Posts Tagged ‘worst-case scenario’

Not With A Bang But A Whimper: LA Times Admits That Obama’s (And Hillary Clinton’s) Intervention In Libya Was A MAJOR Disaster

June 27, 2014

We hear all the time from liberals that George W. Bush broke the law when he attacked Iraq and that Bush turned Iraq into a hellhole with his warmongering.

It’s time to point out a few things.

Number one, no, Bush DIDN’T break the law when he attacked Iraq; he actually passed “the Iraq War Resolution” that Hillary Clinton, Joe Biden, Harry Reid, John Kerry, etc. voted for.  And when George Bush attacked Iraq, he did what nearly sixty percent of the Democrats in the US Senate authorized him to do.  And number two, when George Bush LEFT Iraq, he left a safe, stable region that prompted Joe Biden to say:

“I am very optimistic about — about Iraq. I mean, this could be one of the great achievements of this administration. You’re going to see 90,000 American troops come marching home by the end of the summer. You’re going to see a stable government in Iraq that is actually moving toward a representative government.”

… and for Barack Obama to boast in 2011:

“This strategy is grounded in a clear and achievable goal shared by the Iraqi people and the American people: an Iraq that is sovereign, stable, and self-reliant.”

and:

“[W]e will work to promote an Iraqi government that is just, representative, and accountable, and that provides neither support nor safe haven to terrorists.”

Bush left behind a safe, stable Iraq.  And all Barack Obama had to do was keep a small US force there to keep safe and stable what we had fought to make safe and stable.  Obama failed as only the worst kind of FOOL can fail by ignoring his top general’s urgent warnings and pleas to keep a force in Iraq:

WASHINGTON, Feb 2 2009 (IPS) – CENTCOM commander Gen. David Petraeus, supported by Defence Secretary Robert Gates, tried to convince President Barack Obama that he had to back down from his campaign pledge to withdraw all U.S. combat troops from Iraq within 16 months at an Oval Office meeting Jan. 21.

But Obama informed Gates, Petraeus and Joint Chiefs Chairman Adm. Mike Mullen that he wasn’t convinced and that he wanted Gates and the military leaders to come back quickly with a detailed 16-month plan, according to two sources who have talked with participants in the meeting.

Obama’s decision to override Petraeus’s recommendation has not ended the conflict between the president and senior military officers over troop withdrawal, however. There are indications that Petraeus and his allies in the military and the Pentagon, including Gen. Ray Odierno, now the top commander in Iraq, have already begun to try to pressure Obama to change his withdrawal policy.

A network of senior military officers is also reported to be preparing to support Petraeus and Odierno by mobilising public opinion against Obama’s decision.

Petraeus was visibly unhappy when he left the Oval Office, according to one of the sources. A White House staffer present at the meeting was quoted by the source as saying, “Petraeus made the mistake of thinking he was still dealing with George Bush instead of with Barack Obama.”

Petraeus, Gates and Odierno had hoped to sell Obama on a plan that they formulated in the final months of the Bush administration that aimed at getting around a key provision of the U.S.-Iraqi withdrawal agreement signed envisioned re-categorising large numbers of combat troops as support troops. That subterfuge was by the United States last November while ostensibly allowing Obama to deliver on his campaign promise.

Do you want to know who broke the law and then left a ruined country that is completely going to pot now?

Barry Hussein Obama, that’s who.  Even the fool’s own damn LAWYERS told him that what he was doing was illegal and criminal.  But the thug in chief was above the law.

Obama’s reckless action in Libya prompted even a DEMOCRAT to say this about false messiah Obama:

Representative Lynn Woolsey charged the President of showing “contempt” for the Constitution, and insulting the intelligence of the American people.  Woolsey made the following statement: “The Obama Administration’s argument is one that shows contempt for the Constitution and for the executive’s co-equal branch of government, the United States Congress.  To say that our aggressive bombing of Libya does not rise to the level of ‘hostilities’ flies in the face of common sense and is an insult to the intelligence of the American people.  This act must not stand, because we can’t afford another full-blown war—the ones we’re already fighting are bankrupting us morally and fiscally.  Let those who support the military campaign against Libya make their case, in an open debate culminating with a vote in the U.S. Congress.  The American people deserve nothing less.”

And yes, the criminal fascist thug Obama DID what he ACCUSED George Bush of doing when he attacked Libya without bothering to get ANY Congressional approval:

Senator Obama, taking a cheap shot at then-President Bush:

Barack Obama: “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.

“As Commander-in-Chief, the President does have a duty to protect and defend the United States,” Obama continued. “In instances of self-defense, the President would be within his constitutional authority to act before advising Congress or seeking its consent. History has shown us time and again, however, that military action is most successful when it is authorized and supported by the Legislative branch.”

Do you remember being attacked by Libya?  Did the Libyans invade us?  I mean, maybe I was just asleep when it happened or something.  Otherwise, Barack Obama ought to be impeached, and the single witness against him should be … Barack Obama.  Barack Obama trampled all over the Constitution according to none other than … that’s right, Barack Obama.

George Bush got Congress’ approval before BOTH of his attacks on Afghanistan and Iraq.

And not only did Obama’s adventure in Libya NOT have the approval of Congress, but it also has less approval than ANY US military action in the last four decades going back to Vietnam.

And just what in the hell made our Idiot-in-Chief decide to be the first president in the sorry history of Gaddafi’s forty-plus years of abusing his own people to shake hands with the monster?

Do you see what a meandering idiot this guy is?

So having just taken that trip down memory lane, let’s see what the uberliberal leftist snot rag the Los Angeles Times has to say about the hellhole that Libya has become under Obama’s hypocritical and incompetent watch:

U.S. intervention in Libya now seen as cautionary tale
By Paul Richter,  Christi Parsons
June 27, 2014, 4:00 AM|Reporting from Washington

  • SHARELINES
    3 years after U.S. military intervention, Libya has become what U.S. officials dread most
    As the U.S. considers a limited intervention in Iraq, the experience in Libya is seen as a cautionary tale
    More than 50,000 people, including refugee and migrants, have flooded to Europe through Libya’s porous borders

A group of U.S. diplomats arrived in Libya three years ago to a memorable reception: a throng of cheering men and women who pressed in on the startled group “just to touch us and thank us,” recalled Susan Rice, President Obama’s national security advisor.

