Barack Obama Has Attacked Religion 'Since Virtually the Moment He Took Office'

Via Blazing Cat Fur:

Oh, And One More Thing About the Democrats' $5 Trillion Tax Cut Lies...

At Ace of Spades HQ, "Remember That "$5 Trillion Tax Cut" Obama Was Blathering On About Last Night? Yeah, He Was Lying."

Hey, getting Stephanie Cutter to admit the boss is lying? Priceless.

PREVIOUSLY: "Stunned Leftists Look to 'Fact Checkers' to Rescue President Clusterf-k From Epic Debate Debacle."

'Debacle in Denver': Sean Hannity, Michelle Malkin Shred Democrats After Debate Disaster

Here's my earlier entry: "Stunned Leftists Look to 'Fact Checkers' to Rescue President Clusterf-k From Epic Debate Debacle."

And that seemed to be the consensus on Hannity's last night:

A second theme there is that the left will now look to exact revenge. The knives are out, as Chris Matthews famously revealed in his post-debate meltdown.

Stunned Leftists Look to 'Fact Checkers' to Rescue President Clusterf-k From Epic Debate Debacle

Some folks argued today that Mitt Romney's performance last night was perhaps the best ever in American political history. The left was utterly crushed at Dear Leader's unprecedented defeat at the hands of the Republican challenger. It's hard to be more demoralized, but then again, we've still got a foreign policy debate to come.

Meanwhile, to the rescue come the left's fact-checking brigades, which have gone on attack with completely lame reports on Mitt Romney as a "liar" and a "flip-flopper." Anne Sorock has the key entry on this, at Legal Insurrection, "A new cloak for media bias: the fact-check segment":

The media have fully deployed their defenses to protect President Obama after his dismal debate performance last night. So far two tactics have been employed, the first is the thinly veiled “fact check” attacks, while the other is calling Romney a bully for his take-charge performance.

The left's stupidity here is so heavy it almost hurts. See Big Government, "Fact Check: Top 5 Liberal Excuses for Obama Losing the First Presidential Debate to Romney." And Robert Samuelson, "The Democrats' $5 Trillion Tax Cut Myth."

And of course, the left's not fact-checking's Obama's lies. See the Weekly Standard, "ABC: Obama Falsely Claims He Has a Plan to Cut $4 Trillion from the Deficit."

Frankly, the stench of desperation has overtaken the radical left's fever swamps of Obama worship. President Clusterf-k was outed as a rank presidential imposter. The only argument worth credibility is that in the end the debate won't matter much at all. That may be true. But it's no consolation to those who are investing in a presidential incumbent who's clearly been spending way too much time reading from teleprompters in between making "eye candy" visits to his gal pals on "The View."

The vultures are circling over President Clusterf-k's campaign. He'll be lucky to make it out of October alive.

Markos Moulitsas Lamely Tries to Spin Barack Obama's Embarrassing Debate Debacle

I tweeted Markos Moulitsas during last night's debate:

@markos Romney's winning. Suck it up, brother. #DenverDebates
— Donald Douglas (@AmPowerBlog) October 4, 2012

He didn't reply, although he later posted some sorry-assed post-mortem at Daily Kos, "A loss, but not a game-changing one."

Actually, it was a "game changer." It's going to take a few days for that to sink in on the left, but if early polls are any indication, it's going to be a rough month for President Obama.

See Twitchy, "Game change? Even liberals admitting Obama against the ropes in first debate," and Jamie Weinstein at the Daily Caller, "Liberals throw hissy fit over Obama debate performance."

More later...

A Bad Night for Obama

From Victor Davis Hanson, at National Review (via RealClearPolitics):

Two themes predominated this debate and will be addressed in the next two sessions: For so long Barack Obama has assumed that he will not face cross-examination from the media that he simply has little grasp of policy details, and in exasperation seems to look around for the accustomed helpful media crutch. But there is no such subsidy in a one-on-one debate, and only now it becomes clear just how the media for the last six years have enfeebled their favorite. And unlike 2008, there is now an Obama record to defend, rather than just repeating hope-and-change platitudes and vague generalities that have worked in the past. Romney is an effective debater and had a wealth of detail at his grasp that seemed to stun Obama, as if such a skilled opponent was not supposed to be part of the script. In essence, Obama looked tired, in the Nixonian mode, and he sounded like a petulant 1980 Jimmy Carter. After this debate is over, I expect the Obama team will go into full reset mode to re-prep the president for the next round. Tonight he either coasted or was not up to the task, and it showed, and he knew it — and if the same sub-par performance continues in the next two debates Obama will lose the election outright.

