'Gravediggers for ObamaCare': Dozens Protest Democrat Loretta Sanchez at O.C.'s Balboa Bay Club

Conservative activists gained considerable media attention today while protesting Loretta Sanchez's fundraiser this morning at the Balboa Bay Club, in tony Newport Beach.

Here are photos from the event, taken by cellphone (courtesy of Megan Barth). This first one is absolutely fantastic, "Gravediggers for ObamaCare":

I met Megan, the event organizer, at 8:00am along PCH in front of the Bay Club. The fundraiser was scheduled for 8:30am.

The location couldn't have been better for an ObamaCare protest. Newport Beach is super-affluent, and horns were blaring from cars going up and down Coast Highway.

A photographer from the Los Angeles Times showed up within the first half-hour. He was a real friendly guy - took lots of pictures and took down everyone's name. A Times reporter showed up a little later with a writing pad and started asking questions. Everything was totallly mellow. A few drive-by hecklers shouted at the group, and a passenger in a black BMW flipped the bird while heading south on PCH. We had a couple of leftists on foot stop and annoy us with personal stories of health problems, and with their ignorance of the actual legislation (read a draft of the House bill here).

The photographer told us to look for a report in the Times tomorrow (the story could run anywhere in the paper, and he hinted that we could make the front-page). Some of the local newspapers have already published their reports online.

See, the Daily Pilot, "Protesters Cite 'Chaos' If Health Plan Passes," and the Daily Voice, "Two Dozen Protest Rep. Sanchez Fundraising Breakfast at Balboa Bay Club."

This blog post at OC Weekly probably captures much leftist thinking on the tea parties, "Sanchez Navigates I've-Got-Mines to Get to Newport Beach Cash":

Junkets in Nouveau Riche generally do not draw protesters because the tony club is too far from their homes, parking is a bitch down there and attendance at jobs/bail hearings are required at that hour. But Loretta seems to bring out the loon in some people. Her otherwise routine money grab unhinged a couple dozen picketers ....

What had these fine folks peeved? Was it continuing warfare? Rising joblessness? The meltdown of Cash for Clunkers? Nope, seems the demonstrators were there to lash out about healthcare. But they were not representing the millions and millions of Americans lacking insurance coverage, being denied valid claims or experiencing rising co-pays and assorted out-of-pocket medical costs. Nope, that's what the I've-Got-Mines pooh-poohing the Sanchez visit LOVE about the current health-care system.

It's boilerplate, but that "jobs/bail" line is a riot!

It takes a huge leap to entertain the notion of my retired protesters above getting busted by the boys in blue of the Newport Beach PD.

In any case, Mark Ambinder offers an excellent analysis of the partisan framing in the debates over the healthcare backlash, although there's so far been no Astroturfing in the local events I've attended.

See, "Shocked. SHOCKED. Astoturfing Exists. ... Now What?" (via Memeorandum).

Obama White House to Monitor 'Casual Conversations' for Disinformation on Health Insurance Reform!

Now this is CREEPY:

There is a lot of disinformation about health insurance reform out there, spanning from control of personal finances to end of life care. These rumors often travel just below the surface via chain emails or through casual conversation. Since we can’t keep track of all of them here at the White House, we’re asking for your help. If you get an email or see something on the web about health insurance reform that seems fishy, send it to flag@whitehouse.gov.

Jeff Emanuel has the story, "Call For Informants: If You Oppose Obamacare, Even in ‘Casual Conversation,’ the White House Wants to Know About It."

Michelle Malkin suggests readers click the link and send them her report, "Health Care Czar’s Office Calls for Internet Snitch Brigade." Dan Collins has some thoughts as well, via Memeorandum.

I'm working on a report on today's anti-ObamaCare protest in Newport Beach, and I'm going to e-mail it to the White House when it's posted.

Don't be shy - send your blog post to the Health Czar's office. Michelle Malkin did it, and so can you!

California's Master Plan for Higher Education: Facing Crisis

I'm one to think that the financial problems in California's three-tiered system of higher education are cyclical. When the economy comes roaring back, legislators and future governors will lavish spending on all three levels of the state's college and university system.

Even in good times, however, there has been some erosion of support for even the elite University of California, and at the community college level, invested constituencies have less prestige and less power - and thus don't lobby as effectively to avoid funding crises. It remains to be seen what happens, but if California hopes to remain the world's leader in low cost collegiate education, folks need to think ahead: combine demands for state budget reform (some are talking about constitutational changes to the budgetary process) with innovations in funding of the state's schools. I'd be surprised if a more explicit foundation-style approach to funding research institutions couldn't be established (especially at the prestige schools, UC Berkeley, UCLA, and UCSD, for example); and the community colleges need to start charging more - even if that alienates the disadvantaged communities looking for a last chance at a college degree. We're not in 1960 any more.

That said, a lot in this Los Angeles Times article from last week is a bit pessimistic. A boom cycle will help the colleges in time. How the state takes advantage of it will depend on political leadership. Check, "California's Higher Education System Could Face Decline":

California's master plan for higher education, the product of an era of seemingly limitless opportunity, was nearly 30 years old when Nicolette Lafranchi was born in 1988. By the time she turned 20 last year, the plan was working well for her, just as it had for tens of millions of students before her.

That's less true now.

In the wake of massive cuts in California's three-tiered system of public colleges and universities, Lafranchi discovered that she can no longer transfer from Santa Rosa Junior College to San Francisco State University in December, as she had planned, because midyear admissions were eliminated.

Nor is that necessarily her biggest problem. A fall statistics class she needs is full. Without it, she faces the possibility of forfeiting her health insurance, which requires her to carry at least 12 college credits. A scholarship she had been receiving was eliminated.

"It's a lot at one time," she said. "You know, it's kind of sad. You think it's the state of California and we're the next generation, we have to take over from the baby boomers, but we're going to be a group of uneducated people.

"It's not kind of -- it is sad."

California's higher education system, created to offer the opportunity for advancement to any resident, rich or poor, has seen hard times before. But the deep cuts imposed by the Legislature and Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger this year are raising the question of whether the University of California, the California State University system and the nation's largest community college network can maintain their reputations for quality, or whether a public higher educational system that has been lauded as the world's finest may be in serious decline.

