The American Spectator : Obama's Hackneyed Hypocrisy

Text Size

Obama's Hackneyed Hypocrisy

By Quin Hillyer on 5.13.10 @ 6:08AM

Nonsense from the Kagan roll-out.

Who the hell does Barack Obama, this morally preening, arrogant hypocrite, think he is? His vacuous, demagogic shtick about helping the "people" fight "the powerful" is getting so old from his lips, and already was so hackneyed even before he expropriated it, that it's a miracle that even he himself can say it anymore without getting nauseated by his own oleaginous triteness.

Obama spewed the same old effluvia Monday when introducing Elena Kagan as his nominee for the Supreme Court. Let us count the inanities and dishonesties in his introductory remarks:

"Behind law there are stories -- stories of people's lives as shaped by the law, stories of people's lives as might be changed by the law…" Of course, here he is quoting Kagan herself, but it's still absurd. Of course the law affects people's lives: That's why we have elections to choose legislators to write the laws, and it's why we give trial judges at least a modicum of discretion in meting out sentences when laws are violated. But even that discretion is governed by the laws as laid out by the legislative process. The appeals courts exist to ensure that those laws are applied the same way to every litigant regardless of what their personal stories are, not because of their personal stories.

"During her time in this office, she's repeatedly defended the rights of shareholders and ordinary citizens against unscrupulous corporations." What nonsense. A corporation is a set of shareholders. When a corporation pays a judgment, its shareholders are the ones who pay. When the corporation loses money, it is the shareholders who lose the money. When a lawsuit supposedly on behalf of shareholders is successful, the "payout" gets taken from the corporate accounts, which devalues the stock of, yes, the shareholders themselves. Setting the shareholders against the corporation is asking Peter to fight not Paul, but Peter himself. It's like boxing one's own image in a mirror -- except that when you throw a punch, both the mirror and the puncher get hurt. So too in any match between a corporation and its shareholders: It's nothing more than self-mutilation.

"In a democracy, powerful interests must not be allowed to drown out the voices of ordinary citizens." This is a truism. Too bad he doesn't abide by it. Barack Obama has spent his whole adult life doing the bidding of powerful interests. At Harvard, that bastion of the powerful elite, he kissed up to enough factions to become president of the law review while actually writing next to nothing. In Chicago, he settled in tony Hyde Park with the help of a highly suspect sweetheart deal on his property, got an adjunct gig at the powerful University of Chicago, cultivated leftist elitists like Bill Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn who sat on wealthy nonprofit boards, and chose the church of the wild and hateful Rev. Jeremiah Wright because it gave him a powerful entrée into the poor black community that he otherwise would lack if he spent all his time in Hyde Park. He himself noted that he didn't really join a church until he appreciated "the power of the African-American religious tradition to spur social change." This all was of a piece with his training as an acolyte of Saul Alinsky, who taught that power is its own justification. In the state legislature, Obama became a creature of powerful party leader and eventual Senate President Emil Jones. As Senator and president, he has consistently sided with the most powerful interests in his party, almost never lifting a finger without the approval of the powerful labor bosses (SEIU President Andy Stern was the first year's most frequent outside visitor to the White House) or of the plaintiffs' attorney lobby. He negotiated in secret with the pharmaceutical lobby; he was the second biggest campaign contribution recipient from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac sources, which helps explain why Fannie and Freddie keep getting more taxpayer loot while Obama's administration cracks down on everyone else. Of course, Obama also is all too cozy with the only major investment bank that made out like a bandit in the past several years, Goldman Sachs. Meanwhile, ordinary citizens were ignored, steamrolled over, insulted, and threatened while Obamacare was passed by hook and crook.

Then again, it is beyond obnoxiousness, especially by means of judges whose powers are designed to be limited, for denizens of Hyde Park and New York's Upper West Side by way of the Harvard dean's office, to even pretend to have special insight into, and power to determine, what is in the best interests of those Kagan called "the despised and disadvantaged." The Obamites are the people who savaged "Joe the Plumber," and this is the president who while campaigning claimed that a preference for limited government was merely the province of those who "get bitter [and] cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations."

Barack Obama posing as the representative of the people against the powerful is like Tiger Woods feigning virginity while crusading against promiscuity.

Finally on the absurd-o-meter, Obama said that Kagan's confirmation would create "a court that would be more inclusive, more representative, more reflective of us as a people than ever before." Huh? It would mean that every single justice is a product of either Harvard Law or Yale Law. It would mean the last three appointees were undergraduate alumni of Princeton. It would mean that both of Obama's appointees were women who grew up in New York City, as did the only other woman on the court, Ruth Bader Ginsburg. (Two other justices were born in nearby Trenton, New Jersey.) It would mean there is not a single Protestant on the court, only one southerner, and only two who attended undergraduate school away from the Northeastern seaboard.

In truth, none of this should matter: Quality and qualifications are a matter neither of geography nor religion, and bean-counting-identity-politics by arbitrary criteria should be anathema in a republic. But if Obama is going to try to sell Kagan on such flimsy criteria, the least he could do is to choose criteria that aren't so self-evidently untrue. Kagan would make this court not "more reflective of us as a people than ever before," but instead even more reflective of cloistered, supercilious, East Coast academia.

Then again, that's a perfect reflection of Obama's whole political milieu: East Coast academia, married to Chicago-style power politics rampant with rank dishonesty, backed by demagogic nonsense. Here's hoping all good Americans keep clinging to guns and religion, and to our American limited-government traditions, while focusing our antipathies in a way that keeps these dangerous Obamites at bay.

About the Author

Quin Hillyer is a senior editor of The American Spectator and a senior fellow at the Center for Individual Freedom.

Letter to the Editor View all comments (154) | Leave a comment

Brian Mc| 5.13.10 @ 7:22AM

It's vindictiveness, resentment, class-envy and bitterness laced with hatred vs. opportunism, objectivity, reasoned/forward thinking and positive attitude laced with liberty. The lines are becoming more clear as the annointed one leads us ever so much closer to open civil war.

Purpleguy| 5.13.10 @ 8:15AM

"Setting the shareholders against the corporation is asking Peter to fight not Paul, but Peter himself. It's like boxing one's own image in a mirror" .... If it so for the Corporation, then it is so for the President of the United States. You are fighting against yourself if you don't support your own President. "A corporation is a set of shareholders. " Well, a President is head of the Government, which is US.

The rest of this argument presented is a load of paranoid delusion with a little hatred thrown in for spice that could be applied to any politician's life. Change the names and places, and fill in the blank of any politician in their struggle to get elected in order to make things happen for America.

Ridiculous article....

Mike| 5.13.10 @ 8:51AM

Reality Pupleguy you need some reality.

Are you so enamored with our president or so left wing and out of touch as to believe what you post?

First off the president is the head of the executive branch of our federal government not the head of all of our government. Don't forget the states are sovereign under the Constitution not subordinate and there are two other branches up there in Federal land.

Second, shareholders vote and change company leadership all the time. They are the company and if they don't like the leadership and direction it is going they vote with their wallets and the share price goes down or they exercise their corporate voting rights and change the leadership when possible. Your point that pitting the shareholders against the company is analogous to being against the president is bizarre.

You say that we are fighting against ourselves if we don't support the president and you claim this is like the shareholder against the corporation. Nonsense! This shows a complete lake of understanding of the business world or the government or both. Corporations don't have the police power of the state to compel me to do anything. Government does. Try not paying taxes and see what I mean.

So as a last bit of reasoning to help you see the light consider this scenario:

Next election an evil, monstrous right wing nut job (according to the left) gets elected president. Part of his agenda is to roll back civil rights to the tune of about the year 1856. By your logic you would support him as he is the "head of government and government is US"

For the life of me I can't figure out you libs. It is not so much the policies you subscribe too as much as the dangerous and convoluted thinking that gets you there that concerns me about you folks. God love ya.

