The audience asked intelligent and penetrating questions and Jack was, as always, forthright in his answers.
Jack will make a fine Senator, very much in the vein of the late Paul Coverdell, in my opinion, and he has my/our full support
He deserves yours as well.
Jack has served in The House for 20 years and gained recognition for serious and thoughtful work which has earned him Chairmanships of four key Committees as well as senior posts on others that will give him a tremendous leg up as a Senator.
Assessment of Kingston's presentation by the host: "We had an excellent event today with Cong. Jack Kingston. Our members were very impressed with the Congressman’s depth of knowledge and the manner in which he seems to think through key issues. Although he expressed strong core conservative values, they commented that his manner is non threatening and should appeal to a wide audience." C.B
---
Insights into the way men think!
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
---
Porter Stansberry is not always dour. He can even be upbeat. Yes, he sees a financial collapse ahead for our nation if we do not mend our ways but he also believes history is on the side of optimists and technological progress will point the way.
Time will tell. (See 1 below.)
---
There is an old song entitled: " You Always Hurt The One You Love" and that seems to be true if judged by what Obama is doing to the middle class. (See 2 below.)
---
Pressure mounts on Holder to let go.
He finessed the Panther voting poll disgrace, he ducked and lied his way through "Fast and Furious" and now he is lying his way out of his department's investigation of reporters claiming his name some how just jumped onto the request of a surveillance subpoena.
Obama has repeatedly said Holder has his confidence but apparently cracks are developing in the White House's protective shield. (See 3 below.)
---
Failed attempt on Ahmadinejad's life? (See 4 below.)
---
Obama's presidency swoons! (See 5 below.)
Something continues to drip in the White House plumbing! (See 5a below.)
---
Dick
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1 )Most people don't believe it… but Stansberry & Associates' founder Porter Stansberry believes "the future will be better than we can imagine."
Porter has built his reputation in part on many successful but often bearish predictions… including the downfall of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and the bankruptcies of carmaker General Motors and mall operator General Growth Properties. He is perhaps most famous for predicting the collapse of the U.S. dollar, a phenomenon he has called the "End of America."
While Porter sees serious consequences ahead for America, thanks to its debt-fueled fiscal policies… he also sees an incredible trend building in equity markets – one that has the potential to create more wealth than any other trend in history.
The Next 25 Years Will Bring an Epic Crisis… and Vast Prosperity
By Porter Stansberry, founder, Stansberry & Associates Investment Research
I have become well-known in financial circles of doom-and-gloom themes.
That's mainly because my professional life as a financial writer and analyst happened to correspond with the largest speculative bubbles in history.
As a result, I spent most of my 30s writing about one disaster or another… from the collapse of MCI-WorldCom and the dot-com/telecom bubble… to the mortgage/housing bubble… to today's sovereign-debt bubble (which, by the way, is the largest and most dangerous bubble yet… by a wide margin).
Here's the thing… I'm not a pessimist. Not at all.
What I know about human history and the evolution of technology makes me unbelievably optimistic about my future and that of my children. I have no doubt the next 25 years will contain the greatest creation of wealth in human history.
All around the world, technology is allowing people to move from the Stone Age into the Computer Age. The growth potential for humanity has never been greater. And I believe it will accelerate.
I've been writing for the last year or so about the future of computing – how computers will come to greatly augment human sensory perception and human action. We call the companies involved in this latest expansion of computing "Sensory Masters."
These new technologies will continue to change our world at an ever-accelerating pace. They will create demand for additional global bandwidth, computer storage, and computer processors… demand we can't even imagine today
Because I believe the future will be better than we can imagine doesn't mean I'm not still concerned about the finances of the U.S. government. And it doesn't mean I'm not still convinced the U.S. dollar will lose its status as the world's reserve currency – a crisis I've been calling the "End of America."
It doesn't mean I doubt pain and trouble await millions of Americans who still don't understand the absurd risks our leaders are taking with our financial system.
Anyone with basic math skills should be able to understand we will never repay our $20 trillion-plus federal debts (if accounted for honestly) – an amount equal to a staggering $175,000 per taxpayer. And that's only if you treat taxpayers equally, which, unfortunately, in America, we do not. As things stand today, we're counting on about 10% of the population to repay about 90% of these obligations. And that, my friends, will never, ever happen. What will happen will be a truly epic financial disaster.
