What else do you call a $775 Billion "stimulus plan" other than the largest earmark on record. But this plan won't have any "earmarks" - well, not as long as long as Barack Obama uses his own definitions for the term. I'll guarantee, though, we'll find 10 worse examples of self-serving pork in this bill than what was on this list from the last "emergency" economic recovery plan.

The astronomy picture of the day, the Galactic Core, in infrared. Jonah Goldberg suggests we can see Blago's hair from space--who am I to disagree? Governor Alien or Governor Radioactive, Blago continues to stun the Dem "leadership", phasers or no. It's a 21st century scandal, and the corrupt core of Democrats in Illinois is out there bigtime. DiFi brushes back Obama on Panetta and defies her Senate colleagues Durbin and Reid to urge Burris be seated. Leftie Sun Times columnist Mark Brown says The One should intercede to plead for Burris to withdraw:)

Let's see; The Blagojevich Senate appointment, Bill Richardson's withdrawal from his appointment and the controversy over the completely unqualified Leon Panetta to lead the CIA. Would you call that an "otherwise smooth transition"?

Aides to Mr. Obama conceded that they had mishandled the process, a significant stumble of his otherwise smooth transition. Mr. Biden said it had been a “mistake” not to notify Mrs. Feinstein and others about the decision.

I think its fine to root for your team, but this team is more Washington Generals than Harlem Globetrotters.

The Democrat party being essentially a political spoils coop, its really interesting to see who's in, who's out and who's jostling for position.

Howard Dean clearly looks to be on the losing end of this equation.

The conspicuous absence of Howard Dean from Thursday’s press conference announcing Tim Kaine’s appointment as Democratic National Committee chairman was no accident, according to Dean loyalists.

Rather, they say, it was a reflection of the lack of respect accorded to the outgoing party chairman by the Obama team.

Despite leading the party in consecutive triumphant election cycles — as well as through off-year races such as when Kaine was elected Virginia governor in 2005 — Dean has become all but invisible since Election Day, passed over for the Cabinet position he coveted and apparently not in line for another administration post.

Dean is apparently someone the Obama administration feels it can afford to alienate, and someone with whom continued association is judged to be a liability. Democrats talk crazy, because that who votes for them, but in matters of power they are extremely pragmatic.

Howard Dean says crazy stuff, and since the administration already have Joe Biden to baby sit, they don't need another loose cannon on deck.

OK, but lots of Democrats say crazy stuff, but they still get a seat at the table. Yeah, but its because they have juice with important constituencies. Howie doesn't have a constituency, not even in Vermont. He probably still has some chits with the far-left moonbats, but Daily Kos readers can't elect a dogcatcher.

Yeah, but what's a guy like Rahm Emmanuel got that Howie doesn't? He doesn't have a constituency either. True, but Rahm can raise money. Dean? not so much. In probably the most favorable year for Democrats since the 1930s, Howard Dean raised half of what the RNC did.

No cash, no votes, no brains and no respect. See ya Howie.

More continuity.

Barack Obama opts to keep Bush's White House chef.

H/T Instapundit

Well, you knew this was coming.

President-elect Barack Obama said this weekend that he does not expect to close Guantanamo Bay in his first 100 days in office.

"I think it's going to take some time and our legal teams are working in consultation with our national security apparatus as we speak to help design exactly what we need to do."

..but this is the part I like.

"It is more difficult than I think a lot of people realize," the president-elect explained. "Part of the challenge that you have is that you have a bunch of folks that have been detained, many of whom may be very dangerous who have not been put on trial or have not gone through some adjudication. And some of the evidence against them may be tainted even though it's true. And so how to balance creating a process that adheres to rule of law, habeas corpus, basic principles of Anglo-American legal system, by doing it in a way that doesn't result in releasing people who are intent on blowing us up."

For years, the Democrats didn't have to be "reasonable" about Guantanamo, but no suddenly, when they are in the driver's seat, they have the nerve to ask us to consider the complexity of the issue. Let's face it--betrayals of this sort result in gun play everywhere in the world. The Democrats are going to have to pay a price for the nonsense they've engaged in to the detriment of the country.

Guantanamo was never an "good" solution, but it was always an optimal one--the best that could be done under the circumstances. Every reasonable person knew this, including Bush's two-faced critics, but they played the issue in their own personal political interests and against the interests of the country.

In all likelyhood, Obama is going to come out with a statement, sometime in the spring, that will effectively announce that Guantanamo is going to stay open for the foreseeable future. Sure--he'll spin it, but ultimately it will be a concession that his team could find no better way for dealing with extra-national combattants who wear no uniform and have no place to go.

Next time Democrats feign moral outrage about something, punch 'em in the face.

There's the Burris circus, which may be resolved this week, tho Blago's will go on, crashing the center ring of the new circus. P. J. O'Rourke starts with a bang:

Is it too soon to talk about the failed Obama presidency just because Obama isn't president yet? That depends upon how quickly Barack Obama is able to apply the lessons he's learned from Management Secrets of the Illinois Governors. So far he's not doing very well. He has allowed America's current number one jackleg, crackpot, smut-mouth, slime-licking politician to give the Obama Senate seat to a lovable old African-American doofus whom no one has the heart to execrate. Roland Burris will be the kind of ornament to this year's Senate that the broken plastic Rudolph with its antlers missing was to last year's Christmas tree.

Hillary's confirmation hearing is on this morning. The Campaign Spot asks: What, It's Not Corruption If the Money Goes to the Spouse? The parallel with Blago is obvious, not only with Potty-Mouth Patti, but, as Geraghty points out, with the favor preceding the cash--pay to play bigtime.

WSJ, The Clinton Business. Another seamy connection:

It'd be nice to think Mr. Clinton would forswear this money-hustle while his wife is Secretary of State, but that self-sacrifice would belie his entire career. As for Mrs. Clinton, note the scrutiny that Eric Holder, Mr. Obama's Attorney General nominee, is coming under for his role in aiding pardons for 16 unrepentant Puerto Rican terrorists in 1999. But keep in mind the timing of those pardons was intended to help Mrs. Clinton win Puerto Rican support in her 2000 Senate campaign. Someone should ask her at today's hearing about the role she played in that pardon.

Over three or four days, we've heard that Obama will sign an executive order closing Guantanamo on the first day of his presidency, that he will do nothing in the first hundred days (This Week interview...), and that it make take a year to close Guantanamo.

I am reminded once again how enamored Democrats are with style and symbolism over substance. We're going to have a big party, announce that the captives are going free, that peace and goodwill again reign in the U.S.A.

Then the state media will bury the details over the coming years and hope no one notices.

In addition, people who have conferred with transition officials said the incoming administration appeared to have rejected a proposal to seek a new law authorizing indefinite detention inside the United States. The Bush administration has insisted that such a measure is necessary to close the Guantánamo camp and bring some detainees to the United States.

Its curious how incurious the Times is about what transition officials have in mind here. There are precisely two alternatives to holding some of the terrorists in Guantanamo or on U.S. soil--pass the buck, and let other countries deal with these individuals, or simply let them go.

In practical terms, one of those alternatives could amount to the same thing as the second.

Aside from analyzing intelligence and legal filings on each of the remaining detainees, diplomats and legal experts have said the new administration will need to begin an extensive new international effort to resettle as many as 150 or more of the remaining men. Portugal and other European countries have recently broken a long diplomatic standoff, saying they would work with the new administration and might accept some detainees who cannot be sent to their home countries because of concerns about their potential treatment.

There is a word for sending someone to a country other than their native country for processing--rendition.

I think its a given that the New York Times won't be following the developments with any of these "resettled" detainees. Of course once they are in the custody of other countries, its none of our business what happens after that. The could be indefinitely detained (which is better how exactly?), or they can returned to their home country to face the justice of the religion of Peace, or they could be released to return to the business of terrorism.

These were always the alternatives to Guantanamo, and to their credit, the Bush administration wasn't going to sacrifice lives (those of the terrorists or innocent civilians) for political bennies.

The Obama people seem to feel like a few lives are a small price to pay for the symbolism of peace and reconciliation.

Al Capone was sentenced to eleven years and heavy fines for tax evasion and curiously not nominated for Secretary of the Treasury-->

I'll just state the obvious--if a Bush Treasury-Secretary nominee had failed to pay $34,000.00 in taxes, he would have been crucified and his nomination withdrawn. In fact, he never would have been nominated in the first place.

Obama transition officials continue to say Mr. Geithner's failure to pay Social Security and Medicare taxes was a common mistake for employees at international organizations in Washington. The Internal Revenue Service issued a settlement initiative in 2006 granting amnesty to employees of international organizations who come forward and pay back taxes.

Finance committee aides said that settlement applied to all employees of international organizations, from the cooks and cleaning ladies of Embassy Row to senior World Bank economists. Most of the accidental scofflaws were low-level contractors at embassies, they said.

An interesting choice of words. I've known various people who've worked for the U.N. which also doesn't do withholding. The common mistake is actually better termed a common practice. One couple I knew were very frank about it--it was a financial windfall and they were going to exploit it to the fullest.

Geithner knew precisely what he was doing, and only the prospect of a cabinet position compelled him to pay his social security taxes, otherwise he would have gone merrily on his way with no one the wiser.

Breaking. I'm watching FoxNews. Barack breaks out the flags, sitting between McCain sidekick Sen. Lindsey Graham and his veep Joe Biden, defending his Treasury Sec. Geithner. Awk.

I can't say I'm ready for this bipartisanship.

Exit question--Is this a prelude to throwing Geithner under the bus? Giving it the old Barack college try?

P.S. Awk. Shep Smith has on two talking heads--the Dem one looks like she's about to cry--stop the gotcha politics--Holder, Carol Browner the socialist, now Geithner--during these grim times the country's without a Treasury Secretary!!!

Shep says, "it's OK. There's nothing in the Treasury anyway". Cut to commercial.

Ok, ok, I do want us to get out of this recession as soon as possible. I do think it's good Obama is not just talking to Dems. And I like Larry Kudlow--he's a sunny, Reagan-era guy. Here's Kudlow on the meeting of The One with "conservatives" at George Will's house, beltway guys all. HT HotAir.

Let me 'splain. No--is too much. Let's me sum up...

Sum up--that what this video does very effectively. For all the hopey-changey nonsense, the Obama administration is almost totally a matter of Clinton retreads--excepting the ones who've already cashed in for multi-million dollar paydays at Fannie Mae, etal--or the ones whose legal problems are just too much hassle for "the most ethical administration in history".

Come to this of it--most of the new administration were on the bench during the Clinton years--understudies for geniuses like Madeline Albright.

When it comes right down to it, the only real change is Obama himself. He is literally a "new skin" for the old software.

A couple of recent comments turned on the light bulb over my head.

One liberal commentator on Hannity last night, mentioned that Geithner is a Wallstreet guy, which is why Republicans aren't exploiting his tax problems more voraciously.

I thought that made a lot of sense. If Republicans don't confirm Geithner, they would likely have someone far less amenable to rational economic policy.

Dan Riehl confirms that view from an unnamed Senate source.

Supposedly the inside argument is that Geithner is probably the most conservative nominee they would likely see from Obama for the spot and any replacement would probably be worse.

