Whether you agree with her conservatism or not, this was a well done video; uplifting in an activist sort of way. It’s not big on policy issues because it was never meant to be about policy issues but a renewal of the American voices that seem to be fading away in the cacophony of liberal angst. If those who shout loudest are the only ones heard, the next video fails miserably.

I can think of only one word to describe this one: Infantilism. There’s the nurse, the teacher, the therapist, and the entertainment lawyer. It’s scary to think these people are in charge of anything in any one of those fields. It’s even scarier to realize that at least one of them is in charge of someone’s children somewhere.

The last video reminds me of the old saying: “Babies raising babies.” If not their own, yours.

Crossposted at Redstate.com

I’m sure that by now, most of you have heard about First Lady Michelle Obama’s extravagant Spanish vacation. The story that was on the front page of The Drudge Report for days reported that Mrs. Obama’s trip would cost the tax payers around $75,000 per day (during a recession no less)–not to mention, it had photos of her wearing tight spandex leggings and a revealing, inappropriate top. In fact, Mrs. Obama’s vacation seemed so self-indulgent and over the top, that New York Daily News writer, Andrea Tantaros, called her “a modern day Marie Antoinette”.

Ruth Marcus wrote a column responding to Ms. Tantaros. In her column, Marcus conceded that the optics of Michelle Obama’s Spanish getaway might be less than ideal when she wrote the following–

“Let’s stipulate: A five-star resort on the Spanish Costa del Sol was probably not the first choice of White House spin-meisters for a mother-daughter getaway. Especially when the getaway included a posse of 40 friends of the first lady staying at the Hotel Villa Padierna, where rooms start at $330 a night, and photos of Michelle Obama strolling in Marbella wearing an off-the-shoulder number by Jean Paul Gaultier.”

[For the record, that John Paul Gaultier top probably cost over $2000.]

However, Marcus concludes her column by stating that we are all being a little hard on Mrs. Obama, and that maybe we should “give the First Lady a break”.

Well, I might tend to agree with Ms. Marcus if this had been Michelle Obama’s first foray into ridiculous behavior–however, it most certainly is not. Furthermore, if you will all bear with me, I am prepared to bring forth a plethora of evidence that spans back over two years in order to prove–beyond any reasonable doubt–that Mrs. Obama has gone out of her way to deliberately cultivate the image of a spoiled, entitled brat.

Now, let’s all jog our memories back to the Democratic primary. Does anyone remember when Michelle Obama said that, “For the first time in my adult life, I’m really proud of my country?”

I’m sorry, but how bratty and ungrateful can one woman be?! This is a woman who had attended Princeton University, Harvard Law School, was currently married to a US Senator (who himself was currently running for president)–and she was just now proud of her country?! Seriously?!!

Oh, and who could forget during the Democratic primary when she stated that she “would have to think about that” with regard to supporting Hillary Clinton if she became the nominee instead of her husband.

Again, I don’t think that it’s possible to sound much more bratty than that. You think that I’m being a little hard on Mrs. Obama? Well, imagine if in 2012, Sarah Palin was running for president and someone in the MSM asked her if she would support, say, Mitt Romney if she loses. And then, Palin replied to the questioner by stating, “I’d have to think about that”. The media would crucify her and everyone knows it.

And finally, does anyone remember how Michelle Obama would dress her beautiful ten year old daughter, Malia, in dresses to match her’s during the Democratic convention? Well, I personally didn’t have a problem with Mrs. Obama dressing her daughters to match her. However, what should trouble any parent is that her ten year old daughter not once, but on two different occasions wore a low-cut, spaghetti strapped cocktail dress on national TV–just so she would match her mother. (I’m sorry, but that dress is wildly inappropriate for any ten year old girl to wear.)

OK, now I realize that some on our lefty lurkers will be screaming from the rooftops, “But that’s not fair to bring up her kids!”. First of all, I am not judging her daughter (Malia is beautiful)–I’m judging her mother for putting her in two different inappropriate dresses for a child who is ten years of age. Second of all, could any of you imagine if Sarah Palin had dressed her daughters like that for the Republican convention (or if even Chelsea Clinton had worn a dress like that when she was just eleven or twelve)? We would never have heard the end of it! Andrew Sullivan (who is still obsessed with Palin’s gynecological records), Bill Maher, and Sally “the home-wrecker” Quinn (who has implied in the past that Palin is a bad mother for not staying home with her kids) would still be calling her “white trash” to this very day.

