DNC To Make “Major Announcement” Wednesday

Hot Air is reporting this exciting news:

Democratic National Committee Chairman Tim Kaine plans to make what’s being billed as a major announcement Wednesday about the future of the party, according to a Democratic source with knowledge of the speech.

The source tells CNN that Kaine will announce something that will excite Democrats across the country. Kaine’s event comes as Democrats face the difficult task of holding onto their majorities in the House and Senate this November.

I don’t know about you, but I am on pins and needles…what could this major announcement be?  Another anti-Rush Limbaugh slogan contest? Perhaps they’re going urge Democrats across the country to battle Sarah Palin on Facebook, again. Or…. maybe they’re getting ready to introduce another exciting way to mock Republicans on Twitter? Maybe they’re going to announce another ad campaign to demonize the tea party movement…

Whatever it is, it’s sure to be exciting!

Or not:

WASHINGTON, Sept. 14 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ — Speaker Nancy Pelosi and House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer held a brief press availability this evening before a Democratic Caucus meeting. Below are the Speaker’s opening remarks.

“Good afternoon. It’s very exciting to be back in the nation’s capital. We’re about to join our House Democratic Caucus to talk about how we continue to move America forward. I’m very proud of the work of our Caucus — they had over 2,100 events to celebrate the 75th anniversary of the establishment of Social Security, to honor our veterans and our men and women in uniform who still serve. I had the privilege of speaking at the American Legion Convention in Milwaukee, Wisconsin. So it was about our veterans and how we honor their service and build a future worthy of their sacrifice by creating good jobs for when they come home.

“It’s about three things, about making a distinction between Democrats and Republicans. We’re for preserving Social Security, tax cuts for the middle-class, and ‘Making it in America.’ I salute our distinguished Majority Leader for his leadership. ‘Make it in America’— not only to manufacture it in America but also to enable Americans to make it in America. Preserve Social Security, tax cuts for the middle class, ‘Make it in America’— as contrasted with the Republicans who want to privatize Social Security, tax cuts for the wealthy, and send jobs overseas.

Aw…Sounds like the same ol’ b.s. they’ve been spewing for 50 years.


The Hill: Pelosi: Democrats ‘absolutely’ will retain the House in 2010

CNS NEWS: Newt Gingrich Predicts House Speaker Nancy Pelosi Will Retire:


Andrew Breitbart has a major secret he’s going to announce this week, too. It’s sure to excite Democrats all across the country – or at least Media Matters.

Linked by Michelle Malkin, Buzzworthy and Doug Ross’, Larwyn’s Links thanks.




Dan Riehl, Ace, RS McCainJohn McCormick, Allahpundit, Mark Levin, Jim Geraghty, Jeffrey Lord, John Hinderaker, Patterico

Especially those of you who are throwing rhetorical stink bombs at each other over your O’Donnell/Castle disagreements…

Jeez, I like all of  you guys, I hate to see you going after each other like this.

I try to follow Reagan’s eleventh commandment, myself. (Unless it’s David Frum). But if you must lash out at somebody, how about the DE Republican establishment for putting us in this ridiculous pickle.


O’Donnell wins.

Here’s hoping she’ll be able to ride the republican wave to victory in November.

But something tells me, that if the primary was this ugly, the general is going to be a beast.

Good luck to her.


We’re not getting off to a good start:

Michelle Malkin: Rove bashes O’Donnell; O’Donnell supporter at victory party strikes back; NRSC cuts and runs; Update: Soros Republican Castle won’t back O’Donnell


Obama’s Anti-Colonialist Crusade

You ever wonder what makes Obama tick? Is he employing Cloward/Piven or  is he just an economic illiterate? Why all the apology tours, and other foreign policy  peculiarities – what drives the decisions he makes?

This recent piece, How Obama Thinks, by Dinesh D’Souza, strives to answer those questions. D’Souza, who is a native of Mumbai, India, thinks he  understands  the third world mindset behind Obama’s anti-business, anti-American  policies, which he enumerates, here:

Obama runs up taxpayer debt not in the billions but in the trillions. He has expanded the federal government’s control over home mortgages, investment banking, health care, autos and energy. The Weekly Standard summarizes Obama’s approach as omnipotence at home, impotence abroad.

The President’s actions are so bizarre that they mystify his critics and supporters alike. Consider this headline from the Aug. 18, 2009 issue of the Wall Street Journal: “Obama Underwrites Offshore Drilling.” Did you read that correctly? You did. The Administration supports offshore drilling–but drilling off the shores of Brazil. With Obama’s backing, the U.S. Export-Import Bank offered $2 billion in loans and guarantees to Brazil’s state-owned oil company Petrobras to finance exploration in the Santos Basin near Rio de Janeiro–not so the oil ends up in the U.S. He is funding Brazilian exploration so that the oil can stay in Brazil.

Graphic via Stirring Trouble Internationally

More strange behavior: Obama’s June 15, 2010 speech in response to the Gulf oil spill focused not on cleanup strategies but rather on the fact that Americans “consume more than 20% of the world’s oil but have less than 2% of the world’s resources.” Obama railed on about “America’s century-long addiction to fossil fuels.” What does any of this have to do with the oil spill? Would the calamity have been less of a problem if America consumed a mere 10% of the world’s resources?

Graphic via Barack Obama’s Oil Spill’s Blog

The oddities go on and on. Obama’s Administration has declared that even banks that want to repay their bailout money may be refused permission to do so. Only after the Obama team cleared a bank through the Fed’s “stress test” was it eligible to give taxpayers their money back. Even then, declared Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner, the Administration might force banks to keep the money.

