June 28, 2009

Breakthrough on the Authorship of Obama’s ‘Dreams’

Jack Cashill has a big scoop!

Within days of my going public last September with the speculation that terrorist emeritus Bill Ayers helped Barack Obama write his acclaimed memoir, Dreams From My Father, I learned that I was not alone in that intuition.

Since then, I have received helpful contributions from serious people in at least five countries and any number of states and have integrated many of their observations into my ongoing narrative, summarized here. If you are unfamiliar with this research, please read this before going forward.

About a week ago, however, I heard from a new contributor. I will refer to him as “Mr. West.” Like most contributors, he prefers to remain anonymous. The media punishment that Joe the Plumber received has much to do with this nearly universal reticence.

A week before that, I heard from another excellent contributor, Mr. Midwest. Their collective contribution should dispel the doubts of all but the willfully blind that Ayers played a substantial role, likely the primary role, in the writing of Dreams.

As a reminder, there is no reliable computer science for determining authorship. In assessing the value of the existing science, think polygraph, not DNA. Polygraph-level scholarship may suffice for harmless speculation about the authorship of Midsummer’s Night Dream, but not for Dreams From My Father. Too much is at stake for the latter.

The experts in the field have told me to stick with old-fashioned literary detective work, and I have done just that. Mr, Midwest has helped. His most recent contribution is a good example of keen-eyed detection.

Going forward, I will be referring to five books. These include Ayers’ 1993 To Teach, his 1997 A Kind and Just Parent (shorthand: Parent), his 2001 memoir Fugitive Days, and Obama’s 1995 Dreams From My Father (Dreams). Casual critics of this research have repeated the canard that I attributed both Obama books, Dreams and the 2006 Audacity of Hope (Audacity), to Ayers. I never have. From the beginning, I have asserted that the two books appear to have two different authors, and so I will leave Audacity out of the equation until the end.

What Mr. Midwest noticed recently is that both Ayers in Parent and Obama in Dreams make reference to the poet Carl Sandburg. In itself, this is not a grand revelation. Let us call it a C-level match. Obama and Ayers seem to have shared the same library in any case. Both talk of reading the books of Malcolm X, James Baldwin, Langston Hughes, W.E.B. Dubois and Frantz Fanon among others. In fact, each misspells “Frantz” as “Franz.”

Ayers and Obama, however, go beyond citing Sandburg. Each quotes the opening line of his poem “Chicago.” From Dreams:

He poured himself more hot water. “What do you know about Chicago anyway?”

I thought a moment. “Hog butcher to the world,” I said finally.

From Parent:

“At the turn of the century, Chicago had a population of a million people and was a young and muscular city - hub of commerce and industry, the first skyscraper city, home of the famous world exposition, “hog butcher to the world” - bursting with energy.”

This I would call a B-level match. What raises it up a notch to an A-level match is the fact that both misquote “Chicago,” and they do so in exactly the same way. The poem actually opens, “Hog butcher for the world.”

Last week, the first email I received from Mr. West had in the message box “759 striking similarities between Dreams and Ayers’ works.” This claim seemed so outsized I did not take it seriously. When I was unable to open the documents, I emailed Mr. West back, asked him to reformat, and then forgot about the email. He resent his documents a few days later.

This time I was able to open them and was promptly blown away. Mr. West’s analysis was systematic, comprehensive, and utterly, totally, damning. Of the 759 matches, none were frivolous. All were C-level or above, and I had no doubt of their authenticity. I had been gathering many of them in my own reserve waiting for a book-length opportunity to make my case. Mr. West had done the heavy lifting. He even indexed his matches. This represented months of works. As I learned, he had been patiently gathering material since November when he first began building on my own research.

I read through all 759 matches and culled out those that I would consider B-Level or above. There were 180 of these. As a control, I tested them against my own 2006 book Sucker Punch, like Dreams and Fugitive Days a memoir that deals extensively with race. In that I am closer to Ayers in age, race, education, family and cultural background than Obama is, our styles should have had more chance of matching. They don’t. Of the 180 examples, I matched, strictly speaking, on six. Even by the most generous standard, we matched on only sixteen.

Let me just cite a few matches between Ayers’ work and Dreams that I found intriguing. Rather astonishingly, as Mr. West points out, at least six of the characters in Dreams have the same names as characters in Ayers’ books: Malik, Freddy, Tim, Coretta, Marcus, and “the old man.” Many of the stories involving these characters in Dreams seem as contrived as their names.

In one instance, Obama reflects on his own first days as a ten year-old at his Hawaiian prep school, a transition complicated by the presence of “Coretta,” the only other black student in the class.

When the other students accuse Obama of having a girlfriend, Obama shoves Coretta and insists that she leave him alone. Although “his act of betrayal” buys him a reprieve from the other students, Obama understands that he “had been tested and found wanting.”

Ayers relates a parallel story in Parent. He tells of a useful reading assignment from the 1992 book, The Kind of Light That Shines on Texas, by black author Reginald McKnight. The passage in question deals with the travails of Clint, the first black student in a newly integrated school, who repudiates Marvin, the only other black boy in the school. Upon reflection, Clint thinks, “I was ashamed. Ashamed for not defending Marvin and ashamed that Marvin even existed.”

