WOOF! Watchdogs of Our Freedom

Archive for August, 2013|Monthly archive page

Barack on the Brink: Or how we learned to stop worrying and blow the Hell out of Syria!

In "Unfinished Waffles" forum on August 30, 2013 at 5:32 pm


“It isn’t always being fast or even accurate that counts, it’s being willing. I found out early that most men, regardless of cause or need, just aren’t willing. They blink an eye or draw a breath before they pull a trigger. I won’t.”—John Wayne The Shootist

Well, we know you get tired of hearing “we told you so!” so we aren’t going to begin that way, gentle readers—but you know we told you this would happen way back in June, right? Yeah, we did. As the various scandals ranging from the president’s weaponization of the IRS to Holder’s illegal sale of American firearms to Mexican drug cartels, to the the DOJ’s outreach department acting as propagandists and organizers in a push to indite and convict George Zimmerman, to the botched effort to allow an American ambassador to be taken hostage in Benghazi, and so many more we’ve kind of lost count ourselves, the Liberal Establishment’s angst has grown to the point of furtive-but-unconcealable panic. Yes, Rappin’ Preezy’s extra-constitutional and downright illegal escapades have now acquired sufficient accretive stench that even the mainstream news media are finding it difficult to avert their gaze and their quivering nostrils. It must have become obvious down at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue that it was going to take more than Alec Baldwin’s latest meltdown or Miley Cyrus’s newest vulgarities to sufficiently distract the national psyche from Dear Leader’s cavalcade of high crimes and misdemeanors—nossir, it was going to take something serious!  And just as President Clinton turned the nation’s attention to blowing up aspirin factories in the Sudan and bombing ethnic cleansers in Serbia when Monica Lewinsky proved impervious to what that administration used to term “bimbo suppression,” so the Liberal imagination generally turns in times like these to the art of war.

Monica Lewiinsky: The face that launched a thousand cruise missiles--but somewhat underbid the Helenic paradigm.

Monica Lewinsky: The face that launched a thousand cruise missiles–but somewhat undershot the Hellenic paradigm.

Well, not war war…not like Americans getting shot or blown up by IEDs or anything. Not like Tarawa or Normandy or Khe Sanh or Fallujah–Lord knows enough of that still goes on and it’s increasingly bloody and tragic as Iraq unravels and Afghanistan falters while the president’s commitment melts away. But none of this is embarrassingly bloody or tragic, because the Liberal Establishment Media stopped reporting body counts or filming coffins coming off transport planes the day Obama entered office. Gitmo may never have closed, but since nobody ever mentions it any more, is it really there?  — And the peace movement?  Even if it still exists in small pockets around the nation, it stands no more chance of getting any news coverage than—well—a gun used to prevent a crime, or a Black conservative, or a Black conservative using a gun to prevent a crime! Anyway…

Real war: Marines of the 2nd Division headed for the beach at Tarawa--1,500 casualties on day one--not at all what Dear Leader has in mind.

Real war: Marines of the 2nd Division headed for the beach at Tarawa–1,500 casualties on day one–not at all what Dear Leader has in mind.

No, nobody in or around the Obama cabinet wants a real war—that could be messy and it wouldn’t “focus group” well at all. What is needed to preoccupy the American psyche just now is an almost real war—the kind with lots of explosions and cruise missile strikes and F-18s catapulting off carrier decks and videos of triple-A fecklessly sweeping the night skies over Damascus as our ghostly B-2s drop their payloads with surgical precision and vanish into the nocturne…that is the kind of war that will fill our hearts with martial passion and turn us as a nation in breathless gratitude to the man of the hour, Field Marshall Barack Hussein Obama, who will have, by the above-described demonstrations of military potency, delivered us from the threat of the hour—which was—well…Syrian..something or other. Why, this all sounds so good, gentle readers, we get goose bumps here in the WOOF cave just writing about it!  So what’s holding up production?

Waiter, there’s a fly in my ointment!

Russians in disguise? A rule of thumb is that guys who play basketball and spout empty rhetoric should avoid contests with guys who play chess and know judo--but at least the tho world leaders have habitual prevarication in common!

Russians in disguise? A rule of thumb is that guys who play basketball and spout empty rhetoric should avoid contests with guys who play chess and know judo–but at least the two world leaders have habitual prevarication in common!

