Hmmmmmmmmmmmm: White House Gate Crashers Friends with Obama?

Now this adds an interesting twist to the story:

While the big gun media and American Secret Service are out there investigating “party crashers” Tareq and Michaele Salahi, no one’s telling the truth: Obama knew the Salahis when he was still an Illinois senator.

Polo Contacts Worldwide could make it easy for the investigating Secret Service by brown-enveloping them this picture:

Hey Secret Agent Man, here’s Obama, the senator flashing his pearly whites with Randy Jackson, better known as a judge on American Idol. “Others pictured are Black Eyed Peas Rock Band; Tareq Salahi the President of the America’s Polo Cup; President Elect Obama, Fergie from Black eyed Peas and Michaele Salahi, posing this time as a former Miss USA and SuperModel.

Interesting little detail for White House gumshoes: As the above photo was published in June 2005, Barack Obama was still Senator Obama and not the President Elect.

And with Michaele Salahi yesterday having been caught out—Facebook pompoms notwithstanding—as a bogus cheerleader for the Washington Red Skins and not a model for Victoria’s Secret as claimed, Canada Free Press (CFP) leaves it to FoxNews.com to find out if she ever was a “former Miss USA”.

We do know for a fact that among the slew of memberships on charitable boards, Tareq Salahi is a former member of The American Task Force on Palestine (ATFP). The only way to know for a fact is because even though ATFP scrubbed all references to Salahi as a board member, he can still be found on Google cache.

via “Party Crashers” had five-year relationship with Obama before state dinner.

Now if the Main Stream media had any sort of integrity; they would investigate this. But we both know, that they do not. So, I shall not hold my breath.

Who wants to bet that the “Gate Crashers” get off with little or nothing more than a slap on the wrist?

Obama send in 34,000 more troops with ‘Offramps’ to Afghanistan

Last night I wrote, in some not-so politically correct words, that the President is not interested in fighting the war in Afghanistan. It appears that this news article confirms what I have believed all along.

Quote:

WASHINGTON — President Barack Obama met Monday evening with his national security team to finalize a plan to dispatch some 34,000 additional U.S. troops over the next year to what he’s called “a war of necessity” in Afghanistan, U.S. officials told McClatchy.

Obama is expected to announce his long-awaited decision on Dec. 1, followed by meetings on Capitol Hill aimed at winning congressional support amid opposition by some Democrats who are worried about the strain on the U.S. Treasury and whether Afghanistan has become a quagmire, the officials said.

The U.S. officials all spoke on condition of anonymity because they weren’t authorized to discuss the issue publicly and because, one official said, the White House is incensed by leaks on its Afghanistan policy that didn’t originate in the White House.

They said the commander of the U.S.-led international force in Afghanistan, Army Gen. Stanley McChrystal, could arrive in Washington as early as Sunday to participate in the rollout of the new plan, including testifying before Congress toward the end of next week. Secretary of Defense Robert Gates and Adm. Mike Mullen, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and U.S. Ambassador to Afghanistan Karl Eikenberry also are expected to appear before congressional committees.

As it now stands, the plan calls for the deployment over a nine-month period beginning in March of three Army brigades from the 101st Airborne Division at Fort Campbell, Ky., and the 10th Mountain Division at Fort Drum, N.Y., and a Marine brigade from Camp Lejeune, N.C., for as many as 23,000 additional combat and support troops.

In addition, a 7,000-strong division headquarters would be sent to take command of U.S.-led NATO forces in southern Afghanistan — to which the U.S. has long been committed — and 4,000 U.S. military trainers would be dispatched to help accelerate an expansion of the Afghan army and police.

This all sounds nice and pretty; that is until you read down further…:

A U.S. military official used the term “decisional” to describe Monday evening’s meeting among Obama, Vice President Joe Biden, Gates, Clinton, National Security Adviser Jim Jones, Eikenberry and senior U.S. military commanders.

The administration’s plan contains “off-ramps,” points starting next June at which Obama could decide to continue the flow of troops, halt the deployments and adopt a more limited strategy or “begin looking very quickly at exiting” the country, depending on political and military progress, one defense official said.

“We have to start showing progress within six months on the political side or military side or that’s it,” the U.S. defense official said.

It’s “not just how we get people there, but what’s the strategy for getting them out,” White House press secretary Robert Gibbs said Monday.

The approach is driven in part by concerns that Afghan President Hamid Karzai won’t keep his promises to root out corruption and support political reforms, and in part by growing domestic opposition to the war, the U.S. officials said.

HotAir.com’s Ed Morrissey is not impressed at all:

The increase in troops is a good decision, but the off-ramps almost completely undermine it.  The point in extending our footprint is to win the trust of the local communities and prove our reliability in providing them security, which is the central thrust of McChrystal’s COIN strategy.  By getting them to trust our commitment, we can get them to help fight the Taliban themselves, as we did with the Anbar Awakening in Iraq against al-Qaeda, and greatly improve the intel we get from the locals.   If we send 34,000 more troops but give ourselves a six-month time frame for success or bug-out, the locals will very  quickly come to the realization that allying with us will be suicide.  The COIN strategy only worked in Iraq because George W. Bush was adamant that we would stay until we won.

A Commander in Chief doesn’t need “off-ramps.”  Any President can call an end to a deployment based on his own judgment.  Putting these conditions into the American strategy signals weakness — a desire to pull out without getting blamed for the decision.   Obama wants to be off the hook for an eventual withdrawal by claiming that he’s forced to do it because of these benchmark failures.  And if Obama’s that keen to retreat, he should just do it now.

Ed Morrissey hit the nail square on the head. President Barack Obama was never, at any point, interested in fighting the so-called good war in Afghanistan. President Barack Obama knew that he was inheriting the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan; and he knew that if he continued them, that he would also inherit the backlash from the left that goes with them. Therefore, he is devising a way of getting out that region and making himself look like the saint and President George W. Bush look like the bad person.  This was the plan all along; never at any point was there a plan to fight this war until victory; but rather a plan of stealth defeat.

There are many reasons why the Democrats will not fight the war on terror. Namely, it is because to a certain degree the Democrats actually sympathize with the terrorists. The Democrats have always had a disdain for Israel and its right to exist; many Democrats have always felt that President Harry Truman royally screwed up when he decided to formally recognize Israel as a sovereign Nation. It is due to the frosty relationship towards Israel that sparked the attack of the U.S.S. Liberty by a rogue faction within the Israeli Defense Force. Many people who are of the hatemonger class, like to blame Israel and the Jews for that attack; the problem is, they are blaming the wrong people, they should be blaming the Democrats for it.

Not only this, but you also have about sixty percent of the Democrats who actually blame Bush for the attacks on 9/11. They actually believe that Bush knew the attacks were coming and actually allowed them to happen. This is why Eric Holder and the justice department are having civilian trials for a few of the 9/11 conspirators. They desire to drag out of the stuff that happened in the months after 9/11, as to make a mockery of them.  The remaining people within the Democratic Party and those who are of the far-leftist mentality actually have the audacity to believe that the United States of America actually deserved the attacks on 9/11, because of our capitalistic society and because of our past treatment of blacks; because we do not give enough hand-outs to poor people and so forth . President Barack Obama’s former Pastor even said as this very thing, and now President Barack Obama is allowing them to have civilian trials; ponder that scary thought for a moment.

In closing, I simply will offer this sober note. Elections have consequences. The American people elected a man, who was supposed to be a stark contrast to President George W. Bush, someone who could lead. What the American people received was an out of touch, dithering liberal elitist, who in all honesty could not even lead his own household, if the truth were told. President Barack Obama is more interested in shoving his rather idiotic social agenda, of wealth redistribution and outright class warfare onto the American people, than a fighting a war that will ultimately decide America’s success or demise. We should remember this come the elections of 2010 and of 2012 and decide wisely our choices for those we plan to put in office.

Breitbart to AG Holder: Do your job douche nozzle or we will burn the Democrats come 2010!

Oh Man, there’s gonna be many a Democrat singing the blues, if Eric Holder does not do his job before 2010.

