Posts Tagged ‘vacation’

Obama’s – And Worse The Mainstream Media’s – Incredibly Vile And Dishonest Hypocrisy Over Louisiana Disaster

August 22, 2016

When I searched the internet for these exact words that I personally saw Obama speak on video from Fox News, do you know where I had to go to actually find them?  Sources like Breitbart and Rush Limbaugh.  Why???  Because the wicked, demonically hypocritical and pathologically dishonest mainstream media WILL NOT present the news fairly or honestly or accurately.

This photo of Bush was ran over and over and over again on every single mainstream media “news” site.  The mainstream media made this THE image of the Bush presidency because they WANTED to make it THE image of the Bush presidency.  It was the single thing that BROKE the Bush presidency, the image of a detached, distant commander-in-chief who couldn’t be bothered to land his plane but instead surveyed the damage from the remote heavens:

Barack Obama tore Bush apart for this image.

Calling the flyover a metaphor for Bush’s failed leadership, candidate Obama said, “People looked up at the roof tops for too long and all they saw was an empty sky.”

It is NEWS when a president so hypocritically excoriates his predecessor and then turns out to be stinking WORSE than the man he demonized.

Every single legitimate news agency will run this story into the ground day-after-day-after-day with a deafening drumbeat the same way they ran it thus against George W. Bush.  The problem is that not ONE mainstream news outlet is legitimate any more.  They are ALL propaganda outlets.  They are ALL pathologically dishonest political ideologues spinning and twisting and distorting the news for their socialist political party and their socialist political candidates.

Let’s look at the factual historical record that you basically have to go to Breitbart or Rush Limbaugh or Drudge to actually see.

Candidate Barack Obama, viciously and hatefully slandering and demonizing President George W. Bush in 2008:

“When the people of New Orleans and Gulf Coast extended their hand for help, help was not there. When people looked up from the rooftops, for too long they saw an empty sky. When the winds blew and the flood waters came, we learned for all of our wealth and our power, something wasn’t right with America. We can talk about what happened for a few days in 2005, and we should. We can talk about levies that couldn’t hold, about a FEMA that seem not just incompetent but paralyzed and powerless, about a president who only saw the people from a window on an airplane instead of down here on the ground, trying to provide comfort and aid. We can talk about a trust that was broken, the promise that our government would be prepared, will protect us, and will respond in a catastrophe.” – Obama’s criticism of Bush on Hurricane Katrina

Bush saw the disaster “from the window of an airplane.”  Obama didn’t bother to even look at it AT ALL.

How did Obama “respond in a catastrophe”???  He played more golf.  He played TEN rounds of golf while Louisiana was under freaking WATER:

obama golf la

Now the media is suddenly agreeing with what Bush protested at the time, that if he had landed, precious, vital emergency- and first-response resources would have either been redirected or stopped by the Bush security detail as Bush came down for what the media would have demonized as a “photo op” had he come down.  Because when you are a Republican, you can not win with the news.  They will demonize you whether you zig or whether you zag.

In 2005, Bush had a Democrat governor who failed her state so badly she got booted from office to help demonize Bush.

But in the wave of dishonest Obama propaganda, Democrats have retaken the state, so now we have this.  Look at the hypocrisy from the Democrat governor from these two stories exposed by Mediate:

Democratic Louisiana Governor Backtracks, Praises Trump For Flood Visit
Mediaite Donald TrumpDonald Trump
Sunday, 21 August 2016 (a day ago)

On Thursday night, Louisiana Governor John Bel Edwards (D-LA) released a statement suggesting that Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump‘s hastily-organized Friday visit to Baton Rouge was nothing but a photo op

The governor fed us this crap:

Trump tours flooded Louisiana, in spite of governor’s ‘photo op’ admonishment

BATON ROUGE, La. (Reuters) – U.S. Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump and his running mate toured the flood-damaged city of Baton Rouge on Friday,…
Reuters India 3 days ago – WorldAlso reported by •Seattle TimesRaw Story

Versus:

Louisiana Governor: Donald Trump’s Visit ‘Helpful’

The governor of Louisiana said Sunday that Donald Trump’s trip to his state was helpful in getting the country’s attention on the devastating flooding around Baton Rouge.

Consider what the Democrat governor is now trying to say and read between the lines the way the mainstream media will never do:

Louisiana governor seeks donors and volunteers after floods: ‘We need help’
Many Americans are ‘just now realizing how significant’ the disaster was, says John Bel Edwards, since – unlike a hurricane – it wasn’t given a name
Alan Yuhas
Sunday 21 August 2016 11.24 EDT
Louisiana governor John Bel Edwards pleaded for aid for his state on Sunday, saying that after a week of devastating flooding, “we really need help.”
Unlike a hurricane, Edwards told CNN on Sunday, “this rain event didn’t have a name, so we have folks around the country who I think are just now realizing how significant it was.”
Days of extraordinary rainfall caused severe flooding around southern Louisiana this week, killing at least 13 people, damaging an estimated 60,000 homes and forcing thousands to the shelter of evacuation centers. More than 100,000 people had registered for federal assistance by Sunday, even as waters slowly receded and many families returned home to find furniture broken and caked in mud, walls weakened by water and early signs of mold spreading through their rooms.

“Typically by this point in a storm, I think Red Cross would be receiving a lot more donations; I think there would be more volunteers signing up,” Edwards said. “It would be very helpful for people to donate to the Red Cross, to the Baton Rouge area foundation, and also to come in and volunteer to help people get back into their homes as quickly as possible.”

In the small town of Lake Arthur, east of the Lacassine wildlife refuge, authorities barred residents from returning home as teams piled sandbags and worked pumps, struggling to keep the floodwaters out of more homes.

 In St Amanat, one of the worst-flooded towns of southern Louisiana, teams continued to go door to door in search of survivors and bodies on Sunday. “It’s much worse than I expected,” resident Sheila Siener told the Associated Press. “The water, the dirt, the smell. Water in the cabinets. Everything’s filthy. I’ve never been through a flood, so I really didn’t know.”
About 25 miles away in Denham Springs, floods unearthed graves and damaged tombs at one of at least 15 cemeteries in the region that were affected by the rains. Resident Willie Brooks III found that his mother’s vault had vanished. “The vault was completely gone,” Brooks said. “It could be down the street. It could be in the Amite River. I don’t know.”

Do presidential tours create havoc with local resources in a disaster that are badly needed to deal with the actual emergency?  WELL, IF THEY DO NOW, THEN THEY DID WHEN BUSH WAS PRESIDENT, DONTYATHINK????

But the ONE thing a presidential tour brings to a devastated area is attention, awareness and exposure.

The Democrat governor started out – because being a “Democrat” he is nothing but a DEMOn-possessed bureauCRAT cockroach politician – defending Obama for not coming and trying to demonize and slime Donald Trump for being the ONLY presidential candidate who actually showed up and said, “I CARE.”

But first he was forced to praise Donald Trump’s visit for creating the very awareness and attention that Barack Obama indifferently and without any compassion whatsoever refused to bother to create, and now that same governor is forced to try to say in a quiet, desperate way that Barack Obama horrifyingly let his state down when they needed him the most.

