By Larry Johnson
closeAuthor: Larry Johnson
Name: Larry Johnson
Email: larry_johnson@earthlink.net
Site: http://NoQuarterUSA.net
About: Larry C. Johnson is a former analyst at the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency, who moved subsequently in 1989 to the U.S. Department of State, where he served four years as the deputy director for transportation security, antiterrorism assistance training, and special operations in the State Department's Office of Counterterrorism. He left government service in October 1993 and set up a consulting business. He currently is the co-owner and CEO of BERG Associates, LLC (Business Exposure Reduction Group) and is an expert in the fields of terrorism, aviation security, and crisis and risk management, and money laundering investigations. Johnson is the founder and main author of No Quarter, a weblog that addresses issues of terrorism and intelligence and politics. NoQuarterUSA was nominated as Best Political Blog of 2008.[1] He has worked as a private consultant on issues of international terrorism and security for the U.S. Government and private companies. Johnson has appeared as a consultant and commentator in many major newspapers and news programs.[2]
Contents [hide]
1 Background
2 Views
2.1 1996
2.2 1998
2.3 1999
2.4 2000
2.5 2001
2.6 2003
2.6.1 Plame affair
2.7 2008
3 Notes
4 References
5 External links
[edit]Background
Larry Johnson moved to Washington, D.C. in 1979 to begin work on a Ph.D. at the American University. Although he completed successfully all coursework and comprehensive exams, he did not write a dissertation. In 1978 and in 1983-85 he worked in Latin America on community development projects as a community organizer. Returning to the United States in 1985 he joined the Central Intelligence Agency, thanks in part to a letter of recommendation from Republican Senator Orrin Hatch (R-UT) that helped to "open doors" for him at the Agency.[3] Johnson entered on duty at the CIA in September 1985 and was a classmate of Valerie Plame. Every member of that class was undercover. After a year in the Career Trainee program, which included a stint with the Afghan Task Force, Johnson was assigned as an analyst in the Middle America Caribbean Division in the Latin American Affairs Office of the Directorate of Intelligence. He received two Exceptional Performance awards and was promoted ultimately to Senior Regional Analyst for Central America.
Johnson remained undercover in the CIA until October 1989, when he resigned from the CIA and started a new job in the Office of Counter Terrorism at the Department of State. Johnson played an instrumental role in launching the Terrorism Rewards program international advertising campaign (working with Diplomatic Security officers Brad Smith and Michael Parks). [4] Johnson also was involved in a variety of crisis management response operations, including the release of hostages from Lebanon and liaison with the Pan Am 103 families. He left government service in October 1993 and started his own business as a consultant.
After leaving government service, Johnson became a frequent guest on many major television news shows when a question of terrorism came up. He was first interviewed by CNN following the capture of Carlos the Jackal. Johnson subsequently appeared on CNN, ABC's Nightline, CBS, the BBC, MSNBC, the Jim Lehrer News Hour, NBC, and NPR. In December of 1999, for example, Johnson was hired by NBC to serve as its terrorist expert for the Y2000 and was in Time Square with Tom Brokaw and Katie Couric ("a lot of fun and the best way to see in the New Year"). Johnson also was hired in January 2002 as a Fox News Analyst and remained under contract until February 2003.
Since 1994 a significant focus of Johnson's consulting work has been with the U.S. military special operations forces in scripting and conducting military counter terrorism exercises. He traveled under orders from the U.S. military to Iraq in May 2006 to work on a short term project.
A registered Republican who supported President Bush in 2000, Johnson became a strong critic of the Bush administration in May 2003 for its conduct of the war in Iraq and, a few months later, for its role in the outing of CIA operative Valerie Plame.[5] He was also featured in the 2004 political documentary Outfoxed: Rupert Murdoch's War on Journalism. Since Robert Novak's controversial disclosure of Valerie Plame as a CIA operative in July 2003, Johnson has contributed to public discourse on intelligence matters, often sparking further controversy. He has been interviewed by both the mass media and the alternative media and published commentaries on a variety of issues, including the Plame affair, the controversy concerning Mary McCarthy, and the resignation of Porter Goss as Director of Central Intelligence.
[edit]Views
This article or section may contain an inappropriate mixture of prose and timeline.
Please help convert this timeline into prose or, if necessary, a list.
[edit]1996
In 1996, Johnson noted that terrorism worldwide was on the decline. "Terrorist incidents [both internationally and in the US] have fallen to levels not seen since the 1970s. Whether measured by the number of incidents, the number of fatalities, or the number of groups, raw statistics demonstrate that the level of terrorist violence has declined since the mid-1980s. In fact, the evidence suggests terrorism was more widespread and deadly 10 years ago."[6]
He also wrote an op-ed piece for the New York Times suggesting that the newer and more deadly terrorist threat to the U.S. was embodied by "networks of terrorists, mostly foreign, working within its borders." Exemplifying this threat was Ramzi Yousef, one of the masterminds behind the 1993 attack on the World Trade Center. In the article, Johnson suggests that enhanced cooperation between intelligence agencies, particularly the FBI and CIA, is mandatory to meet the growing threat of terror networks.[7]
[edit]1998
In 1998, Johnson argued that while overall terrorism was declining, the threat from bin Laden and al-Qaeda should be the focus of American counterterrorism policy:
The nature of the threat posed by Bin Ladin is highlighted by my final chart, number 7. Osama Bin Ladin and individuals associated with him have killed and wounded more Americans than any other group. This chart also illustrates that groups such as Hamas and the Tamil Tigers (LTTE) prior to 1998 have killed more foreigners in the anti-US terrorist attacks. If we take into account the bombings of the US Embassies in Kenya and Tanzania, Osama's status as the most lethal terrorist is certain.[8]
In addition, he told USA Today that bin Laden had participated in "virtually every major attack of terrorism against the United States" in the 1990s. Johnson underlined the threat posed by bin Laden, saying that he was possessed by "hatred and craziness." If left unanswered, "he would continue to terrorize Americans around the world. He has no compunction about killing women and children. He's a complete egalitarian in his murderous attitude."[9]
[edit]1999
In an interview with PBS's Frontline for its 1999 program, Hunting bin Laden, Johnson discussed Osama bin Laden.[10] According to Johnson, Americans had "tended to make Osama bin Laden sort of a superman in Muslim garb." "Actually," he continues, "Osama bin Laden, in my view, represents more of a symptom of a problem, and the problem is this: the Saudi Arabian government, not just Osama bin Laden but many people in Saudi Arabia, have been sending money to radical Islamic groups for years." Johnson continued:
When you look at who's killed Americans in the last 10 years, the individuals he's supported and backed--I'm basing that upon the initial information that's been released in the indictments and conversations with others in the intelligence communities--Osama bin Laden has been the one killing Americans. No other terrorist group in the world has been out killing Americans except for Osama bin Laden.... Osama bin Laden remains out there as the one really targeting us. So, we recognize that he's the threat. He's serious about wanting to kill Americans, but as long as he's in Afghanistan, as long as he doesn't have access to a cell phone, as long as he can't just hop on a plane and travel wherever he wants without fear of being arrested, his ability to plan and conduct terrorist operations is extremely limited. We have to recognize [that] he would like to do a lot of damage. He would like to kill Americans, but wanting to is different from being able to, having the full capabilities in place.[11]
In the interview, Johnson doubted the ability of members of bin Laden's organization to plan and put their lives on the line:
There's not another Ali or Mustafa out there at this point and Osama bin Laden in my view has not been a very effective organizer or leader. He talks a great game and puts out terrific threats as far as stirring the passions in the United States and maybe firing up the imaginations of some young Muslims throughout the world. But when push comes to shove, can he get a group of people who are together who will say: we are going to plan an operation, we're going to put our lives on the line, we're going to go out and try and kill people and we don't care what the consequence is? It hasn't happened.[12]
Frontline asked:
[Is it] ... fair to say what you're saying is that the president of the United States, his national security advisor, his deputy national security advisor for counter-terrorism, are basically blowing smoke [about the danger posed by bin Laden] and his followers]?
