what the heck biden! is it safe to fly or not??

I have overlooked a lot of Biden's verbal diarrhea in the past, but this one REALLY pisses me off. What the hell!! I am sitting on a ticket to Seattle, and another to Cabo, and I need to know what the hell to do. I don't need his gaffe machine to completely garble the message. Is it safe to fly to Seattle or not! I will probably have to cancel Cabo, but this kind of idiotic mixed message crap has got to stop!

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

Morning Joe discussed it as well, video captured by Finkelblog.com


Joe Sco had it right when he said the Biden office would have to come out and backtrack. This is ridiculous, and completely irresponsible!

Joe Biden said Thursday he advised his family to stay off airplanes and subways because of the new swine flu, a remark that forced the vice president's office to backtrack and prompted one airline official to complain about "fear-mongering."

"I would tell members of my family — and I have — that I wouldn't go anywhere in confined places now," Biden said on NBC's "Today" show.

Biden, who has a reputation for off-the-cuff remarks, went beyond any precautions recommended by the federal government. In discussing his personal advice to his family, he said simply, "That's me."

Within two hours, Biden's office issued a statement backing off the remarks and suggesting he was talking about travel to Mexico.

"On the Today Show this morning, the vice president was asked what he would tell a family member who was considering air travel to Mexico this week," said spokeswoman Elizabeth Alexander. "The advice he is giving family members is the same advice the administration is giving to all Americans: that they should avoid unnecessary air travel to and from Mexico. If they are sick, they should avoid airplanes and other confined public spaces, such as subways."

Nice try, but that's not what Biden said.

"It's not just going to Mexico, if you're in a confined aircraft and one person sneezes it goes all the way through the aircraft," Biden said on NBC. "That's me. I would not be at this point, if they had another way of transportation, suggesting they ride the subway."

I just called my airlines, asking what I could do, if I should push back my flight, or what... Figures I have a non-refundable, non-changeable ticket. My only option is to wait and see. If they close the border, I can get a refund. Otherwise, I either go, or lose my ticket.

Either way, I am really pissed at Biden.

100 days, in his own words

take the swine out of the swine flu?

It's been a tough year for the pig....

We had lipstick on a pig.


We had wasteful pork in the porkulus bill.


We had pork pigs spending tax payer money on stupid pork projects.



We had sexist pigs revealed all during the campaign.



And we even had some of our favorite politicians unfairly being charachtured as pigs.


And now we have the swine flu.


It's starting to feel a little bit like porky's revenge...

Anyway, the US wants to change the name from swine flu to "H1N1 Virus".

For U.S. pork producers the swine flu name has hurt, forcing government officials into the position of stressing that American pork is safe to eat and that other countries should not ban imports.

Pork, soybean and corn prices have fallen in the last two days, "and if this continues, obviously you have significant potential, which is why it's important to get this right," Vilsack said.

At the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, there was also talk of stripping the "swine" from swine flu, which CDC acting director Richard Besser said was leading to the misapprehension that people can catch the disease from pork.

"That's not helpful to pork producers. That's not helpful to people who eat pork. It's not helpful to people who are wondering, how can they get this infection," Besser told a briefing.

Israel has already rejected the name swine flu, and opted to call it "Mexico flu." But, that's not a good name. The virus is already global.

While I am not opposed to changing the name, I do sympathize with pork farmers who are being unfairly hurt by this flu, I don't think the name "H1N1 Virus" is going to catch on. It's not catchy enough. But, since it did originate with a pig, perhaps we can change the name without changing the meaning?

Perhaps the Tweety Virus is a better name?

Hmm, although, that is unfair to Tweety Bird.

How about Tingle Titus Virus?

Or the Keith Krud?

Favreau Fever?

Matthews Malady?

Shuster Syndrome?

Blight of Olby?

suggested auction items for "stingy" obama's

After reading this article, Obamas prove stingy with school auction by Courtney Hazlett, I thought I would suggest some items the Obama's might donate next year. I'm sure they don't want to be labeled stingy two years in a row.

When Chelsea Clinton was a student at the Sidwell Friends School, the same school the Obama girls attend, the Clinton family’s involvement with the school’s annual benefit brought in big bucks. In 1996, a round of golf with Bill Clinton went for nearly six figures; another year Chelsea Clinton offered up her babysitting services to the highest bidder.

This past weekend was the Obamas’ first chance to participate in the Sidwell Friends School Dollars for Scholars benefit, and some families who remember the Clintons’ support are disappointed in the Obamas’ first showing.

According to a source with ties to the school, the only items up for bid from the Obamas included a signed copy of the Rolling Stone issue featuring the president and a signed copy of the January Vogue that featured the first lady.

greta and more on plane flyover

FAA Memo: Feds Knew NYC Flyover Would Cause Panic - Threatened Federal Sanctions Against NYPD, Secret Service, FBI & Mayor's Office If Secret Ever Got Out

Federal officials knew that sending two fighter jets and Air Force One to buzz ground zero and Lady Liberty might set off nightmarish fears of a 9/11 replay, but they still ordered the photo-op kept secret from the public.

In a memo obtained by CBS 2 HD the Federal Aviation Administration's James Johnston said the agency was aware of "the possibility of public concern regarding DOD (Department of Defense) aircraft flying at low altitudes" in an around New York City. But they demanded total secrecy from the NYPD, the Secret Service, the FBI and even the mayor's office and threatened federal sanctions if the secret got out.

