Separated at Birth

And, interestingly...they're both from Crazytown.

Obama's Alarming Inability to Lead

Much has been made of President Obama's leadership, especially in light of the current crisis in the Gulf.  Now, while its true that a lot of the criticism is, so much opportunistic rhetoric from the other side - designed to pounce on a president, whenever he's vulnerable, to make the all important political hay.  Its just as true that, as we have seen this crisis grow older and were able to simply, look at the facts on the ground (or in the sea) and see that even those on the same side were starting to raise issues with the initial handling of the crisis by the President, then it becomes more legitimate to question his leadership.

But, even then, we're only able to pick on things that appear problematic, in a Leader's inability to lead.  One might argue that apologizing to adversaries (as well as friends) and bowing to Saudi kings, is showing the opposite of leadership and further, may embolden terrorists to strike us, here at home.  But, that becomes subjective.  You can attempt to link Obama's actions to giving rise to the Christmas Day bomber, Nidal Hassan or the Time Square bomber.  But these things might have happened anyway.  Objectively, Obama's actions can't be directly tied to these events occurring and what's left is a series of odd choices and behavior, we'd certainly wish, not to see from our President.

In comparing two crises, Bush's Katrina and Obama's Gulf Spill - Both presidents took extreme heat, fairly and unfairly, for being slow to respond.  The difference I see, from those two checkpoints is that for Bush and his Administration, they put their heads down and tried to make right all the things that appeared wrong in their initial response.  Forging ahead while being beaten about the head and body, by their detractors and supporters, alike.  A Katrina beat down, from which that Administration would never truly recover.  Unlike the Obama Administration, the Bush strategy didn't become two-fold.  On one hand, ensure that everything is being done that can be done - and on the other, try to convey being in charge while, with equal force, attempting to maintain political cover in word and deed, that the demon of this disaster is the dreaded oil company and not them.  And of course, a healthy dash of "Blame Bush", for good measure. 

With an evident inability of Obama, to view a larger picture - perhaps the Vision Thing, that Bush 41 spoke of in olden days, the President's choices to secure all blame to BP, as well as things such as: perpetuating images of keeping the foot on the throat of BP and kicking asses...letting it be known that if BP's CEO, Tony Hayward worked for him, he'd be fired.  For dispatching Attorney General Holder to the scene, so early in this process, to hang the threat of potentially devastating legal action, over the head of BP, while it's in the midst of trying to stop a cataclysmic oil spill, that could be just as devastating to its own survival as it may be to the survival of the Gulf Coast... None of these actions are helpful to the monumental task at hand but, even worse, these rookie, short-sighted lapses in true leadership can be traced to the injuring of our strongest and biggest ally and partner, Britain, as well as hurt us right here in the US, with lost jobs from drilling moratoriums, etc.  Why wouldn't it be logical to think that if you slam a British company that is so important to its own country as well as, in this case, the exposure of British pension funds to BP, that as President, you can cause all kinds of bad things to happen. (the economy, jobs of its citizens and the overall, financial well-being of both our countries)   BIG PICTURE!  You know..we sort of pay a president to be able to think these kind of things through.

Not Obama's clinically detached thinking process that everyone just loved, during the campaign. Lately, that and $3.95, will get you a cup of coffee.  But, a President and/or his administration's talent in calculating their words...their actions, based on world realities that intend to produce results, beneficial for our country and the countries of our closest friends.

So too, has the President and the Administration, misinterpreted the calls for him to emote, in this time of crisis.  Probably not the best word and totally over-used but, I sense where this call comes from. Its from something within us all, that whispers to us, that we haven't seen this before in a president.  Its a bit strange to all of us.  Further, the Administration mischaracterizes this call to mean that, somehow, we want this President to engage in some form of method acting, to placate the American public, for the emotions we're feeling.  Its not at all.  And, its also telling, that the Administration views it this way because, I think it truly believes, that any display of emotion, from this President, would be play-acting and not really genuine at all.

Say what you will of George W. But, in the first days following the attacks, on 911, when he addressed the nation on TV for the first time - though conveying national strength and the will to persevere, through this unthinkable crisis, visited on our Country...when you looked at his face, you saw a president who was as rocked to the core as we were.  In that moment, he was us.  And, in the days that followed, when the shock began to wear away and was replaced by defiance and a bit of anger, across the Country - the President was feeling those same feelings, right along with us. It was a connection to the people he was charged to lead, that brought us out of that National catastrophe.  A catastrophe, we were led out of, that also brought with it, the biggest financial hit this country had absorbed, that wasn't related to a Depression.  Some of Obama's actions may bring on unnecessary, financial consequences to the region, the country and beyond - that are totally avoidable.  Not leading...

A President's connection to the citizens, all the citizens, especially in times of crisis, cannot be underestimated as being perhaps, the crucial element, in the his success of leadership.  This innate connection, cannot be flipped on and off, like a light switch.  It just has to be there.  And with Obama...there's no there, there.  A year-and-a-half in and this reality is seeping into the hearts and minds, of even his most strident supporters.  No one is asking Obama to lead, only with his heart.  But, we may be realizing, as a nation - that the evidence is growing that maybe, the heart of a Leader, does not beat within him.

The final thing that comes to mind - and this is my own speculation but, is brought about, by the feeling that Obama's disconnect, goes far beyond, just that of him and to the country he leads.  Its how we've literally watched our Presidents, grow old and gray, right before our very eyes, from the sheer weight and enormity of the jobs they held.  I somehow, have a sneaking suspicion, that when Obama emerges from his presidency...he will come out of it as handsome and as youthful as he was, on his Inauguration Day.

Never Again?

With thanks to New Zeal, by way of FederalistNo84 for this clip.  Its always good to look to the past, sometimes, to put the present in perspective.

** UPDATE ** Richard Blumenthal Story

An update, to an earlier post on this blog, on May 22nd.  "Richard Blumenthal 'Vietnam' Word-Play Could Prove to be More Insidious" 

An addition to the Blumenthal story, out today on ctwatchdog.com, that can be seen here, details the story of veteran Assistant District Attorney, Richard R. Hine.  In it, Hines claims that Blumenthal lied to him, personally, about his service in Vietnam.  He also claims, hearing Blumenthal misrepresent his Vietnam service, to groups about five other times, when the two men had attended functions together.