The Video:

Breitbart: There’s a lot of hypocrisy and the dust has settled for ACORN and at the end of the day they’ve recognized that Eric Holder, the Attorney General, has not initiated an investigation into ACORN after we now have seven tapes. There were five initially that came out, ACORN was defunded by the Senate, was defunded by the House, lost it’s link to the Census; while all that damage occurred, Congress didn’t come in to investigate them, obviously not the Attorney General’s office, and they’ve now realized let’s get back into business because they realized that the dust settled and they were not being investigated, it was Hannah, James, and me who were being investigated, that’s why we’ve been forced to offer this latest tape.

Hannity: Are you saying, Andrew, that there are more tapes?

Breitbart: Oh my goodness there are! Not only are there more tapes, it’s not just ACORN. And this message is to Attorney General Holder: I want you to know that we have more tapes, it’s not just ACORN, and we’re going to hold out until the next election cycle, or else if you want to do a clean investigation, we will give you the rest of what we have, we will comply with you, we will give you the documentation we have from countless ACORN whistleblowers who want to come forward but are fearful of this organization and the retribution that they fear that this is a dangerous organization. So if you get into an investigation, we will give you the tapes; if you don’t give us the tapes, we will revisit these tapes come election time.

Hannity: This is a blockbuster, what you’re saying here. You guys have more tapes, you’ll release them before the election, that could have a big impact on the election, obviously…

via Big Government  – Breitbart to AG Holder: Investigate ACORN or We’ll Release More Tapes Just Before 2010 Election.

Needless to say; this election cycle coming in 2010 is going to be an extremely interesting one.  😯 If I were holder, I would be contacting Andrew and pronto. Because if there is something huge that Andrew is sitting on, like a corruption tape, involving say, The President. The fall out would be huge; As in Richard Nixon kind of huge.

Others: Townhall.com, Moe Lane, Top of the Ticket, Stop The ACLU and YID With LID

Updated: A Huge Blunder by the Obama Administration

Possibly one of the biggest blunders by the Obama Administration:

WASHINGTON — Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, the self-described mastermind of the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, and four other men accused in the plot will be prosecuted in federal court in New York City, the United States attorney general announced Friday.

But the administration will prosecute another set of high-profile detainees now being held at the military prison at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba — Abd al-Rahim al-Nashiri, who is accused of planning the 2000 bombing of the Navy destroyer Cole in Yemen, and four other detainees — before a military commission.

Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. announced those decisions in a news conference Friday at the Department of Justice. The arrangements would mean that civilian prosecutors would handle those detainees accused of the 2001 terrorist attacks, which killed nearly 3,000 people in New York, northern Virginia and Pennsylvania, while the 2000 attack against the Cole would remain within the military system.

via Key 9/11 Suspect to Be Tried in New York – NYTimes.com.

Here is why this is a big blunder; I’ll let William Teach‘s words say it for me, This is what he wrote in the comments section of Allan Colmes Blog:

You’re forgetting one thing, Alan: KSM is NOT an American citizen, and not entitled to the protections of our Constitution unless we afford them to him.

The problem with “Affording” them to these guys is this, as Ed Morrissey writes:

That brings up a key question.  What happens if the judge throws out key evidence over nitpicky technicalities?  What happens if KSM and others get found not guilty because of gaps in the evidence chain resulting from national-security issues or “evidentiary issues”?  Will Obama let them walk away?  If that happens, look for a massive amount of anger to overwhelm the naive Commander in Chief.  And if Obama isn’t prepared to let them walk after a potential acquittal, then it makes a mockery of the criminal trial, and of the justice system itself.

These terrorists belong at a military tribunal, not the justice system employed for Americans to judge other Americans for civil criminal conduct.  Instead of giving these men the oblivion they deserve, we’re incentivizing further attacks on the US by giving them the biggest possible PR platform.  We may as well put them on TV and call it Dancing With the Terrorists, or So You Want To Be A Jihadist Martyr.

I have worse scenario than that; what if we happen to get a judge that is a Muslim? What happens if during that trial he begins to feel a twinge of sympathy for these terrorists and begins to nitpick at the evidence and ends up tossing the case out of court? I know it sounds far fetched; but it could happen.

Either way, is this massive blunder by the President and I look for Fox News to go on the attack over this. These guy should be tried in International Court. Just like the Nazi’s were. But because our President is a liberal; this will not be done. He is of the belief system that the terrorists were nothing more than common petty criminals and should be treated as such. This is the same mistake that President Bill Clinton made and it is why September 11’th happened in the first place. As long as the United States continues to make the same mistakes,when it comes to handling of terrorists, we will continue to see terrorists attacks on our soil. It is a fact of reality.

Update: Hell, Democrat Jim Webb even thinks that this is a bad idea! (H/T Ed at HotAir)

I have never disputed the constitutional authority of the President to convene Article III courts in cases of international terrorism. However, I remain very concerned about the wisdom of doing so. Those who have committed acts of international terrorism are enemy combatants, just as certainly as the Japanese pilots who killed thousands of Americans at Pearl Harbor. It will be disruptive, costly, and potentially counterproductive to try them as criminals in our civilian courts.

The precedent set by this decision deserves careful scrutiny as we consider proper venues for trying those now held at Guantanamo who were apprehended outside of this country for acts that occurred outside of the country. And we must be especially careful with any decisions to bring onto American soil any of those prisoners who remain a threat to our country but whose cases have been adjudged as inappropriate for trial at all. They do not belong in our country, they do not belong in our courts, and they do not belong in our prisons.

I have consistently argued that military commissions, with the additional procedural rules added by Congress and enacted by President Obama, are the most appropriate venue for trying individuals adjudged to be enemy combatants.

Update: It seems that my gay stalker Ed Brayton does not like what I wrote. Big surprise there, seeing he is a leftist libertarian/classic liberal;  or as I like to call them small Government liberals. I guess he and his sheep that follow after him, did not bother to follow the links and see, that yes, in fact, I did refer to the International criminal court. Anyhow, my stalker says that Conservatives do not support that idea. To that I reply;  Who says that I follow the Republican/Conservative talking points? I believe that these terrorists ought to be tried in international criminal court or at least in a Military trial and NOT in a civilian court on American soil. As Obama said HE felt they should be, back in 2006. But now has flip flopped on, now the he has been elected.

Confirmed: President Obama wants the United States to fail in Afghanistan

Yesterday, some moron liberal left this comment in my comment section of a posting that I made about the Ft. Hood Speech that Obama Gave:

Say, Pat, do you happen to know *why* Obama was 40 minutes late to give the speech?

He was talking to wounded survivors of the attack.

Really, though, it was a perfect situation for you–suppose he had cut short that meeting? Then you could have slagged him for insulting the survivors by running off to the speech.

To Wish I replied back:

Your opinion, of course.

You somehow miss the fuller point. The man is a damned empty suit. He has no true feelings for our Military. He only cares about his political record. I am sorry, I tried giving him the benefit of the doubt. But it is quote obvious, that he just doesnot care. If he did, he would order a congressional investigation into the rampage and call it what it was, A TERRORIST ATTACK! But he does not do that; because he either secretly agrees with this mans actions or is at last sympathetic to the Jihadists cause.

Of course, this doesn’t surprise me that you don’t get this; most socialists liberals are that dumb.

Now comes the news of the confirmation of what I stated:

President Barack Obama does not plan to accept any of the Afghanistan war options presented by his national security team, pushing instead for revisions to clarify how and when U.S. troops would turn over responsibility to the Afghan government, a senior administration official said Wednesday.

That stance comes in the midst of forceful reservations about a possible troop buildup from the U.S. ambassador in Afghanistan, Karl Eikenberry, according to a second top administration official.

In strongly worded classified cables to Washington, Eikenberry said he had misgivings about sending in new troops while there are still so many questions about the leadership of Afghan President Hamid Karzai.

Obama is still close to announcing his revamped war strategy — most likely shortly after he returns from a trip to Asia that ends on Nov. 19.