Mike Johnston
SFC USA (RET)

A. Reid| 5.13.10 @ 12:31PM

Mike: I loved your response. Great analysis and factual. I agree with you fully!. Thought you might consider contacting me about my blog. see www.blackquillandink.com

edward blake jr| 5.13.10 @ 3:02PM

Mike, you could not have said it better!

ZerObama| 5.13.10 @ 9:39PM

I knew Quin's article would annoy the thin-skinned little a-hole troll. Liberal Screeder never disappoints! Screw you, Screeder.

Grzmlyk| 5.13.10 @ 9:24AM

Hey Useless Idiot #413,849,361:

Do you call yourself "Purpleguy" because of the turgidity of your vapid moral vanity, or because you have a perpetual hard-on for shopworn liberal platitudes?

I conclude, from the cacophony of flatus emanating from your computer lately, that you expect to be taken seriously - already a losing proposition for any adult whose goal in life is to occupy his time by taunting those the mistakenly believes are inferior - and you conclude this is a "ridiculous" article based on a single quote?

And then you say, "if it is so for a corporation, it is so for the president of the US." By what inspired logic do you arrive at this whopper? Uh, shareholders enter into their ownership of stock by choice and for profit, and are able to end their relationship with a corporation whenever they want. A corporation does not pick the pockets of its shareholders against their will; if it succeeds, it pays dividends. If it cannot succeed, it goes out of business (or, if it’s on Obama’s shopping list, it gets “bailed out”).

Such is not the case with the tyranny we are currently enduring (the government’s “boot on our throat,” to use the unsubtle parlance of the administration).

I did not choose to put our piece of shit in chief into office, and governance is NOT analogous to a corporation to anyone with even a passing understanding of either. But then you'd know that if you knew one iota about business, which you obviously do not. I’m sure you think you’ve descended from the heavens to this web site to tell us plebes “The Truth” from on high; in reality you merely reflect the tiresome ideology and cookie-cutter thinking of the hoards of fungible, shallow, liberal arts undergrads more concerned with posing than with reality.

Or perhaps you're just a precocious deadbeat cooling your heels until your next welfare check – excuse me – “grant money” - arrives.

Either way, it's obvious that you are one of the people luxuriating in the cart of state, not helping to pull it.

Gee, somehow I'm going to take a wild guess that your bromide about "fighting against yourself if you don't support your president" didn't apply to YOU during the Bush years. Back then, what was the pabulum you turds were promulgating? Oh yes: "Dissent is the highest form of patriotism." What happened to that, kemo sabe?

Assuming you meant this "critique" to pass for something resembling a sentient argument, I have news: It wouldn't pass muster in an 8th grade rhetoric class.

But you'll learn that when you get to the 8th grade. In the meantime, you might do your onanistic "moralizing" - or whatever you call your inchoate, inaccurate and ill-informed jeremiads - on another site. Why don't you try Fisher-Price.com? You might find some takers over there.

Gee, Markos must have outsourced his training for you guys to some third-rate government agency. His ambassadors of greed and nihilism are getting flimsier and flimsier. You are a ridiculous would-be intellectual fop.

raymond| 5.13.10 @ 10:09AM

Grzmlyk,

Thankyou.

Grzmlyk| 5.13.10 @ 11:25AM

:-)

Warrior| 5.13.10 @ 11:03AM

Grzmlyk,

If I may take exception to one part of your otherwise excellent response. Call this president a piece of shit is out of line. At least shit has some positive uses that help things grow.

Grzmlyk| 5.13.10 @ 11:25AM

Warrior, I stand corrected. I admit, I struggle to find a descriptor for this puerile, vengeful, angry, alienated, ideologically warped, simple-minded, bullying, totalitarian, ignorant, bigoted, narcissistic, foolish, immature, despicable, destructive, self-aggrandizing, megalomaniacal, shallow, thin-skinned, whiney, phony shard of human detritis that is, astonishingly, our president.

I guess the search continues! :-)

LookWhosTalking| 5.13.10 @ 3:42PM

Look who is talking. Your hate is grotesque. Disgusting.

Warrior| 5.13.10 @ 5:10PM

Never stated the president is hated. Just think he ranks below shit.

Ken (Old Texican)| 5.13.10 @ 5:14PM

Heh, Grz,
Now you know why I often use the parenthetical, (pardon the shorthand).

He WOULD be another Stalin, except he is also a coward.
Heh, we are armed, trained, experienced, and free men and women.

He cannot win, and he has not figured out how to kill 50 million of us. We don't need no steenking pitchforks. Click.

And the armed forces are on our side. "Oath Keepers" are doing an amazing sign-up among us.
(check it out on your search engine)

Missy| 5.13.10 @ 9:44PM

The 2nd Amendment rocks! Thank you, Founders.

rab| 5.13.10 @ 10:06PM

Jesus ---if you don't own a sword,sell your cloak and buy one --- Luke22:31

loulou| 5.13.10 @ 12:54PM

Perp-le guy is a paid troll, courtesy of ACORN/SEIU. Best to ignore him.

Todd| 5.13.10 @ 12:55PM

I think purpleguy must be an SEIU member since purple is their color after all and they are Obama's mouthpiece for socialism and destruction of capitalism. He was probably given his instructions that his job would be to troll on conservative sites and waste our time rebutting his liberal nonsense rants. Don't waste time on him other to insult him as the troll he is.

RlwMarine| 5.13.10 @ 10:36PM

I disagree, He and his ilk should be rebutted. Not eveeryone who reads here is well versed in critical thinking. GRZ gavd me a few ideas to use when I confront even well meaning liberals who just haven't thought it through.

fransisco| 5.13.10 @ 11:51PM

I think "purpleguy" is the ultimate SEIU cheerleader, Little Barry Hussein himself. Look at how inane and ridiculous the arguments are.

Perhaps our dear leader ought to take a freshman logic class... the ability to think things through in a clear an rational manner is the most powerful source of "e-pants-ipation."

By the way, little purpleguy's analogy is fundamentally incorrect: the POTUS would be analogous to the CEO of a corporation, not the corporation itself. If the shareholders or the board take action to eliminate a crappy CEO and replace him with a better one, this is perfectly consistent with the well-being of a corporation. It is in no way a self-destructive action. So the proper analogy actually supports Mr. Hillyer's argument rather than refuting or weakening it.

Better luck next time, Barry. Try thinking every once in a while.

bob einhorn| 5.13.10 @ 6:16PM

BRAVO Grzmlyk! Thank you for your words and thoughtful response!!!

christina smith| 5.15.10 @ 3:00PM

Right on, right on, right on!

PolishKnight| 5.13.10 @ 10:03AM

Indeed, Purpleguy, it's interesting that socialists present themselves as "protecting" America from eeevil corporations because corporations would be big and powerful and not "care" as much as they do when you have just illustrated that there is fundamentally little difference between "voting" via shares for a CEO versus "voting" in the democratic process.

Except... one key difference: There are several corporations for someone to choose from in investments while just a single government in a state (except for Chicago and Arkansas which co-share government operations with the mob)

Indeed, purpleguy, the socialist paradigm of a government to free them from capitalism and religious fundamentalist puritanism is delightfully silly. It's the left that pushed for "sexual harassment" anti-sex legislation and their boy got caught in the net. It's the left that shoved a major demographic that supported them (working class white males) under the bus and next plans to do so to women ("free burkas for all!")

Leftism is simply a political power grab and most leftists who don't have a direct racist or personal stake in a goodie grab are only cheerleaders drinking cool aid. They're just as much "ignorant" losers as they view working class non-minority men as far as the system is concerned except they're too egotistical to know it yet.

There's a cute History channel documentary about a luxury apartment building in Moscow during the Stalin era where the secret police all had keys to an elevator and a back door to each unit. They would randomly take out "loyalist" tovarisch and take them out to be executed probably with help from other residents of the place who would later be victims themselves.