As Mr. Midwest pointed out in a recent missive, Ayers’ interest in education bleeds into Dreams. The tip-off once again is the contrived name, in this case “Asante Moran,” likely an homage to the Afro-centric educator, Molefi Kete Asante. Moran lectures Obama and his pal “Johnny” on the nature of public education.

“The first thing you have to realize,” he said, looking at Johnnie and me in turn, “is that the public school system is not about educating black children. Never has been. Inner-city schools are about social control. Period.”

“Social control” is an Ayers’ bugaboo. “The message to Black people was that at any moment and for any reason whatsoever your life or the lives of your loved ones could be randomly snuffed out,” he writes in Fugitive Days. “The intention was social control through random intimidation and unpredictable violence.”

In Dreams, “Moran” elaborates on the fate of the black student, “From day one, what’s he learning about? Someone else’s history. Someone else’s culture. Not only that, this culture he’s supposed to learn is the same culture that’s systematically rejected him, denied his humanity.”

If this character were real, and Obama had actually met him, there would be no reason to phony up his name. In fact, however, Moran is spouting exactly the same educational philosophy that Ayers does in To Teach.

“Underneath it all,” Ayers says of standard school textbooks, “the social studies and literature texts reflected and promoted white supremacy. There were no pictures or photographs of African Americans . . . there was throughout an assumed superiority and smug celebration of the status quo.”

Both authors, by the way, use the phrase “beneath the surface” repeatedly. And what they find beneath the surface, of course, is the disturbing truth about power disparities in the real America, which each refers to as an “imperial culture.” Speaking of which, both insist that “knowledge” is “power” and seem consumed by the uses or misuses of power. Ayers, in fact, evokes the word “power” and its derivatives 75 times in Fugitive Days, Obama 83 times in Dreams.

More exotically, both authors evoke images of a “boy” riding on the backs of a “water buffalo” and prodding the beast not just with sticks, but with “bamboo sticks.” Ayers places his boy in Vietnam. Obama puts his in Indonesia.

Both authors link Indonesia with Vietnam. In each case, clueless officials - plural — with the “State Department” try to explain how the march of communism through “Indochina” will specifically imperil “Indonesia.” The Ayers account, however, at least sounds vaguely real. The Obama account sounds like an Ayers’ memory imposed on Obama’s mother. She allegedly discussed these geo-political strategy sessions in Indonesia with her pre-teen son.

Ayers and his radical friends were obsessed with Vietnam. It defined them and still does. To reflect their superior insight into that country, they have shown a tendency to use “Mekong Delta” as synecdoche, the part that indicates the whole.

In Fugitive Days, for instance, Ayers envisions “a patrol in the Mekong Delta” when he conjures up an image of Vietnam. Ayers’ wife, Bernadine Dohrn, pontificated about “a hamlet called My Lai” in a 1998 interview, but to flash her radical chops, she located it “in the middle of the Mekong Delta,” which is in reality several hundred miles from My Lai.

Given Obama’s age, “Mekong Delta” was not likely a part of his vocabulary, but that does not stop him from writing about “the angry young men in Soweto or Detroit or the Mekong Delta.” Ayers, of course, would also have had a much deeper connection than Obama to “Detroit,” whose historic riot took place shortly before Obama’s sixth birthday. Ayers worked in Detroit the year after those same riots.

Returning to the exotic, in his Indonesian backyard Obama discovered two “birds of paradise” running wild as well as chickens, ducks, and a “yellow dog with a baleful howl.”

In Fugitive Days, there is even more “howling” than there is in Dreams. Ayers places his “birds of paradise” in Guatemala. He places his ducks and dogs together in a Vietnamese village being swept by merciless Americans. In Parent, he talks specifically about a “yellow dog.” And he uses the word “baleful” to describe an “eye” in Fugitive Days. For the record, “baleful” means “threatening harm.” I had to look it up.

Ayers is fixated with faces, especially eyes. He writes of “sparkling” eyes, “shining” eyes, “laughing” eyes, “twinkling” eyes, eyes “like ice,” and people who are “wide-eyed” and “dark-eyed.”

As it happens, Obama is also fixated with faces, especially eyes. He also writes of “sparkling” eyes, “shining” eyes, “laughing” eyes, “twinkling” eyes, and uses the phrases “wide-eyed” and “dark-eyed.” Obama adds “smoldering eyes,” “smoldering” being a word that he and Ayers inject repeatedly. Obama also uses the highly distinctive phrase “like ice,” in his case to describe the glinting of the stars.

If Ayers is fixated on eyes, about eyebrows he is positively fetishistic. There are six references to “eyebrows” in Fugitive Days — bushy ones, flaring ones, arched ones, black ones and, stunningly, seven references in Dreams — heavy ones, bushy ones, wispy ones. It is the rare memoirist who talks about eyebrows at all.

On three occasions in Dreams, Obama speaks of people with “round” faces. On four occasions in Fugitive Days, Ayers does the same. Both speak of “grim-faced” people, people with “soft” faces, and, most unusually, people with “tight” faces.

Both Ayers and Obama describe acquaintances who smile like a “Cheshire cat.” Some of their characters have a countenance — grin, squint, or scowl — that is “perpetual.” Others are “suppressing” their smiles or their grins.

