Say What 12/22/2010 Edition [Reader Post]

Loading

Chris Matthews describing Obama Smile

Liberals:

An AP story tells us, “the big new tax law” [is] “the most significant new tax law in a decade…The package, signed Friday by President Barack Obama, will save taxpayers, on average, about $3,000 next year.”   This is the 2-year extension of the Bush tax cuts that Obama signed.   There will be, however, a lower amount taken out of our taxes, as Social Security is slightly reduced.

CBS reporter Nancy Cordes described this legislation as: “an early holiday gift for every American taxpayer.”  Now, bear in mind that no one is getting any more money; this is a preservation of the tax rates which we have had for the past decade.

Chris Matthews, after showing a clip of the President at Friday’s bill signing, spoke about the Commander-in-Chief’s “cute smile we all love…That wonderful, boyish smile”

President Obama on unemployment benefits: “And economists say that not only is that good for those families, it’s good for the entire economy. It’s probably the biggest boost that we can give an economy because they’re the folks most likely to spend the money with businesses and that gives them customers.”

When it comes to the eating habits of children, Michelle Obama says: “We can’t just leave it up to the parents.”

New York Representative Jerrold Nadler said on CBS’s “Face the Nation.””The Republican block is saying, like a bunch of gangsters, it’s a nice middle class tax cut – a pity something would happen to it.”

Democratic Senator John Kerry (D-MA) said sarcastically of the idea of reading the entire omnibus bill before passing it: “Why would be have to read something?  …Lets just chew up the time of the United States Senate keeping everybody up all night reading a bill rather than working on it.”

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi: “President Obama’s was a job creator from day one, with the Recovery Act, and pulled us back from that recession.”

California Air Resources Board Chairwoman Mary D. Nichol says of there imminent California cap and trade system: “[It] will help drive innovation, create more green jobs and clean up our air and environment.”  She made no additional comments about the monkeys that were flying out of her butt.

Robert Gibbs asserted that the repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell will “Strengthen our national security while upholding the basic equality upon which this nation was founded.”

David Aguilar, the deputy commissioner of Customs and Border Protection, said”At no point in history has the border been as secure as it is today.”

A scrolling, 50-second graphic in Times Square reads: `Muslims for Love, Loyalty and Peace.’  It also features the classic iconic Muslim pictures of a dove, an American flag and a peace sign.

Nushrat Qadir said her group wants to clear up misconceptions about Islam – for Muslims and non-Muslims alike.  “I really would hope that people will remember and keep in mind that Islam is a religion of peace, its teachings are of peace and that’s what it means, and that a few extremists do not represent all of us.”

Omar al-Bashir, the Sudanese president, said the country would adopt an Islamic constitution if the south split away in next month’s referendum.   With regards to a woman being lashed by police in a video: “If she is lashed according to sharia law there is no investigation. Why are some people ashamed? This is sharia.”

Crosstalk:

A writer for the Huffington Post was recently arrested for having sex with his adult daughter.   Many HuffPo readers are apparently okay with this:

LakeLucilleLoon
Why do we care who he has relations with? As long as he and his daughter don’t risk birth defect by procreating then consenting adults can do as they please. Many royals marry those very closely related, it’s only in our modern society that we find this practice odd.

Manuel Royal
It’s ridiculous that there’s a law concerning this. If two (or more) parties are consenting adults, it’s none of the government’s business what kind of sex life they have.

kadene
He is probably just following the ancient patriarchs of our much revered Judeo-Christian culture!

LREKing
“Some things are simply always going to be appalling and thoroughly disgusting.” To you, perhaps. Do you want to be the sole arbiter of morality for everyone else in the world? Whatever will we do when you pass on?

billy goat
This isn’t far away from arresting gay people for congregating in bar ala 1969. As the recipient of much maligning as a gay person historically, I would take a long deep breath before condemning the actions of another. May be some of you should too.

LREKing
Yes, it may be illegal. But why? Because people find it distasteful? Isn’t that the source of so much anti-gay sentiment?

From:
http://weaselzippers.us/2010/12/13/lefties-unsurprisingly-ok-with-incest-after-huff-po-writer-arrested-for-having-sex-with-his-daughter/

With comments on each:
http://www.moonbattery.com/archives/2010/12/incest-okay-wit.html

_________________________________________________________________

Feds, when shutting down the use of Christmas symbols at small bank in Perkins, OK, said that these symbols violated the discouragement clause of Regulation B of the bank regulations. According to the clause, “.the use of words, symbols, models and other forms of communication . express, imply or suggest a discriminatory preference or policy of exclusion.”

The feds interpret that to mean, for example, a Jew or Muslin or atheist may be offended and believe they may be discriminated against at this bank. It is an appearance of discrimination.

“This is just ridiculous,” said bank customer Jim Nyles. “This whole thing is just ridiculous. We all have regulatory bodies that govern us. But this is too much.”