Well—the problem with war, no matter how artificially manufactured and gingerly applied, is that it comes replete with an unvarying catalog of contingencies any of which, regardless of how scrupulously the drama is orchestrated, can ruin the impression. What happens if, for example, Syria uses one of its world-class Russian SAMs (surface to air missiles) to nasty effect and knocks down a Navy fighter jet? What happens if the pilot and/or his Radar Intercept Officer parachute to safety only to be taken captive and turned into media sensations by the Syrians?  What happens, for that matter, if a Syrian cruise missile should score a hit on an American naval vessel?  What if Vladimir Putin orders the Russian military (entrenched in the massive Russian naval facility at Tardus in Syria) to carry out attacks on American ships or aircraft while disguised in Syrian livery? Even if Obama became aware of the “false flag” nature of such operations, would he dare make such awareness public? (In case you haven’t guessed, the answer is “nyet!”)

What does the president do when he discovers that nullifying a chemical weapons threat cannot be easily effectuated from the air, and that neutralizing the Syrian Air Force will not prevent delivery of such weapons by artillery or other means? Besides which, blowing up stores of nerve gas or infectious agents on the ground may kill untold numbers of civilians…by inadvertently nerve-gassing them!  Add to this the problems of no exit strategy (or none that doesn’t leave the problem intact), no clear war aims (other than getting everyone to think about foreign policy rather than domestic outrages) and the obvious fact that, just as Dennis Kucinich said during a rare moment of lucidity, we would be “serving as Al Qaeda’s air force,” (as indeed we did in Libya, which ended in Benghazi), and you can begin to understand why Obama’s brain trust saw this as an opportune diversion initially, but sobered into less strident tonalities as the week expired. War, it turns out, is not as simple as all that. It can turn on you.

Proof of maturity: Kerry making all the same old accusations, but saying "Syria" everywhere he used to mention "America!"

Proof of maturity: Kerry making all the same old accusations, but saying “Syria” everywhere he used to say, “America!”

But we have, as Hillary Clinton might say in somewhat different circumstances, “kem too fur tuh tarn back now!” Indeed, the bellicosity with which Secretary of State John Kerry’s most recent pronouncements rang was impressive, and his heartfelt lamentations regarding “the indiscriminate slaughter of civilians, the killing of women and children and innocent bystanders” were of a magnitude of conviction heretofore reserved exclusively for criticisms of his own military. The adventure must have seemed a masterstroke, initially, this idea of a few quick salients into evil Syria, goosing Dear Leader’s approval ratings while depriving the runaway scandal chatter of oxygen. Besides, there was that peskily irretractable quote about crossing a red line if Assad used nerve agents, followed by an apparent reluctance to act, which looked irresolute, because it was. It may be recalled that several reported uses of nerve gas preceded the now cardinal incident of 21 August, making the arbitrariness of the current indignation all the more evident.

The President listeth?

After considering the problems militarily and factoring in the near impossibility of determining who used the nerve gas in the first or second or third place, (it after all being to the rebel’s advantage to gas a few civilians to bring American might to bear against the government forces), and following the administration’s rather lackluster summation of the allegedly damnatory evidence that consisted of a monitored phone conversation that was instantly reminiscent of the monitored phone conversation adduced by Colin Powell at the UN back in 2001 “proving” that weapons of mass destruction were cached in Iraq…oops…and after Bashar Assad categorically denied using weapons of mass destruction, the whole picture became considerably less clear.

images barack alone

The leader of the Free World after the Free World left the room—a good time to “go all wobbly”?

As WOOF has pointed out on numerous occasions, Bashar Assad is a putrescent scoundrel whose preternaturally tiny head contains little thought of truth-telling or humanitarianism even in the calmest of times—but why would he do this now, exactly when he seems to have the upper hand against the rebel factions and exactly when Obama is committed, however injudiciously, to do something about it?  In fact, considerable evidence has been amassed implicating the rebels in the gassings of the 21st, as a glance at Adina Kutnicki’s totally hip and WOOF-approved web site will suffice to demonstrate. For Obama’s part he has carefully explained that “We do not believe that, given the delivery systems, using rockets, that the opposition could have carried out these attacks. We have concluded that the Syrian government in fact carried these out.” To interpret: the president does not believe that the opposition (Al Qaeda and Ansar al-Sharia—which is Libyan for Al Qaeda, otherwise known as our noble allies) could have used the nerve gas because the nerve gas is delivered by missiles, which these terrorist organizations (otherwise known as our noble allies) don’t possess. This is problematic in several respects, not least of which is the statement’s syntactically misshapen but carefully planted axiom. In reality there is no reason whatsoever that nerve gas cannot be delivered by mortar, artillery fire, IED, or the old heave ho. The rebels are well equipped with such options, in part courtesy of the CIA.

