“What Goes Around, Comes Around …” & “The End Justifies the Means …”
By SusanUnPC on May 17, 2009 at 3:45 PM in AfPak Border, Afghanistan, Auto Industry, Economy, Pakistan, Speaker Nancy Pelosi
“What Goes Around, Comes Around …”: First, the WSJ panel, aired every weekend, goes over the Pelosi mess. Then the panel gets into the bullying by the Obama administration of the state of California, ridiculing Obama for his, um, loose interpretation of the “rule of law.” It’s a great discussion:
BELOW, “the end justifies the means” …
The discussion on the significance of being a “secured creditor” is also critical. It’s astonishing how Obama has turned over the control of huge corporations to unions.
In the Obama administration, its political objectives trump any consideration for the rule of law. It’s just that simple.
(Release: November 13)
on sale for only $16.95.
has a spatula.)
8% Off at $11.95, with a rare five-star ranking by 294 customers: 
And check out these: 
("This crazy redhead is on to something. Her pink Rambler story alone is worth the price of the book," writes 
- “Richard Sale’s reportage on Washington, the CIA, the American armed forces, and foreign intrigue has created a perfect background for this account of the steady growth of President Clinton as a master of the game of nations.”--W. Patrick Lang, former head of Middle East Operations, DIA
"Anne C. Heller's stunning biography of Ayn Rand" uses a "plethora of newly unearthed research and fresh insight."
Why is no one suing over the Obama Administration overreach? Are there lawsuits slow to get started? Or have some been filed and we just haven’t heard about them yet? Or are the damaged parties too intimidates to sue…fearing even more strong-arm tactics?
If anyone knows of any lawsuits, curious, please post what you know…
Meanwhile, O/T if you haven’t seen this video yet, do watch…HILARIOUS!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lcroQEkzZjA&eurl=http%3A%2F%2Fhotair%2Ecom%2Farchives%2F2009%2F05%2F17%2Fvideo%2Dremix%2Dwanda%2Dsykes%2Droasts%2Dobama%2Dthe%2Dway%2Dhe%2Ddeserves%2F&feature=player_embedded
After the threats received by Chryslers secured creditors I think everyone is too terrified to sue.
Big banks, big coal, big oil, big pharma, these are entities used to playing hard ball planet-wide. Yet without so much as a vocal protest these formidable actors have handed over the keys to their respective kingdoms.
Barry-O and his clique are scary.
The FBI had an informant inside the Weathermen that said Ayers and his crew used have planning sessions for measures that would be needed upon their taking power. At a time when US population was around 250 million they figured on needing re-education camps for roughly 26 million. When the question came up that what if some did’nt take to the new program, Ayers responded that 7 million or so would have to be liquidated!
These are the people in charge now! Look at California who just got bullied by Andy Stern, ex-Weathermen. The Obama operation is riddled with former Weathermen. Mark Rudd, Marilyn Katz, Todd Gitlin, Carl Davidson etc, look ‘em up all Weathermen & all in Obama’s circle of allies.
If Barry-O gets his National Civilian Security Force its going to get really, really ugly!
Who is John Galt?
Oh and I forgot, add Mike Klonsky and Dale & Wade Rathke(ACORN) to that list of Weathermen.
Oops! Two more I forgot to mention, Tom Hayden and AFSCME’s 2nd in command Paul Booth.
Could you give a link to ex-Weathermen in Obama’s group? I don’t trust the information I tapped. Are Cathy Wilkerson, Kathy Boudin, and Jeff Jones some of his allies?
Just the mention of The Weather Underground and I recoil. I remember their bombings very well.
I don’t have a(singular)link tracking them all down and placing them where they are now is the result of painstaking research. I did oppo-research during the campaign for JSM, who refused to use anything inflamatory at all.
Rev. Wright, Raila Odinga, Frank Marshall Davis, Obama Sr., Anne Dunham & her grandparents(who raised Barry)and their extensive connections to the CPUSA, Billy ayers or any of his cohorts all were deemed off-limits.