"To say that it should not be made public knowing that it might scare people it's just confounding," Sen. Charles Schumer said. "It's what gives Washington and government a bad name. It's sheer stupidity."

The flyover was ordered by the White House Office of Military Affairs so it would have souvenir photos of Air Force One with the Statue of Liberty in the background.... postcards?

"It was a mistake. It will never happen again," President Obama said.

They scared the shit out of New Yorkers, for postcards? Really? Why the big secret? That does not make sense.

$328,835? Hmmm, one might think when looking for ways to cut the budget, idiotic things like this would be a great place to start.

white house causes panic over manhattan

I feel sick to my stomach watching these videos, and seeing this photo (from Perfunction). I feel so bad for the people of Manhattan - you can just feel the raw fear that still exists post 9/11.

Who in the hell thought this would be a good idea? Why were they doing a photoshoot with the President's airplane and fighter jets, flying low over Manhattan?


White House Military Office director Louis Caldera issued a brief statement.

“Last week, I approved a mission over New York. I take responsibility for that decision,” he said. “While federal authorities took the proper steps to notify state and local authorities in New York and New Jersey, its clear that the mission created confusion and disruption. I apologize and take responsibility for any distress that flight caused.”…

An administration official said the Federal Aviation Administration was informed this would be taking places, and notified Mr. Bloomberg’s office on April 22.

The problem was the FAA was told the information was classified and did not alert the press to warn the public.

You get a real sense of the fear that these people went through, in this video:


When President Obama was told about the incident, he was “furious,” a White House official says.

Well, I'm sure he's not the only one who lost sleep over it.

liz cheney and bill clinton on waterboarding

On the topic of waterboarding and the torture vs. enhanced interrogation technique debate, I have to say, I am technically against the USofA using torture as a means of interrogation.

That said, I don't care that waterboarding and enhanced interrogation techniques were used in this situation.

This was done in 2002, after we were attacked on 9/11, and only three detainees were ever subjected to the method of waterboarding:

Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, the alleged mastermind of the Sept. 11 attacks

Abu Zubaydah, an Al Qaeda operative tied to the Sept. 11 plot

Abd al Rahim al Nashiri, a Saudi suspected of playing a key role in the bombing of the U.S. Navy destroyer Cole in Yemen in 2000

Sorry, but I just can't get all worked up about waterboarding those criminals. Personally, I think they should be executed.

CIA head Michael Hayden told Congress in 2008: "We used it against these three detainees because of the circumstances at the time. There was the belief that additional catastrophic attacks against the homeland were inevitable. And we had limited knowledge about al-Qaeda and its workings."

I am against picking up people suspected of having ties to terrorists, but not actual evidence, and waterboarding or renditioning them. But, I am not against waterboarding murderers.

You can debate till the cows come home over whether these techniques work or not, but at that point in time, under the fear of further attacks, I think they did the best that they could. They tried whatever methods they legally could, to gain information.

These murderers were subjected to extremely uncomfortable situations to get information out of them, about other potential plots designed to kill more Americans.

This seems nothing more than a partisan fight, meant to appease Obama's most liberal supporters, that will get really ugly if allowed to continue.

This is a great interview with Liz Cheney and Norah O'Donnell. I find it quite hilarious that Liz calls Norah out for her shoddy journalism work - for reading from an AP article, not the actual legal documents.

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

Hot Air has a clip from 2006 of President Clinton, discussing torture, waterboarding, and whether people would be prosecuted in an imminent danger situation, where waterboarding was used. You need to go listen.

On Countdown last week, Lawrence O'Donnell in an attempt to criticize Sean Hannity, and condemn Bush for waterboarding, made what I feel is the dumbest argument ever for not waterboarding someone.

LAWRENCE O'DONNELL, MSNBC POLITICAL ANALYST: "The reason Sean Hannity thinks torture is a good idea, the reason Sean Hannity thinks it works is because it would worked on him. There are two different kinds of people out there in the world, the warriors, which are a very, very tiny minority. Less than one percent of our population is ever going to face combat. Then there's the rest of us.

I am like Sean Hannity, one of those cowards, just like Dick Cheney, who has refused throughout my life to enter the military and ever subject myself to anything dangerous occupationally, where I might lose a tooth. That is exactly Sean Hannity's approach to life. And he has exactly the same cowardly fear that I do, of combat or submitting myself to anything of the kind of risk that the American military does.

But, al Qaeda, the people who have devoted their lives to destroying their enemy, the people who are willing to die in their exercises-they were all willing to die on 9/11, Sean Hannity thinks torture's going to work on them, because he has never, never known the kind of commitment that those people have. Nothing he's done in his life measures that kind of commitment that the American military has or what our enemies have. Our enemies are more committed than Sean
Hannity will ever be..."

I guess I am confused as to what O'Donnell thinks should be done with this enemy that has devoted their lives to destroying their enemy, and who are willing to die, and have such commitment to their murderous cause. Make them a cup of tea, and hope they just decide to share?

The big debate seems to be one equal to those who are pro-choice or pro-life, or who support the death penalty or not. People differ on what they deem right or wrong. Even the law is interpreted differently.

I don't really care if a mass murderer is waterboarded. In my opinion he loses his rights when he murders thousands of people.

The United States does not torture. The United States is better than their enemy. And the POTUS did the best that he could when we were a nation under attack. I never liked Bush, and never voted for him. But I have to believe that they did the best that they could under dire extreme circumstance.

