The topic of his recent speech? How the Republicans will be GRINCHES if they do not pass pass the extension for Payroll Tax and Unemployment Benefits. This was one of the issues the Super Committee was supposed to undertake before their Super Fail.

Really? Yep, really – he said it:

Click here to view the embedded video.

Okay, maybe not just like that, but pretty close:

[snip] “Tell them, ‘Don’t be a Grinch.’ Don’t vote to raise taxes on working Americans during the holidays. Put the country before party. Put money back in the pockets of working families. Do your job. Pass our jobs bill,” Obama told the crowd of roughly 1,300.

“If Congress refuses to act, then middle-class families are going to get hit with a tax increase at the worst time. … We can’t let that happen. Not right now. It would be bad for the economy. It would be bad for employment,” Obama said. “Are they really willing to break their oath to never raise taxes, and raise taxes on the middle class just to play politics? [snip] (Click here to read the rest.)

This from the most partisan president I can recall in years. And never mind that the Senate refuses to even consider the 22 bills the House has sent on jobs, or that it hasn’t bothered to pass a budget in years. It is ALL the Republicans fault. Even though the Democrats control two houses. And never mind that Obama was AWOL from the whole proceedings.

As I understand it, one of the biggest sticking points for the Republicans was the increase in taxes the Democrats kept pushing, as opposed to closing loopholes, which is what the Republicans were pushing (as in, you don’t raise taxes during a recession). So, first it is the Republicans’ fault for not going along with tax hikes, and now it is their fault that tax extensions weren’t passed.

Oh, and never mind that Obama blew off everything his OWN committee suggested. Talk about a monumental waste of time. Hmmm – I wonder, did we pay those people to do that? Because if we did, that, too, was a waste of money. Even when Sen. Toomey presented some of the committe’s recommendations, the Democrats would hear nothing of it.

But the Republicans are the obstructionists. Got it? That is the message. And it was intended all along. This whole Super Committee was destined to fail from the get-go, to achieve exactly what Obama wanted: Talking Points.

I think Obama has elevated talking out of both sides of one’s mouth to an art form.

Meanwhile, Obama is all to ready to cut the budget in one area: Defense. Despite the plea from pleas from Defense Secretary Panetta that Obama not do this, Obama has threatened to veto any attempt to remove that trigger. Yes, Defense Secretary Panetta said to cut the budget by as much as is planned would have devastating consequences to our National Security:

[snip] During the months the super committee deliberated, Panetta consistently urged lawmakers not to reduce national security spending beyond the more than $450 billion already approved by Congress in August.

Panetta said he had made clear the Pentagon had a responsibility to help the United States get its fiscal house in order, but added his primary responsibility as secretary of defense “is to protect the security of the nation.”

The Pentagon’s ability to provide benefits and support for U.S. troops and their families also would be jeopardized if the automatic cuts are allowed to go into effect, he said.

“Our troops deserve better, and our nation demands better,” Panetta said.[snip] (Click here to read the rest.)

And to that, Obama essentially says, tough – blame it on the Republicans. It’s all their fault. Everything is all their fault. The Democrats are completely blameless in this discussion.

Got it. That’s the campaign in a nutshell. Evidently, we are supposed to have collective amnesia that the Democrats controlled all three houses for the first two years of Obama’s tenure. But hey – playing dirty is what Obama has done throughout his entire political career, from the very first run getting everyone thrown off the ballot to having divorce records of his opponents – Republican AND Democratic – revealed, to race baiting from early on in his career to this day. Check out this interesting video, which includes Obama from 1995. It is very telling indeed:

Click here to view the embedded video.

WOW. Just wow. Oh, and while it would take too long to go through everything he said, but unemployment in the African American community has increased to its highest level in 27 years since Obama too office. Just sayin’.

But that’s how he rolls. And I’m ready for him to roll on outta the White House. How about you?

Second is this one, which I sure hope is true, one way or the other: “Issa: If Holder Is Not ‘Doomed,’ The Obama Administration Is.” From your lips, Rep. Issa, from your lips…

Faithful reader Helenk informed me earlier that something crazy is going on in Iran. I suppose one can always make that case, but even more now, with claims that Ahmadinejad was arrested, along with an advisor, though Reuters refutes that claim.

Meanwhile, Breeze provided an article that claims Ahmadinejad’s media advisor WAS imprisoned. Wanna know why? Oh, you’re gonna love this:

[snip]According to the report, Javanfekr, the former caretaker manager of the daily Iran, has been convicted on publishing an article in the August 13 special edition of the newspaper deemed to be in violation of Islamic principles.

Okey dokey. Now I kinda wonder just what it was he said, don’t you? Hmmm.

Well, it is Monday. This seems like just the right tune for the day:

It’s an Open Thread, and now it’s all yours.

But the numbers don’t stop there. Here’s another number for you: 11/3/10. That would be the date the Obama Administration’s DOE apparently wanted Solyndra to wait for its announcement of layoffs. Yep, they wanted to hold that little piece of information until after the elections to help skew them. Nice. Another date to bear in mind is: 11/17/11. That is when Secretary Chu will be facing the music in front of the Senate about all of the Solyndra machinations.

Speaking of Solyndra, fully 80% of the Stimulus money for Green Energy went to Obama donors. That’s EIGHTY percent of our dollars. Here are just a few examples from “Throw Them All Out,” Schweizer’s new book: Bright Source Venture Partner raked in a $1.6 Billion loan, and its Senior Adviser is Robert Kennedy, Jr. Obama’s current Deputy Assistant, Michael Froman, bundled $200,000 – 500,000, and for his efforts, not only did he get a job in the White House, but the company for which he had been COO received a tidy loan in the amount of $737 million dollars. Then there is Nancy-Ann DeParle, White House Deputy Chief of Staff. Before her WH job, she was the Managing Director of CCMP Capital, and the company for which she was a majority owner, Granite Reliable Wind Generation, received $168.9 million in our tax dollars. Yep, Obama’s bundlers have made out like bandits with our money.