Pray that your time (or your childrens' times) comes later rather than sooner, slimeball.

Stan Redmond| 5.13.10 @ 11:48AM

The problem with your argument is we don't have a choice of leaving a corporation (through employment) or selling shares of a corporation we don't like. You assume we have no choice in the matter of owning coporate shares. When a corporate CEO runs a company in to the ground he is fired or the shareholders walk and the stock collapses. (Unless of course the company has big union and government ties then they get a bailout a la GM via the US taxpayer). Obama is playing with OUR money and we have no choice in the matter. We were not given a shareholders vote to bail out GM. We were lied non stop about the multi trillion dollar health insurance reform bill. Any corporate CEO that was as pathalogical in his lying as Obama would be out on his ass. I have no doubt you do not own a business and hire employees. And I will venture that you pay minimal taxes. When I see policies coming from this moron, and his supporters that are even more moronic, the last thing I do is support Obama.

Of course I can blow your argument out of the water by asking how much you supported Bush during his 8 years? How about Reid? how about Pelosi? Murtha?

PolishKnight| 5.13.10 @ 3:20PM

Indeed, Stan, unions are now largely in government precisely because shareholders and consumers walked off and bought from elsewhere. The cash-for-clunkers program had people dumping their old union made GM cars to buy Toyotas.

Now in Greece and ultimately the USA the government unions are slowly having to deal with market economies like everyone else. Well, not really. 5% cuts? Eeek! That's almost as bad as a 40 hour workweek!

George S| 5.13.10 @ 12:44PM

Corporate shareholders exist because they chose to purchase a piece of the business and can buy in or out as they please. US citizens are stuck with a president, for better or worse, in the interim between elections.

Ridiculous analogy...

JimE| 5.13.10 @ 6:18PM

Pay no mind to purpletroll and his obama jibberish. His degree is in scatology.

Slowtrot| 5.13.10 @ 7:33PM

Obama may be president of the blacks jews and arabs but he certainly isn’t President of the whites and Orientals. One thing he really is though, is a tool of his handlers, Soros, Jarrett Emanuel and others. Notice how quick he trotted off to Copenhagen to get the U. S. and Chicago the Olympic bid? Jarrett has a bunch of slum property she hoped to dump on the Olympic committee for a profit.

Incredible, the President of the United States, a shill for a real estate pimp.

Mondo| 5.13.10 @ 8:11PM

"Ridiculous" is liberal-ese for "points I don't want to have to read, hear or deal with."

Which is why the New York Times exists.

ZerObama| 5.13.10 @ 9:42PM

Of course Liberal Screeder would love to return to 1856--slavery was the creation of democrats just like him!

arnonerik| 5.13.10 @ 11:20PM

We don't need Supreme court justices to "fight" either the corporation we own stock in or the country we live in. Both organizations give us a vote and we will use the one we have as citizens to get rid of "Obama the Destroyer" and his mindless robots in congress. Then there will be time to deal with the purpleguys in the media and academia.

luigi americani| 5.13.10 @ 11:20PM

Purpleguy you are actually "yellow" for your cowardice and awful analysis of this spot-on article. Of all the prevoious commanders in chief, BHO is the only one who despises and belittles his constituency, as he's against the american majority when it comes to healthcare, immigation, terrorism and U.S.- Israel relations. The man is a disgrace as is purpleguy!!

JmsA| 5.13.10 @ 11:27PM

Purpleturd,

"It ain't what you don't know that gets you into trouble. It's what you know for sure that just ain't so.”

JmsA| 5.13.10 @ 11:29PM

Apologies. I failed to attribute the quote above to Mark Twain.

Jack Metcalf| 5.14.10 @ 2:41AM

I suggest you remove your head from the sand and take a good hard look at how this incompetent (pick any derogatory term you can handle) IS DESTROYING OUR ENTIRE COUNTRY and all that it stands for. How about keeping his word to uphold the Constitution of the United States of America for starters.

Purpleguy| 5.14.10 @ 9:06AM

Everything is "Obama is bad", "Obama is evil" .... After 8 years of the worst presidency in history, leaving us in this horrible mess, and you blame the one cleaning up after Bush, the stupid. What cajones y'all have. Or maybe it's just the echo chamber Fox-Rush-Beck that has you buffaloed. Stop drinking the Kool-Aid.

KrlyQ| 5.14.10 @ 4:30PM

Who said, "Obama is bad" or "Obama is evil"? This article, and every criticism I have ever heard made about this President has been a substantive one. You and many other libs have a problem with projection. You have in one sentence demonized a previous administration with no facts. You wrote, "After 8 years of the worst presidency in history, leaving us in this horrible mess, and you blame the one cleaning up after Bush..." I have a question in reference to that vapid statement (which is becoming really old really fast) What "mess" has been left by Bush that Obama has made better? Asked another way; what "mess" that has been left by Bush has NOT been made WORSE by Obama? Unemployment, for example, was at less than 5% under the Bush administration. Obama's policies, which are job killers and reflect a total lack of understanding of the business world, has increased the unemployment to 10%; a rate not seen in this country for 25 years!
Those of us who know history, understand business and basic economic principles know what his ideology is and where it leads. Maybe if you stopped "drinking the Kool-Aid" you'd know that the longest running government in human history wasn't founded on redistribution, but on liberty, freedom and entrepreneurship; all things Obama is attempting to systematically destroy. Increasing the financial burden on the very people who create jobs (you know, the people Obama refers to as the rich) destroys the economy, but for Obama it ensures that the ill-educated, entitlement minded drones will fall for this type of class envy and keep voting in DemocRats to continue getting their hand outs.
I don't know whether you are one of the millions of unfortunate people in this country who is out of work, but from you posts here I do know something about you; you are not a business owner, nor do you have aspirations to be one. If you did, you wouldn't put up with what Obama is doing to our economy.

bobsmith| 5.14.10 @ 6:23PM

Your attempt to absolve the Cheney-Bush administration rings hollow. Unemployment was at 5%? Try 8% and rising fast when Bush left office.

$5 Trillion added to the national debt from 2001-2007, and this was during relatively good economic times. So much for fiscal discipline on the part of the Republicans.

Don't forget Medicare D, an unfunded entitlement, which will add far more to the debt than the Dems' HCR.

Your outrage is over losing two elections. Boo hoo.

ZerObama| 5.16.10 @ 4:10AM

You excoriate GW Bush for our national debt when Obama has QUADRUPLED it in only 15 months?

Not only are you a hypocrite and an idiot, you're blind, too. Now go guzzle some more Obama Marxist Kool-Aid. We'll see you in November, clown.

How can you tell if a liberal is lying?
His/her lips are moving.

Stan Redmond| 5.14.10 @ 4:58PM

I have heard this argument many times from liberals and Obama supporters. Without getting in to Bush's standing in history let me just take your word for it. Bush spent an insane amount of money and left a historic deficit. OK BAD. Obama, has multiplied by a factor of 4 the deficit in one year. Bush, keeps troops on foreign soil in active combat... Obama keeps them there. Bush supported an innefective stimulus. Obama quadruples stimulus spending by giving bailouts to big business. Oil prices went up under Bush, oil prices are up under Obama. Bush consolidated power in the executive office...Obama excercises dictitorial zeal.

EVERYTHING liberals have claimed is horrible about Bush's policies has bee shifted in to OVERDRIVE by Obama. How are all these things "good" with Obama doing the same things Bush was doing only faster and bigger and more expensive?

Nick| 5.14.10 @ 5:58PM

Mr. Redmond,

Excellent points, sir!

President Dither is like having the worst policies of President Bush on meth and crack!

JmsA| 5.15.10 @ 12:07AM

Purpleturd,

Please free yourself, if only for a minute, from the Bush Derangement Syndrome, and remember Jimmy Carter. By the way, cajones means drawer/trunk, ok? If you're going to say something, at least say it correctly. 11/02/2010

WalkingHorse| 5.14.10 @ 10:54AM

Try this on for size: thinking of Obama as an equity, Mr. Hillyer simply took a look at the downstream prospects and elected to sell short.