Oh, and if any of you are remotely curious, all of Sarah Palin’s daughters were quite demurely dressed for the Republican National Convention.

Now, let’s fast forward to the election of Barack Obama as President of the United States. Does anyone remember that God-awful, off the shoulder, inappropriate gown that Michelle Obama wore to the inaugural ball? It looked like something that Wilma Flintstone would wear. The guys over at The Hillbuzz called it “a yaba daba don’t” and wrote that she should be nominated for TLC’s What Not To Wear.

Moreover, after the inauguration, Michelle Obama’s insensitive, diva-like behavior continued full-throttle. On their first trip to visit the Queen of England, Michelle Obama gave the Queen an iPod and gave Prime Minister Gordon Brown some DVDs that were the wrong format for his English DVD player–and she gave Gordon Brown’s sons two plastic models of Marine One from the White House souvenir shop. (I’m not kidding–could they be any tackier?!) Oh, and it should be noted that Gordon Brown gave Barack Obama a pen carved from the timbers of a 19th century British warship, and his wife bought the Obama’s daughters beautiful dresses from Britain’s most exclusive children’s clothing store.

Oh, and did I mention that Michelle Obama wore a cardigan to meet the queen? Fashion icon Oscar De La Renta put it perfectly when he stated that, “You don’t…go to Buckingham Palace in a sweater.”

Furthermore, does anyone remember that soon after her husband passed a budget busting stimulus bill (because we were in the middle of a “great recession”), Mrs. Obama went to volunteer at a local D.C. food bank wearing $540 (extremely tacky) Lanvin designer sneakers?! Oh, yeah, she really feels your pain. (Can anyone imagine if Laura Bush had done this?!) Oh, and later that same month came the infamous “Broadway date night” when the Obama’s flew to New York at the tax payers’ expense right after GM had filed for bankruptcy and after Barack Obama, himself, had admonished CEOs for taking private jets to Las Vegas.

Then, a few months after those PR disasters, Dana Milbank of The Washington Post reported that Michelle Obama did the following in order to buy fresh kale from a local extremely overpriced farmers’ market (“$19 bison steak from Gunpowder Bison, organic dandelion greens for $12 per pound from Blueberry Hill Vegetables, the Piedmont Reserve cheese from Everson Dairy at $29 a pound”, etc.) –

“The Secret Service and the D.C. police brought in three dozen vehicles and shut down H Street, Vermont Avenue, two lanes of I Street and an entrance to the McPherson Square Metro station. They swept the area, in front of the Department of Veterans Affairs, with bomb-sniffing dogs and installed magnetometers in the middle of the street, put up barricades to keep pedestrians out, and took positions with binoculars atop trucks. Though the produce stand was only a block or so from the White House, the first lady hopped into her armored limousine and pulled into the market amid the wail of sirens.

Then, and only then, could Obama purchase her leafy greens. “Now it’s time to buy some food,” she told several hundred people who came to watch. “Let’s shop!”

However, Michelle Obama was just getting warmed up with her spoiled “I don’t at all feel your pain” act.

Back in May, as unemployment numbers rose to 9.9%, Michelle Obama threw a glitzy state dinner for Mexican President Felipe Calderone (you know, the guy who trashed the state of Arizona on American soil in front of the US House of Representatives)–and, she even brought in her favorite Chicago chef to put together an extremely ostentatious and expensive menu. To be specific, the AP wrote the following about Mrs. Obama turning the White House into “Club 1600 Ave.”–

“R&B diva Beyonce topped the entertainment bill for the dinner, taking place in the East Room of the White House, with the action later moving to a luxury marquee on the South Lawn of the presidential mansion. The marquee, the size of two-thirds of a football field, decked out in elaborate black decor and nightclub-style lighting, featured a stage and baskets of flowers and models of Monarch butterflies dangling from the ceiling.”

[By the way, I think that my colleague, Amy Miller, put it perfectly when she wrote that, "ONE DOES NOT POP, LOCK, AND DROP IT IN THE PRESENCE OF DISTINGUISHED GUESTS." But, I digress.]