The Libyans were emotional because the U.S. and its allies had toppled leader Moammar Kadafi in a military campaign that averted a feared slaughter of Kadafi’s foes. Obama administration officials called the international effort, accomplished with no Western casualties, a “model intervention.”

But in three years Libya has turned into the kind of place U.S. officials most fear: a lawless land that attracts terrorists, pumps out illegal arms and drugs and destabilizes its neighbors.

Now, as Obama considers a limited military intervention in Iraq, the Libya experience is seen by many as a cautionary tale of the unintended damage big powers can inflict when they aim for a limited involvement in an unpredictable conflict.

“If Iraq and Afghanistan are examples of overkill and overreach, Libya is the reverse case, where you do too little and get an unacceptable result,” said Brian Katulis, a Middle East specialist at the Center for American Progress, a think tank. “The lesson is that a low tolerance of risk can have its costs.”

Though they succeeded in their military effort, the United States and its North Atlantic Treaty Organization allies fell short in the broader goal of putting Libya on a path toward democracy and stability. Exhausted after a decade of war and mindful of the failures in Iraq, U.S. officials didn’t want to embark on another nation-building effort in an oil-rich country that seemed to pose no threat to Western security.

But by limiting efforts to help the new Libyan government gain control over the country, critics say, the U.S. and its allies have inadvertently helped turn Libya into a higher security threat than it was before the military intervention.

Libya has become North Africa’s most active militant sanctuary, at the center of the resurgent threat that Obama warned about in a May address at West Point. A 2012 terrorist attack against the U.S. diplomatic compound in Benghazi killed four Americans, including Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens.

Arms trafficking from Libya “is fueling conflict and insecurity — including terrorism — on several continents,” an expert panel reported to the United Nations Security Council in February. Weapons smuggled out of Libya have been used by insurgents in Mali, by Boko Haram terrorists in Nigeria and by Palestinian militants in the Gaza Strip.

More than 50,000 people, including refugees from Syria and migrants from North Africa, have flooded into Europe through Libya’s porous borders, sharpening the continent’s immigration crisis.

The latest U.S. State Department travel warning portrays Libya as a society in near-collapse, beset by crime, terrorism, factional fighting, government failure and the wide availability of portable antiaircraft weapons that can shoot down commercial airplanes.

U.S. officials, now scrambling to reverse Libya’s downward spiral, say blame rests with the Libyans who took control of a country that has proved more dysfunctional than expected.

[…]

Some observers are warning that the administration eventually may be forced to do more. A Rand Corp. report this spring predicted that if Libya’s problems continue to worsen, another NATO intervention might be required.

“Libya is a lesson about the risks,” said Robert Danin, a longtime U.S. diplomat in the Middle East who warned about the risks of ensuing chaos. “With nation-building in disrepute, there’s a tendency now to want to declare victory and move on. But interventions can’t be done neatly.”

Here’s the money quote:

“If Iraq and Afghanistan are examples of overkill and overreach, Libya is the reverse case, where you do too little and get an unacceptable result,” said Brian Katulis, a Middle East specialist at the Center for American Progress, a think tank. “The lesson is that a low tolerance of risk can have its costs.”

That’s precisely what Obama did across the Middle East: he declared victory and moved on.  It’s what he did in Iraq in spite of the fact that he refused to deploy ANY security force whatsoever; it’s what he did in Libya after he bombed the country into rioting and terrorism that led to the Benghazi debacle and Obama’s cover-up of that debacle; it’s what he did in Syria after his weakness-personified “red line” and his deal with Putin that secured Assad’s power-grip and ultimately led to the rise of ISIS that is owning Obama right now.  Again and again, Obama declared victory and moved on, having done little or nothing.  He assured us that al Qaeda – which is now larger, more powerful, wealthier and controls more territory than EVER in it’s history – was “decimated” and “on the run.”  But they WEREN’T running; they were running their FLAG up over OUR embassies!!!  And Obama declared that ISIS was “JV” and that just because they dressed up in Laker’s uniforms didn’t make them Kobe Bryant.  When we can now see that it’s OBAMA who is “JV” and ISIS is looking like Kobe Bryant at the very top of his game in comparison to anything our weak president is doing.

Obama lied to you, America: you can’t eat your cake and have it, too.  We either fight to win or we lose and ultimately we die.  Those are out choices.

Whether in Iraq, or Libya, or anywhere ELSE you want to name, “worst-case scenario” is now becoming the normal state of affairs under this spectacularly failed presidency.

The point is this: Bush went on the offensive and there are those who argue that he failed.  Mind you, Bush left office with a JUST A SMALL FRACTION OF THE FORCE that Obama escalated Afghanistan into and was responsible for about a fifth of the casualties suffered in Afghanistan and HE WON IN IRAQ UNTIL OBAMA PISSED VICTORY AWAY (see also here and here).  And here for what I predicted back in 2011.

Obama’s “red line” fiasco turned into a bloodbath in Syria.  Obama’s complete withdrawal from and abandonment of Iraq turned into the largest terrorist caliphate the world has ever seen.  And it will be coming at us soon because they’ve SAID it would be coming:

[The United States] intercepted a letter written from Al-Zawahiri to the leader of Al Qaeda in Iraq. The letter described four stages that they would engage in: drive the Americans out, establish a caliphate in Bahgdad, use that base to attack other countries, attack Israel.

And as Obama has – as a result of his “policy” – utterly abandoned the Middle East to chaos and terrorism and murder – it is now obvious that Obama has failed FAR WORSE than Bush or any other president who ever lived.

Did you notice that Susan Rice was there again, she who is Obama’s top liar of choice first in Benghazi and more recently in the Bowe Bergdahl trade-your-soul and your five captured terrorist generals for a worthless turd deal???

