Nightly Ramble:Where’s the Canary?

Welcome, everyone, to the most intense nightly read anywhere on the ‘sphere… The BitsBlog Nightly Ramble

• SITYS #7216:Fox News, yesterday:
  

  Former Vice President Dick Cheney said Wednesday that the Bush administration had developed a new strategy on the war in Afghanistan before leaving office — a strategy that he said “bears a striking resemblance” to the one announced by President Obama in March.

  In a speech to the Center for Security Policy, Cheney said the Bush administration handed Obama’s transition team a policy review of the Afghan war conducted last fall to meet the new challenges posed by the Taliban.

  “They asked us not to announce our findings publicly, and we agreed, giving them the benefit of our work and the benefit of the doubt,” Cheney said.

  Cheney’s comments countered a recent claim by White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel that the Obama administration had to form an Afghan war strategy from scratch because the Bush administration hadn’t asked any key questions about the war and left it “adrift.”

  Well, now, let’s look at Pajamas Media and see what I said about that before Obama even took office?

  I dare to suggest that Mr. Bush is going to be vindicated over the next four years by President Obama himself. Vindicated not in rhetoric, since left-wing rhetoric is always and forever vitriolic against any successful Republican. No, Bush will be vindicated thanks to the policies sure to be adopted by Mr. Obama and the Democrat-run Senate, House, and State Dept.

  I make this assessment based on the proposition that President Obama is a pragmatist at heart. He goes with what works to keep himself in power. One cannot, after all, be such an astute manager of his own spectacle without being in large part a pragmatist.

  If we accept the lessons of history, in this case the Clinton administration, Democrats have learned how to change political reality. They have learned how to alter the perception they are on the run from an unruly mob, into one that suggests what is really going on is that there is a parade — one that they are leading. Finding in their pragmatism something that works and that someone else has offered, and then getting out in front of it as if it was their plan to begin with. This has been their big talent for the last 20 years or so.

  Indeed, it is Obama who apparently is doing the most in terms of recognizing (the far left’s bleeding anti-Bush vitriol notwithstanding) that Mr. Bush didn’t do that bad of a job after all. He’s adopting the vast majority of his anti-terrorism and economic policies (i.e., the bailout plans).

  Jules Crittenden looks at this whole thing and quips:

  Funny, I was just reading Steve Huntley’s Chicago Sun-Times column about all the things Obama and his people keep saying they inherited from Bush. A viable Afghan war strategy … never mind a pacified, Saddam-free Iraq … is not one of them.

  Yeah, well… did you really expect them to admit such things? No, instead we’ll see claims that the Republicans didn’t care about Afghanistan. Are you starting to understand this yet, America?

• THE DOLLAR AS RESERVE CURRENCY:  Drezner thinks the dollar isn’t going to be leaving that role. I have my concerns, but in the near term I think he’s right.  Of course, there is still the possibility of a second term for Obama,  right?
• “CASH FOR CLINKERS” AND THE LAW OF UNEXPECTED CONSEQUENCES: Looks like the only real effect of that misbegotten mess was to create a situation where good used cars are hard to find. Billy was right when he talked about such destruction. Of course getting you out of good cheap cars and onto government run mass transport was the very nub of the thing, wasn’t it?
• OATH ON THE CONSTITUTION NOT ON A MAN: Speaking of Billy, here he goes:
  

  “We swear an oath to the Constitution, not to a man, even if he makes a thrill run up your leg when he talks.”

  Allegedly cracked upon the appalling nitwit Chris Matthews by one Stewart Rhodes.

  Even accounting for the goddamned nonsense in the United States Constitution (listen up, kids: the Commerce Clause does not describe a condition of freedom — can you bloody understand that?), that’s well done. I’ll be interested to see the video.

  Well, here you are, Billy.

• CAN YOU SPOT THE RACISTS? All MSNBC has to do is look in the mirror.
• BITSBLOG BUMPER STCKER OF THE DAY: Today’s visual giggle has a point to make, and comes to us by way of Don Surber:

The first rather obvious question that pops into my head upon reading this particular missive from Eric Kleefeld, is about there being any doubtwhatever that Alan Grayson is Florida’s answer to Cynthia McKinney. Look, I’m sorry, but in my view,Grayson has turned himself into an embarrassment that is among the few on the planet that could actually give McKinney a run for the money.