Next came the oil spill, which really gave Michelle Obama the perfect opportunity to finely hone her Marie Antoinette/spoiled brat image. First, came the lavish state dinner to honor Paul McCartney who serenaded Mrs. Obama with the song “Michelle”–and, then proceeded to take a cheap shot at President Bush by stating that, “After the last eight years, it’s great to have a President who knows what a library is”. (I guess Mr. McCartney was unaware of the fact that Laura Bush is a former librarian.) Keep in mind by the way, that this whole spectacle took place as oil was continually pouring into the Gulf of Mexico.

Oh, and when Mrs. Obama finally did go to visit the Gulf Coast, she, literally, wore a dress that was “oil spill chic” (see image below). To quote blogger Doug Powers, “Yikes. That’s like visiting a state that was devastated by a forest fire and arriving in a limo covered with flame decals.” Please, allow me to put this another way. Suppose that Laura Bush had worn a “hurricane chic” dress when she went to visit Katrina victims? I rest my case.

Then, to make matters worse, instead of vacationing at the Gulf Coast in order to, you know, maybe help out the local economy there, the Obama’s instead decided to leave for a posh vacation in Maine the day after Mrs. Obama visited the Gulf Coast in her “oil spill chic” attire. (Not to mention, this wasn’t the first time that the Obama’s thought nothing about hurting part of the US tourist based economy. Remember when Barack Obama told people to “not visit Las Vegas”? Well, people in Las Vegas sure haven’t forgotten about it.)

So, after a long list of examples of egregious, bratty behavior–that spans over two years–we have, now, finally arrived at Michelle Obama’s recent Spanish fiesta, where she has been photographed wearing an extremely overpriced top (during a time of high unemployment) that kind of makes it appear like she’s “letting it all hang out” a bit much for a First Lady representing her country, if you get my drift (see image below). Now, some of you lefty lurkers, again, are going to say that I’m being too hard on Mrs. Obama. Except that I’m not. Remember when Hillary Clinton showed the tiniest bit of cleavage on the Senate floor and the MSM went nuts? The WaPo fashion editor devoted an entire column to Mrs. Clinton’s invisible cleavage (I’m serious–look at the picture in the link–I have NO IDEA what she’s talking about), and implied that it made people “uncomfortable”. However, a First Lady, literally, letting it hang out a bit in a foreign country is OK? Please!

[Oh, and speaking of dressing inappropriately as a First Lady, nothing says, "For the first time in my adult life, I am really proud of my country" like getting off of Air Force One looking like a hung over beach bum/spring breaker. Again, could anyone out there imagine the fallout if Laura Bush had let herself be photographed like that?! But, I digress. Seriously lefties, I can play this game ALL DAY LONG.]

In fact, the optics for Mrs. Obama’s Spanish vacation are so cringe-worthy, that even perpetual Obama apologist, Maureen Dowd, has criticized her recent trip on her husband’s 49th birthday no less. (Not to mention, Democratic strategist, Kirsten Powers, called Michelle Obama’s trip “extremely tone deaf” and then stated that, “I can’t believe that she did it”.) However, the Maureen Dowds and the Ruth Marcuses of the world are partially responsible for Mrs. Obama becoming such a self-absorbed, disgrace as a First Lady. Maybe if guilty, white liberals like them weren’t perpetually making excuses for her, and occasionally told the truth about her (gasp!)–instead of shouting “RAAAAACIST!!” (that’s five A’s) at anyone else who does–then maybe Michelle Obama might be channeling more Elenore Roosevelt right now, and less Lindsay Lohan or Paris Hilton.

In other words, Mrs. Obama’s Spanish vacation isn’t her first foray in insensitive, self-indulgent behavior–it is the last straw in a long line of ridiculous breaches of etiquette, as well as ridiculous outfits (as the embed below demonstrates). This whole Michelle Obama affair is a perfect example of an “emperor has no clothes moment”–or actually, it’s an “the empress has really tacky clothes moment”. Everyone has known for years that Michelle Obama, with her whiny attitude towards America, her sense of entitlement, her ginormous “boob-belts” worn over cardigans, and her insensitivity to the suffering of her fellow Americans, is a total spoiled brat of a First Lady. It’s just that, until now, everyone’s just been afraid to say so for fear of offending Oprah, Maureen Dowd, or getting kicked out of the Manhattan cocktail party circuit.

And hey, I realize that “disgrace” and “spoiled brat” are heavy handed words, but if the way overpriced Lanvin sneaker fits, well….

