« Coming Soon: Food Control | Main | What Would Freud Say? »

Excellent! We are in the presence of genius.

Reminds me of that ultra lame enviro-whacko movie THE HAPPENING from last year where the construction workers all take a stroll off the edge of a tall building.

Aaaaaw, come on republicans, stop jumping into that hole! There's always 2010!

ObamInflation: Coming Next Year

http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/Printable.aspx?GUID=501D8D44-71B6-4CF9-8028-BA4B3D9CAD34

And no matter how many bodies are thrown into the hole, it never quite fills up.

It's like Obama's deficits.

we are lemings...
we are crazies...
we will feed our flower habit..

pushing daisies...

between the politicans polarizing power trips.
we are just to pure and peaceful to decide
so we got our head to gether whiel the planet blew to bits
and figured the one step left to take is suicide!

that was from the broadway play national lampoons "the lemings" staring john belushi...

here is a clip of belushi making anouncements like woodstock, (the woodchuck memorial festivil of peace love adn death).

then they perform... lemmings lament..

[any points?]

I love Obamaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa!

Lemmings was a fun game.

best graphic. EVAR!

OBAMA =

O ne
B ig
A ss
M istake
A merica

If anybody is interested in going to one of those Tea Parties, there is a grassroots site called "ReTeaParty.com." I just visited and joined, they have about 6500 members so far. They want to put on a big display on July 4 nationwide.

Jim Cramer of Mad Money was an Obama fan during election. Now he's a big critic of O's economic policies. Question: why such a surprise?

Check out Ann Coulter.com today. She just kicked Olbermann's balls into his mouth. Priceless.

MaryHunter: If you look at Cramer's stock picks, he acts the same way. He's for something until it doesn't work, then he dumps all over it. In other words, he's a perfect Obama supporter in that he has no convictions of his own, he just rolls with the tides. And you're right: if he's such an expert at financial matters (doubtful), why didn't he at least reasonably foresee the results of Obama's economic philosophy? If anyone shouldn't be surprised, it's him.

Coder, I agree with you 100%. The guy flaps in the wind, I've never taken investment advice from him.

Another topic: Rainy day fun activity. Courtesy of the Patriot Post. Go to the Federal Election Commission website's disclosure page

http://www.fec.gov/finance/disclosure/disclosure_data_search.shtml

and search on individuals, then type in your zip code, you can see everybody in your neighborhood who contributed to whom. I can see which contractor I'll be leaning toward and which I'll be shunning. Same with doctors. I would never let an Obamabot put his hands on me.

That's where your comments go on the Internet.

Into a big black hole that nobody cares about.

Karin,
If obaba gets his way we're all going to be going to obababot doctors. Hail the new age of socialism!!!! Click. Bang.

Love the video! Watching all the little drones (to borrow the Great One's phrase for these nit-wits) step into the abyss, willingly and happily, lemming-like . . . it's priceless! Perfect!

Just wish they weren't taking the rest of us with them. [Maybe they won't, though: any Dhimmicrat who has suddenly awakened to the fact that you, that's right, YOU, are screwed just like the rest of us, contact your Congressman and Senator, even if it's a piece of human solid waste like Schmucky, Barney or Chris, and tear into them; tell 'em you're mad that our Maximum Leader is destroying your future, your children's future, and the future of those yet unborn. You may want European-style Socialism, but you didn't count on (though you should've!), full-out Fascism, a remaking of this country into Cuba, the old Soviet Union, Mussolini's Italy or the Third Reich. Enough fury from the voters, especially from their own voters, and at least they'll think before they vote for more of the same kind of "Stimulus" they just witlessly approved, not to mention nationalized health-care, et al.].

Hey, Drones! You enjoying the Obama Depression as well? Step on up to the edge and jump right in!!!

Obama incapable of functioning without a teleprompter

Well..duh!

Except for your comment, Spook, I disagree with you. That's not how a free marketplace of ideas works. I love to read nearly all comments, and I take them as someone else's perspective and it helps shape my own. That said, some sites are better than others.

GOOD!!!!!

Seattle PI employees to start up a "non-profit" news website, plan to beg for donation money to create it.

http://www.bizjournals.com/seattle/stories/2009/03/02/daily53.html

There was a '60s Seattle underground newspaper (Helix) that had more business sense and journalistic integrity than these clowns.

We're doomed. It's The Attack of the Burping Worms.

Look everybody! Free healthcare at the bottom! Weeeeee!