Rep. Alan Grayson (D-FL) has set up a new Web site, Names of the Dead, to memorialize Americans who died because they had no health insurance:

Every year, more than 44,000 Americans die simply because have no health insurance.

I have created this project in their memory. I hope that honoring them will help us end this senseless loss of American lives. If you have lost a loved one, please share the story of that loved one with us. Help us ensure that their legacy is a more just America, where every life that can be saved will be saved.

It’s bad enough that a U.S. congressman figures that because government isn’t spending piles of your money and mine on somene’s healthcare, that their deaths are on OUR hands. The total absence of logic involved with that idea should be enough to disqualify him from the office that he holds that the moment.  Clearly however, that wont disqualify him from attaining higher office in the near future, and that just as clearly is what the man has in mind with all the smoke signals he’s been sending from central Florida lately.  But watch this:

Grayson may be leaving himself open to some online practical jokers. At the moment I write this, four names are memorialized in the site’s rotating list:

– Lassie Martin, 10, Kanab, UT

– Norma Jeane Mortenson, 36, Los Angeles, CA

– Steve Rogers, 90, New York, NY

– Wile E. Coyote, 55, Sedona, Arizona

All four of those names are fraudulent

I’ll bet their being fake names didn’t stop them from voting to elect Grayson, huh?

Ya know, this is getting just a wee bit annoying.

I said this yesterday morning:

So, tell us, oh, vaunted master of the news cycle, what the bleep Rachel Maddow and Keith Olberman were doing in the room? And tell us, given the activities of they and a few other notable crazies inhabiting that channel, does MSNBC count as a “News Org”?  Why?

See, I guess the real question here is this: Is the White House’s definition of what is a news org limited to those who act like they’re the propaganda arm of the Democrat Party?

So this morning,  By way of Memeorandum, I see Chris Arens over at TVNewser:

Here’s a curious turn in the White House vs. Fox News fight.  —  On Monday, MSNBC’s Keith Olbermann and Rachel Maddow were among several people who attended an off-the-record briefing with Pres. Obama at the White House.

OK, fine. But of course now look at the pile of links he catches:Sister Toldjah, Wizbang, Another Black Conservative, Riehl World View, The Political Carnival, The Great American Blog, Weasel Zippers, Verum Serum, Gawker, Hot Air and FishBowlDC

Look, gang, I know how this game gets played.  I’ve been doing online writing for 20 years and longer, now… this ain’t the first rodeo.   I’m usually not one to birch, and maybe it’s the flu bug that has me a little short tempered, today. . But I have to confess a bit of frustration at the lack of recognition this blog’s been getting, in spite of  the effort and good observations involved.  David Mel and myself have been writing our asses off, with analysis as good as any to be found  on the sphere.  Indeed, and clearly, BitsBlog was on the leading edge of this aspect of the story on that presser… and got ignored for it’s trouble. Again.

How about it, next time, huh? Or do I really have to start playing the games that some bloggers play about spamming everyone and their brother with every post they create just to get some hits? If it comes to that, I quit.

(Deep breath, smile)

Allah Pundit, too; jumps on the story with some interesting additional info, and that’s worth a read.

Gee who’d have thunk.   ACORN lies and saps like Media Splatters and the Washington Post fall for it, roll the video:

Gaius, Blue Crab Universe:

Gee, ACORN Lied? Whodathunkit….

Breitbart strikes again. When the first series of sting videos showing ACORN employees cheerfully trying to help two people they thought were a pimp and a prostitute set up a brothel featuring underaged girls brought into the country illegally, ACORN defended itself. They said that they had thrown the couple out of their Philadelphia office and called the cops.

Well, Breitbart revealed video of the Philadelphia visit today. And it did not happen the way ACORN said it did. At all. In fact, the “pimp” and “prostitute” had a nice little chat with the very woman who defended ACORN’s actions

ACORN lied to Media Splatters.  Will George Soros’ lads demand an apology?   Don’t hold your breath.   Will Soros’ lads even realize they were used?

