October 2010

These two lame loser douchebags are not funny. Period.

 By Daily Mail Reporter

The pressure is on Barack Obama – and it is starting to show.
The famously-cool President lost his temper in Connecticut today after hecklers interrupted a speech he was giving at a rally.
Astonished attendees watched as Mr Obama interrupted his own speech as the hecklers – believed to be activists seeking more global Aids funding – began chanting at him.
‘Excuse me, excuse me,’ he said repeatedly, trying to speak over the hecklers. When they kept chanting, he fell silent for several seconds, looking visibly angry and raising one hand in frustration as the crowd began to boo around him.

Losing his cool: The President jabs his fingers at protesters as he tells them to take their protest somewhere else

Losing his cool: The President jabs his fingers at protesters as he tells them to take their protest somewhere else

‘Let me just say this,’ he said, addressing the hecklers. ‘You’ve been appearing at every rally we’ve been doing.

‘We’re funding global Aids,’ he continued defensively. ‘And the other [Republican] side is not.

‘So I don’t know why you think this is a useful strategy to take,’ he finished, jabbing his finger angrily in the direction of the hecklers.

The crowds boos turned to cheers as Mr Obama – who was in the state campaigning for Democrat Richard Blumenthal – spoke.

‘So, what we would suggest,’ he added, ‘I think it would make a lot more sense for you guys to go to the folks who aren’t interested in funding global Aids and shout at that rally. Because we’re trying to focus on figuring out how to finance the things that you want financed.’

Then he turned to another group of hecklers on his other side, adding: ‘You guys same thing.’

As more chants filled the rally, he said: ‘Alright, you guys have made your point, now let’s go.’

Fighting to regain the momentum of the rally, he held his hands up saying: ‘Everybody – we’re alright.

‘Come on guys,’ he said.

He then fell silent again, watching with pursed lips as the crowd booed the hecklers once more.

The President waited nearly 20 seconds for the noise to stop, then attempted again to continue with his speech.

But he was forced to wait in silence for another 20 seconds before finally saying: ‘Hey! Listen up everybody!’

The same group has popped up at other Obama campaign events this election, including a rally in Boston two weeks ago.

Mr Obama finally regained control of the rally and continued with his speech.

But the unexpected loss of control was in stark contrast to the power he held over similar audiences during his 2008 presidential campaign.

With the November 2 mid-term elections just days away, Mr Obama’s Democratic party is facing heavy losses.

The President himself is dealing with a devastating loss in popularity.

Democratic voters are closely divided over whether he should be challenged within the party for a second term in 2012, an Associated Press-Knowledge Networks Poll finds.

That glum assessment carries over into the nation at large, which is similarly divided over whether Mr Obama should be a one-term president.

A real Democratic challenge to Mr Obama seems unlikely at this stage and his re-election bid is a long way off. But the findings underscore how disenchanted his party has grown heading into the congressional elections Tuesday.

The AP-KN poll has tracked a group of people and their views since the beginning of the 2008 presidential campaign.

Among all 2008 voters, 51 per cent say he deserves to be defeated in November 2012 while 47 per cent support his re-election – essentially a tie.

Among Democrats, 47 per cent say Obama should be challenged for the 2012 nomination and 51 per cent say he should not be opposed.

Those favouring a contest include most who backed Hillary Rodham Clinton’s unsuccessful faceoff against Mr Obama for the 2008 nomination. The poll did not ask if Democrats would support particular challengers.

Political operatives and polling experts caution that Mr Obama’s poll standings say more about people’s frustrations today with the economy and other conditions than they do about his re-election prospects.

With the next presidential election two years away – an eon in politics – the public’s view of Mr Obama could easily improve if the economy revives or if he outmaneuvers Republicans in Congress or in the presidential campaign.

‘Democrats currently disappointed with Obama will likely be less disappointed if he spends the next two years fighting a GOP Congress’ should Republicans do well on Election Day, said Charles Franklin, a University of Wisconsin political science professor and polling analyst.

Even so, the poll – and today’s heckling – illustrates how Mr Obama’s reputation has frayed since 2008.