The President continues to push for stimulus even though hundreds of billions of dollars in such funds seem to have done little. The unemployment rate when Obama took office in January 2009 was 7.7%; now it is 9.5%. Yet he wants to spend even more and is determined to foist the entire bill on Americans making $250,000 a year or more. The rich, Obama insists, aren’t paying their “fair share.” This by itself seems odd given that the top 1% of Americans pay 40% of all federal income taxes; the next 9% of income earners pay another 30%. So the top 10% pays 70% of the taxes; the bottom 40% pays close to nothing. This does indeed seem unfair–to the rich.

Graphic via The BS Report

Obama’s foreign policy is no less strange. He supports a $100 million mosque scheduled to be built near the site where terrorists in the name of Islam brought down the World Trade Center. Obama’s rationale, that “our commitment to religious freedom must be unshakable,” seems utterly irrelevant to the issue of why the proposed Cordoba House should be constructed at Ground Zero.

Photo from NYC 9/11 rally via Eye On The World

Recently the London Times reported that the Obama Administration supported the conditional release of Abdel Baset al-Megrahi, the Lockerbie bomber convicted in connection with the deaths of 270 people, mostly Americans. This was an eye-opener because when Scotland released Megrahi from prison and sent him home to Libya in August 2009, the Obama Administration publicly and appropriately complained. The Times, however, obtained a letter the Obama Administration sent to Scotland a week before the event in which it said that releasing Megrahi on “compassionate grounds” was acceptable as long as he was kept in Scotland and would be “far preferable” to sending him back to Libya. Scottish officials interpreted this to mean that U.S. objections to Megrahi’s release were “half-hearted.” They released him to his home country, where he lives today as a free man.

Graphic via Rush Limbaugh.com

One more anomaly: A few months ago nasa Chief Charles Bolden announced that from now on the primary mission of America’s space agency would be to improve relations with the Muslim world. Come again? Bolden said he got the word directly from the President. “He wanted me to find a way to reach out to the Muslim world and engage much more with dominantly Muslim nations to help them feel good about their historic contribution to science and math and engineering.” Bolden added that the International Space Station was a model for nasa’s future, since it was not just a U.S. operation but included the Russians and the Chinese. Obama’s redirection of the agency caused consternation among former astronauts like Neil Armstrong and John Glenn, and even among the President’s supporters: Most people think of nasa’s job as one of landing on the moon and Mars and exploring other faraway destinations. Sure, we are for Islamic self-esteem, but what on earth was Obama up to here?

Photo via The 9/12 march on Washington

Theories abound to explain the President’s goals and actions. Critics in the business community–including some Obama voters who now have buyer’s remorse–tend to focus on two main themes. The first is that Obama is clueless about business. The second is that Obama is a socialist–not an out-and-out Marxist, but something of a European-style socialist, with a penchant for leveling and government redistribution.

These theories aren’t wrong so much as they are inadequate. Even if they could account for Obama’s domestic policy, they cannot explain his foreign policy. The real problem with Obama is worse–much worse.

Keep reading.

D’Souza posits that Obama, profoundly influenced by his father, is an anti-colonialist, making a convincing case that he thinks best explains Obama’s anti-American views.

Newt Gingrich, concurred, telling NRO that D’Souza’s analysis is  the “most profound insight I have read in the last six years about Barack Obama.”

“What if [Obama] is so outside our comprehension, that only if you understand Kenyan, anti-colonial behavior, can you begin to piece together [his actions]?” Gingrich asks. “That is the most accurate, predictive model for his behavior.”


“I think Obama gets up every morning with a worldview that is fundamentally wrong about reality,” Gingrich says. “If you look at the continuous denial of reality, there has got to be a point where someone stands up and says that this is just factually insane.”

When ABC’s George Stephanopoulos asked WH spokesman Robert Gibbs to comment on Gingrich’s view that ”Obama’s ‘Kenyan, Anti-Colonial’ Worldview Rules America”, he responded by saying  that Gingrich is  “trying to appeal to the fringe of people that don’t believe the president was born in this country. You would normally expect better from somebody who had held the position of speaker of the House.”

Not at all surprising that Gibbs would somehow work birtherism into the issue, since painting all Republicans as birthers is part of the 2010/2012 WH election strategy. But I suspect, despite his claims to the contrary,  that he does have a pretty good idea what Gingrich is talking about – which begs the question, why are so many Democrats going along with it?


Gibbs is now pushing back on Twitter:


GOP.Gov: President Obama’s Foreign Policy: Bewildered on Human Rights and Engaging Oppressors

See also:

Baldilocks: Origin of the Nightmare

There is a good reason that many Africans of that generation–educated in Europe and America–are socialists, aside from the desire to repudiate the capitalism to which most of the hated European colonial masters subscribed.  They were actively indoctrinated.

Most readers know that my origin and life circumstances are a mirror image of the president’s—some things are frighteningly similar; others radically dissimilar in obvious areas.  However, for continuity’s sake, here it is again: courtesy of the Mboya Airlift, our Kenyan Luo fathers arrived in America in 1959 to receive an American education, married and produced children with American women, divorced them, and, upon graduation, returned to their homeland.

Both of us were partially raised by the generation prior to that of our parents–in his case, his maternal grandparents; in my case, my maternal grandmother’s sister and her husband.

When Philip Ochieng and Barack Obama, Sr. arrived in America, their mentors were people like radical Progressives Cora and Peter Weiss, who—via the innocuously coined African American Student Foundation— funded much of the tuition, travel, care and feeding of the Kenyan students selected for the Airlift.  (My mother says that when she and my father were in college, their non-African–read: white–social circle included nothing but communists and socialists.)

And herein lies a crucial difference as to the reason that my life turned out differently than Obama’s: both of our biological fathers are socialists and atheists.  However, in Obama’s case, his mother’s immediate family consisted of socialists and atheists as well.  Mine does not.

Read it all.

Hat tip: Lucianne