Democrat Governor Kathleen Blanco and New Orleans Mayor Ray Nagin – I actually REMEMBER these names because the media made it such a giant story and made the story about Bush – both personally failed in shocking ways to do their damn jobs.  Mayor Ray Nagin allowed hundreds of school buses that were under his direct authority that could have been used to save people who drowned to sit there in the flood waters unused.  Blanco had so miserably misdirected funds that had been earmarked to reinforce the levies that broke.

And the same media that made that story about Bush and will NOT make this story about Obama should never be read or watched or viewed ever again.

We need Donald Trump for president on Obama’s logic: because when Obama couldn’t even be bothered to get on a damn plane because he wanted to play ten rounds of golf in Martha’s Vineyard, when Hillary Clinton was taking a long nap every other day between her screeching fundraising events, Donald Trump showed up at the disaster site and ALONE did the job of a president.

 

 

 

Advertisements

Obama Can’t Hide In Hawaii: Even In The Farthest Stretches Of His Realm, The ObamaCare Debacle Haunts King Obama

December 27, 2013

Personal note to King Obama: Notre Dame business law professor Laura Hollis nailed it: you really aint a king, and I certainly am NOT one of your “subjects.”

I say knowing I say it in vain.  Malignant narcissist that you have been diagnosed to be by the leading psychologist authority on the subject of narcissism, no one will ever be able to tell you ANYTHING that doesn’t suit your incredibly vain ego, President Selfie.

It also, tragically, doesn’t matter how much of a costly, colossal and catastrophic failure your signature legislative accomplishment a.k.a. ObamaCare truly is, in your arrogance and in your self-centered wickedness you will NEVER allow it to be overturned until you’re either out of office or rightly impeached.

But you can go to the farthest reaches of your realm, Hussein, and you STILL can’t run from your “signature legislative debacle,” can you???

Obama fled to Hawaii, where (even according to the liberally-biased New York Slimes:

The executive director of Hawaii’s state health care exchange announced her resignation on Friday amid delays in getting the insurance marketplace off the ground.

The director, Coral Andrews, who has led Hawaii Health Connector for two years as the state worked to build the exchange, will step down on Dec. 6. Tom Matsuda, the Affordable Care Act’s implementation manager in the governor’s office, will take over as interim director. […]

From its outset, Hawaii’s exchange has faced many of the same problems that have plagued the federal health care website and other state exchanges around the country.

The (very slightly less) liberally-biased AP said slightly more:

HONOLULU (AP) — The director of Hawaii’s health insurance marketplace under President Barack Obama’s federal health care overhaul has resigned after delays in getting the exchange running and low signups in the first month. […]

The exchange had a two-week delay in starting open enrollment, then signed up only 257 people in its first month of allowing people to buy coverage.

The delay led to complaints from consumers, including some turning directly to health insurance companies to buy plans. Those who bought plans directly from insurance companies are unable to qualify for tax credits and other rebates.

Hawaii is the place where numerous healthcare industry leaders have actually been stepping forward and saying “we’re not going to have any health care.”

The pattern of debacle is going on even in many of the bluest states, such as Maryland and Washington.  Liberals point to California as a shining example of ObamaCare’s wonderfulness, but not so damn fast, you reality-denying idiots: not when the figures released by the executive director of the California Exchange (for ObamaCare) indicate that premiums are going to increase, on average, by between 64% to 146%.  Because if THAT’S “going well,” if THAT’S “succeeding,” then we can claim that as the Titanic plunged stern-first into the ocean and sank toward the bottom, it made really good time aaaaaaaalllllllllllllllllll the way down.

In California, more than ONE MILLION Americans have had their insurance policies CANCELLED because of ObamaCareTHAT’S “going well”????  Seriously????

Similarly, liberals point to New York state and say, “See how well ObamaCare is working?  Praise messiah!  Praise him!  Worship him!  Adore him!”  But consider that:

A headline about the health care law driving down premiums, by this level of magnitude, is a rarity. But it shouldn’t be shocking: New York has, for two decades now, had the highest individual market premiums in the country.

Do you get this?  Your health premiums may actually go down, provided that you live in the state with the very highest premiums on planet earth.  But that’s a “success.”  Praise Obama!  Worship him!”

In the similar industry of auto insurance, the justification for some of the highest rates in America is that:

“the higher rates are justified by the high costs of doing business in New York.”

How about Oregon?  Surely things must be going well there.  I mean, after all, Obama gave Oregon more money to build a website than he gave to ANY other state with the exceptions of New York and California (notice how all the bucks somehow ended up in the blue states???).  But hold on a moment:

The Orgeon website STILL isn’t working, so if you want your ObamaCare fix, you have to fill out a 19 page form to get it.  It’s a shock that it isn’t working, because the same “pros” that built the federal ObamaCare site were brought in.  Nothing but the best for Hussein and his libturds, you know.  And yet in spite of all those millions of dollars to create a “success story” (you know how Democrats are blaming the red states that didn’t want ObamaCare for all the problems, I’m sure), the situation in Oregon is so fouled up that Oregonians are now getting robocalls advising them that if they think they’ve got health insurance, they probably DON’T.

There aint NOWHERE where ObamaCare doesn’t suck the life out of the universe.  Liberalism is by its nature a parasite that just sucks and sucks until the host is dead.

There is nowhere Obama can hide.  He can be the emperor strutting out in his tighty-whiteys, but he is still a very naked scrawny pencil-necked little weasel wherever he goes.

At this point the only possible way to save America from implosion is if the people rise up as one and, with pitchforks and torches if necessary, storm Castle Obamastein and drag the monster-in-chief out with their bare hands.

Let’s Not Forget Who’s Most Important: No Marines for (Now) Murdered Ambassador In Hell Hole Libya, But A Full Security Detail for Valerie Jarrett Vacation

September 15, 2012

Puke alert time, better put on your raincoats:

No Marines for Libyan Ambassador, Full Security Detail for Valerie Jarrett Vacation
by Ben Shapiro
14 Sep 2012

Ambassador Chris Stevens did not have a Marine detail in Benghazi, Libya. But White House Senior Advisor and Obama confidante Valerie Jarrett has a full Secret Service detail on vacation in Martha’s Vineyard, according to Democratic pollster Pat Caddell.

That’s the pathetic foreign policy of the Obama administration, says Caddell today in an exclusive interview with Breitbart News. “Jarrett seems to have a 24 hour, around the clock detail, with five or six agents full time,” Caddell explains. “The media has been completely uninterested. We don’t provide security for our ambassador in Libya, but she needs a full Secret Service security detail. And nobody thinks there’s anything wrong with this. And nobody in the press will ask. What kind of slavish stoogery are they perpetrating here?

“This country has reached the point of absurdity. There are people dead because we don’t have security details for them. But she’s privileged to have a full Secret Service detail on vacation?”

