Amateur Hour at the WH

Comes news today our President is backing away from his plan to try al Qaeda terrorist Khalid Shaikh Mohammed in New York City. Apparently, quite a few people in NYC found the prospect of increased terrorist attacks surrounding this unnecessary show trial to be somewhat of a non-starter. Fair enough.

But if you move the trial away from NYC, you have to move it to somewhere else. Something tells me that the folks in Tulsa, Fargo, DC, Portland or whatever city they park the DoJ U-Haul won't be a great deal more excited about this venture. What kind of a message does that send? We're going to protect New Yorkers from another terrorist attack by putting your little city at risk. Thanks, we knew you'd understand!

Did they think this through?

This whole scenario is starting to get pretty ridiculous. Previously the White House went out of it's way to say that KSM would not be released if he was acquitted. Am I missing something? If we're going to keep him in prison for life regardless of the outcome of the trial, then is there any point?

The ultimate problem really isn't that we'll have to deal with this kangaroo court. The problem is that it appears we might as well have a kangaroo in the Oval Office, for all the thought they put into this stuff.

ICYMI: The Republican Response

In case you didn't stay tuned in to catch the GOP response to the State of the Union, here it is. It is given by the newly sworn in governor of Virginia, Bob McDonnell. It totally knocked the socks off of Obama's speech. Don't worry, its little more than 10 minutes long.

State Of The Union 2010

Let's see, where does one start when disecting the grab bag of half-truths, empty promises and outright lies in last night's State of the Union address? The entire speech is what marines call a "target rich environment". I'll just talk about a few here tonight, but I think you all should watch the video posted at the end of this entry. It's long, but essential.

First and foremost, this "spending freeze" proposed by the President is a J-O-K-E, JOKE! Let's crunch the numbers here: To start off with, the president has placed Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid and all national security priorities off limits. In other words, just about 85% of the federal budget is off the table and will not be affected by this so-called "freeze". Problem number two: the "freeze" on funding for agencies such as the Environmental Protection Agency (one of the most useless agencies ever created by any government anywhere, ever. Like, totally ever) lasts only three years, this following a year in which the EPA saw it's funding vastly increased by our new "fiscally responsible" president. Problem number three: These spending freezes are strictly that - a freeze. No actual cuts will be allowed under this freeze because its, well, frozen. That is not fiscal responsibility, it's more of the same wasteful spending that got us into this mess in the first place.

President Obama also promised in his speech to continue pursuing his disasterous healthcare reform bills, promising to take into account any advice or solutions offered by anyone. Nevermind that conservatives and Republicans have offered numerous suggestions, not the least of which is to break down state barriers and allow consumers to shop for health insurance across state lines, thus opening the market and forcing the nation's 13,000 insurance companies to actually compete for our business. This would have an enormous impact on our premiums, to say nothing of the effect simple tort reform would have on our healthcare system. By insisting on continuing down the path of socialism, and not "pivoting" to the center as many pundits assumed he would, President Obama has proven once and for all his true vision for America; one in which individuals are virtually helpless without the government.

Listening to the speech, one would think Americans are a helpless people, with no hope except that which is given to us by our benevolent leader in the White House. But what the Messiah giveth, he can taketh away, and he did just that by simultaneously lampooning Washington (of which has been a part for over 3 years now) for it's incompetence and in the same breath insisting that we "trust" him. Whatev.

Between whining about the "tone in Washington" and lecturing the Supreme Court on how to do it's job, the rest of the speech was basically a hate-fest over the unnamed president from whom Barry supposedly "inherited" this whole mess. Let's take the deficit as an example, which the president still blames on President Bush. Ed Morrissey, take it away:

Obama repeatedly insisted that he inherited massive budgetary problems from George Bush, but the Con Law professor may want to retake his high-school civics class. Congress passes budgets, not the President, and the last three budgets came from Democrats. In three years, they increased annual federal spending by $900 billion, while the admittedly profligate and irresponsible Republican Congresses under George Bush increased annual federal spending by $800 billion — in six years. And during the last three years before taking office as President, Obama served in the Senate that passed those bills, and he voted for every Democratic budget put in front of him.