Put it this way, you reap what you sow and Michelle Obama has not sown a whole lot of good will with the American people. She has made her own bed–it’s time for her to lie in it. (Don’t worry–I’m sure that it’s fitted with the finest of linens.)

PS–I would like to start a charity for the First Lady. I plan on calling it “Find Some Red State Women to be Friends With Michelle Obama”. Why? Because I am convinced that if Mrs. Obama had some friends who were southern belles–like, say, in Steel Magnolias–that she would never go out and about looking so ridiculous (see 1:20 to 1:49 of the embed below to see what I mean). Red state friends don’t let friends go out in public looking silly, and we tell them when they are about to make a giant fool out of themselves. Just sayin’.

This diary was originally posted on NewsReal and The Minority Report.

Stay classy Obama...

Oh look, the “racist” cop is helping an elderly black man down the steps, while the compassionate Democrat strides ahead. No doubt lost in thought of how he plans to help the elderly with his health initiatives.

I also found this gem of a cartoon from a Jerusalem cartoonist.

If Obama has a beer summit every time he puts his foot in his mouth, Michelle needs to enroll him in an AA program immediately!

]]> http://manyfacesofbarack.com/2009/08/01/a-picture-says-a-thousand-words/feed/ 0 http://manyfacesofbarack.com/2009/07/27/race-baiting-101/ http://manyfacesofbarack.com/2009/07/27/race-baiting-101/#comments Mon, 27 Jul 2009 16:13:42 +0000 miss malevolent http://manyfacesofbarack.com/?p=1168 Once again…just like Obama goes into campaign mode when his “plans” are questioned by rational individualistic thinkers…he also likes to dunk a pail into the “race baiting” well to confuse and confound people from looking closely at his failed agenda.

Latest controversy to take our minds off of the health care debacle going on?

Gates.

Obama even after admitting he had no knowledge of all the facts, decided to open his big lips yet again to “weigh in on race” and stepped in it.

And while a lot of people may quibble with this young woman about her stances and beliefs…ones things for sure…she’s telling truths in this video that more of my black folk need to wake up to.

The problems in this country have more to do with class-ism than racism.

Uppity Blacks vs. Blue Collar Whites

It figures.
Obama called himself a “student of history” yesterday during his apology speech to the Muslim World in Cairo.
Unfortunately, this student of Far Left nutwackery was wrong on the Iranian coup history he mentioned during his speech.
Judith Apter Klinghoffer at History News Network reported:

Yes, the US instigated a coup against Iranian prime minister Mosaddeq but President Obama was wrong to assert that “the United States played a role in the overthrow of a democratically elected Iranian government.” Far from it, the US overthrew a wannabe dictator who came to power because his predecessor was assassinated by Islamists, yes Islamists and following an election he suspended for fear he would lose it. Does anyone in the administration have access to the internet? I found this on a most obscure source known as Wikipedia.

The American Battle Monuments Commission maintains the U.S. cemetery in Normandy, France. The cemetery is situated on a cliff overlooking the English Channel. The 172-acre cemetery contains the graves of 9,387 U.S. servicemembers, most of whom died on D-Day, June 6, 1944. (Courtesy photo)

Last year Barack Obama made the mistake of recognizing dead veterans in the audience(?) during his Memorial Day speech in Las Cruces, New Mexico:

On this Memorial Day, as our nation honors its unbroken line of fallen heroes — and I see many of them in the audience here today – our sense of patriotism is particularly strong.

Here’s the video:

Memorial Day, of course, is a time to commemorate U.S. men and women who died while in the military service. On Veterans Day we salute our military men and women.

Well, he just did it again during his Memorial Day lecture to the country.
The AP reported:

President Barack Obama saluted veterans and urged his countrymen to do the same this Memorial Day weekend, saying the nation has not always paid them proper respect.

In his weekly radio and Internet address Saturday, Obama said people can honor veterans by sending a letter or care package to troops overseas, volunteering at health clinics or taking supplies to a homeless veterans center. He said it could also mean something as simple as saying “thank you” to a veteran walking by on the street.

“We have a responsibility to serve all of them as well as they serve all of us,” Obama said. “And yet, all too often in recent years and decades, we, as a nation, have failed to live up to that responsibility. We have failed to give them the support they need or pay them the respect they deserve.