It suggests lingering bad feelings from Democrats’ bitter primary fight, when he and Mrs Clinton – now his Secretary of State – roughly split the popular vote.

Political professionals of both parties said the findings are a warning for the president, whose formal re-election effort is expected to begin stirring next year.

‘It’s an indicator of things he needs to address between now and then,’ said Kiki McLean, a Democratic strategist who worked in Mrs Clinton’s 2008 campaign.

The White House declined comment on the results.

‘Nobody wants to work with this guy,’ said Steven Fagin, 45, of Cincinnati. A Democrat and 2008 Obama voter, he cited deep divisions between Democrats and Republicans. ‘We’re never going to get anything done.’

The survey found that those likeliest to oppose Mr Obama’s re-election include men, older people, those without college degrees and whites.

Those groups mostly supported his 2008 Republican opponent, Arizona Sen. John McCain.

Three in four Democrats want Mr Obama re-elected while nearly 9 in 10 Republicans oppose it. Independents lean slightly against Obama, 46 per cent to 36 per cent.

Democrats saying Mr Obama should face a primary challenge tend to be less educated, less liberal and likelier to have been 2008 Clinton backers.

Democratic activists say there are no signs of a serious primary challenge to Mr Obama, though some speculate an effort could come from liberals who think he’s drifted too far to the centre.

Recent history shows presidents’ early polling numbers mean little about their re-election prospects.

At this stage two years before their re-elections, Presidents Bill Clinton and Ronald Reagan had approval ratings that were lower than Mr Obama’s now, according to the Gallup Poll; both men won a second term.

The ratings for Presidents George H.W. Bush and Jimmy Carter were better than Obama’s; both lost.

‘Presidents Mondale, Dole and McCain all speak to the very substantial limits of off-year polling results,’ said Bill McInturff, McCain’s 2008 pollster, as he named three politicians who fell short of the White House.

Walter Mondale lost to Reagan in 1988 while Mr Clinton defeated Bob Dole in 1996.

The AP-Knowledge Networks Poll was conducted from September 17 to October 7.

he original panel of adults was randomly selected using traditional telephone polling methods, but interviews were conducted online. People without computers or Internet access were given that technology for free.

The margin of sampling error for all 1,254 adults is plus or minus 4.4 percentage points. It is plus or minus 6.5 points for the 571 Democrats, and 5.3 points for the 852 people who said on Election Day 2008 that they had voted.


You’re doing it wrong, the only way to get people to vote Democrat these days would be to get them drunk before voting. Bonus: Even with the offer of free beer, not one person showed up, that’s how far the Democratic party has fallen…

A Virginia Democratic organization appears to have violated federal election law by offering free beer to voters.

The Arlington Young Democrats held a happy hour last week at which they offered “a free drink and some appetizers” to anyone who brought an “I Voted” stick to prove that he or she had voted early in Virginia, according to a flier.

“In elections in which federal candidates are on the ballot, no one can offer any kind of benefit or reward for voting. The simple way to deal with this is to open up the event to all comers — voters and nonvoters alike,” Loyola Law professor and election law expert Rick Hasen wrote POLITICO in an e-mail. “This is a very common problem, because people believe they are doing their civic duty by encouraging other people to vote. And in many states, in elections when federal candidates are not on the ballot, this activity is perfectly legal.”

Corporations such as Starbucks and Ben & Jerry’s ran afoul of this law in 2008 and complied by offering freebies to everyone rather than just voters.

“We did have a get-out-the-vote happy hour” Young Dems president Gordon Simonett said. But the group said they were not aware that they were running afoul of any laws and held similar events in 2008 and 2009.

Simonett said that “zero people came by” with voting stickers and only a handful of poll volunteers even showed up. ”Turnout was not what we expected,” Simonett said. (The offer is illegal, Hasen said, even if nobody takes it up.)

A GOP group blasted the effort anyway.

“The Arlington Young Democrats knew they may have to pull all the stops to help Moran across the finish line, including offering a free drink and food in violation of the law,” said Michael Thielen, executive director of the Republican National Lawyers Association. “This is just another sign of what scared Democrats will do.”

By Daily Mail Reporter

He’s been pictured shooting a whale, riding a Harley Davidson and flying a fighter jet.