Hine said he knew about the Connecticut Attorney General's true service record, even before his revealed conversation, that occurred 18 years ago.  The Assistant Attorney General, outlines the circumstances of his conversation with Blumenthal, as well as apologizing to Vietnam veterans and their families, on behalf of Blumenthal, in a letter he circulated to various newspapers two weeks ago.

Helen Thomas - Just a Jihadi Headscarf Away...

Separated at Birth???

What is "The WORD"? Two Views - Which Makes More Sense to You?

It's been awhile since Nancy Pelosi, waxed on things biblical - as shown in this video.  Since the game plan became, that the left needed to get their policies talked-up, in Sunday sermons and to use the church to promote the progressive agenda...this is the best she could come up with.  Its literally stunning to hear her speak as though she is so guided by the Word (and a bit hilarious too) - when, with a quick look at her record, the glaring hypocrisy of what she's trying to espouse, shamelessly, compared with her stand on abortion which is so fundamentally against the teachings of any church you could think of. 

Here's Nance, at her babbling best:




Fortunately...there is a much clearer and far more genuine interpretation of what the word truly is, to some.  Only compared with Pelosi's lame attempt, however...

Did You Even Know There Was a Second Verse?

Things you won't learn, right before a baseball game...

Things That Make You Go Hmmm

If you look closely, at the image on the right...you can see Al Gore's face in the black smoke.  I swear!

Remember all the nutty conspiracy theories that sprang from 911, that are still as wildly prevalent today as they were then?  How its said that planes flying into buildings had to be an inside job? (Gulf Deepwater Oil Rig explosion) How an Administration that was pretty much viewed as incompetent, could somehow orchestrate such a complex plan, so that they could move forward on its agenda to invade Iraq? (No one in charge, Green Agenda, Cap and Trade) How, somehow, the President's friends, like Cheney and Halliburton, would benefit, from the US's invasion and occupation, made possible by the attack on 911? (Green technology, Shore Bank, GE, Al Gore, George Soros)  How big a deal was made of the amount of time Bush waited in that children's classroom? (Obama slow to respond and 46 days and counting and no stoppage of the oil leak)

Not that there could be any possible link to the Gulf Oil Spill and the Obama Administration - and conspiracy theories in general, are always crazy, easily debunked and pushed by crackpots.

I'm just sayin'...

We Need Chris Farley and His Interviewing Skills to Bring Perspective Back to Obama

Anyone who can remember the late Chris Farley and one of the more popular skits on Saturday Night Live, called "The Chris Farley Show" - Where his character was a simple, unassuming oaf ,whose one-dimensional interviewing style was applied, in sit-downs with some of the more popular people of the time.  Sometimes, even cultural icons like Sir Paul McCartney were subject to a line of questioning that would start with a piercing inquiry, such as:  "Do you remember when you were with the Beatles?"  For those not familiar with these skits or if you just want to laugh all over again...they can be seen here.

If only Chris Farley were still with us.  If he could score an interview with the President.  It could be the last, best hope to flick on some kind of light, within the President, that might just give him a proper perspective on things.  Especially, as it pertains to what is more widely being viewed and now sticking to him...as his own Katrina.  The Gulf Oil Spill disaster.

Imagine Chris Farley sitting with President Obama. If Farley's interviewing style were true to form, it would probably go something like this:

Farley:  Um...Hello and welcome to the Show.Tonight we have The President O...Um President of the United States, Barack Obama.  Hey, Mr. President.

Obama:  Hi Chris.  Nice to be here.

Farley:  Uh...yeah...oh thanks.  It's good...ah...we'll go to the questions.  Uh...remember when you were president and like...um...when all the Health Care stuff was going on and you were always telling us how good it would be for us?  And you were like...on TV all the time and doin' interviews and it seemed like you were always on TV and how you were traveling all around the country and stuff all the time...givin' speeches about health care and even though it was, um...like sooo huge, like....2000 pages or so and like...no one really knew everything that was in it...but, even though...you like...you were still everywhere all the time, telling us how good it would be and how important it was, that it got passed.  Do you remember that?

Obama:  Well...yes Chris,I remember. I was there.

Farley:  (Alternately pulling on his hair and pounding his head while saying)  Jeez!  I'm so stupid......GAWD!!

Obama:  Chris...it's okay.  You're doing fine.

Farley:  Yeah...Ah, I'm sorry.  Um...thanks, Mr. President.

Obama:  Sure Chris

Farley:  Well, Um...do you remember the oil spill, in like...the Gulf and stuff?

Obama:  Why...yes Chris.  It only happened just over a month ago.

Farley:  Oh yeah.  That was awesome.  Well, you remember how even though there was so much stuff going on like, the wars and unemployment and terrorists trying to bomb us and stuff and all kinds of things but...like you were like all about the Health Care plan and like...it seemed that all you were focused on was getting it passed cuz you were like...it was all good for us and stuff?  You remember that?

Obama:  Well, I guess.... 

Farley:  Yeah...Um...right.  Well...ah...how come you haven't been doing the same thing with the oil spill that you did with Health Care?

So perfect in its simplicity.  Bumbling and scattered, maybe.  But laser-like in its ability to shed all the media fawning and political bullcrap and get right to the point.  Oprah, Stephanopolous, Steve Croft, Diane Sawyer?  Forget all of them.  If only Chris Farley were still here today.  Perhaps he would help, to put everything in its proper perspective, for the President.  And, for the rest of us, as well.

Rahm Emanuel Should Go

Sometimes, a shake-up as severe as jettisoning your White House Chief of Staff, might give the appearance of an Administration lost.  One in complete disarray.  Obama's White House is not in complete disarray...but it is completely dismaying.  Opinion here, is that firing Rahm Emanuel now will give a far different signal to Washington and the country.  One that will benefit Obama and his Administration.

Missteps, wrong messaging, the appearance of incompetence at times - from a President and an administration hailed as being oh so smart...as well as just plain, shooting themselves in the foot in a myriad of instances, can be traced back to the first days of this Presidency.  I bet if you stop reading and sit back and ponder, you'll come up with a good dozen, on your own.  Time and space, prohibits me from actually listing them all here. 

