The YouTube description:

If it feels like 1984 in real life, it should. The threats to our religious liberty and conscience rights are very real. The question that needs to be asked of this president is “who decides”? Time and time again, President Obama has affirmed that it is the government who decides — government who decides what women want and think.

President Obama and his allies in Congress and the abortion lobby must stop the “War on Women” who don’t agree with them!

It’s President Obama’s job to protect the freedom of all women and men to practice their beliefs. Yet, an all-out assault has been launched by this administration on people of faith and conscience. Our rights are at stake and we must do something to stop it now. We must expose him!

Learn more at www.respectmyvoice.com

Along with many other conservative women, I’m doing my part to expose this administration’s Government-First/ObamaMessiah core belief system, especially when it comes to so-called “women’s issues.” Are you? If not – join us! The time is now.

Background in this post about Obama or some sycophant on his team inserting Obama into every biography of every president from Coolidge on, except Gerald Ford.

With regard to Ford, Malcolm observes:

The only modern president left out of the Obama bio adjustments is Gerald Ford. But the All-American football player, lawyer, wartime lieutenant commander, veteran House member and Minority Leader and vice president had an actual resume when assuming office.

BURN.

Malcolm, you meanie.

(Crossposted at Public Secrets)

I saw this news yesterday and laughed:

A new poll of Arkansas Democrats shows Barack Obama receiving support from only 45 percent of Democratic primary voters in Arkansas’s Fourth Congressional District, while 38 percent support his underfunded and relatively unknown primary challenger, Tennessee lawyer John Wolfe, Jr. Seventeen percent are undecided in the district poll.

In an interview with THE WEEKLY STANDARD, Wolfe said the poll results were “unbelievable” and said a defeat for Obama in the Arkansas primary would be “politically cataclysmic.”

“It says the momentum is good,” Wolfe said about the poll. “This is democracy in action.”

Remember, we’re talking about a primary involving the incumbent president, which almost by definition should be a cakewalk for him. And yet, he faced a strong challenge in West Virginia from a federal prisoner who took 41% of the vote and ten counties. And now with this news from Arkansas, it’s evident that there is deep discontent with Obama in at least certain sectors of the Democrat rank and file. But why?

Brian Bolduc offers an explanation:

The main problem with Obama’s presidency, [primary challenger John] Wolfe argues, is that the chief executive has merely “ratified institutional failures.” The corrupt government in Afghanistan? “He expanded our commitment to it.” Our expensive health-care system? “He made a deal to protect Big Pharma.” The irresponsible lending on Wall Street? “He perpetuated ‘too big to fail.’”

And the reason for Obama’s failure to change Washington stems from his personnel: He surrounds himself with bankers, such as former chief of staff Bill Daley (JP Morgan) and current head staffer Jack Lew (Citibank).

“We need someone who will represent the people, not just bankers,” Wolfe concludes. “He doesn’t visit the South that much, either. He needs to show more concern here.”

(…)

Wolfe’s critics might claim that he’s a Republican in disguise, but the candidate says he’s a progressive through and through. He notes that Richard Nixon and Gerald Ford, whom he describes as “perfect,” were progressives. “Republicans are not doing what I would like them to do,” Wolfe says. “They weren’t always this way. Even Ford and Nixon would still stand up against industrial waste and pollution. They would stand up against corporate greed.”

The Democratic party, meanwhile, is “immersed too much in identity politics,” Wolfe says. “I don’t necessarily like that. I think my thoughts are traditionally progressive, and those values a long time ago were shared by Democrats and Republicans alike.”

And now that the president has announced his support for same-sex marriage, it’s likely the discontent among southern Democrats will only increase.

In other words, populism and traditional values. The anti-elites and anti-Establishment view of people going through hard times, who look at Obama appointing corporate bigwigs to high office and then jetting off to hobnob with the Hollywood glitterati, and think to themselves, “he just doesn’t represent us. He’s not one of us, and it’s nothing to do with his name or his skin color.” I think we saw something similar yesterday in Nebraska, but mirrored from the Right, when the heretofore little-known State Senator Deb Fischer beat two career politicians for the US Senate nomination.

But I don’t agree with Wolfe that his views are “progressive,” at least not as the progressive movement has evolved in the US. The chords I hear are those of the Populist movement of the late 19th century, which even for a while formed a strong third party and still influences American politics to this day. With the fading of formal Populism, many of these people became Democrats. And it’s the descendents of those same voters who are now shoving a grapefruit in Obama’s face.

Bolduc then quotes a Republican state official in Arkansas to the effect that Obama has trouble in Virginia and North Carolina (1). But it’s more than that, and it’s touched on by Bolduc when he cites Obama’s “Appalachian problem.” While he describes it geographically, the South and southern Appalachians, it’s really cultural.

My friend Salena Zito has written many articles about the politics of the “average White guy,” the Jacksonian Democrat who’s culturally conservative and patriotic, lifelong hard-workers, typically Democratic but voted in big numbers for Reagan. (For a good example, see…) With her focus on eastern Ohio and western Pennsylvania, we see the same cultural traits that caused Obama pain in neighboring West Virginia and, I’d argue, farther afield in Arkansas.

And it’s here we see the real danger for Obama. To answer the question in the subject line, I don’t think Obama will lose the Arkansas primary. (2) And there’s equally no way he’ll win it in the general.