Of course, these little paybacks with our money fly in the face of yet another promise broken by Obama, also highlighted in the book, “Throw Them All Out”:

When President-elect Obama came to Washington in late 2008, he was outspoken about the need for an economic stimulus to revive a struggling economy… After he was sworn in as president, he proclaimed that taxpayer money would assuredly not be doled out to political friends…

…But an examination of grants and guaranteed loans offered by just one stimulus program run by the Department of Energy, for alternative-energy projects, is stunning. The so-called 1705 Loan Guarantee Program and the 1603 Grant Program channeled billions of dollars to all sorts of energy companies…

…In the 1705 government-backed-loan program [alone], for example, $16.4 billion of the $20.5 billion in loans granted as of Sept. 15 went to companies either run by or primarily owned by Obama financial backers—individuals who were bundlers, members of Obama’s National Finance Committee, or large donors to the Democratic Party. The grant and guaranteed-loan recipients were early backers of Obama before he ran for president, people who continued to give to his campaigns and exclusively to the Democratic Party in the years leading up to 2008. Their political largesse is probably the best investment they ever made in alternative energy. It brought them returns many times over.

Uh huh. That seems to be all Obama has done – reward his donors with our money, and with cushy White House jobs to boot. It’s a Numbers Game, alright, but with Obama at the helm, the numbers just ain’t adding up.

Check that – the numbers have added up, but way too much. In just three short years, $4 trillion in debt has been accrued under Obama’s “leadership.” Those are numbers, and leadership, we can do without…

Peter Schweizer has written a new book, Throw Them All Out: How Politicians and Their Friends Get Rich Off Insider Stock Tips, Land Deals, and Cronyism That Would Send the Rest of Us to Prison (available soon through Amazon). In it, he details some mighty interesting observations about how much Obama’s cronies have benefited since he took office. The Daily Beast had an excerpt, some of which I will share with you here, beginning with this:

When President-elect Obama came to Washington in late 2008, he was outspoken about the need for an economic stimulus to revive a struggling economy. He wanted billions of dollars spent on “shovel-ready projects” to build roads; billions more for developing alternative-energy projects; and additional billions for expanding broadband Internet access and creating a “smart grid” for energy consumption. After he was sworn in as president, he proclaimed that taxpayer money would assuredly not be doled out to political friends. “Decisions about how Recovery Act dollars are spent will be based on the merits,” he said, referring to the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009. “Let me repeat that: decisions about how recovery money will be spent will be based on the merits. They will not be made as a way of doing favors for lobbyists.”

Really?

[...]

Nevertheless, a large proportion of the winners were companies with Obama-campaign connections. Indeed, at least 10 members of Obama’s finance committee and more than a dozen of his campaign bundlers were big winners in getting your money. At the same time, several politicians who supported Obama managed to strike gold by launching alternative-energy companies and obtaining grants. How much did they get? According to the Department of Energy’s own numbers … a lot. In the 1705 government-backed-loan program, for example, $16.4 billion of the $20.5 billion in loans granted as of Sept. 15 went to companies either run by or primarily owned by Obama financial backers—individuals who were bundlers, members of Obama’s National Finance Committee, or large donors to the Democratic Party. The grant and guaranteed-loan recipients were early backers of Obama before he ran for president, people who continued to give to his campaigns and exclusively to the Democratic Party in the years leading up to 2008. Their political largesse is probably the best investment they ever made in alternative energy. It brought them returns many times over.

Shocking, isn’t it? I know none of us should really be surprised. There is so, so much more, even to this excerpt, which I encourage you to read in its entirety.

But I have just one more, pertinent to this whole issue of “green” technology companies: [snip]

One might think that the Department of Energy’s Loan Program Office, which has doled out billions in taxpayer-guaranteed loans, would be directed by a dedicated scientist or engineer. Or perhaps a civil servant with considerable financial knowledge. Instead, the department’s loan and grant programs are run by partisans who were responsible for raising money during the Obama campaign from the same people who later came to seek government loans and grants. Steve Spinner, who served on the Obama campaign’s National Finance Committee and was a bundler himself, was the campaign’s “liaison to Silicon Valley.” His responsibilities included fundraising, recruiting more bundlers, and managing Obama’s relationship with a cadre of very wealthy donors. After the 2008 campaign, Spinner joined the Department of Energy as the “chief strategic operations officer” for the loan programs. A lot of the money he helped hand out went to that same cadre of wealthy Silicon Valley campaign donors. He also sat on the White House Business Council, which is made up of Obama-supporting corporate executives.

Again, Mr. Schweizer’s book will be out Nov. 15, from Houghton Mifflin Harcourt Publishing Company. It would make a great stocking stuffer.

But it is not just green companies which are benefiting from Obama’s largesse at our expense. Over the weekend, news broke that the Obama Administration has spent $443 MILLION of our taxpaying dollars to purchase a smallpox vaccine. You read that right – SMALLPOX vaccine. If you are thinking, “I thought that had been essentially eradicated,” you would be right. What is worse, though, is that this particular vaccine has not even been tested yet, and might not even work. Why, then would our government be spending so much money? You know the answer. From the LA Times:

[snip] Senior officials have taken unusual steps to secure the contract for New York-based Siga Technologies Inc., whose controlling shareholder is billionaire Ronald O. Perelman, one of the world’s richest men and a longtime Democratic Party donor.

When Siga complained that contracting specialists at the Department of Health and Human Services were resisting the company’s financial demands, senior officials replaced the government’s lead negotiator for the deal, interviews and documents show.