Johnson responded:
They're grossly exaggerating the problem. They are hyping it. They shouldn't be talking about rising terrorism. Instead of saying "terrorism's rising," it's not. "Terrorism is spreading," it's not. "More people are dying from terrorism," not the case. But what they should be saying is, "There's one individual out there that really doesn't like us, and he's made it his mission in life to kill Americans, and we've gotta deal with him." But we need to have a voice of reason in that process instead of putting ourselves out crying wolf, because this is essentially what's taking place right now. They call it the administration that cries wolf.[12]
[edit]2000
Johnson co-authored an article in 2000 with Milt Bearden which focused on the threat posed by al-Qaeda specifically, rather than terrorism trends in general. Beardon and Johnson note that new information emerging about the bombings at Kenya and Tanzania in 1998 points to the threat posed by Imad Mugniyah and Osama Bin Laden will require "a coordinated policy that will employ a full range of covert, clandestine, diplomatic, and military operations," concluding:
The Clinton Administration has shot its bolt on the terrorist problem with small effect, and no last minute show of force will change the record. A new administration can start afresh with a more sharply defined set of terrorism goals – Mughniyeh and bin Laden and their protectors for starters – and bring the full, coordinated force of American diplomatic, military, and intelligence capabilities to bear on the problem.[13]
[edit]2001
After Johnson's testimony to the special forum at the U.S. Senate, Gary J. Schmitt, executive director and CEO of the Project for the New American Century, refers in the Daily Standard (blog) to an op-ed piece Johnson wrote two months prior to the 9/11 attacks, claiming that Johnson argued that the US had little to fear from terrorism.[14]
In an editorial entitled "The Declining Terrorist Threat," published in the New York Times on 10 July 2001, Johnson says:
Judging from news reports and the portrayal of villains in our popular entertainment, Americans are bedeviled by fantasies about terrorism. They seem to believe that terrorism is the greatest threat to the United States and that it is becoming more widespread and lethal. They are likely to think that the United States is the most popular target of terrorists. And they almost certainly have the impression that extremist Islamic groups cause most terrorism.... None of these beliefs are based in fact.... While terrorism is not vanquished, in a world where thousands of nuclear warheads are still aimed across the continents, terrorism is not the biggest security challenge confronting the United States, and it should not be portrayed that way.[15]
Ten days after the 9/11 attacks, after quoting the above passage, Timothy Noah concludes a post in his "Chatterbox" feature at Slate: "Johnson's analysis, we now see, was bold, persuasive, and 100 percent wrong."[16] Johnson defended himself against such attacks:
The rightwing is resurrecting an op-ed I wrote in July 2001. I stand by the full article. It is still relevant today. I am accused, incorrectly, of ignoring the threat of terrorism. In fact, I correctly noted that the real threat emanated from Bin Laden and Islamic extremism. President Bush, for his part, ignored the CIA warning in August 2001 that Al Qaeda was posed to strike inside the United States.[17]
After September 11, Johnson appeared several times on FOX News to address the question of military action against terrorism. On 14 November, he defended the FBI's proposal to interview 5,000 students in the U.S. suspected of having information relevant to the September 11 investigations:
I think they should talk to everyone that they feel they have a need to talk to. I mean, look, this is war. This is not a legal proceeding. This isn't the O.J. Simpson trial. The folks that attacked us -- they murdered Americans. And we've got to recognize that in wartime, we should do things differently.[18]
[edit]2003
In January 2003, Johnson wrote an analysis of the relationship between the upcoming U.S. invasion of Iraq and the threat of transnational terrorism. According to Johnson, Bremer's response was to tell him that "it didn't matter what Saddam did or didn't do, we were going to war."[19] The paper warned that an invasion would "do little to destroy the infrastructure of radical Islamic terrorism responsible for the 9-11 attacks." Noting that Saddam Hussein's regime has been a longtime supporter of regional terrorist organizations such as the PLO, Johnson examines contacts between Saddam Hussein and transnational terrorist organizations such as al-Qaeda:
There is no doubt that Iraq is a state sponsor of terrorism—i.e., a country that provides financial support, safe haven, training, or weapons and explosives to groups or individuals that carry out terrorist attacks. . . . According to Central Intelligence Agency data, there is no credible evidence implicating Iraq in any mass casualty terrorist attacks since 1991. . . .
Johnson notes that the period immediately leading up to 2003 saw a rise of activity surrounding terrorist Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, suggesting that "Iraq is willing to help a movement that it would otherwise oppose on ideological grounds. Nonetheless," Johnson concludes, "it is important to understand that Iraqi entreaties to Al Qaeda, are most likely intended as a tactic to bolster Iraq’s ability to fight off a U.S. invasion rather than a deep-seated theological and ideological commitment to the terrorist agenda of Bin Laden.[20]
In that analysis Johnson also warns that the U.S.-led invasion was likely to backfire:
In fact there is a serious risk that a U.S. led war against Iraq may crystallize the diffused anger in the Arab and Muslim world — a heretofore unattained goal of bin Laden and his followers — and persuade more Muslim youths to take up the terrorist banner against America and her citizens.... If we decide to invade Iraq we must be prepared for the contingency that our attack will inspire young Muslims to pursue jihad against the West in general and the United States in particular. Just as the 1979 Soviet invasion of Afghanistan rallied many Muslims, especially young adults to the cause of jihad, a U.S. attack may enable Islamic extremists to attract new followers.[20]
Johnson also gave interviews on the topic of what to do with captured al-Qaeda leaders; while he did not condone torture, he suggested that a "sleep deprivation and reward system" might be useful for getting information from Khalid Sheikh Mohammed:
I don't see a constitutional right to have eight hours of sleep. You shouldn't subject someone to freezing but they don't get to wear mink coats, either.[21]
In May 2003, Johnson joined members of Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS) in condemning the manipulation of intelligence for political purposes:
It is a misuse and abuse of intelligence. The president was being misled. He was ill served by the folks who are supposed to protect him on this. Whether this was witting or unwitting, I don't know, but I'll give him the benefit of the doubt.[22]
[edit]Plame affair
After Robert Novak wrote a column identifying the wife of former ambassador Joseph C. Wilson as a CIA officer, the media invited Johnson to comment on the ensuing scandal because he had been a member of the same Career Trainee class with Valerie Plame Wilson. For example, in October 2003, he appeared on Democracy Now to discuss the Plame affair. He told interviewer Amy Goodman that Valerie Wilson's cover should have been respected whether she was an "analyst" or a "cleaning lady": "if she's undercover she's undercover, period. If the media allows themselves to get distracted with those kinds of curve balls, they ignore the issue."[23]
He told a Senate Democratic Policy Committee in October 2003, "My classmates and I have been betrayed. Together, we have kept the secrets of each other's identities a secret for 18 years. Each and every one of us have kept that secret, whether we were in the CIA, in other government service or in the private sector. But this issue is not just about a blown cover. It is about the destruction of the very essence, the core of human intelligence collection activities: plausible deniability, apparently, for partisan domestic political reasons."[24]
Johnson testified at a special joint hearing of Congressional and Senate Democrats on 22 July 2005 about the consequences arising from the Plame affair.[25]
[edit]2008
In 2008, Johnson emerged as a staunch supporter of Hillary Clinton and a strong critic of Barack Obama. Larry Johnson's blog, NoQuarterUSA, became a rally point for Clinton supporters wary of Barack Obama's qualifications to be president. Supporters of Barack Obama insist that a story that first appeared on Johnson's blog--a report that Republican operatives have a tape of Michelle Obama making racially insenstive comments about caucasians--has been "refuted" Barack Obama's Fight the Smears website.[26]. However, Johnson never claimed to have the tape and reported that the Republican operatives controlling it intended to release the tape sometime after the Democratic Convention in August 2008. On October 21, however, he asserted that the operative in possession of the tape had been instructed by the McCain campaign not to release it.[27]
[edit]Notes
^ http://2008.weblogawards.org/polls/best-political-coverage/
^ Larry C. Johnson, "About Me," No Quarter (personal blog).
^ "Former CIA Official Larry Johnson Delivers Democratic Radio Address," transcript posted on official Democratic National Committee's website for The Democratic Party, July 23, 2005], accessed November 21, 2006.
^ Interview with Larry Johnson, confirmed by his supervisor
^ "Ex-CIA official Blasts Bush on Leak of Operative's Name: Democrats' Radio Address Focuses on White House Aides' Role," CNN July 23, 2005, accessed November 21, 2006.