Continue reading.

IMAGE CREDIT: iOWNTHEWORLD.

Oh My! Sarah Palin Lays Into Barack Obama: 'He Didn't Have His Buddy the Teleprompter in Front of Him...'

At Gateway Pundit, "Sarah Palin Rips Obama for Not Having TelePrompter at Debate (Video)."

Chris Matthews Goes Ballistic on Obama in Post-Debate Meltdown

I linked Matthews' meltdown at my debate analysis last night, but it's worth posting on its own.

Via Anne Sorock, at Legal Insurrection, "MSNBC’s Matthews gives epic smackdown of Obama."

Check Memeorandum and RealClearPolitics for all the day's analysis and spin. And boy, the Dems will be spinning enough to make a Whirling Dervish dizzy.

Perilous Times

Via Theo Spark.

Pat Caddell on O'Reilly Factor: 'There's a Purposeful Conscious Effort to Suppress News That Might Hurt Obama'

Pat Caddell's been making argument frequently of late.

PREVIOUSLY: "The Audacity of Corruption."

San Francisco's Tolerance Toward Tolerance is Wearing Thin

Tolerance. Isn't that an amazingly Orwellian word these days. Those least tolerant are the most prominent advocates for increasing tolerance. And the homo-radical freaks are the least tolerant of  all.

At the Wall Street Journal, "Proposed Ban on Public Nudity Offends Some in San Francisco":

SAN FRANCISCO—San Francisco's tolerance toward tolerance is wearing thin.

A city supervisor here proposed a law Tuesday that would ban nudity in most public places across the city. For years, the city has held an "equilibrium" with nudity at public events and occasionally in neighborhoods, said the supervisor, Scott Wiener, but the nudity recently "has just gotten extreme."

At issue is a public plaza that regularly attracts nudists in the historically gay Castro neighborhood, prompting a debate about the limits of civil liberties in this famously tolerant city. After complaints about the naked people by some businesses and residents, Mr. Wiener proposed the bareness-busting bill.

The proposed ban doesn't sit well with some urban nudists.

"This is, in my opinion, an attack on freedom," said George Davis, 66 years old, who was soaking up the sun Tuesday wearing nothing more than sunglasses and a hat, reading a book about Twitter, the microblogging service. As one of the Castro's famous nudists, "I meet people from all over the world," he said, including South Korea, France and Liechtenstein.

Some argued a ban would mark a slippery slope for the city. "Today it is naked people, and next week it will be drag queens, and then the week after that it will be people who wear leather," said Mitch Hightower, 51, who organizes an annual "nude-in" body freedom demonstration in the city and runs an exhibitionist website.

And then after that it'll be about people who like to wear butt-plugs up their ass in public. End the intolerance!!

RELATED: At Zombie, "San Francisco’s naked protest and the ethics of public nudity."

Why Are We So Nasty to Each Other Online?

This is interesting, at the Wall Street Journal, "Why We Are So Rude Online: Online Browsing Lowers Self-Control and Is Linked to Higher Debt, Weight":

Jennifer Bristol recently lost one of her oldest friends—thanks to a Facebook fight about pit bulls.

The trouble started when she posted a newspaper article asserting that pit bulls were the most dangerous type of dog in New York City last year. "Please share thoughts… 833 incidents with pitties," wrote Ms. Bristol, a 40-year-old publicist and animal-welfare advocate in Manhattan.

Her friends, many of whom also work in the animal-welfare world, quickly weighed in. One noted that "pit bull" isn't a single official breed; another said "irresponsible ownership" is often involved when dogs turn violent. Black Labs may actually bite more, someone else offered.

Then a childhood pal of Ms. Bristol piped up with this: "Take it from an ER doctor… In 15 years of doing this I have yet to see a golden retriever bite that had to go to the operating room or killed its target."

That unleashed a torrent. One person demanded to see the doctor's "scientific research." Another accused him of not bothering to confirm whether his patients were actually bitten by pit bulls. Someone else suggested he should "venture out of the ER" to see what was really going on.