Mistakes were made, mistakes are always made. Every president of the US has made mistakes in the time of war.

If people think issuing these guidline memos was a mistake, and if the Bush administration ends up prosecuted for these memos, Obama better hope he doesn't make any mistakes during his war.

The list of potential prosecutable mistakes could grow rather quickly....

immelt's defense of msnbc was met with lots of boos

The outrage over msnbc and NBC's obvious liberal bias is growing, and the shareholders have had enough! You might say they are mad as hell, and aren't going to take it anymore.

Click here for video.

"My biggest surprise was the open hostility to MSNBC," said Tom Borelli of the Free Enterprise Action Fund and a four-year critic of Immelt. "It was noticeable and loud. I don't remember any of this going on last year."

"Any time MSNBC was mentioned, there was a rumbling in the crowd of 400 people," he added. Borelli also asked a question pertaining to GE's stock performance since Immelt took the helm.

Czajkowski said about 15 shareholders voiced criticism of NBC, MSNBC or CNBC, which was met with applause. When Immelt defended the networks, he was booed. "He didn't have good answers," Czajkowski said.

Paul Roeser, a shareholder since 1962 who had never been to a GE shareholder meeting until now, estimated that more than two dozen people expressed concern about GE's television news division. "The biggest thing there was the put-down of NBC and MSNBC as slanted news media," he said. "Of the people that got to make a remark, almost all of them mentioned it." Roeser, a retired New York state trooper, also said that Immelt's defense of MSNBC was met with "lots of boos," some of which can be heard on the Borelli tape.

Jesse Watters, a producer on "The O'Reilly Factor" snuck into the meeting, and confronted Immelt, but his criticisms were cut short when his microphone was cut off, according to several people there. Also in this video, O'Reilly continues his investigation into the GE and Obama connection, and Cap and Trade and their abuse of power. The first video is here, from my post garofalo’s stench rises all the way to the top..

Click here if video won't load.

Here is a second video with Laura Ingraham, who used to work for msnbc, discussing the liberal shift at msnbc, and the GE - Obama connection.

Click here if video won't load.

It's good to see shareholders express their outrage and realize their decline in profits stems from the bias of NBC networks. Nothing makes people sit up and take notice faster than when it hits them in their pocketbook.

Now, the interesting part will be to see what happens moving forward with GE and NBC and the Obama administration. Will NBC back off their liberal (hateful) bias, in hopes of improving their ratings? Or will they continue with the pro-Obama slant, using their power to influence politics, in hopes of getting more bailout money, and billions of dollars in cap and trade transactions?

who's going down for the torture memos?

In my earlier post, holder: obama does not decide who will be prosecuted, I wrote, "It appears Obama opened a whole can of worms with the release of these memos. Not only does he lack the authority to decide whether there will be prosecutions or not, I assume he also put members of his own party at risk. (Feinstein and Pelosi, members of the Intel Committee…)"

This appears to be just the tip of the iceberg. As reported in the Washington Post a newly released report from the Senate Intelligence Committee showed that Condi Rice played a greater role than she has previously acknowledged in the CIA's harsh interrogation program, and approved the use of water boarding. The report finds that Rice approved the CIA's request to water board a captured al-Qaeda member in 2002, making her the first known Bush administration official to do so.

Condoleezza Rice, John D. Ashcroft and other top Bush administration officials approved as early as the summer of 2002 the CIA's use at secret prisons of harsh interrogation methods, including water boarding, a technique that new Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. has described as illegal torture, according to a chronology prepared by the Senate intelligence committee and declassified by Holder.

holder: obama does not decide who will be prosecuted

According to the Daily Beast, the Justice Department is "incensed" over comments made by Gibbs, Emanuel and Obama that there would be no prosecutions surrounding the so called torture memos. The issue was discussed on Morning Joe today, including the comments from the Obama administration and the Justice Department.

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

Here is the scoop from the Daily Beast:

On Sunday, White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel, appearing on ABC’s This Week, underscored that President Obama had promised that CIA agents who acted in reliance on Bush-era Justice Department memoranda approving since-repudiated torture techniques would not face criminal investigation or prosecution. Then he went one step further, stating “those who devised the policy, he believes that they were—should not be prosecuted either.” A few hours later, White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs reiterated Emanuel’s remarks as official policy. But during the course of the day on Tuesday the White House appeared suddenly to shift gears. President Obama, responding to a reporter’s question, declared that he was not prejudging a possible criminal investigation or prosecution of "those who formulated those legal decisions" behind the interrogation methods. What happened?

Members of the White House press corps struggled to explain the shift, many of them suggesting that Obama was pandering to his political base. But the winds of change blew in from an address just down Pennsylvania Avenue. The Daily Beast has learned that senior Justice Department lawyers were “incensed” at the Emanuel and Gibbs statements, as one put it—not because they disagreed with Obama’s apparent opposition to an investigation and prosecution, but because the statements violated well-established rules separating political figures in the White House from decisions about active criminal cases. The statements were viewed as a frontal assault on the autonomy and independence of the criminal-justice system. “Emanuel got far ahead of the process and described it in a way that clearly suggested that political judgment was driving the entire process,” one senior Justice official told me. “It was depressing and amateurish.”

