A 'HEALTHY' DOSE OF DENIAL

In an interview with Katie Couric, President Obama defended his hopey-changey message.  "Democrats wrote to me," Katie began with an apologetic smile, "saying you campaigned on a slogan of change you can believe in, but their lives and the ways of Washington, they wrote, haven't changed at all."

President Obama then launches into a denial-filled explaination of how transparent his administration is.  He mentions the fact that his visitor logs for the White House are available to the public - something unheard of with other administrations (and you know who he means!).  Of course he neglects to mention that those same logs were kept locked up (even after two federal rulings that the informtion was public), until November of '09 and even then, the list wasn't quite complete, it just went back to Sept. '09.  The new era of transparency leaves much to be desired, in my opinion.

But it gets better.  "We are eliminating lobbyists from boards and commissions," Obama insists.  And what is happening to those lobbyists who are suddenly jobless in DC?  Why, they miraculously get waivers to work in the White House

He finishes up with "There's more transparency on something like the Recovery Act and how taxpayer dollars are being spent than there/s ever been on a project of this size and scale." (has there ever been a project of this size and scale?)  Sure, as long as you don't mind phantom zip codes and congressional districts that don't exist.  And why, exactly, does the website say that about 650,000 jobs have been 'saved or created', but the administration keeps citing 1.5 - 2.4 million?  Easy - they have now changed the rules so that if a company receives stimulus funds, any job within that company now counts as 'saved or created'.  Quite a racket, no?

Obama, Pelosi et al have a little problem.  They truly believe perception is reality, and that if they simply say something often enough, with enough conviction, it will be so.  For the rest of us living in the real world (which luckily has internet access and youtube - something the administration, as tech-savvy has it has been touted as being, seems to have forgotten about), we can hear the spin and find out what's really going on.  Apparently, for about 60% of Americans, their BS detectors are set to ultra sensitive, and claptrap like he was peddling to Couric just doesn't sell anymore.

Now Obama is calling for a health care summit, this time including Republicans and C-SPAN cameras.  I guess bipartisanship and transparency are only necessary if you can't manage to pass it strictly on party lines and behind closed doors.  Can you say 'political act of desperation'?  I know that he is 'pivoting' to jobs, but why can't he just drop the whole health care thing completely for a while?  Get the economy running again and then take up health care over the summer or fall (or, more realistically, next year).  Unfortunately, the administration has managed to sell to their progressive base that economic recovery just won't happen until the health care system has been reformed. 

One thing this administration has gotten really, really good at is painting themselves into corners.

What really strikes me, though, is the petulant tone of the democrats - particularly Obama.  Well, except for Pelosi, who apparently has decided that tone-deaf defiance is the way to go.  Hey Queen Nan - when you said you would "Go through the gate.  If the gate's closed, we'll go over the fence.  If the fence is too high, we'll pole vault in.  If that doesn't work we'll parachute in but we're going to get health care reform passed for the American people", who do you think is making all of those obstructions?  That would be the American people, Nan.  You know, your bosses? 

The woman is the poster child for power drunk career political hacks. 

She is the snarling, snapping, rabid pitbull to Obama's shivering chihuahua, barking furiously to cover his uncertainty and incompetence as he hides behind her.  If the republicans can manage to take back the House, she will be neutralized, and that is more than half the battle.    The spin for this administration has become so lame and transparently, patently false that it is hard to believe anyone is falling for it anymore.  Well, except for their hard-core base, which only comprises about 20% of the voting pool, thankfully.  The rest of us respond to the desperate spin with a hearty chuckle these days, as we mark off one more day on the calendar.

The administration will be learning a hard lesson that perception is not reality, come November.  Until then, let them spin away. 

TOO LATE TO APOLOGIZE

This video is great (via HotAir).  Enjoy!:

HOW TO HANDLE VERMIN

Our senior intelligence officials were called to the Capital today to discuss national security in the wake of the Christmas Day bomber with the Senate Intelligence Committee.