Here's the worst part… these financial problems have been staring us in the face since 2009. We know exactly what's causing them – vastly too much debt and not enough savings. But what has changed? Not a damn thing. The government's debts continue to grow and grow.
So… how do you reconcile these two views? How can you simultaneously believe that life will get tremendously better… and that our government, our way of life, and our financial system are all on the verge of an epic, generational crisis?
Simple. That's the way progress happens.
Progress isn't uniform. Just consider the 20th century. More people were violently killed in the last century than in all of human history before that point, combined.
That 100-year period saw the rise of communism and socialism, two of the greatest wealth-destroying ideas ever planted in the human mind. It saw China, the single-largest ethnic population, succumb to a civil war and spend most of the period locked in a totally senseless, self-imposed isolationism. It saw two World Wars, the Great Depression, Stalin, the Cold War, and the "Domino Theory" that sent so many U.S. citizens to die in jungles, for nothing. And yet…
During the last 100 years, we also saw the discovery of antibiotics – the greatest medical advance of all time. We saw average life expectancy double, from around 30 years to more than 60, globally.
See the point? We expect a financial crisis because we understand accounting and math. But we expect prosperity because we understand history, technology, and progress. There's no contradiction…
While I believe the sovereign-debt bubble will end badly, huge fortunes will also be made during the next phase of the computer revolution.
I recommend readers keep a large portion of their wealth in gold, silver, income-producing real estate, and very safe "capital efficient" companies.
But you're crazy not to take a portion of your capital and invest it in technology businesses that will profit from the tectonic shift taking place in our world today. In 10 or 20 years, they will be 10… 20… or 100 times their current size.
It's inevitable… just like the computer revolution was inevitable in the 1970s… or the automobile revolution was inevitable in the 1920s.
Regards,
Porter Stansberry
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2)President Obama's Agenda Fails the Middle Class
As President Obama travels the country speaking about immigration, student loans, taxes and the like, increasingly Democratic leaders are lobbying him to tell voters how his agenda strengthens the middle class.
Unfortunately, most of Mr. Obama's initiatives may appease liberal elites but don't do much to bolster opportunities for middle-class and working families.
His immigration policy comes down to spending record sums to deport undocumented immigrants with criminal records, but letting just about anyone else who manages to get across the border stay and have babies — presumably, who will one day vote Democratic.
If he gets his way in proposed legislation, many undocumented workers will eventually become citizens, and businesses like GE and Apple will be permitted more visas in skill-short areas like engineering, but the border won't be secured. The ranks of semi-skilled immigrant workers, who drive down wages in hospitality, construction, manufacturing and other sectors, will continue to swell, frustrating the middle-class aspirations of the working poor born in this country.
His massive expansion of student loans permits universities to jack up tuition, bloat administrative staffs and indulge faculty to teach even less and less effectively. Students are graduating encumbered by massive debt and too few marketable skills. Broke and unemployed, they are not marrying and starting families — that shrinks the middle class.
Despite the availability of loans, skyrocketing tuition mandates ever-greater family contributions to finance college. This puts higher education further out of reach for many working-class families, and fewer low-income children are pursuing post-secondary education than in the past — that shrinks the middle class too.
Organized labor, academics and other progressives jealous of peers in business endlessly obsess about income redistribution and tax rates. The president has jacked up taxes on families earning more than $250,000.
Unfortunately, most businesses in America are either proprietorships or pass through corporations that pay those higher individual, as opposed to corporate, tax rates, raising the cost of investing and expanding businesses — that spells fewer jobs for the middle class and those who aspire to its ranks.
Unable to push through Congress limits on CO2 emissions, President Obama has used executive orders and the Environmental Protection Agency to impose limits by fiat. Unfortunately, those raise manufacturing costs, China has no such limits and all this encourages business to outsource in China — again fewer jobs for the middle class and aspiring middle class.
Free trade agreements that permit trading partners to undervalue their currencies, subsidize exports and artificially underprice their products on U.S. store shelves; healthcare mandates that raise the price of insuring employees instead of controlling costs; unnecessarily cumbersome regulations to run factories; mindless limits on developing U.S. oil reserves; and exporting abundant natural gas to countries that shut out U.S. products with high tariffs all encourage outsourcing, not just in manufacturing, but for many supporting services too — yet again, fewer jobs for middle-class Americans.