"This notion of the California dream, the idea that every adult could go to college, we've been hacking away at that during every recession for the past 25 years, and this year may well be it," said Patrick M. Callan, president of the San Jose-based National Center for Public Policy and Education. "We're coming out of this really tarnished."

The governor and legislative leaders acknowledge that the cuts will be devastating, but say they have no choice.

Already, campuses from Humboldt to San Diego are raising fees, shedding courses, slashing enrollment, and compelling faculty and staff to take unpaid furlough days. Class sizes are up, library hours are down, and long-held dreams for new programs and schools are on hold.

It's a far cry from the master plan's sweeping ambitions.

The state's college and university systems, which educate 2.3 million students annually, have roots in California's early days, but their modern history begins in 1960, when the educational plan was approved. It called for all state residents to have access to a tuition-free, public higher education, and outlined the mission of the three levels of colleges.

The higher education system has been credited with helping to shape and nurture California's economy and draw striving migrants from around the world.

"It had a magnet effect here for people who had ambitions for their children, that they could come to a place with good and virtually free public education all the way through college," said Richard White, an American history professor at Stanford University.

Read the whole thing, here.

White House Disinformation About Health Care Reform

The best way to evaluate the Linda Douglass White House Drudge rebuttal is to just watch it. At one point, Douglass says:

You know the people who always try to SCARE people whenever you try to bring them health-insurance reform are at it again. And they're taking sentences and phrases out of context, and they're cobbling them together to leave a VERY false impression.

She then turns around and shows snippets from Obama's statements and does the same thing:

But in addition to evaluating both sides of the messaging-war, folks should just read the bill, here.

The proposed legislation will levy fees on private insurance plans; the legislation will set prices for private insurance plans; the legislation will set prices for pharmaceutical medications; the legislation will authorize government audits of small business health coverage; the legislation will create healthcare rationing; the legislation will authorize bureaucratic decisions over health provision; and the legislation will raise taxes and shift funding mandates to the states.

There's lots more awful stuff beyond that. But folks should read the bill, here.

Also, check The Rhetorican, "Why Linda Douglass Is Wrong":

So the White House is calling the video about Obama dreaming of a world without private health insurance “misdisinformation”.

I thought Douglass was supposed to be a cunning propagandist media-savvy professional. Remember this? If anyone is spreading this so-called “misinformation”, it’s Obama himself.

Newsbusters has more, "White House Attacks Drudge for Exposing Obama's Goal to Eliminate Private Health Insurance."

More at Hot Air and from Pat in Shreveport.

Plus, check Memeorandum. Especially, Mike Allen, "Barack Obama vs. Drudge Report," Michael Scherer, "YouTube Wars: The White House Vs. Drudge Report."

Congresswoman Loretta Sanchez Protest at Balboa Bay Club

This ain't "astroturfed":

"Sanchez Expected to be Greeted With Protests":

Rep. Loretta Sanchez (D-Garden Grove) is hosting a campaign fundraiser Tuesday morning at the Balboa Bay Club and conservative protestors are organizing a demonstration against her stance on health-care reform outside the popular resort.

Sanchez is raising money for her re-election run in 2010 against Assemblyman Van Tran.

"I have made it clear all along that our health care system needs significant reform, and that I believe a public option is necessary to reduce the overall cost of health care for the American people,” Sanchez recently said.

The breakfast is planned for 8:30 a.m. Tickets for the event are selling for $100 per person or $1,000 per table. An audience of 230 people is expected.

I'm heading over their right now ...

Meanwhile, readers might check this out, "Democrats' Break Looking Like a Bad Trip." (Via Memeorandum.)

The Field Negro: 'What About When You People Were Making Fun of George Bush Day and Night?'

From The Field Negro, on the Obama socialist posters:

Nothing like a little mockery of the Kenyan born president to get a rise out of the troops. Oh field, stop it! What about when you people were making fun of George Bush day and night? What about the late night jokes and all the blogs devoted to ridiculing him? On this very blog you called him the frat boy. What about it field? Care to answer that one? Yes, that's true. After Katrina, and after he led us into an illegal war, people got pretty upset at the frat boy. But I don't remember 100 days into his presidency people plastering posters of him all over a major A-merry-can city and it becoming some kind of rallying point for democrats against him. No, in fact, if I recall correctly, the frat boy had a lot of good will right after 911 in this country. Obama inherited a depression like economy and gets no such good will from the wingnuts while he tries to work things out. It has been one loof (That's a backwards fool for those of you who were wondering about my spelling.) after another from day one. The birthers; the tea party people; the deathers; the he is going to take our guns crowd; the he is a Socialist crowd (we could only wish); the he is a secret black Nationalist crowd. ....get the idea? With George it was ridicule, but it was just that: Ridiculing his incompetence and his policies. Not drumming up silly conspiracies worthy of an Olivr Stone movie.

Uh, actually, George W. Bush hadn't even taken office yet and the radical left's anti-American lobby was threatenting "a massive civil rights explosion" should the GOP take power. See ABC News, "Jackson Urges Nationwide Protests: Gore Advocate Urges Supreme Court to Allow Manually Recounted Florida Votes":

And from then on it was pretty much like this:

See, Newsbusters, "Obama Joker Poster Stirs Outrage, Bush Joker Poster Not So Much."

Long Island Tea Party Protest!

From Pamela Geller, "Long Island Tea Party!":

Great collection of photos!

I also learned something about citizen reporting: "YouTube opportunists."

Some dwid had blocked the videotaping of Pamela's speech:

Because he is one of these youtube opportunists. He didn't want me to get my remarks, so I would be forced to run his vid. No way.

Man, it's hard out there for a neocon!

Obama Socialist Posters: 'Accuracy in Language is Important'

From the L.A. Weekly yesterday, on the Obama socialist posters:

The only thing missing is a noose.

From the L.A. Weekly January 13, 2009, on "Sarah Palin Mannequin Ebay Auction":

Bidding starts at a thousand bucks. Proceeds go towards more of the artists' rooftop installations ....