^ Gail Russell Chaddock, "Why Terrorists Pick On the French," Christian Science Monitor (5 December 1996) p. 1.
^ Larry Johnson, "Terrorists Among Us," New York Times (20 August 1996) p. A19.
^ Terrorism Today
^ Lee Michael Katz, "The Hunt for Bin Laden," USA Today (21 August 1998) p. 1A.
^ See Transcript of original interview with Larry C. Johnson, as broadcast on Frontline in 1999. Cf. "Interview: Larry C. Johnson," for Hunting bin Laden, transcript of interview broadcast on Frontline subsequently on 13 April 2001. See also dedicated PBS webpages for media links: Iraq and the War on Terror, Frontline PBS, online featured programs, accessed 19 November 2006.
^ frontline: hunting bin laden: interviews: larry c. johnson | PBS
^ a b [1].
^ As posted in [2].
^ Gary Schmitt, [ 07/25/2005 "Meet Larry Johnson: The CIA official Turned Democratic Spokesman Has a Pre-9/11 Mindset," Daily Standard (blog), July 25, 2005, accessed November 20, 2006.
^ *Larry C. Johnson, "The Declining Terrorist Threat," The New York Times 10 July 2001: A19.
^ Timothy Noah, "(Not Exactly a) Whopper of the Week: Larry C. Johnson," Chatterbox: Gossip, speculation, and scuttlebutt about politics (blog), hosted by Slate September 21, 2001, accessed November 20, 2006. Note the full context of this quotation:
It is, to be sure, a little bit cheap (and slightly at odds with the usual parameters of this feature) to criticize someone for making an erroneous prediction, particularly after a tragedy. Chatterbox is especially reluctant to tag Johnson because Johnson's op-ed was argued forcefully, backed up meticulously with factual data, and bravely at odds with conventional wisdom at the time of its publication. Add in that Johnson now makes his living as a consultant to corporations about terrorism, and therefore had everything to gain by exaggerating the dangers terrorism poses, and the guy practically looks like a hero. Chatterbox, who two decades ago was an editor for the New York Times op-ed page, would have published Johnson's piece had he still been an editor there this past July. In his capacity at Slate, Chatterbox might well have written up Johnson's prediction, and perhaps even endorsed it.
But boy, is he glad he didn't! Johnson's analysis, we now see, was bold, persuasive, and 100 percent wrong. Sadly, a mistake this embarrassing cannot be ignored. As a fellow skeptic, Chatterbox in all sincerity wishes Johnson better luck next time.
^ Larry C. Johnson, "Johnson vs. President Bush," re-posted and updated by SusanHu at DailyKos (blog) July 25, 2005.
^ FOX News Interview with John Garrett (14 November 2001) Transcript #111405cb.260.
^ [3].
^ a b Larry C. Johnson, "Setting the Record Straight on Iraqi Terrorism," posted in Booman Tribune: A Progressive Community (personal blog) 27 January 2003. accessed 19 November 2006.
^ Qtd. in Toby Harnden, "CIA 'pressure' on al-Qa'eda chief," The London Telegraph 5 March 2003: 16.
^ Qtd. in Nicolas D. Kristof, "Save Our Spooks," The New York Times 30 May 2003:A6.
^ Democracy Now (3 October 2003)[4]
^ U.S. Senate, Democratic Policy Committee Meeting on the CIA Operative Leak, (24 October 2003).
^ Letter to the Senate.[Needs full source citation; see "References" section.]
^ Tumulty, Karen (2008-06-12). "Will Obama's Anti-Rumor Plan Work?", Time Magazine. Retrieved on 20 June 2008.:"a story that apparently first made a big splash on the Internet in late May in a post by pro-Hillary Clinton blogger Larry Johnson"
^ Whitey Tape, API, Phil Berg, and Andy MartinSee Authors Posts (1090) on April 14, 2008 at 2:04 PM in Current Affairs
Poor Barack Obama. Someone kidnapped him during Bill Clinton’s term as President. Held him hostage in a dark room, cut off from the news. How else to explain Barack’s persistent and erroneous recounting of history? Maybe Uncle Jeremiah Wright had him tied to a pew. Barack’s statement about the root cause for the bitterness of small town Pennsylvanians–you know, folks who seek solace in guns, God, or immigrant bashing because they are pissed–blames the economic policies of both George Bush and Bill Clinton. I can understand the George Bush reference. Our economy and Federal budget have been raped by W. But Clinton? That is just a damn lie.
Honest to God. Couldn’t this be further indication that Barack is using mind altering drugs? How else to explain a comment so out of touch with reality? Here are the facts. This is from a Clinton/Gore website in 2000:
EXPANDING ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY FOR ALL
- Unemployment Down to 4.1%: The unemployment rate in Pennsylvania has declined from 7.3% to 4.1% since 1993.
- 503,600 New Jobs: 503,600 new jobs have been created in Pennsylvania since 1993 — an average of 71,096 jobs per year. In contrast, an average of 500 jobs were lost each year under the previous administration.
- 486,300 New Private Sector Jobs: Since 1993, 486,300 new private sector jobs have been created—an average of 68,654 jobs per year, compared to an average loss of 2,325 private sector jobs per year in the previous administration.
- 43,600 New Construction Jobs: 43,600 construction jobs have been created in Pennsylvania since 1993 — an average of 6,155 jobs per year. In contrast, an average of 8,775 construction jobs were lost each year during the previous administration.
- Poverty Has Fallen: Nationally, the poverty rate has fallen from 15.1% in 1993 to 12.7% in 1998. In Pennsylvania, the poverty rate has fallen from 13.2% in 1993 to 11.2% in 1998 –down 2.0% under President Clinton. [Census Bureau]
- 450,000 Have Received a Raise: Approximately 193,000 Pennsylvania workers benefited from an increase in the minimum wage—from $4.25 to $4.75 — on October 1, 1996. They, along with about 257,000 others received an additional raise—from $4.75 to $5.15 — on September 1, 1997.
- A $500 Child Tax Credit to Help Families Raising Children: To help make it easier for families to raise their children, the balanced budget included a $500 per-child tax credit for children under 17. Thanks to President Clinton, the Balanced Budget delivers a child tax credit to 1,185,000 families in Pennsylvania.
- Homeownership Has Increased in Pennsylvania: Homeownership in Pennsylvania increased from 72.3% to 75.2% since 1993.
- Business Failures Down 7.0% Per Year: Business failures have dropped an average of 7.0% per year since 1993, after increasing 30.8% per year during the previous four years. [Oct 98 data]
- Over $25,000 of Reduced Federal Debt for Every Family of Four: The national debt will be $1.7 trillion lower in FY99 than projected in 1993 — that’s $25,000 less debt for each family of four in Pennsylvania this year.
- 2.0% Growth in Total Bank Loans and Leases: Pennsylvania has seen a 2.0% average growth rate in total bank loans and leases per year since 1993. In contrast total bank loans and leases fell an average of 1.3% per year during the previous administration.
- 1.1% Growth in Commercial and Industrial Loans and Leases: Since 1993, Pennsylvania has experienced a 1.1% annual growth rate in commercial and industrial loans and leases. In contrast, commercial and industrial loans and leases fell an average of 5.5% per year during the previous administration.
EXPANDING ACCESS TO EDUCATION
- Nearly 29,000 Children in Head Start: 28,973 Pennsylvania children were enrolled in Head Start in 1999. In FY00, Pennsylvania will receive $183.8 million in Head Start funding, an increase of $82.1 million over 1993.
- More High-Quality Teachers With Smaller Classes for Pennsylvania’s Schools: Thanks to the Class Size Reduction Initiative, Pennsylvania received $51 million in 1999 to hire about 1,311 new, well-prepared public school teachers and reduce class size in the early grades. President Clinton secured funding for a second installment of the plan, giving Pennsylvania an additional $55.2 million in 2000.
- $19.4 Million in Goals 2000 Funding: This year [FY00], Pennsylvania received $19.4 million in Goals 2000 funding. This money is used to raise academic achievement by raising academic standards, increasing parental and community involvement in education, expanding the use of computers and technology in classrooms, and supporting high-quality teacher professional development. [Education Department, 12/3/99]
- $17.7 Million for Technology Literacy: This year [FY00], Pennsylvania received $17.7 million for the Technology Literacy Challenge Fund, which helps communities and the private sector ensure that every student is equipped with the computer literacy skills needed for the 21st century.
