The Obamapologists

Obviously, with the MSM so in-the-tank for Team Obama, and having bet all their chips on blue some time ago- they will now be finding it difficult to extricate themselves from the role of knee-jerk apologists for a president who's popularity is in steep decline. 


Surely many have been caught by surprise by Obama's collapsing support, and will rapidly formulating a Plan B they didn't think they'd be needing for awhile... if ever. For people with a business to run, their blind support of the Dear Leader seems to have been a reckless gamble... perhaps fueled by liberal hubris and delusions of their own power.

But many of those who have painted themselves into this corner will not be able to reverse course, and their residual credibilty will evaporate. They are actually complicitous in covering-up Obama's shady past and dubious credentials, and in the process saddled us with the most radical and anti-American of presidents. 


These media figures -the Courics, the Gibsons, Williams', MSNBC- will likely go down with the USS Obamamania, while those who put a little more effort into seeking the actual truth -like ABC's Jake Tapper- will be recognized for fulfilling their duties as more principled journalists.

The entire American media scene might be shaken to the core, and in the wake a new landscape with the traditional MSM in smoldering little bits- and new media emerging as the most likely victors. 


Obvious exceptions would be Obama pumpers at Daily Kos, HuffPo, and other online toadies who will be recognized as the propaganda organs that they actually are. It will also be interesting to note just how many people will still be reading these rags when Americans wince at the mere mention of the name Obama- and George Soros' son Jonathan isn't putting them on the top of the Google Blog Search results any more.

There are supposedly free-thinking American citizens still be deep in the ether, cheerleading as Obama re-arranges the deck chairs on the Titanic. Many seem oblivious to the fact that this administration is far more focused on quickly and irreversibly inflicting a radical liberal agenda upon this country than any practical management of our actual priorities. Monotonous drones appear on political forums and blog comments, and continue to be accomplices with MSM- willing to put a substantial, sustained effort into creating excuses for Obama's habitual dishonesty, hidden past/agenda/asscociates... as well as serial incompetence and shocking ignorance for a man with degrees from Columbia and Harvard... one purported to be "the smartest president ever" (hat tip: American Thinker).

But these poeple who are enabling this Bolshevik con-artist are doing a terrible disservice to this country, as he is doing everything possible to bring us down. His otherwise inexplicable disregard for things the rest of us hold dear -while lying to our faces about his true intent- appears to be part of a plan to gain from an orchestrated crisis- per the Cloward-Piven strategy.

This is a man who hates America because he had a bad childhood and was raised by far-left freaks... and unsettlingly appears to be a clinical narcissist in the mold of Hitler, Stalin, Kim Jong Il, Idi Amin, and Pol Pot. Yet there are those who still never tire of telling us how great, kind, wise, and cool he is... while doing their level-best to keep a contrasting focus on the "disaster" of the Bush Administration... just so we all realize just how good we've got it now.

Back in reality, it has become apparent to most that Obama is not only completely unqualified and incompetent, but he's little more than a racist, arrogant, self-absorbed Chicago Machine hack. His divisive comments on the Gates arrest -and nomination of a La Raza member to the SCOTUS- shows you just how far he will be setting back race relations in the country... for decades.

Many wishful-thinking or guilt-tripped voters are finally waking up to all this... although conservatives have been warning them for over a year. And Obama's disowned Chicago allies -felons Blagojevich and Rezko- haven't even started talking yet. Yet still we have those unwilling to see, many of them perhaps liberal one-issue voters who see no home for them in the GOP... and/or are directly involved with the DNC.

I'm really not that interested in the Birthers' crusade- for purely pragmatic reasons, as Biden is even worse. And you can bet that Obama planned it that way, since narcissists need to be surrounded by obsequious sycophants to confirm their omnipotence.... as-well as provide political security as an upalatable alternative. 


But as the Obamapologists aggressively try to bury the birth-certificate issue, one has to wonder why they show such energetic concern... as with Sarah Palin, if she's so silly and irrelevant... why the obsession? Is the president again hiding something? He's already been proven to be a shameless liar... perhaps even a compulsive one. I'd like to see any such issue resolved in a comprehensive manner- I'm sure not going to take Obama's word for anything, after the 12 mos of his habitual dishonesty, his credibility is already non-existent.