To this point, I have just skimmed the 759 items in the bill of particulars in my case against Obama’s literary genius. Not familiar with the term “bill of particulars?” Uncertain myself, I looked that one up too. It means a list of written statements made by a party to a court proceeding. Ayers and Obama each refer knowingly to a “bill of particulars.” Doesn’t everyone?

The answer, of course, is no. In Audacity of Hope, Obama does not use this phrase or most of the distinctive words or combinations of words in Dreams. In Audacity, for instance, there are virtually no descriptions of faces or eyes, and the few that the author does use are flat and clichéd — like “brave face” or “sharp-eyed.” In Dreams, seven different people “frown,” twelve “grin,” and six “squint.” In Audacity, no more than one person makes any of these gestures.

Mr. West independently came to the same conclusion that I did, namely that Ayers was not meaningfully involved in Audacity. These two Obama books almost assuredly had different primary authors. What should be transparent to any literary critic is that the author of Audacity lacked the style and skill of the author of Dreams. There are a few pockets in Audacity that evoke the spirit of Dreams but without the same grace.

A likely suspect for these imitative passages, perhaps the whole of Audacity, is Obama’s young speechwriter, Jon Favreau. Favreau joined the Obama team in 2005, time enough to play that role. The London Guardian reports that Favreau carries Dreams wherever he goes and can “conjure up his master’s voice as if an accomplished impersonator.” If so, in Audacity he played the classic role of the ghostwriter — one who absorbs his client’s thoughts and relates them in a refined version of his client’s voice.

Bill Ayers was no one’s ghostwriter. The now overwhelming evidence strongly suggests that he used the frame of Obama’s life and finished it off with his own ideas, his own biases, his own experiences, his own passions, his own friends, even his own romances, all of this toned down just enough to keep Obama viable as a potential candidate.

I would argue that Ayers played Cyrano to Obama’s Christian. His personal history was too ugly for him to woo Roxane/America himself. But Obama — “articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy,” as Joe Biden reminded us — could and did make America’s heart melt.

Very, very interesting stuff! A terrorist ghost writer for an American President. Who would have ever imagined such revolutionary things?


Trackback URL

Posted by Jay in Barack Obama, Bill Ayers, Fraud/misrepresentation, News, Politics As Usual at 1:48 am | Comments (3) | Trackbacks (0) |

Boehner: Climate bill a ‘pile of s–t’

Every time I hear about this Boehner guy I seem to like him more. I can’t help but like someone that calls things what they are.

Minority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio) had a few choice words about House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s (D-Calif.) landmark climate-change bill after its passage Friday.

When asked why he read portions of the cap-and-trade bill on the floor Friday night, Boehner told The Hill, “Hey, people deserve to know what’s in this pile of s–t.”

Using his privilege as leader to speak for an unlimited time on the House floor, Boehner spent an hour reading from the 1200-plus page bill that was amended 20 hours before the lower chamber voted 219-212 to approve it.

Eight Republicans voted with Democrats to pass the bill; 44 House Democrats voted against it.

By the way, if you wanna know who the eight are…no problem.

capandtax804

Indeed…not one red cent.

Also see Doug Ross.

Hat tip: Weasel Zippers!


Trackback URL

Posted by Jay in AGW hyposterics, Agenda based science, Agriculture/Farming, Anti-Americanism, Anti-Capitalism, Barack Obama, Cap & Trade, Communism, Congress, Constitution, Democrats, Economy, Energy, Fascism, Global Warming, Government ethics/corruption, Government malfeasance/misfeasance, Marxism, Nancy Pelosi, Nanny State, News, Property Rights, Protectionism, RINOS, Republicans, Science/pseudo-science, Socialism, States Rights, Stupidity, Taxes, Totalitarianism, U.S. House, Unconstitutional, environmentalism, liberalism at 1:36 am | Comments (8) | Trackbacks (0) |

June 27, 2009

Is Michelle Obama a Drunk?

Take it with a grain of salt cuz it is the Enquirer, but they did get the scoop on Edwards’ affair right!

Michelle Obama - cracking under the pressure of being First Lady - is drinking way more than she should, friends fear.

Longtime pals have been keeping a close eye on her White House booze intake for months, sources told The ENQUIRER, and her husband President Barack Obama even stepped in when she recently consumed too much alcohol.

“When Barack saw Michelle drink more than she should at a recent dinner, he hit the roof. He told her, ‘This is NOT going to turn into a problem!’” a close source told The ENQUIRER.

“Barack is overly sensitive to the issue because of his own past drinking and substance abuse problems. But he also feels guilty because of the pictures taken of him drinking beer at an NBA game recently.”

The President also feels he may have contributed to his wife’s alcohol issues by not stopping her from overindulging during their date night in New York City on May 30.

Michelle, 45, knocked back “a glass or two of champagne” while the couple flew to the Big Apple on a private jet, according to the close source, and published reports said she downed two martinis during dinner at the Greenwich Village restaurant Blue Hill.

Woo hoo! Fun times!


