According to the authors at PJ Media, this list has been checked and verified, and it will be updated as time goes on:

[snip]All entries on this list are real and verified. Below each entry you will find a series of source links documenting the support for OWS. We have striven in almost all cases to reference either first-hand statements by the groups or individuals themselves, hosted on their own Web sites; or videos of the people in question voicing their support for OWS at various Occupations; or news reports from reliable mainstream networks; or articles by publications or organizations sympathetic to the Occupy movement; or indisputable evidence, whatever the source. As a result, it cannot be claimed that these statements of support were made up or distorted by detractors of the Occupy movement.[snip]

Okay, ready? Here we go:

The 99%: Official list of Occupy Wall Street’s supporters, sponsors and sympathizers

	Communist Party USA Sources: Communist Party USA, OWS speech, The Daily Caller
	American Nazi Party Sources: Media Matters, American Nazi Party, White Honor, Sunshine State News
	Ayatollah Khamenei, Supreme Leader of Iran Sources: The Guardian, Tehran Times, CBS News
	Barack Obama Sources: ABC News, CBS News, ForexTV, NBC New York
	The government of North Korea Sources: Korean Central News Agency (North Korean state-controlled news outlet), The Marxist-Leninist, Wall Street Journal, Times of India
	Louis Farrakhan, Nation of Islam Sources: video statement (starting at 8:28), Black in America, Weasel Zippers, Philadelphia Weekly
	Revolutionary Communist Party Sources: Revolutionary Communist Party, Revolution newspaper, in-person appearance
	Joe Biden Sources: Talking Points Memo, video statement, Mother Jones
	Hugo Chavez Sources: Mother Jones, Reuters, Examiner.com
	Revolutionary Guards of Iran Sources: Associated Press, FARS News Agency, UPI
	Black Panthers (original) Sources: in-person appearance, Occupy Oakland, Oakland Tribune
	Socialist Party USA Sources: Socialist Party USA, IndyMedia, The Daily Caller
	CAIR Sources: in-person appearance, Washington Post, CAIR, CAIR New York
	Nancy Pelosi Sources: Talking Points Memo, video statement, ABC News, The Weekly Standard
	Communist Party of China Sources: People’s Daily (Communist Party organ), Reuters, chinataiwan.org, The Telegraph
	Hezbollah Sources: almoqawama.org, almoqawama.org (2), almoqawama.org (3), wikipedia

Again, this is not the entire list – please do go check out the entire thing from top to bottom. It is really eye-opening.

And now, how about the 1%ers? Well, just one of the 1%ers for the moment. That lucky winner is former NJ governor, Jon Corzine. You may recall Jon Corzine went on to work for a Wall St. firm after his stint as governor until Chris Christie booted him out of the Governor’s Mansion. Seems Governor Corzine’s firm has gone belly-up. Damn economy.

Oh, but don’t cry for Governor Corzine, oh, no. He received a $12.1 million “golden parachute” from his dying firm. Still, good thing Corzine hosted that $38,500 a head fundraiser for another 1%er, Barack Obama, back in April when he was still flush with cash. Ahem. But now you know why Obama refers to him as a “great friend” and “ally,” right?

One little thing about that whole “golden parachute” business. You may also recall that Obama slammed John McCain with an attack ad as a result of McCain’s friendship with Carly Fiorina. See, she, too, received a “golden parachute,” and Obama took umbrage with that. I seriously doubt he’s going to talk smack about his “great friend” – he wants more of his money, I am sure! Check out the article – it’s something, especially the piece with Obama in his own words about Corzine.

It’s an Open Thread – your turn!

You might recall, Obama tried this very same phrase back in 2008 with John McCain. It didn’t get much traction then, but that hasn’t stopped Obama from trotting it back out now, trying to scare the crap out of people and malign the Republicans all at the same time.

And may I digress for a moment and say, this whole thing about forgiving student loans at OUR expense pisses me off. I just paid off my student loans last month. I am not kidding. It is expensive to go to graduate school in New York City and Boston, but I did it because that is what I needed to do for ordination. No one forgave my loans, no one helped pay off my loans, and I damn sure didn’t ask my fellow taxpayers to cover the debt I CHOSE to incur. Just sayin’. Frankly, I do not think MoveOn.org should be dictating our public policy. But that’s me.

Ahem. But that is precisely what Obama is talking about doing in his current jaunt around the country at our expense, trying to get back the 20-somethings who have become disenchanted with The One. But it is not just at our financial expense, but at the expense of our Constitution. There is a reason we have checks and balances, and it is precisely to keep the president from acting as King. But that is not stopping the so-called Constitutional Scholar in Chief. No sirree. His claims belittling Republicans and Congress have gotten out of hand, and his rhetoric is negative, to put it mildly.

One Congressman who is not taking it sitting down is Rep. Paul Ryan. Ryan is fighting back against Obama’s allegations that the reason he willfully plans to violate the Constitution (and just WHEN is someone going to call him on that) is because those horrible Republicans will not pass any of his plans, damn their eyes. Not only does Ryan speak out against the plans, but claims, rightfully, IMHO, that Obama is “sowing social unrest.” I could not agree with him more (Photo by US Embassy Kabul):

“Instead of working together where we agree, the president has opted for divisive rhetoric and the broken politics of the past,” Ryan will say, according to speech excerpts. “He is going from town to town, impugning the motives of Republicans, setting up straw men and scapegoats, and engaging in intellectually lazy arguments, as he tries to build support for punitive tax hikes on job creators.”

“Pitting one group against another only distracts us from the true sources of inequity in this country – corporate welfare that enriches the powerful, and empty promises that betray the powerless,” Ryan also plans to say.

[...]

“Instead of appealing to the hope and optimism that were hallmarks of his first campaign, he has launched his second campaign by preying on the emotions of fear, envy, and resentment,” Ryan says, according to his prepared remarks.

“This has the potential to be just as damaging as his misguided policies. Sowing social unrest and class resentment makes America weaker, not stronger. Pitting one group against another only distracts us from the true sources of inequity in this country – corporate welfare that enriches the powerful, and empty promises that betray the powerless.” (Click here to read the rest.)

You tell ‘em, Rep. Ryan – that is PRECISELY what Obama is doing. He is playing people off each other, threatening them with doom and gloom should they not keep him in the White House, like the past 3 years have been anything to crow about (continued high unemployment, continued low house sales, escalating health costs, etc.).

Obama’s fear-mongering in an attempt to keep people in his camp is disingenuous at best, especially given his lack of effort in actually working with the House, and his convenient amnesia that the Senate is controlled by Democrats. I am glad Rep. Paul Ryan is standing up to Obama, and calling him out on his divisive rhetoric. It reminds me of why I wish he was running for president. Someone who actually has a grasp of economics seems like a mighty good choice to me right now, not to mention someone who doesn’t antagonize half of the nation.

But hey, that’s Mr. Unity Hope and Change for you – you can bet if he says something, the exact opposite is the case, at least as far as I can tell. How about you?

Oh, wait – I know. Obama was NOT great on women’s issues, he did not treat women well and his sexism was in evidence frequently on the campaign trail, his wife, too. Seriously, do I need to provide evidence to support that after all this time, and the numerous links/examples? Seriously? Okay – here is one more, with some bonus coverage of how misogynistic the media was:

Click here to view the embedded video.

And then comes this report from the Washington Post in a review of the new Ron Suskind book, Confidence Men: Wall Street, Washington and the Education of a President. To say it is not glowing about how women – upper level women – were treated in the Obama Administration is putting it mildly:

Friction about the roles of women in the Obama White House grew so intense during the first two years of the president’s tenure that he was forced to take steps to reassure senior women on his staff that he valued their presence and their input.

At a dinner in November 2009, several senior female aides complained directly to the president that men enjoyed greater access to him and often muscled them out of key policy discussions.