Accusations of Chicago style politics and outright thuggery, of the Administration's strong-arm tactics and shady backroom deals.  The apparent disdain for the media and the propagandizing of the message.  The demonizing of those who oppose them, to the point of dismissing a huge swath of their American constituency. On and on we could go.

Of the two men, Emanuel and Obama - when speaking of the Chicago way, of politics.  Emanuel was clearly, the student and Obama, more the beneficiary of such tactics.  Oh, Obama knew exactly how the game was played but to allow his own elevation to the ultimate goal, he needed also, to appear to be elevated above such things and someone like Emanuel, needed to be the actual practitioner of all the lessons learned, in Chicago.

But now, more than ever, the president needs to show, who really is in charge.  As with the current Gulf Oil Spill debacle, Obama found himself having to overtly inject his authority over the continuing crisis, after weeks of the public, the punditry, as well as those within Washington and those on the ground in the Gulf states, wondering why he came off as so disengaged and deferring authority and responsibility to others. 

Letting Rahm go now, would perfectly underscore to the country, his seriousness in how he sees his Presidency moving forward.  Who Obama picks as a replacement is as crucial as the signal he'll give in giving Emanuel his pink slip.  And believe me...this isn't coming from the perspective of someone, who is a big fan of Obama and his progressive, government expanding policies.  I wish for him a one-term presidency and then, a succession of the right people in the job, to steer this country back to its founding principles and drive the progressive ideology and agenda back underground, at a minimum or ideally, vaporized from the American consciousness, altogether.

No.  Not at all.  This is an exercise in dealing with Obama's current reality.  And, in dealing with this reality - let's indulge ourselves in some fantasy.  Obama needs a Chief of Staff, cut from the same cloth as "Leo McGarry."  The fictitious character in the once popular show, West Wing, played beautifully by the late John Spencer.  Imperfect as we all are, McGarry was Chief of Staff in Jed (Martin Sheen) Bartlett's White House.  He seemingly, handled the activities of an entire administration, with all its complexities and potential for disaster at every turn, while allowing his President to be, well...President.  But, you always had the sense that Leo McGarry's every move, was done in service of his President.  You felt that whenever he spoke, intuitively, he reflected the wishes of his boss.  The two characters, President and Chief of Staff, were very close and went back a long way but, in the presence of his Boss, McGarry always addresed him as "Mr. President."  Somehow, perhaps wrongly, I have an image of Emanuel calling President Obama, "Barack", in private.  An interesting tidbit, is that the character played by Bradley Whitford, who was Deputy Chief of Staff, Josh Lyman, was based on Emanuel.

I think the dynamic of the Obama/Emanuel relationship, is that of Brothers, close in age, who work in the Family business together.  And, regardless of whether the business may suffer and the Brother who holds the ultimate authority in doing what's best for the business...that Brother's unbreakable allegiance to Family will choose to struggle forward, while the business suffers, than to make the painful choice of removing his Brother from a position that is adversely affecting the other's ability to run a successful business.

A big part of bringing his presidency back, will be Obama's truly learning to govern from a far more centrist location, then he is right now.  His far-left, extreme progressive agenda, notwithstanding - it's high time for Obama to learn the lesson, learned by all truly good Presidents.  And that's to adapt your policies and leadership, that enable you to govern the entire population of America.  Not just serve those, of one collective and inherently, narrow thought.

Now, all of this doesn't fall on the mere existence of Rahm Emanuel in Obama's White House.  But, it would be a significant step in showing all of us, in America, that maybe this President is ready to stand on his own and really lead this country and truly be responsible...and not just mouth the words, when he finds himself up against it.  To paraphrase Emanuel in, "Never letting a serious crisis go to waste..."  Now would be the time for the President to thank him for all he's done and cut his ties, with Emanuel.  Thus, showing all of us, both for and against, just what he's really made of and just maybe...make his last 32 months a lot better than his first 16.

Of King Makers, Lyin' Kings and Smoking Guns

Rahm Emanuel, Bill Clinton, Joe Sestak's charge and the Obama White House.  You can be of two minds, now, with the news that Bill Clinton was dispatched to visit Joe Sestak, to speak about options, as they relate to his bid to unseat Arlen Specter in the Pennsylvania Senate primary.  The first could be that nothing good can come from involving a former President to act as a go-between, for the White House, to dangle some kind of inducement in front of a Senate candidate, in the hopes of dissuading him from running against a preferred candidate of the current administration.  The second, is that what we may see, as the end result of this four month long dust up between Sestak and the White House, where the initial charge by Sestak was that he was offered a job by someone in the Administration, to abandon his campaign for Senate -  is one of the slickest maneuvers to side-step a potential scandal, by the Obama administration.  One that could have resulted in real, legal problems, should the statements made by Sestak were able to be proven, as true.

What we have now, after months of nothingness from White House spokesman, Robert Gibbs, when continually pressed for something that answered Sestak's claim - and more recently, President Obama's promise, when questioned about it, during his annual press conference, that there would be a statement issued soon, in response.

Well, the statement is out, in the form of a memorandum, issued by White House Counsel, Robert F. Bauer.  And, as I write this...Joe Sestak has issued his own statement on the WH memo.  In the memo, the key issues covered are 1. The paid position of Secretary of the Navy was not offered to Sestak in exchange for his dropping out of the primary.  2.  That uncompensated advisory board options for Executive Branch service, were discussed that would enable Sestak to remain in Congress and would have the added benefit of avoiding a divisive senate primary race within the Democrat Party.  And, 3.  That the White House staff didn't discuss these options with Congressman Sestak but that, Bill Clinton was enlisted by Chief of Staff Emanuel to raise these options with Sestak.  So, the King Maker had the Lyin' King do the talking for the White House.  And in the events leading up to this memo's release were, Obama having a dicussion with Clinton, before his annual press conference.  The White House talking to Joe Sestak's Brother and campaign manager, Richard Sestak, about the job offer allegations.  Also, purportedly, Sestak himself was cooperating with the White House in preparation of the memo's release.  So, a cooperated effort by all, to bury deep, any possible smoking gun that might hurt the Administration. 

