I am sure you will be SHOCKED to learn that Obama is acting in much the same way. I know, I know – what a surprise. Ahem. Well, it seems some one has been doing a little investigative journalism, something in VERY short supply of late. But get this – I tell you, you better be sitting down – in this case, it was – WAIT FOR IT –
MSNBC. YES, the very network to which we routinely refer as “MSNBO”! Once I recovered from the shock of it all, I couldn’t wait to see just how transparent President Obama was compared to Bush. (I wonder if there is a way for us to do a pool on these kinds of things, like for NCAA basketball or something?)

This is what MSNBC uncovered in this report:

Obama Names 110 White House Visitors

The White House on Friday released a small list of visitors to the White House since President Barack Obama took office in January, including lobbyists, business executives, activists and celebrities.

No previous administration has released such a list, though the information out so far is incomplete. Only about 110 names —and 481 visits —out of the hundreds of thousands who have visited the Obama White House were made public. Like the Bush administration before it, Obama is arguing that any release is voluntary, not required by law, despite two federal court rulings to the contrary.

The emphasis there is mine. This is a bit of a schizophrenic opening. On the one hand, they want to champion that Obama released 110 names – Woohoo!! On the other hand, they have to acknowledge that, once again, President Obama is using the SAME arguments as Bush. Moreover, this “Constitutional Scholar” is doing so in clear violation of not one, but TWO federal court rulings! Maybe the KoolAide was made improperly that day, I don’t know, but the report continues:

Under the Obama White House’s policy, most names of visitors from Inauguration Day in January through the end of September will never be released. The White House says it plans to release most of the names of visitors from October on, and that release is due near the end of the year. There are limitations there as well, including potential Supreme Court nominees, personal guests of the First Family, and certain security officials.

The names released Friday include business leaders and lobbyists with a lot to gain or lose from Obama policies. They include Microsoft co-founder Bill Gates (whose foundation is pushing for changes in teacher pay), former AIG chairman Maurice Greenberg, Exxon Mobil CEO Rex Tillerson, Chevron CEO David O’Reilly, Citigroup’s Vikram Pandit, Goldman Sachs CEO Lloyd Blankfein, JP Morgan’s James Dimon, Bank of America CEO Kenneth Lewis, John Stumpf of Wells Fargo, Morgan Stanley’s John Mack, State Street bank’s Ron Logue, BNY Mellon’s Robert Kelly, labor leader Andrew Stern of the Service Employees International Union (22 visits)*, American Bankers Association CEO Ed Yingling, community bankers president Camden Fine, and lobbyists Heather and Anthony Podesta, whose brother John Podesta led Obama’s transition team.

Besides Gates, Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer and General Electric CEO Jeffrey Immelt are also on the list. (Msnbc.com is a joint venture of Microsoft and NBC. One of NBC’s parents is GE.)

Advocates and nonprofit leaders include National Organization for Women President Kim Gandy, and Risa Lavizzo-Mourey, president of the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, which is interested in health policy.

So, this is how Obama is paying these people and organizations back, by having them in the White House? I bet Kim Gandy was just all aflutter after she threw ALL women under the bus to endorse Obama over a life-long women’s advocate. There is more on her below.

I know many readers will be interested in this White House guest:

Democratic donor and businessman George Soros visited with White House aides twice.

Yes, indeedy, a major funder of Moveon.org has been to check up on his biggest investment – ahem – twice.

We’re just getting started:

Political figures include former Sen. Thomas Daschle, former House Speaker Newt Gingrich. Chicago Mayor Richard Daley, former Gov. Howard Dean, Sen. Al Franken, former Vice President Al Gore, former Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan, the late Sen. Edward Kennedy, and Democratic strategist Steve Elmendorf.

Celebrities at the White House include Oprah Winfrey, actors Brad Pitt, George Clooney and Denzel Washington, and tennis star Serena Williams. Journalists include Paul Krugman, the New York Times columnist and Nobel Prize winner in economics.

Conservative religious leader Gary Bauer visited, as did liberal civil rights leaders Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson.

Okay, the last two, along with Oprah, are NOT a surprise. Gary Bauer? Just a tad surprising.

For anyone who wants to see more:

Msnbc.com has put the full list in a handy PDF file, and also in an Excel file for those who like to sort.

One guest is mighty interesting:

Not that Bill Ayers

The White House warns that many names that may appear familiar — and controversial — do not in fact refer to the most famous people to carry those names. Jeremiah Wright is on the list, but it’s not the president’s former pastor. This Michael Jordan is not the basketball player. This Michael Moore is not a filmmaker. The William Ayers who took a group tour of the White House isn’t the former radical from Chicago who figured so prominently in the 2008 campaign. And the Angela Davis on the list has a different middle initial than the activist and former fugitive.

The White House could have avoided some of that sort of confusion by providing more information on the visitors, such as an employer name and the city they hail from. For example, is the Shawn Carter who attended a poetry reading the same one who goes by Jay-Z and had campaigned for Obama?

“This unprecedented level of transparency can sometimes be confusing rather than providing clear information,” a White House special counsel, Norm Eisen, wrote on the White House blog.

If you spot a name on the list that bears investigating, please drop us a note.

Of COURSE we will just trust Obama and his spokes-minions when they assure us that this Bill Ayers could not POSSIBLY be domestic terrorist – Capitol Building and Pentagon bomber – long time friend and mentor Bill Ayers! He is just some guy who wanted to visit the White House Gift Shop and pick up a couple of Marine One helicopter models for his boys. I am sure of it. Sheesh. Really? They expect us to believe this crap? Evidently – they got plenty of other people to believe that kind of crap and more, so why stop now?

Okay – if you are consuming any liquids right this minute, I suggest you put it down when you read this:

Limited release

Despite the accompanying White House claim of “transparency like you’ve never seen before,” the Obama White House continues to take the same legal position as the Bush White House, arguing that the records are not public records subject to the Freedom of Information Act. Only limited “voluntary releases” are being made to settle a lawsuit filed by an advocacy group, though a federal judge has twice ruled that all the visitor logs are public. (Again, emphasis is mine.)

Yet there are severe limitations to the transparency:

Most of the visitors from Inauguration Day to September will never be released by the White House under this voluntary disclosure — unless the public can guess their names. The White House policy doesn’t allow members of the public or press to ask for “everyone who visited health czar Nancy-Ann DeParle,” or everyone who visited on May 4, or everyone from the American Medical Association. Only individual names can be checked.

I know, right? Didn’t this sound just a little pissy?? From someone at MSNBC?? The bigger picture is that the Obama Administration is BREAKING THE LAW. Hell to the YES, that information falls under FOIA – this is OUR White House, not the Obamas. We most definitely DO get to know every single John Smith and Jane Doe who cross the threshold of the White House. You better believe we do.

This is just the tip of the iceberg, but it is a start:

The list released at 4:30 p.m. Friday includes just about 110 names with 481 visits. Those names were among those requested by members of the public so far, for visits during the period from Inauguration Day through July. (That’s why we know of visits by the wrong Bill Ayers, the wrong Angela Davis, etc., but we don’t know of visits by countless unnamed lobbyists.) Members of the public who used the White House online form to check names did not receive a personal reply indicating whether or not the request was received, or whether the name appeared on the list, so the system provides no feedback. Does the absence of Bill Clinton’s name on the list mean that he has not been to the White House, or that the request wasn’t received by the White House online system?

A request for the complete records of all visitors from the first months of the administration, filed by msnbc.com, was rejected by the White House, and an appeal is pending. The news organization requested the names of all visitors to the Obama White House beginning with Inauguration Day. Msnbc.com has filed an administrative appeal with the Department of Homeland Security, which oversees the Secret Service.

Say whaa?? The White House rejected a request from their lapdog “news” source?? Huh. There’s a shocker. Welcome to the “Under The Bus” club, MSNBC!

The Wall Street Journal focused on the most frequent visitor to the White House. He was mentioned in the list above, but without the acknowledgment of the frequency:

SEIU’s Stern Tops White House Visitor List

Promising “transparency like you’ve never seen before,” The White House released its visitor log this evening under a new voluntary disclosure policy.

The log chronicles 481 visits to the White House from individuals ranging from Jay-Z to Bill Gates from January through July.

The list includes William Ayers, Jeremiah Wright, Michael Moore, Robert Kelly (R. Kelly), Malik Shabazz, and Michael Jordan.

But the White House said those aren’t the guys you’re thinking of. Nor is the log complete.