Brits out, now!

British PM David Cameron stumped for involvement but lost t parliament said "no!" Cameron expressed regret but underscored his belief "in respecting the will of this House of Commons." But he has yet to apologize for making "Titanic" or "Avatar."

British PM David Cameron urged involvement but Parliament said “no!” Cameron expressed regret but has yet to apologize for making “Titanic” and “Avatar.”

 And as these drawbacks grow more noticeable Our Beloved Helmsman seems to equivocate. The man who orotundly assured us that “There need to be international consequences,”  is now in earnest of assuring us that he has not made a decision, and that even when he does make a decision, he won’t decide to target Assad. (We just hope he doesn’t target Assad’s wife—she’s hot. Why do some total losers get chicks? But we digress…)  Obama is not alone in his equivocation as our staunch allies begin to ask themselves, (rather sensibly if unstaunchly), what on earth they would be doing and whom on earth they would actually be punishing– or aiding and abetting — by committing themselves to an air war over Syria.  Britain fell away with a thud on Thursday, and other “allies” (who obviously have no more faith in Obama’s word, wisdom or backbone than they do in, say, the Greek economy) are wobbling uncertainly in the moral vacuum. It may well be that the Bamster will have to go to Al Qaeda’s rescue alone, or nearly so, if he chooses to plunge ahead. This will make relatively little difference militarily, truth be told, but it looks bad on the surface—and Barack Obama is the consummate political surface dweller. Here is the man who excoriated George Bush for invading Iraq without UN sanction and without a declaration of war, preparing to launch attacks into Syria despite the UN Security Counsel’s refusal to approve the venture, and without so much as a congressional vote of support (which Bush sought and received). Where Bush had allies, whom Kerry memorable denounced as a coalition of the coerced and the bribed, Obama seems fresh out of allies and the only coerced and bribed coalition he has ever put together were the Democrats who passed national health care.

Consulting America’s “charter of negative liberties.”

images consAnd then there is the minor inconvenience of congress, and particularly that band of notorious haters and bitter clingers in the House who stand stubbornly between the Regime and the ultimate collectivization of America, sabotaging as they do our brilliant young president’s every progressive salient, obstructing his perfect vision, delaying the elevation of our rapaciously materialistic system into an enlightened matrix of Big Unions, undocumented aliens, and entitlement recipients. It seems highly unlikely that Obama will wrangle a vote of temporary support let alone a declaration of war out of these troglodytes, and to make matters worse, even the Democrats—who so obediently upheld the destruction of the world’s most effective medical system so that the IRS could seize control of every citizen’s health care, are balking at the Syrian operation. Most of this is just for appearances sake however. Even dyed in the wool peace-at-any-cost subversives like Barbara Lee and Jim McDermott are only mumbling in a pro forma kind of way.  Like all those supposedly pro-life Blue Dogs, they will shape-shift and support the White House when Obama passes the pork. But can the president use the War Powers Clause of the constitution to launch “police actions” without the consent of Congress? In the area of the War Powers Clause, the flexibility provided by the requirement is mootable. The President is often argued to be granted the right to defend the country, its people, or its manifest interests by virtue of Article I, Section 8, Clause 11. But  in 1973 a particularly dove-ish Congress passed the War Powers Resolution which requires the President to obtain either a declaration from Congress or a resolution specifically authorizing the use of force within 60 days of initiating hostilities. This, WOOF feels obliged to acknowledge, gives Obama two months to bomb Syrians without congressional approval, although other constitutional opinionists most definitely differ.

What’s the job pay?

It’s hard to see how Our Beloved Leader goes about making the current situation pay off for himself or his party—he miscalculated the value of threatened aggression and must now either aggress or demure. If the former, he risks tremendous ramifications militarily and geopolitically. If the later, he looks even more like a quintessentially indecisive wimp in the eyes of the world, and what remains of his prestige at home will be grossly diminished. If he attacks too little, he will appear to have underbid the crisis, and if he ventures too much he could launch a series of devastating confrontations throughout the region and beyond.

Waging just enough war to distract the home folks but not enough to get them upset--a relatively novel tactical problem.

Waging just enough war to distract the home folks but not enough to get them upset–a relatively novel tactical problem.

