Incredibly Stupid Political Question of the Day

From Barbara Walters to Sen.-Elect Scott Brown:

“How do you think that Senator Ted Kennedy would feel about your election? Do you think he'd be disappointed?”

Nah, Teddy's too busy swatting away pitchforks to worry about the election in Massachusetts.

Rip Torn Busts Bank

A little excitement for the veteran actor:

Actor Elmore "Rip" Torn has been arrested for breaking into a Salisbury bank and carrying a firearm while intoxicated.

Connecticut state police said the 78-year-old Salisbury resident was arrested Friday night after police found him inside the Litchfield Bancorp with a loaded revolver.

The "Men in Black" actor was taken into custody and booked on numerous criminal charges, including burglary and possession of firearm without a permit.

He was held on $100,000 bond and is scheduled for a Monday appearance in Bantam Superior Court.

Last year, Torn was given probation in a Connecticut drunken driving case and granted permission to enter an alcohol education program. He also has two previous drunken driving arrests in New York.

Isn't it nice to see older people living active lives...

"Glory of Easter" Cancelled as Crystal Cathedral Tightens Its Belt

UPDATE 10/18/10: Crystal Cathedral files for bankruptcy.

The Crystal Cathedral in Garden Grove, CA has long been known for two major productions each year - the "Glory of Christmas" and the "Glory of Easter". The latter is now a former glory:

The Crystal Cathedral, the Garden Grove megachurch, is laying off 50 workers, selling surplus property and may pull its "Hour of Power" television show in up to eight markets because of a precipitous drop in contributions.

The 7,000-member church also has canceled its "Glory of Easter" pageant, a popular reenactment of the life and death of Jesus Christ, which sold tens of thousands of tickets each year. "This cuts to the heart of our ministry," said spokesman John Charles. "It is sad news."

Charles said the church's revenue sank 27% from roughly $30 million in 2008 to $22 million in 2009. Anticipating a drop in 2010 revenue, he added, "If it maintains, that would be fine, but we don't have a crystal ball, so we are cutting."

The church, founded by the Rev. Robert H. Schuller more than 50 years ago, lost members in the wake of a family feud after he retired. His son, the Rev. Robert A. Schuller, succeeded his father, but stepped down in 2008 after disagreements. His sister, is now the church's leader.

Charles said the church surveyed its members last fall to see if the dispute had caused a drop in contributions. "We found out it had no effect. It is the economy. We have a lot of older, retired people," he said.

Given the ticket prices charged for the "Glory" productions I would have thought those would be profitable enough to stand on their own, but I guess I was wrong.

I remember back in the early 80's my sister lived in house that backed up to the Crystal Cathedral. I was over there one night when the "Glory of Easter" was playing next door and you could hear the pyrotechnics from the show echoing through the neighborhood. I'll bet that got a little old after awhile.

Political Quote of the Day

From Cicero in 55BC (from Rick Warren's twitter feed):

"The budget must be balanced, treasury refilled, public debt reduced & arrogance of officials tempered lest Rome be bankrupt"

Still works today.

The Science of Global Warming....Isn't Science at All

Let's look at how the IPCC came up with their bogus glacier info:

The revelation will cause fresh embarrassment for the The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), which had to issue a humiliating apology earlier this month over inaccurate statements about global warming.

The IPCC's remit is to provide an authoritative assessment of scientific evidence on climate change.

In its most recent report, it stated that observed reductions in mountain ice in the Andes, Alps and Africa was being caused by global warming, citing two papers as the source of the information.

However, it can be revealed that one of the sources quoted was a feature article published in a popular magazine for climbers which was based on anecdotal evidence from mountaineers about the changes they were witnessing on the mountainsides around them.

The other was a dissertation written by a geography student, studying for the equivalent of a master's degree, at the University of Berne in Switzerland that quoted interviews with mountain guides in the Alps.

The revelations, uncovered by The Sunday Telegraph, have raised fresh questions about the quality of the information contained in the report, which was published in 2007.

It comes after officials for the panel were forced earlier this month to retract inaccurate claims in the IPCC's report about the melting of Himalayan glaciers.

Sceptics have seized upon the mistakes to cast doubt over the validity of the IPCC and have called for the panel to be disbanded.

It's clearly time for these fools to go.

Meanwhile, I'm going to work on a paper that suggests that granting me great sums of money will stop global warming. If I can just get them to publish that I'm set for life.

Bring Back the Trains

As a train buff myself, and a guy who at one time built a pretty nice HO layout, I find this a pretty sad story:

FULLERTON The death of his grandpa in December devastated Jay Wydra, 14.

The two had spent years together visiting train shows, driving to NASCAR races and watching baseball.

Jay Wydra and his mother, Ann Wydra, show a picture of Grandpa Bernard taken when he was a young man in Pennsylvania. Jay, 14, is hoping burglars will return his grandpa's train collection, which he had willed to Jay.

Grandpa Bernard Wydra, who died of lymphoma at age 65, even willed his collection of more than 50 rare "S" gauge and a smaller number of "HO" gauge model trains to his grandson.

Now, Jay is dealing with his second loss in as many months.

Burglars broke into his grandpa's vacant home in east Fullerton on Monday, taking all of the trains and a rare Infant of Prague statute of the baby Jesus that the elder Wydra's Polish mother had given her son years ago.

Jay and his mother, Ann, are hoping someone in the train-collecting or Polish Catholic communities will stumble upon someone trying to sell the merchandise. A police report was filed estimating the financial loss at $7,000.

Police Sgt. Andrew Goodrich said the stolen goods could pop up for sale on the Web.

"It's the sentimental value of all this," Ann Wydra said, with tears in her eyes. "Dad had three girls and when Jay was born, he was ecstatic. He finally got his boy. The two did everything together; they even looked alike."

Ann Wydra periodically checked on her father's house in the Troy High School neighborhood. On Monday, she walked in to find the newspapers in which the trains had been wrapped scattered all over the floor.

"I'll never forget the shock of seeing the mess," Ann Wydra said. "How was I going to tell Jay?"

I hope they find them. They probably don't have that much monetary value to someone trying to fence them, but the sentimental value must be enormous to the family.

This story give me an excuse to run a 19-year old video of the HO set I used to have before my son got big enough to want to grab everything and knock stuff over. I finally had to break it all down and put it away.

Cellphone Bans While Driving Have No Effect

Not surprised at all to read this:

“As state legislators across the United States enact laws that ban phoning and texting while driving, a new study is showing no reductions in crashes after hand-held phone bans take effect. Comparing insurance claims for crash damage in 4 US jurisdictions before and after such bans, The Highway Loss Data Institute (HLDI) researchers find claim rates are comparable with nearby jurisdictions without such bans. ‘The laws aren’t reducing crashes, even though we know that such laws have reduced hand-held phone use, and several studies have established that phoning while driving increases crash risk,’ says Adrian Lund, president of HLDI.”

It could be that a lot of people like me regularly ignore the law and talk on our cellphones while driving anyway, thus the law isn't really changing anyone's behavior.

These nanny laws rarely have the impact promised by the lawmakers. Just passing a law isn't enough to change the behavior of people.

State of Decline

The last Gallup poll prior to the State of the Union lecture had Obama's approval/disapproval at 48%/46%. The first post-speech poll has it at 47%-47%.

A lot of fawning media types were predicting a nice bounce for the president following the speech. I don't think that's the bounce he was looking for.

CA Dems Try to Solve Another Desperate Problem - Free Parking

They're against it, of course:

State lawmakers are taking aim at what some of them see as a menace to California’s environment: free parking.

There is too much of it, the legislators say, and it encourages people to drive instead of taking the bus, walking or riding a bike.

All that motoring is contributing to traffic jams and pollution, according to state Sen. Alan Lowenthal (D-Long Beach), and on Thursday he won Senate approval of a proposal he hopes will prompt cities and businesses to reduce the availability of free parking.

"Free parking has significant social, economic and environmental costs," Lowenthal said. "It increases congestion and greenhouse gas emissions.’’

Republicans opposed the measure, saying the Legislature should not be meddling in how much people pay to park.

"If local governments want to entice people to shop or do business in a particular area, that is entirely their business. Not the state’s," said Sen. Tom Harman (R-Huntington Beach).