But Russian prime minister Vladimir Putin’s latest photo opportunity shows his slightly more environmentally caring side. 

The former KGB man closed his eyes as he lowered his head to gently nuzzle the horse he had just been riding across the Siberian wilderness.

Horsing around: Vladimir Putin cuddles his horse during an expdition to monitor the habitat of snow leopards
Horse whisperer: Vladimir Putin cuddles his horse during an expedition to monitor the habitat of snow leopards

Putin had been fighting the elements, again, as he trekked across the Siberian wilderness to check the endangered snow leopard’s natural habitat.

The route was similar to an earlier journey in 2009 when Putin revealed his tanned torso with bare-chested horse riding. Only this time he kept well covered up in the cool Autumn temperatures.

The carefully choreographed expedition to the southern resort of Sochi was part of a pledge Putin made before Russia won the right to host the 2014 Olympic Games.

Putin promised to reintroduce the big cats to the Caucasus if Russia won the 2014 Winter Olympic games. Russia was awarded the games in July 2007.

What a catch: Putin rode to the secluded hillsides before catching a fresh pike fish from the mountain streams
What a catch: Putin rode to the secluded hillsides before catching a fresh pike fish from the mountain streams

What a catch: Putin rode to the secluded hillsides before catching a fresh pike fish from the mountain streams

And the 58-year-old lived up to his meticulously crafted action man image by donning black shades and camouflaged army cargos as he looked suavely into the camera.

For Putin has become something of a professional when it comes to man-versus-nature photo shoots in the wild.

Cool: Vladimir Putin looks more like a male model than a prime ministeras he poses for the camera in Siberia
Mr. Cool: Vladimir Putin looks more like a male model than a prime minister as he poses wearing dark shades for the camera in Siberia

The athletic pursuits will help the prime minister maintain the youthful image which will be vital to winning the country’s 2012 elections if he decides to stand.

The mission if the latest stunt that has seen the prime minister tackle the wilderness. In August last year Mr Putin revealed his toned torso when he rode topless in Siberia. He later swam in a freezing lake and made a fire with other officials.

Just two months ago in August this year Mr Putin angered animal rights groups when he braved rough seas with a harpoon in his hand to shoot a whale.

‘Living in general is dangerous,’ Mr Putin joyously told photographers. Asked why he got involved, he simply said, ‘Because I like it. I love the nature.’

Explorer: The prime minister walks his horse through a mountain stream on
Explorer: The prime minister walks his horse through a mountain stream

The prime minister was previously pictures fishing bare-chested, shooting a tiger, and tagging a polar bear. 

Putin, during his eight years as president and the past two as prime minister, has learned to use television to cultivate the image of a rugged leader beloved by the Russian people.

His mastery of the medium has been on full display in recent weeks as he has taken command of efforts to extinguish the wildfires that swept across much of western Russia and to help the thousands of people who lost their homes.

Macho man: Vladimir Putin when he rode topless and shooting whales
Macho man: Vladimir Putin when he rode topless and shooting whales

Macho man: Vladimir Putin when he rode topless and firing darts at whales from a dinghy

The message has been that it is Putin, rather than his junior co-leader President Dmitry Medvedev, who is equipped to look after Russia, its people and environment.

Putin has been canny about his plans to run in the 2012 presidential election, but has excluded running against Medvedev, saying the two will come to an agreement.

The strength of his position was made clear when Russia’s ruling party swept regional elections in several provinces at the weekend, easily maintaining its grip on power.

The United Russia party is chaired by former president Vladimir Putin who has continued to call the shots as prime minister and remains widely popular.

Whatever the decision, his action-man lifestyle shows he is not about to recede from public view.

By The Fox and Rice Experience

FRX is worried about fake-person/comedian Stephen Colbert’s mental stability. Why? Because he’s a psychopath. He lives his life as the persona of someone else. And now, this weekend, he’s organizing a rally on the National Mall in Washington DC, alongside his Sith Lord Master, Jon Stewart. The Comedy Central inspired Obama love-fest has multiple names, but we here at FRX are calling it “The March to Keep Stephen Colbert Alive.”