And the numbers don't add up here: you have a guy that is supposedly so smart... yet he will spend over a million dollars to have a bunch of lawyers fight these kind of cases in court... rather than just cough-up 20 bucks and be done with it? And why seal all his records?

And the reality that they are attempting to obfuscate is that Barack Obama has not only scrapped myriad campaign promises, is not bipartisan, and is not post-racial... but that he has actually accomplished precious little in his first six months except spend trillion$ that we don't have, reach out to the scum of the earth only for them to spit in his "extended hand"... while creating new, deep divisions in this country financially, politically, and racially. All of this is in direct conflict with his past pledges and "soaring rhetoric", of course.

Why will some people defend Obama regardless of his failures and lack of moral clarity? Is this the remnants of the Totalist Cult mentality that many of us saw developing last summer? One of the most common traits of cult members is that they don't realize it's all a scam until it's too late. This is indeed a luxury that we can't afford in this country as a whole.

If these relentless Energizer-Bunny Obamapologists aren't paid by David Plouffe's "Organizing for America", they must be willingly ignorant, and/or they really need this one to work out... bad. That, or they're as naive as an 8-year-old Girl Scout. A lot of dopey wishful thinkers voted for Obama, a terribly irresponsible act without doing their DD on his past- especially since the MSM covered it all up... while only vetting the Republicans. 


But with America's admirable tendancy for self-correction, a lot of these voters are now realizing their mistake, or at least starting to ask the questions they should have last year. This fact is made clear by Obama's plummeting support among the independent voters.But why would anybody still making wall-to-wall excuses for this guy still at this point? The preponderance of evidence would make any thinking person re-evaluate their support of Obama, you would think... or at least adopt a more nuanced position of support.

Myopic, delusional, or DNC volunteers/posters paid by David Plouffe... what else could they possibly be thinking?

What Can We Gain From Russia, Anyway?

In the 1980's, Reagan actually toyed with the Russians in talks at Geneva and Reykjavik. The Kremlin at the time badly needed a deal to save the entire communist economic system -Gorbachev's #1 objective- and this had to include the cancellation of the US missile defense program, a technology the Soviets lacked the resources to compete with.

But Reagan knew it, and wasn't really interested in helping them save their dictatorship, nor in giving up his SDI plans- the aim was nothing less than freedom and democracy for Russia and all of eastern Europe, not just Glastnost and Perestoika. So The Gipper waited until 1987 -a full two years after his first Swiss summit with Gorbachev- before signing the INF treaty.

Today we have Barack Obama -who's in need of a foreign-policy victory- openly pandering for a missile deal as the START treaty expires... it's hard to imagine him bringing home anything of value from Russia now. Sadly for us, it appears that Obama's poker skills are in the same league with his bowling and girly-style baseball throw. And Russia recieved much of what it wants before Obama even landed, so how would anybody expect Barack to gain any advantage? Meanwhile, the Kremlin has failed even to comply with the terms of the truce signed with Georgia last year- continuing to do pretty much as it pleases.

At this summit in Moscow, Obama is to announce the restoration of bilateral military relations with Russia, as well as of the NATO-Russian Council. And to please the Kremlin, Obama has now put on hold plans for the deployment of American missile defenses on Polish and Czech soil. In a letter to Medvedev earlier this year, Mr. Obama floated the idea of cancelling those deals entirely if Russia can prod Iran to give up its nuclear ambitions. The Russian's response was dismiss this out of hand, but they now know the installations are negotiable.

When a superpower like the United States faces the world with an insecure foreign-policy posture, you can really get taken to the cleaners in trying to convince certain people to like you. The Kremlin leaders Obama is rushing-into-the-arms-of now are in reality zero-sum, mostly ex-KGB thugs who are out to settle a few scores with the west; this crew can smell weakness, and will be taking advantage of any on the US side to the fullest. Wouldn't it be fascinating to read the Russian intelligence files on Barack and Hill's personality flaws... and how best to exploit them?