They came to talk about not-so-distant future technology, where cash is a relic, we’ve all but ditched the PC in favor of the mobile phone and the entire cable TV 500-channel universe — including pay TV — can be seen online, any time of the day.  Read more at USA Today Technology

Hello and welcome one and all tot he most intense nightly read anywhere on the ‘sphere; The BitsBlog Nightly Ramble

They say you’re supposed to have 5 service of veggies every day. Well, here’s one heapin helpin’, just now;

• CONTAINMENT: Politico’s Mike Allen and Josh Gerstien that The White House is attacking Fox News as a part of a containment strategy.
  

  But most of all,  (….they’re about getting….) other journalists to think twice before following the (…Fox…)  network’s stories in their own coverage.

  “We’re doing what we think is important to make sure news is covered as fairly as possible,” a White House official told POLITICO, noting how the recent ACORN scandal story started because Fox covered it “breathlessly for weeks on end.”

  “And then you had a couple days of breast-beating from The Washington Post and The New York Times about whether or not they were fast enough on the ACORN story,” the official said. “And it’s like: Wait a second, guys. Let’s make sure that we keep perspective on what are the most important stories, and what’s being driven by a network that has a perspective. Being able to make that point has been important.”

  To some media observers, it’s almost the definition of a “chilling effect” – a governmental attempt to steer reporters away from negative coverage – but the White House press corps has barely uttered a word of complaint.

  That could be because of the perception among some journalists that Fox blurs the line between reporting and commentary – making it seem like not the most sympathetic victim.

  I actually had something written to the effect already that would have gone up on tonight’s Ramble , saying I suspected that’s what was happening.  (Yeah, I know that’s kind of like saying “I knew that”.)  But this  says it better than I, did,  I think, so they get the award. I said it this way;  It’s not the network they’re trying to squash… it’s the stories.  The asking of hard questions.

  Allahpundit, though notes;

  The irony of this story, though, is that the press was already happy to quarantine “wingnut” stories emanating from Fox, be it Van Jones or ACORN or the White House trying to politicize the NEA. Compare the first boldfaced quote in the blockquote above to this one from Chuck Todd more than a month ago. In fact, here’s what I wrote on September 4, while the Jones thing was roiling, on how Tapper — again — seemed to be the only non-Foxy willing to break the wider media embargo on covering what Fox News was covering.

  That’s from Tapper, who to my knowledge remains the one and only reporter from big media pursuing this story. The Times, WaPo, broadcast news — it’s a complete blackout, at least as of early this afternoon. (NBC’s blog mentioned it in passing at the end of this morning’s news recap, in a sneering aside about the “conservative media machine.”) Why would they cede the field to Jake when he’s pulling big traffic from the righty blogosphere for covering this? I don’t think it’s simply to protect The One; they covered Geithner’s and Daschle’s tax problems and they’re much bigger fish. I think it’s that they know Glenn Beck’s been after Jones for weeks and it pains them too much to give him credence by following his lead. It’s analogous to the NYT refusing to review Michelle’s book even though she’s been number one on their own bestseller list for more than a month. Who cares if her thesis about Obama’s culture of corruption is correct and newsworthy and obviously of great public interest? They’re not going to help promote the work of someone whom they dislike. The state of the media, 2009. As for Tapper, his willingness to take up stories circulating in the righty blogosphere that other outlets try to suppress might give him a lot more influence as a reporter going forward. The White House can spin the Jones story as just another Fox News vendetta against the administration if it’s only FNC covering it; if ABC’s on it too, that becomes impossible and the story becomes “legitimate.” From now on, think of Tapper as the swing vote in the press pool, I guess.

  Boldface added. That last part is truer now than it was then, before the ACORN story broke big and Beck’s ratings soared even higher. The White House must be panicking at the thought that the “legitimate” media will only ignore these stories for so long before the lure of bigger, Foxier ratings finally proves too much

  Well, that or the logical inconsistency of ignoring the implications of the stories Fox has been running, and the degree of effort being put by this White House to squash such news orgs and such stores gets to be too much. As I noted in a post of David’s yesterday, that’s already begin to occur. See, the real issue for the non-Fox orgs is their credibility has long since started taking hits for ignoring such stores as Fox and the Blogs etc are exposing…. the viewers/readers are starting to notice. As Gaius at Blue Crab Blvd suggests:

  The backfire has begun in earnest. By singling out Fox as a target, the other news organizations are being exposed as little more than trained seals, regurgitating Obama worship at the drop of a hint by the White House. Fox, on the other hand, is being given a huge boost in ratings, assuring the White House of more and more people seeing the news Obama wants suppressed, sidelined and marginalized.

