American Elephants

Irony Defined. by American Elephant
May 1, 2012, 9:29 pm
Filed under: Election 2012, Humor, Liberalism, Politics, Progressivism | Tags: , , , ,

[click to enlarge]

Say, those occupy kids aren’t particularly bright, are they? 

Based on a political cartoon I saw, but cannot find again. Artist unknown. Take the pic, elephants, tweet it, facebook it, disperse it far and wide! Ridicule is a powerful weapon. (please link back )

Once Again, Michael Ramirez Makes a Direct Hit! by The Elephant's Child
May 1, 2012, 7:18 pm
Filed under: Politics

(click to enlarge)

One of the highlights of any day is the Michael Ramirez political cartoon. He is a master of the visual metaphor, and has a needle sharp pen to point out hypocrisy and misdemeanor. He works at the peak of his considerable powers at

Politicizing the War for His Own Gain? by The Elephant's Child

The news is full of discussion about the”anniversary” of the Osama bin Laden killing. President Obama is getting very bad advice, and it makes him appear completely classless. When the raid on bin Laden’s hideout comfortable residence in Pakistan was announced, the mainstream media said in unison “gutsy call”. I don’t know who comes up with the talking points, undoubtedly the Center for American Progress, the Soros-funded policy generator; but when the mainstream media all says the same thing in the same words at the same time— it’s fairly obvious that they are just pre-determined talking points.

In the first place, it was not a “gutsy call.” It is the kind of decision that presidents are expected to make. That’s his primary job— commander in chief.. Bill Clinton, who avoided two chances to get Bin Laden, was excoriated for not making the decision to get him. And it was Bill Clinton who narrated the unfortunate campaign video celebrating Obama’s “gutsy call” to kill bin Laden. Any president would have made the call.

Celebrating the anniversary of a killing is tacky. If anyone brings it up, it should be the media, but all this hoo-haw is classless. The president’s decision was the smallest part of the operation. A lot of people put their lives at risk to make it happen — and they deserve our gratitude.

The trip to Afghanistan and the campaign speech from Afghanistan are just another campaign event, trying to emphasize that Obama once made a “gutsy call.” Sad. It really was a dreadful speech. He needs new speechwriters.

Obama wanted out of Afghanistan, which he believes his supporters demand. The generals and Ambassador Ryan Crocker have said that victory is within reach and the withdrawal is ill-advised.

George W. Bush saw victory in Iraq, and Obama threw that away. Now he is throwing away our efforts in Afghanistan, as a result of dreadful diplomacy. The Afghans are poorly prepared to take over, and any idea that “the Taliban have expressed interest in reconciliation” is laughable.  Or if they have “expressed interest” reconciliation is not on the menu. Obama has regularly announced our intentions, what we are doing and when we will do it — not exactly how you run a military campaign.

This is an effort to shore up Obama’s hawkish credentials. There was no news in the speech. He’s trying to claim credit for winning a war that is not won. He’s bringing the troops home in about 2 ½ years. There is no news, and no real reason for the speech, and no reason for his appearance in Afghanistan.

John Podhoretz noticed that Obama was celebrating winning the war against al Qaeda, but our troops in Afghanistan have been fighting a war against the Taliban. Bad day for Obama, bad speech, bad trip.

This Imperial President Is Above Mere Laws by The Elephant's Child

The White House seems to have an odd relationship with the separation of powers. The 2010 mid-term election when Republicans took over control of the House of Representatives was a sharp rebuke to the administration and congressional Democrats. Rather than understand that as a call for more cooperation and bipartisanship, Obama saw it as a sign that he should just go around Congress, accomplishing his goals by executive orders and agency regulation.

The Friday night news dump showed that Obama had exceeded his own guidelines. He decided that he would ignore the restrictions of Congress’s Palestinian Accountability Act with a “waiver.” He made the decision to pour American taxpayer dollars —$192 million — into the coffers of the Palestinian Authority despite its being illegal. This was first printed in the foreign press (AFP), where many of the more interesting things about this administration first appear.

Congress mandated that no funds may be made available to the Palestinian Authority until it ends its terrorist activities and an independent audit is conducted of its finances. White House spokesman Tommy Vietor said it would ensure “the continued viability of the moderate PA government.” This is the same moderate government which has tried to form a pact with Hamas. He added that “the PA had fulfilled all its major obligations, such as recognizing Israel’s right to exist, renouncing violence and accepting the Road Map for Peace.”

In the real world, the PA is not only not moderate, but has reneged on all its commitments. The whole thing is a blatant  lie.

Obama’s thinks of himself as an imperial president, above mere laws. His rant against the Supreme Court in the wake of the ObamaCare hearing was a disgrace. The Supreme Court is a fully equal branch of the government to the executive branch, and they decide what is Constitutional — not the president, who was a part-time lecturer on the 15th Amendment at the University of Chicago —not a professor of Constitutional Law.

Obama instructed Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to inform Congress of the move, on the grounds that “waiving such prohibition is important to the national security interests of the United States.” Embarrassing.

Former federal prosecutor Andy McCarthy suggests that Congress should slash the executive branch’s budget— perhaps with a treble damages rule. Will they do it? remains to be seen, but unless they respond definitively, the imperial presidency will continue. Obama doesn’t think anyone will dare to do so.


“Downtown Scottie Brown” Sinks One From Half-Court by The Elephant's Child

Senator Scott Brown (R-MA) stopped by the Hyannis Youth and Community Center, and made an amazing half-court shot. Brought back his college basketball nickname: “Downtown Scottie Brown.”

Democrats are trying to convince Massachusetts voters that Mr. Brown is the out-of-touch elitist in the race. “Scott Brown is actually a millionaire pretending to be an ‘everyman’ while attacking [his opponent] Elizabeth Warren for her success,” the spokesman of the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee claimed in a press release last week. Once again Democrats are out making charges without doing their homework. Tax returns released by the candidates indicate that the opposite is the case.

In 2009, Mr. Brown reported a household income of $294,000 while Ms. Warren reported a household income of $980,000. In 2010 Mr. Brown’s income skyrocketed to $840,000 — thanks to a book advance for his biography Against All Odds. Ms. Warren reported $950,000 that year.

Like many other members of “the 1%” Ms. Warren has  spoken out about the rich not paying enough in taxes. In Massachusetts the wealthy can voluntarily pay a higher state income tax rate, but she didn’t volunteer to give more, nor did she give much to charity. Mr. Brown gave a larger percentage of his income to charity. If you’re going to make charges, better check the facts to avoid embarrassing yourself.

If Democrats are going to try to get brownie points for insisting that the rich pay more in taxes, they are apparently demanding that the government force everyone to pay more, but are not going to put their money where their respective mouths are.

Pretty cool shot though.

%d bloggers like this: