Yes, she was on there. It was not as bad as I thought it would be. She made some valid points. She does, however, come off as a bit snobbish and haughty, but that’s just Ann. I can see why people find her revolting, heck even those over at the National Review do not like her. She’s like your typical rich, white, Connecticut girl with the volume turned way, way, way, up!
Watch these two videos and you will completely understand:
I say anyone that has the stones to basically make a Liberal gas bag like Michael Moore look like an idiot, has my respect, and I hope like hell that Obama will pick this guy. Gupta made Moore look like a tool and basically discredited his movie “Sicko”. I think this was a brilliant move. I might not agree with Obama’s Politics, but this was an excellent move! 😀
I must admit, the man speaks the truth. I don’t agree with one point however. To me, it does not matter how many missiles Hamas fired into Israel, one missile is one too many. But the rest, I pretty much agree with.
I say reluctantly, because quite frankly, I find all this quite stupid, if you want to know the truth about it. AllahPundit has the videos, if you care to watch it.
Originally, I had planned on coming on here and really laying it to the Democrats; But I just stopped and thought, “Why Bother?” I mean, this is what the American people wanted, when they elected Barack Obama and the Democrat Congress in 2006. So, why should I sit here and write a disparaging blog posting about it? I mean, Indentity Politics is what the Democrats do. They’ve done it for years, not like it is going to change anytime soon.
Anyhow, according to what I’ve seen, even they did go to court, they would win the right for Burris to keep his seat.
Adding to the Stupidity, Blago’s General Council is gone. I assume to help the feds.
So, stay tuned, it could get quite interesting here over the next few weeks. I’m sure ol’ Barry is just farking thrilled shitless over this one. I know I would be. Because really, Obama can basically do zero about it. Blago knows this too. He might be a crazy man on the take, but he ain’t stupid, that’s for sure. I mean, he had enough sense to do the black man political cover thing and knows what he do legally, he ain’t dumb. Ain’t no legally insane guy that damned brilliant. If that’s the case, Charles Manson belongs at farkin’ Harvard. 😀
Anyhow, there it is, my opinion on that. If you ain’t noticed; I have not been feeling my normal self. My body clock is seriously foobarbed at this point. Sleeping when I should be awake, Awake when I should be asleep. It’s just farking beautiful. So, yesterday was not a good day. I ended up not going with the old man shopping, I just did not feel like it. I did help him bring the stuff (Food) in the house though. So, I should avoid the abyss; this time. 😉
Gov. Rod Blagojevich is expected today to name former Illinois Atty. Gen. Roland Burris to replace President-elect Barack Obama in the U.S. Senate.
The action comes despite warnings by Democratic Senate leaders that they would not seat anyone appointed by the disgraced governor who faces criminal charges of trying to sell the post, sources familiar with the decision said.
Shortly after Obama’s Nov. 4 victory, Burris made known his interest in an appointment to the Senate but was never seriously considered, according to Blagojevich insiders. But in the days following Blagojevich’s arrest, and despite questions over the taint of a Senate appointment, Burris stepped up his efforts to win the governor’s support.
Though he is 71, Burris has said that Obama’s replacement should be able to win re-election and he has noted that despite a string of primary losses in races ranging from Chicago mayor to governor and U.S. senator, he’s never lost to a Republican.
Blagojevich, who has sole authority to name a replacement senator, scheduled a 2 p.m. news conference at his downtown Chicago office.
Of course, Harry Reid is having none of it, at all
The Senate will not seat Roland Burris if Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich attempts to appoint him, a Democratic leadership aide said.
Majority Leader Harry Reid views Burris as "unacceptable," the aide said.
Oy. I bet that presser is going to be, um, Interesting. Allah Pundit calls it a "Total Clusterfark." Indeed. However, one could argue that this election cycle was a "cluster fark" from the word go. Especially the stuff with Hillary. She was like the child that just would not take no for an answer, funny thing is, she going to be the Secretary of State. Retreads Change you can appoint?
The neat part about all this, that it puts Reid in a spot. If he does not accept the appointment it could be, but most likely won’t be; viewed as racist by some. Which I think was quite the slick move by the Governor.