This is the thing that drives me crazy about Washington--nothing is as it seems. There is always some hidden agenda, some "real" reason behind the superficially ridiculous rhetoric. That's the stuff I want to know, but can't seem to find anywhere.

Just to name a few.

1. Why have Democrats consistently opposed energy development in this country?--the real reason.

2. Why the hurry to pass global warming legislation when the entire country is freezing its collective butt off?--the real reason.

The state media is completely AWOL on these questions, and while there is a temptation to ascribe the basest of political motives--power, and more of it. I'd like to believe that these people are more sophisticated than that, and might in fact have genuinely patriotic reasons for pursuing a program that politically they feel they can't be honest about.

On the other hand, they could just all be idiots, making it all up a day at a time...

I actually laughed out loud when I read this.

Barack Obama suggested last night that removing Osama bin Laden from the battlefield was no longer essential and that America's security goals could be achieved merely by keeping al-Qaeda "on the run".

"My preference obviously would be to capture or kill him," he said. "But if we have so tightened the noose that he's in a cave somewhere and can't even communicate with his operatives then we will meet our goal of protecting America."

The closer he gets to his own chair in the oval office, the more like George W. Bush he sounds. During the debates with McCain, His hopeychanginess was somewhat more aggressive.

"We will kill bin Laden. We will crush Al Qaeda."

I don't really mind actually, but it is damned funny.

Let me be perfectly clear--there is very little that we've done in Afghanistan to account for al Qaeda's sorry state these days. What really took out al Qaeda's legs was their defeat in Iraq. Having come off as the "weak horse", al Qaeda's prestige was badly undermined in the Islamic world. no Jihadi is going to join al Qaeda if he's serious about restoring the Caliphate. The prospects are so much better with the Taliban or perhaps Hezbollah.

I guess you know what that means, right?

Iraq was the right war after all. We got a two-fer: Saddam and al Qaeda in the game bag.

Remember this?-->

It was clearly contrived imagery--the commander-in-chief, man of action, the virile leader. We've seen similar nonsense from a shirtless, fly-fishing Putin, and a photo-retouched Sarkozy. Now its Barack Obama's turn.

President-elect Barack Obama, cheered by onlookers along the train route Abraham Lincoln took nearly a century and a half earlier, undertook the final leg of his inaugural journey to the nation's capital Saturday, pledging to reclaim America's spirit but also warning of steep challenges facing the country.

Hundreds of people screamed and cheered as Obama waved from the back of his inaugural train when it rolled slowly through the station in little Claymont, Del., on the way to larger crowds at stops in Wilmington, Del., and Baltimore on the route to Washington.

Barf.

I'm not going to be one of those morons who arrogantly proclaims what Americans want and what they are thinking. Yet it bears recalling that Bush's landing on the aircraft carrier was pretty well received at the time by his supporters, and criticisms airily dismissed as sour grapes. That all came back to haunt Bush, and I expect this Obama circus stunt will too.

I imagine for some small minority of Americans, the fact that Obama has dark skin is some sort of epiphany. Frankly I don't get it. To me he's just a guy, and making him into some mythical figure is just insulting. I'm perfectly willing to cut him some slack, to let him demonstrate his leadership, but the cape and tights are just too much.

Apparently The Obamessiah's inauguration is officially a natural disaster, um a national emergency.

And his supporters may become his personal FEMA.

I think his campaign should foot the bill. Let them minister to themselves at their expense. (And who will be the first to complain?)

Such unseemly conspicuous consumption during a national emergency. As ABC's Terry Moran said on the occasion of the last inauguration: "In a time of war and natural disaster, is it time for a lavish celebration?"

For about a week after New Year, I'm predictably depressed. Not sit-wordlessly-in-a-dark-room depressed, but "down", sort of what I imagine the crash after a weekend of ecstasy-use must be like.

I know I'm not going to feel that way six months from now, because unlike a lot of liberal Democrats who are buzzed on endorphins as a result of the secular second coming, I can't be disappointed by Barack Obama.

I know that he was lying about everything during the campaign, but many liberals don't , and some that suspect that he was lying, think naively that he was lying to someone besides themselves.

The interesting thing is that throughout the campaign, Obama and Joe Biden took the exact same position as Warren on gay marriage. And yet, gays overwhelmingly supported Obama (and Democrats generally) but consider Warren a slap in the face of the first order. When you ask gay activists and liberal strategists about this sort of thing, their response might be: "It's OK because we know they're lying." They insist that when it's politically feasible, "Obama and the Democratic Party will be there for us."

That's one reason why the Warren appearance is so offensive to activists: It conjures the frightening possibility that Obama's election posturing wasn't posturing but rather (gasp!) his actual position.

If the Obama administration was to abandon Afghanistan, what would it look like?

Well, the first thing you'd have to do is manufacture consent here in the U.S. by recasting the Afghan government as unworthy of U.S. support--say like the South Vietnamese regime?

U.S. Secretary of State-designate Hillary Clinton's use of the term "narco state" to describe Afghanistan in a recent Senate testimony has caught the attention of her Afghan counterpart.

Her Afghan counterpart was concerned enough to make his own seemingly panicked statement.

"Madame Clinton is a good friend of Afghanistan, a close friend of ours," Spanta told The Associated Press in an interview arranged to rebut Clinton's classification of Afghanistan.

"But if somebody believes that our government, the government of President (Hamid) Karzai is involved as a government entity in the production of drugs, this is absolutely wrong."

Its notable that the Democrats plan to throw Colombia to the wolves was also preceded by such rhetorical flourishes.

Stay tuned...

I too have a slight bit of excitement waiting for Obama to take the oath of office. Not the "oceans will begin to recede" anticipation, but the feeling I used to get from watching "Lets make a Deal" where the contestant forgoes the kitchen set and new couch for what's behind door number three.

It's the anticipation of observing Obama make a concrete decision - actually take a stand on something. He's come a long way by sidestepping most issues - in a fashion his supporters have interpreted to fit their fantasies. But today the real Obama, or at least the Obama of consequence, must emerge. Where does he stand for instance, on Israel, or pulling troops from Iraq or Afghanistan? Is he a socialist? Was his friendship with Bill Ayers and Reverand Wright real or just a step in the path to bigger and better things? What does Obama consider bigger and better?

As I watch Carol Merrill open the third door, Obama fans expect a Ferrari. I expect a donkey. Either way, I'll be the one least disappointed.

Anybody else get more than a little creeped out by the mass hysteria and worship yesterday? And even more disappointed in the media? Which created a little shame spiral, because you had told yourself you weren't going to let them in again? You weren't going to listen? Well, Melanie Phillips at the Daily Mail Online will totally talk you down:

The coverage is so gushing we might all drown. Of course it’s a great thing that America, with its history of slavery and segregation still a shockingly recent memory, now has a black President; the palpable joy of African-Americans is entirely understandable and deeply touching. And there’s no doubt that Obama is a highly charismatic and attractive personality.

But what’s more than a wee bit troubling is that the swooning hysteria reflects the fact that people appear to believe that as of today the world will be saved. Swords will be beaten into ploughshares, peace will be brought to the Middle East, Iran will be pacified, every American will have health insurance, poverty will be eliminated and utopia will have arrived.

She forgot the part about how we'll all be receiving unicorns, but otherwise, yeah, exactly! She goes on to connect his rhetoric and actions to this point to Saul Alinsky and his Rules for Radicals. It's a great read, even if just to prove that not all major journalists are fanboys in the throes of new-issue ecstasy.

I'm taking my time with Obama's inauguration speech, because as essentially a definition of the Obama administration, it deserved a better than average fisking. Nevertheless, other aspects of the inauguration are more easily analysed--such as the report that twice as many private jets--600, landed at Washington, Dulles for the inauguration, than in 2004. Look for Kansas to be reforested later this year to offset the carbon dioxide hurricane.

You just know all these rich people have skin in the game.

OK, the global warming hypocrisy is just too easy. More interesting is the very earliest signs of Obama let-down.

Jon Stewart may be the only person who can tell a certain Bush-hating demographic the truth about Obama and the Bush foreign policy--yeah, not a dime's worth of difference. Eight years of bitching and moaning and now...Nevermind...

When they started calling Mr. Obama the magic negro, they weren't kidding. Apparently we should just all call him President Eisenheim (The Illusionist).

President Obama moved swiftly on Wednesday to impose new rules on government transparency and ethics, using his first full day in office to freeze the salaries of his senior aides, mandate new limits on lobbyists and demand that the government disclose more information.

Mr. Obama called the moves, which overturned two policies of his predecessor, “a clean break from business as usual.” Coupled with Tuesday’s Inaugural Address, which repudiated the Bush administration’s decisions on everything from science policy to fighting terrorism, the actions were another sign of the new president’s effort to emphasize an across-the-board shift in priorities, values and tone.

“For a long time now there’s been too much secrecy in this city,” Mr. Obama said at a swearing-in ceremony for senior officials at the Eisenhower Executive Office Building, adjacent to the White House. He added, “Transparency and rule of law will be the touchstones of this presidency.”

The appearance of "change" and the substance of continuity. In the new "transparent" Obama administration, the oath of office was readministered absent the Washington press corps. Perhaps the real touchstones of the Obama administration are apparent in the organizational disaster that was the inauguration, where thousands of ticket holders heard and saw nothing aside from the Howitzers. But it wasn't just the rabble that got inconvenienced.

Despite misgivings, Tim Geithner's nomination for Treasury Secretary has been advanced out of committee. But there is fallout-- Geithner (and Obama) get hammered from the Left. Jeffrey Klein, Huffpo, "President Obama Fails his First Hard Choice":

"Tim Geithner, when I nominated him, was rightly lauded by people from both sides of the aisle, from the market, from labor, as somebody who was uniquely qualified." Obama responded when questioned about Geithner's taxes. "Is this an embarrassment for him? Yes. He said so himself. But it was an innocent mistake. It has been corrected. He paid the penalties."

Geithner didn't make one mistake. He committed multiple transgressions over the course of many years. To call them "an innocent mistake" is as insulting as deducting your kid's expensive summer away camp as a childcare expense, which Geithner tried to do. Furthermore, Geithner paid the majority of his missing taxes and penalties only after he was nominated to be Secretary of the Treasury. His situational ethics are directly at odds with the culture of personal responsibility that Obama has set as his foremost goal.

Some wry observations from the WSJ.

I would imagine both Geithner and House Ways and Means Chairman Charlie Rangel are relieved the confirmation hearings have been conducted in the Senate.

P.S. We won't hold our breath on any Dem run investigation of Charlie Rangel. And doesn't Geithner's abuse of TurboTax remind you of the Obama donations modus operandi--where his campaign had to knowingly override fraud safeguards. "Creditable" explanation yet to be forthcoming.

Michelle Obama makes the top ten of Dems Barack needs to watch out for. The Politico:

She’s glamorous, she’s on message, she’s the nation’s favorite mom — and now she has nowhere to go but down.