- $343.7 Million for Students Most in Need: Pennsylvania receives $343.7 million in Title I Grants (to Local Educational Agencies) providing extra help in the basics for students most in need, particularly communities and schools with high concentrations of children in low-income families [FY00]. This includes $5.8 million in accountability grants, to help states and school districts turn around the worst performing schools and hold them accountable for results.
- $296.1 Million in Pell Grants: This year [FY00], Pennsylvania will receive $296.1 million in Pell Grants for low-income students going to college, benefiting 147,757 Pennsylvania students.
- Expanded Work-Study To Help More Students Work Their Way Through College: The FY00 budget includes a significant expansion of the Federal Work Study program. Pennsylvania will receive $51.6 million in Work-Study funding in 2000 to help Pennsylvania students work their way through college.
- Over 5,800 Have Served in Pennsylvania through AmeriCorps: Since the National Service program began in 1993, 5,836 AmeriCorps participants have earned money for college while working in Pennsylvania’s schools, hospitals, neighborhoods or parks. [through 2/00]
- Tuition Tax Credits in Balanced Budget Open the Doors of College and Promote Lifelong Learning: The balanced budget included both President Clinton’s $1,500 HOPE Scholarship to help make the first two years of college as universal as a high school diploma and a Lifetime Learning Tax Credit for college juniors, seniors, graduate students and working Americans pursuing lifelong learning to upgrade their skills. This 20% tax credit will be applied to the first $5,000 of tuition and fees through 2002 and to the first $10,000 thereafter. 213,000 students in Pennsylvania will receive a HOPE Scholarship tax credit of up to $1,500. 259,000 students in Pennsylvania will receive the Lifetime Learning Tax Credit. [fully phased-in FY2000 estimate]
- Expanded Job Training to Pennsylvania’s Dislocated Workers: Thanks to President Clinton, the FY99 budget includes a significant expansion in the dislocated worker program. Pennsylvania will receive $46.8 million in 1999 to help 27,740 of Pennsylvania’s dislocated workers get the training and reemployment services they need to return to work as quickly as possible.
FIGHTING CRIME AND VIOLENCE
- Crime Falls in Pittsburgh: Under the Clinton-Gore Administration, America has experienced the longest continuous drop in crime on record. Between 1992 and 1997, serious crime, as indicated by the crime index, has fallen 33% in Pittsburgh, with robberies declining 48%. [1992 and 1997 Uniform Crime Reports]
- Juvenile Arrests Down in Pennsylvania: Pennsylvania’s juvenile arrests have decreased 51% between 1992 and 1997, (as measured by the crime index), with Pennsylvania’s juvenile murder arrests dropping 79%. [FBI, Uniform Crime Report, 1992 and 1997]
- 3,332 More Police: The President’s 1994 Crime Bill has funded 3,332 new police officers to date in communities across Pennsylvania. [through 1/00]
- Reducing Crime with Drug Courts: Working to reduce drug-related crime in Pennsylvania, the Clinton Administration has awarded Drug Court grants to the communities of Philadelphia and West Chester. The Administration had previously awarded grants to a number of Pennsylvania communities including: Williamsport, Erie and York. Drug courts use the coercive power of the criminal justice system to combine drug testing, sanctions, supervision and treatment to push nonviolent, drug-abusing offenders to stop using drugs and committing crimes.
- Over $26.8 Million to Combat Domestic Violence: Through the Violence Against Women Act, Pennsylvania has received over $26.8 million in federal funds since FY95 to establish more women’s shelters and bolster law enforcement, prosecution and victims’ services. And in October 1999, California University of Pennsylvania was awarded $250,000 to help address sexual assault, domestic violence, and stalking on campus. [through FY99]
- Over $2.6 Million in Grants for Battered Women and Children: In FY99, Pennsylvania received over $2.6 million in HHS’s Family Violence Prevention Program grants to assist women and children fleeing domestic abuse.
- Nearly $18 Million to Keep Drugs & Violence Out of Pennsylvania’s Schools: Pennsylvania will receive $17.9 million in FY00 for the Safe & Drug Free Schools Program, which invests in school security and drug prevention programs.
MOVING PENNSYLVANIANS FROM WELFARE TO WORK
- 300,250 Fewer People on Welfare: There are 300,250 fewer people on welfare in Pennsylvania now than there were at the beginning of 1993 — a 50% decrease. [through 6/99]
- Child Support Collections Up 27%: Child support collections have increased by over $213 million—or 27% — in Pennsylvania since FY92. [through FY98]
- Encouraging Responsible Choices—Preventing Teen Pregnancy in Pennsylvania: Since 1993, President Clinton and Vice President Gore have supported innovative and promising teen pregnancy prevention strategies, with significant components of the strategy becoming law in the 1996 Personal Responsibility Act. The law requires unmarried minor parents to stay in school and live at home or in a supervised setting; encourages “second chance homes” to provide teen parents with the skills and support they need; and provides $50 million a year in new funding for state abstinence education activities. Efforts are making a difference, adolescent pregnancy rates and teen abortion rates are declining. And between 1991 and 1997, teen birth rates declined 20.5% in Pennsylvania.
- $85.5 Million for Pennsylvania Welfare-to-Work: In 1998, Pennsylvania received $44.3 million in Federal welfare-to-work state formula grants (the state matched $22.1 million in funding), helping Pennsylvania welfare recipients get and keep jobs. In addition, in 1999 and 1998 a total of $19.1 million in competitive grants were awarded to Pennsylvania localities to support innovative welfare-to-work strategies. Part of the President’s comprehensive efforts to move recipients from welfare to work, this funding was included in the $3 billion welfare to work fund in the 1997 Balanced Budget Act.
- Helping People Get to Work: Through the Access to Jobs initiative, the Clinton-Gore Administration is working with communities across the country to design transportation solutions to help welfare recipients and other low-income workers get to and from work. Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, Lancaster, and Johnsonburg have received a total of $2.6 million this year to fund innovative transit projects.
INVESTING IN PENNSYLVANIA’S HEALTH
- Health Care for Over 81,700 Uninsured Children: In 1997, President Clinton passed the largest single investment in health care for children since 1965 — an unprecedented $24 billion over five years to cover as many as five million children throughout the nation. This investment guarantees the full range of benefits that children need to grow up strong and healthy. Two million children nationwide have health care coverage thanks to the President’s plan, including 81,758 in Pennsylvania. [HHS, Health Care Financing Administration, FY99 SCHIP enrollment data]
- Helping Nearly 236,000 Pennsylvania Women and Children with WIC: The Clinton Administration is committed to full funding in the Special Nutrition Program for Women, Infants and Children (WIC). In FY99, Pennsylvania received $133 million in total WIC grant funding, helping 235,972 women, infants and children in need receive health and food assistance. [through 8/99]
- More Toddlers Are Being Immunized: As a result of the President’s 1993 Childhood Immunization Initiative, childhood immunization rates have reached an historic high. According to the CDC, 90% or more of America’s toddlers received the most critical doses of each of the routinely recommended vaccines in 1996, 1997, and again in 1998 —surpassing the President’s 1993 goal. In Pennsylvania in 1998, 97% of two-year olds received the vaccines for diphtheria, tetanus, pertussis; 92% received the vaccine for polio; 94% received the vaccine for measles, and 97% received the vaccine for Haemophilus influenzae B, the bacteria causing a form of meningitis.
