An Extension of Power

2009 April 24

Presidential Poison is the title of an editorial in Thursday’s Wall Street Journal.  It is a blistering, scathing indictment of Obama for opening the door to prosecution of former attorneys for the Bush administration.

Mark down the date. Tuesday, April 21, 2009, is the moment that any chance of a new era of bipartisan respect in Washington ended. By inviting the prosecution of Bush officials for their antiterror legal advice, President Obama has injected a poison into our politics that he and the country will live to regret…

…at least until now, the U.S. political system has avoided the spectacle of a new Administration prosecuting its predecessor for policy disagreements. This is what happens in Argentina, Malaysia or Peru, countries where the law is treated merely as an extension of political power.

The  conflicting messages since Sunday from Barack Obama and Rahm Emmanuel and Robert Gibbs have garnered such labels as reversal, muddied and creating confusion.  On Thursday, Gibbs said the White House doesn’t support creating an independent panel; however, he also “noted that it is up to Congress — not the White House — to decide whether to pass legislation creating a commission.”

Now is this White House off message? undecided? waivering?  In my opinion, no.

Did Rahm Emmanuel, as Chief of Staff to Obama not confer with him before giving  George Stephanopolous an exclusive interview Sunday on “This Week”  and stating, “…Obama will not pursue the prosecution of Bush-era officials who devised torture policy against detainees”? Did Obama wake up Monday morning and suddenly decide to contradict Emmanuel? Was Gibbs bewildered when he said that Obama thinks the memos, “provide a moment of reflection, not of retribution”?

I believe Obama is like a ship beating into the wind.  The conflicting messages are simply tacking to port and tacking to starboard in order to move forward.  I don’t think judgments about chaotic messages or disorder in his appointments to high level posts bother him.  Some things are orchestrated and some are unimportant.  Logical and cohesive statements and organized government are unimportant except as they further his purpose.  The things that I’m aware of that have angered him were criticisms of his person and fury regarding the Tea Parties.  The first is beyond criticism and the Tea Parties are the gathering headwind that’s beginning to blow against him.

So don’t look merely at the words of different officials or stay focused on whether or not their words are contradictory–look at the effect of the words–look at the ripples and waves and the forward movement.  Obama is committed to an extension of power to accomplish his objectives; this week he chose to use the conflict over memos and law.

_____

UPDATE: Important!  Read the lists of Alinsky’s Rules!

Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals (HT:  Moe Lane for the link)

Alinsky’s Rules of the Ethics of Means and Ends

Biography and related articles on Saul Alinsky at Discover the Networks.

More from The American Thinker, including the link below to Front Page Magazine.

Remember that Hillary Clinton wrote her Wellesley College senior thesis, “There is only the Fight” on Saul Alinsky.  The link at the article to her thesis appears to be dead, however, a search will still find it online.  I do not know anything about the site hosting it and have not provided a direct link.

_____

UPDATE II: Cheney continues to fire broadsides at Obama, making two holes in the sails!

Cheney formally requests release of two CIA memos on detainees

_____

UPDATE III: Andy McCarthy surveys the battle scene and reports on damage:

Obama’s Interrogation Mess: He made it, and now he’ll have to bear the consequences. (HT: Judy)

“The president is reeling because he sees his legislative agenda going up in smoke.

_____

UPDATE IV: Reading from my kind of radical:  John Adams to H. Niles, February 13, 1818, in which he says:

“This radical change in the principles, opinions, sentiments, and affections of the people, was the real American Revolution.”

86 Responses leave one →
  1. 2009 April 24 8:17 am
    [1]
    Colorado KnightOwl permalink

    The “One” is not as omnipotent as he believes. His legions on the left commanded by Soros are moving him to make war on America…..

  2. 2009 April 24 8:29 am
    [2]
    chekote permalink

    INC

    Maybe they are playing good cop and bad cop. Kinda like Cantor?!

  3. 2009 April 24 8:39 am
    [3]
    chekote permalink

    is the moment that any chance of a new era of bipartisan respect in Washington ended.

    And thank God for that. Enough with this bipartisan baloney. Time to draw distictions between the two side instead of this constant blurring to the point that most voters see no differences between the two.

  4. 2009 April 24 8:41 am
    [4]
    justrand permalink

    excellent post, INC. Very insightful!

    I love a good analogy…and the “tacking” one is a GREAT analogy!