Trackback URL

Posted by Jay in 1st Amendment, News at 7:39 pm | Comments (12) | Trackbacks (0) |

Obama Drafts Order for Indefinite Detention Without Trial for Terrorists

Remember when the left used to cry about how Bush was Hitler for indefinitely detaining terrorists without trial? Now that Obama is actually considering making it law, there aren’t so many cries. Unfortunately, I have to give credit to the most annoying sock puppet in the blogosphere for consistent convictions. Yes, it is a trail balloon, and it’s being floated on a Saturday, but is shows what principles Obama is willing to consider compromising if the outrage factor is low enough. Hypocrite.

Such an order would embrace claims by former president George W. Bush that certain people can be detained without trial for long periods under the laws of war. Obama advisers are concerned that bypassing Congress could place the president on weaker footing before the courts and anger key supporters, the officials said…

Some of Obama’s top legal advisers, along with a handful of influential Republican and Democratic lawmakers, have pushed for the creation of a “national security court” to supervise the incarceration of detainees deemed too dangerous to release but who cannot be charged or tried.

But the three senior government officials said the White House has turned away from that option, at least for now, because legislation establishing a special court would be both difficult to pass and likely to fracture Obama’s own party…
“Legislation could kill Obama’s plans,” said one government official involved. The official said an executive order could be the best option for the president at this juncture. Under one White House draft that was being discussed earlier this month, according to administration officials, detainees would be imprisoned at a military facility on U.S. soil but their ongoing detention would be subject to annual presidential review. U.S. citizens would not be held in the system…

One administration official said future transfers to the United States for long-term detention would be rare. Al-Qaeda operatives captured on the battlefield, which the official defined as Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan and possibly the Horn of Africa, would be held in battlefield facilities.

A liberal president going against the ACLU crowd will not go over well, though I hope he has actually felt the weight of responsibility his job entails and has come to a common sense conclusion for the security of our nation. We will soon see.

Hot Air:

Bottom line: No matter how much the left pouts, Barry O’s not risking a second term on letting questionable jihadis go until some other branch of government makes him.

Moe Lane:

What’s the only thing better than popping awkward news on a Friday? Popping awkward news on the Friday after Michael Jackson died!

Jules Crittenden:

You know, it’s kind of touching to think that Obama might prove to be the single strongest factor in exalting Bush to his proper place in history … and marginalizing the radical anti-war left … thanks to his endorsement of some of Bush’s most controversial positions.


Trackback URL

Posted by Jay in ACLU, Barack Obama, Guantanamo Bay, National Security, News, War On Terror, military, terrorism at 7:33 pm | Comment (1) | Trackback (1) |

Links

Gaffemaster J Does It Again!

Dear Lord, does it ever stop?

Biden also praised Tim Kaine as the “great governor of New Jersey.”

One problem: Tim Kaine’s not governor of New Jersey.

Jon Corzine (right) is governor of New Jersey (Remember, he didn’t wear his seatbelt in the state patrol car for the big high-speed crash).

Tim Kaine is governor of another state, called Virginia.

He’s also chairman of the Democratic National Committee.

Biden is from Delaware.

He used a Teleprompter.

Blame Secretary Teleprompter. And, if that wasn’t bad enough

Standing ovations as he pledged to repeal the Defense of Marriage Act, Don’t Ask Don’t Tell…Additionally, Biden promised to put a ban on workplace discrimination….

In case Gaffemaster J missed it, his boss is against gay marriage, is keeping DADT, and, there are already laws regarding workplace discrimination. Where has he been these past years?


Trackback URL

Posted by William Teach in DOMA, Democrats, Homosexual Agenda, Joe Biden, News at 6:20 pm | Comments Off | Trackbacks (0) |

Immigration “Reform” Dead?

Let’s hope so, since it is simply a slightly stealth way of giving illegal aliens a free pass

White House chief of staff Rahm Emanuel bluntly admitted Thursday that “the votes aren’t there” to win comprehensive immigration legislation — even as President Barack Obama met with a bipartisan group of lawmakers in an attempt to jump-start stalled reform efforts.

Calling it one of the most critical issues facing the nation, Obama told the lawmakers, including Texas Republican Sen. John Cornyn and Rep. Lamar Smith, R-San Antonio, that the U.S. immigration system is “broken and needs fixing.”

Everything seems to be critical, and of crisis proportion, in ObamaLand.

But Obama and Emanuel signaled that political obstacles are likely to make it difficult to reach consensus on sticking points such as guest workers and the legal status for 12 million immigrants here illegally.

“It’s going to require some heavy lifting, it’s going to require a victory of practicality and common sense and good policy-making over short-term politics,” Obama said.

It’s going to require lots of arm twisting, blackmail, pay offs, and ignoring the Will of the People. Like with Cap and Tax. Fortunately, I do not think this one will go anywhere. Especially since the Democrats and Obama might be over-reaching after hosing the people with the cap and tax bill, and with the coming showdown on ObamaCare.


Trackback URL

Posted by William Teach in Amnesty/Immigration reform, Barack Obama, Congress, Democrats, Dems In Charge: Now What?, Fed Immigration Law, Government ethics/corruption, Illegal Aliens/Immigration, News, liberalism at 8:29 am | Comment (1) | Trackbacks (2) |

Links

Data Dump: What’s In The Cap And Tax Bill?