Those tensions prompted Obama, urged on by senior adviser Valerie Jarrett, to elevate more women into senior White House positions, recognize them more during staff meetings and increase the female presence in the upper ranks of the reelection campaign. “There were some issues early on with women feeling as though they hadn’t figured out what their role was going to be on the senior team at the White House,” Jarrett said in an interview Monday. “Most of the women hadn’t worked on the campaign, and so they didn’t have a personal relationship with the president.”

Uh huh. But that is not the full story. It wasn’t just that some of these women weren’t involved in the campaign. This isn’t about one group being outsiders trying to get into the inner circle, no, not at all. It was women-specific:

[snip] One of the most striking quotes in the book came from former White House communications director Anita Dunn, who was quoted as saying that, “this place would be in court for a hostile workplace. . . . Because it actually fit all of the classic legal requirements for a genuinely hostile workplace to women.”

Dunn says she was quoted out of context and told The Post on Friday that she told Suskind “point blank” that the White House was not a hostile work environment.

On Monday, Suskind allowed a Post reporter to review a recorded excerpt of the original interview, which took place over the telephone in April. In that conversation, Dunn is heard telling Suskind about a conversation she had with Jarrett.

“I remember once I told Valerie that, I said if it weren’t for the president, this place would be in court for a hostile workplace,” Dunn is heard telling Suskind. “Because it actually fit all of the classic legal requirements for a genuinely hostile workplace to women.” [snip]

So first, Dunn tells the truth, then tries to lie to cover up for Obama, but her own voice confirms this quote, “Because it actually fit all of the classic legal requirements for a genuinely hostile workplace to women.” That is mighty damning, indeed (and honestly, Anita, STOP COVERING FOR THIS MAN! Good grief. Have a little self-respect already.).

But Dunn was not the only one:

Other episodes were relayed to Suskind by Christina Romer, former chairwoman of the Council of Economic Advisers, whose disputes with Summers have been widely reported, including in an earlier book on Obama’s White House by journalist Jonathan Alter.

Romer is quoted by Suskind saying, after being excluded by Summers at a meeting, “I felt like a piece of meat.”

Holy smokes. These two women were not some underlings who resented not being higher up in the chain. No, these two women had pretty prominent positions. Wow. That is an incredible statement. And it goes on from there. Click here to read the rest of the article.

I might add, what makes that statement so striking is that most women know how incredibly difficult it is to prove that kind of “workplace” hostility. Too often, the perpetrators are defended, and circle the wagons to protect them. Heck, as noted, even Dunn tried to protect Obama from the charge. So it is telling indeed that she used that phrase in her conversation with Jarrett. Telling, indeed.

I wish I was surprised. I am not. When Obama made Jon Favreau the Head White House Speechwriter, and allowed him to retain that position even after the following photo came to light, I knew that was the kind of ship Obama would be running:

And that was AFTER then-Senator Clinton had been named as Obama’s Secretary of State choice.

Yeah. That sums up how things were going in the Obama Administration perfectly, don’t you think? Just how much do you think has changed now? Let’s hear it!

There was so, so much more to this woman than I knew. Mainly, I knew her as the wife of the bumbling Gerald Ford, who took over the presidency after the Watergate Scandal felled Richard Nixon. I have since learned that the clumsy, klutzy depiction of Gerald Ford was the result of one trip, glorified by Chevy Chase on SNL, and forever associated with this former Michigan quarterback and US Navy veteran. Such is the power of the media, even those dedicated to spoofs (how many people still think Sarah Palin said she could see Russia from her house after Tina Fey made the comment on SNL?).

But back to Betty Ford. In her early days, she was a dancer, modern dance in particular. She even danced in New York with Martha Graham’s company at Carnegie Hall (who knew?). There is much to this woman, including how involved she was with women’s issues, and the work of the president in general:

[snip] According to their son Jack, Betty Ford not only read through the President’s briefing papers on political issues he faced, and reviewed with him those pertaining to social programs or any which affected women. She also quietly worked as a conduit on legislative and other domestic agenda issues, both to and from him to others. Although she refused to ever discuss what issues they may have disagreed on, she did admit to serving as what she called, a “sounding board,” and exercising “pillow talk” on occasion. She also admitted to reviewing his more important speeches, offering advice to make cuts and use livelier language, without the need to always spell out details but rather leave audiences with some eagerness for further clarifications. Publicly, she gave only faint enthusiasm for the public relations effort “Whip Inflation Now,” a public relations action effort by the Administration intended to encourage cost-cutting and budgeting by citizens to counter the economic inflation of 1974-1975. In the White House, Mrs. Ford emphasized that she was reducing both her family and public entertaining food costs by serving less-expensive poultry, substituting soup for the pricier fish course, having smaller portions served. Personally, she stated, she would have her older shoes dyed rather than buy new ones for each event she needed them, and purchased her cosmetics in larger bulk to keep cost down. She also signed a “consumer’s pledge” to buy “only those products and services priced at or below present levels…” [snip]

She was an amazing woman, to be sure. If you have the time and inclination, you can read all about her at the National First Ladies’ Library.

First Lady Ford’s funeral is Tuesday, July 12th. Something else I did not know is that presidents and first ladies prepare their funerals down to the detail. According to this Washington Post article, First Lady Ford knew a few years back who she wanted to deliver her eulogy:

[snip] In 2006, Cokie Roberts got a call from Ford’s daughter Susan: her mom wanted Roberts to deliver a eulogy, whenever that time came, at her funeral.

“Wow — that’s an incredible honor,” the veteran D.C. journalist replied. Then, she recalls, Susan gave Roberts her assignment: “Mother wants you to talk about the way things used to be.”

Meaning?

“A time in Washington when Democrats and Republicans used to be friends, when their families were all friends,” Roberts told us Monday. “The main message she wanted me to say is when you’re friends, government works. It’s like she planned it for this week.”

Roberts has been friends with the Fords for decades. Her father, Hale Boggs, was House majority leader when Gerald Ford was minority leader. Her mother, Lindy, teamed with Betty on various causes. The familes went to school and church together.

“They were all friends with each other,” Roberts said. When her father disappeared after an Alaska plane crash in 1972, the Fords were “devastated. . . they were so supportive.” [snip]

Ah, yes, those were the days, were they not? Sadly, they seem long gone, it seems…(There will be two other speakers at the Washington funeral, First Lady Rosalynn Carter and the Betty Ford Center’s Geoffrey Mason. First Lady Ford will have a funeral service in Michigan, too, where she will be laid to rest with her husband.)

What an amazing, complicated, dedicated woman First Lady Betty Ford was. My sincerest condolences to her family and friends. In honor of First Lady Ford being an Episcopalian, I have the following rendition of the Nunc Dimittis* is in her honor (this is one of my favorite hymns from Vespers):

Rest in peace.

* Translation:

Salva nos, Domine, vigilantes, custodi nos
dormientes, ut vigil emus cum Christo et requiescamus in pace.
Save us, O Lord, while we are awake, and guard us
when we sleep, that we may watch with Christ and rest in peace.

Nunc dimittis servum tuum, Domine, secundum verbum tuum in pace:
Quia viderunt oculi mei salutare tuum
Quod parasti ante faciem omnium populorum:
Lumen ad revelationem gentium, et gloriam plebis tuae Israel.
Now Thou dost dismiss Thy servant, O Lord, according to Thy word in peace;
Because my eyes have seen Thy salvation,
Which Thou hast prepared before the face of all peoples:
A light to the revelation of the Gentiles, and the glory of Thy people Israel.