    The movements this way and that way are not changes of course…merely tacking to good wind (of ill wind, in this case). And his progress is steady…alarmingly so.

    The line from the WSJ article that is most chilling is this:
    …at least until now, the U.S. political system has avoided the spectacle of a new Administration prosecuting its predecessor for policy disagreements

    America essentially INVENTED the concept of “peaceful transition of power”. A few nations employed it occaisionally before us, but we have had a tradition going all the way back to 1797 (end of Washington’s 2nd term) of our Presidents NOT doing what Obama is doing now.

    And what of the NEXT President (assuming there IS one)? Should Palin prosecute Obama for HIS crimes?? 🙂

  5. 2009 April 24 8:46 am
    [5]
    MFG permalink

    Criminalizing policy differences will destroy the country

    Absolutely destroy it

    I’m sure there are CIA agents right now who are telling themselves, “Why risk it? To hell with it, I’ll just be hung out to dry anyway. They want civil rights for terrorists? Let them live with the consequences.”

  6. 2009 April 24 8:46 am
    [6]
    INC permalink

    chekote, yes, you’re following my thinking. It’s a similar game, only I believe the sowing of confusion is more complex and has a more nefarious purpose.

    Boehner and Cantor are working the good cop/bad cop, IMO, and Cantor is playing two audiences before the camera and on his Whip page.

  7. 2009 April 24 8:49 am
    [7]
    INC permalink

    Justrand, yes, the peaceful transfer of power has always been an important part of our history.

    That WSJ piece is the sharpest and angriest thing I’ve read in criticism of a Obama–maybe any president.

  8. 2009 April 24 8:51 am
    [8]
    INC permalink

    MFG, yes, I agree. Go back and read the blog post that coldwarrior put up about this. I linked to it in the Sites To Be Seen. He was in the CIA.

    Justrand, Should Palin prosecute Obama for HIS crimes?? 🙂 I saw a satire on this. Let me see if I can find it.

  9. 2009 April 24 8:53 am
    [9]
    chekote permalink

    I say let the show trials begin. Let the American people see what the previous administation did to keep us safe. Somebody posted here that maybe the Bush administration should have released the memos. You are darn right. If the Bush administration had been more forceful in the defense of its actions. They should have NEVER allowed this boloney about American values being violated. How is putting a BUG in someone’s cell and American values. We have allowed the opposition to constantly redefine values and rights and that is why we are in the mess we find ourselves today.

  10. 2009 April 24 8:54 am
    [10]
    INC permalink

    Here it is–it’s satire not just for amusement, but to make a point:

    President Palin’s Quandary: To Prosecute Or Not

  11. 2009 April 24 9:04 am
    [11]
    phineasgage permalink

    This is the briar patch that the GOP would love to be thrown into.

    I wonder if the Dems will be stupid enough to do it? Nancy Pelosi certainly, so one can always hope.

    I agree with Chekote about bipartisanship. The Founders would have laughed at such a concept. Political combat was about as partisan as it gets back then, and they saw that as healthy. The more partisanship, the less government does, and most likely it will only do the necessary things.

  12. 2009 April 24 9:16 am
    [12]
    judyt2009 permalink

    INC, you are a spectacular writer.

  13. 2009 April 24 9:22 am
    [13]
    chekote permalink

    Let the record show that I was the first to call for INC to become a contributor.

  14. 2009 April 24 9:23 am
    [14]
    INC permalink

    chekote, another difference I see between Boehner & Cantor and the WH is that B & C may give the appearance of conflict, but if you look carefully at their words it’s not there. The WH issues statements that are flat out contradictory. They don’t care about the criticisms, because that doesn’t matter–they’re like flies they simply swat off. In fact, I think they’re delighted in sowing confusion and uproar. This is the Left we’re talking about.

  15. 2009 April 24 9:23 am
    [15]
    INC permalink

    Thanks, Judy, that means a lot coming from you!

  16. 2009 April 24 9:25 am
    [16]
    judyt2009 permalink

    Isn’t it ironic that the poster doing the loudest cheers for an end to Washington bi-partisanship is the same one constantly pestering the rest of that we should either silence or cut loose those politically aligned segments who possess values different from her own? I now understand that the references to “we” in her posts are acknowledgements of her own duality.

  17. 2009 April 24 9:29 am
    [17]
    judyt2009 permalink

    diva alert!

