Monday, January 31, 2011

Jeremy Piven: "Rapist-berger and the Cheeseheads"

Jeremy Piven isn't happy with the teams in Super Bowl XLV.

He directs his wrath toward Steelers quarterback Ben Roethlisberger - "Ben Rapist-berger." And Piven, who grew up in suburban Chicago, doesn't show respect for the Packers.

From TMZ:

Jeremy Piven thinks this year's Super Bowl is gonna suck -- because no one wants to see a game between Ben "Rapist-berger and the Cheese Heads."

Piven was hanging out at the Sundance Film Festival in Utah last week when he started talking sports ... voicing his distaste for a "cheesy rape-berger" match up between Ben Roethlisberger's Pittsburgh Steelers and the Green Bay Packers.

Watch the video.



Transcript
JEREMY PIVEN: Jets - Bears would have been the greatest Super Bowl. Now it's Rapist-berger and the Cheeseheads. The Cheesy Rape Burger.

Bears fan Piven is a sore loser.

Schumer: Three Branches of Government (Video)

Senator Chuck Schumer has all the brilliance of Joe Biden.

Schumer correctly said the United States has three branches of government. However, poor Chuck is confused about what those branches are.

Video




Transcript, from NewsBusters:

CANDY CROWLEY, HOST: Let me turn you to domestic policy because it is budget season. It is time to raise the debt ceiling. Otherwise the U.S. is going to lose its ability to pay its debts.

Where do you see this fight going now?

Because, basically, we have a very determined bunch of Republicans right now, particularly on the House side, saying, no way we're going to raise this debt ceiling until we start doing some cutting.

SEN. CHUCK SCHUMER (D-N.Y.): Well, there's even a problem before the debt ceiling. On March 4th, the government funding resolution expires. And it seems that a lot of Republicans in the House want to risk a shutdown of the government if they don't absolutely get their way.

That was a mistake when Newt Gingrich tried it in 1995. It will be a bigger mistake now. It's really playing with fire because, if they were to shut down the government, not only would horrible things happen like an inability of people to get Social Security checks, you can't fund the military, but ultimately, it risks the credit markets.

They are getting wary because of the large debt we have, which we have to get down, but if they feel that people are willing to shut down the government, you could risk the credit markets really losing some confidence in the United States Treasury, and that could create a deeper recession than we had over the last several years -- God forbid, even a depression.

So I would urge my Republican colleagues, no matter how strongly they feel -- you know, we have three branches of government. We have a House. We have a Senate. We have a president. And all three of us are going to have to come together and give some, but it is playing with fire to risk the shutting down of the government, just as it is playing with fire to risk not paying the debt ceiling.

Chuck Schumer, are you smarter than a 5th grader?

NO.

This is a major gaffe.

If Schumer were a conservative woman, he would be mocked mercilessly for his claim that the House, the Senate, and the president constitute our three branches of government.

It's strange that Schumer would leave out the judicial branch, given that the guy is a member of the
Senate Judiciary Committee.

(Russ Feingold used to be a member of that committee. Not anymore.)

Packers: Send-Off to Super Bowl

As fans cheered, the Packers boarded buses at Lambeau Field just before noon, leaving for Austin Strabel airport to fly to Dallas.



The Packers are on their way to victory in Super Bowl XLV.

The Muslim Brotherhood

Andrew McCarthy explains why there's reason to "Fear the Muslim Brotherhood."

John Barry 1933-2011

John Barry is responsible for some of the most memorable music in movies.

Scores and songs can make or break a film. John Barry's contributions should not be underestimated.


From the Associated Press:

Composer John Barry, who won five Oscars for his film work but was best known for his contributions to a dozen James Bond movies, has died. He was 77.

Barry died in New York on Sunday, his family said.

The English-born composer won two Oscars, for the score and the song, for "Born Free" in 1966, and he earned single statuettes for "The Lion in Winter" (1968), "Out of Africa" (1985) and "Dances with Wolves" (1990).

From Sky News:
A statement released by his family said: "It is with great sadness that the family of composer John Barry announce his passing on January 30, 2011 in New York."

Barry won a total of five Oscars, two of them for the 1967 film Born Free - for best song and best score.

But he was not even nominated for any of the 11 Bond films he worked on.

His association with the series came with the first, Dr No, in 1962 when he was asked to contribute to the score.

It started what is seen as the most enduring musical relationship in film history.









Rest in Peace.

Teach Me How to Raji



WISCONSIN BLIZZARD

From the National Weather Service:

URGENT - WINTER WEATHER MESSAGE NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE MILWAUKEE/SULLIVAN WI
820 PM CST SUN JAN 30 2011

...BLIZZARD LIKELY TUESDAY NIGHT AND WEDNESDAY...

.THREE DIFFERENT WEATHER FEATURES WILL COMBINE TO BRING EXTREME SNOW TOTALS TO SOUTHERN WISCONSIN. A FAVORABLE SETUP FOR LAKE EFFECT SNOWS BEGINS EARLY MONDAY MORNING OVER SHEBOYGAN COUNTY AND OVER THE REMAINDER OF THE LAKE COUNTIES MONDAY AND MONDAY NIGHT. IT THEN PERSISTS INTO WEDNESDAY AFTERNOON. A WEATHER DISTURBANCE WILL AFFECT THE AREA ON MONDAY INTO TUESDAY BRINGING 4 TO 6 INCHES OF SNOW WITH UP TO 8 INCHES NEAR LAKE MICHIGAN.

A STRONGER LOW PRESSURE CENTER WILL GATHER STRENGTH AND MOISTURE AND MOVE NORTHEAST FROM THE MID MISSISSIPPI VALLEY TUESDAY. BLIZZARD CONDITIONS ARE POSSIBLE FROM THE SHEBOYGAN AND JANESVILLE AREAS ON EAST. A LARGE AREA OF 6 TO 12 INCHES IS EXPECTED SOUTH OF A LINE FROM THE WISCONSIN DELLS TO FOND DU LAC. 12 TO 18 INCHES ARE FORECAST SOUTH OF A LINE FROM JANESVILLE TO PORT WASHINGTON...WITH ABOUT 18 INCHES IN RACINE AND KENOSHA COUNTIES.

STORM TOTALS FROM BOTH SYSTEMS COULD BE IN THE 18 TO 24 INCH RANGE IN FAR SOUTHEAST WISCONSIN. SIGNIFICANT BLOWING AND DRIFTING SNOW AND BLIZZARD CONDITIONS ARE POSSIBLE. THIS STORM IS SIMILAR TO THE EARLY JANUARY 1999 BLIZZARD...WHICH PRODUCED 14 TO 18 INCHES OF SNOW IN SOUTHEAST WISCONSIN WITH 4 TO 8 FOOT DRIFTS EAST OF A LINE FROM FOND DU LAC TO JANESVILLE.

NEEDLESS TO SAY THIS COULD BE A HISTORIC BLIZZARD CAPABLE OF PARALYZING PARTS OF SOUTHEAST WISCONSIN.

MILWAUKEE-RACINE-KENOSHA-
INCLUDING THE CITIES OF...MILWAUKEE...RACINE...KENOSHA
820 PM CST SUN JAN 30 2011

...WINTER WEATHER ADVISORY REMAINS IN EFFECT FROM 3 PM MONDAY TO 3 PM CST TUESDAY...
...BLIZZARD WATCH REMAINS IN EFFECT FROM TUESDAY AFTERNOON THROUGH WEDNESDAY AFTERNOON...

A WINTER WEATHER ADVISORY REMAINS IN EFFECT FROM 3 PM MONDAY TO 3 PM CST TUESDAY. A BLIZZARD WATCH REMAINS IN EFFECT FROM TUESDAY AFTERNOON THROUGH WEDNESDAY AFTERNOON.

* TIMING...LAKE EFFECT SNOW POTENTIAL AND SYSTEM SNOWS INCREASE MONDAY AFTERNOON INTO MONDAY NIGHT. LAKE EFFECT POTENTIAL CONTINUES TUESDAY...WITH ANOTHER STRONGER LOW ARRIVING LATER TUESDAY THROUGH AT LEAST EARLY WEDNESDAY AFTERNOON.