[snip] AGAINST her, that is. Yep, it turns out there was some news hidden in those thousands of Palin e-mails after all. But the American media couldn’t use it against her, which is why you have to go to the British press to learn about it. The Daily Telegraph reports: “The release of 24,000 pages of Sarah Palin’s emails shows that she received a barrage of abusive emails including death threats in the run up to the 2008 presidential race. One message sent by someone in Juneau, Alaska on Sept 17, 2008 said the governor should be ’shot from one of the planes that shoot the very wolves that you ordered.’ Five days earlier an email landed in her in-box saying she ‘must be killed.’ It said: ‘She doesn’t belong to the NRA to support the right of each citizen to have weapons in an aim of self-defense, but just to support the right of every southern white citizen to shoot all non-white people legally! Sarah Palin MUST BE KILLED!’ Another emailed death threat in the same month, while Mrs Palin was on the campaign trail as John McCain’s vice-presidential running mate, came from Antwerp, Belgium. It said Mrs Palin should be shot and that ‘only on that moment justice will be accomplished.’” If you think Sarah Palin deserved that, you might be a liberal. Or, at the risk of redundancy, an American journalist.[snip] (Click here to read the rest.)

Holy crap. Now, I am not (that) naive, I know many leaders receive death threats, but the vitriol directed at the VP candidate, was rather shocking.

Just as it is shocking that there are very few news sources in the United States that covered this, as Jim Treacher highlighted. After doing my own search, I saw two: ABC News, which mentioned the death threats briefly, though it did highlight what a voracious reader of news Palin was (that that, Katie Couric); and Fox News, which used an AP report, also mentioning the death threats in passing (very brief statement).

Across the pond, as noted above, the Daily Telegraph (UK) has been reviewing Palin’s emails (again, a bit of a witch hunt since no other politician I can remember has had to endure this level of intrusion). The title, and subheading are telling, indeed, “Sarah Palin Emails: Enemies Sent A Series Of Death Threats; The release of 24,000 pages of Sarah Palin’s emails shows that she received a barrage of abusive emails including death threats in the run up to the 2008 presidential race.”

I continue to be amazed at all this woman has endured, and with such incredible strength, determination, and even good humor. What also amazes me is how she is depicted compared to , oh, I dunno, the Petulant Commander in Chief, who somehow got the title of being “even-keeled,” at least that’s what the NY Times said about him. It is remarkable since he seems to get so testy when someone actually asks him a question. And while Obama claimed families were off-limits, that sure never stopped the media, and liberal bloggers, from going after Palin’s then and now.

All things considered, though, I think this witch hunt by the media has backfired tremendously. While the MSM might be a little (too) quiet on some of the more dangerous and heinous emails Palin has received, and what she has endured, they have had to acknowledge that she was engaged, smart, not a “prima donna,” and more. I’d say the last laugh is on them.

Now, if they could please get back to doing some real journalism, perhaps investigate Obama 1/100th as much as they have Palin, or heck, even Anthony Weiner to see if he broke any laws with which he can be charged? The MSM failed mightily with Obama in 2008, allowing him to get away with all kinds of secrets and lies. They have the opportunity for a do-ver in 2012. You know, like doing some real journalism instead of this assault on one woman whose only crime as far as I can tell is being a strong, accomplished woman, and who isn’t even in the running (yet). Just saying…

It made me mad. It is just more of the media’s continued unfounded, politically motivated, assault on Sarah Palin. They have attacked her mercilessly for three years, and now claim, after the constant harassment, that she has “darker tendencies”? Are you kidding me with this circular logic crapola??

And so, I was compelled to write this letter to the editor of the Post and Courier. I have no illusions they will actually publish it:

I read Molly Ball’s article on Gov. Palin. The emails requested back in 2008 from sites such as Mother Jones are proving to be a bit of a disappointment to all those who wanted to get dirt on the former governor. Turns out that she was – gasp – hardworking, warm, engaging, and dedicated to her state. Shocking!

But here’s the thing – to qualify Palin now as exhibiting her “darker tendencies” is disingenuous at best. The only reason these emails are even available was the desire to take down this qualified woman 3 years ago by the media when they filed their FOIA requests. They have hounded her, and her family, on a daily basis, flat out making crap up (like that she, personally, shot wolves from the air, which your newspaper has already dispelled). They have accused her husband of incest, claimed her baby was not her own, used despicable language to attack her, and her family, sent numerous reporters to Wasilla to dig up dirt on her, and AP reporters to “factcheck” her book. And now, Ms. Ball is claiming that Palin is a divisive figure. If she is, it is only because the media has MADE her a divisive figure.

Even more, why has the media never spent anywhere NEAR this much time investigating Barack Obama? He claimed he had no records, not even a datebook, of his time as an IL Senator. How is that even possible?? The media failed miserably in ferreting out why the two front runners for the IL US Senate seat both, mysteriously, had their SEALED divorce records unsealed just a few short months before the election, forcing them both to drop out, allowing Obama, once again, to run basically unopposed as he did when he ran for office the first time (he got everyone else thrown off the ballot – look it up).

Where has the media been in looking at his connections to Khalid Rashidi, Bill Ayers, Tony Rezko, Kwame Kilpatrick, Louis Farrakhan, and Jeremiah Wright? They could not be bothered to research the presidential candidate, or his methods for becoming the candidate, much less his associates, any one of whom would have brought down any other candidate. (How many people know about the rampant caucus fraud perpetrated by the Obama camp? There were complaints made to the DNC by a number of people, including Hillary Clinton, but the DNC turned a blind eye. Even worse, they took lawfully cast and certified votes for Hillary Clinton and GAVE them to Obama. That was the day this Yellow Dog Dem became an Independent.)

But to the VP candidate from Alaska the media managed to devote all kinds of resources. Lo, and behold – there is nothing there. Of course, that doesn’t stop Ms. Ball from making gratuitous, unfounded, slights against Palin, thus demonstrating her very clear bias even as she was tasked with acknowledging there was nothing there.

This isn’t journalism, this is tabloid writing. And you put it on the front page.

While I am at it, I would like to highlight something else from these emails that was in my local paper – and listen up all of you who made this salacious claim – SARAH PALIN DID NOT SHOOT WOLVES FROM THE AIR, AND WAS OPPOSED TO IT. Got it? Seriously. Oh, and the emails highlighted how much of a conservationist she really is. I bet that will stick in some folk’s craw…

Good grief.

Clearly, despite there being nothing there to attack Palin over, these rags will continue to make the kinds of gratuitous smears Ms. Ball did. They just cannot stand that this woman is exactly who she said she is and has demonstrated herself to be. I guess in the face of Obama’s failures, this must really get to them, so they have redoubled their efforts to go after her, not him. Pathetic. Be big enough people to admit you were duped, you were snookered, you were fooled, and you were wrong. Give it a shot.

And now, for our musical moment to take a break from this continued media folly, I leave you with this:

Before I go on with the duties of the position, I have to ask: media sites filed FOIAs for Palin’s email back in 2008? Yes, indeed they did. From the very beginning, they set out to dig up anything they could possibly find on the very popular Governor of Alaska. Apparently, because Palin is just a girl, think that the First Dude was the one doing all of the work. Sexist pigs, the lot of them.

Oh, if only they had bothered to do the same with the man sitting in the White House (unless he is out on the golf course), making a wreck of the country but no – it is much more fun to try and destroy someone for no other reason than sheer derangement syndrome, which overcame these sites very quickly, I must say. (Isn’t there some kind of vaccination for that kind of lunacy? Just wondering.)

Okay, back to the NY Times job description:

[snip] We’re asking readers to help us identify interesting and newsworthy e-mails, people and events that we may want to highlight. Interested users can fill out a simple form to describe the nature of the e-mail, and provide a name and e-mail address so we’ll know who should get the credit. Join us here on Friday afternoon and into the weekend to participate.

What you will see when you click on the link is that the title REALLY is, “Help Us INVESTIGATE the Sarah Palin Email Records.”