"Her noose accessory will be included."

Super! But will she be shipping in a coffin?

Here's Dan Collins thoughts on Scott Walker's argument that the GOP shouldn't be "over the top":

I was seeing a pervasive preference of the Republicants to tiptoe through the tulips while the Demoncrats lobbed all manner of ordinance in their paths. And I found this disheartening, because I knew the stakes were higher. And I also knew we had turned a corner, so to speak. That there would be no polite discussion with the Left - no agreeing to disagree. And that what the Left wanted was for Conservatives like myself to die like lawyers in a bus over a cliff. This was a no-holds-barred bar brawl and our good 'ol wine and cheese tasting Republicant Elites were showing up with casseroles instead of shanks.

Anyway, calling a spade a spade is important. Accuracy in language is important. So I am very pleased to see this image popping up. I think a debut in Milwaukee seems in order. If there's one thing I hate, it's a dirty socialist.

See also, "Hype and Chains: The Real Obama Administration."

TBogg: 'I Just Wanna Give You the CREEPS!!'

A good friend of mine in the conservative activist community maintains her Twitter access on a pre-approval basis. This is why:

John Hawkins of RightWing News came to the sad realization today that he has wasted almost a thousand dollars on the entire White Chicks/Black Dicks DVD collection when he could have been doing some "lap-based web browsing" for free ...

Gawd, I love twitter ...

Okay, let's crank up some Social D in honor of TBogg the master-demonic-ridicule-creep of the leftosphere:

I'll be vigilant, I'll be silent Yes, no one will know.
You want something for nothing,
A toast on your grave!!

*****

"I just wanna give you the CREEPS!!"

******

Run and hide when I'm on the streets,
Your fears and your tears
I'll taunt you in your sleep!!

*****

"I just wanna give you the CREEPS!

With apologies to Mike Ness, TBogg might want to run and hide before bumping into some folks on the right side on the net.

By the way, Michelle Malkin blocked TBogg in advance:

I guess she's kind of thin-skinned and so maybe I shouldn't have posted this in the past:

Yeah. Right.

Freaking-a-hole TBogg's Twitter's here. Creep yourself out. And block the perp.

Christian Hosoi Wins X-Games Legends Competition

I used to hang out with most of these guys back in the day. And Christian Hosoi in particular never put on airs - "stuck up" airs, that is. As a skater he put up some of the biggest blasting vertical airs of his day - and he always made time to say hello to fans and young beginners looking for heroes. I love the dude.

From the Los Angeles Times, "Christian Hosoi wins skateboard legends final: The skateboarding fixture from the 1980s defeats Chris Miller for the gold medal":

Ten of the most influential figures in skateboarding convened Sunday for a showdown tabbed the skateboard park legends final.

Christian Hosoi and Chris Miller supplied the excitement, rekindling the competitive edge that made them skateboarding fixtures in the 1980s.

Hosoi withstood Miller's tricks and forged ahead late in the final heat to win the gold medal at the Home Depot Center.

"We're far from dead," Hosoi said. "To be out here experiencing X Games competition and then winning gold, it's one of the greatest moments of my life."

Lance Mountain won the bronze medal. And there was a two-way tie between Steve Caballero and Tony Magnusson for fourth place.

Here's a blog post on the event, Christian Hosoi wins Skateboard Park Legends title." But check this part out from the side notes at the Times, "Happy Hosoi":

Christian Hosoi, the high-flying pastor from Huntington Beach, prevailed in the inaugural skateboard park legends final.

Afterward, he said, "It's incredible to be out here, just to be alive, you know what I mean?"

The 41-year-old Hosoi, who spent five years in prison on drug-related charges, added: "Things that I went through in life -- to be out here experiencing X Games, competition and then winning gold -- it's one of the greatest moments of my life."

Here's a biography:

Skateboarding's first rockstar, "Holmes" as he’s known to his peers was untouchable as a vert skater in the 80s for his speed, massive Christ and Rocket airs, and flamboyant fashion sense. As vert was replaced in the early 90s by street skating, Christian disappeared from the spotlight, but his legacy wasn’t forgotten. After a drug arrest in 2000, just as the X-Games and other contests were breathing new life into vert skating, Christian spent five years in prison. Christian found salvation with Christianity, never lost his love for skateboarding, and upon being released, hit the ground rolling. Newly wed to his longtime girlfriend Jennifer, the skate world welcomed him back with open arms as he was kitted head-to-toe in the best sponsors and had photos in every magazine. The documentary Rising Son: The Legend of Christian Hosoi is the story of his life. The new generation of skaters has taken note of his classic style and ability to rip everything from vert ramps, to skateparks, to backyard pools.

Check Hosoi's homepage for some warmup video from Home Deport Center.

Besides that, not too much available yet, so check the video below, dated 2006, for some hot clips of Hosoi in action. Note especially at 53 seconds where Christian's doing a frontside air with an underside grab - it's effortless, and that's the kind of skating the made Hosoi one of the greatest of that generation:

Check out Christian's family pics at his MySpace page as well.

God bless you man.

Palin-Haters Crash and Burn on Bogus Divorce Rumor: 'Gryphen' Battles Back Against Threats, Right-Bloggers Slow Investigation!

From Eric Florack's piece at Pajamas Media today, "Liberal Bloggers Crash and Burn on Bogus Palin Divorce Rumor":

By now you have probably seen the wave of Sarah Palin rumors in the dinosaur media and the liberal blogs’ focus on the story that Sarah Palin and husband Todd are headed for divorce because of extramarital affairs by both. As you may imagine, the rumor was like a dream come true for many lefty bloggers.

PJM’s own Rick Moran looks at this issue at American Thinker and raises a great point: own American Thinker and raises a great point:

Several Alaska bloggers hounded the former Alaskan governor with bogus ethics complaints while she was in office — Alaska Report being one of them. Could a little payback be at play here?

I don’t doubt there are serious motivations for such tactics, but I suspect it runs a bit deeper than payback. Moran openly admits he’s being highly speculative. In that same spirit, here are a few thoughts and ideas.

