First time visitor? Learn more.

A fairytale presidency and Hollywood

by Speranza ( 100 Comments › )
Filed under Barack Obama, Democratic Party, Media, Politics at February 26th, 2013 - 7:00 am

For some reason I cannot help but think that Ann Romney or Laura Bush would never be invited to participate in the Oscars. Mr. Tobin reminds us of what Republicans are up against in trying to defeat the Obama/Hollywood/Media machine.

by Jonathan S. Tobin

No one who decided to go to bed or just switched the channel sometime before the end of a spectacularly boring Oscars show last night should be blamed. But if you did, you missed more than the identity of the winners of the major awards. In a night full of not particularly funny jokes or entertaining production numbers, and winners that most of the movie pundits predicted, the biggest surprise came when First Lady Michelle Obama appeared live from the White House to help Jack Nicholson present the Best Picture Award that capped the evening. Mrs. Obama is as graceful, attractive and well dressed as most of the film stars present at the ceremony. But the decision to include her at its conclusion illustrated a salient fact about the advantages her husband has been given and why the laws of political gravity do not seem to apply to him.

In the last year I have often written about how conservatives have underestimated President Obama’s political appeal as well as the kid glove treatment he gets from the media. The full explanation of his ability to escape the sort of critical scrutiny his recent predecessors have received is multifaceted, but I believe the most important aspect of this phenomenon is what I call the “Camelot” factor. The Obamas are the beneficiaries of a media whose liberal bias is beyond doubt.  [.......]

It almost goes without saying that it is impossible to imagine any other recent First Lady being invited to present the Best Picture Oscar. Mrs. Obama’s many fans will argue that she is the most stylish and perhaps attractive of recent presidential wives, and perhaps they have a case to make in that regard.  [......]

While all presidents, including some of the most revered like George Washington and Abraham Lincoln, have always been subjected to abuse in the political arena, popular culture had always tended to treat presidents with deference. But ever since Kennedy, that salute-the-flag way of looking at our political leaders has gone out the window. Since then all denizens of the White House have been subjected to the same cynical and sarcastic treatment accorded everybody else in contemporary American culture. Though liberals were certainly treated better than conservatives, they were not exempt. Not, that is, until Barack and Michelle Obama.

President Obama’s historic status as our first African-American president grants him the sort of edge that no other contemporary politician or any of his successors can ever hope to acquire. But the strength of his position is not just a function of a lapdog liberal media that is so easily led around by the nose by White House flacks. The Obamas are not just the leading figures in our politics; they are treated by popular culture as the uncrowned king and queen of America.

[.......]

Part of this is seen in the way the first lady and the Obama children are held exempt from the sort of nasty criticism that has been the normal fare of every presidential family since Jacqueline Kennedy, Caroline and John-John were the darlings of the press. The children of even liberal presidents such as Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton were the butts of jokes–but not the Obama kids.

But the ability of the Obamas to preside over American culture like apolitical monarchs while simultaneously taking part in some of the most bitter, partisan and demagogic political warfare against their opponents gives the president an enormous advantage in everything he does, whether it is conducting a re-election campaign or bullying Congress to raise taxes.

Prior to the Oscars, it was understood that politics had torpedoed the chances of the superior “Zero Dark Thirty” from winning the top award. But Mrs. Obama’s presence in the ceremony told us more about the intersection of culture and politics than even that travesty.

Republicans have spent much of the last few months since their defeat at the hands of President Obama engaged in an orgy of introspection and recrimination. A good deal of that is justified. But as much as they need to rethink their approach to some issues, as well as their messaging, they would be foolish to think that their losses in 2008 and 2012 are unconnected to their bad fortune in being matched up against a Camelot presidency.

Read the rest – The Oscars, the Obamas, and Camelot

Tags: ,

Comments

Comments and respectful debate are both welcome and encouraged.

Comments are the sole opinion of the comment writer, just as each thread posted is the sole opinion or post idea of the administrator that posted it or of the readers that have written guest posts for the Blogmocracy.

Obscene, abusive, or annoying remarks may be deleted or moved to spam for admin review, but the fact that particular comments remain on the site in no way constitutes an endorsement of their content by any other commenter or the admins of this Blogmocracy.

We're not easily offended and don't want people to think they have to walk on eggshells around here (like at another place that shall remain nameless) but of course, there is a limit to everything.

Play nice!

100 Responses to “A fairytale presidency and Hollywood”
( jump to bottom )

  1. 1 | February 26, 2013 7:34 am

    This is one of the reasons, perhaps even the main reason, Obama was able to shrug off an almost impossibly bad performance on jobs and the Economy, the two issues that polls consistently indicate are first and foremost on Americans’ minds. Indeed, from all indications he simply doesn’t care about the unemployment situation, and yet voters returned him to the Presidency. It wasn’t helped by malfeasance by Romney’s top aids. The post we had yesterday about Romney’s top aid denying this very phenomena indicates that we were, again, betrayed at the very top by our Consultants. Whomever we choose for our nominee in 2016, I hope they have the wisdom to steer clear of Inside-the-Beltway consultants who are more interested in padding their resume with the Liberal Elites than they are winning.


  2. Tanker
    2 | February 26, 2013 7:55 am

    We (conservatives) can re-brand, we can take all social conservative moral, principle and values out of our platform. We can become a little less Godly (never letting our religious beliefs be part of the conversation). It really won’t change anything though. We can become just like the left and we will still be branded as the party not of the people (facts be damned). We have neither the means nor it seems the will to come up with a counter to the Media/Hollywood hold on our society.

    We see all the problems, we see all the things needed to be done. The problem arises when we try to get there from here.