Ahahahahahahaha!!! I just cannot get enough of this one – sure, they aren’t the same people. Yeah, okay, we believe you. NOT. And because it is just so much fun to see them squirm, I am keeping in the part that is repetitive of the article above, especially the quotes from Eisen. Oh, what a funny guy:

“A lot of people visit the White House, up to 100,000 each month, with many of those folks coming to tour the buildings. Given this large amount of data, the records we are publishing today include a few ‘false positives’ – names that make you think of a well-known person, but are actually someone else,” Norm Eisen, a special counsel to the president, writes on the White House blog. “The well-known individuals with those names never actually came to the White House. Nevertheless, we were asked for those names and so we have included records for those individuals who were here and share the same names.”

Adds Eisen: “This unprecedented level of transparency can sometimes be confusing rather than providing clear information.”

Uh, ya know, I think we are all smart enough to not get all confused by this incredible level of “transparency.” Beginning with, we actually know the definition of “transparency,” something Eisen and Obama apparently do not.

And then there is this:

One thing is clear: *Service Employees International Union President Andrew Stern holds sway at the White House, where he’s listed for 22 visits—the top number on the logs. Visitors in the top 10 also include former Clinton White House Chief of Staff John Podesta, former Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle, National Organization for Women President Kim Gandy, and NARAL Pro-Choice America President Nancy Keenan.

So THAT’S what Gandy and Keenan got for stabbing Hillary Clinton and, well, WOMEN, int he back – visits to the White House. I guess there is something gained by selling your soul, though, personally, I don’t think it is worth it. But that’s just me.

Anywho – yes, the President of the SEIU, again, the union co-founded by the founder of ACORN, Wade Rathke, is the TOP visitor at the White House. The SEIU has been in the news quite a bit, especially for holding California hostage – threatening that their good buddy, Obama, would not give the state any federal stimulus funds if it had the audacity to expect the union to cut wages like everyone else so the state wouldn’t go bankrupt. NOW we know how the union was able to do that. All those visits to the White House apparently paid off – for the union, not California, the state with one of the largest budgets around (as in 5th in the world). What makes this more egregious is that California pays a lot into the federal tax system and receives little comparatively speaking. And this union is allowed – by the White House – to hold it over a barrel. Yep, all those meetings seemed to do the trick!

Aren’t you just so heartened by all of this “transparency”? And by seeing who Obama is welcoming into our White House? Yeah, me, too. As long as the Obama Administration continues to thumb its nose at Federal Law, I reckon we should be “thankful” for this (no, not really – it’s BS that they are still sitting on so much information).

Oh, but if you can just GUESS who might else have been there and submit that form asking them, maybe you can confirm some other folks who have been there, too. Lemme know what you find out, okay? I am sure we would all just love to know…

In Memphis Elementary Schools these days after a recent policy change affecting Kindergarten through Third Grade. Check out this change in policy (click HERE if you prefer to read the transcript):

I wonder if this is what Senator Kennedy was thinking when he stood behind the “No Child Left Behind” policy? I kinda doubt it. I don’t think he thought THAT would be his legacy…

I am curious as to the research Superintendent Cash quoted. Especially given this research:

Educators have discovered that if a child can’t read fluently by the end of third grade, he may not become a strong reader. And the road ahead will be much more difficult.

“In fourth grade, students start using their reading skills as a tool for learning other things,” said Dr. Sandra Baxter, director of the National Institute for Literacy. “They have to read well because the subjects get harder. Teachers have less time to help kids catch up on reading skills they don’t have.”

That’s why parents need to stay in constant touch with their children’s day care providers and teachers from kindergarten through grade three. It’s important to make sure that children’s reading skills are developing “on schedule.”

In fact, research has shown that children who aren’t strong readers by the end of third grade are more likely to drop out of school later on. “We should all pay attention to that,” said Dr. Baxter. “Fortunately, the research has also shown us the best ways to teach reading, and how parents can make a big difference in helping their children learn to read.”

That seems to fly in the face of the new Memphis policy. If children have not learned reading fundamentals by Third Grade, they are more likely to drop out of school. That seems to completely contradict the logic behind the new Memphis policy.

I find this whole idea to be staggering – no grades, no holding back (though parents are allowed to hold their children back), and extra work for the teachers. And what are the potential effects on the children who are able to do the work? What does it means for them to have other kids in their classes who can’t keep up in terms of their OWN education?

Naturally, I am particularly curious what educators and parents around the country think of this new policy in Memphis. So, what do you think?

The first round winners were determined by your votes and revealed last night on the Nocturnal Warrior Show on No Quarter Radio. You can listen to that here. We did a review of last night’s so-called press conference followed by the tournament results. The show includes the scores, a review of the next round matchups and all sorts of commentary that we just can’t fit here.

Remember, your votes determine the winners. We are asking you to look at each matchup and determine for yourself who is the bigger ass in each matchup (We are not asking who has the biggest ass, although that may have helped Oprah and Donna Brazile in round one). Without further ado here we go:

ROUND TWO

White House Bracket

6th Seed Rahm Emanuel vs. 3rd Seed Dick Cheney

Capitol Hill Bracket

Media Bracket

At-Large Bracket

There you have it. Just use the polls as set up at No Quarter to determine your votes. The Polls will be open until midnight Friday. This weekend, we will reveal the “Sweet Sixteen,” and open up the voting. The “Sweet Sixteen” winners will be announced on next Tuesday night’s Nocturnal Warrior Show where we will break down the Elite Eight.

Feel free to add your comments about the matchups below. The key is to have as much fun with this as possible!

I’ll be honest upfront with my opinion. I see them as little parasites made from hijacked taxpayer dollars that members of Congress attach to totally unrelated bills for the purpose of impressing their own constituents. President Obama rallied against the considerable flab involved, but signed the 2009 omnibus spending bill anyway, with 9,309 (representing 7.7 billion dollars) little money suckers clinging to it.

I examined this long list of earmarks, searching for the most outrageous use of our “taxation without representation” at a time when millions are watching their jobs, homes, and retirement nest eggs disappear.

The first contestant was $200,000 for “tattoo removal” (Woodland Hills, CA). However, it’s not quite as nutty as it sounds. The idea is to remove gang and jailhouse marks for those who presumably want to try walking a more positive life path. However, Woodland Hills is hardly a bastion of gangs and crime compared to other parts of the San Fernando Valley. Yet I decided to let it pass.

Same for the 1.7 million for—ironically–controlling hog-created odors (Iowa). Jokes are being passed around about this one. But, if you have ever visited a hog farm you already know that an aroma exists that can cause you to hurl your cookies right where you stand. So, pig stench research didn’t rise to my level of “outrageous.”

The clear winner is a 5.8 million vanity project (one of the higher priced earmarks) to further bloat the ego of Senator Edward Kennedy. Whether you like him or not, you are supporting the Edward M. Kennedy Institute for the Senate (Boston, MA). Matt Viser writing for the Boston Globe, described the project status as of last August:

Senator Edward M. Kennedy and several of his closest friends have accelerated plans to build an institute near the John F. Kennedy Library that will be dedicated to research and education about the US Senate and that will use Kennedy’s lengthy political career as a case study.

The group has formed a nonprofit organization, the Edward M. Kennedy Institute for the United States Senate, and is planning an aggressive fund-raising campaign that aims to raise at least $50 million and will be spearheaded by prominent Boston businessman Jack Connors.

Actual designs have not been drawn, but officials envision a 40,000-square-foot building, with construction beginning as early as spring 2009.

It is also clear that the original plan called for private donors to finance this project.

Connors said that in the spring, about two weeks before the senator’s cancer diagnosis, Kennedy called and asked him to head up a fund-raising effort. Connors has held several meetings to identify about two dozen “precinct captains” who will raise money. So far, the fund-raising group includes John Sasso, a veteran Democratic consultant; Thomas P. Glynn, the chief operating officer of Partners HealthCare; John Fish, president of Suffolk Construction Co.; and Kenneth R. Feinberg, a Washington lawyer and former Kennedy aide who ran the September 11th Victim Compensation Fund.

Connors said the group is also considering tapping Kennedy’s colleagues in the US Senate, asking them to call key political donors in their home state to raise money for the institute.

In the meantime Kennedy’s friends and former staffers had already collected 20 million from drug companies, hospitals, and insurance companies, which raises some ethical questions for Timothy Noah , writing for Slate. Senator Kennedy will be a central figure in President Obama’s health care plan. Might these donors expect favors?

Many of us admire the positive accomplishments of Senator Kennedy and are sorry he is so ill. But we didn’t volunteer to donate to his pre-memorial project. We are being forced into it when most of us have other desperate priorities. That’s what makes this earmark such a cheap trick to pull on us during such grave times.