  18. 2009 April 24 9:37 am
    [18]
    chekote permalink

    Judy

    What don’t you leave the accounting/legal profession and go into psychology? You obviously enjoy ananlyzing people more than crunching numbers. I want to you be happy Judy. Really. I do.

  19. 2009 April 24 9:43 am
    [19]

  20. 2009 April 24 9:43 am
    [20]
    judyt2009 permalink

    Che — once again — it’s all about you? Can you at least attempt to give up the me, me, me, me, me, me, me for one thread? You even make it about you with regards to my happiness. sheeesh….

  21. 2009 April 24 9:44 am
    [21]
    MFG permalink

    INC is the most talented of all of our contributors

  22. 2009 April 24 9:46 am
    [22]
    MFG permalink

    Show trials will destroy the country forever

    This wasn’t even done after The Yankee War of Coercion Against The Peaceful Inhabitants Of The South

    Lincoln and Grant realized prosecuting former Confederates would have utterly destroyed the country

  23. 2009 April 24 10:03 am
    [23]
    INC permalink

    Thank you, MFG!

    We have an obscure little history book (we collect those kind of things!) that includes a discussion of the aftermath of the Civil War, Jefferson Davis, by Herman S. Frey. In it he writes:

    Chief Justice Chase tenaciously clung to the idea that there should be no trial for treason:

    If you bring these leaders to trial, it will condemn the North, for by the Constitution secession is not rebellion.

    Trials for treason in the civil courts are not remedies adopted to the close of a great civil war. Honor forbids a resort to them after combatants in open war have recognized each other as soldiers and gentlemen engaged in legitimate conflict . . . . It would be shockingly indecorous for the ultimate victor in such conflict to send his vanquished opponent before the civil magistrate to be tried as if her were a mere thief or rioter.

    Lincoln wanted Jefferson Davis to escape, and he was right. His capture was a mistake; his trial will be a greater one. We cannot convict him of treason. Secession is settled. Let it stay settled.

    …On December 15, 1868, President Johnson ended all prosecutions in a proclamation of amnesty which included Davis…But Davis was always sorry that he was not tried for he felt that his case could prove that the Southern States had a right under the Constitution to secede as he had always believed before and after the war; and such proof would have convicted the North for a war which was not justified.

    Not to derail 🙂 my own thread into a discussion of slavery, the Civil War or secession–I just wanted to throw in this bit of information!

    Those were different times and honor and decorum have short shrift today.

  24. 2009 April 24 10:31 am
    [24]
    judyt2009 permalink

    Expanding on INC’s excellent post.

    There is an interesting comment over at NRO blog row by Peter Kirsanow on the Criminalizing Policy Differences —the Galactic Double Standard

    He presents the bewildering juxtaposition of the Democrat and moonbat partisan’s firestorm over prosecuting a policy decision by the Bush administration for enhanced interrogation techniques that did not result in the loss of one American life (or one life for that matter)
    with the Republican and sane Americans own forbearance from prosecuting Jamie Gorelick, et al who crafted the famous pre- 9/11 “Wall”, “the Clinton-era policy that separated criminal investigations from intelligence operations, thereby impeding counter-terrorism investigations.”

    If hindsight second guessing is to be applied in determining whether the information that stopped additional terrorist attacks and therefore saved lives could have been obtained with other “less-enhanced” techniques, then shouldn’t we also apply hindsight to questioning whether giving intelligence officers access to the 20th hijacker Moussaoui’s computer may have prevented 9/11 from happening at all.

    “The Wall was kept in place by government officials who were on notice that terrorists planned to kill Americans. It was kept in place even after terrorists had succeeded — pre 9/11 — in killing Americans. Maintenance of the policy was reckless and inexcusable — some might even argue that it was criminal.”

    Mr. Kirsanow asks: “Will the partisans who demand the prosecution of those who kept America safe also demand the prosecution of those who endangered America?”

    He isn’t holding his breath and neither am I.

    But I wonder, if we could prosecute Gorelick for her creation of the Wall how large of a dent would her legal defense put in her $26 million dollar salary from Fannie Mae?

  25. 2009 April 24 10:35 am
    [25]
    drdog09 permalink

    INC,

    Lincoln for similar reasons never did bring before the SCOTUS of the time whether secession was legal. The court was a southern majority. Read pieces of the period and the war was called The War of Southern Aggression for a reason.