But, those rumblings from unhappy culturally conservative populist voters in Arkansas and West Virginia are real signs of trouble for him in Ohio and Pennsylvania, states he desperately needs to retain to win. What we’re seeing now may just be foreshocks of a real political earthquake in November.

Footnotes:
(1) Frankly, I think he can wave bye-bye to North Carolina, too.
(2) But, if he did, I would laugh like a hyena.

(Crossposted at Public Secrets)

A medical report compiled by the family physician of accused Trayvon Martin murderer George Zimmerman and obtained exclusively by ABC News found that Zimmerman was diagnosed with a “closed fracture” of his nose, a pair of black eyes, two lacerations to the back of his head and a minor back injury the day after he fatally shot Martin during an alleged altercation.

[...]

The morning after the shooting, on Feb. 27, Zimmerman sought treatment at the offices of a general physician at a family practice near Sanford, Fla. The doctor notes Zimmerman sought an appointment to get legal clearance to return to work.

The record shows that Zimmerman also suffered bruising in the upper lip and cheek and lower back pain. The two lacerations on the back of his head, one of them nearly an inch long, the other about a quarter-inch long, were first revealed in photos obtained exclusively by ABC News last month.

But the report also shows Zimmerman declined hospitalization the night of the shooting, and then declined the advice of his doctor to make a follow-up appointment with an ear nose and throat doctor.

And from Orlando’s WFTV:

SANFORD, Fla. — WFTV has confirmed that autopsy results show 17-year-old Trayvon Martin had injuries to his knuckles when he died.

The information could support George Zimmerman’s claim that Martin beat him up before Zimmerman shot and killed him.

The autopsy results come as Zimmerman’s attorney, Mark O’Mara continues to go over other evidence in the case.

O’Mara wouldn’t comment on the autopsy evidence, but WFTV legal analyst Bill Sheaffer said it’s better for the defense than it is for the prosecution.

WFTV has learned that the medical examiner found two injuries on Martin’s body: The fatal gunshot wound and broken skin on his knuckles.

When you compare Trayvon’s non-fatal injury with Zimmerman’s bloody head wounds, the autopsy evidence is better for the defense, Sheaffer said.

“It goes along with Zimmerman’s story that he acted in self-defense, because he was getting beaten up by Trayvon Martin,” Sheaffer said.

The injury to Martin’s knuckle also fits with Zimmerman’s story that before he shot and killed Martin, Martin had broken his nose and knocked him to the ground, slamming his head on the sidewalk.

But Sheaffer said there could be another explanation for Martin’s knuckle injury.

“It could be consistent with Trayvon either trying to get away or defend himself,” Sheaffer said.

As I wrote on Twitter just a few minutes ago, the release of this documentation/evidence does make you wonder all the more at what led the prosecutor to think she had enough to even try George Zimmerman at all, much less for second degree murder. We will, of course, find out at trial – but what we know so far about this case tends to favor Zimmerman’s account of events.

In related news, WFTV also reports that the FBI is busy conducting interviews with witnesses in order to determine whether or not to seek hate crime charges against Zimmerman, which could possibly see him face the death penalty:

SANFORD, Fla. — WFTV has learned charges against George Zimmerman could be getting more serious.

State prosecutors said Zimmerman, a neighborhood watchman, profiled and stalked 17-year-old Trayvon Martin before killing him, so the FBI is now looking into charging him with a hate crime.

Zimmerman admitted to killing Martin in February during a confrontation. However, he claims the shooting was in self-defense. He’s facing a second-degree murder charge, which carries a maximum possible sentence of life in prison without the possibility of parole. But if Zimmerman is charged and found guilty of a federal hate crime involving murder, he could face the death penalty.

FBI investigators are actively questioning witnesses in the retreat at the Twin Lakes neighborhood, seeking evidence for a possible federal hate crime charge.

[...]

WFTV legal analyst Bill Sheaffer said federal prosecutors would have to prove the hate crime to charge Zimmerman, though.

“What the government would have to prove is that Mr. Zimmerman acted out of hatred toward African-Americans. That’s why he came into contact with him. That’s why he shot and killed him,” Sheaffer said.

I have followed this case extensively and I just do not see hate crime charges being leveled against Zimmerman. Not even the prosecution alleges that Zimmerman said “f*cking c**ns” on the now-infamous 911 call.  And given  Zimmerman’s family’s mixed-race make-up, not to mention the back story on the crime problems that plagued his community months before that deadly night in February – which indicate reasons why Zimmerman would be suspicious of someone he didn’t know in the neighborhood – nothing so far points to a person full of rage specifically due to someone’s race.

We’ll know more in the weeks and months to come, to be sure, but for now I remain convinced that Zimmerman acted in self defense on that February night.

Your thoughts?

RALEIGH, N.C. — Some Democrats are worried that the state party’s inability to rid itself of embattled chairman David Parker could hurt their candidates’ chances this fall.

At a chaotic six-hour meeting Saturday [on Saturday], Parker offered his resignation, then reversed himself when the state executive committee voted 269-203 to reject it.

A smiling Parker returned to the stage to thank the SEC for its support. “My friends, I resigned this morning but I abide by the will of the state executive committee,” Parker said.