The bill, supported by the Natural Resources Defense Council and the Sierra Club, provides financial incentives for cities and counties to stop providing free parking on the street and at government offices and to reduce the amount they require businesses to provide.

"It’s nice that we’ve been treated to this luxury," Lowenthal said. "The problem with free parking is it’s not free.’’

No, actually it is free. It's not that complicated.

Democrats think they can force people into buses, onto bikes, or other public transportation with silly laws like this. Chances are they'll only force themselves into taking a bus back home after they're voted out.

Pelosi's the Problem

That's pretty much the message the GOP House members gave to Obama yesterday at the GOP Retreat:

President Obama and House Republicans had a rather candid, at times combative, but overall a fascinating and rare public exchange on the successes and failures of the administration's first year in office here today. Republicans came in determined to show that they in fact have been more than the "party of no" that Democrats portray them as, while Obama called on the opposition to tone down what he deemed as hyperbolic attacks.

In the end, what emerged from the session was a clear sense of how Republicans could potentially frame this year's midterm elections. Multiple Congressmen rose to hail the president's promises and intentions but argued that he has been ill-served by an obstinate House Democratic leadership, and specifically Speaker Pelosi.

That point was driven home most effectively, perhaps, by Rep. Pete Roskam (R-Ill.), a former colleague of Obama's in the Illinois state Senate. He said he had enjoyed collaborating on tough issues with Obama in Springfield, but wondered what had changed.

"You've gotten the subtext of House Republicans that sincerely want to come and be a part of this national conversation toward solutions, but they've really been stiff-armed by Speaker Pelosi," Roskam said. "The obstacle is, frankly, the politics within the Democratic caucus."

Rep. Mike Pence (R-Ind.), the GOP conference chairman, was more blunt, waving a compilation of his party's ideas, and saying to the president that the summary "is backed up by precisely the kind of detailed legislation that Speaker Pelosi and your administration have been busy ignoring for 12 months."

And despite the whipping her party took in Massachusetts largely because of the health care issue, San Fran Nan issued another "damn the torpedoes, full speed ahead!" message on healthcare. She doesn't get it.

And making her the focal point of the House races this fall could be a very successful strategy. She's not well loved among most of the people in this country.

Day 1 Bash Lobbyists. Day 2 Invite Them to the White House

That's the way it works in BarackWorld:

A day after bashing lobbyists, President Barack Obama’s administration has invited K Street insiders to join private briefings on a range of topics addressed in Wednesday’s State of the Union.

The Treasury Department on Thursday morning invited selected individuals to “a series of conference calls with senior Obama administration officials to discuss key aspects of the State of the Union address.”

The invitation, which went to a variety of stakeholders, was sent by Fred Baldassaro, a senior adviser at the Treasury Department’s Office of Business Affairs and Public Liaison.

The invitation stated, “The White House is encouraging you to participate in these calls and will have a question and answer session at the end of each call. As a reminder, these calls are not intended for press purposes.”

Every promise, statement, or program of the Obama Administration has an expiration date, and some of them are pretty short.

IPCC Chief Knew About Glacier Fraud Before Copenhagen Summit

But he didn't dare let it ruin his opportunity to take over the world's economy:

The chairman of the leading climate change watchdog was informed that claims about melting Himalayan glaciers were false before the Copenhagen summit, The Times has learnt.

Rajendra Pachauri was told that the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change assessment that the glaciers would disappear by 2035 was wrong, but he waited two months to correct it. He failed to act despite learning that the claim had been refuted by several leading glaciologists.

The IPCC’s report underpinned the proposals at Copenhagen for drastic cuts in global emissions.

Dr Pachauri, who played a leading role at the summit, corrected the error last week after coming under media pressure. He told The Times on January 22 that he had only known about the error for a few days. He said: “I became aware of this when it was reported in the media about ten days ago. Before that, it was really not made known. Nobody brought it to my attention. There were statements, but we never looked at this 2035 number.”

Asked whether he had deliberately kept silent about the error to avoid embarrassment at Copenhagen, he said: “That’s ridiculous. It never came to my attention before the Copenhagen summit. It wasn’t in the public sphere.”

However, a prominent science journalist said that he had asked Dr Pachauri about the 2035 error last November. Pallava Bagla, who writes for Science journal, said he had asked Dr Pachauri about the error. He said that Dr Pachauri had replied: “I don’t have anything to add on glaciers.”

The Himalayan glaciers are so thick and at such high altitude that most glaciologists believe they would take several hundred years to melt at the present rate. Some are growing and many show little sign of change. ...

Dr Pacharui has also been accused of using the error to win grants worth hundreds of thousands of pounds.

It's all about the money.

Have a School System Beyond Repair? You Need a Major Hurricane

That seems to be what Education Secretary Arne Duncan is suggesting:

Education Secretary Arne Duncan called Hurricane Katrina “the best thing that happened to the education system in New Orleans” because it forced the community to take steps to improve low-performing public schools, according to excerpts from a television interview made public Friday.

Duncan’s interview on “Washington Watch With Roland Martin” was scheduled to air Sunday on TV One.

The excerpts quoted an exchange between Duncan and Martin about the effect of the 2005 hurricane on the city’s schools.

Martin was quoted as saying: “What’s amazing is New Orleans was devastated because of Hurricane Katrina, but because everything was wiped out, in essence, you are building from ground zero to change the dynamics of education in that city.”

Duncan was quoted as replying: “It’s a fascinating one. I spent a lot of time in New Orleans, and this is a tough thing to say, but let me be really honest. I think the best thing that happened to the education system in New Orleans was Hurricane Katrina.

Now you know the only thing that's saving Duncan from a public flogging is the fact he's a liberal Democrat. If any Republican had suggested that something good came out of Katrina the outrage police on the left would have beaten him beyond recognition.

The city was a disaster and had been for decades (if not centuries). Wiping it out and starting over was just about the only way to fix it.

And now look - their team is in the Super Bowl.

Hawaii Says Aloha to Gay Marriage

Yet another state, this time a pretty liberal one, says "no" to gay marriage:

Hawaii lawmakers declined to vote Friday on a bill that would have allowed same-sex civil unions, effectively doing away with the measure.

State House leaders said a narrow majority of representatives would have voted for civil unions, but they decided to indefinitely postpone a decision on whether to grant gay and lesbian couples the same rights and benefits the state provides to married couples.

Civil union supporters in the crowded House gallery on Friday shouted, "Shame on you!" while opponents cheered.

"It's an election year, and they're more concerned about keeping their seats than doing what's right," said Stephen Nagle of Kaaawa, wearing a rainbow lei in support of civil unions.

At least these guys are smart enough to understand that voting against the will of the people is a foolish endeavor. They haven't figured that out in Washington yet.

They Take Their Soccer Seriously in Africa

Maybe way too seriously:

Togo have been banned from the next two Africa Cup of Nations following their withdrawal from this year's tournament.

The Confederation of African football (Caf) also fined the Hawks $50,000 for quitting the competition in the wake of a gun attack on the team bus in Angola.

Two members of their delegation and a coach driver were killed in the ambush, which occurred two days before the start of the tournament.

World football governing body Fifa declined to comment on the ban.

However, a statement from CAF read: "The executive committee has banned Togo from the next two African Nations Cup and fined the Togo FA 50,000 U.S. dollars."

A Togolese assistant coach and a press officer died along with the driver following the ambush on their bus in the northern Angolan province of Cabinda on 8 January, prompting the government to recall the team for three days of mourning.

The Hawks initially wanted to compete in Group B with Ivory Coast, Ghana and Burkina Faso, but quit on 10 January - the tournament's start date - on 10 January on their national government's orders.

But African football's governing body says the decision to pull the team out amounted to governmental interference in the sport.

"The players publicly expressed their willingness to return to the Nations Cup to compete. But the Togo government decided to call back their national team," Caf explained in its statement.

"The decision by political authorities contravenes Caf and African Nations Cup regulations."

Wouldn't that be similar to banning the Israelis from the Olympics because a bunch of their team members were killed in the 1972 attack in Munich?

Something seems very wrong about that decision.

For All Your Perp Shooting Needs

A new product for all your home defense needs (h/t Jawa):

Introduced at this year's Shooting Hunting and Outdoor Trade Show was this high-tech watch and gun combination. Apparently, the arguably ugly watch sends a wireless signal to the gun, a safety feature which reportedly prevents accidental shootings.

