President Egobama

FacebookTwitterPrintFriendly

**Posted by Phineas

I knew the guy was a narcissist, but declaring himself the fourth-best president in our history?

From his 60 Minutes interview with Steve Croft:

The issue here is not gonna be a list of accomplishments. As you said yourself, Steve, you know, I would put our legislative and foreign policy accomplishments in our first two years against any president — with the possible exceptions of Johnson, F.D.R., and Lincoln — just in terms of what we’ve gotten done in modern history. But, you know, but when it comes to the economy, we’ve got a lot more work to do. And we’re gonna keep on at it.

Washington, Adams, Jefferson, Jackson, Polk? Pikers! Teddy Roosevelt? Bah! Ronald Reagan? Don’t make me laugh. They and all the others are but nothing before The O-Man!’

I mean, what did Warren G. Harding ever do but end a massive economic depression in less than three years?

I’m sure Our Munificent Sun King could have done it in two, if it were worthy of his talents.

Yeesh.

(Crossposted at Public Secrets)

VIDEO: Whoopi Goldberg literally proves once & for all she’s full of sh**

FacebookTwitterPrintFriendly

Via the Star-Ledger:

Yup, you heard correctly. This [Friday] morning, Whoopi Goldberg, the Oscar-winning co-host on “The View” let nature take its course as the rest of the gang were interviewing Golden Globe-nominee Claire Danes.

The “Homeland” actress was chatting about her acclaimed Showtime series when we heard a certain WHOOPI CUSHION let loose.

As the rest of the panel, Danes and the audience cracked up, Goldberg easily admitted, “Oh, excuse me! I think I just blew a little frog out of there!” […]

Listen here:

Hey, I’ve been saying she was full of it for years now, but to have it come straight from the source itself, in it’s ‘purest’ form – well, it doesn’t get any better than that.

Or worse. :p

Gov. Haley’s endorsement may not help Romney out that much

FacebookTwitterPrintFriendly

In case you missed it, South Carolina Governor Nikki Haley endorsed Mitt Romney for president yesterday – just a little more than a month before her state’s first-in-the-south Presidential primary. Will it help Mitt? The National Journal thinks so:

South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley’s endorsement of Mitt Romney gives the ex-Bay State governor a crucial tea party imprimatur in a state that holds a critical Jan. 21 presidential primary. But Haley’s endorsement might be even more helpful by solidifying the perception that Romney’s campaign is on the rebound after a downturn.

Consider where Romney stood at the beginning of the week. Republicans and other critics were hammering him for offering Texas Gov. Rick Perry a $10,000 bet, and national polls showed Gingrich leading the GOP race by double-digits. The news was just as pessimistic in the Palmetto State: Romney trailed the ex-speaker of the House by 20 points there, according to an NBC News-Marist Poll. And on Tuesday, state party Chairman Chad Connelly questioned his commitment to the state.

The outlook for Romney is improving. National polls have shown Gingrich’s standing slipping (from 37 percent to 29 percent in roughly a week, according to Gallup), raising questions of whether Gingrich is following in the footsteps of onetime front-runners Perry, Herman Cain, and Michele Bachmann. Romney also turned in a strong debate performance Thursday night.

Haley’s support puts an exclamation mark on Romney’s revived prospects. He still is in a dogfight against Gingrich — nowhere moreso than in South Carolina, where his organization is still lacking. But Haley is a favorite of many conservative activists and could bolster his chances in the state that has voted for the eventual GOP nominee in every contested primary since 1980.

Maybe, but Haley’s also facing a backlash over her endorsement, if the reactions from conservatives on Facebook and Twitter, and in pundit world are any indication.   True, she backed Romney in 2008 and went on to become Governor of the state two years later thanks to a wave of popular support from SC conservatives, but Haley’s not the popular political figure she once was in South Carolina, if this poll is any indication.  Not only that, but if there’s one candidate the Tea Party despises the most, it’s Mitt, so her endorsement is not necessarily Mitt’s Golden Ticket to winning SC.

Also consider this: Prime time endorsements from prominent, news-making political figures are not an automatic indicator of a “sure win” – whether the endorser is popular or not.  Remember, Ted Kennedy created a stir in Democratic circles when he endorsed the young, politically inexperienced Senator Barack Obama in 2008 over longtime friend and political ally Hillary Clinton.  But in spite of the weight Ted Kennedy’s endorsement carried with liberal Democrats in Massachusetts and beyond, Hillary Clinton still won the Massachusetts primary handily.

