Showing posts with label ben smith. Show all posts
Showing posts with label ben smith. Show all posts

Saturday, July 25, 2009

Reactions to barry’s press conference


July 25, 2009

[Quotes compiled by ALEX KOPPLEMAN at Salon.]

I’ve always maintained that Howie Fineman will be the first from the NEWSWEEK crew to turn on barry [Altman never] and finally report the truth. After barry’s world tour as a not even nominated candidate, Fineman came clean about barry’s refusal to go to Landstuhl (because there’s be no photo op/video payoff) and also gave insight to barry’s enormous ego.

Here’s his first installment:

Howard Fineman: I’ve been covering Barack Obama for a few years, and it’s usually crystal clear what he is up to. Not last night. This is the first time I’ve asked myself: What was THAT all about?

Even Chris Matthews was upset with barry’s performance.

An honest and perceptive comment.

Chris Cillizza: But, from his opening statement on, it was clear that part of Obama’s goal in the press conference was to directly rebut charges leveled against him and his health care plan by Republicans.

What can one possibly say about Mr Krugman that his words don’t reveal?

Paul Krugman: I found Obama’s health care presentation so impressive — so much command of the issues — that it had me worried. If I really like a politicians’ speech, isn’t that an indication that he lacks the popular touch? (A couple of points off for “incentivize” — what ever happened to “encourage”? — but never mind.) … Seriously, it’s really good to see how much he gets it.

He uses the words “long” and “Obama’s political career” in the same sentence.

Ben Smith: The appearance was striking by its absence of a move that’s long characterized Obama’s political career: When in trouble, go big. Faced with a crisis of confidence or with a political furor, he’s repeatedly shown an ability to rise above the storm, and to broaden the playing field, as when he turned a flap over his pastor into a meditation on race in America … Now, facing his hardest test as President, Obama chose to go small.

And he chose to use the race card like he has routinely done every time his polls drop.

“Actual Americans”?

Digby: Luckily, if actual Americans were listening they likely learned something tonight.

As opposed to what?

Ones who refuse to show their birth certificate or name the hospital they were born in?

And what was the real deal with that reporter “mix up”?

Friday, June 5, 2009

cowardly barry calls Bill Clinton a liar

June 2, 2009

Ben Smith actually has something worthwhile to read…because they’re not his own words. Transplanted Brit Richard Wolffe in his book Renegade quotes barry calling President Clinton a liar.

We had to figure out how to deal with a former president who was just lying, engaging in bald-faced lies.

Their new strategy? Same as the old – race card and sexist attacks – with an assist by the ever-enamored dickie.

barry has lied since day one about his Iraq fairy tale and it took till February when it came out of his own mouth. He lied all the way to the White House with an (ongoing) assist from Politico and Newsweek’s Evan Thomas, Howie Fineman and jonjon “DISABLED INFANT” alter.

Who is going to write the book that details how each one of the barrymedia were used? How barry manipulated their manlove feelings toward him to write ridiculous stories like the one about barry going to Pakistan on spring break.

The first sentence will be:

We had to figure out how to deal with a president who was just lying, engaging in bald-faced lies….ones that we had sold our souls to perpetuate…ones that had our wives wondering our manhood…

Friday, April 10, 2009

“Birthers”

This is another one of the birth certificate posts that was deleted along with the *Orly Taitz* posts.

March 15, 2009

I looked in the drafts to find other people like CNN’s Mark Preston, who wrote articles blasting the conspiracist racists, right-wingers, disgruntled Hillaryites and tinfoil hat-wearing nutjob birthers. It is amusing to see them go into great detail about the nuttos and never once ponder: Why doesn’t he just show it?

Ben Smith of Politico is just one more. I’ll quote his own words so you can see for yourself:

SMITH: Out of the gaze of the mainstream and even the conservative media is a flourishing culture of advocates, theorists and lawyers, all devoted to proving that Barack Obama isn’t eligible to be president of the United States.

First of all, the premise is not that he isn’t eligible. It is that he hasn’t proven he is eligible.

And it is based on the common sense curiosity it seems only the unhinged fringe possess: Why?

Why does he continue to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars resisting efforts to compel he prove he is eligible to hold the Office of President as stipulated by the Constitution?

The question as to why the media hasn’t forced him to do so is one that defies logic and will be the one never forgiven by time…just like Iraq.

