Jul
07
2014
5

No, an Obama Presidential Library/outhouse float is not racist. …*Duh*.

Sometimes, the Left’s soft bigotry of lowered expectations isn’t actually all that soft.

I’m going to change it up a little and show you this comparison picture first

presidential-libraries

…because I want people to understand precisely how STUPID – and unfortunately revealing – this latest nonsense on stilts is: (more…)

Jul
03
2014
8

White House debating whether to ally with… God help us… Syria.

You have got to be… kidding me.

There’s a battle raging inside the Obama administration about whether the United States ought to push away from its goal of toppling Syrian dictator Bashar al-Assad and into a de facto alliance with the Damascus regime to fight ISIS and other Sunni extremists in the region.

As President Obama slowly but surely increases the U.S. military presence on the ground in Iraq, his administration is grappling with the immediate need to stop the ISIS advance and push for a political solution in Baghdad. The 3 1/2-year grinding civil war is Syria has been put on a back burner for now. Some officials inside the administration are proposing that the drive to remove Assad from power, which Obama announced as U.S. policy in 2012, be set aside, too. The focus, these officials argue, should instead be on the region’s security and stability. Governments fighting for survival against extremists should be shored up, not undermined.

(more…)

Jul
01
2014
8

Why Barack Obama won’t just unilaterally fund access to abortifacients.

In the course of a not-entirely-unfair piece by Time magazine that makes it clear that the Obama administration has decided to play partisan politics with the Hobby Lobby decision*, the magazine article noted something interesting.  At issue is the centerpiece of the ruling – that companies are not actually required to violate their owners’ religious principles by paying for abortifacients – and the funny thing here is that the government never really had to seek a ruling in the first place:

Legal observers say it would not be difficult for the Obama Administration to resolve the situation unilaterally. The Department of Health and Human Services has already taken unilateral executive action to ensure that women employed by religious nonprofits get contraception coverage in cases where the employer declines to pay. “There was nothing in the statute that specifically allowed them to create the exemption for non-profit organizations so I don’t see why they couldn’t extend that to for-profit corporations,” said Timothy Jost, a law professor at Washington and Lee University and an expert on the Affordable Care Act’s regulations. “I don’t know why they couldn’t do it themselves.”

Two answers to that: first, then the Democrats couldn’t fundraise on the issue. Second, if the administration decided to fund procedures that an extremely large swath of the population considers to be abortifacients then they’d be in for several more exquisitely painful months in the public disapproval barrel.  Better by far to send it to Congress, let it die there, then blame it all on the Republicans.  And, of course, fundraise on the issue. (more…)

Jun
17
2014
--

Sure, Hillary Clinton should promise to fulfill Barack Obama’s legacy!

I don’t really want* to fisk this article on how Hillary Clinton should run on a platform of being Barack Obama’s third term – she totally should, by the way – but it’s hard not to fisk when somebody leads off with a sentence this interruptible.  So let me just interject, the one time:

Conventional wisdom has it that President Obama’s middling poll numbers will be a drag on Hillary Clinton’s presumed march toward the presidency.

…Actually, conventional wisdom has it that President Obama’s second term poll numbers are awful, are likely to continue to be so, and are already notably below average for Presidents halfway through their second term. That’s because conventional wisdom knows that Gallup has a website where it keeps track of such things. (more…)

Jun
16
2014
4

So Eisenhower- sorry, Obama – is going to send advisors to South Vietnam – sorry, Iraq.

Temporarily, to be sure.

The White House is considering sending a small number of American special forces soldiers to Iraq in an urgent attempt to help the government in Baghdad slow the nation’s rampant Sunni insurgency, U.S. officials said Monday.

While President Barack Obama has explicitly ruled out putting U.S. troops into direct combat in Iraq, the plan under consideration suggests he would be willing to send Americans into a collapsing security situation for training and other purposes.

Mind you, sending advisers and trainers is not something that I am against doing.  Then again, I was against pulling out our troops in Iraq in the first place, largely because it was far too early to leave and I figured that we’d just have to go back.  Which is what is appearing to be happening, here.  And if you think that I’m going to pass up this opportunity to remind the least-historically ignorant of the Left about their own misty-hued past via noting the parallels between this situation and the one in South Vietnam… well, I’m not. This is how it starts, ye Democrats.  Have fun kicking yet another one of your principles in the testicles a few times.

Via

Moe Lane (crosspost)

PS: You can, I suppose, make the argument that the Democrats will actually fight tooth and nail any reintroduction of American troops in Iraq. That argument reminds me of a Dorothy Parker poem:

Oh, life is a glorious cycle of song,
A medley of extemporanea;
And love is a thing that can never go wrong;
And I am Marie of Romania.

Jun
16
2014
1

The real question is, are Democratic politicians done with Barack Obama?

I don’t often do this, but I feel that this Hill article about how much Barack Obama hates Washington, wants to leave it, and doesn’t like hanging out with all the other Democrats is missing a couple of key paragraphs at the end.  I intend to now provide them.

Barack Obama’s detachment from, and disdain of, Washington DC reportedly concerns many Democrats, particularly those running for re-election this year.  While the President continues to raise funds for the Democratic party, it is unclear how much campaigning he plans to do for at-risk candidates – or, indeed, how much campaigning those candidates want him to do.  As former Democrat (and current online Republican contributor to a major conservative website) remarked, “Going into 2010 Barry’s best assurance to candidates was that they had him in their corner.  So they [Democratic Members of Congress] trusted him.  And they got clubbed like baby harp seals for it.  Now the President’s best assurance will be, what? That he’ll stay holed up in Washington?”