Look at the “name in the paper” syndrome that followed Palin resigning her office and the stir that caused on the left. Not only did she reinforce her name recognition with that move with publicity you couldn’t buy from the dinosaur media at any price, but the press attacks on her actually brought out a lot of sympathy from grassroots types who don’t like and don’t trust the dinosaur media anyway.

I am beginning to think Palin played the press for fools on that one. All an accident? Perhaps, but I doubt it. Think of it in the following way. What could she have possibly done by plan or accident to get more press, more name recognition, and more favorable polling reactions from voters than resign as governor? That degree of success smacks to me of planning.

Her position thus reinforced with grassroots Republicans, the left took up the call on this “divorce” rumor, apparently wanting desperately to take a little of her momentum away. In so doing, the left apparently found the answer for Palin and her people to the question of what might give her even greater name recognition and voter sympathy. The beauty is, she didn’t even have to lift a finger this time around. All she had to do was to answer the rumor with:

Divorce Todd? Have you seen Todd? I may be just a renegade hockey mom, but I’m not blind!

Boom. Up go the polling numbers yet again, with minimal effort on Palin’s part. I think the woman is pure gold on these things. One simply cannot extinguish a rumor with any greater force, save perhaps dropping a nuke on the house of the author of the rumor. We see once again that the chief rumor monger is Alaskan CNN stringer Dennis Zaki of the Alaska Report website Moran mentions. Zaki and his website, you may recall, were involved in the spread of some seriously vicious rumors about Trig Palin and his parentage – rumors some on the left have been fixated on since the Republican convention.

More at the link.

Also, at Extra TV, of all places, "Palin Hunts Down Blogger, Threatens Lawsuit:

In a letter obtained by the Alaska Report, Thomas Van Flein, Sarah's lawyer, threatened the blogger known as "Gryphen" with legal action if Gryphen didn't post a retraction and an apology for his "malice" and "defamatory" accusations about the former GOP VP hopeful. If there's no retraction, Van Flein threatens to serve him with a court summons and a complaint at the kindergarten where the blogger works.

In response, Gryphen wrote on his blog, admitting that he did work in a kindergarten, and slammed Sarah's counsel for outing his life outside of the Internet. He also dissed Van Flein for mentioning his classroom "in order to frighten me into compliance."

As of now, Gryphen stands by his source and the story that the Palins are on the outs ...

Conservative bloggers Robert Stacy McCain and Dan Riehl have been all over this story. They've been contacting sources in Alaska, digging down deep for more information on "Gryphen." The guy's apparently a kindergarten assistant, and it looks like he's pushing back hard with threats of potential legal action.

From The Other McCain, "GRIFFIN INVESTIGATION:

Just got off the phone with Dan Riehl, with whom I'm co-blogging a project about anti-Palin blogger "Gryphen," a/k/a Jesse Griffin, Anchorage kindergarten teacher.

Given the serious nature of this story, Dan has decided to seek legal advice before publishing, a decision in which I concur. Readers are requested to visit Riehl World View or back here, where updates will be posted as soon as possible.

Here's the latest at Riehl World View, "Warning: Please Be Careful of Comments:

As I've just received a threat which seems to be from Jesse Griffin and suggests lawyers are already involved, please refrain from making any comments here that suggest Jesse Griffin is guilty of any crime, particularly as regards children. I have suggested no such thing.

Dan has just now added an update indicating that he's combed through the comments and deleted potentially inflammatory insinuations.

There must be something big cooking!

Image Credit: FullosseousFlap's Dental Blog, "The 'OUTING' of Sarah Palin Hate Blogger Jesse Griffin?"

'Americans Always Fight for Liberty': Awesome Tea Party Commercial!

Via Nice Deb, "Powerful Tea Party Commercial."

Yes, awesome! This is why we fight, and always have ... "put together by a high school kid":

'My Father Was a Drinker and a Fiend': Obama 'Joker' Posters Go Hollywood Viral

From The Blog Prof, "Obama "Joker" Posters Popping Up All Over L.A.":

No need to describe them as pictures are worth a thousand words ...

Also, from Associated Content, "Obama Joker Poster Plastered All Over Hollywood":

... posters depicting President Obama as the Joker character have been plastered on various freeway off-ramps and underpasses in the Hollywood area.

And from KTLA-TV Los Angeles, "Obama 'Joker' Poster Causing a Stir in L.A.":

A poster showing President Barack Obama as Heath Ledger's "Joker" character from "The Dark Knight" is creating a stir on the streets of Los Angeles where the image began appearing over the weekend.

The Obama-Joker poster shows President Obama with white face paint, dark eye shadow and smudged red lipstick and also has the word "socialism" printed in bold, dark letters under the image of his face.

It's unclear who created the image and who is posting it across the city. No one has taken credit so far.

Los Angeles Urban Policy Roundtable President Earl Ofari Hutchinson is calling the depiction, politically mean spirited and dangerous.

Hutchinson is challenging the group or individual that put up the poster to have the courage and decency to publicly identify themselves.

I don't recall Hutchinson getting so uptight about two-terms of "BusHitler" attacks. And actually, the First Amendment's a bitch that way sometimes. See, "Obama 'Joker poster' is Free Speech at Work."

Also, check Allahpundit, "LA Weekly Wets Itself Over Obama/Joker Poster: 'The Only Thing Missing is a Noose'."

More at World Weekly News and Newsbusters (via Memeorandum).

Dogging Lloyd Doggett: 'Just Say No' to Obamacare!

Via The Astute Bloggers, here's the video of the eruption of protest against Congressman Lloyd Doggett's town hall at a supermarket in Austin on Saturday. Listen to the angry demonstrators chanting, "just say no":

Here's this from Bob McCarty Writes:

“Rep Doggett met with constituents outside a grocery store in south Austin regarding the health care bill. Apparently the event was mostly advertised in liberal leaning local publications. He did not bring a megaphone, so hearing what he had to say was difficult. When he started making the move to leave, the crowd erupted chanting “Just say no!” His worker got the car ready to shuttle him away but the crowd surrounded it and it took a while for him to get out of the parking lot. The whole time, the “Just say no!” chant continued. It probably won’t matter – from his facial expression, body language, and what was heard to come out of his mouth, he’s for the the health care bill in its present form and has no openness to change on that.”

