Bernie Goldberg discussed Obama’s Fall from the MSM’s “slobbering love affair” recently, based on research he conducted for his book of the same title Slobbering Love Affair: The True (And Pathetic) Story of the Torrid Romance Between Barack Obama and the Mainstream Media, and evidenced by recent statements from prominent members of the media:

Gee – is it possible that some folks are really starting to get what we were trying to tell them (and for which we were roundly dismissed with charges of racism, sour grapes, and much worse)? Even some folks in Hollywood are getting it now:

Here’s the thing, Gene – maybe if you had actually done some homework, maybe looked at the local Chicago papers, or thought to yourself, “huh – I wonder why we can’t see Obama’s transcripts, or medical records, or any paperwork at all from his time in IL?” Or even, “why did Obama have to get everyone thrown off the ballot to win his IL seat?” Or how about, “Why did Obama’s team expose the sealed divorce records of both front-runners for the US Senate seat?” Or maybe, just maybe, THIS question: “Why is this guy running after being in the U.S. Senate for 143 days?” Maybe then you wouldn’t have wasted your vote, and be regretting it now.

I have to say, I LOVE Jane Lynch, so I was thrilled to see that she got it. I have tried and tried and TRIED to tell my Obot-loving family that Obama does NOT support same-sex marriage, just the same as the woman they love to hate, Sarah Palin.

While I am speaking of Obama, SC Gov.-Elect Haley was on Greta discussing Obamacare the other night (and thanks to fellow writer, Eastan, for alerting me to her appearance):

Yep – she’s going to be representing our state, and I have to say, I am glad of it.

Anywho – so some in the media continue to wake up (others, not so much – three words, Olbermann and Maddow), but there are signs of life now among not just the media, but the Hollywood cheerleaders, too.

Okay, so NOW do I get to do my “Told You So” dance? Hmm – that wouldn’t be in keeping with the spirit of the season, so how about this: Welcome. We have been waiting for you.

Breaking News: As of this writing, the Senate has voted to allow DADT to advance. Finally. I knew this was going to happen – it would be left until right before the new Congress came in. But it appears DADT will finally be repealed, thank heavens (and no real thanks to Obama – if anyone should be thanked for this, it is Rep. Patrick Murphy, who has pushed for repeal tirelessly). A final vote should be forthcoming this weekend, but it looks good for repeal!

The Courage Campaign has highlighted an important aspect of DADT repeal about which you may not have heard. This from an email I received today:

Here’s the skinny: the Senate vote was the last legislative obstacle. Now the bill will head to President Obama’s desk for his signature. But even after the President signs this law, no one can serve openly. Certification is first required from the President, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, and Secretary of Defense. It’s part of a backroom deal cut months ago, and it’s ridiculous. We’ve seen how the Administration has dragged their feet over the past two years on “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell”. We can’t let that happen again.

It is not a done deal yet. We must keep the Administration’s feet to the fire on this issue so that all Americans who wish to serve may serve.

But I’m not talking about any of that. Nope, I have some interesting little news tidbits for you.

First up, Rep. Maxine Water’s attorneys are irritated that she is still being investigated. Yes, they want the Ethics Committee to “Leave Maxine ALOONNNEEE!” They assert that since the formal probe is over, the Ethics Committee should knock it off. But as The Hill article indicates, they aren’t the boss of the Ethics Committee:

[snip] Unlike criminal proceedings, however, the ethics committee itself, not a judge, determines whether Waters’s legal arguments are accepted or dismissed. For that reason, it’s unlikely the panel will halt its activities after receiving the letter from Brand and Herman. [snip] (Click HERE to read the rest.)

So, there’s that. Perhaps it didn’t occur to them that Rep. Waters might have committed additional ethics violations. Just a thought.

Second up, and you’re going to love this, is Ed Schultz, of MSNBO and Air America fame, had himself a little “Mel Gibson” moment, as this NY Post article, “MSNBC’s Ed Schultz Goes Bonkers.” Just wait until you read why:

MSNBC talk show screamer Ed Schultz had a meltdown in the network’s 30 Rock newsroom, shouting at staff, “I’m going to torch this [bleep]ing place.”

The hot-tempered anchor of “The Ed Show” lost it during a phone call in the packed studio and slammed down the phone before exploding.

