The Word

A “What you are up against” Update:

Woodhouse says he never remembers anyone going after Bush during his presidency the way Republicans are attacking Obama. Woodhouse said Democrats never equated Bush to a terrorist or as someone who had committed manslaughter.

“Many Republicans will say didn’t democrats attack George Bush in exactly the same way. what’s your response to that?,” Bashir asked Woodhouse.

“I don’t remember anything that equates from official Democratic Party. I mean, of course there are interest groups and people have their say, but I don’t remember anything coming from Democratic Party about George W. Bush being equated to a terrorist or George W. Bush being equated to somebody who has been accused of manslaughter. I don’t remember anybody questioning some of the things about George W. Bush that have been questioned about the president. I don’t remember an opposing Governor wagging his or her finger in president George W. Bush’s face,” Woodhouse said.
“The truth is, is that the Republican Party starts from a core of extreme positions and it seems that leads to extreme rhetoric when things don’t work out for them with the voters,” he said.

Search for Bush is A Chimp, a Moron, Stupid, or Hitler.

The cognitive dissonance or just plain dishonesty is what you are up against you.

************

For the first time, the Justice Department has made public a series of sensitive messages that passed to the highest levels of the agency within hours of an ambush  that killed a U.S. border patrol agent along the Southwest border in  December 2010, igniting a national scandal over a gun trafficking  investigation gone wrong.

Justice officials sent the documents to Congress late Friday evening, only a few days before Attorney General Eric Holder is set to testify before the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee.

The  email messages show the former top federal prosecutor in Arizona,  Dennis Burke, notifying an aide to Holder via email on Dec. 15, 2010 (Holder testified in May 2011- he heard about in the “last few weeks”) that agent Brian Terry had been wounded and died. “Tragic,” responds the  aide, Monty Wilkinson. “I’ve alerted the AG, the acting Deputy Attorney  General…”

Only a few minutes later,  Wilkinson emailed again, saying, “Please provide any additional details  as they become available to you.”

An email from one official, whose name has been redacted from the  document, to now-former Arizona U.S. Attorney Dennis Burke reads: On  December 14, 2010, a BORTAC agent working in the Nogales, AZ AOR was  shot. The agent was conducting Border Patrol operations 18 miles north  of the international boundary when he encountered [redacted word]  unidentified subjects. Shots were exchanged resulting in the agent being  shot. At this time, the agent is being transported to an area where he  can be air lifted to an emergency medical center.

Burke then delivered another piece of bad news: “The guns found in the desert near the murder [sic] … officer connect back to the investigation we were going to talk about they were AK-47s purchased at a Phoenix gun store.”

That investigation, dubbed Fast and Furious,  was supposed to follow U.S. weapons into the hands of kingpins in the  violent Sinaloa Mexico drug cartel, building a big case against the  gangs. Instead, it cost Burke his job, got the director of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms reassigned, and has prompted multiple federal probes by Congress and the department’s own inspector general.

The Justice Department also sent a letter to lawmakers  Friday night outlining several changes they had made within their own  ranks and at the ATF: from requiring additional oversight in cases that  involve wiretaps and confidential informants to extra procedures at the  ATF for putting weapons purchases under surveillance to a realignment at  the U.S. Attorney’s office in Phoenix and the ATF itself.

The  new documents are certain to stoke the fires among congressional  Republicans, who have questioned what the attorney general knew about  the botched investigation and asked why the chief of the Justice  Department’s criminal division, Lanny Breuer, didn’t do more when he found out about other questionable tactics used by ATF in gun trafficking probes in the Bush administration.

In  a meeting with Mexican government officials in February 2011, for  instance, Breuer “suggested allowing straw purchasers cross into Mexico  so [police] can arrest and [prosecutors] can convict. Such coordinated  activities between the US and Mexico may send a strong message to arms  traffickers.”

A Justice official,  speaking on background, said Breuer’s proposal involved coordination  between the governments and didn’t contemplate agents losing track of  guns, as happened in the Fast and Furious debacle.

A  few days after the meeting between Breuer and Mexican authorities, the  department’s attache to Mexico raised this issue, according to an email:  “there is an inherent risk in allowing weapons to pass from the U.S. to  Mexico. The possibility of the [government of Mexico] not seizing the  weapons, and the weapons being used to commit a crime in Mexico.”