The gun-watch pair is manufactured by the German company Armatix GmbH and it sells for about $9,700.

The watch is handy because you can record the time of death of the perp you just shot.

The Blackberry Christian

After more than a year in office some in the media are noting that the Obama Family still doesn't have a Washington D.C. church:

If church attendance is one measure of a man's faith, then President Obama may appear to have lost some of his. The first family, once regular churchgoers, have publicly attended services in Washington just three times in the past year, by ABC News' count, even bypassing the pews on Christmas Day.

Obama quit Chicago's embattled Trinity United Church of Christ months before taking office in 2008 and has not formally joined a new one in his new hometown.

But sources familiar with the president's personal life say Obama remains a faithful Christian while in the White House, practicing his beliefs regularly in private with family and the aid of his BlackBerry.

I'm gonna cut him a little slack on this. Presidential movements are very complicated things and having him attend a church every week would be enormously disruptive to whatever congregation he chose. Everyone would have to go through metal detectors, special security equipment would have to be installed at the church, and frankly I think Obama doesn't think it's worth the hassle.

I tend to agree. There are other ways to worship rather than go to a specific building.

Obama Wants to Fix College Football

We have two wars going on right now, massive deficits, big unemployment numbers, and lots of other important stuff the Federal government could be working on, but somehow they've found time to try and fix the college football playoff scheme:

The Obama administration is considering several steps that would review the legality of the controversial Bowl Championship Series, the Justice Department said in a letter Friday to a senator who had asked for an antitrust review.

In the letter to Sen. Orrin Hatch, obtained by The Associated Press, Assistant Attorney General Ronald Weich wrote that the Justice Department is reviewing Hatch's request and other materials to determine whether to open an investigation into whether the BCS violates antitrust laws.

If you're looking for something that defines "things the federal government should leave along", this is it.

The Other Super Bowl Ad Controversy

We all know about the Focus on the Family ad featuring Tim Tebow that has pro-abortion feminists in a lather, but there's another ad that's getting attention too - from what is supposedly a gay dating website. However, this one looks pretty fishy:

Lorie Byrd makes an excellent point regarding an ad for a gay male dating service currently under review for approval to run during the Super Bowl - assuming a spot opens up.

I could imagine CBS approving a different ad for the same company however -- one with less "making out." I have a feeling the company would not want to submit such an ad though. It is much better for them to submit one with little chance of getting approved so they get lots of publicity at little cost. The racier the ad, the more publicity it will generate, especially in the current atmosphere where the discussion has been over the Focus on the Family pro-life Tebow ad.

Based upon Google and the sites 2009 - 2010 coyright notice, it looks as if the site is a brand new creation. Ican't find one news mention of the site before this. Advertising Age isn't impressed and thinks it's a scheme. Sure enough, the alleged business just launched this month. Imagine that.

Also, why there certainly are gay football fans, is this the business's key demographic? There've been several popular TV shows with prominent gay male characters, would they be interested in advertising on them? All in all, it does look like as much ploy, as serious ad play.

I'll bet these people don't have the $3 million bucks it would take to buy a 30-second ad, so they've submitted something sure to generate a lot of free publicity for them without risk of it actually airing (and costing them the money).

Clever marketing ploy if nothing else.

Nancy Pelosi is a Big Spender, and Apparently a Big Drinker

Pelosi has often demanded Air Force jets for her flights around the country and the world, and once airborne it's apparently PARTY TIME!

It reads like a dream order for a wild frat party: Maker's Mark whiskey, Courvoisier cognac, Johnny Walker Red scotch, Grey Goose vodka, E&J brandy, Bailey's Irish Crème, Bacardi Light rum, Jim Beam whiskey, Beefeater gin, Dewars scotch, Bombay Sapphire gin, Jack Daniels whiskey … and Corona beer.

But that single receipt makes up just part of the more than $101,000 taxpayers paid for "in-flight services" – including food and liquor, for House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's trips on Air Force jets over the last two years. That's almost $1,000 per week.

Documents obtained under the Freedom of Information Act by Judicial Watch, which investigates and prosecutes government corruption, show Pelosi incurred expenses of some $2.1 million for her use of Air Force jets for travel over that time.

"Speaker Pelosi has a history of wasting taxpayer funds with her boorish demands for military travel," Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton said today. "And these documents suggest the Speaker's congressional delegations are more about partying than anything else."

She acts like she's half-sloshed all the time - I guess this explains it.

The Obama Agenda is Being Undone by a Member of His Family

Who is that family member throwing a monkey wrench into the Obama political machine? Massachusetts Senator-Elect Scott Brown:

President Barack Obama can add a new name to the list of things he calls Scott Brown: cousin.

Genealogists at the New England Historic Genealogical Society said today that the president and the Republican senator-elect from Massachusetts are 10th cousins. Obama’s mother and Brown’s mother are both descendents of Richard Singletary of Haverhill, Mass., who died in 1687.

The Obama-Brown family tree can be seen here.

This isn’t the first time genealogists have tied the president to notable Republicans. During the 2008 presidential campaign it was reported that Obama and former Vice President Dick Cheney are 8th cousins.

The revelation led Obama’s spokesman to quip: “Every family has a black sheep,” and the vice president tojokingly refer to him as “my cousin Barack Obama.”

Obama's family tree has more twists and turns than a macramé project.

Political Quote of the Day

From conservative radio host Dennis Miller, commenting on Obama's petty tirade against the Supreme Court during the State of the Union address:

Obama chose to call out the only 9 guys in the room that did their homework in law school. And the rest who ended up settling for politics stood and and cheered it.

Obama also chose to pick on the only people in the room who couldn't fight back. How courageous. He expected the Justices to just sit there and take it, but just the slightest head nod and quiet comment from Alito turned his speech on its head. It is now the story of the speech and not anything else that was said during the 81 minutes.

An attorney adds this:

William Jacobson thinks it's a revealing moment: "The attack on the Supreme Court during the State of the Union was a window into Obama's divisive soul. I have posted numerous times before about Obama's need to identify and campaign against enemies. He did it during the campaign and he does it every day in office. Last night it was (mostly) the bankers and Wall Street (which donated more money to his campaign than to Republicans) and the Senate Republicans who were his target. But if those were the only attacks, it would have been merely another typical political speech. The attack on the Supreme Court exposes the intolerance of this President. The politician who campaigned and allegedly champions the rule of law actually has very little use for the rule of law when it does not advance his political agenda. Last night was an attempt at intimidation, a chance to work the referees on the sideline during a home game with the guarantee of crowd approval."

Are We Boring Obama?

Normally at this point in any of his previous jobs Obama was already running for the next one, and that kept him busy and occupied. Since the position of Supreme Ruler of the World is not currently available, and he's not a Catholic so he can't be Pope, there's no higher position for him to aspire to and Byron York thinks he's getting bored in the job:

This is about the time Barack Obama becomes bored with his job.

He's in his second year as president, and he's discovered that even with all the powers of office, he can't do everything he wants to do, like remake America. Doing stuff is hard. In the past, prosaic work has held little appeal for Obama, and it's prompted him to think about moving on.

Begin with his first serious job, as a community organizer in Chicago. Obama got a little done, but quickly became frustrated with small achievements. "He didn't see organizing making any significant changes in things," Jerry Kellman, the organizer who hired him, told me in 2008.

What Obama wanted was political power, and that is what sent him to Harvard Law School. "He was constantly thinking about his path to significance and power," another organizer, Mike Kruglik, told me. "He said, 'I need to go there [Harvard] to find out more about power. How do powerful people think? What kind of networks do they have? How do they connect to each other?'"

Out of law school, Obama did some civil rights work in Chicago before running successfully for the Illinois Senate in 1996. Almost immediately, Obama began "chafing ... at the limitations of legislating in Springfield," in the words of a Washington Post profile. Easily bored, and with a growing sense of dissatisfaction, he set his eyes on the House of Representatives, unsuccessfully challenging Rep. Bobby Rush in 2000. In 2002 he began his campaign for the U.S. Senate.

He won in 2004, but the Senate proved unsatisfying, too. By mid-2006, Majority Leader Harry Reid "sensed his frustration and impatience, had heard rumblings that Obama was already angling to head back home and take a shot at the Illinois governorship," write Mark Halperin and John Heilemann in the new book Game Change. Reid knew "Obama simply wasn't cut out to be a Senate lifer."