    It would great to be able to even talk with each other (our side) without getting in the mud or pissing each other off trying to get our points across. We can lay the blame on one segment of our party and say if that group would just stay out of it we can solve this (and then wonder why they don’t go the polls), or we can learn that we are in this mess together and work together even if that means the party isn’t working and can’t be fixed. Then we start over!

    Do I have the answers, NO, but I still think I deserve a chair at the table without the stupid blame game being used to block me out!

    We’ll see where this all goes, I’m beginning to think the time has past for us to get our act together and come together. For now I think this is all I will have to say on politics for the next few months. I will read if solutions arise, but life has a way of pulling one inward, and it’s pulling hard on me now!


  3. MikeA
    3 | February 26, 2013 8:00 am

    Michelle Obama an attractive first lady?!?!? Is that guy on crack? Sorry, just don’t see it. Laura Bush was attractive. Hillary, Barbara Bush and Nancy Reagan, not so much. But Mooch? I’d become a tibetan monk before doing that….


  4. 4 | February 26, 2013 8:12 am

    @ MikeA:

    I don’t think she’s that bad, but her personality is abrasive as sandpaper. It comes from her Leftism, or maybe her Leftism comes from that. Someone that has had all of the advantages that she has had handed to her shouldn’t be so ungrateful to the Country that made that possible. That chip on her shoulder is what makes her unattractive, not her simple looks.


  5. eaglesoars
    5 | February 26, 2013 8:18 am

    Camelot, Shamalot. That was a post-assassination myth propagated by Jackie. There is a big difference between Jackie and Mooch. Jackie never wanted to be a celebrity. She used her social position to advance causes in the arts and history and that’s it. Mooch makes Beyonce look like a recluse and wants nothing so much as to be a star.


  6. MikeA
    6 | February 26, 2013 8:28 am

    @ Iron Fist:

    That has a LOT to do with it. Now that I think about it, I have known very physically attractive women who were very ugly once you knew tham and others who were just OK to look at but once you got to know them, become super-models.

    To get back on topic, fighting the whole media / hollywood / academia monsters is huge. I sometimes think we are too late. Of course, I also think the whole thing is gonna come crashing down because it is unsustainable. Maybe then, we get to hit the reset button like Hillary execpt it won’t say “That was easy”. This reset is gonna hurt big time.


  7. Fritz Katz
    7 | February 26, 2013 8:33 am

    Instead of getting our panties in a bunch over the very real pigs in Hollywood, the MFM, and our govt. Let’s get worked up over a fake pig:

    GEICO Pig on a Date Angers One Million Moms

    And it’s about time someone called GEICO out over their offensive treatment of cartoon animals. Bestiality indeed! I personally cancelled my GEICO policy when their corporation joined the boycott of Glenn Beck.


  8. eaglesoars
    8 | February 26, 2013 8:34 am

    The Obamas are the beneficiaries of a media whose liberal bias is beyond doubt

    One thing I’ve never seen asked/discussed is WHY is the media liberal?

    And why do they deny it?


  9. eaglesoars
    9 | February 26, 2013 8:43 am

    This has to bethe whackiest case of celbrity hubris I’ve seen in awhile.

    Meet the newest U.S. sports ambassador for North Korea: Flamboyant former NBA star Dennis Rodman becomes unlikely face of diplomacy for secretive nation

    These channels of cultural communication might appear untraditional, and perhaps they are, but we think it’s important just to keep the lines open,’ he said. ‘And if Washington isn’t going to send their Generals then we’ll send our Globetrotters.’

    See? These people think they’re actually important.


  10. Speranza
    10 | February 26, 2013 8:45 am

    eaglesoars wrote:

    The Obamas are the beneficiaries of a media whose liberal bias is beyond doubt
    One thing I’ve never seen asked/discussed is WHY is the media liberal?
    And why do they deny it?

    Stuart Stevens (Romney’s ****** up campaign adivser claims there is no media bias.


  11. Speranza
    11 | February 26, 2013 8:46 am

    What was Mooch doing surrounding herself with service men and women?


  12. Speranza
    12 | February 26, 2013 8:47 am

    eaglesoars wrote:

    Camelot, Shamalot. That was a post-assassination myth propagated by Jackie. There is a big difference between Jackie and Mooch. Jackie never wanted to be a celebrity. She used her social position to advance causes in the arts and history and that’s it. Mooch makes Beyonce look like a recluse and wants nothing so much as to be a star.

    From 1961-63 it was referred to as “The New Frontier”, not Camelot.


  13. Speranza
    13 | February 26, 2013 8:48 am

    Hollywood outsources its productions to Canada yet they get tax breaks from a friendly Obama administration. Can’t say that I am surprised.


  14. Tanker
    14 | February 26, 2013 8:51 am

    Speranza wrote:

    What was Mooch doing surrounding herself with service men and women?

    They were the servers for the Governors Dinner. Great way to use your military, make servers of them. Reverse of the old house slave…notice they are all white!


  15. eaglesoars
    15 | February 26, 2013 8:56 am

    Tanker wrote:

    Great way to use your military, make servers of them. Reverse of the old house slave

    That’s common military practice. As CiC, Obama did nothing out of the ordinary. Go to any shindig at a moderately high-ranking person’s place and you’ll see lower ranks working as servers.


  16. Tanker
    16 | February 26, 2013 9:01 am

    eaglesoars wrote:

    Tanker wrote:
    Great way to use your military, make servers of them. Reverse of the old house slave
    That’s common military practice. As CiC, Obama did nothing out of the ordinary. Go to any shindig at a moderately high-ranking person’s place and you’ll see lower ranks working as servers.

    I know all that, I served 29 years in uniform. Doesn’t make it right to use them as a backdrop for her though! Guess I should’ve used the /// tag.