I also can’t help but laugh that the same damn fool president who caused such a humanitarian crisis in Libya has also caused a similar one on our very own border with his ridiculously failed morally idiotic policies.

Somehow I remember the mainstream media propaganda that is our “journalism” today going ape poop over the Bush administration prediction that “we’ll be greeted as liberators” line.  But where have they been in the three years since Obama’s reckless, criminal and incompetent action in Libya broke down all civilized structures in Libya?  NOWHERE.  Because if you’re a reporter today, you view yourself as serving your messiah Obama and the Ultimate Cause of liberalism and secular humanism.  And you are willing to lie for your god and for your cause because you believe the ends justify the means.

George Bush essentially won the Iraq War in 21 days.  That’s how long it took for the air power to cripple Iraq’s ability to wage war and for US troops to largely secure the most vital parts of the country.  The rest of it was the attempt to “build and hold.”  Obama didn’t bother with that in Libya.  Hell, he didn’t even bother with it in Iraq.  As Jonah Goldberg pointed out:

Hillary Clinton has defined leadership in a democracy as a relay race: “You run the best race you can run; you hand off the baton.” Obama was handed a baton he didn’t want, so he dropped it.

Which is to say that even by Hillary Clinton’s standard, Barack Obama was a complete, unmitigated FAILURE who screwed America horribly in Iraq.  Obama lost what had been won at great cost because he didn’t like the baton he was held and threw it away like it was a piece of trash even as he claimed credit for the victory that he was about to piss away with his abject fool stupidity.

When you secure something, you stay there to make sure it STAYS secured.  That’s one of the great lessons that we learned in Vietnam.  We would take a hill at bloody cost, like “Hamburger Hill, and then withdraw a day after we took it to allow the communists to occupy it all over again.  We learned not to do that by paying a terrible price for our stupidity.  Only to have Barack Obama UN-learn it for us so we get Vietnam all over again.

At this point I submit that there is only one thing left to try regarding the Middle East: the World War II strategy.

In World War II we did not concern ourselves with “collateral damage.”  If you were a civilian and you were sitting on a Nazi tank, too damn bad for you.

We FIREBOMBED Dresden.  We killed something like 135,000 people.

We FIREBOMBED Tokyo.  We killed about 100,000 people – nearly as many as both the two atomic bombs combined did.

We were able to do that because we were a people who had something to live for, something to fight for, and therefore something to kill our enemies for.

We HAVE to respond to terrorist attacks.  And frankly at the same time, we’re simply not prepared any more – for various reasons including sheer exhaustion – to conquer, hold and rebuild.

All that is left is to bomb the populations that allow terrorism to fester into the stone age.  And if they start to get nasty again, bomb the rubble into smaller particles of rubble.  And DON’T GO IN.  LEAVE THEM to the consequences of their evil ideology.

Turn Afghanistan into “Lake Afghanistan” if that is what it takes to end the scourge of Islamic violence.  Because at this point, if these people are going to act like cockroaches, they need to be STOMPED like cockroaches.  And we don’t need to send in troops as long as we’ve got a big enough fly swatter from the air and our naval platforms out at sea.

I truly believe that if the message – the clear, consistent message regardless of president or party – was, “If you threaten us or our interests, we will bring the fire of hell to you, to your women and to your children,” terrorism would become a lot less popular.  All these Muslims would have to see is that yes, we DO mean business and we mean it in a very painful way.  But as it is now, there is no down-side to fostering terrorism whatsoever.  We do these precise, surgical strikes to avoid actually hurting anybody.  And all our enemies have to do is put a hand-lettered sign that reads “Baby milk factory” and our destruction of a weapons-of-mass-destruction facility becomes a war crime:

One of [CNN reporter Peter] Arnett’s most controversial reports during the Gulf War was a report on how the coalition had bombed a baby milk factory. Shortly after the report, an Air Force spokesman stated “Numerous sources have indicated that [the factory] is associated with biological warfare production”. Later the same day, Colin Powell stated “It was a biological weapons facility, of that we are sure”. White House spokesman Marlin Fitzwater stated “That factory is, in fact, a production facility for biological weapons” and “The Iraqis have hidden this facility behind a façade of baby-milk production as a form of disinformation.”

The image of a crudely made hand-painted sign reading “Baby Milk” in English and Arabic in front of the factory, and a lab coat dressed in a suit containing stitched lettering reading “BABY MILK PLANT IRAQ” only served to further the perception that purportedly civilian targets were simply being made to look like that by Saddam Hussein, and that Arnett was duped by the Iraqi government. The sign appeared to have been added by the Iraqis before the camera crews arrived as a cheap publicity ploy. Newsweek called the incident a “ham-handed attempt to depict a bombed-out biological-weapons plant near Baghdad as a baby-formula factory.”

Arnett remained firm. He had toured the plant in the previous August, and was insistent that “Whatever else it did, it did produce infant formula”. Described as being a veritable fortress by the Pentagon[citation needed], the plant, Arnett reported, had only one guard at the gate and a lot of powdered baby milk. “That’s as much as I could tell you about it … [I]t looked innocent enough from what we could see.” A CNN camera crew had been invited to tour this plant in August 1990. They videotaped workers wearing new uniforms with lettering in English reading, “Iraq Baby Milk Plant”.

If we’re not going to fight back – and fight back like we really mean it – we truly deserve to die.

I mean, my God, you pathetic, apathetic coward herd animals, just bleat until you die like the sheep you are.

Here’s another thing: the terrorists ARE fighting for a cause that they believe is very much worth dying for.  Versus us: what the hell are WE fighting for?  Are we fighting for Obama?  Are we fighting for political correctness?  Are we fighting for the determination to not allow God or any transcendent cause whatsoever to interfere with our abortion and our homosexual sodomy???

If I had a son, I would urge him with all the passion I had not to waste his life for this country at this point.  I served, as did my father, my father, my grandfather and my grandfather’s father before me.  But we served a very different nation which did not piss in the Eye of God.