But the president raised questions at a war council meeting Wednesday that could alter the dynamic of both how many additional troops are sent to Afghanistan and what the timeline would be for their presence in the war zone, according to the official, who spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss Obama’s thinking.

This my friends, is a strategy for failure. This President just does not care about winning the war on terror. All President Obama cares about is passing his rather idiotic social agenda. If President Obama knew that it would not “Deep Six” his poll numbers; he would pull the United States of America out of Iraq and Afghanistan in a New York Minute.

My friends, elections have consequences —- and this is one of them. Keep this in mind, come 2010.

Others Covering this Story: JustOneMinute, Jules Crittenden, The Jawa ReportOutside The Beltway, , BLACKFIVE, Stop The ACLU, Another Black ConservativeJammieWearingFool, MoonbatteryDon Surber, The Foundry,, Below The Beltway, Scared Monkeys,, Le·gal In·sur·rec· tion, Townhall.com and Gateway Pundit (Via Memeorandum)

Mao-Worshiping communist Anita Dunn to step down at end of the month

This little tip comes via Amanda Carpenter on Twitter:

White House communications director Anita Dunn will step down from her post at the end of the month and Dan Pfeiffer, her deputy, will take over, according to sources familiar with the move.

Dunn, a longtime Democratic media consultant, took over the job on an interim basis earlier this year when Ellen Moran abruptly left the post to take a job at the Commerce Department. Dunn will remain as a consultant to the White House on the communications and strategic ends.

via The Fix – Dunn leaving White House, Pfeiffer takes over.

From what I read she will be staying on as an consultant on the outside. But at least she is out of the White House. Of course, she will be close to the White House and the Administration; so, I do not think that we should remove her totally from the radar screen. What is more important is the fact that President Obama has surrounded himself with this sort of people; straight up Marxists who hate this Country and it’s founding principles. That alone should be enough to alarm anyone. But we do not live in society anymore; where people actually care about whom or what surrounds our President. We just elect them and then go back to our normal lives.

This is not to say that President George W. Bush was any better; Bush surrounded himself with yes men and with warmongering Wilsonian Conservatives — Commonly known as Neo-Conservatives. These people urged President Bush to go to war with a Country that had zero to do directly with 9/11. They proceeded to basically drive his Presidency square into the ground. When it was over with, the Nation, including Conservatives; just wanted him out.

That is the problem with a Country such as ours; the office of the Presidency is a difficult one to fill. Because there are two types of leaders; those who surround themselves with people who will tell them the things that they want to hear and those who surround themselves with people that tell them the things that they NEED to hear. Unfortunately, this President and the one before him have chosen the latter of those to types of people —- and we are a worse off Nation because of it too.

More proof that Ft. Hood shooter is a terrorist

Well, first off, we know that the shooter did try and contact Al-Qaeda. Now there’s this posting on a site that is ran by a fellow who has direct ties to Al-Qaeda. His site is spotty due to all the attention; but here’s a Google cache of this evil bastard’s writings:

Nidal Hassan is a hero. He is a man of conscience who could not bear living the contradiction of being a Muslim and serving in an army that is fighting against his own people. This is a contradiction that many Muslims brush aside and just pretend that it doesn’t exist. Any decent Muslim cannot live, understanding properly his duties towards his Creator and his fellow Muslims, and yet serve as a US soldier. The US is leading the war against terrorism which in reality is a war against Islam. Its army is directly invading two Muslim countries and indirectly occupying the rest through its stooges.

Nidal opened fire on soldiers who were on their way to be deployed to Iraq and Afghanistan. How can there be any dispute about the virtue of what he has done? In fact the only way a Muslim could Islamically justify serving as a soldier in the US army is if his intention is to follow the footsteps of men like Nidal.

The heroic act of brother Nidal also shows the dilemma of the Muslim American community. Increasingly they are being cornered into taking stances that would either make them betray Islam or betray their nation. Many amongst them are choosing the former. The Muslim organizations in America came out in a pitiful chorus condemning Nidal’s operation.

The fact that fighting against the US army is an Islamic duty today cannot be disputed. No scholar with a grain of Islamic knowledge can defy the clear cut proofs that Muslims today have the right -rather the duty- to fight against American tyranny. Nidal has killed soldiers who were about to be deployed to Iraq and Afghanistan in order to kill Muslims. The American Muslims who condemned his actions have committed treason against the Muslim Ummah and have fallen into hypocrisy.

Allah(swt) says: Give tidings to the hypocrites that there is for them a painful punishment –
Those who take disbelievers as allies instead of the believers. Do they seek with them honor [through power]? But indeed, honor belongs to Allah entirely. (al-Nisa 136-137)

The inconsistency of being a Muslim today and living in America and the West in general reveals the wisdom behind the opinions that call for migration from the West. It is becoming more and more difficult to hold on to Islam in an environment that is becoming more hostile towards Muslims.

May Allah grant our brother Nidal patience, perseverance and steadfastness and we ask Allah to accept from him his great heroic act. Ameen

….and you tell me, that not all Muslims are terrorists? I call bullshit. Moderation my ass. They’re all like that! 😡

There needs to be action; if you are of the Muslim Faith; you should be REMOVED from the United States ARMED FORCES; screw the gott damned Diversity and Politically Correct BULLSHIT; Muslims are our enemies and should be treated as such! One woman, whom I do not always agree with wrote a book that WARNED America about this sort of a thing and everyone; including me, rejected it. Now I see, that she was right on point.

My question is this; when will America pull its head out of its collective ASS and stop looking at these people as common criminals? —  they are NOT, they are blood thirsty killers, who are fighting a religious war against our nation. They must be stopped and our President, whom many suspect of being a closet Al-Qeada sympathizer, needs to either step up or resign his office.  We just cannot afford to allow this sort of a thing to continue. It needs to stop now!

Ft. Hood shooter tried to make contact with Al-Qaeda

This is getting downright interesting….:

U.S. intelligence agencies were aware months ago that Army Major Nidal Malik Hasan was attempting to make contact with people associated with al Qaeda, two American officials briefed on classified material in the case told ABC News.

It is not known whether the intelligence agencies informed the Army that one of its officers was seeking to connect with suspected al Qaeda figures, the officials said.

Rep. Pete Hoekstra (R-MI) said the CIA had, so far, refused to brief the intelligence committees on what, if any, knowledge they had about Hasan’s efforts.

CIA director Leon Panetta and the Director of National Intelligence, Dennis Blair, have been asked by Congress “to preserve” all documents and intelligence files that relate to Hasan, according to the lawmaker.

via Fort Hood Shooter Tried to Contact al Qaeda Terrorists, Officials Say – ABC News.

I would be willing to bet a old wooden shoe, that before it is over with; that the CIA will come out and say that this guy had direct ties to Al-Qeada. It will also come out that the CIA and the FBI were scared to bother the guy for fear of accusations from him and his family of Anti-Muslim or Arab Bigotry by the Government. This is what happens when you allow your Government offices to become “PC” in nature. People die, just that simple.

It appears that this White House and the Governmental agencies that work under it have no clue the seriousness of the war on terror. Whether it is one person or a legion of them; they are dangerous criminals and should be treated as such. Of course, Obama will not even use the phrase to describe what these murderous thugs are doing; which is the “War on Terror” or “Terrorism.”‘  Obama, along with his fellow Democrats are basically wanting to treat this like some sort of average criminal activity. Which of course, is not what it is; it is people killing in the name of a religion. A false and quite Satanic Religion; but I digress.

As I have written on this blog many times; Elections have consequences and this is one of them. The American people are watching; all of them, not just the liberals in California, New York and Chicago. But all of America.  If President Obama and this congress treats this like some sort of isolated incident and not as a part of the broader war on terror. They will pay the price during the next election in 2010 and in 2012 as well. Because the America people did not elect someone who waffles on leadership and that my friends is exactly what President Obama and this Congress is doing, they are more interested in passing socialist programs that will bankrupt this nation; than they are being diligent on the war on terror. That is not what the American people elected; and the Democrats will find this out come next year and in 2012.

The Enemy Within

(H/T Wizbang Politics)

The sick part is Democrats are in lock step with these terrorists.