As to poll numbers for the GOP presidential primary? Newt’s got a double digit lead average over Romney with just four weeks to go.  Of course, as we’ve seen many times this year already, it doesn’t take four weeks for a candidate’s campaign to take a nosedive but unless some blockbuster scandal breaks about Newt like it did for Herman Cain, I suspect all the effort in the world from HaleyCo. is not going to get a majority of SC conservatives to vote for Romney.  I don’t even think Senator Jim DeMint’s endorsement of Romney, if it were to happen, would make much difference. Southern conservatives are understandably hesitant about supporting a Yankee (heh) for political office – especially one who most realize is a “progressive” in conservative clothing.

As they say, stay tuned …

Rep. Ellison goes on “hunger strike” w/ #OccupyDC – for a whole 24 hours / #OccupyCLT

FacebookTwitterPrintFriendly

The Washington Examiner reports (hat tip):

Rep. Keith Ellison, D-Minn., embarked on a 24-hour hunger strike in solidarity with four Occupy DC protesters who have gone without food since Dec. 8 to advocate for D.C. voting rights.

Ellison, the first Muslim to serve in the House, met with the hunger strikers Thursday and pledged to read their declaration – which calls for full voting rights for District residents as well as legislative and budget autonomy – on the floor of the House of Representatives to enter it into the congressional record.

What a dope.  Who the heck puts a time frame on a hunger strike? Aren’t they supposed to be indefinite until your “demands” have been met/”point” made?  Bryan Preston is on the same page:

One day is not a hunger strike. It’s a diet. Maybe a fast. Not a hunger strike, in which one commits slow suicide to make a political point.

I was thinking when I read about this story about the small group of Occupy DC hunger strikers that I bet it’s not a “real” hunger strike in the traditional sense of the term, and sure enough, I was right:

The men are consuming only electrolyte-enhanced water and vitamins. Parsons, Mears and Jewler, all district residents, began their hunger strike at noon on Dec. 8 after a nutritious last meal of fruit smoothies and stir-fried vegetables. Gray, of Gaithersburg, Md., joined them the next morning after chowing down on an egg burrito.

I guarantee you they’re having more than this – I’ve seen this in other “hunger strikes”, where the “hunger strikers” eat ice cream and soup broth but claim neither really are “food.”

Continuing:

While they insist they won’t declare victory until they’ve accomplished their numerous goals, the strikers say they are not suicidal. Each has signed a document that specifies what kind of medical intervention he would want if he becomes incapacitated.

Mears, a 24-year-old freelance software developer, said he was still struggling with how much he was willing to endanger his health.

“It’s not that I want to die,” he said. “I very well could end up in the hospital on an IV.”

In other words, they’ve just told the DC politicos they’re trying to emotionally blackmail into “doing something” about what they perceive is a “voting dilemma” for Washington, DC citizens that this “protest” is symbolic only, so even if a few politicos were willing to intervene in order to keep the “strikers” from dying, they aren’t going to do it now. Not even Ellison himself was willing to go for more than 24 hours.

In spite of that, there’s no doubt in my mind that these “occupiers” view themselves as modern day revolutionaries “for the cause.” Morons.

Oh, and the sob story the Washington Post wrote about the poor suffering and weak OccupyDC hunger strikers wouldn’t be complete without the requisite photo of them in – you guessed it – wheelchairs:

Occupy DC Hunger Strikers

Occupy DC 'hunger strikers' - Photo via Jacquelyn Martin/Associated Press

About the wheelchairs, the Post writes:

They’ve walked the halls of congressional office buildings, sometimes being pushed in wheelchairs to conserve energy, and they’ve met with a few members of Congress and staffers for several others.

“[T]o conserve energy” my a**. This is all about images. Remind you of anything?

Push youngest/oldest to the front lines….This is a battle over images, not just over the park.
Charles Lenchner, Occupy Wall Street activist, Oct. 13, 2011

These idiots have become so predictable at this point that I almost feel bad for feeling obligated to point it out again and again and again and again.

Almost.