However, I most likely will not be around to see the whole thing go down. My Dad and I are supposed to go shopping. So, my blogging for the remainder of the day will be scattered. Lovely. 🙄
Have I ever mentioned how much I despise shopping? Especially with my dad? Oy. I’d rather be water boarded. (Well, Sorta…)
When president-elect Barack Obama chose evangelical leader Rick Warren to lead a prayer at his inauguration the cultural Left threw the predictable fits. Said Kathryn Kolbert, president of People for the American Way, “this decision further elevates someone who has in recent weeks actively promoted legalized discrimination and denigrated the lives and relationships of millions of Americans,” referring to the recently passed anti-gay marriage referendum, Proposition 8 in California. Said Joe Solmonese, president of the Human Rights Campaign, “by inviting Rick Warren to your inauguration, you have tarnished the view that gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender Americans have a place at your table.” Added Democratic political consultant Chad Griffith “Rick Warren needs to realize that he is further dividing us at a time when the country needs to come together.”
In light of the Rick Warren controversy, such “coming together” rhetoric, so often mouthed by champions of “diversity” has one again proven to be a farce. For a true “coming together” of any sort on social issues, one might expect political opponents to either agree-to-disagree, yet still join and work together where they can, or for both sides to at least concede some principles as a compromise. In this case, as in most cases, the champions of diversity simply do not want an evangelical of Warren’s stripe to even be allowed a seat at the table. And while Warren hasn’t budged from his stance on gay marriage, neither will the Left anytime soon. It seems that the oft-desired “coming together” means not any new, warm embrace, but unconditional surrender, where only conservatives are always expected to wave the white flag.
The rise of social issues in American politics has as much to do with campaign strategies as the issues themselves. Gay marriage has become for the Democrats what abortion has long been for Republicans – issues that are better left unresolved because they are too useful in controlling certain voters. Any liberal or moderate Republican worried about shoring up his evangelical base can do so by mouthing just the right amount of pro-life rhetoric during his campaign, knowing full-well he has no intention of seriously revisiting the subject after the election. Just ask John McCain. To woo the cultural Left, the tiniest illustration by Democrats that they are at least favorable to gay-marriage is enough to garner those votes, even if it’s practically invisible on their actual agenda. Just ask Barack Obama.
Social issues like gay marriage and abortion remain trivialities not because they aren’t important – but because neither are likely to be solved precisely because neither party benefits from doing so. Why do mainstream Republicans or Democrats not demand states’ rights solutions, where individual states would be free to legalize or outlaw gay marriage or abortion according to the popular will? Because neither party really wants any real solutions. The purpose of a Republican supporting something like the Defense of Marriage Act is not to protect marriage per se, but to protect your office by signaling to voters that you stand on the right side of an issue that you and your successors hope never goes away. Likewise, in standing against the Defense of Marriage Act, Democrats benefit for the exact opposite reason.
Rick Warren’s invocation at Obama’s inauguration will not be a brighter, sadder or even different new day in the culture wars – but a symbolic gesture by the president-elect whose very rise to power has been more symbolic than substantive. Leftists who believe Warren’s mere presence at the inauguration represents anything tragic are as naïve as those on the Right who might believe it represents promise. And in both satisfying and enraging both sides of the social issues fence by inviting Warren to his swearing-in, the president-elect may indeed be introducing a new symbolic style, if only to cover-up the same old lack of substance.
When president-elect Barack Obama chose evangelical leader Rick Warren to lead a prayer at his inauguration the cultural Left threw the predictable fits. Said Kathryn Kolbert, president of People for the American Way, “this decision further elevates someone who has in recent weeks actively promoted legalized discrimination and denigrated the lives and relationships of millions of Americans,” referring to the recently passed anti-gay marriage referendum, Proposition 8 in California. Said Joe Solmonese, president of the Human Rights Campaign, “by inviting Rick Warren to your inauguration, you have tarnished the view that gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender Americans have a place at your table.” Added Democratic political consultant Chad Griffith “Rick Warren needs to realize that he is further dividing us at a time when the country needs to come together.”