John didn’t understand that Marquis of Queensbury rules do not apply when dealing with people of this ilk.
Only the Gods know the terrible price we are going to pay for his gallantry.
If it is of any help I wote a smallish peice on these contacts at PAPundits, copy & paste the below in your browser and it’ll pop up.
PAPundits The Obama Economic Medicine, Triage or Euthanasia?
I read your post at PAPundits. The site’s bias is conservative Republican as Ann Coulter is listed in your right margin of sites.
All that you’ve written may be true (like with anything written by Republicans or journalists), but I always have to balance a person’s words with their politics, if known.
I have noted the ex-Weathermen listed who are in a group of Obama’s allies. I was already focusing on any socialist, “spreading the wealth” schemes on 0’s part and ANY attacks on the Constitution.
Therefore, I have been informed by your comments here, but won’t be reading further at PAPundits.
Out of those named by you my only info is that Boudin is still doing time for, if memory serves me, the bank hiest in Ithaca NY in conjuntion with the Black Panthers in the early 80’s.
Also, during her incarceration her child has been raised by Ayers & Dohrn.
This of course makes Obama’s statement that he and Ayers’ kids went to the same school preposterous as there is at least a 20yr age gap between them. They may have gone to the same school, but never remotely at the same time.
This some-guy-from-my-neighborhood statement is non-sense as Ayers & Obama lived less than a block apart when Obama was at school in NYC.
Methinks the Ayers/Obama link probably goes back to Ayers Sr.(Com-ED now Exelon) and Frank Marshall Davis, but I’ve yet to put it together.
I would not worry about a National Security Service. There will be hardly any money left to keep the light on the White House then to hire millions of people.
The video, a ‘parody’ of Wanda Sykes’ appearance at the Correspondents’ dinner, focuses mostly on denigrating MO’s body. Not funny at all. At all.
jbjd
Agreed. Not funny and out-of-bounds in an anti-misogynist site….thanks
The Democrats are a bunch of hypocrites. They knew what was going on and they are trying to use it to smear Republicans. Folks, this is just a sign of things to come for the Democrats. You reap what you sow. Too bad they didn’t use this opportunity to really act different. They are acting worse than Bush and Cheney.
As for giving unions control of anything….first of all it’s payback for unions helping Obama get into office. Second, they’ve already tanked car companies once, they will do the same thing until the car companies are simply extinct. Auto workers have been complicit by striking and demanding outrageous, exhorbitant wages and benefits. Unions used to be useful but they have been corrupt for some time.
Please explain Senator Grahm’s journal, which showed that he had been briefed ONCE instead of the FOUR times the CIA had asserted and that the content of his briefing had NOTHING to do with torture. Oh, of course, he went back to the CIA and they said, “whoops, we erred,” but no explanation for the mistake/”mistake.” Too bad there are a few uncomfortable facts floating around for all you kids here who are so excited about leaving the union and so forth.You remind me of a bunch of fourth graders. What are you going to do when there are hearings under oath and the truth isn’t so much fun for you? I’ll be waiting to see if any of you from the blogger herself, down, have the balls to say, “I was mistaken.”
Senate Intelligence Committee…House (of Representatives) Intelligence Committee…applies…oranges…
And all the while Nancy Pelosi would have us believe that House Intelligence is an oxymoron.
I, I,… oh fotget it, I won’t waste my time on the likes of you.
If anyone wanted to know about O’s views on the “rule of law,” all they needed to do was watch the way the primary played out.
he showed us all..but some just couldn’t see.
True that - and isn’t this just Chicago politics as far as the eye can see? We saw that coming, too, but despite all evidence to the contrary, his supporters wanted to pretend he wasn’t really part of that machine. Now we are ALL paying the price for that.
Great video, Susan - thanks!
Regardless of who knew what, when, about the CIA briefings or Senator Graham’s journal, we do not need that to prove how the rule of law was egregiously violated in the primary caucuses and the precedent-setting decision by the May 29, 2008 Rules and Bi-laws committee torpedoed by Donna Brazile and Alexis Herman as the next to the last final blow for Hillary’s campaign.