The President says he is opposed to earmarks that sneak in, sometimes literally during the night, to raid our treasure.

The future demands that we operate in a different way than we have in the past,” Mr. Obama told reporters before signing the bill in private. “So let there be no doubt: this piece of legislation must mark an end to the old way of doing business and the beginning of a new era of responsibility and accountability that the American people have every right to expect and demand.

Well, he caved this year. Let’s watch same time next year.

I end by noting that many, probably most, earmarks are not inherently evil. They say they will help repair roads and bridges, remodel museums, fund programs for children, and the like. (See them all for yourself here .)

But the whole process stinks in my book. There has to be a better way for states and districts to get federal aid for truly necessary projects that does not involve draining blood out of major congressional bills.

Dear ACLU Supporter,

Yesterday, ACLU lawyers encountered a recurring — and troubling — obstacle in our lawsuit seeking justice for torture victims caught up in the CIA’s extraordinary rendition program. But this time, the objections were not coming from the Bush administration.

To our surprise and disappointment, the new Justice Department urged a federal appeals court to dismiss our lawsuit charging a Boeing subsidiary with providing critical support for the CIA’s rendition program based on the same “state secrets” claim that the Bush administration had repeatedly invoked to avoid any judicial scrutiny of its actions. During the course of the argument, one judge asked twice if the change in administration had any bearing on the Justice Department’s position. The attorney for the government said that its position remained the same.

This isn’t the kind of change we need if we want an America we can be proud of again.

If the judges rule in the government’s favor, our clients — who were tortured as part of the government’s rendition program — will never get their day in court.

We’re still hoping the court will rule in our favor and allow our case to move forward. But, in the meantime, we must do everything we can to end the abuse of the “state secrets” doctrine both in the courts and on Capitol Hill.

Senators Kennedy, Leahy, Specter and Representative Nadler introduced legislation in 2008 to narrow the scope of the state secrets privilege — and open the courthouse doors to people who have suffered real and legitimate harm by the government. Clearly, this legislation is needed now more than ever.

Send a message to these members of Congress to let them know you support the State Secrets Protection Act.

This crucial civil liberties bill recognizes the need to take precautions when it comes to national security. But, it also acknowledges that courts have been competently managing the balance between the security of classified information and the right to a fair trial in criminal cases for years. And, most important of all, it makes it much more difficult for the government to abuse the state secrets doctrine to escape accountability for illegal behavior.

We can’t allow any administration to invoke state secrets to hide a reprehensible history of torture, rendition and the most grievous human rights violations.

Send a message to support the State Secrets Protection Act.

Yesterday, the Obama administration had an opportunity to act on its condemnation of torture and rendition. But, instead, the Justice Department opted to stay the course.

Now, we must hope that the court will assert its independence, reject the government’s false claims of state secrets, and allow victims of torture and rendition their day in court.

Thanks for standing with us as we work to pursue justice on this critical civil liberties issue.

Sincerely,

Anthony D. Romero
Executive Director
ACLU

P.S. The ACLU has been working on this case for years. To learn more about rendition and the people impacted, watch our short video:

Yes – “disappointment” – that is exactly the word I would have chosen to convey my outrage that, once again, Obama reneged on a MAJOR campaign promise. Just like the “disappointment” people in my family felt when Obama voted for FISA, after promising to filibuster it and ensure it did NOT pass. No reason for him to have voted for it – Clinton sure didn’t. Heck, even McCain didn’t. But Obama? Oh, yeah – he threw that campaign promise away like yesterday’s garbage. I can only assume it was because he wanted to make sure he got to have ALL the same abilities to spy on us and sneak people away in the dead of night that Bush had. How else to explain his readiness to do a 180 on something so important? Oh, besides his being a liar, that is. Ahem.

And the NY Times finally weighed in on this, too (you know this happened earlier in the week. You may not have known because the MSM is continuing its pathetic journalism when it comes to Obama – protect and divert.), in an Editorial entitled, “Continuity of the Wrong Kind.” Ya know, I have been saying for months and months and months that Obama was another Bush. Nice of him to prove me right, isn’t it? Though, for the sake of the COUNTRY, I would have been happier to be proved wrong…

Apparently, the Editors at the Times feel similarly:

The Obama administration failed — miserably — the first test of its commitment to ditching the extravagant legal claims used by the Bush administration to try to impose blanket secrecy on anti-terrorism policies and avoid accountability for serial abuses of the law.

On Monday, a Justice Department lawyer dispatched by the new attorney general, Eric Holder, appeared before a three-judge panel of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in San Francisco. The case before them involves serious allegations of torture by five victims of President Bush’s extraordinary rendition program. The five were seized and transported to American facilities abroad or to countries known for torturing prisoners.

Incredibly, the federal lawyer advanced the same expansive state-secrets argument that was pressed by Mr. Bush’s lawyers to get a trial court to dismiss the case without any evidence being presented. It was as if last month’s inauguration had never occurred.

Voters have good reason to feel betrayed if they took Mr. Obama seriously on the campaign trail when he criticized the Bush administration’s tactic of stretching the state-secrets privilege to get lawsuits tossed out of court. Even judges on the panel seemed surprised by the administration’s decision to go forward instead of requesting a delay to reconsider the government’s position and, perhaps, file new briefs.

And not to harp, but honestly – if the people who voted for Obama really, really believed he was a man of his word, it is their own fault. He made it abundantly clear, time and time again, that he would say or do whatever needed to be said or done, to get what he wanted. They just refused to believe their own eyes and ears.

Back to the editorial:

The argument is that the very subject matter of the suit is a state secret so sensitive that it cannot be discussed in court, and it is no more persuasive now than it was when the Bush team pioneered it. For one thing, there is ample public information available about the C.I.A.’s rendition, detention and coercive interrogation programs. The fact that some of the evidence might be legitimately excluded on national security grounds need not preclude the case from being tried, and allowing the judge to make that determination. More fundamentally, the Obama administration should not be invoking state secrets to cover up charges of rendition and torture.

President Obama has taken some important steps to repair Mr. Bush’s damaging legacy — issuing executive orders to prohibit torture, shut secret prisons overseas and direct closure of the detention camp at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba. It would have been good if he and Mr. Holder had shown the same determination in that federal court, rather than defending the indefensible.

Um – do they realize Obama hasn’t actually CLOSED Gitmo?? I’m just asking, because they seem to think it is a done deal. And given their frustration over Obama’s actions in this very piece, WHY would they think that? It just defies logic! Sheesh!

And I do have a question – if the CIA can still carry out rendition, how is it that the secret prisons are shut down? I mean, isn’t that just mincing words? Seriously, that seems a bit counter-intuitive to me.

How many times, and in how many ways, does Obama have to repudiate his campaign promises before the MSM and his followers stop carrying water for him? After three weeks, it is just laughable. Or it WOULD be if this wasn’t such a serious issue. One widely decried when Bush did it. So where the hell are all the folks who screamed about it then? Sure would love to know. Maybe they have changed their minds now that Obama wants to do it, because obviously, if The One wants it, it has to be A-okay, right? Right?

Wrong. It just makes them hypocrites.

I’m not sure what part of Do. Not. Want. people in the NY Times and the Governor’s mansion do not understand. New Yorkers do not like this Kennedy trick one bit.

Here’s the message:

New York State voters have cooled on Caroline Kennedy and more voters now prefer State Attorney General Andrew Cuomo 31 – 24 percentfor Hillary Clinton’s U.S. Senate seat, according to a Quinnipiac University poll released today. U.S. Rep. Carolyn Maloney gets 6 percent, with 5 percent for U.S. Rep. Kirsten Gillibrand, 2 percent for U.S. Rep. Steve Israel, 18 percent for someone else and 14 percent undecided.

Here’s the rest of the message:

New York State voters say 48 – 37 percent that Kennedy is not qualified to be a U.S. Senator and 40 – 37 percent that she would not be a good Senator. Democrats say 47 – 35 percent that she is qualified, while Republicans say 65 – 24 percent that she is not qualified. Independent voters say 51 – 34 percent that she is not qualified.

Still, voters say 38 – 33 percent that Gov. David Paterson will appoint Ms. Kennedy to the U.S. Senate.

In other words, New Yorkers are not in a good mood about this whole skanky deal and they aren’t letting up about it either. They know they are being railroaded and Teddy Kennedy’s tantrums mean nothing to them. New York is not Massachusetts. Dave, tell Teddy nobody in New York cares that he wants his name embedded in politics forever. They do not care to be bamboozled. This is starting to smell like Pay To Play and it’s not even being done in secret.