  Even Brit Hume weighs in:

  And I don’t think it can be any clearer, now, that this stuff will define the Obama Presidency, in much the same way that Nixon’s “Enemies List” defined his.

• Committing Suicide for the Environment, Redux: I see comments from David and from James Joyner about the Limbaugh “Green Suicide’ bit. I quote form a NIGHTLY RAMBLE post of Apl of 2008:
  

  I related a story recently as regards an enviro-zealot who approached us a few years ago. He advised us that the planet has too many people on it, and we need to take immediate steps to solve this crisis.  I advised him that committing suicide thus removing his negative environmental influence on the planet was a far more effective means to the end of solving the crisis, than was bitching at us about altering the American lifestyle.  Of course, he took offense. Yet he couldn’t deny that was the logical conclusion to draw.  And after all, the earth depends on what we do next…. and it’s a crisis, needing immediate action. He did stop babbling.  Ya know, you’ve got a hand it to the Unabomber. He had a heavily underlined copy of “earth in the balance” in his collection. Say what you will about him, I will likely agree. But at least, he understood the relationship between what the environmentalists preach, and the logical conclusion of it.  It’s funny. I don’t seem to recall to many environmentalists labeling him an “extremist”. Or, for that matter, a “terrorist”.  Yet, so he was.  One would think that these kind of events would get the enviro-wchack-jobs to reexamine the logical basis of their arguments, when the logical conclusions present themselves as such.  I tell you with no uncertainty whatsoever, that these extreme examples that I’ve cited, are the logical conclusion of that brand of non-thought. That we have people now controlling our government who subscribe to that logic, makes the way this thing will go quite predictable.

  So, remember, you heard it here first.

• CDC shocker: Swine Flu killing young people at surprising rate: So  says  Fellow  Genesee Valley guy Chuck Simmins. And no, I’m not overly shocked by this. The rule, you see, is where government is concerned, the chances for the illness being worse than the cure is quite high.
• CULTURE vs GOVERNMENT vs LIBERTARIANISM: An interesting read at Reason this morning. ‘ve long held that the reason government was set up was to reinforce the culture that gave it life.  THe trouble being that government, however formed and however implemented, is a less than perfect tool.  Read both links and decide for yourself.

So along comes Jake Tapper, speaking to Bobby “the mouthpiece” Gibbs at a White House Gaggle:

Jake Tapper

Tapper: It’s escaped none of our notice that the White House has decided in the last few weeks to declare one of our sister organizations “not a news organization” and to tell the rest of us not to treat them like a news organization. Can you explain why it’s appropriate for the White House to decide that a news organization is not one –

(Crosstalk)

Gibbs: Jake, we render, we render an opinion based on some of their coverage and the fairness that, the fairness of that coverage.

Tapper: But that’s a pretty sweeping declaration that they are “not a news organization.” How are they any different from, say –

Gibbs: ABC –

Tapper: ABC. MSNBC. Univision. I mean how are they any different?

Gibbs: You and I should watch sometime around 9 o’clock tonight. Or 5 o’clock this afternoon.

Tapper: I’m not talking about their opinion programming or issues you have with certain reports. I’m talking about saying thousands of individuals who work for a media organization, do not work for a “news organization” — why is that appropriate for the White House to say?

Gibbs: That’s our opinion.

Right, Bobby.

So, tell us, oh, vaunted master of the news cycle, what the bleep Rachel Maddow and Keith Olberman were doing in the room? And tell us, given the activities of they and a few other notable crazies inhabiting that channel, does MSNBC count as a “News Org”?  Why?

See, I guess the real question here is this: Is the White House’s definition of what is a news org limited to those who act like they’re the propaganda arm of the Democrat Party?