State Worker gets beat up at a SEIU meeting

Your Unions hard at work!

The Video is here, and boy does it ever show the damage.

The Story:

A state worker is recovering after a bloody brawl at a union hall. He says members of the local SEIU 1000 beat him up and sent him to the hospital all because he wanted to expose allegedl corruption within the union.

Ken Hamidi is a state worker at the California Franchise Tax Board. Last night he walked into a union hall in Sacramento for an SEIU local 1000 meeting.

“We had every right to be here, very simple; it wasn’t anything private or anything exclusive,” said Hamidi.

But Hamidi says the union members did not want him there.

“Three, four people jumped at me, wrestled with me, then did all that,” said Hamidi. “I was covered in blood and then over to the emergency room.”

via State Worker Beat Up At SEIU Meeting For Speaking His Mind – cbs13.com.

Wow, Is this what the SEIU means about Stronger Together? Stronger for beating people up? Unbelievable.

Of course, who can forget these fine selections? :

The Democratic Party goon squad. Doing the heavy lifting for Obama.

I wonder how many Main Stream National outlets will cover this little attack?

*crickets*

I will not hold my breathe least I turn blue and die.

Others Covering: Gateway Pundit, American Glob and NewsReal Blog

Give to Project ValourIT Today!

Just a reminder, these guys need your help.

This comes via From My Position….On the Way!

Click here to give to Soldiers Angels. You will be getting voice activated laptop’s to our war injured. Let’s help those who put thier lives on line; for our President and for all of us.

The White House should run WordPress

Hey, it works good for me!

I guess the White House website is running Drupal (ugh!) and Chris Wilson over at Slate does not think that it is such a swell idea.

Chris Writes:

Drupal knows best. It’s not that Drupal thinks you’re evil. It just thinks you’re ignorant. In a basic setup, the software is suspicious of everything you try to do. Should you, say, go completely rogue and try to add some Javascript in the body of a page—a 14-year-old technology that controls interactive components like buttons—the platform will have none of it. The message: “That’s dangerous stuff, and you probably don’t know what you’re doing.” Better to outlaw something altogether, Drupal figures, than simply ask you if you really want to use it. If Drupal ran the Food and Drug Administration, it would ban high-fructose corn syrup. This is just the sort of straitjacketed paternalism that half the country is convinced the Democrats are hell-bent on imposing on us all.

Drupal is impenetrable. Even the software’s defenders admit that it is hostile to newcomers—or at least indifferent to their plight, as a University of Baltimore study found. The apologists will tell you that, once you scale the learning curve, it gets much easier. This is probably true, but a lot of ordinary, code-fearing people who just want a simple Web site are getting left behind. If Drupal were an employee of the federal government, it would be the person who answers the phone at Immigration and Customs Enforcement who is unable to help you and unable to tell you who can. If you suspect government is the problem, not the solution, this sort of bureaucratic sprawl is your worst enemy.

Drupal hates change. Want to modernize Drupal by upgrading to a newer version? Ask these guys how that worked out for them. If Drupal were a piece of legislation, it would be the farm bill: desperately in need of an overhaul but unlikely ever to get one because entrenched interests keep the forces of reform at bay.

Drupal is disorganized. Instead of displaying your pages in folders that you can browse, like you do on your personal computer, Drupal provides a nightmarish content list. To find what you’re looking for, you have to search for it. And unlike most content management systems, Drupal doesn’t have a convenient way to prevent two people from accidentally editing the same page at the same time. This is exactly the kind of rudderless confusion that small-government types have always said defines the federal government.

Drupal is righteous. The open-source movement has done wonderful things for the Web. But at its core, it remains a religion. If you went to DrupalCon in Paris last month, then you would have almost certainly come across proselytizers of one the movement’s fundamental tenets: Drupal doesn’t break Web sites. People with Drupal break Web sites. Most problems with Drupal stem from people who “don’t get it” or aren’t using it correctly. This is probably true, but it’s not much consolation when you spend 45 minutes trying to upload a photo. Drupal’s defenders are eerily reminiscent of those movement Democrats who were constantly knocking at your front door in the summer of 2008. Granted, they did get Obama elected, but it’s a miracle they didn’t cost him the election in the process.

Allow me to share with you all my little experience. Back before I wrote here on Political Byline. I used to be a “Left of Center” blogger. One day I got this wild hair up my butt about running a news site on Drupal; with my WordPress Blog in a sub-directory. How did it work out? To be blunt:

EPIC FAIL!

The pesky Russian hackers that had been sniffing around my blog, found their opening and they got it. To be very blunt; they farking hacked my crap to hell and back. A years worth of blogging, GONE in an instant. Nothing like a SQL Database injection hack to bring things in to perspective. I just about cried; and it was two days before Christmas no less.

Anyhow, after that; I said, no more Drupal and WordPress.

In fairness to the Drupal people, I did have some lousy hosting and I am not referring to the guy that was giving to me for free; it was the fault of the company that this guy buying from. (Hosting Scene) In techie terms; their MODSECURITY was much out of date. I know, OUCH! What I said, when it happened. I was not a happy camper. 😡

I am much pleased to report that I am, “Over the Moon” as they say with my current hosting provider. Which is EWF Media; who gets his reselling hosting from a neat company named Site 5. Site 5 basically does co-location with The Planet hosting; which is about the best darned hosting company on, well, The Planet! I highly recommend them, they are the best. If you are looking for excellent reseller hosting, go with EWF Media, he is so affordable. If you are looking to get a reseller account, go with Site 5, they are the best. (Now, watch my server go down after talking these guys up… HA!)

Anyhow, if the White House sees this, go with WordPress, you will be glad you did. It is truly, the bomb diggity.

Others: Lean Left, techPresident and Greg’s Opinion

Update: After I posted this last night and came back this morning, I realized that I forgot to mention why WordPress itself is so wonderful… So, without further ado; I present that reason. First here are some video as to why WordPress is so wonderful:

https://videopress.com/v/creB0kaV

https://videopress.com/v/Pu3T4X8l

If you’d like to learn more about this software, head on over to the WordPress Home Page. For what it is worth; some of the biggest names in Blogging run WordPress.

Some advice that Obama should really listen to

Seeing that the running meme in the political Blogosphere is the fact that Obama White House is trying to marginalize its critics. I thought I would post a very well done speech: (H/T to HotAir for Video and Transcript)

Transcript:

In 1969 and during the first half of 1970, I was a wet-behind-the-ears, 29-year-old staff aide in the West Wing of the Nixon White House. I was working for the wisest man in that White House, Bryce Harlow, who was a friend of President Johnson, as well as the favorite staff member of President Eisenhower, and President Nixon’s first appointee.

Based upon that experience and my forty years since then in and out of public life, I want to make what I hope will be taken as a friendly suggestion to President Obama and his White House: don’t create an enemies list.

As I was leaving the White House in 1970, Mr. Harlow was heading out on the campaign plane with Vice President Spiro Agnew whose job was to vilify Democrats and to help elect Republicans. The Vice President had the help of talented young speechwriters, the late Bill Safire and Pat Buchanan. In Memphis, he called Albert Gore, Sr., the “southern regional chairman of the eastern liberal establishment.” He labeled the increasingly critical news media, “nattering nabobs of negativism.”

Those phrases have become part of our political lore. They began playfully enough, in the back and forth of political election combat. After I had come home to Tennessee, they escalated into something more. They eventually emerged into the Nixon enemies list.

In 1971 Chuck Colson, who was then a member of President Nixon’s staff and today is admired for his decades of selfless work in prison reform, presented a list of what he called “persons known to be active in their opposition to our Administration.” He said he thought the administration should “maximize our incumbency . . . [or] to put it more bluntly, . . . use the available federal machinery to screw our political enemies.” On that list of 20 people were people like CBS correspondent Daniel Schorr, Washington Star columnist Mary McGrory, Leonard Woodcock, the head of the United Auto Workers, John Conyers, the Democratic Congressman from Michigan, Edwin Guthman, managing editor of the Los Angeles Times, and several prominent businessmen such as Howard Stein, of the Dreyfus Corporation and Arnold Picker, vice president of United Artists. The New York Times and the Washington Post were made out to be enemies of the Republic.