But America’s Student President has talked too much, promised too much and postured too much to simply change the subject. He cannot vote present; he must make a command decision, and the only certainty is that whatever decision he makes will be a bad one, if only because there are no good options on the table. The Bamster finds himself hogtied by his own propensity for bombast, and this only because he needed a break from all the scandal talk in Washington and his mouth got ahead of his brain–if only because he forgets from time to time that some of this is real. So now he is about to attack a country about which he knows nothing, in a region of which he is almost totally ignorant, without a single ally either on the ground or in the sky above—except the media! We may safely predict (and indeed we do), that the Liberal Establishment Media will “sing of arms and the man” as soon as Barack shoots his first cruise missile at some ammo dump, and Hollywood writers will go to work on film treatments depicting him as the lonely colossus, bringing the force of American arms to bear where lesser men feared to tread. Meanwhile, where can we get one of those bumper stickers? You know the ones—the ones sanctimoniously emblazoned with,“War is not the answer!”  We could use a few of those stickers this week. They’re not just for Priuses anymore!

obama for peace

Benghazi Decoded? WOOF Sees Through the Blind Sheikh Conspiracy

In "Springtime for Terror" Forum on August 24, 2013 at 2:34 pm


Gentle readers, WOOF cannot take credit for the views and insights flooding the blogosphere on the subject of Benghazi, although frequent readers know we have maintained a steady interest in the topic. What we will take partial credit for (in case the NSA is curious) is putting all the pieces garnered from various new-media resources into the particular mosaic presented here–not original, but more encompassing, we believe, than other presentations of the latest evidence. We are chiming in now because we have followed these interwoven stories, verified what we can, and gone for broke intuitively; and we are ready now to present our hypothesis.  Despite what many of our allies in the right-wing blogosphere have been suggesting, WOOF has always insisted that the Benghazi cover up was never about protecting a CIA operation running weapons to Syrian rebels. This explanation never made any sense to us because Obama’s stated policy was one of support for the rebels, so why wouldn’t he be supporting them with weaponry? The average American is too distracted by sports and show business personalities to marvel at the administration’s penchant for finding the dirtiest rats in the manure pile and consistently throwing its weight behind them.


Miss you, Willmoore!

It is generally and legitimately accepted that Bashar Assad is a butcher and an America- hating creep, so why not back his opposition? (The answers are manifold, but too sophisticated for most Americans to dilate on—try this one on for brevity’s sake: They’re mainly Al Qaeda!) But our point is, catching the CIA transferring weapons to Assad’s opponents would hardly cause a ripple of distress across that great, supinely bovine entity, the American public.  To appreciate the point it may be necessary to at least temporarily abandon a standard aphorism on the Right, namely that the American people are wise “in their hips” (as Willmoore Kendall used to put it), and while sometimes misguided are generally  savvy and capable. Alas, WOOF has long maintained that the average American citizen these days wouldn’t know the Declaration of Independence from the Communist Manifesto—which fact was amply demonstrated last November.  We readily attribute this state of affairs to the infiltration of public education by communist ideologues, which nowadays also goes unnoticed because Americans are too distracted by sports and show business personalities; but we said that already.

That’s show biz!

A still from "The Innocence of Muslims"--were there any good tunes?

A still from “The Innocence of Muslims”–were there any good tunes?

So if Our Beloved Helmsman wasn’t covering for the CIA, which is a difficult concept to envision in any instance, why then contrive the cockamamie fiction that “the Arab street” was whipped into a frenzy by the cinematic efforts of an immigrant Coptic Christian named Nakoula Basseley Nakoula, a small time check forger and paroled meth cook, as well as the writer, producer, and director of an ostensibly epic two-hour movie entitled The Innocence of Muslims that WOOF determined only ten people ever saw? Why send Susan Rice out to give serial TV interviews citing the film as the basis for the attack on the American mission in Benghazi? And this even as Dear Leader solemnly informed the United Nations that no matter how distasteful the film in question, (and no matter that nobody ever heard of it prior to the administration spending a week advertising it in the press) we have freedom of expression in the USA so that even the awesome and mighty ‘Bamster could not reign in the likes of Nakoula Nakoula before his movie ignited the firestorm of protest that consumed our consulate, Ambassador Stevens, his aide, and two SEALs. And one additional thought, Woofketeers; didn’t the whole “it’s because of that movie” explanation seem rehearsed and coordinated–almost as though prepared in advance? But how could the administration have been prepared such a red herring in advance, unless it was designed to explicate the incident–an incident that seemingly nobody could have predicted?