According to the book, the majority leader invited Obama to his office for a talk. "You're not going to go anyplace here," Reid told Obama. "I know that you don't like it, doing what you're doing." Reid suggested Obama run for president. Obama had been a senator for all of 18 months at the time. Soon after, he was off and running.

What drove Obama was not just ambition, although he is certainly ambitious. As he became frustrated in each job, Obama concluded that the problem was not having the power to do the things he wanted to do. So he sought a more powerful position.

Today he is in the most powerful position in the world. Yet he has spent a year struggling, and failing, to enact far-reaching makeovers of the American economy. So now, even in the Oval Office, there are signs that the old dissatisfaction is creeping back in.

There's more at the link. If he's not bored he's certainly frustrated. Running for president is much different than BEING president. As a candidate you can promise the moon and say anything you want to the slavering masses yearning to worship at your feet. But once you're in the office it's time to perform, and Obama isn't performing.

Osama bin Laden Rants About Global Warming

How do you know when a public figure has gone completely around the bend? When they start ranting about global warming:

Al-Qaida leader Osama bin Laden has called for the world to boycott American goods and the U.S. dollar, blaming the United States and other industrialized countries for global warming, according to a new audiotape released Friday.

In the tape, broadcast in part on Al-Jazeera television, bin Laden warned of the dangers of climate change and says that the way to stop it is to bring "the wheels of the American economy" to a halt.

He blamed Western industrialized nations for hunger, desertification and floods across the globe, and called for "drastic solutions" to global warming, and "not solutions that partially reduce the effect of climate change."

Bin Laden has mentioned climate change and global warning in past messages, but the latest tape was his first dedicated to the topic. The speech, which included almost no religious rhetoric, could be an attempt by the terror leader to give his message an appeal beyond Islamic militants.

The al-Qaida leader also targeted the U.S. economy in the recording, calling for a boycott of American products and an end to the dollar's domination as a world currency.

"We should stop dealings with the dollar and get rid of it as soon as possible," he said. "I know that this has great consequences and grave ramifications, but it is the only means to liberate humanity from slavery and dependence on America."

I'm not sure what OBL has to complain about. Obama is pretty much following his guidelines and trying to destroy the U.S. economy as fast as he can.

Dems Offer a Lame Plan to Divide-and-Conquer the GOP

This will probably end up being pretty funny to watch as the Dems try to pull this off:

During this year's U.S. Senate races, it will be Democrats raising the issue of President Obama's eligibility to occupy the Oval Office.

Politico reported Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee chief Robert Menendez is distributing a memo to U.S. Senate campaign offices stating Democrats need to demand that their opponents answer a series of questions, including, "Do you believe that Barack Obama is a U.S. citizen?"

The report said Menendez wants to use the questions to "frame" opponents and "drive a wedge" between moderates belonging to the GOP and those who have adopted the tea party standards advocating limited government, lower taxes, fewer regulations and more freedom for Americans.

The Democrat memo said, "Given the pressure Republican candidates feel from the extreme right in their party, there is a critical – yet time-sensitive – opportunity for Democratic candidates.

"We have a finite window when Republicans candidates will feel susceptible to the extremists in their party. Given the urgent nature of this dynamic, we suggest an aggressive effort to get your opponents on the record."

The Politico report listed the following questions for Democrat to ask of Republican opponents:

-Do you believe that Barack Obama is a U.S. citizen?

-Do you think the 10th Amendment bars Congress from issuing regulations like minimum health care coverage standards?

-Do you think programs like Social Security and Medicare represent socialism and should never have been created in the first place?

-Do you think President Obama is a socialist?

-Do you think America should return to a gold standard?

The memo instructs that if a GOP candidate says no, make his or her "primary opponent or conservative activists know it."

Here's where this is going to go wrong - the Dems think the GOP is a collection of special interest groups like the Dems are, where something that appeals to one group can completely turn another group away. The GOP generally doesn't operate that way.

Yes, we have a variety of folks in the party and some are more devoted to one issue than another, but we rarely have issues that make it impossible for one faction to vote with another. This plan assumes that if a candidate doesn't follow the extreme right line that those voters will go elsewhere. Not likely. Sure, some may be more enthused about a libertarian or conservative party candidate enough to vote for them, but not enough to make a difference.

And in a year where the very word "democrat" has almost become an expletive, someone's stand on the issue of Obama's birth certificate or whether we need a gold standard won't matter one single bit.

It's Time to Put Sacramento Out of Our Misery

It's bad enough having brain-dead droids running Washington, but we have another whole collection of crazies in Sacramento:

The California Senate approved creating a government-run health care system for the nation's most populous state on Thursday, ignoring a veto threat from Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger.

Supporters said it is time for state legislatures to take up the debate as the Obama Administration's national health care proposal falters in Congress.

"If it's not to be done at the national level, let us take the lead," said state Sen. Christine Kehoe, D-San Diego.

The move in California comes after Massachusetts voters changed the calculus in Congress by electing a Republican to the Senate who opposes the pending plan.

Democrats are the majority in both houses of the California Legislature. The 40-member state Senate passed the single-payer plan on a 22-14 vote, sending it to the Assembly. One Democrat voted against the measure.

Schwarzenegger promised to veto the proposal, as he has two similar plans that previously reached his desk. Spokeswoman Rachel Arrezola cited the state's massive budget cuts and looming $20 billion deficit in arguing the state cannot afford to shift to a single-payer health care system.

"Any elected official who thinks it's a good idea to strap the state with tens of billions of dollars from a government-run health care system is clearly not in touch with what voters need and deserve," Arrezola said.

Boy, if that isn't an argument for a part time legislature, nothing is. These people are so sadly out-of-touch with reality that they should be committed - except the mental institutions in this state won't take them because they'd be a bad influence on the other inmates.

Every Democrat - EVERY DEMOCRAT - must be voted out at the first opportunity before they completely destroy the country and the state.

iPad?

Did Apple know about this when they chose the name iPad for their newest tech toy?

The Squeamish Republic

Jonathan Chait has a good item at The New Republic on those libs who are getting the vapors over Justice Sam Alito's sotto voce criticism of Obama during the State of the Union speech:

Last year, Joe "You Lie!" Wilson earned the scorn of the establishment. Last night, Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito came under criticism. His crime? Being caught on camera expressing disagreement in response to criticism from the president. This emerged as a minor theme of the cable talking head wrapups, and the New York Times reported, "Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr., breaking with decorum at such events, shook his head and appeared to mouth the words, 'No, it’s not true.'"

Have we really gotten so squeamish? I haven't seen a convincing explanation as to why it's so awful for Republicans to disagree with a presidential speech. The answer is "decorum," but to me, decorum suggests giving latitude to the opposition. The State of the Union, remember, was originally delivered elsewhere in order to avoid the appearance of a president dictating to Congress. Forcing Congress and the Supreme Court to defer to the president as a ceremonial head of state, rather than the head of a co-equal branch of government, runs counter to the deepest spirit of our form of government.

Moreover, it represents the Washington establishment's prudish aversion to debate. I can see why a loud outburst might be objectionable -- though I'd prefer a feisty back-and-forth, like in Great Britain -- but to scold Alito merely for moving his lips in such a way as to show disapproval seems to be taking the prudishness to a new extreme. Yes, he's a Supreme Court Justice and we're supposed to believe he has no political beliefs or agenda, but in the post Bush v. Gore world it's a little late for that.

Besides, as Linda Greenhouse reports, Alito was right. Shouldn't that count for something?

Good stuff, and from a liberal, no less.

And Ann Althouse absolutely devastates liberal Glenn Greenwald's criticism of Alito. It's a thing of beauty.

Looks Like No Terror Trials for NYC

New York City doesn't want them and most Americans think terror trials in the United States are just plain foolish:

"White House orders Justice Department to look for other places to hold 9/11 terror trial."

How about Gitmo?

UPDATE: Major Garrett tweets, "Military charges against 9/11 plotters have been dropped, ruling out military commissions. No timeline yet to resolve talks on alt NYC site." So I guess Gitmo's out.

Good luck figuring this one out.

My Candidate for Mission Viejo City Council - Dave Leckness

UPDATE 2/3/10: The recall passed by only 19 votes and Dave Leckness won the City Council seat.