In light of the Rick Warren controversy, such “coming together” rhetoric, so often mouthed by champions of “diversity” has one again proven to be a farce. For a true “coming together” of any sort on social issues, one might expect political opponents to either agree-to-disagree, yet still join and work together where they can, or for both sides to at least concede some principles as a compromise. In this case, as in most cases, the champions of diversity simply do not want an evangelical of Warren’s stripe to even be allowed a seat at the table. And while Warren hasn’t budged from his stance on gay marriage, neither will the Left anytime soon. It seems that the oft-desired “coming together” means not any new, warm embrace, but unconditional surrender, where only conservatives are always expected to wave the white flag.
The rise of social issues in American politics has as much to do with campaign strategies as the issues themselves. Gay marriage has become for the Democrats what abortion has long been for Republicans – issues that are better left unresolved because they are too useful in controlling certain voters. Any liberal or moderate Republican worried about shoring up his evangelical base can do so by mouthing just the right amount of pro-life rhetoric during his campaign, knowing full-well he has no intention of seriously revisiting the subject after the election. Just ask John McCain. To woo the cultural Left, the tiniest illustration by Democrats that they are at least favorable to gay-marriage is enough to garner those votes, even if it’s practically invisible on their actual agenda. Just ask Barack Obama.
Social issues like gay marriage and abortion remain trivialities not because they aren’t important – but because neither are likely to be solved precisely because neither party benefits from doing so. Why do mainstream Republicans or Democrats not demand states’ rights solutions, where individual states would be free to legalize or outlaw gay marriage or abortion according to the popular will? Because neither party really wants any real solutions. The purpose of a Republican supporting something like the Defense of Marriage Act is not to protect marriage per se, but to protect your office by signaling to voters that you stand on the right side of an issue that you and your successors hope never goes away. Likewise, in standing against the Defense of Marriage Act, Democrats benefit for the exact opposite reason.
Rick Warren’s invocation at Obama’s inauguration will not be a brighter, sadder or even different new day in the culture wars – but a symbolic gesture by the president-elect whose very rise to power has been more symbolic than substantive. Leftists who believe Warren’s mere presence at the inauguration represents anything tragic are as naïve as those on the Right who might believe it represents promise. And in both satisfying and enraging both sides of the social issues fence by inviting Warren to his swearing-in, the president-elect may indeed be introducing a new symbolic style, if only to cover-up the same old lack of substance.
Thousands of Iraqis took to the streets Monday to demand the release of a reporter who threw his shoes at President George W. Bush, as Arabs across many parts of the Middle East hailed the journalist as a hero and praised his insult as a proper send-off to the unpopular U.S. president.
The protests came as suicide bombers and gunmen targeted Iraqi police, U.S.-allied Sunni guards and civilians in a series of attacks Monday that killed at least 17 people and wounded more than a dozen others, officials said.
Journalist Muntadhar al-Zeidi, who was kidnapped by militants last year, was being held by Iraqi security Monday and interrogated about whether anybody paid him to throw his shoes at Bush during a press conference the previous day in Baghdad, said an Iraqi official.
He was also being tested for alcohol and drugs, and his shoes were being held as evidence, said the official, speaking on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to talk to the media.
Showing the sole of your shoe to someone in the Arab world is a sign of extreme disrespect, and throwing your shoes is even worse. Iraqis whacked a statue of Saddam with their shoes after U.S. Marines toppled it to the ground following the 2003 invasion.
I mean, seeing I am not a war-loving Neo-Conservative, I will simply say this. When you invade a country based upon faulty; some would say falsified, intelligence, What do you really expect? The shoe thing is the least thing this Nation should worry about. Wait till the revenge attacks happen years from now.
Of Course, the Neo-Cons are going to dismiss this as just liberals exploiting a embarrassing moment. Of which, to extent, I say is deserved. But it makes one take pause and wonder, what in the hell did this President do to our image around the World?
It scares me to even think about it. It also makes me wonder, will Obama be enough to fix what is broken?
Barack Obama is 15 picks into his Cabinet — he announced New Yorker Shaun Donovan as his Housing and Urban Development head on Saturday—but has yet to name one who hails from the South.
“Not a one,” grumbles a one senior Democratic aide who hails from the South. “Not even half of one, unless you count Hillary Clinton, and she doesn’t count because she’s not even an Arkansan anymore. She’s a Yankee.”
Honestly, considering the dark history of the south and blacks. Can you honestly blame the guy? I mean, honestly.
I say obligatory, because I think this story has got about the traction of a damned bald Goodyear tire in the winter. But I digress.