Performance not polemics is the problem. His progressive agenda has accomplished 2.1 percent growth and an anemic job market since the economic recovery began.
In comparable circumstances, Ronald Reagan engineered 5 percent growth and many more middle-class jobs by rejecting the failed policies of the left and betting on Americans' competitive instincts.
Democrats are asking too much of President Obama to explain how his agenda helps the middle class. There's no there, there
.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3)White House Wants Holder to Resign
By Audrey Hudson
Presidential aides are privately admitting to a growing frustration inside the White House with Attorney General Eric Holder’s political ineptness in the press leak investigations and are hoping the embattled appointee will resign from office, The New York Times reports.
“The White House is apoplectic about him, and has been for a long time,” said an anonymous Democrat source, identified only as a former government employee who acknowledged the White House staffers in question are his friends.
President Barack Obama’s advisers are frustrated with Holder’s inability to foresee problems arising from his approval of a subpoena naming a Fox News reporter as a coconspirator in an espionage investigation. Now Congress is looking at whether Holder lied under oath when he testified last month that he knew nothing about the incident.
Additionally, Holder has become a lightening rod for criticism for pulling the phone records of 100 Associated Press reporters in another polarizing investigation.
“How hard would it be to anticipate that the AP would be unhappy?” the former official said. “And then they haven’t defended their position.”
The New York Times article highlighted a rare glimpse of the interworking of the White House social circle, stating that Holder’s “saving grace through years of controversies has been the friendship of two women close to Mr. Obama” – First Lady Michelle Obama, who is good friends with Holder’s wife, and Valerie Jarrett, the president’s senior adviser.
In addition to the press leak scandals, Holder has come under attack for his agency’s participation in the botched gun-trafficking investigation “Fast and Furious,” for which Holder was found in contempt of Congress.
And, in 2009, Holder made a contentious decision to prosecute September 11 terrorists in a Manhattan civilian court, but his decision was eventually reversed.
Bob Woodward of the Washington Post brought up the New York Times story during a press roundtable discussion on CBS’s “Face the Nation,” and said both Holder and Obama need to explain this and other unfolding scandals to the American people
“It’s all very troubling, and you lump all these things, IRS and Benghazi together, and what you’ve got is a feeling that no one’s coming clean, we aren’t getting straight talk,” Woodward said.
“This goes to President Obama, he’s got to find a way to unravel this. We live in an age of distrust, I think it’s more severe now, and he has to find some way to clean this up and say this is what happened,” Woodward said.
David Ignatius, a columnist and associate editor at the Washington Post, said the larger question is whether Holder has done a good job as the nation’s top law enforcement officer.
“In terms of the critique of Eric Holder, the problem is Eric Holder has been a weak attorney general,” Ignacious said.
Friends of Holder told the Times that the attorney general does not want to leave his job working for the government because he does not like working in the private sector, but there are rumblings he might resign as early as this fall.
William M. Daley, Obama’s former chief of staff, spoke on the record to the Times and said that as long as Holder runs the department in a competent manner and remains a friend of Obama, he would not be drummed out of the administration for political reasons.
“Whoever Barack Obama puts in there, these people will try to drumbeat him out of there, no matter what,” Daley said.
Tom Brokaw, the former NBC “Nightly News” anchor, said on NBC's "Meet the Press" that the Times article exemplifies the typical Washington two-step – being praised on the record, “but at the same time there’s another part of that two-step that is going on in which people are saying it would be better if he left, it would be better for the president to get this cleaned up.”
Brokaw there is a political double standard in play with regards to how the Obama administration scandals are playing.
“From a political point of view, one of the ways that you can measure the impact of all of this and the fairness of it, is think if this had happened in the Bush administration with John Ashcroft as the attorney general. You know full well that the Democrats and the left would be going very hard after them,” Brokaw said.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
4)Gulf sources: "Accidents" to Ahmadinejad, Jalili were attempted assassinations
Twelve days before Iran’s presidential election, stubborn rumors were making the rounds that two “accidents” which took place Sunday, June 2, were in fact attempts on the lives of outgoing Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and a leading presidential hopeful, Iran’s senior nuclear negotiator Saeed Jalili. Both escaped unhurt. The rumors pointed the finger of suspicion at supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei or his underlings possibly acting on their own.