Upstate New Yorkers are particularly angered. Of course that’s probably the place Caroline will “volunteer” to dump all those terrorism suspects when Obama closes down that other place. She’ll call it “job creation” for prisons. Don’t think New Yorkers haven’t thought of that either. They know the disdain with which she treated them and they know that they will never see her again if she forces herself into the Senator’s chair.

Caroline didn’t even know there was a place above Manhattan until she decided she would scrap her useless resume and become New York’s junior Senator because she has a certain last name. But the only people who are buying into this insult are politicians who got phone calls and Democrats who would vote for anything with a (D) after its name.

Cuomo leads Kennedy 31 – 20 percent among upstate voters and 36 – 22 percent in the suburbs, while Kennedy gets 31 percent of New York City voters to Cuomo’s 29 percent, the independent Quinnipiac (KWIN-uh-pe-ack) University poll finds. Men back Cuomo 32 – 23 percent while women back him 31 – 25 percent.

This is not good, Dave. She’s only up by two points in New York City, for goodness sakes. What do you need, a telephone poll on your head to get it?

6844 people were polled, Dave. So it’s pretty safe to say Quinnipiac has it right.

You know damned well that the Kennedys can pour millions into her election and yours, Barack Obama can go to Upstate New York, part the Mohawk River and pass out fishes — and they still won’t forget what’s going on here right now. You know that Upstate New York Democrats have nooooooo problem voting Republican. Monarchies make them itch.

Worse yet, you are setting the Republicans up for running that morally bankrupt exploitative thief Rudy Giuliani against her. Or you.

Is this what you really want?

Caroline. Caroline. Caroline. Please stop embarrassing yourself and pissing New York off. New York has a lot of work to do. And Teddy, not that you won’t burn in hell anyways (See “Mary Jo”), but you should have a special room there for ruining Caroline’s image after all these years.

************************************************************

UPDATE: Due to accusation of not supporting “women” for positions. Here is my response to that:

Politics is run exactly like Corporate America. They put a token female in a slot now and then so that they can show everybody that she can’t do the job. They downplay competent women so that they won’t be embarrassed by their skill. Falling for this is the very worst thing you can do.

Caroline is holding HERSELF to a different standard. She is behaving above everybody else because her name is Kennedy. She should have known better, although I think this is all Teddy’s doing, that shit. Caroline KNOWs she is not qualified and instead of providing a little humility to the mix, she showed up in upper New York with a stick in her butt. How exactly does this attitude help promote women? She is not qualified and putting an unqualified attitude-riddled woman in this slot does NOT help women.

The fact is, there are several VERY good women in NY who are qualified for this slot. They are getting railroaded by a Monarchy. Now THAT makes me angry. When we support this kind of behavior, we set women back even further.

Furthermore, NY is in a financial shambles, businesses drive right by, and this only serves to make people more angry. This isn’t about a woman, this is about a Monarch trying to shove his last name down the throats of a state that is in dire need of somebody who can replace a hardworking, roll- up- your- sleeves policy wonk named Hillary Clinton. Caroline Kennedy is nothing more than a token woman. And if I have learned one thing in Corporate America it’s that token women ruin it for everyone else.

And finally, the very competent Maloney would have one damned good shot at this if the Monarchy weren’t scewing HER. Ditto for Gillibrand. If you want to be angry, be angry about that. It’s the same old tune all over again.

Here is what women are losing thanks to Ted Kennedy:

http://www.gillibrand.house.gov/

http://maloney.house.gov/

That’s the number of questions Caroline Kennedy has answered in her pursuit to secure Hillary Clinton’s seat, according to THIS article in the NY Times. Want to guess how many interviews she has granted in this pursuit? Zero. How about answers to questions regarding her finances? Zero. Yes, Caroline Kennedy is using the Barack Obama School of campaigning – give up NO information whatsoever. None. According to the article:

If she were applying to be, say, an undersecretary of education in Barack Obama’s new administration, Caroline Kennedy would have to fill out a 63-item confidential questionnaire disclosing potentially embarrassing text messages and diary entries, the immigration status of her household staff, even copies of every résumé she used in the last 10 years.

If she were running for election to the Senate, Ms. Kennedy would have to file a 10-part, publicly available report disclosing her financial assets, credit card debts, mortgages, book deals and the sources of any payments greater than $5,000 in the last three years.

But Ms. Kennedy, who has asked Gov. David A. Paterson to appoint her to succeed Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton — and who helped oversee the vetting process for Mr. Obama’s possible running mates — is declining to provide a variety of basic data, including companies she has a stake in and whether she has ever been charged with a crime.

Isn’t that just fitting considering Obama’s own levels of secrecy? Once again, it begs the question WHY she wants to be a politician. It would seem she sees it not as a service to the people of New York, but as an honor OWED her. I’d say she’s a bit unclear on the responsibilities of the job. Never mind that this is an appointed position, and there are actually other people out there interested in the position who are FAR more qualified than she, say Andrew Cuomo, for starters (and I, too, would love to have a woman replace a woman in this seat, but women are not interchageable by gender alone. Experience, qualifications, and commitment to public service count, too.).

Jonah Goldberg had an interesting comparison of Gov. Sarah Palin and Caroline Kennedy in this article: Cinderella vs. the Barracuda
A perfect example of the bowel-stewing self-indulgence of elite liberalism:

For people who think there’s no cultural divide in this country, consider the treatment of two women much in the news in 2008.

The first is Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin. A woman from very humble roots and with a very blue-collar life story, she worked with her steelworker and professional-fisherman husband to provide a life for their large family. She got involved in the PTA. She became mayor of her small town, then rose, by dint of her dedication and almost naive fearlessness, to the job of governor. In a mainstream, almost romantic sense, it’s almost like she was designed by God for a Hallmark movie of the week.

But, when John McCain picked her to be his running mate, the full fury of the liberal establishment — and sizable swaths of the conservative establishment, some of whom dubbed her a “cancer” on the GOP — came down on her with a vengeance usually reserved for Klansmen and pedophiles. Don’t get me wrong: There were valid criticisms to make. But that is quite a different thing than saying all of the criticism was valid or that the intensity and volume of the criticism was warranted.

No kidding. Americans used to revel in the “pulling oneself up by one’s bootstraps” kind of story. Gov. Palin couldn’t BE a better example of that rise. Well, maybe not quite as good as President Bill Clinton, but still – she clearly has made something of herself through hard work and perseverance. Not that you could tell that by the media’s attacks on her.

And now to potential senator from the Great State of New York:

Then there’s Caroline Bouvier Kennedy, daughter of John F. Kennedy, sister of John Jr., niece of Senators Ted and Robert Kennedy, granddaughter of Ambassador Joseph Kennedy, and the cousin of myriad other Kennedys and Shrivers who’ve burrowed deep into the timber of the house of liberalism. A multimillionaire from birth, Ms. Kennedy has spent most of her life on the charity-benefit and cotillion circuit. A product of the Brearley School in New York and the Concord Academy in Massachusetts before she attended Harvard and Columbia, Kennedy has made the importance of public education her signature cause.

Sweet Caroline (she was the inspiration for the Neil Diamond song) recently made it known that she would like to be appointed to Hillary Clinton’s vacant Senate seat.

One could say without fear of overstating things that the liberal reaction to the inexperienced Caroline has been somewhat more gracious than the reaction to the “inexperienced” Palin. Ruth Marcus of the Washington Post has devoted two columns in as many weeks to this “fairy tale” scenario in which Kennedy, our “tragic national princess,” is finally rewarded — for her years of quiet dignity, selflessly avoiding scandal and the paparazzi — with the Senate seat that once belonged to her uncle Bobby. What’s astounding about the normally sensible Marcus’s case for “the Cinderella Kennedy” (New York magazine’s phrase) is that she doesn’t really make one, at least not on the merits. Marcus doesn’t even bother. It’s all schoolgirl gushing.

Pretty much. While there are very few actual requirements to be Senator, age being one of the few. But, don’t you think that wanting to BE a politician might be helpful?? You know, going among the people, talking to them, shaking their hands, going to meeting after meeting after meeting? Just sayin’. Not that that seems to matter to The NY Times:

The editors of the New York Times, in a more skeptical editorial, summarized her qualifications thusly: “Ms. Kennedy has much going for her. As a public figure, she carries the glamour and poignancy of her family …” The editors then went on to describe what great liberals her dad and uncles were. That’s it.