Also, check CBS News, "Rally Interrupts Dem Rep.'s Health Care Town Hall."

Note how the left is in full panic mode, e.g., at Think Progress, "Angry Right Harasses Rep. Lloyd Doggett With Anti-Health Care Chants," and "Durbin Responds to Lobbyist-Run Efforts to Harass Town Halls …"

But as Phillip Klein indicates:

The liberal effort to discredit American citizens who are expressing their views on an issue of vital importance is completely without merit, but it is instructive. It tells us that liberals know that despite their tremendous advantages in terms of resources and power in Washington, they are losing the health care messaging war. It’s becoming clear that Americans are not ready for a government takeover of the health care system, and they aren’t going to sit by idly while Democrats ram it down their throats.

More at Memeorandum. And, Ed Morrissey, "Three Videos Show Why ObamaCare is in Trouble."

Addendum:

Local O.C. organizers are preparing a protest against Representative Loretta Sanchez tomorrow morning - and lobbyists are not organizing the event! Here's the information (get there early):

Aug 4 Tuesday 8am-9:30am, Newport Beach: Breakfast with Congresswoman Loretta Sanchez! Balboa Bay Club 1221 West Coast Hwy., Newport Beach
Special Guests: Members of Congress to be announced! Suggested contribution: Individual Tickets $100 Table of 8 $1000 Individual Sponsor $2400 PAC Sponsor $5000 Please RSVP to Kelly Martinez at 714-832-4431 or kmartinez@loretta.org.

Also, here's the Merriam-Webster entry for "dogging" (I'd never heard of Urban Dictionary's version before, so I wanted to be clear).

'Have You Read the Book, Joy?' Michelle Malkin on The View!

Michelle Malkin tore it up on The View this morning!

Allahpundit's got the details:

The boss clearly went in there with a game plan, though: Knowing that she’d be interrupted at every opportunity, she set out to dominate the conversation, and knowing that Joy would be hostile, she made no pretense that they were just having a friendly chat. The tone is set from the get-go, with MM quizzing her about whether she read the book and Behar looking at Whoopi and smirking ostentatiously. Best part: The groans from the audience when Michelle referred to Hasselbeck as “the friendlier side of the aisle.” How dare she impugn Joy’s scrupulous impartiality.

The video is pure gold! Joy is really upset, squirming uncomfortably in her seat.

And here's this from Michelle Malkin herself: "Best part: Every single member of the audience got a copy of the book!"

Classy.

More at Memeorandum.

P.S. Michelle wasn't introduced until 45 minutes after the hour. The cast gabbed about the "hot topics," including Ryan O'Neal hitting on own daughter Tatum at Farrah Fawcett's funeral." I couldn't believe! But ...

Ryan O'Neal admits that he was so frazzled at Farrah Fawcett's funeral that he hit on his own daughter, Tatum O'Neal.

Man, I gotta watch The View more often. Go Elisabeth!

Town Halls Get Results! 'Audience Shouts Down Sebelius, Specter at Health Care Town Hall in Philadelphia'

The story's at Fox News, "Audience Shouts Down Sebelius, Specter at Health Care Town Hall in Philadelphia."

But watch it for yourself!

Freaking amazing ... video of a town hall meeting yesterday at the National Constitution Center in Philadelphia. Arlon Spector and Kathleen Sebelius are loudly heckled. Sebelius' extremely frustrated body language @ 2:05 minutes? Priceless:

Photos at the Fox News story, here.

Glenn Reynolds has more: "This kind of thing keeps happening. And it’s happening all over."

Hat Tip: Atlas Shrugs, "Town Halls Grow More, Hostility too: Arlen Specter and Kathleen Sebelius Heckled, Jeered at Town Hall."

Why the Obama Birth Certificate Story Won't Go Away

Steve Benen has a new post up attacking those who want the truth about Barack Obama's birth, "They'll Never Stop" (via Memeorandum):

Last week, Hawaii's health director apparently checked the president's birth certificate again, and discovered that Obama was, in fact, born in Hawaii on Aug. 4, 1961, and "is a natural-born American citizen." A nutty right-wing website, however, produced an obviously-fake document purporting to show that Obama was born in the "Republic of Kenya" in February 1964.

The problem, actually, is that the "birth certicate" has never been formally released. The public's only seen the "certificate live birth," and there's a real difference.

I posted on this last night, "Obama's Kenyan Birth, or Indonesian Citizenship? Shoot, I Can't Keep Up With This Stuff!"

I got a couple of responses, from RaDena at Blasting Caps and Dynamite and Stogie at Saber Point. Also, just now Dave at Dave's Notepad made a comment.

My position is pretty much captured by Doug at Political Pistachio, "Responding to Critics of Obama's Kenyan Birth Certificate" (with minor edits):

I don't know if Obama was born in Hawaii, Kenya, or on the moon. I wasn't there. I will not take a position that states I know for sure Obama is ineligible for President of the United States. That said, the reason I entertain the possibility that he is not a Natural Born Citizen of the United States is not primarily driven by the spurts of evidence, but by Obama's response to the challenge. His response to the accusations has been to seal all of his records, spend $900,000 on defending himself, and to refuse supplying documentation to verify eligibility and be done with it.

A man with nothing to hide does not take these kinds of actions.

This issue is not just about birth certificates and the U.S. Constitution, but about the honesty, integrity, and character of Barack Obama. I believe he fails on all counts ...

Go to Political Pistachio, here. Doug also runs a popular Blog Talk program as well, here.

Also, from a few days ago, see Hot Air, "Poll: 28% of Republicans don’t believe Obama was born in America? Update: Skeptics mostly southern."

Robert Stacy McCain is All Over 'Gryphen' Smear Campaign on Palin

Robert Stacy McCain has been putting his inside reporting skills to good use in breaking open the Palin divorce-smear story. Not only are the latest attacks on Sarah Palin demonic in their attemps to destroy the from GOP vice-presidential candidate, they're almost hillarious in their rank idiocy.