  26. 2009 April 24 10:53 am
    [26]
    INC permalink

    Thanks for bringing that out, Judy. I put a link into your comment to take everyone to the specific post. My husband angrily brought out the same point about the double standard this morning.

    But I wonder, if we could prosecute Gorelick for her creation of the Wall how large of a dent would her legal defense put in her $26 million dollar salary from Fannie Mae?

    !!!!!!!!!

  27. 2009 April 24 10:53 am
    [27]
    INC permalink

    Dr. Dog, The court was a southern majority. That’s something I didn’t know. Thanks.

  28. 2009 April 24 10:54 am
    [28]
    MFG permalink

    Very good research, INC

    An interesting side note: Johnson wanted to prosecute Lee and Davis for treason but it was Ulysses Grant who refused, threatening to resign his commission if they were prosecuted

  29. 2009 April 24 10:56 am
    [29]
    INC permalink

    Interesting!

  30. 2009 April 24 11:04 am
    [30]
    MFG permalink

    ULYSSES S. GRANT BY LOUIS A. COOLIDGE

    Grant was not content with written words. He
    hurried to the White House, where for once he found
    his tongue in controversy. ” A general commanding
    troops,” he said, “has certain responsibilities and
    duties and power which are supreme. … I have
    made certain terms with Lee, the best and only
    terms. If I had told him and his army that their
    liberty would be invaded, that they would be open
    to arrest, trial, and execution for treason, Lee would
    have never surrendered, and we should have lost
    many lives in destroying them. … I will resign the
    command of the army rather than execute any order
    directing me to arrest Lee or any of his commanders
    so long as they obey the laws.”

    That was a contingency which Johnson dared not
    face. He could not hope to put his influence to the
    test against the all-pervading popularity of Grant.
    The indictments were withdrawn, though Johnson
    still denied to Lee his amnesty.

  31. 2009 April 24 11:50 am
    [31]
    chekote permalink

    I say let the show trials begin.

  32. 2009 April 24 11:56 am
    [32]
    justrand permalink

    there’s a part of me that would welcome the show trials…but then again, considering that the media will slant and distort the coverage I am wary as well.

    The Duelfer report is a perfect example. The ACTUAL report supported the invasion of Iraq, since it clearly showed that Saddam’s aim was to be able to quickly reconstitute his WMD…and he had retained the expertise and means to do so! The press? They trumpeted the report’s conclusion that he didn’t have them at the moment we invaded. And the press NEVER did report on the actual conclusion: that Saddam was a MASSIVE threat!

  33. 2009 April 24 11:59 am
    [33]
    chekote permalink

    No offense but right wing blogs are becoming Groud Hog Day. Everyday: the MSM is biased. Everyday: Obama is a Marxist. Everyday; Obama is applying the Alinsky rules for radicals. Everyday: same soup. We all know this. The question is: HOW DO WE FIGHT IT?

  34. 2009 April 24 12:05 pm
    [34]
    chekote permalink

    Justrand

    That is why you need somebody who can communicate effectively. That is why you need the old, tired talking points. Instead of worrying about the MSM, somebody needs to step up and call the Dems and the American people weasils. After 9/11, We ALL demanded that the government do whatever it took to prevent another terrorist attack. We DIDN’T give a damn about the Geneva convention. We DIDN’T give a damn about what the world thought.

    If instead of Bush we had somebody who could actually talk, when this crap about torture first started it could have been nipped in the bud. Go on prime time and remind the American people how scared they felt on 9/11. Remind them that we ALL wanted to prevent another attack. Remind them that we are dealing with the filth of humanity (terrorists) and that you can’t stop cleaning up the world just because you might get a stain on your pants in the process.

  35. 2009 April 24 12:07 pm
    [35]
    chekote permalink

    What did we get with Bush? An inarticulate, boob going around repeating “Freedom for the Iraqis”, “Freedom”, “Freedom” while the Iraqis were killing each other. NEVER AGAIN!

  36. 2009 April 24 12:08 pm
    [36]
    chekote permalink

    Sorry, I meant you DON’T need the old talking points. I am in between meetings.