Framed filmaker Nakoula--all the skill of Ed Wood but none of the luck!

Framed filmmaker –all the skill of Ed Wood but none of the luck!

And to add a final absurdity, Nakoula Nakoula was tracked down, arrested, and imprisoned for—what? For violating his parole, supposedly, but mainly because he was the hapless sap tapped to be the regime’s fall guy. Yes, Nakoula Nakoula (WOOF’s man of the year for 2012) was railroaded just prior to the election and has yet to see the light of day despite the fact that even the White House long ago jettisoned its cover story as indefensibly dumb… a fact now apparent to everyone except Hailey Branson-Potts of the subversive Los Angeles Times who as recently as a week ago wrote that Nakoula’s film “sparked rioting across the Muslim world.”  Some folks just never get the memo!

Candy Crowley, debating Mitt Romney so Obama doesn't have to!

Candy Crowley, debating Mitt Romney so Obama didn’t have to!

Surely an administration incapable of inventing a better cover story must be adjudged so hopelessly inept that a rational nation would laugh the oafs to derision—but no, the story was simply changed. You may recall when objective debate moderator Candy Crowley reconstructed history by interrupting Mitt Romney in mid-debate to insert (inaccurately) that Mr. Obama had blamed terrorists even at the outset of the Benghazi outrage, and this is now the “official”” truth, the movie story having been flushed down the memory hole, along with all those appearances by Susan Rice, Secretary Clinton’s repeated statements–even to victims’ families–the president’s solemn avowals at the UN, and the indignities heaped upon the luckless Nakoula Nakoula. But reasonable adults with memory spans of more than a few weeks may reasonably wonder why such a story was confected in the first place—what was being covered up if not the CIA’s weapons smuggling?

And then there is the additional question begged by the White House’s simple failure to respond to the assault regardless of its cause. Why, with the devastating firepower of an AC-130U aircraft at its immediate disposal, and numerous ground forces within striking distance of the event, did the president eat dinner, talk on the phone with Benjamin Netanyahu and trundle off to bed leaving his un-elected aide Valerie Jarrett to order everyone in the region to do nothing? It seems inadequate simply to postulate that Rappin’ Preezy is so pro-Islamic and so venomously anti-American that sheer spitefulness drove him to inaction. After all, even a geopolitical flyweight like the Bamster could foresee embarrassment down that rocky road! No, something far more complex than a snotty attitude and considerably less naive than paralysis born of pure shock was at work that night!

Our man Morsi!

But, the regime’s support of Morsi in Egypt is explicable precisely in terms of our executive branch’s snotty attitude—as is the insane amount of dedication Obama and Her Magnificence (we mean Hillary—we justg9510.20_Morsi.cover like Tina Brown’s gushy encomium for her so much we use it all the time) put into bum-rushing President Mubarak from office. Mubarak committed the twin sins of being an American ally and a man who was willing to tolerate Israel, and to Obama such sympathies in the heart of a foreign leader are grounds for his unceremonious ousting.  So out indeed went Mubarak, rug jerked from beneath his heals only weeks after Obama praised him as a loyal friend and trusted ally, and in came the Muslim Brotherhood. Again rationalists persisted in wondering why a pro-American Egyptian leader, albeit a despotic one, was less desirable to the Obamans than a slathering brute spewing anti-Semitism and excoriations of America with alternating breaths; but the administration professed delight at the installment of Morsi (whom Reuters briefly called Mursi and whom the president’s own press releases unaccountably called Morsy)  and the ever-obedient American news media continued to rhapsodize over  the miracle of “Arab Spring,” even as Morsi and his all-girl band of revisionists rewrote the Egyptian constitution to eliminate all viable dissent, denounced the holocaust as a hoax perpetrated by Jews, and called for the destruction of America, France, and other European nations because they were supporters of Zionism.

Not to worry; Kerry can see Cairo from his poop deck.

Not to worry; Kerry can see Cairo from his poop deck.

When the streets filled with Egyptians calling for Morsi’s expulsion from office, the Obama White House could not have made it plainer that Morsi was their man in Cairo, that his continuation in office was the desired course in Washington, and that the Muslim Brotherhood represented the duly elected democratic government. When the Egyptian Military began to make manifest its intention to drive Morsi from the Presidential Palace by force if necessary, the Obama administration issued a series of petulant threats that, emanating from any other American president, would have been taken seriously. Woofketeers will also recall that John Kerry was so confident after his brief stopover in Cairo that Morsi would remain in power, he jetted home to Massachusetts and boarded his yacht for some sun and fun. He was lounging on the poop deck, as it were, when the Egyptian Army escorted Morsi from the palace and tossed him into the slam.