* SNOW ACCUMULATIONS...4 TO 7 INCHES OF ACCUMULATION MONDAY AFTERNOON INTO TUESDAY. ADDITIONAL 15 TO 21 INCHES TUESDAY NIGHT INTO WEDNESDAY WITH STORM TOTALS AROUND 2 FEET IN SOME AREAS.

* WINDS...NORTHEAST WINDS 15 TO 30 MPH TUESDAY AND TUESDAY NIGHT GRADUALLY SHIFT NORTH WEDNESDAY. GUSTS OF 40 TO 60 MPH WITH HIGHEST WINDS IN OPEN AREAS AND NEAR LAKE MICHIGAN.

* IMPACTS...REDUCED VISIBILITIES TO 1/4 MILE OR LESS AT TIMES DUE TO SNOW AND BLOWING SNOW...RESULTING IN TREACHEROUS TRAVEL CONDITIONS. WORST CONDITIONS TUESDAY NIGHT INTO WEDNESDAY WHEN NEAR ZERO WHITEOUT CONDITIONS AND DRIFTS OF 5 TO 10 FEET
POSSIBLE. POTENTIAL FOR PARALYZING BLIZZARD.

Oh no!

A "paralyzing blizzard" would be rather inconvenient. A blizzard won't fit into my schedule this week.

Perhaps some other time?



Sunday, January 30, 2011

SNL: Michele Bachmann

SNL: Mark Zuckerberg

Reince Priebus Top Ten


TOP TEN WAYS TO MISPRONOUNCE REINCE PRIEBUS

10. Ripe produce

9. Rented Prius

8. Prell cream rinse

7. Darrelle Revis

6. Justin Bieberbus

5. Rented Prius -- now, wait a minute, we already did that. How does this happen?

4. SpongeReince PrieberPants

3. France hates us

2. Rice pilaf

1. Ryan Priebcrest

Late Show with David Letterman
January 17, 2011


Video.

Saturday, January 29, 2011

Hannity: Rebecca Kleefisch, Sly Sylvester

On Thursday, Wisconsin's Lt. Gov. Rebecca Kleefish was Sean Hannity's guest on his FOX News program.

They discussed WTDY radio host John "Sly" Sylvester's recent brutal personal attack on Kleefisch.

I'm glad Hannity put the incident in the spotlight and exposed Sylvester to a national audience.

Kleefisch has conducted herself with such dignity throughout this ugly episode. She's maintained her poise and continues to serve the people of Wisconsin.

Meanwhile, Sylvester is becoming nationally known as the epitome of uncivil political discourse. I suspect he's enjoying the notoriety, but I hope he's also experiencing some regret. If he has any conscience at all, he can't be comfortable being known for demeaning women and cancer patients.

I want to hear women on the Left condemn Sylvester's degradation of Kleefisch. Where are the women's organizations? Why aren't they coming to the defense of Kleefisch?

Here's video of the interview:




Interview transcript

Friday, January 28, 2011

Obama Confused: Afghanistan, Iraq

The brilliant Obama had some problems with his brilliance during an online interview by YouTube.

President Obama answers questions on a wide range of issues submitted by and voted on by YouTube users in an interview moderated by YouTube's Steve Grove. January 27, 2011.

Video here.

From
Politico:
Hit with a tough question about his administration’s policy in Afghanistan and Iraq on Thursday, President Obama made a muddled mess out of his plans for withdrawing troops from the region.

Obama swapped “Iraq” for “Afghanistan” when he answered a question on YouTube about whether he still believes soldiers need to die in the wars there.

“As I said, we will be out of Afghanistan by the end of this year,” Obama said, a fairly significant misstatement of his administration’s Afghanistan policy, which doesn’t call for a troop withdrawal until 2014. The misstep was picked up by the Future of Capitalism blog.

“We’ll have a relationship with Iraq in the same way we have relationships with many countries around the world,” Obama continued, correcting himself.

The YouTube moderator interjected, in an effort to clarify Obama’s statement. “So out of Afghanistan, as in ...”

Future of Capitalism points out that Obama's gaffe comes at 21:39 in the video.
President Obama declares, "As I said, we will be out of Afghanistan by the end of this year." Then he declares, "Combat operations in Afghanistan have ended."

This is a major gaffe. What happened to the supposedly most intelligent president in American history?

Was his repeated gaffe a Freudian slip?

Wishful thinking?

Sleep deprivation?

No teleprompter anxiety attack?

Who knows?

As we've seen in the past, take the genius Obama off the teleprompter and the flubs flow.

Vince Lombardi: 52 Years Ago

Fifty-two years ago today, Vince Lombardi was hired as the head coach of the Green Bay Packers.

Chris Abele: 'Lefty'

Meet the REAL Chris Abele.

When Chris Abele, candidate for Milwaukee County Executive, is meeting with Democrats, he does not talk like the bipartisan centrist he claims to be in his ads.

His campaign rhetoric avoids traditional labels like Democrat and Republican. He defines himself as post-partisan.

This blog post from his campaign website illustrates his strategy:

Our message talks about the need to put politics aside and come together to solve problems and get things done. I’ll work with Democrats and Republicans alike to help create private sector jobs, get the budget under control, and change the culture in Milwaukee County to bring the reform we need.

Abele wants to put politics aside.

What a crock!


Charlie Sykes writes:
[Chris Abele] has been running for county executive as a bipartisan centrist, stressing his willingness to work with both Democrats and Republicans.

Contrast that with his comments at Monday's meeting of the Milwaukee Democrat party, in which he proudly, unabashedly defines himself as a "lefty," lists his progressive credentials... brags about support for the ACLU, Planned Parenthood, Citizen Action, NARAL, rips Scott Walker and declares his intention spend more on human services.

Here's the audio:



When speaking to Democrats, Abele isn't putting politics aside at all. He proudly identifies himself as firmly on their side. He lays out his liberal credentials. He sucks up to them and declares he has the ability to beat Republican Jeff Stone.

Transcript

CHRIS ABELE: I'm from Boston. I moved here about 20 years ago, and I stayed here because I love this place like nowhere else I've ever lived. And I won't live anywhere else.

As many of you know, I run a foundation right now. I support, have supported for a long time a lot of LEFTY causes proudly, a lot of Democrats. Prior to that, I built and ran a business, had some success in that, continue to maintain it, but most of my time and the most rewarding thing I do is to work hard and try, try to help move the world in the right direction as I see it. I imagine, largely, how you see it.

Politically, I was thinking before experience with other-minded people for a long time a big part of what I did was human rights work. And I had the odd and somewhat surreal experience of working with the Bush State Department, which was just that - odd and surreal.

I know that things you've heard and descriptions about how partisan things can get in government, even when I thought I'd seen the highest extremes, I had the experience of the State Department requesting a group that I was working with, a meeting. And they wanted to do a grant with us, and they asked on a phone call, 'Hey we like your group, but we researched your board of directors and you have a lot of Democrats on your board.' And I seriously thought he was joking at the time, and I said, 'Well, that's still legal, right?'

...But just in terms of the extremes to which things go, if we can never forget, never forget it's so important to fight for the things that make Democrats great: fundamental fairness, fundamental civil liberties, and that's why I've spent a lot of my working life in the last 20 years doing that and with pride.

My progressive experience I think is best summed by ACLU, Citizen's Action, Planned Parenthood, NOW, Feminist Majority, NARAL, Women for the League of Conservation Voters, a whole bunch of education groups, and, you know, a long list, none of which of course I was doing because I thought I was going to be running for office, all of which I was doing because they're things I care about and will do no matter what happens in this race.

I decided to run because, while I've been on the other side and supported candidates and Dems with varying degrees of success locally, statewide, and federally for many years, I truly, truly care, again, about the place that's my home. And I've watched, as we all have, as this county has been an increasing train wreck. I mean, I think it might have been the Titanic about, you know, maybe six years ago. It's become the Titanic plus the Hindenburg, but worse. Since then, and given what the governor's likely to do in terms of shared revenue and reimbursement funds, it'll get worse still.