  37. 2009 April 24 12:15 pm
    [37]
    MFG permalink

    Amen, Chekote

    The inability of W to speak was a catastrophic disaster for the Republican Party and for the country

  38. 2009 April 24 12:29 pm
    [38]

    chekote, get a grip dear… has it been that long since a DEM had to suffer the slings and arrows that comes with the office of the president or are the Obama faithful just more whiney?

    inquiring minds want to know when the Obama faithful are going to man up and stop with the sniffling and pouting. 🙂

    coo…

  39. 2009 April 24 12:45 pm
    [39]
    INC permalink

    chekote, I spent a long time the other night just trying to convince you of what Boehner and Cantor were doing.

    We’re in the process of education and knowing the enemy. we have to recognize and comprehend what Obama is doing, why he is doing it and his strategy and tactics. That is the FIRST step to how to fight. Otherwise, he’s just going to roll us all. You have to understand that and try to think through what’s happening and why. You also need a GOAL other than just fight. This is a process of exchange of ideas and thoughts.

  40. 2009 April 24 12:45 pm
    [40]
    INC permalink

    But what do we mean by the American Revolution? Do we mean the American war? The Revolution was effected before the war commenced. The Revolution was in the minds and hearts of the people; a change in their religious sentiments of their duties and obligations….

    By what means this great and important alteration in the religious, moral, political, and social character of the people of thirteen colonies, all distinct, unconnected, and independent of each other, was begun, pursued, and accomplished, it is surely interesting to humanity to investigate, and perpetuate to posterity….

    It was not until after the annihilation of the French dominion in America that any British ministry had dared to gratify their own wishes, and the desire of the nation, by projecting a formal plan for raising a national revenue from America, by parliamentary taxation. The first great manifestation of this design was by the order to carry into strict executions those acts of parliament, which were well known by the appellation of the acts of trade, which had lain a dead letter, unexecuted for half a century, and some of them, I believe, for nearly a whole one.

    This produced, in 1760 and 1761, an awakening and a revival of American principles and feelings, with an enthusiasm which went on increasing till, in 1775, it burst out in open violence, hostility, and fury.

    The characters the most conspicuous, the most ardent and influential in this revival, from 1760 to 1766, were, first and foremost, before all and above all, James Otis; next to him was Oxenbridge Thacher; next to him, Samuel Adams; next to him, John Hancock; then Dr. Mayhew; then Dr. Cooper and his brother. Of Mr. Hancock’s life, character, generous nature, great and disinterested sacrifices, and important services, if I had forces, I should be glad to write a volume. But this, I hope, will be done by some younger and abler hand. Mr. Thacher, because his name and merits are less known, must not be wholly omitted…

    His indignation against him hence forward, to 1765, when he died, knew no bounds but truth. I speak from personal knowledge. For, from 1758 to 1765, I attended every superior and inferior court in Boston, and recollect not one, in which he did not invite me home to spend evenings with him, when he made me converse with him as well as I could, on all subjects….

    But his favorite subject was politics, and the impending, threatening system of parliamentary taxation and universal government over the colonies….

    –John Adams, letter to H. Niles, 13 February 1818

    Elsewhere in the letter he writes:

    This radical change in the principles, opinions, sentiments, and affections of the people, was the real American Revolution.

  41. 2009 April 24 12:50 pm
    [41]
    INC permalink

    Remember the quote I gave you the other night!

    This spirit, however, without knowledge, would be little better than a brutal rage. Let us tenderly and kindly cherish, therefore, the means of knowledge. Let us dare to read, think, speak, and write. Let every order and degree among the people rouse their attention and animate their resolution. Let them all become attentive to the grounds and principles of government, ecclesiastical and civil. Let us study the law of nature; search into the spirit of the British constitution; read the histories of ancient ages; contemplate the great examples of Greece and Rome; set before us the conduct of our own British ancestors, who have defended for us the inherent rights of mankind against foreign and domestic tyrants and usurpers, against arbitrary kings and cruel priests, in short, against the gates of earth and hell.

    — John Adams from “A Dissertation on the Canon and Feudal Law” – 1765

  42. 2009 April 24 1:19 pm
    [42]

    The inmates are now running the asylum.

  43. 2009 April 24 1:36 pm
    [43]
    justrand permalink

    well spoken, ip…in any other time in our history Obama’s actions would be labeled: “Treason!”

    now, of course, they are celebrated!

    The left continues to gleefully slosh gasoline about…as Obama leads the way, torch in hand. What could go wrong?

