Marvino Guardino

Yes, gasoline is expensive, but Hinchey is a lunatic

While I realize that no one has given a New York politician high marks for either intelligence or honesty since Teddy Roosevelt, Representative Maurice Hinchey, Democrat, New York, yes sir, takes the proverbial cake and eats it too—with his mouth open.... no doubt “…drunk, hiccupping… dribbling streams of liquor and bits of men...,” as Homer wrote describing the Cyclops.

How incredibly stupid is Komrad Hinchey? “We (the government) should own the refineries. Then we can control how much gets out into the market.”

Ones blood begins to boil…

No New York pol has done anything right since the Panama Canal was dug (brief exception: Rudy G.); товарищ Maurice is unlikely to reverse the trend. This idiot-trotskyite wants to control the means of production in order to ensure “correct” market planning. Such policies worked extraordinarily well in the U.S.S.R., in East Germany, and continue to perform splendidly in China and Cuba. Thank you, Genosse! Thank you for volunteering to destroy the world’s economy.

Perhaps instead of nationalizing the refineries, Tovarish Mo-Mo should stop writing love letters to Hugo Chavez and work to get oil companies permission to build new refineries. When was the last time a new refinery was built from scratch in the U.S.?

Still I side with Malcolm Forbes: let’s continue to pump oil from the Mid-East until it’s totally tapped out there, rendering that accursed corner of the world once again irrelevant. But we could refine it here…

Contact Komrad Maurice Hinchey at:

2431 Rayburn H.O.B.

Washington, DC  20515

Phone: (202) 225-6335

Fax: (202) 226-0774

Or email the super-genius

Barry doesn't get it. Which means we will.

“What we know is that, in previous terrorist attacks—for example, the first attack against the World Trade Center—we were able to arrest those responsible, put them on trial. They are currently in U.S. prisons, incapacitated.”

---Barry O

Others have pointed out that Abdul Rahman Yasin, the bomber in question, is not incapacitated (whatever that means) in a U.S. prison, but is rather, at large having been a guest of Sadam Hussein until that thug’s untimely overthrow. Confederate Yankee sums up his piece with “Once again, Barack Obama is dead wrong on the facts.”

And I couldn’t agree more, nor could I more vigorously acknowledge the incredible degree to which The Arrogant O has drawn a pass from the Press on this latest lapse in historical accuracy. Yet I assert, Barry’s historical accuracy is the least of his problems.

In 1993, we thought some crazy guys were trying to blow up a tall building in New York. They tried; it was scary; but they ultimately failed. Bill Clinton, whom we can ultimately blame a great deal of 9/11 on, cowardly lobbed a couple of missiles in the direction of Afghanistan and Sudan. Obviously, Bill knew more than he let on, but preferred to leave the dirty work of protecting his country for his successor. So at the time, most Americans didn’t recognize the full extent of the looming threat. After 9/11, most of the world saw that something bigger was underway.

The HUGE problem with Barry’s naïve statement is that he obviously still views the enemies we face as some rag-tag nut jobs who can simply be arrested and put in the county lock-up until they’ve paid their debt to society, as Batman used to say. (Before he got all post modern. But let that pass.) 9/11 was a carefully orchestrated military-style operation, not a ninth grade science project.

Bill Clinton’s (did I saw cowardly?) response led to 9/11; it certainly didn’t prevent it. Obama has looked squarely at the facts (well, I guess he really hasn’t even done that, since he can’t get the facts right), and has come up with the wrong answer.

Obama will be a dangerous president. Hope. Change. Disaster.

So many distractions

Michael Scherer has a piece in Time Magazine’s Swampland blog criticizing Senators Dodd and Conrad for accepting favorable rates from mortgage lenders. (Better than listed rates, but not crazy better.) He thinks that just because one of the Senators oversees the Senate Banking Committee, that Senator should hold himself to some kind of higher ethical standard—like not to accept sweetheart rates from an entity he regulates. This is like asking the Senator not to be a Senator. Why would he do that? Turn down financial favors? Crazy talk.

I do think there are two important issues in the piece, however, worth examining. At the least, there are questions worth asking.

1. Why do all the well-regarded newspapers and magazines have a “blog” section? Either the piece is part of the magazine/newspaper or it’s not. That it’s published online isn’t the point. I think these “blogs” are a way of avoiding payment (or at least regular scale payment) to journalist-bloggers and at the same time a means of accruing additional costsaves by not bothering to edit, fact-check, or proofread the content. This would be in a different way than their not bothering to edit, fact-check, or proofread all the other content they publish elsewhere on paper or the Web. Big publishers fail to edit, fact-check, or proofread that content in a far more expensive and elegant manner. Seems to me.

2. Why do all the well-regarded newspapers and magazines not think that anyone notices how inherently biased towards Obama their reporting (or “blogging”) is? Scherer’s first line: “The endless and insufferable presidential candidate guilt-by-association game may have finally led to a big story.” This line is worth looking at because he ain’t talking about McCain’s coverage.

a. It would be helpful if he added a little color, a touch of clarification: is he referring to the “distractions” caused by the Right Reverend Jeremiah Wright, noted racist and hate-monger? Bill Ayers, renowned anti-American terrorist? Model businessman, Tony Reszko? Or, does he refer not to Obama’s associates at all, but to McCain’s? People like…like…uh, yeah. Must be Obama’s.

b. Should it not matter to the Press and to the public that this scurvy lot includes Obama’s closest friends and advisors? Barry’s strength and majesty are so great as to wash away any of the (putative) sins of his henchmen? My, his power is great indeed.

c. Has the “endless and insufferable” nature of the campaign not been facilitated by the sheer volume of Obama’s poor choices in friends and advisors?