CIA Chief Leon Panetta and his peers from National Intelligence and the FBI, in a rare moment of candor, admitted that the chances of an attempted attack were 'certain'.  Panetta also admitted that the new 'lone wolf' tactics were difficult to track.

To me, terrorists are like cockroaches.  With 9/11, they were successful as a large group because we weren't really aware that there was such a large, organized nest of them and that they were such a potent threat. 

Now we know that they are determined to do us harm but we have managed to scatter the nest; they are still coming, but it is individuals now instead of a swarm.  We have learned how to detect large groups and stomp them out, so they have adapted to splintering off and coming at us from many different directions.  They are taking their training, getting their drugs and explosives, and are on their own.  Sort of like a terrorist express line.   

So what do we do?  First and foremost, target the training camps.

We know it's nearly impossible to figure out who might end up being a bomber before heading off to camp, and there is no contact between the killer and the network after training.  They choose the time and place and research rudimentary pieces of information on line at home, like knowing where to sit on the plane so that you are directly over the fuel tanks.  So target the camps, where we know they are intending (and actively training) to do us harm but haven't managed to do so yet.  Destroy the nests, wherever they may be.  Demand help and approval from the UN and NATO for surgical strikes to any and all known terror training camps, be they in Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Syria, wherever. 

Once you've targeted the nests, you start picking off the stragglers.  One way is to go digital.  Shut down the network globally.  Bomb building website?  Deleted.  Radical Imam spouting 'Death to Israel'?  Detained, questioned and surveilled.

There will still be attempts, but the number will have shrunk dramatically.  A smaller suspect pool means more agents will be assigned to each case, thus upping the odds of  successful identification and disruption of plots. 

This administration is crippling our intelligence agencies with their insistence on treating terrorists as common criminals.  Their hands are tied, and our safety is at stake.  If there is a successful attack in the next three to six months, God help the democrats.  Their policies will be to blame and they will suffer the consequences on election day and beyond.

There's plenty more that can be done, I'm just offering up a few suggestions that seem like common sense to me - whether they are practical and possible are up for debate.  But at least I'm not throwing my hands up with an air of futility and telling the country we're helpless to stop it.  Our intelligence chiefs are somewhat less than inspiring when it comes to instilling confidence.

Thank God our intelligence and military personnel are more savvy and on the ball than their appointed betters.  They are the reason I'm not totally freaking out.  May they be ever vigilant and successful in destroying those vermin, down to the very last one.

JUST A FEW QUESTIONS

The 2011 budget proposal was just released.  Can someone please explain to me how the budget increased by $200 billion despite a spending freeze?

While you're at it, could you please tell my why I should be excited by $20 billion in 'savings'?

Also, why, exactly, is Cap and Trade being discussed again?  The AGW argument is falling apart more and more with every day that passses, but for some reason we need to invest in green technology now, now, now!

While we're at it, I'd also like to know why Paul Kirk is still voting for legislation even though Scott Brown is the Senator from Massachusetts.  Brown won't be sworn in until Feb. 11th, so don't be surprised if they try to jam something reallly offensive through before then.

How exactly will repealing the Bush tax cuts on our small business owners and allowing the SEC to impose new regulations requiring companies to disclose potential risk to investors due to environmental regulations increase job growth and profitability?  Oh, I forgot - uncertainty and heavy taxation are the linchpins for a booming economy and low unemployment.

Those are just my top five questions so far this week.  I'm sure I will have many more before the week is out.

Hey, one more just struck me - why does Obama want Congress to rush the budget through, when it won't be effective until Sept. 2010?

Isn't it amazing how, with all of the spin explaining going on, there are still so many unanswered questions?

THE NEW TERROR FRONT

I guess they don't get internet access in the mountains of Afghanistan and Pakistan.  If they do, Osama Bin Laden apparently missed the ClimateGate bruhaha.  Another audio tape from Bin Laden has been released today, and in it, the terror leader calls for a boycott of American goods and the dollar because of America's contribution to 'Global Warming'.

