t have to be the “big problem” that Obama tries to paint it as. I would imagine that millions of Americans are sitting there thinking, “I know how to keep that from happening. I have actually done it for my son. This guy wants to oversee a total overhaul of the system and he doesn’t even know as much about seeing doctors as I do. No thanks.”
People who have researched medications for themselves or loved ones know that the difference is often much more complicated than the president’s example of two pills that are equally effective and differ only in price. People do not lose time or sleep over such questions. The real difficulty comes when an insurance company has decreed that there is only one medication that is acceptable in a situation when the doctor and the informed patient know there is a more expensive medication that is well known to be more effective. Obama either doesn’t know that such circumstances arise or he wants to act like they do not exist. There are a lot of people out here that know better. And Obama’s blatant parading of his ignorance for all to see cannot be increasing the level of trust.
And does he have to keep reminding me how much better his insurance is than mine? That’s just going to remind me that he has lacked motivation to become a more informed health care consumer.

Coulter Says Obama Cannot Handle Criticism

He's temperamentally unsuited for leadership. But who would know since he has never lead anything before.

"That's Great Now FixThe Economy"

The Daily Show With Jon Stewart	Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c
That's Great Now Fix the Economy
www.thedailyshow.com
Daily Show Full Episodes Political Humor Joke of the Day

h/t: Pundit and Pundette

Bad Teleprompter

From a Reuters story: "MOSCOW (Reuters) - In a slip of the tongue, U.S. President Barack Obama described Prime Minister Vladimir Putin on Monday as president, echoing the widely held view that he remains Russia's most powerful man."
In a related story Barack Obama said he has no respect for any world leader who cannot speak Austrian. A reporter who tried to ask a follow up question about the Austrian language was ordered to remove his luggage from Air Force One and find his own transportation back to the US. An AP and a CBS reporter stated they are ashamed of their 'disgraced former colleague.' President Obama then asked, "Anymore wise a$$ questions?"

















'

History Rewritten In Plain View

Hey, ya know like love is hate and war is peace, dude.


And if you don't believe Barack, he and his teacher's unions will continue the dumbing down until the evening news is just too intellectually challenging.

h/t: Pundit and Pundette

When Is A Promise Not A Promise? When Barack Obama Made It

Who put the mess in Messiah? And,no. I don't care about that Sanford guy. He's been done to death by every liberal talking head there is.


h/t: Hot Air.com

That Cairo Speech Might Not Have Been as Revolutionary as Advertised

There are other factors yjat might inspire democratic aspirationas. From Coulter's most recent column:

. . if the better part of valor is for America to stand neutral between freedom and Islamic oppression, why are liberals trying to credit Obama's ridiculous Cairo speech for emboldening the Iranian protesters?

The only reason that bald contradiction doesn't smack you in the face is that it is utterly preposterous that Obama's Cairo speech accomplished anything -- anything worthwhile, that is. Not even the people who say that believe it.

The only reaction to Obama's Cairo speech in the Middle East is that the mullahs probably sighed in relief upon discovering that the U.S. president is a coward and an imbecile.

Two weeks ago, New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman was exulting over the "free and fair" national election in Lebanon, in which the voters threw out Hezbollah and voted in the "U.S.-supported coalition." (Apparently support from America is not deemed the vote-killer in Lebanon that it allegedly is in Iran.)

To justify his Times-expensed airfare to Beirut, Friedman added some local color, noting that "more than one Lebanese whispered to me: Without George Bush standing up to the Syrians in 2005 ... this free election would not have happened."

That's what Lebanese voters said.

But Friedman also placed a phone call to a guy at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace -- which he didn't have to go to Lebanon for -- to get a quote supporting the ludicrous proposition that Obama's Cairo speech was responsible for the favorable election results in Lebanon.

"And then here came this man (Obama)," Mr. Carnegie Fund said, "who came to them with respect, speaking these deep values about their identity and dignity and economic progress and education, and this person indicated that this little prison that people are living in here was not the whole world. That change was possible."

I think the fact that their Muslim brethren are now living in freedom in a democratic Iraq might have made the point that "change was possible" and "this little prison" is "not the whole world" somewhat more forcefully than a speech apologizing for Westerners who dislike the hijab.

Obama -- and America -- are still living off President Bush's successes in the war on terrorism. For the country's sake, may those successes outlast Obama's attempt to dismantle them.