Caddell points out that Americans are already unhappy with President Obama on foreign policy aside from the killing of Osama Bin Laden. Caddell, along with Republican pollster John McLaughlin, runs Secure America, a nonpartisan advocacy group. “We’ve just finished two polls coming out in the field today,” says Caddell, “but we already know that people feel strongly about Iran; they feel strongly about the administration’s policy with regard to Islamic extremists. They don’t like the Obama administration’s handling of these issues. And this election won’t only be about the economy. The American people aren’t stupid. They can walk and chew gum at the same time.” 

Caddell does reserve heavy criticism for the Republican establishment, which he believes has ignored foreign policy issues for far too long. “When three quarters of the American people believe Iran will give nuclear weapons to terrorists, you can see that Americans care about this issue. And people overwhelmingly believe that Obama’s sanctions policies will not work. The pronounced minority who disagree with those positions seem to be centered in the mainstream media – and ground zero seems to be at NBC and MSNBC.”

This is particularly obscene because even the evil and wasteful devil Bush did not give his Great Satan adviser Karl Rove a Secret Service detail:

President Obama has expanded the very small group of top aides who are given the privilege of taxpayer-funded personal drivers — who take them from their house to work and back home again each day — to include two top political advisers.

The Bush White House did not give the same privileges to any of its political advisers, according to former Bush administration officials. There is a record of the Clinton White House doing so once for two months, according to documents obtained by The Daily Caller.

Valerie Jarrett and David Axelrod, both senior advisers to the president, have been given the luxurious and prestigious perk of being picked up at their homes and driven to work or around town throughout the day in government vehicles chauffeured by military drivers, according to a list of those given the benefit provided to The Daily Caller by the White House.

In addition, Jarrett has been made a “protectee” of the Secret Service, a spokesman for the agency said. It is not clear to what extent Jarrett receives protection. Neither the White House or Secret Service would comment on the matter.

“We don’t discuss the scope or nature of protection for any Secret Service protectee due to operational security concerns,” said Secret Service spokesman Ed Donovan.

But except for a few weeks after 9/11, political advisers to Bush such as Karl Rove did not have Secret Service details with them except for the rare occasion where they gave a speech where protesters were expected.

Axelrod was given protectee status in the late summer of 2009, according to a blog written by a former Washington Post national security reporter. It is unclear whether he retains that status. Donovan declined to comment on Axelrod’s status.

Regardless, one knowledgeable source indicated that Jarrett has regular or semi-regular detail protection, which has left some questioning whether the close friend of the president’s, whose portfolio involves mostly outreach to the business sector and domestic policy, really needs the high level of security.

Okay, I’m going to quiz you now, and I’m warning you, it’s a tough question.  I say that because even our president wasn’t smart enough to answer it and he’s the most smartest man who ever lived.  Are you ready?

Which one of these people needed to have a security detail more:

Valerie Jarrett:

Or Ambassador Christopher Stevens:

Take your time now.  Like I said, this one COMPLETELY fooled your president.  Mind you, it might have been due to the fact that he’s skipped 62 percent of his daily intelligence briefings and just franklydoesn’t have a damn clue how to do his job.  They seem to have quit counting back in June after Obama had reached his 100th round of golf milestone, but do you have any idea how hard it is to keep your golf game sharp while endlessly campaigning?  Something damn well had to give.

And that’s why Obama was warned about this attack on the US Consulate in Libya a full 48 hours before it happened and did NOTHING:

According to senior diplomatic sources, the US State Department had credible information 48 hours before mobs charged the consulate in Benghazi, and the embassy in Cairo, that American missions may be targeted, but no warnings were given for diplomats to go on high alert and “lockdown”, under which movement is severely restricted.

And it is why Obama also skipped the daily intelligence briefing the next day after the United States Consulate in Libya was destroyed and Ambassador Stevens and three other Americans were murdered, you see.  Stuff like that just isn’t that important to Obama as compared to his campaigning and his golfing.

Oh, oh: 

There goes Mr. Creosote…

As Obama Claims Republicans Ruined Economy, Consider Economy During LAST YEARS’ Martha’s Vineyard Vacation

August 19, 2011

One of the lies Obama told on his BS (because U weren’t in his Canadian-built bus, were you?) tour was that he’d fixed the economy, and then the Republicans came to power

Let’s burn that lie down right now. 

While Obama was happily hobnobbing with the super-rich at Martha’s Vineyard last August, I wrote up a list of all the things that were truly going to hell:

Obama’s having a grand old time because he doesn’t give a flying fart about the following facts that have gripped the country while he was gripping a golf club:

The mainstream media’s adjective of the day to summarize all of the above is “unexpected,” of course.

And my favorite headline while Obama was on vacation #6 (not hard give the competition) comes from Überlefty David Letterman:

Okay, scratch that: THIS is my favorite headline:

All of these things were reported as occurring during one of Obama’s four golf outings on his sixth vacation so far just this year.

I didn’t realize that last year’s post on Obama’s Martha’s Vineyard vacation would come in handy to refute the massive Obama lies just before this year’s Martha’s Vineyard vacation.

Boy, Obama sure had the streets paved with gold last year before those nasty Republicans entered the scene, didn’t he?  Last August, you might recall, Obama had the White House, Nancy Pelosi owned the House of Representatives lock, stock and barrel and Harry Reid had a filibuster-proof majority in the Senate.  But of course Bush was to blame for everything back then, just like Republicans are to blame for everything now.

Since Barack Obama became president, the number of Americans on food stamps has increased by 43%.  But blame Bush.  And Republicans, of course.

As Barack Obama leaves on vacation to hob-nob with the millionaires, the man who isn’t bothering to get economic briefings on a daily basis is ignoring a world on the verge of meltdown over fears of a U.S. meltdown.

It is amazing how utterly jammed-packed with fecal matter Democrats are.  George Bush was to blame for everything because George Bush was president; but Barack Obama being president for nearly three years means he is absolutely not to be held responsible for anything.  Republicans are to be blamed for everything now because they control the House of Representatives, but the fact that Democrats had total control of both the House of Representatives AND the Senate from 2006 until 2010 – which strangely corresponds quite well to when everything started going to hell – means they aren’t responsible for anything.  Because Bush was president, and the president is responsible unless that president happens to be Barack Obama.  And of course you hold the Republicans responsible if they control the House because you don’t hold the Democrats responsible even if they control both the House and the Senate.

One might laugh at this mindset, but it is the mindset of your mainstream media news.

I leave you with the words of former NBC News president Michael Gartner about Barack Obama:

“I think people have a fondness for him and I don’t think people blame him for anything that’s wrong in this country, unless – I think the far-right of the Republican Party does, but I don’t think the moderates do and certainly the Democrats don’t.”

When this is the representative attitude of the mainstream media, you know that America has truly surpassed Joseph Goebbels in the field of propaganda.

Obama And Libya: Liberals Show The Hypocrisy That Defines Them

March 23, 2011

Liberals are hypocrites.  Obama is a hypocrite.  Hypocrisy is the quintessential defining essence of liberalism.

Don’t like that claim?  Tough.  It’s the truth.