With a curtsey to Dan at Protein Wisdom, this was the Reverend Lowery's inaugural benediction:

We ask you to help us work for that day when black will not be asked to get back, when brown can stick around, when yellow will be mellow, when the red man can get ahead, man and white will embrace what is right. That all those who do justice and love mercy say amen.

Now, before you get all up in my business, let me give you some Jonah Goldberg:

For instance, you will not soon see a German chancellor of Turkish descent. Nor will a child of North African immigrants soon take the reins of power in France. It will be a long time before a Pakistani or Indian last name appears on the mailbox at 10 Downing St. And yet these countries bubble over with haughty finger-waggers eager to lecture backward and provincial America about race and tolerance. Why not enjoy rubbing Barack Obama in their faces? .... The media understandably, if tediously, focus on how Obama’s presidency is a deathblow to the legacy of official discrimination and racism. True enough. But the fact that a black man can become president of the United States may also be transgressive to all sorts of more relevant racial orthodoxies on the left and in the black community.

But after that, having run past a memorial to the Freedom Riders on Wednesday night, and running past Birmingham's 16th Street Baptist Church on a regular basis, I got your post-racial right here:

The video is long, good, funny, and definitely not for the faint of heart. If I didn't love the guy so much, I might actually have been cheesed at him for equating all southerners with sister-humping banjo players.

Is this the change America voted for? A President so hands on he has an opinion about bathroom renovations? Barack Obama, redecorating policeman-in chief. Good grief. Bloomberg:

Obama also criticized the way some companies getting federal bailouts are spending their money, and he said stricter accountability will be part of any future assistance.

Without citing any individual or company, Obama said recent reports “about companies that have received taxpayer assistance, and then going out and renovating bathrooms, or offices, or other ways not managing those dollars appropriately” show the need for more scrutiny.

John Thain, the former Merrill Lynch & Co. chief executive officer ousted yesterday, spent $1.2 million redecorating his downtown Manhattan office last year as the company was firing employees, a person familiar with the project said.

He may have thumbed his nose on inauguration day, presumably at former occupants of the White House, but he may have trouble thumbing his nose at this. Sun Times:

In the days when President Obama confidante Valerie Jarrett sought an appointment to Obama's vacant Senate post last November, Gov. Blagojevich's staff received a call:

Blagojevich should expect nothing in return from Obama for giving the Senate appointment to Jarrett -- nothing but "appreciation."

But the person who made the call wasn't on Obama's team. He was John Wyma, a longtime Blagojevich aide who had been secretly working with the government, according to sources.

Wyma made the call at the request of another friend, the then-president-elect's chosen chief of staff, Rahm Emanuel -- a contact with the Blagojevich camp that was not mentioned in Obama's internal report released in December.

Maybe you remember Chevy Chase back in the day on SNL opening with, "I'm Chevy Chase and you're not." Our uniter president Barack Obama--swagger or thin-skinned, take your pick--"I won". He gets annoyed at The Politico for pesky questions (reporters aren't supposed to ask questions? of course not, but the Politico has a little life in it), brushes back Republicans for questioning the huge Pork component of the stimulus, and now he spouts off at Rush Limbaugh-- tells us we shouldn't listen to him. We are apparently more dangerous to his piece uh peace of mind than OBL. He can't fire missiles at us yet.

Oaf of office. Energizing our base bigtime.

This guy really has no sense of humor.

Obama's second full day of on the job executive training. He's issuing executive orders like a kindergartner being prompted in a school play:

OBAMA: In order to effect the appropriate disposition of individuals currently detained by the Department of Defense at Guantanamo, uh, and promptly to close the detention facility at Guantanamo consistent with the national security and foreign policy interests of the United States and interests of justice, I hereby order. And we then we will then, uh, the process whereby Guantanamo will be closed no later than one year from now. We will be... Uhhh.... Umm.... Is there a separate executive order, Greg, with respect to how we're going to dispose of the detainees? Is that it, eh, uh, what we're doing?

CRAIG: We'll set up a process!

OBAMA: We will be setting up a process, uh, whereby this is going to be taking place.

Well he's gonna close Gitmo but he doesn't have a clue for the disposition of the prisoners. I figure he's kicking the can down the road. Most likely we'll still have the prisoners locked up somewhere, a year from now. Fine by me, if they are still hell bent on attacking America. Obama might as well rename Gitmo, however, for all the difference this executive order is going to do.

H/T Small Dead Animals - Kate has more Greg-O-Prompter outakes

Addendum: I just stumbled accross this starstruck Obamaphile and former Vanity Fair and New Yorker editor's take:

... the first president who has seemed to be in charge from the day he was elected, not, like other presidents from the day he was sworn in.

Is she talking about Craig or wearing the high powered rose colored glasses? Neo Neocon says it's only love...

If you're old enough, you might remember a show called "Get Smart", recently remade with Steve Carrell. Don Adams, the start of the original show, used a number of regular catch phrases, including the notorious "Would you believe?..." exchange

One year from now, we have the chance to tell all those corporate lobbyists that the days of them setting the agenda in Washington are over. I have done more to take on lobbyists than any other candidate in this race - and I’ve won. I don’t take a dime of their money, and when I am President, they won’t find a job in my White House.

To burnish Obama’s reformist credentials, Podesta on Tuesday rolled out what he billed as a tough set of ethics rules targeting professional lobbyists. But there was a loophole: Lobbyists could work on the transition as long as they stayed away from the policy areas that their lobbying involved.

Would you believe the 1st Marine division?

Mr. Obama’s nominee for deputy secretary of defense, William Lynn, has been a lobbyist for the defense contractor Raytheon, and his nominee for deputy secretary of health and human services, William V. Corr, lobbied for stricter tobacco regulations as an official with the Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids.

A senior White House official, speaking on the condition of anonymity, conceded the two nominees did not adhere to the new rules. But he said that Mr. Lynn had the support of Republicans and Democrats, and would receive a waiver under the policy, and that Mr. Corr did not need a waiver because he had agreed to recuse himself from tobacco issues.

“When you set very tough rules, you need to have a mechanism for the occasional exception,” this official said, adding, “We wanted to be really tough, but at the same time we didn’t want to hamstring the new administration or turn the town upside down.”

When I say it, I'm a right-wing nut. Howabout when a "left-wing nut" says it?

Obama's approach to the establishment media -- the TV and radio networks, wire services, newspapers and magazines that still cover the White House -- doesn't differ all that much from George W. Bush's. As in, their correspondents are not getting much access. They are tightly managed. The White House press office doesn't say very much, and what it says isn't very revealing. What's more, it's signaling that past press rituals will not necessarily be observed. The Obama team declined to give the New York Times a pre-inauguration interview. Yesterday, the White House didn't even let press photographers in to get some shots of Obama working in the Oval Office, provoking an AP announcement that it would not distribute what amounted to "visual press releases."

I find it almost amusing that people who marched in the street because they were lied to, are shrugging their shoulders now that "their guy" is in office. With Clinton it was "just sex", now with Obama its "just lies".

The implications of the policy of deception are very interesting. In the short term, it bridges the gap between the unreasonable expectations of his political supporters and the practical requirements of national security and other considerations.

In the long term it will prove amazingly corrosive.

In his inaugural address President Obama said Americans want a government that works. Well, then, will this stimulus package work? This stuffed pork lobbyist luau? We already have a money supply spiking straight line up--sure to bring on inflation, the hidden tax. And we're going to load up with all this debt for negligible job creation?!!

Even John McCain, President Obama's new bipartisan best friend can't support this. Even mushy moderate David Brooks of the New York Times can't support this as configured now:

This reminds me of the fellow who accidently fell from the top of the Chicago Sears building. As he passed the 32nd floor he was heard saying "so far nothing bad has happened...":

A financial war is brewing -- and it's likely to pit these public employees against Illinois taxpayers who are responsible for paying those generous pension promises. There simply isn't enough money in all these retirement plans (see box) to send out the promised checks. If you think Bernie Madoff had a Ponzi scheme going, wait until the wave of boomer retirement hits the reality of pension underfunding.

One of the more prominent recipients of an Illinois state pension:

Obama reported between $50,001 and $100,000 in pensions from his work as an Illinois state legislator...

I'm sorry for writing so many Obama posts, but its just so damn funny!

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton suggested on Tuesday the world was breathing a sigh of relief that President Barack Obama had replaced George W. Bush and was working to fix the damage he had caused.

In her first news conference as top U.S. diplomat, Clinton said excitement over the change in power was "reinforced time and time again" during her welcome calls in recent days with foreign counterparts.

"There is a great exhalation of breath going on in the world as people express their appreciation for the new direction that's being set and the team that is put together by the president," Clinton said.

"We have a lot of damage to repair."

Why do you think the Euroweenies are so excited about Barack Obama? Is he buying drinks? Did they refuse to cooperate with the U.S. on the war on terror, on economic issues, etc... simply because they didn't like the "cowboy in the White House"?

So what can Americans expect from the capitals of Europe and the Middle East now that everything is all "kumbaya"?

Apparently nothing at all.

Some allies have already shown resistance to Obama's early requests. For example, France has indicated it will not send more troops to Afghanistan and the European Union failed on Monday to agree to offer any concerted aid to help Obama close down Guantanamo Bay prison.

"In Europe and elsewhere, there is a disconnect between Mr. Obama's popularity and receptiveness to his likely policies," The Washington Post commented in an editorial on Monday.

The true nature of anti-Americanism is that we are in their way.

Its a new day, but Barack failed to mention it was groundhog day.

Latest--"stimulus" porker over One TRILLION now. Should the Government Stop Dumping Money into a Giant Hole?

Plus, tea party tax protest in blue state New York, "We're not going to take it any more!":

I keep blogging about this because it worries me so much. And since I don't know enough, here's Jim Manzi, The Corner outlining what we all expected a wholly Dem bill to be:

Defense represents only about 3% of the spending in the bill (as opposed to 12% of U.S. government spending overall, or about 3% of French overall government spending as a point of comparison) and Public Safety represents only about 1% of spending in the bill (as opposed to about 6% of U.S. government spending overall, or about 2% of French government spending overall). In other words, the net effect of this bill is to shift the distribution of U.S. government spending as a whole away from defense and public safety and toward social programs: for good or ill, to make the U.S. into more of a European-style social welfare state. Because the amount of spending is so huge, this will be a material, not notional, shift. Eventually, we will emerge from this recession/depression/whatever it’s going to be. When that happens, is this really the kind of government we’re going to want?

And this change is unlikely to be temporary.

Peggy Noonan is off the Obama reservation, her touching faith in his world-changer charm shaken by the passage of Pelosi's bill:

The party-line vote in favor of the stimulus package could have been more, could have produced not only a more promising bill but marked the beginning of something new, not a postpartisan era (there will never be such a thing and never should be; the parties exist to fight through great political questions) but a more bipartisan one forced by crisis and marked by—well, let's call it seriousness.

President Obama could have made big history here. Instead he just got a win. It's a missed opportunity.

P.S. I see Mick and I are on the same page again:)

You have to read this to believe it.

Rantville Reborn excerpts the text of a State Department Press Conference.

QUESTION: About a month or two ago, there was an IG report that warned that Blackwater was likely going to lose its license to operate in Iraq. That has now happened. Considering that you guys have been aware of this impending decision for some time, I presume that contingency plans have been made. What are those? What are you going to do to protect your people?

