Mixed Messages: Confusing, contradictory statements regarding the economy, courtesy of His Majesty.

Follow me through the progression of contradictory and confusing statements from Majesty & His Court:

1. February 2009: We are told by the White House that the first stimulus bill was absolutely necessary in order to remedy an economy (of course "inherited" by His Majesty -- they always throw that word in) that was the "worst since the Great Depression."

2. 7/1/09: His Majesty, in his best Bush "Mission Accomplished" impersonation, declares and ordains that the first stimulus bill has "done it's job."

3. 7/2/09: But the next day, the 9.5% unemployment figure comes out -- so much for Mission Accomplished.

4. 7/5/09: Biden goes on Sunday morning TV and says that the White House "misread" how bad the recession and economy were back in February when the first stimulus bill was enacted. Gee, that's funny, since you seemed to have a firm handle on that issue in February when you said this was the worst economy since the Great Depression.

5. 7/7/09: One of His Majesty's advisors says that the first stimulus bill was a "bit too small" and that the U.S. should consider drafting a second stimulus bill. The statements of the advisor, Biden the day before, and other dems last week were basically their attempt at an initial trial balloon on the notion of a second stimulus bill.

6. Today, 7/11/09: His Majesty is back to the Mission Accomplished rhetoric, proclaiming that the first stimulus bill "has worked as intended" (link below).

Now, is it too much to ask for just an ounce of honesty and consistency from Majesty and his handlers? I'm frankly sick of the morass of seemingly contradictory statements and mixed messages. Is this "transparency"? Is this "change we can believe in"? Seems like just a lot more of the same to me, with the only difference being that this time it's coming out of the far left instead of the Neo-Cons. Same difference, as far as I'm concerned.

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=a0StZd9y2rCY

Hey Newsweek: I'm Catholic. And an Independent. And Barack Obama does not represent me at all.

And it has little to do with the Pope, as explained and detailed nearly every day in this space. (Newsweek article: "Without a Doubt: Why Barack Obama represents American catholics better than the pope does").

http://www.newsweek.com/id/205961

The New Jacko!

The endless coverage of Sarah Palin this week by both the right-slanted and left-slanted mainstream media has been deplorable. I'm actually now more sick of hearing about her than I am of hearing about Jacko. As far as I am concerned, this woman is DONE (stick a fork in her) in terms of any ability to credibly run for president or a national office given her performance any time she's asked to think and speak on her feet and given that she quit on her gubernatorial term in Alaska. So enough already! I realize how much you HATE her, far left, and I realize how much FoxNews LOVES her for both her right-wing ideology and her celebrity, but ENOUGH! Most of us no longer care, and/or certainly don't care enough to watch this kind of wall-to-wall Jacko-type B.S. coverage. Act like journalists, and not jackasses, maybe just perhaps for once in your lives, mainstream media.

Postscript: I watched some loon named Sally Quinn (Washington Post -- a very credible source these days) tonight on O'Reilly delivering the same tired far left talking points about how Bristol Palin "is fair game for everything under the sun" since she dared to express a viewpoint on the merits of abstinence with respect to a teenage female. Tell me something, Quinn, you ultra-liberal freak, did Bristol "open herself up" and "just invite" widely disseminated comments (defended by your ilk) about her being knocked up by some greedy womanizing steroid freak, as well as all the other vile, evil, hateful, wholly mean-spirited comments (having nothing to do with the merits of the abstinence issue) that I read coming out of the far left blogosphere towards Bristol? Hey Sally, why don't you go **** yourself.

One toke over the line, sweet Jesus.

A new CNN poll today reports that most Americans say His Majesty's cigarette smoking does not change their view of him. I'm in the majority on this one too. I really don't give a rat's behind about Majesty's smoking, although I would like to see him quit just for his own better health. And kids: Never chew tobacco either.

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2009/07/10/cnn-poll-do-american-care-if-obama-smokes/

Oba-ttoming out; Independents not happy with His Majesty.