The final blow was Nancy Pelosi, Chair of the 2008 Dem Nat’l Conv and Howard Dean, Chairman of the Dem Party who together made sure Hillary’s candidacy could not possibly be revived at the conv. They even *honored* Hillary by asking HER to declare 0zero the nominee as the spokesperson for the NY delegation during the so-called roll call vote. The rule of law….violated? No! Our democracy was savagely damaged and possibly destroyed by these so-called “leaders” who indeed used ‘any means to an end’ they wanted. They should be tried for treason and sent to jail for life.
But I maintain that manipulating DNC rules, for example, the rule that says the nominee for POTUS shall be Constitutionally eligible for the job - the DNC refuses to inform voters who ask, on what basis they determined BO possessed such eligibility - so as to dupe state elections officials into printing the name of BO onto state general election ballots, constitutes election fraud, which can be criminal, and should, therefore, be investigated by states Attorneys General, the chief law enforcement officers in the states.
Nancy Pelosi is the one who “certified” the election results and answered THE question that asks if the president-elect is a naturalized American citizen. She simply and quickly answered, “yes” and signed the certification. I’m sorry I cannot reference that, but I’m pretty sure it was someone here at NQ that knew how it came about. I remember commenting that it was the missing link for me since I had assumed B0 had lied (probably) when he answered the question.
jbjd, I realize this does not answer the burning question of what satisfied the DNC that he was born in this country as he claims to be in the face of lots of evidence to the contrary. I don’t think the DNC cared whether the naturalized citizenship was real or not. They were so determined to make him POTUS it was too late for those kinds of details. We even heard this week at Nancy’s news conference how focused on electing a dem president she was in 2002 & 2003. So when Kerry didn’t make it in 2004, that focus became obsession for 2008 - B0 was selected by them by 2006 at the latest if not following his Dem Nat’l Conv speech in 2004.
You speak for me!
Yes, that “honoring” of Hillary, forcing her to declare Ozero the winner, was when I finally started to cry. Up until then, I just screamed at the television.
Nahhhh, the parties decide how they are going to nominate their presidential candidates. You may not like the outcome of the process in this particular case but you are going to be hard pressed to make any kind of real case that the law was broken.
Making the process democratic would require changes to the Constitution that many would not like at all.
James, any one of us would have accepted the result of the nominating process had it been done in an honest way. It was not. Instead the Democratic Party violated its own rules on multiple occasions to accomodate their desire to nominate Obama. Obama did not win the nomination by any measurement. He was awarded delegates he did not win and delegates were taken from Clinton and given to Obama. Those two actions are completely against the Rules.
Then there’s the abysmal excuse of a roll-call vote, where my vote from California was not even counted because had California called out their votes, it would have put Clinton ahead.
For years I have encouraged people to vote, because every vote counts. Well, now it is clear that every vote does not count, at least in Democratic primaries.
And please don’t forget the broken caucus rules. For instance, in my state you cannot attend a party caucus to vote if you are not registered with that party and live in your caucus precinct. But we all know how that turned out: People’s registration and addresses were not checked because of the overwhelming numbers of people who would show up. Who knows how many precincts they voted in or where they really lived? Some of the county chairmen did amazing jobs, staying up hours on end to do the verification that the precinct chairment did not do and reporting people to the state chairmen. Other county chairment didn’t care, especially if they were for THE MESSIAH! These are state party rules. They may not be laws in your eyes, James Guglielmino, but in my eyes if you can’t follow your own party rules, you don’t care too much for your country’s laws either.
Let me say it again. The parties nominate in whatever way they want to nominate. Is it a fair and democratic process? Heck, no. There isn’t much fair and democratic about any voting in this country. Think Ohio in 2006. Think Florida in 2000,where the Republicans essentiall promoted a riot of white shirts to stop the recounts. Obama is our President. If you hate him as much as I grew to hate shrub Bush, go ahead and keep ranting and raving but if you believe that we are vastly better off than we have been in the last 8 years, criticize his policies in a way that puts pressure on him to be better and stop complaining that Hillary should have been something or other. As I pointed out in a previous comment, there were numerous gaffs in her campaign that made a lot of people not trust her. Obama didn’t make those kinds of mistakes. By all accounts that I am aware of, his was a VERY well run campaign for the nomination and a masterful campaign for the presidency.