All things considered, Mr. Hillyer was more gentle than circumstances and performance warrant.

Tom| 5.13.10 @ 9:55AM

I agree with your sentiments but to the liberal ruling class class-envy is a tool not a belief. They are the elites, well educated, in positions of power, and wealthy. They use class envy to seduce those whose real interests are diametrically opposed to them. Theirs is an aristrocracy of Ivy League elite who believe they know what is best for the nation and its people. For this we fought a revolution.

Alan Brooks| 5.13.10 @ 10:18AM

It is such a relief Bush is gone. Obama has possibilities;
Bushes, Doles, and McCains do not.

Grzmlyk| 5.13.10 @ 12:07PM

And to think I used to think you had a reasonable bone in your body.

Unless you're talking about "possibilities" as the new Il Duce. I might agree with you there.

RAMIII| 5.13.10 @ 1:56PM

Alan,

Your statement above is moronic. You are saying nothing at all. Of course: "Obama has possibilities;
Bushes, Doles, and McCains do not." Obama is the one who is currently President. The other guys are a part of "History" . . . that would be the PAST.

What are Obama's "possibilities" you refer to? Umm Jimmy Carter comes to mind.

Are you looking to be some kind of "Czar" in his Administration?

Michael Mastro| 5.13.10 @ 5:02PM

Alan - Much like Obama, your statement was vacuous nonsense.

Anne| 5.14.10 @ 1:02AM

Dear Alan,

Got your note in study hall. Love that coded language that you used! Tooo cooool! Soooo intellectual! "Possibilities"...hehehhe. Love you way much!

Cuddles

Nobama| 5.14.10 @ 5:10AM

Watch that one, Anne--he's off his nut. Keep your pepper-spray handy, girl.

Stephie| 5.13.10 @ 8:33AM

How can you say that Purpleguy? He is what he is. We hear what he says and we don't agree with it. He is taking this country down a road from which it will be damn hard to come back from. And why do you hate America? Why do you want it to be a carbon copy of the EU or Canada? Good God, help us.

PolishKnight| 5.13.10 @ 10:09AM

Stephie, that's one of the most hilarious things about the situation. Most ideologically motivated leftists think they're going to make the world look like Sweden and it's evil capitalist America and the resident white males standing in their way.

Except... aren't there also a lot of white males in... Sweden? Wouldn't their immigration policies not only for the states, but also Western Europe as well, create a culture and society that looks more like Mexico and Syria?

Yeah, that's going to be a real paradise. Well, in a way it is. The elites of those nations live in expensive fenced compounds where they insulate their children and loved ones from kidnappings and murder if they step out on the streets (unless they vacation in the states or Europe, of course) They're like parasites that destroy their own nests and then move on.

Purpleguy| 5.14.10 @ 9:13AM

Nope, capitalism made this country great - but it isn't the only thing. The continual refreshing of the American blood by the people who have the courage and fortitude to leave their home, everything they own and come to America to start a better life - the immigrants, also made America great. They worked hard, and still do, to make that better life for themselves and their descendants.

And capitalism, in conjunction with the Government providing a framework for freedom and business, incentives, tax policy, and innovation startups, added to the unique position the United States is in.

Add to that near self-sufficiency in raw materials, and you have US!

But Government too burdensome, or Capitalism too free to run wild, or immigration gone made, or lack of raw materials (Oil) can hamper or retard America's greatness.

God Bless America!

Nick| 5.14.10 @ 5:46PM

You don't believe in God. And you hate America.

You are a bleeding heart liberal, PurpleJackass.

JmsA| 5.15.10 @ 12:11AM

Purpleturd,

Nice try, but no cigar. We ain't buying. At least stick to your previously expressed convictions; you're much more entertaining that way. What a joke! 11/02/2010

BozObama| 5.16.10 @ 4:13AM

Purpletard, that's LEGAL immigrants!
Yeah, we know you love amnesty so you Marxists can steal more elections--we get it, jackass.

Alan Brooks| 5.13.10 @ 12:10PM

"He is taking this country down a road from which it will be damn hard to come back from."

But the GOP had 12 years of Bush; the GOP screwed up and you get so many chances.

Ask yourselves this:
if the GOP were really serious, wouldn't they have run a more competent candidate than McCain? Could be the GOP left hand doesn't know what the right is doing.

PolishKnight| 5.13.10 @ 3:17PM

Alan, I voted for Hillary in the primary instead of McCain. The fact is that McCain was endorsed by the left and spoil voters as a "moderate" and "maverick" and then abandoned and labeled as just another "republican EXTREMIST" in the general election.

Much like pro-amnesty for illegals GW Bush...

Indeed, Alan, Obama is the only openly leftist candidate to get into the oval office in my lifetime. The rest ran as political moderates. Actually, even Obama tried to put on a pretense as a moderate claiming he wasn't going to raise taxes on the middle class.

The American people are getting a true taste of socialism for the first time in decades.

robert petersen| 5.13.10 @ 7:24PM

My Grannie always told me I was going to Hell and you Bozos seem to believe Obama is the Anti-Christ: maybe you are right as I would much rather live in the Hell Obama is trying to create rather than the Heaven Shrub and his cronies from the Project for a New American Century had in mind for us.

ZerObama| 5.13.10 @ 9:00PM

Ask the Greeks how their "Obama Hell" is working out for them. Careful what you wish for, moron.

Radegunda| 5.13.10 @ 11:38PM

So you really like 10 percent + unemployment for a long time, and electricity prices "skyrocketing" (your boy thinks that's a great idea), and scarcity of doctors & other medical resources with gov't dictating who gets what, and everybody getting poorer except for a handful of gov't favorites.

You aren't talking facts at all. You can only argue from what you IMAGINE that Obozo "is trying to create" and what conservatives "had in mind for us" according to your paranoid fantasies

JmsA| 5.15.10 @ 12:19AM

Give it time, you'll come around to seeing things for what they truly are.

Purpleguy| 5.14.10 @ 8:38AM

I don't hate America, and Love America as much or more than any of you. Why do you want to change the Government of the country you grew up in? What do you like about America? Aren't you fighting to take it back to an era before you were born?

I just wonder how blind y'all can be in the midst of the worst economic downturn since the Great Depression? Your buddies, Reagan and the Bushes put is in this boat. Unfettered capitalism did it in the 1920's and now again. But you refuse to acknowledge that it was GREED accompanied by the lack of regulation or the lack of enforcement of regulations that allowed the GREED to metastasize into a cancer that almost brought us and the world to the soup lines.

I don't want to be EU or Canada, but I also don't want a dog-eat-dog country to live in. I have mine, and I am comfortable with my living standard (from professional work, I might add), but I think we should share with others and help those in need. And, if it takes a Trillion or 10 Trillion, so be it. All the Government need do is raise taxes (they are the lowest level in 60 years, btw), end the wars, curtail spending, pull back the American Empire (Ron Paul's idea) and stop borrowing for 15 years - all debt will be paid off, period, end of story. You know that right? As all Bonds and Bills come due, you pay them off, do not issue more and after 15 years, you have NO DEBT. It's just that simple.

You have to pay more taxes, cut more spending, and BOOM, crisis over.

WalkingHorse| 5.14.10 @ 1:12PM

GREED?

Provide an objective, un-emotional, precise definition of that term. It is always employed as an undefined rhetorical bludgeon.

BozObama| 5.16.10 @ 4:17AM

Shut up, you Communist troll. Of course we should share with others--that's what we Christians do every day, moron. You're talking about wealth distribution, tightwad--not charity.

Ken (Old Texican)| 5.13.10 @ 9:19AM

Quin,

Thank you once again.

Please, the next time you see Mr. Tyrrell in the hall, thank him profusely for deciding to have an open forum here.