We are losing the war on terror because secular humanist liberals like Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton have eradicated ANY reason whatsoever to actually fight for our own worthless lives – and if you believe in abortion your life is worthless by definition because you acknowledge that you began as the kind of thing that could have and even SHOULD HAVE been killed as a parasite or a disease – and our own worthless values.

We need to either figure out what it is that is worth fighting for in our age of secular humanism or we need to go out “not with a bang but a whimper” as the T.S. Elliot poem predicted we would.

Because in the age of Obama, a whimper is about all we’ve got.

Obama’s policy of inaction, of too-little-action-way-too-late, of bogus “red lines,” of retreat, of withdrawal, of apologizing, of weakening America and broadcasting the message of weakness to the world, has resulted in the world erupting into a firestorm that we now cannot put out with our meaningless and frankly depraved values.

Our own pathetic secular humanist values have been used against us and turned into a weapon of our own mass destruction.  We COULD fight, but as morally insane secular humanists we put on a strait jacket – and now we’re helpless while our rabid enemies are coming at us with the passion that comes from having a powerful cause that we long-since abandoned as a post-Christian culture.

And that’s why Armageddon is coming.

 

Advertisements

Obama Fiddled, Stonewalled And Lied While Gulf Coast Drowned In Oil

October 11, 2010

When we find out the actual record of just how bad Obama failed us in the Gulf of Mexico during the BP oil spill disaster, we should all be enraged.

First of all, we now find that:

The Obama administration blocked efforts by government scientists to tell the public just how bad the Gulf oil spill could become and committed other missteps that raised questions about its competence and candor during the crisis, according to a commission appointed by the president to investigate the disaster.”

And we now find that:

The Obama administration failed to act upon or fully inform the public of its own worst-case estimates of the amount of oil gushing from the blown-out BP well, slowing response efforts and keeping the American people in the dark for weeks about the size of the disaster, according to preliminary reports from the presidential commission investigating the accident.

You get the sense that Obama fiddled (I suppose the modern equivalent of ‘fiddling’ by incompetent tyrants today would be ‘golfing’) while the Gulf Coast drowned.

Disaster in the Gulf: 52 Days and Counting …
Published June 10, 2010

The Obama administration claims it has been on top of the Gulf oil spill disaster since “day one.” Here’s a look at what the president and administration have been doing every day since the Deepwater Horizon rig exploded April 20, triggering the massive spill. The following daily updates are based on a review of White House schedules, news releases and news coverage and do not cover every activity in the Gulf or in Washington:

June 10

In the Gulf: BP awaited the arrival of a second vessel to help pump more oil from the ruptured well up to the surface — the containment cap was capturing 630,000 gallons a day, but the second vessel is expected to double that. Meanwhile, local business owners and workers who have filed damage claims were complaining that BP is slow to respond and not paying them enough for their losses.

At the White House: President Obama was scheduled to meet in the afternoon with the families of those killed on the Deepwater Horizon oil rig. He was also receiving a briefing on the oil spill in the morning and meeting with business leaders and energy experts to discuss energy reform after his meeting with the families.

June 9

In the Gulf: BP said it is dialing back a prediction by its chief operating officer that the leaking oil would be reduced to a “relative trickle” by next week. COO Doug Suttles now says it will take more time to reach that point.

At the White House: Coast Guard Adm. Thad Allen, who is heading the U.S. oil spill response, said the containment operation is now catching up to 630,000 gallons (2.3 million liters) a day and that the amount could nearly double by next week as processing of the captured oil is expanded.

June 8

In the Gulf: While the wellhead has been capped, oil that was still leaking and oil that has already leaked was separating and spreading out along the Gulf shore. Coast Guard Adm. Thad Allen warned the day before that the slick is no longer a “large, monolithic spill.” Rather, it is an “aggregation of hundreds or thousands of patches of oil that are going a lot of different directions.” Local officials continued to express concerns about the impact the spill would have on the economy as tourism season begins.

At the White House: President Obama was receiving a briefing on the spill in the morning before leaving to conduct a “tele-town hall meeting” on health care issues concerning seniors. He and first lady Michelle Obama were holding a congressional picnic at the White House later in the day.

June 7

In the Gulf: Coast Guard Adm. Thad Allen reported that the cap on the wellhead was capturing 460,000 gallons of oil a day — up from 250,000 on Friday. At that rate, the cap could be diverting as little as 37 percent or as much as 77 percent of the oil leaking from the Gulf floor. Patches of oil were spreading out all along the Gulf region. Florida’s Panama City Beach was expected to get hit by oil within 72 hours, while Pensacola Beach continued to have tar balls wash ashore.

At the White House: President Obama and top federal officials were briefed in Washington by Allen on the BP spill. The president said the Gulf region will “bounce back” from the crisis and be “stronger than ever.” Obama was scheduled to participate in a high school graduation ceremony in Kalamazoo, Mich., later in the evening.

June 6

In the Gulf: BP CEO Tony Hayward said the container collected 10,500 barrels in 24 hours. Mississippi Gov. Haley Barbour said the spill is killing tourism though the beaches in his state are not suffering badly from the oil. National Incident Commander Adm. Thad Allen told morning news shows that progress is being made but the relief well is the ultimate solution.

At the White House: More Coast Guard are being sent to the region for direct oversight of the contractors. Allen said he reports to Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano and President Obama but he is the on-scene coordinator and he makes the calls in the gulf.

June 5

In the Gulf: BP worked on its latest attempt to tame the runaway well by capping it and trying to siphon off some of the crude. The damaged rig has disgorged at least 22 million gallons of crude in the Gulf.

At the White House: In his weekly radio and Internet address recorded from the Gulf, President Obama promised to fight the oil spill and maintained his increasingly forceful tone toward BP.

June 4

In the Gulf: BP engineers adjusted a sophisticated cap over the Gulf oil gusher, trying to collect the crude now fouling four states. Engineers hoped to close several open vents on the cap throughout the day in the latest attempt to contain the oil.