The  attorney general, in testimony to the House and Senate last year, said  he feared the Justice Department could be living with the consequences  of more than 1,000 guns connected to Fast and Furious that remain  unaccounted for years to come.

So The AG is lying again…Will anyone care? Probably Not.

“Obviously I think if the question is referring to things like Fast and Furious, I think everyone has acknowledged that mistakes, serious mistakes, were made there,” Napolitano replied, “The key question [is] to make sure that those mistakes, from my standpoint, are never again repeated.”

Mistakes? To suggest that Fast and Furious was not a program that was intentionally designed to funnel firearms to straw purchasers is disingenuous and to use the mild word “mistake” to color over a program that led to the death of a U.S. border patrol agent and more than 200 Mexicans is irresponsible. While it’s encouraging that Napolitano wants to ensure that administration officials never design such a foolish and lethal program again, her language seems too calculated to also create the impression that administration officials have no possible culpability here. In her mind, it was all just a series of “mistakes” from which to learn and move forward — but, again, even if the operation was intended to lead to a different ending — to the prosecution of the biggest fish within Mexican drug cartels — the sale of the weapons to straw purchasers in the first place was not a mistake. It was that tactic that was and is and will continue to be controversial — and Napolitano’s comments should reflect that the tactic should never have been used in the first place.

While the congressional investigation into Fast and Furious is far from over and while those of us who are strongly suspicious of DOJ higher-ups have to fight not to ascribe to them the worst of ulterior motives until those motives are established by the evidence, administration officials should at the very least express a stronger sense of the inexcusable facts of Fast and Furious.

**********

A $500 million green jobs program at the Department of Labor has so far provided only 15 percent of current participants with jobs, leading the agency’s inspector general to recommend that the bulk of the money be returned to the Treasury.

The program, which was funded through the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, aims to find employment for almost 80,000 people by providing grants for labor exchange and job training projects. With those grants expiring over the next 15 months, IG officials concluded that the program would fail to come close to that target.

So how many workers has this program actually placed?  As of June 30th … 8,035, or about a tenth of what was projected after burning through 40% of the funding.  That actually comes to a surprisingly modest $25,000 per job placement.  However, that total includes temp jobs; only 1,336 people found jobs lasting longer than 6 months.

In other words, this is just like Obamanomics in general.  It provides a short-term gimmicky gain at incredible expense that is designed to do nothing except give politicians a headline and a photo op.  It would be cheaper in the long run to buy politicians a camera and get them a blog.

 Not Mine! 🙂
As always, it’s all flash and cash and no actual solutions. It just looks good for the media and the talking points but the reality is, it’s crap on a stick.
During his Google+ hangout Pres. Obama tells a woman that her husband  shouldn’t be unemployed from the growth he has seen in the economy.  Obama said he finds it “interesting” because he is getting “the word”  that someone in her husband’s job field “should be able to find  something right away.”Obama offered to do something if she would just send him her husband’s resume.

The woman wants to know why Obama is extending visas for foreigners when there is tons of demand for American jobs by Americans.

(and ignoring the border)

President Obama takes a question from an “Occupy” protester during his Google+ Hangout web event.“Mr. President, I voted for you. I’m paying my taxes, I’m unemployed  five years now and I need help. I’m 52, what am I going to do? How will I  recover from this? Do you have a plan for me?,” the Occupy protester  ask.

Obama told her his solution is to “grow the economy.”

Maybe she should give him $38,500 for his autograph like the Wall Streeters. 🙂

Political Cartoons by Lisa Benson

Political Cartoons by Gary McCoy

The Democrats Plan Revealed

Over the last few days the Democrats plan for dealing with the $14,300,000,000,000 debt of this country can be summed up in 3 words:

BLAME THE REPUBLICANS!

That’s it. That’s all they want or need.

Nothing else matters as they want you to blame the Republicans in the most hyper-partisan act in American History in 150 years.

It’s the Perfect POLITICAL solution.

Political Cartoons by Nate Beeler

I didn’t say anything about economic solutions because neither are the Democrats.

The Republicans propose a plan (3 now) and the democrats just demagogue it into the ground and refuse to even vote on it.

Hell, they haven’t even passed their own budget (in the Senate) in 819 days!