  44. 2009 April 24 1:54 pm
    [44]
    judyt2009 permalink

    The third rule of the ethics of means and ends is that in war the end justifies almost any means.

    The fourth rule of the ethics of means and ends is that judgment must be made in the context of the times in which the action occurred and not from any other chronological vantage point.

    We should apply Alinsky’s own rules to the analysis of the enhanced interrogation. We can’t sit with a 2009 mindset and think back to 2002. We must think with the worried minds and fully functional AQ of 2002.

  45. 2009 April 24 1:56 pm
    [45]
    judyt2009 permalink

    Justrand or Mary — can you fixt my post

  46. 2009 April 24 2:11 pm
    [46]
    justrand permalink

    judy, howzat?? 🙂

  47. 2009 April 24 2:25 pm
    [47]
    judyt2009 permalink

    I’m reading along when the exchange between Inc and MFG on Johnson and the decision to not prosecute Davis et al, leaves me thinking about how impressed I am with the level of intelligence and discourse on this blog, the detailed expression of ideas, and supporting documentation, the unique content of the posts, and then….

    Then the magpie posts….

    chekote permalink
    No offense but right wing blogs are becoming Groud Hog Day. Everyday: the MSM is biased. Everyday: Obama is a Marxist. Everyday; Obama is applying the Alinsky rules for radicals. Everyday: same soup. We all know this. The question is: HOW DO WE FIGHT IT?

    ummmm, might I suggest by developing a set of values and principles grounded in facts with a detailed understandings of history, that includes not only the founding principles of the United States but the circumstances and factors leading up to historical and global failed ideologies. Using a strategy of approaching the issues from a thoughtful and intellectual versus purely emotional perspection. Developing responses that reflect an ideology not limited by the concepts of the world is a zero-sum game.

  48. 2009 April 24 2:26 pm
    [48]
    judyt2009 permalink

    Thank you sir. Got to watch that hitting the shift key to slow in closing my brackets.

  49. 2009 April 24 2:33 pm
    [49]
    chekote permalink

    Judy

    We have the principles. We just can’t seem to sell them. How do we sell them?

  50. 2009 April 24 2:54 pm
    [50]
    MFG permalink

    Judy,

    Thanks for the kind words

    Ulysses Grant was a truly great American, his magnanimity in victory enabled the Confederates to retain their pride and eventually acquiesce emotionally in the reunification of the country

    Robert E Lee was a truly great American; it was his insistence after the war that the South accept defeat that kept the country from flying apart

    God Bless them both

  51. 2009 April 24 2:58 pm
    [51]
    MFG permalink

  52. 2009 April 24 2:59 pm
    [52]
    INC permalink

    VotingFemale,

    I neglected to welcome you! Welcome! And thanks for commenting!

  53. 2009 April 24 3:01 pm
    [53]
    judyt2009 permalink

    And then I read on — to nothing more than the same old tired, worn-out, backward-looking rantings and attacks on President Bush. Gosh, it sounds so much like the kool-aid drinking moonbats that I have to check the byline. Obama won because he propped up President Bush as is opponent. Obama won because he ran against President Bush and not Senator McCain. What better way to continue the Obama popularity by hauling out President Bush as the negative point whipping boy. To date a significant part of Obama’s strategy is to bash President Bush every chance he gets as part of his fallacious rhetoric, as it keeps his useful idiots foaming at the mouth, lapping up his hopey-dopey change, and ignoring his unprecedented attempt to amass power, shred the Constitution, and destroy the very fabric and basis of US exceptionalism.

    Thankfully, this was followed by INC’s brilliant posts that provide exactly that historical understanding of US founding principles crucial to a winning strategy.

    Che stop bashing President Bush. The past cannot be changed, doing so adds nothing to the discourse on future strategy, only facilitates Obama’s agenda, and amplifies your trollish qualities.

  54. 2009 April 24 3:06 pm
    [54]
    chekote permalink

    Che stop bashing President Bush. The past cannot be changed, doing so adds nothing to the discourse on future strategy, only facilitates Obama’s agenda, and amplifies your trollish qualities.

    It is not bashing. It is trying to learn from past mistakes. We CANNOT afford another inarticulate leader. I see that plenty of people willing to make the same mistake.