He is indeed an unstable man, and in front of all 50 of the expected attendees, the pressure might be too much to bear.

He may simply snap.

How long can one exist as a mere echo of real life? How long can one exist as a nervous, bespeckled mental patient whose only path to success is to live a derivative life, devoid of meaning? Well, no one can say that FRX doesn’t care about his well being…and if you click the player below, you’ll find out why:


IF CARLOS Mota had $17,505 lying around, he would be able to pay off his North Philadelphia house.

Not that he has that kind of money, but that’s the amount Verizon Wireless expected him to cough up in one bill this summer.

Mota, 52, bought a USB modem in March that allows him to access the Internet wirelessly on his laptop, and he signed a two-year contract for $60.75 a month, he said.

When Mota, who has lived in Philadelphia for 23 years, visited family in the Dominican Republic, he took his laptop and the USB modem. He said he accessed the Internet with no problem for an hour early on June 19 and a half-hour that evening.

The third time he tried to log on, he said, a message told him that he was roaming and he immediately shut down his computer and didn’t use it the rest of the trip.

When he returned, he found the $17,505 Verizon bill in his mailbox – $17,445 of which was for roaming charges.

“I was shocked, with no words,” Mota said in Spanish as his niece, Maribel Castro, interpreted. “I called my daughter and wife to look at it. I asked them, ‘Am I seeing correctly?’ ”

Two days later, Mota said, he began trying to resolve the bill, first by visiting the Center City Verizon office. He was told that they couldn’t resolve the problem and gave him a number to call in Texas, he said.

Mota said he spoke with numerous Verizon representatives and supervisors but got nowhere.

“Every time I called, when they pulled up my account, each worker had the same reaction: ‘Wooowwww!’ they would say,” he said.

On July 27, a supervisor told him he was responsible for the monumental bill, he said.

On Mota’s bill, his roaming charges aren’t determined or listed in minutes, but rather kilobytes – 872,255 of them, to be exact. He said he has asked for an audit of the bill, but has yet to receive one.

At first, Mota continued to pay the $60.75 base fee he had agreed to, but Verizon began billing him more than $250 in late fees each month, so he stopped paying the bills altogether. This month’s bill is for $18,225.87.

Now, on top of the bills, he’s also getting letters from Verizon threatening to take him to court, he said.

Castro wondered yesterday if a company like Verizon even knows what $18,000 means to someone like Mota, a father of four who worked in landscaping before he was injured and was forced to go on disability.

“For them, it means nothing, but for him, it means his life,” she said. “It would ruin him.”

Mota said he has finally built his credit back after declaring bankruptcy several years ago, and he fears that this will ruin all his hard work.

“I am worried, I can’t sleep, I can’t eat,” he said. “Here, in the U.S. no one is no one if you don’t have credit.”

Sheldon Jones, Verizon spokesman, said the company was looking into the bill yesterday, after being contacted by the Daily News.

“We go to great lengths to educate our customers on our products and services so they avoid any unintended bills,” Jones said. “We understand our customers don’t like surprises. Neither do we; it’s bad business. We are looking into Mr. Mota’s case.”

Mota admitted that he never asked about fees for Internet usage overseas but said he was never informed of it when he bought the modem. He said that if he had any clue, he would never have used it.

Separately yesterday, Verizon Wireless agreed to pay a $25 million settlement for charging customers who inadvertently accessed the Web via their cell phones, even though they didn’t have data plans. The company also agreed to pay $52 million in customer refunds.


Welcome to America: 4 kids, 23 years in the U.S. and can’t speak English, filed for bankruptcy once already, living off of disability, travels abroad, can afford laptops and modems and the $60.50 a month for surfing the net while traveling, and the list goes on…

Life is sure is good in America if you’re a POS immigrant—for law abiding tax paying citizens…not so much.

By Ken Blackwell

Massachusetts Sen. John Kerry is frustrated. He recently spoke to the Greater Boston Chamber of Commerce and complained that we are in “a period of know-nothingism in the country, where truth and science and facts don’t weigh in. It’s all short-order, lowest common denominator, cheap-seat politics.” He’d really like to elect a new people.