Next Tuesday (Groundhog's Day) we'll be having a special election in Mission Viejo with only two questions:

1. Should Lance MacLean (the current mayor) be recalled?
2. Who should replace him if he is?

There are a variety of good reasons why MacLean should be removed. I've had very little contact with city politics over the years, but it's become obvious that the council majority that includes MacLean has gotten badly out-of-touch with the voters. They voted themselves lifetime medical coverage if they serve three terms (at an estimated cost of somewhere around $300,000 per person), and in 2008 wasted another $300,000 on a Rose Parade float that served no purpose whatsoever.

MacLean has also had some personal issues with anger management, and if you really want to know all the gory details you can peruse the various posts in the Mission Viejo Dispatch or the Mission Viejo Watchdogs.

I do remember the election in 2002 when MacLean and Trish Kelley were elected and a couple of old guard people who had become dangerously detached from the citizens were booted. On election day I drove past the intersection of La Paz and Muirlands near my home and saw MacLean and Kelley in the ARCO station with campaign signs, waving to the passing commuters. The next morning, after they'd both won, they were back in the ARCO station with signs thanking the voters for electing them. I thought that was a classy thing to do. Too bad they've fallen into the bad habits of their predecessors.

As a result, I'll be voting "Yes" on the recall question.

So, who should replace MacLean? My vote will go to Dave Leckness, a local businessman who I've known for most of the 25 years he's run his Kwik Kopy shop across from Saddleback College.

For years Dave

printed lots of stuff for the bank I worked for, and he also did nearly everything I ever needed for The Crimson River Quartet.

With 25 years of experience as a business owner, employer and taxpayer, he's already done more for the city than most of the local activists combined. He's seen firsthand what it takes to operate in this city, and we need people like that in government.

And, he's a fun guy. Believe it or not, that's pretty much the biggest criticism his detractors have offered. He's a fun guy.

I haven't been in his shop for awhile, but when I used to go in there he'd see me and yell out "Rick Moore is in the house!" Every now and then I'd hear my music playing on his in-store CD player. He enjoys life and has a quirky personality. Given the robots that seem to hold most governmental positions these days, he'd be a refreshing change. I'm going to vote for him.

Dave has a YouTube video which is quintessentially Dave. Here you go:

Animatronic Phil

Next Tuesday is Groundhog's Day, the day the great rodent is plucked from his burrow and exposed to the sunlight. It made for a great Bill Murray movie, and they have quite a spectacle in Pennsylvania, but the folks at PETA needed some attention so here you go:

Next week, Punxsutawney Phil will make his annual appearance to decide whether we will experience another six months of winter or whether spring has finally arrived. However, PETA has other plans — they have demanded that Phil be replaced this year with a robot. You got that right — a robot. According to the Associated Press:

People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals says it’s unfair to keep the animal in captivity and subject him to the huge crowds and bright lights that accompany tens of thousands of revelers each Feb. 2 in Punxsutawney, a tiny borough about 65 miles northeast of Pittsburgh. PETA is suggesting the use of an animatronic model.

However, it doesn’t look like Phil is going anywhere soon. According to event organizers, the groundhog is “treated better than the average child in Pennsylvania” and even receives an annual checkup from the Pennsylvania Department of Agriculture.

Now, if a "Phil" was sacrificed to the gods every year on February 2nd PETA might be onto something, but it sounds like the creature is pretty well taken care of. And with all those movie residuals coming in, he'll be in better shape than most PETA members.

The Guests Who Weren't Honored

It's become a tradition, a somewhat silly one in my opinion, to invite prominent Americans who have done something significant to sit in the presidential box for the State of the Union and get a shoutout from the president sometime during the speech. A number of people are noting today that two of the guests last night received no mention at all:

Every president since Ronald Reagan has used the State of the Union as an opportunity to honor some distinguished Americans (and, occasionally, foreign friends of America). It's become a tradition for the First Lady to share her guest box with a few mostly-ordinary people who've done something extraordinary.

Reagan started it with a man who, upon seeing an airliner crash into a freezing river, dove in and pulled a passenger to safety. Other notable guests have included entrepeneurs, soldiers, foreign dignataries, and sports stars.

Last night was no exception. Obama's special guests were Officers Kimberly Munley and Mark Todd, the two heroic cops who stopped the Fort Hood shooter

We know this because that's who was announced to be the guests, and viewers might have caught glimpses of police uniforms during the cutaways to the first lady for her reactions.

Because President Obama didn't bother to give them a "shout out" during the speech.

Maybe the officers in question asked the president to not single them out, not to draw attention to them, not to invite the Congress (and the nation) to take a moment to honor their heroism on that day when an army major (and, by an astonishingly unpredictable coincidence, a Muslim who'd been in close contact with a radical Islamist cleric) opened fire and killed 13 troops.

But I find it far more likely that if they didn't want attention that much, they'd have respectfully declined the invitation. I find it a bit more plausible that President Obama -- who made so much of the speech about himself, as it had more "I's" than Argus or a Lovecraftian monstrosity or Simpsons mutated animal -- simply figured that being in His presence was honor enough, and he didn't even think of sharing the limelight of his first State of the Union address.

Anyway, officers, hope you had a good time last night, and got to do the tourist thing in DC. 'Cuz you certainly didn't get the honor you were due from the Chief Executive. If he'd said something nice about you, he might have had to drop one of the dozen or so "blame Bush" lines he salted into his speech.

Just another in a long line of tone deaf moments in last night's speech.

Auto Bailout Headlines of the Day

From Drudge:

A PROFIT! FORD earns $2.7 billion in 2009...

TOYOTA Owners Frustrated Over Massive Recall...

GM to pay $1,000 to TOYOTA owners to switch brands...

Recalled TOYOTA Slams Into Busy Laundromat...

I don't think $1,000 is going to be enough to get Toyota owners to switch to GM. For most of owners they'd have to GIVE them a GM car to make them switch.

Atheists Go Postal

Atheists are upset that the US Postal Service plans to honor Mother Teresa with a commemorative stamp:

An atheist organization is blasting the U.S. Postal Service for its plan to honor Mother Teresa with a commemorative stamp, saying it violates postal regulations against honoring "individuals whose principal achievements are associated with religious undertakings."

The Freedom from Religion Foundation is urging its supporters to boycott the stamp -- and also to engage in a letter-writing campaign to spread the word about what it calls the "darker side" of Mother Teresa.

The stamp -- set to be released on Aug. 26, which would have been Mother Teresa's 100th birthday -- will recognize the 1979 Nobel Peace Prize winner for her humanitarian work, the Postal Service announced last month.

"Noted for her compassion toward the poor and suffering, Mother Teresa, a diminutive Roman Catholic nun and honorary U.S. citizen, served the sick and destitute of India and the world for nearly 50 years," the Postal Service said in a press release. "Her humility and compassion, as well as her respect for the innate worth and dignity of humankind, inspired people of all ages and backgrounds to work on behalf of the world’s poorest populations."

But Freedom from Religion Foundation spokeswoman Annie Laurie Gaylor says issuing the stamp runs against Postal Service regulations.

"Mother Teresa is principally known as a religious figure who ran a religious institution. You can't really separate her being a nun and being a Roman Catholic from everything she did," Gaylor told FoxNews.com.

Postal Service spokesman Roy Betts expressed surprise at the protest, given the long list of previous honorees with strong religious backgrounds, including Malcolm X, the former chief spokesman for the Nation of Islam, and the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., a Baptist minister and co-founder of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference.

"In fact we honored Father Flanagan in 1986 for his humanitarian work. This has nothing to do with religion or faith," Betts told FoxNews.com.

Gaylor said the atheist group opposed Father Flanagan's stamp but not those for King and Malcolm X, because she said they were known for their civil rights activities, not for their religion.

Martin Luther King "just happened to be a minister," and "Malcolm X was not principally known for being a religious figure," she said.

"And he's not called Father Malcolm X like Mother Teresa. I mean, even her name is a Roman Catholic honorific."

Gaylor said Mother Teresa infused Catholicism into her secular honors — including an "anti-abortion rant" during her Nobel Prize acceptance speech — and that even her humanitarian work was controversial.

"There was criticism by the end of her life that she turned what was a tiny charity into an extremely wealthy charity that had the means to provide better care than it did," Gaylor said. "...There's this knee jerk response that everything she did was humanitarian, and I think many people would differ that what she was doing was to promote religion, and what she wanted to do was baptize people before they die, and that doesn't have a secular purpose for a stamp."