Where’s all the criticism for Obama that Democrats, liberals and the unhinged leftwing media constantly threw at George Bush???

Here’s a good brief collection of ways the left demonized Bush over Iraq that are very conveniently being forgotten by the left and by the press which are the left’s useful idiots:

John Hawkins
7 Questions For Liberals About Obama’s Libyan War

It seems like it was just yesterday when we had an “imperialist warmonger” in the White House who was going to be replaced by a peace-loving Democrat who promised “hope” and “change” instead. It’s funny how that worked out, isn’t it? We still have troops in Iraq, we’ve escalated the war in Afghanistan, and now we’re bombing everything that moves in Libya. Yet, the same liberals who were protesting in the streets and calling George Bush a war criminal have mostly been meek and quiet about the fact that the President they supported has been following in George Bush’s footsteps.

So, the obvious question is, “Did you lefties believe ANY of the crap you were spewing about the war on terrorism before Obama got into office?” If so, maybe you could answer a few questions prompted by the things liberals were saying during the Bush years.

1) Isn’t this a rush to war? There were 17 UN resolutions regarding Iraq, Bush talked about going to war for a full year before we actually invaded, and he received Congressional approval first. After all that, liberals STILL shouted that it was a “rush to war.” Meanwhile, Obama decided to bomb Libya in between making his Final Four picks and planning out a vacation to Brazil, probably because Hillary yelled at him. How about applying the same standards to Obama that you applied to Bush?

2) Is Obama invading Libya because Gaddafi insulted him? Liberals claimed George Bush invaded Iraq because Saddam tried to assassinate his father. Using that same line of thinking, could the notoriously thin-skinned Obama be bombing Libya because he’s still angry that Gaddafi once said this about him?

We fear that Obama will feel that, because he is black with an inferiority complex, this will make him behave worse than the whites. This will be a tragedy. We tell him to be proud of himself as a black and feel that all Africa is behind him because if he sticks to this inferiority complex he will have a worse foreign policy than the whites had in the past.

Obama doesn’t have much use for anyone who criticizes him. Even his spiritual mentor Jeremiah Wright learned all about what the underside of a bus looks like after he dared to criticize Obama. Is that Obama’s real motivation? Hmmmmmmm, liberals?

3) Is this a war for oil? What was it liberals kept saying over and over about Iraq? Oh yeah, it was “No blood for oil!” What was the rationale for claiming the war in Iraq was about oil? Iraq had oil; we were going to war there; so obviously it just MUST be about oil. That was it. So, Libya has oil and unlike Hussein, Gaddafi has been cooperative of late; so there’s no compelling reason for America to invade….except perhaps, to safeguard all that Texas T. flowing beneath the sand. So, when do we have liberals in the streets shouting “No blood for oil?”

4) Where are the massive protests? Can’t you just see it? The Communist Party, Code Pink, the black bloc, and the free Mumia wackjobs all joining together with the Tea Party to protest Obama. Wouldn’t that be fun? I mean personally, I’ve been waiting for years to wear a “No Blood For Oil” sign while I carry around a giant puppet head. Someone call the commies and union members who organize all these hippie shindigs for the Left and let’s do this thing!

5) Shouldn’t we have tried to talk it out with Gaddafi instead? I thought that the Muslim world loves and respects America since Barack Obama became President? So, why not try to talk it out with Gaddafi? Perhaps Obama should have been humble, realized he didn’t have all the answers, and then he could have had a conversation with Gaddafi instead of threatening him? Maybe he should have considered the possibility that Libya’s culture is a little different than ours. Had he perhaps met with Gaddafi and bowed to him to show his respect, this could have probably been worked out without violence. Oh, why, why must we be so arrogant and so ignorant of other nations’ rich cultural traditions, which in Libya apparently consist of murdering everyone who opposes you?

6) Aren’t we just starting a cycle of violence by bombing Libya? You know what they say, “An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind!” We drop bombs on them, they get angry, and next thing you know, they turn into terrorists to get us back! That was what we heard from the Left over and over during the Bush years, wasn’t it? That we were creating terrorists?

That’s why liberals like Richard Gere suggested brilliant strategies like this to deal with Al-Qaeda:

In a situation like this, of course you identify with everyone who’s suffering. (But we must also think about) the terrorists who are creating such horrible future lives for themselves because of the negativity of this karma. It’s all of our jobs to keep our minds as expansive as possible. If you can see (the terrorists) as a relative who’s dangerously sick and we have to give them medicine, and the medicine is love and compassion. There’s nothing better.

Maybe instead of bombing Libya, Obama needs to engage in a little more love and compassion by hugging Gaddafi into submission!

7) Isn’t Barack Obama a chickenhawk? Barack Obama has never served in the military; yet he just decided to engage in a “war of choice” in Libya. Even if you chalk up Iraq and Afghanistan to Obama cleaning up after Bush, this one is all on him. If American soliders die, it’s because Obama chose to put them in harm’s way. If Libyan civilians are killed by American weapons, it’s because Barack Obama gave the order to attack. So, can we all agree that Barack Obama is a squawking, yellow bellied chickenhawk?

I had a slightly different project last week in an article I titled, “Obama Adds Stupid And Hypocritical To Weak In His Libya No-Fly Policy.”  In that, I added factoids, such as how Obama went from demonizing the war in Iraq to claiming credit for it; how Obama’s people claimed his wonderful Cairo speech was responsible for the desire for freedom, when really it was his terrible economic policies that have undermined economies throughout the world; how Obama attacked Bush for not having enough troops in Afghanistan and subsequently “air-raiding villages and killing civilians” to refusing to have any troops at all while we do nothing BUT air-raiding villages in Libya.  That sort of thing.

But it turns out there is so much hypocrisy oozing out of Obama like toxic contaminents that it is hard to contain them all in any one article.  There’s what Obama said when he claimed Bush didn’t have the right to go to war in Iraq

“The President does not have power under the Constitution to unilaterally authorize a military attack in a situation that does not involve stopping an actual or imminent threat to the nation,” Obama responded.

– with what the hypocrite is doing RIGHT NOW.

Obama literally ought to be impeached by his own standard.

Then there’s the fact that Obama is an abject LIAR about what he is saying about Bush:

[T]he President declared: “In the past there have been times when the United States acted unilaterally or did not have full international support, and as a consequence typically it was the United States military that ended up bearing the entire burden.”

First of all, there’s this:

On Saturday, President Obama while visiting Brazil launched a United Nations war without obtaining Congressional approval. We all must remember how the left crucified President George W. Bush over a nine-month debate concerning war with Iraq. This debate included multiple UN Resolutions and a Multi-National Force composed of dozens of nations. Many refer to this time of debate as a “rush to war.” Yesterday however, President Obama approved the launch of Tomahawk missiles effectively engaging us in a Libyan civil war. This decision came with no debate in Congress and one UN Resolution that was only voted on 48 hours before.

Then there is this fact:

As the folks at Fox quickly pointed out, Bush actually had twice as many international allies for the invasion of Iraq as Obama has put together for his adventure in Libya.  They even put together a list.