But wait – it gets worse:

When Siga was in danger of losing its grip on the contract a year ago, the officials blocked other firms from competing.

That’s right – it was a NO-BID contract:

Siga was awarded the final contract in May through a “sole-source” procurement in which it was the only company asked to submit a proposal. The contract calls for Siga to deliver 1.7 million doses of the drug for the nation’s biodefense stockpile. The price of approximately $255 per dose is well above what the government’s specialists had earlier said was reasonable, according to internal documents and interviews. (Click here to read the rest of this excellent article.)

Are you freakin’ kidding me?? Never mind that the nation already has enough smallpox vaccine to vaccinate every man, women, and child should it ever rear its ugly head again ($1 billion worth, according to the LA Times article), but they don’t even know if this new one even WORKS!

Wow. So glad Obama feels free to let our money run through his fingers like water. I am glad, though, that there are intrepid reporters out there ferreting out this information, from Peter Schweizer to David Willman at the LA Times, at least some people will not let this go under the radar. Nor should it – this is OUR money, and our nation is in a terrible economic fix. For Obama to act as if there is an unending pot of our money to pay back his donors is simply wrong, and must be stopped.

And these companies can start paying us back any ol’ time. What do you think?

Click here to view the embedded video.

The Daily Caller also emphasized these aspects of the ad:

[snip] Obama won the primary in a landslide. He easily won the 2004 election against a weak GOP opponent, after his main GOP rival quit the race when a Democratic-appointed judge unsealed damaging divorce testimony.

The 2004 video also showcases several recurring features of Obama’s speeches — his use of the passive tense to glide past controversial issues, his passive-aggressive portrayal of himself as the reasonable moderate among extremists, and his promises of benefits without costs.
[...]

He cites his attendance at Trinity United Church of Christ without mentioning the controversial pastor, Jeremiah Wright.

[...]

He uses the passive tense to mention his 1996 race for a state Senate seat. That passive-voice phrase — “seven years ago, this opportunity came up to serve in the General Assembly in Illinois” — avoids any mention of the sharp-elbowed tactics that he used to snatch the seat from a veteran, female African-American Democratic incumbent.

[...]

“If there is an Arab American somewhere getting rounded up by [Attorney General] John Ashcroft, without benefit of an attorney or due process, that threatens my civil liberties even if I am not an immigrant,” he declares, three years after the 9/11 attacks. Ashcroft was not “rounding up” Arab immigrants in 2004, but was actually resisting efforts by police agencies to expand surveillance. (Click here to read the rest.)

Oh, what a walk down Memory Lane this provoked, including some of the underhanded tactics Obama’s camp employed in addition to what was mentioned above. And as the article notes, Obama enthusiastically mentioned his active participation in his church. Yep, good ol’ TUCC with that paragon of Christian virtue, Rev. Jeremiah Wright. As a reminder, here’s a bit more on TUCC and Wright:

Click here to view the embedded video.

Note that his “US-KKK-of-A” speech was in 2003, the year before this ad came out. Oh, and yes, he has retired now, to his million dollar mansion in a “white suburb.” Uh, yeah. And of course, it just reminds us of how many of Obama’s associates like Rezko, Father Fleger, Auchi, Khalidi, Meeks, et al., were allowed to slip on by our “esteemed” media…

I urge you to read the rest of the article to make sure you catch all of he nuances of Obama’s 2004 ad compared to his rhetoric today. It is mighty interesting.

And since it is Sunday, I have to leave you with something fun to bring a smile to your faces. This clip is from Jimmy Kimmel, getting parents to play a bit of a trick on their children post Halloween:

Click here to view the embedded video.

Hilarious!

This is an Open Thread. Have a great day, everyone.

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?

For instance, Rev. Jesse Jackson, Jr. is making some headlines now, not just for his “extra-constitutional” exhortation to Obama he made recently. That was an incredibly stupid thing for a US House of Representatives member to say, someone who is sworn to uphold the Constitution. That was bad enough. But some of you may recall that Rep. Jackson was one of the people who wanted to buy Obama’s IL Senate seat.

Yes, Jesse Jackson, Jr., the man who was Obama’s go-to guy in harassing and threatening members of the Black Caucus to toe the line and support Obama over Hillary Clinton (like Rep. John Lewis, whom he threatened with a primary challenger, and then made good on the threat even after Lewis changed because he shouldn’t have supported Hillary in the first place over Obama). Remember him? Obama’s National co-chair for his campaign? Right, well now he is in a tad of hot water in the House with an impending ethics probe regarding his attempt to buy Obama’s seat.

Couldn’t happen to a more deserving man, if you ask me. And it is a bipartisan decision:

A statement on the committee’s website notes that the chairman of the committee, Alabama Republican Rep. Jo Bonner, and the ranking member, California Democratic Rep. Linda Sanchez, “have jointly decided to extend the matter.”

The probe into Jackson’s involvement was initially deferred due to a request by the Justice Department. That request was withdrawn after former Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich was found guilty of corruption in June.

Jackson testified at Blagojevich’s trial in May that he never authorized an associate to make a deal with the former governor in exchange for the Senate appointment.

An affidavit detailing the alleged crimes of Blagojevich describes how a designee of “Candidate 5” — later revealed to be Jackson — offered to gather $1,500,000 for Blagojevich in exchange for the seat.

In a clandestinely recorded Dec. 4, 2008 phone conversation, Blagojevich said that Jackson was being considered for the appointment because “we were approached ‘pay to play’” by a Jackson associate, who said that the congressman would “you know, he’d raise me 500 grand.”

Blagojevich said that the congressman’s representative had offered to have another fundraiser rake in an added $1 million. “An emissary came. Then the other guy would raise a million, if I made him (Senate Candidate 5) a senator.” (Click here to read the rest.)