  17. eaglesoars
    17 | February 26, 2013 9:19 am

    Tanker wrote:

    I know all that, I served 29 years in uniform. Doesn’t make it right to use them as a backdrop for her though!

    I WONDERED about that! I thought, gee, this guy has been active duty, surely he’s seen that before?

    As far as using them as backdrop, it’s only because Beyonce’s backup dancers weren’t available.


  18. 18 | February 26, 2013 9:23 am

    @ Iron Fist:

    I have apost on that later. Newt Gingrich eviserates Karl Rove and Stuart Stevens.


  19. 19 | February 26, 2013 9:25 am

    @ Tanker:

    Doesn’t make it right to use them as a backdrop for her though

    That’s what dictatorships do.


  20. 20 | February 26, 2013 9:26 am

    Speranza wrote:

    Hollywood outsources its productions to Canada yet they get tax breaks from a friendly Obama administration. Can’t say that I am surprised.

    The Republicans like idiots refuse to propose cutting tax breaks for Hollywood. They can use class warfare against the Dems on this one.


  21. eaglesoars
    21 | February 26, 2013 9:30 am

    gotta hop -- they day awaits

    ugh


  22. Tanker
    22 | February 26, 2013 9:32 am

    eaglesoars wrote:

    Tanker wrote:
    I know all that, I served 29 years in uniform. Doesn’t make it right to use them as a backdrop for her though!
    I WONDERED about that! I thought, gee, this guy has been active duty, surely he’s seen that before?
    As far as using them as backdrop, it’s only because Beyonce’s backup dancers weren’t available.

    I guess my greater point is that this administration has shown nothing but utter contempt (think ROE) for the military unless they (military) serves their purpose.


  23. 23 | February 26, 2013 9:38 am

    @ Tanker:

    Just like a dictatorship. We live ina soft dictatorship. Instead of a secret police, we have the Media-Entertainmnet Industrial Complex enforcing this dictaorship.


  24. RIX
    24 | February 26, 2013 9:38 am

    The Obama propganda machine is formidable & almost impossible
    to overcome.
    Here is the nightmare, if Mooch runs she will have all of those
    advantages.
    I know, she has never signaled that she wants to run, but………..


  25. 25 | February 26, 2013 9:38 am

    @ Tanker:

    That’s a Democrat trait. At least the Obamas aren’t the Clintons. IIRC, Clinton wouldn’t even let the Marines on Marine One. What a total scumbag Clinton was, yet the Democrats worship him as surely as they worship Obama.


  26. Tanker
    26 | February 26, 2013 9:41 am

    Iron Fist wrote:

    @ Tanker:
    That’s a Democrat trait. At least the Obamas aren’t the Clintons. IIRC, Clinton wouldn’t even let the Marines on Marine One. What a total scumbag Clinton was, yet the Democrats worship him as surely as they worship Obama.

    To bad the pilots didn’t leave his ass in mid-air.///


  27. Speranza
    27 | February 26, 2013 9:54 am

    Rodan wrote:

    @ Tanker:
    Just like a dictatorship. We live in a soft dictatorship. Instead of a secret police, we have the Media-Entertainmnet Industrial Complex enforcing this dictatorship.

    A soft dictatorship indeed!


  28. 28 | February 26, 2013 9:56 am

    Gun Control ineffective without forced buy-backs. “Forced buy-backs” == compensated confiscation. DOn’t let the name fool you. There’s no question the Obama Administration is considering confiscation, but I really don’t see how they get that through Congress. I guess we’ll see.


  29. Speranza
    29 | February 26, 2013 9:56 am

    Iron Fist wrote:

    @ Tanker:
    That’s a Democrat trait. At least the Obamas aren’t the Clintons. IIRC, Clinton wouldn’t even let the Marines on Marine One. What a total scumbag Clinton was, yet the Democrats worship him as surely as they worship Obama.

    Yeah Bill Clinton for all his “affability” really was and is a nasty guy.


  30. Speranza
    30 | February 26, 2013 9:58 am

    Rodan wrote:

    Speranza wrote:
    Hollywood outsources its productions to Canada yet they get tax breaks from a friendly Obama administration. Can’t say that I am surprised.

    The Republicans like idiots refuse to propose cutting tax breaks for Hollywood. They can use class warfare against the Dems on this one.

    The Republicans need to stop falling on their swords for millionaires.


  31. Speranza
    31 | February 26, 2013 10:00 am

    Rodan wrote:

    @ Iron Fist:
    I have a post on that later. Newt Gingrich eviserates Karl Rove and Stuart Stevens.

    Stuart Stevens, Steve Schmidt (McCain’s adviser in 2008), and Karl Rove -- three putzes!


  32. 32 | February 26, 2013 10:01 am

    @ Speranza:

    My wife met him one time. She said he struck her as a “total sleezebag”. I never saw what people saw in him, and I don’t see it in Obama, either. This hero-worship of a President is unseemly, and Obama would realize that except that he “believes [his] own bullshit”.


  33. citizen_q
    33 | February 26, 2013 10:03 am

    @ Iron Fist:
    They will do it at the state level. By dangling carrots such as money and power to fascists like cuomo and o’mally.


  34. 34 | February 26, 2013 10:09 am

    @ Speranza:

    All losers.


  35. 35 | February 26, 2013 10:10 am

    @ citizen_q:

    The Supreme Court may have something to say about that, though. We’ll see. I am very interested to see what the Supremes are going to do with that Seventh Circuit decision ordering Illinois to come up with some kind of concealed carry law. That flies in the face of things like Cuomo’s dictatorial power-grab in New York. Personally, I don’t think the New York law will withstand Judicial Review if the Supereme Court stays the way it is today. If Kennedy were to retire, though, and Obama appoint his successor, that could change drastically.