We know this  story has been out a while, but can’t resist diving in with some recommendations to help the New York Times get back in touch with being a Newspaper again. After all, they got rather badly burned by failing to cover the resignation of Van Jones, the ACORN scandal, and more  the New York Times Times has announced an appointment of an editor to monitor opinion media, from Clark Hoyt, New York Times:

Jill Abramson, the managing editor for news, agreed with me that the paper was “slow off the mark,” and blamed “insufficient tuned-in-ness to the issues that are dominating Fox News and talk radio.” She and Bill Keller, the executive editor, said last week that they would now assign an editor to monitor opinion media and brief them frequently on bubbling controversies. Keller declined to identify the editor, saying he wanted to spare that person “a bombardment of e-mails and excoriation in the blogosphere.”

As a public service this blog has compiled a list of daily must reads for this anonymous  editor:

Michelle Malkin

Memorandum

Corner on National Review

Gateway Pundit

William Jacobson, Legal Insurrection.

Steve Gilbert, Sweetness & Light

Bruce McQuain, QandO.

Neal Boortz

Hot Air

This Ain’t Hell….

Sister Toldjah

Conservative Reader

Blue Crab Blvd

Oh, and of course, BitsBlog.

Now, mind, we don’t expect that the New York Times will follow our advice. After all such advice falls well outside what the White House thinks a “News Org” should be doing. But you know, maybe that’s the issue, here, huh?

Listen, as Rush Limbaugh nails another environmental wacko and fraud, video:

Transcript:

LIMBAUGH: I think these militant environmentalists, these wackos, have so much in common with the jihad guys. Let me explain this. What do the jihad guys do? The jihad guys go to families under their control and they convince these families to strap explosives on who? Not them. On their kids. Grab your 3-year-old, grab your 4-year-old, grab your 6-year-old, and we’re gonna strap explosives on there, and then we’re going to send you on a bus, or we’re going to send you to a shopping center, and we’re gonna tell you when to pull the trigger, and you’re gonna blow up, and you’re gonna blow up everybody around you, and you’re gonna head up to wherever you’re going, 73 virgins are gonna be there. The little 3- or 4-year-old doesn’t have the presence of mind, so what about you? If it’s so great up there, why don’t you go? Why don’t you strap explosives on you — and their parents don’t have the guts to tell the jihad guys, “You do it! Why do you want my kid to go blow himself up?” The jihad guys will just shoot ’em, ’cause the jihad guys have to maintain control.

The environmentalist wackos are the same way. This guy from The New York Times, if he really thinks that humanity is destroying the planet, humanity is destroying the climate, that human beings in their natural existence are going to cause the extinction of life on Earth — Andrew Revkin. Mr. Revkin, why don’t you just go kill yourself and help the planet by dying?

Hat tip:  Media Splatters.

This one is so simple, that even a libtard ought to be able to understand it.   If Andrew Revkin honestly believes that people are bad for the planet, then Andrew Revkin is bad for the planet.   As Mr.  Revkin seems to have no intent of ridding Planet Earth of himself,  it is  quite apparent that Revkin does not believe what he writes.

The aforementioned Mr. Revkin,  New York Times:

I’d like to think that Rush Limbaugh was floating a thought experiment, and not seriously proposing something, when he told millions of listeners the following: “Mr. Revkin, why don’t you just go kill yourself, and help the planet by dying.”

He had picked up on some commentary and reports that have been bouncing around the instanet ever since I spoke via Skype video at a symposium on media coverage of the population part of the climate and energy challenge, put on by the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars.

I, like Rush, have no desire to see Mr.  Revkin join his enviromental wacko version of seventy-two virgins.   I say  Mr.  Revkin’s lack of desire to indicate any belief in the words he writes is sufficient and amble reason for Mr. Revkin to quite spouting such nonsense.  What say you?

Is Bobby Gibbs the worst White House press secretary ever, or has Gibby been given some rather lame talking points?   Gibbhs does not appear to know the difference between a news show and an opinion show.  Well neither does Keith Olbermann, but that’s a different show. When asked why the White House does not consider Fox News to be a legitimate new organization, Gibbs cited two opinion show, from Fox News:

White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs on Tuesday pointed to two top-rated opinion shows on Fox News as the reason why the Obama administration has castigated the network as an illegitimate news organization.