I made the mistake of going over to Thomas and skimming through the majority of the climate change OMG WE’RE ALL GOING TO DIE IF THIS ISN’T PASSED! THINK OF THE CHILDREN (they didn’t think of the children when they passed Porkulus) MANKIND IS BAD SAVE THE WORLD NOW monstrosity of a legislative bill. Here is the link, though, you may have to search for H.R. 2454, the links change at times.

This thing is so long that I had to go back and restart the text of it, as it timed out 5 times (that happens at Thomas). I can’t say I actually read it, but, sure skimmed quite a bit, though, I do not think the 300 page attachment is included yet in the text of the bill. That’s where the pork probably lies.

I’m going to give you a slightly disjointed data dump, in some cases long passages, in others just things I saw. Since it is long and rambling, click on the inline more tag

Show More >

Trackback URL

Posted by William Teach in 10th Amendment, AGW hyposterics, Agenda based science, Agriculture/Farming, Anti-Americanism, Anti-Capitalism, Cap & Trade, Coal/Energy Resources, Communism, Congress, Constitution, Democrats, Dems In Charge: Now What?, Economy, Energy, Global Warming, Government ethics/corruption, Government malfeasance/misfeasance, Marxism, Nanny State, News, Propaganda, Property Rights, Protectionism, Science/pseudo-science, Socialism, State Sovereignty, States Rights, Taxes, Totalitarianism, U.S. Constitution, U.S. House, Unconstitutional, environmentalism, liberalism at 8:17 am | Comments (4) | Trackbacks (4) |

Links

Obama Killed Singer Michael Jackson

One of the most disastrous pieces of legislation in decades, one that will be as ruinous as Smoot-Hawley, came before the House of Representatives on Friday, June 26. This bill will further destroy the economy, wipe out jobs all across the country, and is based on what more and more people understand as the pseudo science of global warming, or globaloney as I like to call it. This piece of garbage is as bad as they come. It’s called the cap and trade bill.

A similar bill like this one has been in play in Australia and it is so bad for their economy, Australia is set to repeal it. Ditto for New Zealand, who’ve suspended it.

Yet the idiots in the House of Representatives, with the traitorous “yes” vote of some 8 quisling Republicans have actually been stupid enough to pass the same sort of nonsense that is proving such a farce everywhere else.

So, what does that have to do with Michael Jackson, pedophile and boy singer? And what did Obama have to do with it?

Well, if the wackos on the extreme left can claim that 9/11 was perpetrated by George W. Bush, I can create a crazy conspiracy theory of my own. And here goes…

Did you notice that no one but us wonks knew anything about the cap and trade bill? It was no where on TV or radio. Even the Internet was nearly taken to its knees, crowding out coverage of this monumentally destructive bill.

And what was it that was on every radio, network TV, and cable show? What else but wall-to-wall coverage of the death of wacko Jacko. Oh, suddenly everybody loved him again and the child abuse charges and million dollar payoffs to quash his actions of pedophilia were suddenly forgotten. He was the bestest again.

Why, Al Sharpton even came on TV to blather that Jackson was the first black man to get whites to like black musicians. Sachmo? Billie Holliday? Stevie Wonder?? Never heard of them. Why, no white person ever liked a black entertainer until Michael Jackson moonwalked into a 10-year-old white boy’s bedroom… literally.

Obama? OK, OK, I’m getting to him.

So, no coverage of the most dangerous piece of legislation since the mistake that caused the Great Depression and led to WWII was seen anywhere because it was all about the death of the gloved one.

Hence, Obama killed the dancing creep so that he could slip through his dangerous, communist inspired, economy-busting mess without having to worry that the sheeple would be alerted — even accidentally — by the media.

There you have it. Obama killed Michael Jackson as a smoke screen in order to stop any news coverage of cap and trade.

See. It’s gotta be true. Hey, this sunray of truth has caused the ringing to stop… oh, wait. There it is.

Lighten up, Francis. It’s the weekend.


Trackback URL

Posted by Warner Todd Huston in Barack Obama, Cap & Trade, Economy, Humor, News at 7:12 am | Comments Off | Trackbacks (0) |

ABC/Obama Healthcare Special Not so Special in Ratings Game

-By Warner Todd Huston

For those of you that are curious, Obama’s super special, ultra spectacular healthcare infomercial was a dud in the ratings last Wednesday night.

ABC’s Barackspactacular Healthcare Extravaganza (I think that was the official name of the show, wasn’t it?) went up against the NBC premiere of “The Philanthropist,” widely panned as disappointing, and a repeat of “CSI: NY” on CBS, widely seen as already once widely seen. Unfortunately for ABC, its prop”O”ganda special got a dismal 1.2 rating to the 2.0 and 1.8 ratings respectively for the entertainment competition.

Apparently the TV show where he’s president but plays a doctor on TV didn’t go over well. The “Super-dooper, Obamalicious, Doctor Spock medicine woman show” was only able to cajole 4.703 million viewers into watching while NBC picked up 7.414 and CBS got 7.393 in the ten O’Clock hour. Remembering that we have 300 million citizens and healthcare is supposed to be the biggest emergency in history, well, that is a paltry number of viewers that Doc Barack got.