MR. WOOD: Well, let me just say, first off, you know, contingency plans are obviously being looked at, but I think it was on January 23rd when the Ministry of Interior informed the Embassy in Baghdad that Blackwater’s applications for an operating license was not going to be approved. And so we’re going to encourage, of course, contractors working for us to comply with Iraqi law. We’re right now looking at the implications of this decision by the Iraqis for us. But let me just make clear that we will do everything necessary to make sure that our personnel have the security that they need.

I can't really improve on Jimmy's characterization of the exchange.

I think the only way Robert Wood could come away from this looking dumber, was if he had a dunce cap on and his pants on backwards.

To steal a phrase from Kanye West.

A crippling winter storm has plunged about a million customers into the dark from the Midwest to the East Coast, and thousands of people in ice-caked Kentucky have sought refuge in motels and shelters.

Dozens of deaths have been reported and many people are pleading for a faster response to the power outages. Some in rural Kentucky ran short of food and bottled water, and resorted to dipping buckets in a creek.

Local officials are complaining that FEMA is a no show, but what's the hurry? There are no cameras there. The state media is sitting this one out.

Jimmie at the Sundries Shack is already printing the signs--"Obama dozed, people froze"

In truth, organizing a rescue and support effort is not an easy thing to do. It takes particular knowledge of the area involved and the resources on hand to work effectively. Otherwise the rescue effort flails around for a while. That’s why we usually leave such things in the hands of local officials unless, like in the case of Hurricane Katrina, local officials prove completely incompetent. Reasonable people can not expect the Federal government to simply swoop in a day or to after a disaster and work at anything near top effectiveness. Then again, it’s not unfair for us to hold the Obama administration to the same standards the MSM and Democrats held the Bush administration.

Surely a Messiah can do better than this.

Well any groundhog in Chicago saw his shadow today too, but I for one will take a sunny day any time, regardless of the temperature. I actually like to wear sweaters indoors, though I haven't gone for a snuggie. But I join with Michelle Malkin in this WhiteHousewarming idea, and perhaps this could be a Barack Obama decree for those freezing people in Kentucky--let them wear snuggies.

P.S. Or perhaps orchids as a tasteful gift from the president:

“He’s from Hawaii, O.K.?” said Mr. Obama’s senior adviser, David Axelrod, who occupies the small but strategically located office next door to his boss. “He likes it warm. You could grow orchids in there.”

--crossposted at BackyardConservtive

CNBC's Jim Cramer on Morning Joe. Watch:

Thomas Jefferson adds thru Mark :

The democracy will cease to exist when you take away from those who are willing to work and give to those who would not.

Mark adds: No representation without taxation!

Peter Berkowitz wrote a great editorial last week in the WSJ: Bush Hatred and Obama Euphoria Are Two Sides of the Same Coin. If you've ever been just plain flabbergasted at the unicorns-sneezing-skittles adoration from some Obama supporters, with all their kittens and soviet propaganda and condescending YouTubery, this lays it out. Snap:

Some will speculate that the outbreak of hatred and euphoria in our politics is the result of the transformation of left-liberalism into a religion, its promulgation as dogma by our universities, and students' absorption of their professors' lesson of immoderation. This is unfair to religion.

We've got to get Mr. Obama to quit smoking. Can you imagine Joe Biden as President?

After mocking Chief Justice John Roberts for stumbling on Obama's oath of office, Biden blows Hillary Clinton's swearing-in and he's reading from a cheat sheet!

The infatuation with Obama is wearing off as they are starting to realize their worst nightmare--The U.S. adopts socialism.

The EU has increased its pressure on the US to reconsider the "Buy American" clause in the $800bn (£567bn) economic recovery package now before Congress.

The clause seeks to ensure that only US iron, steel and manufactured goods are used in projects funded by the bill.

A European Commission spokesman said it was the "worst possible signal" the Obama administration could send out.

The EU will launch a complaint with the World Trade Organisation (WTO) if the clause remains, the spokesman said.

The EU and Canadian ambassadors to Washington have already warned that the clause could promote protectionism and trigger retaliatory moves.

Protectionism is the very soul of socialism.

It used to be that Democrats were primarily know for sex scandals. Now apparently tax dodging is their thing.

Nancy Killefer, who failed for a year and a half to pay employment taxes on household help, has withdrawn her candidacy to be the first chief performance officer for the federal government, the White House said Tuesday.

Killefer was the second major Obama administration nominee to withdraw and the third to have tax problems complicate their nomination after President Barack Obama announced their selection.

"Nancy Killefer has decided to withdraw her nomination, and we accepted her withdrawal," Tommy Vietor, a White House spokesman, said Tuesday. The 55-year-old executive with consulting giant McKinsey & Co., was expected to explain her reasons for pulling out later in the day.

When her selection was announced by Obama on Jan. 7, The Associated Press disclosed that in 2005 the District of Columbia government had filed a $946.69 tax lien on her home for failure to pay unemployment compensation tax on household help.

The Obama administration is being uncharacteristically mum on her withdrawal, no doubt realizing that two tax cheats is the public's unofficial limit for plausible explanations.

Let's take stock:

• The new President has apologized to Arabs for Bush's arrogance;
  
• The appointments' process has been a clusterfuck;
  
• America has a tax cheat as tax chief, but 'no 2-tier tax system';
  
• The President's $1t emergency stimulus bill is stuffed with pork, protectionism and social engineering - stimulus, not so much.." Oh, but it wasn't my bill, it was that awful Nancy Pelosi, I just put my name to it...and it was a first attempt anyway"; *
  
• Iran has launched a satellite and told America where to stick its handwringing about nukes;
  
• N.Korea threatens to test a missile that can reach Alaska;
  
• Israel is about to elect Netanyahu who may be less receptive to State Dept bullshit and may take on Iran;
  
• But it's ok.....the President has initiated a study on how to close Gitmo. More: he's funding embryonic stem cell research and abortion promotion in America's aid budget.
  

It took Daschle’s resignation to shake the president out of his arrogant attitude that his charmed circle doesn’t have to abide by the lofty standards he lectured the rest of us about for two years.

Before he recanted, his hand forced by a cascade of appointees who “forgot” to pay taxes, his reasoning was creeping perilously close to that of the outgoing leaders he denounced in his Inaugural Address: that elitist mentality of “we know best,” we know we’re doing the “right” thing for the country, so we can twist the rules.

Mr. Obama should have taken a red pencil to the $819 billion stimulus bill and slashed all the provisions that looked like caricatures of Democratic drunken-sailor spending.As Senator Kit Bond, a Republican, put it, there were so many good targets that he felt “like a mosquito in a nudist colony.”

Mr. Obama protested to Brian Williams that the programs denounced as “wasteful” by Republicans “amount to less than 1 percent of the entire package.” All the more reason to cut them and create a lean, clean bill tailored to creating jobs.

The Democratic president has been spending so much time trying — and failing — to win over Republicans that he may not have noticed the disillusionment in his own ranks.

* Give me strength.

The Democrats hoped to slide it by unnoticed, but the Stimulus bill that passed the house contains a provision prohibiting worship, religious instruction in any facilities that uses federal funds for renovation purposes. Here is the actual language.

"Grants awarded under this section shall be for the purpose of modernizing, renovating, and repairing institution of higher education facilities that are primarily used for instruction and research"

"Funds may not be used for the "modernization, renovation, or repair of facilities--(i) used for sectarian instruction, religious worship, or a school or department of divinity; or (ii) in which a substantial portion of the functions of the facilities are subsumed in a religious mission."

You can hide all sorts of liberal-left goodies in a trillion dollar looting bill.

"Democrats are looking for every opportunity to purge faith and prayer from the public square. This will empower the ACLU with ambiguous laws that create liability for schools, universities, and student organizations. This is an attack on people of faith and I don't think Americans will stand for it." -Senator Jim DeMint (R-South Carolina)

DeMint's spokesman Wesley Denton says, "This is an ACLU stimulus, because any school that gets funds to upgrade a student center or building where Bible studies or religious meetings may be held will be slapped with a lawsuit. This bill declares a war on prayer at college campuses in this country. Students have constitutional right to use public facilities regardless of their religious views, and President Obama needs to step in to ask Sen. Reid and Speaker Pelosi to stop this attack on students of faith.”

This is how the left rolls. The characterization of churches who supported Prop 8 as anti-gay simply failed to mention that GLBT groups also hope to use legal precedents like this to chase religion out of the public square. It was and is the prospect of losing personal rights of worship to the GLBT or ACLU agenda that was the real impetus behind the intense effort to pass Prop 8 in California.

I suspect Mr. Obama is having a very bad day today. The 300+ million birth control funding that Nancy Pelosi defended as "stiimulus" was so clearly ridiculous that it undermined the credibility of the entire bill in spite of its subsequent removal. That was mild compared to how this piece of language is going to threaten Americans of faith. This rises to bitter-clinger remarks in undermining the credibility of the administration. Yes, Obama probably had nothing to do with it, but the politics of the issue will nevertheless hold him responsible.

"Hope and change" rhetoric has completely vanished to be replaced with fear, blame and bewilderment.

They did not vote for the false theories of the past, and they didn't vote for phony arguments and petty politics. They didn't vote for the status quo -- they sent us here to bring change. We owe it to them to deliver. This is the moment for leadership that matches the great test of our times. And I know you want to work with me to get there. (Applause.) If we do not move swiftly to sign the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act into law, an economy that is already in crisis will be faced with catastrophe. This is not my assessment. This is not Nancy Pelosi's assessment. This is the assessment of the best economists in the country. This is the assessment of some of the former advisors of some of the same folks who are making these criticisms right now. Millions more Americans will lose their jobs. Homes will be lost. Families will go without health care. Our crippling dependence on foreign oil will continue. That is the price of inaction.

The first thing to understand is that he's talking to Congressional Democrats here, and that this is essentially a rally-the-troops speech. Why do the troops, who just enjoyed a near total victory in November need to be rallied? I think the answer can be found in another one of his comments.

For you, these aren't just statistics. This is not a game. This is not a contest for who's in power and who's up and who's down. These are your constituents. These are families you know and you care about. I believe that it is important for us to set aside some of the gamesmanship in this town and get something done.

Yes it is a game. Yes it is a contest of power. It is a considerable irony that the party that ran on "Hope and Change" is trying to use fear to ram down a far-left agenda that no American voted for because no politician campaigned on it.

I was asked today how "I knew" that the Obama "stimulus" plan wasn't going to work. It was an honest question and I gave an honest answer--Japan's Lost Decade.

“It is not enough just to hire workers to dig holes and then fill them in again,” said Toshihiro Ihori, an economics professor at the University of Tokyo. “One lesson from Japan is that public works get the best results when they create something useful for the future.”

In total, Japan spent $6.3 trillion on construction-related public investment between 1991 and September of last year, according to the Cabinet Office. The spending peaked in 1995 and remained high until the early 2000s, when it was cut amid growing concerns about ballooning budget deficits. More recently, the governing Liberal Democratic Party has increased spending again to revive the economy and the party’s own flagging popularity.