As astonished MSNBC staff members fell silent, Schultz glared around the room and yelled, “[Bleep]ers!”

A witness told us, “Ed was furious the network was running election-night promos and he wasn’t in them. He’d been arguing on the phone with marketing, then he slammed down the phone and exploded. It was like Mel Gibson had entered the newsroom.” [snip]

But wait – there’s more:

[snip] Our source added, “Schultz was told: ‘If you do that again, you are fired.’ He broke down crying.”

Sources say the hothead was pushed over the edge by MSNBC’s catering to bullying fellow anchor Keith Olbermann and its focus on golden girl Rachel Maddow. [snip]
(Click HERE to read the rest.)

Poor Ed – not feeling the love. Just breaks your heart for him that the MSNBO Execs love Keith and Rachel more, doesn’t it? Oh yeah, my heart bleeds for him.

Finally, did you know that the other name by which the Tea Party should be known is the KKK? Oh, yes, indeedy. Check out this OBC, I mean, ABC, report:

Did you catch that quote at the end? Apparently, Rev. Fauntroy didn’t since he justified his remarks with this explanation:

[snip]Fauntroy attempted to explain the comparison to white supremacists by saying that organizers behind the “Restoring Honor” rally are the same people who cut audio cables from a sound system the night before the historic March on Washington and the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr.’s “I Have a Dream” speech at the Lincoln Memorial. (Click HERE to read the rest.)

Well, that certainly makes it all better: Tea Party = White Supremacists. I mean, c’mon, who could possibly take offense at that connection? Never mind that it is completely false, but hey – you know, that’s all he meant by it. No big deal or anything.

Good grief. All because the Tea Party dared to hold a rally around the same time they are being compared to KKK members? I have to say it – Rev, Fauntroy completely missed the message Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr. was trying to impart. His son said it all – his father “would not want to limit voices.” So, why is Rev. Fauntroy attempting to do so with this incendiary speech? That’s what I would like to know.

I am sure there are more stories out there that we may have missed. Let’s have them!

At my most recent post about Secretary Clinton providing full benefits to the GLBT Diplomat Corp, faithful No Quarter reader, Mountaires, had a comment which included the following video from the Rachel Maddow Show. As you know, and as I have mentioned a number of times, Rachel Maddow, and her network, MSNBC, were very blatantly, and obviously, in the tank for Obama (there are too many examples to go into right now – do a search here, or No Quarter, or Goodsearch.com – you will get hits, I promise). That should convey to you just how incredibly serious what she says is – she is a HUGE Obama supporter (or was – who knows now). And what Obama wants to do next should scare the bejesus out of everyone in this country. It is his further dismantling of our Constitution, and our democracy. And what it is staggers the mind:

I have no words for this. Oh, wait – yes I do. For Obama to give this speech in which he is taking away rights GUARANTEED by the Constitution of the United States (right to a speedy trial, to not be held without charges) is criminal.

I was wrong, though. Obama is not another Bush, he is WORSE than Bush. I didn’t think that was possible, but there it is, from his very own lips – he is actively working to take away our rights. This is shocking beyond belief. I can’t wait to hear how the Obama minions will defend THIS.

David Shuster loves teabagging. He just can’t get enough of it. Full throated, tongue lashing, in your face teabagging.

How many puns can you count in this clip?

You’re going to need a *dick* army? Wow, funny stuff there, Shuster.

Well, he couldn’t be outdone by Rachel Maddow, who has dedicated a lot of time giggling over teabagging. More videos here. And here. (note to Rachel – nobody is calling this *tea bagging*, they are calling the events tea parties. you are the one bringing the smut.)

Nothing like a major network news channel discrediting themselves by acting like a bunch of prepubescent children, in an attempt to *discredit* Americans upset over our ever growing deficit.

(this is why I no longer watch msnbc…except for Morning Joe, that is!)

And since Rachel and David are apparently having trouble trying to figure out why people are having tea parties, here is the reason, from the Tax Day Tea Party web site:

“Americans across the country are gathering across the country to express anger over Congress’s irresponsible and reckless spending habits. Taxpayers are not deceived by the notion that the American economy can be revived by government simply spending its way out of a recession. They are a sophisticated people who recognize that continued overspending runs up massive deficits that ultimately lead to higher taxes and less freedom for all Americans.”