I look forward to your opinions on this very surprising poll result. It shows the public is shockingly clueless on the porkulus issue that I thought everybody understood, everywhere.

This is a Fox/Opinion Dynamics poll: "A 63 percent majority of Americans believe Obama's priorities and policies are more likely to 'significantly help the country,' while 25 percent believe they are more likely to 'seriously harm the country.' ... Over two-thirds (70 percent) of Americans think it is at least somewhat likely that the economic stimulus and spending bill recently passed by Congress will 'create new jobs.'"

I am reeling at this, because I thought that the basic argument behind Porkulus is clear and easy to understand, even to those under the MSM spell.

With the blog climate of the last week, I felt we were looking at a tidal wave of backlash. Now to find that it's only 25%?

I am eager to hear explanations on this one. Do we have to wait a little longer for slower folks to catch on? Is it just blind partisanship? Even if it was, one could assume that a little logic would still prevail for most.

Great Open Thread Pic.

Amidst Obamadisaster... It's time to bash Palin again!

A new article in the Journal of Experimental psychology makes the case that Sarah Palin's looks -- and the focus on them -- hurt her and John McCain in November's election.

The study is behind a pay wall, but Tom Jacobs summarizes the findings:

They took a group of 133 undergraduates and assigned them to write a few lines about one of two celebrities: Palin or actress Angelina Jolie. Half of the participants in each category were asked to write “your thoughts and feelings about this person,” while the other half were asked to write “your thoughts and feelings about this person’s appearance.”

The participants were then asked to rate their subject (Palin or Jolie) in terms of various attributes, including competence. Finally, they were asked who they intended to vote for in the upcoming election.

Those who wrote about Palin’s appearance were more positive in their assessments than those who assessed her qualities as a person. But they rated her far lower in terms of competence, intelligence and capability, and were far less likely to indicate they planned to vote for the McCain-Palin ticket.

“It wasn’t her appearance per se” that soured people on Palin, Heflick said in an interview. “It was the effect her appearance had on their perception of her competence and humanity. Those variables made people less likely to vote for her."...

Michael Steele finds redemption - exposes Dem plan to use Rush as distraction

"I just want to make one thing very clear. Folks need to understand what's happening here, Sean. You've already talked about it. This is a systematic effort, I think, very well planned out to distract. They're saying, "Oh, yeah, prices are going up for everything you have to pay for. Oh, let's talk about Rush... Your 401K just dropped. Let's talk about Rush... The stock market it tanking. Let's talk about Rush..." We get it. We've figured it out now what the game plan is."

RNC Chairman Michael Steele

Roseanne Moon-Barr says Israelis missile-ing themselves as excuse to invade Palestine

ohlmert you lie:

you say that twelve rockets were fired into israel since the end of the "war" (ethnic cleansing). Not one Israeli was hurt or killed by these rockets, and now you say you are going to go back and kill more palestinians to teach them a lesson!!!

I think rockets are being fired by your own sources, since less than ten israelis have been killed by them. You are bullshitting the world as you pocket money made from arms sales, along with bibi and your agents in Hamas. step down all men in power!

More Marines sulking at having to endure Obamaboredom

More police fascism in the New Age of Obama: Questioned for discussing whether gun-toting civilians would have stopped Virginia Tech massacre

Last October, John Wahlberg and two classmates at Central Connecticut State University gave an oral presentation for a communications class taught by Professor Paula Anderson. The assignment was to discuss a “relevant issue in the media,” and the students presented their view that the death toll in the April 2007 Virginia Tech shooting massacre would have been lower if professors and students had been carrying guns.

That night, police called Wahlberg, a 23-year-old senior, and asked him to come to the station. When he arrived, they they read off a list of firearms that were registered in his name and asked where he kept them. Guns are strictly prohibited on the CCSU campus and residence halls, but Wahlberg says he lives 20 miles off-campus and keeps his gun collection locked up in a safe. No further action was taken by police or administrators....

Good one BH!

I remember being on the USS Iwo Jima, deployed and underway under Yougo, when Clinton's Sec Def came aboard to give us a 'pep talk'. They had to order the Marines and Sailors out to the hanger deck to get anyone to attend. And we were bored out of our minds after 30+ days of underway time.

No questions were allowed unless cleared by several layers of command.

No one cared and no one applauded, except for the fat Navy 1 star.

But the press got the photo-op.

Don't worry, they'll all land on the soft bed of trillions of dollars the federal gov't dumped there beforehand.