Check Robert's story, "CNN Bozo Accidentally Outs His Source; Palins Threaten LegalActionOn Divorce Smear":

An attorney for Sarah Palin has delivered a letter threatening legal action against an anti-Palin blogger who was the source of a divorce rumor that the attorney for the former Alaska governor called "categorically false."

Publication of the letter at a Web site that repeated the rumor has uncovered circumstantial evidence that the anti-Palin blogger "Gryphen" is a kindergarten teacher at an Anchorage elementary school.

Saturday, the rumor that Todd and Sarah Palin were divorcing created an online uproar. CNN stringer/anti-Palin blogger Dennis Zaki published a thinly-sourced "news" item asserting that "multiple sources" had confirmed the rumor first published by "Gryphen" at his Immoral Majority blog.

Zaki obtained a copy of a letter from Palin attorney Thomas Van Flein, ordering "Gryphen" to retract the allegations -- calling them "complete fabrications, false and defamatory" -- or face legal action. The Van Flein letter, published by Zaki with the name of the recipient blacked out, ended with this sentence ...

See also, R.S. McCain, "LEAVE JESSE GRIFFIN ALONE!"

Dan Riehl has more, "Is This Sarah Palin's Gryphen?"

There's so much to this story!

I'm going to read around a bit and write new post, but will add the updates here ...

Obama's Kenyan Birth, or Indonesian Citizenship? Shoot, I Can't Keep Up With This Stuff!

Some readers on the left of the spectrum have ribbed me about when I'd be blogging on the Obama birth certificate conspiracy.

And that's the thing, it's a conspiracy; and as much as I love my fellow conservatives, I'm' not touching this story: "BORN IN THE USA? Is This Really Smoking Gun of Obama's Kenyan Birth? Attorney Files Motion for Authentication of Alleged 1960s Certificate From Africa."

Actually, this little clipping below is the main reason I don't bother with this stuff. It's from the Honolulu Advertiser. As Ed Morrissey noted last July:

Unless someone wants to argue that the Advertiser decided to participate in a conspiracy at Obama’s birth in 1961 to provide false citizenship on the off-chance that an infant from a union of a Kenyan father and a teenage mother would run for President, then I’d say the “mystery” is over.

But wait! There's more, a lot more.

Andrew McCarthy's got a penetrating essay at National Review, "Suborned in the U.S.A.: The Birth-Certificate Controversy is About Obama’s Honesty, Not where He Was Born"

The theory that Obama was born in Kenya, that he was smuggled into the U.S., and that his parents somehow hoodwinked Hawaiian authorities into falsely certifying his birth in Oahu, is crazy stuff. Even Obama’s dual Kenyan citizenship is of dubious materiality: It is a function of foreign law, involving no action on his part (to think otherwise, you’d have to conclude that if Yemen passed a law tomorrow saying, “All Americans — except, of course, Jews — are hereby awarded Yemeni citizenship,” only Jewish Americans could henceforth run for president). In any event, even if you were of a mind to indulge the Kenyan-birth fantasy, stop, count to ten, and think: Hillary Clinton. Is there any chance on God’s green earth that, if Obama were not qualified to be president, the Clinton machine would have failed to get that information out? ....

So, end of story, right? Well, no. The relevance of information related to the birth of our 44th president is not limited to his eligibility to be our 44th president ....

Shortly after divorcing Barack Obama Sr., Obama’s mother, Stanley Ann Dunham, married an Indonesian Muslim, Lolo Soetoro Mangunharjo, whom she met — just as she had met Barack Sr. — when both were students at the University of Hawaii. At some point, Soetoro almost certainly adopted the youngster, who became known as “Barry Soetoro.” Obama’s lengthy, deeply introspective autobiographies do not address whether he was adopted by the stepfather whose surname he shared for many years, but in all likelihood that did happen in Hawaii, before the family moved to Jakarta.

Under Indonesian law, adoption before the age of six by an Indonesian male qualified a child for citizenship. According to Dreams from My Father, Obama was four when he met Lolo Soetoro; his mother married Soetoro shortly thereafter; and Obama was already registered for school when he and his mother relocated to Jakarta, where Soetoro was an oil-company executive and liaison to the Suharto government. That was in 1966, when Obama was five. Obama attended Indonesian elementary schools, which, in Suharto’s police state, were generally reserved for citizens (and students were required to carry identity cards that matched student registration information). The records of the Catholic school Obama/Soetoro attended for three years identify him as a citizen of Indonesia. Thus Obama probably obtained Indonesian citizenship through his adoption by Soetoro in Hawaii. That inference is bolstered by the 1980 divorce submission of Ann Dunham and Lolo Soetoro, filed in Hawaii state court. It said “the parties” (Ann and Lolo) had a child (name not given) who was no longer a minor (Obama was 19 at the time). If Soetoro had not adopted Obama, there would have been no basis for the couple to refer to Obama as their child — he’d have been only Ann Dunham’s child.

In any event, the records of the Catholic school and the public school Obama attended during his last year in Indonesia identify him as a Muslim. As Obama relates in Dreams from My Father, he took Koran classes. As Obama doesn’t relate in Dreams from My Father, children in Indonesia attended religious instruction in accordance with their family’s chosen faith. Moreover, acquaintances recall that young Barry occasionally attended Friday prayers at the local mosque, and Maya Soetoro-Ng, Obama’s half-sister (born after Lolo and Ann moved the family to Jakarta), told the New York Times in a 2008 interview, “My whole family was Muslim, and most of the people I knew were Muslim.” In fact, back in March 2007 — i.e., during the early “Islamic ties are good” phase of Obama’s campaign — the candidate wistfully shared with New York Times columnist Nicholas Kristof his memories of the muezzin’s Arabic call to prayer: “one of the prettiest sounds on earth at sunset.” Kristof marveled at the “first-rate accent” with which Obama was able to repeat its opening lines.