Conservatives:

Charles Gasparino: “You’re telling me that when you tax a business, they’re still going to hire the same amount of people?”

0 0 votes
Article Rating
15 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Here.
Chris Matthews can choke on that fake, frozen, exactly-the-same smile Obama is so appealing to him for.
http://www.thefrisky.com/post/246-quickies-092509/
When this 1st came out people screamed ”FOUL!””
But they are compiled from official White House photos.

From Europe where they have seen a lot of Aspiring Politicos over the years…

The World from Berlin
‘Barack Obama Was the Biggest Loser of 2010’

http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,736320,00.html

After months of stalling, the US Senate has finally approved the New START disarmament treaty with Russia. The ratification is a major triumph for US President Barack Obama, but German commentators warn that it may be the last such success for a long time.

US President Barack Obama came to power promising a new era of bipartisan cooperation. But there has been precious little of that since he took office. Indeed, Republican opposition to Obama’s initiatives has been markedly vociferous.

Now, in a rare victory for the president, the US Congress has ratified the New START disarmament treaty, with Republican support. On Wednesday, the Senate approved the treaty, which had been stalled for months, by 71 votes to 26. At least 13 Republicans voted with the Democrats after being won over by Obama. The ratification is an important foreign policy triumph for Obama, who suffered a crushing defeat in November’s midterm elections.

The treaty, which Obama signed with Russian President Dmitry Medvedev in April 2010, involves Russia and the US cutting their stock of nuclear warheads by 30 percent and will also introduce a new mutual inspection regime. “This is the most significant arms control agreement in nearly two decades,” Obama said. It replaces the START treaty, which was signed in 1991 and expired in December 2009.

German Chancellor Angela Merkel congratulated Obama on the ratification. In a statement issued on Wednesday evening in Berlin, the chancellor said the treaty was an “important milestone in the development of a real partnership” with Russia. She also expressed her hope that further disarmament steps would follow the ratification of New START.

The two houses of the Russian parliament still need to ratify the treaty. The lower house, the Duma, might do so as early as Friday, the Duma’s speaker said Thursday.

On Thursday, German media commentators take a look at what the ratification means for Obama’s presidency.

SPIEGEL’s Washington correspondent Marc Hujer writes on SPIEGEL ONLINE:

“Barack Obama was the biggest loser of 2010. He allowed the angry Tea Party movement to grow powerful, he did not pass any decent laws despite his majority in Congress and he was aloof, elitist and indecisive. He had to accept a formidable, yet entirely understandable, defeat in the midterm elections as a result. No one expected much from Obama, at least not during the rest of this year.”

“Now, just days before Christmas, Congress has ratified the New START disarmament treaty with Russia. … Will Obama build on this victory? Is it Obama’s breakthrough as a president? Will it mark his comeback as a reformer? … Is a new era of cooperation beginning?”

“The opposite is much more probable, namely that the disarmament treaty will be Obama’s last significant achievement for a long time. In January, the new Congress will convene. The new representatives who won in the midterm elections will come to Washington, including those Tea Party activists who have little interest in making compromises with Obama. With them, Congress will move to the right …. Possibly the only reason why so many Republicans voted for Obama’s law was because they themselves fear the new era and see few chances of passing sensible, bipartisan laws in the new Congress.”

The center-right Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung writes:

“All previous treaties between Washington and Moscow regarding strategic nuclear weapons are associated with names of a Republican presidents, such as Nixon, Reagan, Bush Sr. and Bush Jr. Nevertheless, this time around, representatives of the Republican Party left no stone unturned in their bid to prevent the new disarmament treaty being passed by the Senate. Even though some of them may have had entirely legitimate concerns about the treaty on principle, or regarding its details, it was clear that the Republicans wanted to deprive Obama of one of his few demonstrable foreign policy successes. Half a dozen former Republican secretaries of state testified that the ratification of the New START treaty was in the national interest of the United States. But many senators were willing to put the supposed interests of the party over those of the country. How shameful!”

The center-left Süddeutsche Zeitung writes:

“The ratification of the New START treaty is extremely important. The treaty guarantees that the number of nuclear weapons continues to fall, by an equal number on both sides, so that a dangerous imbalance does not arise. … It also refutes the accusation that the nuclear powers always demand that non-nuclear states do without atomic weapons, without disarming themselves. Even with the treaty, the idea of a world free of nuclear weapons remains just a hope. But a small step is better than nothing.”

“Barack Obama, who negotiated the treaty with Moscow, is justified in celebrating a major personal victory. Despite his serious defeat in the midterm elections, the US president invested a lot of political capital in order to get the treaty through the Senate. US voters are unlikely to thank him for it — they have other worries. But they should, at least for one day, feel a little proud of their president.”