  36. Speranza
    36 | February 26, 2013 10:11 am

    Rodan wrote:

    @ Speranza:
    All losers.

    And all ugly pigs.


  37. Speranza
    37 | February 26, 2013 10:12 am

    Iron Fist wrote:

    @ Speranza:
    My wife met him one time. She said he struck her as a “total sleezebag”. I never saw what people saw in him, and I don’t see it in Obama, either. This hero-worship of a President is unseemly, and Obama would realize that except that he “believes [his] own bullshit”.

    He does have that sleazebag look about him. The rumors about him in 1992 turned out to be completely true -- terrible temper and an hardcore womanizer.


  38. citizen_q
    38 | February 26, 2013 10:15 am

    @ Iron Fist:
    I have little faith in the Supreme Court after the obamacare decision. Also, for a case to make it to the Court doesn’t it have to have been enacted and there be injured parties with standing to make a case that will work through the court system?

    Also look how DC has dragged its feet throwing as many road blocks as possible to thwart the Heller decision.


  39. 39 | February 26, 2013 10:17 am

    @ Iron Fist:

    It is going to be very entertaining to see what the IL legislature comes up with in the way of a CCW law. It’s a given that they want the appearance but no more than that than absolutely required. They know there’s certain lines they can’t cross ($ 5000 application fee and $ 5000 annual renewal, as an example) because they’ll be too blatent to stand judicial muster, so they’re going to try and walk a fine line. And I don’t think they’ll want a CA-type system, where some rural redneck sherrif might actually hand out permits to common folk. We should start seeing their brain farts this week.


  40. 40 | February 26, 2013 10:20 am

    @ citizen_q:

    Also, for a case to make it to the Court doesn’t it have to have been enacted and there be injured parties with standing to make a case that will work through the court system?

    In almost all cases, yes.


  41. 41 | February 26, 2013 10:25 am

    @ citizen_q:

    It’s not perfect, but it is the system we’ve got. If the Supreme Court fails us, we really have no choice left but resistance. That gets real messy, real quick. It is better than surrender mind you, but it will be along dark road.


  42. citizen_q
    42 | February 26, 2013 10:35 am

    @ Mike C.:
    Thanks, Glad I remembered my 9th grade civics. :-)

    @ Iron Fist:

    Agreed, I have hope, but I guess no illusions.


  43. lobo91
    43 | February 26, 2013 10:44 am

    Feinstein plans to stack the deck for tomorrow’s hearing:

    Dem Sen. Diane Feinstein: Gun Owners Should Decide Between “Personal Pleasure” And “General Welfare”…

    Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) said she believes a Wednesday Judiciary Committee hearing will “make the case” that her assault weapons ban is constitutional.

    The witness list for the hearing is United States Attorney for Colorado John Walsh, Milwaukee Police Chief Edward Flynn, Philadelphia Mayor Michael Nutter, and two lawyers. [...]

    “I think we will make the case that these weapons do not belong on the streets of our cities, that many of the parts of these weapons make them into weapons that are specifically designed to kill large numbers of people in close conflict,” Feinstein said today on MSNBC.

    “I’ve tried to do it carefully. We have 22 co-sponsors. I recognize it’s an uphill battle. But I also know that there — these events are going to continue and America has to step up. The mothers, the women, the men of America have to make a decision as to whether their personal pleasure is more important than the general welfare.”

    Feinstein said “grievance killers” can find automatic weapons “out of a back of a car, at a gun show.”


  44. 44 | February 26, 2013 10:49 am

    lobo91 wrote:

    Feinstein said “grievance killers” can find automatic weapons “out of a back of a car, at a gun show.”

    If they can get automatic weapons, then that shows that our existing laws are an EPIC FAIL. They really haven[‘t addressed what happens when a “grievance killer” uses multiple revolvers to comitt an atrocity. Of course, theiar answer is always more gun control. 22 co-sponsors, and I’ll bet two things: one, none of them are up for re-election in 2014, and two, none of them are Republicans. 22 co-sponsors may be all the votes she can get for this unconstitutional attack on American Civil Rights. Let’s hope that is all she can get.


  45. 45 | February 26, 2013 10:51 am

    Iron Fist wrote:

    @ citizen_q:
    It’s not perfect, but it is the system we’ve got. If the Supreme Court fails us, we really have no choice left but resistance. That gets real messy, real quick. It is better than surrender mind you, but it will be along dark road.

    I do not trust John Roberts.


  46. lobo91
    46 | February 26, 2013 10:53 am

    @ Iron Fist:

    I went to the source article and noticed that they left out some of the most delusional parts:

    “America’s laws are virtually nonexistent and, therefore, I think this is a good bill,” she said. “I intend to fight. I did it once before. If it doesn’t get done right now, be assured I will continue to press the case.”

    The senator said she’s racked up “lists and lists” of supporters for her bill.

    “I think we’ve got all the police. We have all the mayors virtually, the Conference of Mayors. Mayors against Guns. We have medical experts. We have virtually dozens of religious organizations, of every creed supporting us. We have just lists and lists,” Feinstein said. “I put together a little booklet that contains the basics on the bill, as well as a list of the endorsers, so we will be making our arguments. It’s very difficult to go against the NRA.”

    Our gun laws are “virtually nonexistent”?

    And she has the backing of “all the police” and mayors?


  47. 47 | February 26, 2013 10:53 am

    @ lobo91:

    Where the hell are these guns shows where I can buy an automatic weapon out of the back of a car? Do they have grenades as well? I am flat out of grenades, and I haven’t seen any in the local gun dealers in, like, forever.

    If, God forbid, a bus should run over that evil bitch today, I promise I will TRY to work up a tear.