Transcript, Jake Tapper, ABC  News.

Jennifer Rubin, Commentary:

It isn’t every day that a news organization gets an assist from a well-respected rival pointing out that its editorial and news functions are separate. And it isn’t every day that the name “Fox” comes up in story after story in competing outlets.

Gibbs evidently feels that the White House in entitled to treat their opinions as if they were facts,  Fox is not entitled to hold any opinion. Tom Bevan, RCP:

In other words, the White House’s strategy may be the Chicago way, but it isn’t the American way.

Shame the White House would not direct as much wrath towards the Islamic Republic of Iran as it does toward Fox News.

Welcome, one and all to the most intense nightly read now gracing the world wide web…The BitsBlog Nightly Ramble

• THE LEANINGS OF THE PRESS: I keep telling you about stuff like this, and saying it proves that the press will swallow without fact checking, anything is thinks matches the politically correct worldview they subscribe to. Case in point, today from The Politico:
  

  In a dramatic shift, the Chamber of Commerce announced Monday that it is throwing its support behind climate change legislation making its way through the U.S. Senate.

  Only it didn’t.

  An email press release announcing the change is a hoax, say Chamber officials.

  Several media organizations fell for it.

  A CNBC anchor interrupted herself mid-sentence Monday morning to announce that the network had “breaking news,” then cut away to reporter Hampton Pearson, who read from the fake press release.

  Pearson quickly followed up with a second report saying the “so-called bulletin” was an “absolute hoax.” Smelling a rat, CNBC’s Larry Kudlow demanded to know whether the White House had been involved.

  Kudlow has a point, in the context of the chatter yesterday about White House control of the press.

• THE DISCUSSION IS OVER: What we have with Obama is a socilaist. (Here’s a working definition) Remember, I said it here yesterday as regards Anita Dunn:
  

  …lets please disabuse ourselves of the idea that so many avowed Marxists showing up the inside this administration is an inadvertent slip, also. They’re not going to toss her out, precisely because she’s what they wanted. Her politics directly reflect those of this administration. Frankly, I don’t know what can be more frightening about government, currently, than that.

  I note via Billy Beck, Dunn being called Mao Se Dunn.  Spot on, in my view.  Well, now Boortz climbs into the ring and tosses a few off.. and here’s one of them:

  

  Neal Boortz

  Obama has professed his fondness of Communist student groups and Marxist professors while in college. He appointed an avowed communist to be his “Green Jobs Czar.” Now we learn that Anita Dunn, the White House Communications Director has a favorite philosopher .. a Communist responsible for the murder of 70 million people.

  Uh huh.

  Gateway Pundit has vid on Bloom that you’ll want to see.
  So here’s what I suggest, people… There is more in evidence and that Obama is a socialist, and certainly more people agreeing with that idea, than there is proof or consensus on the myth of “global warming”. can we call the discussion over now, and act on what we know?

• BY THE WAY, BILLY: What your commentor said? That is what I meant when I drew a line between those able to read and play the notes and those who can make music. Vastly different things. You will recall that sadly, I count myself as one of the former.
• TARGETED FOR DESTRUCTION? Ann Coulter notes Glenn Beck is being “Targeted for Destriction”. Gee, ya think?
• OBAMA”S LACK OF LEADERSHIP ON AFGHANISTAN: Armstrong Williams:
  

  He’s right of course Obama should have… must have known.Ponder, however, the irony involved with this; Obama is using corruption in government as an excuse  to avoid doing anything while his generals are telling him this stuff can’t want. I wonder if it is occurred to anyone yet, that the corruption there in Afghanistan was part of the reason the Bush administration made a conscious decision to take on these problems piecemeal, with Iraq being first.  Just a thought.   And Barry,buddy, you need to understand the excuses on all fronts you’ve been offering are wearing kinda thin, OK?

• OIL ABOVE $80: Of course the open question is why… is oil really up, or is the dollar sinking?
• VOTER FRAUD: And of course the fraud leans toward the Democrats.
• BITSBLOG BUMPER STICKER OF THE DAY: (Seen on the freeway me alone and without my Camera)

HAVE COFFEE, WILL WRITE

Today will be the third (and final) week sitting in for Tim Albrecht at The Bean Walker Live on Des Moines Local Live/Mac’s World Live.  I have a number of interesting topics to share today, including the news about the possible Democratic opponent to Chuck Grassley, the Iowa Attorney General’s plans for staff cuts, oddities, and of course we’ll talk about Health Care Reform.