Why do they need to commit to anything. They just demagogue whatever the Republican put up and the Ministry of Truth Media demagogues it to death and you buy the bullshit! It’s a perfect solution.

So what if it cause a depression that destroy the country for generations and possible crashes the world’s economy…like they care. As long as they win…who cares!

So what if this depression crushes the very people they are allegedly “protecting” in their demagoguery…The poor. Like they actually care.

If they can get the very people who are hurt by them to blame the other guy and flock to them and suckle at the government tits so much the better! It’s what they wanted all along. It’s a win-win for them.

As long as they aren’t to blame what does it matter how ugly it gets. And they calculate that they will win politically in 2012 from it. Political Capital is the only capitalism that Democrats believe in.

So where’s the downside for them??

Class Warfare. Demagoguery. Fearmongering. Dishonesty. It’s all Good.

The country can go completely to hell because that is irrelevant compared to the potential political gains they feel they will receive and are entitled to.

And the In-The-Tank Liberal Media will cheerleading them all the way.

The Republicans keep proposing plan after plan and the Democrats just turn their noses up at it like a 4 year old who’s told to eat their peas. 🙂

The Democrats just spread fear, intimidation, threats, and class warfare.

Divide and Conquer.

But as long as the Republicans are blamed for it that’s all that really matters in the end because then the Democrats can sweep into power in 2012 and really have no opposition to their Socialist Utopian vision. And that is the ultimate goal.

People so dependent on the Government that they have no choice but to keep the Democrats in power for generations and the longer and deeper it becomes the harder and harder it will be to pry them out of power and eventually it may even come to a point where people would wonder why you’d want to in the first place.

The Democrats dreams come true.

So why would they bother with an actual plan to fix the actual problem? They don’t need one, so why would they agree to one?

They wouldn’t.

But they key is, they have to keep the blame on the Republicans.

And the Republican have to keep acting like the school nerds who is constantly getting beat up by the school bully.

That’s they key.

So the question then becomes, are you that easy to manipulate?

I think so.

Baaaaaaaaa! 😦

In a series of phone calls, administration officials have told bankers that the administration will not allow a default to happen even if the debt cap isn’t raised by the August 2 date Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner says the government will run out of money to pay all its bills, including obligations to bond holders. Geithner made the rounds on the Sunday talk shows saying a default is imminent if the debt ceiling isn’t raised, and President Obama issued a similar warning during a Friday press conference after budget negotiations with House Republicans broke down.

A senior banking official told FOX Business that administration officials have provided guidance to them that even though a default is off the table, a downgrade “is a real possibility for no other reason than S&P and Moody’s have to cover (themselves) since they’ve been speaking out on the debt cap so much.”

This guidance is a big reason why Wall Street has largely dismissed the possibility of default, and though the markets have been jittery amid the talk of default, they haven’t imploded as would be the case, many economists fear, if the nation missed a payment on its debt.

Obama has offered nothing, instead just attacking, attacking, attacking, blaming everyone but himself in utter denial of the reality that no man on the face of this Earth is more responsible for our debt catastrophe than he.

Leadership anyone? anyone?

Sorry, all we have is a Community Organizer who only understands threats and intimidation not Leadership. And even since the days of Senator Obama when he voted “present” more often than he ever voted at all, he doesn’t like to take a stand for anything that isn’t beneficial to him personally. So that’s why we get nothing but campaign speeches from him.

He isn’t going to lead the nation. He is just going to lead himself to re-election. That’s all that matters to him.

So what if the nation goes down the toilet, as long as he get re-elected, and re-elected with a Democrat majority he’s good.

This president who now tells us we must raise taxes to save the Republic is the same president who just seven months ago was telling us that everyone agrees the worst thing one could do during a crisis is raise taxes. Republicans agreed then and hold to that position now. That makes them unreasonable, unbalanced.

And where did this sudden spurt of media fiscal discipline come from, anyway? Where were they when America needed someone to ask Obama, Pelosi and Reid how they were going to pay for TARP? Where were the media demanding to know where the trillion bucks for the anti-stimulus program was coming from? How about the trillion for Obamacare?

They went along for the ride on all these budget-busting disasters. And now they have the temerity to lecture us on fiscal discipline?