Speak for yourself, Barack.
Hat Tip David R. Graham

According to an account in Newsweek, Biden did give up one of the country’s  secrets at another dinner where journalists and politicians make fun of Republicans (and occasionally laugh at each other). Biden told his dinnermates about the existence of a secret bunker under the Vice President’s Residence at the U.S. Naval Observatory.
Eleanor Clift writes:

Ever wonder about that secure, undisclosed location where Dick Cheney secreted himself after the 9/11 attacks? Joe Biden reveals the bunker-like room is at the Naval Observatory in Washington, where Cheney lived for eight years and which is now home to Biden. The veep related the story to his head-table dinner mates when he filled in for President Obama at the Gridiron Club earlier this year. He said the young naval officer giving him a tour of the residence showed him the hideaway, which is behind a massive steel door secured by an elaborate lock with a narrow connecting hallway lined with shelves filled with communications equipment. The officer explained that when Cheney was in lock down, this was where his most trusted aides were stationed, an image that Biden conveyed in a way that suggested we shouldn’t be surprised that the policies that emerged were off the wall.

From Gateway Pundit

I think that Charles Krauthammer hit it out of the park, in regard to Pelosi’s behavior, in his recent column titled, “Pelosi: Utterly Contemptible”, when he stated the following–

Today Pelosi protests “we were not — I repeat — were not told that waterboarding or any other of these other enhanced interrogation methods were used.” She imagines that this distinction between past and present, Clintonian in its parsing, is exonerating.

On the contrary. It is self-indicting. If you are told about torture that has already occurred, you might justify silence on the grounds that what’s done is done and you are simply being used in a post-facto exercise to cover the CIA’s rear end. The time to protest torture, if you really are as outraged as you now pretend to be, is when the CIA tells you what it is planning to do “in the future.”

But Pelosi did nothing. No protest. No move to cut off funding. No letter to the president or the CIA chief or anyone else saying “Don’t do it.”

On the contrary, notes Porter Goss, then chairman of the House intelligence committee: The members briefed on these techniques did not just refrain from objecting, “on a bipartisan basis, we asked if the CIA needed more support from Congress to carry out its mission against al-Qaeda.”

More support, mind you. Which makes the current spectacle of self-righteous condemnation not just cowardly but hollow. It is one thing to have disagreed at the time and said so. It is utterly contemptible, however, to have been silent then and to rise now “on a bright, sunny, safe day in April 2009″ (the words are Blair’s) to excoriate those who kept us safe these harrowing last eight years.

Now, the funny thing is that I could actually forgive Nancy Pelosi this one factual inaccuracy (OK–outright lie) if this was her first brush with idiotic and untrustworthy behavior–but, unfortunately for the country, it’s not.

Remember during the whole TARP/Bailout bill fiasco when Pelosi gave that God-awful partisan speech–which gave cover to both Republicans and Democrats (who were already skeptical of the bill) to vote against it? (The embed is below). In this ridiculous turkey of a speech, Mrs. Pelosi actually has the unmitigated gall to make a fuss over seven hundred billion dollars (even though Obama’s porkulus/stimulus bill, that Pelosi subsequently helped write, will eventually cost the taxpayers over a trillion dollars). Furthermore, Nancy Pelosi also states, in the first two minutes of the video, that “the golden parachute and the government bailing you out–those days are over”. Well, again, Mrs. Pelosi was being disingenuous to say the least (OK–again, she was lying), because in the recent stimulus/porkulus bill, ACORN was given a 5.2 billion dollar bailout. Yeah, that ACORN who is under investigation by the FBI for voter fraud in thirteen different states. Oh, and who could forget about the recent AIG bonus debacle as covered by Dan Spencer or Obama’s recent bailout of the auto industries that even some Democrats opposed, but I digress. (I guess the days of government bailouts aren’t over yet, are they?)

Now, whether you were for or against the TARP/Bailout bill is neither here nor there. My point is that in another speech (which went viral under the title, “Nancy Pelosi: Dumber than Soap”–the embeded is below), Pelosi claimed that if we didn’t pass President Obama’s stimulus/porkulus bill IMMEDIATELY, that “five hundred million Americans would lose their jobs” (where she got that figure from, I don’t know–I don’t think that anyone knows). Anyway, my point is that Nancy Pelosi thought that it was urgent to pass the Obama stimulus package immediately in order to prevent millions of Americans from losing their jobs, and yet, she was willing to play partisan politics with the TARP bill which, to paraphrase Daniel Henninger of the WSJ, caused “the terrified stock market” to crater “wiping out individual voter wealth” when it fell apart? To quote Charles Krauthammer, that is “utterly contemptible”.