The criteria is straightforward. Section 1 of Article Two of the United States Constitution:

No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.

barry is clearly older than 35 and has been a resident for more than 14 years - but he has not clearly proven he is a natural born citizen.

That is what he is being asked to do.

Period.

And it is nothing a self-proclaimed Constitutional “law professor”, Agent of Change and Man of Transparency should be compelled to do.

He has not been transparent at the most fundamental level and he continues to tout that his administration is the most transparent ever!

What does that say about his (lack of) character? His integrity? And what does it say about the media that they continue to let him claim it?

Secondly, no one is “Out of the gaze of the mainstream and even the conservative media” or limited to “weird little internet sites”.

The media is and has been choosing to look the other way - just like they did with Jeremiah Wright, Bill Ayers, ACORN, Tony Rezko and Rod Blagojevich. Oh yes. Blagojevich was there from the start - as far back as when barry and his Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel were enthusiastically campaigning for him. Tony Rezko is the direct link between blago and barry and is the reason why barry’s own governor was never interviewed, why he never stumped for barry, why he was banned from barry’s $2 million Chicago taxpayer party in Grant Park and why Mayor Daley handled the Convention farce. And all of it took place before Blagojevich was arrested for allegedly selling barry’s senate seat. Before the media woke up to the corruption that is Chicago politics from whence came pure as the driven snow barry.

How can the media take themselves seriously?

For the record, the truth is closer to Burris buying the seat directly from barry.

How much coverage did Politico give to Tony Rezko’s trial? How accountable did they hold barry to his lies about Rezko fundraising? How much have we heard about the subpoenas of barry, Valerie Jarrett and Rahm Emanuel?

Who is asking Ben LaBolt how many millions of dirty money he has had to dispense with?

And the “birthers” are not a flourishing culture of whatever. They are American citizens who can reason, who value The Constitution, and who are not under the spell of the obamessiah.

In other words, they don’t have what’s left of their journalistic integrity riding on barry’s lies.

And as much as the media is choosing to ignore them (save ridicule) - they are ever under the watchful eye of Google, Facebook, Technorati and subject to cyberattacks by the army of barrybotletss. Hell, maybe even under direct surveillance by FISA advocate barry himself.

SMITH: Viewed as irrelevant by the White House, and as embarrassing by much of the Republican Party, the subculture still thrives from the conservative website WorldNetDaily, which claims that some 300,000 people have signed a petition demanding more information on Obama’s birth, to Cullman, Alabama, where Sen. Richard Shelby took a question on the subject at a town hall meeting last week.

Viewed by the White House as irrelevant. Ha-ha. How else would they view it?

But why is the spineless media viewing it as irrelevant?

Why don’t they have the least bit of curiosity - outside the fact that if barry were to be proven ineligible every one of their careers would be exposed as irrelevant?

SMITH: Their confinement to the fringe hasn’t cooled the passion of believers…

Fringe? I resent that, as do my fellow citizens here.

It’s perfectly clear which “fringe” needs confinement, owing to their delusional devotion to a man they don’t know, whose words they blindly trust and whose halo they resist denting.

How can they remain so gullible? Where is their journalistic curiosity? Do they still believe his teleprompter words after all of his “refinements“?

Chuckie T was quick to wake up to barry’s obamanating his answers (something he has been doing since day one as a politician), when it involved Chuckie looking like a “virginal” idiot.

Do they still believe barry’s claim of “transparency” after they discovered his bills weren’t being exposed to the 5 days of “Sunlight before Singing”?

Do they still believe his claim of “superior judgment” after his selection of 5 tax cheats - one a purported “financial wizard”, who cheated on his taxes and then tried to blame it on TurboTax, who cheated on his taxes even after he was audited, who cheated on his taxes until he was forced to pay them to get his appointment to head the IRS and who just happened to be head of the New York Federal Reserve Bank while Bernie Madoff was making off right in his neighborhood?

Leave the market alone! they scream. With good reason.

And how can they possibly still believe barry when he switched his position on Iraq–the very reason why he got the nomination?

Like always, he picked the middle choice and found a reason to justify it and the proobamedia were more than happy to accept it. Or as Hilary Rosen said, “processed it“.

What type of gullible is that - even for card carrying cult members?

Now here is where Mr Smith jumps into the deep end of gullibility - or in honor of the truly exasperated fringed birthers - ignorance.