Though some continued help will be required to keep the smoking gun from ever going off and shooting the Obama Administration in the foot.  That help will need to come from the Democrats in Congress, to continue to keep issuing a pass to this administration, for holding itself up to any of the lofty standards that candidate Obama pledged and has continued to pay lip service to, as President.  Because, it seems that White House Counsel Bauer has only negotiated down, from felony, to misdemeanor, in highlighting the fact that no compensated position was offered to Sestak...only advisory positions, within the Executive Branch. 

In showing in the memo that the position of Secretary of Navy or any other compensated position was offered - Counsel showed that there wasn't a violation of US Code 18 USC 600 .  By the most technical sense, even though Clinton is no longer employed by the govenment of the United States but, if you extend it back to Chief of Staff, Rahm Emanuel...a misdemeanor might have occurred under US Code 18 USC 595.

However, don't count on anything ever going forward, in a legal sense, by anyone in Congress. The pungent aroma that surrounds this whole issue is that - for one, if things shook out as the memo and now, Sestak contends...what was Sestak's problem in just expounding on his initial claim, if it was the same as this memo contends.  He went as far as to not dispel the insinuation, when questioned, that the position offered was Secretary of the Navy.  Not to mention the months-long stonewalling by the White House in answering these questions.  And the apparent coordination of all parties concerned in the preparing the release of this memo.  Or, at least, the appearance of everyone getting their stories straight. 

It's just all a little fishy and more evidence that this Administration is just more of the same, as it goes, in the world of shady politics.  Counter to what Obama held himself up to be, His Administration is unfolding as one of the least transparent, least concerned about honesty and forthrightness and waaaay more about them, then us, then any other administration in memory.

Greg Gutfeld is a Cool, Smart, Funny Guy - And We Get to Claim Him as Ours

There's something of a secret pride that, I think, Greg Gutfeld fans feel...that is likely akin to how we felt as youngsters, coming across something in the woods that becomes our secret, prized possession.  We find this rock that we swear is some ancient arrowhead made, by some Indian, hundreds upon hundreds of years ago when the first Americans roamed these very woods.  Woods, that are now the playground of the neighborhood kids that live in the development of houses at the top of the hill.

We tuck our ancient artifact securely away in our special hiding place.  Allowing only our closest buddies, access to see our new-found, prized possession.  See it.  Not necessarily to touch it.  Oh, we might give in and allow physical inspection - provided the right gifts or services are offered, in fair exchange for the privilege of actually holding it.

That's what Greg Gutfeld is.  Our own secret, ancient arrowhead.  Tucked secretly away, at 3  o'clock in the morning, Where his show, Red Eye can be seen, on the Fox News Channel.  A place, where only we know about.  Just like the arrowhead of our youth, we make time each day to view it, preferably in the dark.  And if there's too much light, we admire our treasure, under a hastily pitched tent, made by propping the blanket on our bed up, with a whiffle ball bat.  Oh, we might share Greg with some of our closest friends, while still not telling them, exactly where he can be found.  But, we're torn.  We want to share what we know, with our friends - but, somehow, we want to preserve the secret for ourselves.  We want to retain and not soil, the special-ness of this thing, we stumbled upon.  But, we give up, on our initial instinct.  Because, especially in the TV/video age - we've always found we enjoyed something we knew was good, when we also knew that someone was watching with us.  We want other people we know and like, to get the same enjoyment we do, from this right-of-center, comically irreverent goofball genius, that we've grown to know and like.

Now, Greg Gutfeld has written a book.  This one titled, "The Bible of Unspeakable Truths".  Unlike his previous books, this one of Gutfeld's, is sure to take off into the stratosphere.  The cat (or unicorn) will be out of the bag and we'll have to reconcile the fact that he'll have to be shared with a lot more people and will no longer be our own guilty pleasure.

What initially and continually attracts you to Gutfeld is how and what he says, in his verbal, nerf machine gun delivery, on virtually any topic.  Which is often funny and at times provocative.  Not provocative in the shock value, jaw-dropping sense, only meant to induce reaction and notoriety.  His is a provocation rooted in common sense and the sensibility, in not suffering fools gladly. 

A perfect Exhibit A would be, on a night during his Red Eye show, when interviewing Rob Tannenbaum.  I wasn't even sure who this guy Tannenbaum was but, on this night, the subject was global warming...er, I mean, climate change.  Early in the questioning, as Gutfeld, in true form, was jamming a hundred words into a 5 second question - on the spit-screen of the host and guest, you started seeing Tannenbaum nodding his head and rolling his finger in the air, as if to say, "Wrap up this silly question, so I can respond with my own special wit and oh so superior intellect, to counter your inane ramblings."  It should be noted that though in his style, Gutfeld's question was neither inane nor rambling.  It was pointed and even accommodating to both sides of the argument. 

Anyway, while watching this exchange, I was already disliking this clown, Tannenbaum.  And, as it went on, you could sense Gutfeld's level of ire rising, all the while, retaining his impish grin though, perhaps, a little more tight-lipped than usual.  Well, as the verbal sparring elevated, Tannenbaum thought he was putting Gutfeld in his place by asking who he should believe more on the science of climate change, being real - Nasa scientists, of whom he'd sited, earlier in his argument..."or a guy whose talk show comes on after Chuck Norris infomercials, in the middle of the night."  What followed was poetic, in Gutfeld's not just turning the tables on this tool but, grabbing the table by its legs, picking it up off the floor, lifting it high over his head and then, bringing it crashing down on the head of this smug, pseudo-intellectual _______.  Well, the next logical word to describe this guy is the same word Greg used to perfectly punctuate his verbal, knock out blow, of this particular fool.  See the exchange here, to truly watch and enjoy, watch and enjoy-ers.  The money word, in this video clip is bleeped out...but, it starts with "D" and ends with "G".  This is probably, also the moment my man-crush on Greg Gutfeld, became official.  He said what I would have wanted to say to this guy, at that moment and had even better ammunition, with which to make his place-putting point.  And...I was loving it.