Earlier in the day, during the 8PM hour, ABC itself got 7.715 million viewers for “I’m a Celebrity… Get me Out of Here!” Sadly, ABC’s 10PM sequel show guest starring the president, “I’m a Sellout… Get me Some Knee Pads,” wasn’t so well received.

Imagine: nearly double the amount of people that watched the healthcare special would rather have watched a repeat of “CSI:NY.”

Ouch. I think OJ got more viewers for his slow motion police chase in the White Bronco.

Meanwhile, that same hour, the Cable newsers seem to have kept their regular audiences:

10 PM P2+ (25-54) (35-64)
On the Record with Greta—1,655,000 viewers (472,000) (740,000)
Anderson Cooper 360—1,016,000 viewers (271,000) (421,000)
Countdown with K. Olbermann—749,000 viewers (275,000) (364,000)
Nancy Grace –587,000 viewers (231,000) (324,000)

These numbers are not appreciably different than normal, really. One might think that people so into the news that they regularly watch any particular cable news show would switch over to see “President McDreamy: MD,” but it doesn’t look like too many loyal cable watchers were much interested.

But, not to worry, folks. ABC won’t let anything as silly as ratings or disinterest from its viewers deter it from giving The One as much air time as he desires. I am pretty sure that Obama is working up a nice ventriloquist act with a dummy that looks just like Joe Biden for next week’s episode. And Michelle and the girls have a great dance number they are working up. I hear Rahm Emanuel has a flashy baton and tap dance routine he used to do in college to show us, as well — though friends are trying to get him to ditch the sequined leotards.

Sadly, I hear through the grapevine that Obama Press Secretary Robert Gibbs had his stand up routine axed from the show. Apparently Obama said that Gibbs gets enough TV time doing his standup elsewhere and cut the poor guy. No respect, ya know? Tattlers also tell us that Nancy Pelosi was told that her gothic horror retrospective was not going to fly. Even ABC has some limits.

Anyway, who needs ratings when we have all of this going for us? I for one will be glued to my TV set for the next episode of “ABC’s Sellout Theater” starring Barack Obama as George Clooney.

**I make no claim that my sources for upcoming Barackspactaculars are accurate.**

Correction: I’m a Celebrity, etc., etc. is on NBC, not ABC. I misread the ratings sheet.


Trackback URL

Posted by Warner Todd Huston in Anti-Americanism, Barack Obama, Congress, Culture of Death, Delusional Dupes and DUmmies, Democrats, Economy, Government ethics/corruption, Healthcare, Journalistic Malpractice, Journalistic Prostitution, Liberal Media/Bias, Liberal World, News, bailouts, liberalism at 6:25 am | Comments Off | Trackbacks (0) |

Oh, Now the SEIU is FOR ‘Anti-Union Tactics’?

-By Warner Todd Huston

We have been reporting on the clash between the Service Employees International Union (SEIU) and it’s California subsidiary the United Healthcare Workers (UHW). We have talked of the battle between the two, how the SEIU has strong-armed or dismissed the elected members of the UHW board, and how at last thousands of members of what was the UHW are attempting to leave to start a new union to rival the SEIU.

But, it appears that the SEIU is a tad unhappy that so many of its California members would quit to form a new union. And so, in order to stop the rival union’s birth, the SEIU is using what the L.A. Times is snickeringly referring to as “anti-union tactics” to stop the bleeding.

For years, the powerful Service Employees International Union has played a lead role in the campaign for a landmark federal law that would allow workers to join a labor organization simply by signing petitions.

Now, as part of a high-stakes battle in California, the union is urging federal officials to throw out petitions signed by tens of thousands of its own members who have asked to be represented by a rival upstart group.

The irony is rich, isn’t it? Maybe not irony. Maybe just straight out hypocrisy.

The SEIU, it appears, is doing its level best to quash any possibility that hospitals and healthcare outlets that currently operate as SEIU union strongholds in California might be permitted to call a vote on whether members wish to stay with the SEIU or to join the fledgling new union, the National Union of Healthcare Workers.

In fact, according to the LATimes, the SEIU is using the very same argument that many businesses use to disparage unionizing efforts: that the NUHW is “intimidating or misleading workers” during the decertification vote. And the SEIU wants federal officials to stop the attempts at voting on the matter.

SEIU President Andy Stern said his union has a legal responsibility to object to the elections because it believes the leaders of the new group have violated labor laws. He accused them of stalling wage-and-benefit negotiations with employers to keep contracts open and leave the SEIU vulnerable to membership raids.

The irony is not wasted on the members of what might be a new union:

“The SEIU is advocating free choice for every employee in the United States, unless you’re an SEIU member,” said John Borsos, an interim vice president of the National Union of Healthcare Workers, which says it has enough signatures to represent nearly 100,000 employees. “The only reason the SEIU doesn’t want elections is that they know they would lose.”

What’s the saying? “It all depends upon whose ox is getting gored”?

There is another very amusing thing the SEIU is doing and it smacks of desperation. The SEIU is accusing the new union of being “dominated by employers” because one of the consultants for the NUHW is a fellow named Clint Reilly. It turns out that Mr. Reilly employs some janitors that happen to be members of the SEIU in some commercial real estate he owns.