- Funding for HIV/AIDS Assistance Programs: In FY 2000, Pennsylvania will receive over $9.3 million in Ryan White Title II formula grants. This funding provides people living with HIV and AIDS medical and support services. Also through the Ryan White Act, Pennsylvania will receive nearly $17.6 million for state AIDS Drug Assistance Programs (ADAPs), which help those without insurance obtain much needed prescription drugs. There has been a tenfold increase in ADAP funding in the last four years, up from $52 million in 1996 to $528 million in 2000. [HHS, Health Resources and Services Administration, 4/7/00]
- Tobacco Plan Will Cut Smoking and Premature Deaths by 43% in Pennsylvania: The Clinton Administration’s tobacco proposal, combined with the recently enacted state tobacco settlements, will cut youth smoking and resulting premature deaths 43% in Pennsylvania by 2004. Between 2000 and 2004, 170,500 of Pennsylvania’s youth will be kept from smoking and 54,600 will be spared a premature tobacco-related death. [Treasury Dept., 2/99]
- 6,160,000 Americans in Pennsylvania Cannot Be Assured They Have Patient Protections: Even if Pennsylvania enacted all the protections in the Patients’ Bill of Rights, 6,160,000 people in Pennsylvania cannot be assured they have the comprehensive patient protections recommended by the President’s Advisory Commission. This is because the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA) may preempt state-enacted protections. That is why the President has called on Congress to pass a federally enforceable patients’ bill of rights so that everyone enrolled in managed care may have a basic set of protections. Notably, 3,120,000 Pennsylvania women are in ERISA health plans and are therefore not necessarily protected. Women are particularly vulnerable without these protections because they are greater users of health care services, they make three-quarters of the health care decisions for their families, and they have specific health care needs addressed by a Patients’ Bill of Rights.
PROTECTING THE ENVIRONMENT
- 46 Toxic Waste Sites Cleaned Up: Since 1993, the EPA has completed 46 Superfund toxic waste clean-ups in Pennsylvania – more than any other state in the nation. This is nearly four times the number of sites cleaned up under the previous two administrations combined. [through 3/1/00]
- $24.4 Million in Safe Drinking Water Funding: This year [FY00], thanks to President Clinton, Pennsylvania will receive $24.4 million for the Drinking Water State Revolving Funds to provide low-interest loans to municipalities to build, improve, and prevent pollution of drinking water systems.
- Revitalizing Brownfields Projects in Pennsylvania: As part of the Clinton-Gore Administration’s efforts to clean up Brownfields, the EPA has awarded grants to counties and communities in Pennsylvania—Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, Phoenixville, Ford City, Johnstown, Reading, and Northampton and Bucks Counties—for environmental clean-up and economic revitalization. These projects are intended to jump-start local clean-up efforts by providing funds to return unproductive, abandoned, contaminated urban properties to productive use.
SPEARHEADING URBAN RENEWAL EFFORTS
- Revitalizing Pennsylvania’s Communities: Philadelphia was designated an Urban Empowerment Zone in 1994 and was awarded $79 million to create more jobs, housing, and economic opportunity for its residents. As part of this designation, Sea Change Environmental Services, a north Philadelphia asbestos and lead removal company, was given a $100,000 loan in July, 1996 which it will use to buy equipment and hire workers to remove lead and asbestos at city-owned homes, Independence Mall and the Philadelphia Naval Base. Lock Haven, Pittsburgh, and Harrisburg were awarded $3 million each to pursue similar job creation efforts. In 1999, Uniontown was designated a Rural Enterprise Community.
- Expanding the Low-Income Housing Tax Credit Will Help Develop 5,500 To 6,600 New Affordable Housing Units in Pennsylvania Over the Next 5 Years: Last year, the President and Vice-President pushed for a 40-percent expansion of the Low-Income Housing Tax Credit. This year, the President and Vice President will try again to enact tax incentives to develop affordable housing. In Pennsylvania alone, this proposal would mean an additional 5,500 - 6,600 quality rental housing units for low-income American families in Pennsylvania during the next five years.
PROVIDING DISASTER RELIEF
- $411.9 Million in Federal Emergency Assistance: Since 1993, Pennsylvania has received $411.9 million in disaster relief. This includes $36.5 for Hurricane Floyd in 1999; $3.7 million for severe storms and tornadoes in 1998; and $164 million in assistance to recover from severe flooding that occurred in January 1996. [FEMA, 2/29/00]
EXPANDING FUNDS FOR TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT
- Over $3.5 Billion in Federal Highway Aid: Since 1993, Pennsylvania has received over $3.5 billion in federal highway aid, including $71.1 million for emergency relief in response to natural disasters and $300,000 for scenic byways. These funds have helped generate over 151,376 jobs. [through FY99]
- Over $404.5 Million in Aviation Funds: From FY93-FY99 Pennsylvania received over $404.5 million in Airport Improvement Program funds to help build and renovate airports, and, when necessary, to provide funds for noise abatement to improve the quality of life for residents who live near airports.
- Nearly $2.1 Billion in Transit Funds: Pennsylvania has received nearly $2.1 billion in Federal Transit funds since 1993.
- Saving Lives and Property: In 1999, the United States Coast Guard saved 18 lives and $3.4 million of property in Pennsylvania.
Yep. That explains why Pennsylvanians are angry, why they buy guns, why they go to church, and why they hate those pesky foreigners.
It is time for Democrats to call Barack on his bullshit. He has embarked on a deliberate campaign to disparage the positive accomplishments of the Bill Clinton era. I know why. He’s scared to death that Americans will support Hillary if they take time to remember about what was actually accomplished in the Clinton Administration while the press obsessed over Bill getting a blow job in the Oval Office. The American economy was in good shape and Americans prospered.
Barack will lie about Bill Clinton for his own political ends. He’s doing his own bamboozle by trying to convince middle class Americans that they suffered under Bill Clinton. But the truth is otherwise. America’s middle class did pretty good under Bill Clinton. It is a Republican President and a Republican Congress who squandered the fruits of a balanced budget and growing economy. If Barack were honest, and a real leader, that’s where he would focus his wrath. But Barack is not honest. He will lie to secure his own advantage. He will trash everything achieved during Bill Clinton’s eight years in office. While Clinton can be criticized on several issues, his stewardship of the U.S. economy was sound. What Barack Obama is trying to do is flat out wrong. Let’s call it the “Audacity of Arrogance.”
(small, medium and large sizes; for both dogs and cats)
+ 
It is time for Democrats to call Barack on his bullshit. He has embarked on a deliberate campaign to disparage the positive accomplishments of the Bill Clinton era..
I would call obama on it Larry.. But I’m too busy clinging to my guns.
Larry,
Just to let you and Susan know, I called Hillary HQ today and spoke with a woman who works with Peter Daou.
I gave her the names of blogs and their owners that many of us strongly believe are being paid by the Obama Campaign and/or Surrogates.
I also sent them the post below about Annie and Guns B/S. The said they would get “on it”.
Sorry - back to the topic of the post.
I don’t think anyone kidnapped him. The 90s for him were probably like the 60s for people of Hillary’s age. It isn’t that he’s ignorant of the economic success of the time it is that he can’t remember it.
Like a Stuart Levine memory problem?
This might help him to regain his memories
http://clinton3.nara.gov/WH/Accomplishments/states/Illinois.html
NICE LINK! Let’s all send this link to the Obama Campaign to help Barry remember FACTS!!
Facts? Facts? He don’t want no stinkin’ FACTS …
Obama is obviously the bitter one. He can’t shoot, he can’t bowl and he doesn’t even lie well.
Annie Oakley ‘08!
(Annie must be proud)
Geez Larry, your fingers tired from all the copy and pasting?….lol
One task to do still Larry, type out all Obama’s lies, see you in a few days…lol
Seriously, it is wonderful how this time, Obama isn’t getting a free ride, it is about time!
Nice to see the fight Clinton supporters are continuing to lead against the Obamabot repeater machines!
One poster at ABC tried to expain how Obama made a simple mistake and spoke incorrectly and should be excused for the mishap! When asked Why, when it wasn’t given to Clinton for her mishap, they said well that was a lie, their is a difference, so when asked you mean like Obama and NAFTA lie, they shut up and went back to the old Hillary attacks, but fewer participated this time than usual!
Ya know, that’s the sort of 90s I remember growing up in the middle class (at most) in the southwest. I was told by Reagan and Gingrich I was supposed to hate government, but Clinton/Gore demonstrated to me that government can actually work.
My portfolio trullllllly misses him.
the attack on the objectively good economy of the 1990s was the biggest insult.
The “clingy” guns and god stuff was poison for November. I can’t see how the GOP will resist replaying the comment on a loop.
I’m an atheist who reckons that guns should be confiscated…but i’m not running for President. I understand that firearns and church are the pillars of American folk culture.
It not an issue worth bringing up outside of municipal politics where there is a localized crisis with firearm violence. Sorta like Wyatt Earp in Dodge City and Tombstone.