Now make no mistake, politics was not such a gentlemanly affair in those days either. After Barry Goldwater had won the Presidential nomination in 1964, Daniel Schorr had told CBS viewers that Goldwater had – quote – “travel[led] to Germany to join-up with the right wing there” and – quote “visit[ed] Hitler’s old stomping ground.” — unquote. Schorr later corrected that on the air.

What was different about Colson’s effort, though, was the open declaration of war upon anyone who seemed to disagree with administration policies. Colson later expanded his list to include hundreds of people, including Joe Namath, John Lennon, Carol Channing, Gregory Peck, The St. Louis Post-Dispatch, the Congressional Black Caucus, Alabama Governor George Wallace. All this came out during the Watergate hearings. You could see an administration spiraling downwards. And, of course, we all know where that led.

Now the only reason I mention this is because I have an uneasy feeling, only ten months into this new administration, that we’re beginning to see symptoms of this same kind of animus developing in the Obama administration.

According to Politico, the White House plans to “neuter the United States Chamber of Commerce,” an organization with members in almost every major community in America. The Chamber had supported the President’s stimulus package and some of his early appointments, but has problems with his health care and climate change proposals.

The Department of Health and Human Services imposed a gag order on a large health care company, Humana, who had warned its Medicare Advantage customers that their benefits might be reduced in Democratic health care reform proposals—a piece of information that is perfectly true. This gag order was lifted only after the Republican leader, Sen. Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, said he would block any future nominees to the Department until the matter was righted.

The White House Communications director recently announced that the administration would treat a major television network, Fox News, as “part of the Opposition.” On Sunday White House officials were all over talk shows urging other news organizations to “boycott” Fox and not pick up any of its stories. Those stories, for example, would include the video that two amateur filmmakers made of ACORN representatives explaining how to open a brothel. That’s a story other media managed to ignore until almost a week later when Congress decided to cut ACORN’s funding.

The President has not stopped blaming banks and investment houses for the financial meltdown even as it has become clear that Congress played a huge role, too, by encouraging Americans to borrow money for houses they couldn’t afford.

He was “taking names” of bondholders who resisted the GM and Chrysler bailouts.

Insurance companies, once the allies of the Obama health care proposal, have suddenly become the source of all our health care problems—because they pointed out, again correctly, that if Congress taxes insurance premiums and restricts coverage to those who are sicker and older, the cost of premiums for millions of Americans is likely to go up instead of down.

Because of that insubordination, the President and his allies have threatened to take away the insurance companies antitrust exemption.

Even those of us in Congress have found ourselves in the crosshairs:

The assistant Republican leader, Sen. John Kyl of Arizona, said to ABC’s George Stephanopoulos that the stimulus plan wasn’t working. The White House wrote the governor of Arizona and said, “If you don’t want the money, we won’t send it.” Sen. McCain said that this could be perceived as a threat to the people of Arizona.

Sen. Bennett of Utah and Sen. Collins and I as well as Democratic Senators Byrd and Feingold all have questioned the number and power of the 18 new White House czars who are not confirmed by the Senate and have suggested that is a threat to constitutional checks and balances. The White House refused to send anyone to testify at congressional hearings. Sen. Bennet and I found ourselves “called out” on the White House blog by the President’s communications director, Anita Dunn.

Even the president, in his address to Congress on health care, threatened to “call out” members of congress who disagreed with him.

This behavior is typical of street brawls and political campaign consultants. It is a mistake for the President of the United States and the White House staff.

If the President and his top aides treat people with different views as enemies instead of listening to what they have to say, they’re likely to end up with a narrow view and a feeling that the whole world is out to get them. And as those of use who served in the Nixon administration know, that can get you into a lot of trouble.

This administration is only ten months old. It’s not too late to take a different approach – both at the White House and here in the Congress.

Here is one opportunity. At the beginning of this year, shortly after the President’s inauguration, the Republican leader, Sen. McConnell, addressed the National Press Club. He proposed that he and the President work together to make social security solvent. He said that he would make sure the President got more support in that effort from Republicans than President George W. Bush got from Democrats when he tried to solve the same problem. President Obama held a summit on the dangers of the runaway costs of entitlements which I attended. Every expert there said making social security solvent was essential to our country’s fiscal stability. There is still time to get that done.

On clean energy, Republicans have put forward four ideas: build 100 nuclear plants in 20 years, electrify half our cars and trucks in 20 years, explore offshore for low-carbon natural gas and for oil, and double energy research and development for alternative fuels. The administration agrees with this on electric cars and research and development. We may not be far apart on offshore exploration. And, at his town meeting in New Orleans last week, the President said the United States would be “stupid” not to use nuclear power. He is right, since nuclear reactors produce 70% of our carbon free electricity. So why don’t we work together on this lower-cost way to address clean energy and climate change instead of enacting a national energy tax?

On health care, the White House idea of bipartisanship has been akin to that of a marksman at the state fair shooting gallery: hit one target and you win the prize. With such big Democratic congressional majorities, the White House figures all it needs to do is unify the Democrats and pick off one or two Republicans.

That strategy may win the prize but lose the country. Usually, on complex issues, the President needs bipartisan support in Congress to reassure and achieve broad and lasting support in the country. In 1968 I can remember when President Johnson, with bigger majorities in Congress than President Obama has today, arranged for the Civil Rights Bill to be written in open sessions over several weeks in the office of the Republican leader, Everett Dirksen. Dirksen got some of the credit; Johnson got the legislation he wanted; the country went along with it. Instead of comprehensive health care that raises premiums and increases the debt, why should the White House not work with Republicans step by step to reduce health care costs, and then, as we can afford it, reduce the number of Americans who don’t have access to health care?

The President and his Education Secretary Arne Duncan have been courageous— there is no better word for it— in advocating paying teachers more for teaching well and expanding the number of charter schools. These ideas are the Holy Grail for school reform. They are also ideas that are anathema to the labor unions who support the President. President Obama’s advocacy of master teachers and charter schools could be the domestic of equivalent of President Nixon going to China. I, among others, admire his advocacy and have been doing all I can help him.

Having once been there, I can understand how those in the White House feel oppressed by those with whom they disagree, how they feel besieged by some of the media. I hope the current White House occupants will understand that this is nothing new in American politics—all the way back to the days when John Adams and Thomas Jefferson exchanged insults. The only thing new is that there are today multiple media outlets reporting and encouraging the insults 24 hours a day.

As any veteran of the Nixon White House can attest, we’ve been down this road before and it won’t end well. An “enemies list” only denigrates the Presidency and the Republic itself.

Forty years ago, Bryce Harlow would say to me, “Now Lamar, remember that our job here is to push all the merely important issues out of the white house so the president can deal with the handful of issues that are truly presidential.” Then he would slip off for a private meeting in the Capitol with Democratic leaders who controlled the congress and usually find a way to enact the president proposals.

Most successful leaders have eventually seen the wisdom of Lord Palmerston, Prime Minister of the United Kingdom who said, “We have no eternal allies, and we have no perpetual enemies.
The British writer Edward Dicey was once introduced to President Lincoln as “one of his enemies”. “I did not know I had any enemies,” was the Lincoln’s answer; And Dicey later wrote, “I can still feel, as I write, the grip of that great boney hand held out to me in token of friendship.”

So here’s my point. These are unusually difficult times, with plenty of forces encouraging us to disagree. Let’s not start calling people out and compiling an enemies list. Let’s push the street-brawling out of the White House and work together on the truly presidential issues: creating jobs, reducing health care costs, reducing the debt, creating clean energy.

Now, do I believe that Obama was listen to this advice? Most likely not, as his White House is doing that same thing that Bush’s did; except for Obama has a bigger share of the media on his side, Bush did not. It is quite obvious that Obama is in full campaign mode, which will be to his own downfall. You watch and see.