SMITH: A quick reality check, before we dive in: The challenges to Obama’s eligibility have no grounding in evidence. Courts across the country have summarily rejected the movement’s theory — that Obama can’t be a citizen because his father wasn’t —as a misreading of U.S. law; and Hawaii officials, along with contemporary birth announcements, affirm that Obama was in fact born in Honolulu in 1961.

Reality check? Evidence? Summarily rejected?

Summarily rejected cases don’t make it to the Supreme Court to be distributed and conferenced - even if they are not heard.

What lower court judge is going to risk the angry bots and the proobamedia? They’ve seen what has been done to barry naysayers. Reelection beats fending off barama matthews.

And how many judges are as clueless as Judge Surrick, who said barry “underwent excessive vetting during what was one of the most hotly contested presidential primary [sic] in living memory.” Or Judge Robertson who based his decision in part on Twitter.

And the cases have been thrown out but because a regular citizen doesn’t have “standing” to compel barry to produce proof - not because barry was proven to be eligible. It never got to actual evidence.

SURRICK: Ordinary citizens can’t sue to ensure that a presidential candidate actually meets the constitutional requirements of the office. [Congress could determine] that citizens, voters, or party members should police the Constitution’s eligibility requirements for the Presidency. Until that time, voters do not have standing to bring the sort of challenge that Plaintiff attempts to bring.

And in the latest ruling, Keyes v Bowen Judge Michael Kenny said the Secretary of State and Electors had no duty to make barry produce it.

Birth announcements?

barry’s grandmother could get a Certification of Live Birth (COLB) - which is not a birth CERTIFICATE - with just her word that barry was born and without any corroboratable evidence of where (including state and country), when, how or by whom - as long as she could prove that barry’s mother had resided in Hawaii for the year previous to his birth.

Nobody even knows what hospital barry was born in - even in Hawaii.

And no birth announcement in a newspaper from 1961 is going to prove anything. It’s like heresay. The fact that it is cited as proof proves Mr Smith’s own lunacy.

If he had a kid come up to him and say ‘You’re my daddy, you need to pay child support’ and the kid handed him a newspaper birth notice with “Ben Smith” written as the father, would he open his wallet and pay up?

So why should a soldier have to pull the trigger without proof positive that barry is in fact Constitutionally eligible to order them to do so?

What kind of Commander in Chief would allow brave Americans, who volunteered to defend his wife and children, to wonder about the legitimacy of their actions?

What kind of man orders young Americans into battle - some to a certain death - without respecting them enough to answer their one and only question?

Just ponder that.

That is really and truly all they are asking for.

Tell me why their lives are not worth a $6 piece of paper?

And then tell me why the media, who insisted barry allow caskets be photographed, not want to do everything in their power to keep that soldier from hesitating, which might very well mean another casket to photograph?

SMITH:…a recent survey showed, 34 percent of the public believes in UFOs….

Including barry endorser Jimmy Carter.

SMITH: But the thriving birth-obsessed fringe also poses political risks and opportunities for the Obama White House, coming as it does after a campaign that devoted a substantial effort to rebutting another, now fading, myth — that Obama is a Muslim who would insist on being sworn in on the Koran.

Political risks and opportunities for a White House (and media) who finds it irrelevant?

And so what if he were Muslim and swore himself in on the Koran? His campaign did not devote any effort to it anyway. They accused the Clinton camp and the proobamedia handled the rest. And then David Singleton decided to make a name for himself by claiming someone at a McCain/Palin rally yelled “kill him”, which never happened, and the media was off again. barry himself lied about it by announcing it to the entire nation during the last debate and it was his own Secret service who proved the allegation was bogus. And most of the media still believes it happened.

SMITH: The risk, of course, is the growth of a segment of the population, however small, that views the president as illegitimate.

However small. Ha-ha. Elected officials are getting so much grief from their constituents they are saying things out loud. Newly elected Rep Posey has gone one further and introduced the barry birth certificate bill that would require future presidential candidates to prove they are eligible.

Again - barry is viewed as having not proved he is legitimate. The ball is in his court - as it always has been. He could put an end to all of this by producing that one document. He is causing the risk and he is providing the opportunities. Period. He has no one to blame but himself.

“Some individuals and groups who are opposed to Obama’s presidency want an ‘acceptable’ reason to cite to convince other individuals and groups who might be on the fence to join in their way of thinking,” said Patricia Turner, who studies rumors at the University of California, Davis. “The notion that his presidency is actually in violation of the Constitution has a fundamentally patriotic appeal.”