At the White House: President Obama was in Louisiana, his second trip in a week and the third since the disaster unfolded.

June 3

In the Gulf: BP CEO Tony Hayward hailed the company’s work after underwater robots successfully sheared off a busted oil pipe spewing millions of gallons of crude into the Gulf, telling reporters that the company would have a “fully sealed” containment system in place by the end of June.

At the White House: The White House announced President Obama will return to the Louisiana Gulf Coast Friday, his third trop to the region since the Deepwater Horizon oil rig explosion on April 20.

June 2

In the Gulf: BP’s effort to contain the oil gusher hit a snag when a saw became stuck in a thick pipe on a blown-out well in the Gulf of Mexico. Coast Guard Adm. Thad Allen said the goal was to free the saw and finish the cut later in the day.

At the White House: The Justice Department has announced it started criminal and civil probes into the spill, although the department did not name specific targets for prosecution.

June 1

In the Gulf: BP is moving to start its first major pipe cut as soon as Wednesday, after which they will attempt to place a cap-like containment device over the leaking riser that would siphon the mixture to the surface.

At the White House: President Obama gave the leaders of an independent commission investigating the Gulf oil spill marching orders to thoroughly examine the disaster and its causes to ensure that the nation never faces such a catastrophe again. He said if any laws were broken, people will be prosecuted.

May 31

In the Gulf: Transocean, which owned the rig that it leased to BP, said it would like its liability limited. The beach at Grand Isle, La., which was hit with oil from the spill, and other areas along the coast were opened but swimming and fishing was prohibited.

At the White House: The White House confirmed that its national incident commander Thad Allen will begin on Tuesday to hold daily press briefings from the scene of the spill. The Justice Department announced Attorney General Eric Holder and U.S. attorneys will meet with state attorneys general and hold a press conference on Tuesday.

May 30

In the Gulf: BP says it will try another containment effort beginning on Monday or Tuesday.

At the White House: Obama remained in Chicago for the Memorial Day weekend vacation. The White House released a summary of a discussion between Obama and chief liaison Thad Allen, which said the government is tripling its environmental cleanup team in areas affected by the spill. Environmental adviser Carol Browner appeared on NBC’s “Meet the Press.” She said 150 government scientists are on the case.

May 29

In the Gulf: BP offered few details on its latest bid to plug the well as progress was difficult to measure from BP’s “spillcam” of mud, gas and oil billowing from the seafloor.

At the White House: Obama returns to Chicago for his Memorial Day weekend vacation.

May 28

In the Gulf: BP continues to try the “top kill” method, but also tries shooting rubber and other man-made “junk” into the well.

At the White House: Obama tours the Louisiana coastline. He says the federal government is treating the spill as its highest priority — he says the government has deployed 1,400 National Guard troops, 1,400 vessels and 3 million feet of boom

May 27

In the Gulf: BP continues to shoot heavy mud into the well, a process that appears to be making progress.

At the White House: Several developments related to the spill emerge in Washington. Minerals Management Service director Elizabeth Birnbaum resigns. The Obama administration announces new restrictions on offshore oil drilling, canceling and delaying certain projects. Obama holds a major press conference in which he declares the federal government is “in charge” and pledges to stop the leak. Obama leaves for a family vacation in Chicago at night.

May 26

In the Gulf: BP attempts to use the “top kill” method to shoot mud into the well. Meanwhile, BP says 25,000 claims for economic losses have been submitted, and that it has already paid close to $30 million.

At the White House: Obama visits a solar facility in Fremont, Calif.

May 25

In the Gulf: BP agrees to show a live feed of the “top kill” procedure under pressure from the Obama administration.

At the White House: Obama meets Italian President Giorgio Napolitano, then travels to San Francisco for fundraisers for Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., and the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee.

May 24

In the Gulf: BP continues to prepare for the “top kill” procedure, as oil moves deeper into the Louisiana marshes.

At the White House: Obama meets with Lebanese Prime Minister Saad Hariri. Interior Secretary Ken Salazar and Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano lead a Senate delegation to the Gulf region.

May 23

In the Gulf: BP says it will take at least another two days before crews can start to implement the “top kill” plan to plug the leaking well. BP continues to siphon out some oil from the leak.

At the White House: Obama orders top administration officials back to the Gulf to monitor the response.

May 22

In the Gulf: BP says it intends to continue using chemical dispersants after the EPA raises concerns about their long-term effects. Oil continues to wash ashore.

At the White House: Obama announces a presidential commission to investigate the disaster. He says in his weekly radio address that the panel, which is given six months to complete its work, is intended to figure out the “root causes” of the explosion and figure out how to make offshore drilling safer. The president speaks at the West Point commencement ceremonies in the morning.

May 21

In the Gulf: BP continues to prepare for the “top kill” procedure, while officials find animals covered in oil.

At the White House: No public events.

May 20

In the Gulf: BP continues to siphon out oil from the busted well. The company begins preparing for a new plan to stop the oil leak called a “top kill.” The plan involves injecting mud into the top of the well and then sealing the area with cement.

At the White House: No public events.

May 19

In the Gulf: U.S. officials reportedly hold talks with Cuban officials on response efforts amid concerns that the oil slick is spreading even farther.

At the White House: Obama welcomes Mexican President Felipe Calderon to Washington. Both heads of state publicly criticize Arizona’s new immigration law. The president hosts a state dinner for Calderon at night.

May 18

In the Gulf: A U.S. official says it is “increasingly likely” the oil will be swept out to the Florida coastline.

At the White House: Obama visits a factory in Youngstown, Ohio.

May 17

In the Gulf: BP claims the tube is sucking out more than 42,000 gallons a day from the Gulf floor to a tanker ship. That’s still a fraction of the oil leaking out from the well.

At the White House: Obama hosts the NCAA tournament champion University of Connecticut women’s basketball team.

May 16

In the Gulf: BP crews successfully hook the tube to the oil pipe to siphon oil to a tanker ship. Researchers say the oil has entered a current that could carry it toward the Keys.