But check out Mr. Reilly’s pedigree:

Reilly, who once ran for San Francisco mayor and has a decades-long record as a pro-labor Democrat, said he has worked alongside the SEIU in the past. He has managed political campaigns for House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-San Francisco) and Sens. Dianne Feinstein and Barbara Boxer, both of California. During the 2008 presidential election, Reilly said, he hosted a fundraiser for Hillary Rodham Clinton in a building that he also made available to the new union’s leaders, who at the time were still in the SEIU.

This guy is a long-time Union hack, yet the SEIU, the most powerful union in the country, is trying to paint him as an adversarial “employer” to stop its own members from deciding what union they want to belong to? Now THAT is desperation.

So, one might think that the biggest slave to unions that ever set foot in the White House would be intent on getting this settled. Think again. Barack Obama has allowed his National Labor Relations Board to sit on this, to slow things down, to try and run out the clock giving the powerful SEIU all the time it needs to kill the new union movement.

Quid pro quo. The SEIU donated millions to Obama and Obama is helping the union destroy its rival… even if it does mean that another union is the target and even if he is making sure the worker’s voices cannot be heard.

It isn’t about the workers with Big Unions. It isn’t about helping the economy with Barack Obama. It’s about control of the huge pot of dues money. That is the first and last matter and all that Obama and the SEIU is concerned with. And we all know that money is power.

Workers be damned.

That’s unionism.


Trackback URL

Posted by Warner Todd Huston in Anti-Capitalism, Barack Obama, Card Check, Cronyism, Delusional Dupes and DUmmies, Democrats, Economy, Employee Free Choice Act/EFCA, Government ethics/corruption, Hypocrisy/Situational Ethics, Liberal World, News, SEIU, Union Mafias/Thugs, liberalism at 6:24 am | Comments Off | Trackbacks (0) |

I’m Quoted in the Washington Times

-By Warner Todd Huston

WaTimes writer Jennifer Harper gave me a ring the night that Michael Jackson died and asked for some reaction to the media coverage. I have no interest in Michael Jackson specifically. I’ve never purchased his music and likely never will. I used to switch stations when I heard his stuff hit my radio.

But, Harper’s angle was interesting. Read on music lover…

Death video, photos radiate as media, Internet go viral

By Jennifer Harper

It is shades of paparazzi past.

A photo of Michael Jackson, engulfed by an oxygen mask and lying in an ambulance, was made public Thursday afternoon, even before his death was officially announced. Footage of Mr. Jackson’s body being moved from hospital to morgue was trailed overhead by a TV station helicopter, as if the crew were following a police chase or tracking a celebrity wedding.

“It’s truly the coarsening of our culture. It’s the Princess Diana syndrome. Can you remember a time in the past when morbid photos of celebrities were spread all over the place for all to see?” said Warner Todd Huston, a media analyst with Newsbusters.com and publiusforum.com.

“It is driving us down the road of bad taste and poor judgment. Some of it has to do with our culture of communication. You have to know things right this minute. Now. On Twitter, or on the screen. People are not willing to be reflective at a time like this, which deserved solemnity,” Mr. Huston said.

Robert Lichter, director of the Center for Media and Public Affairs at George Mason University, said he “wouldn’t be surprised if we see the autopsy photos….

To read the rest: Death video, photos radiate as media, Internet go viral.


Trackback URL

Posted by Warner Todd Huston in Crime, Culture of Death, Hollywood, Internet, Journalistic Malpractice, Liberal World, Moral Relativism, News, liberalism at 5:22 am | Comments Off | Trackbacks (0) |

Blue Dog Democrats Voting for Cap and Trade

Crossposted at Truth and Reason

There are 52 Blue Dog Democrats in the Blue Dog Coalition.

22 of them voted Yes on Cap and Trade (HR 2454, American Clean Energy and Security Act) Friday evening, in a bill that narrowly passed the House 219-212. That’s just over 42% of supposedly “conservative” Democrats voting Yes on a VERY liberal piece of legislation than no one had a chance to even read.

Baca, Joe (CA-43) 225-6161
Bishop, Sanford (GA-02) 225-3631
Boswell, Leonard (IA-03) 225-3806
Boyd, Allen (FL-02) 225-5235
Cardoza, Dennis (CA-18) 225-6131
Chandler, Ben (KY-06) 225-4706
Cooper, Jim (TN-05) 225-4311
Cuellar, Henry (TX-28) 225-1640
Giffords, Gabrielle (AZ-08) 225-2542
Gordon, Bart (TN-06) 225-4231
Harman, Jane (CA-36) 225-8220
Hill, Baron (IN-09) 225-5315
Michaud, Mike (ME-02) 225-6306
Moore, Dennis (KS-03) 225-2865
Murphy, Patrick (PA-08) 225-4276
Peterson, Collin (MN-07) 225-2165
Sanchez, Loretta (CA-47) 225-2965
Schiff, Adam (CA-29) 225-4176
Scott, David (GA-13) 225-2939
Shuler, Heath (NC-11) 225-6401
Space, Zack (OH-18) 225-6265
Thompson, Mike (CA-01) 225-3311

If you live in any the blue areas below, and your representative’s name is listed above, you need to replace them with a conservative Republican. No excuses.