— David Gordon Smith

PS: We as a Former World Power got Punked on START.

Vice Admiral: Obama was outmaneuvered by Russians on START

http://www.usni.org/vice-admiral-obama-was-outmaneuvered-russians-start

U.S. Naval Institute – December 23, 2010

President Barack Obama was outmaneuvered by the Russians and should have abandoned the New START negotiations instead of seeking a political victory, says former nuclear plans monitor Vice Admiral Jerry Miller, USN (Ret).

“The Obama administration is continuing a dated policy in which we cannot even unilaterally reduce our own inventory of weapons and delivery systems without being on parity with the Russians,” Miller told the U.S. Naval Institute in Annapolis, Md. “We could give up plenty of deployed delivery systems and not adversely affect our national security one bit, but New START prohibits such action – so we are now stuck with some outmoded and useless elements in our nuke force.”

After meeting resistance from several Republicans, the U.S. Senate ratified the New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START) with Russia by a vote of 71-26 on Wednesday.

“The Soviets/Russians were done in by Reagan and our missile defense program because they cannot afford to build such a system,” said Miller. “They instead try to counter our program with rhetoric at the bargaining table. And they won by outmaneuvering Obama. START plays right into their hands.”

Former President Ronald Reagan’s Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI) is often credited with bankrupting the U.S.S.R. because the Soviets were unable to keep pace with the technology being developed by the United States.

“We have always been superior in quality of our nuclear force, so we did not have to negotiate with a party we do not trust,” said Miller. “If Obama wanted to save some money and improve national defense, he should have gotten out of the nuke negations and acted unilaterally. START is simply a political victory for Obama.”

Miller, who helped prepare the National Strategic Target List and Single Integrated Operational Plan for waging nuclear war and later participated in arms control meetings with the Soviet government, expressed concern that START could leave the United States vulnerable to other emerging threats.

“The treaty prohibits the conversion of an existing ballistic missile system into a missile defense system,” said Miller. “We might want to do that with a Trident or an ICBM sometime in the future, particularly if the Chinese alleged threat materializes.”

Miller’s book “Stockpile: The Story Behind 10,000 Strategic Nuclear Weapons” details the buildup of nuclear arms and the policies to keep the stockpile under control.

Oral History of VAdm. Gerald E. Miller, U.S. Navy (Ret.) Volume I and II

Out Maneuvered is POLITE for PUNKED.

😉

O.T.Just a few IN FAVOR of treaty Sec of Def Gates Fmr S.D’S Schlessinger and Perry
Sec.Of State Clinton
Fmr Sec.of States Albright,Schultz,Kissinger,Condi Rice
JT.Chiefs Chairman Admiral Mullen and V.Chair Gen.Cartwright
George H.W. Bush Bill Clinton

Know you wouldn’t take a Ret.Vice Adm.into battle against this group.

Merry Christmas to you and yours Enjoy reading your posts but your professed neutrality(or at least your pox on all their houses) sometimes seems in question.

@ rich wheeler, Have YOU read it? I have. It leaves a whole lot to be desired and determined.

Again I will remind you that Obama and Clinton have left Our Allies out of the consultation on this and NOT a ONE of them want it. Only the folks that YOU reference seem to believe that it is a plum.

Read it before you comment further. I just have the same reservations as the majority of our NATO allies as well as Hungary, Poland and others did not get a missile defense that they were PROMISED.

You need to see more than the endorsements from folks that I quite frankly don’t believe have the experience or knowledge of how the Russians Operate. Our NATO Allies do.

Why not talk about things that you have recent experience with. Like watching football. National Defense and Diplomacy are not the NFL. National Security is the extension of Strength, not deal cutting with folks that punk Clinton & Obama at every bend in the road.

Read the Treaty before you comment. You come off here a lot like those in DC that voted for Bills without reading them. I thought You were smarter than that. I will spend my Christmas away from home, again, but my Daughter is on Holiday leave from the USAFA and keeping a light in the window at the House.

Merry Christmas to You and Yours!
You have EARNED the Right to Question if you have an investment in the Outcome.

Rich, so because they are for it, it somehow isn’t a bad deal? 🙄

Albright, Schultz, Kissinger, Clinton, Rice, Bush, Perry? You really think Their word means a lot to us? Albright is a flaming moonbat. Schultz a State Department hack. Kissinger is another incompetent. Clinton? Do I even have to comment? Rice proved to be disappointingly spineless. Bush, who looked into Putin’s eyes? Perry was Clinton’s secretary of defense-enough said.

As for Gates I have some issues with him. Mainly I think he is somewhat gutless. As for Cartright, I think he “needs to get real” about working with our allies.

Quick heads up thanks to START and another decision by obama:

“…the U.S. now has no effective seaborne tactical nuclear systems with which to counter North Korea and Iran.”