LUCKILY for only about 35% of PA voters apparently
Mr. Odrama IS A MIND ALTERING DRUG!
He is what he IS! I guess.
LOL
I call it Barackoolaid
we call it Barak-obama-ding-dong. (Dingle berries sold separately)
Appropriate for ages 18-26.
(matching Muslim robes sold under separate packaging
Made in China.
Distributed by Rezko Importers
This is the good thing about Hillary fighting out this battle to the end. The longer it goes on, the more chinks in Obama’s armor we’ll see. He can’t keep up the playacting forever. The real Obama is going to shine through, and let’s pray it isn’t too late before the lemmings see it.
HALP US BROK O’BOMBA– WE R STUCK HEAR N ALTOONA.
Funny!
Is there any truth to the Faux News rumor that there are a bunch of supers getting ready to push Hillary back? The tail end of it.
I read it on their crawl earlier.
I doubt it. Not before the 22nd. They’re all waiting on tenterhooks to see how the voters take it as much as we are.
no, don’t think so -this was reported in the Scotsman — a foreign paper — that Gore and Carter were rumored to be talking behind the scenes to ask her to bow out — Gore just a couple of weeks ago gave an interview saying he saw no problem with the campaign continuing — why would he saay differently now — before the first votes after his comments came in?
I think this can be classified along with the rumor that 50 SDs were going to come out for Obama the day after the TX, OH primaries — also a fiction.
The drumbeat from Obama’s camp is going to get deafening this week cause they know he is going to get trounced in PA next week.
Also, after his latest horrible gaffes, SDs would be idiots to force Senator Clinton out — they see this story has legs — they would have the worst egg on their faces and ruin the Democratic party for years by backing this man unconditionally when voters all over the place are so upset about his comments.
Perhaps this idiotic “Scotsman” story was written before Bitter/SnobGate broke.
Keep the Faith!
yeah … and he tried to blow smoke up Al’s pant leg last night on CNN. I hope that I wasn’t the only one thinking “bite me” when he played his Pander Bear routine.
Fox’s Democratic strategist said she had been in contact with Gore’s people and they said this story is not true and have been trying to get the Scotsman to retract the story.
Apparently, this little tidbit came from the Obama campaign’s Stephanie Power. While she was calling Hillary a monster, she was also telling this story-LIE.
What happened to the “Hope and Kumbaya” campaign?
How about the fact that Bill himself has made similar comments:
“…feel more resentful paying taxes, and become even more receptive to their appeals for tax cuts and their strategy of waging campaigns on divisive social and cultural issues like abortion, gay rights, and guns.”
– Bill Clinton, in his 2004 memoirs, My Life
Too funny… so Larry, ummmm - where does he trash the Clinton Administration? I asked you the same question earlier… are you saying that manufacturing or blue collar jobs weren’t lost during the Clinton admin? That’s what he was referring to.
He said this, yet you continue to misrepresent it to push your skewed and obviously biased meme:
“But the truth is, is that, our challenge is to get people persuaded that we can make progress when there’s not evidence of that in their daily lives. You go into some of these small towns in Pennsylvania, and like a lot of small towns in the Midwest, the jobs have been gone now for 25 years and nothing’s replaced them. And they fell through the Clinton administration, and the Bush administration, and each successive administration has said that somehow these communities are gonna regenerate and they have not. So it’s not surprising then that they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren’t like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations.”
Kevin, a couple of words for you, real proof of Obama and his words a week ago in SF:
Maytag!
Now fuck off and stop with the sleeze style of mis-truths from a political liar Obama!
Thank you!
what are you, eight?
Not comparing cell phone sizes Kevin, so please refrain from your input of self derived responses and stick to your Obamabot manual for at least the presumption of better intelligence on your part!
Thank you!
great cognitive dissonance on display there Mel, keep up the
goodgreat workKev:
Michelle was looking for you earlier. She was out in public trying to help Barack straigten out the misconceptions about what he said:
“We live in isolation, and because of that isolation we fear one another.
Because Barack Obama is the only person in this race who understands that. That before we can work on the problems we have to fix our souls. Our souls are broken in this nation.
Barack will never allow you to go back to your lives as usual; uninvolved, uninformed.”
Maybe you’d like to go somewhere else and spin her enlightened words.
So… you’re saying we don’t live in isolation, whatever she meant by that since you didn’t cite the full reference? “the powers that be” pick your poison - don’t divide and isolate by steering people towards niches that compete w/ one another?
You’re saying that both Bill and Obama are incorrect in their similar assessments?
ROFLMAO
spin baby, spin.
correction - some of us don’t live in isolation and fear of “the other”?
MEL … I think I LOVE you … size doesn’t matter to real women!
Speaking of Maytag…I heard the little ratbastard talk about the Maytag jobs today. He stood there without so much as a flinch and claimed that nobody listened to them.
Are you kidding me? This guy is unfrickingbelievable. It’s not about listening, Obama. It’s about lying and selling the Maytag workers out. Who SOLD those workers out? Huh?
clinging to your guns and your god?
Clinton offered analysis. Obama offered an insult.
voters bittlery clinging to _______ are resisting his charms. Because they lost their jobs.
That is a moral judgement of the voters, not an analysis of the campaign waged by Republican operatives.
Also Obama got all sorts of things wrong.
The economy was good in the 1990s.
People take pleasure in hunting and target shooting. They also use firearms as a tool for work and potential self defense.
Church is the community in a twon with 500 people. It’s the primary social communion and source of dependable company and sympathy.
We don’t even need to get into why people are Racists and Xenophobic. Are Democratic voters by habit, in Demcratic primaries Racists and Xenophobes? Yes. That’s what Obama was suggesting–voters for Clinton have a racial and xenophobic agenda.
Obama was clearly talking about his failure to beat Clinton in the Democratic primary in PA. He was never addressing the General election contest.
That’s what Obama was suggesting–voters for Clinton have a racial and xenophobic agenda.
Which also doesn’t explain the xenophobia of his filthy-rich backers, who were totally happy to smear on those little people who weren’t like them from an obscenely wealthy vantage point.
Bill took issue with the Republicans exploiting the economic insecurity of voters. Obama blasted the entire culture of these voters claiming they all “cling” to their guns, faith, xenophobia out of bitterness.
Maybe Rezko…….
http://www.wthitv.com/Global/story.asp?S=8163418
CLING TO GUNS
hey, why can’t YOU DRUGGED OUT OBAMATRONS see that it’s the words CLING TO…………
nothing to do with outsourcing
it’s his sanctimonious attitude that he has displayed ever since he first started running.
I grew tired of it the 2nd time I heard him. No actually it was his WIFE the 2nd time. That’s all it took for me. The fact there might be even ONE undecided person that is truly an avid voter is a joke to me.
I DOUBT it! So I guess with all that money he has …… he’s probably out right BUYING votes by now.
but I have no proof - for all I know that could be par for the course in politics? I’ve only become blog active since GW stole it (with the help from the Supremes of course).
ARGH another reason to SCREAM for FLORIDA!! (where I lived MOST of my life) We really keep getting ripped off! Is it because we have so much SUNSHINE? lol
Someone kidnapped him during Bill Clinton’s term as President. Held him hostage in a dark room,
Good seats to Bulls games, courtesy of patrons like Rezko. Meanwhile, public housing fell through the cracks.
If Barack were honest, and a real leader, that’s where he would focus his wrath.
Make that: If Barack were honest, and a real Democrat, that’s where he would focus his wrath.
I couldn’t even believe he brought up Reagan as a uniter. It’s slugs like Obama that made Democrats turn to that creep to begin with. Reagan, the guy who turned mental patients loose to save money, the guy who declared ketchup as a vegetable in the school lunch program, the shit head who created more ills and more poor homeless people than all the presidents before him put together. For a Democrat of any soul to even mention that shithead in any positive light is a downright sacrilege. He also recently refered to George Bush The First as an example of his foreign policy. Another man out of touch with reality. What the hell IS Barack Obama anyhow?
BO doesn’t have a clue about people outside his socioeconomic group apparently. Again I have to ask the question is it arrogance or stupidity that lead him to make this statement. Here in NC, I don’t think this comment is going to go over well. A very large majority of male folks in the south love their guns and I do mean love and probably a large portion here “cling” to their religion, not because their bitter, but because it is social, cultural thing. Apparently he doesn’t get that.