ABC’s Jack Tapper calls the White House out

This is why I really like good ol’ Jack Tapper. The man is just not drinking the Kool-Aid. I got to give the man props for that:

Tapper: It’s escaped none of our notice that the White House has decided in the last few weeks to declare one of our sister organizations “not a news organization” and to tell the rest of us not to treat them like a news organization. Can you explain why it’s appropriate for the White House to decide that a news organization is not one –

(Crosstalk)

Gibbs: Jake, we render, we render an opinion based on some of their coverage and the fairness that, the fairness of that coverage.

Tapper: But that’s a pretty sweeping declaration that they are “not a news organization.” How are they any different from, say –

Gibbs: ABC –

Tapper: ABC. MSNBC. Univision. I mean how are they any different?

Gibbs: You and I should watch sometime around 9 o’clock tonight. Or 5 o’clock this afternoon.

Tapper: I’m not talking about their opinion programming or issues you have with certain reports. I’m talking about saying thousands of individuals who work for a media organization, do not work for a “news organization” — why is that appropriate for the White House to say?

Gibbs: That’s our opinion.

via Today’s Qs for O’s WH – 10/20/2009 – Political Punch.

That is their opinion; the problem with that is this, that is the White House, not a campaign office; what the White House says affects many things. Besides all that, this is still the United States of America; and we still have a two party system. Just because Fox News is not getting in lockstep with the President’s stupid socialism does not give them the right to fling around extremely stupid statements like this.

Folks, if I have told you this here once; I have told you a million times. This President Administration is totally overextending itself and it is totally gone of the rails with arrogance. Possibly as bad as, if not, worse than the George W. Bush Administration. There are some that read this blog, that might think that I am Bush fan. I am not, nor was I ever. I believe that his War in Iraq was wrong. Having said that, I am glad that he sent the surge in there and won the damn war. I just hope like hell that THIS President does the same thing in Afghanistan; as I would like to see some justice to those Al-Qaeda terrorists for what they did to those 2,996 people that died on 9/11. This is what separates me from the idiotic libertarians; they believe that 9/11 was a false flag operation carried out by the evil JEWS Neo-Conservatives to cause an excuse to go to war. Which is, of course, a bunch of bunk. I do not believe that our Government is smart enough to do something like that —- much less cover it up.

I know, that the rest of sane America know that 9/11 was carried out, by a group of criminal thugs, who hate our Country and everything that she stands for. These thugs hijacked a Religion as a recruitment tool. But yet, Obama wants to extend his hand these blood thirsty killers and give them a “Place at the table” as it were. George W. Bush called it correctly at the U.N.; that is nothing more than appeasement and it results in nothing more than dead people.  Just ask Neville Chamberlain. He tried that with Hitler, and you see what that got him.

It is a pity that this White House has no grasp on history and the lesson that Neville Chamberlain learned.

Update: Fixed my rather humorous name error in the posting. Ooops! 😛 I have zero idea why I called him Wilt.

Another Mao Worshiping Communist in the White House

Here we go again!

Via Gateway Pundit:

So, who is Ron Bloom? Jammie Wearing Fool writes:

The name Ron Bloom is one that we need to start paying attention to. He has a long history of being the negotiating face of unions in a suit. He is a Harvard Business School graduate who has worked for the unions beginning with SEIU for decades. The most recent union he represented was the United Steel Workers (USW) before becoming a part of the automotive team that Obama put together. You know the one that had the head Steven Rattner having to resign over some questions about his personal finances mixed in with a little fraudulent money gifts.Rattner was replaced by Ron Bloom, and voila the United Auto Workers (UAW), got a sweetheart deal backed up by the power of the federal government to try and stave off bankruptcy.

Nice….. So, President Obama’s communications director is a Mao-Loving Communist and now his Manufacturing Czar; or Union Liaison is now a Mao-loving Communist. I expect that Glenn Beck is going to be all over this one. President Obama needs to rid himself of these people or resign his Presidency.

Vice President Joe Biden should resign says… Arianna Huffington??

Oh, this is too rich…..

Seems that socialist Liberal Blogger Arianna Huffington; the marble mouthed, little miss “unicorns and rainbows” of the progressive Blogosphere, thinks that Gaffe Master Joe Biden should resign as Vice President if President Obama decides to escalate the war in Afghanistan.

From the Article:

I have no doubt that Joe Biden is a loyal guy — the question is who deserves his loyalty most? His “team” isn’t the White House, but the whole country. And if it becomes clear in the coming days that his loyalty to these two teams is in conflict, he should do the right thing. And quit.

Obama may be no drama, but Biden loves drama. And what could more dramatic than resigning the vice presidency on principle? And what principle could be more honorable than refusing to go along with a policy of unnecessarily risking American blood and treasure — and America’s national security? Now that would be a Whisky Tango Foxtrot moment for the McChrystal crowd — one that would be a lot more significant than some lame, after-the-fact apology delivered in a too-late-to-matter book.

I have a better idea; although it involves stuffing a sock in that feckless bitch’s mouth and duct tape. I mean, is not this is same group of people that declared the Iraq War to the unjust war and the Afghanistan war the good war? But yet now, they want to stop fighting in Afghanistan too?  What more living proof that we need that Progressive Blogosphere is siding with the terrorist? I mean, Republicans and Conservatives said that about them during the Iraq War and they were Poo-Poo’ed by the media and the Progressive Blogosphere for saying it. Well, guess what kids? It looks like that it is absolutely true.

However, I will give here one little once of credit for writing this:

This is indeed very tragic, and I share her concern. But missing from the discussion was the fact that “Sharia law with all of its violence” has just been made the law of the land by President Karzai — you know, our man in Kabul. The Sharia Personal Status Law, signed by Karzai, became operational in July. Among its provisions: custody rights are granted to fathers and grandfathers, women can work only with the permission of their husbands, and husbands can withhold food from wives who don’t want to have sex with them. On the plus side, if a man rapes a mentally ill woman or child, he must pay a fine.

Of course, even with America standing guard, only 4 percent of girls in Afghanistan make it to the 10th grade, and up to 80 percent of Afghani women are subjected to domestic violence. As one of the Afghan women interviewed in Rethink Afghanistan sums up the current situation: “The cases of violence against women are more now than in the Taliban time.”

So can we please put to rest the nonsensical rationalization that we’re there for women’s rights? And don’t be surprised if that reason is soon replaced by another — those pushing for escalation in Afghanistan seem to have learned the Bush administration’s old tactic of constantly moving the goal posts.

Now this here, I do share her feelings on this. This is where the Bush Administration screwed up. One of the worst things that George W. Bush did was allow that sitting Government in Afghanistan to stay there. What we should have done in Afghanistan was put in someone that was not going to enact the same Islamic sharia law in that country, after the defeat of the Taliban.  However, her reasoning on our presence in that Country is flawed; we are supposed to be —- emphasis on the word “supposed” — to catch or kill Osama Bin Ladin and defeat Al-Qaeda.  What happened was this; the Bush Administration thought that they could fight two wars, at the same time; with an all voluntary force. This was because the people that planned this war out; were under the impression that Iraq was going to be a cake-walk. Well, needless to say about that little thought, they were horribly wrong.

The same goes for Afghanistan; I believe those who originally planned to go into Afghanistan thought that the conflict was going to be an easy one. That the Taliban was just going to hand over Osama Bin Laden and it would be over. Well, that also proved to be false. So, now, we are stuck in this position that we have to do a little dance over there; because if we move the wrong way, the U.N. would be all over our backs.

Of course, I think Miss. Huffington might not have been informed of this, But there about to be a huge eslation in forces from Pakistan in that tribal region. Pakistan’s Military is planning a major military operation in that tribal region over there. So, we might not have to do anything major at all; except wait for Osama’s body to show up. Which would be a good thing for us, seeing that have already lost a good number of troops already in Iraq and in Afghanistan.

So, while I think Miss. Huffington is noble for trying to challenge her party. I think her reasoning is quite flawed. She has a obvious lack of understand of how Military operations work. Which is quite common amongst the Progressive Community.