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2010/12/22/arms-agreement-gets-bad-start/

If you think that is good, I have a bridge to sell you. Then again, I know you think anything that goes the dems way is just great.

@ Hard Right, I’m quite sure that the Norks, China and the Russians are high fiving each other over this very bad agreement for US but great for them. It leaves then many opportunities to take advantage of US and Our Free World Allies. Too many if you ask me.

Jimmy Carter is no longer the worst.

@ Hard Right, #6:

“…the U.S. now has no effective seaborne tactical nuclear systems with which to counter North Korea and Iran.”

I don’t know who that quote is from, but they haven’t done their homework. We currently have some 350 supersonic, sea-launchable AGM-129 Advanced Cruise Missles equipped with 5 to 150 kiloton selectable yield warheads. They have a range of 3,000 kilometers. We’ve got another 460 that are air-launched versions.

OT #5 NATO Summit Declaration unanimous statement of the 28 members ,

“We welcome the conclusion of New Start Treaty and look forward to it’s early ratification and entry into force”
Sec. Gen. Rasmussen “Ratification of The Start Treaty will contribute strongly to the improvement of the overall security environment in the Euro- Atlantic area”
German Chancellor Merkel “We thank Pres. Obama that he negotiated a new Start Treaty”

I respect the fact you disagree with the treaty and have read it.It’s true I’d rather watch a great college football game or read a good book.

Semper Fi rjw

Hard Right I could list many more supporters from both parties and around the country and the world,but hell you don’t like anybody.Smile

Rhonda Arkley, the Democratic Party’s candidate for the Minnesota Senate in District 37.
In that race, she received an “A” rating from the NOW, the National Organization of Women.
She is a prominent member of Minnesota’s atheist community,

says Congresswoman Michele Bachmann is “nutty.”

Then Rhonda Arkley proceeds to enter her bedroom where her husband is and throw gasoline on him,
hurl an oil lamp at him.
hit him with an exercise weight,
spread 5 gallons of gasoline around the house,
locked herself in her car in the driveway,
and
started trying to drive a screwdriver into her own chest with a hammer.

Who’s nutty????

Rhonda needs help. MINNESOTA Politics does bring out the radicals like Jesse Ventura,Al Franken and Michelle B.

OT Wondering why you haven’t responded directly to #9. Is Nato for or against the treaty? Did they or did they not unanimously call for its “ratification and entry into force?”

Rich,

NATO members and their populations have not shown a historical trend to wanting American nuclear overkill and I can’t think of a single “arms reduction” that they wouldn’t sign on for.

They know where ground zero is for a NATO v. Russia conflict.

Also in the bigger context the reduced capability of either of the big boys correspondingly raises the value of France and UK’s nuclear stockpiles.

Greeeat. 😡

China moving toward deploying anti-carrier missile

http://www.foxnews.com/world/2010/12/28/china-moving-deploying-anti-carrier-missile/?test=latestnews

Malize #12 Thanks You say NATO in favor. OT in #5 says NATO opposed.

rich wheeler, HAPPY HOLLIDAYS TO YOU AND YOUR LOVED ONE, YOU KNOW WHAT IS SO VISIBLE looking at the victory of BARRACK OBAMA?
IS that he is more interested and work very hard when
he want to please other COUNTRYS LIKE RUSSIA AND HIS NEW ALLIED CHINA,
SO THEY GET THE SUPERPOWER ONCE OWN BY THE MANY SMARTS MOVE AND STRATEGIC DECISIONS OF PREVIOUS LEADERS OF THIS COUNTRY WHERE THEIR GOAL WAS THE PROTECTION OF AMERICA, THIS TREATY JUST DEMOLISH THE BALANCE OF POWER FOR THIS COUNTRY,
you would think that to agree with that VICTORY IS LIKE AN BLATANT ACT TO DIMINISH AMERICA, JUST LIKE CLOSING NASA’S POSSIBILITYS OF CONTINUYING THEIR ENDEVIOUR TO CONQUER SPACE AND SELLING IT TO POTENTIAL ENNEMIES IF NOT PRESENT BUT MOST
LIKELY FUTURE,
AS HE SAID ,HE WAS GOING TO CHANGE THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA FOREVER,
WE ARE SEEING MORE WHERE HE AIM TO BE AND THAT IS WITH THE UN POWER ADVANCING A MENACING LONG ARM OVER THE CITIZENS OF THIS BEAUTIFULL AMERICA,
AND I ask you now if the day will come where you have to as a MILITARY, to follow a LEADER WHO CAN COUNTER THE COMING DANGERS ON AMERICA, WOULD YOU OBEY YOUR OATH TO THE LAWS OF THIS COUNTRY AND JOIN THE IN THE FORCES OF PROTECTING THIS AMERICA,
OR FOLLOW A LEADER WHO CONTINIUE TO SELL AMERICA TO THE WORLD