Remember too that all of this, in much the same order and fashion, happened first in Libya where Obama sent NATO and a sizable contingent of the American military to bomb Muammar Qadhafi out of power, (Qadhafi having withdrawn from the exportation of terror after Reagan blew up his air force and sank his navy back in the ’80s) in order to replace him with a confederacy of cutthroats whose political action wing appears to include such violent Islamic terror organizations as Ansar al-Sharia (an Al Qaeda affiliate and the principle actor in the September 11th attacks in Benghazi). So Qadhafi was captured by the forces of Islamic terrorism (with more than a little irony, WOOF grants), strapped to the hood of a car and given a grand tour of his home town of Sirte while being pummeled, stabbed and shot. Memorably, Mrs. Clinton (Her Magnificence) announced his death, braying, “We came, we saw, he died!!” even as another Arab nation was destabilized completely and handed over to the most rabid elements within its geographic confines by the Obama administration’s policies. There is no question that Obama and Clinton acted purposefully in these instances. The object was to remove neutral or friendly governments and replace them with powder-keg consortia of radical scatterbrains whose qualifications in the eyes of the White House were their uncompromising hatred of Israel and their outspoken detestation of America.

Her Magnificence relaxed among friends at the good ol' CFR.

Her Magnificence relaxes among friends at the good ol’ CFR.

Arab Spring next sprung in Syria, where it may be viewed as a kind of extra dividend in this cavalcade of hits. On his own merits Assad might be considered more than amply rabid to retain his position in accordance with the Obama/Clinton plan, but the opportunity presented itself to replace him with a more adventuresome and less dunderheaded pack of authentic Islamo-fascists more inclined than Assad to fanatical acts of militancy and more capable of rousing the street rabble in a fashion dear to the heart of a community organizer from bloody Chicago. But for our purposes let Syria pass for the moment as a sideshow whilst we focus on the Cairo-Benghazi connection. But remember, it may be back with a bang and a boom if Dear Leader feels threatened by revelations such as those that follow! (See what we mean here.)

Connection? Yes, it is now widely reported (just as it is completely suppressed in the mainstream) that the attack on the American consulate in Libya occurred under the direction of Mohamed Morsi, in Egypt. But why, you ask, would Morsi go to such lengths to alienate his loyal supporters in the Obama Administration? Why on earth carry out a wanton assault on American property and personnel in Libya when the Obama White House was falling all over itself heaping praise and weaponry on the “democratically elected” Morsi regime? Well, you came to the right place with those questions, beloved readers!

Cherchez la blind Sheikh!


Sheikh Omar Abdel-Rahman, not just another pretty face!

First, consider that a long-standing goal of Mohammed Morsi was the release of no less a person than Sheikh Omar Abdel-Rahman, aka, “the blind sheikh,” who masterminded the original assault on the World Trade Towers during the Clinton administrations—the one that didn’t work because the explosion, while it killed six and wounded nearly a thousand, was insufficient to bring down the skyscraper. There is no doubt here in the WOOF cave that Dear Leader and Her Magnificence were also anxious to see the Sheikh free, subscribing as they do, to the madcap political postulates of liberation theology, social-justice theory, and the anti-historical belief that expanding American “colonial power” precipitated all problems everywhere around the world (and caused global warming and, you know…really bad stuff). As for the sources of opinion that matter most to Obama and often seem to dictate his actions, the Sheikh’s release was deemed nothing short of imperative. Let us briefly examine the wellsprings of radical opinion that inform Obama’s weltanschauung:

It must be born in mind that Dear Leader's public image changed, but never his  attitudes.

It must be born in mind that Dear Leader’s public image changed, but never his attitudes.