Perhaps if David and Rachel would pull the teabags out, and act like journalists, they could figure it out.

Obama may have promised taxes wouldn’t be raised, but they will be. And that will be yet another broken campaign promise.

And now, CLASS: Please compare, and contrast, these two examples of television journalism:

Yes, well. Actually, there was some news in there.

And, Rachel, I’d flat-out kill for Hillary’s coat BUT it is NOT your lead, Rachel. So not your lead! (North Korea, for example

Hillary, you rock. Rachel? You not so much.

And why oh god why Rachel do you over-enunciate and over-emote every single word that comes out of your mouth in a very much too-high-pitched way?

Breathe, Rachel.

Take it from an old former French horn player: Use your diaphragm.

You’re supposed to be engaging, not grating!

Oh, that second example? That’s from the new PBS world news program that I’m very fond of, WorldFocus. Besides the above video, there’s this “blog” report:

U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton arrived in Tokyo on Monday night on her first trip as the nation’s chief diplomat.

“I have come to Asia as my first trip as secretary of state to convey that America’s relationships across the Pacific are indispensable to addressing the challenges and seizing the opportunities of the twenty-first century,” Clinton said to a crowd in Tokyo.

Sheila A. Smith, a senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations, joins Martin Savidge to discuss how Clinton will approach North Korea, Japan and how the Japanese view China’s growing economic and military power.

Read what a Worldfocus contributing blogger had to say about Clinton’s stop in Japan and what her visit means for internal Japanese politics: Clinton plans for a rare meeting with Japan’s opposition.

Check out MORE at WorldFocus.

P.S. Last night’s program included a quite disturbing if fascinating examination of the fascination with and admiration for Joseph Stalin that today’s Russians have: “Stalin Makes a Comeback With Russia’s Youth.”

Obama has signed an executive order limiting interrogation techniques to the 19 outlined in the Army Field Manual, but Panetta conceded those might not be enough. He said he would not hesitate to go to the president and ask for additional authority if there was “a ticking-bomb situation.”

Well, that’s just jake, isn’t it? Wonderful news.

I wrote yesterday about this issue, and thanks to truthtelling007, I have two videos to share with you on the continuation of this policy.

First up is a general overview from Fox news:

Then there is Obama Water Carrier, Rachel Maddow, on Obama’s decision to continue this policy. Now let me say, I used to like her, but from the very beginning of the Primary, she made it QUITE clear that she supported Obama, and the vast majority of her reporting was skewed to support Obama. So here she is, discussing Obama’s continuation of this Bush policy:

Once again, why she is surprised is BEYOND me. Here she is discussing with Russ Feingold the FISA vote this summer, and Obama’s vote for these expanded presidential powers. Oh, and Russ, whom I also used to like, continues that meme that Obama is a Constitutional Scholar, that he’ll restore the Constitution, blah, blah, blah, if he becomes President, that he would rescind a lot of Executive Orders (so far, only for unions), etc. I recommend having clear access to a bathroom or barf bag for all the GLORIOUS things Obama will do. Anyway, here it is:

So, yeah, Rachel – that, along with his flip flops on so many other issues, should have been a big, huge clue to you about what Obama was really going to do when he got into office. Hate it for you that you clung to your hopes and dreams rather than looking at the reality of who this guy is. Maybe now you’ll actually try to engage in some actual freakin’ journalism. That’s MY hope, Rachel. That you’ll actually take off the rose-colored glasses, stop drinking the damn Kool-Aide, and do the job of a true journalist.

Just to be clear – Obama and his new CIA chief, Panetta, are crystal clear on the policy of rendition. And it is exactly the same as the last guy. It’s about damn time people started to deal with the REAL Obama, and stop trying to prop up the IMAGE of Obama you helped to create. Any time now.

[My apologies to Old Grumpy and all of you for posting about the woman-who-shall-not-be-mentioned. Sometimes I wander off but I always have good faith that I can return untainted. And sometimes I actually learn a thing or two from the unmentionables. But that's just me and I needn't subject you to the same. Old Grumpy, you're the best, and I really dig your high principles - Susan]