I’m hoping to have a local heart surgeon join us to discuss some of the costs embedded in the current system, and talk about ways we can address those costs.

Join us today… click this link!

When you’ve got the Helen Thomas, the NYT, and The Nation lining up against you, it’s time to admit defeat, boys. But alas, Axelrod and Emanuel can’t help themselves.

Mary Katherine Ham, Weekly Standard.

The thing I like about giving advice to the Obama administration is that am sure they will not heed it.

ADDENDUM:(Eric)  Well, this is interesting. Wasn’t it just last night’s Ramble that I was mentioning the relative silence of Helen Thomas? Interesting, the timing of this. Apparently I wasn’t the only one who noticed it.  I must say, that I am very glad to see that there is a line of  logical  inconsistency that even Helen Thomas won’t cross.  I must also say, however, that it would be very interesting to me to know just what it was that finally triggered a response from the woman.

Welcome, one and all to the most intense nightly read anywhere on the ‘sphere…The BitsBlog Nightly Ramble

• 
• MORE ANITA DUNN:  Victor Davis Hanson, on Saturday:
  

  I am not a big fan of saying that officials should resign for stupid remarks. But interim White House communications director Anita Dunn’s praise of Mao Zedong as a “political philosopher” is so unhinged and morally repugnant, that she should hang it up, pronto.

  Mao killed anywhere from 50 million to 70 million innocents in the initial cleansing of Nationalists, the scouring of the countryside, the failed Great Leap Forward and Cultural Revolution, Tibet, and the internal Chinese gulag. Dunn’s praise of a genocidal monster was no inadvertent slip: She was reading from a written text and went into great detail to give the full context of the remark.

  Trouble is, Victor, she’ll never do it. And the administration will never force her out either.

  You’re quite correct in that this was no inadvertent comment, but lets please disabuse ourselves of the idea that so many avowed  Marxists showing up the inside this administration is an inadvertent slip, also. They’re not going to toss her out, precisely because she’s what they wanted. Her politics directly reflect those of this administration.  Frankly, I don’t know what can be more frightening about government, currently, than that.

• ONE HAND, MEET THE OTHER HAND:  Mark Tapscott at the Washington Examiner points out that the rhetoric coming from the White House doesn’t seem to be meeting their actions.
  

  President Obama said something yesterday during his New Orleans stopover that caught the eye of Patrick Creighton of the Institute for Energy Research.
  Here’s what Obama said: “What I think we need to do is increase our domestic energy production… I’m in favor of finding environmentally sound ways to tap our oil and our natural gas.”

  That statement got Creighton’s attention because one of his jobs is to follow the progress of Washington’s processing of applications to explore and develop energy resources in places like federal lands in the western U.S. and in the Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) areas off the U.S. coast.

  Here’s what the Obama administration has done in those regards thus far in 2009, according to Creighton’s tracking:

  · Feb 2 – Revokes 77 Utah oil and gas leases (later reinstates 17 of the 77 leases)

  · Feb 10 – Delays new Five-Year-Plan for the OCS

  · Feb 23 – Cancels commercial R&D on oil shale leases

  · Sept. 17 – Obama’s Secretary of the Interior, Ken Salazar explains these facts by observing that he’s “in no hurry to make a decision on whether to allow offshore drilling in federal waters off Alaska and other states”

  Well, look, this is a campaign-oriented White House. They’re telling people what they want to hear while doing whatever they want… regardless if it matches the words of the head of the ticket or not.