The ayatollah’s insiders are said to fear Ahmadinejad is plotting an emergency for bringing the masses out on the streets in order to force the postponement of the June 14 election. He would then stay on as president until the dust settled.
In the overheated, pre-election atmosphere in Tehran, government circles are extra jittery over the apparently irrepressible wave of Turkish popular dissent against the Islamist government of Tayyip Erdogan. They are concerned lest the tumult spill over into Iran and target the ayatollah’s authority.
Ahmadinejad and a large party of officials were on the way Sunday to inaugurating Iran’s longest tunnel under the Alborz Mountains the northeaster province of Mazandaran, when their helicopter went into a tail spin. The pilot made a safe emergency landing.
Ahmadinejad and a large party of officials were on the way Sunday to inaugurating Iran’s longest tunnel under the Alborz Mountains the northeaster province of Mazandaran, when their helicopter went into a tail spin. The pilot made a safe emergency landing.
The accident could have been genuine: Iran’s air fleet is in a bad state of maintenance because Tehran is unable to get hold of spare parts due to sanctions and a shortage of foreign currency. Replacement parts are either roughly improvised at home or bought from questionable sources in China or the Ukraine.
But the wording of the communiqué released by Ahmadinejad’s office after the event was found suggestive in Gulf capitals and Washington: It was described as “an unspecified accident” rather than a technical breakdown.
The president’s advisers’ suspicions of an attempted assassination were further strengthened when they heard about another accident. This one was not published. Saeed Jalili, Head of the National Security Council, nuclear negotiator and leading presidential candidate, was on his way back from a campaign appearance in the town of Qazvin, when a truck suddenly swerved into the convoy carrying him and party, forcing one of the vehicles to crash into a safety barrier. Four of Jalilee’s aides were injured, two seriously.
Jalilee’s own car was 20 meters away from the crash.
The general view in Tehran is that this “accident” too was deliberate. It was tied to rumors going around the Iranian capital that Jalili and Ahmadinejad had struck a secret deal, which had reached the ears of the ayatollah. The two figures were said to have agreed in quiet meetings that the outgoing president would back Jalili’s run for president. If he won, he would award the post of vice president with special powers to Ahmadinejad or alternatively, to Ahmadinejad’s candidate, his in-law Esfandyar Rahim Mashee, whose candidacy the supreme leader arranged to have disqualified.
It is therefore believed that the order to stage the two accidents came from Khamenei’s office. This time, they were meant as a final warning.
Iranian sources reported suspicions in Tehran that Ahmadinejad was plotting to sack Interior Minister Mostafa Mohammad Najjar to torpedo the election. Those sources added that Khamenei warned the president that if he did not stop his intrigues, he might not survive a “road accident.”
On April 29, the president was detained for several hours and cautioned to stop his maneuvers for derailing the presidential election.
Two weeks ago, he confided to his friends that he has evidence of a conspiracy to assassinate him. Since then, he has stopped making public statements on controversial matters.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
5)The Decline of the Obama Presidency
His second term is coming undone not because of scandal but because of decisions made in the previous four years.
By FRED BARNES
John Dos Passos, the novelist and historian, once said: "Often things you think are just beginning are coming to an end." His observation was made in the 1960s. But it's true today of Barack Obama's presidency and the promise of a bright future for his second term.
Mr. Obama's re-election stirred grand expectations. The vote heralded a new liberal era, or so it was claimed. His victory was said to reflect ideological, cultural and demographic trends that could keep Democrats in the majority for years to come. His second four years in the White House would be just the beginning.
Now, six months later, the Obama administration is in an unexpected and sharp state of decline. Mr. Obama has little influence on Congress. His presidency has no theme. He pivots nervously from issue to issue. What there is of an Obama agenda consists, at the moment, of leftovers from his first term or proposals that he failed to emphasize in his re-election campaign and thus have practically no chance of passage.
Congressional Republicans neither trust nor fear the president. And Democrats on Capitol Hill, to whom Mr. Obama has never been close, have grown leery of him. In the Senate, Democrats complain privately about his interference with the biggest domestic policy matter of 2013, immigration reform. His effect, the senators believe, can only be to weaken the fragile bipartisan coalition for reform and make passage of major legislation more perilous.
The Obama breakdown was not caused by the trio of scandals—IRS, Justice Department, Benghazi—now confronting the president. The decline preceded them. It's the result of what Mr. Obama did in his first term, during the campaign and in the two months following his re-election. But the scandals have worsened his plight and made recovery next to impossible.