Supporters said Parker was the victim of a conspiracy by elected officials. Some said the conspiracy had to do with how party funding is divided. Others said Parker was scapegoated because the same-sex harassment scandal that happened under his leadership came to light just three weeks before a ballot initiative to ban same-sex unions.

Parker said he was pressured by elected leaders to refuse to serve.

“I will tell you there’s been a lot of phone calls made. But this is our party,” Parker said.

His decision humiliated those who publicly called for his resignation – especially the party’s gubernatorial candidate Walter Dalton, who announced at that meeting that Parker WOULD step aside.

“As you know David is resigning as the chair of the party,” Dalton told the committee in his opening remarks Saturday morning. “And he says he is committed – he’s indicated he’s committed to a smooth transition. I want you to know that this is a very selfless act.”

In a statement Saturday evening, Dalton spokesman Schorr Johnson said the Lieutenant Governor was “surprised and disappointed” by Parker’s move.

“David Parker had assured him that he would resign and assist in the smooth transition to a new chair. Clearly that did not happen,” Johnson said.

A statement Monday from the Dalton campaign softened the message, calling the flap a distraction.

This scandal has become so embarrassing for NC Democrats that even the state’s most liberal paper, the Charlotte Observer, has condemned the Party’s Saturday actions, especially Parker’s:

Yet the party’s sexual harassment scandal, and Parker’s self-centered decision to stay on as party chairman despite his role in it, are embarrassing the Democrats and threaten to hurt the very candidates Parker is supposed to help elect. By putting himself first and his party second, Parker thumbs his nose at his party’s top elected officials toward no good end.

It could cost the party a huge amount of money, and Democratic candidates thousands of votes.

Parker stayed on as Democratic Party chairman Saturday after assuring Walter Dalton, the party’s candidate for governor, that he would resign. Gov. Bev Perdue, the White House and several other high-ranking elected officials* had also called for his resignation.

It would have been the right thing to do. The party’s executive director, Jay Parmley, resigned last month after details about sexual harassment allegations against him became public. A male staffer accused Parmley of a number of inappropriate advances, and was later fired. Parmley and Parker authorized paying the staffer a secret settlement and had him sign a non-disclosure agreement, while Parmley kept his job.

Parker hardly seemed bothered by the whole affair. “I honestly believe that this is and was a tempest in a teapot,” Parker said, according to WRAL.

Any party has problems when led by someone who thinks sexual harassment allegations, and the firing of the person who makes them, is no big deal. When that chairman goes back on his word after promising to resign, he breeds distrust within the party.

The upshot: Parker’s actions imperil the considerable national dollars that typically flow through the N.C. Democratic Party from the Democratic Governors Association, the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee and organizations devoted to President Obama’s reelection. The governors’ group, wary of the split within the party, might direct its money to some of the 11 other states with gubernatorial races this year. Obama’s campaign might put more resources elsewhere, or control them more closely in a way that hurts candidates down the ballot.

*WRAL link added by me.

Keep in mind that President Obama won this state by only 14,000 votes in 2008 – his smallest margin of victory on election night, and it might have been even less than that if we didn’t have a Libertarian candidate on the ballot at the time. And it looks as though the Presidential race here will be competitive again this year. Team Obama knows they need every single vote they can get, and “distractions” like Parker’s resignation and then “unresignation” can hurt in-state fundraising efforts as well as the money coming in from national Democrat groups, which ultimately hurts “down-ticket” candidates – as noted in the Observer’s editorial. Also, even though the black vote in this state will once again be a lock for the President in spite of his “evolution” on Amendment One, if even 2 or 3 percent of the black voters who voted for him in 2008 stay home this year in protest over A1 it could hurt him significantly. Keep in mind, too, that the decision to hold their national convention here has become a giant headache for national Democrats:

President Barack Obama’s decision in February 2011 to hold the Democratic National Convention in North Carolina looked like a bold move to reclaim a state he’d won in 2008. Today, it’s more like an awkward fit.

The state’s Democratic Party is mired in a sexual harassment scandal. Voters just approved a state constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage, which conflicts with Obama’s view on the issue. Convention fundraising has been slow, and labor unions tapped to fill the financial gap are angry the convention will be in a city — Charlotte — with no unionized hotels and in a state where compulsory union membership or the payment of dues is prohibited as an employment condition.

North Carolina’s 9.7 percent unemployment rate is above the national average and one of the host city’s top employers –Bank of America (BAC) — has announced job reductions. Obama is scheduled to accept his party’s nomination at Bank of America Stadium in September.

[...]

Convention planners are expecting to receive, at most, $4 million from unions this year, less than half of the $8 million contributed by organized labor in 2008, according to a person familiar with the funding strategy who wasn’t authorized to speak on the record about fundraising. The number could eventually be less than $1 million and the Charlotte host committee, the main vehicle for funding the convention, is still short more than $20 million, the person said.

Obama’s campaign is working to connect Jim Rogers, the host committee co-chairman and chief executive officer of Duke Energy Corp. (DUK), with Obama’s wealthiest supporters. Rogers has accompanied Obama on his last two $35,800-per-person fundraisers in New York City, most recently last night at the home of Tony James, the president of Blackstone Group LP, according to a person familiar with the matter who wasn’t authorized to speak on the record.