Oopsie daisy. That doesn’t sound so good for Jackson. Sure sounds like a “pay to play” request to me, so I am not sure what took the House Ethics committee so long. That was a few years ago, after all. I suppose better late than never, though sooner would have been best (say, before the 2010 election – just sayin’).

And then there is this little story about the dirt rising to the surface, or should I say, becoming more “transparent”? Turns out that the White House wasn’t really all that keen on the whole transparency thing, despite the frequent Obama campaign claims to the contrary. There are any number of instances in which Obama has already failed miserably in that regard since taking office (a quick Google search brings up a fair amount).

But this one is particular, well, hmm, what is the word? It would be amusing if it weren’t so freakin’ hypocritical:

Emails obtained through a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request by government watchdog group Judicial Watch suggest that the White House had direct involvement in shutting a transparency hearing to the press. (Emphasis mine.)

“Please don’t have them reach out to any reporters before I clear [with White House] press,” wrote White House Deputy Associate Counsel Blake Roberts to the Office of Information Policy (OIP), about what should have been a fairly noncontroversial training session.

The workshop was conducted by the OIP for Department of Justice employees on FOIA compliance procedures.

Yes, the workshop was one over Freedom of Information Act procedures. Incredible, isn’t it? Do you think that these Administration folks are aware of how duplicitous they are? If this is any indication, I doubt it:

Another email, from DOJ Press Release Deputy Director Gina Talamona to the OIP and the attorney general’s office, says “after talking with … [then-Assistant White House Press Secretary] Ben Labolt, the decision is that the training will be closed to the press.”
[...]

These documents suggest that it is the Obama White House that is directly responsible for this unprecedented lack of transparency,” wrote Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton in a statement. “Only in Washington would political appointees think it appropriate to keep secret a government workshop on transparency.” (Click here to read the rest.)

No kidding. And only the most gullible would still believe that Obama was the least bit transparent in his dealings on Capitol Hill. Unfortunately, there seem to be a whole lot of gullible people in this country.

But one way or the other, the truth does come out. Some may still refuse to see the very facts in front of their eyes, but there is little one can do with those who staunchly refuse to admit they have been had (like my Physical Therapist who claims the Republicans’ primary objection to Obama is his race, and that Obama himself has never played the race card). But for those of us in the Reality-based community, we are able to see the truth when it is revealed. Better late than never, right?

What’s on your mind today?

I, for one, am very glad this law will no longer be on the books. It is about time our LGB Americans are able to serve openly without fear of reprisal should their private life be found out. No one should have to hide who they are for fear of being stripped of their position, of their vocation (for some), of their income, simply because of who it is they love. This is long, long overdue.

But for some in the community, this change comes to late. One such person is Lt. Dan Choi, a decorated war veteran, and graduate of West Point. Lt. Choi was dismissed because of his sexuality. It was a tremendous loss for our Army, and for Lt. Choi, who was willing to serve his nation, and did, with great distinction.

And now, Lt. Choi is considering throwing his support not to Barack Obama, but to former governor, Gary Johnson:

Choi, who in 2010 was arrested for chaining himself to the fence of the White House in protest, told The Daily Caller in an email, “I lost significant trust in Obama and his fawning gay elites in the wake of recent homophobic court appeals and election-induced double-talk.”

Choi’s frustration with the president’s apparent lack of interest in the policy’s repeal during the lame duck session of Congress has been compounded by administration appeals of court decisions that have ordered an immediate end to the policy’s enforcement.

[...]

Choi has ruled out supporting Minnesota Republican Rep. Michele Bachmann, who he said “foolishly aids the Obama camp in making a cartoonish parody” of Republicans.[snip]

Interesting. I admit, I do not know much about Gary Johnson, but I certainly share Choi’s frustration with Obama. I am pretty tired of people acting like he is all that for the LGBT community when his DOJ has repeatedly upheld DOMA, for instance, not as a matter of law, but by characterizing gay people as perverts. For Obama to now say he supports a bill by Sen. Feinstein to repeal DOMA is just laughable. That’s an easy thing for him to say – costs him nothing. But those of us who have been paying attention know what his Administration has done to keep it in place.

In much the same way, Obama has done NOTHING to abolish DADT. He didn’t push for it, others did. He merely paid some lip service when it was politically expedient for him to do so. Like all of a sudden having the Certification to end DADT coming as his numbers continue to decline. What a coincidence, huh? Yeah, I didn’t think so, either.

But Lt. Choi didn’t stop there:

[snip]“There are some very appealing candidates such as Governor Gary Johnson and others who are much better than Obama on civil rights,” Choi said. “Our community is too often manipulated by homophobic Democrats; I see very little difference when being manipulated by homophobic Republicans,” Choi said. “One group is openly vile while the other remains closeted towards the same objective: political exploitation.” (Gary Johnson assails conservative Iowa group’s marriage pact.)

[...]

“Our community is too often manipulated by homophobic Democrats; I see very little difference when being manipulated by homophobic Republicans,” Choi said. “One group is openly vile while the other remains closeted towards the same objective: political exploitation.” (Click here to read the rest.)

Ain’t that the truth. We are the newest political football – whee!

I never expected Obama to do anything for this community anyway. As I have written numerous times, the people whom he has counted as close friends, like IL Senator, the Reverend James Meeks, or campaigned with, like Donnie McClurkin, are not exactly gay-friendly (that is a massive understatement – they are both unbelievably homophobic). Quite the opposite, in fact. Still, it is nice to see people like Lt. Choi realizing Obama is no friend to us – unless it helps his poll numbers, that is…

In any event, at long, long last, in 60 days, all Americans will be able to serve equally, without fear of reprisal. This is no small thing. Having to hide something so fundamental, so integral, is soul-sucking stuff. It is a horrible thing to do to another human being, and it sure shouldn’t have been institutionalized in our military.