Dammit, ain't the truth refreshing?

Lastly on my very, very short list of complaints (for the long list buy my Barack Obama biography, entitled "Bend Over, America", now available in paperback!) let us turn to an issue I care very much about. Last night President Obama promised to finally work with Congress to repeal the Don't Ask, Don't Tell policy barring homosexuals from serving openly in our armed forces. So much as I would like to praise the president for this step towards equality, the fact remains that the President is as two faced as ever in regards to this issue. He did no more last night than state the same policy position he has stated throughout his campaign for president. The fact of the matter is that, so far, the only action Barack Obama has taken in regards to Don't Ask, Don't Tell has been to direct his Justice Department to vigorously defend it in the only standing lawsuit against the policy. And what organization is the only plaintiff in the only case to repeal Don't Ask, Don't Tell? Why, it's the Log Cabin Republicans, America's largest organization of gay Republicans!

Seriously, Barry, when a big group of queers is kicking your ass on any issue dealing in military matters perhaps it's time to go back to Chicago.

The Adventures of TOTUS

As has been well reported by now, Mr. Obama is heavily dependent on the aptly nicknamed TOTUS (Teleprompter Of The United States). Much as been said over the last year of the president's "safety net", but we can now say beyond doubt that the president everyone hailed as giving the most eloquent speechess since Pericles' funeral oration is totally and completely incapable of giving any public speech without his beloved TOTUS. Are you ready for this? Barack Obama has been caught giving a Teleprompter aided speech...to a sixth grade class.


That really happened.

In case you're still not convinced that the president is unable to speak without a visual aide, here he is giving a speech to about a dozen people in his "middle class task force"...with a teleprompter.




The Onion News Service has a hillarious funny spoof on his dependence on his glass aide, too:

It's not so much that this is a devestating blow to Mr. Obama. But the fact is that his fabled eloquence is as fake and phony as the hope and change he promised us; as non-existent as the transparency and honesty we were assured.

Exit question: What's more disturbing? The fact that Obama says such assinine and stupid things, or that all of these things are prepared far ahead of time by a team of political and policy advisers?

Will The Real Ellie Light Please Stand Up

As Glenn Beck reported today, it appears that Barack Obama's popularity has fallen so terribly that he has only one supporter remaining who is willing to speak up for him within America's op-ed pages. Her name is Ellie Light from Philadelphia, PA. No wait, I'm sorry she's from Daly City, CA. Um, I mean she's from Bangor, Maine.

Well, to tell ya truth no one really knows where Ellie Light is from, or if she even exists because editorials supporting Barack Obama have appeared in literally dozens of newspapers across the country and all written by her, each time claiming to hail from that city. So far, editorials by "Ellie Light" have appeared at Politico; the the Philadelphia Daily News; the San Francisco Examiner; the Washington Times; USA Today; and literally dozens of smaller local papers from across the country. Hot Air is on it, as well:

Ms. Light always claims to be a local in these letters. Her real estate holdings are apparently prodigious, as she has claimed residences in Philadelphia, PA; Daly City, California; Mansfield, Ohio; Waynesboro, Virginia; Algoma, Wisconsin; Bangor, Maine; and dozens of other places. Who said Obama supporters were all downtrodden?

Our friends over at Patterico's Pontification's are keeping a running count of how many of Ellie's editorials they can find nationwide. So far: 47 editorials in at least 23 different states. No joke.

But, alas, my dear Tusk Readers, I must beg my fellow conservative bloggers to please, please leave poor Ms. Ellie Light alone. Should she be an actual person (as opposed to a White House troll) then I believe we should give Mr. Obama the respect and dignity of being able to enjoy the support of his last remaining devotee for as long as it lasts.

UPDATE: Now the number is 61 papers and 31 states, as well as the District of Columbia and even two foreign publications. Sheesh.