There is the oblivious. Some journalists refuse to acknowledge that spending has soared under Obama. When Grover Norquist factually noted Obama’s binge, CNN anchor Ali Velshi erupted in protest. “Wait a minute! ‘He created with his spending’? You didn’t just suggest that our budget problem is because of President Obama, did you, Grover?” Norquist said yes, he wasn’t kidding. Velshi dismissed this concept as unreasonable: “OK, we’re going to pass by that question because that’s an unreasonable position.”

In round numbers: In fewer than four years, Obama has increased the debt by $4 trillion. He proposes we raise it another $2.3 trillion. This makes Obama responsible for almost half the debt of the United States. But it is “unreasonable” to say so.

The leftist news media aren’t coming to this debate to be an honest broker. They’re just trying to break one side apart, and never mind that it’s their vision that is driving us right over a cliff. (Brent Bozell)

As long as The Democrats and The Liberals  win the Political battle nothing else matters to them.

After all, what will be left will be solely dependent on them and what better outcome for them could their possibly be?

Political Cartoons by Michael Ramirez

Political Cartoons by Robert Ariail

Political Cartoons by Eric Allie

Political Cartoons by Steve Kelley
Political Cartoons by Bob GorrellPolitical Cartoons by Lisa BensonPolitical Cartoons by Nate Beeler




The Devil You May Not Know

(ARLINGTON, Va.) – A draft executive order that would force government contractors to disclose all political contributions would make it too easy for political appointees to punish contractors for their political views or to coerce contributions from firms, officials with the Associated General Contractors of America warned today in testimony submitted to Congress.

“The process outlined in the draft executive order would make it much easier for government officials to use the political activities of government contractors as a factor when awarding contracts,” Stephen E. Sandherr, the association’s chief executive officer noted in testimony submitted today to a hearing held jointly between the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform and the Committee on Small Business. “This order actually introduces, instead of excludes, politics from government contracting.”

So you have if you give your political contributions to the wrong source (aka Republican or Tea Party) then you might not get that big fat government contract.

Be a toadie and and an apparatchik or else. Even if you hate me (a Liberal Democrat), give me money or else!!

Now that’s good for business…

“This rule makes it look like the Administration is more interested in punishing political opponents and propping up political allies than protecting public taxpayers.”–Stephen E. Sandherr, CEO Associated General Contractors of America.

It does indeed. Now ask them if they (the liberal progressives) care? 😦

My bet, Not even a little bit.

Oh, and the journalists covering the stories, well, they just might not be very impartial either.

Gov. Mike Huckabee (2010): I’m sad to report today a death of a good friend to all of us…..Journalism, the once esteemed 4th estate of our nation and the protector of our freedoms and a watchdog of our rights has passed away after a long struggle with a crippling and debilitating disease of acute dishonesty aggravated by advanced laziness and the loss of brain function.

When liberal investor George Soros gave $1.8 million to National Public Radio , it became part of the firestorm of controversy that jeopardized NPR’s federal funding. But that gift only hints at the widespread influence the controversial billionaire has on the mainstream media. Soros, who spent $27 million trying to defeat President Bush in 2004 (and millions getting Obama elected), has ties to more than 30 mainstream news outlets – including The New York Times, Washington Post, the Associated Press (see later story), NBC and ABC.

Prominent journalists like ABC’s Christiane Amanpour and former Washington Post editor and now Vice President Len Downie serve on boards of operations that take Soros cash. This despite the Society of Professional Journalists’ ethical code stating: “avoid all conflicts real or perceived.”

The investigative reporting start-up ProPublica is a prime example. ProPublica, which recently won its second Pulitzer Prize, initially was given millions of dollars from the Sandler Foundation to “strengthen the progressive infrastructure” – “progressive” being the code word for very liberal. In 2010, it also received a two-year contribution of $125,000 each year from the Open Society Foundations. In case you wonder where that money comes from, the OSF website is http://www.soros.org. It is a network of more than 30 international foundations, mostly funded by Soros, who has contributed more than $8 billion to those efforts.

The ProPublica stories are thoroughly researched by top-notch staffers who used to work at some of the biggest news outlets in the nation. But the topics are almost laughably left-wing. The site’s proud list of  “Our Investigations” includes attacks on oil companies, gas companies, the health care industry, for-profit schools and more. More than 100 stories on the latest lefty cause: opposition to drilling for natural gas by hydraulic fracking. Another 100 on the evils of the foreclosure industry.