Now, I bet you are asking yourselves right now, “Can Nancy Pelosi’s tom-foolery, hypocrisy, disingenuousness, and out-right idiocy get any worse?” Well, I’m here to answer your question ladies and gentlemen–yes it can. Back in 2006 when Pelosi first became Speaker of the House she requested “regular military flights not only for herself and her staff, but also for relatives and for other members of the California delegation.” Now, it should be noted that the Bush Administration’s Department of Defense offered Pelosi the same plane to fly in that Dennis Hastert used when he was Speaker of the House, but Pelosi declined to use it because “She found it was not big enough for staff, supporters and other members.” However, in August in 2008, when asked why she was against offshore oil drilling, even though gas prices were going through the roof at the time, Pelosi replied by stating that, “I’m trying to save the planet”. OK–let me get this straight. Nancy Pelosi is “trying save the planet” by regularly flying herself and her posse across the country (creating a carbon foot-print the size of a Sasquatch’s), but we poor plebiscites are supposed to suck it up and pay $4.00 a gallon for gas, because she has a problem with offshore drilling. Man, that’s really rich. It kind of reminds me of President Obama telling us to turn down our thermostats while he cranks his up, but I digress.

However, if anyone was really interested in getting a clear view into both Nancy Pelosi’s character and competency, one only needed to look at who she initially tried to appoint to be the House Majority Leader, as well as who she eventually appointed to be be the head of the House Intelligence Committee, back in 2006 when she first became the Speaker of the House. In 2006 when the Democrats first took back the House and the Senate, the very liberal LA Times wrote a scathing op-ed about Nancy Pelosi titled, “Don’t Snub Harman”. Below is an excerpt from the column–

NEWLY MINTED House Speaker Nancy Pelosi is off to a rocky start. On the same day she was formally elected to lead the new Democratic majority, party colleagues refused to endorse her bizarre choice of Rep. John P. Murtha (D-Pa.), who was investigated but not charged in the Abscam scandal more than two decades ago, as her second-in-command.

That embarrassing experience should induce Pelosi (D-San Francisco) — who appeared chastened before reporters Thursday — to reconsider another ill-advised promotion: Her apparent intention to bestow the chairmanship of the House Intelligence Committee not on the panel’s ranking Democrat, Rep. Jane Harman (D-Venice), but on Rep. Alcee L. Hastings (D-Fla.).

Hastings, like Murtha, seems an unlikely choice for a leadership role in what Pelosi has been advertising as “the most honest, the most open and the most ethical Congress in history.” Hastings was impeached as a federal judge and removed from office in the late 1980s (although he was acquitted of bribery in a criminal trial in 1983).

A litany of explanations have been adduced to explain why Pelosi would bypass Harman, an expert on intelligence matters who has won the respect of both parties while criticizing some of the Bush administration’s excesses in the war on terror. None of them is persuasive. Harman has earned this chairmanship.

But, what this op-ed doesn’t mention is WHO exactly Nancy Pelosi wound up picking to head the House Intelligence committee. After Pelosi found herself the butt of much ridicule due to her “bizarre” and ethically challenged choices after hammering Republicans for having a “culture of corruption”, she settled on Sylvester Reyes (D-TX) to head the House Intelligence Committee–a man who did not know the difference between a Sunni and a Shia Muslim. Furthermore, when Reyes was pressed to answer if he knew anything at all about Hezbollah (the Shia Iranian terrorist group), Reyes responded by using the Sammy Sosa Defense (i.e., the “No habla Ingles”/”I speak no English” defense). I’m not kidding. This is the man that Nancy Pelosi put in charge of the House Intelligence Committee–think about that for a second. It clearly demonstrates just how seriously she takes our national security.

Now, I realize that Harman is embroiled in a semi-scandal of her own having to do with the Israeli Public Affairs Committee (although, the LA Times has an interesting column saying that the Harman scandal is really just some members of the Obama Administration’s Justice Department engaging in CYA–you can be the judge); however, I would be willing to bet dollars to donuts that Jane Harman knows the difference between a Sunni and a Shia, and that she wouldn’t use the “Sammy Sosa Defense” if she didn’t know the answer to a question.