Is it just me, or is it weird that al Qaeda is triangulating like this?  Do I smell a faint whisp of desperation?  I guess all of the hard-core Islamic religious fanatics have all blown themselves up or been captured, so now Bin Laden is being forced to recruit a different type of religious fanatic - Gaia worshipping eco-terrorists.

Good luck with that.  Those eco-freaks are crazy.  Just be careful, they can turn on you in a heartbeat!

What's next with this guy - boycotting Whole Foods because they oppose the health care reform that his jihadis desperately need when their mission fails and they burn their bits off?  Maybe a sit-in at a cattle ranch to protest cow flatulence and the evil ways of decadent Western meat eaters?

Does this mean he will no longer accept that dirty middle eastern oil money for his terror plots?

I wonder if Bin Laden knows what the carbon footprint is on a suicide bomber.  Hey, perhaps now he will stop trying to obtain a dirty bomb because it it so environmentally reckless - after all, it's not so much a problem with killing millions of innocent civilians, it's about being a good steward of the environment!  Can you imagine the carbon offset credits he would have to buy?  What do you think the odds are that in his next video he will be munching granola and sporting a "Make love, not war" t-shirt?

Doesn't it sometimes feel like we're smack dab in the middle of a bad Twilight Zone episode?

THE STATE OF OBAMA

Was it just me or was that an incredibly boring speech last night from the Great Orator?  It just seemed like a rehash of the past bazillion speeches he has given.  Blah, blah, blah, blame Bush....blah, blah, blah, party of no...blah, blah, blah, attack, complain, deceive.  No wonder his democrat supporters wanted to get drunk.

At least he expanded his rhetorical attacks to include the Supreme Court, so that's a refreshing change - I'm sure congressional Republicans and Wall Street bankers are happy for the break.

The only thing that kept the speech from being a total snoozefest was the remarkable amount of, shall we say...inconsistencies.  The AP does a fact check analysis of the speech and finds it wanting.  Here are some highlights:

• Spending Freeze - It's unrealistic, probably won't pass, and doesn't rescind the 12% average increases democrats instituted last year with the stimmulus bill.  Pelosi, tone-deaf idiot that she is, called today for the freeze to include defense spending as well.  For the details on what a waste a freeze would be, check this out.
• Bipartisan Fiscal Commission - A lame attempt to shield democrats from their profligate ways by forcing republicans to help make unpopular spending cuts and tax increases.  This is also remarkably redundant, because one of the jobs of Congress is to be fiscally responsible and monitor their own spending.
• Lobbyists - Is he kidding us with this?  Does he really think we don't know there are at least 12 lobbyists currently holding top positions in his administration?
• Jobs - Obama trotted out the number "two million" when he spoke about jobs 'saved or created'.  This number is a joke.  Back in December, the number on their website was about 650,000, but many of those were highly questionable.  It's amazing that in one month they managed to add an additional 1.35 million jobs, even though the unemployment figures took another 'unexpected' dip.  I guess that comes from their new calculation method - if a company takes stimulus dollars, every job in the company is now considered saved or created.  Quite a racket.
• Transparency - I'm surprised the man doesn't clang when he walks - he must have a huge brass pair to tout transparency after the past year.  FOIA requests are ignored by the White House, and we all know about his broken promise of CSPAN cameras capturing the health care debate.  Backroom deals and dead-of-night passage of legislation has become the norm for this administration.  Not only are bills not posted for 5 days for the public to read before voting, but now they aren't even released to members of Congress to read - vapor bills have become the norm.  They are actually voting before they write the bills now.

That isn't the complete list, but they are the most egregious ones.  On top of flat out lies, he also omitted quite a bit.  In a State of the Union speech, especially in our post 9/11 world, and even more especially because of the failed Christmas Day attempt, national security should be a main talking point.  It was barely given a paragraph, and even then it was a slam on George Bush:

"And in the last year, hundreds of al-Qaida's fighters and affiliates, including many senior leaders, have been captured or killed - far more than in 2008."