I think the fact that the biggest thing the county does, health and human services, is something we rarely hear about is because for seven years the last leader of the county was largely indifferent to health and human services, and that is truly tragic. Yes, parks matter, absolutely, and so do the arts, and so do the courts, and so does busing and so does transit. BUT human services, I mean, the human part of what we do, to allow that to suffer the way we have is beneath all of us.

I'm running because I care. I'm running because I had a lot of opportunities to lead and I've had a lot of success doing it. I'm running because I've worked with politicians at local, state, and federal level on both parties. And I'm running because I know I can make a difference. And I will beat Jeff Stone.

Abele's closing remark is that he will beat Republican Jeff Stone. That's the message he wants to leave with these Dems. He will defeat the Republican candidate.

I didn't hear any talk about fiscal responsibility.

During the question and answer session that follows Abele's statement, he states that he is a Democrat. His allegiance is to the Democratic Party and their values and agenda.

It bothers me that Abele is being so dishonest and running such a misleading campaign. There's nothing centrist about him. It's a snow job.

It is clear that Abele is a proud dyed-in-the-wool liberal.

He is the anti-Scott Walker.

He would be a disaster for Milwaukee County.

Tracy Morgan, Sarah Palin, and Masturbation (Video)

Tracy Morgan is a comedian. So when he shows up on live TV in an unscripted situation, it's risky. Who knows what he'll say? What he says may offend some viewers.

I think it's safe to say that probably at least some viewers of TNT's coverage of the Miami Heat - New York Knicks game last night were offended by Morgan's remarks.

From Mediaite:

Actor/comedian Tracy Mogan stars alongside Tina Fey in NBC’s 30 Rock, so when he appeared for a surprise interview before TNT’s telecast of the Miami Heat vs. the NY Knicks game, the question presented to him seemed innocent enough. Co-hosts Kenny Smith and Charles Barkley needed someone to settle a disagreement as to who is more attractive: Ms. Fey or former Alaskan Governor Sarah Palin . An odd question to be sure, but certainly no odder than the response they received from the unpredictable actor.

...Morgan completely demurred when asked of Fey, but had no problem sharing his honest affection of Ms. Palin, which impossibly seemed to even shock the hard to rattle Charles Barkley.

Video



Transcript
KENNY SMITH: Me and him have this argument all the time. You can settle it. He's the only one who can settle it.

TRACY MORGAN: Shoot.

SMITH: Tina Fey or Sarah Palin.

CHARLES BARKLEY: He can't get fired.

SMITH: No, I'm just telling...

MORGAN: Listen, both of them...

BARKLEY: Let me ask you one question. Sarah Palin's good looking, isn't she?

MORGAN: Oh, yeah, absolutely.

SMITH: But Tina Fey's good looking.

MORGAN: Let me tell you something about Sarah Palin, man. She's good masturbation material, glasses and all of that. Great masturbation material.

Whoa!

Smith and Barkley were laughing but Ernie Johnson just sort of nodded and smiled and understandably looked uncomfortable.

The objectification of Palin, former governor of Alaska and vice presidential nominee, was not cool. Will NOW or other feminist groups complain about Palin being treated like this?

That's highly unlikely.

It was a mistake for Smith and Barkley to bring up Sarah Palin while talking to Morgan. They were asking for trouble.

I really think this obsession with Palin is bizarre.

________________

Earlier Thursday on CNN, Barkley was also talking about Sarah Palin's appearance. During the interview, Barkley said she was good looking.

If you didn't know that Barkley thinks Sarah Palin is good looking, you do now.

Watch that interview here.

Transcript

T.J. HOLMES: Does Sarah Palin have 'it'?

CHARLES BARKLEY: She has 'it,' but she's not gonna win. I think she's good looking, but she's not going to win. They're not, and that's no disrespect, they're not going to let a woman be the presidential candidate in 2012.

HOLMES: What do you mean 'not going to let a woman'?

BARKLEY: They're not going to let a woman.

HOLMES: Well, they said they weren't going to let a black man either.

BARKLEY: Yeah, but I think the Republican Party is a little bit different than the Democratic Party. I vote Democratic because I think they represent a majority, more of the people, people where I came from, people that don't have money. Because let's get one thing straight: Politics are rich people screwing poor people. I mean, this ain't got anything to do with this or that. Politics are rich people screwing poor people. And I like Sarah Palin, but I'm gonna tell you something. She's not going to be the Republican candidate, and I like her. But let me tell something: The good ol' boy network is not gonna let a woman be the frontrunner of their party. Who are we kidding?

Barkley says he likes Sarah Palin.

Why?

Because he thinks she's good looking?

Packer Backin' Puppies

There's a NEW Packer Puppy video from the Wisconsin Humane Society.

Watch Packer puppies in action, and enjoy the wisdom of Vince Lombardi.


Adoption Discounts for Packers Fans

Get $10 off any dog, cat, or rabbit adoption fee at the Wisconsin or Ozaukee Humane Societies if you are wearing any Packers attire, through February 6! Steelers gear will not cut it. Adoption hours on Superbowl Sunday at WHS will be 10:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. to accommodate fans. The Ozaukee Humane Society is closed on Sundays.

Thursday, January 27, 2011

Meghan McCain, Sarah Palin, and Michele Bachmann

Meghan McCain seems to have a problem with conservative women.

She has repeatedly slammed Sarah Palin.

In February 2010, Meghan McCain, brilliant political analyst, was on The View. True to form, McCain attacked Palin and the Tea Party movement.

She also went on the attack during an interview with FOX News Sunday.

Here's another example of Meghan McCain blasting Sarah Palin--

On September 7, 2010, she was a guest on the Tonight Show. She talked about her relationship with Sarah Palin during the 2008 presidential campaign. She said she didn't get along with her at all.

Watch the interview.

A couple of months later, Jay Leno had Meghan McCain on his show to discuss the midterm elections.

On the Tonight Show, November 3, 2010, she mocked Christine O'Donnell, Sharron Angle, Sarah Palin, and the Tea Party.

Some of McCain's remarks on Christine O'Donnell:


MEGHAN McCAIN: I was never a fan of Christine O'Donnell because I think again it belittles all the great people that run for office. Um, and, you know, she's out of her fricking mind, so I'm glad she's not in the Senate, you know?

JAY LENO: She will actually have to get a job now.

McCAIN: I know. She's actually gonna have to work. And you know, it's, I don't know how you have a job...

LENO: Maybe something in the fast food industry?

McCAIN: Yeah, or maybe continue your anti-masturbation platform. That was sure popular, little lady.

Some of McCain's comments on Sarah Palin and her daughter, Bristol:

LENO: I thought this was interesting. Bristol Palin said today she didn't vote. I mean, if you didn't vote, don't tell people that.

McCAIN: Yeah, I mean, if you didn't vote in my family that was like bad news. I've been voting since I turned eighteen. I guess it's only important to Bristol Palin to vote for Dancing with the Stars. I don't know. I think a lot of women worked really hard to give us the right to vote and I think it's, anyone that doesn't vote, it's just ridiculous.

LENO: I agree. Now, I think Sarah Palin called them... what did she call them? 'corrupt bastards.'

McCAIN: Yeah.

LENO: She called the media 'corrupt bastards.' But isn't she sort of part of the media now or no?

McCAIN: Yeah, she's a FOX correspondent which is, you know, part of the media. So, I guess, I don't know if she's calling herself a corrupt bastard. I think it's a strange comment. I have no idea. I think that there's a symbiotic relationship between politicians and the media, and both just can't reject each other.

LENO: Do you think she will run in 2012?

McCAIN: Oh, yeah. Hell, yeah.

LENO: You think she will?

McCAIN: Oh, yeah. She's getting that ready right now. Of course. Yeah. Oh, yeah.

LENO: See, I don't know. I think to me, you can sorta, she seems to like to make money, so she can give speeches. once you saying you're running, you can't make that $100,000 talking to his group.

McCAIN: One thing I know about it is it's an addiction. Running for president is an addiction, and that's not going away. That girl is running for president.

Watch the interview.

Everyone is entitled to their opinion, but I don't think McCain's views carry special weight. What are her qualifications as an analyst?

Of course, the Leftists like to give her a forum because she's a Republican who attacks conservatives.

No one ever asks McCain why her opinions of Sarah Palin have changed so dramatically since 2008.