  48. 48 | February 26, 2013 10:55 am

    @ Mike C.:

    Where the hell are these guns shows where I can buy an automatic weapon out of the back of a car?

    In her imagination.


  49. 49 | February 26, 2013 10:57 am

    @ Iron Fist:

    Uh, I’ve seen automatic weapons for sale at gun shows. From Class III dealers, of course, and subject to all the BATFE bells, whistles and hoops. But yes, in most states you could find them at a big gun show. Bring your walllet. Better yet, bring somebody else’s wallet, because you’re going to be out a very large chunk of change.


  50. 50 | February 26, 2013 10:59 am

    @ Rodan:

    Oh, I don’t trust John Roberts. Not after that ridiculous ObamaCare decision. But he is still the best shot we’ve got at stopping this mess cold. If he is consistent with Heller and McDonald, he will vote against New York’s laws, and he will uphold the Seventh Circuit in Illinois. I’ll take what I can get from a Federal Government that is way out of control.


  51. citizen_q
    51 | February 26, 2013 11:03 am

    @ Iron Fist:
    Nary a word about self-defence against multiple attackers?

    I wonder why older americans don’t take these attacks against the 2nd Amendment as disproportional impacting them? They / we will be deprived of the most effective avenue of self-defence as their physical abilities wane. Criminal predators know this.

    I pointed this out to one person I know who railing about the NRA’s opposition to “common sense” gun laws long before the current push. At that time there was this guy robbing elderly ATM users with a box cutter in the area. This gentleman was older and frail. I pointed out that predators look for the weak who cannot or are unlikely to fight back to victimize, just like him. I said the people robbed so far were very lucky. Instead of just forcing his victims to withdraw the max daily amount, he could just as easily kidnap them to continue milking their accounts dry.


  52. 52 | February 26, 2013 11:04 am

    @ Mike C.:

    Sure, but that isn’t what she is talking about. You don’t normally see them out of the backs of cars legally. I’m sure in any big city, though, the people you can buy cocaine from can get you automatic weapons for the right price. That is one of the big holes in gun control. The drug smugglers will just turn to smuggling guns t suplement their income. You are growing the consumer base for illegal operations. It is stupid if your goal is as stated to reduce crime. Of course, we kno wthat their goal isn’t to reduce crime, but that’s a different arguement.


  53. lobo91
    53 | February 26, 2013 11:04 am

    @ Iron Fist:

    22 co-sponsors, and I’ll bet two things: one, none of them are up for re-election in 2014, and two, none of them are Republicans.

    Here’s the list:

    Sen Blumenthal, Richard [CT]
    Sen Boxer, Barbara [CA]
    Sen Cardin, Benjamin L. [MD]
    Sen Carper, Thomas R. [DE]
    Sen Cowan, William M. “Mo” [MA]
    Sen Durbin, Richard [IL]
    Sen Franken, Al [MN]
    Sen Gillibrand, Kirsten E. [NY]
    Sen Hirono, Mazie K. [HI]
    Sen Klobuchar, Amy [MN]
    Sen Lautenberg, Frank R. [NJ]
    Sen Levin, Carl [MI]
    Sen Menendez, Robert [NJ]
    Sen Mikulski, Barbara A. [MD]
    Sen Murphy, Christopher S. [CT]
    Sen Reed, Jack [RI]
    Sen Rockefeller, John D., IV
    Sen Schatz, Brian [HI]
    Sen Schumer, Charles E. [NY]
    Sen Warren, Elizabeth [MA]
    Sen Whitehouse, Sheldon [RI]


  54. 54 | February 26, 2013 11:04 am

    @ Iron Fist:

    None of the 5 that voted in the majority on Heller or McDonald are going to vote to overturn themselves.


  55. 55 | February 26, 2013 11:08 am

    @ Iron Fist:

    I think Roberts has turned. This will be a test.


  56. Lily
    56 | February 26, 2013 11:13 am

    @ Tanker:

    We (conservatives) can re-brand, we can take all social conservative moral, principle and values out of our platform. We can become a little less Godly (never letting our religious beliefs be part of the conversation). It really won’t change anything though. We can become just like the left and we will still be branded as the party not of the people (facts be damned). We have neither the means nor it seems the will to come up with a counter to the Media/Hollywood hold on our society.

    This is the problem…obama…period. Something we haven’t seen in ordinary politicians in a while. I’m not sure there was anything we our conservatives could have done with the media on obama’s side and he even won re-election with Benghazi right on the heels of that election!!! No other politician would have been able to over come that. No obama is something different and nothing sticks to him. Nothing. Not to mention as you pointed out you could become like the left and still this election would have been lost to obama.


  57. 57 | February 26, 2013 11:14 am

    @ Mike C.:

    I agree. It would be almost unprecedented to see that kind of switch in viewpoint. The lines are pretty clearly drawn. I think Sotomayor will vote for gun control, though, despite having told congress that he sees Heller as binding precedent. That was just for the rubes who voted for her in Congress. Everybody knew she was lying when she said it.


  58. lobo91
    58 | February 26, 2013 11:17 am

    An example of the “police” who back Feinstein’s bill:

    Chicago’s Anti-Gun Police Chief Admits He Has Never Seen A Legal Firearm Owner Commit A Crime With A Gun, “It Just Doesn’t Happen”…

    During Feb. 22 testimony before an Illinois state house committee, Chicago Police Superintendent Garry McCarthy admitted he’s never seen anyone with a Firearm Owner’s Identification Card (FOID) commit a gun offense.

    “It just doesn’t happen,” McCarthy said.

    Instead, McCarthy alleged most gun violence comes from gang members, who are “not eligible to receive [FOID] cards” to begin with. This also means they are not eligible to own guns in the state of Illinois.