And as to set the tone, as Obama landed in Moscow thousands of Russian troops were involved in the biggest war games in the south Caucasus since the end of the Cold War... menacing the small, independent nation of Georgia yet again. President Saakashvili remains a thorn-in-the side survivor, resistant to Russian hegemony in what the Kremlin sees as its near abroad. A pro-Kremlin regime in Georgia would give Moscow the control it desires over energy routes through the Caucasus... and influence over independent-minded Azerbaijan and Armenia, too. But as Barack smiles and glad-hands Kremlin leaders, it's like the brutal war in Georgia never happened. The Russians have paid no real price whatsoever for their expansionist adventure there- and therefore would do the same thing again in a minute.

It's hard to imagine just what Barack Obama expects to gain for America by rushing over to Moscow like this- as with Iran, he's allying the US with unsavory, anti-democratic regimes for little benefit, while abandoning those who aspire to traditional American ideals of free elections, free press, free enterprise, and rule of law in Russia and the CIS.

And he might be betting on the wrong horse yet again- the evolving reality in Russia today is that Vladimir Putin is on the political ropes-

As reported in American Thinker:

A few weeks ago, a massive protest by unpaid aluminum industry workers in the town of Pikalyovo, outside of St. Petersburg, snarled traffic for more than a hundred miles on a major interstate roadway. Putin was forced to make an emergency visit to the town and put up significant government funds to assure payment of wages.

Nearly a quarter of Russia's population lives in "monotowns" like Pikalyovo, which depend entirely on a single industry for subsistence. Russia can't afford this kind of largesse everywhere, and economists were openly worrying whether the gesture in Pikalyovo could place the country on the road to ruin.

Putin's assumed plans of cruising right back into the presidency in a couple years are suddenly looking shaky; the collapse of the Russian stock market and the ruble have dented support, and it's not possible to blame it all on Medvedev- everyone knows where the real power lies. Like Gorbachev, Putin needs an arms deal to save his economic model -a brand of dictatorial crony capitalism- so Barack Obama would be well-advised to not let him have it.

The new missile deals Obama has made a priority seem to be of little value to US interests- few expect Russia to ever seriously face off with the US or NATO, let-alone with nuclear weapons. But any substantial nuclear arms deal with Moscow certainly frees them up to focus on far more useful endeavors, such as modernized conventional forces that could wipe the floor with Georgia, Ukraine, Belarus, or Poland. More special forces and US-type weapons, communications, transport, and training is something Putin could actually put to good use... unlike 2000 ICBMs sitting in silohs.

Russia has little to offer the United States in any negotiations- and they have almost no influence on America's foreign policy. It would be difficult for the US to purchase gas without the necessary LNG infrastructure in place. Russia's state-dominated oil industry is a chronic underacheiver, and government property grabs discourage western oil tech firms from providing the needed development. Add to that the Kremlin's use of energy as a diplomatic truncheon and oil deals simply look better elsewhere. Moscow's industrial backwardness and continuing Wild East legal environment brought them a pitiful $36B in trade with the United States last year- much of that likely Stolichnaya, not notoriously shoddy Russian manufactured goods.

However, there are few things we would value coming from Russia- like maybe a halt to their calculated and opportunistic attacks upon US power and influence, i.e.- bad mouthing the dollar/calling for a world currency, selling high-tech weapons and nuclear know-how to our enemies/terrorist sponsors such Tehran, Damascus, Caracas, and Pyongyang, as well as nabbing that US/Kyrgizstan air base from right under Obama's nose... just to make a point. But it's difficult to address these issues when Obama appears to not be interested in any such unpleasantries while chatting with Vlad and Dmitri.

The prototypical narcissist Obama is primarily after power and fame- and at any cost. In practice this means looking for a headline weapons-control deal that props-up his man of peace schtick while allowing him to eliminate F-22 production, cancel needed missile defense programs, and perhaps even cut military aid for traditional American allies, and all in order to fund his expensive domestic programs and entrench the Democratic party politically.

Obama long-ago bet his whole foreign policy platform on appeasement and legitimizing dubious regimes, and has nowhere else to run... it's hard for him to now support America's traditional freedom agenda when he's already on the record abandoning it. Thus his kid-gloves treatment re. issues like Russia's bullying of Georgia and Obama's shameful acquiescence to the brutality deployed in Tehran last month.