When
Meghan McCain was Leno's guest on September 17, 2008, she said she loved Sarah Palin.

"I love Sarah Palin. She's awesome."

According to her recent interviews, that was a lie.

Last night, Meghan McCain had Michele Bachmann in her crosshairs. (DISCLAIMER: That's a metaphor.)


She appeared on Left-wing extremist Lawrence O'Donnell's MSNBC program. Naturally, the radical O'Donnell was receptive to McCain's criticism of Bachmann.

From the New York Daily News:

Meghan McCain took aim at Rep. Michele Bachmann's State of the Union rebuttal on Wednesday night, insisting the Minnesota congresswoman is "a poor man's Sarah Palin."

The 26-year-old Daily Beast columnist and daughter of former GOP presidential nominee John McCain, made the cutting remarks when MSNBC host Lawrence O'Donnell asked what she thought of the "second response to the speech."

...O'Donnell agreed with McCain that "there were these different people who are just using their platforms to their own personal advantage rather than thinking about what it means for the party."

"I think it's important to note that Michele Bachmann is not a leader," said McCain. "She is not a leader of the Republican Party. Michele Bachmann in my opinion is no better than a poor man's Sarah Palin."

CNN was the only cable network to air Bachmann's rebuttal live, which McCain said the network should be "ashamed" about.

McCain has previously criticized Palin, who ran on the same ticket as her father during his presidential campaign in 2008. In her book, McCain writes that Palin, also a Tea Party darling, brought "drama, stress, complications, panic and loads of uncertainty" throughout her father's bid for the White House.

According to McCain, Bachmann too is also bringing drama and stress.

"It is one rogue woman that can't even look into the camera directly," said McCain, referring to Bachman, who spoke into the wrong camera during her rebuttal on Tuesday night.

"I take none of it seriously, and I think if the Tea Party wants to put a candidate up to give a response, why don't they have someone like Rand Paul, who was elected on the Tea Party platform, give that."

Here's some video, via Breitbart:



Good grief.

McCain touts the quality of MSNBC's journalism?

Of course, O'Donnell eats up McCain's bashing of Bachmann and the Tea Party. He loves to highlight her attacks on conservatives.

In terms of "bringing drama and stress," I think Meghan McCain and her enablers are doing their best to be divisive and damage the Republican Party.

Here's the complete interview.


Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Super Bowl XLV Game Balls

Packers Tweet:

Wilson Sporting Goods football factory in Ohio began making this year's Super Bowl XLV balls Sunday.

See photos.
Wilson Sporting Goods football factory in Ohio, which has made the official Super Bowl football since 1966, began making this year's game balls Sunday night immediately after the conclusion of the championship games.





Made in America!

Color-Coded Terror Alert System Replaced

Goodbye, color-coded terror alert system.



From CNN:

The much-maligned, color-coded Homeland Security Advisory System is about to be consigned to the proverbial dustbin of history.

...Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano is expected to announce Thursday that the almost 9-year-old threat alert system will go away in April. It will be replaced by the new National Terror Advisory System that will focus on specific threats in geographical areas, a department source said Wednesday.

The source did not provide details of the new system, which Napolitano will unveil at what the department is calling "the first annual 'State of America's Homeland Security' address" at George Washington University.

..."Though the system served a valuable purpose in the terrible days and months following the terrorist attacks of September 11, it was clearly time for the current color-coded system to be replaced with a more targeted system," [Rep. Peter King, R-New York,] said. "I know they have been working on this for a long time. It sounds to me like the changes they are proposing make sense. We will have to wait and see how they implement this new, more targeted system. I expect the biggest challenge for DHS will be balancing the need to provide useful and timely information with the need to protect sensitive information."

"The old color coded system taught Americans to be scared, not prepared," said ranking member Rep. Bennie Thompson, D-Mississippi. "Each and every time the threat level was raised, very rarely did the public know the reason, how to proceed, or for how long to be on alert. I have raised concerns for years about the effectiveness of the system and have cited the need for improvements and transparency. Many in Congress felt the system was being used as a political scare tactic -- raising and lowering the threat levels when it best suited the Bush administration."

The color system really didn't provide any information to the public, but obviously terrorist threats were thwarted while it was in place.

Although the color chart was rather meaningless, dedicated Americans successfully worked to keep us safe. Their efforts deserve respect, not mockery.

I don't agree with Thompson that the color-coded system "taught Americans to be scared, not prepared."

It didn't do much of anything for the public, good or bad. Certainly, in the months shortly after 9/11, when the threat level was raised, I took notice. But in terms of its impact on the public for most of the past decade, its influence has been negligible.

Will the new system be more valuable? Time will tell.

It should be better considering a new system was said to be in the works just after Obama took office. It's been two years in the making.

I suppose it's to be expected that the old color-coded system, a Bush administration relic, would be mocked by the liberal media as it makes its exit.

It was useless. It frightened people. It was ineffective.

Actually, that sounds a lot like the Obama administration's airport security measures of today, the body scans and "enhanced pat downs."

The simple color-coded chart was such a harmless thing compared to the TSA gropings. It didn't involve what can amount to sexual assault.

I hope the new terror alert system takes the terror threat seriously.

Janet Napolitano's loony assertion that she didn't want to use the term "terrorism" was truly scary. Replacing it with "man-caused disasters" in order to allegedly move away from the "politics of fear" was a joke.

The Obama administration has repeatedly created frightening doomsday scenarios to get the public to submit to its agenda, particularly when it comes to increased spending. The idea that the Obama administration doesn't utilize the politics of fear is absurd.

And at the airport, government employees grope the grandma with a walker and the old man with an artificial hip as if that will prevent a "man-caused disaster."

I don't have much faith in Janet Napolitano and the Obama administration to do what's right to protect the public from terrorists. Their hesitancy to use the word "terrorism" reveals the degree to which they'll go to score political points with their fellow Leftists.

Keeping the public safe from terrorists isn't a game.

Thankfully, in spite of the missteps of the Obama administration, we haven't been hit on a large scale.

Hopefully, the new system will reflect the reality that Islamic extremists still pose a threat to Americans and our homeland, as well as our interests abroad.

Obama's election two years ago didn't magically make them like us so we can all live happily ever after.

Obama and Plagiarism

Obama's State of the Union address may have sounded familiar.

As Mark Levin pointed out on his program yesterday, Alvin Felzenberg, U.S. News & World Report, writes that Obama's address was "tantamount to plagiarism."

If imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, what can be said of plagiarism? President Obama’s second State of the Union address contained enough recycled ideas and lines lifted from speeches of others to make historians wince. I suppose this is what one does when one not only has nothing new to say, but is required by custom and Constitution to come forth with a report of some kind by a certain time and day.

Had Obama or his writers been considerate enough to have informed listeners of where some of the president’s best lines and offered-up ideas originated, the speech might be remembered for its cutting and pasting of great and not-so-great moments of the past performance of others. After quoting Robert Kennedy early on, Obama tried to have his listeners believe that everything else he said that we might remember were his or his writers’ creations. Had the president submitted the text of his second State of the Union Address in the form of a college term paper, he would have been sent forthwith to the nearest academic dean. Once again, our public affairs are such that we have one standard for presidents and another for undergraduates. Now is as good a time as any to let Obama’s listeners in on what the late Paul Harvey would have termed “the rest of the story.”

Felzenberg cites several specific examples of Obama's shameless "borrowing" from other presidents.

It's embarrassing.

Felzenberg concludes:

It would appear that the only president of note whose imprint was absent in Obama’s long awaited and much-anticipated speech was Obama. This was supposed to have been the moment when the nation found out whether he was at the core a Rooseveltian liberal of a Clintonian centrist. What it got was a cut and pasted version of great and not-so-great State of the Union and other addresses of the past.

Sometime last year, many suggested that Obama would have an easier time getting his message across if he was less dependent on his teleprompter. This may be the year his writers are advised to throw away their books of political quotations. Then we may finally find out what the president truly believes and what he hopes to achieve in the office he so ardently sought.

There's nothing wrong with a president quoting a predecessor.

There's something very wrong with Obama lifting lines from past presidents and officials and passing them off as his own.

