This speaks volumes all by itself. You want proof that the media is in Obama’s pocket? How about the fact that not one critical issue was brought up in the news article…?
By Harvey Morris at the United Nations
Published: September 8 2009 19:59 | Last updated: September 8 2009 19:59
Her remarks were the latest by the Obama administration to emphasize a shift from the strategy of the previous Bush administration, sometimes criticized by its UN partners for seeking to use the world body principally to endorse its own unilateral policies. The US currently holds the month-long rotating presidency of the Security Council.
“The council has a very important role to play in preventing the spread and use of nuclear weapons, and it’s the world’s principal body for dealing with global security cooperation,” Susan Rice, US envoy to the UN, said last week.
Barack Obama will cement the new co-operative relationship between the US and the United Nations this month when he becomes the first American president to chair its 15-member Security Council.
The topic for the summit-level session of the council on September 24 is nuclear non-proliferation and nuclear disarmament – one of several global challenges that the US now wants to see addressed at a multinational level.
Well, y’all wanted change. Choke on it.
The man has proved with his choice of advisors that he can’t manage his way out of a paper bag, so this promises to be really damned scary.
As much as I would rather chew off a limb than be in the same room with Camille Paglia, she does have a head on her shoulders – a smart one, too – and is actually closer to what I’d call a moderate than 95% of the so-called moderates (all liberals think they are moderate). I’m joking about the limb-chewing and same room stuff.
She had some things to say about Obama, the Democrats, and the state of the Liberal Machine. All undermined by Obama, the Democrats, and the Liberal Machine.
By foolishly trying to reduce all objections to healthcare reform to the malevolence of obstructionist Republicans, Democrats have managed to destroy the national coalition that elected Obama and that is unlikely to be repaired. If Obama fails to win reelection, let the blame be first laid at the door of Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, who at a pivotal point threw gasoline on the flames by comparing angry American citizens to Nazis.
Who is naive enough to believe that Obama’s plan would be deficit-neutral?
One would think that the total number would be about two people, both of whom huff paint thinner fumes to get high. But the polls and surveys argue differently.
Why did it take so long for Democrats to realize that this year’s tea party and town hall uprisings were a genuine barometer of widespread public discontent and not simply a staged scenario by kooks and conspirators? First of all, too many political analysts still think that network and cable TV chat shows are the central forums of national debate. But the truly transformative political energy is coming from talk radio and the Web — both of which Democrat-sponsored proposals have threatened to stifle, in defiance of freedom of speech guarantees in the Bill of Rights.
Why has the Democratic Party become so arrogantly detached from ordinary Americans? Though they claim to speak for the poor and dispossessed, Democrats have increasingly become the party of an upper-middle-class professional elite, top-heavy with journalists, academics and lawyers
Take-home points: Democratic Party is not interested in the little people. The Democratic Party is contemptuous of dissent and this is akin to cutting their own throats. The Democratic Party has taken a vacation from reality. Obama’s team is in way over their heads and is amateurish and naive on many fronts, thinking that “looking good” is a one-for-one substitute for competence and professional work.
Geek out on this: Making your own 3D printer. Thanks go to Ms. Tenacious for the link.
Someone had the balls to come out and utter something this stupidly hypocritical in regards to the proper elimination of Van Jones.
“The ability of the conservative media machine to generate a controversy for this White House is amazing.” –MSNBC’s Chuck Todd
The whole idea of “czars” is asinine. If the person is qualified to have the ear of the president, they ought to be nominated for a position and vetted just like any other candidate.
The vacuum in Tanenhaus’ head must be painful…
“The primary dynamic of American politics, normally described as a continual friction between the two major parties, is equally in our time a competition between the liberal idea of consensus and the conservative idea of orthodoxy. We see it in the Democratic Party’s recent history of choosing centrist, explicitly nonideological presidential candidates (Kennedy, Johnson, Carter, Clinton, Obama), as contrasted with the Republicans’ preference for ideologically committed ones (Goldwater, Reagan, George W. Bush).” –Sam Tanenhaus, editor of The New York Times’ Book Review and Week in Review sections, in his new book, “The Death of Conservatism”
A judge that hasn’t long to serve before being removed. He has questioned divinity.
A California judge today tentatively scheduled a trial for Jan. 26, 2010, for a case that challenges Barack Obama’s eligibility to be president based on questions over his qualifications under the requirements of the U.S. Constitution.
If the case actually goes to arguments before U.S. District Judge DavidCarter…
Good news: The ObaMessiah did not speak in my daughter’s school today.
I did miss the local Tea Party on it’s stop through Michigan today. I found that my neck issues just made it logistically impossible. So… sorry iamfelix, but we just couldn’t make it.
I don’t recall this kind of idiocy during the Bush years. The Health and Human Services Secretary demonstrating how to cough?
Read Full Post »