"It was ridiculous," says Ms. Bristol, who stayed out of the fight. Her old buddy, the ER doctor, unfriended her the next morning. That was eight months ago. She hasn't heard from him since.

Continue reading.

My theory is that online you're always right. People don't care about others' opinions. They seek out people who agree with them. So even if you're a friend in the "real world," online you become an enemy if you're on the wrong side of an issue.

Romney Advertisement Exploits Biden's 'Buried' Gaffe

Via Althouse.

WKBT-TV's Jennifer Livingston Responds to Email From Man Bullying Her About Her Weight

This has gone viral the last few days.

And from ABC's Good Morning America yesterday, "Jennifer Livingston Fights Weight Criticism; Wisconsin News Anchor Blast Viewer's Email On-air."

FULL VIDEO: First Presidential Debate 2012

Oh boy, was this one for the history books.

There's going to be a bunch of fact-checking and spin all through the week and into the Sunday news shows, but the unshakable fact is that Mitt Romney destroyed Obama on Wednesday night. It was a crushing performance and the left is completely demoralized. Jonah Goldberg captures things well at National Review, "There Went the Boom" (via Memeorandum):

I’ve been getting more and more cautiously optimistic about Romney in the last few days and, going in, I had a pretty good feeling about tonight’s debate. But I had no expectation that Romney would simply control the night the way he did. I don’t think Obama did terribly on the merits, even though he clearly lost by a wide margin on points. But you don’t really score a debate like this on points. Romney simply dominated and deflated Obama. This was the first time millions of people ever heard Mitt Romney make a case for himself at any length. Most Americans didn’t watch the GOP debates. The ratings for Romney’s convention speech were sub-par and he never really talked about policy anyway at the convention. But tonight Romney brilliantly dismantled the straw man Obama has been running against for months. I think it was David Freddoso who said on Twitter that if all you knew about Romney was what you saw in Obama’s TV ads, you’d get the sense that Obama’s been lying to you all this time. Romney helped himself tonight — possibly a lot.

Actually, more than a lot. Romney helped himself enormously. More at the link.

Lying Liar Stephanie Cutter Lamely Defends Obama's Debate Performance, Attacks Moderator Jim Lehrer

I don't think I can ever recall a more accomplished liar. And we know from earlier this year that Stephanie Cutter is bald-faced liar. She's a remorseless bitch if there ever was one. And she's spins President Obama's historic debate debacle in true Stephanie Cutter contempt-for-the-truth style. Via Politico, "Obama's Stephanie Cutter knocks Lehrer" (at Memeorandum):

DENVER, Colo. -- Obama spokesperson Stephanie Cutter took a swipe at moderator Jim Lehrer's largely passive debate performance tonight, saying the PBS anchor had allowed Mitt Romney to act as the moderator.

"I sometimes wondered if we even needed a moderator because we had Mitt Romney," Cutter told CNN shortly after the debate, though she told POLITICO that Lehrer did his job as moderator and that her comments were strictly about Romney.

(See also: Complete coverage of the Colorado presidential debate)

Cutter's decision to knock Lehrer may signal an acknowledgment by the Obama campaign that the president did not perform as well as his challenger, Mitt Romney -- which was the general consensus of the media, including the usually pro-Obama MSNBC. (MSNBC hosts Chris Matthews and Ed Schultz slammed Obama's performance.)

Many on the left criticized Lehrer for being too silent. He rarely interrupted the candidates when they went over their allotted time, and when he did it was almost always a losting battle. His attempts to control the conversation were so notably nonconfrontational that they became memorialized in a Twitter handle named @SilentJimLehrer.

But Lehrer's passivity also allowed the two candidates to engage one another, and if Obama did not engage Romney or land any singificant blows, he may have no one to blame but himself. Though it is the moderator's responsibility to keep time and keep the candidates on topic, it was up to the president -- not the moderator -- to take on his challenger.

More at the link.

BONUS: Check the great post-debate roundup at The Lonely Conservative, "Presidential Debate 1 Wrap Up – Romney Won."

Did the White House Order a Libya Cover-Up?

From Con Coughlin, at Telegraph UK, "Did the White House order a cover-up over the murder of Libya's US Ambassador?":

Immediately after the murder of Chris Stevens, America's Ambassador to Libya, I suggested that the assault on the US consulate in Benghazi on September 11 could have profound consequences for President Barack Obama, particulary if he failed to take appropriate action against the murderers – the most likely candidates being members of al-Qaeda's new terror franchise in Mali.