    But hey…we can’t restrict gun ownership by criminals, so we have to do what we can, right?


  59. Lily
    59 | February 26, 2013 11:17 am

    @ Tanker:

    Well sometimes Tanker life is more important than politic’s and of course the rehashing and blaming does get old when the election was lost. But the main reason is we have a damn different type of politician with obama…and personally I don’t think anyone could have beat him. I highly over-estimated the amount of people who really worship him. Shameful.


  60. 60 | February 26, 2013 11:19 am

    @ Lily:

    What is scary is that Obama has bult a practibly invincible electoral machine in the guise of OFA. He will not be on the ballot in 2016, but whoever he gives his blessings to will be the Democrat nominee in 2016 and the next President.

    Unless Republicans get their act together, we are facing Democratic dominance until 2020 at the earliest.


  61. 61 | February 26, 2013 11:19 am

    @ Iron Fist:

    Well, remember that Heller didn’t say anything about the right to carry, concealed or otherwise. Nor did McDonald. So anything that might involve that 7th circuit opinion RE IL (and so far as I know, IL hasn’t even appealed to SCOTUS for cert, yet) is new ground.


  62. citizen_q
    62 | February 26, 2013 11:21 am

    @ Iron Fist:
    @ lobo91:

    Another feinswine whopper

    Assault weapons are “personal pleasure[s]” that should not take precedence over the good of the nation,” she said.

    Sounds like direct nazi quote from the thirties.

    I wonder how long it will take for people to start seeing the totalitarianism? Perhaps when this logic is used to rationalize palliative care, and thus the early deaths of many loved ones of us serfs while the elites and their families get care for the same conditions granny could not get and live?


  63. 63 | February 26, 2013 11:21 am

    @ Lily:

    I highly over-estimated the amount of people who really worship him.

    I was warning people here and told to shut up. That is why I did not comment much in the week before the election. People were getting mad at me for speaking the truth. I was warning everyone Obama was hard to be beat.

    Oh well!


  64. 64 | February 26, 2013 11:23 am

    @ Mike C.:

    I haven’t heard whether Illinois will appeal or not, but I think it likely. You are right. Defining the right to keep and bear arms as existing outside the home would be new ground. I hope that the same five justices that decided Heller will “find” this right in the Right to Keep and Bear Arms. I guess it’ll come down to reading comprehension.


  65. Lily
    65 | February 26, 2013 11:24 am

    RIX wrote:

    The Obama propganda machine is formidable & almost impossible
    to overcome.
    Here is the nightmare, if Mooch runs she will have all of those
    advantages.
    I know, she has never signaled that she wants to run, but………..

    But she may want the celebrity part and the un-ending money to vacation and buy that she has now.


  66. lobo91
    66 | February 26, 2013 11:26 am

    Given that we now have the 10th and 7th Circuits issuing conflicting rulings, this issue probably will end up at the Supreme Court:

    10th Circuit Court of Appeals: Constitution does not protect the right to concealed-carry

    The Second Amendment’s guarantee of a right to bear arms does not extend to the right to carry a concealed weapon in public, a federal appeals court in Denver has ruled.

    “We conclude that the carrying of concealed firearms is not protected by the Second Amendment” Justice Carlos Lucero wrote on behalf of a three-judge panel of the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.

    Lucero cited case law dating to the 1800s that put restrictions on walking around in public with a gun.

    “In light of our nation’s extensive practice of restricting citizens’ freedom to carry firearms in a concealed manner, we hold that this activity does not fall within the scope of the Second Amendment’s protections,” he wrote in the ruling issued Friday.


  67. lobo91
    67 | February 26, 2013 11:31 am

    And so it begins:

    Unreal: Obama Uses Pending Sequester Cuts As Excuse To Release “Waves” Of Illegal Immigrants From Detention Centers…

    The federal government released groups of illegal immigrants from custody across the country Monday at the same time the White House was making its case that impending budget cuts would harm efforts to protect the border and enforce federal immigration laws.

    Advocates reported “waves” of illegal immigrants being released from at least three detention centers in Texas, Florida and Louisiana.


  68. 68 | February 26, 2013 11:31 am

    @ lobo91:

    I believe the 7th ruling is in conflict with rulings other than the one you mentioned as well. Which means SCOTUS would likely grant cert, but so far, nobody has filed.

    Then there’s the complication of concealed v open carry.


  69. 69 | February 26, 2013 11:33 am

    Surprise, Surprise!

    GAO Report: Obamacare Adds $6.2 Trillion to Long-Term Deficit


  70. Lily
    70 | February 26, 2013 11:35 am

    Rodan wrote:

    @ Lily:
    What is scary is that Obama has bult a practibly invincible electoral machine in the guise of OFA. He will not be on the ballot in 2016, but whoever he gives his blessings to will be the Democrat nominee in 2016 and the next President.
    Unless Republicans get their act together, we are facing Democratic dominance until 2020 at the earliest.

    Not totally sure that this bubble of worship will be able to hand down to the next Democratic nominee. There are quite a few people who do not worship obama. Where they were this past November is up for grabs..but looks like most the cities. I could be wrong. But the obama’s are certainly tarnishing the brand if you ask me. But then again where I live I don’t see the hero worship like others do. In fact it is quite the opposite here. Normal people who don’t talk politic’s …talk it now since obama has been elected.


  71. 71 | February 26, 2013 11:36 am

    @ lobo91:

    This is done on purpose. Rand Paul said that is you just let positions go vacants when workers quit, you cans ave money. Obama will on purpose do the worse case crap to get public outcry.