At the White House: No publicn events.

May 15

In the Gulf: BP struggles to install the tube into the oil pipe, but expresses optimism in the plan. The company continues to drill a relief well, which is considered the permanent, though time-consuming, solution to the problem. The process is about halfway done.

At the White House: Obama speaks at the National Peace Officers Memorial Service. He delivers his weekly radio address on “Wall Street Reform.”

May 14

In the Gulf: BP uses robots to try to insert a small tube into the leaking pipe on the Gulf floor, in an attempt to seal it off and siphon oil to the surface.

At the White House: Obama honors TOP COPS award recipients at the White House.

May 13

In the Gulf: BP prepares to suck oil away from the spewing well before trying to place the smaller containment box on top.

At the White House: Obama flies to Buffalo, N.Y., for a tour and town hall meetings at a local factory. He later travels to New York City for a Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee event.

May 12

In the Gulf: Crews lower the new, smaller containment box to the Gulf of Mexico floor.

At the White House: Obama meets with Afghan President Hamid Karzai at the White House, then takes questions from the press.

May 11

In the Gulf: Response crews replenish fuel and water in preparation for long-term relief efforts.

At the White House: Reports surface that the Obama administration has proposed splitting up the Minerals Management Service, the agency responsible for overseeing offshore drilling. One arm would be tasked with inspecting rigs and enforcing regulations while the other would oversee drilling leases.

May 10

In the Gulf: BP announces it will try to place a smaller dome over the leaking oil well in the Gulf of Mexico.

At the White House: Obama meets with Cabinet officials and senior staff at the White House to discuss the oil spill response.

May 9

In the Gulf: BP officials say, after the 100-ton box fails to stop the leak, that they may try to do the same thing with a smaller box. Approximately 3.5 million gallons of oil have spilled into the Gulf at this point.

At the White House: Obama speaks to graduates at Hampton University in Virginia.

May 8

In the Gulf: Balls of tar begin washing up on Alabama’s beaches. Meanwhile, the 100-ton box meant to capture the leak is not working.

At the White House: Obama delivers his weekly radio address on holding insurance companies more accountable.

May 7

In the Gulf: Robots place a 100-ton box over the oil well on the ocean floor, in an unprecedented attempt to stop the flow. Officials expand the coastal area closed to fishing due to the spill.

At the White House: No public events.

May 6

In the Gulf: Officials confirm that oil has made landfall on the Louisiana coastline. BP prepares to lower a giant box over the oil well to capture the leak.

At the White House: Obama participates in a national security meeting on Afghanistan and Afghanistan.

May 5

In the Gulf: BP caps one of the three oil leaks, though thousands of barrels of oil continue to leak into the Gulf.

At the White House: Obama attends a Cinco de Mayo celebration at the White House.

May 4

In the Gulf: Winds in the Gulf of Mexico calm down, giving crews a chance to lay down boom by the shorelines. BP tries to cap a small leak while preparing to place a containment dome over the main leak.

At the White House: Obama speaks at the Business Council in Washington. There he pledges to minimize economic damage from the oil spill.

May 3

In the Gulf: BP’s executive says crews are reducing the amount of oil reaching the surface by using dispersants. He pledges that BP will pay “all necessary and appropriate” costs associated with the clean-up.

At the White House: The administration, holding a meeting with BP executives, presses BP to explain how it will cover those clean-up costs. The president has a conference call with Allen and local officials to discuss the response.

May 2

In the Gulf: More vessels and response teams are deployed. Fishing is shut down from the Mississippi River to the Florida panhandle.

At the White House: Obama travels to the Gulf coast to survey the damage and meet with local officials. He calls the spill a “potentially unprecedented” disaster and pledges a “relentless” federal response. Obama is later briefed on the attempted Times Square bombing.

May 1

In the Gulf: Two more offshore platforms are shut down in the Gulf of Mexico as a precaution. Crews continue using dispersants by the leak. The slick from the explosion has tripled in size. Coast Guard Commandant Adm. Thad Allen is put in charge.

At the White House: Obama speaks at the University of Michigan commencement. Obama later attends the White House Correspondents Dinner.

April 30

In the Gulf: Oil reportedly begins to wash ashore in Louisiana’s wetlands. High winds make coastal protection efforts difficult.

At the White House: Obama again addresses the spill in public remarks. He suspends new offshore oil drilling but reaffirms his commitment to domestic oil production. The president order an immediate review on rig safety and sends top administration officials to the Gulf coast.

April 29

In the Gulf: The Coast Guard says the oil spill could soon reach landfall, while mitigation efforts continue.

At the White House: Obama, in his first public remarks on the spill, pledges to deploy “every single available resource” in response. He speaks with the governors from five Gulf states, while Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano declares a “spill of national significance.”

April 28

In the Gulf: Crews start to set fire to select sections of the spill. The Coast Guard reports that it has found a new leak, and updates its estimate of the spill from 1,000 to 5,000 barrels a day.

At the White House: Obama talks about the economy in Missouri. He later travels to Illinois to talk about financial reform. He is briefed on Air Force One about the spill on the way back to Washington.

April 27

In the Gulf: More boats are deployed to the Gulf. Coast Guard officials say they’re considering lighting the spill on fire.

At the White House: The Obama administration launches an investigation into the explosion. Administration officials meet with BP executives. Obama meets with the newly formed debt and deficit commission, then travels to Iowa to speak at an energy facility.

April 26

In the Gulf: About 15,000 gallons of dispersants and 21,000 feet of boom are used at the spill site to mitigate the damage from the leak.

At the White House: Obama greets the New York Yankees at the White House, then speaks at an entrepreneurship summit.

April 25

In the Gulf: The Coast Guard estimates up to 1,000 barrels are leaking in the Gulf every day in the wake of the blast. Dozens of boats and hundreds of response workers are deployed to contain the spill.

At the White House: Obama leaves Asheville to attend a memorial service for the West Virginia miners who died in the Upper Big Branch explosion.