  55. 2009 April 24 3:09 pm
    [55]
    MFG permalink

    Sorry for the lengthy playlist in my link above, I can’t figure out how to select individual items from the youtube playlist

  56. 2009 April 24 3:12 pm
    [56]
    INC permalink

    Judy, one of the most exciting things I saw at a Tea Party was a young man and an elderly woman pouring over his copy of a booklet containing the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution.

    The Founders still speak, and they’re working to help us win!

  57. 2009 April 24 3:14 pm
    [57]
    judyt2009 permalink

    Do “we”? Maybe acting a little less like chicken little might help.

    Pendulums swing. Those that bought into the cult of personality are already discovering that the folly of their purchase.

  58. 2009 April 24 3:18 pm
    [58]
    INC permalink

    chekote, go read Judy’s comment in Justrand’s thread today. Here’s the end of it:

    The real difference in 2010 and 2012 will be reaching out to those who think their vote does not matter, that there is no difference in the candidates. They must be energized to vote in order to save their incomes, their assets, and their country. These folks need to be shaken from their slumber and made aware that if they do not act to protect their most important asset – their freedom, then it too will disappear down that same rat hole of excessive taxes and government spending that now sucks away their incomes.

    The first step for you is to understand what those principles are.

    Folks won’t wake up if you don’t understand and you can’t articulate what’s at stake to them.

  59. 2009 April 24 3:22 pm
    [59]
    judyt2009 permalink

    Don’t skip this one

    Excellent.

    I sense a potential paradigm shift. At the end of a multitude of missteps.

    Hey Justrand and Mary — Can we start a 100 days of mistakes thread? A list the 100 stupid mistakes things that Obama and his administration have committed that reflect why the Zero was not ready to lead.

  60. 2009 April 24 3:35 pm
    [60]
    INC permalink

    Judy, thanks for the link to Andy McCarthy. I’ve put it in the post in an update.

  61. 2009 April 24 3:43 pm
    [61]
    judyt2009 permalink

    Che — like most amateurs, your posts telegraph your intentions. Your visceral aversion to Governor Palin arises from your own psychosis and blocks your ability to comprehend her appeal and potential to be the 2012 equivalent of Ronald Reagan. Now whether she emerges as a candidate for 2012 or another rises is unknown; however, princess it isn’t just your slip showing, but your maladroit arse.

  62. 2009 April 24 3:45 pm
    [62]
    INC permalink

    Andy McCarthy really goes after Obama. His column makes me want to stand up and cheer:

    However unintentionally, Obama has invited an accounting.

    and

    If President Obama really thinks he can dance away unscathed after making a little feel-good mayhem for his side by telling only half of the story, he is mistaken.

    and

    Obama and Holder can’t pretend that this is not their decision to make, that the “rule of law” is a train on which they are mere passengers. At issue here is a matter of policy, not evidence: In the United States of America, should the victor in a presidential election use the enormous powers of his office to investigate and prosecute his political adversaries, and thereby begin a cycle of retribution in which policy disputes will henceforth be criminalized?

    That is exactly what the Left wants. We, on the contrary, believe it would tear the country asunder, in addition to re-establishing the ethos of risk-aversion that invited 9/11. President Obama could have let sleeping dogs lie. Instead, he stirred both sides to battle stations. Now he will have to decide, and bear the consequences.

  63. 2009 April 24 4:15 pm
    [63]
    justrand permalink

    judyt2009 to chekote: “princess it isn’t just your slip showing, but your maladroit arse

    When we get around to a “Comment of the Year” contest this will CLEARLY be the one to beat!!

    LOL!!! 🙂

  64. 2009 April 24 4:21 pm
    [64]
    justrand permalink

    judyt2009…I like the “100 Mistakes” thread idea…I’ll talk to Justmary and see when she wants to post one up!!

    It may not be tonight though…’cause Justmary just got home, and has to feed Justkids, play with Justdog and prepare the castle for Justhusband! 🙂

  65. 2009 April 24 4:21 pm
    [65]

    COYOTE~~~Poster child for this Eric hoffer quote:

    I hang onto my prejudices, they are the testicles of my mind.
    Eric Hoffer

  66. 2009 April 24 4:22 pm
    [66]
    justrand permalink

    GREAT quote, ip!! 🙂

  67. 2009 April 24 5:30 pm
    [67]
    judyt2009 permalink

    INC — my thoughts exactly on the McCarthy column — it was a

    yea, YEA! YEA!!!! read.