Not to be outdone is the Washington Post:

[snip] Over 24,000 e-mail messages to and from former Alaska governorSarah Palin during her tenure as Alaska’s governor will be released Friday. That’s a lot of e-mail for us to review so we’re looking for some help from Fix readers to analyze, contextualize, and research those e-mails right alongside Post reporters over the days following the release.

We are limiting this to just 100 spots for people who will work collaboratively in small teams to surface the most important information from the e-mails. Participants can join from anywhere with a computer and an Internet connection.

If you need inspiration before getting started, take a look at what to expect from the e-mail drop. For micro-updates as tomorrow unfolds, check out our new Twitter feed. [snip] (Click here to read the rest.)

Here we are, with a shitty economy, people losing jobs, REAL scandals in people like Weiner (a little more on that in a minute), high gas prices, high food prices, illicit war being waged in Libya, Obama inviting the likes of Ali Bongo from Gabon to the WHITE HOUSE (hint: Bongo’s family’s theft of money from the nation of Gabon makes Mubarrak look like Mother Teresa), and two of the biggest papers in the country are still going after PALIN?? They are seriously screwed up.

You might like to take a look at the comments at both papers. A number of people are calling them out on their sexism toward Palin, and their inability to do their own damn jobs. Rightly so, too. What a bunch of jackwagons.

And in a major Screw You to at least two of the Big Ten (that would be Commandments), the people in Weiner’s district don’t give a damn that he is an adulterer, liar, predator, sick, twisted, misogynist. Yep, 56% of those polled think he should stay in his position. Wow. That is amazing. And incredibly disturbing. It isn’t like he is even all that great at his job. He is considered more of a show horse than work horse, so WHY would the people in his district support a man who has demonstrated such horrible judgment, such misogyny, such twisted sexual proclivities, and who is a downright liar? I’d love to know.

Blech. Okay, that’s enough crapola for one day. Time for a metaphorical shower:

TGIF…

Good grief.

Yes, that is the problem – that Weiner’s “privacy” has been violated, not that he has disgraced his office, his wife, and himself, with very little contrition for what he actually DID. No, his tears were over being CAUGHT, not that he is a freakin’ pervert, engaging in sexting with women around the country, and apparently, made phone calls to some of these women from his House office. There is no doubt that not only did he act unprofessionally, but unethically, compounded by his vast number of lies upon lies.

But as Jennifer Rubin pointed out in her Washington Post piece, “Anthony Weiner, Wronged Man? Not Quite,” some are taking the Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz approach, claiming this is a “private matter.” They are wrong. Rubin specifically mentions Ezra Klein and Richard Cohen:

I’ve been a bit amazed at the post-bizzaro press conference insistence by some on the left that Rep. Anthony Weiner (D-N.Y.) is a wronged man. Ezra Klein via Twitter professes to be puzzled how this can be a big deal. Richard Cohen writes:

We are doing a terrible thing here — we hypocrites of the press, especially of the blogosphere. Every man lives a bit in a fantasy world, maybe women, too, but I know nothing of them. Every man is a boy, either in mind or in deed. Much of this is harmless. There are no bodies. There is no crime. This is the case with Weiner. No damsel was in distress, and no one was rescued.

This is the place for me to condemn Weiner. Consider it done. He’s a liar and a creep, although how one can be the latter without being the former is beyond me. (Still, lying is impermissible.) But I would also like to condemn those who made it their business to destroy him, who deputized themselves to invade someone’s private life, his fantasy life, and hold him up to ridicule.

Let me point out that Weiner went beyond fantasy. Or have we forgotten that these are real women with whom he was communicating? Women who, gosh, he thinks, are not underage. Women who he supposed would not blackmail him. Women whom he apparently told his wife about before their marriage but could not bring himself to give up. The press isn’t invading his mind or his bedroom; it’s looking at his Tweets and talking to the women on whose Timeline he was willing to risk his marriage, his career and his self-respect. [snip]

So let me make sure I understand Mr. Cohen’s point – he thinks the press is doing the wrong thing by REPORTING THE NEWS??? I am just shaking my head in disbelief at these men. Oh, no, check that – I am shaking my head in DISGUST at these men, and their willingness to use their professions as “journalists” to try and protect this pervert.

Jennifer Rubin’s response was very good, I thought:

[snip] Let me point out that Weiner went beyond fantasy. Or have we forgotten that these are real women with whom he was communicating? Women who, gosh, he thinks, are not underage. Women who he supposed would not blackmail him. Women whom he apparently told his wife about before their marriage but could not bring himself to give up. The press isn’t invading his mind or his bedroom; it’s looking at his Tweets and talking to the women on whose Timeline he was willing to risk his marriage, his career and his self-respect. (As for the comment, “Another Christian has been thrown to the lions. The ‘Christian in this case is a Jew,” I am dumbfounded and dismayed that Weiner’s religion should enter into the discussion.)

As for the “I just don’t get it” response of some young liberal men out there, I can only imagine that ideology so dominates their lives that they fail to see the harm in a public figure’s not-at-all-private conduct. Or perhaps they too see the Tweets as a harmless pastime. Maybe, for all the “sexual harassment” training we’ve gotten, we’ve forgotten some essential training in ethics. [snip] (Click here to read the rest.)

I don’t get it, either, Ms. Rubin, except to say that this mindset is incredibly disturbing. (Ms. Rubin goes on to note that the Wall Street Journal has a very good editorial on Rep. Weiner’s behavior and judgment, and I encourage you to either finish reading her piece, or read the WSJ piece here.)

The next piece of news also deals with a Democratic Representative, Earl Blumenauer. Seems Rep. Blumenauer is upset at the effort put forth by the Parks Department for doing anything that might amount to educating Gov. Palin about American history. Yes, he is upset that money is being spent to give the governor an education at our historic sites and monuments, presumably because it is making her smarter than many in the press (I refer you to the ridiculous recent brouhaha over Paul Revere) in which journalists by and large failed to factcheck before jumping on their condescending “gotcha” bandwagon).

Yes, this representative, Earl Blumenenaur, has some “serious concerns” over the money spent thus far on Palin and her bus tour:

[snip] “Many of the press accounts of stops included in this tour, which provided personal and political benefits to former Gov. Palin, suggest that National Park Service resources were made available to an extent beyond that which an average American family would receive,” Blumenauer wrote.

He cited media reports of Palin and her family receiving a private guided tour of Mount Vernon, early admission to the National Archives and a 10-person escort involving park rangers and New York City police officers at the Statue of Liberty.

“For cases in which the Park Service did not have additional personnel on duty as a result of the tour, was manpower diverted from regularly-scheduled services to accommodate the Palin family’s visits and is this a routine practice for visiting celebrities?” Blumenauer added.

National Park Service spokesman Jeffrey Olson said his understanding is that Palin received customary treatment for a visiting celebrity and that the costs of her visits were nominal at best.

“We see celebrities on a regular basis, it’s something that we’re used to,” Olson said. “We give them a tour but we also try to not make it a bug hoo-ha for all the other visitors. So it’s kind of standard fare if there’s a celebrity or two that show up we do a special program for them.”

That usually involves rangers and interpreters that are on the job regardless. “That’s why it’s not an extra cost for us,” Olson said. “We just try to make sure everybody has a good experience at a national park.” [snip] (Click here to read the rest.)

Maybe that’s what is getting Rep. Blumenaur’s goat – that Palin is seen as, and treated like, a celebrity. Oh, but the best part? Palin was not the one who requested the Park Police provide an escort while she was at the Statue of Liberty. Rather, it was one of the officers in charge who did that. Oops – so much for this little “gotcha” attempt by Rep. Blumenaur.