Gug
Oh, please, James Guglielmino!! YOU absolutely do NOT know what you are talking about! Yes, there has always been some corruption in politics, but what happened with the caucuses, the fundraising, voter fraud, the race baiting and I could go on, was of epic proportions. We have detailed this stuff thousands of times on here. Gaffs in Hillary’s campaign? B0’s “masterful” campaign? Which campaign are you speaking of - the fundraising campaign run by a company in Pelosi’s district that she got to do it for the 0 campaign that raised 76% of all contributions over $1,000, the MoveOn.org campaign run by George Soros, the ACORN campaign well funded by the US Congress whose republicans didn’t even realize it only supported democrats, the media campaign happily run by media owners, or the front campaign run by the Chicago stooges that took credit for all the campaigns. You notice B0 called David Plough the best campaign manager in history. Where is David Plough? He isn’t working in the B0 WH.
This is bizarre.
The rule of law, on the table with “social justice” and “the public good”, has to take the back-seat?
What these unions, UAW and SEIU, want now is pushed through regardless of the contracts of secured creditors and budget-cutting legislation passed by California?
I agree that we’re heading toward a new system, and one I oppose.
It AMAZES me that the term “social justice” has been turned by some into a blasphemy. It isn’t and it is not in opposition to rule of law. What you refuse to accept is that the government has the right to set parameters for money that it is granting. The idea that this, in any way violates the Constitution or rule of law, is so preposterous as to call into question the sentience of anyone making such a claim. As a friend said, ”
“they have no idea what they’re talking about. There are no Constitutional questions here. The federal government is entirely within its rights to set requirements for states to receive funds.”
“Democrats in congress realized early on that Republican governors were likely to use stimulus funds for purposes that wouldn’t help the economy. So they put requirements in the law to prevent misuse of the funds. If anyone thinks there’s a legal problem with that, they are welcome to take it to court…”
It appears that the MSM has been told over the weekend to drop coverage of the Pelosi accusations. Whether they will comply is an open question.
Do you consider Faux to be part of MSM. What a strange assertion. Where did you get it? Pelosi is all over the place and almost everyone is critical even though it SHOULD be a non-story. The story is that we tortured and in case you haven’t noticed, the torturers, those who support torturing and defend it as a useful tool are coming out of the wood work, too. If you don’t believe in torture, you may want to forget Pelosi. If she did know and didn’t do anything, she is STILL way down on the totum pole of those who really, REALLY, *REALLY need to be prosecuted. And don’t misunderstand that I would try to protect her if an investigation done by a special prosecutor revealed that she cowardly failed to protect the rule of law. Oh,for a fun video, find Jesse Ventura going after a torturer on Faux. Let me see if I can get it for you. Yup: http://rawstory.com/08/news/2009/05/19/ventura-schools-kilmeade/
Gug
Gene Poteat, president of AFIO, offered this statement:
Those CIA officers chosen to brief the Congress, and especially the intelligence committees, are very senior, experienced officers, who well know the reputation and future of the CIA, as well as their own jobs, are on the line should they be perceived as not telling the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. Such restrictions, however, do not apply to members of the Congress when they then appear before the public.
http://campaignspot.nationalreview.com/post/?q=YjMwYWMwZTFiYTA4NTlmY2MzMjU5NGI5NDE0NzcwOGE=
Ouch …
Fine. Now see if he can explain the now FOUR reported “mistakes”/mistakes made by the CIA, including at least two that CIA apparently admits making….with no explanation on how the “mistakes”/mistakes could have occurred. Bob Grahm kept track in his little anal retentive journal and looke up the dates…gos, gee, golly, CIA “erred,” and now Congressman David Obey (D-WI) has become the latest lawmaker to highlight erroneous information in CIA records.