His new book is all  about speaking truth to power...and morons and the Hollywood elite, and terrorists  and models, as well as liberal academia, Europeans, Republicans, Democrats...  From any subject you could dream up.  Up to and including: porn, squirrels, crab lice, race, organ donation, conspiracy theories, sex and many subjects and people you haven't even thought of yet.  You can get a taste of this, by reading his Gregalog series on his website or catching them when featured on his TV show. 

Not to turn this into a book review but, if you already know Greg Gutfeld...you'll love the book. And, if you don't know him yet - reading his book will make you curious about wanting to know him, more.  Take it from the rest of us who do.  To know Greg Gutfeld is to love him.  Enough gushing.  He's just a man, DAMN IT! 

But really - To allow you the experience of getting to know Greg Gutfeld...is probably worth giving up our special hiding place for him.

Richard Blumenthal "Vietnam" Word-Play Could Prove to be More Insidious

With the New York Times coming out with more instances of Connecticut Attorney General, Richard Blumenthal, inferring his active military service was in theatre (on the ground) in Vietnam, as opposed to simply serving during the conflict - it seems, Mr. Blumenthal will be forced to face a little more music, beyond his half-hearted, photo op of a mea culpa.  But, you may not want to hold your breath, waiting for him to pop his head out of the ground again, during the rest of this controversy.

Blumenthal is a lawyer and by extension, a wordsmith.  We have to assume that he knows the value of particular word placement in anything he says.  We have already seen instances, since this story broke, of how Blumenthal and his people went back to news reporters when they felt the words were not just right, in a given article about or concerning the Attorney General.  We can see him practicing his craft when, in his news conference to respond to the charges the word "lied" is deftly replaced with the word, "misspoke".

I contend that these instances, of Blumenthal's play on words, in speaking of his military service were far more calculated then he'd have the public believe.  One very important thing to consider, is that these examples of misspeaking, by Blumenthal - examples that are growing in number as the days pass...seem always to be found in formal addresses to a group.  So far, references to his false contention of serving in Vietnam aren't coming from off the cuff remarks.  They are being found in prepared speeches.  Words that are not spoken extemporaneously but, are first written - then presumably reviewed and possibly rewritten and reviewed again, before being spoken.  Plenty of time for an intelligent and honest person, in tune with his own truth, to possibly say, "Hey, these words here and here should probably be changed, so as not to give any wrong impressions."  That didn't seem to be the case and what we have seen is a cute, back-and-forth, between Blumenthal's historic fantasy and fact, when he speaks of his military service.  Over the years, he has substituted the word during for in, when referring to that service.

When you look at the words used by Blumenthal, both in those cases where it can be said he'd given a false impression of his military service, during Vietnam and when he was more clear about his service being stateside - one might see something intentionally provided by the speaker of those words, for himself.  An out. 

Blumenthal has already used the 'wrong word' defense, in suggesting the innocent use of the words in Viet Nam, instead of during Vietnam.  But, as the examples of his, "misspeaking" pile up and forces him to defend himself further - I predict that again, no apology will be forthcoming, should he choose to address these claims again publicly, since he's already dug himself in.  I also predict that the next strategy will be, for Blumenthal to say that his references were of the Vietnam era, overall.  When speaking of himself, he was speaking, contextually of Viet Nam in the larger sense.  "In Viet nam" was referring to the time itself and not about Blumenthal, himself.  Surely, not about him, he'll say.  "Because we all know the truth is, I didn't serve my military time in Vietnam."

The master of word play will continue playing the game.  Since, more and more it seems, for those in public life...furthering a political career will trump integrity or answering for a lack, thereof, every time.

Tea Party Missing One Big Opportunity

With the "Mini Super Tuesday" behind us and further evidence of a changing political landscape, as voters around the country continue to make their voices heard.  Especially with the impressive showing of new-comer and Tea Party backed, Rand Paul, in the Kentucky Senate primary - A key opportunity for the Tea Party, is being missed and if they don't take one important quality, in their selected candidates into account, from here on out..could be lost forever.

And, of course that is...to finally rid Washington, once and for all, of bad hair in general and bad choices in hair augmentation, specifically.

This Administration is Drifting Off Into Bizarro World

Michael Posner, the Assistant Secretary of State in the Obama administration, is just the latest entry into the Bizarro sweepstakes.  Michelle Malkin has some good background information and more of the story here.  The Bizarro concept was made popular again, in the show Seinfeld.  The original concept emanated from the DC comic books, such as Superman.  That being the polar opposite of Superman.  In the show, Jerry was a Superman fan and, in the 137th episode of the series, "The Bizarro Jerry" - The show heavily referenced the bizarro concept, to the point of the gang of Seinfeld friends, George Elaine, Kramer and Jerry coming face to face with their own polar opposites.

For Assistant Secretary Posner's part, He has demonstrated the polar opposite of how a high-level diplomat in an American administration should comport himself.  I sat, stunned, in front of the TV tonight when seeing this little Q & A exchange the Assistant Secretary had, after meetings with China representatives and covering things, such as...human rights:

Q: Did the recently passed Arizona immigration law come up? And if so, did they bring it up? Or did you bring it up?

MR. POSNER: We brought it up early and often. It was mentioned in the first session and as a troubling trend in our society, and an indication that we have to deal with issues of discrimination or potential discrimination. And these are issues very much being debated in our own society.

Breathtaking

It should be noted that Mr. Posner was positively glowing, at being able to state with pride how, "We brought it up early and often."  And don't miss the little ditty of how the Arizona law is the disturbing trend in our society and not rampant illegal immigration itself or the drugs and criminals that flow through our porous southern border...or even the Cartels that now reach across the border to kill Americans.  No troubling trends there.  It's those damnable LAWS!

The previous question sheds more light on Posner's thinking and sheds a little light, as well, on the questioner and their apparent desire to create some sort of equivalence:

Q: Was there any areas in which China sort of turned the tables and raised its own complaints or concerns about U.S. practices around the globe or at home? Can you give some examples there –

MR. POSNER: Sure. You know, I think, again, this goes back to Ambassador Huntsman’s comment. Part of a mature relationship is, do you have an open discussion where you not only raise the other guy’s problems but you raise your own and you have a discussion about it? We did plenty of that.