To be clear, the two problems—the decline and the scandals—are different matters. The scandals have not been linked directly to the president. They are vexing to the administration, but they are not the source of its current impotence. Instead, Mr. Obama's power and influence have been sapped as a direct result of his own choices and decisions. He also suffers from shortcomings normal to a second term, such as a new, less able team of advisers and cabinet members and the arrogance fed by an impressive re-election.
In his first term, when Democrats controlled the House and Senate, Mr. Obama ignored Republicans—he didn't need their votes to pass the $800 billion stimulus, the Affordable Care Act (aka ObamaCare) and Dodd-Frank, with its fresh wave of Wall Street regulations. Then, after Republicans captured the House in the 2010 midterm election, his efforts to reach agreements with them proved futile.
Why did Mr. Obama fail at compromise? For one thing, he is rarely able to mask his contempt for Republicans, especially those with conservative views. For another, he began to question Republicans' motives, insisting publicly that their paramount goal in Washington is to protect the rich from higher taxes. As a tactic for encouraging compromise, his approach was counterproductive.
Robert Merry, the editor of the National Interest magazine and a longtime Washington journalist, recently pinpointed a bigger reason for the impasse after 2010: "It is a deadlock born largely of the president's resolve to push an agenda for which he has no clear national consensus." In other words, Mr. Obama is too liberal to find common ground with Republicans. The spending cuts he offers are illusory, the tax increases specific.
Then, after the November election, Mr. Obama spurned conciliation. He upped the ante, calling for higher spending, a new economic stimulus and an increase in the debt limit without congressional approval. Senate GOP Leader Mitch McConnell laughed out loud when he heard the proposal.
Mr. Obama used his last bit of leverage to prevail over Republicans in the fiscal-cliff budget negotiations late last year. With the Bush-era tax cuts due to expire Dec. 31, the president forced Republicans to accept a hefty tax hike on the top 2% of wage earners. His short-term victory has had long-term political consequences. Republicans vowed to oppose new tax increases, which ruled out a "grand bargain" to reduce the deficit and national debt.
The exclusion of Republicans from a role in crafting ObamaCare has also backfired. By failing to ensure that the GOP had some influence on the health-care law, the president gave them no reason to support its implementation. With ObamaCare more unpopular than ever, House Republicans voted last month to repeal it. The vote was largely symbolic, but it was telling that two Democrats joined the effort. Short of repeal, Republican elected officials across the country are committed to making the law's implementation, beginning this year, as difficult as possible.
Nor is tax reform likely to get anywhere this year or next despite Mr. Obama's support, at least rhetorically, for the idea. He wants to eliminate tax preferences and loopholes so the government can collect more revenue. To win those changes, though, he would need make a bargain with Republicans, offering to cut tax rates, including the top rate on individual income, to generate faster economic growth. That clashes with Mr. Obama's zeal for higher taxes on the well-to-do.
Faced with such obstacles, the president could focus instead on his own domestic agenda—if he had one. He doesn't. He's paying the price for a re-election campaign that was based on attacking his opponent, Mitt Romney, and not much else. In the president's State of the Union address in February, he endorsed a $9 minimum wage and universal prekindergarten for 4-year-olds, but those proposals lack a popular mandate. If he had campaigned for them last year, they might have better prospects now.
More often than not, presidents focus on foreign policy in their second terms. But Mr. Obama's practice is to downgrade foreign policy in favor of domestic concerns. Where he has sought to restrain foreign governments—Russia, Iran, North Korea—he has been unsuccessful. His speech in May on national security and the terrorist threat revived an issue from his 2008 campaign, the closing of the terrorist prison at Guantanamo Bay. The chance that will happen is slim.
He is also pushing two leftovers from his first year in office, immigration reform and gun control. What's striking about Mr. Obama's handling of both is his complete absence of influence. On gun control, his speeches had zero impact. On immigration, his influence is entirely negative. He can impede a bill. He cannot aid its passage.
All this has left Mr. Obama in a state of weakness. And Democrats are increasingly blaming him. Doug Sosnik, a former senior adviser in the Clinton White House, wrote in a memo last month that Mr. Obama's re-election "was a great political achievement, but the fact that he didn't set out a clear policy agenda for a second term left him without a clear mandate to govern over a politically divided Congress."