We have a president who's more focused on his personal and far-left domestic political agendas than on what's in the long-term, common-sense strategic interest of the United States- at best, a warped world view. Today's Russia is nothing to be afraid of, either- really just a Saudi Arabia with trees. Russia is a deeply dysfunctional society who's industry, political culture, and rule-of-law all remain seriously underdeveloped. They've got oil, though- and pride themselves in punching-above-their-weight. What our president doesn't seem to realize is that the Russians are -as is so often their practice- bluffing... as they are dealing from a position of comprehensive weakness.

But the cynical Kremlin surely doesn't take Obama seriously at all, instead they purely see an opportunity for comprehensive strategic and diplomatic gains at America's and NATO's expense. The reality is that Russia has nothing to offer the US- so as Barack heads over there to flatter them and give away our strategic advantage, perhaps we should ask for what?

And the worst is yet to come. In 1978 Jimmy Carter met with Soviet Premier Brezhnev, extending his hand in friendship much as Obama is doing in Russia today. After seeing what kind of a zero they were dealing with firsthand, the Soviet Union promptly invaded Afghanistan- in direct violation of promises made to Carter in Moscow six months earlier.

It is hard to imagine today's Kremlin being cowed or intimidated after meeting with a smiley plastic mannequin like Obama, putting his arm around them and schmoozing all the time- they know he's not going to do anything.

Next year it's Yes We Can invade Ukraine... and what are you going to do about it?

UPDATE: Obama reaches all-time low of -3% differential rating in Rasmussen's latest -here-

Clintons Plotting Their Comeback on Obamamania's Ashes?

While many Obama supporters where still delirious in the fresh afterglow of Barack Obama's "historic" election victory, a strange thing happened last December- he appointed his critical, often hostile, and recently defeated primary opponent Hillary Clinton to the head the State Department.

Was it based upon her qualifications?

What qualifications?- Clinton had no foreign policy experience to speak of. Other presidents lacking diplomantic exposure have brought someone who has such a background to the State Department--- but he didn't feel the need, for some reason. Perhaps the most unsettling concern is that Hillary's judgement is warped by her blinding ambition to gain power and control- causing her to be manipulative in her dealings with others.

So maybe it was their friendship? Deep interpersonal respect? LOL, not exactly...

In addition to other puzzling cabinet choices that starkly contrasted Obama's Hope-n-Change theme -old-guard party aparatchiks like Joe Biden and other primary challengers like Bill Richardson- the only explanation would be fulfilling political deals that got him elected... as well as the calculated co-opting of Democratic rivals that could pose a challenge in 2012 when The One's numbers are in the toilet. When you're talking about a guy like Obama who had all three other Democratic Party challengers thrown off the ballot in his very first Illinois State Senate race... a man who displays a history of shocking and ruthless political opportunism... the deduction seems obvious.

The appointment of Hillary to State was likely a political bargain struck at the convention- Obama wasn't about to let qualifications or ethical considerations get in the way of such a win-win deal. And Barack takes care of Barack- so given the opportunity, it was a priority to control and contain Hillary, Richardson... even Biden. And if he hadn't suffered a most inopportune bimbo-eruption, elaborately-coiffed leftist Ken-doll John Edwards would have been appointed to a substantial position in the Obama Administration too... he was certainly angling for it.

But the Clintons were -and still are- the #1 potential Democratic threat to an Obama-world future. Obama knows his radical domestic transformation foisted upon an economically shellshocked American public in a desperate "do something" mood all but ensures that his popularity won't remain stable for long... particularly when the print-money spending creates 1970's style stagflation with continued unemployment. Obama's plan is to ram his entire liberal domestic program down our throats as quickly and quietly as possible- while putting a lid on other potential power centers like the Clinton machine and keeping the GOP back on their heels with the help of his MSM allies.