Most of us do sincerely appreciate the opportunity to avoid an "echo chamber" effect by having the thoughts and talking points of the communists, (pardon the shorthand), the "useful idiots" of same, along with the "fellow travelers" of same. ...

.....displayed here in all their glory.

We are reminded almost every day here that the communists and their followers simply cannot and/or will not acknowledge objective lies or objective truth.
I sometimes think they honestly cannot help standing on their heads as they peer at the world around them.

We are saddened that the communists, (pardon the shorthand), cannot come up with better arguments, or better "argumenters", heh, to at least challenge and sharpen our minds a little better. You know, it is very difficult to sharpen a knife with a cucumber.
We keep hoping for them to "whip out the whetstone"...the big guns if you will. Instead, we keep reading the same sad, empty, shallow, self abnegating, and self destructive lies that they are submerged within. (heh, as submerged in a bathtub with four inches of water in it.)

One example is here today. One of them can with, I suppose, a straight face, on the one hand disparage the "evil Biiiiiiig corporations", and in the same sentence prostrate themselves to "Biiiiiiig government".

He cannot even seem to see the absolute sillyness comparing a "corporation" to government. Governments have the power of life and death and imprisonment in their hands. Corporations on the other hand simply try to earn a profit for our shareholders. Our employees can walk away from our corporate governance any day they choose.

Our Boards of Directors can be thrown out on their ear...along with the corporate officers....within the time it takes to call a shareholders meeting. (usually 30 days.)

If one 0f our Boards sees management plunging our corporation into disastrous debt, or materially lying...or any other of a number of offenses, they can be fired in a heartbeat..."for cause".

Again, pass along my heartfelt thanks to Mr. Tyrrell for the glimpse into their minds and souls.

Heck, we can at least pray for them.

Brad West| 5.13.10 @ 11:17AM

Ken makes a very good point here. Corporations can change, and aside from the case of GM and some banks, are often forced to change by the market. When was the last time we saw the government make tough decisions, even when the markets (i.e. debt markets) are clearly calling for change? Like Ken says, employees can walk away from corporations, and are often forced to when business is bad. I'm still waiting to hear about the government downsizing ....

Petronius| 5.13.10 @ 10:06AM

The most despised people on this earth are we individuals who want to live by and for ourselves without hindrance from Purple_____, (add your own moniker) and his ilk. But what counts inside the beltway is who is doing the despising. Licenses for that come from the ivy league.

Anthony| 5.13.10 @ 10:17AM

Quin's back with a vengence. BRAVO. Seems to me, we need another S.C. Justice to protect Americans from Washington hacks and Obama in particular.
Obama's and the Left's carnage of America makes the Gulf oil spill look like the oil spill on my arugala salad.
Memo to "The One": Can't wait for that great share-holder revolt in November, when the true shareholders of America kick the whole rotten elitist D.C. bunch back the hell where they came from, and you to, in 2012.

dnicholson| 5.13.10 @ 11:01AM

I think Stephie has a very honest question for Purpleguy and I wonder if he has the courage to answer it? Why do you and Liberals in general hate America?

J.P. Travis| 5.13.10 @ 11:08AM

You're absolutely correct, Mr. Hillyer. The makeup of the court is a scandal. (My column on the subject here: http://www.jpattitude.com/100512.php) In addition to every single Supreme Court justice being a Harvard or Yale graduate after Kagan replaces Stevens, most Americans are Protestant Christians and there won't be a single one on the Court. There also won't be one single military veteran. Add those scary facts to the fact that we haven't had a non-Yale/Harvard president since Reagan, and it seems clear that we are ruled by elitists.

Richard Taylor| 5.13.10 @ 11:19AM

Great point Quin and J.P. How about someone from Ohio or Tennessee on the Court? How about a Methodist or Baptist? Where's the diversity!

TennesseeVolunteer| 5.13.10 @ 2:07PM

I was born in Ohio and live in Tennessee and my wife was Methodist! do I qualify?

RLW Marine| 5.13.10 @ 10:48PM

How about a right wing conservative atheist? If I had a law degree I'd love to be on that court. I inteerpret the Constitution in exactly the way Jefferson, Adams & Monroe did. I find the super religious annoying because they ignore the Constitution. "There Shall be no Religious Test." Not all Christians are conservative and not all atheists are liberals. And, yes, I was an atheist in a fox hole, 1950. Haven't changed my mind since. Would fight just as hard for religious liberty as anyone here. But liberty of conscience requires respect for a differing opinion that does not threaten our liberities.
Just a very old Marine and curmudgeon from Tennesseee.

Nobama| 5.14.10 @ 5:15AM

It's gonna suck to be you on Judgment Day, RLW--if you're wrong; as for me, I'm sticking with my 50/50 bet!
Thank you for your service, Sir.

Stephie| 5.13.10 @ 11:13AM

NO MORE IVY LEAGUERS IN WASHINGTON!

DEMS OR GOPers!

Wade Walsh| 5.13.10 @ 11:36AM

While I agree with the sentiments expressed in Quin's piece, I do think Kagan is the best we can expect. What we can glean from her record suggests she's more open to non-liberal judicial reasoning than any of the other potential picks.

Grzmlyk| 5.13.10 @ 12:48PM

I'm guessing she's been vetted and has the official imprimatur of the Obama lickspittle.

Not a single republican should vote to confirm her. Why is it that the GOP rubber stamps Dem nominees with nary a whimper, and yet our nominees are subjected to character assassination, grandstanding, vocal opposition, ostentatious "Nay" votes and the usual liberal thuggery?

After Bork, the Republican party should have vowed never to let a Dem nominee through without a fight to the death.

Instead, our fierce protectors of liberty and defenders of teh constitution turn into docile lapdogs every damned time.

Mimi | 5.13.10 @ 3:28PM

Heh "G".....Check out the Jack Cashill article on today's American Thinker.....KAGAN, OBAMA and the HARVARD LEGACY of LITERARY FRAUD". I think this onehas LEG'S. Maybe Kagan will get questioned if the senate boy's have the moxie.

RLW Marine| 5.13.10 @ 10:52PM

Kagan believes the Constitution is a problem, needs to be a living document, meaning changed by congreessional vote. She also is anti 2nd Amendment and has very strange views on the 1st Amendment. A disaster in a skirt.

Ken (Old Texican)| 5.13.10 @ 11:53AM

Hi Wade. Welcome.

In my mind, Kagan's only positive is that the other justices will laugh at her. She couldn't sell wine to a dehydrated Frenchman off the desert.

in textspeak: the other justices will ROTFLTAO when she gets stupid.

Jobe| 5.13.10 @ 12:09PM

I am so sick and tired of obama and his "downtrodden and powerless" crap. He and his ilk are the bullies who foist their will on the unwilling on an almost daily basis. These left wing nuts have been beating the public over the head with their assinine laws, their amoral convictions, and their whimsical social provisions. Obama was never the underdog. He was the protected golden child for his whole life. He has become president of what was once the greatest nation on the face of the earth with NO accomplishments, no moral compass, and no firm conviction that hasn't been provided by his handlers. He is an empty suit, a man devoid of principle, and a charlatan of the first magnitude. The country suffers and follows him at our peril.

Pete| 5.13.10 @ 12:38PM

I think very few are "following" him any more, which is why he is trying to consolidate his power as quickly as possible. His dictatorial fantasies must be fought at every opportunity or we are looking at becoming just another Eurotrash country.

George S| 5.13.10 @ 12:55PM

"In a democracy, powerful interests must not be allowed to drown out the voices of ordinary citizens."

Translated: The powerful interests are ordinary citizens and ordinary citizens are the Obama Government, which speaks for everybody, ergo, the Tea Party is a powerful interest speaking against the ordinary citizens personified in Obama.