The point here is not to join another crackpot conspiracy, the “Obama as Muslim Manchurian Candidate” canard. Obama was only ten years old when he left Indonesia; there is no known evidence of his having made an adult choice to practice Islam, and he is a professed Christian. The point is that he lies elaborately about himself and plainly doesn’t believe it’s important to be straight with the American people — to whom he is constantly making bold promises. And it makes a difference whether he was ever a Muslim. He knows that — it’s exactly why, as a candidate, he originally suggested his name and heritage would be a selling point. Obama’s religious background matters in terms of how he is perceived by Muslims (Islam rejects the notion of renouncing the faith; some Muslims, like Libyan strongman Muammar Qaddafi, make no bones about regarding Obama as a Muslim; and — as the mainstream media took pains not to report during the campaign — it is suspected that significant illegal donations poured into the Obama campaign from Islamic countries and territories). Obama’s religious background also matters in terms of how he views American policies bearing on the Muslim world.

There's more at the link.

It's pretty compelling. I'm not going over into "birther territory" after reading McCarthy's essay. But the piece does confirm what I already know about our president - the guy's a sneaky con-man who snaked his way into the Oval Office by pulling the most grandiose hoodwink on the American people in history.

More at Memeorandum. See especially, Confederate Yankee, "Another (Faked) Obama Birth Certificate Found."

Trina Thompson Sues College After Bombing on Job Market

Dr. Melissa Clouthier wrote about it last night: "College Grad Can't Find Job, Wants $$$ Back."

The women, Trina Thompson, is suing Monroe College to get her tuition back, $ a beefy!

Well, it turns out my young friend Suzanna Logan's got something to say about it, "Entitled to Succeed? Two letters: BS":

Newsflash, Ms. Thompson, it's not anyone else's responsibility to ensure your success, especially your college, post-graduation. It's your school's job to offer you a competitive education, feed you crappy cafeteria food, and keep you perpetually sleep-deprived for four years. At least those were the rules when I was an undergrad.

Maybe the rules have changed since then? Or, maybe I don't get the girl's beef because my school didn't even have a "career" center. Or, maybe I don't get it because my class schedule didn't include Bogus Lawsuits 101 or the Meta-Physics of Whiners.

Hey, at least, are two areas she seems to have excelled in.

Well said, Suzanna!

And keep up with the posting!

See also, "Jobless Grad Sues College for 70g Tuition!."

Also check Memeorandum and Joanne Jacobs.

Ruthlessness in International Politics!

I just love this tip from Glenn Reynolds!

Over at Volokh Conspiracy, Kenneth Anderson links to a research paper by Brad Roth of Wayne State University: "Coming to Terms with Ruthlessness: Sovereign Equality, Global Pluralism, and the Limits of International Criminal Justice."

Anderson adds this, "This article pulls no punches and must have caused a stir among the genteel precincts of academic international law when it was presented at the Santa Clara conference."

Well, I can't speak for law professors writing on international relations, although by reading the paper I get a sense that scholarly norms are much kinder on that side of the disciplinary divide!

Here's a clip from the paper. It's not too bad:

International law represents – not exclusively, to be sure, but vitally – an accommodation among entities prone to conflict rooted, not only in competing interests, but also in systematic and profound disagreement about justice. Political conflict’s much-lamented intractability is largely owing to its moral component; contestants are least willing to back down from positions taken as a matter of principle. Although human beings rarely disagree about the most fundamental moral principles in the abstract (e.g., “murder is wrong”), they all too frequently disagree about the application of those moral principles to unmediated struggles over the terms of public order (e.g., “one person’s terrorist is another’s freedom fighter”). While the specific configurations of contemporary international conflict can be ascribed to historical contingencies of the “Westphalian” state system, the animating tendency toward moral disagreement is endemic to the human condition.

In the absence of commonalities of substantive moral principle, participants in the international community need to find common ground on a different plane. The imperative to honor agreements – and other forms of accommodation on which others are led to rely – is not reducible to a pragmatic concern of the “repeat player” to maintain a reputation that will enable her to obtain cooperation on subsequent “plays,” but is a duty, owed to the community, to maintain an expectation of compliance with established institutions. Moreover, “honor” itself is not without moral significance, as it reflects integrity and respect for the other. One honors agreements made with the unjust, mostly because it is irresponsible to do otherwise when morally important interests depend on maintaining one’s own and others’ ability to trade on the convention of agreement in similar future contexts, but also because treachery, even when employed against actors who are themselves immoral, incurs a moral taint. The point is not that considerations of extraordinary injustice, even unilaterally conceived, may never override the duty to honor one’s formal commitments. It is that positive obligations may be morally binding even where they demand forbearance from the single-minded pursuit of one’s unilateral moral ends. Whatever the exceptions, they do not swallow the rule.

Thus, however paradoxical it may seem, restraint on the pursuit of justice is not only central to the mission of existing international law, but also central to any sound theory of international political morality that pertains to the development of international legal institutions. Unilateral impositions, deriving from a particular, empowered conception of universal morality, are more likely to be the problem than the solution. What Prosper Weil stated a quarter-century ago remains valid today:

"At a time when international society needs more than ever a normative order capable of ensuring the peaceful coexistence, and cooperation in diversity, of equal and equally sovereign entities, the waning of voluntarism in favor of the ascendancy of some, neutrality in favor of ideology, positivity in favor of ill-defined values might well destabilize the whole international normative system and turn it into an instrument that can no longer serve its purpose."

Interestingly, among human rights-oriented scholars, this argument has considerable (though by no means universal) appeal as applied to unilateral threats and uses of force, and perhaps even to unilateral coercive economic measures such as secondary boycotts. Yet some of the same scholars who embrace restraints on those categories of exertions by individual states or coalitions of the willing” appear to see national courts’ exercises of extraordinary extraterritorial jurisdiction, nullifications of the immunity of foreign officials, and creative circumventions of nullum crimen sine lege as not only exempt from the pitfalls of such unilateral executive measures, but actually as a peace-building and law-developing alternative to such executive measures.

This is a fundamental mistake. Extraterritorial prosecution of foreign-state actors and forcible impositions upon foreign political communities are both conceptually and practically intertwined. Because the legal limitations on the two derive from the same jurisprudential concept, the likely consequence of the loosening of constraints in the former realm will be the erosion of constraints in the latter.