Oh Dear God. Studies rumors? How much time did he spend getting these quotes? Why doesn’t he just get his coworker Jonathan Martin to ask about it during the daily press briefing? You’ll get all the confirmation you need once Gibbs’ head starts sweating. And you can’t label something a rumor unless it has been proven to be one and that will never happen unless barry produces proof.

SMITH:…that the Birthers may discredit Obama’s more mainstream enemies.

Who in the mainstream is not a friend of barry? If one existed, barry would have been vetted. Remember, it’s not just his birth certificate - it’s his school records and his medical records and everything else the press hasn’t demanded. Instead we get articles like Mr Smith’s taking about things he doesn’t know and getting quotes from rumor experts.

Fringe??

SMITH: The conservative talk show host Michael Medved recently referred to the movement’s leaders as “crazy, nutburger, demagogue, money-hungry, exploitative, irresponsible, filthy conservative imposters” who are “the worst enemy of the conservative movement.” It makes us look weird. It makes us look crazy. It makes us look demented. It makes us look sick, troubled, and not suitable for civilized company,” he mourned.

Mourned? Just look at the words this Medved used. One might wonder if it takes one to know one. Worst enemies of the conservative movement? Where does that put abortion doctors, serial killers and pedophiles? Ten bucks he voted for barry. And why is he taking credit for all the fringian birthers? Phil Berg is a card carrying democrat. Alan Keyes created his own party.

SMITH: One of the lead anti-Obama lawyers…

It’s always anti-Obama. Anyone who does not worship at the feet of the obamessiah, anyone who listens to his words and actually checks out the inconsistencies aka lies is anti-barry. Just like folks who voted for McCain were voting against barry. Whatever their rhetoric, they are pro-Constitution, which is the crux of the matter.

SMITH: The White House is, presently, ignoring the birth certificate questions, having released an official copy of the Hawaii certificate during the presidential campaign. The press aide once tasked with quashing viral rumors, Ben LaBolt, no longer follows the fringe. But lawyers for the Democratic National Committee and for Obama have been steadily batting down a stream of lawsuits, winning motions to dismiss the suits in courts from Pennsylvania to Hawaii, from the state level to the United States Supreme Court.

Again, they did not release a BIRTH CERTIFICATE. They did not release an OFFICIAL COPY OF A BIRTH CERTIFICATE - Hawaiian or otherwise. They did not release anything - let alone an official copy of something. They gave a copy of a COLB - purportedly barry’s own - to his allies kos, factcheck and then politifact. They did not, have not, and will not release it to anyone else to examine it. Why?

Would Mr Smith rely on a birth notice in a newspaper or a copy of a non birth certificate or even an actual birth certificate to establish paternity? Would the word of his alleged son’s two friends be enough? Or would he go straight to DNA?

SMITH: Kreep has been battling Obama’s California lawyer, Fredric Woocher, to release the president’s records from Occidental College on the theory that they might provide information about his citizenship. Woocher has threatened to seek sanctions against Kreep for pursuing the case.

“This suit, like all of the others that have been filed challenging Obama’s qualifications for the Presidency, is frivolous,” he said in an email to POLITICO, adding that he is, in fact, working pro bono. “There is absolutely no truth to the stories about the untold millions supposedly being paid to us,” he said.

And Michael Strumwasser? And Amy ? And their process servers? Paralegals and secretaries? Who is paying for their travel? Their lodging? Their meals? They’re not billing barry for any of the hours they conference? What about copying and cost of court filings? This has been going on since August 2008. barry has been paying since then.

And what about barry’s main lawyer Robert Bauer? How much has he made off barry? The post Mr Smith copied from Kenneth Vogel said Bauer made $1.5M since 2005. He’s made way more than that this election alone. And then there’s the pay to play aspect. barry appointed Bauer lawyer for the Democratic party and Bauer’s wife was a barry advisor during the campaign. So Mr Smith can fantasize all he likes - barry is shelling out money and his lawyers are getting paid - including pro bono Wooten.

SMITH: The state’s governor, Linda Lingle, has attested to the authenticity of the birth certificate…

When did this happen?

SMITH: The suits share a vague, underlying notion that Obama must be some sort of foreigner, probably Kenyan, Indonesian or British, though none have any evidence or a coherent narrative to support the claim.

Again, the notion is and always will be - he has not proven he is a natural born citizen. Period. The conclusion that one might come to, since he will not produce his birth certificate, is that he is either foreign born or gave up his citizenship. There wasn’t a spontaneous uprising - barry’s a foreigner! The questions came about because he refused to provide any records, including his birth certificate.