The President and the White House just lost half of their base

I saw this and my jaw dropped. Just how arrogant is this President Administration? 

This Arrogant:

Unbelievable. Surprise

Needless to say; The Liberal Bloggers are pissed! You can check out the roundup here. Here’s an entry from a well-known Conservative Gay Blogger. Again, Wow…. Just —- Wow.

In case anyone has forgotten

This is the real cost of war.

LittleSoldierGirlPaigeinFormation

NBC in Philly has the whole story

White House is screwing the War in Afghanistan to hell

Not a big surprise, considering the President’s middle name; I mean after all, The President does not even want the words “War on Terror” used anymore.

This comes via the AP:

President Barack Obama is prepared to accept some Taliban involvement in Afghanistan‘s political future and appears inclined to send only as many more U.S. troops as needed to keep al-Qaida at bay, a senior administration official said Thursday.

The sharpened focus by Obama’s team on fighting al-Qaida above all other goals, while downgrading the emphasis on the Taliban, comes in the midst of an intensely debated administration review of the increasingly unpopular eight-year-old war.

Though aides stress that the president’s final decision on any changes is still at least two weeks away, the emerging thinking suggests that he would be very unlikely to favor a large military increase of the kind being advocated by the top U.S. commander in Afghanistan, Gen. Stanley McChrystal.

McChrystal’s troop request is said to include a range of options, from adding as few as 10,000 combat troops to — the general’s strong preference — as many as 40,000.

Obama’s developing strategy on the Taliban will “not tolerate their return to power,” the senior official said in an interview with The Associated Press. But the U.S. would fight only to keep the Taliban from retaking control of Afghanistan’s central government — something it is now far from being capable of — and from giving renewed sanctuary in Afghanistan to al-Qaida, the official said.

[….]

There now are no more than 100 al-Qaida in Afghanistan. Instead, the U.S. fight in Afghanistan is against the Taliban, now increasingly being defined by the Obama team as distinct from al-Qaida. While still dangerous, the Taliban is seen as an indigenous movement with almost entirely local and territorial aims, less of a threat to the U.S. than the terrorist network.

Obama’s team believes some elements in the Taliban are aligned with al-Qaida, with its transnational reach and aims of attacking the West, but probably not the majority and mostly for tactical rather than ideological reasons, the official said.

“They’re not the same type of group,” White House press secretary Robert Gibbs said. “It’s certainly not backed up by any of the intelligence.”

That leaves the primary aim in Afghanistan to deny al-Qaida any ability to regroup there as it did when the Taliban was in power before the 2001 invasion that ousted them. And this points to a smaller military increase in Afghanistan and a bigger focus on surgical strikes against terrorists in Pakistan and elsewhere — essentially the approach being advocated by Biden as an alternative to the McChrystal recommendation for a fuller counterinsurgency effort inside Afghanistan.

Biden has argued for keeping the American force there around the 68,000 already authorized, including the 21,000 extra troops Obama ordered earlier this year, but significantly increasing the use of unmanned Predator drones and special forces that have been successful in Pakistan, Somalia and elsewhere.

[….]

Clinton has not tipped her hand as to how she is leaning in the sessions, according to aides. While she is broadly supportive of building up troop levels — although not necessarily in the numbers favored by McChrystal — she also believes the military cannot be the only focus, said the aides, who spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to detail her views.

Defense Secretary Robert Gates, long wary of a large troop presence in Afghanistan, appears to have grown more comfortable with the prospect of a moderate, middle-path increase.

Many lawmakers from Obama’s own Democratic Party do not want to see additional U.S. troops sent to Afghanistan. According to a new Associated Press-GfK poll, public support for the war has dropped to 40 percent from 44 percent in July.

Republicans, meanwhile, are urging Obama to heed the military commanders’ calls soon or risk failure. “Unnecessary delay could undermine our opportunity for success,” House Republican leader John Boehner of Ohio said Thursday.

So, while President Obama and Hillary Clinton are playing political chess and trying not to offend one another; our troops are dying on the battlefield. Terrific.

AllahPundit over at HotAir.com, who was in New York during the 9/11 attacks; is quite livid:

They’re looking for any way they can to avoid giving McChrystal the troops he says he needs to secure the country, so they’ve come up with a way out. If the people we’ve been fighting for eight years aren’t the enemy, then the country no longer needs to be secured from them, does it?

[…]

In other words, rather than eat crap by forthrightly admitting he’s prepared to abandon huge swaths of the country to Islamist fascists rather than invest another 40,000 troops, he’s going to create an artificial distinction between the Taliban and Al Qaeda to let him save face by claiming he’s focused on “the real enemy.” Much like how he was focused during the campaign on “the good war” in Afghanistan rather than “the bad war” in Iraq. I wonder how long it’ll be before he decides that not everyone who’s in Al Qaeda is an enemy either — or, better yet, that AQ’s been “substantially defeated” or something, which has been the unstated thrust of all those WH-leaked pieces in the press lately about how weak Bin Laden’s gang has become. Why, I’ll bet in a year or so we’ll be told that they’re so weak that we can start pulling out of Afghanistan altogether. Things sure have improved over there since Bush was president, huh?

I would not want to be in the United States Military right now for no amount of money in the world. Not with that idiot buffoon running the Military. The man has zero, and I do mean ZERO clue how to fight a war. I feel for our boys over there right now; because, quite frankly, they are trapped. Just like in Vietnam.

The real sick and sad part is; that the Republican and the Democrats both are taking this whole, “Whatever you decide to do boss! We’ll support you, all the way!” attitude; because none of them have the damn guts to stand up and tell this jack assed idiot to either damn lead or resign and let someone else lead for him. That is what makes me so damned angry.

Update: Video: (H/T to reader Stephanie)

As Stephanie said, this is going to be tough one. But he does need to stand up and lead and quit putting it off.

Others: Atlas ShrugsThe Long War Journal, Flopping Aces, Stop The ACLU, theblogprof, War in Context and Pajamas Media

The Obama Administration cannot handle real press

The is just too damned rich; Ol’ Big ears and his Administration cannot handle Roger Alies and Co. over at Fox News.

Via the Obama Magazine AKA Time:

There was never a single moment when White House staff decided the major media outlets were falling down on the job. There were instead several such moments.

For press secretary Robert Gibbs, the realization came in early September, when the New York Times ran a front-page story about the bubbling parental outrage over President Obama’s plan to address schoolchildren — even though the benign contents of the speech were not yet public. “You had to be like, ‘Wait a minute,'” says Gibbs. “This thing has become a three-ring circus.” (See who’s who in Barack Obama’s White House.)

For deputy communications director Dan Pfeiffer, the more hyperbolic attacks on health-care reform this summer, which were often covered as a “controversy,” flipped an internal switch. “When you are having a debate about whether or not you want to kill people’s grandmother,” he explains, “the normal rules of engagement don’t apply.”

And for his boss, Anita Dunn, the aha moment came when the Washington Post ran a second op-ed from a Republican politician decrying the “32” alleged czars appointed by the Obama Administration. Nine of those so-called czars, it turned out, were subject to Senate confirmation, making them decidedly unlike the Russian monarchs. “The idea — that the Washington Post didn’t even question it,” Dunn says, still marveling at the decision.

All the criticism, both fair and misleading, took a toll, regularly knocking the White House off message. So a new White House strategy has emerged: rather than just giving reporters ammunition to “fact-check” Obama’s many critics, the White House decided it would become a player, issuing biting attacks on those pundits, politicians and outlets that make what the White House believes to be misleading or simply false claims, like the assertion that health-care reform would establish new “sex clinics” in schools. Obama, fresh from his vacation on Martha’s Vineyard, cheered on the effort, telling his aides he wanted to “call ’em out.”

The take-no-prisoners turn has come as a surprise to some in the press, considering the largely favorable coverage that candidate Obama received last fall and given the President’s vows to lower the rhetorical temperature in Washington and not pay attention to cable hyperbole. Instead, the White House blog now issues regular denunciations of the Administration’s critics, including a recent post that announced “Fox lies” and suggested that the cable network was unpatriotic for criticizing Obama’s 2016 Olympics effort.