April 24

In the Gulf: The Coast Guard discovers oil leaking from the ocean floor.

At the White House: Obama plays golf in North Carolina.

April 23

In the Gulf: The Coast Guard ends the search for the missing 11 workers, who are presumed dead, at the end of the day. The Coast Guard reports that oil does not appear to be leaking from the well head, though they are trying to contain what spilled in the explosion.

At the White House: Obama and the first family travel to Asheville, N.C., for vacation.

April 22

In the Gulf: The Deepwater Horizon rig sinks, while search-and-rescue efforts continue.

At the White House: Representatives from 16 federal agencies collaborate as part of a national response team to the Gulf disaster. Obama travels to New York City to discuss his financial regulatory bill. The president later holds a meeting in the Oval Office about the response to the oil rig tragedy. The White House releases a statement saying Obama is ensuring the government is offering “all assistance needed” in the rescue effort and in responding to the environmental impact.

April 21

In the Gulf: Coast Guard helicopters search for 11 missing oil rig workers.

At the White House: Obama meets with Senate Judiciary Committee members at the White House to discuss the Supreme Court vacancy. He later hosts a reception for G20 labor officials.

April 20

In the Gulf: An offshore oil drilling rig owned by Transocean and operated by BP explodes in the Gulf of Mexico nearly 50 miles of the Louisiana coast.

At the White House: The president returns to Washington from Los Angeles, where he was attending a set of Democratic fundraisers the night before.

And if that isn’t bad enough, the president added injury to incompetence.  Thanks to Obama’s incredible incompetence and failure as a president, more than 800,000 Americans are going to lose their jobs, according to a government report by the Environment and Public Works Committee.

… The noble Indian rode his horse up to the putrid brown muck that had once been known as the Gulf of Mexcico.  And he saw what President Barack Obama had allowed to happen to the majestic waters.  And he wept at the incompetence of the most evil American president since Democrat Andrew Jackson – who had ordered the genocidal march known as the Trail of Tears.

Upcoming Slaughter Of House Democrats Might Make 1994 Losses Seem Tame

April 9, 2010

The Washington Examiner provides a very good summary of a detail analysis of a polling expert.

On the positive side (for Democrats), it’s possible they could only lose 20 seats; but realistically, it’s far more likely that they will be utterly slaughtered than the scenario in which they only lose a few seats.

Could Democrats lose 79 House seats in November?
By: Chris Stirewalt
Political Editor
04/09/10 12:32 PM EDT

Nate Silver of 538.com today rejiggers his assessment of the midterm elections to reflect a bunch of new numbers that show Republicans with a bigger edge in the generic ballot.

If Republicans outperformed generic-ballot ratings, as they usually do, Silver projects a worst-case scenario for Democrats of 79 seats in the House switching from blue to red based on the surveys of Rasmussen Reports.

Silver puts the more likely scenario at 51 seats going to the GOP — 11 more than they need to take over the majority.

And while he holds out that much smaller Democratic losses are possible — say 20 or 30 seats — his warning to Democrats is that the worst case scenario is more likely to occur and is more catastrophic than previously imagined.

Worth reading.

“The point is not necessarily that these are the most likely scenarios — we certainly ought not to formulate a judgment based on Rasmussen polls alone, as the jury is still out on whether the substantial house effect they’ve displayed this cycle is a feature or a bug. But these sorts of scenarios are frankly on the table. If Democrats were to lose 50, 60, 70 or even more House seats, it would not totally shock me. Nor would it shock me if they merely lost 15, or 20. But their downside case could be very far down.”

If Democrats thought they would benefit by imposing health care by means of the vicious partisan tactic of reconciliation, they were wrong.  Following the passage of ObamaCare, Obama’s approval went into the toilet.

Here’s what top pollster Rasmussen had to say as of April 6:

Forty-six percent (46%) of voters not affiliated with either major party now prefer the Republican candidate, while 24% like the Democrat. These findings show little change from the previous survey. Last week, support among unaffiliateds for Democrats jumped six points, while support for Republicans held steady.

Two weeks after passage of the health care plan, 54% of the nation’s voters still favor repealing it, unchanged since Obama signed the bill into law.

CBS polling showed Obama hitting his lowest point EVER following the passage of ObamaCare.  Now Fox News’ polling shows that that anger against Obama has only increased; their numbers now show that Obama has just hit a new, lower, low.  And they show that the American people are more outraged over the partisan ObamaCare boondoggle than ever before.

It’s hard to say whether Obama ever succeeded in “spreading the wealth” around, given the fact that the percentage of rural or suburban homelessness has risen from 23 percent to 32 percent since last year under his watch.  But one thing is DAMN clear: Obama has spread the rage like no president ever has.  And this rage is “progressive,” too, in that it is progressively growing against Democrats.

Update, April 14, 2010: Did I say 79 seats?  The number could be 100 seats.

Sean Trende – who was one of the first who accurately saw a Scott Brown victory in Massachusetts – had this to say:

…I think those who suggest that the House is barely in play, or that we are a long way from a 1994-style scenario are missing the mark. A 1994-style scenario is probably the most likely outcome at this point. Moreover, it is well within the realm of possibility – not merely a far-fetched scenario – that Democratic losses could climb into the 80 or 90-seat range. The Democrats are sailing into a perfect storm of factors influencing a midterm election, and if the situation declines for them in the ensuing months, I wouldn’t be shocked to see Democratic losses eclipse 100 seats.

Trende sees the generic ballot between Republicans (red) and Democrats (blue) shaping up like this as we approach November, based on Obama’s “popularity”:

What a lovely looking map!  Unless you’re an unhinged liberal loon.  Then it becomes some kind of Rorschach test.

Not all conservative-open pollsters are seeing these kinds of numbers.  Frank Luntz on Hannity tonight said his projection as of right now was that Republicans would gain 35 House seats.  Nice, but not enough to fire Nancy Pelosi and take back the House of Representatives.