The article goes on to detail the tangled web they have created, and what the next steps might be. The final paragraph closes with this:

Obama’s initial statement that CIA agents involved in the Bush “enhanced interrogation techniques” program would not be investigated or prosecuted was taken at the Justice Department as pushing the boundaries of political involvement in criminal law. But the statement by Emanuel, seen as a distinctly political figure, was perceived at Justice as going beyond those boundaries, according to high Justice officials. Within Justice, if Holder follows the now well-articulated views of the president and his chief of staff, the fear is that the attorney general would be viewed as a political subordinate in the mold of Alberto Gonzales. Ironically, the White House pronouncements have contributed to the momentum for a special prosecutor. That development coincides with the congressional voices now being raised for such an appointment.

If it's true that Eric Holder is indeed incensed at the Obama administration, that would certainly explain the obvious and rapid flip flop, as seen in this video from Finkelblog:



It appears Obama opened a whole can of worms with the release of these memos. Not only does he lack the authority to decide whether there will be prosecutions or not, I assume he also put members of his own party at risk. (Feinstein and Pelosi, members of the Intel Committee...)

I would also assume that with his use of illegal wiretapping, and the continued policy of rendition, he has now opened himself up to prosecution in four years.

i was running for president, there you go.

Following in the same vein of Obama's recent comments to Tapper, to explain his apparent flip flop on the Cuban embargo, that he was just "running for senator", we now have a new catch phrase to explain his many broken campaign promises, I was running for President, there you go.

PROMISES, PROMISES: Obama and black farmers
By Ben Evans

WASHINGTON (AP) — As a senator, Barack Obama led the charge last year to pass a bill allowing black farmers to seek new discrimination claims against the Agriculture Department. Now he is president, and his administration so far is acting like it wants the potentially budget-busting lawsuits to go away.

The change isn't sitting well with black farmers who thought they'd get a friendlier reception from Obama after years of resistance from President George W. Bush.

"this is racism straight up and is nothing but a bunch of teabagging rednecks"

The liberal MSM continues to bash the Tax Day Tea Parties and the attendees, dismissing them, mocking them, and acting confused as to the purpose. This particular video has me so enraged I spun around like a dog chasing its tail for about an hour, trying to figure out how to reply.

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

First, I would like to ask the liberal MSM, and hateful people like Garofalo, wasn't Barack Obama elected POTUS, in large part, because of the anger and frustration over Bush's last couple of years in office? (I say last couple of years, since he was reelected in 2004.)

cnn reporter smears tea parties - UPDATE

Susan Roesgen from CNN tries her best to smear the entire concept of the tea parties, stir up trouble, points out a couple of extreme signs, and is flat out RUDE to a guy with his baby. What she says after the *interview* is irresponsible, negligent, and flat out bullsh*t.

Not family viewing? She was the one not appropriate for family viewing. I would like to know if she ever showed up on Keith Olbermann's door and attacked him for REPEATEDLY calling George Bush a facist.

When the segment was over she was taken to task for her obvious bias and, her attempts to smear the event and the people in attendance.

h/t Hillbuzz

I watched live coverage of this for hours yesterday, and never saw any craziness. I have seen hundreds of photos, and again, all mild, mainstream protesters.

This woman was there for one reason, and one reason only. She should be ashamed.

UPDATE: Well, looky here. Apparently back in 2006 Susan Roesgen, doing an interview, sees someone dressed as Bush, and calls it a look a like. The Bush costume has a Hitler mustache and Devil horns. Apparenly it is ok to disparage one POTUS, but not another.

h/t Michelle Malkin

should jamie foxx be fired?

This is not ok. People demanded Don Imus be fired, I expect to see them lining for Jamie Foxx's firing as well.

I won't hold my breath though.

(Jamie Foxx apologized, but so did Don Imus.)

ah...forget what i said about all that habeas corpus crap

Obama the candidate:

September 2008


December 2007


September 2006


Obama was a big ol' candidate for change, and a big supporter of habeas corpus, wasn't he? In addition to those videos, here are some additional situations, where he discussed civil liberties and habeas corpus here, here, here, and here is McCain discussing a back and forth with Obama.

And back in June, Obama said this:

"Today's Supreme Court decision ensures that we can protect our nation and bring terrorists to justice, while also protecting our core values. The Court's decision is a rejection of the Bush Administration's attempt to create a legal black hole at Guantanamo - yet another failed policy supported by John McCain. This is an important step toward reestablishing our credibility as a nation committed to the rule of law, and rejecting a false choice between fighting terrorism and respecting habeas corpus. Our courts have employed habeas corpus with rigor and fairness for more than two centuries, and we must continue to do so as we defend the freedom that violent extremists seek to destroy."

But, apparently that was all campaign rhetoric, because today the New York Times reported that Obama the President is set to appeal a ruling that would allow prisoners in Afghanistan to file lawsuits seeking their release.

"The Obama administration said Friday that it would appeal a district court ruling that granted some military prisoners in Afghanistan the right to file lawsuits seeking their release. The decision signaled that the administration was not backing down in its effort to maintain the power to imprison terrorism suspects for extended periods without judicial oversight.

In a court filing, the Justice Department also asked District Judge John D. Bates not to proceed with the habeas-corpus cases of three detainees at Bagram Air Base outside Kabul, Afghanistan. Judge Bates ruled last week that the three — each of whom says he was seized outside of Afghanistan — could challenge their detention in court.