Polling suggests that this may be a smart strategy.  Today’s RCP average shows that President Obama has a favorable/unfavorable rating of 42/54.  By comparison, former President George W. Bush’s comparable daily numbers in 2006 were 38/57: while President Obama enjoys a slightly higher amount of regard, many question whether his presence on the campaign trail in battleground states would be more welcomed by Democrats, or Republicans.  This may add some poignancy to the President’s choice to stay out of the limelight: it may be the best chance the Democratic party has to retain control of the Senate.

…or something like that.

Via Instapundit.

Moe Lane (crosspost)

Jun
10
2014
19

Barack Obama: historically ignorant AND astoundingly hypocritical!

Take a look at this picture, in all of its alleged ‘glory.’

idiot

 

Two things that jump out about this.

  1. If Barack Obama wants to do something about wage inequality, he should start with… the White House itself.  Or does it not count when it’s his own staff? – That’s a rhetorical question, of course: Barack Obama clearly thinks that it doesn’t count when it’s him doing it.
  2. As my teachers (but apparently, not Barack Obama’s) carefully taught me, we didn’t have anybody on the Moon in 1963.  We went there in 1969.  Here, let me show the President how to check things like this.

…Truly, this man is a veritable and literal icon of the Democratic party.

Moe Lane (crosspost)

Jun
09
2014
2

As we say over at @redstate: embrace the healing power of ‘And,’ @julia_azari…

…there is nothing stopping Barack Obama from being both a would-be* tyrant AND a weakling.  Indeed, one can argue that the two states of mind are not even remotely incompatible.  One is based on one’s willingness to do certain things; the other measures one’s competency and ability to do those things. Put another way: just because Barack Obama allegedly wants to emulate the worst qualities of a spoiled brat all the time doesn’t mean that he’s actually any good at getting his way.

This is not hard to understand, honestly.

Via Hot Air Headlines.

Moe Lane

*’Would-be’ because there are sharp limits to how much foolishness we will tolerate from a President before the spanking commences.  Obama’s admittedly kissed that line a few times; then again, he got awesomely spanked in 2010 for it.

Jun
09
2014
2

Permit me to make a public service announcement.

Contra David Plouffe, Barack Obama will not “go down to the fire fighting.”  That would imply that Barack Obama knew how to fight in the first place, instead of finding somebody who would do that for him.  Which is something that David Plouffe should know very well, given that he was there when Barack Obama used that strategy to get elected*.

Ah, David: the lies that they tell, in this business!  - Especially the lies that they tell themselves.

Moe Lane

*It’s going to be hysterical when somebody goes ahead and assumes that Plouffe and his fellow power-gamers can go back to that particular well any time that they like.

Jun
09
2014
4

New USA Today/Pew poll: Veterans hate the Bergdahl/terrorist swap.

Mind you, the country in general also dislikes the swap (43/34). But that’s nothing as compared to how veterans feel both about Bose Bergdahl, and the deal that Barack Obama made to bring him back: “Veterans are much more harsh in their assessment of the 28-year-old sergeant. Only 6% of veterans who responded say they sympathized with him, while 33% say they were angry. By 68%-16%, veterans say Obama made the wrong decision.” A couple of other things:

  • The Pew poll found a two-to-one ratio in favor of having the President inform Congress before he does this sort of thing.
  • The Pew poll also found that this story was tied with the ongoing Veterans Affairs meltdown – and the meltdown is only getting worse – as being the most important thing that Americans were paying attention to right now.  Third thing? The economy*.
  • This poll is of adults.  How all of this is playing out among likely voters… well.  Glad I’m not the one who has to worry about that!

(more…)

Jun
06
2014
4

Quote of the Day, Really. Yes. EVERYBODY Is Counting The Days Until 01/20/2017 edition.

The Washington Free Beacon gets it right on the first try:

According to Politico, Obama’s Italian dinner party illustrates the paradox of his second term. “Stymied at home and abroad, Obama recognizes that he is less in control of the Washington agenda than ever in his presidency,” write Budoff Brown and Epstein. “Yet his newfound realism has also given him a palpable sense of liberation.” I find nothing paradoxical about Obama’s recent pattern of behavior, nothing mysterious about the golfing, partying, traveling. It is quite obvious: Obama has given up.

Which is not the worst thing in the world, frankly. We’ve all seen what happened when the man attempted to actually run things…

Jun
04
2014
7

White House accuses military veterans of ‘Swift-Boating’ them.

This is as nasty as the Left can get:

Chuck Todd told Matt Lauer on Wednesday that the White House was “caught flat-footed” on the backlash against the prisoner swap for Sergeant Bergdahl.

“I’ve had a few aides describe it to me as ‘we didn’t know that they were going to Swift Boat Bergdahl’,” Todd said, “And Matt, of course, that’s a reference to that political fight back in 2004 over John Kerry’s military service which became so controversial in that campaign. So there’s some fighting words there.”

Remember, to Democrats ‘Swift-boating‘ doesn’t mean ‘Telling people accurate, yet inconvenient, details about a candidate’s military record.’  To them that term means ‘lying.’  Which is an absolutely fascinating thing for the White House to say about what appears to be a nigh-universal reaction from the US military.  The relevant video footage is below(more…)

Site by Neil Stevens | Theme by TheBuckmaker.com