This is the attitude that conservatives need to be stoking: we have a historic opportunity to take back control of our government and undo a lot of the damage that Obama, Pelosi, and Reid did before it truly screws the country.  We shouldn’t be complacent, because it won’t just “happen”; we have to work for it.  Every conservative needs to start seeing himself or herself as their own precinct leader, and be “out there” as much as possible – by writing articles on blogs, or commenting on those articles; by registering people to vote; by keeping informed so he or she can inform others in a convincing manner; by attending tea party rallies; by writing letters and making phone calls; etc. – in order to take back our government and restore the Constitution.

Mainstream Media Touts $848 Billion Senate Health Bill, Ignores Actual Cost Of At LEAST $2.5 Trillion

November 20, 2009

Democrats have done a good job – along with the loyal participation of a leftwing propaganda machine – of projecting their takeover of the health care system as “only” costing a “mere” $848 billion.

They think the American people are dumb enough to buy their fraud, and maybe they are.

But the actual cost of this program over ten years of its actual implementation will be at least $2.5 trillion.  And that is $107.5 trillion more than we’ve got.

Updated November 19, 2009
Senate Health Bill Price Tag, Rosy Deficit Estimate Assailed as ‘Fantasy’

by FOXNews.com

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid claims that his health care bill costs about $848 billion in the first 10 years, well under President Obama’s $900 billion target. That’s for 10 years of revenue-gathering, but only six years of service.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid claims that his health care bill costs about $848 billion in the first 10 years, well under President Obama’s $900 billion target.

That’s for 10 years of revenue-gathering, but only six years of service, according to the analysis by the Congressional Budget Office.

Adding in expenses beyond the 10-year mark drastically skews the overall cost, making the $848 billion a mere fraction of the long-term price tag of overhauling America’s health care system — and that’s if no changes are made to the legislation during that time.

The additional claim touted by Senate Democrats — that the bill will reduce the deficit by $130 billion over the first 10 years — is also coming under fire as “fantasy.”

Republicans have countered the CBO estimate with a figure of their own: $2.5 trillion, an estimate that comes out of the Senate Budget Committee minority’s analysis of Reid’s plan.

“This is a lousy bill that’s going to cost American taxpayers like mad for the rest of our lives,” Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, a fierce critic of the health care legislation, told Fox News on Thursday.

Part of the problem with the CBO estimate is that it covers a 10-year period from 2010-2019 — however, the health care reform plan is not fully implemented until 2014. That means the federal government is raking in billions in taxes and savings for the first four years without spending on the new program. The $2.5 trillion estimate is for the 10-year window starting in 2014, after implementation of the program begins.

Under the timetable in the CBO estimate, the government spends $9 billion in the first four years, but $838 billion in the last six when the overhaul goes into full force.

The revenue significantly ramps up in the latter half of the decade to keep pace with spending, but the nearly $100 billion in deficit savings in the first four years is not necessarily in the piggy bank either.

Democrats are holding up estimates that show the second decade of health care reform yields even more deficit reduction.

President Obama said in a statement Wednesday night that the unveiling of the is a “critical milestone” and cited one estimate showing the second 10 years would yield up to $650 billion in deficit reduction.

Sen. Kent Conrad, D-N.D., chairman of the Senate Budget Committee, cited the same estimate, telling Fox News that Reid’s bill is “going in the right direction” and yields significant savings.

“That to me is the most encouraging part of this,” he said.

Budget analysts say that the early revenue cannot be fenced off, much like Social Security money is spent despite a trust fund for that purpose. The funding gets absorbed into the general federal budget, presumably to go toward reducing the deficit on a yearly basis.

However, this creates the possibility that Congress could spend that money twice, by using the up-front savings as fun money for new projects and then having to pay the bill for health care reform down the road. Holtz-Eakin called this a worst-case scenario.

“The government’s incapable of segregating funds. You can’t put the money in a cigar box and bury it behind the Treasury Department,” said Michael Tanner, senior fellow with the libertarian Cato Institute.

Tanner pointed to two other “gimmicks” that make the price seem smaller than it is.

One deals with the so-called “doctor fix,” which would be an act of Congress to ensure Medicare doctors don’t face steeps cuts in federal reimbursements. This would cost at least $210 billion over 10 years, and it’s a “fix” that Democrats are trying to separate from the health care reform bill
.

That alone erases the $130 billion in deficit savings claimed by the CBO’s latest health care estimate.

Tanner also pointed to the CLASS Act, a long-term care program in the bill that takes in billions in revenue early on but does not pay out in any significant way until the next decade.

“If you use honest accounting … then this bill’s not paid for,” Tanner said. “It’s smoke-and-mirrors accounting.”

The Budget Committee document estimating the actual cost to be $2.5 trillion over years five through 14 of the program also showed $126 billion in deficit reduction in that period. It estimated even more down the road.

But Holtz-Eakin called that “fiction,” since it relies on more than $1 trillion in cuts to Medicare and Medicaid.

He said there’s no way the government can sustain and increase those cuts and expect the program to work.

The biggest problem of all is that the CBO – regardless of how well-intentioned or “objective” it is – have routinely underestimated the costs of government programs – especially health-related government programs – by a factor of ten.

The Senate Democrat health bill includes the public option.  It guarantees a government takeover of healthcare.

We are talking about clear matters of life and death.  We are talking about 1/6th of the U.S. economy.  And Democrats are playing games of smoke and mirrors.  What they are doing is beyond unconscionable.

$1 trillion in cuts to Medicare?  Bye-bye, old people.  In the words of Obama adviser Robert Reich, “We’re going to let you die.”

Liberal Newsweek has it’s “Case for Killing Granny.”  Newsbusters points out:

For good measure the magazine also promises readers to explain “Why We Should Insure Illegals” and how “Health Reform Could Combat Crime” in related articles linked on the front page. More illegal immigration, fewer criminals and old people. What a deal!

Please don’t be so naive and so stupid as to believe that these people aren’t serious.  And I mean deadly serious.

Make no mistake: Democrats are voting for the national economic suicide of the United States, and for the deaths by medical-resource rationing of millions of Americans who otherwise would have lived.