Return with WOOF now to those thrilling days of yesteryear, to 1950, to be precise, when the House Un-American Activities Committee denounced the National Lawyers Guild as the “legal bulwark of the Communist Party in America” and called for the disbarment of its membership. Sadly, this never occurred, and to this day the NLG maintains a high profile as the organization most likely to rush to the aid of any proven subversive or anti-American villain. When the Occupy Movement was caught making bombs, the NLG rushed to its defense. The Guild is also deeply invested in Code Pink, whose founder and most prominent member is also an Obama fundraiser and adviser. The Guild’s raison d-etre was probably best described by one of its founders, Rutgers University School of Law Professor Arthur Kinoy, who described the duty of the radical lawyer as promotion of the coming anti-capitalist revolution and the slow but deliberate weakening of the legal system’s ability to function effectively against law-breaking radicals. The fact that the NLG still exists and flourishes is a tribute to its success thus far.

Meant for one another

It should surprise no one that the terrorist Weather Underground movement and the NLG became thoroughly entwined during the radical ‘60s and ’70s. One prominent crusader in the imagescause of the radical Left and a longtime member of the Guild was Leonard Boudin. His daughter, Kathy, was imprisoned for 20 years after her Weather Underground group gunned down 4 police officers in the aftermath of perpetrating the Nyack, New York, Brinks job back in 1981. She is now free and a professor at Columbia University School of Social Work—her son, as most Woofketeers are already aware, was raised by Bill Ayers and his wife, Bernardine Dohrn, also a Weather Underground communist. Ayers, of course, is the Pentagon-bombing Weather Underground radical who went on to teach at the University of Illinois, set the stage for Obama’s entry into politics and ghost-write Obama’s first “autobiography”—(which, to Ayers’s credit, is the readable one). When Kathy Boudin’s comrades went up on charges of murder and robbery, the lawyer who defended comrade David Gilbert (cop killer) was comrade Lynne Stewart. In this capacity Stewart had ample opportunity to philosophically cross-pollinate with the rag-tag urban guerillas even as she was defending them in court (unsuccessfully, we are pleased to note). Thus, common cause was indisputably made between the Underground brats of the post-60s radical left and the dedicated communists of the National Lawyers Guild. They were, in effect, meant for one another.

Lynne Stewart--not just another pretty face

Lynne Stewart–not just another pretty face

Lynne Stewart enjoyed a frenetic career defending various terrorists, airplane hijackers and radical activists, finally taking the Blind Sheik as a client in 1993. She did so announcing that “the only hope for change in Egypt is the fundamentalist movement” (by which she definitely did not mean Jerry Falwell), and insisting that her client (whose plans also included blowing up the Lincoln Tunnel, the Holland Tunnel, and the George Washington Bridge) had been framed by the feds. (This is called the Alger-Hiss defense: When all the evidence proves you are guilty, simply explain that all the evidence was fabricated by the FBI, even if doing so would defy all current technologies, and/or require time travel). True to form, she lost the case, and was shortly afterwards arrested for passing orders from her client on to his terror network in Egypt. She is consequently in prison. But radical Islamic movements in Egypt (as best represented by the Muslim Brotherhood) remain every bit as anxious to see the Blind Sheikh walk free—they have, in fact, made him an Egyptian folk hero. In a speech in Cairo’s Tahrir Square on June 30, 2012, Mohamed Morsi vowed to free Omar Abdel-Rahman, (the Blind Sheikh to the rest of us) from his American prison. How did he propose to effect such an implausible release?

Apparently Rep. King was not the only one to get the tip!

Apparently Rep. King was not the only one to get the tip!

Consider that what now existed was a consortium of like-minded ex-Weather Undergrounders, Guild members, and higher-ups in the Morsi regime, all determined to free Sheikh Omar Abdel-Rahman.  Consider too that the newly ensconced Obama administration was, by virtue of its own radical philosophies and communist roots, entirely sympatico with this objective. Upon taking power in Cairo, The Morsi government placed the Obama administration on notice that it expected to see the Sheikh released. Representative Peter King (R-N.Y.), confirms that this pressure was very real, and that while Obama was keeping the communications in this regard secret, he was considering (unthinkable as it may seem) complying with the demand. This sounds insane, of course, but we are talking about a cadre of radical-chic Marxists and nihilists now occupying the West Wing whose credo is so far to the radical left of the nation’s political center that most Americans cannot bring themselves to consider it, any more than mainstream Democrat voters can bring themselves to consider the fact that the party they grew up in is now an engine of socialist sedition that threatens their liberties, the prefered term for all of this being “hope and change.” But by tracing the major influences on Obama’s thinking and policy formulation, we soon reach a nexus of pro-Islamist, pro-communist and anti-American sentiment of such intensity that releasing the Sheikh comes to seem less a plausibility then a dialectical  inevitability.