Then add to that insult the fact that Obama never bothered to get any kind of approval from Congress, whereas Bush had Congress’ approval for both Afghanistan AND Iraq.  In Iraq, the war liberals always demonize him over, Congress granted Bush the “Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq” in October 2002.

Not only did Obama not have any such authority, but he literally started his unlateral war in Libya while he was on vacation in Brazil!!!

Dennis Kucinich is about the only Democrat who actually has the integrity to demand Obama answer for his impeachable offense which his fellow Democrats deceitfully and falsely tried to claim that Bush had committed.

Where are Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid in demanding that chicken hawk war criminal Obama be impeached for abandoning the Constitution?

Iraq was – and damn, IT CONTINUES TO BE – depicted by the left as some kind of massive failure (except when it benefits them to falsely take credit for it).  But Saddam Hussein’s head is hanging on Bush’s wall.  And what about Muammar Gaddafi’s head?

Chairman of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff Admiral Mike Mullen has admitted that a stalemate could allow Libyan leader Colonel Muammar Gaddafi to remain in power despite facing intenational military action gainst his forces.He said that the outcome of military action from the air was “very uncertain” and made it clear that the US did not see the goal of Operation Odyssey Dawn as removing the Libyan leader from power, The Telegraph reports.

If Gaddafi stays in Libya, it will be a massive failure.  And Gaddafi is going to stay in power.

Even the New York Times acknowledges that this will be a massive failure:

If Colonel Qaddafi manages to remain in power, that will leave the United States and the United Nations-backed mission looking like a failure, foreign policy experts from all sides of the political spectrum said. “Barack Obama told Qaddafi to go; if Qaddafi doesn’t go, America will look diminished in the eyes of the world,” said Steven Clemons, senior fellow at the New American Foundation.

Stephen J. Hadley, a former national security adviser to President George W. Bush and an architect of the 2003 Iraq invasion, said at a forum in San Francisco on Saturday that he feared the limited approach “could set us up for failure.”

“I don’t quite see what is behind the strategy in Libya,” Mr. Hadley said, speaking while a small clutch of protesters — mostly yelling chants about Iraq — were on the streets below. “We are now in a situation where we have a mismatch of what the president said we want to do as a nation, what the U.N. Security Council authorizes, and what we are actually ready to commit in resources.”

As an example of still more failure, Obama’s coalition is falling apart in front of the world while Obama continues to party in South America.

The fact of the matter is that I pointed out two weeks ago that Libyans were missing George Bush.  Why?  Because Obama is a failure, and Bush was a guy who got things done, that’s why.

I also pointed out nearly a week ago what the people who knew what they were talking about were saying DAYS before Obama finally bothered to do too little and too late to change the situation:

Obama pontificated, made some bold statements, and then did nothing.  Now a no-fly zone would probably come to late.

Liberals and Democrats are hypocrites.  They have been hypocrites for my entire lifetime.

But this display of sheer, galling incompetence and stupidity is new, even for them.

There’s The Media Propaganda Of Obama As Leader; Then There’s The Actual Facts

March 21, 2011

It’s 3 AM.  The White House phone is ringing with news of a developing crisis.  But Obama is sound asleep after a busy day filled with first a round of golf and then laboring over his NCAA bracket picks (which turned out to be as gutless as he is).  And, of course, if you try to call back later, Obama will be long-gone on his Brazil vacation that even Brazilians clearly don’t want him to take.

Mind you, Hillary Clinton is a liberal, and therefore quite a a fool herself.  And she clearly hasn’t made every right step herself in dealing with the building disaster in the Middle East.  But she was clearly correct in her campaign assessment that Obama would be a weak and ineffective leader; and she’s clearly correct that Obama is an utter disgrace as a president now.

OH, HILL NO
Obama’s indecision on Libya has pushed Clinton over the edgeh
By Joshua Hersh Thursday, March 17, 2011
Fed up with a president “who can’t make his mind up” as Libyan rebels are on the brink of defeat, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton is looking to the exits.

At the tail end of her mission to bolster the Libyan opposition, which has suffered days of losses to Col. Moammar Gadhafi’s forces, Clinton announced that she’s done with Obama after
2012 — even if he wins again.

“Obviously, she’s not happy with dealing with a president who can’t decide if today is Tuesday or Wednesday, who can’t make his mind up,” a Clinton insider told The Daily. “She’s exhausted, tired.”

He went on, “If you take a look at what’s on her plate as compared with what’s on the plates of previous Secretary of States — there’s more going on now at this particular moment, and it’s like playing sports with a bunch of amateurs. And she doesn’t have any power. She’s trying to do what she can to keep things from imploding.”

Clinton is said to be especially peeved with the president’s waffling over how to encourage the kinds of Arab uprisings that have recently toppled regimes in Egypt and Tunisia, and in particular his refusal to back a no-fly zone over Libya.

In the past week, former President Bill Clinton and Hillary Clinton’s former top adviser Anne-Marie Slaughter lashed out at Obama for the same reason.

The tension has even spilled over into her dealings with European diplomats, with whom she met early this week.

When French president Nicolas Sarkozy urged her to press the White House to take more aggressive action in Libya, Clinton repeatedly replied only, “There are difficulties,” according to Foreign Policy magazine.

“Frankly we are just completely puzzled,” one of the diplomats told Foreign Policy magazine. “We are wondering if this is a priority for the United States.”

Or as the insider described Obama’s foreign policy shop: “It’s amateur night.”

Clinton revealed her desire to leave yesterday in an interview with CNN’s Wolf Blitzer, responding four times to his questions about whether she would accept a post during a potential second Obama administration with a single word: “No.”

Philippe Reines, an adviser and spokesman for Clinton, downplayed the significance of the interview, saying, “He asked, she answered.  Really that simple. [It] wasn’t a declaration.”

But her blunt string of four “no’s” followed a period of intense frustration for the secretary, according to the insider, who told The Daily that Clinton has grown weary of fighting an uphill battle in the administration.

Defense Secretary Robert Gates came out against a no-fly zone almost two weeks ago, while Clinton grew closer to the Libyan opposition.

Last week, excommunicated members of Libya’s embassy to the United States set up shop in an office inside the State Department.

Obama himself made light of her strong feelings for supporting the opposition in a speech last week at the Gridiron Club Dinner, an annual gathering  that traditionally features a stand-up comedy act by the president.

“I’ve dispatched Hillary to the Middle East to talk about how these countries can transition to new leaders — though, I’ve got to be honest, she’s gotten a little passionate about the subject,” Obama said to laughter from the audience.

“These past few weeks it’s been tough falling asleep with Hillary out there on Pennsylvania Avenue shouting, throwing rocks at the window.”

And to some, the firing last week of State Department spokesman P.J. Crowley over disparaging remarks he made about the Pentagon detention policies had the appearance of a power move by the Defense Department more than anything else.

While the stakes in Libya could not be higher, the insider said that something far more domestic was on Clinton’s mind after she leaves the State Department: “She wants to be a grandmother more than anything.”