In the end, say economists, it was not public works but an expensive cleanup of the debt-ridden banking system, combined with growing exports to China and the United States, that brought a close to Japan’s Lost Decade. This has led many to conclude that spending did little more than sink Japan deeply into debt, leaving an enormous tax burden for future generations.

A lot of people aren't going to be old enough to recall a time during the seventies and eighties where Japan was supposed to eclipse us as an economic power. Hordes of Japanese tourists, flush with cash would tour the U.S., snapping pictures of everything. Snowbird Ski resort, which has been a favorite of mine since my college days, had trail signs in Japanese and we amused ourselves watching Japanese tourists in fifteen hundred dollars of equipment and fashionable ski clothes, snow-plowing down Big Emma trail. By the early nineties they were gone--all the way gone.

The irony is that there has been virtually no controversy among economists about Japan's lost decade. The reasons for it were clear, as was the prescription, but politics intervened as their liberal Democrats imposed a politically-correct band-aid over the gaping wound. Japanese liberal Democrats borrowed nearly twice the GDP of Japan to build bridges and roads to nowhere, saddling not one but several future generations with the bill.

Those who cannot learn from history, are doomed to repeat it. Japan's experience was bad, but we are talking about a complete different scale of economic devastation if the U.S. is driven into depression to satisfy Democrat lust for an illusory permanent majority.

I seemed like just a months ago that being a "cowboy president" was a bad thing.

He branded Saddam Hussein's Iraq "an outlaw regime" and took the vanquished dictator's pistol as a trophy. As for Osama bin Laden, Bush declared, "I want justice. And there's an old poster out West, I recall, that says, 'Wanted: Dead or Alive.' " Britain's liberal newspaper The Guardian noted that "such language feeds the image overseas of Mr. Bush as a hopelessly inarticulate, trigger-happy cowboy."

That was then, this is now.

David Ignatius of the Washington Post:

The Marine Corps’ 1st Division has a macho motto: “No Better Friend. No Worse Enemy.” President Barack Obama could use a little of that Clint Eastwood-style bravura now as he bargains with Republicans over the stimulus package and tries to establish momentum and credibility for his new administration.

Obama needs to make Washington politicians fear that if they cross him, they’ll pay a penalty. That’s the essence of political power -- the ability to help your friends and punish your enemies (or, to put it politely, those who obstruct your efforts to do the public’s business). All successful presidents have had this ability to inspire respect; most unsuccessful presidents have lacked it.

Cheerios-spewing time. This of course is precisely how conservatives think you should deal with terrorists, but Democrats have demured, stroking their inner wimp with shibboleths like "smart power". With Republicans though, its "I'm coming, and hell follows after me..."

The is the second article by a tingle-up-my-leg "journalist" I've read, that just stinks of fear. Ignatius is clearly panicked, as the litany of contradictions simply overwhelms the reader.

I have been a fan of Obama’s efforts to create a post-partisan politics that ends Washington’s business-as-usual.

Ignatius then goes on to recommend clearly partisan tough-guy actions.

Even more bizarre, Ignatius, after telling himself that Obama has a mandate to do whatever he likes, ends with a recommendation to defy the Democrat's tsunami of spending and vote-buying

One start would be to scrub the stimulus legislation for any hint of wasteful spending for partisan political gain. Another would be to review pending nominations anew for tax and other problems -- and any suggestion that the old rules of Washington still apply.

I have this image of Dave running through the Washington Post offices, pulling all the fire alarms and screaming "get out!, get out now!"

For the smartest guy in the world, he sure seems to have a lot of klutzes working for him.

The Nose On Your Face has a little fun with an actual news conference by the lamentable Obama administration press secretary Robert Gibbs. I find myself actually having to point out that this is not a SNL skit, in spite of the characterization of Gibbs as Bambi. The audio is completely authentic.

Tappers asks for copies of waivers to which Gibbs tries to reply with an Obamaism, "do you have any pertinent questions?" Tapper just cuts him off at the knees and leaves him to bleed out.

How bad is Gibbs? He makes Scott McClellan look good.

You remember all the comments about Obama's rather obvious inexperience? Do you remember all the main stream media's pooh-poohing the notion?

I gotta tell ya, Gibb's performance is tip-of-the-iceberg stuff. You have to ask yourself how an incompetent like this gets hired, and who sends him out in the cold without boots and mittens.

Do you think Gibbs is an isolated case? Look at the confirmation fiasco for your answer. Obama doesn't have a bad vetting process, he has NO vetting process. Moreover, the total lack of preparation for what I think most people would agree should have been considered an inevitable question confirms the impression that having Nancy Pelosi write the Stimulus bill created--this is not an administration that has any strategic planning in place.

The cold pit in your stomach is the realization that the fate of the world is in the hands of these guys.

I had to groan a bit when I heard Barack Obama was going on his magical mystery tour to Elkhart, Indiana. More campaign staging. Elkhart is the heart of RV manufacturing and union country. He'll have no shortage of cheering crowds for his Savior-based economic message.

I find it disgusting that he will leverage the desperation of workers with hope and change nonsense. The RV industry goes through this every time there is a recession for the simple reason that RVs are not exactly necessities in difficult economic times. As I drive along the I-15, there are dozens of RV dealerships with lots full of unsold inventory.

But its worse that that. Its as if Obama was using coal miners to create his television moment, knowing full well that its his administration policy to bankrupt the coal industry. Democrats have been demonizing gas guzzlers for decades at this point, and you just know their plans for gas tax hikes and moratoriums on energy exploration are designed to kill the RV industry deader that Nancy Pelosi's credibility.

But hey, what else can they do? Rasmussen polling shows that 62% of Americans want more tax cuts and less spending, which should come as no surprise to Obama since he himself ran on tax cuts--so much for failed economic policies of the Bush administration. There is no argument the Democrats can make, so they have to go with what's worked--Obama's campaign skills.

Its a sign of desperation, a need to "do something, anything" to avoid a black eye so early in this administration's history. As it stands, the tax cutters are pushing the spending out of the bill. They might be able to pass something, but they'll never be able to call it a signature accomplishment, and in fact, its a virtual certainty that it will fail to remedy the economic crisis. The bill is a classic "ugly baby".

I don't believe for a minute that Obama is going to be able to move the needle. The campaign is over and its time to govern. You can't scare people anymore that they are already scared. What Americans need for the President is reassurance in the form of a real plan, a clear path forward and some prospects for stability.

I am actually a pretty good example of what kind of fix the economy is in. I'm literally frozen right now--unable to move forward until I have some clear idea of what the environment is going to be like. Its the ambiguity that is killing me and I expect you can scale that up to the whole country. Literally the biggest problem is that there is no clear leadership from the White House, no indication of what their plan is. The Stimulus bill doesn't mask it true nature very well--activity for activity's sake. Its a political band-aid designed to make it look like the government is doing something when in fact they don't have a clue, can't agree, or are pursuing another agenda.

The reality is that the solution is obvious. What's hard is the political consequences for a candidate that was totally dishonest with the American people.

Am getting huge hits for me on the NoStimulus.com petition I posted on my other site--apparently the traffic is affecting the Americans for Prosperity site. The Senate votes today on the package--call your Senator if you're not sure of their stance, and even if you are. The switchboard number is 202-224-3121. They've probably got the votes--but who knows--some of the moderates may get cold feet.

I don't know who should be more embarrassed--Obama or the media.

Last night's press conference was like listening to your kid's piano recital. The first wrong note produces a twinge. On the second one you drop your head. On the third the blood rises to your head. On the fourth, you want to grab the kid and run out of the room.

It used to be that what was bad for the country was good for Democrats. Now it appears that what bad for the country is good for the President. Obama has been relentlessly talking down the economy like someone selling gold on late night television. I guess it makes some sort of sense since you can't really have a Messiah without a backdrop of imminent doom.

This was not a Presidential press conference, it was candidate Obama's townhall meeting. He flat out lied about the opposition to the bill, contradicted himself on several occasions, gave vague and meaningless answers and most astonishingly, actually argued that since Bush doubled the public debt, he should be able to as well. You know you're hopeless when you make George W. Bush look like champion press conference performer.

In a nationally television press conference, Obama called on Huffington Post, who predictably asked when Bush administration officials would be incarcerated, and Helen Thomas--a columnist. Why didn't he just invite his mother-in-law to ask him a few questions? This might in fact end up biting Mr. Obama in the butt. Ana Marie Cox twittered that there was "grumbling in the press room". Apparently no one has considered that the mainstream's media's leverage for respectful treatment in the White House press room is the tone of their coverage. These guys are prima donnas, and I would expect that payback will be a bitch. Aside from Cox (who is working for AAR? Are they still around?). Liberal talk show host Ed Schultz had a seat besides Helen Thomas. Can you imagine Bush inviting Rush Limbaugh or Sean Hannity to a press conference like this?

We had fainting on the campaign trail, now women are having dreams of Barack Obama. And since this is the age we're in, where even adults think nothing of sharing the most personal or mundane detail of their lives with millions, it is inescapable. And since this is the era of Obama, we are reading about this in the New York Times. All the news that's fit to print, yes we can.The press as props news conference yesterday was more of the same. At least some on the left are grossed out too.

We have been here before, but not to quite this extent. I thought it was a one off with Bill Clinton, but it seems to be a pattern among Dem women. Somehow Dem men also gush over Barack. And somehow engage in some envy of W.

Elizabeth Warren is a Harvard Law Professor and an expert in bankruptcy. I became familiar with her because of her work on a PBS program about American credit card companies and the dirty deeds they do.

She's also the head of the Congressional oversight committee on the TARP funding, and what she has to say is extremely disturbing, especially in light of the hurry-up-and-pass-the-trillion-dollar-looting-bill nonsense going on right now on Capitol hill.

Ms. Warren, head of TARP’s Congressional oversight panel, told the banking committee that after three months on the job, her panel was still not getting enough answers from Treasury. She described the bailout as “an opaque process at best.”

Ms. Warren said she plans to release a report on Friday that calculates Treasury put about $254 billion into financial institutions in 2008, but got only $176 billion in value.

“That’s a shortfall of about $78 billion,” she said, adding that Mr. Paulson “was not entirely candid” in his description of TARP’s bank capital injection program.

Mr. Barofsky, the independent TARP inspector general at Treasury, raised concerns about potential fraud in one of several programs financed by bailout money, the Federal Reserve’s Term Asset-Backed Loan Facility. “Treasury should consider requiring that some baseline fraud prevention standards be imposed,” Mr. Barofsky said in his first report to Congress.

The story was undoubtedly reported to throw more dirt on the Bush administration, but its worth noting that like defense, this was one of the programs that Obama gave the tacit nod of approval too, by nominating Timothy Geithner, Hank Paulsen's hand-picked successor.

There are a number of remarkable things about the TARP program--in spite of Obama's assurance of an open government--no one, not even Congress can get any information out of the Tarp boys. Fox Business has filed suit to pry loose information as mundane as who got TARP funds--so far no luck. Considering the size of the fund, its astonishing that only 40 people control the whole thing.