Wow. Talk about your hard-hitting journalism! Way to GO, NY Times!!! Goldberg continued:

This (is) a perfect example of the bowel-stewing self-indulgence of elite liberalism.

Here’s a news flash: Not everyone truckles with doe-eyed awe at “America’s royal family.” Some of us don’t even like the idea of American royal families. JFK and RFK had their good points, but they don’t deserve the beatification they receive on a daily basis. As a man, Teddy Kennedy is hardly a role model, and as a public servant he’s not much better. I, for one, don’t think denying poor black kids private-school scholarships (aka vouchers) is heroic. Nor do I think his support for alternative energy, except when it might obstruct his Hyannis Port estate’s views with windmills, is admirable.

Simply, the Kennedy clan is no priestly caste, serving as the conscience of the nation, and its progeny do not deserve eternal deference.

You gotta admit – he has a point. Many liberals, myself included, found Ted’s position on windmills to be just a TAD hypocritical, but it is to the more important issue that Mr. Goldberg is addressing: the Kennedys are hardly worthy of beatification with all of the personal, and political, issues in which they have engaged, or been caught, much less be “American royalty.”

Goldberg concludes:

Now, I know the comparison between Palin and Caroline Kennedy is not perfect. Each has strengths where the other has weaknesses, and the jobs of senator and vice president aren’t identical (the former actually has more responsibility, for starters).

But the comparison is nonetheless revealing. Palin’s selection triggered troughs of bile, vomited up from nearly every respectable liberal quarter. A Florida congressman, and Obama surrogate, insinuated that Palin was a “Nazi sympathizer” and anti-Semite (she’s not, but Caroline Kennedy’s grandfather was). Her by-the-bootstraps story was ridiculed by nearly every ex-debutante newsreader and avowed “feminist” in America.

Meanwhile, Caroline, with a resume perfectly suited to being a Kennedy and little else, is a Cinderella who deserves a Senate seat because, well, she just does.

Whatever Palin’s faults, Sarah Barracuda’s America has a lot more going for it than Sweet Caroline’s.

Oh, sure – Caroline Kennedy deserves the seat just because she wants it, at least in HER mind, and the mind of her family. That’s just exactly the kind of people we need in Washington, especially to provide oversight to The One Who Wants To Be King.

On a lighter note, I think Andy Borowitz, the humorist, has the perfect interpretation of Caroline Kennedy wanting something for not much in this piece:

Caroline Kennedy Asks to be Time’s Person of the Year: Places Phone Call to Magazine’s Editor

Caroline Kennedy would like to be considered Time magazine’s Person of the Year for 2009 and has let the magazine’s editor know of her interest in the honor, aides to Ms. Kennedy confirmed today.

While some observers considered Ms. Kennedy’s bid to be premature, especially since 2009 has not officially begun, aides to the New York senatorial aspirant said that it reflected her view that 2009 will be a very big year for her.

“I think Caroline’s calling Time magazine and asking to be put on the cover shows just what a tireless worker she is,” said cousin Kerry Kennedy. “When she really wants something, she’s not afraid to roll up her sleeves and make a phone call.”

Her cousin said that having witnessed Caroline’s work ethic, she has no doubt that she is deserving of Time’s highest honor: “I can’t tell you how many times she’s gotten the wrong number, been put on hold, or had calls dropped altogether.”

In addition to the Person of the Year honors, Kerry Kennedy said that Caroline had also expressed an interest in next year’s Nobel Peace Prize.

“That’s a call she hasn’t made yet,” Ms. Kennedy said. “She has to figure out the time difference in Oslo.”

Ahem. Well, she’s just as qualified for THAT as she is the US Senate.

I could be wrong, but isn’t SHE engaging in a “Pay to Play” scheme? Isn’t that what her uncle, Harry Reid, and all the others are doing by trying to force Gov. Paterson to choose her?? It sure seems to be pretty close to what is happening in IL, except from the other side. They are trying to coerce Gov. Paterson to give her this position for what, payback for all of her service during the election? Probably. Hey, I’m just sayin’. But it seems eerily similar to me. What do YOU say?

In Sunday’s post, I picked up on a story about the friendly noises being made by Ted Kennedy toward proposals made by the health insurance industry, which is reminiscent of the way things went with the Bush Adminstration’s Medicare Part D and Big Pharma plan, with much “protest” at the time by Kennedy. (See The Past Week: November 30-December 6, Recaps and Random Thoughts (Freepers “Heart” GG; Obama & Chester Arthur; Healthcare “Reform”; Montana-Yes, MONTANA-Legalizes Assisted-Suicide; Greens Pic); (once again, a h/t to Not Your Sweetie for the source article). And, of course, the Democrats failed to change the plan as part of their “100 hours” agenda when they retook the House and Senate after the 2006 election:

There’s a spirit of optimism about our work to ensure quality, affordable health care for all Americans — and today’s announcement adds to that optimism,” said Kennedy spokesman Anthony Coley. “The insurance industry has advanced serious proposals that deserve serious analysis and consideration.

Meanwhile, there’s a new twist to the story (this particular version of the story features a big picture of Tom Daschle–inspiring, no?), along with the obligatory dig at the Clinton Administration/Hillary Clinton’s efforts:

Obama Hopes To Avoid Clinton Health Care Missteps:

Former U.S. Senate Majority leader Tom Daschle, right, who is the nominee for health and human services secretary in the Obama administration, greets U.S. Sen. Ken Salazar, D-Colo., after Daschle’s speech about plans for reforming the country’s health care system during the 2008 Colorado Health Care Summit in Denver on Friday, Dec. 5, 2008. The summit capped off a 31-county tour of Colorado by Salazar to discuss the condition of the nation’s health care system with elected officials and business owners. (AP Photo/David Zalubowski)

WASHINGTON — President-elect Barack Obama and his aides are determined not to repeat the mistakes the Clinton administration made 15 years ago in trying to revamp the nation’s health care system. That means applying some of the lessons learned — moving fast, seizing momentum and not letting it go.

Tom Daschle, Obama’s point man on the issue, discussed the early strategy, although details of Obama’s proposals won’t be finalized for a while. Already, however, the political and public relations parts are coming into place.

The strategy begins with giving people the chance to highlight their concerns and experiences. Daschle invited people around the nation to hold what amounts to house parties from Dec. 15-31. Obama’s transition team will gather the information from those meetings and post the material on its Web site, http://change.gov.

By asking anybody and everybody to share their health care experiences, Daschle is confronting one of the major criticisms of 15 years ago: that the effort to craft former President Bill Clinton’s plan for universal coverage was too secretive.

“We have to make this as inclusive a process as possible,” Daschle, the former Senate majority leader from South Dakota, said in a speech in Denver. It was his first since Democratic officials confirmed last month he was offered the job as health and human services secretary and that he had accepted.

“They are clearly trying to do it differently and help the American public see the case for reform in human terms,” said John Rother, public policy director for the advocacy group AARP.

So, here are the healthcare “house parties,” public relations blitz and all that fake “transparency” being rolled out. And are we supposed to be impressed with AARP which lost a load of members over its support of the Medicare Part D sellout?? The same AARP which is selling more Part D policies than any other outfit? Are you buying any of this? “Reform in human terms?” (For an exhaustive history of AARP and it’s machinations, see, “The Seduction: The Shocking Story of how AARP Backed the Medicare Bill,” by Barbara T. Dreyfuss, the American Prospect, 2004.)

For a really great personal account of the Medicare Part D realities for seniors and what Obama’s “plan” means for Medicare and healthcare reform as a whole, check out this piece by James Ridgeway entitled, “Medicare’s Poison Pill,” which was published in the September/October 2008 edition of Mother Jones. Take note of this warning about what this could all mean for Medicare itself, not just the Part D drug plan:

None of these measures addresses the core weakness of the program—its obligations to the insurance and drug industries. Medicare Part D is a small-scale model of just the kind of system some Democrats, including Barack Obama, now propose—a government-subsidized health insurance plan, one that preserves the profits of private middlemen at a high cost to citizens’ and government coffers.

For conservatives, meanwhile, the goal is to take Part D as a model for the rest of Medicare—and they’ve already made some inroads. The 2003 law that established Part D contains a “demonstration project” beginning in 2010 that will require Medicare to compete with private plans (which, via a complicated pricing formula, will be rigged to have lower rates) in six metro areas. This is meant to be the model, the seed that will grow into the Brave New World of privatized Medicare.

Back before the drug bill passed, the senior advocacy group Gray Panthers saw the writing on the wall and denounced the legislation as “bait in an insidious strategy to undermine traditional Medicare and convert it into a private industry using taxpayers’ subsidies to pay for it.” They were right, and the way things are going, I may yet live to see it happen—as long as I keep taking my drugs.