SMITH: Others imagine that Obama was smuggled into the country as an infant, a claim contradicted by state records and contemporaneous birth announcements in two Honolulu papers.

Smuggled? What are these “state records”? Passport records? Or is he back to the COLB? And of course they would be contemporaneous announcements - whether real or fraudulent.

More quotes - this time an expert on urban legends. No kidding.

SMITH: David Emery, an expert on urban legends who writes for About.com, said the citizenship rumor has been fueled by an unusually “deep well of revulsion toward Barack Obama himself, and rage.”

Now this just ticks me off. How does Emery possibly know this? Sounds like the expert just voiced his own urban legend.

SMITH: “Thanks to the relentless agitation of the conspiracy theorists and the sheer quantity of hypothetical scenarios and legal arguments floating around, they’ve clearly succeeded in planting unreasonable doubts in reasonable people’s minds,” he said.

Where in this article or anywhere else has anyone, just once, proven that it is unreasonable to have doubts about barry’s refusal to produce his birth certificate? About his refusal to release any of his other records? Especially since he claims to be transparent?

At minimum, he is a liar.

What is beyond unreasonable is how folks automatically assume he has nothing to hide and that people are out to get him.

What do they know about him outside of his own words? How much verifiable proof of what he has said have they found?

What about the alleged “ambush attack” and violent racial awakening 9 y/o barry had while looking at pictures of a black man, who had tried to “peel off his skin” so he could pass as white? Compelling story - great for his narrative - good visuals for a movie - only the pictures never existed…in LIFE as he originally wrote or in Ebony which he said next or anywhere else. And you know his people looked. The best they could come up with was an ad for skin lightening cream in TIME, with no associated pictures of a man with peeled off skin.

That single lie is all one needs. He lied about the most fundamental moment in his life. And not just once. He mentioned it twice in his book and then at least twice more trying to defend it. The exact moment of his enlightenment as to who he is was a fairy tale.

Why take him at face value? Why believe anything he has to say? How does one know if there is a coat in the closet unless one looks? And if neither party has looked, how can one assume it is unreasonable to assume that there may not be one?

The fundamental question is why the media takes barry at his word.

Second to that is why they never wonder why he doesn’t keep it.

And third is why don’t they press him on it?

SMITH: But, ignored by the left and the mainstream media and dismissed by the courts, the citizenshp movement find its bitterest disappointments coming from the right.

Are the left and mainstream media two separate entities? And the bitterest disappointment is barry himself. The man asking Americans to pitch in and begin a new era of responsibility won’t own up to his most fundamental Constitutional duty as president: proving he is eligible.

SMITH: Tom Fitton [president of Judicial Watch] said he hadn’t “seen any credible evidence Barack Obama is not a U.S. citizen eligible for the presidency. If people understood better what the law is, I don’t think they’d be as concerned as they are,” he said.

Mr Fitton has not seen any credible evidence that barry is eligible and that is all people are asking for. They understand what the Constitution says and they are asking the president to prove he is eligible - not defend his ineligibility.

SMITH: Others have been less polite. Conservative bloggers regularly mock the “Birthers,” as they’re dismissively known

And how many times has he used “birthers”?

SMITH: The conspiracy theorists are “embarrassing and destructive” the conservative activist David Horowitz wrote recently.

All folks want is for barry to prove he is eligible. Nothing they should have to keep asking a supposed man of transparency to do.

The conspiracy theories come about because he hasn’t and refuses to do so. He is the one feeding whatever conspiracy theories there might be and he is he only one who can dispel them and he refuses to.

Why?

If you could turn on the lights and make the cockroaches disappear - forever - would you keep the lights off and continue to walk around barefoot?

Friday, March 20, 2009

A proposition for Ben Smith & Politico re: birthers

(cyberattack deleted - recovered from cache)

March 20, 2009

Mr Ben Smith and Politico -

I challenge you to secure a copy of the Kos/factcheck COLB and allow a disinterested third party to investigate it’s authenticity. Someone not remotely affiliated with barry or any of his minions.

If a reputable third party looks at it and deems definitively that it is not a forgery, each day, for as long as we exist, this site will devote a post extolling the awesomeness that is Politico and it’s writers - even Roger Simon.

Game?

I’ve got $50 riding on it.

You do it, I’ll donate it to barry.