Obamacare Not Good Enough For Obama's Own Family: “It’s A Terrific Question”

You will be surprised when I tell you that the MSM apparently didn't hear these words spoken in front of millions. I am beginning to note a definite connection between kneeling and very poor hearing. Judgment is often impaired as well. When reporters lack judgment and decent hearing their jobs could be done better by your average dry cleaner, auto mechanic, nurses' aide or unemployed porn star. This is part of my massive snaggletoothieCare plan. Essential will be the replacement of most journalists by people who will report the news. The long term effect of snaggletoothieCare will be that ObamaCare will die a quick death and we will begin rational and widely discussed improvements of the actual problems in the existing system.

If You Turn Your Back On Hope You Just Might Get Shot In The Heart

h/t: Stop the ACLU

OK, Granted, Obama doesn't have a clue about what he is doing.

OK, Granted, Obama doesn't have a clue about what he is doing. But that still doesn't give reporters the right to ask him difficult questions, does it? What do they think he is? Perez Hilton at a rap concert? No, he's the most powerful man in the world. Tapper and Garrett are just going to ruin it for the rest of us. If they don't back off, they'll push Obama too far. And he'll end freedom of speech for all of us. And it will be all your fault, Jake.

Obama's Long History of Viewing Elections as a Problem to Be Managed Is Typefied in his Nonreaction to Iran's Questionable Vote

Laura Ingraham, Brigitte Gabriel, as well as Justin Logan of the CATO Institute on Obama’s Nonreaction to Events in Iran (from 6/18)

Obama is not displaying leadership. I understand it is delicate. But it is not as delicate a situation as Obama's lack of response would imply. I am afraid that a lot of the problem is that Obama has not been tested and learned to adapt as a leader. He seems to have a fear of making mistakes that just shouts 'novice.' He seems to not understand that any course he chooses will have negative consequences. Sometime he just has to choose the lesser evil. He seems to to have a sophomoric belief that he can be slick and emerge with lots more adulation. I think those days are numbered. Will he know when he must act? I am less optimistic about that then I have been since he was elected. Pundit and Pundette have a couple of recent posts that analyze Obama's patterns and motivation and give links to other writings about these subjects here and here. I highly recommend thatblog.

h/t: MsUnderestimated

Victor D. Hanson on Iran and Obama

It is sad to contemplate, but Obama lacks the temperament, knowledge and desire to do anything but screw up foreign affairs. The remainder of this post is two quotes from VDH's column yesterday at Pajamsmedia about how clueless Obama is about what is happening in Iran.


"It’s a personal thing that interferes with Obama’s ego, and messianic personal diplomacy.  Obama himself is not comfortable with those abroad who emulate American values and seek to have the freedoms and rights we take for granted. The post-colonial industry mandates that the Other is a perpetual victim of colonialism, imperialism, capitalism, and racism with justified grievances. Only elite American intellectuals of singular insight and empathy understand the calculus of the oppressed, and so, through apologies, accommodations, and concessions, they alone on our behalf can deal with an Ahmadinejad, Chavez, Ortega, Castro, Morales, Nasrallah, etc. But when we see a purple-finger election, a statue of liberty at Tiananmen, or the current Levi-clad, cell-phoning, English-placard-carrying Iranian grassroots resistance, all the above is rendered null and void. Obama wants to rise above his country; but when his country is not held in disrepute (as is true among the Iranian people), he is an actor without a role.
"People abroad really do prefer freedom and true constitutional government to autocratic grievance mongers who loot their country and brutalize the free. In such conditions, old-fashioned Americans, often inarticulate and perhaps clumsy, but honest in their belief in the universal appeal of human freedom, do better than all the nuanced Kennedy School intellectuals (e.g. They laughed at the reductionist  “Tear Down This Wall” and “Evil Empire” and apparently preferred “No Inordinate Fear of Communism”). So a deer-in-the-headlights Obama wonders, ‘Wait, why aren’t they shouting the boilerplate ‘Death to America!’ and invoking, like I did, 1953 and the CIA crimes? Don’t they know the things that we did to them and I apologized for? Don’t they see that I am as separate from the US of the 1950s as they are? What’s this grass-roots rejection of an anti-Western, anti-colonialist indigenous Iranian government all about? (cf. his moral equivalent comparison of Mousavi to Ahmadinejad as equally anti-American)."
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
"4)   He’s addicted to the ossified Iraqi paradigm of “Bush intervened and caused a mess” (Free Iraq is apparently still equivalent to Saddam’s Iraq), so “I don’t want to follow his lead” (as if vocal support now is the same as shock and awe then). Somewhere in stone a lie is chiseled “Iraq made Iran stronger”. He doesn’t see the footnote: “But if Iraqi democracy survives, it fuels emulation in neighboring Iran and does more to undermine the theocracy than all the F-22s in the world”. Who knows-if Iranian freedom spreads, some nut might praise Bush’s commitment to Middle East freedom in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Lebanon, and not Obama’s apologetics at Cairo? (Free Shiites in Iraq are far better for Iran than either oppressed minorities under Saddam, or Saddam’s opportunistic dictatorship). Bottom line again: Obama needs to forget Ahmadinejad and talk daily with Maliki.
 