So why would the TARP boys overpay for preferred shares in recipient banks? Kick backs are always a possibility, but pretty risky considering the political profile of the program. More likely that Paulsen etal wanted to protect the industry as much as possible from too much "nationalization", making it easier for the banks to eventually pay the feds off.

Major Garrett's question last night about Joe Biden's comment that even if the Obama administration did everything right, there was still a 30% chance of failure, was one of the few brilliant questions from the press gallery.

Brilliant because it was a subtle but direct confrontation of Obama's assertion that the bill has to be passed to save the country from economic extinction.

Obama's response was a less than subtle dismissal of Joe Biden as the clown we all know him to be.

As reporters started giggling, Obama came close to conceding that Biden was indeed a joke. "You know, I don't remember exactly what Joe was referring to, not surprisingly."

The President went on to say that "I think what Joe may have been suggesting, although I wouldn't ascribe any numerical percentage to any of this, is that given the magnitude of the challenges that we have, any single thing that we do is going to be part of the solution, not all of the solution."

Of course, Biden wasn't saying anything of the sort - Obama knew that and all the rest of us did too.

Remember during the campaign how Obama would put the white people directly behind the podium so the cameras would see them?

Now he puts the black people in the front row for the same reason.

After the first black president completed his first prime-time press conference, the black press was red hot.

"We were window dressing," said Hazel Edney, a reporter with the National Newspaper Publishers Association, also known as the Black Press of America. "We were nothing more than window dressing."

As the media filed into the stately White House East Room on Monday night, the reporter was shocked to find herself in the front row. Alongside her were the top news agencies, Associated Press, Reuters; also up front, 86-year-old Helen Thomas, who started covering presidents 50 years ago.

Alongside the most prominent journalists in America was Tiffany Cross from Black Entertainment Television. Like Miss Edney, she didn't know why she was in first-class while all the television networks - every single one - was exiled to the steerage compartment.

"I really don't know why I'm up here," Miss Cross said with a shy smile.

While most on the front row got to pose a question to President Obama, the two reporters from the black press did not. Nor did any other black-press reporter, for that matter.

"This was like Reagan, when he'd put all the blacks up front," said another prominent but visibly peeved black-press reporter who asked to remain anonymous. "He oughta' be ashamed."

Can you imagine the fuss they'd be making if they were seated in the back?

Remember when Tim Geithner got a pass on his tax problems because he was the only man in the country who could save the banking system?

Yesterday evening, members of Congress and their staffs actually snorted in derision and laughed at the man during his briefing.

The laughter was at its height when Obama officials explained that the White House planned to guarantee a wide swath of toxic assets -- which they referred to as "legacy assets" -- but wouldn't be asking Congress for money. Rep. Brad Sherman (D-CA), a bailout opponent in the fall, asked the officials to give Congress the total dollar figure for which they were on the hook. The officials said that they couldn't provide a number, a response met by chuckling that was bipartisan, but tilted toward the GOP side. By guaranteeing the assets, Geithner hopes he can persuade the private sector to purchase a portion of them.

Well that inspires a lot of confidence.

I tend to discount Dick Morris' views on the Clintons, but in this case, he has a point.

The fact is that the power of the secretary of State is not statutory, nor does it flow from the prestige of the post’s occupant. Former Gen. Al Haig, once supreme commander of NATO and chief of staff to President Nixon, found that out when he was undercut as secretary by the White House troika of Mike Deaver, James Baker and Ed Meese. Bill Rogers, Eisenhower’s attorney general and Nixon’s California confidant, found himself on the outs from the moment he became secretary of State, with Henry Kissinger soaking up all the power through his direct access to Nixon as national security adviser.

The power of the secretary of State flows directly from the president. But Hillary does not have the inside track with Obama. Rice and Powers, close advisers in the campaign, and Gen. Jones — whose office is in the White House — all may have superior access. Holbrooke and Mitchell will have more immediate information about the world’s trouble spots.

The number of Obama buddies with direct access and foreign policy briefs is amazingly long and includes Joe Biden, Richard Holbrooke, George Mitchell, Samantha Powers, Susan Rice and Gen. James Jones.

Morris has that raging case of Clinton-myopia. The real story here is Obama. Having so many direct foreign policy advisers serves another purpose as well--insuring that Obama remains the unchallenged star of his own administration.

Deadheat congressional generic ballot. Barone marvels:

Given that this generic ballot question over the years has tended to understate Republicans' performances in actual elections, one gathers that if the 2010 election for House seats were held today, Republicans would win or come close to winning a majority of seats—which is to say, they would gain about 40 seats. By way of comparison, they gained 52 seats when they won their majority in 1994. This result may just be a momentary blip, which will pass away as quickly as it appeared, and we are a long, long, long way from the November 2010 elections. But if I were a Democratic member of Congress in even a marginally marginal district, I would be just a little bit worried.

More polling here.

95% of Americans were going to get a tax cut, said Obama during his campaign. Everywhere he went he promised the people that everybody would get a tax cut except the very richest Americans.

Spend your 13 bucks a week wisely.

Q: What are some of the tax breaks in the bill?

A: It includes Obama's signature "Making Work Pay" tax credit for 95 percent of workers, though negotiators agreed to trim the credit to $400 a year instead of $500 — or $800 for married couples, cut from Obama's original proposal of $1,000. It would begin showing up in most workers' paychecks in June as an extra $13 a week in take-home pay, falling to about $8 a week next January.

If you're an Obama voter, go ask someone to kick you in the ass right now. You just got 13 bucks a week for most of year, and then 8 bucks thereafter--and a three thousand dollar promissory note for each member of your family. Yes my friend, you are an idiot.

There was a time in this country when we didn't think much of actors and their political views. Ronald Reagan was routinely derided as an intellectual light-weight for his choice of career. Yet Reagan was famously spontaneous and devastatingly effective in a debate or a press conference--without teleprompters and without pre-screening his questioners.

About half-way through President Obama's press conference Monday night, he had an unscripted question of his own. "All, Chuck Todd," the President said, referring to NBC's White House correspondent. "Where's Chuck?" He had the same strange question about Fox News's Major Garrett: "Where's Major?"

The problem wasn't the lighting in the East Room. The President was running down a list of reporters preselected to ask questions. The White House had decided in advance who would be allowed to question the President and who was left out.

Actor's political opinions seem to very important these days--at least to themselves, and the President's theatrical skills more important than his executive abilities. Unfortunately, the world doesn't turn according to the script.

NY Times examines Michelle's fashion practices. Obviously they're miffed she's patronizing a Chicago retailer, but they raise some interesting questions. Michelle's Fashion Gatekeeper.

Very Interesting. Very, very interesting. Flash from Drudge.

Senator Gregg Statement on His Withdrawal for Consideration of U.S. Commerce Secretary

Sen. Gregg stated, “I want to thank the President for nominating me to serve in his Cabinet as Secretary of Commerce. This was a great honor, and I had felt that I could bring some views and ideas that would assist him in governing during this difficult time. I especially admire his willingness to reach across the aisle.

“However, it has become apparent during this process that this will not work for me as I have found that on issues such as the stimulus package and the Census there are irresolvable conflicts for me. Prior to accepting this post, we had discussed these and other potential differences, but unfortunately we did not adequately focus on these concerns. We are functioning from a different set of views on many critical items of policy.

“Obviously the President requires a team that is fully supportive of all his initiatives.

“I greatly admire President Obama and know our country will benefit from his leadership, but at this time I must withdraw my name from consideration for this position.

“As we move forward, I expect there will be many issues and initiatives where I can and will work to assure the success of the President’s proposals. This will certainly be a goal of mine.

“Kathy and I also want to specifically thank Governor Lynch and Bonnie Newman for their friendship and assistance during this period. In addition we wish to thank all the people, especially in New Hampshire, who have been so kind and generous in their supportive comments.

“As a further matter of clarification, nothing about the vetting process played any role in this decision. I will continue to represent the people of New Hampshire in the United States Senate.”

This pretty much confirms that the Democrats plan to manipulate the census. Michael Barone commented early on that it might just be worth losing Gregg in the Senate for his oversight of the census as Secretary of Commerce. The Crats didn't find that very appealing and soon afterwards the Obama critters announced he was being cut out of the loop by having the Census Director report directly to the White House.

Gregg wasn't having none of it, and withdrew his candidacy.

I guess that whole smart-guy image is pretty much toast at this point. Just like the campaign, a week can't go by without a serious blunder. Finally a nominee who actually pays his taxes and he takes a hike because the White House doesn't meet HIS ethical standards. It would be funny if it wasn't so scary.

Let's assess the damage, just for fun...

1. The one cabinet secretary nominee who actually pays his taxes pulls out because the White House doesn't meet HIS ethical standards.

2. The super-secret plan to screw with the census is public knowledge before the first census-taker gets a clipboard. Attorneys are preparing lawsuits as we speak.

3. The blunder counter just ticked over...again.

4. Obama has run out of doubt-benefits.

Just making it up as he goes along...

"Yesterday, Jim [Owens], the head of Caterpillar, said that if Congress passes our plan, this company will be able to rehire some of the folks who were just laid off. And that's a story I'm confident will be repeated at companies across the country."

Jim Owens, chief executive officer of Caterpillar who announced 22,000 layoffs recently and supports the president's plan, was asked if he agreed with that re-hiring assessment:

"I think, realistically, no. The truth is we're going to have more layoffs before we start hiring again."

Nevermind that Obama lied, that's old news. The instructive aspect of this exchange is how someone charged with the major executive responsibility conducts themselves. Owens primary duty and objective is to produce results--to make Caterpillar a healthy and productive company. To do that he has to deal with reality as it exists and make adjustments accordingly. He's judged by the results he produces, not the rhetoric he utters. In fact, Wallstreet rewards companies whose performance matches or over-performs their predictions. Meet your quarterly forecast earnings--see your share price climb. Fail to do so, and investors bail out like rats leaving a sinking ship. The reason is simple--If your plan doesn't work as advertised, then you don't know what your doing and there is no reason for anyone to have confidence in your leadership.

By now you've probably inferred that this is Obama's responsibly as well, as the chief executive officer of the United States. Do you have ANY reason for confidence in HIS leadership?

UPDATE: Owens also came out strongly against the "buy American" provisions that may or may not be in the Looting bill.

“The worst thing that could happen right now would be a turn toward protectionism, nationalism,” Owens said. “We need to avoid things like ... ‘Buy American’ — sounds great. I’m American. I believe in our country.”

But, Owens said, “If we turn inward, it sends a terrible signal to the rest of the world, and I’m concerned that other countries will adopt even more protectionist measures for their countries.”

He's not kidding. Caterpillar exported 12.6 Billion dollars with of products in 2007, and they make those products here in the U.S.A., mostly in Obama's home state of Illinois. Wouldn't it be terrible ironic if the Democrat's incredibly stupid protectionist instincts resulted in 15% unemployment in Illinois?

Red state in 2010.

I didn't catch this--glad that Don Surber did...

Michelle Obama said: “You’re getting $600. What can you do with that? Not to be ungrateful or anything. But maybe it pays down a bill, but it doesn’t pay down every bill every month.”