Throw in a couple investigations making the military look bad and another about prisoners at Guantanamo Bay and you have almost the perfect journalism fantasy – a huge budget, lots of major media partners and a liberal agenda unconstrained by advertising.

One more thing: a 14-person Journalism Advisory Board, stacked with CNN’s David Gergen and representatives from top newspapers, a former publisher of The Wall Street Journal and the editor-in-chief of Simon & Schuster. Several are working journalists, including:

• Jill Abramson, a managing editor of The New York Times;

• Kerry Smith, the senior vice president for editorial quality of ABC News;

• Cynthia A. Tucker, the editor of the editorial page of The Atlanta Journal-Constitution.

ProPublica is far from the only Soros-funded organization that is stacked with members of the supposedly neutral press. 

The Center for Public Integrity is another great example. Its board of directors is filled with working journalists like Amanpour from ABC, right along side blatant liberal media types like Arianna Huffington, of the Huffington Post and now AOL.

Like ProPublica, the CPI board is a veritable Who’s Who of journalism and top media organizations, including:

• Christiane Amanpour – Anchor of ABC’s Sunday morning political affairs program, “This Week with Christiane Amanpour.” A reliable lefty, she has called tax cuts “giveaways,” the Tea Party “extreme,” and Obama “very Reaganesque.” 

• Paula Madison – Executive vice president and chief diversity officer for NBC Universal, who leads NBC Universal’s corporate diversity initiatives, spanning all broadcast television, cable, digital, and film properties.

• Matt Thompson – Editorial product manager at National Public Radio and an adjunct faculty member at the prominent Poynter Institute.

The group’s advisory board features: 

• Ben Sherwood, ABC News president and former “Good Morning America” executive producer

Once again, like ProPublica, the Center for Public Integrity’s investigations are mostly liberal – attacks on the coal industry, payday loans and conservatives like Mississippi Gov. Haley Barbour. The Center for Public Integrity is also more open about its politics, including a detailed investigation into conservative funders David and Charles Koch and their “web of influence.”According to the center’s own 990 tax forms, the Open Society Institute gave it $651,650 in 2009 alone.

The well-known Center for Investigative Reporting follows the same template – important journalists on the board and a liberal editorial agenda. Both the board of directors and the advisory board contain journalists from major news outlets. The board features:

• Phil Bronstein (President), San Francisco Chronicle;

• David Boardman, The Seattle Times;

• Len Downie, former Executive Editor of the Washington Post, now VP;

• George Osterkamp, CBS News producer.

Readers of the site are greeted with numerous stories on climate change, illegal immigration and the evils of big companies. It counts among its media partners The Washington Post, Salon, CNN and ABC News. CIR received close to $1 million from Open Society from 2003 to 2008.

Why does it all matter? Journalists, we are constantly told, are neutral in their reporting. In almost the same breath, many bemoan the influence of money in politics. It is a maxim of both the left and many in the media that conservatives are bought and paid for by business interests. Yet where are the concerns about where their money comes from?

Fred Brown, who recently revised the book “Journalism Ethics: A Casebook of Professional Conduct for News Media,” argues journalists need to be “transparent” about their connections and “be up front about your relationship” with those who fund you.

Unfortunately, that rarely happens. While the nonprofits list who sits on their boards, the news outlets they work for make little or no effort to connect those dots. Amanpour’s biography page, for instance, talks about her lengthy career, her time at CNN and her many awards. It makes no mention of her affiliation with the Center for Public Integrity.

If journalists were more up front, they would have to admit numerous uncomfortable connections with groups that push a liberal agenda, many of them funded by the stridently liberal George Soros. So don’t expect that transparency any time soon.

Oh and that polling data showing how Obama is now Mohammad Ali and is staging a miraculous comeback and people love him after he gave the order to Kill bin Laden like something out of a Video Game…

Well… IT JUST MIGHT BE RIGGED!!

Wow! The AP poll has Obama’s approval rating hitting 60 percent! And 53 percent say he deserves to be reelected!