It will be a good day, indeed, when this is behind us…

[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…

Naturally, Obama’s Administration has continued the trend of Obama the Candidate. It has taken a major step back in that whole transparency thing, according to the AP. Even when he wins awards for being transparent, he has to do so in a closed ceremony – how much more hypocritical can one be?

Well, there is one bit of transparency that is now coming forth about Obama. And that is how he pays off his big campaign donors. Of course, it is not unusual for a president to give a plum position to a big contributor, but Obama has done so for about 200 – that is two hundred – of his supporters in government positions in just two years. By comparison, George W. Bush hired about 200 contributors over EIGHT years. Uh, yeah.

So much for that “change” in Washington from “special interests,” huh? I know, I know, I am not surprised, either, but I didn’t drink the Kool Aide and vote for the man who made this claim:

[snip] As a candidate, Obama spoke passionately about diminishing the clout of moneyed interests. Kicking off his presidential run on Feb. 10, 2007, he blasted “the cynics, the lobbyists, the special interests,” who had “turned our government into a game only they can afford to play.”

“We’re here today to take it back,” he said.[snip]

Ahahahahaha – I know, I know, it is hilarious. Or it would be if so many people hadn’t bought this total BS.

And in direct contradiction to what the candidate said, here are some particulars of Obama the president’s sycophants:

Telecom executive Donald H. Gips raised a big bundle of cash to help finance his friend Barack Obama’s run for the presidency.

Gips, a vice president of Colorado-based Level 3 Communications, delivered more than $500,000 in contributions for the Obama war chest, while two other company executives collected at least $150,000 more.

After the election, Gips was put in charge of hiring in the Obama White House, helping to place loyalists and fundraisers in many key positions. Then, in mid-2009, Obama named him ambassador to South Africa. Meanwhile, Level 3 Communications, in which Gips retained stock, received millions of dollars of government stimulus contracts for broadband projects in six states — though Gips said he had been “completely unaware” that the company had received the contracts.

[...]

• Overall, 184 of 556, or about one-third of Obama bundlers or their spouses joined the administration in some role. But the percentages are much higher for the big-dollar bundlers. Nearly 80 percent of those who collected more than $500,000 for Obama took “key administration posts,” as defined by the White House. More than half the 24 ambassador nominees who were bundlers raised $500,000.

• The big bundlers had broad access to the White House for meetings with top administration officials and glitzy social events. In all, campaign bundlers and their family members account for more than 3,000 White House meetings and visits. Half of them raised $200,000 or more.

• Some Obama bundlers have ties to companies that stand to gain financially from the president’s policy agenda, particularly in clean energy and telecommunications, and some already have done so. Level 3 Communications, for instance, snared $13.8 million in stimulus money.[snip]

The last one is particularly troublesome to me. I thought the nation generally frowned upon companies having inside tracks to getting our hard earned, tax paying dollars. I dunno about you, but for Level 3 to get that kind of cold, hard cash from the stimulus sounds like payback to me. (You know, the $3 Trillion stimulus that Obama thought was a joking matter the other day? When he flippantly, arrogantly, joked there weren’t as many shovel ready jobs as they thought, that one? What a piece of work. It is not a laughing matter to most of us, President Obama.)

Oh, but wait – there is more:

[snip] The appointment of George Washington University law professor Spencer Overton illustrates how the administration has rewarded many top fundraisers.

Overton wrote in 2003 that the influence big donors wield in elections means that an “overwhelming majority of citizens are effectively excluded from an important stage of the political process.” Yet Overton bundled at least $500,000 for Obama. He was named to the Obama transition team and in February 2009 was appointed principal deputy attorney general in the Department of Justice’s Office of Legal Policy. Overton visited the White House more than 80 times from January 2009 through the end of 2010 for events ranging from small meetings with high-level staffers to social and entertainment events, sometimes with his wife, records show. Overton resigned the $180,000-a-year job in July 2010. He declined to comment for this story.

Overton is one of seven campaign bundlers who took jobs at Justice, including Attorney General Eric Holder, who was a $50,000 bundler. Holder had been deputy attorney general in the administration of President Bill Clinton. [snip]

Just to be clear, here is the problem with “bundling” contributions:

[snip] Bundling is controversial because it permits campaigns to skirt individual contribution limits of $2,500 in federal elections. Bundlers pool donations from fundraising networks and, as a result, “play an enormous role in determining the success of political campaigns,” according to government watchdog Public Citizen. [snip]

Yes, that would be a bit of a problem. And it also helps explain how someone who has made such a mess of the DOJ got his position. Of course, I am referring to Eric Holder, who has been just a disaster in upholding federal law (the examples are too numerous to mention here, but the dismissal of the clear cut voter intimidation by the New Black Panthers case is the tip of the iceberg).

There is so much more to this story I cannot possibly recount it all here, so I urge you to read it all. It goes into more detail about those who got these positions, but I have to leave you with one more example:

[snip] In March 2009, Obama appointed $500,000 bundler and law school pal Julius Genachowski to chair the Federal Communications Commission, an independent agency. Two other bundlers at the FCC are chief of staff Edward Lazarus, a litigator and former federal prosecutor, and William T. Lake, a lawyer specializing in communications and e-commerce issues who serves as chief of the media bureau.

Genachowski had previously served as chief counsel to the FCC chairman in the 1990s, but his close ties to Obama have raised eyebrows. He has turned up so often at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. that in March, congressional Republicans demanded an accounting of whom he has met with and what was discussed. [snip] (Click here to read the rest.)

You know someone is spending a lot of time at the White House when US Representatives are demanding to know just what the hell they are doing there all of the time.