The Democrat party has their work cut out for them here in NC. It is incumbent upon all of us who want to see this President and his party lose big this fall to do our part in making sure the jobs of Democrat party movers and shakers at both at the state and national levels get a lot harder from now until election time — and beyond.

President Obama has inserted his name into every official White House website presidential biography since Calvin Coolidge (save Gerald Ford). Here are some examples via Commentary:

• On Feb. 22, 1924 Calvin Coolidge became the first president to make a public radio address to the American people. President Coolidge later helped create the Federal Radio Commission, which has now evolved to become the Federal Communications Commission (FCC). President Obama became the first president to hold virtual gatherings and town halls using Twitter, Facebook, Google+, LinkedIn, etc.

• In a 1946 letter to the National Urban League, President Truman wrote that the government has “an obligation to see that the civil rights of every citizen are fully and equally protected.” He ended racial segregation in civil service and the armed forces in 1948. Today the Obama administration continues to strive toward upholding the civil rights of its citizens, repealing Don’t Ask Don’t Tell, allowing people of all sexual orientations to serve openly in our armed forces.

• President Lyndon Johnson signed Medicare signed (sic) into law in 1965—providing millions of elderly healthcare stability. President Obama’s historic health care reform law, the Affordable Care Act, strengthens Medicare, offers eligible seniors a range of preventive services with no cost-sharing, and provides discounts on drugs when in the coverage gap known as the “donut hole.”

I find this very creepy. But I wonder why he’s stopping there? Sure the Obama folks can hie themselves to Wikipedia and get to work on the biographies of leaders going back centuries. After all, Joe Biden says Obama is the most audacious military leader in 500 years, or something like that.

I can’t get to the WH website just now to read some of the other bios, but I’m thankful at least they didn’t carry this all the way back to Lincoln. That one likely would have made me hurl more than any of the others.

Really. There is nothing this man and this administration will not do to attempt to artificially elevate his Presidential legacy. Nothing.

Phineas Butts In: Looks like ST and I were on the same wavelength today. My post is here — Biggest White House ego, ever.

UPDATE: The RNC has set up a very funny satirical site of Obama’s great moments in history. (Phineas)

“It can’t only be me that kind of initially saw Ann Romney as maybe a sympathetic or neutral figure but who is increasingly seeing her as someone who is kind of insufferable because of the way she’s milking this thing,” Newsweek and Daily Beast columnist Michelle Goldberg said about Ann Romney writing a column about raising her children.

Goldberg found Ann Romney’s glowing praise of motherhood in a column she wrote for USA Today to be “kind of creepy.” During an appearance on MSNBC’s weekend program “Up with Chris Hayes,” Goldberg said the phrase “the crown of motherhood,” which Ann Romney used in her column, reminded her of “authoritarian societies” that give out awards for large families.

“In a lot ways, the column was totally anodyne, right? She’s, you know, yes, motherhood is beautiful. I found that phrase, ‘the crown of motherhood’ really kind of creepy. Not just because of it’s somewhat — you know, it’s kind of really authoritarian societies that give out like a Cross of Motherhood. They give out awards for big families,” Goldberg said on the program’s panel.

“You know, Stalin did it, Hitler did it,” she said. 

“The other part of it is that it plays into this thing of what we, you know. We have this kind of compact in the United States, where what we deny women in social support, or status or kind of economic security, we make up for in, in sort of insipid condescending praise,” Goldberg concluded.

Unsurprisingly, once her remarks were reported on at Glenn Beck’s Blaze website and spread like wildfire to other conservative sites – prompting understandable outrage, Ms. Goldberg pretended to “apologize” – in classic liberal fashion (which is to say she didn’t apologize at all) – again, bolded emphasis added by me:

I got into trouble, however, by saying that Romney’s closing lines, about how there is “no crown more glorious” than the “crown of motherhood,” reminded me of the pro-natalist propaganda of World War II-era totalitarian regimes. That was a mistake. Not because I don’t think it’s true – when I read Romney’s words, I immediately thought of the “Motherhood Glory” medals that Stalin gave to women who had lots of children, and of the extreme Nazi cult of motherhood, which Hitler called women’s “highest exaltation.” To me, bombastic odes to traditional maternity have a sinister ring, especially when they come from people who want to curtail women’s rights. But it was an offhand point, and one that wasn’t worth the aggravation it’s caused. I should have realized that right-wingers were going to pretend that I was saying that Romney is akin to two of the century’s most murderous tyrants.

For the record, I don’t believe that Ann Romney is either Hitleresque or Stalinesque. Rather, I think she is a calculating political wife who once struck me as fairly likeable, but who is now determined to play up the idea that’s she’s being victimized for being a stay-at-home mom. Her op-ed was part of that effort. Unfortunately, if the messages I received on Monday are any indication, it’s an effort I might have assisted.

Hmm. Wouldn’t Goldberg’s rant about someone allegedly playing the “victim” card hold more water if she, as a liberal feminist, routinely denounced the rampant and phony victim card playing we’ve seen played for decades by militant feminists across this country who routinely push to get both their message and agenda passed by any means necessary, including lying their a**es off about data/stats?  Furthermore, seeing as she implied she is anti-totalitarian, does this mean she is opposed to ObamaCare, cap and trade, corporate bailouts, unlimited public sector union “benefits”, etc?  And since she is opposed to the tactics of “murderous regimes”, does that mean she’s a strong proponent of pro-life causes, considering how some historical murderous regimes engaged in eugenics in order to “cleanse” their societies of certain types of people – a tactic favored, encouraged, and promoted by Planned Parenthood founder and “feminist” heroine Margaret Sanger?