And on the economy, 52 percent approve of the way Obama’s handling it, and only 47 percent disapprove! He’s up 54–46 on approval of how he’s handling health care! On unemployment, 52 percent approval, 47 percent disapproval! 57 percent approval on handling Libya! Even on the deficit, he’s at 47 percent approval, 52 percent disapproval!

It is a poll of adults, which isn’t surprising; as I mentioned yesterday, you don’t have to be a registered or likely voter to have an opinion on the president.

But then you get to the party ID: 46 percent identify as Democrat or leaning Democrat, 29 percent identify as Republican or leaning Republican, 4 percent identify as purely independent leaning towards neither party, and 20 percent answered, “I don’t know.”

With a poll sample that has a 17-percentage-point margin in favor of the Democrats, is anyone surprised that these results look like a David Axelrod dream?

(Interestingly, George W. Bush is at 50 percent approval, 49 percent disapproval, even in this sample wildly weighted in favor of the Democrats.)

AP response: Some conservatives criticized the AP-GfK poll as heavy with responses from Democrats that skewed the results. AP-GfK polls use a consistent methodology that draws a random sample of the population independent of party identification.

But the question isn’t really whether the sample changed too much from their poll in April; the question is whether the sample accurately reflects the American public at large, and whether we indeed have 1.63 Democrats in this country for every 1 Republican. If their sample had an unrealistic proportion of Democrats one month, it’s entirely possible they can get a similar unrealistic proportion the following month. (NRO)

Ya Think? 🙂

Naw, Liberals would never do that…

Lying, cheating, and stealing…Naw, never happen.

Dishonesty, disingenuous and pure self-interest…never happens… 🙂

So Caveat Emptor. Buyer Beware!

Political Cartoons by Michael Ramirez

Political Cartoons by Robert Ariail

Political Cartoons by Chuck Asay

Political Cartoons by Gary Varvel

When the Dove Lays Down with the Lion

Here’s Nancy Pelosi from a press conference on September 7, 2006:

[E]ven if [Osama bin Laden] is caught tomorrow, it is five years too late. He has done more damage the longer he has been out there. But, in fact, the damage that he has done . . . is done. And even to capture him now I don’t think makes us any safer.

And here’s Nancy Pelosi yesterday:

The death of Osama bin Laden marks the most significant development in our fight against al-Qaida. . . . I salute President Obama, his national security team, Director Panetta, our men and women in the intelligence community and military, and other nations who supported this effort for their leadership in achieving this major accomplishment. . . . [T]he death of Osama bin Laden is historic. . . .

This devastating then-and-now comparison comes to us courtesy of John Hideraker of Power Line. It underscores the degree to which partisanship can ravage people’s fair-mindedness and, in the process, make them look like fools and hacks. Such things aren’t uncommon in politics—but what is rare is to see such intellectual dishonesty proven so conclusively.(Peter Wehner)

This is the kind of hyper-partisanship and general dishonesty we live with these day. Especially, from Democrats  who will say or do anything to win power. ANYTHING!

I’m surprised Obama hasn’t been deified yet. Or been lionized as the next great McArthur Or Alexander or some such nonsense.

But Obama is going to use it for a PR stunt though. After all, Mr Campaign Mode can’t pass up an opportunity!

It can be awkward when a dove tries to pass himself off as a war hero. From the tone of President Obama’s speech Sunday night, it’d be easy to conclude he was the one who came up with the idea that America should hunt down and kill Osama bin Laden. He also made it sound like he was the one who formulated the takedown plan. We can look forward in coming days to details of the actual operation, emphasizing Mr. Obama’s intimate involvement.

“Shortly after taking office,” the president said, “I directed Leon Panetta, the director of the CIA, to make the capture or death of Osama bin Laden the highest priority of the war on terror.” Of course, this had been a high priority since shortly after Sept. 11, 2001. “I want justice,” President George W. Bush said on September 17. “And there’s an old poster out West … I recall, that said, ‘Wanted, Dead or Alive.’ “

Sunday’s only mention of Mr. Bush came when Mr. Obama defended himself by quipping that even his predecessor insisted America isn’t at war with Islam. Left unsaid was how Mr. Bush setting the groundwork for the conduct of the war on terrorism provided Mr. Obama with the tools to get this job done. The national unity, sense of purpose and offensive posture were largely the result of Mr. Bush’s decisive action and strong leadership following national tragedy. Had Mr. Obama been in Mr. Bush’s position on Sept. 11, 2001, bin Laden would still be alive today, and probably winning. (Washington Times)