However, the Voice in my Head blog reports that in the wake of the mild rift between Biden/Hillary and Obama re. support of Iran's demonstrators, it now appears as though Hillary and perhaps some of the old guard are hedging their bets... so as to stake a claim on told ya so credits when Obama goes into his inevitable political tailspin:

Last week, the New York Times dropped this tibit about the Obama administration's response to the protests in Iran:

Even while supporting the president’s approach, senior members of the administration, including Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr. and Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton, would like to strike a stronger tone in support of the protesters, administration officials said.

To that point, criticism of President Obama was mostly confined to Republicans and conservative leaning blogs. And while that story raised more than a few eyebrows, it was quickly dismissed by the White House.

However, since that time President Obama has begun to move away from his early hesitation in speaking out against the thuggish regime and for the protesters as reportedly advocated by both Biden and Clinton.

But even with this new approach, new evidence has emerged that Biden and Clinton may have themselves moved further toward the view that Obama is simply not up to the task.

So with Obama's poll numbers now slipping - the negatives are dragging him down- the Clintons' timing here in bringing-in such a loyal Clintonite Rottweiler like Sidney Blumenthal (who coined the phrase "vast, right-wing conspiracy") as consultant to Hillary is... let's just say they know what they're doing (as noted by Dan Riehl). And a betting man would keep an eye on them, for Clinton will be pro-actively planning her future with or without Obama- she's a canary in the coal mine that indicates top-level Democrats'/Clintonites' confidence in his leadership.

It shouldn't surprise anyone then if Hillary Clinton were to do a Bobby Kennedy, should it? RFK was Johnson's Attorney General -inherited from JFK- and when President Johnson's popularity started to slip, Kennedy turned on him and ran for President against him in the 1968 primaries. Anyone telling you today that the Democrats wouldn't run a serious primary challenge against Obama in 2012 -which I have heard and read often- plainly doesn't know what they are talking about.

Some time in the next 2 years, Clinton would simply resign as Secretary of State -saying that she can no longer support Obama, of course- and then run for President in 2012, perhaps presenting herself as the best (moderate) hope against Sarah Palin's appeal as a potential first female president.

You can never really count the Clintons out... and they've almost certainly schemed and brewed up a post-Obama "plan B" as The One employs politically high-risk policies at home and abroad... why wouldn't they? There's no real loyalty there, everybody knows that.

And although they are careful to say the right things these days, the pramatic, insatiably power-hungry Clintons must have all the bases covered, and are surely watching his ill-advised programs unfold like a gift from heaven as they wait for the exact right moment to expoit his mistakes. It would be hard to imagine Bill-n-Hill not holding a grudge too, desirous of revenge after the denial of a presidency they thought they owned, and of course all the things that were said by both sides in the primaries.

Hillary ain't going down with the USS Obamanation, bet on it- serving Chairman O to the bitter end is not the way the Clintons plan to end their legacy. And as for other Democrats who were caught surprised by the meteoric rise of Obama, then just went with the flow-- there's a lot of shallow support out there that could evaporate as quickly as it appeared. The arrogant serial-opportunist Obama seems destined to offend much of the party's old guard, as well as anyone else that he used to get elected... but now no longer finds useful.

The way he's burning through the unprecedented goodwill he's enjoyed is beyond me- a compulsive narcissistic personality disorder, coupled to a megalomaniac's warped sense of self-awareness has become the only apparent explanation. That, and he's incredibly spoiled after having the rails lubricated by a crooked Chicago Machine and adoring DNC for years... Obama simply doesn't seem to realize how quickly it can all disappear- he obviously believes his own mythical narrative... ala Elvis.

But Barack Obama's personality flaws and misguided decision-making are the kinds of things that political opponents tend to take notice -and full advantage- of.

You can be sure that the Clintons have- and are planning accordingly.

WHERE is the Left on Iran?

Throughout the Cold War years, the self-appointed moral watchdogs of the American left preached to us ad-nauseum on the perils of supporting anti-communist dictators like The Shah, Samoza, and Pinochet. We only damaged our own credibility when backing those who did not uphold human rights above all- regardless of the complex security challenges and/or decidedly undemocratic opponents that confronted these allies. This according to the McGoverns and Carters of the world, anyway.