International legal constraints on the use of force are predicated not on a principle of non- violence, but on a principle of respect for a foreign state’s authority within its boundaries. To put the point colorfully, but without substantive exaggeration, the right against coercive intervention is the right of territorial political communities to be ruled by their own thugs and to fight their civil wars in peace. It reflects a pluralism that self-consciously sacrifices one set of genuine moral imperatives to another. It favors the creation and maintenance of a stable platform for peaceful and respectful accommodation among territorial political communities – which may be ruled, for the time being, by governments bearing incompatible conceptions of political morality – over licensing unilateral projections of power across borders in service of what might objectively be a just cause.

Although considerations of human rights may ground episodic exceptions to the non-intervention norm, human rights do not constitute a general qualification of the norm; rather, a state’s right against dictatorial interferences in its internal affairs presumptively withstands the state’s own violations of international legal norms, including human rights norms. To the extent that extraterritorial jurisdiction licenses the vilification of foreign state officials, it has the potential to undermine the platform that undergirds peaceful and respectful international relations. International efforts to secure the bases of human well-being routinely require the cooperation of political leaders to whom significant human rights violations can be attributed. Even recourse to force, both international and internal, must often be directed toward creating the conditions for a compromise that will respect the honor of the opposing party, notwithstanding the opponent’s ruthless acts. Moreover, where ruthless acts have been committed with substantial popular support, particular leaders cannot be singled out for vilification without impugning underlying constituencies, thereby further complicating efforts to establish cooperation going forward. These are morally important reasons to forbear from the pursuit of retributive justice across borders, even though countervailing considerations may outweigh them in a limited set of circumstances.

Maybe international lawyers are inclined, let's say, to a more cooperative way of looking at relations among nations. From my perspective, the Roth piece isn't that revelatory. It could be that the norms of transnationalism and the legalization of international politics have gotten to the point of simply ignoring the enduring verities of self-interest in global life. That said, the Roth piece is a kicker.

White House Boasts of Obama Cairo Apology Speech: Axelrod, 'Musical Impulse' to Grovel to Islamist Fanatics; America's Muslim Conversion Continues!

Today's Los Angeles Times pieces together the thinking that went into preparing President Obama's disastrous Muslim apology speech in Cairo in June.

See, "The Crafting of Obama's Cairo Speech to World's Muslims."

The speech was roundly criticized at the time. Nice Deb has a roundup, "Obama’s Muslim Speech In Cairo." Atlas Shrugs has the text, "TEXT: Obama's Speech to the Muslim World." Also at Atlas Shrugs, "Obama to Ummah: 'America is not – and never will be – at war with Islam' Usama: Called for 'Long War Against Infidels'."

Read the Times piece here.

The President knew the Cairo address was pushing major political incorrectness. But he was determined to continue with his agressive global-groveling apology tour. This passage on the final revision of the speech really captures how badly the administration is working to appease our Islamist enemies:

'A musical impulse'

Obama went over the new text on Air Force One as he flew to an overnight stop in Saudi Arabia. As he read, he nodded, pausing now and then to ink in a thought or a suggestion.

That night, at the Riyadh ranch of King Abdullah, Obama had cardamom tea with the Saudi ruler. Emanuel went for a run in the 110-degree heat. Then Obama holed up with him, Axelrod and other senior staffers. Their buffet dinner simmered over cans of Sterno as they studied the text.

At midnight, the door to the staff work space creaked open. The president and his personal aide, Reggie Love, were delivering more changes.

On the two-hour flight to Cairo the next morning, Obama continued to tinker with the words and whisper parts of the speech to himself.

"He's very focused on both content and cadence," said Axelrod, "so he'll move the order of words around in order to get the cadence that he wants. . . . It's almost a musical impulse -- how the words play against each other."

Rhodes would punch each change into his laptop, then walk to the back of the plane and read them to the Arabic translator.

"You've had a tough job," Obama said as they landed in the Egyptian capital.

A motorcade sped them through the streets. Then, surreally, the frenetic pace was interrupted as the president paused to tour the Sultan Hassan Mosque, one of the world's oldest.

"Rhodes" is Ben Rhodes, the lead speechwriter for the Cairo apology.

At one point, Obama told Rhodes:

"I know you've been under a lot of pressure to get this right," he said. "But this speech is way too cautious. We have to say everything and say everything candidly. I'm not going all the way to Cairo to do anything else."

Yes, Obama didn't want to waste a chance to lay America prostrate once more before our enemies, and to sell out Israel while he was at it. As Anne Bayefsky put it:

President Obama’s meticulously planned and executed Egyptian speech marks the lowest point in the U.S. presidency’s understanding and appreciation of the Jewish state, its history, and its people’s future. Added to his administration’s evident infirmity on Iran, the speech of June 4, 2009, by the supposed leader of the free world will be remembered as a major decline in human history.

It's heart-sinking stuff. And all the more reason to get this man out of power ASAP.

As Pamela Geller noted at the time of the speech:

Little did America know that Obama's objective would be a conversion of this nation to 'the largest Muslim country in the world'. From the moment he spoke as President, in the inaugural address, Islam was falsely given a preeminent place in the creation of America. In this speech, he quoted from the Koran three times. Why doesn't anybody comment on this? Why doesn't anyone ever comment on what he projected vs. what he is? Why won't all those talking heads state the obvious?

We're seeing more evidence of that this afternoon.

Michelle Malkin on Bill Maher: 'When They Can’t Attack the Message...'

From Michelle Malkin, on Bill Maher's attack on her book, Culture of Corruption:

... they attack the messenger.

This is all they’ve got (vid at link if you can stomach it) ...

That’s it. Not a single refutation of a single fact in the book. Bill Maher can’t bring himself to open it and read what’s in between the covers. Why? Because he and all of his enablers in Hollywood, D.C., and Manhattan are in a state of denial about Obama’s Culture of Corruption. They don’t want to hear it, see it, or smell it. Unlike many brave whistleblowers who worked in the Obama trenches and who have seen the light, the liberal elites don’t want to know the truth.

Read the whole thing, here (via Memeorandum).