Bring out Mother Teresa's "darker side"? Yeah, that's how you bring people around to your way of thinking.

Supreme Court Historian: Justices Might Not Show Up at Next Year's SOTU

Didn't I say something like that just a little while ago?

A noted Supreme Court historian who “enthusiastically” voted for President Obama in November 2008 today called President Obama’s criticism of the Supreme Court in his State of the Union address last night “really unusual” and said he wouldn’t be surprised if no Supreme Court Justices attend the speech next year.

“It was really unusual in my mind to see the president going after the Supreme Court in such a forum,” said author and Law Professor Lucas Powe, the Anne Green Regents Chair in Law, and a Professor of Government at the University of Texas-Austin School of Law. “I’m willing to bet a lot of money there will be no Supreme Court justice at the next State of the Union speech.”

Added Professor Powe, who clerked for Supreme Court Justice William Douglas, “you don’t go to be insulted. I can’t see the Justices wanting to be there and be insulted by the president.” His opinion has nothing to do with animus towards the President, for whom Powe said he voted enthusiastically.

I'm guessing the more liberal members will still show up, and for that matter probably the Chief Justice too since he probably wants to stay above the fray, but wouldn't it be something if they all just decided to knock off early that night?

The 2010 Senate Map

Karl Rove takes a look at the 2010 Senate elections and sees some big changes:

A much bigger version is available at this link. Bottom line - Dems lose 8 seats but retain control with 51 members of the Dem caucus (both independents will likely caucus with the Dems).

This assumes that both California and New York stay in Dem hands, but I still think Barbara "Dumb-as-a-Box-of-Rocks" is still very beatable. Gillibrand in New York also looks weak if the GOP can come up with a good candidate. And although Rove gives Wisconsin solidly to the Dems, that position could be a little shaky too.

Justice Alito's Quiet Comment Now Shouting Down Obama's Speech

And the Democrats are helping make it the story of the night, burying anything else Obama might have said:

The political furor over President Barack Obama's high profile rebuke of a recent Supreme Court campaign finance ruling escalated Thursday as Democrats pounded the high court decision.

Democrats rallied around Obama the day after the president committed a rare breach of political etiquette, criticizing the controversial ruling in his State of the Union address as members of the high court sat only a few feet away.

The court's 5-4 decision, issued last week, removed long-established legal barriers preventing corporations from spending unlimited sums of money to influence voters in political campaigns. Democrats fear the decision has given the traditionally pro-business GOP a powerful new advantage.

"With all due deference to separation of powers, last week the Supreme Court reversed a century of law that I believe will open the floodgates for special interests - including foreign corporations - to spend without limit in our elections," Obama told a packed House of Representatives chamber Wednesday night.

"I don't think American elections should be bankrolled by America's most powerful interests, or worse, by foreign entities. They should be decided by the American people. And I'd urge Democrats and Republicans to pass a bill that helps to correct some of these problems."

Justice Samuel Alito, part of the court's conservative majority, could be seen apparently frowning and quietly mouthing the words "not true."

Supreme Court justices rarely express any hint of emotion or opinion during the president's State of the Union speech.

Alito certainly as lots of reasons to dislike Obama. After all the president voted to filibuster Alito's nomination during his brief few moments in the Senate.

Obama's comments were typical of the petulant, immature man-child that he is. If he doesn't get his way on EVERY issue, he pouts. Last night when Republicans refused to fall for an applause line he put in the speech just for them he was visibly angry. He got used to adulation and worship during the campaign and the adjustment to reality has been hard for him. This whole episode was very banana republic - trying to humiliate your political opposition in public.

Republican presidents have had plenty of disagreements with the Supreme Court, but none of them would ever have considered calling them out during a State of the Union, nor would their fellow GOP members have stood and applauded such treatment as the Democrats did last night.

It won't happen, but I would love to see Chief Justice John Roberts issue a letter to both the White House and the Congress expressing his disappointment at the antics of the president and the Democrats in Congress, and reminding them that the Supreme Court is a co-equal branch of the U.S. government. A little civics lesson, not to mention a civility lesson, is needed.

And there's another reason why Obama's tirade and the Dem reaction was foolish - Justices are humans, not machines. While they may pledge their allegiance to a strict following of the law, their human emotions come into play as well and the sights and sounds from last night will stick with them - especially the next time some liberal hot button case comes before them. They may not be able to go out and make speeches denouncing their opposition, but they can stick it to them via their opinions and votes.

I wonder how many justices will appear for Obama's next State of the Union? If I were on the court I think I'd find something else to do that night.

Hillary Watch 2012

A few weeks ago, before the Massachusetts Massacre (in fact before anyone serious thought the GOP could win Ted Kennedy's seat), I wrote this in a piece in which I warned people to keep an eye on Hillary:

Here's a scenario that I think may become more realistic as the year unfolds. Should Obama and the Dems continue to slide, and especially if the Dems take a bloodbath in November, I look for Hillary to resign the Secretary of State's job sometime in early 2011. Nobody will believe she wants to "spend more time with her family" so she'll have to come up with another excuse. In reality, she'll be setting the table for a primary challenge to Obama in 2012.

And she'll be very popular. She barely lost the nomination in 2008 and given Obama's performance and her work as Secretary of State, her star probably shines brighter today than ever. For one thing, she hasn't been in the news all that much and we haven't had to listen to her. That's gotta help.

So, with Hillary out of the Secretary of State's office, who will Obama choose to replace her? Here's where the scenario becomes even more interesting - Joe Biden. Biden's many years on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee will be cited as the main reason to move him to SoS, though the real reason will have more to do with the fact that Biden will be a drag on the 2012 ticket. He's not seen as a viable future candidate for 2016 and frankly people are a little bit afraid that something will happen to Obama and we'll get stuck with President Biden.

This will give Obama and his political crew the opportunity to choose his potential successor, someone younger and more attractive as a 2016 candidate. Confirmation could be a bit problematic should the GOP pick up a bunch of Senate seats this year, but I don't know if they will have the stomach to filibuster a vice presidential nominee.

Meanwhile Hillary will be the Ted Kennedy of 2012, challenging the sitting president the way Kennedy challenged Carter in 1980 - only she'll win. The nomination, that is, but not necessarily the White House. That will depend on both the GOP nominee and voter feelings about Democrats in general. After four years of unbridled liberalism the voters may not be willing to take a chance that Hillary will be any better. Her history certainly suggests she just as much a lefty as Obama, though possibly more competent.

Keep your eyes on Hillary - she could be the early warning sign of what's to come for Obama and the Democrats.

Lookie what I found today:

The ongoing decline in the president's approval ratings has more than a few Democrats concerned. The Democratic defeats in the Virginia and New Jersey gubernatorial elections and the Massachusetts Senate race have a number of them running scared, in much the same way that the party's poor performance in 1978 helped propel Sen. Edward M. Kennedy forward to challenge incumbent President Jimmy Carter in 1980.

The chatter has increased in recent days about Clinton leaving the cabinet sometime in the first term, likely over some matter of principle, so that she can position herself to challenge Obama in 2012. Perhaps it is just wishful thinking on the part of those Democrats who have already grown tired of Obama. What is true is that Clinton can still mobilize the political infrastructure necessary to mount an effective challenge to the sitting president. A primary challenge against a sitting president whose approval numbers are above 50 percent and one mounted against an incumbent who is below 50 percent are two very different things, a fact of which the Clinton political team is surely aware.

I'm tellin' you, it's gonna happen.

The Speech Obama Should Have Given

It was offered by Rush Limbaugh during yesterdays's show:

"So if Obama really is serious, here are some suggestions for a post-Massachusetts, post-New Jersey, post-Virginia 'State of Obama' speech. Defund ACORN. Prosecute voter intimidation. Fire all the czars and end the practice of hiring them. Propose a bill that actually cuts spending 2% every year for the next ten years and veto every spending bill until the requested bill is passed. List your proposed cuts to achieve the 2% reduction in spending every year. Across-the-board tax cuts, individual two levels: 10% up to a hundred thousand dollars a year, 25% for over that amount. Corporate tax rate: 15%. Repeal the Alternative Minimum Tax, the death tax, and capital gains taxes. Just repeal them. Privatize General Motors and Chrysler, and that includes getting the unions out of ownership. End TARP and the slush fund. Cut off all slush fund and Porkulus spending that has not been spent. Lift all restrictions prevalent in interstate health insurance and real tort reform, and endorse Charles Krauthammer's proposal to scrap the current medical malpractice system. Repeal Executive Order 10988, which gives federal workers the right to join unions and bargain collectively. Reserve constitutional rights for Americans: Treat terrorists as enemy combatants and not common criminals and US citizens, and return the right to interrogate those that attack us to the FBI and the CIA. And last, but not least, keep Guantanamo Bay open for business because we're going to need it. It's very simple. Those are my suggestions if you want to fix what Obama's done wrong. I know it's a pipe dream and it isn't gonna happen."