Something tells me the answer to all of the above is “no.” Consistency is not exactly the left’s strong point.  Not even close, really.

In closing, Goldberg wrote:

So my apologies aren’t for Ann Romney, but for everyone else. I’m truly sorry to have given the right a pretext for another tedious spasm of feigned outrage. I’m sorry to have stirred one of the teapot tempests that now dominate the increasingly dispiriting world of political journalism. I’m especially sorry if I’ve done anything to strengthen the conservative myth that liberals disdain motherhood. I certainly don’t. As it happens, I’m hoping to have a baby of my own very soon. When I do, like most mothers I know, I’d much prefer accessible day care, strong public schools and affordable health care to a metaphorical crown, however glorious it may be.

You know what I think would be neat? If liberal women like Hilary Rosen and Michelle Goldberg were given primetime speaking spots during the DNC, UNFILTERED, of course –  saying exactly what they’ve said about Ann Romney and other SAHMs  from day one.  Then Americans across the country would get a chance first hand to see  in this “War On Women” which side really plays the “victim” card, which side really believes there “ain’t no man like Uncle Sam”, which side really is waging the “War On Women”, which side really doesn’t give a damn about the unborn,  which side is cut off at the knees from reality, etc.   Just so the tide can finally turn, again, for the GOP in terms of its appeal to women voters.

In fact, it sounds like that is happening already – if results from a recent CBS/NYT poll are any indication:

War on Women? Romney now edges Obama among women, 46-44%, in new CBS/NYT poll.

— Jan Crawford (@cbsjancrawford) May 14, 2012

Keep it up, “feminists.” Keep it up!

AUGUSTA, Ga. –  Aimee Copeland, the Georgia grad student who contracted a deadly flesh-eating bacteria after she cut her leg in a zip lining accident, will likely lose her fingers.

Aimee, 24, has already had her left leg amputated after necrotizing fasciitis — a rare bacteria that infects the deep layers of the skin and spreads quickly — took hold of her injured limb just over a week ago.

“Aimee will suffer the loss of her fingers, however physicians have hope of bringing life back to the palms of her hands, which could allow her the muscle control to use helpful prosthetics,” read a post on the website of the University of West Georgia psychology department, where Aimee is a masters student.

“They are awaiting a safe time before embarking on surgery for this,” the update, posted Saturday night, added.

Aimee’s family has remained optimistic about her recovery after she defied doctors’ doubts about her chances of survival.

“Aimee is doing wonderful this morning,” her father, Andy Copeland, wrote in a Facebook post Sunday. “She is awake, alert and wanting to be rid of that blasted ventilator.”

Copeland also highlighted Aimee’s frustrated attempts to communicate with him and her other family members, as she is still unable to speak.

“I tell her not to worry, I tell her to concentrate on breathing, I ask her to pray and meditate on healing. I hold her and pray while she prays,” he wrote. “This is all we can do now and I can honestly say it works quite well.”

Aimee was kayaking down a creek with some of her friends in Carrollton, Ga., nearly two weeks ago when she stopped to ride on a homemade zip line along the water. The line snapped and she cut a large gash in her left calf.

I can only imagine what she and her family must be going through. The constant pain, agony, worry – and probably sometimes hopelessness, too. Assuming she does fully recover, the rest of her life will be totally different and I suspect she’ll have to go through some pretty extensive rounds of rehab. Not to mention the toll all of this will take on her emotional state. Please keep both her and her family in your thoughts and prayers that she continues to defy the odds. You can keep up with developments on Aimee’s condition here.

How much do we have? Try more than the rest of the world, combined:

The Green River Formation, a largely vacant area of mostly federal land that covers the territory where Colorado, Utah and Wyoming come together, contains about as much recoverable oil as all the rest the world’s proven reserves combined, an auditor from the Government Accountability Office told Congress on Thursday.

(…)

“The Green River Formation–an assemblage of over 1,000 feet of sedimentary rocks that lie beneath parts of Colorado, Utah, and Wyoming–contains the world’s largest deposits of oil shale,”Anu K. Mittal, the GAO’s director of natural resources and environment said in written testimony submitted to the House Science Subcommittee on Energy and Environment.

“USGS estimates that the Green River Formation contains about 3 trillion barrels of oil, and about half of this may be recoverable, depending on available technology and economic conditions,” Mittal testified.

“The Rand Corporation, a nonprofit research organization, estimates that 30 to 60 percent of the oil shale in the Green River Formation can be recovered,” Mittal told the subcommittee. “At the midpoint of this estimate, almost half of the 3 trillion barrels of oil would be recoverable. This is an amount about equal to the entire world’s proven oil reserves.”

Sadly, most of this sits on federal lands, and we know what that means: no drilling, no fracking, no how. This administration is enslaved to a chimerical “Green agenda” that treats anything to do with fossil fuels the way a vampire would garlic, and instead wants to flush billions down the drain in pursuit of alternative energy sources that are nowhere economically viable. In fact, boondoggles like wind farms and solar can only exist via taxpayer subsidies, increasing costs for everyone and destroying genuinely productive jobs in the process.