"Behind law there are stories -- stories of people's lives as shaped by the law, stories of people's lives as might be changed by the law…"

I wonder how many of the unfortunate folk stuck in Tony Rezko's slums have a story to tell about broken promises and shattered hopes, and how if the law caught up to Obama and his other "investors" things might have changed.

"a court that would be more inclusive, more representative, more reflective of us as a people than ever before."

Just like Kagan's appointments to her own staff, eh?

stephie| 5.13.10 @ 12:58PM

we're half way there.

Yosemeti Sam| 5.13.10 @ 12:59PM

" Obama's Hackneyed Hypocrisy ...."

Um, BHO has literally brought the Barbarians to the gate via the Hun Democrats.

Notwithstanding warped Christian tenets of inculcation via 20 years under the Wright pulpit Meister.

See the newsreel of events since BHOs' coronation by the LBSM PEN1.

This Resident in the White House is in control of
a joy stick he simply cannot let go of - Marxism
incarnate.

Nate| 5.13.10 @ 1:27PM

Hillyer --

Get a brown paper bag. Hold it tightly to your mouth. Breathe in, breath out. Try to relax.

Obama's policies may not be your cup of tea, and criticizing them is fair game, of course.

But you seem to believe you can examine his soul and his deepest motives and intentions. It seems a little ridiculous to me.

Obama has a fairly even-keeled temperament. Kagan is not a wild, left-wing radical. She's been praised by conservative jurists, and she's definitely going to get confirmed.

The politicization of this process -- which I freely admit Democrats engage in -- is disgusting.

The Constitution gives "advice and consent" to the Senate. This should mean that the Senate can veto a nominee who is flat out incompetent or corrupt. It should not be a license for a free-for-all, whether the nominee is Kagan, Roberts, Alito, or Bork.

Again, obviously the Democrats have contributed to, and may even be ultimately responsible for, these debasements of public discourse. But that's no reason to wallow in the squalors. We can put pressure on the Senate to return this process to what it is supposed to be.

Dai Alanye| 5.13.10 @ 1:51PM

What a set of arguments: Accept the bad lest you get the worst, and expect the Senate--totally dominated by leftists--to do what is right and proper re Kagan.

Further, the idea that Obama has an even temperament is simple-minded madness. The man has an arrogant belief in his own intelligence, judgment and righteousness beyond Lyndon Johnson and Jimmeh Carter added together. If a person can't discern this he must not be looking.

And as for you, Quin Hillyer, next time don't hold back--tell us what you really think of the Obamanator.

Nate| 5.13.10 @ 4:02PM

Obama has "an arrogant belief in his own intelligence"?

What does that even mean?

Obama is pretty smart; he's well educated; he has a well-attested ability to think well. He may not be Einstein, but I see no reason for him not to have a certain confidence in his intellectual abilities.

These arguments -- that Obama is arrogant or whatever -- just don't hold water. They track with what Beck and Limbaugh say about Obama, but they track with little I've heard him say or seen him do.

At some point, you have to pull your head out of your ass.

Now this doesn't mean Obama is never capable of acting arrogantly. And I think arrogance is probably the most common flaw of liberals -- just as foolishness and bigotry are the most common flaws of conservatives.

But I see nothing to suggest arrogance is some kind of dominant characteristic of Obama's temperament, and everything we know about how he works and makes decisions suggests otherwise.

I suppose if you get all your information from the world watching Beck or listening to Limbaugh you'd come to the conclusion you have, but there are other sources of information, and you really should avail yourself of some of them.

Gimmabreak| 5.13.10 @ 8:20PM

Do you actually read what Obama says, or just watch the short clips on mainstream news outlets? This is, by far, the most arrogant SOB I've ever witnessed. He is incredibly stupid, on top of his arrogance. And, he is a huge liar. Whenever he starts a sentence with "Let me be clear" (which is quite often) a HUGE whopper is the next thing out of his mouth. I suggest you read what he says, not just hold out for the "tingle up your leg" when he says it.

Nate| 5.13.10 @ 10:15PM

I don't think what you're saying is true. I think you've HEARD what you are saying repeated endlessly on Fox News and Limbaugh, so you think you're saying something that is true. You're all hat, no cow, man.

Nick| 5.14.10 @ 12:02AM

Nate,

You are incapable of thinking, dope!

JmsA| 5.14.10 @ 12:28AM

Nate, you better hurry, Keith Olbermann is about to come on.

Nobama| 5.14.10 @ 5:18AM

Nate's still trying to recover from his mighty hot Chrissie tingle!

gimmeabreak| 5.14.10 @ 9:08AM

I can READ dude, can you? Off the top of my head, a few examples: Category: Arrogant and Stupid - Give the 84 yr old Queen of England an IPOD with his SPEECHES downloaded on it. Give the PM of England a box set of DVD's that won't play on European electronics system. - LIE (repeated endlessly): 'Let me be clear, you can keep your health insurance if you like it.' when he knows full well his Health care law stacks the deck so that (a) no employer in his right mind would keep providing the benefit to his workers and (b) within 3 years of its going into effect, no company will be able to offer private insurance because people with half a brain will pay the much smaller penalty not to buy it until they actually get sick. (then drop it as soon as they are better). - Arrogant, Stupid and a Lie (and exceedingly dangerous) - we aren't in a war against islamo-fascist terrorism. Topped off with bows to Muslim leaders and going to Eygpt to bash the good people of the US (including you dude)

I don't know where you get your info, but you need to expand your horizons if you can't see what this man is doing to our country.

Dustoff| 5.13.10 @ 1:50PM

Indeed, Purpleguy, it's interesting that socialists present themselves as "protecting" America from eeevil corporations.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
LOL... I have to wonder how well them Socialists did in Greece.
Bet they wish they have a few EVIL corporations now.

Fools.

GW| 5.13.10 @ 2:36PM

For a "constitutional law professor", Obama hardly talks about the constitution. In nominating Kagan, I haven't heard him refer to the document once, even though the Supreme Court makes decisions about whether or not certain law is Constitutional. It's sad when a so-called expert in constitutional law becomes president and picks someone he feels is "representative" of America (even though this is done by Congress, our actuall representatives) and not because the nominee will uphold the Constitution.

Stefie| 5.13.10 @ 10:05PM

What the hell GW. He, obama, doesn't hold up the constitution and he doesn't want a justice who will. He wants them to "defend the little people" and do what "feels right" and push his marxist agenda. Screw the constitution, right Barry?

rileymrr| 5.13.10 @ 2:49PM

only problem with limited govenment is that as the population of the US grows, so will the role of government. it's only natural. more people, more government.
And Brian Mc, please, "open civil war" get real

Hammer| 5.13.10 @ 3:43PM

The role of government is spelled out in the constitution, why would it change based on population?

Horacio| 5.13.10 @ 4:31PM

It is most definitely not natural that the role of government should expand simply because the number of people in the country expands. I think you are confusing the natural growth of the number of people required to fulfill the role of government with the role of the government. No one would argue that the governement should not grow the number of its employees as the population expands, but those employees should be aded to fulfill the duties and responsibilities of the governement as defined in the constitution, not to expand them.

Brian Mc| 5.13.10 @ 5:26PM

rileymrr,

I'm sorry; I only had one cup of coffee this a.m. before having to rush off to work...I REALLY meant open rebellion against socialist institutions that are attempting to destroy the Consitution I swore an oath to uphold.

By the way, any time you want to march off ten paces and have at it, I'm all in. One less liberal whiner will make the world a better place.

rileymrr| 5.13.10 @ 7:35PM

Brian Mc i also swore to uphold our constitution but when i read a asinine statement i have to say something. what are you 16 years old?

ZerObama| 5.13.10 @ 9:32PM

You could use a little English Grammar refresher course, libtard. Is your IQ 16?

Dave in Mclean| 5.13.10 @ 2:54PM

re Kagan
Old saying: "Well-formed stool is better than diarrhea, but s*** is still s***.