Fly Like a Cheesehead

Wednesday, January 26, 2011

Obama at Orion - Better Than Sputnik

When Obama was at Orion in Manitowoc today, he was impressed by this super cool, extra wide, energy efficient Jedi lightsaber - the lightsaber of the future.

Way better than Sputnik.

Jay Cutler: Critics and Critics of Critics

The Jay Cutler story will not die.

An explosion of criticism about Cutler's retreat from the NFC Championship game began on the Internet before any facts about his injury were known.

Current and former NFL players blasted him on Twitter.

Deion Sanders and others rushed to judgment and harshly criticized Cutler during the game.

Cutler's teammates came to his defense immediately while speaking to the press following the Bears' defeat. (GO PACK!)

If anything, the Cutler story has been growing in intensity as time passes rather than subsiding.

New reports about Cutler's physical condition continue to emerge.

From the Bleacher Report, Ryan Neiman writes:

In what is already a public relations nightmare, Jay Cutler's image continues to be tarnished.

Instantly after Cutler was removed from Sunday's NFC Championship game against the Packers, the Internet exploded from fans to athletes, claiming Cutler does not possess any physical toughness. Criticism mounted questioning if Cutler had any passion for the game he plays.

On Monday, we all learned Cutler suffered from a grade II tear in his knee, which means it would be very difficult to stabilize his knee, plant his foot and he would not be mobile during a football game.

However, the controversy surrounding Cutler grew full steam today.

The Chicago Tribune is reporting Cutler was dining at Mastro's Steakhouse in Chicago after the game, where he was spotted walking up a flight of stairs. The article goes on to say Cutler was not in crutches, but he "limped a little bit."

The injured Cutler walked up a flight of stairs - proof he's a quitter.

Not necessarily, according to others.

From the Bleacher Report, Ryan Rudnansky writes:

The report has re-ignited a litter of Twitter rumblings ranging from NFL players to fans to the media, apparently reinforcing the notion in their minds that Cutler is the wimp of a quarterback he's been made out to be.

I'm here to say that is flat out wrong.

First of all, Cutler sustained a second-degree sprain of his MCL, an injury that can be extremely limiting out on the field.

Second, walking while limping "a tiny bit" is completely different than planting your foot every time you drop back to throw, not to mention running away from a ferocious Packers' pass rush.

Third, and most important, no one but Cutler knows how that knee feels, and anyone that criticizes him based on an assumption is wrong to do so.

Now a backlash against Cutler's critics appears to be growing.

Charles Barkley and Boomer Esiason are among those defending Cutler.

The critics of Cutler's critics are questioning the manhood of his critics.

Kevin Blackistone writes:

"You're not any less of a man if you don't pull the trigger, you're not necessarily a man if you do." -- A Tribe Called Quest.

Jay Cutler didn't pull the trigger on Sunday, and that doesn't, as some of his brethren charged, make him any less of a real man, whatever our mythology has come to say manliness is.

But the same can't be said for many of Cutler's accusers, those who couldn't muster the chutzpah to say they were wrong, let alone sorry, for summarily dismissing the Bears' quarterback after learning by Monday that there was real reason for Cutler's reticence: a torn knee ligament.

The story about Cutler in the NFC Championship game, in which his Bears fell to the Packers, didn't reveal so much about Cutler. He suffered an injury. He couldn't go any longer, or at least his coach decided he couldn't. We've seen it with plenty of players before.

Instead, the story about Cutler revealed more how confused some athletes are about what it is they do for a living and how that defines their masculinity.

Suddenly we have a national debate about manhood because Cutler left the game.

When Bears fan Obama was asked to give his take on the controversy, he refused. Robert Gibbs, Obama's press secretary, said simply, "I don't want to get into that."

If Obama did weigh in, he might say something stupid. Then, there might have to be another Beer Summit.

Yeah, it's all getting pretty weird.

What's nice from my position is none of it matters. My world isn't shaken because Cutler was spotted walking a flight of stairs.

Of course, I don't want to see anyone unfairly crucified in the media.

I don't know who's right, but I do know Cutler sustained an injury.

I also know Cutler wasn't exactly acting like a leader from the sidelines during the second half. He was oddly detached during a huge game.

But it really doesn't matter to me. I'm enjoying not being in this debate.

Cutler is the Bears' problem.

Just like when the sexual harassment scandal involving the disgraced Vikings quarterback Brett Favre blew up, it didn't impact my team. Favre is the Vikings' problem and the Jets' problem. The Packers are free of Favre. He's history.

So let the Vikings implode. Let the Bears implode.

Whatever. Their seasons are over.

The Packers are going to Super Bowl XLV! SUPER BOWL XLV!

Leno: Ben Roethlisberger, Restraining Order

JAY LENO: Even though Green Bay is the favorite, Pittsburgh looks tough to beat in the Super Bowl. In fact, the only thing that's been able to stop Ben Roethlisberger so far I guess is a restraining order.

Obama: Manitowoc and Orion

Obama's "Main Street Tour" will be in Wisconsin on Wednesday.

The post-State of the Union Obamapalooza tour is stopping in Manitowoc.

From the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel:

President Barack Obama will visit with employees at Orion Energy Systems in Manitowoc during his visit to the state on Wednesday, according to a White House official.

The visit is part of the president's Main Street Tour. Obama is expected to tour the company and speak to employees about the economy, the official said.

The president is expected to make additional stops in the Manitowoc area.The White House did not immediately release what time Obama is expected to be in Manitowoc.

Obama's visit will come one day after he delivers his State of the Union speech to Congress. His Main Street Tour began in December 2009 when he visited the Lehigh Valley area of Pennsylvania.

The official said that, while in Wisconsin, Obama will "continue his conversation with American families and workers about rebuilding an economy that ensures America’s long-term economic competitiveness and guarantees that America and its people continue to lead in the future."

Here's more on Obama's Manitowoc visit, from the Green Bay Press-Gazette:
President Barack Obama's Wednesday visit to the Lakeshore area was at the top of Mayor Justin Nickels' "Community Update" Monday.

..."President Obama is going to be in Manitowoc pretty much the whole news day," Nickels said, expressing delight that reporters would have "Manitowoc" as their dateline in reports filed with TV networks and national newspapers.

"This is the day after his State of the Union speech," Nickels said. "I've gotten calls from MSNBC, NBC, CNN … our name will be all over the national and international news."

However, a noon tour of Orion Energy Systems is the only certain stop on Obama's agenda in Manitowoc, and Nickels said it may be as late as tonight before other locations are identified.

It is part of Obama's "White House to Main Street Tour" that also has included, since December 2009, Lehigh Valley area of Pennsylvania, Lorain County, Ohio; Savannah, Georgia; Kokomo, Indiana; and several cities in Iowa, Illinois and Missouri.

"What is Obama's visit going to cost us, and are we going to get reimbursed?" asked Helen Goswitz when Nickels started taking questions following his update.

"The federal government doesn't reimburse for presidential visits … we have asked finance to create a separate line where departments can charge so we know what we have spent," Nickels said.

The presidential visit will cost the city. Terrific. It should be called Obama's "White House screws Main Street Tour."

Gov. Scott Walker will greet Obama when Air Force One arrives at Austin Straubel International Airport in Green Bay.

That's pretty sweet. Chicago Bears fan Obama will be flying in to Green Bay, Titletown.

Walker will welcome Obama with a "special gift."

Gov. Scott Walker has a present for the president. Walker says he’ll be welcoming Barack Obama to Wisconsin on Wednesday, when the president plans to visit a renewable-energy company in Manitowoc. The Republican governor plans to present Obama with a “special gift.”

Walker spokesman Cullen Werwie wouldn’t reveal what the gift is. He says he doesn’t want to spoil his boss’s secret.

It’s possible the gift has to do with the Packers. Obama, an Illinois native, had predicted his Chicago Bears would beat Green Bay in the NFC Championship game.

A cheesehead emblazoned with the Packers logo and the presidential seal would be nice. Perhaps an iPod with Vince Lombardi's speeches would have a positive effect on Obama. A Packers jersey would also be a good present, though I get the feeling that Obama is more of a Jay Cutler sort of guy.