Meanwhile, we sit figuratively chained, forbidden to take those rational steps to develop and exploit our vast resources (1) safely and with due regard for environmental stewardship, all while restoring prosperity to our economy and pushing us toward energy self-sufficiency.

The Obama administration’s energy policies aren’t just stupid and they aren’t just destructive — they’re immoral.

RELATED: More from Hot Air. Power Line demolishes the president’s “two-percent lie.”

Footnote:
(1) And this doesn’t even include Canadian resources, or that available in the Bakken formation.

(Crossposted at Public Secrets)

A few days ago, when writing about the revelation of a Al Qaeda plot to blow up a commercial flight with a new and improved underwear bomb and our penetration of said plot, I speculated as to why we were hearing about what should have been a top-secret operation:

With the economy in the crapper and the public mood so bad that even a convicted felon gives Obama a run for his money in a Democratic primary, Obama needs all the good news he can get.

You can bet on it: The One and his team couldn’t wait to brag about this. And all it cost was letting AQAP know just how much we had penetrated them.

I’m sorry to say I was right:

Detailed leaks of operational information about the foiled underwear bomb plot are causing growing anger in the US intelligence community, with former agents blaming the Obama administration for undermining national security and compromising the British services, MI6 and MI5.

The Guardian has learned from Saudi sources that the agent was not a Saudi national as was widely reported, but a Yemeni. He was born in Saudi Arabia, in the port city of Jeddah, and then studied and worked in the UK, where he acquired a British passport.

Mike Scheur, the former head of the CIA’s Bin Laden unit, said the leaking about the nuts and bolts of British involvement was despicable and would make a repeat of the operation difficult. “MI6 should be as angry as hell. This is something that the prime minister should raise with the president, if he has the balls. This is really tragic,” Scheur said.

He added: “Any information disclosed is too much information. This does seem to be a tawdry political thing.”

He noted that the leak came on the heels of a series of disclosures over the last 10 days, beginning with a report that the CIA wanted to expand its drone attacks in Yemen, Barack Obama making a surprise trip to Afghanistan around the time of the Bin Laden anniversary and “then this inexplicable leak”.

The agent was apparently a Yemeni studying in Britain who was recruited by MI6 and spent over a year in Yemen covincing Al Qaeda that he was ready and willing to be a suicide bomber. When he got his hands on the bomb, he was spririted out of the country. Now Al Qaeda can be certain who the mole was; this guy is going to spend the rest of his life looking over his shoulder, wondering when the revenge hit will strike.

And it’s bad enough that we blew our own secrets, but we compromised British and Saudi intelligence, too. As the article goes on to point out, the British may well think twice and then think again before sharing with us. The danger, of course, is not just a loss of trust between intelligence services that have a long tradition of close cooperation, but that, for failure to share information, we might miss a terrorist plot in the making and wind up with a lot of corpses and a lot of grieving families wondering how it could have happened.

All because either Obama himself or someone on his team wanted to make him look tough for his reelection campaign.

Meanwhile, the Chairman of the House Intelligence Committee is not happy and he’s asking questions:

House Intelligence Committee Chairman Mike Rogers (R-Mich.) blamed administration “chest-thumbing” for the leak of information over an intelligence operation which thwarted a plot to bomb an America-bound airliner.

“I think there was a little premature chest-thumbing,” said Rogers on CBS’s “Face the Nation” on Sunday. “I’ve ordered a preliminary review. And I’ll tell you something, this has been a damaging leak. We shouldn’t underestimate what really happened here.”

(…)

Rogers was asked by host Bob Schieffer if he believed information about the operation was leaked to the press by administration officials “to take credit for it.”

“I said chest-thumping, but it clearly raises some serious questions that we are going to have to ask,” responded Rogers. “We do know that the CIA was trying to stop the story and we know that there was a scheduled White House or at least planned press conference on the particular event. Those two disparate positions lead one to believe that someone was at odds over how much they should or shouldn’t talk about it.

“It’s clear that the information was leaked. That information as presented at some point to the CIA,” added Rogers. “The CIA at that point tried to put the story back in the can for security reasons. People’s lives were at stake during this operation. And that’s where it gets a little murky, which is why I ordered the review. “

To top it all off, while the administration was apparently anxious to blab to all and sundry about the operation, they neglected to tell the ranking members of the Intelligence Committee, even though they’re required to do by statute. Probably shouldn’t be surprised, though; it’s not as if they’ve shown any respect for Congress’ oversight function in the past.

I’m tempted to quote again Bill Clinton on the amateurs in the White House, but that would be too flip. These amateurs aren’t just earnest bumblers; they’re doing real harm.

And it’s worrying.

(Crossposted at Public Secrets)

Well, I guess he couldn’t be our first Black president, since Billy Jeff already has that title. So Obama will have to settle for being our first Gay president (1), as annointed by Newsweek:

And do note the required religious symbolism (gag!), proclaiming our Lightworker (2) chief executive as not just our first Gay president, but some sort of rainbow saint. This, of course, comes from the news magazine Obama marketing rag whose editor once proclaimed Obama “like a god.”

Funny, that god-like saint apparently tried back in 2008 to bribe his racist ex-pastor, in whose church he sat for over 20 years without ever noticing he was a flaming bigot, to shut up. Through intermediaries and with full deniability, of course.