One of the commenters at this Politico.com article was kind enough to post a video of another “celebrity” getting a private tour at the Statue of Liberty. I wonder if Rep. Blumenaur was so quick to investigate the money spent on THIS tour:

I am going to guess, no, Rep. Blumenaur did NOT demand an accounting from the Parks Service for Rep. Weiner being able to go where people had not been able to go since 9/11. But, hey – that’s different, right? Yeah, sure, right.

And in an incredible twist of irony, Rep. Weiner called President Clinton to apologize to him for this whole sexting scandal. President Clinton officiated at Weiner and Huma Abedin’s wedding.

Gee, I wonder what the conversations are like between Hillary Clinton and Huma Abedin?

Blech. This whole thing is making me ill – support for this immoral, unethical piece of work (Weiner), and attempts to take down someone as a result of PDS. The hypocrisy is staggering, and I am just sick of it.

How about you? Feel free to talk about the issues above, or anything else on your mind today.

Oh, my – Sarah Palin really stepped in it this time, didn’t she? She completely bungled the history of Paul Revere while up North. Yes, this short little clip says it all:

What an idiot, right? I mean ALL the Lefty blogs and news channels are claiming so, from Think Progress above, to Mother Jones, to Chris Matthews (big surprise), to USA Today, and many news outlets in between. Yes, they are all laughing with glee at the ridiculous, preposterous account by Sarah Palin of Paul Revere’s ride.

Except – she’s right. Whoops.

I am sure all of these outlets are just RACING to correct the record. Ahahahaha – not. Of course they aren’t. It is far too much fun to attack Palin for being the biggest idiot this side of George Bush, so why would they bother?

What I have really found funny is when people point out Obama’s misspeaks, his minions are quick to defend him. Check out this comment from Mother Jones in response to someone’s mentioning the 57 (and counting) states comment by Obama:

Nishant Srivastava; Except Obama, at the time a rookie national campaigner, said “We’ve visited 57 states”, when he obviously meant stops in states at a press event he did as part of a campaign for President.

Palin has endured the heat of a prior political campaign, so one can reasonably argue that she should have more experience. [snip]

Uh huh. Except at that point, Obama had been on the campaign trail for months and months, and that was not the only stupid thing he said then, or now. And never mind that Palin had been riding around on a bus for hours and hours and hours – she couldn’t possibly be the least bit tired when she said what she did about Revere.

Which, as I noted above, turned out to be correct, as this historical document highlights:

[snip] I observed a Wood at a Small distance, & made for that. When I got there, out Started Six officers, on Horse back, and orderd me to dismount;-one of them, who appeared to have the command, examined me, where I came from,& what my Name Was? I told him. it was Revere, he asked if it was Paul? I told him yes He asked me if I was an express? I answered in the afirmative. He demanded what time I left Boston? I told him; and added, that their troops had catched aground in passing the River, and that There would be five hundred Americans there in a short time, for I had alarmed the Country all the way up. He imediately rode towards those who stoppd us, when all five of them came down upon a full gallop; one of them, whom I afterwards found to be Major Mitchel, of the 5th Regiment, Clapped his pistol to my head, called me by name, & told me he was going to ask me some questions, & if I did not give him true answers, he would blow my brains out. He then asked me similar questions to those above. He then orderd me to mount my Horse, after searching me for arms. He then orderd them to advance, & to lead me in front. When we got to the Road, they turned down towards Lexington. When we had got about one Mile, the Major Rode up to the officer that was leading me, & told him to give me to the Sergeant. As soon as he took me, the Major orderd him, if I attempted to run, or any body insulted them, to blow my brains out. We rode till we got near Lexington Meeting-house, when the Militia fired a Voley of Guns, which appeared to alarm them very much. [snip] (Click here to read the rest.)

So, tell me where she was wrong?

Like Palin or not, the issue here is one of hypocrisy. We saw it with Hillary Clinton when she exaggerated a story about a trip in Bosnia, one that was fraught with danger, which was, of course, omitted from the accounts.

Obama has misspoken PLENTY, but his misstatements are often underreported by the media or just plain ignored. I don’t recall ANY major news outlet going through his books the way they did Palin’s book. If ANYONE else had said in a speech so blatant a lie as he did describing how the March on Selma enabled his (glorious) birth into this world, though he was born at least FOUR YEARS BEFORE the March, they would have been treated like, well, like Sarah Palin was for what she said about Paul Revere. Though, again, she was accurate, and Obama was not.
At least Hillary Clinton’s claim about Bosnia had SOME truth to it – Obama was just a liar, and allowed to get away with it (then as now).

And they wonder why Palin doesn’t like to talk with MSM? Sheesh.

Bottom line, I don’t care if you love Palin, or think she is Demon Spawn, want her for president, or are horrified at the thought of it. What I DO care about is the media lambasting her for something she was actually correct about, when it fails repeatedly to acknowledge Obama’s foibles (or other prominent Democrats – Biden’s gaffes are now treated as routine), and to do so in such an incredibly juvenile manner. That is the purview of hacks and rags, not prominent news outlets.

My advice? Try checking your facts before you go on the attack, and grow the hell up already. Be a big enough person to admit you attacked her in error, and APOLOGIZE for it. There are legitimate reasons to question ANY politician in a rational manner. But the uproar over this alleged “gaffe” was far from reasonable, and far from adult. Issue a retraction, admit your mistake, and try and be a little less biased in your coverage. Just a thought.

Oh, and for all of those who jumped on this bandwagon just to attack Palin, this is for you:

UPDATE: Thank goodness I was sitting down when I saw the following article from the LA Times, “You know how Sarah Palin said Paul Revere warned the British? Well, he did. Now, who looks stupid?” I know, right? I still almost fell over. Now, of course, despite pesky facts, the commenters are still raging on, attacking the messenger of this reality rather than being big enough people to say they were w-w-w-r-r-o-o-n-n-g-g-g-g, but who really expected them to have that much integrity? They continue to attack Palin relentlessly because, well, just BECAUSE, okay?!?! Here is the pertinent part of the article:

You may have heard recently something about that Sarah Palin telling a reporter that Paul Revere warned the British on his famous rousing revolutionary ride.

Now, that so many Americans have wallowed in their smug confirmation that Palin is an idiot unqualified for anything but repeating sixth-grade history, how far, wide and fast do you think the contradictory news will spread that the former governor of Alaska was indeed correct?

That the Republican non-candidate, in fact, knew more about the actual facts of Revere’s midnight ride than all those idiots unknowingly revealing their own ignorance by laughing at her faux faux pas? How secretly embarrassing this must be, to be forced to face that you’re dumber than the reputed dummy.

As it happens, though, such phenomena are regular occurrences in American politics, reminding consumers of news to be wary when some fresh story seems to fit contemporary assumptions so absolutely perfectly.

The well-known fable is Revere’s late-night ride to warn fellow revolutionaries that….

…the British were coming. Less known, obviously, is the rest of the evening’s events in which Revere was captured by said redcoats and did indeed defiantly warn them of the awakened militia awaiting their arrival ahead and of the American Revolution’s inevitable victory.

Palin knew this. The on-scene reporters did not and ran off like Revere to alert the world to Palin’s latest mis-speak, which wasn’t.

Like a number of famous faux gaffes in American politics, the facts of the situation no longer really matter. [snip] (Click here to read the rest.)

Read the rest – there is some interesting information about someone I always assumed was an idiot for not being able to spell “potato” – turns out he was set up a bit. Who knew? Gore is included, too, for his “creating the internet” comment, though the reality of what he actually said was lost in the rush to (erroneous) judgment.

Anyway, pretty amazing that such a big time outlet actually did the right thing. I do believe we have witnessed a miracle!

Both sides seem terrified of Trump while calling him a joke. It reminds of the Indian warrior in the film “Dances with Wolves” who screams at Kevin Costner’s soldier character at the top of his lungs: “Do you see how I am not afraid of you!!!”