Mr. Sosnik, who is now deputy commissioner of the National Basketball Association, added: "There's not a single member of either party [in Congress] who fears paying a political price for not falling in line with the President, making it even more difficult to get members to cast difficult votes."
Mr. Obama's top priority now is winning the House in 2014 while retaining control of the Senate. "I'm going to do everything I can to make sure that we've got Nancy Pelosi back in the speakership," he said last week at a Democratic fundraiser in Chicago. In Mr. Obama's case, "everything" is unlikely to be enough.
5a) Funeral rites for a perfidious presidency
By Wesley Pruden
Drip, drip, drip. And then the deluge.
After that the roof falls in. The perfect storm dashing Barack Obama’s second term onto the rocks is not the consequence of a sudden squall. This storm has been a long time coming.
The White House still doesn’t get it. Sending the president out to make another speech won’t change anything. Calling in a favored few to listen to more bloviating won’t do it, either. Neither will sacking Eric Holder, which is an idea whose time has come, but that would only buy a little time, with the emphasis on little.
The president may be tempted to cast the perfect storm as a matter of national security. When his speech to the National Defense University, declaring that the war against the terrorists was over because he had vanquished all the bad guys, landed with the thud of a noisy dud, he invited a gaggle of media elites to the White House for a session of the familiar argle-bargle. That didn’t work then, and it won’t work now. Mr. Obama's administration is the enemy “foreign and domestic” the founding documents warned us about.
An invitation to the White House is ordinarily the invitation no good citizen declines without a very good reason. If a president, or one of his deputies, summons a citizen to come to the aid of the government, a good citizen catches the next streetcar to Pennsylvania Avenue, even if the streetcar is a bus.
This time it’s fashionable to say thanks, but no thanks. Eric Holder’s invitation to media executives to “air concerns and exchange ideas” is not necessary because if he wants to hear the concerns he can read about them in the morning papers. Meetings to “ensure that First Amendment rights are respected by the Department of Justice” are not necessary, either, nor are conversations with news executives, lawyers and intelligence and investigative ‘experts’.”
The First Amendment needs no explanatory help from politicians, lawyers or anyone else. The language of the amendment, the cornerstone and guarantor of all the other rights of Americans, is as plain as the language of the Gospel, written so that the humblest among us can understand it. Presidents and their administrations have understood the words of the First Amendment for two centuries, with the further understanding that trifling with the words and meanings is always reckless and foolish.
Hiring new public-relations help for Eric Holder is not the answer to the president’s troubles, though a new flack is always the aspirin a president reaches for when he feels a presidential headache coming on. Mr. Obama’s headache is not merely the messenger, but the message that everyone, at last including the sleeping beauties of the media, now hears loud and clear.
The president’s headache is compounded by the harsh reality that the organs of mainstream media, for so long the altar boys of the president, have become allies of partisans on the right whether they like it or not. Facts are stubborn. When Republicans in the House of Representatives assail Eric Holder for targeting journalists to plug leaks, even The New York Times has to take grudging notice. The canard that critics of Mr. Obama are racists by definition has been rendered permanently “inoperative.”
The letter from the chairman and a senior member of the House Judiciary Committee asking Mr. Holder to explain the contradiction between his sworn testimony and reliable news accounts is the red meat journalists usually crave. A fortnight ago Mr. Holder told the committee that he had never taken part in any pursuit of a journalist for criminal prosecution, and it would not be “wise policy” to do that. No equivocating there. But Reuters news agency reports thatMr. Holder had approved the search warrant to retrieve email archives of Fox News, and approved a subpoena for the network’s telephone records.
Mr. Obama and his administration face a long, hot summer of charge, countercharge, whistles and whistleblowing. He’ll need more than aspirin. Obamacare as it is revealed looms as another storm.
All of this is exciting news for prospective Republican candidates. Incumbent presidents nearly always take a licking in the midterm congressional elections, particularly in their second terms. The president can take hope, thin as it may be, that Republicans are capable as always of blowing slam-dunk opportunities.
Republicans should have taken the Senate again by now, but insist on nominating Doofus and his little brother Dumber. They must avoid nominating aspiring gynecologists this time, and stick to candidates who want to come to Congress for the funerary rites of a misbegotten presidency.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
.jpg){kind=link}
No comments:
Post a Comment