White House officials offer no apologies. “The best analogy is probably baseball,” says Gibbs. “The only way to get somebody to stop crowding the plate is to throw a fastball at them. They move.”

There is a whole bunch of stuff to say here; much of which I have written before. It is quite obvious to anyone who has been following this President and his White House staff since day one; and has not been drinking the damn Kool-Aid, knows that this President Administration, much like the last one, is still running in campaign mode. I believe it was not until the very bitter end, that Bush realized that he was doing wrong and stopped the campaign mode, this is why Karl Rove and Donald Rumsfield were tossed overboard.

Just as well, this President is making the same mistakes as the last one. The difference is this; it took George W. Bush six years for his poll ratings to plummet and it has taken this President six months. That my friends, is the astounding fact.

The glaring fact of this Administration is that they seem to have this glaring sense of entitlement. It seems that they are caught up in this whole mentality of, “This is a black President and you must treat him special!” The problem with is, that may work in the city of Chicago; but just does not cut it in American or more specifically beltway politics.  Does this Presidential Administration actually believe that Sean Hannity is just not going to say anything at all about President Obama socialist agenda?

The way I see it, Fox News has been extremely fair to the President, they have given him all of the benefit of the doubt. But they have not went into the tank for the President, at all. Something that I am extremely grateful for. As a result of this; Fox News’s rating have soared over every other networks; and I know why. It is because the American people, like me, do not want apologists for the Administration; we want hard factual news and critical reporting. If the President is screwing up, I want to know about it. If what the President is doing is not good for the Country, the American people have a right to know.

What the American people do not need; is someone like that sniveling four-eyed punk Robert Gibbs dictating to them, what they can and cannot report. Personally, I think Robert Gates is a asshole; and he is not doing much for the White House and President Obama’s image, he needs to be replaced. But I do not see that coming, unless Gibbs makes a major blunder.

Others: JustOneMinute, NewsBusters.org, Townhall.comRedState, Riehl World View, Left Coast Rebel, Jules Crittenden, , Hot Air, Pajamas Media, JammieWearingFool,Gateway Pundit and TVNewser

The White House of Unoriginality

Via Malkin:

matisse4

Pathetic. Of course, I have never known African-Americans to ever do anything original at all. I mean, look at rap music; How unoriginal can you get? Talking over music, made by other people. They very fact that they even call that  tripe music, is an insult to musicians like myself.

Others: Althouse, Ruby Slippers,

Obama not happy with General McChrystal

Oy, this is not good.

According to sources close to the administration, Gen McChrystal shocked and angered presidential advisers with the bluntness of a speech given in London last week.

The next day he was summoned to an awkward 25-minute face-to-face meeting on board Air Force One on the tarmac in Copenhagen, where the president had arrived to tout Chicago’s unsuccessful Olympic bid.

Gen James Jones, the national security adviser, yesterday did little to allay the impression the meeting had been awkward.

Asked if the president had told the general to tone down his remarks, he told CBS: “I wasn’t there so I can’t answer that question. But it was an opportunity for them to get to know each other a little bit better. I am sure they exchanged direct views.”

An adviser to the administration said: “People aren’t sure whether McChrystal is being naïve or an upstart. To my mind he doesn’t seem ready for this Washington hard-ball and is just speaking his mind too plainly.”

In London, Gen McChrystal, who heads the 68,000 US troops in Afghanistan as well as the 100,000 Nato forces, flatly rejected proposals to switch to a strategy more reliant on drone missile strikes and special forces operations against al-Qaeda.

He told the Institute of International and Strategic Studies that the formula, which is favoured by Vice-President Joe Biden, would lead to “Chaos-istan”.

When asked whether he would support it, he said: “The short answer is: No.”

He went on to say: “Waiting does not prolong a favorable outcome. This effort will not remain winnable indefinitely, and nor will public support

via Barack Obama furious at General Stanley McChrystal speech on Afghanistan – Telegraph.

I’m with Jimmie over at the Sundries Shack; If I were serving in the Military right now and I were in the Afghan Theater. I would  be just a wee bit worried.

GrayHawk over at Mudville Gazette says:

Seriously, I can think of several alternatives to General McChrystal’s plan for carrying out the administration’s Afghan strategy, but certainly none I’d want my name associated with in any way, shape, or form. In D.C., no one in the administration (or the Pentagon) is willing to have their name associated with any alternative plan, but apparently many are willing to whisper to reporters that there is one and Biden thinks it’s great.

Just something to think about.

Oh Yeah,this is not going to end well, at all. Kind of like watching a train wreak. You hate to look; but curiosity just will not let you look away.

My Prediction: General McChrystal will tell ol’ big ears Bambi, to puff a damn root and will resign, which will leave the President and his staff twisting in the wind; let THEM be responsible for one of the biggest screw ups, since Vietnam.  I mean, seriously, would you want this whole debacle on your shoulders, and have on your conscience the lives of all those men; because the President is more interested in making himself look good; than he is actually interested in being the commander in chief? I think not.

Others Covering: JustOneMinute, American Spectator, And So it Goes in Shreveport, protein wisdom, Flopping Aces and Weasel Zippers (Via Memeorandum)

Does President Obama want to impose a VAT tax?

Great, that is all we need. 🙄

(H/T to Reason)

Does President Obama have a secret plan to raise taxes on middle-class Americans — and,well, pretty much everybody else — with a European-style, value-added tax? Actually, it’s not such a big secret. Connect the dots:

1) The joint statement from the just-concluded G20 Summit in Pittsburgh called for balanced global growth — which means Americans must spend less and save more and reduce its budget deficit.

2) That same weekend, John Podesta, co-chairman of Obama’s presidential transition team and an outside White House adviser, tells a Bloomberg reporter that a value-added tax is “more plausible today” than ever, adding that “there’s going to have to be revenue in this budget.” A VAT is a kind of consumption tax.

3) Yesterday, the Center for American Progress, the liberal think tank with close White House ties, holds a conference on the rising national debt. While speaker after speaker — Paul Krugman, Roger Altman, CAP President Podesta (again), Laura Tyson — admits entitlement spending must be reduced, they also agree that taxes must be raised. Altman suggests $400 billion in new tax revenue is needed almost immediately to calm financial market fears, and a VAT would be a great way of doing it. That’s $400 billion a year, by the way, not over ten years.

4) Also, yesterday was the first meeting of President Obama’s tax reform panel led by former Federal Reserve Chairman Paul Volcker. In a two-part interview with Charlie Rose airing yesterday and today, Volcker says that if Washington can’t get spending under control, either a VAT or a carbon tax would be effective revenue raisers. “Those are two big ones,” he says.

5) As they used to say in the Soviet Union, “It’s no coincidence.” This is also the conclusion of one Washington insider with ties to the White House economic team: “Does this all add up to a trial balloon? Of course, it’s a trial balloon. And I expect the administration will propose major tax reform, including a VAT.”

via James Pethokoukis – Obama’s not-so-secret plan to raise taxes

Terrific. First Obama wants to shove healthcare down our throats and then he wants to tax the living hell out of us; to pay for it. Fantastic. 🙄

Somewhere, John McCain is smiling. Because he warned America, that if they elected Obama to be President; that this would be the result. Did America listen? Of course not. Because of mean ol’ Bush; people wanted change. While I can understand the desire for change. But did America want this sort of change? Of course not. However, elections have consequences; and this is one of them.

Realistically however, I doubt that the White House would be able to get something of this nature. It just does not seem feasible. The reason being that Congress knows that they are on borrowed time.  The midterms are coming; and I highly doubt that anyone in Congress would be that crazy to try and pass anything of this nature. Heck, there already is great infighting over the “Public Option” in that healthcare bill. So, this would even lead to more that.

So, while it would not hurt to be vigil for something of this nature. I highly doubt that the Democrats are going to attempt to do something this hair-brained.

Video: The Day Obamacare Died

I saw this one on Twitter, and man is it funny!

Although, I believe the celebratory tone is a wee bit premature.  But that face! Oh my goodness! 😆