***

Ben Smith: another “birther” illiterate

Ben Smith: just another “birther” illiterate

(cyberattack deleted - recovered from cache)

March 17, 2009

Why is it that folks enjoy jumping on the “birther” train when they don’t know from whence it came or where it’s going?

Why do they assume it involves only one track and one direction?

And why do they think birthers inhabit just “weird little internet sites”?

Maybe because the big internet sites - like Politico - are too busy cranking out pro-barry propaganda?

I wonder if our site here would be considered birtherite or is it birtherithian? Birther friendly, yes - except to octo mother birther, which is the proper use of the word.

Here are some of Ben Smith’s words (Politico), who seems to know what “birther” means, but not birth certificate or certification of live birth (COLB). He gets COLB and birth certificate mixed up in reference to Rep Bill Posey’s (R-FL) barry soetoro birth certificate bill, which is how it will be referred to by historians. The proper form of the root word is certificate - not certification or certified. [emphasis added]

SMITH: Obama has actually produced a copy of his Hawaii birth certificate, and it has been certified by the state of Hawaii.

No. And no. No birth certificate has ever been produced and nothing has been certified. He produced a green image that appears to be a Certification of Live Birth that Dr Fukino did not vouch for. They are separate entities.

SMITH (3-13): It echoes the concerns of the fringe movement that believes, without evidence, that Obama is somehow foreign and ineligible to be president.

Right - except it’s the wrong corollary. barry has never shown definitive proof that he is eligible and continues to refuse to do so. The COLB cannot be considered definitive proof until the document has been vetted. What Dr Fukino said in Hawaii in no way translated to the green image on factcheck’s website.

SMITH: They’re unlikely to be satisfied by this legislation, though: By requiring that candidates submit “a copy of the candidate’s “birth certificateit doesn’t actually satisfy the fringe, which claims that the official copy, which is the only document the state of Hawaii will release is not sufficient.

Now what kind of nonsense is this?

First off:

DOH Director DR CHIYOME FUKINO: State law prohibits the release of a certified birth certificate to persons who do not have a tangible interest in the vital record.

As in birthers. barry can get a copy whenever he wants and he can direct one to a tangible interestee. Besides which, barry has already admitted to having a copy of his long form birth certificate in his possession at one point.

Secondly, a birth certificate would very much satisfy the birthers. It is what they have been asking for. It would have cleared up the issue up August before it became an issue. $6 would have gotten rid of the fringian birthers once and for all - if in fact the COLB was legit.

But what has the self-proclaimed Mr Transparency done?

Fought it all the way to the Supreme Court - spending hundreds of thousands of dollars as he goes - Frederic D Woocher pro bono BS aside.

But forget the long form birth certificate and just look at the COLB. No one has ever been able to explain why he hasn’t released his COLB for vetting.

The only explanation to sane reasoning folks is that it has been altered = forgery. And the only reason for the forgery is because he is not a natural born citizen.

Why else hasn’t he proven it?

So if barry thinks the COLB is enough and Mr Smith thinks it’s enough - why doesn’t barry email Mr Smith a copy of his COLB?

And why hasn’t Smith and Politico made life easier for barry and independently vetted it themselves or through a third party?

Why wouldn’t they want to be known as the site who put the issue to rest and officially send the birthers out to pasture? They brag about everything else. Jeanne Cummings got a major atta girl for crawling through credit card receipts and exposing! wardrobegate so Joe Biden’s prediction of the nonhandling of the Hamas-Israel crisis could be covered up. And Biden was right - barry needs help - with the domestic AIG bonus crisis he created.

They have done everything else possible to promote barry and his bogus agenda while tearing down his opposition - why wouldn’t they take care of the one and only issue that could dethrone their leader?

The answer: because they are cowards. Because somewhere inside they know there is a possibility that the COLB is a forgery.

What 5 y/o wouldn’t get suspicious when you tell them you have a $50 in your hand and when they ask to look at it and touch you say no?

*I just realized I discussed his previous article from March 1st in detail and don’t think I ever posted it. Will have to go locate it.

***

A proposition for Ben Smith & Politico re: birthers

Sunday, November 30, 2008

President Clinton conditions

November 30, 2008

List of conditions President Clinton agreed to. I wonder how much arm turning it took? By Sen Clinton and others - including the Board of Directors? I would have liked to have heard husband and wife (and daughter) having that discussion. And what type of assurances did Mr Bill have to make the donors who had assumed everything would be private? I think barry wants all the info so he can potentially destroy both of them. Nobody has seen barry's Columbia transcripts or full medical records but they have every possible bit of info on the Clintons.