Reports Politico's Ben Smith: "In a potentially alarming trend for the White House, independent voters are deserting President Barack Obama nationally and especially in key swing states, recent polls suggest."

That's correct -- it seems that plummeting support from Independents has been a key factor (or perhaps the key factor) in Majesty's rapidly diminishing approval ratings, as reported by Gallup and Rasmussen in the last 18 hours. Gallup late yesterday had Majesty's overall approval rating at a new low of 56%, while Majesty's Rasmussen numbers were even lower. Rasmussen this morning has Majesty's disapproval rating up to 48%, with only 51% of voters saying they somewhat approve or strongly approve of Majesty's job performance. Further, Rasmussen has Majesty's Presidential Approval Index rating at a new low of minus 8, meaning that only 30% of voters strongly approve of his job performance while 38% strongly disapprove of it.

I look at these trends, and they tend only to mirror the sentiments that this Independent has himself held in recent weeks. I did not vote for His Majesty (nor for McCain), and I knew what we were dealing with when he came into office, i.e. likely the most liberal American president in history. And to be sure, that's precisely how Majesty has governed -- absolutely nothing "moderate" or "centrist" about it. Given that I am not a liberal, I've disagreed with many of Majesty's words, positions and policies from day one, but it's truly been only recently that Majesty, in combination with his agents in Congress, has really sparked some genuine anger from me. The final straw for me was the cap-and-trade fiasco in the House. Ram-rodding that massive 1300 page bill right down our throats, with 300 pages thrown in at the last minute, and with no one reading the bill before voting on it (they didn't have time!!!) -- that was it for me. These dems in Washington, His Majesty included, are completely out of control right now and are not representing me nor the majority of the people of this country in any appreciable fashion. The people who did vote for Majesty last fall were trying to vote for change, but they were not voting for this.

A final thought: His Majesty's White House still seems remarkably oblivious to the ongoing shift in Independent approval. As Politico reported, "the White House denies there's any real shift [in Independents]." Of course, that could just be B.S., but I'm not so sure: I've not seen anything from the White House indicating any recognizion whatsoever of the current Independent unrest. Instead, it's just full steam ahead trying to force every possible huge government and huge spending measure through the Congress like there was no tomorrow. And if it continues, I'm frankly not sure what kind of tomorrow we're really going to have to look forward to (sorry Jeeves for ending a sentence on a preposition).

http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0709/Independents_on_the_move.html
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/obama_administration/daily_presidential_tracking_poll

This looks like Hell.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,530801,00.html

...That, or some long lost Apocalypse Now outtake. The current numbers in Afghanistan? 57,000 American troops on the ground. 68,000 to be there by year's end. More troops dying seemingly every day. And still no explanation from His Majesty as to the plan we're purportedly trying to follow over there or why we need to continue to ratchet up troop levels. And, Majesty, why is one of your Generals saying today that we "don't necessarily need more [U.S.] troops" in Afghanistan (yet we keep sending more), but rather that we need to have more Afghan forces involved? (A statement, by the way, which makes no sense to me on its face, but I digress.) So what's the plan, Majesty? I think you owe us an explanation (as I've been stating for at least a few months). The American left has largely run for the hills on this issue, but I won't.

Hey libs: Trigger, Trigger, Trigger!

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2009/07/08/emanuel-faces-liberal-pressure-over-trigger-comments/

Trigger, Trigger, Trigger!

Second Stimulus: The buzz is growing!

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=washingtonstory&sid=aIHpsBT0JHFc

Although, the best read would seem to be that the dems will not be trying to push a second stimulus bill immediately. Forcing cap-and-trade through the Senate, and pushing Majesty's health care legislation, are the two biggest brinks trucks on the left's plate right now.