Obama is paying back one by one those who helped elect him - Wall Street, the unions, GE, when will it end? Gays want DADT repealed, they’re told to wait, the Latino community wants immigration reform, he’s been pretty silent on that as well. Guess they just didn’t contribute enough money to his campaign. By the way, is there an accounting anywhere of which special interests contributed the most to his campaign? If we had that, we could probably predict his next move.
The single largest contributor to Obama’s campaign was Andy Stern’s SEIU which just took Ahnold to task. My info had it placed at $26M but Gigot cites $30M in the clip.
Goldman Sachs was Obama’s top contributor. That fact was well-publicized during the campaigns, but people voted for him anyway.
I heard today that similar measures have been introduced in 18 states. The following is from the TX Governor’s web site last month.
My bold above. California lawmakers should read and reread that last paragraph above.
I know a state resolution (from only one state) is not binding on the federal government. But I think that is part of the inverse message Gov Perry and others are sending to Washington.
People who are not bothered by the overreaching of Washington should read:
A View of the Constitution by William Rawle, L.L.D - 1825. Secession As Taught At West Point.
Actually under the tenants of Federalism assertion of the 10th by any one state are indeed binding. Especially Texas which aws originally founded as a seperate Republic apart from the United States.
However, the more the merrier and the more states that jump on the bandwagon might garner more attention in the MSM and lend it greater weight.
Montana was the first to file followed by Utah & Texas. Montana’s goes into effect Oct 10th and from what I here the challenge to it has already been filed and therefore should wind up in front of the Supremes in due time. From legal scholars I’ve heard that this law was not well written and so will probably not survive the scrutiny of the High Court. Haste makes waste, but Utah & Texas are supposedly taking their time to offer a more stalwart filing.
Add Washington State to the list. Very interesting since it’s one of the liberal latte strongholds on the eastside. (Seattle - Bellevue crowd)
The Tenth has been tested a number of times with different outcomes. Here is a short history of X and the supreme court cases involving it.
http://www.answers.com/topic/amendment-x-to-the-u-s-constitution
Well, where was Rick Perry when Bush made every American contribute to the Christian Church and proselytizing through the Faith Based Initiative? When he let the feds spy on every American? Listening in to our phone calls, etc? All this stuff smacks of partisanship. I have a feeling Rick Perry has no objections to interfering in every minute aspect of Texans’ lives if it’s politically advantageous. He just doesn’t like some other party doing it.
<>
That would be *your* interpretation of a “great discussion,” three or four people from the right going after Pelosi and Obama. Do tell, where were the people presenting the other side? Oh, never mind. That wouldn’t be a “great discussion,” would it. We need to be told only what we WANT to hear. Good job.
Gug
James as you semm to not offer much in the way of facts in your commentary, it is not surprising that you might feel a little peeved and left out. You’re a troll who is bent upon refutation without research. Peddle your crap elsewhere.
You have a poorly chosen nom de plume, Archimedes. The real Archimedes was a seeker of truth through science. You choose to call names indicating your intolerance for ideas foreign to you. Are you a xenophobe too? That would fit in with wingnut ideals that seem to make torture and illegal spying a part of our national moral fabric but disdain a President enforcing a law of the land and call him out as a violator of the Constitution for doing so.
I am always happy to hear the ‘other side’. But when the ‘other side’ either does not know the facts or refuses to accept the facts, you cannot have a meaningful discussion.
What are the *facts* as you understand them, FranSC? Isn’t it a fact that the administration has threatened to with hold the federal funds from California?
“The Obama administration is threatening to rescind billions of dollars in federal stimulus money if Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and state lawmakers do not restore wage cuts to unionized home healthcare workers approved in February as part of the budget.” I imagine that you don’t disagree with that report, right?