I am sick and tired of him slamming the Clinton administration, it’s one of the things that makes me not want to vote for him if he is the GE. I don’t know if I can ever forgive his treatment of Bill Clinton.
Clinton showed a new campaign ad in NC today. She answered a question sent in over the Internet by a NC voter(What would she do about high gas prices?) Obama ran an ad, too. It was the same old ‘canned’ ad where he lies about how he will bring back jobs to the US. It could have been made for any state. Which ad do you think came across better?
I think it’s male envy with some of them.
They are so ticked OFF that Hillary (apparently) forgave Bill for his being a bad boy.
They wouldn’t be so lucky, I’m sure. And they know it. It’s Penis envy. (can I say that here?)
LOL and the women that are against Hillary? I don’t get that because my X cheated on me and I didn’t forgive him but still respect Hillary for her choices. Women seem to do that easier for other women. IN general. But I don’t get the ones that are for BO except for the Koolaid thing. Idol worship? Guilt? A combo of them all maybe?
sigh
people
whaddaya gunna do?
Blatant broad-stroke painting ahead …
The women I know who are for Obama (I mean the real foamymouthed ones) are routinely either Office Barracudas or Trophy Wives.
You know the type — the ones who flash their tits and stocking tops at the guys in the office and all it a management technique. They hate any woman in the office who is thinner than they are. They are great at fawning over the boyz to get stuff done, but when they have to collaborate with or manage a team of women, they revert back to full-bore bitch-queen harpie mode because their giggles and jiggles don’t work to control that crowd.
The Trophy Wives are easy — they got to where they are by stabbing other women in the back. Aiming for the rich man’s wife position, there is room for ONE woman at the top of their personal pyramid, and it’s them. They hate Hillary Clinton because she’s getting all the attention and they aren’t. The fact that she — a plain jane with brown hair and glasses — snagged an even more alpha husband than they did just makes them angrier.
That doesn’t even begin to delve into the mommy-separation anger issues that I’ve seen in some.
Broad-stroke painting, but I am telling you, this is it. ALL of the women I know who are rabidly pro-Obama have massive, massive problems with female authority. It’s either “move over bitch you’re in my light” or “shut up mommy!”
Funny, no mention of NAFTA at all. Fact is, Democrats lost seats and R voter registrations were exacerbated in many rural areas during the Clinton administration. Clearly, they didn’t feel the love for the Clinton administration that the “urban elites” did. Obama is far from the first person to point this out. Might I suggest “What’s the Matter with Kansas?”.
Clinton won states like Kentucky, Tennessee, West Virginia. Take your bullshit theory and shove it.
The revision of the 1990s is disgusting.
Obama will be trounced in the rural areas. He’s admitted it himself ON TAPE in front of donors.
The simple fact of the matter is Obama is a tool. Just like Bush. He is a frontman for much more powerful people. Once in office, he is a bought and paid for servant of the powers-that-be. Just like Bush. He is W2. He will do what he is told.
The incredibly obvious prop job being done on his behalf by most networks is proof aplenty. And THEY want to destroy Hillary because they can’t control her.
Follow the money.
and the exact same things can’t (and won’t?) be said about Hillary?
Honey, he’s raised in one campaign more than twice the money that it took those two decades to earn — and Bill was a freaking president!
Well I’m sure you are going to bore us with the details Kevin.
Seriously, isn’t there somewhere else we’d rather you be?
No, it can’t. And maybe that is why the MSM (and especially it’s owners) hate Clinton so much.
you’re kidding right?
Everytime I hear that theory
I immediately wonder who then will be HIS DICK CHENEY???
and is this an old grudge (really?) in the bubble being waged in silent between the Carter Dems and the Kennedy Dems or? no wait they are on the same side the Carter/Kennedy Dems against the Clinton Dem and RAY-gun DEMS? no clue who they are unless they fell for the koolaid of Reagan in the beginning?
I don’t know what to call myself anymore.
I’ve gone from Liberal to Progressive and now apparently I am what I used to call a cowardly middle of the road moderate…….. HAHA! woo yes it was some strong koolaid.
another lie makes the news today at the Rezko trial, testifying today it was reported that Obama and Michelle attended a reception for Auchi at Rezko’s home in April 2004, something that agains slipped Obama’s recollection!
Amazing isn’t it! Then Obama swears he didn’t know who Auchi was for the Big to do at the Chicago Marriot in June 2004!
I am going to blast this all over the Obamahuffpost. They have a “casual” relationship with history over there!
Larry- Great post- but you should post a warning for the Obamaniacs - “Beware- This way lies TRUTH!” The poor things just can’t take it you know.
Given the number of posts about his “clinging” commnents and the frantic responses to them, I would say Obama did not step in shit- he’s in a big pool of quicksand and all the struggling is just taking him under faster!
I am still strugling to understand why all the pundits are trying very hard to explain to us what he ment when he made his “BITTER” comment.
I believe an average american understood what he ment.
Thanks
W O R M
AGAIN AND AGAIN AND AGAIN
WHAT OBAMA REALLY MEANT
only the shadow knows - LOL
Larry,
I used to read your blog daily for the good inside information and thoughtful analysis you provided. NQ was near the top of my bookmark list, but I’m on my way out now because I see little else than . . . well, you might as well rename it ObamaBashing.com. It’s very disappointing. Will check back later.
But but.. you are not interested in insie information and thoughtful analysis when it is about Obama?
If knowing who the potential candidate to be President of the United States says and who he is, is not important to you; then little else should be.
I never said I was not interested in information about Obama, nor did I say it was not important to me. Obviously, it’s very important to all of us. There’s a lot of information to be found about all the candidates. I just don’t see the need for all anti-Obama ranting all the time. If this is your niche, fine. I’m interested in more varied debate.
Christy,
go check the stats. We have tripled the number of folks coming here to read and quadrupled the page views. It’s a free country. Read if you like. I don’t have a gun to anyone’s head. You also are welcome to go elsewhere.
Congrats. Your blog deserves a lot of traffic for your experienced views and insight. But the Obama bashing has become incessant and heavy handed. Those who already agree with you will gladly jump aboard. But there are a lot of us out here who are still concerned first and foremost with keeping McCain out of the White House and have been hoping, naively I suppose, for some solidarity and civility among Democrats. I know. Crazy idea.
This is one of the few sites where we can get inside info about Obama and analysis of who he is. We certainly can’t get it AT ALL from the media, which probably explains a big part of our obsession and hunger for truth.
Great post, Larry. The Clinton bashing and lying about his presidency are a betrayal of the whole Democratic party and expose Obama for who he is - an ambitious, self-centered man who will do anything to win, including destroy his party, distort truth, and who cares only for himself, not the party. He has trashed the Dem Party in other ways, too, by praising Reagan and Repubs, by considering Bloomberg as VP (Bloomberg? A Repub VP? Outrageous), and his talk of bipartisanship.
A multi-party system is essential for democracy. It gives people a means for knowing who they are voting for, what the candidate stands for. When she chooses her party she is telling voters this is what I believe, these are my positions. Without this every candidate would be a totally unknown quantity, we would not know what we were getting until too late (which still happens but would be worse), which is what we do have with Obama. Who the hell is he?
Those talking bipartisanship are calling for centrism, for blurring differences between both parties, and it almost always comes from supposed Dems, who seem to want to move right to Repubs.
I’d be for Repubs moving left, but that is not happening. After eight years of Bush Dems should not be moving to Repubs.
I would also like to see the Clintons talk more about the prosperity in the nineties, and show how change should be from the Bushes, not Clintons, that they are not at all the same, as Obama is continually saying.
I know where he was! He was creating the Obamamometer!
Politically Incorrect but funny as hell! Read the rest.
http://tinyurl.com/6nn9dm
No it’s really not drugs, at least I give Barry the benefit of the doubt when he sez he stopped with the blow and the crack, it’s stupidity.
Think I’m kidding?
Which ‘administration’ is Barry talking about when he says:
Clinton, Bush….Uh, Barry there has been no successive administration after Bush.
Not enough for ya?