— With Anthony DeCeglie

I can’t believe I’m saying this: but I’m with Hillary Clinton.  And it is truly despicable that Obama would actually make light of a powder-keg about to explode in the heart of the Arab world.  Only a true fool would do that.  Even as that same fool further undermines and trivializes his own Secretary of State.

Mind you, this isn’t some “rightwinger” assessment, is it?  It’s Hillary Freaking Clinton, the Obama administration’s own Secretary of State.  The Republicans and Democrats, right and left both agree that the Obama presidency is an abject disaster who seems almost allergic to making essential decisions in a timely manner:

Senate Democrats were less pointed in their comments, but expressed similar concerns about the Obama administrations handling of the crisis. At one point, Sen. Robert Menendez, D-N.J. lamented all that the international community said but didnt do about the Qaddafi regimes military assault, and wondered aloud whether the presidents national security team was ever serious about trying to shape the outcome of the Libyan conflict.

I read the statements [from administration officials] and I almost get a sense it’s like a Texas two-step, Menendez said. I’m still not sure what we are supporting. It seems to me that it is a dangerous proposition to urge people to seek democracy and revolt and then basically not to help them. And so, you know, I am concerned as I listen to your answers, including what happens if Qaddafi prevailsI think we’re going to miss an opportunity to promote democracy with a small ‘d’ throughout the region, and to be seen on the side of those who have aspirations of that.

And it wasn’t just Hillary Clinton who warned us that Obama would be a failure.  His own Vice President also warned us that Obama simply wasn’t up to the job:

Sen. Joe Biden (D-DE) Reaffirmed That Obama Was Not Ready To Be Commander In Chief. ABC‘s George Stephanopoulos: “You were asked is he ready. You said ‘I think he can be ready, but right now I don’t believe he is. The presidency is not something that lends itself to on-the-job training.’” Sen. Biden: “I think that I stand by the statement.” (ABC’s “This Week,” 8/19/07)

Sen. Biden: “Having talking points on foreign policy doesn’t get you there.” (“Biden Lashes Out At Obama,” ABC News’ “Political Radar” Blog, blogs.abcnews.com, 8/2/07)

Democrats are between a rock and a hard place in the sense that they can’t point out overly-loudly what a disaster Obama is, because the obvious result of their abandonment of Obama would be a conservative (and probably very conservative) president in 2012 to go with a Republican-controlled House and a Republican-controlled Senate.  Which means that while Obama goes from one “dangerous proposition” to another, they have to be bobbing-head dolls.

And Hillary – probably with Bill’s advice – is getting the hell out of Dodge before this total disaster and disgrace of a White House drags her down to hell with it.  Because this community agitator is very clearly is not up to this job, and we are one genuine crisis away from a total disaster.

Then there’s Obama’s schedule compared and contrasted to his poor underlings’.

For what it’s worth, it isn’t as though Libya is the first time Obama has failed in foreign policy.  Just off the top of my head, I can add articles I’ve written detailing Obama’s total failure in Egypt, in Iraq, in Afghanistan (not to mention all three combined), In Iran (and see here), in Russia and in North Korea.

I remember several years ago watching a fascination PBS program on presidential leadership.  The documentary’s poster-boy for pathetic presidential leadership was Jimmy Carter.  Obviously the man was intelligent, but the experts on leadership said “intelligence” does not a leader make.  Jimmy Carter was particularly faulted for not empowering his subordinates with enough power to do their jobs; he micromanaged and undermined through a tiny cadre of close advisors.  And as a result the nation drifted like a ship without a rudder.  That is clearly what is being described by Hillary Clinton now.

Obama clearly has an “inner circle” problem.  Even DEMOCRATS acknowledge it.

The PBS program did not make mention of the fact that Jimmy Carter was (and clearly still is) a fool with a totally bogus worldview.  A false worldview makes it impossible to act intelligently because, no matter how intelligent one is, one cannot possibly comprehend reality.  And I would submit that Both Carter and Obama have tragically and truly flawed views of the world.  Both of these men view the world through a set of theories that are simply totally false.  And from their poor foundations, all of their intelligence goes into the fruitless process of endlessly rationalizing and justifying their erroneous worldview.

One thing stands out in my mind as a symbol of disconnectedness: Obama flying off in the opposite direction of the planet for a routine (vacation) trip as he starts a war.  Via Sadhillnews:

Is it anything but a stupid thing to do to initiate a war and then do a photo shoot playing soccor?

If Obama doesn’t think this business is serious enough to bother to stick around, I don’t know why anybody else should.

List Of How Our Country Went To Hell While Obama On Vacation #6 Almost As Long As It Is Scary

August 27, 2010

If there was ever a “Let them eat cake” administration, this one’s it.

I like the hilariously cynical “Newsflash” part of this ABC News title.  It brings out the massively disconnected look of contempt for the “forgotten man” in Obama’s eyes.

“Wave at all the little nobodies, daughters, wave at all the little nobodies.  Emperor worship is all they have left to live for.”

Breaking News: President Obama Says “I’m Having a Great Time” On Vacation
August 25, 2010 12:42 PM

Last night President Obama and First Lady Obama dined at State Road Restaurant in West Tisbury on Martha’s Vineyard.

Their dinner companions were family friends Dr. Eric and Cheryl Whitaker, senior adviser Valerie Jarrett, and lawyer and business executive Vernon Jordan and wife Ann Dibble Jordan.

As they departed the restaurant at 9:55 pm ET, reporters asked the president if he was enjoying his vacation even with the rain.

“I’m having a great time,” the president said. “Doing a lot of reading”

[Snip]

Kenworth said she’d been asked not to talk about what the Obamas ordered, but “the whole table got lobster tempura with island corn succotash and lemon vinaigrette” in addition to their individual entrees.

You wouldn’t have asked for about 310 million doggy bags for those lobster tempura leftovers, would you, Barry?

Meanwhile, back in the real world, the American people are watching their economy go directly to hell.  As in, “Go to hell.  Go directly to hell.  Do not pass ‘Recovery Summer,’ do not collect $200.”

Obama’s having a grand old time because he doesn’t give a flying fart about the following facts that have gripped the country while he was gripping a golf club:

The mainstream media’s adjective of the day to summarize all of the above is “unexpected,” of course.

And my favorite headline while Obama was on vacation #6 (not hard give the competition) comes from Überlefty David Letterman:

Okay, scratch that: THIS is my favorite headline:

All of these things were reported as occurring during one of Obama’s four golf outings on his sixth vacation so far just this year.

And the bad news is that I am very likely missing some real important seriously bad news that’s happened during Obama’s little holiday from responsibility (but after all, it IS “Bush’s fault,” right?  And why should Obama do anything to take responsibility when he can just continue to demonize Bush?).

But, I mean Obama’s having a good time, right?  Just imagine how much the worse our our sucky little lives would have been if Obama’s vacation lacked some luxury that turned his smile into a frown…

Michelle Obama, the Bride of Messiah, decried America as a “downright mean” place in 2008, that was “guided by fear.” Maybe so.  But thanks to your husband, Michelle, it’s gotten a whole hell of a lot meaner and a whole hell of a lot more fearful in the two years since in which Obama has led us down the path to ruin.