Anyway. From Politico's MIKE ALLEN & BEN SMITH:
Here are details of what the former president agreed to:

At the request of President-elect Obama, and to avoid even the appearance of a conflict of interest between the work of President Clinton and the service of Hillary Clinton should she be nominated and confirmed as Secretary of State, President Clinton is taking the following steps above and beyond the requirements of current laws and regulations.

— The Clinton Foundation will publish the names of everyone who has contributed since its founding in 1997 (this year).

— Should Senator Clinton be nominated and confirmed as Secretary of State, during her time of service, the Foundation will also publish the names of everyone who contributes going forward on an annual basis.

— The Foundation will separately incorporate CGI from the Foundation; President Clinton will continue to host CGI gatherings, such as the one in NYC and its meetings for college and university students, as Founding Chairman of CGI.

— Although President Clinton will continue to invite participants to CGI events (which involves normal registration fees), he will not solicit 'sponsorship' contributions for CGI.

— CGI will also not host annual events outside the US and CGI will not solicit or accept foreign government contributions.

— Given the extensive and life-saving work of the Clinton Foundation's HIV/AIDS Initiative which can and should continue, the Foundation will continue to fulfill its commitments funded by foreign governments (including, among others, Sweden Norway, France, Great Britain). In the event an existing contributing country chooses to substantially increase its commitment, or a new country, or government-owned entity, decides to contribute, the Foundation will share such proposed contributions with the State Department ethics officials. State may also share the issue to the WH Counsel's office for review. To whatever extent there are conflict of interest concerns raised about such potential contributions related to Senator Clinton's service as Secretary, they will be conveyed to Hillary Clinton and the Clinton Foundation for appropriate action.

— Same procedure to be followed for any foreign country contributors to CCI, CGSCI and CHDI.

— Regarding President Clinton's private work, during her tenure, President Clinton will share proposed hosts of speeches with the State Department ethics officials for their review, and as appropriate for review by the White House Counsel. Again, should there be conflict of interest concerns related to the Senator's anticipated service as Secretary, they will share those concerns with Senator and President Clinton for appropriate action.

— During her tenure as Secretary of State, should she be nominated and confirmed, President Clinton will share any proposed consultant relationships with State Department ethics officials, and the same procedures outlined above will apply here as well.

None of these protocols is required by any law, and all of them go above and beyond the requirements of the law to avoid even the appearance of a conflict of interest.

The procedures are, of course, in addition, to the already extensive laws and regulations government the activities of spouses of federal officials (such as those outlined in 5 USC 208 and related regulations)

Wednesday, November 19, 2008

More opinions re: Secretary of State

November 19, 2008 (long post)

I really don't care. Just documenting how the lies prove pro-obama media bias. Notice how barry - the president elect - has allowed all this to go on just like the VP selection. Why are people shocked by this? He has no spine so he leaks it to the press to see the potential fallout. Can someone remind him he needs to take charge - not a vacation to sleep in his own bed? His passivity is truly inspiring.

Politico's BEN SMITH:
Obama supporters point to her specific qualifications, her global celebrity, command of the issues and personal acquaintance with international players (assets Obama downplayed in his long campaign against her) as central to the decision to offer her the position.
ABNER MIKVA:
"She brings so much to the table. On the other hand, there are the obvious downsides, the conflicts that that her husband has."
ROBERT WEXLER:
"It says that he has the personal confidence to engage someone of the notoriety and substance of Sen. Clinton. Implementing change is an exciting exercise."
RUSS CARNAHAN:
"This would really give her a very unique platform to really be a part of this historic time we're living in right now, even greater than her role as a powerful senator. She is a capable and strong candidate for that post. Probably few people would have the kind of built-in knowledge and relationships with world leaders she would have."
AARON DAVID MILLER:
"This notion of team of rivals is an absurd concept."
Miller said Clinton has some of the key attributes of a good secretary of state — stature and toughness — but that she's untested as a negotiator, and her status as an erstwhile Obama rival might undermine an envoy's traditional trump card.

"People need to know that you speak with the authority of your president, and she … lacks a close relationship with" Obama..."the best of a weak field of potential Secretaries of State.
OBAMA SUPPORTER:
“It’s a risk with a big upside."