Hardly what one would expected from such an enlightened, sensitive being. Except one from Chicago.

LINKS: More from Politico.

Footnotes:
(1) Does this mean he’ll finally speak out for all the gays tortured and murdered under Islamic regimes? Nah. They don’t vote here.
(2) I’m never going to let you live this down Morford. It’s fawning toadies like you who feed cults of personality.

(Crossposted at Public Secrets)

This year has seen a lot of changes in mom’s life, most noteably the fact that she was forced into retirement earlier this year. It’s taken some getting used to, because mom has worked all of her life – since she was a teenager – and hasn’t known how to act getting up every morning now and not having to go to work. It’s been an adjustment for her both financially and emotionally but has ultimately been for the best, what with the health issues going on with my dad and her desire to be at home acting in the role of caretaker (even though he by and large can still take care of himself, even with being on dialysis and having eye problems). Her new role is stressful at times but she is thankful to be able to be at home to help dad when he needs it and just in general to be able to spend quality time with him as he weathers his health issues.

Below is a picture of mom and me from roughly a couple of months ago. People tell us all the time we look alike (my oldest sister looks a lot more like her than I do) but the funny thing is that as I’ve gotten older I’ve started to ACT more like her and view things the way she always has. I remember when I was a teenager (and knew everything there was to know about life, of course) I would tell myself I would be so different from mom in terms of being more carefree, wanting to stay out late, do stupid things, etc. But as I’ve grown up and matured, I see she was right about so many things. Not EVERYTHING, mind you, but many things.

And please … do NOT tell her I said that!

ST and Mama Toldjah

Karl at Patterico’s sets it up:

You see, the Washington Examiner columnist [Tim Carney] had the gall to not only suggest that Americans care more about the economy than whether Mitt Romney gave someone a haircut 47 years ago, but also to suggest that Tamron Hall was pandering to her audience of dozens by dragging out the story on the pretense of doing the meta-story of how the Romney campaign is reacting to the story which most people do not care about. Actually, Carney was far more polite than that, which did not stop MSNBC from cutting Carney’s mic while Hall yelled at him:

Carney emailed the Politico later and said that the question MSNBC sent him for the segment was did the “bullying” story matter. Obviously Hall didn’t like the answer:

HALL: Hang on, Tim. You’re kind of in my house here. The problem is this: The story’s out there, and you’re right—I am not saying that we should belabor what happened 50 years ago. We are talking about the response by the campaign and the governor, not just on this issue, but—

CARNEY: You are bringing up a meta story here, which is, “What is the Romney response to this other non-story?” I’m trying to go meta-meta on you, and say here’s some media treatment—

HALL: You don’t want me to go anything on you, because you are actually irritating me right now. I’m going to be honest with you—yes, you are, because you knew the questions and topics we were going to discuss. You knew them; you agreed. And we are not talking or demeaning—listen, 50 years ago, I was a much tougher kid probably than Mitt Romney was in high school. I’m not talking about the issue of whether he was bullying or not. He says he doesn’t remember; to be fair, I cannot say he does. What I am asking about is how the campaign has handled this situation, how he handled the Colorado reporter, how he handled same-sex marriage where he said he agrees with gay parents be able to adopt, but he does not agree with same-sex marriage? Just the handling of questions beyond the economy. If you’re not comfortable talking about that, I am a-okay, but you’re not going to come on and insult me, you’re not going to come on and insult the network when you knew what you were going to come on and talk about. Done. Now, let me talk to Jimmy, I’m done.

CARNEY: Are you going to cut me off?

HALL: Yes, I am.

Perhaps she’s auditioning for a spot as fill-in host for Chris Matthews for when he takes time off.

Of course, Hall is being praised as a “hero” by left wingers who obviously share her views on how to deal with people with whom you disagree. How very tolerant. And predictable.

Greenville, NC (WITN) — North Carolina Governor Beverly Perdue says Tuesday’s passage of Amendment One makes the state look like Mississippi. Perdue made the remarks in response to a question from WITN’s Brittany Gunter while in Greenville Friday morning.

On Tuesday, 61% of the state’s voters approved the constitutional amendment which bans same sex marriages. State law already prohibits gay marriages.

The governor, a Democrat who said leading up to the vote that she was against the amendment, told WITN that the result is wrong for the state.

“People around the country are watching us, and they’re really confused to have been such a progressive forward thinking economically driven state that invested in education and that stood up for the civil rights people including the civil rights marches back in the 50s and 60s and 70s,” said Perdue. “People are saying what in the world is going on with North Carolina, we look like Mississippi.”

Read the rest of the article for comments from a disappointed Mississippi Governor Phil Bryant (R).

Here’s video of Perdue’s remarks:

Is this a “risky” statement for her, much in the way Obama’s supporters laughably suggested his “evolution” on same sex marriage was for him? Nope. Perdue, who supports existing state law on gay marriage which is very similar in nature to Amendment One, isn’t running for reelection even though she could have.

The elephant in the room here is that, by a 2 to 1 margin, black Democrats in this state voted in favor of Amendment One. Black Democrats typically line up with conservatives on social issues like gay marriage and abortion, but rank and file Democrats, commentators, prominent politicos and the like won’t bring this up during the course of any conversation/debate/interview because they need the black vote too much to be condescending to them like they routinely are to conservatives. Besides, it plays much better on a national stage for them to characterize their opposition as made up of nothing but “white conservative homophobic bigots.”