Brits not taking kindly to the Obamas snubbing the Browns

In return Mrs Obama gave the Brown children, Fraser and John, two toy models of Marine One, the Presidential helicopter. Fair enough on the helicopter part, always a popular choice with small boys; but Marine One? It’s not as though anyone needs reminding that Barack Obama is President or that he has his own helicopter. Short of giving the boys Action Man models of her own husband smiting the evil forces of neoconservatism, Mrs Obama’s gesture could not have been more solipsistic or more inherently dismissive of Mrs Brown.

Not only did she demonstrate that she spent approximately three seconds contemplating the needs of the Brown boys (having an aide pop to the White House gift shop for a piece of merchandising does not imply a great deal of thought), she appeared to show a most uncharacteristic lapse of judgment.

It might have been possible to overlook the incident were it not for the official photograph.

The White House released one picture of the two women and it does not appear to have been selected with any kind of special relationship in mind. There is a menacing bunch of pink peonies in the foreground and the angle is most unflattering to Mrs Brown, who has the air of a woman very much in need of a stiff drink.

Whether deliberate or not, the whole thing feels like a snub.

As for Fraser and John, their parents’ trip to America will always be remembered as the time that “Mum and Dad went to see the President, and all we got was this lousy plastic helicopter”.

Barack Urkel Obama

Awesome moving picture show!!!

Can't post at a blog I frequent, which for some reason isn't linking to its comment thread. So I'll drop these questions here Too bad my carriage returns aren't taking, but I'd got to get some of this out.
:
1. As Jim Cramer has suggested, what kind of nuttineness has a government doing whatever it can to discourage investment when the stock market is taking?

2. Will a mainstream journalist or anyone else hurl one of their favorite words to describe articulate conservatives as "ideologues" at Barack Obama?

3. It was obvious from what one could learn of Obama and his past that he was a left-winger, and, as with most of his ilk, a bigot. And he wanted to reshape American society into a form pleasing only to secular and unreasoning and unreasonable leftists. So why are some people, like David Brooks, surprised he is what he was?

4. When will journos and others recognize that Obama's initial appointments of reasonably centrist people to top-level national security spots meant little to Obama's primary interest, pushing this country to the secular left, strongly pursuing redistributive policies that aim for an egalitarian sharing of wealth, without caring much that those policies will shrink total wealth?

5. When will the corrupt AP report on the raft of way-out lefties appointed to key domestic posts, in the Justice Department especially, but elsewhere, too: notably Steven Chu, Chas Freeman, and John Holdren? Who is in charge of selecting these people? Obama wouldn't have the time.

6. It is a great shock to this writer that so many Democrats appear to support Obama's methods as well as his objectives. If Larry Summers had any integrity, he would resign. Why doesn't he?

7. Who knows much about Peter Orszag? Why don't we know more about him?

9. Last autumn, I described one major party presidential candidate as Senator Bad. The other was Senator Much Worse. Senator Much Worse was elected. Can anyone provide any reason to dispute my conclusion that he is President Worst of All?

10. Does anyone think the MSM will fairly write an "analysis" of What Rush has said? I found his remarks of January 17 on his not hoping for Obama's success--especially since that success, in my view, would crush my hopes to pay for my needs in retirement and my desires to help people close to me financially? Someone has to provide the capital that business needs to pay for innovation and growth. That's me, among many. And Obama has done everything to shrink that capital and punish me for investing.

11 and more. It's so easy to blast into Obama. So why is it that journalists can't fairly and truthfully report on developments, especially the obviously strong leftist tint of lower-level appointees to the President Worst of All Administration? I was a newspaper reporter, for nearly eight years. The story is there. But reporters and "writers" seem intent on producing nothing but loving accounts of what their Hero Man is doing and saying.

Oops. A typo. In the second paragraph, that should have been, "when the stock market is tanking."

During the campaign, Obama proposed a new Social Security "savings" feature, which would be optional. He displayed zero understanding of investments or savings. People planning for retirement wouldn't gather up much through saving, despite the beauty of compound interest. But the people most in need of extra money at retirement, the people in the lowest income quintile, find it difficult, if not impossible, to save much after taking care of food, clothing, shelter, and maybe a few beers, a few smokes, and chances on lottery tickets.

I see such people at a local convenience store. It's amazing how much they spend on lotteries, their sole hope for anything much financially. A "community organizer" who had observed the people with the lowest incomes and their behavior would have realized that his plan would do nothing for them.