Tina Foster, the executive director of the International Justice Network, which is representing the detainees, condemned the decision in a statement.

“Though he has made many promises regarding the need for our country to rejoin the world community of nations, by filing this appeal, President Obama has taken on the defense of one of the Bush administration’s unlawful policies founded on nothing more than the idea that might makes right,” she said."

This is a perfect summation from Salon.com, by Glenn Greenwald:

So that Barack Obama -- the one trying to convince Democrats to make him their nominee and then their President -- said that abducting people and imprisoning them without charges was (a) un-American; (b) tyrannical; (c) unnecessary to fight Terrorism; (d) a potent means for stoking anti-Americanism and fueling Terrorism; (e) a means of endangering captured American troops, Americans traveling abroad and Americans generally; and (f) a violent betrayal of core, centuries-old Western principles of justice. But today's Barack Obama, safely ensconced in the White House, fights tooth and nail to preserve his power to do exactly that.

Obama the candidate spent months, YEARS, trashing the Bush administration for their policies, and is yet again, embracing them. What was that change all about, really?

In this video from This Week, George plays Obama a sound bite of Dick Cheney saying that Obama before he starts to implement his campaign rhetoric, needs to site down and find out precisely what it is [they] did...because it would be a tragedy to throw over all those policies simply because he had campaigned against them.

Wouldn't it be better to have an idea about the national security BEFORE you hit the campaign trail, and promise all kinds of things to your supporters?

I mean, heck, Hillary could have campaigned on the promise that she would give every American a new puppy, a million dollars, and a new car, and she would sitting in the White House right now....

Glenn Greenwald finishes his article (it's a great piece, and contains a lot of info) with this comment:

To recap: Obama files a brief saying he agrees in full with the Bush/Cheney position. He's arguing that the President has the power to abduct, transport and imprison people in Bagram indefinitely with no charges of any kind. He's telling courts that they have no authority to "second-guess" his decisions when it comes to war powers. But this is all totally different than what Bush did, and anyone who says otherwise is a reckless, ill-motivated hysteric who just wants to sell books and get on TV.

We are definitely living in bizarro land.

shuster can't get enough of teabagging

David Shuster loves teabagging. He just can't get enough of it. Full throated, tongue lashing, in your face teabagging.

How many puns can you count in this clip?



You're going to need a *dick* army? Wow, funny stuff there, Shuster.

Well, he couldn't be outdone by Rachel Maddow, who has dedicated a lot of time giggling over teabagging. More videos here. And here. (note to Rachel - nobody is calling this *tea bagging*, they are calling the events tea parties. you are the one bringing the smut.)

Nothing like a major network news channel discrediting themselves by acting like a bunch of prepubescent children, in an attempt to *discredit* Americans upset over our ever growing deficit.

(this is why I no longer watch msnbc...except for Morning Joe, that is!)

And since Rachel and David are apparently having trouble trying to figure out why people are having tea parties, here is the reason, from the Tax Day Tea Party web site:

"Americans across the country are gathering across the country to express anger over Congress’s irresponsible and reckless spending habits. Taxpayers are not deceived by the notion that the American economy can be revived by government simply spending its way out of a recession. They are a sophisticated people who recognize that continued overspending runs up massive deficits that ultimately lead to higher taxes and less freedom for all Americans.”

Perhaps if David and Rachel would pull the teabags out, and act like journalists, they could figure it out.

Obama may have promised taxes wouldn't be raised, but they will be. And that will be yet another broken campaign promise.

phil spector guilty

Yet another reminder that just because someone is a celebrity, it doesn't mean they are worthy of adoration. People placed on pedestals tend to fall off. And sometimes when they fall, they don't get back up.

Granted, it's been a long time since Spector has been considered a celebrity but he is known as a legend in the music industry. In 1989 he was inducted in the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame.

In the 1960's "Phil Spector reigned as the hit maker supreme", producing classics like the Righteous Brothers’ “You’ve Lost That Lovin’ Feelin”’ and the Ronettes’ classic, “Be My Baby”, “To Know Him is to Love Him,” The Crystals’ “Da Doo Ron Ron” and “He’s a Rebel” and Ike and Tina Turner’s “River Deep-Mountain High.” He also worked on the Beatles' album "Let It Be."

But Monday he was convicted of second degree murder for shooting a film actress six years ago.

"The 40-year-old Lana Clarkson, star of the 1985 cult film “Barbarian Queen,” died of a gunshot fired in her mouth as she sat in the foyer of Spector’s mansion in 2003. She met Spector only hours earlier at her job as a nightclub hostess.

Prosecutors argued Spector had a history of threatening women with guns when they tried to leave his presence.

Spector, 69, who had long lived in seclusion at his suburban Alhambra “castle,” was out on the town in Hollywood when he met Clarkson on Feb. 3, 2003, at the House of Blues. The tall, blond actress, recently turned 40 and unable to find acting work, had taken a job as a hostess. When the club closed in the wee hours, she accepted a chauffeured ride to Spector’s home for a drink. Three hours later, she was dead.

Spector’s chauffeur, the key witness, said he heard a gunshot, then saw Spector emerge holding a gun and heard him say: “I think I killed somebody.”

The prosecution presented testimony from five women who told of being threatened by Spector, even held hostage in his home, with a gun pointed at them and threats of death if they tried to leave. Apparently he had a thing for Russian Roulette.