In Mr. Posner's response...I'm assuming "the other guy's problems", refers to the other guy's government and not what may be perceived to be, potentially, in the hearts and minds of an American state's police officers in carrying out the laws of of their state and some concern of potential, racial profiling by these same police.  So, in China's turning the tables on us, as posed in the question - human rights record to human rights record...it's not a fair fight.  Please....China??

What's telling is the pervasiveness of  an absolutely, pornographic desire to perpetuate and declare their perception of America's un-exceptionalism to the world.  And by they, I mean from the President, on down through the entire administration.  Well, no...not to paint all in this administration with that broad brush but, surely all the Lib-con Progressives that pepper this current administration - from Posner to Cass Sunstein, ( a whole other blog post in itself) Manufacturing Czar, Ron (the free market is nonsense...we kind of agree with Mao that political power, comes largely from a barrel of a gun) Bloom.  The increasingly buffoonish, AG Eric Holder.  This is not an America first crowd.  The school of progressive thought that heavily colors those, who now lead us is counter to what is in the best interest of this country, in the near, medium or long term, both domestically and internationally.  It's like, it stands everything we believe in, on its head. 

Like Seinfeld's Bizarro Superman.  Superman's exact opposite, who lives in the backwoods of Bizarro world.  Up is down, down is up.  He says "hello", when he leaves..."goodbye", when he arrives.

Bizarro indeed.

    

Scott Brown the Hunky Poster Boy for New Republican Party? Not So Fast - We've Got the Real Eye Candy Right Here

Scott Brown burst on the scene, by virtue of a come-from-behind win for the Massachusetts Senate seat, left vacant by Ted Kennedy due to his passing. The sheer magnitude of his accomplishment, in the bluest of blue states, coupled with a good, end of campaign performance and rugged good looks and an appeal that was reinforced with his past Burt Reynolds-esque spread in Cosmopolitan magazine, had people dreamy eyed and already talking of bigger things for him in 2012.  Not so much since, being his rookie year in the Senate and his dropping from view, a bit, since assuming office.

But, for Republican hopes for the future and gauging political "hunky-ness", through the measure of governing by core republican principles and in taking his state's fiscal bull by the horns, a state, by the way, that is one of the nation's true, economic basket cases.  Or by handling whatever needs being handled, by taking ownership of problems he inherited and implementing and fighting for, the solutions as he sees them.  Handling also, with ease, a snarky reporter at a press conference, who's acted as a foil to him in the past - through confidence, sharp wit and just being himself...New Jersey's rotund Governor, Chris Christie, is one sexy, sexy man. 

The liberal reporter, Tom in the video, asks the Governor if he thinks his "confrontational tone" will increase the chances of passing a piece of legislation.  Apparently, there is history between Christie and this reporter.  However, instead of just going off on him - Christie intelligently and confidently riffed on this guy with the precise measure of sarcasm that wasn't condescending, along with sharply stating his case about what he's been tasked to do, by the voters, as well as who he is.  It was a masterful display of owning a moment and bringing everyone with him.  And all this without a teleprompter anywhere in sight.

Like a lot of people, with these first elections that took on an air of being a referendum on Obama's first year - the gubernatorial race, in New Jersey caught my interest and for those of us not as familiar with Chris Christie, we got a glimpse of the man.  He was self-effacing and smart and came off as a good and honest family man and he made his point with the voters of New Jersey.  So, they threw in their lot with him, to get them out of fiscal hell and just maybe erase the memories of a state rife with political corruption.

Make no mistake - over the course of Christie's first 100 days, from freezing all state spending to address the its budgetary woes, to painful budget cuts across the board.  From pension limits for state workers, to battling the Teacher's Union on wages and benefits. (a battle he's winning since what he's asking is not unreasonable - a one year salary freeze and that teachers pay the same toward their health benefits as state employees pay, 1.5 percent of their salaries)  There have many tough choices and some bumps in the road.  These are just some things the Governor is doing to keep New Jersey afloat and bring it back.  While, at the same time, attempting to hold the line on taxes.

Its a tall order with no guarantee of success.  But if Christie pulls it off and brings his state back from potential economic ruin. Not to mention the fact, that he's already caught the national eye.  If his story and that of his home state unfolds into one with a happy ending, while the rest of the country is watching and we continue to be further exposed the the inherent, good qualities that Chris Christie obviously possesses...2012 could become a very interesting time, because this guy isn't just another pretty face.

Finger Pointer in Chief

I was in the midst of writing a new post for my blog, when President Obama came on the news, for a short briefing after meeting with various members of the administration, to discuss the tragic oil spill of BP's oil rig, off Louisiana's coast, in the Gulf.

I left my seat at the computer, to go stand in front of my TV to see what Mr. Obama had to say. In his initial remarks, he immediately lamented the embarrassing display of deflecting blame and finger-pointing done, by the executives of BP, Transocean and Haliburton, in their testimony before one of the Senate inquiries into the disaster. Visibly upset, the President spoke of the "ridiculous spectacle" of finger-pointing, by the oil companies and the American people's being fed up of this kind of unwillingness to accept responsibility.  With this disaster of an oil spill, surely, responsibility should be owned and accountability should be enforced.  That concept, however, cuts both ways.

I wondered, at that moment, if anyone else but me was struck by the irony of the President's words. Standing there alone, I still found myself muttering under my breath - "This from a guy who, over a year into his presidency, deflects blame and responsibility for anything...ANYTHING that's bad...wrong of just messed up, to the eight years previous to his administration."  I was soon back at the computer, putting the new post on hold, so I could write this. 

That eight year window of time, is where all the country's current ills can be traced. Never at all, anytime before then...and certainly, no time since. The anemic, jobless economic recovery since a near trillion dollar stimulus....Bush. The continued inaction by the Federal Government to do anything about illegal immigration or securing our borders, um...Bush. Anything bad in this administration, was inherited or the direct result of failed, previous policies.

There has to be a point, when you've taken over the candy store, where you are the one responsible for the candy.

The American people probably aren't surprised by the behavior of the oil executives on Capitol Hill. They just want someone to do what needs to be done, to stop the titanic gush of oil pumping out at the bottom of the sea. If, more than a year from now, they're still pointing fingers of blame at the other guy and things are getting worse, instead of better...the American people will be fed up for sure.