And the pragmatism that lay behind the defense and intelligence policies that they so heavily criticized -these were in actuality proxy struggles with the expansionist Soviet Union- was brushed aside by liberals as cynicism and a lame excuse for continued US "imperialism". But these views were decidedly in the minority in the United States- and the narrow appeal of such short-sighted thinking surely contributed to McGovern's drubbing in the 1972 election.

Later, pollyana do-gooder Jimmy Carter showed us all how it's done with his withdrawal of support of Samoza over human rights concerns- perhaps it never occurred to him that we'd get something 10x worse with the communist Sandinistas: armed and trained by Moscow, East Germany, and Czechoslovakia... and allied with Havana in a Kremlin-funded enterprise to export communist revolution throughout central and South America.

Now we have a President Obama that basically got elected trashing America's proud history and defense policy-as he continues to do- as well as proposing that we downgrade our position as leader of the free world. All in all, there's not much daylight between Obama's zeitgeist and the finger-wagging, simplistic moral assumptions of the Cold War left.

So with the president's astounding silence and even apparent disinterest in today's Iranian crisis, WHERE is the moral concern of the holier-than-thou left now? Shouldn't these hypocrites being asking a few questions now that Barack Obama has kissed-up to Ahmedinijad and the Iranian theocracy since before he was even elected? We're talking about a former kidnapper and Holocaust-denying president of what all can now see is a brutal police state; one racing towards constructing nuclear weapons with the oft stated aim of wiping Israel from the map; a regime that cozies up to most or all of America's enemies; who supplied a large amount of Iraq's instability; one that publicly stones adulterers and petty criminals after burrying them up to their necks... and today is shooting unarmed protesters in the street. (Gateway Pundit).

Obama has now gotten his 3am-crisis-call- and so far he's done little but pound the snooze button. The complete inaction and lack of leadership is stupifying. Of course, the irony is that while the Ayatollah Khamenei is now laying blame for his Iranian citizens' uprising on the "Americans" and "the Jews"- the United States under Obama is really not doing anything of substance to support the protesters and would be counter-revolutionaries. To add insult to injury for the freedom-seeking patriots of Iran- the Obama administration also has zeroed out funding for pro-democracy programs inside Iran from the State Department budget for fiscal 2010... just as protests in Iran are ramping up (Newsmax).

Khamenei is now hinting strongly of a much harder crackdown to come- he's already using Hamas thugs imported from Gaza, who are showing their appreciation for the funding, arming, and training of their Islamofacist terrorist organization by cracking heads in the street alongside Iran's own plainclothes security forces.

Compare this all to Ronald Reagan's brave and unwavering support for Solidarity in Poland in the early 80's: in collaboration with Pope John Paul and Polish anti-communists, Reagan helped those seeking freedom in any way possible- with money, training, equipment such as radios and stepped-up VoA broadcasting to help liberate those behind the Iron Curtain.

Obviously -although it’s the last thing Team Obama want to hear- Ronald Reagan’s support of Poland’s Solidarity in the dark days of the Soviet-ordered crackdown is the model- not the preposterous straw-man argument of “what are you going to do, invade?” disingenuously presented by the do-nothing, Obamapologist left/MSM.

Most importantly, Reagan brought the Poles moral support with consistent public statements that gave the revolutionaries hope. The Gipper did this not only because of his belief in the cause of freedom worldwide; he also recognized the larger geopolitical implications of peeling the Warsaw Pact away from a weakened USSR bit-by-bit (similar to the effect that a free Iraq and free Iran could have on the Middle East today). While most referred to European states behind the Iron Curtain as Soviet "satellites"- Reagan insisted on calling them "captive" nations. And not only was Reagan right, visionary, and victorious... but the Poles remember who was with them when it seemed all was lost... that's why Poland is one of America's strongest allies for over 20 years now.

Shamefully, it seems Obama's primary concern is to bide a little more time for the the Mullahs and Ahmedinijad to pull themselves up by their bootstraps... while they beat-down any hope of actual democracy. Barack's already bet all his chips on legitimizing this vile regime- a democratic revolution in Tehran could be downright embarassing at this point. Once the Mullahs put a lid on things over there, these boys can all get back to talking business... just like they do it back in Chicago.