Blue Dog Democrat district map

Blue Dog Democrat district map

I count 8 that are from southern states that depend largely on farming. At least 2 others are from mostly conservative states (OH and AZ). We only needed 7 of these 9 to defeat the bill. Every one of these 22 needs be replaced in 2010.

Many are jumping on the 8 GOP turncoats who voted Yes: Bono Mack, Castle, Kirk, Lance, LoBiondo, McHugh, Reichert, and Smith(NJ). But these are mostly RINO’s. Are we really that surprised?

Michelle Malkin asks of the 8 GOP turncoats: “We still want to know: What were your payoffs/earmarks?” Who will ever know?

I’m more surprised at the 22 of 52 Blue Dogs that voted Yes than I am of the 8 GOP turncoats. But I’m also more confident that conservatives can recruit and elect conservative Republicans in most, if not all, of these 22 districts.


Trackback URL

Posted by Truth and Reason in AGW hyposterics, Agriculture/Farming, Anti-Capitalism, Barack Obama, Cap & Trade, Coal/Energy Resources, Communism, Congress, Democrats, Economy, Energy, Global Warming, Government ethics/corruption, Government malfeasance/misfeasance, Marxism, Nancy Pelosi, News, Protectionism, RINOS, Republicans, Taxes, Totalitarianism, Unconstitutional, environmentalism, liberalism at 12:15 am | Comments (3) | Trackback (1) |

Links

June 26, 2009

The Eight

Cap and Trade just passed in the House.

The margin of passage was seven votes.

Eight Republicans voted yes.

Here’s the link to the roll call vote.

Now, party unity is not a bedrock principle above all others. But this legislation is (I would say “on its face”, but can’t because it’s not been read and may actually not be completely written yet) so very extreme, so very radical, and so very leftist that the YES! votes of the following members of the Republican Party is prima facie evidence that they would most likely vote to outlaw the Republican Party if asked to do so. I’m not even kidding about that. Unfortunately.

Yes-vote Republicans who put this disastrous bill over the top in the House:

Bono-Mack of California
Castle of Delaware
Kirk of Illinois
LoBiondo of New Jersey
Lance of New Jersey
McHugh of New York
Reichert of the State of Washington
Smith of New Jersey


Trackback URL

Posted by ArrMatey in AGW hyposterics, Anti-Capitalism, Cap & Trade, Coal/Energy Resources, Communism, Democrats, Economy, Energy, Global Warming, Government ethics/corruption, Government malfeasance/misfeasance, Liberal World, Marxism, News, Protectionism, RINOS, Republicans, Taxes, Totalitarianism, U.S. House, Unconstitutional, environmentalism, liberalism at 7:36 pm | Comments (5) | Trackbacks (0) |

Sarah Palin Responds To Kerry’s “Joke” With Her Typical Classiness

I know, I know, cap and tax is the big story, an issue I usually cover quite a bit, but, everyone has it covered, and something about some child abuser dying, which is on every news channel 90% of the time, but, Sarah Palin shows that she is not your ordinary politician, and that she has class, something which John “Waffles” Kerry didn’t have when he made the joke about her to start it off

Senator John Kerry makes this joke..I don’t know if you saw this…but he makes this joke saying “Well, shoot, of all the governors in the nation to disappear, too bad it couldn’t have been that Governor from Alaska.”

Well, when he said it he looked quite frustrated, and he looked so sad, and I just wanted to reach out to the TV and say “John Kerry, why the long face?”

(laughter)

Only thing missing was the good old Southern saying “bless his heart.” If you’re a Southerner, you understand what that means. :D

Via Real Clear Politics, which has the video.

Photo via Conservatives for Palin. Compare that to how the troops felt about Kerry.


Trackback URL

Posted by William Teach in Democrats, News, Sarah Palin at 6:28 pm | Comments (8) | Trackback (1) |

Links

A Major Shift in Priorities


From Radarsite
Michael Jackson is dead. All other current crises will now be put on hold. Sorry Ahmadinejad, sorry Kim Jong Ill, but your audiences have all left the room. No one is paying any attention to you today, current events have pushed you off the stage. Ahmadinejad, you will just have to continue work on your nuclear weapons without comment from the West. And Kim Jong Ill, your threats and provocations have no weight with us today. Your newsworthiness has been usurped by a much more significant story, a much more significant crisis.
Michael Jackson is dead. From Fox News to the BBC, it has already been decided, this is the major issue of the day. Forget about nuclear proliferation. Forget about escalating threats and impending confrontations. Forget about the Global War on Terror. The Western World has spoken, they have made their priorities known. The Western World has decided what is truly important today, and what is not. And you, Ahmadinejad, and you Kim Jong Ill, just don’t have what it takes to compete with this current crisis. So, just do whatever you want to do, we’re going to be ignoring you for awhile. You see, you’re just not as important as you thought you were. - rg


Trackback URL

Posted by Roger W. Gardner in Announcements, Foreign Policy, Government malfeasance/misfeasance, Iran, Journalistic Malpractice, Journalistic Prostitution, Journalistic incompetence, News, North Korea at 4:12 pm | Comments Off | Trackbacks (0) |

« go back — keep looking »

gauggggggggauuuu11 yehhhaaahhhuuuuuu11