A Perplexing Mix of Enabling and Empowerment

The Cinco de Mayo incident, at Live Oak High School in California, when a Vice Principal of the school walked over to four kids wearing 'American Flag', emblazoned shirts and head wear ordered them to turn their shirts inside-out and remove the head wear, lest they offend the Mexican kids on "their day" - is, again...to use a cliche of our times, "political correctness run amok".  It's also a few other things but, we'll touch on those later.

High school, as we all can remember, is basically an oligarchy.  From the Principal, Vice Principal to even a few teachers who wielded a certain authority, either through bestowment of such authority from above or by simply being a teacher who commanded respect and whose authority was generally respected by most of the students at the school.  The Vice Principal, in many cases is also the security chief.  There isn't an rambunctious, unruly classroom full of kids, whose substitute teacher is out of the room, leaving chaos to reign, that wouldn't dive back into their seats and immediately become quiet and behaved, should the Vice Principal happen to walk into the class. 

A day after at the school, Seis de Mayo, the Mexican-American students were now out of the school, skipping class and protesting and demanding respect.  Some reported incidents then occured, where other schools in the Bay area with a similar name to Live Oak, were receiving threats.  It's also believed that Live Oak itself has received threats of violence and to "shoot up" the school, over the incident.  This doesn't seem to be helpful in attaining respect, for these protesting kids, as much as a blatant show of intolerance of someone Else's beliefs or pride in something.

But, these kids and others, were enabled, to think and act as they did at that moment.  I understand one definition of enabling to be, where you are guilty of assisting someone to engage in behavior, detrimental to their own well being.  They were also empowered to openly and collectively assemble publicly to not only display their pride but also to gather en masse to shout for their due respect.  But, I submit, the foundation that was built for them, by which they were empowered and enabled to display this pride for all to see and command the respect from all who could hear...was based on and at the exclusion of, other's sense of pride and same right of simple respect.

And, this can be traced directly back to the Vice Principal's initial response, when seeing a group of kids with American flags on their clothes, in the cafeteria of the school, during lunch.  It should be noted that this was a moment when no waves of discord were at all present, among any of the kids, due to the sartorial choices made by any of the students.  If something had clicked, in the V.P.'s brain, at the first sight of these kids with American flags, on Cinco de Mayo - the proper course would have been the stealth monitoring of the situation, which at that point in time, was not a situation at all. 

For a moment, let's float back, to a place in our minds, many years before our ages in High School, to an age where we can play a little game of "Let's Pretend".  For the sake of argument... Let's have one of the kids with the American flag on display, walking with his lunch tray to his table. Now let's have another kid, with a like display of a Mexican flag on his clothing, walking the other way.  As the two cross paths, let's have first kid toss a little glare at the second one and point to the flag on his shirt and say something like, "America's number one."  Now, they stop and face-off and let's escalate tensions even further and have them both slam their food trays to the floor, standing in defiance of one another, which also gets the attention of the Vice Principal, whose duty at lunchtime is patrolling the cafeteria and providing a presence.  He sees what's happening and injects himself into the situation.  His evident authority and calming influence eases tensions of the two and of others, who are now focused on the scene and in that moment, takes the opportunity to speak to the two, at a stand-off and to all the other kids in the lunch room and says something like, (and remember, it's pretend so we can dream can't we?)  "Now listen.  It's Cinco de mayo and it's a special day in the lives of our Mexican American students.  And, pride in their heritage is something that's supported and encouraged in this school and in this country.  Pride in one's heritage is a good thing and it's encouraged here but, never at the expense of anyone Else's.  It's just one of the things that makes, where we live great and one of the many things that makes us all want to live here."  In conclusion he asks,  "So how about, we all take pride in our patriotism and heritage, in however we choose and respect everyone's right to do just that, in honor of where we live and of who we are?"

A bit altruistic, yes but...what if pretend could have been closer to reality in that school, on that fifth day of May?  A lot is made of "teaching moments", lately, and earlier this week, in a town, at a school in California, a big one was missed.  Enabling young people and a situation to spin off into further events that don't do a whole lot to foster understanding and tolerance and, in this case empowered some to intolerance of others -I can't help but think, if something like what happened in our game of "Let's Pretend" was allowed to take hold, in those kids' minds on that day and they weren't permitted to take away the actual images they saw - that of one group of kids rights excluded, to promote the inclusion of the rights of another group of kids.  Subsequent events would have unfolded, differently and to the betterment of all the kids involved.

Instead, they were misguidedly empowered to a point where one young Latina girl, when interviewed that day stated, “I think they should apologize cause it is a Mexican Heritage Day,”...“We don’t deserve to be get disrespected like that. We wouldn’t do that on Fourth of July.”  An argument not easily provable in the school setting, since no kids are attending on that date.  But it is done. 

I actually have my own experiences with that.  Some years ago, on the Fourth of July, I spent it with my best friend, who's Asian American, and his Family.  Cooking out and partying, in celebration of the day, at a medium-sized park/campground in Rhode Island, called Goddard Park.  To say there were people of varied heritages there - cooking, playing volleyball, badminton and all the typical things done on an American Summer day...would be an understatement.  And there weren't just American flags on display, that day.  Hanging off one Family's temporarily, erected cabana that covered part of their campsite, was the flag of the Dominican Republic, proudly displayed.  This event in California pushes that memory of mine to the forefront...but, at the time, I don't recall thinking anything of it or even anyone in attendance at the park, that day, being offended by anyone's show of pride of country.  For everyone there, that day - we were just who we were.  Doing what we were doing, enjoying the day...together, in one place.

Doing More to Stop Terrorists Before They Act Out

The adage, as it pertains to combatting modern day terrorism, goes:  The United States has to be successful every time, one-hundred percent of the time.  The terrorists only have to be successful once.  Thankfully, for those of us in the U.S., the bungled attempts of some of these modern day terrorists, save for Malik Nadal Hasan's shooting rampage at Fort Hood, have not yielded more bloody acts of terrorism.