May Obama, having the rest and clarity of yet another vacation, decide to resign from office before it’s too late to save what is left of the nation.

You probably won’t listen to my version of “In the name of God, GO!”  But it would sure be better for America – and even for your own party – if you did.

On the bright side, for you, Barry:

There’s a place for “the hungry, the naked, the homeless, the crippled, the blind, the lepers, all those people who feel unwanted, unloved, uncared for throughout society, people that have become a burden to the society and are shunned by everyone.”

Mother Teresa started it, and it’s still running strong. Although you don’t deserve it, Barry, there will be a place for you to go after you’ve imploded the entire American and global economies.

Even Über-Liberal Martha’s Vineyard Starting To Miss Bush

August 19, 2010

Martha’s Vineyard is quintessentially Über-Über liberal.  In the 2008 election, fully 75% of the island residents voted for Obama.  Which is why Democrats love it so much.

Which makes the following story a) utterly hilarious in its sheer delicious irony and b) terrifying news for Democrats.  Democrats  should basically view themselves as cockroaches caught in the light and seeing a giant boot forcefully descending from heaven (mind you, Democrats should ALWAYS view themselves as cockroaches) as November approaches:

Vineyard buzzes less for Obamas’ second visit
Many say they’ll leave family alone
By Milton J. Valencia
Globe Staff / August 18, 2010

OAK BLUFFS — Sharky’s Cantina is once again mixing its “Obamarita’’ cocktail, with tastes of the president’s favorite fruits, and the Locker Room on Circuit Avenue has restocked the “I vacationed with Obama’’ T-shirts.

But as Martha’s Vineyard prepares for the first family’s visit tomorrow — their second summer stay here since President Obama took office — the excitement that marked last summer’s arrival of the fresh-faced commander in chief seems to have ebbed like the tide.

Obama, now a tested president burdened by war and economic upheaval, may well get the peace and quiet he has been seeking as he settles in for a 10-day stay, presumably at the historic Blue Heron Farm in Chilmark where he stayed last year, local residents said.

“I have no desire to go chase him or see him,’
’ said Elaine Allen, owner of the Laughing Bear clothing shop on Circuit Avenue, one of the few stores to feature a poster in its window welcoming the first family this year.

“Let him just have that R and R that he needs,’’ she said.

It was only a year ago that the president, a superstar after his historic election, rode a wave of popularity to The Rock. Islanders typically brag about a laissez-faire attitude when it comes to celebrities, but it seemed everyone wanted a glimpse of Obama playing golf or biking with his daughters.

But in the final days before his second visit, some residents say the excitement has waned along with Obama’s popularity after two years in office. Others say his poll numbers are not the issue; they just want to give the president the quiet he seeks.

“It’s not as hectic or as crazy’’ this year, said Maya Sharp, a clerk at Alley’s General Store in West Tisbury, one of the locations the president visited last summer. She remembers the excitement when Secret Service agents came into the store announcing that the president would visit. No one else was allowed in the store when he came in to buy candy for his two daughters.

“It’s just a laid-back feeling now,’’ Sharp said. “It’s like ‘Wow, he’s coming — again.’ ’’

One barometer of the plunge in excitement has been the sale of Obama-themed T-shirts, which designers had been banking on after the craze of last year. Clothing labeled with the president’s name sold by the thousands, helping to salvage a tough economic year for the island.

But this year’s T-shirt sales are much less brisk, merchants say.

“Last year, Obama gave you goose bumps, but I don’t think you’re going to see that this year,’’ said Alex McCluskey, co-owner of the Locker Room, who sold more than 4,000 “I vacationed with Obama’’ T-shirts last year. But so far this year, he said, his hot item is T-shirts of former President Bush asking, “Miss me yet?’’

Residents have also noticed a drop in the number of stores with Obama posters on their front windows and homes with signs that welcome the first family.

Just imagine the sorry loser who doubled his order of “I Vacationed with Obama” T-Shirts.  There’s your metaphor for “hope and change” in a nutshell: hope in Obama means no change in your pockets.

Maybe Obama-themed T-shirts will come back if someone makes a shirt that says, “I hoped in one hand and crapped in the other, and all I got to show for it was this lousy handful of crap.”

To miss Bush or not to miss Bush, that is the question:

And when even the snotty elite and snotty elite wannabes miss the leadership of George W. Bush, Democrats are in for the “Titanic, meet Iceberg” event of their lives.

Not only are more and more Democrats missing Bush; they’re preferring him over their current disastrous reality:

A prominent Democratic pollster is circulating a survey that shows George W. Bush is 6 points more popular than President Obama in “Frontline” districts — seats held by Democrats that the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee sees as most vulnerable to Republican takeover. That Bush is more popular than Obama in Democratic-held seats is cause for outright fear.

As for me, I do miss Bush.  He did a lot of things right, and he did a lot of things wrong.  In that, he’s very unlike Barry Hussein, who’s done nothing right and absolutely everything wrong.

For those who are keeping scorecards at home, this marks the Obamas’ sixth vacation so far this year.

Democrats Stuck Between Crazy and Pandering on Domestic Oil

August 4, 2008

As George Stephanopoulos asked House Speaker Nancy Pelosi virtually the same question over and over again – and as Pelosi provided one disingenuous non sequitur after another – Stephanopoulos increasingly began to look as if he had just stepped in something that really stank.

Here’s a partial transcript of the encounter from the August 3, 2008 This Week:

GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS, HOST: You’ve been getting a lot of heat for not allowing a straight up or down vote expanding drilling off the coasts of the United States. Why won’t you permit a straight up or down vote?

NANCY PELOSI, SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE: What we have presented are options that will really make a difference at the pump. Free our oil, Mr. President. We’re sitting on 700 million barrels of oil. That would have an immediate effect in ten days. What our colleagues are talking about is something that won’t have an effect for ten years and it will be 2 cents at the time. If they want to present something that’s part of an energy package, we’re talking about something. But to single shoot on something that won’t work and mislead the American people as to thinking it’s going to reduce the price at the pump, I’m just not going to be a part of it.

STEPHANOPOULOS: Except it’s not just Republicans that are calling for this. Members of your own caucus say we must have a vote. Congressman Jason Altmire, let me show our viewers right now, says, “There is going to be a vote. September 30 will not come and go without a vote on the opening the Outer Continental Shelf. The message has been delivered. The issue can’t be ignored any longer.” He says he speaks for a lot of Democrats. He’s talked to the leadership and a vote must happen.

PELOSI: Maybe it will, as part of a larger energy package. Let’s step back, call a halt and put this in perspective. What we have now is a failed energy policy by the Bush/Cheney, two oilmen in the White House. $4 a gallon gasoline at the pump. And what they’re saying is let’s have more of the same. Let’s have more of big oil making, record profits, historic profits. You see the quarterly reports that just came out, who want to be subsidized who don’t really want to compete. Let them use the subsidies to drill oil in protected areas. Instead we’re saying, free the oil. Use it, don’t lose it. There’s 68 million acres in lower 48 and 20 million more acres in Alaska where they’re permitted where they could drill anytime. This is a diversionary tactic from failed energy policies.

