Dec
23
2012
2

Barack Obama wimping out on Chuck Hagel?

Hmm.  Could be:

Besieged by criticism from right and left, and considerable skepticism from his former Senate colleagues, Chuck Hagel appears to be following the path of Susan Rice as a trial-balloon nominee who finds himself quickly losing altitude in Washington. And as happened with Rice, the White House is now signaling that it may soon puncture Hagel’s hopes.

Just as occurred with Rice, the U.N. ambassador whose prospective nomination as secretary of State—leaked to the media—flamed out in the face of widespread criticism of her, President Obama appears to be rethinking his choice for Defense secretary.

If true… then it’s nice to see that the torpedo buttons at least still work on this thing. I was starting to wonder.

(more…)

Dec
16
2012
6

This Heritage Action video is giving the Left the fainting vapors.

Gotta agree with Ann Althouse, here: if this Heritage Action rally-the-base video is freaking out Josh Marshall then the man ain’t what he was.

THAT required a passive-aggressive Godwinization on Marshall’s part?  Geez, I knew that the man sold out and everything – but surely he still has his dignity, right? …Or maybe he’s just too beaten down to be able to process the idea that some groups simply won’t let themselves be broken as easily as, well, apparently Josh Marshall.  Don’t know; can’t say that I really much care, either.

Moe Lane

Feb
24
2010
--

The nastiest thing said about President Obama yet. #rsrh

Mind you, this is considering the source:

Like many Democrats in Congress, [Rep. Louise Slaughter (D, NY)] praises Mr. Obama as intellectually gifted and a generous listener. But “if you are asking me if he dominates the room,” she said, “I would have to say no.”

Via Hot Air Headlines.  The rest of the article is pretty much an extended written game where the goal is to describe the President as a passive, ineffectual wimp without actually using the words ‘passive,’ ‘ineffectual,’ or ‘wimp:’ the writer succeeds, but at the expense of having to use the word ‘gentle’ in the title.  That possibly may have been too artful; I understand that the average New York Times reader is a bit delicate in his or her sensibilities (particularly when they’re being challenged), but surely they’re not that delicate?

Don’t answer that.

Moe Lane

Site by Neil Stevens | Theme by TheBuckmaker.com