From page 31 in ‘The A of H’:
‘That Reagan’s message found such a receptive audience spoke not only to his skills as a communicator (nice use of the ReThug frame Barry); it also spoke to the failures of liberal government, during a period of economic stagnation (gee I wonder why that was Bar being as the ReThugs were in charge before and during St. Ronnie’s ‘Reign’/) to give middle-class voters any sense that it was fighting for them (dude never heard of teh Mighty Wurlitzer…he runs in the GE he’ll find out all he wants and more about it.”
What ties these two items together is Barry’s inability to recall history as it happened. I really don’t know where he’s been all his life but his book and his current words show something grievously wrong with the man.
He makes Bush look smart.
Seriously, read what this chump has said and written and you will be forced to agree with my characterization of him as:
‘Barry the Ignorant’
Come on guys, he’s a Harvard grad! The freakin’ editor of their law review journal, and he’s sooo articulate and smart–he can’t be bothered with facts about Bill Clinton’s tenure and the real reasons why vast swathes of midwestern/rural American voters have religion and guns in their lives! He’s a superstar. And did I mention he’s a Harvard grad?
And so was George W. Bush. Need we say more?
A point that Harvard no doubt regrets to this day.
Someone at TM posted this from Time (go vote!)
NAFTA, maybe? Could it possibly be NAFTA Obama is talking about? Wasn’t NAFTA a Clinton economic policy we’re feeling the effects of to this day?
Yeah, things were great during the 90s when the interet exploded and Clinton happened to be president. But I think maybe he’s talking about the long-term effects of Clinton’s economic policies, i.e. NAFTA, which were very short-sighted.
I don’t think he’s referring to the economic boon in the 90s that was brought about by a new, untapped marketplace (that rose and fell on Clinton’s watch by the way). Because if you think about it that’s kind of an artifact of those times and isn’t relevant today. Unless Hillary has a new internet under her sleeve and she’s not telling.
NAFTA as implemented by Bush and Cheney?
Best to try to stick to the facts, as opposed to the spin, otherwise you lose.
Really, no fooling.
Oh! So happy to see this, Larry! That line about the Clintons and the awful 90’s was the thing that pissed me off most about what he said. And he does it all the time. And no one ever calls him on it! So thank you a million times!!
And another thing! My bud at General Clark’s blog, ms in la posted this the night O originally made the gaffe:
The new, improved “cleaned up” AP version tonight:
Yahoo News
The Clinton era slam was replaced by … a series of dots. Somebody must have checked with the Bureau of Labor!
I noticed that new version in the National Review article about Barry at Harvard, linked above.
What is that about, that revised version? Did that come from Obama campaign? From Repubs because of Bush? That was the most important, worst line. How could they just take it out? And who and why?
Obama thinks the 90s were bad because he was sitting in the pews at Rev Wright’s house of hate, listening to “sermon” after “sermon” about how rotten America is.
It is nearly impossible for me to type with one hand clinging to my bible and the other to my gun, but I just wanted to thank you for being a voice of reason and for telling it like it is.
It gets hard out here for bitter garlic noses with no delusion or kool-aid opiate of the masses without sites like this for reality checks.
hmmmm, I wonder if Obama endorsed Bill in 92 and 96?
Or voted for him.
Or will vote for Hillary.
Maybe he voted for Bush the first, instead of Bill.
After all, he thinks he had the best foreign policy. And for Reagan in the eighties?
I’m so glad to see this story! The most outrageous part of Obama’s controversial words for me wasn’t the belittling of people and calling them bitter (although that certainly was bad), it was the lies about the Clinton years.
Obama cannot rewrite history, but that is exactly what he has been trying to do since he started running… Let’s face it, he has to try to make people believe lies about how “terrible” the Clinton years were, or what would be the point of voting for him? Hillary is clearly the best choice when a true account of the 90’s is given. Obama doesn’t stand a chance against that record. So he has to lie like crazy and tell us a fairytale about what a horror the 90’s was. LOL Too bad for Obama, people who aren’t drunk on the kool-aid remember. The 90’s were great!
This is great! I started to call him Rip van Obama because apparently he was asleep from 1993 to 2001.
I am simply furious that Obama continues to disparage the economic performance of the Clinton years. Comments I wrote on this on over the Confluence:
http://riverdaughter.wordpress.com/2008/04/14/what-obama-said-was-a-lie-there-were-more-jobs-during-the-clinton-years/Obama attacked Bill Clinton because Bill Clinton won’t endorse him.
Obama attacked older women because Wolf Blitzer and others said that older women voted for Hillary. One of Obama’s surrogates even went so far as to claim that no one should listen to Ferraro because she was an “old woman”.
Then he attacks white people as racist, like the grandmother who raised him, another old woman.
Now he’s attacking small town people because they won’t vote for him.
It’s a pattern. He accuses everybody who won’t vote for him as racist and prejudiced when he is the one who is.
He claims he is a uniter, but he does it with insults and bullying and accusations of ignorance. He has turned blacks against white and vice versa, women against men, old against young. Why is anyone surprised he would turn small town against big city, the religious against those who aren’t?
There was a saying in WWII… First the Germans went after the sick, the elderly, then the homosexuals, then the Poles, then the Jews, and at each stage no one did anything because it was someone else. The day arrived when Hitler came after the last ones and there was no one left to protect them, just as there’d been none to protect those he attacked in the beginning.
It’s no coincidence that David Axelrod looks like Adolph Hitler.
If Obama can identify a “group” of people who won’t vote for him as a “group”, he will throw the race and prejudice and ignorance accusations at them. That’s what cult leaders do to anyone who doesn’t follow them.
Obama does not believe in free choice - people aren’t allowed to vote for who they want to follow, they have to vote for him or otherwise they “prove” that they’re racist.
The Obama followers have made excuse after excuse for the contemptuous and demeaning comments he has made over and over again. Roland Martin on CNN claimed “He’s telling the truth” about small town America. If Obama had made the comment that “big city people clung to guns and immorality”, I wonder how that would have gone over since the majority of people in many large US cities are black, commit most of the 18,000 murders per year in the US and most of the crime. That would have been telling the truth, but it also would not be fair to those who don’t fit that category. Would that not have been labelled a racist and divisive statement.
Obama can criticize Bill Clinton’s record as being non-existant, but it’s a lie. Bill accomplished great things. Obama, despite being almost the same age as Bill, has accomplished nothing in either senate but make the same repeated, boring, contemptuous, sarcastic, mean-spirited speeches and been paid a quarter of a billion dollars to do so.
I can’t believe what this jerk Obama has done to race, class and gender relations in america. He has set us back to the 70s. This is one sick bastard who should be tarred and feathered for the damage America has incurred. I have NEVER been so disgusted and angry at a candidate in my entire Not Too Short life. He is a hooved, socially bankrupt beast and this is a travesty.
The definition of prejudice:
Judging people to be wrong or flawed without any facts or with imaginary ones.
Judging behaviour to be a crime when there is no crime.
That’s also the definition of bad judgement.
It also almost always leads to injustice.
Obama is prejudiced. As leader of the free world, the outcome is predictable.
Prejudice is also defined as:
Judging people to be righteous and good when there are no facts to support that judgement.
Judging a crime to not be a crime because of who committed it.
BO’s Marin County speech is an example of how he often speaks, which is to pander to the specific interest of whoever’s listening.
He panders to what he perceives as their self-righteous elite-ism, by telling them in so many words, ‘the poor wretches cling to their sub-class ideals, they can’t help it, don’t you feel sorry for them; and BTW I need your money to campaign there, because they themselves don’t have the enlightened wisdom of y’all’.
Trouble is, he often ignores who else is listening. In this case, within ear-shot across the bay, are the urban working class in urban Alameda County/Oakland; and just down the 101 freeway, are the rural conservatives.
This is another example of a disturbing trend with Obama, his habit to create his own necessity to back-track on his own statements, resulting from his ignorance that his pandering statements to one audience, are often heard by others, whom he panders to with a different slant.
[...] via Antonin Rezko, his relationship with William Ayers, he’s trashing FDR and the New Deal, compared Bill Clinton’s two terms in the White House to George W. Bush’s, accused Democrats of [...]
[...] Security privatization scheme, who savaged Bill Clinton’s record of economic prosperity by comparing Clinton’s eight years to Dumbya’s, whose education policy echoes the Never-Right [...]