STEPHANOPOULOS: But if you feel you have the better arguments, why not give a straight up or down vote for drilling?

PELOSI: Because the misrepresentation is being made that this is going to reduce the price at the pump. This is again a decoy, it’s not a solution.

STEPHANOPOULOS: Well, if you’re right, why not let it be debated out and have the vote?

PELOSI: We have a debate every single day on this subject. What you saw in the Congress this week was the war dance of the hand maidens of the oil companies. That’s what you saw on the Republican side of the aisle. Democrats and Republicans are not right there on party lines on this issue. There are regional concerns, as well as some people concerned about what this means back home for them. But we have a planet to save. We have an economy to grow. And we can do that if we keep our balance in all of this and not just say but for drilling in unprotected and these protected areas offshore, we would have lower gas prices.

STEPHANOPOULOS: So what exactly are you trying to say? You say you might allow a vote as part of a comprehensive package, but you won’t allow a vote on —

PELOSI: We have put on the floor. Free our oil. Strong bipartisan support for that. Use it, don’t lose it. Strong bipartisan support for that. End undue speculation, strong bipartisan support for that. We’ve talked about these things. Invest in renewable energy resources so that we can increase the supply of energy for our country. Strong bipartisan support for that.

STEPHANOPOULOS: Yet you brought those measures to the floor in a way under the suspension of the rules so that it couldn’t be amended with a drilling proposal.

PELOSI: Well, we built consensus and have a strong bipartisan. This is what’s going to make a difference to reduce the dependence on foreign oil, to stop our dependence on fossil fuels in our own country. To increase the supply of energy immediately to reduce the price at the pump to protect the consumer. So this is a policy matter. This is very serious policy matter. It’s not to use a tactic of one — one tactic in order to undermine a comprehensive energy package to reduce our dependence on foreign oil which is a national security issue. To reduce our dependence on fossil fuels in our own country. Now, will we be talking about natural gas that’s cheaper, better for the environment —

STEPHANOPOULOS: But why not allow votes on all that? When you came in as Speaker you promised in your commitment book “A New Direction for America,” let me show our viewers, you said that “Bills should generally come to the floor under a procedure that allows open, full, fair debate consisting of full amendment process that grants the Minority the right to offer its alternatives.” If they want to offer a drilling proposal, why can’t they have a vote?

PELOSI: They’ll have to use their imagination as to how they can get a vote and then they may get a vote. What I am trying to, we have serious policy issues in our country. The President of the United States has presented this but for this our economy would be booming. But for this, gas would be cheaper at the pump. It’s simply not true. Even the President himself in his statement yesterday and before then has said, there is no quick fix for this by drilling.

STEPHANOPOULOS: And Senator Obama has agreed with you. He says, listen. This is not the answer. Drilling is not the answer. But he said over the weekend that he might be willing to sign onto drilling as part of a comprehensive proposal.

PELOSI: What Senator Obama said is what we want a President to say. Let’s look at all of the options. Let’s compare them. And let’s see what really does increase our supply. Protect our environment, save our economy, protect the consumer, instead of a single shot thing that does none of the above. Why we give subsidies to big oil to drill instead of letting them —

STEPHANOPOULOS: I want to move on to other issues. Just to be clear, you are saying you will not allow a single up or down vote on drilling. But you will allow a vote on a package that includes drilling?

PELOSI: No, what I’m saying to you is, as far as I’m concerned, unless there is something that — you never say never to anything. You know, people have their parliamentary options available to them. But from my standpoint, my flagship issue as Speaker of the House and 110th Congress has been to reduce our dependence on foreign oil and reverse global warming. I’m not giving the gavel — I’m not giving a gavel away to a tactic that will do neither of those things. That supports big oil at the cost and expense of the consumer.

STEPHANOPOULOS: So you’re not going to permit a vote, you may get beat, but you’re not going to permit a vote on your own?

PELOSI: Again, we take this one step at a time. But while we’re spending all of this time on a parliamentary tactic when nothing less is at stake than the planet, the air we breathe, our children breathe.

STEPHANOPOULOS: But that’s what I don’t understand. If you could get votes on everything else that you care about which you say there is strong bipartisan support, why not allow a vote on the drilling as well?

PELOSI: Because the President will not allow any of these other things to go forth. Why are we not saying to the President, why don’t you release oil from the SPR in ten days to have the price at the pump go down? Why are you opposed to any undue speculation in the oil markets? Why do you not insist that people who have leases on our land with permits ready to go use those? The oil companies don’t want competition. And what we would do by saying, go ahead, give them the subsidies. Allow them to drill in areas that are protected now, instead of where they’re allowed to drill, is to diminish all of the opportunity that we have for an electricity standard for our country. Where we set out standards that makes the competition for renewable energy resources better. Which says to the private sector, invest here because there is a standard that they have to honor. If you just say it’s drill, drill, drill, drill and we’re going to subsidize it, what is the motivation for the private sector to come in and say we’re going to support these renewable energies, wind, solar, biofuels. Plug-in cars. Natural gas and other alternatives.

Speaker Pelosi has engaged in every form of partisan gamesmanship in order to block Republicans from even having a debate over drilling measures. Apparently, that qualifies as “open, full, fair debate consisting of full amendment process that grants the Minority the right to offer its alternatives” in the Nancy Pelosi dictatorship.

According to a CNNMoney.com poll, 73% of Americans favored offshore drilling as of June 2008.

In PelosiLand, that kind of demand from the American people calls for only one thing: a five week vacation.

But Republicans aren’t having any of it:

House Republicans will be back on the floor of the U.S. House of Representatives again Monday to continue the unprecedented protest that began last Friday, when dozens of Republicans joined hundreds of American citizens on the House floor to protest Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s (D-CA) decision to send Congress home for the rest of the summer without a vote on legislation to lower gas prices and move America toward energy independence.

President Bush doesn’t mind letting Democrats twist in the wind for the next five weeks while Americans become angrier and angrier.

Barack Obama reversed his position (what else is new?) against opening up the Strategic Petroleum Reserve to provide immediate price relief on gas prices. He had earlier said that the Strategic Reserves should only be tapped in the event of an emergency. Apparently a nine point drop in the polls over the course of a single week qualifies as an emergency where crippling $4 plus gasoline does not. Obama is hoping that taking 70 million barrels from the Reserve would reduce the price just long enough to keep the oil issue at bay until after the election.

Obama does not seem to want to take part in Nancy Pelosi’s (Captain KoolAid’s) suicide pact with the environmentalist groups. He is clearly beginning to hedge his position on offshore drilling. But we can’t depend upon this serial pandering flip flopper to follow through with whatever promises he makes any more than we can depend upon Nancy Pelosi’s mental health.

The Democrat Party finds itself stuck between a Crazy and a Panderer.