He’s a nasty guy, is our prez

Something “utterly remarkable” in run-up to inauguration, which is meant to be full of “democratic fellowship and good feeling”:

President Obama has been using the days and weeks leading up to his inauguration to show the depth of his disdain for the leaders of the other major party and, by inference, that party’s voters, which is to say more or less half the country. He has been spending his time alienating instead of summoning. It has left the political air more sour and estranged.

In his news conference the other day,

he didn’t seem to think he had to mask his partisan rancor or be large-spirited. He bristled with unashamed hostility for Republicans on the Hill. They are holding the economy “ransom,” they are using the threat of “crashing the American economy” as “leverage,” some are “absolutist” while others are “consumed with partisan brinkmanship.” They are holding “a gun at the head of the American people.” And what is “motivating and propelling” them is not a desire for debt reduction, as they claim. They are “suspicious about government’s commitment . . . to make sure that seniors have decent health care as they get older. They have suspicions about Social Security. They have suspicions about whether government should make sure that kids in poverty are getting enough to eat, or whether we should be spending money on medical research.”

As if he’s bitter.

Joe Berrios has a lesson for us all

Charity begins at home.

Not to mention the troubles the poor Democrats — do not our hearts go out to them? — suffer when their leader flaunts his power by flouting the law.

And neither to mention the perils of one-party rule, as in Cook County.  Nor the danger of taxing and spending in the Democrat way.

Nor the motivation herein provided for mistrusting government far more than the private business operation, except when it thrives because of its own clout with the political powers which are invulnerable to correction or punishment.

This is why there’s a Tea Party movement.  Precisely.  Keep it in mind next time politicos and pundits bemoan Tea Partiers and/or celebrate their presumed but inadequately demonstrated demise.

Yes.

Yes, folks, there is voter fraud in our fair country

This is very big. Slugger O’Keefe hit a home run:

A lot has happened in the last 24 hours. The entire political establishment is in an uproar over our latest report on voter fraud.

Since yesterday, U.S. Rep. Jim Moran’s son Patrick has resigned from his position as campaign Field Director, and the Arlington County Police have now opened a criminal investigation into the fraud exposed by Project Veritas.

And after she was grilled about our report on CNN, Debbie Wasserman Schultz was forced to admit what the vast majority of Americans have known all along: . . . .

more more more more

Ideological soft spot for Sharia? Uh-oh.

 

Obama Knew

By on 10.25.12 @ 6:11AM

Did ideological soft spot for Sharia keep U.S government from protecting Benghazi consulate?

Obama knew.

Say again, Obama knew.

So. The question.

If what happened in Benghazi wasn’t incompetence — was it ideology?

Did Sharia kill Ambassador Chris Stevens, Foreign Service officer Sean Smith, and two Navy SEALs?

And is Hillary Clinton’s insistence yesterday that the leaked State Department e-mails were “not evidence” yet more evidence that indicates the Obama White House not only knew what was going on but deliberately turned a blind eye to Benghazi because of that ideology?. . . .

more more more more

Suburbs Swing to Debate-Tested Romney: M. Barone at Real Clear Politics

By Michael Barone – October 25, 2012

Back in May, I wrote a column laying out possible scenarios for the 2012 campaign different from the conventional wisdom that it would be a long, hard slog through a fixed list of target states like the race in 2004.

I thought alternatives were possible because partisan preferences in the half dozen years before 2004 were very stable, while partisan preferences over the last half dozen years have been anything but.

Now, after Mitt Romney’s big victory in the Oct. 3 debate and his solid performances in the Oct. 16 and 22 debates, there is evidence that two of my alternative scenarios may be unfolding.

. . . For the rest, go here.

Emanuel attacks criminals? Sorry, no.

Had to read hard copy head for this Sun-Times story twice: “Emanuel leads attacks on criminals”  — SORRY — on Romney.
Same head,continued: “Dems concede excitement level lower than” — SORRY — unlike 2008.
 
It’s not lower.  It’s different.  Like level 2 for men’s shoes, level 3 for ladies’ undergarments.  It’s all in how you say things, not in whatever the hell you are saying.

And let us pass over in silence another Sun-Times hard-copy head, about what Obama plans for the convention this week: “MESSGAGE: LOOK WHAT I’VE DONE.”

It shows how hard it is to get good help these days.

Labor Day is Empty Chair Day!

Evil Blogger Lady on the empty-chair schtick:

I thought it was funny that night. But I did not realize how much it would upset the left! Even Barack Obama did not ignore it (which suggests it is worrying Obama 2012)… .

And Jennifer Rubin:

I was there and it was darn weird. But at times it was funny and devastating in its dismissal of the president’s excuses. And in clips and sound bites the day after the live performance, the oddness is diminished and the punch lines seem more biting. In simple terms, the movie icon encapsulated the message of the convention: If someone is doing a bad job, you have to fire him.

Yes.

She adds reference to Obama supporters’ “obsessive plea for more details about Romney’s policies.” Which he has given, she adds to that. But no matter: Chi Trib today has its “short on details” story (LA Times story)

And Richard Fernandez:

It was an old man’s delivery, but overstatedly so for effect. It was a cutting delivery and for that reason delivered in low key. But for all of Clint Eastwood’s rhetorical cleverness at the Republican convention it derived its effectiveness precisely because it wasn’t one of those “I take this platform tonight with pen in hand, bearing in mind the immortal words of Clancy M. Duckworth” type orations. It wasn’t the speech of someone who was running for office.

Rather it might have come from Mr. Weller down at the corner office musing on simple things to not very important people. How it wasn’t good form to mess things up continuously. How one might lose faith in a man who made one broken promise too many. How at the end of the day everyone either did the job or quit out of decency. Even Presidents.

Remember. Empty Chair Day tomorrow.

(H/T the irreplaceable Instapundit)