And, of course, it didn't happen. The speech is taking a beating from most in conservative circles, and I don't hear a lot of joy coming from the liberals either.

The Nation Demands More Obama

At least that's what Obama thinks (from Jonah Goldberg):

There's a story of an ex hausted tenor at La Scala who, facing repeated cries of "Encore," responded that he couldn't go on. A man rose in the audience to say, "You'll keep singing until you get it right."

That seems to be the defining principle of the Obama administration -- whose response to every problem, every setback, every hiccup and challenge has been, simply, "more Obama."

Indeed, for people who aren't sticklers for political jargon, it will be a shock that last night was Obama's first State of the Union Address, since it was his third formal address to a joint session of Congress. Yet for all of the political déjà vu, what was most surprising last night was the degree to which Obama delivered even more of the same.

Washington graybeards and pundits have been insisting that Obama needs to "start over," "reboot" and "tack to the middle" after Scott Brown's win in Massachusetts. But Obama's response last night was to recommit himself to the agenda that has gotten him in so much trouble.

In fairness, the president took a French-bath of Clintonism before he took to his beloved TelePrompTer. He doused himself with the scent of the deficit-fighter and trade-promoter. He unveiled a slew of small, easy, applause-gathering proposals and populist appeals that he knows will go nowhere.

He also indulged in a lot of feel-your-pain pathos, trying to connect with the real Americans suffering from the recession and the misdeeds of a "Washington" that Obama seems to think is run by someone other than him.

But the eau-de-Clinton couldn't mask the stench -- and Obama, in his supreme arrogance, didn't really seem to care.

There was no "pivot to the center," no serious accounting for the Massachusetts miracle or his misfortunes. Instead, there was an innumerate, inaccurate and distinctly unpresidential whine -- blaming George W. Bush for nearly all of his problems (leaving out, among other things, that the Democrats have been controlling Congress and crafting budgets since 2006).

The White House insists that the new wave of populism created by Democratic governance is, in fact, the same populist wave that carried Obama to victory in 2008. In other words, Obama was elected president by the backlash against his own presidency.

This novel theory allows Obama to stick to his view that there's nothing wrong with his health-care plan, and anyone who feels differently hasn't heard or understood the president's explanations.

So, he not only implored Democrats not to "run for the hills" on the health-reform bill, but insisted that as "temperatures cool," hot-tempered opponents will, of course, realize they were wrong about the bill.

Obama began his presidency insisting that government is the answer to our problems. A year later, he still believes that the era of big government is upon us.

There's more at the link. The self-absorption of this president apparently knows no bounds. He's convinced himself that the voters don't like his plans because they don't understand them, not because they disagree with them.

Last night's speech may give him a temporary bump, but even political expert Larry Sabato thinks it'll be gone in 48 hours.

A SOTU Wrap-up

This piece by James Capreta seems to summarize the State of the Union speech quite nicely:

Quite literally, all talk and no action.

The president says he won’t walk away from health-care reform and he won’t pass onto the next generation a mountain of federal debt.

But there’s no plan to achieve either of these goals.

On health care, he offered nothing new. He is sticking with the plan the public has quite plainly rejected. According to a recent CNN poll, a full 70 percent of Americans want Congress either to start over entirely or to drop the subject altogether. That’s because they recognize that the plan the president has been pushing so aggressively for the better part of a year would be a disaster, for the quality of American medicine and for the nation’s budget outlook. The president claims the bill would cut the deficit, but that’s based on completely implausible assumptions. The bill would stand up another runaway entitlement program, paid for with offsets that will never hold up over time and cost-control ideas that are weak and largely meaningless.

And so what does the president now propose to do to get his signature initiative out of the political ditch it’s in? Nothing — which means it will remain there.

On the budget, the president did his very best to look and sound determined and serious. And indeed the problem is serious. With realistic assumptions, the federal budget deficit is likely to remain over $1 trillion every year for as far as the eye can see. Over the next twenty years, spending on Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid will increase by about 5 percent of GDP.

What’s the president’s response to this looming budget and entitlement crisis? A budget freeze on a small subset of discretionary appropriations and a debt commission that is a transparent attempt to avoid making any difficult choices himself. He is the president of the United States. If he wanted to tackle the budget deficit, he could offer a plan to do so. But he has chosen instead to try to look like a leader without offering any genuine leadership to solve the problem. The public will see right through this, of course.

All State of the Union addresses descend into applause lines and laundry lists that are forgotten almost as soon as the words are spoken. But this speech stands out for its lack of authentic substance. If the president really wanted to make progress on health care and the budget deficit, he could have helped himself tonight. But he chose instead to posture for political advantage, which means he very likely will end his second year as president with almost nothing to show for his time in office.

He'll have two things to show at the end of his 2nd year - a Republican House and Republican Senate.

The AP also fact-checked the speech and found a lot of problems.

Sports Headline of the Day

From Fox News:

NBA Suspends Arenas for Rest of Season

From this point on they'll be playing all their games at elementary school playgrounds.

State of the Union Commentary of the Night

From Chris Matthews, once known to get a "tingle up his leg" when he saw Obama, had this to say about the president:

"I Forgot He Was Black Tonight"

I tried to forget he was president but it didn't work.

John Roberts is Now Looking Forward to Presiding at Obama's Impeachment

The president unwisely slaps at the Supreme Court during the State of the Union speech:

With the black-robed justices of the Supreme Court sitting not far away, President Obama took aim at a recent court decision which said that corporations could spend as much as they wanted to sway voters in federal elections.

“Last week, the Supreme Court reversed a century of law to open the floodgates for special interests -- including foreign companies -- to spend without limit in our elections,” Obama said tonight. “Well, I don’t think American elections should be bankrolled by America’s most powerful interests, and worse, by foreign entities. They should be decided by the American people, and that’s why I’m urging Democrats and Republicans to pass a bill that helps to right this wrong.”Yes, let's pass some other unconstitutional laws to replace the ones the Supremes threw out.

Petty, very petty.

UPDATE: Sam Alito has a "YOU LIE!" moment:

POLITICO's Kasie Hunt, who's in the House chamber, reports that Justice Samuel Alito mouthed the words "not true" when Obama criticized the Supreme Court's campaign finance decision.

" Last week, the Supreme Court reversed a century of law to open the floodgates for special interests – including foreign corporations – to spend without limit in our elections," Obama said. "Well I don’t think American elections should be bankrolled by America’s most powerful interests, or worse, by foreign entities. They should be decided by the American people, and that’s why I’m urging Democrats and Republicans to pass a bill that helps to right this wrong."

The shot of the black-robed Supreme Court justices, stone faced, was priceless.

Chuck Schumer stood up behind the justices and clapped vigorously while Alito shook his head and quietly mouthed his discontent.

Political Quote of the Day

From former Senator and presidential candidate Fred Thompson (h/t Rick Jensen)

"I can't wait to watch tonight's State of the Union to find out what George Bush is doing wrong."

Stand Up, Sit Down, Clap, Clap Clap

We are about to see unfold in the House Chamber one of the silliest annual events in American politics - the State of the Union Address. It is required by the Constitution that the President provide Congress with a report on the "state of the union" each year, though that report does not need to be in the form of a speech to a joint session. However, that has become the norm, especially in the age of TV.

What makes this spectacle all the sillier is the kabuki theater that goes on throughout the speech. There's the standing ovation when the president is welcomed into the chamber. Another standing O when he's formally introduced by the Speaker. And then as the speech drones on the floor of the House begins to look like the playing table of a Whack-a-Mole game (or perhaps we should call it "Whack-a Pol"). One side jumps up when they hear something they like, then the other side, then everybody...ad infinitum. The media keeps track of how many standing O's the president got and whether one side or the other was particularly enthusiastic or glum.