Over at the The Obama-Biden Plan, there’s a vague reference amidst the scraps of Hillary Clinton’s plan (sans universality) to some sort of “competition”:

Reform the insurance market to increase competition by taking on anticompetitive activity that drives up prices without improving quality of care.

Oh, really? When have we heard THAT sort of line before??

The last line of the entire “agenda” is billed as A Commitment to Fiscal Responsibility:

Barack Obama will pay for his $50 – $65 billion health care reform effort by rolling back the Bush tax cuts for Americans earning more than $250,000 per year and retaining the estate tax at its 2009 level.

Oops, hasn’t that “changed” already?? Yes, it has!

***

Postscript:

Before the election my doctor reminded me to vote for Obama because we needed “healthcare.” Post-election, another health provider, already souring a bit, told me the only thing they trusted Obama with was “healthcare.” I told that person they shouldn’t trust him with anything. Next time I see either of them, I’m giving them a copy of this post…

AGAIN, special thanks to InsightAnalyticalGrl for this post. Please check out InsightAnalytical for more thought-provoking articles.

He was apparently measuring drapes for the office over in Foggy Bottom (trimmed with French lace, I’m sure) and now will have to try and have them installed in his cramped Senate Office back on Capitol Hill. In the Globe, Joan Vennochi reminds us, just what a good little Obot, Kerry was:

The Massachusetts senator helped to launch Obama on the national stage. As his party’s presidential nominee, Kerry chose Obama as the keynote speaker for the 2004 Democratic National Convention. Ever since then, Kerry did everything right by Obama.

He walked away from his own presidential dreams and embraced Obama’s. He helped with fund-raising and organized a Web-based fight against the kind of negative campaigning that helped derail his own presidential bid. He also delivered a powerful speech when Democrats gathered in Denver to nominate Obama. …

Both Kerry and Senator Edward M. Kennedy endorsed the Illinois senator at a critical point in his primary battle. Back in Massachusetts, Kerry took most of the heat for the Obama endorsement. An enraged contingent of Bay State women for Clinton badgered Kerry for his failure to back their candidate. They were so angry, the women helped a Democratic rival win enough votes at the state convention to earn a spot on the ballot. As a result, Kerry faced his first primary challenger in 24 years.

You can read her entire article here

Perhaps the junior Senator from Massachussets should have studied the President-elect’s history a little more. “Change you can believe in” is a new slogan, the one he has always lived by is “what have you done for me lately?”

The more conservative Herald is a bit more blunt.

Word from Capitol Hill is that, despite his kind words for Hillary Clinton yesterday, Sen. John Kerry is angry and disappointed about not being considered a serious candidate for Barack Obama’s secretary of state.

“He’s pretty PO’d,” said Someone Who Knows. “After going from the early front-runner to not even being considered, he’s pretty disappointed.”

You can read the rest of that article here.

Bottom line, Kerry lost out. Why, because he is a loser. Losers lose, that’s what they do. Getting elected as a Democrat in Massachusetts, does not count. Britney Spears could win that Senate seat if she had the Democratic line. Several reports in recent weeks indicated that for all of his loyal Obot status, Kerry would have been more than willing to endorse Hillary Clinton had she promised him the Secretary of State position (something she apparently was unwilling to do.) Perhaps that’s another reason why Obama and Clinton seem to be getting along these days, they probably have had a couple of laughs together over the thought of Kerry as S.O.S..

The Herald article did add this unrelated nugget.

As for Hillary, we hear that one of the reasons she decided to abandon the Senate to serve under her former rival was Sen. Ted Kennedy’s snub on health care.

Kennedy declined to put the former first lady on his health care task force – the group that will shape the Senate’s health care bill.

Word is, the senior senator, who is battling brain cancer, hopes to get the bill through the Senate as soon as work is completed on Obama’s economic plan, and he didn’t believe Clinton had the juice to get it done.

I would have thought the “Liberal Lion” wouldn’t need any additional juice to get anything through a 58 seat Democratic Senate.

That reminds me, after all the work Kerry and Kennedy did for Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton easily won the Massachussets primary. Enjoy the Cabernet.

HILLLLLLLLLLAAAAAAAAAAAARRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRY! I’m 150% for Hillary taking SecState, and I don’t care if you disagree! So there! She’ll be fine. She KNOWS the ropes and the palace intrigue better than all of us combined. Don’t fret so much! And if she helps Obama succeed, by god that is great! The last thing we need is for Obama to fail! It’s too twisted to think like that! It’s too Old Testament. It’s too self-centered to think like that. P.S. Ted Kennedy I don’t care if you have a brain tumor, that was an a–h-le thing to do — to all of a sudden dangle health care in front of her to try to prevent her from becoming SecState, after denying it to her all this time. You are contemptible, sir.

Here’s a bunch of blah blah blah blah blah blah:

NOTE: You can CLICK on either screenshot from Memeorandum.com in order to get to the links to all of those stories.

AND NOW –> THIS IS YOUR SPACE! CHAT ABOUT ANYTHING YOU WISH! With hugs and the greatest affection, Susan

But I really thought (yes, I really did) — that day when Hillary and Barack were whispering to each other on that plane — that they’d come to an arrangement. That they had struck THIS deal: Hillary would dutifully campaign for Barack, frequently and with passion, and so would Bill. And, in exchange, she’d get to lead the Congressional effort for universal health care. And her name might even be attached to the health care plan.

(Of note: She had to campaign for Barack no matter what because, if he’d lost, she’d forever have been blamed. And even if he’d won, and she hadn’t performed, she’d have been treated as a turncoat outcast. It was a terrible situation for her to be in, and I ached for her.)

But now this?????? This twisting of the knife stabbed into Hillary and all of her supporters, most of whom came through for you (god knows why but they did), you selfish pr–k, Barack??? This comes from Jennifer Rubin, a guest of Nocturnal Warrior on our No Quarter Radio channel — on both of these must-listen archived shows on October 21, 2008 and September 16, 2008:

And For The Losers

Hillary Clinton didn’t get the VP slot. And she is not getting health care stewardship– at least not in the Senate. Politics is tough stuff. And if you lose, the winners generally ignore or spurn you, unless you have something to offer them or pose some danger to them. It might be wise for the new President to give Hillary, and Bill too, something to do. There will be rockier times ahead and it pays to keep your rivals close. Still, it is not likely she will pose much of a danger to his success. Her bargaining power is gone.

Ms. Rubin links to the New York Post’s article, “DENIED.” I decided to take a couple screenshots. The New York Post clearly ENJOYS Hillary’s pain. But they did report the story, so here goes:

______________________________________________

Did you catch that?

“In the end, it’s President Obama
who’s going to lead the effort for us,”
Myers told Inside Health Policy.

ALL HAIL CAESAR!

______________________________________________

You can read the full article here.

P.S. DO listen to Nocturnal Warrior’s archived shows with Jennifer Rubin. For one thing, Nocturnal Warrior will make you laugh yourselves silly because he is SO clever, SO funny, and makes SO much fun of Barack Obama!.

Listen to Jennifer Rubin and Nocturnal Warrior (and his sidekick Puma Pam) by clicking here: October 21, 2008 and September 16, 2008.

You cannot be angry ALL the time. Laughter is our savior!

It is wildly amusing to read articles about comedians who are stuck with how to make fun of Barack Obama. Some are even claiming that his election means the “death” of comedy.

Uh, people. Get a clue! Hire Nocturnal Warrior. He’s totally hilarious. And he mocks Obama all the time, yet is never — not once — below-the-belt cruel. That’s an exceptional talent: To be riotously funny without being nasty. Nocturnal Warrior has it down.

Every Tuesday night at 9:00 p.m. on NoQuarterRadio.

I have long been a fan of General Wesley Clark and appreciated his early and very strong endorsement of Hillary Clinton, our rightful nominee. He worked very hard for her nomination but then, like so many, started singing the Unity Pony crapanola after the primary ended. Despite the lousy treatment he has received since, he is still playing the game to get Dems elected and what follows is excerpted from a letter I received from Wes yesterday:

… I can’t tell you how ready I am to head to Denver and join my fellow Democrats.

Personally I think Wes would rather stick needles in his eyes…

We’re a party loaded with talent. Like many of you, I’ve been thrilled by the speeches at the Democratic National Convention so far. Hillary Clinton was great last night. Her strength, her character, her call for unity. Her speech just proves once again that she is a great American and has many years of distinguished public service ahead of her.