But the vision of what might have happened - whether it was the Christmas Day attempted bombing of  Northwest flight 253 over Detroit, by "Underwear  Bomber" Umar Abdulmuttallab, resulting in fiery bodies raining down over the city of Detroit or Time Square bombing suspect, Faisal Shahzad succeeding in igniting a fireball in the heart of downtown New York City that could have caused untold casualties of innocent men, women and children... A different outcome in either of these attempts at terrorism would have changed us.  Changed us in the same way were, on that sunny September morning, when the Towers fell.  The bad guys got it right on that day. They were successful.  We were not.

The suspected Time Square bomber, Shahzad, was apprehended some 53 hours from the time an observant, New York City street vendor alerted a mounted NYPD cop, to his being taken into custody by Customs and Border Patrol agents, from an Emirates flight bound for Dubai.  Except for a tiny glitch, here and there...this was a case of great work, investigative and otherwise, from the man on the street, to the highest levels of law enforcement, to the Obama administration, which deserves credit as well.  Although they always seem to have to battle through their initial, reflexive tendencies to frame these events as some lone wolf who just happened to feel like blowing stuff up, that day.  In spite of themselves, in this latest case, they got it done.

What's left to ponder, though, as some observers like Steve Hayes of the Weekly Standard have - is, when can we start realizing more success, by the current administration, in snuffing out these twisted, murderous dreams of these would-be killers, much earlier on in the terrorist planning process?

Picking off Al-Qaeda bad guys, by the use of predator drones in Pakistan and Afghanistan, is a good thing and Obama should be applauded for this low-risk form of reducing the enemy's ranks.  But future news stories need to report on how we're 'thwarting' attempts at terrorism against the United States.  And I don't mean some dubious prosectution of those nut-jobs from Michigan, the so-called Hutaree group who are accused of, among other things, attempting to overthrow the Government.  Don't get me wrong...here's hoping they pin something on these wackos because what they represent is evil and my thought is, justice will be served.  The timing may be suspect when it seemed what we needed at the particular time was some good old, home grown right wing hate group to roll out there when the Tea Party movement was gaining even more steam and we were warned how Aunt Tillie, with her "Obama is a Socialist" sign, would ignite the Right's fringe element out there, to horrible acts of violence.

The point being - the good news is that these real acts of attempted terrorism, against this country, within this country were not successful.  For us to remain safe as a nation, the Government needs to do more to stop terrorism in the planning stages, so that it need not be left with responding to terrorism and terrorists after they've acted out on there evil plans, unsuccessfully...or not.

A Quick Note

Oh my...  Some of the panelists on This Week with Jake Tapper, this morning.  Bill Maher, Rev. Al Sharpton and Kristina vanden Heuvel.  They've got George Will Surrounded!

Keith Olbermann - Driving Slowly Past the Accident Scene to Sneak a Peek

It's one of those things we don't admit, in polite company. But it's part of that "human condition". Human foibles and such, that cause us to do just that, when coming upon an accident scene on the highway. George Carlin, I believe, touched on this in some routine long ago, about not being shy about having the police bring the bodies closer to the car so he could get a look. He was best when he expounded on the simple things, we had in common.

That's where I am now, with Mr. Olbermann. I find myself visiting the sites that highlight his mania, more and more lately. Olbermann Watch, et al... I actually watched his first shows. The same goes for Chris Matthews when MSNBC was in it's infancy. I was attracted to Matthew's "inside baseball", view of the goings on in Washington. His straight-forward approach and some of the things he would say. Olbermann was okay to watch too. Very early on, there wasn't much indication of things to come but, soon after...I just drifted away. They became further and further away from my reality. And...they weren't even likable, anymore. I can name more than a few people in all forms of media, who DO NOT THINK AT ALL LIKE ME but, who I can actually say, I like. I would definitely hang out with Jon Stewart, if I could. (I never will get the chance) I've seen Lawrence O'Donnell as he captained the Good Ship Lefty-pop to Crazy Town, on occasion. But I still "like" him. Come on...West Wing? You didn't have to be on the Left or Right side of things to be addicted to that show, in it's heyday. I can watch it, even now and O'Donnell was a big part of that. He's an impressive person. Not so, for the Olbermanns or the Bill Maher's of the world. They just became totally un-likable, even if they didn't start out that way. Dylan Ratigan never started out that way...

I won't deny that, I happened to notice one day that, when watching some channel on my TV, that had a dark area on the bottom of the screen for whatever was being shown at that time... I noticed a shadow burned into the screen, somewhat, that appeared as a black bar across the bottom. I eventually figured out that it was a result of the Fox News crawl that runs virtually non-stop through most of their broadcasts. Indicating how much my TV was on that particular channel. It was a bit of a bummer that my fairly new HD television now had this blemish that truly, only I would be aware of and no one else, since it only appeared when the screen was dark and you really had to be looking and know what you were looking for, to see it. Still, I promised to watch more varied programming, if only to 'degauss' my TV screen in some way.

I won't disguise my leanings but I do like to think that I survey and allow myself to absorb lots of different points of view. Through the TV, sure, but mostly on the Internet. Politico, Huffington, Real Clear Politics, NewsRealBlog, Salon, the "Bigs": Government, Hollywood, Journalism and many more. I'd venture to say, like many Fox viewers who provide themselves with news and opinion from all over and make their own determinations that build and nurture their views of the world. I think that's what the difference might be, that gives Fox such huge breathing room, between them and whoever might be second. Sure all points of view have their zealous following but, my feeling is those that choose Fox are secure in their own thinking and intelligence, that they don't fear seeing all that's out there and make up their minds on their own. My feeling is also that, those who patronize someone like Keith Olbermann's brand of Info-tainment, (with much less emphasis on the "tainment") do have a closed off, over-zealous and unwavering allegiance to only one point of view...one political narrative. A sort of, "our way is the only way" and if you disagree, you're not just someone with an opposing point of view...you are the devil incarnate and all that is sub-human. And those who truly harbor these narrow beliefs, on either side, will always be the minority and and those fringe-like numbers are reflected in what makes up Olbermann's total viewership.

I can't remember the last time I actually turned to MSNBC at the 8 o'clock hour. Long, long time ago. I can only view Olbermann in snippets. Feeling a bit guilty and disappointed with myself, as I slow down while driving past the accident scene, to get a look. "Could you bring the body a little closer, please?"