Trump is a forceful competitor who is raising some interesting issues about our economy and global interactions, the “birther” issue notwithstanding. What is the harm in letting the American people decide what interests them? If he talks on long enough, voters might conclude he is a blowhard and not bother. Then they will turn him off without any help from the mainstream media. But of course, the governing elites of both parties must fear the opposite is true. Political analyst Charlie Cook recently offered that after three consecutive “wave elections,” 2012 could be the year Independents rise up and say “a pox on both their houses.”

Many have grown tired of arrogant talking heads who, happily trapped in their own echo chamber, have little awareness of what is transpiring on the ground but see fit to decide for us who is relevant and who is not.

“They” decided to trash Hillary Clinton in 2008. The hazing was non-stop and look where that got us…These self proclaimed political geniuses have now taken to criticizing the inexperienced Illinois Senator they once championed. Yet every time President Obama is in trouble in the polls, another profound pundit floats the idea that Secretary Clinton should trade places with Joe Biden and become the VP next time around. They are content to have her carry President Obama’s water, lift his numbers, and come to his rescue when she could likely do his job far better — though they will never admit it. Certainly, she would not have taken 61 golf outings and who knows how many vacations in the first two years of her presidency.

After dispensing with Hillary, the media went after Palin and now it is Trump’s turn. While each of them bring something different to the table, and one could argue they are not of equal merit, we should be able to decide for ourselves who we want — which means we need to hear all the facts first. But the American people do not get the privilege of making such a decision based on the facts of each person’s record, so loudly do their critics trumpet their negatives, while running interference for our current President much the same way they did for our last one. I used to say that President Bush was made of Teflon, but I have never seen Teflon with the thick protective coating the likes of which the media uses to shield our current chief executive.

Moreover, the alternating tactics of trumpet/trash that comprise the 24-hour news cycle are designed to manufacture crises and obscure the issues with bread and circuses rather than sharing real news. That is part of the reason it seems no punishment is ever meted out for any wrongdoing, so distracted are we with the next bit of nonsense media shoves down our throats. Now the media is shoving “The Donald” down our throats while in the same moment telling us to ignore him. Danger, Will Robinson. That tactic might backfire.

Here’s a thought…what if Donald Trump raises a couple of economic issues worth discussing by all those vying for office? What’s the harm? If pundits complain Trump steals focus from more “serious” candidates, surely they have the ability to cover those other candidates’ policy positions 24/7 and elevate their importance and profile. If the media is choosing not to do so and instead focuses on more demagoguery, is that Donald Trump’s fault? The man hasn’t even said he is running yet.

We need to open the political field up to more than the same old same old. I have no feelings about Trump, nor does that matter. What matters is that free speech be exercised and that the Hillary Clintons and Russ Feingolds and Dennis Kucinichs and Ron Pauls and Sarah Palins and Paul Ryans and yes, even the Donald Trumps of this world — have an opportunity to be heard. Along with Joe and Josephine Q. Public.

Then we can decide what is valid and important. Not the media.

People vote their pocketbooks and ultimately will make their own decision about who best addresses their concerns — that is, if they have an opportunity to hear more than just one person’s incessant drum.

And for those on both sides who are deeply offended by the “birther issue” as it has been called, it is unfortunate that the President has himself to thank for much of this, having spent so much money on lawyers to keep this information secret. While I never gave this matter credence, instead choosing to focus on President Obama’s continuation of George Bush’s policies and his lack of transparency, I can see where all his obfuscation would make even the most dubious person curious.

The President is arguably the most powerful man in the world and could obtain and present his long form BC in about five minutes — so why bother to keep this circus going? And by the way, it could be discovered President Obama is from Mars and such information would never be allowed to surface. The ramifications are too dreadful to imagine. This is no more than tilting at windmills. It will never happen. I think Donald Trump raises this issue just to make a dent in the mystical Obama narrative. No more. No less.

Just spitballing, but it is far more likely that the reason for secrecy is not to do with the place of President Obama’s birth, but something on the birth certificate he would rather not divulge. Although what the big deal secret could be, I cannot imagine.

I remain far more concerned by the world’s most media-exposed politician’s preoccupation with fundraising twenty months before the election rather than dealing with pressing problems, foreign and domestic. Where is the “fierce urgency of now” in dealing with continued joblessness, skyrocketing gas and food prices, Libya…

After hailing and helping to elect as President a man with a short resume, whose past actions and voting record contradicted his lofty campaign rhetoric, it is downright silly for the media to call anyone else a “joke.” They are going to have a hard time condemning a “celebrity candidate” when they were fine with creating one three years ago. Mainstream media and pundits on both sides have made themselves a joke. But if we continue to allow them to dictate the debate, the joke will be on us.

I know, I know, that can cover a wide variety of issues, and these days there seems to be no shortage of ones that would merit such a response.

But in this case, I am referring to Jack Stuef at Wonkette writing a particularly egregious piece directed at – wait for it – Trig Palin. Yes, Trig Palin, the Downs Syndrome baby of Sarah and Todd. It begs the question, what in the world could anyone have to say about any toddler that would be egregious, but especially a Special Needs child? Well, the headline of Tommy Christopher’s article at MediaIte gives you a hint:”Wonkette Editor Comments on Reprehensible Birthday Greeting to Trig Palin.”

First to a portion of Jack Stuef’s piece (and hey, I’m not linking to it, because he doesn’t deserve the traffic):

[snip] Today is the day we come together to celebrate the snowbilly grifter’s magical journey from Texas to Alaska to deliver to the America the great gentleman scholar Trig Palin. Is Palin his true mother? Or was Bristol? (And why is it that nobody questions who the father is? Because, either way, Todd definitely did it.)[snip]

What the hell is wrong with him? Seriously – what would make a grown (presumably) man attack a child this way just to get back at his parents for what, BEING? That “snowbilly grifter,” as he called her, is the freakin’ former governor of Alaska, and former VP presidential candidate – just what the hell has HE done that is anywhere NEAR that level of accomplishment? Apparently, nothing. And I say “apparently” because when you target a toddler for no reason other than his Special Needs status and who his parents are, well, you’re not exactly the cream of the crop. IMHO, that is.

Christopher’s response was pretty much along the lines of my own:

[snip] Hey, that’s really funny, calling Trig a gentleman scholar because he has Down Syndrome. And the speculation that Todd Palin may have raped his daughter? Pure comedy gold. You know what will be even funnier? The first time Jack Stuef runs into Todd Palin. That one practically writes its own punchline. [snip]

Uh, yeah. Now, Todd clearly has way more class than Stuef, and I am not an advocate of violence, but, wow…

And get this initial reaction from Ken Layne, Editor of Wonkette, in response to Christopher asking if this offensive post would be removed:

[snip] On whose account are you requesting that Jack Stuef remove a post mocking Sarah Palin’s well-documented use of her special needs child as a political prop? Is this coming from Mediaite? Which editor? [snip]

“Political prop”? How’s that again? She had him around her when she had ALL of her children around her. He’s her child, and was an INFANT at the time. If she did NOT have him with her, there would be charges against her for being a horrible parent, hiding her Special needs child, blah, blah, blah – you know there would be. She just cannot win for losing.

And really – they are pushing this meme that Bristol is really the mother?? What is wrong with these people?!

There are more exchanges between Tommy Christopher and Ken Layne, and you can click here to read the rest. Suffice it to say, it didn’t get any better (and really, it went downhill). There is still no sense of shame, or acknowledgment that this toddler should not be a target for “satire” or “humor,” since that is what they think Stuef’s post was.

Honestly, is there no line these folks won’t cross? Sure doesn’t seem like it, but I gotta say, going after a toddler, a Special Needs one at that, just to get at his parents, is plain wrong. Never mind the depiction of Palin – that was offensive, too. But this is way beyond the pale. There should be no place for this, either by the writer, or an editor who would defend it.