Classless pandering from the Campaigner-In-Chief? Naw, that never happens… 🙂

“I directed Leon Panetta, the director of the CIA, to make the killing or capture of bin Laden the top priority of our war against al-Qaida,” he said. “I was briefed on a possible lead to bin Laden … I met repeatedly with my national security team as we developed more information about the possibility that we had located bin Laden hiding within a compound deep inside Pakistan. And finally, last week, I determined that we had enough intelligence to take action … Today, at my direction, the United States launched a targeted operation against that compound in Abbottabad, Pakistan …”

It wasn’t you. It was Obama. His orders, his intel, his determination and his direction. Are we clear yet?

After all, as Obama explained, bin Laden was “a terrorist who’s responsible for the murder of thousands of men, women and children.” 🙂

It’s all about me! Aren’t I the Greatest that ever lived.

Makes you want to forget that silly little Debt problem, the 9% unemployment (officially, unoffically 16%), the gas prices, the class warfare, ObamaCare, etc. doesn’t it! 🙂

You just want to bask in his glow! (fainting is optional but appreciated).

Political Cartoons by Ken Catalino

According to another one of those White House briefings of reporters designed to suck up all available credit for good news, President Obama’s homeland security advisor reveals that it was a really tense time in the air-conditioned White House as unidentified U.S. Navy SEALs closed in on the world’s most wanted man after midnight a half a world away.

“Minutes passed like days,” says John Brennan, who bravely stood with press secretary Jay Carney before reporters and TV cameras today chronicling his boss’ weekend heroics.

The heavily-armed commandos flying in a quartet of darkened Blackhawk and Chinook helicopters more than 100 miles into Pakistan were probably listening to their iPods and discussing the NFL draft.

“The concern was that bin Laden would oppose any type of capture operation,” said Obama’s Sherlock Holmes. So U.S. troops were prepared “for all contingencies.”

In fact, this weekend was such a tense time in the White House that Obama only got in nine holes of golf. But he still managed to deliver his joke script to the White House Correspondents Assn. dinner Saturday evening.

Sunday was, Brennan revealed to his eager audience, “probably one of the most anxiety-filled periods of times in the lives of the people assembled here.” Poor poor bureaucrats. Extra Tums all around. Did someone order dinner?

There may have been a little anxiety aboard those combat choppers. Who knows? We can’t hear from them. And, as every day, anxiety in the kitchens, hearts and mind of thousands of military families who put up with the terrifying uncertainty of the dangerous deeds their loved ones have volunteered to secretly do for their country. During his 49 minute presentation Brennan did squeeze in one reference to the mission’s “very brave personnel.”

But the emphasis, with 2012 just around the calendrical corner, was on the boss’ valor. “There was nothing that confirmed that bin Laden was at that compound,” Brennan related as if such uncertainty is uncommon in war.

“And, therefore,” Brennan continued, “when President Obama was faced with the opportunity to act upon this, the president had to evaluate the strength of that information and then made what I believe was one of the most gutsiest calls of any president in recent memory.” (LA TIMES)

On the Flipside:

An imam from the Al-Aqsa Mosque in Jerusalem vowed to take revenge over “the western dogs” for killing Al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden in Pakistan on Sunday.

In a Youtube video uploaded by the imam he said: “The western dogs are rejoicing after killing one of our Islamic lions. From Al-Aqsa Mosque, where the future caliphate will originate with the help of God, we say to them – the dogs will not rejoice too much for killing the lions. The dogs will remain dogs and the lion, even if he is dead, will remain a lion.”

The imam then verbally attacked US President Barack Obama saying: “You personally instructed to kill Muslims. You should know that soon you’ll hang together with Bush Junior.”

“We are a nation of billions, a good nation. We’ll teach you about politics and military ways very soon, with god’s help,” he vowed.(Ynet)

So much for the radical Muslim vote. Time for another apology tour!

Political Cartoons by Steve Kelley

Political Cartoons by Michael Ramirez

Political Cartoons by Chuck Asay

Political Cartoons by Bob Gorrell