But, isn’t *this* also true? ” Schwarzenegger’s office was advised this week by federal health officials that the wage reduction, which will save California $74 million, violates provisions of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. Failure to revoke the scheduled wage cut before it takes effect July 1 could cost California $6.8 billion in stimulus money, according to state officials. ”
All I am saying is that the President is required by the Constitution to enforce the law. If this law says that wages cannot be frozen or reduced, then the President seems to be required to with hold the funds if the state insists on freezing or reducing the wages. AND, all the assertions here that he is doing what he is doing because he is paying back the unions are just specious arguments. He seems to not have any choice. I would be happy to have you show me the fallacy of what I have posted.
What part of the discussion isn’t true? We would love hear where Ms. Pelosi was falsely called out, GUg,GUG,gug…? Bueller?
Should I ignore your childish play with my nick name, which comes from the first three letters of my last name, Guglielmino, or respond in kind? Nahhhh, I’m old enough to be your daddy so I’ll try to set an example for you.
Was Ms Pelosi “falsely” called out? Well, there certainly is evidence for that. I have repeatedly asked for one of you to explain how Senator Graham, who is anal retentive about keeping notes, could have found that the CIA was so wrong in its assertion that he had EVER been briefed about torture. If it was wrong about Graham, why couldn’t it be wrong about Pelosi?
Wing on over to “Empty Wheel” http://tinyurl.com/r565xt to see more damning stuff from Graham.
“But Graham’s other point was clearly damning. He said the briefing occurred in the Hart Senate Office Building and not–as happened with highly classified briefings–at the White House. That detail, plus Graham’s earlier observation that staffers attended the briefing, suggest the briefing was not treated as typical “Gang of Four” or “Gang of Eight” briefings were generally treated. ”
Also go to Empty Wheel” again http://tinyurl.com/qo3fem for a parsing of what Panetta actually said but potentially more important for some information on the guy who probably headed the briefing was Jose Rogriguez, the man who admits to having destroyed the tapes of the torturing.
So, yeah, I’d say that there is considerable question as to whether Pelosi is getting a fair shake. Frankly, we don’t know what has happened and “ya’ll” are just way to happy to nail her to a cross. Why? I don’t much care for Pelosi, either but are you being fair? I don’t think so. AND, a far more important issue is that torture was DONE. Frankly, I don’t care if the person is a Democrat or a Republican. I want those responsible for torture or for knowing but not trying to stop it, brought to justice. It is my very strong sense that is the position that any true American should and would take.
So, we see now that when the shoe is on the other foot, it’s just as uncomfortable. I don’t like Obama, but he’s doing the same things George W. Bush did only with different players. That’s why I loved Larry Johnson’s article about how Dubya paved the way for Obama.
Americans are now so partisan they put on blinders when their party of choice is in power, pull out the daggers when the opposition gets in. We need to start thinking critically and objectively all the time. Hold all the politicians’ feet to the fire.
Bush caused this recession by repealing all the rules that applied to businesses. If Obama has turned everything over to the unions, Dubya and Cheney turned the whole governance of the country over to corporations. Republicans didn’t complain.
Read Bob Somerby’s account of the Pelosi flap in today’s Dailyhowler before making any judgments.
Susan–watching this video and doing some reading over the weekend I am left wondering WHAT ARE PEOPLE THINKING? This is such a scary power grab with implications that should frighten all Americans.
I said this in a comment to another post but it seems appropriate to repeat it as a comment to your post: “……What you refuse to accept is that the government has the right to set parameters for money that it is granting. The idea that this, in any way violates the Constitution or rule of law, is so preposterous as to call into question the sentience of anyone making such a claim. As a friend said, ”
‘they have no idea what they’re talking about. There are no Constitutional questions here. The federal government is entirely within its rights to set requirements for states to receive funds.”
“Democrats in congress realized early on that Republican governors were likely to use stimulus funds for purposes that wouldn’t help the economy. So they put requirements in the law to prevent misuse of the funds. If anyone thinks there’s a legal problem with that, they are welcome to take it to court…’
Well, for those who voted for the current President Obama. Thanks for giving us The Mr. President Obama. I hope he stops messing things up. The rest of us will waite for the next election.