But with the US presidential contest entering its critical final phase, the Obama administration deftly avoided getting into any controversy over the murder of Mr Stevens and three other members of the consulate staff by leading everyone to believe the murders were not part of an al-Qaeda plot, but the result of an outbreak of violence caused by a blaphemous film clip. This was certainly the line advanced by Dr Susan Rice, the American Ambassador to the United Nations, and a close confidante of Mr Obama.

Dr Rice, in common with other senior officials in the Obama administration, insisted that the assault on the US consulate had been "spontaneous", rather than a carefully planned attack by terrorists. By making this claim, the White House effectively silenced any criticism that the Obama administration was culpable for not taking more effective measures to protect the consulate.

But now it appears that Rice's version of events – endorsed by the White House – was wrong. Within 24 hours of the attack taking place, Washington was informed by a variety of intelligence sources that the attack had indeed been pre-planned and was undoubtedly the work of al-Qaeda which, apart from attacking the consulate, had also attacked the CIA's safe house in Benghazi.

As a result, rather than absolving itself of any blame for this tragic incident, the White House – and Mr Obama – now find themselves at the centre of a mounting storm over what precisely they knew about the attack on the consulate, and when.

Now that Hillary Clinton, the US Secretary of State, has confirmed there was an explicit link between al-Qaeda and the attack, questions are being asked about the role Dr Rice played in trying to play down the significance of the attack. The Republicans have already called for her to resign from her post for misleading the American people.

But the real smoking gun is whether the Obama administration was warned in advance that al-Qaeda was planning an attack...

Continue reading.

It's a cover-up alright. Indeed, the Libya debacle is perhaps the biggest diplomatic clusterf-ks in American history.

See also Eli Lake, "U.S. Consulate in Benghazi Bombed Twice in Run-Up to 9/11 Anniversary."

Mitt Romney Kicks Ass in First Debate

I thought my perspective was biased, that Romney just destroyed Obama in the debate. But the results are coming in, and it's a bloodbath for the Democrats.

See BuzzFeed for the big headline, "How Mitt Romney Won The First Debate." (At Memeorandum.) Also at Washington Free Beacon, "Liberal Media Calls It for Romney."

I'll be updating, but if you're checking my blog as this post goes live, click your remote over to MSNBC. This is a devastating night for the left. It's a collective meltdown over there. Ed Schultz just said that Mitt Romney was "in his wheelhouse on the economy." And Chris Matthews was literally going ballistic. I'll be looking for the video and will update.

Check back from more reporting and analysis.

8:10pm Pacific: At the Los Angeles Times, "In position to surprise, Romney has sharp answers in first debate." And the Wall Street Journal, "Candidates Spar Over Taxes: Obama, Romney Lay Out Differing Views of Government, Regulation, Deficit Cuts."

And The Other McCain, "MITT ROMNEY WINS FIRST DEBATE."

8:16pm Pacific: Here's some raw video from CNN. I'll link the full clip as well, when I find it.

8:27pm Pacific: Glenn Reynolds has video from MSNBC, "CHRIS MATTHEWS IN POST-DEBATE MELTDOWN..."

8:45pm Pacific: At CNN, "CNN Poll: Romney wins debate by big margin."

JetBlue Will Fly Upset Voters Out of the Country

Great, if Romney wins we can ship loads of depraved progressives overseas.

But I'll tell you, JetBlue's going to have to expand operations if President Clusterf-k wins a second term.

At Politico:

JetBlue Airlines is offering Americans upset about their candidate's defeat in the upcoming November election a chance to leave the country for free — if only temporarily.

"If your candidate doesn't win, don't worry. Election protection could be your ticket out of the country," the company writes on a new website.

The site allows voters to declare their support for a candidate — and if that candidate loses, they'll be entered into a contest to win one of 1,000 trips to a tropical destination.

More.

40th Birthday! Smokin' Cameron Diaz Cover Shoot for British Esquire

Some pre-debate Rule 5.

At London's Daily Mail, "'I feel better at 40 than I did at 25': Cameron Diaz defies her age as she shows off cleavage in new sultry men's magazine shoot."