Ah, yes – the only thing transparent about Obama is how much “change” he is getting from his bundlers. I mean, members of his Administration. Heaven knows, they siphoned a whole boatload of it into his coffers. He is returning the favor with OUR change.

That is the kind of change I can do without.

Former Sen. Russ Feingold and progressive group MoveOn today called on General Electric CEO Jeff Immelt to resign from the President’s Council on Jobs and Competitiveness in the wake of a report that despite $14.2 billion in worldwide profits – including more than $5 billion from U.S. operations – GE did not owe taxes in 2010.

They also expressed anger over the fact that the company has cut its U.S. workforce by roughly one fifth since 2002.

“How can someone like Immelt be given the responsibility of heading a jobs creation task force when his company has been creating more jobs overseas while reducing its American workforce?” Feingold asked in an email to supporters, as The Hill reports. “And under Immelt’s direction, GE spends hundreds of millions of dollars hiring lawyers and lobbyists to evade taxes.”

MoveOn asked its members to sign a petition calling on Immelt to leave the administration, and Executive Director Justin Ruben called G.E.’s tax status “outrageous.”

“At a time when many in Washington, including the President, are worried about our nation’s deficit we should be punishing–not rewarding–companies like GE who are robbing the US Government and taxpayers of billions of dollars,” he said in a statement. “This sort of bad corporate behavior should not be rewarded with a top White House appointment.”

Why did it take the honorable Mr. Feingold so long to notice? Please forgive my cynicism but it is quite apparent that most politicians no longer speak out to help the American people – they speak out to help themselves. If indeed he does have a mind to challenge Barack Obama for the nomination in 2012, this is awfully good timing to start noticing corruption that was all too apparent to the rest of us three years ago.

Ironically, CBS also reports that President Obama has lambasted the very tax loopholes that companies like GE take advantage of. So are you telling me he is not aware of this contradiction?

The only people not aware are the ones who don’t follow the news closely enough to know the President is railing against the very people he has been helping all along. There seems to be a current bent to punish small businesses who create the bulk of jobs in this country in favor of crony capitalism and powerful über companies who wield far too much political influence as it is.

By the way, during 2008, GE owned NBC/MSNBC and also owned Newsweek. These are three organizations that morning, noon and night posted grossly favorable press to Mr. Obama in 2008 while trashing his primary opponent Hillary Clinton with a zest not before seen. That’s quite the coincidence…

MoveOn was so busy denigrating Hillary and trumpeting Obama beyond all sense, I suppose they did not notice the coincidence either. Did they not think there would be some sort of quid pro quo?

And if President Obama finally notices the “coincidence,” you can be sure he will not throw Immelt under the bus unless and until it is politically advantageous to do so.

I hasten to add, the stories of the six victims in Tucson, Judge John Roll, Christina Taylor Green, Giffords Aide Gabe Zimmerman, Phyllis Schneck, Dorwin Stoddard, and Dorothy Morris, need to be held in the fore, our prayers going out to their families. The continued updates regarding Rep. Giffords miraculous improvements, as well as the condition of the other 13 injured, is also important to keep in the fore.

But here are some of the things you may have missed. Amy Siskind of The New Agenda had a very interesting post about Obama, and the number of women in his cabinet/inner circle. Bottom line, it is low, as her post, “After Arizona, Will Obama Learn to Include Women?” indicates:

[snip] Yes, just as I was snapping to, Air Force One would be landing back in D.C. Senator Gillibrand and Congresswomen Wasserman Schultz and Pelosi would deplane and return to their 17% minority. President Obama would be head back to the White House — or should I say, the “fraternity house”: his inner-circle is composed almost exclusively of men.

Yes, to the president’s credit, he did appoint two women to the Supreme Court. That’s the end of the good news for women. Here’s the bad news:

* Obama’s cabinet picks are just 25% women.

* Obama’s czars are only 12% women.

* No women have leadership roles in running our country’s economy.

* Obama has only one woman in his inner-circle: Valerie Jarrett.

[...]

Paradoxically, Speaker Boehner in his opening days seems quite comfortable with women. One of his first symbolic gestures: to build a women’s restroom near the House floor. Next, Boehner shocked even me: he officially endorsed a woman for RNC chair (Maria Cino). And here’s a prediction: Boehner’s ability to cry in public will make it easier for women candidates to do the same in the future. Hey — I gotta admit — although I agree with Speaker Boehner on very few issues, I like the guy! He walks the walk for women on the right.

[...]

So I say this to our president: yes, let’s live up to the dreams of Christina Green, the nine-year-old who was tragically and senselessly killed in the Arizona shooting. The girl who was interested in politics and therefore came to see Congresswoman Giffords, Arizona’s only female representative in the U.S. House or Senate. Why don’t we have more women in leadership for girls like Christina to see and model after? And President Obama, what will YOU do to live up to her expectations? (Click HERE to read the rest.)

Yes, I can see why so many “feminists” wanted to support Obama over Hillary Clinton. He is SO good on the women’s equality issue – not.

But wait, there is more. Once again, LGBT groups are unhappy with Obama. Yes, yes, I know he signed the bill to repeal DADT, but he did blessed little to get that to come about, and did exactly what I thought he would do – have it in the Lame Duck session so he could blame the Republicans in case it didn’t pass.

Well, that is exactly what he did in terms of DOMA, but not before his Justice Department did this:

Supporting DOMA: Gay rights advocates are criticizing the Obama Justice Department after its attorneys filed a court motion Thursday in support of the Defense of Marriage Act despite the president’s view that the law should be repealed.

[...]

The Justice Department says it’s obligated to defend U.S. policy regardless of the president’s personal beliefs. The department made the same case after it had to, awkwardly, fight a judge’s ruling against “don’t ask, don’t tell” in the months before it was repealed by Congress.