Oldefarte| 5.13.10 @ 3:05PM

Quin, Your PROSE becomes better with age. THANK YOU!!!!!!!!!!!!

Hammer| 5.13.10 @ 3:36PM

Enjoyed reading some really good conservative common sense comments following Quin’s article, it brings me comfort knowing like minded individuals still exists in the land of the free and the home of the brave.

Nate| 5.13.10 @ 4:05PM

Hah!

It makes you happy to learn a bunch of nit-wits agree with everything a like-minded person says, because that's your vision of living in "the land of the free and home of the brave."

Spoken like a true fascist in the making!

Bravo, America!

Troll Watch| 5.13.10 @ 7:13PM

Nate needs to get back on his meds. He can't seem to handle people disagreeing with him and he thinks he is addressing America. In a final delusional projection he is accusing freedom loving people of being what he and his crew are, a bunch of brown shirted thugs trying to force their way into every part of a citizens life. I hope he gets help.

robert petersen| 5.13.10 @ 7:39PM

forcing their way in peoples lives- like telling people what they can or cannot do with their own body, who they can love and or marry, what kinds of books, movies or music we should be allowed to peruse, is this the kind of stuff you mean? Oh, no, you mean making Corporations clean up their mess, making sure Drug Cartels are not arming themselves better than the Army at gun shows, assessing the cost of using carbon fuels at their true rate instead of subsidizing the oil companies as they pump free oil from our lands to sell to us? Yeah, that's me, real thug.

ZerObama| 5.13.10 @ 9:02PM

I think you're living in the 1950s, clown. Wise up.

You just hate the 2nd Amendment don't you? Hahaha!!

Bohred| 5.13.10 @ 8:10PM

I think this bunch of like minded nit-wits agree you're a pompous jackass.

Hey, it's a free country.

JmsA| 5.14.10 @ 12:16AM

Two questions: Why are you so angry about conservative postings in a conservative site? If you don't agree, why do you linger?

REMEMBER NOVEMBER!| 5.14.10 @ 5:20AM

It won't be a "FREE COUNTRY" much longer with you freakin' Marxists in office! Losers.

Oldefarte| 5.14.10 @ 11:44AM

Nate, in the language of nit-witism, STICK IT WHERE THE SUN DON'T SHINE.....AND TWIST IT SIDEWAYS!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Bill Hussein O'Stalin| 5.13.10 @ 4:47PM

Another great article from Quinn Hillyer!

However, what else could one expect from an arrogant know-it-all liar like Barack Obama who referred to average Americans like this: "it's not surprising then they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations."

The only real bitter people are the Obamas and the Kagens who exist in ivory towers and only come down to smell the little people when they don't smell. Think that's ridiculous?

Here's Harry Reid, another morally bankrupt elitist criminal wannabe: "My staff tells me not to say this, but I'm going to say it anyway," said Reid in his remarks. "In the summer because of the heat and high humidity, you could literally smell the tourists coming into the Capitol. It may be descriptive but it's true."

The sensitive Harry Reid made the statement after 621 million was spent on a Capitol Visitor Center. The original projection for that center was $140 million. If anything stinks it's the Harry Reids of the world who lie to the public about cost projections all the while knowing that costs overruns are welcomed and anticipated.

Nancy Pelosi is another conundrum of elitism spouting her pearls of stupidity: "There's no question there is, at this moment, an anti-incumbent mood," the Speaker said at her weekly press conference.

It isn't anti-incumbent, it's anti-elitism, anti-corruption and it's all happening to a public who has discovered the internet and has discovered how to tell the wheat from the chaff.

In the meantime the other official group of elitists is the state run media, comprised of the Washington Post, The New York Times, MSNBC, CNBC, ABC, CBS and CNN amongst others.

You can hear their anguish in this little quip from Charles Todd, a totally out of his element journalist. He would make a better hot dog vendor. Here's the quip: " How about that new immigration law in Arizona? Well, a whopping 64 percent support the law. And we read them the law verbatim exactly as it's been written – 64 percent approve of it; 34 percent oppose it. But look at this number among Hispanics: It's reversed – 70 percent of Hispanics oppose it; 27 percent support it. It is something that is going to be a political hot potato for probably the next couple of years.

How about the President? Well, look at this. There's sort of a polarizing view of the President these days – 51 percent, a majority, actually now disapprove of his policies. And yet he's still well liked: 69 percent like him personally. So this polarized view, he's sort of Teflon personally, but he's having a hard time selling his agenda"

In essence, the former bastions of the state run media are falling and for the same reason Obama is failing. Their elitism isn't selling because it's packaged to make them look like the arrogant leftist snobs they are, and no one is buying.

TomF| 5.13.10 @ 4:54PM

What's wrong with Nate? He rattled off "Home of the Bave and Land of the Free" as if it's some draconian mumbo jumbo from yesteryear that doesn't apply anymore. Yah, just like the Ten Commandments & The United States Constitution, all outdated, insignificant, and meaningless, right Nate? And why do the lefty's alway reduce a different opinion or viewpoint - "must have come from Beck or Limbaugh". What a douchebag!

Stephie| 5.13.10 @ 10:14PM

I firmly believe that liberalism/progressivism
is a disease.

Michael Mastro| 5.13.10 @ 4:58PM

Well said. If you want to know what Obama stands for, look at his past. His mother was a Marxist. His father was a Marxist. His best friend was a Communist. His favorite professors are all Marxists. He began his political career in the home of an admitted, unrepentant terrorist. He spent 20 years in the church of an anti-American racist. And it always will go back to Saul Alinsky, his mentor.

Ken (Old Texican)| 5.13.10 @ 5:02PM

Nate,
I am sorely getting tired of your fun-house mirror approach to this conversation.

You are obviously a communist, (pardon the shorthand), and an apologist for the communists.
Do you get paid for commenting here, or are you just plain butt-stupid?

or.....are you yet another looser counting on "Obama's Stash"?

Well, sir, Obama's stash is ripped out of our back pockets. I see no need to give part of our cash to you.
I would rather just embarrass the heck out of you, so you have to change screen names again.

Nate,
you are simply an embarrasment to your fellow "useful idiots".
You have contributed nothing here but whining and puffery.
Get a job to serve your fellow Americans in some fashion.

Nick| 5.13.10 @ 7:05PM

Ken,

Nate believes that the Ft. Hood shooting committed by Nidal Hasan, that killed 14 innocent people, was the equivalent of just another "workplace shooting." Not a terrorist attack.

The moron is so ill-informed, he doesn't know about the contacts that Hasan has had with another known terrorist, Anwar al Awlaki.

You are spot on, Ken.
Nate makes Useful Idiots look stupider than they really are.
I didn't think that was possible! Ha-ha!

Oldefarte| 5.14.10 @ 11:50AM

Nick & Ken, Nah, Nate is obviously one of those technology SPIES housed/planted within Holder's D of J to provide his boss' socialistic arguments/comments to usens ''''nit-wit'''' conservatives!!!!!!!!

robert petersen| 5.13.10 @ 7:46PM

well, after my first and last visit to this site I must say thanks for the entertainment but I have to go take a nap now, Mike, Tom, Pingy, you guys make my brain hurt. It's easy to see what happened to Cheney's dream of a "Century of Republican Rule". You have to come up with new leaders and the Party seems to have been conquered by cretins.

ZerObama| 5.13.10 @ 9:28PM

What brain? Your head's been up your stupid liberal ass so long it's putrefied!

JmsA| 5.14.10 @ 12:25AM

Thank you very much for your thoughtful comments, and please, don't let the door hit you on the way out.