Bev Perdue enjoys a cozy relationship with black Democrats in this state. She has knowingly coddled them in the past in spite of their “just like Mississippi” views on gay marriage. She would be coddling them again this year if she were running for reelection. And who knows, even if she were running again she still might have insulted her black voting bloc with her Friday comments. Why? Because black Democrats have made it clear they don’t care whether or not one of their favored candidates/politicos change their views on gay marriage:

ARDMORE, Pa. (AP) — Like many black Americans, Dorsey Jackson does not believe in gay marriage, but he wasn’t disillusioned when Barack Obama became the first president to support it. The windows of his suburban Philadelphia barbershop still display an “Obama 2012″ placard and another that reads “We’ve Got His Back.”

If Obama needs to endorse same-sex marriage to be re-elected, said Jackson, so be it: “Look, man — by any means necessary.”

With that phrase popularized by the black radical Malcolm X, Jackson rebutted those who say Obama’s new stand will weaken the massive black support he needs to win re-election in November. Black voters and especially black churches have long opposed gay marriage. But the 40-year-old barber and other African-Americans interviewed in politically key states say their support for Obama remains unshaken.

Some questioned whether he really believes what he says about gay rights or merely took that stand to help defeat Republican Mitt Romney — suggesting African-Americans view the first black president less as an icon than as a straight-up politician who still feels like family.

“Obama is human,” said Leon Givens of Charlotte, N.C. “I don’t have him on a pedestal.”

On Tuesday, Givens voted in favor of banning gay marriage in North Carolina. Many black precincts voted 2-1 for the ballot measure, which passed easily.

The next day, Givens heard Obama tell the nation in a TV interview: “I think same-sex couples should be able to get married.”

But this fall, Givens plans to register Obama voters and drive senior citizens to the polls. Givens, a retired human resources manager, said she suspects the president’s pronouncement was “more a political thing than his true feelings.” But she’s not dwelling on it.

“We can agree to disagree on gay marriage,” Givens said of the president, “and then I leave him alone.”

Did Team Obama know this going into Wednesday’s “courageous” announcement? You betcha. They knew they had the black vote in their back pockets. The support of liberal gay voters were a different matter. Money and votes talk, as they say.

“Risky” my a**!

Here’s what happens when the president of the United States publicly targets a private citizen for the crime of supporting his opponent.

Frank VanderSloot is the CEO of Melaleuca Inc. The 63-year-old has run that wellness-products company for 26 years out of tiny Idaho Falls, Idaho. Last August, Mr. VanderSloot gave $1 million to Restore Our Future, the Super PAC that supports Mitt Romney.

Three weeks ago, an Obama campaign website, “Keeping GOP Honest,” took the extraordinary step of publicly naming and assailing eight private citizens backing Mr. Romney. Titled “Behind the curtain: a brief history of Romney’s donors,” the post accused the eight of being “wealthy individuals with less-than-reputable records.” Mr. VanderSloot was one of the eight, smeared particularly as being “litigious, combative and a bitter foe of the gay rights movement.”

About a week after that post, a man named Michael Wolf contacted the Bonneville County Courthouse in Idaho Falls in search of court records regarding Mr. VanderSloot. Specifically, Mr. Wolf wanted all the documents dealing with Mr. VanderSloot’s divorces, as well as a case involving a dispute with a former Melaleuca employee.

Mr. Wolf sent a fax to the clerk’s office—which I have obtained—listing four cases he was after. He would later send a second fax, asking for three further court cases dealing with either Melaleuca or Mr. VanderSloot. Mr. Wolf listed only his name and a private cellphone number.

Some digging revealed that Mr. Wolf was, until a few months ago, a law clerk on the Democratic side of the Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations. He’s found new work. The ID written out at the top of his faxes identified them as coming from “Glenn Simpson.” That’s the name of a former Wall Street Journal reporter who in 2009 founded a D.C. company that performs private investigative work.

The website for that company, Fusion GPS, describes itself as providing “strategic intelligence,” with expertise in areas like “politics.” That’s a polite way of saying “opposition research.”

[...]

Political donations don’t come with a right to privacy, and Mr. VanderSloot might have expected a spotlight. Then again, President Obama, in the wake of the Gabby Giffords shooting, gave a national address calling for “civility” in politics. Yet rather than condemn those demeaning his opponent’s donors, Mr. Obama—the nation’s most powerful man—instead publicly named individuals, egging on the attacks. What has followed is the slimy trolling into a citizen’s private life.

Mr. VanderSloot acknowledges that “when I first learned that President Obama’s campaign had singled me out on his ‘enemies list,’ I knew it was like taping a target on my back.” But the more he’s thought it through, “the public beatings and false accusations that followed are no deterrent. These tactics will not work in America.” He’s even “contemplating a second donation.”

Still. If details about Mr. VanderSloot’s life become public, and if this hurts his business or those who work for him, Mr. Obama will bear responsibility. This is what happens when the president makes a list.

Then-candidate for President Barack Obama promised a “change” in how business as usual was done in Washington, DC. It was an obvious lie then, and it’s even more obvious now.

It’s gonna get nastier, too. Gird your loins.