Charles Blow: Ask Your Doctor if Klonopin or Xanax is Right for You

I'm normally a huge fan of deliberately inflammatory polemics. The border between what's appropriate to say and write and what's not often just begs to be crossed.

However, I had to read this following sentence in today's New York Times a few times before I could fully digest it. It is the lede for a column by Charles Blow titled Mobs Rule:

"Welcome to the mob: an angry, wounded electorate, riled by recession, careening across the political spectrum, still craving change, nursing a bloodlust."

It's that last word that just threw me for a crazy loop. But I'll get back to that.

Does anyone remember November of last year? Most media professionals were just in a constant state of uninterrupted euphoria over the election results, as if someone had dropped large amounts of time-release MDMA into newsroom watercoolers across America. These people wrote incessantly about how this momentous, hopeful, exciting, historic and magnificent change was all around us. And don't get them started on the voters who did it. These humble voters were also just so wonderfully hopeful, compassionate, well-informed, thoughtful people. Each one (who voted for Obama) was just an absolute saint. Democracy had been saved!

And now, we have one special election in one state that didn't happen to go the way these journalists wished and these same voters are equated with a "mob... angry, wounded... riled... nursing a bloodlust."

Wikipedia: "Bloodlust, a desire for extreme violence and carnage, often aroused in the heat of battle and leading to uncontrolled slaughter and torture."

Seriously. Crazy. Stuff.

Does Scott Brown's Election Mark The End of Liberalism?

We will begin with this video of Brit Hume and Bill O'Reilly discussing the Massachusetts senate race and the implications of that election's results the day before the election took place. As we all know, Scott Brown went on to win a triumphant victory. Watch the full video, particularly what Brit Hume has to say, and then hear me out on my interpretation and the reason I chose the title I did for this entry.



Two cases presented here by two men whose opinion should not be taken lightly. Essentially, they argue that Scott Brown's victory is a terrible thing for Democrats because they will be utterly destroyed this November or, as Hume posits, Brown's victory is a long-term positive for Democrats because they will be able to moderate their positions and "steal Republican ideas" to earn back the trust of the people.

Are you hearing this? The two possibilities presented by these two gentlemen are both completely possible, but they both mean essentially the same thing. Either the Democrats remain an insane assembly of assinine "progressives", becoming an inconsequential thorn in the side of Republicans or they take a sharp right turn and become...more conservative. Either way, the liberalization of the Democratic party and the far left's grip on what was once the national party is over. With the election of Barack Obama and the ascedance of ultra-liberal Congressional leaders (Reid, Pelosi, et al) the Ameican people have seen what liberalism truly is, and they don't like what they see. Or, perhaps, what they don't see.

What they do not see is the transparency promised us by this administration and this congress. They have not been shown deatils of bills that will alter forever the future of our nation. They have not seen anyone from their side of the aisle articulate clearly the almost certain risks and consequences associated with their socialist policies. But, honestly, why would the Democrats want us to see anything? They meetings and negotiations are held behind closed doors because Democrats and their liberal overlords are keenly aware of how unAmerican their ideals and principles are. They know that if the American people catch even a whiff of their crimson commie policies they will reject it.

Unfortunately for them and their cohorts the American people have seen for themelves the truth; the arrogance, corruption and the hubris of liberal power. And now we are seeing the results across the nation. In New Jersey and Virginia Republicans now sit in the governors' mansions. In Massachusetts Scott Brown has broken a Democrat stranglehold on that state. In California even Barbara Boxer now looks vulnerable. Blanche Lincoln of Arkansas stands poised to lose her seat. Democrat Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid will certainly lose his seat. Senators Arlen Specter and Mary Landrieu of Pennsylvania and Louisiana, respectively, are on the verge of losing their seats, as well.

This could very well mark the end of the Reid-Pelosi-Obama brand of liberalism that has plagued the Democratic party and America for last half century.

Good riddance, sayeth The Tusk.