Oh wait. She was talking about President Bush’s $600 stimulus last year, and not her husband’s $600 stimulus this year.

So she does get it. That makes it even more depressing. Still, 600 dollars beats 13 bucks everytime.

Also from Surber, is this:

The National Health Service may not provide health care in a timely manner, but by golly, it can provide separate refrigerators for halal, kosher, vegetarian and normal food — as well as admonish staff not to meet where alcohol is served for fear of offending Muslims, the London Telegraph reported.

I guess offending Mormons by drinking booze is OK.

Seems as good a time as any to point out that Mormons AREN'T offended by drinking. Mormons don't drink because they make promises not to--as a sign of their faith, like a yarmulke, a cross, or a Sikh kirpan. Its a matter of personal conduct, not general proscription.

Red state revival starting in Obama's Illinois? GOP Rep. Aaron Schock on the floor of the House. What kills a Skunk:

I got a kick out of this cartoon from Powerline, but while John Hinderaker reflected on how little the media love is really helping Obama, something else occurred to me.

Given the Democrats' control over Congress, this was an easily-achieved "victory," but Obama has tied himself irreversibly to the deeply unpopular Congress and will have to live with the consequences of the Reid-Pelosi porkfest, as well as TARP I, TARP II, and whatever additional follies the Democrats may come up with in the months to come. Nothing that reporters and editors can do will protect Obama from the effects of his policies: inflation, unprecedented debt, economic waste and stagnation.

What it really reminds me of are those delusional young mothers, praising their infant's clumsy locomotion, toilet training and barely comprehensible babbling as if they were all young Einsteins and Mozarts.

All the other mothers are of course laughing their asses off...

The Bust of Winston Churchill, on display in the Oval Office during all eight years of the Bush administration, and somewhat symbolic of the close ties between the U.S. and the U.K. has been returned by the Obama administration. Barack Obama, unsurprisingly, prefers Abraham Lincoln's image to Churchill's, but perhaps for reasons other than his admiration of the Great Emancipator.

Churchill has less happy connotations for Mr Obama than those American politicians who celebrate his wartime leadership. It was during Churchill's second premiership that Britain suppressed Kenya's Mau Mau rebellion. Among Kenyans allegedly tortured by the colonial regime included one Hussein Onyango Obama, the President's grandfather.

Yeah, no one saw that coming. You suppress the rebellion of some Kikuyu tribesmen armed with machetes, and as luck would have it, one of their descendants ends up as President of the U.S. Who knew?

That's a bit of a stretch though. New presidents redecorate--its one of the perks.

I do find it rather delightful that Barack Obama has a direct link to the Mau Mau Rebellion. The term "mau-mauing" refers to the act of menacing using intimidating tactics, an obscure reference to terrorism. Judging from this President's actions and announced actions so far, I think I'll start calling him President Mau-Mau...

My former blogging associate used to tell me quite frequently that one should never suspect malevolence where stupidity will do.

OK then, the Obama administration isn't evil, its just unbelievable stupid.

Obama yelps, "don't taze me bro!"

"Sen. Obama does not support reimposing the Fairness Doctrine on broadcasters," press secretary Michael Ortiz said in an e-mail to B&C late Wednesday.

"He considers this debate to be a distraction from the conversation we should be having about opening up the airwaves and modern communications to as many diverse viewpoints as possible," Ortiz added. "That is why Sen. Obama supports media-ownership caps, network neutrality, public broadcasting, as well as increasing minority ownership of broadcasting and print outlets."

There are two ways of looking at this. Dan Riehl has one of them

Karl Rove states what is has long been obvious--The Obama White House is "winging it".

Nevertheless, this fast start can't overcome a growing sense the administration is winging it on issues large and small.

Its a pattern, not an exception. These people are way in over their heads.

A lifetime of experience has taught me, and undoubtedly a great many other people, that you can never be too prepared. The unpredictable is just so...predictable. Every time I see someone truly successful at what they do, I also see a fanatically degree of attention to detail, planning and preparation.

The problem for the Obama administration is that they wandered into the combat zone without even the benefit of boot camp.

I'd read that Rove editorial if I were you...

Rick Santelli, CNBC on the CBOT floor says exactly what he thinks this morning. Open revolt.

CNBC reporter Rick Santelli's now famous rant has clearly rattled the Obama administration. How can I tell?

White House spokesman Robert Gibbs engaged in a shocking and totally unprofessional personal attack on Santelli.

"I'm not entirely sure where Mr. Santelli lives or in what house he lives," Gibbs said during the daily briefing. "But the American people are struggling every day to meet their mortgage, stay in their jobs, pay their bills to send their kids to school, and to hope that they don't get sick or somebody they care for gets sick that sends them into bankruptcy. I think we left a few months ago the adage that if it was good for a derivatives trader, that it was good for main street. I think the verdict is in on that."

Wow.

Santelli is some out-of-touch elitist who doesn't give a damn about the suffering out there in the country. Not like Gibbs, who has literally never had a real job in his life. As we've come to expect though, Gibb's was not long in beclowning himself.

Gibbs picked up a hard copy of the housing plan from the briefing room lectern and implored Santelli to "download it, hit print and begin to read it." Gibbs added: "I would be more than happy to have him come here and read it. I'd be happy to buy him a cup of coffee, decaf."

You mean the same legislation no Senator read before voting on it? Yeah, that legislation.

Michelle's jewelers roll out a budget line at Target. NY Daily News. Lynn Sweet spends some time with First Lady Michelle Obama, giving us a snapshot of her portfolio:

The newest item on her non-controversial agenda is healthy living. That's in addition to assisting military families, pushing work-family balance, national service, women's concerns and opening up the White House to the community.

The NY Times on Michelle as mom--the kids will have their First Chores:

NY Times' Krugman turns sour--we have lemon socialism. For once I agree with him. James Pethokoukis, US News, "Rick Santelli, The Man Who Talked Back":

Which, do you suppose, would be the bigger draw right about now: a) a Barack Obama house party supporting the housing bailout package, or b) a Rick Santelli-inspired "Chicago Tea Party" opposing the bailout package? Well, given that a) more Americans oppose the plan than support it, and b) Obama's house parties in support of the stimulus package drew mere dozens of Obamaniacs in major cities around the nation, "tea time" it is.

An old friend on mine just got remarried--for the third time. She is drunk with love, text messaging "I miss you" when her new husband is absent for a mere matter of hours. Its terribly amusing, but also a little sad--I remember this same behavior with both ex-husbands. One day she'll walk into the bedroom and see his socks lying on the floor where he dropped them, and the bliss will be replaced with a flash of anger and resentment. The honeymoon will be over.

Maureen Dowd found some socks on the floor.

In one of his disturbing spells of passivity, President Obama decided not to fight Congress and live up to his own no-earmark pledge from the campaign.

He’s been lecturing us on the need to prune away frills while the economy fizzles. He was slated to make a speech on “wasteful spending” on Wednesday.

“You know, there are times where you can afford to redecorate your house and there are times where you need to focus on rebuilding its foundation,” he said recently about the “hard choices” we must make. Yet he did not ask Congress to sacrifice and make hard choices; he let it do a lot of frivolous redecorating in its budget.
...

Blame it on the stars, Rahm, or on old business. But as Shakespeare wrote in “Lear”: “This is the excellent foppery of the world, that, when we are sick in fortune — often the surfeits of our own behavior — we make guilty of our own disasters, the sun, the moon, and the stars.”

Maureen is not the only one seeing the full bloom of love wilting under the weight of day to day living with the Obama administration. Jennifer Rubin, in a Pajamas Media post, lists the shocked and appalled Chris Buckley, David Brooks, David Gergen and Marty Peretz, as disappointed former lovers.

Some will no doubt chortle over the comeuppance of these media know-it-alls, but in some ways they are ahead of many conservatives who keep insisting that Barry is some evil genius with a plan. More on that later...

Its fairly clear to me that Barack Obama thinks there is one set of rules for George W. Bush, and another set of rules for him. Perhaps its because the mommy-media always picked up his socks for him, but whatever the reason, he seems to think that he can forever point the finger at his predecessor or Congress and safely maintain an Olympian detachment and a contrived centrist image. What was generally perceived as a beginner's mistake--the delegation of the stimulus bill creation to Nancy Pelosi, is more recently being recognized as a pattern--let Nancy do the left-wing dirty work to keep Barry's hands clean.

Yet as these pundit complaints reveal, those watching closely are not fooled, and those not watching closely will inevitably ignore such subtle distinctions and lay the blame or credit squarely at the feet of the administration. The Democrat brain trust seem to think that Obama has some sort of Reaganesque teflon suit he can wear to deflect criticism, and blissfully unaware that the teflon was a result of popular policies that actually succeeded. Reagan's landslide reelection could best be summarized by a question he asked in 1980 and then again in 1984--"...are you better off than you were four years ago?" Having done the big things right, the people weren't much interested in the day-to-day ticky-tack.

Click to enlarge-->

With a no confidence vote by the financial markets, the moral hazard of Obama's mortgage rescue plan, increasing unemployment and generally no light at the end of the tunnel, its a stretch to claim that Obama is doing the "big things right". Obama's wrong track numbers are in the red zone, and only an "improvement" relative to the spike in October during the Lehman Bros. debacle. Pollster.com aggregates the polls for an average wrong track number of 59%.

Historically wrong track numbers this high have always signaled an election loss for the incumbent during an election year. Clinton had numbers like this in 1994 when Republicans won 54 seats in the House,12 governorships and 20 state legislatures. It also marked the year that Clinton hired Dick Morris and decided to govern with Republicans instead of minority Democrats.

Currently the administration has some cover as there is still a substantial number of wrong-trackers who blame the Bush administration for the current woes, but both time and the growing disillusionment of the politically informed is going to erode that bulwark, and faster than anyone might expect. Truman's famous "The buck stops here" was less an acceptance of responsibility than a simple acknowledgment of the realities of the presidency.

There is no public consensus accepting the Democrat rhetoric that low taxes caused the current economic nightmare, which is simply counter-intuitive to most people. By contrast, the Republican narrative about how Dodd and Franks forced the banks into making bad loans is entirely plausible. Democrats and Republicans might have differing tolerance for corruption, but both have no trouble acknowledging its existence.

Sky-is-falling conservatives need to recognize the relative contributions of various environmental factors in determining the future political landscape. Only eight years after Nixon resigned, and party affiliation dropped to its nadir, Reagan entered the oval office with a Republican majority in the Senate. 2010 and 2012 could be significantly more impressive than that.

The Democrats have laid the groundwork for an ignominious defeat, but the scale of that defeat is entirely in the hands of conservatives who have an enormous amount of work to do to articulate a modern political program that borrows the best from the past, trashes the worst, and adapts to current issues like the environment, immigration, corporate responsibility, etc...

Yesterday I had lunch with some friends who recounted to me the story of an old neighbor who had built a successful business, sold it for 15 million and then preceded to lose it all--to the point that he was living with his adult children. Sounds terrible doesn't it, but this is American, land of the second acts. The same man ran across an interesting piece of exercise equipment at a trade show, and somehow managed to raise a quarter million to buy the rights. That piece of exercise equipment because the Healthrider--a company he sold for 100 million.