But that’s no salve to the gay rights community, which has called on the administration to show more resolve against laws like DOMA. [snip]

And it is not true, either. Other Administrations have stood up to laws they thought were un-Constitutional, not continuing to defend them, as the Obama Administration has done repeatedly with DOMA. Indeed, it continues in that same vein in this filing:

[snip] “All families deserve the recognition and respect of their government. We know the president supports us. It’s time for him to help lead the American public toward full equality for all Americans,” Human Rights Campaign President Joe Solmonese said in a statement. The gay rights group said the Justice Department should at least “acknowledge that the law is unconstitutional.”

It does not. In its filing, Justice Department attorneys said the law was “not unconstitutional under this court’s binding precedent.” The Justice Department argued that the law “reflects Congress’s reasonable response to this still-evolving debate among the states regarding same-sex marriage.”

Why Solmonese, that Hillary Clinton backstabber, continues to act all insulted is beyond me, but I will spare you my diatribe on him this time around.

But here’s what I knew would happen with Obama:

[snip] “The Department of Justice has long followed the practice of defending federal statutes as long as reasonable arguments can be made in support of their constitutionality, even if the administration disagrees with a particular statute as a policy matter, as it does here,” the brief said.

“Indeed, the president supports repeal of DOMA and has taken the position that Congress should extend federal benefits to individuals in same-sex marriages. But a consensus behind that approach has not yet developed, and Congress could properly take notice of the divergent views regarding same-sex marriage across the states,” it said.

[...]

He told a gay-and-lesbian magazine last month that while a repeal of DOMA may not be possible, particularly with Republicans in control of the House, “that’s something that I think we have to strategize on over the next several months.” (Click HERE to read the rest.)

Yep, like I expected, Obama will blame the Republicans if it doesn’t get changed now. The Democrats were in control of the entire Congress for FOUR years, and now it is all the Republicans fault…(Civility? Oh, that is only for Conservatives, not Democrats.)

Here is a whopper of what came out this week. It was foretold by none other than Sarah Palin back in November when the government was looking to buy more bonds:

“All this pump priming will come at a serious price. And I mean that literally: everyone who ever goes out shopping for groceries knows that prices have risen significantly over the past year or so. Pump priming would push them even higher. And it’s not just groceries. Oil recently hit a six month high, at more than $87 a barrel. The weak dollar — a direct result of the Fed’s decision to dump more dollars onto the market — is pushing oil prices upward.”

I intentionally withheld the title of that article: “What Sarah Palin Gets Wrong About Inflation.” And that would be what, exactly? Haven’t all of those things, along with foreclosures setting another record high in 2010, and an increase in unemployment claims, come to pass? Yes.

In that same article, though, there was this (condescending) response:

[snip] Sudeep Reddy of The Wall Street Journal pointed out that Palin didn’t seem to be quite up on what’s been going on with inflation. In fact, he noted, grocery prices haven’t risen that much. “The consumer price index’s measure of food and beverages for the first nine months of this year showed average annual inflation of less than 0.6%, the slowest pace on record (since the Labor Department started keeping this measure in 1968).” [snip]

Hey, Reedy – guess which one of you is wrong here? I’ll give you a hint – it is not Palin. No need to take my word for it. Here is Stuart Varney discussing this issue:

These are just a few of the issues that have been going on this week (I know, Daley came onboard on Friday, but the massacre on Saturday pretty much knocked that way down, as it should have). Women still are underrepresented, Obama’s Justice Department is still targeting gay people, and we are increasingly in an economic world of hurt.

We cannot forget the victims of last week’s shooting, but nor can we allow ourselves to allow the political smoke and mirrors to distract us from what else is going on in our country.

What else happened this week that was low on the media totem pole? Consider this an Open Thread.

The Washington Examiner had an editorial on this very issue, “Obama’s $5 A Gallon Gas Just Ahead.” The editorial reminded readers of one of Obama’s statements ignored by his supporters, though not by those of us who had our eyes wide open, and our ears, too. And that was this:

Most politicians play word games to cast themselves in the most favorable light, so perhaps it’s understandable that few people took it seriously when President Obama unaccountably said during his 2008 presidential campaign that energy prices would “necessarily skyrocket” under his program.

With gas steadily approaching $4 per gallon and projected by federal Energy Information Administration experts to hit $5 in 2012, it’s time to accept Obama at his word. The costs of heating and cooling our homes and offices, keeping gas in the cars and trucks that get us to work and the grocery store, and generating the electricity that keeps our laptops humming are heading skyward because Obama thinks that’s what is best for us. It’s a classic illustration of liberals using government to do to us what we would never do to ourselves. [snip]

Remember that pithy little statement by Obama? It should have cost him a few states, including Pennsylvania, but for reasons beyond me, it didn’t. Anyway, this is what Obama said about “Cap And Trade” back in the day:

Again, don’t know about where you live, but I can tell you, our electric costs have been on the rise since Obama took office, and I fear it will only get worse.

When prices escalate for products like gas, it necessarily changes how people live, what they can do, and where they drive. We are comfortable financially, but when prices were high not that long ago, it did change where we drove, how often I went to see my horse, Jordan (which is one of the highlights of my week), or up into Charleston, or any number of places. I just spent $38 filling up my tank on Thursday, and I still had between 1/4 – 1/2 of a tank left (I drive a Sienna, which gets decent gas mileage). When gas goes up like this, it means, for some people, the difference between being able to drive to work or not.

So what has Obama done to affect gas prices? This:

[snip] Here are just some of the ways Obama has constricted U.S. energy exploration and development, thereby forcing prices upward and making America more dependent on the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries, Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez and other costly, unreliable foreign oil sources who bear this country ill will:

»?Reimposed bans on oil and natural gas drilling in America’s outer continental shelf that were previously reversed by a Democratic-led Congress and a Republican president. Experts estimate there are at least 130 billion barrels of oil and trillions of feet of natural gas to be harvested from these areas, but Obama won’t allow it.