A liberated Iran does little to help Obama politically... which is all that ever really interests him in the end. Besides the obvious embarassment that would result from a new Iranian revolution -or even a substantially more moderate regime in Tehran- Obama appears to lack a Plan B. And if Iran becomes a struggling young democracy, trying to create a better society while battling the country's darker forces (a development any normal US president would have welcomed) -like, say, Columbia- it looks like Obama might just turn on them, too- as he's far more interested in cozying-up to the Castros, the Chavezes, and other tin-pot bullies who hold America in contempt... while snubbing the allied nations that share traditional American values of freedom, democracy, and free-market enterprise.

In other news, Obama's poll numbers are headed south: Rasmussen's daily tracking has him at a weak +1% rating- only once before has it slipped lower -to zero- and that was last week. The more friendly Gallup has him at a job approval of 58%- still a new low for this administration- looks like the deprogramming of the delusional Obamamania cult has begun.

UPDATE 6.21.09: make that Rasmussen poll differential a negative two (-2%)... a new low, and the first time in negative territory for the Obama Administration.

Biden is a Dangerous Fool

Although he may have taken Biden aboard as VP in some deal with the DNC, it appears that the opportunistic Obama at least initially had no problem with it- insecure narcissists like and need to be surrounded by fake suck-ups.  The ever-calculating Obama also likely sensed that such an appointment increased his job security... since the nation would cringe at the surreal thought of a gaffe-prone and confused President Joe replacing him.

He was presented to us last year as a seasoned asset for a future Obama Administration, yet the sad fact is that Biden has been consistently on the wrong side of history over the last 30 years... so his DNC-vaunted foreign policy “experience” has little value… this partisan hack doesn’t appear to have learned a thing.

Like Obama, he vehemently opposed the highly-successful Iraq Surge strategy- instead, Biden favored what amounted to surrender, and came-up with a harebrained proposal to split the country 3-ways.  In 2006 he was still calling the Surge "a tragic mistake".  What is clear is that if the Obama Administration were in-charge 4 years ago, Iraq today would be an Al Qaida Caliphate that makes 2001 Kabul look like Disneyland.

In the 1980s, alleged foreign-policy expert Biden opposed every element of Reagan’s defense buildup that peacefully toppled the USSR as “dangerous”- in particular, the vital Pershing II missles to match the Soviets' in Europe.  The Delaware Senator later voted against the first Gulf War in 1991, which would have allowed Saddam to keep Kuwait and control a large chunk of the world’s oil supplies. 

In the 1987 presidential primaries, he not only had plagiarized British Labour leader Neil Kinnock’s speeches wholesale… but actually adopted his entire life story(!), falsely claiming to have been the “first in his family to go to college” and a “coal-miner’s son”.  Back in reality, Biden’s father was a car salesman (no surprise there, Biden looks like the sales manager at a Buick dealer).

And when it comes to gaffes, Biden says incredible things that Sarah Palin would have surely been pilloried mercilessly for... while Joe gets yet another mulligan from the O-bots of the MSM. Typical was how the Biden schooled us all in the presidential campaign last fall regarding how FDR came on television in 1929 to discuss the Depression, as he suggested President Bush should have done-  But unfortunately, 1929 was a year in which there was no President Roosevelt... no Depression... and no television.  

At the height of uncertainty regarding the unfolding financial crisis earlier this year -when the nation was yearning for a confident voice from this new administration- Biden said on camera that the economy was "in danger of really tanking".   Was Obama using him to stir panic in order to pass his reckless stimulus spending package?  Then when met with an uproar, it's "oh, that's just Joe" again?  I wouldn't put it past him-

Inexplicably, Biden is allowed racist slurs, too-  like when he called Obama in the early primaries the first "clean" black politician who "speaks well" to run for president... before he went-on to state that Obama was unqualified.  Biden also said something about not being able to go into a 7-11 convenience store "without an Indian accent"..... and like his boss, Biden finds it appropriate to mock the disabled in public for a few chuckles.