I hope when Obama visits Orion he'll manage to pronounce the company's name correctly.

Remember this, from March 23, 2009?

Obama touted the work being done by Orion. Unfortunately, he struggled with saying "Orion." The brilliant Obama didn't learn how to pronounce the company's name, even though just minutes earlier he had listened to a presentation that included the proper pronunciation.

Video



All terrific press for Orion, except that Obama kept pronouncing the company’s name wrong, calling it OAR-ee-on.

After finishing his remarks and talking with a few people, the president returned to the microphone and said his prepared remarks led him to pronounce the firm's name wrong.

“I suspect this is Or-EYE-on as opposed to OAR-ee-on. Just wanted to make sure that when I’m giving you a plug, that we’ve got the right plug. It’s Or-EYE-on.”

Not too smooth.
___________________

UPDATE, January 26, 2011:

During his remarks today at Orion, Obama mispronounced Manitowoc. He incorrectly put the accent on the third syllable instead of the first.

His staff really should make sure he has the correct pronunciation.

Tuesday, January 25, 2011

FACT CHECK: Obama's State of the Union

According to the Associated Press, Obama's proposals and statements didn't add it.

He's proposing a spending spree, not proposing cuts.

The ledger did not appear to be adding up Tuesday night when President Barack Obama urged more spending on one hand and a spending freeze on the other.

Obama spoke ambitiously of putting money into roads, research, education, efficient cars, high-speed rail and other initiatives in his State of the Union speech. He pointed to the transportation and construction projects of the last two years and proposed "we redouble these efforts." He coupled this with a call to "freeze annual domestic spending for the next five years."

But Obama offered far more examples of where he would spend than where he would cut, and some of the areas he identified for savings are not certain to yield much if anything.

...A look at some of Obama's statements Tuesday night and how they compare with the facts:
OBAMA: Tackling the deficit "means further reducing health care costs, including programs like Medicare and Medicaid, which are the single biggest contributor to our long-term deficit. Health insurance reform will slow these rising costs, which is part of why nonpartisan economists have said that repealing the health care law would add a quarter of a trillion dollars to our deficit."

THE FACTS: The idea that Obama's health care law saves money for the government is based on some arguable assumptions.

To be sure, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office has estimated the law will slightly reduce red ink over 10 years. But the office's analysis assumes that steep cuts in Medicare spending, as called for in the law, will actually take place. Others in the government have concluded it is unrealistic to expect such savings from Medicare.

In recent years, for example, Congress has repeatedly overridden a law that would save the treasury billions by cutting deeply into Medicare pay for doctors. Just last month, the government once again put off the scheduled cuts for another year, at a cost of $19 billion. That money is being taken out of the health care overhaul. Congress has shown itself sensitive to pressure from seniors and their doctors, and there's little reason to think that will change.

___

OBAMA: Vowed to veto any bills sent to him that include "earmarks," pet spending provisions pushed by individual lawmakers. "Both parties in Congress should know this: If a bill comes to my desk with earmarks inside, I will veto it."

THE FACTS: House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, has promised that no bill with earmarks will be sent to Obama in the first place. Republicans have taken the lead in battling earmarks while Obama signed plenty of earmark-laden spending bills when Democrats controlled both houses.

It's a turnabout for the president; in early 2009, Obama sounded like an apologist for the practice: "Done right, earmarks have given legislators the opportunity to direct federal money to worthy projects that benefit people in their districts, and that's why I've opposed their outright elimination," he said then.

___

OBAMA: "I'm willing to look at other ideas to bring down costs, including one that Republicans suggested last year: medical malpractice reform to rein in frivolous lawsuits."

THE FACTS: Republicans may be forgiven if this offer makes them feel like Charlie Brown running up to kick the football, only to have it pulled away, again.

Obama has expressed openness before to this prominent Republican proposal, but it has not come to much. It was one of several GOP ideas that were dropped or diminished in the health care law after Obama endorsed them in a televised bipartisan meeting at the height of the debate.

Republicans want federal action to limit jury awards in medical malpractice cases; what Obama appears to be offering, by supporting state efforts, falls short of that. The president has said he agrees that fear of being sued leads to unnecessary tests and procedures that drive up health care costs. So far the administration has only wanted to pay for pilot programs and studies.

Trial lawyers, major political donors to Democratic candidates, are strongly opposed to caps on jury awards. But the administration has been reluctant to support other approaches, such as the creation of specialized courts where expert judges, not juries, would decide malpractice cases.

___

OBAMA: Praised the "important progress" made by the bipartisan fiscal commission he created last year.

THE FACTS: The panel's co-chairmen last month recommended a painful mix of spending cuts and tax increases, each of them unpopular with one constituency or another, including raising the Social Security retirement age, cutting future benefit increases, raising the gasoline tax and rolling back popular tax breaks like the mortgage interest deduction. But Obama has yet to sign on to any of the ideas, even though he promised when creating the panel that it would not be "one of those Washington gimmicks."

Obama missed another chance Tuesday night to embrace the tough medicine proposed by the commission for bringing down the deficit. For example, the president said he wanted to "strengthen Social Security for future generations" — but ruled out slashing benefits or partially privatizing the program, and made no reference to raising the retirement age. That left listeners to guess how he plans to do anything to salvage the popular retirement program whose trust funds are expected to run out of money in 2037 without changes.

___

OBAMA: As testament to the fruits of his administration's diplomatic efforts to control the spread of nuclear weapons, he said the Iranian government "faces tougher and tighter sanctions than ever before."

THE FACTS: That is true, and it reflects Obama's promise one year ago that Iran would face "growing consequences" if it failed to heed international demands to constrain its nuclear program. But what Obama didn't say was that U.S. diplomacy has failed to persuade Tehran to negotiate over U.N. demands that it take steps to prove it is not on the path toward a bomb. Preliminary talks with Iran earlier this month broke off after the Iranians demanded U.S. sanctions be lifted.

_______________

Reaction Roundup: Heritage Responds To The State Of The Union

Obama Makes Boehner Cry

Obama threw a bone to the Leftists who love to mock John Boehner's tears.

He delivered some lines that were guaranteed to get Boehner to choke up.

OBAMA: We may have differences in policy, but we all believe in the rights enshrined in our Constitution. We may have different opinions, but we believe in the same promise that says this is a place where you can make it if you try. We may have different backgrounds, but we believe in the same dream that says this is a country where anything’s possible. No matter who you are. No matter where you come from.

That dream is why I can stand here before you tonight. That dream is why a working class kid from Scranton can stand behind me. That dream is why someone who began by sweeping the floors of his father’s Cincinnati bar can preside as Speaker of the House in the greatest nation on Earth.

We all know that Boehner cannot think of sweeping floors without becoming weepy.

I think Obama included that on purpose, just to bait Boehner.

Joe Biden's expression gave it away. He was smiling ear to ear.

Obama and Earmarks

Obama promised to veto any bill that contains earmarks.

OBAMA: And because the American people deserve to know that special interests aren't larding up legislation with pet projects, both parties in Congress should know this: if a bill comes to my desk with earmarks inside, I will veto it.

WHAT?

Is that a new promise to compensate for the many times he already broke that promise?








Are we supposed to believe Obama this time?

Blah, blah, blah....

Obama and Biden: No Handshake

Why didn't Obama shake Joe Biden's hand?

When he reached the podium, he greeted the Speaker of the House, John Boehner, with a handshake.

Although Biden stuck out his hand, Obama just sort of nodded at Biden.

Did Obama know that Biden was out of Purell?

__________

UPDATE: Obama did shake Biden's hand once immediately upon his arrival. However, after Boehner introduced Obama, he turned around to shake Boehner's hand. Then, Biden held out his hand and Obama left him hanging.

Here's video:


Obama's State of the Union Address

This is a big night! Obama is going to talk to the nation!

Whoop-dee-doo.

The New York Times offers some tips on watching Obama tonight.

What to Watch for in Obama’s State of the Union

President Obama will deliver a blueprint for economic recovery and American competitiveness on Tuesday night, as he tries to chart a two-year path to re-election in the face of newly empowered Republican adversaries.