The sensational media rolls on, I suppose. One day in the tank, next minute throwing Obama in the tank. 🙄
Anyhow… here we go! 😀
The Chicago Tribune’s Political Blog, “The Swamp” Reports:
Rahm Emanuel, President-elect Barack Obama’s pick to be White House chief of staff, had conversations with Gov. Rod Blagojevich’s administration about who would replace Obama in the U.S. Senate, the Chicago Tribune has learned.
The revelation does not suggest Obama’s new gatekeeper was involved in any talk of dealmaking involving the seat. But it does help fill in the gaps surrounding a question that Obama was unable or unwilling to answer this week: Did anyone on his staff have contact with Blagojevich about his choice for the Senate seat?
Blagojevich and John Harris, his former chief of staff, face federal charges in an alleged shakedown involving the vacant Senate seat, which Illinois law grants the governor sole authority to fill.
Obama said Thursday he had never spoken to Blagojevich about the Senate vacancy and was “confident that no representatives” of his had engaged in any dealmaking over the seat with the governor or his team. He also pledged Thursday that in the “next few days” he would explain what contacts his staff may have had with the governor’s office about the Senate vacancy.
Emanuel, who has long been close to both Blagojevich and Obama, has refused to respond to questions about any involvement he may have had with the Blagojevich camp over the Senate pick. A spokeswoman for Emanuel also declined to comment Friday.
One source confirmed that communications between Emanuel and the Blagojevich administration were captured on court-approved wiretaps.
Another source said that contact between the Obama camp and the governor’s administration regarding the Senate seat began the Saturday before the Nov. 4 election, when Emanuel made a call to the cell phone of Harris. The conversation took place around the same time press reports surfaced about Emanuel being approached about taking the high-level White House post should Obama win.
Emanuel delivered a list of candidates who would be “acceptable” to Obama, the source said. On the list were Obama adviser Valerie Jarrett, Illinois Veterans Affairs director Tammy Duckworth, state Comptroller Dan Hynes and U.S. Rep. Jan Schakowsky of Chicago, the source said. All are Democrats.
One thing that stands out in this article, is this right here:
The revelation does not suggest Obama’s new gatekeeper was involved in any talk of dealmaking involving the seat. But it does help fill in the gaps surrounding a question that Obama was unable or unwilling to answer this week: Did anyone on his staff have contact with Blagojevich about his choice for the Senate seat?
However, to read some of the Republican/Conservative/Neo-Conservative Blogs, you would think that Obama offered to help finance the operation or something. Which I think is outright silly and blatantly asinine. There’s no proof of that at all, and I am inclined to believe the President-Elect, if he says he had no contact with the man. Sorry, you cannot count me amongst the group of people who believe he’s some sort of undercover Muslim or anything of that nature, I don’t run with that crowd at all. Most of that nonsense is of the Alex Jones flavor, and I deal with facts and reality, not conspiracy theories and lunacy. Oh, sure, I’ve written things on here, mostly in jest and trying to be snarky… and once, because I was pissed at the race baiting of the far lefty Liberals, during the election, but Obama is going to be the new President, and I’m fine with that. But I will write and speak out against what I feel to be wrong, and likewise, I will defend the man, when I feel that it is due.
Anyway, got way off track there! 😮
As for the current situation at hand here, my advice to the President-Elect is, dump Rahm Emanuel now. Because as long as Emanuel is on the Obama team, the Conservative/Neo-Conservative/Republican talking heads and some of the more main stream media are going to continue to hound you over this. I know, it is a bit silly, but that is what the Conservatives do, they did it Bill Clinton, almost to the point of lunacy and as long as this guy is on your staff, you will have to contend with the questions, and with the insinuation that you are connected with this scandal. In other words, Ann Coulter will have something to talk about for the next four years. God knows, we have heard enough of that feckless bitch for the last eight years.
I hope that the President-Elect figures this out and gives Rahm Emanuel the ol’ Heave Ho and gets someone else in there. Otherwise, it will be a circular firing squad on this Blog for the next four years.
)
Amazon.com: Guilty
However, one could argue that this election cycle was a "cluster fark" from the word go. Especially the stuff with Hillary. She was like the child that just would not take no for an answer, funny thing is, she going to be the Secretary of State. 