  68. 2009 April 24 5:34 pm
    [68]
    chekote permalink

    Justrand

    Judy is jealous because she was never daddy’s little girl. I forgive her.

  69. 2009 April 24 5:45 pm
    [69]
    JustMary permalink

    I like the 100 mistakes thing…..but if I am not mistaken, there is actually a site keeping track of his mistakes already. In fact, I think the site is dedicated to it. If I find it, I will post a link to it for you.

  70. 2009 April 24 6:09 pm
    [70]
    bc3b permalink

    zi’ve seen a lot of WH press secretaries in my time, but Gibbs is the biggest joke.

  71. 2009 April 24 6:10 pm
    [71]
    justrand permalink

    chekote…”Daddy’s little girl” is even deadlier than Daddy…and Daddy is a former Marine.

    Jus’ sayin’

  72. 2009 April 24 6:28 pm
    [72]
    judyt2009 permalink

    tsk, tsk, Chekote —

    I certainly was my daddy’s little girl and apple of his eye — but when I became a woman I stopped acting like and responding to life as a petulant child.

  73. 2009 April 24 6:31 pm
    [73]
    bc3b permalink

    judyt2009 –

    That’s gonna leave a mark.

  74. 2009 April 24 6:31 pm
    [74]
    chekote permalink

    Dr. Phillipa,

    You should try Divafying yourself a bit. It is fun. I promise.

  75. 2009 April 24 6:36 pm
    [75]
    judyt2009 permalink

    Oh, Chekote — jealous no, but reproach, disdain, pity, and irritation certainly come to mind.

    I also suspect that your constant need for attention and drama queen diva antics that you were far from daddy’s little girl. But more likely starved for any attention you could get.

  76. 2009 April 24 6:38 pm
    [76]

    Cat fight puke.

  77. 2009 April 24 6:40 pm
    [77]
    judyt2009 permalink

    bc3b — the thought skipped across my mind this morning (when listening to one of those top soundbites of the week) that Gibbs cannot possibly be as bad as he is unintentionally. I decided that Gibbs must put on a significant amount of the uh,uh,uhs so that when the ZERO is off the teleprompter his own uhs, uhs, uhs do appear so inept.

    Sort of like no one in the kingdom can be taller than the king.

  78. 2009 April 24 6:44 pm
    [78]

    Judy you give the administration too much credit.

  79. 2009 April 24 6:57 pm
    [79]
    judyt2009 permalink

    KH — it was just a thought – because, as Bc3B says, Gibbs is so terrible that he is a joke — so they must be expecting us to laugh.

  80. 2009 April 24 7:07 pm
    [80]
    judyt2009 permalink

    Earlier in the week someone reference a juggler metaphor that Obama has thrown so many balls in the air that our attention is distracted and he is sneaking something worse past us.

    Now I wonder with the interrogation memos and potential investigation and prosecution of Bush administration officials was this intended or did Obama not expect that backlash.

    The Congressional Republicans have been rather silent during the first 100 days, but now as it approaches the end we are seeing life from some in Congress. Is this because they were stirred to action and defense by the interrogation issue or were they trying to give Obama his “honeymoon” and are now going to

  81. 2009 April 24 7:22 pm
    [81]

    “Gibbs is so terrible that he is a joke — so they must be expecting us to laugh.”

    Court jester.

    The memo dust up was simple incompetence in trying to have it both ways, be loved by all, and he could help but mix in on of his best assets – naivete.
    Obama is certainly not a decider.

    Hey if Rove can be accused of having hurricane targeting technology, certainly then Pelosi being the puppet master controlling Obama’s thoughts isn’t out of the equation right? 😉

  82. 2009 April 24 7:58 pm
    [82]
    drdog09 permalink

    Judy,

    The Three Stooges, Laurel and Hardy, Mork and Mindy were funny. I fully expect to see a stuttering ventriloquist come from stage left and stick his hand up Gibbs’ ass. Just sayin’.

  83. 2009 April 25 5:23 am
    [83]

Trackbacks & Pingbacks

  1. The Masked Manipulator « Bejohngalt’s Blog
  2. Glenn Beck Interviews David Horowitz:How Radicals Operate and Achieve Their Agenda | Be John Galt
  3. Glenn Beck Interviews David Horowitz:How Radicals Operate and … – CelebrityTwitterGossip.com

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.