  72. Lily
    72 | February 26, 2013 11:37 am

    @ Rodan:

    As far as Republicans getting their act together…yeah they need to do that..but what they are facing with obama is something I’ve never seen and I don’t think they have ever seen. What is the answer hell I don’t know…with obama whatever you think will work doesn’t.


  73. citizen_q
    73 | February 26, 2013 11:38 am

    @ lobo91:
    I thought the grabbermint has stopped detaining these future demonrat voters. They must be extra special. /

    Wonder how delusional you have to be in order to continue assuming they have our best interests in mind?

    Delusional enough to believe that being the serfs in a marxist thugocracy is in one’s best interest, I guess.


  74. 74 | February 26, 2013 11:41 am

    @ Lily:

    It’s not just cities Obama is popular in. He’s well liked in many Suburbs as well. Republcians only carried rural areas in 2012 and lost the Suburbs (some exceptions) and Cities to the Democrats.

    Progressives are giddy and OFA has not been dismantled. I would not be shock if the Republcians lose the House in 2014. Too many are still underestimating the Progressive Machine.

    OFA + The Media-Entertainment Industrial Complex = Invincble electoral machine.

    The Democrats have created One Party Machines in various Urban areas, then exapnded to the Suburbs and then State levels. Now they are doing this nationwide. Do not underestimate what these guys.


  75. Lily
    75 | February 26, 2013 11:42 am

    Rodan wrote:

    @ Lily:
    I highly over-estimated the amount of people who really worship him.
    I was warning people here and told to shut up. That is why I did not comment much in the week before the election. People were getting mad at me for speaking the truth. I was warning everyone Obama was hard to be beat.
    Oh well!

    No your warnings were taken into account. The problem is we weren’t seeing it and you have a lot of Texas and deep south and regular Southern commenters here. We weren’t seeing it. In fact we were seeing the opposite. Not to mention I was totally blown away by the low turn-out by conservatives! WTH? Romney may not have been what conservatives wanted but he was hands down way better than obama. To listen to his speeches he actually loves this country….obama not so much..in fact not at all. This country is heavily divided and that’s the way obama likes it and that is one of the ways he won too..besides voter fraud..and obama worship.


  76. Lily
    76 | February 26, 2013 11:48 am

    Rodan wrote:

    Surprise, Surprise!
    GAO Report: Obamacare Adds $6.2 Trillion to Long-Term Deficit

    I have had a lot of health issues the past year or so…and I have asked many doctors and nurses about obamacare. What they are saying is not good. Not only is it bad to people (think death panels or basically who will or will not receive care and the taxes people will pay for not having insurance). The really bad thing is that it is here to stay and will be very hard to remove and a lot of people don’t understand the bill or understand the ability of not being able to remove it once it’s on full force.


  77. lobo91
    77 | February 26, 2013 11:51 am

    @ citizen_q:

    I thought the grabbermint has stopped detaining these future demonrat voters. They must be extra special. /

    They are. ICE only detains criminal aliens now.

    Or did, until they let them go.

    Remember when Saddam released thousands of criminals from his prisons just before we invaded?


  78. Lily
    78 | February 26, 2013 11:51 am

    Rodan wrote:

    @ Lily:
    It’s not just cities Obama is popular in. He’s well liked in many Suburbs as well. Republcians only carried rural areas in 2012 and lost the Suburbs (some exceptions) and Cities to the Democrats.
    Progressives are giddy and OFA has not been dismantled. I would not be shock if the Republcians lose the House in 2014. Too many are still underestimating the Progressive Machine.
    OFA + The Media-Entertainment Industrial Complex = Invincble electoral machine.
    The Democrats have created One Party Machines in various Urban areas, then exapnded to the Suburbs and then State levels. Now they are doing this nationwide. Do not underestimate what these guys.

    Oh I’m not going to disagree with you as to 2014…but I’m hoping after that there is going to be a bad taste…but then again where I live makes a huge difference concerning how obama is viewed.


  79. 79 | February 26, 2013 11:55 am

    @ Lily:

    Obamacare is worse than what people think. There is already a doctor shortage in Florida.


  80. 80 | February 26, 2013 11:57 am

    @ Lily:

    I wish I was wrong, but OFA is something I have never seen at a national level. The Media and Popular Culture are in the tank for the Democrats. This is a soft dictaorship in the making.


  81. Lily
    81 | February 26, 2013 11:57 am

    Rodan wrote:

    @ Lily:
    Obamacare is worse than what people think. There is already a doctor shortage in Florida.

    Big time worse than what people think. We don’t have a doctor shortage here…and all the doctors I’ve seen aren’t going anywhere…but they do not like obamacare and are basically starting to freeze out new patients at this point in time. That’s not good either.


  82. citizen_q
    82 | February 26, 2013 11:59 am

    @ lobo91:
    Par for the course for the criminal way the grabbermint is being run.


  83. Lily
    83 | February 26, 2013 12:00 pm

    Rodan wrote:

    @ Lily:
    I wish I was wrong, but OFA is something I have never seen at a national level. The Media and Popular Culture are in the tank for the Democrats. This is a soft dictaorship in the making.

    I don’t think you are wrong right now….what I hope for is something will give..something has to give! I have never seen the media in the tank either like they are…it truly is surreal. The people I am coming across are seeing this. So all is not lost at least there is some hope. Some. How it will play out I have no idea.


  84. 84 | February 26, 2013 12:31 pm

    @ Rodan:
    We’ll see how well OFA is at selling gun control. So far that effort looks like a bust. Obama’s having to postpone his gun control drive right now because of economic factors. I wonder if he’ll just let it die a quiet death, or if he’ll try to resurrect it after sequestration?