Our point today really isn’t about Senator Dodd (but to echo Scherer…what was he thinking???), but is about the Press’s attitude, and indeed Obama’s own stance, prohibiting the questioning of any of Barry’s statements, frequent gaffes, or filthy associates. Any critical or probing examination of Obama is a distraction. Pulls our attention away from his message of hope and change. We are not worthy to loose the sandal of his feet. So don’t ask.

The Arrogant O

It's early days yet, but what may emerge as Barry's biggest weakness is a fuller awareness of his real and very apparent arrogance.

Next Victim, Please!

Now Johnny Mac is going after Eric Holder, another of Barry O’s Veep-Vetters. Jim Johnson is gone in a puff of smoke—for the moment. Wristrockets blazing, McCain said, "I think it is a matter of record that Mr. Holder recommended the pardoning of Mr. [Marc] Rich."

The Obama campaign countered by noting that McCain’s campaign is enjoying the services of Carly Fiorina, formerly head of Hewlett-Packard. Huh. All right... So she was. Zing. I’m sorry, what were we talking about? Oh, yeah, crooks.

David Gergen, formerly of the Clinton White House and miraculously still employed, advises, "You know, if we're going to take everybody who has commercial ties on either side of the campaign and question anything, any little cloud or any little suspicion and force them out of the politics, I must tell you, we're going to take an awful lot of talent out of politics. And the country will not be better off."

Gergen is probably right—except for the “any little cloud” part. Nothing was sleazier than the Clinton White House. The Marc Rich pardon continues to baffle and annoy after eight years. One man’s “little cloud” is another’s “what a sleezeball.”

The Arrogant O might employ a little rule of thumb: Don’t use anyone who had anything to do with either Clinton. They’re tainted. They’re crooks. They’re bad news.

Johnson resigns...Times gets a couple of facts wrong. No big.

So Jimmy J.’s out and Barry O. “accepts” this removal of “distraction.” What Obama wants, actually, is more distraction. He needs anything to happen that will distract people from looking too closely at his sleazy political and personal connections.

Glenn Reynolds warns that Johnson will be back once the commotion dies down.

In an interesting yet hardly surprising lapse of fact-checking, the L.A. Times notes Johnson’s sweetheart deal with Countrywide gratis his “Friend of Angelo” status. That part's accurate.  The Times then describes Angelo Mozilo as “the former head of Countrywide.” [The Times spells his name incorrectly as “Mozillo.”]

Check your calendars guys: Mozilo is still Chairman and CEO. BofA hasn’t signed the deal yet.

Isn't there something creepy about Maureen Dowd?

Maureen Dowd whines today in the New York Times that Republicans have or will begin “Mincing Up Michelle” Obama now that the Clintons are out of the picture. Dowd spent a great deal of time during the past few months “mincing up” Hillary Clinton, but that was different—Hillary is a monster. Michelle is apparently the creepy holy virgin to Barack’s infallible savior. Dowd says:

“There are creepy Web sites, like TheObamaFile.com, dedicated to painting Michelle as a female version of Jeremiah Wright, an angry black woman, the disgruntled, lecturing “Mrs. Grievance” depicted on the cover of National Review.”

Couple of problems here:

1. Michelle has thrown herself into the campaign and made it known that she has opinions. As she’s entitled. Having jumped into the fray, however, every one of her opinions are open to scrutiny, worthy of comment, and may be disagreed with. Vigorously. (There’s a weird rhetorical thing going on here, I think. She has opinions, and isn’t that great, but do not dare call her on any of them. I think there’s some reverse, left-handed sexism there.)

2. Michelle like Barry sat in Wright’s church for 20 years, and brought her children to hear his racist screeds. Quitting the church now doesn’t erase this history—BTW, has Michelle quit also? Or just Barry? Taking your daughters to this church is not “loving parenting.”

3. Michelle’s sinecure and pay raise following the successful delivery of earmarked funds is creepy.

4. There’s plenty more.

According to Dowd, this is all off limits.   Almost like Bill Clinton was hired as a consultant to the campaign and came up with another brilliant policy:  Don't ask, don't notice.

It is henceforth unacceptable to question the candidate.

Barry O. will not be questioned on Jim Johnson, the Right Reverend Dr. Wright, or anybody else "tangentially" related to his campaign.  So don't ask.

Get used to hearing this excuse a lot…

Barry O. responds to criticism that his V.P. Search Guru, Jim Johnson, received a sweetheart mortgage deal from Countrywide while he headed Fannie Mae. (via Real Clear Politics)

"This is a game that can be played, everybody, you know, who is tangentially related to our campaign, I think, is going to have a whole host of relationships.”

 They certainly will: think of Obama’s own acquaintances, friends, spiritual advisors, etc. They hate America; they bombed America; they blame America. 

Sorry, Barry, but your excuse here goes beyond typical political rhetoric—it’s just plain stupid. To paraphrase, “Everyone has associations—I can’t check on all of them. Or on any of them.” Apparently, because the job is time-consuming, it needn’t be done. It doesn’t matter whether his pals are crooks; everyone knows people. 

If running for president is this time-consuming, imagine how difficult being president must be.

He's so dreamy! Except for the whole crypto-socialist thing...

Oh, geez, he’s just so wonderful. 

It’s going to be really tiresome now that the apotheosis of Barry Obama has become explicit. Politico’s Ben Smith jumps on the hagiographic bandwagon with this throwaway comment in a post dealing with the non-existence of the Michelle Rant Tape: 

‘As he acknowledged yesterday, beating back whisper campaigns is perhaps the central challenge his campaign faces.’

Really, Ben? This is Obama’s central challenge? What about dealing with his dangerously naïve foreign policy proposals? What about his ruinous social programs? What about his shameful associates—terrorists and racists? The list is long, and Jerry Wright wasn’t whispering.