Let's be clear: Sarah Palin did quit & will have huge problems ever overcoming that politically. But the Left's "quitter, quitter, quitter" drumbeat..

http://davidnyc.dailykos.com/

...simply touches upon again for me something that I commented upon a few days ago: This poor lady, even though she's a conservative ideologue (hell, she's my "Deranged Right-Winger of the Day" today) and was ill-equipped and ill-prepared for the national spotlight which was thrust upon her (and yes, which she accepted), has been probably the biggest target of leftist HATE (yes, absolute, unadulterated HATRED), inappropriateness, and mean-spiritedness that I have ever witnessed in my almost four decades on this planet. So you just keep pounding away, pathetic far left, on a lady who is no longer a serious player on the national political stage, and keep pounding away on her family and children as you like to do, and in the meantime I will just keep pounding on you slimes for being the hateful, almost sub-human creatures that you are. And if you have a problem with those sentiments, go **** yourselves (yeah, I've been looking for a good spot to bring back my catch-phrase!).

Here it comes!

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601068&sid=ajQbZ.WrAVwQ

I suspected that Biden's so-called "admission" Sunday that the White House previously "misread" the seriousness of the economic recession really wasn't much of an admission at all, but rather possibly an intentional opening salvo in trying to build momentum towards a second economic "stimulus" bill (on which there have been small rumblings in recent weeks). And guess what? It looks like it's already starting. Today one of His Majesty's advisers, Laura Tyson, said that the U.S. should consider drafting a second "stimulus" package. She actually claims that the $787 billion approved the first time around in February was "a bit too small." Well, maybe she does have a point there. After all, I can only imagine all the nice, new, greasy pork barrel projects that the dems have been able to identify in the intervening 4.5 months. I would assume that Pelosi & Reid already have the keyboards (and calculators) going on a new bill. Stay tuned...

Today's Russian deal will make our warfare in Afghanistan more fuel efficient.

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2009/07/06/u-s-russia-reach-deal-on-afghanistan/

"The new transit routes [through Russia as a result of the deal] will allow the U.S. military to resupply international forces more quickly, saving up to $133 million a year in fuel and other transportation costs, the White House said."

I guess that's the most important thing, after all. I have to say, the lunacy and hypocrisy of the American left on Afghanistan is frightening. Suddenly, once a liberal dem is president, it's OK for a sitting president to wage warfare abroad without any clearly articulated plan for what the hell we're doing there and why we keep ratcheting up troop levels. Nope, apparently as long as the war we fight is a "energy efficient" as possible, it's OK by most of the left. H-y-p-o-c-r-i-t-e-s.

Sarah Palin resigns as Alaska governor. Who cares?

I don't live in Alaska, do you? The almost wall-to-wall media coverage of Palin's resignation this weekend just illustrates how Palin is much more of a celebrity and circus act than serious politician -- as if her previous words, demeanor and actions weren't already sufficient evidence of the same. My views on Palin, I think, have always been fairly clear: I generally like her on a personal level, and she is hot. But even apart from her being a right wing ideologue (which I have no place for), I don't think she has what it takes to be president. I just don't see it. However, I would like to thank Palin for something. With the possible exception of "W!", there is no person in this country rising to the level of Palin in terms of being the incessant drumbeat target of far left hate, disdain and mean-spiritedness. Just by being you, Sarah, you help to remind me on a regular basis just how nutty and hateful the far left loons really are.

Happy Independence Day to All! Even you libs and conservatives!

And on this wonderful day of Independence, be sure to make a point in the near future to visit The Wounded Warrior Project website. There are many ways to get involved in this charitable organization that supports our wounded troops. One simple way is to download their small tool bar, which makes a small contribution to the Project for every internet search you do using the tool bar. I use it for all my searches. After all, Mr. T commands it (see below in the right sidebar). Happy Independence Day -- Bang, Bang!

On this Eve of Independence Day, a thought: "Elephants & Asses are destroying the masses."

No, that's not a quote of mine (I wish it was), but rather a bumper sticker that I saw today. Anecdotal, yes, but also illustrative of a larger point: We Independent Ragers are out here, and dems and repubs are definitely not entertaining us. We just need more of us to speak out -- loud and proud. As that happens, you'll see more of us grouping together into collective efforts to try to bring change (any change) to the rotten, hollow, corrupted, extreme-slanted political system that we currently have. And some day soon, I believe, these two B.S. extremist parties are gonna have to start paying just a bit of attention.