"OR
 
"5) His entire anti-Bush foreign policy is then in trouble. We’ve heard for eight years a cheap slur of “neo-cons” did it, not that in the dangerous world abroad there are no good choices, but supporting freedom is usually the better alternative if one must choose. If a peaceful democratic revolution succeeds in Iran, then what happens with “outreach” to Putin, Chavez, and Hamas? The new liberal realpolitik insisted that we don’t offer moral judgment, and was framed instead by winning the hearts and minds of tyrants through humbling ourselves and meae culpae. But if these democracies in Afghanistan, Iraq, and an Iran (?) were to succeed, then what? You would not go to Chavez and promise first to talk about shared colonial racist oppression, but rather say to the Venezuelan people, “We stand with you in your struggle to achieve freedom and dignity and to join the other democracies of Latin America”? That is not just in the cards, and so Iran, is well, a monkey-wrench.
 
"For now, watch the Iranian army and police. If one battalion bolts, then . . ."

Camille Paglia Damns Obama's Cairo Speech With Faint Praise

She liked his speech more than I did. But she is not excited. The remainder of the post is quotes Ms. Paglia's Salon piece.

"Obama's speech (which I read rather than heard) seemed to my teacher's eye like a strong first draft rather than a polished final product. This could and should have been one of the most important documents in American political history. But any president, given the crushing onus of his daily agenda, needs help from a team of speechwriters and advisors who will flesh out his thoughts and argument with example and detail. Despite his Ivy League background, Obama evidently still lacks a reliable circle of erudite, cosmopolitan analysts like those John F. Kennedy drafted via his Harvard network.
"The Cairo speech is well-organized, ticking off central thorny issues region by region. But there is an unsettling slackness and even sentimentality in its view of history. Yes, Obama's principal targeted audience was moderate Muslims, whom he attempted to woo away from extremism. But the president missed a huge opportunity to speak with equal force to doubters in his own nation, where suspicion of Muslims has sometimes turned ruthless and paranoid." . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
"Hence, given the lingering climate of fear and suspicion, I wish that the Cairo speech had been more specific and instructional about Muslim beliefs and culture. Obama's quick and late citations of Andalusia and Córdoba, for instance, could only prove baffling to the majority of Americans, who know virtually nothing about Moorish Spain. Obama's cursory two-sentence summary of the past relationship between Islam and the West -- jumping from "conflict and religious wars" to "colonialism" -- seemed vague and timid. While there was a mini-list of Muslim ideas and inventions (including the questionable assertion that we owe our "mastery of pens and printing" to the Arabs), no comparable credit was given to the enormous Western contributions to science, medicine and technology. But the gravest omission was that Obama failed to fully articulate the most basic Western concepts of legal process and civil liberties, which have inspired reformers around the world. The president of the U.S. should be an eloquent ambassador of those ideals wherever he goes."

[I suspect that Obama's inability to be a good ambassador of Western ideals stems from those ideas being of absolutely no importance to him. Ms. Paglia is very intelligent and I think she will, one of these days, come to see through Obama's meaningless and misleading veneer of liberal values.]

"I Don't Think He's Really A Reformer. He's the President of Earmark Nation."

Scarborough: Torture Opponents Are Inviting Terror Attack

From 4-17-09 I have the impression Mika feels certain things should not be discussed.