Dohfugwimee| 5.13.10 @ 8:41PM

... after reading the comments and rebuttals .. I can honestly say that those of you standing against this "regime" and or "aristocracy" make me proud to call you my fellow Americans!
This is a special country... Don't Tread on it.

tractah| 5.13.10 @ 9:52PM

I can't stand Obama, he's an obnoxious prick

GiveMeLiberty| 5.13.10 @ 10:05PM

Why weren't the Republicans whining so loudly when their fearless leader took away many of our civil liberties under the patriot act? What about the financial devastation we've suffered under this war we can't seem to win? Republican leadership started this war. They coined phrases like axis of evil and would have us believe there is a terrorist around every corner. They've used the fear of terrorism to bleed our tax dollars dry spending 12 billion per month as of 2008 on this war. You have done nothing more then put the American tax payer in a very deep hole and left your mess to the next Presidency and are now trying and lay all the blame on them.

Furthermore corporate greed and shady business deals are the hallmark of a true Republican. They care only for their own personal gain at the expense of the American tax payer. It was Republicans that put America into this recession and now we're supposed to believe you can get us out of it? I don't see why America should ever trust a Republican again.

Stephie| 5.13.10 @ 10:22PM

No darlin, your boy Barry is the thief that is only out for his personal gain. And it just pisses you libs off that he hasn'tlived up to his "promises" of getting out of Gitmo, ending the war that he has escalated in Af-gan-ee-stan. He's a liar and a thief and is dragging us into a European hole we'll never come out of. Wake up dude and quit blaming the those on the other side of the isle. Your guy is destroying this country.

stupidpeopleshouldntbreed| 5.13.10 @ 11:15PM

givemeignorance:
I patiently await the list of liberties you lost due to the Patriot Act.
While your at it, grab your calculator and tally up the war cost so far; then, tally up ODhimmi's budget so far.

I think you are reading from a talking points fax that is about 3 years old.

Do you realize just how -inane- you sound?

clown.

Hammer| 5.13.10 @ 11:21PM

The Obama administration is continuing the patriot act. Many conservatives spoke out against the patriot act and continue to do so. I do not believe the previous administrations would abuse this power but I do believe the socialists in power now will. Wasn't Fannie and Freddie, liberal ideology at its finest, at the core of the financial meltdown? Talk about greed and shady deals. Didn’t they just get a multi-billion dollar bailout? I guess the repeated and thankfully failed Islamic terrorist attempts at murdering Americans is the fault of the Republicans. I truly believe that some people are incapable of lucid thought.

tractah| 5.13.10 @ 10:30PM

Giveme liberty: what freedom did you lose under the Patriot Act? Act

jgdp| 5.13.10 @ 10:34PM

bama's a truly worthless turd. Where's LHO when we actually need him???

tractah| 5.13.10 @ 10:47PM

This is the 12th president I have seen in my life and the first that I despised. The Slytherin hiss as he speaks makes me recoil....

Nate| 5.13.10 @ 11:18PM

This website is fascist central. What a bunch of spiteful, nasty, bigoted ignoramuses.

Beck and Limbaugh have poisoned your brains.

Nick| 5.13.10 @ 11:34PM

You are admonishing others about being spiteful, nasty, bigoted, and an ignoramus, Nate?

What a hypocrite!

JmsA| 5.14.10 @ 12:23AM

Nate, you're still here?

Dai Alanye| 5.14.10 @ 1:34AM

Nate keeps blathering about Limbaugh and Beck, but those two are successful because so many Americans agree with them not because they are able to manipulate feeble intellects.

When it comes to manipulating minds with emotional yet meaningless rhetoric no-one tops Barry O. That a slogan as simple-minded as "Hope and change" can win an election clearly indicates a sizable portion of the electorate is easily swayed by nonsense.

And how about the lowering of the sea level, Mr Canute the Second?

Oldefarte| 5.18.10 @ 3:38PM

At least we have......'BRAINS' !!!!!!!!!!

wouldee5150| 5.13.10 @ 11:22PM

that's the best opening paragraph I have read in months. Superbly insightful- alliterates the illiterate idiot with a flourish. Dr Gates would love the literary nuance, I am sure. Very poetic- poignant, yet with a fruitful bouquet fit for springtime.

JmsA| 5.13.10 @ 11:57PM

If anyone wishes to understand how twisted leftist minds can be, besides the rantings of that sort interspersed herein, please refer to the recently posted online Elena Kagan Princeton senior thesis about socialism in America. I must offer a warning though, it is just as boring as anything Karl Marx ever wrote, though with a touch of early 20th century northeastern sweatshop Americana thrown in. It is simply astounding to behold how anyone would contemplate, let alone nominate anyone like that to a position requiring interpretation of one of the highest bodies of laws ever written.

TomF| 5.14.10 @ 8:09AM

Horse's Ass = Nate & GiveMeIgnorance

Both bonafide card carrying memebers of MoveOn, Media Matters, Talking Points Memo, Center for American Progress, nothing more, nothing less. Both intellectually bankrupt, incapable of critical thinking or rational thought. Oh yah, that's also the Obama no liability voter. My guess is they're also both tax consumers, not tax contributors.

Bob Belvedere| 5.14.10 @ 8:28AM

You magnificent bastard! Bravo!

Quoted from and Linked to at:
Up On Fisking Creek
-----
It's Time To ROC 'N' ROLL:
Restore Our Constitution & Restore Our Lost Liberties

WOLVERINES!

David| 5.14.10 @ 3:28PM

David| 5.13.10 @ 3:13PM
Now is the time for repubs to start opposing liberal judge nominees: at the district court and appellate court levels. They make a huge mistake by waiting until libs are nominated to the Supreme Court.

First, the dems always claim that the repubs voted for them for the district or appellate court and now oppose them for the supreme court. If they are not supreme court material, then repubs had no business voting to confirm them to the lower courts.

Second, the vast majority of cases never make it to the supreme court, or to the appellate courts for that matter. Liberal judges wreak havoc at the district court and appellate court levels.

Last, federal judges at levels serve for life just as the justices on the supreme court.

It is time for repubs to start stopping them from ever becoming federal judges - like the dems did to Miguel Estrada and several other Bush nominees.

bobsmith| 5.14.10 @ 6:27PM

Only a great article if your intent is to re-litigate the 2008 election. ("Ooh, Obama knows scary people! Help, mommy, the big bad president man isn't one of us!")

Maybe for your next piece you can re-fight the 1964 election, and explain how we would have been better served by a President Goldwater.

BozObama| 5.16.10 @ 4:23AM

We would have won the Vietnam war, idiot. Democrats suck big time at fighting wars and national security.
What a dope!

WAKE UP| 5.14.10 @ 7:22PM

"I struggle to find a descriptor for this puerile, vengeful, angry, alienated, ideologically warped, simple-minded, bullying, totalitarian, ignorant, bigoted, narcissistic, foolish, immature, despicable, destructive, self-aggrandizing, megalomaniacal, shallow, thin-skinned, whiney, phony shard of human detritis that is, astonishingly, our president. "

Gryzmlyk, the whole American nation has yet to squarely face the question: Why did we elect someone so UN-American? Answer that and the rest will follow. Keep the faith.

WAKE UP| 5.14.10 @ 7:25PM

"Change the names and places, and fill in the blank of any politician in their struggle to get elected in order to make things happen for America. "

Purpleguy, lissen up. Whatever their failings or virtues, achievements or failures, the one thing you can say about All the Presidents of the United Stateas is that they were unequovically, staunchly AMERICAN. Until now.
See my remark to Grzymlk above - and start THINKING.

Peggy| 5.16.10 @ 12:56AM

Telling "stories" is the essence of community organizing groups.

BozObama| 5.16.10 @ 4:25AM

You mean 'lying' right, Peggy? Libs excel at lying, like all good Marxists.

jdi| 7.1.10 @ 2:47AM

beijing massage

Mark| 9.27.10 @ 11:54AM

The thing about the Left Wing holding western europe up as the model--sweden, france, germany--those nations have never been liberal, and never will be. As I write these words, Sweden just elected into power a right wing nationalist government, france is forcing the removal of tens of thousands of roma (gypsies), and germany has more mothers killing their children due to debt problems than the big bad old USA.