OK, enough Majesty posts already. The one question this weekend: Will we see a North Korean missile launch on July 4 (or otherwise) towards Hawaii?

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,529808,00.html

I'm putting the likelihood at about 45%. But regardless, I sure as hell hope not. Such an act of provocation (even from a non-nuclear missile that likely would get nowhere near Hawaii) threatens only to be a potential first step down a very dangerous road. I think that regardless of our political persuasions, we can probably agree on that.

Unemployment rate hits 9.5% -- the worst we've seen since 1983.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_economy

http://www.usnews.com/articles/news/national/2009/07/02/unemployment-reaches-95-percent-highest-in-26-years.html

Tell me, Your Majesty: Care to retract your Bush-esque "Mission Accomplished"-type rhetoric from yesterday? (Yeah, I'll believe that when I see it.)

His Majesty declares, decrees and ordains this day that the Stimulus Bill has "done it's job". Say it with me...

http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2009/07/01/live-blogging-obamas-town-hall-meeting-on-health-care/ (see the 2:04 p.m. entry)

Gallup: "More Americans see Democratic party as too liberal." -- Largest percentage since the 1994 midterm elections.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/121307/More-Americans-See-Democratic-Party-Too-Liberal.aspx?version=print

This item is well-summarized in its first sentence: "A Gallup Poll finds a statistically significant increase since last year in the percentage of Americans who describe the Democratic Party's views as being 'too liberal,' from 39% to 46%. This is the largest percentage saying so since November 1994, after the party's losses in that year's midterm elections."

It's good to see that at least some folks are finally starting to wake up and get it. The dems are a party that was already too liberal for my tastes in the 1990's, and they have completely gone off the deep end during the Internet Age and in the years that have followed 9-11. During that period, the term "liberal" for me has gone beyond the simple left-wing ideology and has become also synonymous with hatefulness, bitterness and mean-spiritedness -- which is a bit of a problem since these are the people who control the democratic party. In a nutshell, this definitely ain't the democratic party that my grandparents grew up with in the 1940's and 50's, nor even the one that I grew up with in the 1980's.

As a final note, I do hope that the same 46% of Americans who view the dems as too liberal also understand that the repubs have the very same problem -- complete domination and control by the conservatives. Dems and repubs: Two peas in the same extremist pod, as I like to say.

His Majesty's poll is definitely not risin'.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/obama_administration/daily_presidential_tracking_poll

According to Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll, only 31% of voters strongly approve of Majesty's job performance -- the lowest level that Rasmussen has yet recorded for His Majesty. With 33% of voters strongly disapproving of his job performance, Majesty's Presidential Approval Index rating (i.e., the 31% minus the 33%) is now Minus 2 -- a level it has only reached once previously. In fairness, Majesty's "total approve" number (i.e. the total of the strongly approve and somewhat approve numbers) is currently at 54%, which is close to where it's been for much of the month. But given the recent jump we've seen in Majesty's disapproval rating amongst us Independents, it can't be welcome news today to see the 31% figure, nor another Minus 2. In the meantime, I'll be independently monitoring...

Here are the facts as we know them tonight.

I begin with crediting His Majesty for our current pullback in Iraq. About time. And if a slimey old coot Neo-Con like Dick Cheney is against it, methinks Majesty is doing something very right there. But the rest of what I have to say is not so complimentary:

Flashback to September 2008, the campaign trail, Dover New Hampshire: His Majesty looks all of us straight in the eye and pledges that no middle class American family with an income of less than $250,000 (me included) will see any form of tax increase. And what have we instead seen in the months since Majesty was coronated?

1. Statements by the Administration (Axelrod) on ABC last Sunday morning that Majesty will not for one second "rule out" the prospect of supporting a health care tax hike in the soon to-be-battled health care reform bill debate, i.e. the taxing of middle class Americans' employee health care benefits. Strange they wouldn't "rule out" such a new tax out given Majesty's campaign pledge. And the most disingenuous aspect to this: Majesty's campaign spent myriad campaign funds on nationwide attack ads villifying John McCain for advocating the very same thing in terms of taxing employee benefits. McCain was wrong, but apparently Majesty was right then, and is now right again advocating the precise opposite position to which he spewed his venom at McCain during the campaign.