He delivered a nonsensical tirade on Dick Cheney's alleged abuse of power and violation of The Constitution while betraying a shocking, comprehensive ignorance of the Articles himself.  This supposed foreign-policy guru has claimed that we  "kicked Hezbollah out of Lebanon" somehow- which of course never happened. And he warned us a few months back that the new president would be "tested" by foreign adversaries, and that we should "gird our loins" for the Obama presidency... huh?.

Some of Biden's most grevious howlers were compiled (below) by the McCain campaign last year.  While Biden's oafishness is often a convenient excuse for this administration, many of these statements appear to be calculated, politically useful prevarication- as it's hard to believe he's actually this ignorant and/or loose with the facts:

1. TAX VOTE:  

Biden said McCain voted “the exact same way” as Obama to increase taxes on Americans earning just $42,000, but McCain DID NOT VOTE THAT WAY.

2. AHMEDINIJAD MEETING: 

Joe Biden lied when he said that Barack Obama never said that he would sit down unconditionally with Mahmoud Ahmedinijad of Iran. Barack Obama did say specifically, and Joe Biden attacked him for it.

3. OFFSHORE OIL DRILLING: 

Biden said, “Drill we must.” But Biden has opposed offshore drilling and even compared offshore drilling to “raping” the Outer Continental Shelf.”

4. TROOP FUNDING: 

Joe Biden lied when he indicated that John McCain and Barack Obama voted the same way against funding the troops in the field. John McCain opposed a bill that included a timeline, that the President of the United States had already said he would veto regardless of it’s passage.

5. OPPOSING CLEAN COAL: 

Biden says he’s always been for clean coal, but he just told a voter that he is against clean coal and any new coal plants in America and has a record of voting against clean coal and coal in the U.S. Senate.

6. ALERNATIVE ENERGY VOTES: 

According to FactCheck.org, Biden is exaggerating and overstating John McCain’s record voting for alternative energy when he says he voted against it 23 times.

7. HEALTH INSURANCE: 

Biden falsely said McCain will raise taxes on people’s health insurance coverage — they get a tax credit to offset any tax hike. Independent fact checkers have confirmed this attack is false

8. OIL TAXES: 

Biden falsely said Palin supported a windfall profits tax in Alaska — she reformed the state tax and revenue system, it’s not a windfall profits tax.

9. AFGHANISTAN / GEN. MCKIERNAN COMMENTS: 

Biden said that top military commander in Iraq said the principles of the surge could not be applied to Afghanistan, but the commander of NATO’s International Security Assistance Force Gen. David D. McKiernan said that there were principles of the surge strategy, including working with tribes, that could be applied in Afghanistan.

10. REGULATION: 

Biden falsely said McCain weakened regulation — he actually called for more regulation on Fannie and Freddie.

11. IRAQ: 

When Joe Biden lied when he said that John McCain was “dead wrong on Iraq”, because Joe Biden shared the same vote to authorize the war and differed on the surge strategy where they John McCain has been proven right.

12. TAX INCREASES: 

Biden said Americans earning less than $250,000 wouldn’t see higher taxes, but the Obama-Biden tax plan would raise taxes on individuals making $200,000 or more.

13. BAILOUT: 

Biden said the economic rescue legislation matches the four principles that Obama laid out, but in reality it doesn’t meet two of the four principles that Obama outlined on Sept. 19, which were that it include an emergency economic stimulus package, and that it be part of “part of a globally coordinated effort with our partners in the G-20.”

14. REAGAN TAX RATES: 

Biden is wrong in saying that under Obama, Americans won’t pay any more in taxes then they did under Reagan.

Joey Plugs is a reckless clown who often says things that betray a major disconnect with reality– and it's not easy to shut him up.  Truly this was a ridiculous choice for Vice-President of the United States, where a few loose words can start wars or crash markets- but like most of Obama's picks, was made for the opportunist's own political security, above all.  As with the appointments of potential 2012 rivals Hillary and Bill Richardson -or obedient partisan toadies like Napolitano- the nation's interests don't weigh very heavy in this president's descision-making process, to say the least.  And Biden was no exception.

Now that we're all stuck with him for awhile, best chain this national embarrassment to a teleprompter every time he heads out the door- before he causes us some real trouble.