In his first State of the Union address before a Congress under divided control, Mr. Obama will lay out his case for investment in education and infrastructure, advisers say, while tempering his call for new initiatives with an acknowledgment of the country’s long-term fiscal challenges.

Aides said Tuesday that Mr. Obama would propose a five-year freeze on “nonsecurity discretionary spending,” though they did not disclose the details of that proposal in advance of the speech.

A White House official, who declined to be identified discussing the speech in advance, called the proposal “a down payment toward reducing the deficit” and said the president “also will be looking for cuts and efficiencies.”

...Mr. Obama’s speech — the details of which have been held more closely than usual — offers the president an opportunity to redefine his administration at the start of the 2012 presidential campaign.

Mr. Obama has started to recover politically in the last few months by demonstrating a new willingness to engage in compromise with Republicans and by performing well in the wake of the Arizona shooting. Aides said that reality lowered the pressure on Mr. Obama to hit a grand slam Tuesday night.

But the stakes remain high for the president, who must find a way to re-energize his most ardent supporters, persuade independents to believe in him again and build a case against returning the White House to Republicans after four years.

...What else will we hear? Here’s a brief rundown of what to look for:

—The spending clash. Mr. Obama’s aides have hinted for days that the president will call for a new wave of investment to spur job growth and keep the country competitive globally. But how much spending? And on what? How will he make the case in the face of Republican opposition to what they view as moving in exactly the wrong direction.

Among the unknowns Tuesday night is whether Mr. Obama will endorse specific provisions of his commission to reduce the nation’s debt, and how much he will say about the need to confront overhaul of Social Security and Medicare. Doing neither will invite criticism of his commitment to the country’s long-term fiscal health.

—The tone. The elections last November caused Mr. Obama to adopt a more bipartisan tone during the lame-duck session of Congress. And the shooting in Arizona all but ensured that civility is essential. But Mr. Obama must also draw sharp policy contrasts with his rivals over the course of the next two years — a process that may begin in Tuesday’s speech.

—The seating arrangements. The idea was originally floated by Third Way, a centrist group with close ties to the Obama administration, and soon no politician could ignore it. Instead of sitting by party to listen to the speech, lawmakers will mix themselves up. The upshot? Those moments when Democrats stand to applaud and Republicans sit on their hands may not be quite as obvious as they were in the past.

—Making the left angry. Many of Mr. Obama’s most liberal supporters fear that his speech will cater to the interests of big business when it comes to trade policy and taxes. And there has been little indication that Mr. Obama plans to make any grand promises along the lines of his pledge last year to end the military’s “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy banning gay service. (A promise he kept at the end of 2010.)

After the president’s compromise with Republicans to extend the Bush-era tax cuts for the wealthy — and the appointment of William M. Daley as chief of staff — Mr. Obama’s liberal supporters are eager for some red meat. Will he give them some?

—Making the right angry. The success of the Tea Party candidates in November’s elections cemented the idea among conservatives that Mr. Obama’s $787 billion stimulus was a failure. So his likely call for increased government investment is bound to be something conservatives on Capitol Hill pounce on. What Mr. Obama calls investment, they view as more federal spending at a time when they are trying to shrink, not grow, the size of government.

—Gun control. Watching Mr. Obama from his wife’s box in the House chamber will be several family members of the victims and heroes of the Arizona shootings. But how will their presence affect the content of the president’s speech? Gun control groups have stepped up their efforts to limit the production and sale of magazines that hold dozens of bullets. And interest groups have been lobbying furiously for Mr. Obama to endorse such legislation in his State of the Union address.

But since becoming president, Mr. Obama has rarely addressed gun issues, and it’s unclear whether he will want to wade into the controversial subject now. Mr. Gibbs told reporters Monday, “I don’t doubt that as a result of the impact of the issues of what happened in Tucson, that there will be a number of proposals that this White House and the Congress will evaluate, and we’ll wait until tomorrow to see what’s in the State of the Union.”

—A brief mention of foreign policy? From all accounts, the president intends the speech Tuesday to be primarily about domestic policy. But it’s hard to imagine that he will avoid national security issues entirely. With the bombing of an airport in Russia fresh on everyone’s mind, Mr. Obama is likely to make a mention of the war against terrorism, perhaps in the context of his administration’s stepped-up use of drones to attack terrorists in Pakistan and Afghanistan.

The president could talk about the beginning of troop withdrawal from Afghanistan this summer, though he has already made clear that many troops are most likely to remain there for several years. It remains unknown whether Mr. Obama will use the speech as an opportunity to send messages to the warring factions in the Middle East or to the leaders of Iran or North Korea.

—The victory lap. State of the Union addresses are about the future. But Mr. Obama could decide to use the nationwide audience to recount the achievements of his first two years. Administration officials often promote the legislative battles they have won, in particular passage of the health care law and revamped financial regulations. Last week, Republicans in the House passed a symbolic repeal of the health care legislation. Mr. Obama could use the speech to highlight the impact that such a move would have on people who could lose benefits.

—The big line. Unlike inaugural addresses, most State of the Union speeches pass into history with little notoriety. But a few serve as the vehicle for memorable lines. Bill Clinton declared that “the era of big government is over” in his 1996 speech. And in his 2002 address, after the 9/11 attacks, George W. Bush declared that Iran, North Korea and Iraq constituted “an axis of evil.”

Listen carefully. The next big line could be uttered Tuesday night.

Next big line?

When did Obama give us the first "big line"? "Shovel-ready jobs"? That was a lie.

I don't plan to watch the entire speech. I just can't. Sure, I want to see John Boehner behind Obama, though I admit that I'll miss being hypnotized by Nancy Pelosi's non-stop blinking.

I get dizzy watching Obama turn right, then left, then right, then left, then right, then left.... as he reads from the teleprompters.

What to watch for? Watch for Obama looking like he's at a tennis match.

I'm very interested in seeing Paul Ryan deliver the Republican response, but I don't think I can sit throught another rambling reading by Obama. Blah, blah, blah, blah, blah....

Maybe he'll say something funny, like "e-pants-ipation," or "corpse-man," or "Cominskey Field."

I'll catch that stuff later.

Bottom line: I'm in Super Bowl mode. I don't care about Obama's State of the Union address.

Paul Ryan - Republican Response - Excerpts



Wisconsin's Paul Ryan is delivering the Republican response to Obama's State of the Union address.

Here are excerpts:

Excerpts from Chairman Paul Ryan’s Republican Address to the Nation
As Prepared for Delivery
January 25, 2011


WASHINGTON – Tonight, House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan (R-WI) will deliver the Republican Address following the President’s State of the Union message. Chairman Ryan will address the nation from the House Budget Committee hearing room, where the Democrats’ spending spree will end and the Republicans’ push for a fiscally responsible budget that cuts spending will begin. Following are excerpts from Chairman Ryan’s address:


REP. GABRIELLE GIFFORDS: “President Obama just addressed a Congressional chamber filled with many new faces. One face we did not see tonight was that of our friend and colleague, Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords of Arizona. We all miss Gabby and her cheerful spirit; and we are praying for her return to the House Chamber.”

**********

SPENDING: “In one of our first acts in the new majority, House Republicans voted to cut Congress’s own budget. And just today, the House voted to restore the spending discipline that Washington sorely needs. The reason is simple. A few years ago, reducing spending was important. Today, it’s imperative. Here’s why. We face a crushing burden of debt. The debt will soon eclipse our entire economy, and grow to catastrophic levels in the years ahead. On this current path, when my three children – who are now 6, 7, and 8 years old – are raising their own children, the federal government will double in size, and so will the taxes they pay. No economy can sustain such high levels of debt and taxation. The next generation will inherit a stagnant economy and a diminished country. Frankly, it’s one of my greatest concerns as a parent – and I know many of you feel the same way.”

**********

BUDGET: “Americans are skeptical of both political parties, and that skepticism is justified – especially when it comes to spending. So hold all of us accountable. In this very room, the House will produce, debate, and advance a budget. Last year – in an unprecedented failure – Congress chose not to pass, or even propose a budget. The spending spree continued unchecked. We owe you a better choice and a different vision. Our forthcoming budget is our obligation to you – to show you how we intend to do things differently, how we will cut spending to get the debt down, help create jobs and prosperity, and reform government programs.”