I don't know about you, but I've definitely lost that lovin' feeling.

good things come in small packages

Susan Boyle on Britain Got Talent
by dwarthy h/t hotair.com

let's roll! (easter egg roll, that is)

The Obama's and Biden's welcomed 30,000 people from 48 states to the White House for the annual Easter Egg Roll today. The focus of the day was on having fun, and moving!


Those tulips are just gorgeous!

Tapper wrote, "The President , wearing a jacket and no tie, then spoke but only got one word out before the microphone died. The president playfully pretended to test out the ear of the life-sized Easter bunny to see if his ear would have more luck broadcasting sound that the other defunct microphones.

After a few awkward moments, the Obama's oldest daughter, Malia stepped to the mic for her own test and said, “"Is it on? Oh yeah,” when her trial worked, gaining praise from her sister who said, "go Malia!".

"Hello everybody that's Malia, our technical advisor," the President joked."

This year's Easter Egg Roll theme is "Let's Go Play," with an emphasis on health and fitness. In addition to the traditional egg roll, there are a variety of activity stations. There is a kids’ kitchen and organic garden, a sports court with basketball and soccer, the "Hop to it!" area featuring jump rope, dance and yoga, a story time stage, and an arts and crafts station cleverly called "Eggpress Yourself."

The day's activities were all meant to encourage kids to lead healthy and active lives, something that Michelle has said will be one of the issues she addresses. I really hope she does take on child obesity. It is a cause that really needs attention in America. Considering how many Americans fawn over the Obama's right now, it would be a great cause for her to tackle. Hopefully she can inspire families to get out and move, and eat healthier! Obesity and diabetes are huge drains on our healthcare system, too.

Sasha and Malia, and all the little kids running around are so cute! Here is another video, and interview with the White House Social Director.



This year they had eco-friendly eggs for the Easter Egg roll. (eco-friendly eggs?? Are real, or chocolate eggs not eco-friendly? What do they normally use for the roll? oh...maybe real and chocoloate eggs aren't healthy enough?) Anyway, the eggs are kind of cool, as a souvenir.

It looks like everyone is having fun, and it was a successful event. I wish I could have seen Fergie!

buona pasqua!

obama's brother denied entry to UK - accused of sexual assault

From the News of the World:

Obama brother accused of UK sex assault
Samson denied British visa after incident with teen girl in Berkshire
Obama's half brother was REFUSED a visa to enter the UK after being accused of an attempted sex attack on a young girl in Berkshire

Dang, and Bill and Jimmy thought they had it bad with Roger and Billy. Obama has yet another brother making headlines. Apparently he was denied entry into the UK, in January, because of a previous arrest in Britain for sexual assault including a minor. He had been living there illegally at the time of the incident.

"The hi-tech database revealed that Samson -who manages a mobile phone shop just outside Nairobi-was the same man arrested by British police after he approached a group of young girls, including a 13 year-old, and allegedly tried to sexually assault one of them.

the australian: obama is bush's acceptable face

This is an interesting read. Highlights below:

Obama is Dubya's acceptable face
Greg Sheridan, Foreign editor April 11, 2009

Can Barack Obama seduce even the Muslim world? So far I have manfully resisted falling for Obama and becoming an antipodean Obama boy. But, like everyone else on the globe, I bear witness to his charm and smoothness.

I suffer a certain ambiguity in my attitude to Obama. He is the President of the US and as such an enormous force for good in the world. He represents the continuity of overwhelmingly beneficial American policy. So at one level I am all for him.

On the other hand, it is impossible not to be annoyed by the double standards that the Bush-hating media applies to him. Can you imagine the noise and fuss that would be made if George W. Bush had tried to appoint to his cabinet a gaggle of charmed plutocrats who apparently felt the payment of tax was entirely optional?

But the fact Obama has a double standard working in his favour is a great benefit for those who appreciate the importance of US leadership in the world. So I should rejoice in the double standard and hope it continues for the eight years Obama is likely to be President.

After all, on all the big foreign policy questions, Obama has continued Bush's policies. The predator drones still fly over Pakistan, destroying any al-Qa'ida operative dumb enough to talk on the phone. The terrorists are still in Guantanamo as Obama's administration develops the Bush administration's decision to shut Guantanamo, as a necessity of global PR, while trying to stop the terrorists from going back to killing civilians. Like Bush, Obama is pursuing an attempt to engage the Iranian regime and even using the same official Bush did. He is withdrawing from Iraq very slowly, on a timetable approved by Republican senator John McCain. He acknowledges the success of the US troop surge in Iraq and wants to emulate it in Afghanistan. He stands four square behind Israel's security. And so on.

Yet while much of the world hated Bush with an irrational passion, allegedly for these policies, it loves Obama with at least a seemingly similar passion, notwithstanding these very same policies. This is a bit of a mystery, but so far at least it's a good mystery.

snip

But the real purpose of Obama's speech [in Turkey] was his broader pitch to the Muslim world. Much as I love Indonesia, it probably is true that this had a greater resonance in the Arab world by being delivered in Turkey (not that Turks are Arabs) than it would have had if it had been delivered in Jakarta. The speech was carried live on al-Jazeera and al-Arabiya television networks.