»?Even before the cause of the Deepwater Horizon disaster was known, Obama imposed a six-month moratorium on deep-water drilling in the Gulf of Mexico that cost thousands of jobs and effectively ended drilling in both deep and shallow waters there. Although officially lifted, slow-walking federal bureaucrats have yet to approve new permits and are busily issuing costly new requirements that are certain to stifle most, if not all, drilling in the Gulf for years to come. A third of America’s oil production comes from wells in the Gulf.

»?Reversed a Bush administration decision that opened millions of acres of public lands in the western parts of the nation to careful oil and natural gas exploration and development, then invented an entirely new classification that puts those and millions more acres not previously covered off limits.

»?Appointed an energy secretary — Steven Chu — who said in December 2008 that Americans should pay the same prices as Europeans for gas. Gas in Europe then averaged around $8 per gallon.

Maybe now people will believe that Obama meant exactly what he said in 2008 about making us pay much more for energy. If they don’t, they surely will in coming months. (Click HERE to read the rest.)

Maybe. One can only hope, though the blinders and earplugs seem to be in plenty for too many.

So, what are things like where you are? Are gas or other energy prices affecting your daily lives? Feel free to talk about this, or anything else going on (reading the Constitution in the House? Repealing Obamacare? Pelosi claiming that NOW House Democrats will focus on jobs though they did blessed little to address that issue while controlling all three houses? Obama calling the Eagles owner to thank him for giving Michael Vick, the dog torturer, a second chance?).

And TGIF…

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.

Except it hasn’t. Nope. Turns out that the unemployment number is more like 17%, particularly when one factors in the underemployed. Add to that people who have been on Unemployment for 99 weeks, much less those who have exceeded that time, and it paints a bleak picture indeed:

To hear these stories is just heartbreaking, isn’t it? Some states are suffering more than others. For instance, the state of California has an unemployment rate closer to 22%. One can understand, then, why Jerry Brown’s economic remedy is this (h/t to Gina):

“If we can find some more money, we can dish it out.”

Wow. And he’s currently leading Meg Whitman in CA? For real?? Holy moley. I am sure that is a comfort to those who are currently in need. Ahem. That is one heckuva plan there, Brownie.

And speaking of Jerry Brown, if I may digress for a moment, check out this little news clip (again, h/t to Gina):

“Yawn – I just can’t be bothered talking any more about my aide calling former CEO, and fellow gubernatorial candidate, Meg Whitman a whore. What’s the big deal, anyway?? Sheesh. Get off it already.”

Ah, yes – I can see why N.O.W. endorsed him over Whitman, can’t you? (That’s snark, btw…)

Back to the issue at hand. Not only is the actual number much higher than is generally claimed by this Administration, but many of these people currently unemployed have been out of work for over a year. Imagine that – out of work for over a YEAR. Even with unemployment compensation, that fundamentally changes how one lives. Some of you know all too well what that is like, how heartbreaking, frustrating, and demeaning that is, even when the loss of the job is not performance related (and in this economy, that is the case for most folks).

And why is the actual number being underreported? Why is Obama not focusing all of his attention on this issue, rather than, I dunno, claims that the Chamber of Commerce is trying to impact the midterm elections, and taking funds from foreign nations with ZERO proof. (Oh, and in an ironic twist of fate, guess who actually takes in more foreign money, twice as much, to be exact? You guessed it – the Democrats! Oopsie daisy.)

Let’s see. What else has Obama been focusing on rather than unemployment, and the economy in general? Oh, yes. His all-time favorite thing. Campaigning. Yep – he’s been traipsing all over this land of ours, from sea to shining sea, endorsing all manner of candidates with a “D” after their names (whether they want him to or not, I presume) in an attempt to stave off what is looking like a bad election for the Democrats.

Except for one. That would be Rhode Island Democratic candidate for Governor, Frank Capprio. Seems Obama has declined to endorse him because of his buddy, Lincoln Chafee, former Republican now Independent who endorsed Obama back in the day, who is also in the race. Oh, the White House will send out Vice President Joe Biden to assist whacky Alan Grayson down in Florida in his campaign, but not Capprio (you remember Grayson, right? He is the one who said Republicans’ health plan is for “sick people to die quickly.“). Well, Mr. Capprio isn’t taking this lying down. His response to Obama on his refusal to endorse him? “Shove it.” No, seriously – that’s what he said! “Shove it!”

I think “Shove It!” is what many Americans are going to be saying next Tuesday, too, those people who fall in the 17%, or even 22%, of the unemployed. Those who have lost their livelihoods, often their homes, and had their worlds turned upside down by this economy that Obama has been just too busy to address. No, he would rather tilt at windmills like the Chamber of Commerce boondoggle, or push his Obamacare on us, the issues involved with it coming to light every day (simply put, it’s gonna cost us a gazillion dollars), push his Cap and Trade (which will also cost us a gazillion dollars), or travel around the country on our dime to shore up (fading) support for the likes of Harry Reid, than deal with the real issues facing our country. Gee, can’t imagine why some folks might see this election as a referendum on Obama, can you?

People in this country are hurting, and hurting badly. Jobs are hard, if not impossible, to come by. Finally, at least one of the major network news sources is willing to acknowledge what some of the other stations (like Fox) have been reporting, and before an election, to boot. So, good for CBS for doing this (finally). Kinda makes you wonder just what else they are “under-reporting” or under-counting, doesn’t it? Sure does me. In this case, though, hopefully, something positive will happen in the upcoming election to help out the (almost) 1 out of 5 Americans. Better than hope, get out and vote.