The insinuation, of course, is that he is tougher on terror than Bush was.  First, it is impossible to verify, as we do not release body counts.  Second, it's hard to project that image when he insists on treating terrorists who are actively trying to kill American civilians as common criminals and has restricted our military's ability to combat our enemies by forcing them to follow the Army field manual - effectively giving our civilian police forces more options and tactics than our military.

He basically stated that, Massachusetts election or not, he was sticking with his agenda.  He has heard the people and found them to be wrong.  He knows best.  Health care is still a priority and he is still determined to spend us into collapse prosperity.  He is not misguided in his plans, he is determined.  He is a fully committed socialist who is refusing to bend to the will of the people.  His tactic is to attack any and all resistance and force his will on the People. 

When, exactly, do we cross the threshold from tone-deaf to tyrannical?

AGW IS MELTING AWAY

There has been a lot trickling out over the past week or so regarding the UN's IPCC and erronious reports.  The first report was about a part of the 2007 report that talked about the glaciers of the Himalayas melting completely away by 2035.

The melting glaciers were a major talking point for AGW alarmists.  Their argument was backed up by the IPCC report citing their demise, and, of course, the science was irrefutable because the IPCC only puts out quality, well researched reports. 

Eh, not so much.

Turns out the 'report' was the product of a quote from a scientist during a media interview that wasn't backed in any way by studies or science.  It was basically hysterical ravings that were taken as proven fact and published by the preeminent panel for AGW.  It was just a mistake, the IPCC explained.

Then came the revelation that it was put in the report for purely political reasons.  Apparently the lead author of the 2007 report knew that the claim was false but included it anyway in order to pressure world leaders to take stronger action on AGW.

“We thought that if we can highlight it, it will impact policy makers and politicians and encourage them to take some concrete action.” In other words, Rose says, Lal “last night admitted [the scary figure] was included purely to put political pressure on world leaders.”

James Delingpole of the UK's Telegraph has the scoop on the latest.  In the 2007 report, the claim is made that up to 40% of the Amazon rainforest is in danger of a drastic reaction to changes in precipitation due to climate change.  The report asserts that the reaction would be a change from a rainforest environment to a tropical savannah.  The report cites Andy Rowell and Dr. P.F. Moore's 2000 report on global forest fires.

The problem with Andy Rowell and Dr. P.F. Moore and their report is that they are affiliated with WWF and IUCN.  The World Wildlife Foundation is an environmental activist group focused on conservation, as is the International Union for Conservation of Nature.  Dr. Moore is not an Amazon specialist, he is a policy analyst.  As for Andy Rowell, he is a green activist and a reporter for the UK's Guardian newspaper.  Their non-peer-reviewed paper is apparently just the tip of the iceburg.  It turns out there is a long list of non-peer reviewed WWF papers that have been cited as evidence in the IPCC report.  That violates the IPCC's rules for inclusion - all papers must be peer reviewed.  And, one would assume, based on some sort of science, not some scientist spitballing a what-if scenario to illustrate their alarmist visions.

Let's not forget, too, that the chairman of the IPCC, Dr. Rajendra Pachuri, is in hot water himself.  Mr. Pachuri has been investing heavily in companies that are being recommended by the IPCC.  He has shrugged it off, of course, as has the other champion of AGW, Al Gore.  There are those calling for his resignation, but he refuses to step down, naturally. 

The 2007 IPCC report that has all of the flaws I have been discussing is also the one that won the shared Nobel Peace Prize with Al Gore.  Since the report is being shown daily to be filled with false information and supposition, not science, does that mean the prize will be rescinded?

Oh, if only.....

Global warming is now dead last on the list of priorities for Americans, so at least it seems people are paying attention instead of just blindly believing the AGW hysterics.  It's a start.  When the Europeans start wising up, I'll breathe easier.  But at least people are wising up to the scam, and it's happening before our governments sink trillions of dollars into it and cede our sovereignty to some global government.

So when do we get to bring Gore up on charges?  How about taking away his Oscars and all the other prizes his fraudulent 'documentary' garnered? 

Heck, I'd just be happy if they would stop peddling this AGW crap in the schools - I'm getting tired of having to deprogram my kids every year.