Obama said: "The US is not, and will never be, at war with Islam. In fact our partnership with the Muslim world is critical not just in rolling back the violent ideologies that people of all faiths reject but also to strengthen opportunity for all its people. I want to make it clear that America's relationship with the Muslim community, the Muslim world, cannot, and will not, just be based upon opposition to terrorism. We seek broader engagement based on mutual interest and mutual respect. We will listen carefully, we will bridge misunderstandings and we will seek common ground. We will be respectful, even when we do not agree. We will convey our deep appreciation for the Islamic faith, which has done so much over the centuries to shape the world, including my own country."

These were all sweet and sensible words by Obama, delivered with charm and grace. They were almost exactly the same as words Bush had uttered countless times. Yet the reaction in the Arab world was overwhelmingly positive.

This is fascinating and it is very difficult to judge its precise significance.

snip

The real question is whether this desirable honeymoon of Muslim affection for Obama will last and what strategic consequences it will have. Already the Noam Chomsky Left in the West is presenting Obama as an agent of American hegemony. No doubt in due course the Islamists will paint him in the same light. But he may just be able to appeal over their heads directly to Arab and other Muslim publics.

One way this could be derailed would be if there were to come a time when Obama had to take tough national security action, perhaps in Iran, which would be unpopular with Muslim publics.

But just now it's a fascinating concentration of very dynamic factors.

As someone who broadly supported neo-conservative foreign policy, long live the cult of Obama, say I.

You can read the entire article here. I left out some good parts.


There is another article I just read, from Forbes.com, by Susan Lee, that is a good read.

We Have a Right to Rant
Why shouldn't bailouts and government spending make us angry?

Both the stock market and the economy are beginning to show tiny signs of recovery. But the national mood, defined by continuing popular rage over the bailouts, seems darker.

Talking heads have jumped on this rage, calling it a resurgence of 19th-century populist fury at bankers and other elites. But this characterization allows them to dismiss the rants or even demonize them as the output of ignorant yokels driven by irrational anxieties.

This is a mistake. The anger is entirely righteous. And it's being driven by four factors--all of which are completely rational. Continue here.

what do you do when buried in rubble for 30 hours?

Crochet, of course.

I just love this little ol' lady - the story of her rescue is one of the few happy moments in an otherwise extremely tragic situation.

An elderly woman spent 30 hours buried beneath the rubble of her home crocheting to pass the time, she told her rescuers.

Maria D'Antuono, 98, was rescued from her home in Tempera yesterday after a powerful earthquake rocked central Italy, killing at least 260 people.

Safe: Maria D'Antuono is interviewed after being rescued from the upper floors of her quake damaged home in Tempera, Italy

Yesterday there was a mass funeral for 205 of the victims. It was so sad seeing all the little coffins.

just shut up?

It's very ironic that those who bashed Bush for eight years, sent emails bashing him, making fun of him, and trashing him, now invoke the *Shut Up* attitude when it comes to Obama.

Do people think that just because they prefer Obama that there weren't people who liked Bush, and took offense to the attacks on him and his supporters?


No one should EVER shut up. We won't always like what others have to say, but people have a right to say it. And the more people try to shut you up, the louder you should yell. It means you are doing something right.

earthquake updates

UPDATE: Crews are still working, digging people out, looking for survivors. Last I heard there were still around 15 people missing. ONe of the buidling that had collapsed was a student dormitory, and there were thought to be seven students still inside. The have pulled out four bodies, but did find a 20 year old girl alive, after 42 hours. This was a big boost for the search and rescue crew. Last night was really tough for those left homeless. It rained and hailed, and there have been like 250 aftershocks since the earthquake. One earlier today was a 4.9 that left people and rescue workers running. The church furthere collapsed, as did other buildings.

This is video of one of the scarier aftershocks. Rescue workers were inside and had to run out.

Silvio Berlusconi has said Italy does not need any assistance, but he did accept an offer from the U.S, as a sign of friendship. "If the United States wants to give a tangible sign of its solidarity with Italy, it could take on the responsibility of rebuilding heritage sites and churches," Berlusconi said. "We would be very happy to have this support." The US Embassy in Rome offered $50,000 in emergency funds. The EU, France, Germany, Greece, Israel, Russia immediately offered aid, but apparently funds are not immediately needed.

In Onna, a small village nearby, 38 people out of some 300 inhabitants were killed, and 90% of the village destroyed. The death toll overall is up to 235 (as best I know) and now the estimations are there are still 50,000 homeless. Many people have found shelter with family or friends. They are setting up tent towns where they can. Some people have been able to enter their homes, and gather what they can. Many Italians keep a lot of their money in their homes, so it can be very dire if they can't find their stash. Most people have been left with basically nothing. The pictures are just tragic.


DONATIONS:
Corriere della Sera - Aprile 2009
An appeal on behalf of communities affected by the Abruzzo earthquake, was launched within hours of the disaster by the Corriere della Sera, Corriere.it, the Gazzetta dello Sport, Gazzetta.it and City.

WHAT TO DO
– Anyone wishing to make a donation to help victims in the earthquake zone can do so by bank transfer or by credit card.

BANK TRANSFER:
Intesa-San Paolo, ABI 3069, CAB 05061, account number 1000/144, account name: “Un aiuto subito – Terremoto dell’Abruzzo”. IBAN: IT 03 B 03069 05061 100000000144

CREDIT CARD DONATIONS
(CartaSi, MasterCard, Visa, American Express) CartaSi Freephone: 800 317800 (from some mobiles, dial 12 followed by the number)

Calls from abroad:
+39 02 34980235.
Have your credit card ready and follow the recorded instructions.

earthquake strikes central italy - l'aquila

There was a terrible earthquake early this morning just north of Rome, in a town called L'Aquila. So far, there are 50 dead, and about 45 - 50 thousand displaced from their homes. In a town of 68,000, that is practically the entire town, now homeless.