Again, I have to ask: what the hell is wrong with these people??

Update: Fortunately, many advertisers have pulled their ads from Wonkette. Seems some people DO still have a sense of decency and decorum, since Wonkette clearly does not.

Faithful NQ reader, Helenk, provided a link to an excellent piece at HotAir, “3 Reasons Why Wonkette Self-destructed By Publishing A Hit Piece On Trig Palin,” which included the video below:

Well said, Mr. Crowder. Thank you.

But that is not the point of this post, believe it or not. No, rather it is this: at the very same site, there is this article, “PROFESSOR: Sarah Palin Probably Staged A Gigantic Hoax About Being Trig’s Mother.”

I am not kidding, and it is not a tongue-in-cheek article, either. Oh, Andrew Sullivan must be SO happy that some professor at Northern Kentucky University is taking his assertion to heart. (And I am sure the parents who send their kids to school there are so happy to learn that one of the professors seems to be spending time “proving” that Sarah is not Trig’s real mother.) From what I can tell, the conclusion reached by Scharlotte was mere conjecture, but hey, that’s better than nothing, right? Ahem.

It does make me wonder one thing: just what is it this professor teaches exactly? I mean, with all this time on his hands to delve into such ground-breaking research, and all, it’s gotta be something important, no doubt. (That is snark, by the way.) Actually, he teaches journalism. Yes, journalism. Now you have a glimpse into why our media is in such bad shape, presuming this is representative of the professors in this field (he is also very upset that some “Palin Flack” is trying to squelch discussion on this critical issue facing us today. Again, not kidding.) Uh, yeah. THIS is what he is so concerned about the media not covering now, during this tumultuous time. Wow.

Oh, you’re probably wondering who IS Trig’s real mother according to Scharlotte (and Sullivan). Well, it’s Bristol, of course. C’mon, that’s as clear as the nose on your face, people!

What is really hilarious to me, though, are the comments at this article. The exact same people who demean, belittle, and attack those who would like to see Obama’s birth certificate act like this is a matter of National Security. You know, because Palin ran as the Vice Presidential candidate, so who her baby mama is matters a LOT. Hey, say what you will about Birthers, at least the desire to see an actual birth certificate is to fulfill a Constitutional requirement. And it is a requirement other presidential candidates have fulfilled, I might add.

But this has zero to do with the Constitution. This has to do with Palin Hatred veiled as outrage at a lackluster media, one that hasn’t done its job in reporting this “earth shattering” story:

[snip] He (Professor Scharlotte) concludes two things:

* First, that the “conspiracy theory” is likely true–Sarah Palin staged a huge hoax, and, second,

* The American media is pathetic for not pursuing the story more aggressively
[snip] (Click here to read the rest.)

Oh, yes – where has the media been? You know, the one that aggressively pursued Obama’s connections to Tony Rezko, or Bill Ayers, or Jeremiah Wright, or James Meeks, or his college/grad school records, or why there were ZERO paper recrods from the entire time Obama was in the IL Senate, or how he got everyone thrown off the ballot the first time he ran, or how he got the sealed divorce records of the two front-runner US Senate candidates unsealed right before the election, or any NUMBER of red flags about Barack Obama.

Oh, wait – they didn’t. But this man thinks what they SHOULD have been doing was going after Palin even more. Because the boatload of reporters who descended on Wasilla to turn over every rock they could, or the 11 reporters the AP assigned to check her book, is not the least bit aggressive in its efforts. Kinda makes you wonder how many they have assigned to “fact check” Obama’s books, huh? Yeah. I’m not holding my breath for that to happen, either.

It is just comical the complete and utter hypocrisy contained within this one site on such a related issue. And the utter lack of recognition of the hypocrisy, too, is a bit comical.

Yes, by all means, let us spend lots of time and media resources on whether or not Trig is Sarah Palin’s son, because that is of the utmost importance. Never mind Obama’s real back-story – he’s only the President after all. Hey, we have to have our priorities with our media, right? Right. Budget crisis? What “budget crisis”? I need to know who is really the mother of that kid, don’t you?

If you’ll excuse me, I have to go read “People” magazine now to get the REAL news…

Update below the fold.

Of Obama campaigning. Yes, he has already started for his re-election. Blech. Oh, he just happened to show up at the Lincoln Memorial after the 11th hour agreement on the budget vote, running around, glad handing, acting like he was the one who wrote the damn thing:

Never mind that he was kicking and screaming throughout the whole process, threatening to veto an extension bill that would fund the Pentagon, thus the military, should there be a government shutdown. And never mind that the REASON we were on the verge of a government shutdown was the Democrats refusal to pass a damn budget last year when they controlled all three houses. Gee – can’t imagine why they decided not to do that, and that decision was made pretty early in the year.

And now Obama is prancing around like he did this single-handedly? Please.

It is only going to get worse from here on out. This is only the beginning of his re-election bid, which he curiously decided to launch in the midst of a boatload of serious issues facing the nation and the world (Libya, Syria, Yemen, Iran, the budget, gas prices that have doubled – DOUBLED -under Obama, and on and on).

Just as a reminder, these are some of the “highlights” toward which I imagine we can look forward, and the mature responses of his followers:

Or this:

Or how about this memorable comment:

Here’s some campaign advice for Mr. Obama, free of charge: when you are in the middle of a campaign, and you choose to go out to be among the people, including eating in a diner, when someone dares ask you a question, answer it. That’s why you are there, right? If you want an uninterrupted waffle-eating breakfast (and was that waffle ever an indicator of things to come from Obama), stay in your hotel room. I’m just saying – you might not want to get all snappy with the people you want to vote for you when you deign to mingle among them.

That is just the beginning. That doesn’t even begin to touch the ways in which Obama takes credit for actions that were not his (the list is way too long, but think back to the last election when he claimed to be on committees he wasn’t on, or bills on which he didn’t work, etc., etc.). How much worse is it going to get now that he actually got into the White House? Geez, I shudder to think.

I wonder if, maybe the second time around, the media might actually do more of its job, and ask him some real questions, like about Rezko, for instance. Or his connections to Big Oil. Yeah, I didn’t think so…

I don’t know that I can take another 1 1/2 of Obama campaigning. The last time was one time too many, if you ask me. I think I’m going to have to spend more time watching videos like this instead of watching Obama lie like a rug, calling people racists if they disagree with him, or tilting his chin up at people in the most arrogant manner possible:

Uh, yeah. This is much better, don’t you think?

**Update** My aunt mentioned to me today that Obama had been complaining about his loss of privacy. Was he ever. I knew he had complained about this before, but wow, want a little whine with that cheese, Mr. Obama? Good grief. I guess he didn’t believe Bush when he said being president was “hard work.” Hmm – I wonder if people will give Obama as hard of a time for saying this:

“I just miss – I miss being anonymous,” he said. “I miss Saturday morning, rolling out of bed, not shaving, getting into my car with my girls, driving to the supermarket, squeezing the fruit, getting my car washed, taking walks. I can’t take a walk.”

His dream, he said, was to “go through Central Park and watch folks passing by … spend the day watching people – I miss that”.

Faced with simmering criticism for playing more golf than most previous occupants of the White House, he explained that the sport was simply the best way of getting away from it all.

“It’s the only excuse I have to get outside for four hours at a stretch,” he told Hearst magazines. [snip] (Click here to read the rest.)

Oh, freakin’ spare me. After he pulled every dirty trick in the book to get INTO the White House, from caucus fraud to vote-stealing, he’s complaining (again)? That just takes the cake…

I think this calls for another horse video, this time with a cat (this one reminds me of my Jordan playing with a teeny tiny little kitten, letting him play with his tail and everything – so cute):

At the age of 75, Geraldine Ferraro, the first woman to run as a Vice Presidential candidate in 1984, died today (h/t Sara in Italy):

[snip] Ferraro died at Massachusetts General Hospital, where she was being treated for blood cancer. She died just before 10 a.m., said Amanda Fuchs Miller, a family friend who worked for Ferraro in her 1998 Senate bid and was acting as a spokeswoman for the family.