• WE CONTROL THE HORIZONTAL, AND THE VERTICAL: If you doubt that the White House is controlling the press, make particular note of this video:
  What you’re seeing, is White House Communications Director Anita Dunn discussing the degree to which the White House controls the media. It also would seem to answer the question of just why the White House has decided to declare war on Fox News… they can’t be controlled. A couple of the pull-out quotes:

  “Very rarely did we communicate
  through the press anything that we didn’t absolutely control,” said Dunn.
  …
  “One of the reasons we did so many of the David Plouffe videos was not just for our supporters, but also because it was a way for us to get our message out without having to actually talk to reporters”

  Dunn also goes into some detail on why Obama has gone to some length to use live TV as much as possible. Now, granted, that the context of the statements is the actions of the Obama campaign. But, again, it seems fairly clear that the White House is in permanent campaign mode. I’ll be interested in anyone providing any proof whatever that the situation is not as I describe it here.

  I’ve no doubt I’ll be told that we should be looking to Karl Rove for the inspiration for this attitude. INdeed, she says it herself in the vid. But at what point did Rove ever shut off access to one news outlet, due to their being unwilling to knuckle under? Indeed, rather the opposite has occurred. Consider the case of Helen Thomas as an example.

  There is this, also.  The kind of “routing around the messenger” that Rove and others had the Bush administration doing in the end left them without a sympathetic press corps toward the end of his second term.  I suggest that effect is less pronounced when there’s a Democrat in the White House, given that the press corps is by and large sympathetic to leftists. So, Obama will be naturally somewhat more immune to the effect… but, it can’t be completely discounted, either.

  Oh… speaking of Rove… I note him making the link we did the other day, between Obama’s White House shutting off press they don’t like, and The Nixon White House  Enemies List.

• BITCH, BITCH, BITCH: Joe Sudbay at AmericaBlog is making noises that Obama’s busy walking away form the so-called ‘public option.  I’m beginning to think that this is all a matter of trying to herd the White House toward government takeover by the left.  Frankly,though I doubt they’ll do it. Don’t mistake me…  I think the White House does want a full government takeover of our Healthcare system, as miuch as the left-o-sphere, including AmericaBlog does. The problem (And perhaps America’s salvation)  is, Obama has to face the reality of the situation,  and Joe Sudbay doesn’t.
  Oh… You’ll want to check out the picture of the pro-Obamacare “Organizing For America” rally in Cincy that Glenn has up. He’s got links to more, too. Tell me again how they’re not socialist.
• FIRST THEY CAME FOR RUSH: So says  Dianna West, as she weighs in on the NFL issues surrounding him. And she makes an interesting point I’ve not seen made elsewhere. Oh, certainly I invoked Olberman myself, but neglected to mention the NFL connection, here :
  

  Diana West

  I will start with two words: Keith Olbermann. In addition to his nightly gig on MSNBC — a numbing blend of Leftist politics and something approaching Tourette’s Syndrome — Keith Olbermann is a co-host of NBC’s “Football Night in America,” the pre-game show that leads into “Sunday Night Football.” Naturally, that would be Sunday night NFL football.This job makes Olbermann a public face of the NFL. And a public face of the NFL with many filthy things coming out of it. These include his recent pronouncement that Limbaugh claiming his own success paved the way for Glenn Beck is “is like congratulating yourself for spreading syphilis.”

  We could slap a headline on that — “NFL talker compares star radio and TV conservatives to venereal disease” — only trash talk against conservatives doesn’t generate mainstream outrage.

  Message to NFL commissioner Roger Goodell: How about that, Roger? If we’re to accept the judgments about Limbaugh, would you mind telling me how having Olberman in such a position is any less divisive?

• BITSBLOG BUMPER STICKER OF THE DAY:

The Obama administration has an OODA loop somwwhat larger than Lake Michiagan.   Wenn the Obama adminstration smear Rush Limbagh, did Limbaugh bet mad?   No,  Limbaugh got even.   Limbaugh has Al Sharpton theatening to sue for libel.

In contrast, the Obama adminstration has declared oeen war on Fox News and is losing.    Even the New York Times  has noticed and disapproves,  David Carr, NYT:

The one weapon all administrations can wield is access, and the White House, making it clear that it will use that leverage going forward, informed Fox News not to expect to bump knees with the president until 2010. But Fox News, as many have pointed out, is not in the access business. They are in the agitation business. And the administration, by deploying official resources against a troublesome media organization, seems to have brought a knife to a gunfight.

The White House can not wage war on a media organization and hope to win.    The act of using state rescources to besmerch a private organization, both demeans the White House and elevates Fox News.