  85. SciFiGuy
    85 | February 26, 2013 12:35 pm

    lobo91 wrote:

    An example of the “police” who back Feinstein’s bill:

    Chicago’s Anti-Gun Police Chief Admits He Has Never Seen A Legal Firearm Owner Commit A Crime With A Gun, “It Just Doesn’t Happen”…

    During Feb. 22 testimony before an Illinois state house committee, Chicago Police Superintendent Garry McCarthy admitted he’s never seen anyone with a Firearm Owner’s Identification Card (FOID) commit a gun offense.

    “It just doesn’t happen,” McCarthy said.

    Instead, McCarthy alleged most gun violence comes from gang members, who are “not eligible to receive [FOID] cards” to begin with. This also means they are not eligible to own guns in the state of Illinois.

    But hey…we can’t restrict gun ownership by criminals, so we have to do what we can, right?

    His statement proves that he is a political hack, stupid, or both


  86. lobo91
    86 | February 26, 2013 12:41 pm

    @ SciFiGuy:

    His statement proves that he is a political hack, stupid, or both

    He’s obviously a political hack. Just about all big city chiefs are.

    And from what I’ve heard, he’s beyond stupid.


  87. 87 | February 26, 2013 12:42 pm

    @ SciFiGuy:

    You see that he admits that gun control is basically useless for crime control, but he wants it anyway. I’m sure from where he’s sitting a Police State doesn’t look so bad…


  88. lobo91
    88 | February 26, 2013 12:48 pm

    Iron Fist wrote:

    @ SciFiGuy:
    You see that he admits that gun control is basically useless for crime control, but he wants it anyway. I’m sure from where he’s sitting a Police State doesn’t look so bad…

    As long as the murders stay in the South Side ghetto, he doesn’t care. Gangbangers are pretty much a renewable resource.


  89. yenta-fada
    89 | February 26, 2013 12:50 pm

    Hollywood is DEAD. From Sultan Knish.

    Hollywood has no problem being dumb, sleazy and violent. Those are all known and marketable qualities. What it does not look is appearing desperate. Desperation however is what the Oscars of this year and last year have in common. They stink of an industry desperately racing its own age and irrelevance reaching for gimmicks to try and hang on to a younger audience.

    The dirty little secret is that Hollywood hardly exists anymore. The industry is bigger than ever, but its bread and butter consists of 200 and 300 million dollar special effects festivals filmed in front of green screens and created in Photoshop and three-dimensional graphics programs. They star obscure or mildly famous actors and they do two-thirds of their business abroad.

    America is still the official headquarters of the global entertainment industry, but many of the bigger projects are filmed internationally with foreign money and intended for foreign markets. What the American corporations bring to the table is the intellectual property which is why the latest spasm of mergers and buyouts has focused on taking control of every treasury of classic marketable properties.

    Disney has put Star Wars, Mickey and Marvel Comics under one roof. It’s impressive from a business standpoint, but bankrupt from a creative standpoint. Old Americana is being milked dry for the sake of turning out another disposable movie starring familiar characters. The movies are actually still the same.


  90. lobo91
    90 | February 26, 2013 12:50 pm

    @ lobo91:

    Besides, after they raise the minimum wage to $9, everything will be fine.
    //


  91. 91 | February 26, 2013 12:52 pm

    There’s a lonely new thread upstairs…


  92. Speranza
    92 | February 26, 2013 1:01 pm

    Rodan wrote:

    @ Lily:
    Obamacare is worse than what people think. There is already a doctor shortage in Florida.

    Throughout the nation and it will get worse.


  93. Speranza
    93 | February 26, 2013 1:01 pm

    Rodan wrote:

    @ Lily:
    I wish I was wrong, but OFA is something I have never seen at a national level. The Media and Popular Culture are in the tank for the Democrats. This is a soft dictaorship in the making.

    It is a relentless machine.


  94. Speranza
    94 | February 26, 2013 6:34 pm

    Rodan wrote:

    @ Lily:
    What is scary is that Obama has bult a practibly invincible electoral machine in the guise of OFA. He will not be on the ballot in 2016, but whoever he gives his blessings to will be the Democrat nominee in 2016 and the next President.
    Unless Republicans get their act together, we are facing Democratic dominance until 2020 at the earliest.

    That is scary but probably true.


  95. Speranza
    95 | February 26, 2013 6:35 pm

    citizen_q wrote:

    @ Iron Fist:
    They will do it at the state level. By dangling carrots such as money and power to fascists like cuomo and o’malley.

    Fascists indeed!


  96. Speranza
    96 | February 26, 2013 6:35 pm

    Rodan wrote:

    @ Speranza:
    All losers.

    The Consulting Class. lol


  97. Speranza
    97 | February 26, 2013 6:35 pm

    Iron Fist wrote:

    Gun Control ineffective without forced buy-backs. “Forced buy-backs” == compensated confiscation. DOn’t let the name fool you. There’s no question the Obama Administration is considering confiscation, but I really don’t see how they get that through Congress. I guess we’ll see.

    Criminals will not be deterred that’s for shit sure.


  98. Speranza
    98 | February 26, 2013 6:36 pm

    citizen_q wrote:

    I have little faith in the Supreme Court after the obamacare decision

    John Roberts and that smirking face of his can go to hell.


  99. Speranza
    99 | February 26, 2013 6:37 pm

    Rodan wrote:

    @ Mike C.:
    Where the hell are these guns shows where I can buy an automatic weapon out of the back of a car?

    In her imagination.

    She has passed Patty Murray and officially become the dumbest Senator.


  100. Speranza
    100 | February 26, 2013 6:39 pm

    Feinstein and Boxer are the gruesome twosome of the U.S. Senate from the same state (until Ed Markey replaces John Kerry in Massachusetts to team up with Fauxcahontas Warren).


Back to the Top

The Blogmocracy

website design was Built By David