OK. His comment about Hillary was the only piece of truth in his entire missive. And now, some drivel:

And what an inspiration Ted Kennedy was, as was Nancy Pelosi, our Speaker of the House…

Yes, I too am moved by people who ‘diss’ somebody’s record, achievements and legacy out of jealousy and a need for power. How inspiring. More…

And then there’s tomorrow. Our Party is so fortunate at this time in history to be nominating Barack Obama. After Michelle’s incredibly warm and personal speech on Monday, any American can see the strength of character in their family. It’s clear that when the Obamas become first family, they’ll definitely bring change to America.

I can’t wait to hear Senator Obama’s words in person.

Wes ‘can’t wait’?? If that last phrase doesn’t make you want to lose it, nothing will. Wes was dis-invited from speaking but is going to stand mute on the stage while the arrogant Obama is crowned Caesar tonight – while a lesser General speaks in his stead. Oh, Wes, I’m so sure you can’t wait to go to Denver!

Let’s call the following a bit of revisionist history, but this is my take on what Wes would say if he could say it:

I, Wes Clark, am here today to right a wrong. And the wrong is mine.

For 34 years, I proudly wore the uniform in service to my country. I rose to the rank of Four Star General, Supreme Allied Commander of NATO and probably have more medals and accolades from this great country and other nations around the world than I can count. I have served under many administrations, both Republican and Democratic. I was always a registered Independent as those of us in the military must pledge to support the Commander in Chief regardless of party.

After my retirement, I came to terms with my own Presidential aspirations and in 2003, was drafted to run myself. What my grass roots campaign lacked in money and organization, it compensated for in a progressive platform and heart. I watched as John Kerry wound up being named our nominee. Even though I noticed he had lifted some of my ideas, like a good, and newly minted Democrat, I worked tirelessly to get him elected to office. I did it because that’s how the Party works. That’s what you do. You work together for the common goal no matter who gets the nod.

That’s what I thought.

In 2005-2006, I crossed the country, campaigning on behalf of the seemingly hapless Democrats, hoping to finally achieve some oversight if we could take back Congress. We achieved that goal. Well, we achieved the election part. The oversight part was non-existent.

My brief 6 month run in 2003 was a great learning experience and yes, I had my own Presidential aspirations this time around, too, but quickly saw that I could not connect the dots. The dots connected for Hillary and as someone I have known and respected for 25 years, I gladly endorsed her bid for the Presidency. One year ago, I asked my own supporters to extend themselves to her in the same way they had for me. I did this because I know this woman has a spine of steel and the courage of her convictions.

I have seen up close and personal how she has fought for education, health care, veterans, women’s rights, first responders and children.

Imagine my surprise that my own supporters were split down the middle. Imagine my horror when I realized my own naivété and short-sightedness watching the appalling media coverage Hillary and her family were subjected to.

We campaigned together, I tooted her horn on every TV program I could, and finally after June 3rd, when the writing was on the wall and this primary was brought to a forced end by the Super Delegates, I did the unthinkable 2 days later: I made the statement on my website that we should all get behind Barack Obama and that he would make a great President. I did not realize what that statement would cost me in terms of my own credibility, or what would be the cost to my soul.

Once again, I was playing the good Democrat. And yes, ambition played a big part, too. I knew my name was being floated for VP so perhaps I thought I could ride to the rescue of this inexperienced man. I won’t go into any more detail than that. You can fill in the blanks for yourselves and attribute whatever negative or positive motives to me you want. You’ve earned that right.

For weeks I’d been riding Senator McCain about the fact that his military record did not prove his ability to lead or his understanding of policy. Then came that fateful day on Face the Nation when I uttered the words that “being shot down does not qualify you to be President.”

I expected the right wing freak show. It was the left wing freak show that blindsided me.

After spending five years tirelessly fighting for the DNC and being their go-to guy on foreign policy, I went from top of the VP list to bottom of the Dem elite heap. Even my old pal John Kerry saw fit to trash my name. And as for Barack, well, let’s just say I was left to suck on some arugula under his very big bus.

And now I have to answer for the mistake I made. The mistake had nothing to do with Senator McCain. My mistake was that I did not stand up and shout from the highest hill that the DNC is making a horrid blunder. Hillary’s your girl. She’s our girl. She’s the one to lead us out of this morass.

I watched her speech Tuesday night. Senator Clinton was amazing, gracious, powerful and presidential. Everything I know her to be. She reminded me why the hell I endorsed her in the first place. She is a public servant who is truly willing to put her own interests aside for the good of the American people.

She did us all proud.

But the DNC did her dirty. I should have said as much. I have paid the price in the past for opening my big mouth. Since it wound up costing me anyway, better I should have paid the price for telling the truth than telling a lie.

I believe Hillary said recently at a dinner she was having with Terry McAuliffe that this is not the Democratic Party she knew. I certainly agree.

This Convention has been an exercise is turning upside down the values that we purport to defend. Since Wednesday night’s Convention theme was Securing America’s Future (ironic since it echoes the name of my PAC), but I was not invited to speak since I am under the bus sucking arugula – I would just like to remind you that it is Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton who has America’s interests writ large. I know she will continue to fight for the values and goals of people most in need in this country.

Whatever unity pony nonsense we all feel forced to spout, I hope you can forgive me for my lapse. I believe there’s a saying to the effect that evil thrives when good men do nothing. The political M.O. that got us to this place obviously needs to be thrown out with the bathwater. And those who are behind it need to be thrown out with it.

My deepest apologies to Hillary, who understands that politics is a blood sport, but she did not deserve to get bloodied by the likes of those I chose to unite with. I hope she can forgive me for boarding Obama’s disastrous bus before having done all my homework on this guy. No wonder I wound up under it. There are many things that qualify a person to be President but he is not possessed of those qualities.

And now that I have apologized, I’d like to also give thanks.

Thanks to the ungrateful, shortsighted DNC that has kicked the best and brightest political couple to the curb. P.S. – it didn’t work.

Thanks to the news media for doing their level best to once again pick the worst possible candidate in an effort to vaunt him to the Presidency. P.S. – I think enough people are awake this time and your ever decreasing credibility is much in evidence.

Thanks again to the elitist boobs in the party for telling us that 18,000,000 voters don’t matter. P.S. – they do.

But most of all, thanks to all of you for once again giving me the opportunity to say that the Hillary I know is the lady we want to follow. P.S. – I should have.

And I know you will.

Here’s to our rightful Presidential Nominee, Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton.

Others have been discussing Obama’s “Greek temple” stage, and some of the other Convention shenanigans, so I’ll spare you. Except to say this about the FAKE Greek Temple – that should be a little clue to all of you Obama supporters out there of his real mindset. I’m just sayin’ – take a good hard look, and then ask yourselves – what the heck were you THINKING?!?!?! Because of ONE LOUSY SPEECH you think this first term senator who has done nothing of note but run for President really DESERVES the highest office in the land?? And you are willing to destroy the Democratic Party, denigate the only two-term Democratic president in four decades, and any real chance of taking BACK the White House with this man? All I can ask is, WHY??? WHY are you so supportive of him? What has he done that makes you think he will follow up on ANY ONE of his promises?? Why do you dismiss the people with whom he chooses to surround himself?? Why do you keep claiming he has “good judgment”??? I just do not get it. I do not understand any of this.

And then there’s Howard Dean. And Donna Brazile. Nancy Pelosi. John Kerry. Ted Kennedy. ESPECIALLY Ted Kennedy, the man who fought tooth and nail for the Democratic nomination has become the one DEMANDING the popular vote winner get out of the race, and shut up already. All of them did not even want Hillary Clinton on the ROLL CALL. All of the leadership at the DNC has to be thrown out if we have any chance whatsoever of re-CLAIMING the DNC. What these people have done, what the DNC has BECOME is anything BUT Democratic.

So, Hillary Clinton’s speech is done. I am so going to miss hearing from her. Whoever wins this election, it will be four more years of me not being able to listen to the president speak, that’s for sure.

Oh, and one last thing – as others have pointed out so eloquently – HILLARY CLINTON is not responsible for Obama’s loss OR win (yeah, right). Stop freakin’ blaming your candidate’s poor performances on HER. It is ALL about him, which is what those of us who did not drink the Kool Aid have been saying all along. Instead of focusing so much of your energies on Clinton and REAL Democrats, maybe you should have been looking at who Obama really is/is not. Hillary is not his mother; she is not his handmaiden; she is not the cause of his not getting our votes – HE is doing that all by his own self. So knock it off already and get a clue. Go look at him standing up in his faux Greek temple, and open your eyes. It’s too late for this election, though, but still, maybe, JUST maybe, we’ll get the Democratic Party back to being one of Democratic ideals – REAL Democratic ideal, not vote stealing, caucus fraud, and all the stuff you already know the DNC did this year. Yep, getting back to real Democratic Ideas? Now THAT would be change I could believe in.