2. The increased tobacco tax advocated by Majesty and now passed into law, which is completely regressive in nature, hammering lower income folks very disproportionely, in order to pay for an extension of the children's health care program (yes, an inherently funding-worthy pursuit on its face, but there are other ways to fund things besides hammering lower income folks with huge new taxes during the worst economic downturn we've seen since the early 80's or perhaps earlier (which dems in recent months have loved to take advantage of at every turn, when it serves their purposes, in terms of passing massive new ultra-liberal pieces of legislation with narry an ounce of debate or any federal lawmaker typically being given the chance to even read the legislation before a vote is forced upon it)).

3. The massive "cap-and-trade" bill which just passed the House in the evening hours Friday despite 300 new pages of complex statutory jargon only being added to the bill that morning by ultra-liberal freak Henry Waxman. The Wall Street Journal called this bill the single largest tax hike in American history, hitting the middle class and all Americans significantly hard, which I'm afraid is the truth. The dems have tried to defend it in their typical spin-and-chicken$hit manner by claiming it's "technically" not a new tax since even though all Americans will see a big increase in their regular energy bills from ulility companies, such increase will not be collected "directly" by the federal government, but rather by the ultility companies themselves as they pass-through their heightened costs (resulting from the bill) to all of us consumers. Say what, dems? Sounds like a huge new tax on us regular folks, if you ask me.

So now let's get down to brass tacks (I love that phrase). Let's talk turkey (love that one too): His Majesty made a solemn pledge to us during the campaign -- a promise that he has been willing, and apparently continues to be willing, to break whenever he feels like it. Now, am I going to say that he was lying to us when made that devout pledge? Hell no. I think he believed it at the time. But for him to now go around disregarding that very simple promise, right and left, is to me a sign that Majesty is very little different from basically every president I've seen during my lifetime -- campaign promises are meant to be broken, and prior words mean absolutely nothing. Hardly "Change We Can Believe In."

His Majesty says Honduras coup was "illegal" and Zelaya remains the president.

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D994HRB00&show_article=1

So much for restraint.

It's Revolution in Honduras. And Hugo, the Castros, and Obama are all starting to weigh in.

http://www.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/americas/06/28/honduras.president.arrested/index.html

I realize how much I like to beat the drum (i.e. truth) of how our two US extremes control our two B.S. political parties, but please realize also that when I say "extremes", I'm fully cognizant of the fact that there are much more extreme places that politics and hate can take human beings than even the venom we see on a daily basis from our US far left and far right. And we see that playing out in Central and South America on an ongoing basis basically into perpetuity. In those regions, it seems like it's always some VERY far left socialist or communist group or power competing against some VERY far right totalitarian group or power in one country or another. And it appears we're seeing just such a struggle play out yet again right now in Honduras, at least based on the limited material I've been able to read on the situation tonight. Too often in the last several decades, I believe the mistake of our executive branch has been to so quickly takes sides in these battles between REAL extremists. Much too often during the Nixon and Reagan years, in particular, we would routinely and unthinkingly side with any extremist right wing power or regime that we could (no matter how authoritarian or barbaric they were) out of the mantra of the Cold War and the Policy of Containment. And we made some real mistakes in many of those endeavors (e.g., check out sometime the book or the movie, "Missing"). Which is why I call on President Obama (on a serious issue like this, I am not going use my usual silly catch-phrase moniker, "Majesty") to exhibit some of the wise restraint he showed towards the Iranian situation, and not to rush to take sides in the Honduras situation. In case the folks reading this blog haven't noticed (and I know some of you are reading, even if you won't admit it!), I despise the Neo-Cons -- the great Neo-Con experiment of the "W!" days is OVER -- and I want to see a whole lot of restraint from our executive branch in terms of meddling in the affair of other sovereign nations. That means not invading or getting the CIA involved in sovereign nations unless we have one HELL of a good reason for doing so (we did not in Iraq), and it means using common sense, reasonableness, and restraint when it comes to our rhetoric about firestorm situations in other countries. So far, this is one isolated area on which Obama gets a generally passing grade from me (although I'm still waiting to hear what the heck our plan actually IS in Afghanistan), and I look forward to hopefully continuing to generally agree with him in this realm (because I gotta tell ya, it gives me no pleasure or delight that a majority of my posts have so far been critical -- as opposed to agreeing -- with a sitting President). But I will just continue to do my best to call each issue like I see it. (Sorry for the long rambling post, but you'll get that from me sometimes! ;) ).