MSNBC
RICHARD WOLFFE:They're (barry's camp) indebted to Hillary Clinton for her work during the general election. I expect they'll both (Clinton & Richardson) will have a prominent role in his administration.

JON MEACHAM: She's a formidable politician....It also plays into her ongoing remarkable story. Whether you agree or disagree with Hillary Clinton, she has built a remarkable career of public service and this would be an interesting next step.


MARK FELDMAN on HARDBALL doesn't look so smug anymore. He doesn't believe what he's saying looking back and forth between Republican John Feehery and hardball like a kid lying to his parents.
"Bold transformational change doesn't necessarily mean winning on a party line vote. That's why you see him meeting with John McCain. That's why you see him reaching out to Republicans. That's why you see him showing that he is going to govern from the center because big bold transformational change doesn't have-"
Hardball calls him on it and he starts laughing in relief. Face it folks. You voted for somebody you don't know and when he continues to do what he always does--rhetoric followed by "policy refinement" so he doesn't have to act--you're shocked.

How meaningful were your arguments? How informed was your vote? How rosy your future?

More chatter on Secretary of State

November 19, 2008

Investors Business Daily: But on the whole, if she focuses solely on the job, she has real potential to do good work for the next president. She's tough. She knows the players, she grasps national security and she's popular. If she is named, let's hope that her strengths will shine through, and the country will be served first.

Politico's BEN SMITH
:
Democrat close to Obama campaign:
"These are people who believe in this stuff more than Barack himself does. These guys didn't put together a campaign in order to turn the government over to the Clintons."
How much faith do barry's minions have in his ability to lead the world if they think he can't control "The Clintons"?
An overlooked theme in Obama's primary victory was his belief that the Clinton legacy was not, as the Clintons imagined, a pure political positive. The Obama campaign had no compunctions about poking holes in that legacy and even sent out mailings stressing the downside of the last "8 years of the Clintons".
It's nice (shocking, really) to see someone finally acknowledge that barry's campaign was far from clean and state out loud why Mr Bill was not pleased. (Besides the fact that barry refused to call him.) It's unconscionable for a rookie to come in and attack the previous democratic president. Worse - the pro-obama media never mentioned it as it was going on. barry was attacking and implicating Sen Clinton in her husband's administration at the same time he was saying she did nothing and can't claim experience because of it. Where was the media reporting on this? Smith just proved he knew what was going on and said nothing. More proof of pro-obama media bias from their own obamerized mouths. Can't even keep track of it all.

MR SMITH - THE FACT YOU USED THE WORD "OVERLOOKED" MEANS YOU KNEW ABOUT IT AND CHOSE TO NOT REPORT ON IT. YOU ARE AS CORRUPT AS THE REST OF THE PROOBAMEDIA. CONGRATULATIONS. I LOOK FORWARD TO MORE ADMISSIONS.

ROBERT KUTTNER (Clinton hater who has slithered out to hawk his new book on barry.) wants barry to go back to his liberal roots. Never gonna happen folks. He'll be in the middle to avoid having to act.
"There's always a risk of a Cabinet member freelancing and that risk is enhanced by the fact that Hillary has her own public and her own celebrity and that she comes attached to Bill. The other question is the old rule - never hire somebody you can't fire. What happens if her views and his views don't mesh? The silver lining, for those of us who are skeptical, is that it drastically limits the number of other Clinton administration alums that he can appoint, and that's a blessing.
How does that limit anything? Already 1/2 of his appointments are ex-Clinton people. Why do these folks still believe barry is going to do anything he promised? What were they watching as he gradually crept toward the center during the primaries and sprinted towards it in the general election?

BERNIE SANDERS (D-VT):
"Sen. Clinton is one of the brightest people in Congress and she would be an excellent choice."
More truth from Smith:
"During the primary, top aides like David Plouffe and Robert Gibbs developed a particular distaste for all things Clinton, one that filtered down through the campaign."
Obama source:
"During the campaign there was a lot of agreement and correspondence about how the grassroots felt about the Clintons and how the Obama leadership felt. There's a bit of a divergence now. They're confused that the guy they elected . . . because we need to go in a different direction on the world stage" might choose a secretary of state with whom he had some of his sharpest foreign policy disagreements during the primary campaign.
Confusion is only the beginning. And what does it say when his own people are being surprised by him.
Obama insider: "I can't stand her - but I think she's a great choice."

Someone involved in the process: "It's not like he hedged his bets in conversation with her - he offered her the job. "