**********

FISCAL CHALLENGE AHEAD: “Our nation is approaching a tipping point. We are at a moment, where if government’s growth is left unchecked and unchallenged, America’s best century will be considered our past century. This is a future in which we will transform our social safety net into a hammock, which lulls able-bodied people into lives of complacency and dependency. Depending on bureaucracy to foster innovation, competitiveness, and wise consumer choices has never worked – and it won’t work now. We need to chart a new course.”

**********

“STIMULUS”: “The facts are clear: Since taking office, President Obama has signed into law spending increases of nearly 25% for domestic government agencies – an 84% increase when you include the failed stimulus. All of this new government spending was sold as ‘investment.’ Yet after two years, the unemployment rate remains above 9% and government has added over $3 trillion to our debt.”

**********

HEALTH CARE: “What we already know about the President’s health care law is this: Costs are going up, premiums are rising, and millions of people will lose the coverage they currently have. Job creation is being stifled by all of its taxes, penalties, mandates and fees. Businesses and unions from around the country are asking the Obama Administration for waivers from the mandates. Washington should not be in the business of picking winners and losers. The President mentioned the need for regulatory reform to ease the burden on American businesses. We agree – and we think his health care law would be a great place to start. Last week, House Republicans voted for a full repeal of this law, as we pledged to do, and we will work to replace it with fiscally responsible, patient-centered reforms that actually reduce costs and expand coverage.”

**********

DEBT LIMIT: “Whether sold as ‘stimulus’ or repackaged as ‘investment,’ their actions show they want a federal government that controls too much; taxes too much; and spends too much in order to do too much. And during the last two years, that is exactly what we have gotten – along with record deficits and debt – to the point where the President is now urging Congress to increase the debt limit. We believe the days of business as usual must come to an end. We hold to a couple of simple convictions: Endless borrowing is not a strategy; spending cuts have to come first.”


**********


ROLE OF GOVERNMENT: “We believe government’s role is both vital and limited – to defend the nation from attack and provide for the common defense; to secure our borders; to protect innocent life; to uphold our laws and Constitutional rights; to ensure domestic tranquility and equal opportunity; and to help provide a safety net for those who cannot provide for themselves. We believe that the government has an important role to create the conditions that promote entrepreneurship, upward mobility, and individual responsibility. We believe, as our founders did, that ‘the pursuit of happiness’ depends upon individual liberty; and individual liberty requires limited government. Limited government also means effective government. When government takes on too many tasks, it usually doesn’t do any of them very well. It’s no coincidence that trust in government is at an all-time low now that the size of government is at an all-time high.”

**********

LIMITED GOVERNMENT: “We need to reclaim our American system of limited government, low taxes, reasonable regulations, and sound money, which has blessed us with unprecedented prosperity. And it has done more to help the poor than any other economic system ever designed. That’s the real secret to job creation – not borrowing and spending more money in Washington. Limited government and free enterprise have helped make America the greatest nation on earth.

______________

Here's video of Ryan's response:

Oprah and Patricia

It took a lot of effort and a number of years, but Patricia of Milwaukee finally succeeded in finding her biological family and being reunited with them.

It's not an unusual journey for an adopted individual to make. What makes Patricia's search noteworthy is that she discovered she and Oprah Winfrey have the same mother.

From the Associated Press, via the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel:

Oprah Winfrey has discovered she has a half-sister - a Milwaukee woman who was given up for adoption by Winfrey's mother nearly 50 years ago, when the talk show host was eight years old.

An emotional Winfrey introduced her newly found sibling to viewers Monday and explained the woman's persistent quest to find her birth mother.

"This, my friends, is the miracle of all miracles," Winfrey said before bringing out the 48-year-old woman, who throughout the program was identified only as Patricia, with no mention of her occupation or any other details.

...When Patricia was born in Milwaukee in 1963, the young Winfrey was living with her father and did not even know her mother was pregnant, she said.

Patricia, who Winfrey said bounced from foster home to foster home until she was adopted at age 7, had given up after previous searches for her mother. But she decided to resume looking several years ago at the insistence of her grown children.

The effort seemed to hit a dead end when a woman from the Wisconsin adoption agency called to respond to her inquiries.

"She was telling me that my birth mother had called her back, and she had made the decision at that particular time that she did not want to see me," Patricia said.

Coincidentally, on the local news that day was a story about Winfrey' mother, Vernita Lee, who revealed details about two of her children who had since died. Those details, Patricia said, matched information she had seen in papers about her own adoption.

Watch TMJ4's 2007 interview with Vernita Lee.

Winfrey's mother also said that one of the deceased children had been named Patricia.

"The hairs on the back of my neck stood up," Patricia said. "Because I knew one of my siblings and I shared the same name."

Later, she found more matching details, including the fact that Winfrey was born in 1954, the same year as the woman Patricia knew was her surviving sibling.

Patricia found the daughter of Winfrey's dead sister in Milwaukee, and they took a DNA test that confirmed their relationship.

Lee, who recently suffered a minor stroke, said she never told Winfrey about her half-sister, "because I thought it was a terrible thing for me to do, that I had done, gave up my daughter when she was born."

This really wasn't "Oprah's secret." It was her mother's secret.

It's sad Vernita Lee felt she had done something terrible by giving up her baby girl for adoption. Giving her daughter life was a very loving thing to do.


...[Winfrey] said Patricia had known since 2007 that the two were related, but never attempted to profit off her discovery or contact the press, even as she tried unsuccessfully to contact Winfrey, her mother or others in Winfrey's family.

"She never once thought to sell the story," Winfrey said, recalling how she felt betrayed by others who have sought to take advantage of their relationship with one of the largest figures in the entertainment world and one of the wealthiest women in the United States.

I'm happy that Patricia found her biological family and that they were finally willing to accept her after years of being turned away.

From
WLS-TV:

Video



Patricia was born April 26, 1963, when Oprah was 9 but living with her father in Tennessee. Oprah said she finally met Patricia on Thanksgiving of last year in Milwaukee when she and boyfriend Stedman Graham drove up for the holiday.

Oprah also learned she has a nephew and niece -- Patricia's children, Andre and Aquarius.

Oprah said on Monday's show that she was touched by the fact that Patricia spent a few years trying to make contact, knowing she was related to Oprah, but did not go to the press.

"Since I have been a person known in the public, there have been few times that I've been anywhere and not been sold out," Oprah said. "There have been few times where you can bring anybody new into your life and not have that person in some way betray you or use you or take advantage of you. What is so extraordinary about Patricia and Andre and Aquarius is that they have known this secret since 2007. She had tried and tried and tried again, even wrote an e-mail to our offices back in 2007 that we tracked -- but nobody would've given me an e-mail with somebody saying, 'I'm your sister' -- had sent me an e-mail, had gone to her pastor, who contacted my mother's pastor, who then sent a letter to my mother. She tried and tried and tried again to get responses from my mother and other people in the family. She never once thought to go to the press. She never once thought to sell this story."

Patricia shares her name with Oprah's sister, Pat, who passed away in 2003. To make contact with the family, Patricia finally approached Oprah's niece Alisha at her restaurant in Milwaukee. Patricia and Alisha, who is Pat's daughter, took a DNA test that confirmed the match.

Patricia's pastor was instrumental in helping her to contact her blood relatives. He told TMJ4 that Oprah's niece was the one who was more open and helped Patricia into the family.

Given her celebrity status and wealth, I understand Oprah's hesitancy to embrace Patricia initially. However, I do feel sorry for Patricia having to struggle for years to get members of her biological family to acknowledge the connection and accept her.

Patricia seems like a wonderful woman.

What I find interesting is that Patricia never attempted to profit financially from her relation to Oprah. She didn't go the media with the story.


Oprah, on the other hand, chose to use the newfound relationship as fodder for her show. The "Oprah's secret" program was promoted for days. Wasn't Oprah, in effect, "selling the story" and profiting from it?

I don't know why Oprah handled it that way.

Nonetheless, I'm glad Patricia's journey was a success.

And I hope that Oprah learned there actually are some people, like her half-sister, who are sincere and have a good heart and value personal relationships more than all the money in the world.