Failure always hurts, but its often a remarkable opportunity to move forward unshackled of the necessity to protect what you have. Republicans don't have to play defense anymore and can build a better future from the lessons learned from the past.

You are what you do, not what you think of yourself while you are doing it. 'His motives were good' may excuse a child who lights a match from curiosity. The fault that the house burnt down belongs to the adult who allowed the unqualified child access to matches. So, yes, if you never grow up, how you feel about yourself trumps all outcomes other than dying in the fire.

Kevin Hassett:

Obama is giving us the War on Business. Imagine that some hypothetical enemy state spent years preparing a “Manchurian Candidate” to destroy the U.S. economy once elected. What policies might that leader pursue?

He might discourage private capital from entering the financial sector by instructing his Treasury secretary to repeatedly promise a brilliant rescue plan, but never actually have one. Private firms, spooked by the thought of what government might do, would shy away from transactions altogether. If the secretary were smooth and played rope-a-dope long enough, the whole financial sector would be gone before voters could demand action.
...
you need to initiate entitlement programs that are difficult to change once enacted. These programs should transfer assets away from productive areas of the economy as efficiently as possible. Ideally, the government will have no choice but to increase taxes sharply in the future to pay for new entitlements.

A leader who pulled off all that might be able to finish off the country.
...
No More Deferral

On the tax hike, Obama’s proposed 2010 budget quite ominously signaled that he intends to end or significantly amend the U.S. practice of allowing U.S. multinationals to defer U.S. taxes on income that they earn abroad.

Currently, the U.S. has the second-highest corporate tax on Earth. U.S. firms can compete in Europe by opening a subsidiary in a low-tax country and locating the profits there. Since the high U.S. tax applies only when the money is mailed home, and firms can let the money sit abroad for as long as they want, the big disadvantage of the high rate is muted significantly.

End that deferral opportunity and U.S. firms will no longer be able to compete, given their huge tax disadvantage. With foreign tax rates so low now, it is even possible that the end of deferral could lead to the extinction of the U.S. corporation.

If any firms are to remain, they will be festooned with massive carbon-permit expenses because of Obama’s new cap-and- trade program.

It’s clear that President Obama wants the best for our country. That makes it all the more puzzling that he would legislate like a Manchurian Candidate.

NBC won't tell you, but I will. Obama just turned the corner on the economy, and I don't mean in a good way.

"What is required is a commander in chief that's looked at like a commander in chief in a time of war," Buffett said.

The coverage of his interview on CNBC is remarkably devoid of long quotes, and if you saw the interview, you'd know why--Buffett was singing a funeral dirge, predicting high double digit unemployment, but more importantly being distinctly, if mildly critical of the Obama administration's response to the crisis.

The media coverage is remarkable consistent--only reporting the most mild criticism and contrasting it with Obama administration official's arguments for patience as well as the inevitable point that the president is still popular.

Well, they have to say something, don't they?

Buffett is actually a latecomer to the party, but he's nevertheless a bellwether. His criticism, like Walter Cronkites criticism of the Vietnam war, is a sign that Obama's policy, and its arguments, have failed.

Just as important; the issue has turned from who is to blame for the situation (why Bush of course!) to who is to blame for not solving it.

Charles Freeman, an anti-Israel Hezbollah apologist with financial ties to the Saudi government and the Chinese government was nominated to head the National Intelligence Council. Obama's not to blame as Freeman was nominated by someone who reports to Obama. Obama is only the ceo. Then Freeman withdrew in the face of Senate opposition, blaming the Israel lobby. The immediate scandal is that Obama's 2nd tier appointments are a disgrace. The long-run scandal is that this Obaman rabble have fubarred everything they've touched. Has anything been well executed? Anything? The head of Britain's civil service says of his US counterparts that:

Downing Street was finding it "unbelievably difficult" to plan for next month's G20 summit in London because of problems tracking down senior figures in the US administration. "There is nobody there. You cannot believe how difficult it is,"

Fifty days after President Obama was sworn in, every senior post in the US Treasury Department remains vacant, with the exception of Timothy Geithner as Treasury Secretary, who should have 17 deputies.

Caption your own Obama poster here.

It was interesting contrasting Mark's morning rant with Camille Paglia's usually honest, if not always accurate assessment of the the political milieu.

Leadership apparently means something very different to liberals than it does to conservatives, a fact that liberals are only to willing to exploit when it suits their purposes. When Bush failed to show leadership, he was properly castigated even by his ideological confederates. When Obama fails to show leadership (which apparently is every waking moment), his ideological confederates blame his subordinates.

Heads should be rolling at the White House for the embarrassing series of flubs that have overshadowed President Obama's first seven weeks in office and given the scattered, demoralized Republicans a huge boost toward regrouping and resurrection. (Michelle, please use those fabulous toned arms to butt some heads!)

First it was that chaotic pig rut of a stimulus package, which let House Democrats throw a thousand crazy kitchen sinks into what should have been a focused blueprint for economic recovery. Then it was the stunt of unnerving Wall Street by sending out a shrill duo of slick geeks (Timothy Geithner and Peter Orszag) as the administration's weirdly adolescent spokesmen on economics. Who could ever have confidence in that sorry pair?

And then there was the fiasco of the ham-handed White House reception for British Prime Minister Gordon Brown, which was evidently lacking the most basic elements of ceremony and protocol. Don't they read the "Iliad" anymore in the Ivy League? Check that out for the all-important ritual of gift giving, which has cemented alliances around the world for 5,000 years.

President Obama -- in whom I still have great hope and confidence -- has been ill-served by his advisors and staff. Yes, they have all been blindsided and overwhelmed by the crushing demands of the presidency. But I continue to believe in citizen presidents, who must learn by doing, even in a perilous age of terrorism. Though every novice administration makes blunders and bloopers, its modus operandi should not be a conspiratorial reflex cynicism.

Apparently, liberals really do prefer the French model of government, where the President confines himself to the symbolic acts of a head of state and any political safe activities he chooses. The rest he delegates to the Prime Minister (Nancy Pelosi?)

Just a couple of problems with this. The first is that regardless of how liberals would like Americans to perceive blame and credit, American tradition accords them almost solely to the President. This is of course due to the fact that Americans understand leadership to mean responsibility--a view reinforced every week in the narrative of both professional and amateur sports. Players who blame their teammates or "environmental factors" are condemned as cry-babies and losers.

The second, subsidiary reason is that the very people Paglia castigates aren't holdovers from the hated Bush administration, but Obama appointees. These are his people, and they inevitably reflect his values and judgment. If they are incompetent, arrogant and irresponsible, well its simply a reflection of the values of the Obama administration, and specifically the values of the President.

Its understandable that Obama supporters don't want to believe their eyes and ears, afterall, they elected Captain Kirk, not William Shatner. Nevertheless, the epic fail of this administration is painfully and embarrassingly obvious, and rhetorical efforts to spin only serve to create new laughingstocks.

What's interesting to me is the pattern I'm seeing. After 9/11, Bush also had this reservoir of goodwill with the American people, so his critics, both conservative and liberal, focused on those surrounding him--Rove, Cheney, etc... Bush was getting "bad advice". Eventually though, Bush's 'good will' tank was on 'E' and the attacks refocused on him. That took years-- this situation is developing on a seemingly impossibly accelerated schedule.

Setting aside the politics, the reality of this administration is devastating. As Mark reported, The British PM's office can't find senior American administration officials to talk to about the upcoming G20 summit.

Venting drive plasma, phasers off-line, shields failing. Its Kobiyashi Maru time.

UPDATE: From Small Dead Animals, a recollection by Carol Platt Liebau on Barack Obama's days as President of Harvard Law Review.

When he was at the HLR you did get a very distinct sense that he was the kind of guy who much more interested in being the president of the Review, than he was in doing anything as president of the Review.

A lot of the time he quote/unquote "worked from home", which was sort of a shorthand - and people would say it sort of wryly - shorthand for not really doing much. He just wasn't around. Most of the day to day work was carried out by the managing editor of the Review, my predecessor, a great guy called Tom Pirelli whose actually going to be one of the assistant attorney generals now.

He's the one who did most of the day to day work. Barack Obama was nowhere to be seen. Occasionally he would drop in he would talk to people, and then he'd leave again as though his very arrival had been a benediction in and of itself, but not very much got done.

So, you know, you see that and you think, gosh, maybe that's the way the guy operates, hut then you figure ok, obviously he always had his eye on bigger and better things.

This explains a lot, doesn't it?

Mitt Romney weighs in on the AIG bonus scandal and reminds us what a tragedy it is that he's not the President.

The news that employees at AIG are on the verge of being rewarded $165 million in bonuses at a time when the insurance giant is on the verge of collapse is rightly shocking to taxpayers who have pumped billions into the company to keep it afloat. Of course, the Obama administration was wrong to initially defend the bonuses as contractually obligated. In 1990, I was asked to assume the CEO position at the management consulting firm Bain & Co., then in acute financial distress. The need to restructure was paramount or else the company would fail, leaving 1,000 employees without a job. We renegotiated debt with bankers. We rewrote leases with landlords. We designed a whole new governing system. We also had to convince the founding partners to turn back profits they had already taken out of the company. Of course, we had no legal basis for making such a request, but without a shared sacrifice we couldn’t keep the company alive. Generously, the founders returned the money, putting us on a path to stabilizing the firm and turning it over to new leadership. It’s difficult to understand why the same lesson about shared sacrifice is lost on AIG’s executive team and their government overseers.

The odd thing is that Mitt Romney has proved conclusively that rescuing things is good politics. While the resurrection of Bain & Co. made Romney a rich man, the Lazarus routine on the Salt Lake 2002 Winter Olympics made him governor of Massachusetts. Its hard to image Obama etal wanting to fail, but as even Obama supporters are discovering, hope, finally, isn't a strategy.

Not long ago, after a string of especially bad days for the Obama administration, a veteran Democratic pol approached me with a pained look on his face and asked, "Do you think they know what they're doing?"

The question caught me off guard because the man is a well-known Obama supporter. As we talked, I quickly realized his asking suggested his own considerable doubts.

Yes, it's early, but an eerily familiar feeling is spreading across party lines and seeping into the national conversation. It's a nagging doubt about the competency of the White House.

The worries have turned into polite pleas and gentle criticism from such Obama supporters as Ignatius and Broder of the Washington Post.

Everyone is dancing around the real cause of public disgust here--the AIG folks are doing nothing that Congress hasn't been doing for two months now--raiding the hen house.

Wallstreet attracts greedy bastards the way dumps attract seagulls, but they are pikers compared to Congress. The collusion of the Obama White House with Nancy Pelosi's mafia in the House resulted in a stimulus bill that delivered a mere 7% of its near trillion dollar price tag for actual economic stimulus this year. Even Bernie Madoff didn't have the balls for a rip-off on that scale.

This isn't lost on Americans, 82% of which regard the recent antics of Congress as deeply worrisome. Like Broder and Ignatius, they are holding on to vain hope that Obama actually does have a plan. He doesn't.

Who is more stupid, the King of fools, or the fools that made him King?