But, what I find the most troubling is something that I read from a liberal blog called The Reaction. In their column, they basically admit that (and I’m paraphrasing) “Harman was backed by the Blue Dog Coalition”….”she is respected by her colleagues on both sides of the isle”….”Pelosi didn’t consider Harman partisan enough and thought that she has not been a tough enough critic of the Bush Administration”…..they quote and cite Robert Novak as saying that “Pelosi’s judgment might be distorted by personal considerations”…..and finally that “Pelosi needs to look beyond herself to the good of the country”. If this is true, then to me it is “utterly contemptible” that Nancy Pelosi would jeopardize our national security–by appointing a man to head the House Intelligence Committee who doesn’t know the difference between a Sunni and a Shia–simply because she’s involved in some kind of p*ssing contest with Jane Harman. Not to mention, it’s also pathetic, immature, catty and embarrassing, but I digress.

So, in conclusion, I feel that it’s time to bring the Nancy Pelosi circus to an end. Yes, she had an amusing run there for a time, all the while providing great fodder for pundits and bloggers everywhere, but enough is enough. The national security of the country is at stake and this woman is at best a half-wit and a hypocrite, and at worst, she’s a slightly unbalanced liar. By the way, this is not an easy diary for me to write. I never agreed with Nancy Pelosi’s politics, but I was proud when the first woman was made Speaker of the House and I didn’t want her to turn out to be a laughing stock. (I’m sorry, but that’s how I felt–write it down, take a picture, sue me, whatever. Oh, and for any of you lefty lurkers out there who don’t believe that Pelosi’s a laughing stock, check out the SNL video that I embedded below mocking her–and SNL is a predominantly liberal organization). However, my country comes first and I can no longer trust this woman–who has by all means proven herself to be “utterly contemptible”–with our national security for another second. It is time for the circus to hit the road. Nancy Pelosi needs to go–now!

Update: Today, Ed Morrissey of Hot Air has written an excellent column (citing The Washington Post) which provides further evidence that Nancy Pelosi lied about her knowledge of waterboarding and other enhanced interrogation techniques that were being used on high level Al Qaeda terrorists.

This diary is cross-posted on The Minority Report.

Power Line adds:
Obama apparently relied on left-wing internet crank Andrew Sullivan for the fake Churchill quote, which is a bit worrisome in itself.

Sure enough. Obama got his Churchill talking points from Far Left crank Andrew Sullivan.

From Power Line

In his press conference Wednesday evening, Barack Obama invoked Winston Churchill in support of his anti-waterboarding position, quoting Churchill to the effect that “we don’t torture,” even during the extremities of World War II. We expressed skepticism about Obama’s invocation of Churchill here. Now, Churchill student Richard Langworth confirms that Obama was wrong:

In his press conference of 29 April, in response to a question on the disclosure of top secret memos on the use of “enhanced interrogation methods,” Mr. Obama said:

I was struck by an article that I was reading the other day talking about the fact that the British during World War II, when London was being bombed to smithereens, had 200 or so detainees. And Churchill said, ‘We don’t torture,’ when the entire British–all of the British people–were being subjected to unimaginable risk and threat….the reason was that Churchill understood — you start taking shortcuts, over time, that corrodes what’s best in a people. It corrodes the character of a country.

While it’s nice to hear the President invoke Sir Winston, the quotation is unattributed and almost certainly incorrect. While Churchill did express such sentiments with regard to prison inmates, he said no such thing about prisoners of war, enemy combatants or terrorists, who were in fact tortured by British interrogators during World War II.

The word “torture” appears 156 times in my digital transcript of Churchill’s 15 million published words (books, articles, speeches, papers) and 35 million words about him–but not once in the subject context. Similarly, key phrases like “character of a country” or “erodes the character” do not track. …

Churchill spoke frequently about torture, mostly enemy murders of civilians. His daughter once told me, “He would have done anything to win the war, and I daresay he had to do some pretty rough things–but they didn’t unman him.” But if Churchill is on record about “enhanced interrogation,” his words have yet to surface.

Obama apparently relied on left-wing internet crank Andrew Sullivan for the fake Churchill quote, which is a bit worrisome in itself.

Via Jonah Goldberg at The Corner.

Emphasis mine