The quake was a 5.8, which doesn't sound too strong, having lived in WA and CA, but in a country like Italy, it is devastating.

Luckily, we are far from Rome, and did not feel a thing. (I didn't realize there had been an earthquake when Diamond Tiger left a comment, asking if I was ok. Now I get the question! Thank you, we are ok!)

Corriere della Serra has more photos and videos, albeit in Italian, but you can see the damage that was done. BBC also has lots of video and photos, including this scary interview with a woman, while another tremor hit.

How awful! And how incredibly scary that is occured while it was still dark outside. I can't imagine the fear.

I receive messages from the Consulate when something like this happens, and this is what they just sent, in case anyone needs the info:

Warden Message
Italy

April 6, 2009

This Warden Message is being issued to alert U.S. citizens to the
earthquake in central Italy on April 6, 2009.

A 6.3-magnitude earthquake occurred in central Italy at 3:32 a.m. local time (1:32 a.m. GMT) on April 6, 2009. The epicenter of the earthquake was 60 miles northeast of Rome in the region of Abruzzo. Damage from the earthquake is concentrated around the city of L'Aquila, the capital of the Abruzzo region, as well as other small towns near L'Aquila in Abruzzo.

According to media reports, the earthquake has disrupted electricity, phone service, and other utilities. Widespread damage to buildings is reported in and around L'Aquila. Italian civil protection authorities have requested that people avoid traveling to the L'Aquila area.

Americans should strongly consider deferring any travel plans to the area affected by the earthquake. Americans traveling in Italy should also consider contacting family in the U.S. to let family members know they are unharmed. U.S. citizens traveling to or through Italy are encouraged to follow post-earthquake developments in the media.

All Americans in Italy are urged to register either online at https://travelregistration.state.gov/ or by phone or in person directly with the U.S. Embassy in Rome or the Consulates General in Milan, Florence, and Naples. Registering gives U.S. citizens access to updated information on travel and security within Italy and makes it easier for the Embassy to contact citizens in case of emergency. U.S. Embassy Consular Section in Rome is located at Via Vittorio Veneto, 121. The telephone number is 06-4674-1.

Our website is:
www.italy.usembassy.gov
U.S. Consulates General in Italy are located in:
NAPLES: Piazza della Repubblica; telephone number: 081-583-8111
MILAN: Via Principe Amedeo, 2/10; telephone number: 02-290-351
FLORENCE: Lungarno A. Vespucci, 38; telephone number: 055-266-951

U.S. Consular Agents in Italy are located in:

GENOA: Via Dante, 2
PALERMO: Via Vaccarini, 1
VENICE: Marco Polo Airport, General Aviation Terminal, Viale Galileo
Galilei, 30

As the Department continues to develop information on conditions affecting the well-being and safety of U.S. citizens overseas, it shares information through its Consular Information Program documents, available on the internet at http://travel.state.gov .

In addition to information on the Internet, travelers may obtain up-to-date information on security conditions by calling 1-888-407-4747 toll-free in the U.S. or outside the U.S. and Canada on a regular toll line at 1-202-501-4444.

obama bows to king abdullah

And everybody is asking why? He didn't bow to Queen Elizabeth. Presidents and other heads of state don't bow to royalty. But Obama bowed so low, when he met King Abdullah, he seemed to almost fall over. (and no, he wasn't picking something up off the floor.)



Now everyone in the blogosphere is trying to figure out why.

If you remember, during the primary, I and others, wrote about Obama and his relationship to a man named Dr. Khalid al-Mansour. During an interview on NY1, Percy Sutton started discussing a friend of his, a man who contacted him and asked him to write a letter for Obama. That man was Dr. Khalid al-Mansour, and he was raising money for Obama, and helping Obama to get into Harvard. This was the original interview:



Percy mentions that Dr. Khalid al-Mansour is the principal advisor to one of the world's richest men.

Who is Khalid Al-Mansour?

"Although many Americans have never heard of Khalid Abdullah Tariq al-Mansour (his full name), he is well known within the black community as a lawyer, an orthodox Muslim, a black nationalist, an author, an international deal-maker, an educator, and an outspoken enemy of Israel."

So, who did Khalid work for, who was this rich man he adavised? It was Prince Al-Waleed bin Talal bin Abdul Aziz Al Saud.



And who is Prince Al-Waleed?

He is the nephew of King Abdullah.

So, perhaps that might shed a little light as to why Obama is bowing to the King of Saudi Arabia? Maybe they go *way back*? Perhaps they have some history? Maybe Khalid was working on behalf of Prince Al-Waleed when he *sponsored* Obama?

Obama sure doesn't help those *rumors* with things like bowing before the king of Saudi Arabia....

For more reading on The Bow, the RBO web site has a great round up of blog stories about this, including the Saudi media coverage, and lots more videos and pics.

Some people seem to think Obama was kissing his ring, but it does not appear to me, that he is. He's just kissing his butt.

But...I'm sure it is just a coincidence....right?

Or maybe Obama just has issues about bowing down to females? (I just hope he didn't call Queen Elizabeth sweetie!)

Memorandum has a round-up of stories on the event, too.