A three-term congresswoman from the New York City borough of Queens, Ferraro catapulted to national prominence in 1984 when she was chosen by presidential nominee Walter Mondale to join his ticket against incumbents Ronald Reagan and George H. W. Bush.

[...]

Palin paid tribute to Ferraro on her Facebook page on Saturday.

“She broke one huge barrier and then went on to break many more,” Palin wrote. “May her example of hard work and dedication to America continue to inspire all women.”

For his part, Mondale remembered his former running mate as “a remarkable woman and a dear human being.”

“She was a pioneer in our country for justice for women and a more open society. She broke a lot of molds and it’s a better country for what she did,” Mondale told The Associated Press. [snip] (Click here to read the rest.)

If you wish to read the entire statement from Sarah Palin, click here. You may recall that Sarah Palin and Geraldine Ferraro did appear together, the only two women to run as Vice Presidential candidates for the major parties. Here they are:

My thoughts and prayers go out to the Ferraro family. Ms. Ferraro broke a lot of barriers in this country, was an outspoken advocate for women, and she will have my undying gratitude. May she rest in peace.

Update: The Clintons issued a statement following the death of Ms. Ferraro, a staunch Hillary supporter:

[snip] “Gerry Ferraro was one of a kind — tough, brilliant, and never afraid to speak her mind or stand up for what she believed in — a New York icon and a true American original. She was a champion for women and children and for the idea that there should be no limits on what every American can achieve. The daughter of an Italian immigrant family, she rose to become the first woman ever nominated to the national ticket by a major political party. She paved the way for a generation of female leaders and put the first cracks in America’s political glass ceiling. She believed passionately that politics and public service was about making a difference for the people she represented as a congresswoman and Ambassador.

For us, Gerry was above all a friend and companion. From the rough-and-tumble of political campaigns to the important work of international diplomacy, we were honored to have her by our side. She was a tireless voice for human rights and helped lead the American delegation to the landmark Fourth World Conference on Women in Beijing in 1995. Through it all, she was a loyal friend, trusted confidante, and valued colleague.

Our thoughts and prayers are with Gerry’s husband John, her children and grandchildren, and their entire family.”

Greta Van Susteran will be doing a tribute show to Geraldine Ferraro at 10:00pm Sunday night.

Yes, Rep. Moran made this ludicrous charge in an interview with an Arab TV station (honestly, I am having a hard time writing this, I am just so incredulous that this is his delusional rationale for the Election results. WOW.). Here is what the Representative from Virginia said:

[snip] The Virginia Democrat told Alhurra that Republicans gained 63 seats in the House “for the same reason the Civil War happened in the United States.”

“The Civil War happened because the Southern states, particularly the slaveholding states, didn’t want to see a president who was opposed to slavery,” Moran said. “In this case a lot of people in this country, I believe, don’t want to be governed by an African American, particularly one who is inclusive, who is liberal, who wants to spend money on everyone and who wants to reach out to include everyone in our society.” [snip] (Click here to read the rest.)

Can you believe this shit? Bringing up the Civil War as a justification for this absurd, obscene, ridiculous charge? What the hell is wrong with Moran?

Let me help you understand what happened in 2010, Rep. Moran. The reason for the huge shift was your party shoving a massive, costly health care law, that none of you bozos bothered to read, down the throats of Americans after we screamed our heads off telling you in every way we could we DID NOT WANT IT. It is because Unemployment in this country is still EXCEEDINGLY high, currently being touted at 9.4%, but that does not include the underemployed. It is because foreclosures in this country are expected to hit a record high in 2011. It is because the debt you and your cronies are running up just this year is $1.5 TRILLION dollars, added to the over $14 trillion we are in debt, a debt that has escalated under your party’s, and Obama’s, “leadership.”

I could go on and on, but it is clear you aren’t listening to what the people have been saying. No matter how clearly we have been telling you. This isn’t about race, this is about one party dominating the political landscape and doing what they wanted to do, and not what they people who sent them to DC wanted them to do. Seriously, using a charge of racism in the face of the reality of what is going on in our country is delusional at best. Using a charge of racism, or Nazism, as your colleague, Rep. Cohen (D-TN), did recently, is offensive, gutless, and an attempt at silencing all opposition.

With all due respect (as much as I can muster for someone who uses such a ridiculous charge), you need to look in the mirror, look at your party, look at what you are doing to this country, rather than cast aspersions. The Democratic Party has no one to blame but itself for what happened in 2010, and it has zero to do with race.

And now to the sexism portion of the post. I received a lovely email from a faithful No Quarter reader, Candy*, who wrote about the way Google organizes responses to a search on Sarah Palin. She noted that the primary results are largely negative, with only a few favorable ones tossed in here or there. I have no doubt she is right. (Photo credit: October 22, 2010, Photo by Matt Stroshane/Getty Images North America)

For instance, if you did a search right this minute, one of the very top articles is one that made me throw up in my mouth a bit. Here is the headline: “Tracy Morgan: Palin Is ‘Good Masturbation Material,’” complete with video of Morgan saying this. TNT was quick to apologize for this remark on their show, “Inside The NBA,” after they started getting emails about it, that is. But hey, still, they did apologize. One of the hosts, Ernie Johnson, did try to change the topic quickly, and to cut Morgan off, but it was already out there. Wow.

Many of us remember all too well how Google operated during the 2008 campaign. Many people complained about the bias way it presented its search results. Apparently, with some justification, as this article in Politico would indicate, “Obama-Google Connection Scares Competitors.” Uh huh, I bet. Though I would not hold my breath for any official acknowledgment, as the article makes clear:

[snip] Google says that Schmidt was acting on his own, and his politics don’t reflect the company’s official stance.

“Eric’s endorsement of Sen. Obama was a personal matter, and as a company Google was neutral in the campaign,” said Adam Kovacevich, Google’s senior manager of global communications and public affairs. “We look forward to working with the new administration and congressional leaders on both sides of the aisle to keep the Internet open and to promote economic growth.”

Obama’s transition team declined comment. [snip] (Click here to read the rest.)

Show of hands – who believes the Google guy? Anyone? Anyone? Yeah, me neither. Especially since Obama’s own team declined comment. Many of us remember having to grab snapshots of images before they got scrubbed from Google (yes, they may have gone up initially, but often got taken down). And, many of us remember Google not allowing anti-Obama blogs during the 2008 campaign. I am going to guess there may be more of the same now, especially given the close relationship between Obama and Google’s owner, Eric Scmidt.

But hey, don’t take my word for it. How about a little exercise – do a search on Google for Sarah Palin, and see what comes up. See how far you have to go to find something positive on her that does not come from, say, Fox News or American Thinker. Better yet, try to find a site for photos of her that do NOT have sexually suggestive photo-shopped pictures. Then try another search engine and see what happens. I am curious to see what you all find. Please feel free to share.

Finally, here’s a challenge for the Democrats as they gear up (or continue) the campaign for Obama for 2012: Please refrain from calling those who do not support Obama racists, or Nazis, or any of the other smears you have used against us in the past. Our opposition has absolutely nothing to do with the color of Obama’s skin, but with his policies and actions (along with the actions of many others in the Democratic Party, like Nancy Pelosi, who helped to craft Obamacare). Instead of using such highly charged rhetoric, try listening for a change at why people in this country are unhappy. Try looking at what is really going on with the economy, with the deficit, with people’s very lives. You know, what you were sent to Washington to do. Just a thought.

*Candy, thank you so much for the email. I appreciate your taking the time to write me, and appreciate your kind words. Thank you!