But Obama wasn't observing and he didn't think through his proposal. His head was bulging with grandiose dreams and learning the Newspeak that modern Democrats use, like "revenue enhancements" for taxes.

George W. Bush spoke English like someone newly immigrated from Mexico and he and we paid for his inarticulateness. Teh big question for this class is this:

Is it better to have an inarticulate man who supports the right things and right ways to achieve beneficial results for the country as President?

Or is it better to have an articulate man, who can string sentences together, but who doesn't have a clue about economics? Bad acknowledged he didn't grasp economics, while Much Worse was too ignorant or too dishonest to acknowledge his incompetence.

One final comment. I returned to the blog where I've added things in the threads. (I don't know how to set up a blog.) And one of the guys from Minneapolis posted a Michael Ramirez cartoon on WHY YOU CAN'T TAKE DEMOCRATS SERIOUSLY.

I have seen many cartoons in three quarters of a century of life. This one has to rank among the top ten funniest and most biting.

It's also first-rate art, well designed, well colored, and well drawn. I hope Timothy Egan, a critic of the Sage of Palm Beach, will see it.

Mockery: Ahmadinejad and Obama on Israel's status

Lady Macbeth and Lady Michelle: Two Manipulative Peas in a Pod?

She may not look much like how I’d always envisioned Lady Macbeth, especially in a pants suit, but America’s new First Lady may be the true power behind America’s new President Obama’s throne.

You may recall Shakespeare’s Lady Mac, the scary, ambitious, vicious, and manipulative wife of the title character in Macbeth who, with a few scraggly chin hairs and some eye of newt, could have been the model for those 3 potion-stirring witches in Hamlet. Or for Hillary Clinton, for that matter, providing they could match her witchy cackle.

Michelle Robinson Obama has no (visible) chin hairs as yet but she does have a history of, if not witchcraft, then surely expertise in various dark arts, if we can consider racism one of the dark arts as in her hatred and distrust of Whitey going back to her college years.

Lady Michelle was largely kept under wraps throughout much of the presidential campaign after it was discovered she tended to shoot off her mouth almost as much as the Dem VP candidate, Joe Biden. She didn’t tell a crippled man at a Missouri rally to stand up, as Joe did, but her infamous line about feeling proud of America for the first time in her life after her hubby was nominated was far more outrageous. So, in Obama’s highly scripted campaign, she was a liability and was shuffled off to Buffalo or to the friendlier confines of her Chicago home.

Needless to say, just as hubby’s reference to campaigning in all 57 states with just two to go was ignored by an idolatrous mainstream media, along with his and Biden’s many other gaffes, so too was Lady Michelle’s foot-in-mouth disease.

Fortunately, you can run (and be muzzled) but you can’t hide on the other side of the Pond in Merry Ol’ England and at least one Brit writer, James Delingpole, has outed Lady Michelle’s dark history: http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/james_delingpole/blog/2009/03/05/was_lady_macbeth_behind_barack_obamas_snub_of_gordon_brown.

Above all else and if nothing else in the twenty-first century, the Brits have their pride. Their worldwide empire, grown after Elizabeth I and bad weather trashed the Armada in 1588, and once encompassing fully a quarter of the globe, is long gone. It began to be whittled away after America told George III to stuff it in his wig in 1776 and was effectively ended when Mahatma Ghandi proved that passive resistance was mightier than England’s sword in 1947.

Yet, there’s still hope for the Brits based on the above article asking the Earth-moving question: Was Lady Michelle the driving force behind Obama’s snub of British Prime Minister Gordon Brown?

Frankly, my dears, I don’t give a damn about snubbing P.M. Brown, aside from the fact it evidenced the foolish and amateurish nature of the new administration, and nor do I give a flying fig about presumed or actual insults to the English. When they apologize for the atrocities committed against the Irish people for centuries, I might re-consider. But I doubt it.

In any event, that piece on TheTelegraph.com had its redeeming social value by exposing what is actually old news, that Lady Michelle, . . .

(Read the rest of this article at http://genelalor.com/.)

A Black Hole..........

"The term derives from the fact that absorption of visible light renders the hole's interior invisible, and indistinguishable from the black space around it."

"Despite its invisible interior, a black hole may reveal its presence through interaction with matter orbiting the event horizon."

and the liberals are saying... how come i cant feel the event horizon and the point of no return...

Posted by: BURNING HOT at March 5, 2009 6:44 PM

The Democrats realize that Bush will not do as their very own Emmanuel Goldstein any longer.