Now, that last bit — cheap-seat politics — is the kicker. How truly awful it must be for the Senate’s richest man — wealthier than the Senate’s Rockefeller — to have to put up with those of us in the cheap seats. Brahmins from Boston have been complaining about democracy since Thomas Jefferson was elected. And that Andrew Jackson fellow — talk about the cheap seats running things! When he was elected, mobs of frontiersmen — wild and woolly — descended on Washington. They nearly crushed the Hero of New Orleans in the mob scene at the White House reception on Inauguration Day, 1829. Bostonian John Q. Adams had left the White House that morning, unwilling to witness the triumph of the cheap seats.


Kerry was most gracious in addressing the Greater Boston Chamber of Commerce, speaking in person to an audience that was not sitting in the cheap seats. The frosty aristocrat spends a lot of his time on the deck of his yacht — moored in Rhode Island to avoid the sky-high taxes that Kerry’s liberal friends impose on the cheap-seat folks in Massachusetts.


Kerry was particularly incensed that his yeoman work on the Cap and Trade legislation had collapsed in the Senate. The House passed this unwisest of bills earlier this year. Many members of the House were forced to walk that plank by their leadership. Many of those who voted for Cap and Trade may not be returned next Tuesday. They will be especially vulnerable if their constituents mine coal, drill for oil, or manufacture anything at all.


Cap and Trade has been called an invitation to massive corruption by Britain’s former Chancellor of the Exchequer, Lord Lawson. Now, someone who sits in the House of Lords can hardly be accused of squatting down in one of those cheap seats Kerry despises. Lord Lawson says if you really want to deal with carbon emissions, tax carbon emissions. And give tax credits to the poor so they can cope. That’s not my preferred option, but it’s not Kerry’s, either.


What Cap and Trade would do, of course, is nationalize all American enterprise. It would have the federal government control all decisions about what to produce, where to produce it, when to produce, where to market it, and how.


This is the reason why Europeans — those smarter folks Kerry likes more than he likes our “know-nothing” voters — teasingly call the Greens watermelons: green on the outside, red on the inside.


Are we against science and truth merely because we object to Kerry’s Cap and Trade legislation? Bjorn Lomborg, the famed “Skeptical Environmentalist,” has said Cap and Trade is the worst way to go about dealing with global warming.


Even if we imposed Cap and Trade, with all of its ability to straitjacket the already paralyzed economy, Lomborg says it would result in barely a one-degree difference in global warming by the end of this century.


Now, Lomborg agrees with Kerry that global warming is occurring. He agrees that it is a problem. And he agrees that some of all of it is man-caused. But he has produced a new documentary called Cool It urging his fellow environmentalists to cool the rhetoric about global warming as an existential threat to the planet.


Lomborg’s thesis is subject to a lot of reasoned debate. You can tell Lomborg is liberal. One, he’s a Dane. Two, he calls the earth the planet. Only liberals call it the planet.


When John Kerry says we’ve abandoned science and truth, we can only ask: If the truth was so compelling, why did the environmentalists at the University of East Anglia’s Climate Research Unit have to perform their usual “tricks” to “hide the decline”?


The funniest part of Kerry’s anguished cry is his complaint that Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck are responsible for this rise in what he calls “know nothingism.” If you add all of Rush’s listeners — and they are legion — to all of Glenn Beck’s viewers, you still don’t come close to the tens of millions of voters who are expected to render a verdict on Kerry liberalism next week.


So why doesn’t Kerry start his own TV show or go on radio? Why do you think Al Franken escaped from his sinking Hot Air America gig and sneaked into the Senate on a disputed vote? It’s a lot easier to bloviate in the Senate than to attract and hold an audience. The only reason Kerry and Franken are sitting in the Senate is because they are not the cheaper seats.

Tens of thousands of supporters of the militant Islamic Jihad movement rallied in the streets of Gaza on Friday, chanting “Death to America” and “Death to Israel.”

Young men and boys wearing white T-shirts with a slogan in the shape of a rifle carried portraits of militants killed in combat, under the black flags of Islamic Jihad. Continue Reading

Michael Ramirez Cartoon


Next Page »