As angry as His Majesty has made me by forcing yet another piece of massive ultra-liberal legislation down our throats w/o debate or anyone reading it

http://apnews.myway.com/article/20090627/D9930GJ80.html

...I still would like to take up defending His Majesty tonight against the continuing verbal assault he's receiving from Iranian President Mahmoud ("Mama") Ahmadinejad. Hey Mama, why don't you unequivocally, officially go **** yourself -- that is, if you can bear to tear yourself away from murdering your own citizens who have the gall to disagree with you. Let me tell you something, Mama, you are a flunkie, a lackey, a sidekick, a mascot to the Supreme Leader. And all of us in America know it. You're about as powerful as a rat in a cancer research center. You're about as dangerous as a dead tick in an Alabama $hithouse. As much as some in our American far right might like to incessantly build you up as the second coming of Hitler or Stalin or something, to me and most knowledgeable Americans, you're just our Mama -- and you also make a very dreadful looking mascot, by the way. Trim the beard, dude.

Cap-and-trade bill ram-rodded right down our throats by the far left powers-that-be in the House.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0609/24232.html

It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that there's something ROTTEN in Denmark when this bill gets expanded by 300 pages (by ultra-liberal freak Henry Waxman) early in the morning of the same day when the dems are dead-set on forcing the House to vote on it. Those were 300 pages that were never read by virtually any of the 219 representatives who voted to approve this bill. Why the big rush? Why did this bill absolutely have to be voted on today (with 300 last-minute additional pages), despite most members of the House not reading it? I think it's pretty obvious: To fast track another piece of ultra-liberal legislation while His Majesty's slipping approval ratings will still allow these kinds of shenanigans to occur in Pelosi's chamber. Today the Wall Street Journal called this bill the single largest tax increase in US history, and it appears to me that WSJ is exactly right. I guess something has to pay for all the bailouts and the "stimulus" bill, right? And here's another thing: The completely disingenuous statements coming out of the mouths of some of these so-called "moderate" democrats tonight. For example: "I'm in a tough spot voting against this bill," said Rep. John Salazar (D-Colo.). AS IF he would have ever voted against it if Pelosi and the radical left powerbrokers who control the House would have ordered him to vote for it. I mean, $hit, he was one of the lucky ones that Pelosi allowed to vote against it since the dems had the votes to pass it. "Tough spot" my ass. And I loved the following sentence from the above-linked story: "Many of those moderate Democrats, like freshman Rep. Bobby Bright of Alabama, also waited until the end of the roll call to cast votes against the package." In other words -- the same thing I was talking about just above: These so-called "moderate" dems were very ready to vote for the bill if necessary to pass it, and only voted against it because it was not necessary for them to support it. My God, people, I've ranted and raved for 3 months now about the slimey way that these two parties conduct themselves in the halls of power of this country on a daily basis. You won't see a better example than what we witnessed today. And you vote for people in either one of these 2 B.S. parties, why precisely? For the record: I do not, and won't start any time soon. I'm not represented by anyone from these two parties, but I'm gonna keep running my big mouth until someone listens. That's a guar-an-damn-tee.

Postscript: Yeah, I'm a bit riled up tonight and it may well be a moot point (maybe) since this unread 1200-page piece of legislation will face a whole lot tougher road in the Senate than in the House. But regardless, this was some slimey politics that we saw today, and I felt compelled to speak my mind on it.