I don't think we'll hear another "YOU LIE!" shouted from the floor, though I'm sure there will be many moments during the speech when that will be completely appropriate. That certainly will take some of the drama out of the whole thing.

If I were a congressman or Senator I'd make an announcement prior to the speech something like this:

"If you watch me during the speech here's what you won't see - standing, clapping, or shouting. I'll stand and applaud when the president is introduced at the beginning of the speech out of respect for the office, and I'll stand and applaud when it's done (and probably with more enthusiasm since it will finally be over). However, in-between the start and finish I plan to remain seated listening to the speech and will not participate in the silly stand-up, sit-down, clap, clap, clap nonsense that always characterizes these things. I'd advise my colleagues to do the same, though I doubt they'll take my advice."

I don't care what party a guy is in, any congressman or Senator who said that would get my vote.

SOTU Bingo

Courtesy of the Jawa Report, you can play Barack Bingo during the State of the Union Address:

If you need a larger version, just click on the link above.

State of the Union Cartoon of the Day

Seen on Facebook:

It's Not 1994 Again, It's 1974 Again

Ahh, 1974. I graduated from high school that year and President Nixon resigned and handed the Oval Office to Gerald Ford. Busy year. Also, a very bad year for Republicans. The GOP moniker was pure poison after the Watergate mess.

Michael Barone is looking at the political environment today and doesn't see the parallels to 1994 that most people are seeing (the year the GOP blew the Dems out of power in both houses of Congress). Barone is seeing 1974 only with the parties reversed:

The victory of a Democrat in the special election to fill Vice President Gerald Ford's House seat in February 1974 was a clear indication that the bottom had fallen out for the Republican Party. Brown's victory last week looks as if something similar has happened to the Democratic Party.

Many people ask me whether the Democrats are in as much trouble as they were in 1994. The numbers suggest they are in much deeper trouble, at least at this moment. Back in 1994 I wrote the first article in a nonpartisan publication suggesting that the Republicans had a serious chance to win the 40 seats necessary for a majority in the House. That article appeared in U.S. News & World Report in July 1994.

This year political handicapper Charlie Cook is writing in January, six months earlier in the cycle, that Republicans once again would capture the 40 seats they need for a majority if the House elections were held today. I concur. The generic vote question -- which party's candidates would you vote for in House elections -- is at least as favorable to Republicans as it was in the last month before the election in 1994.

Nothing is entirely static in politics, and opinions could change....

But I sense that something more fundamental is at stake. Obama in his first year adopted the priorities of what pundit Joel Kotkin, a Democrat himself, calls the "gentry liberals."

It's early yet, but the Dems have shown no signs of learning from their mistakes so I imagine they'll continue down the road toward their electoral destruction.

Political Headline of the Day

From RedState:

Things are so bad there is a betting pool on which DEMOCRAT screams ‘You Lie!’ tonight.

There could be a whole bunch of them.

And if they don't, this guy might:

Washington (CNN) – Congressman Joe Wilson will deliver the first ever live response to a State of the Union via Facebook on Wednesday.

The South Carolina Republican is most known for blurting out “You lie!” during President Obama’s last speech to a joint session of Congress. Wilson will deliver an address live on his Facebook page approximately 30 minutes after Obama concludes the State of the Union.

“Just like you and I would talk with our friends through the Internet [Wilson] is going to sit there with a Mac Book and camera on it and talk directly with people across the country,” Wilson campaign manager Dustin Olson told CNN.

Oregon Goes Over to the Dark Side

I guess enough liberal Californians finally moved to Oregon to change an anti-tax state to a "tax-the-rich" state:

The Oregonian reports that Oregon voters yesterday bucked decades of anti-tax sentiment "raising taxes on corporations and the wealthy to prevent further erosion of public schools and other state services."

"The double-barreled victory is the first voter-approved statewide income tax increase since the 1930s. Other states, facing similar budget woes, are watching the outcome closely because Oregon, after all, is a state that capped property taxes and locked a surplus tax rebate program into the constitution."

And now Oregonians can look forward to a declining employment base just like California! Businesses that can will look for alternative locations to avoid the higher taxes.

I wonder what the tax rates are in British Columbia?

Toyotal Recall

That's the title of the Fox News piece detailing the major woes being experienced by car sales leader Toyota:

The faulty gas pedals that prompted Toyota to suspend U.S. sales of eight of its most popular models — including the Camry, America's best-selling car — are also in its vehicles sold in Europe, an official with the automaker said Wednesday.

Toyota Motor Corp. announced late Tuesday the unprecedented sales suspension to fix gas pedals that could stick and cause acceleration without warning. Last week, Toyota issued a recall for the same eight models involving 2.3 million vehicles.

Toyota is also halting production at six North American car-assembly plants, beginning the week of Feb. 1, and gave no date on when production could restart.

The problem could spread to Europe, where a similar accelerator part is being used, said Toyota spokeswoman Ririko Takeuchi, while declining to give the number of vehicles affected. The company was studying possible responses, including a recall, she said.

I put 130,000 miles on a 2003 Camry and never had the slightest problem with the accelerator (except for the fact I tended to stand too hard on it). Lucky for them they can still sell the hybrids because everyone knows those things can't accelerate fast enough to get out of their own way.

To Boldly Not Go Where Man Has Gone Before

It looks like Obama has plans to turn NASA into the most expensive global warming research unit on earth. And on earth is where it will stay because they won't be conducting space missions anymore:

NASA's plans to return astronauts to the moon are dead. So are the rockets being designed to take them there — that is, if President Barack Obama gets his way.

When the White House releases his budget proposal Monday, there will be no money for the Constellation program that was supposed to return humans to the moon by 2020. The troubled and expensive Ares I rocket that was to replace the space shuttle to ferry humans to space will be gone, along with money for its bigger brother, the Ares V cargo rocket that was to launch the fuel and supplies needed to take humans back to the moon.

There will be no lunar landers, no moon bases, no Constellation program at all.

In their place, according to White House insiders, agency officials, industry executives and congressional sources familiar with Obama's long-awaited plans for the space agency, NASA will look at developing a new "heavy-lift" rocket that one day will take humans and robots to explore beyond low Earth orbit. But that day will be years — possibly even a decade or more — away.

In the meantime, the White House will direct NASA to concentrate on Earth-science projects — principally, researching and monitoring climate change — and on a new technology research and development program that will one day make human exploration of asteroids and the inner solar system possible.

Drudge calls Obama the "un-Kennedy". Very true.

Obama doesn't want anything taking funds away from his domestic social programs and NASA costs a lot of money when you start launching big heavy expensive things into space.

It's a crying shame that the leadership of the country that went from no men in space to putting men on the moon in the 60's has lost that desire to explore.

President Obama is AWESOME!

That's what Jim Geraghty thinks in today's Morning Jolt:

I observe in video form: "My fellow conservatives, one year ago, we found ourselves lost in the wilderness. We feared that a massive stimulus bill might persuade Americans that more spending is good for the economy. We feared that a united Democratic party might pass a health-care bill that would lead to a government takeover of one-sixth of our economy. We feared those same united Democrats would pass a cap-and-trade bill, making all energy use more expensive. We feared that a new president would hesitate from sending more troops to Afghanistan, and we feared a precipitous withdrawal from Iraq. And one year ago, control of either the House or Senate seemed very, very far away. Today, one year later, we can see that change has come to our nation.

"There are Republican governors in Trenton and Richmond, and a Republican represents Massachusetts in the U.S. Senate. Stuart Rothenberg says that 58 Democratic House seats are in play, and we only need to win 40 to take back the House. We have a good chance of winning Senate seats in North Dakota, Delaware, Illinois, Arkansas, Nevada, Pennsylvania, Colorado, Indiana, and California. And now, President Obama is endorsing a spending freeze.

"What can we learn from all this?

"President Obama is AWESOME. He is the greatest thing to happen to conservatism since Jocelyn Elders called on the government to teach masturbation in schools. Finally, President Obama said earlier this week that he would rather 'be a really good one-term president than a mediocre two-term president.' Mister President, I share this dream. And I believe that by working together, it can be done. I guess you could say, 'Yes we can!'"

Yes we can! And yes we will!