And this is WHO I believe in:

Instances of the DNC’s poor judgment keep piling up so it’s hard to keep it all straight, but four years ago, this elitist boob was our Presidential nominee. He was destined to join the ranks of Dukakis, Mondale, McGovern and yes, even the incredibly smart Al Gore must be counted here. It seems they don’t know how to run a campaign without their noses in the air, so superior and so much smarter than the other guy. The ‘Captain of the debating team’ strategy doesn’t seem to work out so well for the Dems.

I think Hillary is an exception to the debate rule because she can string three sentences together without coming across as a snob.

Perhaps that’s one of the reasons the DNC elite can’t stand her. Too middle class. Too plain spoken. Too good at throwin’ back the occasional bourbon shot with us regular folk. Heaven forefend we pick someone who actually understands the reality of having to live on Social Security or the need for having affordable health care. Does she have a top notch education? Yes. She’s a millionaire, you say? True. But that wealth was acquired relatively late. She knows what it is to work for a living. She spent seven years working for the Children’s Defense Fund right out of school, and throughout her life has worked for veterans, first responders, women, health care and education.

She was accused of many things, but no one ever said she looked down her nose at anyone. Right, Barack? Come to think of it, maybe that’s why they chose him – he can’t debate either! He’s just a snob. Finally! I have unearthed the DNC’s strategy for victory! Get someone who can eerrr uuuhh aaaaah his way into office.

But let’s get back to Kerry, the feller who hand-picked Obama to give that Convention speech back in 2004…

Remember when Bush Sr. was running for re-election in ’92 and got labeled as out-of-touch because he didn’t know what a bar code was? Kerry recently had a ‘barcode’ moment of his own. A young woman made a moving appeal to Senator Kerry to obtain fuel assistance benefits for a senior citizen in need of a new boiler. The elderly lady apparently supplements her Social Security with a part time job. She was told that because she earned $30 too much a week, she was not eligible – ergo, no money for heat.

Senator Kerry’s idea was “why doesn’t she cut back a couple of hours?”

Well, no, John, because a) she needs the money, b) that’s like borrowing from Peter to pay Paul and c) when you’re fortunate enough to get a part time job, you don’t generally tell your employer when you feel like showing up. But I guess if you’re a U.S. Senator and married to the Heinz fortune, you don’t worry about such piddling details.

Kerry has likewise shown himself to be a turncoat dunce on many occasions. First, he endorsed Obama over Clinton. Never mind Hillary, he endorsed Obama over Edwards, his former running mate, without so much as a “Dear John” letter.

Senators Kennedy, Kerry and Governor Duval Patrick made a grand showing of trumpeting Obama before the Massachusetts primary. Odd that Hillary still trounced him to the tune of 15 points.

This was the most telling primary of all 50 states (yes, 50, not 57) since David Axelrod was also Patrick’s campaign manager. The people of Massachusetts had already experienced Obama 1.0 in the person of Patrick, and he’s not doing so well, so they decided not to sip the hopey-changey koolaid a second time.

Kerry stated Hillary Clinton’s health care plan was ‘a non-starter.’ Uh, it’s the only health care plan that would actually cover everyone. ‘Dead on arrival’: those were his words. Didn’t Chairman Dean say universal health care is a moral imperative? Not so much, I guess.

Then Kerry gave the New Bedford Standard Times an interview basically saying that we needed to elect Barack because he is African American and would build a bridge between us and the Muslim community. That’s like saying if my mother had family in Austria, she could have talked Hitler out of invading Poland. And dare I say it, John, wanting to elect someone because of their skin color is…racist.

In July, Kerry allowed his new good buddy Barack and his clueless campaign people to ‘diss’ and dismiss none other than one of the heroes of the Democratic party: Max Cleland. But I thought he was John’s good friend?

Kerry was furious that Cleland was swift-boated in 2002 by the Republicans. That negative campaign cost Cleland his Senate seat. Oddly enough, Kerry had nothing to say when Barack ‘uninvited’ Cleland from a campaign event because he was labeled a ‘lobbyist’ and Obama has ‘nothing to do with lobbyists.’ M’kay.

Cleland occasionally works on behalf of Tissue Regeneration Technologies, a company that helps injured vets recover faster. Fitting that Max would do this since he lost three limbs fighting for his country in Viet Nam and sits in a wheel chair. And they asked him not to attend a campaign event for Obama? Why? Because they were ‘afraid they would be criticized’ for having someone in attendance with ‘lobbying ties.’ How courageous.

Way to win the military vote, Barack.

Do you have any idea how many vets out there are still angry with Kerry for his protests back in ’71??? I remember this clearly because I spent many hours campaigning for him in ’04 – not because I thought he was great, but because we needed to get Bush out. Many people I spoke to with military backgrounds acted like Kerry’s protests happened yesterday. These wounds don’t heal easily.

Not everyone lives in the disposable society that Senator Obama’s campaign seems to encourage with its’ every condescending or insensitive comment or action. Something I would have thought Senator Kerry learned the hard way, snatching defeat from the jaws of victory in 2004 running against arguably the worst president in history.

Here’s how many words of support for Max or rebuke for Barack were uttered from John Kerry’s lips: zero. Max Cleland, another dutiful Democrat, God bless him, remained silent. That silence spoke volumes.

Kerry’s latest lead-footed behavior was in evidence last Sunday on Meet The Press, when John decided to show what a good Obamabot he is by bringing up a subject I thought had worn itself out in the news cycle: throwing General Wesley Clark under the bus. He roundly criticized Clark for his appearance on Face the Nation where, aiming to board the unity pony, Clark made this unfortunate statement regarding McCain: “being shot down in a plane does not qualify you to be President.” It was a poor choice of words, even if true.

But there was no reason for Kerry to bring this up — again. The ‘courageous’ Obama had already thrown Clark under the bus weeks before. Did Kerry forget how hard Wes campaigned for him in 2004 after losing his own Presidential bid? Believe me, Clark would have made a far better President than Kerry, and is far less mind-numbing to listen to. While I may be furious Clark would speak on behalf of the empty suit, Obama, in the first place, if anyone can make an argument against McCain, it’s Clark. Did Kerry forget that Clark took four bullets in a jungle and still led his troops to victory in Viet Nam and has 34 years of distinguished service in the military?

Kerry allowed himself to be swift boated by the Republicans with nary a whimper and now he’s pulling the same crap? To what end? Clark has worked tirelessly for down ticket Democrats for the last five years.

I also remember Kerry campaigning before the Latino community back in ’04. He wagged his finger, reminding them in very rudimentary Spanish that voting is “muy importante”. He sounded as though he were talking to three years olds. Talking down to the voters; sounds like someone else we know.

John Kerry managed to accomplish one thing with all the above actions. He’s made me ashamed that I ever canvassed for him or made a phone call on his behalf.

And after all the years he and the rest of these pompous fools chose to back Mr. Wrong, wouldn’t you think for once they’d cop a clue and back Ms. Right?

I don’t recognize this party any more. I can’t figure out their endgame except that the losers’ club of Kerry, Dodd, Dean, Richardson and the rest, unable to win the Presidency themselves, think they will grow their own power whispering into this neophyte’s ear.

Kerry has been a Senator for 24 years and is so cozy in his job that he won’t even grant a debate to his primary opponent. Hmmm. That sounds familiar. That’s right. Kerry has a Democratic challenger in the person of Ed O’Reilly. O’Reilly may actually have a shot. Certainly there are many in Massachusetts not pleased with Kerry at the moment. Perhaps O’Reilly, a real salt of the earth gentleman, by the way, has a chance to pull this off. I’ve sent some dough to help. The primary is September 16th.

I think it’s time to send a shock wave to Kerry and the DNC. They keep advocating for change. Maybe it’s time to change them.

Tonight I have the honor of interviewing Bob Shrum. His book, No Excuses, is just out in paperback and it’s candy for the political junkie. If you love politics, you’ll love this book. I’ll be asking him about his political war stories. I also want to get his thoughts on this recent primary campaign and the concerns expressed by Hillary’s supporters. We’ll take some calls. I hope you’ll tune in to hear this very special guest. The show begins at 9 p.m. EST.