Our beloved readers may suppose that no one among Obama’s advisers, no matter how loopy, would be so naive as to believe such a release could be effected unilaterally. Even the posterior-osculating doyens of contemporary post-journalism would have to blink once or twice if that happened. Charlie Rose would have to do a lot of chin rubbing and throat clearing before he could begin to perceive the sapience of such a demarche, even with, say, Cass Sunstein in the opposite chair, patiently guiding him through the paralogisms. And FOX, still dangerous when aroused, might do more than blink. That such a release was simply in keeping with a world view shared by the President, the communists who raised him, his closest advisers, his longtime comrades in the movement, and his fellow travelers back in Chicago, would elude everyone largely because the Obama image is so sheep-dipped by the president’s pet media, it is impossible for most citizens to retain his serial seditions in focus, besides which they go mainly unreported.


The usual suspects.

But WOOF knows that earlier this year the release of the Blind Sheikh was discussed seriously during a highly confidential planning session that, despite the administration’s best efforts, was actually reported here and there in the press. The New York Post declared last January that, “the Obama administration is weighing the release of blind Sheikh Omar Abdel-Rahman — the spiritual adviser to the 1993 World Trade Center bombers — in a stunning goodwill gesture toward Egypt” even as Andrew McCarthy, the prosecutor who put Rahman behind bars, fretted aloud, “I believe there may already be a nod-and-wink agreement in place.” And there was–of that we are certain.

The Working Lunch?

What WOOF does not know, embarrassingly enough, is where the agreement was finalized.  Several White House locations were suggested by our cherished sources, but only one site was named twice—and by sources with no knowledge of one another.  Thus, if we credit the numbers, a select group of Obama’s and Hillary’s most malignant functionaries were read into the “swap plot” at California Senator Dianne Feinstein’s 7 million-dollar “Willow Oaks” compound at 3300 Nebraska Avenue NW.  Why, you may ask, was such a highly confidential meeting not held at the White House?  It bothered us too. So we asked.


“Willow Oaks” or Home of the Depraved…where the final plan was green-lighted?

What a co-inky-dink!

Our sources generally agreed on the reason Obama prefered an  unofficial gathering site. We were reminded that the administration was undergoing a great deal of criticism in those days for refusing to make the White House visitor logs public. Trivial? Judicial Watch filed freedom-of-information requests to no avail, and finally launched a suit to force the President to reveal his guest list. The lists were finally released, but were so riddled with holes and gaps that no one was satisfied except Obama, who declared the release proof of his administration’s unprecedented transparency. And if you think that’s funny, get this: visitors who were not redacted included Jeremiah Wright, Michael Moore, William Ayers, and Angela Davis, but reporters were mollified by the Regime’s assurances that these visitors simply happened to have the same names as famous radicals, whereas in fact, each was a harmless, average, non-communist American; in other words, nothing like the President’s buddies.

True, the most heated moments of the visitor-list imbroglio occurred in 2011, while Benghazi happened in 2012, but the White House remained sensitive to the evidentiary nature of the guest lists and therefore, we are informed, switched to holding highly confidential (read: subversive) meetings in locations hospitable to whatever treasonable hijinx were in the offing, the better to keep them undocumented. Thus, we are told, the Feinstein residence was chosen to host the final swap-plot conference. We continue to seek additional confirmation.

A nod and a wink! (The swap plot goes hot)

index hill winkBut no matter where the scheme was concretized, more than a bit of coy diplomatic theater was planned in cahoots with the Morsi regime. Obama’s disappearing act during the battle in Benghazi, Valerie Jarrett taking the controls, the.blanket stand-down orders issuing from Jarrett, who could not constitutionally give them but who was obeyed anyway, all point to one stark reality: The assault on the American mission in Benghazi was planned not only by the Morsi government, but also by the Obama Regime. The idea was fairly simple, at least on paper. Morsi gave the orders, Ansar al-Sharia carried out the attack. The target would be “defended” by locals whom a complicit Hillary Clinton had placed in charge of security at the consulate, knowing they would turn their coats or flee at the first volley. Repeated requests for reinforced security from the unwitting Ambassador Stevens had been repeatedly denied by Clinton in the run up to the event,.and nobody has ever offered an explanation for so emphatic a display of indifference. Secretary Clinton has been denounced by critics as stupefyingly negligent in this regard, but she was, in fact, ensuring that her friend, Stevens was a sitting duck. The plan was to keep defenses at the consulate local and permeable. But the plan was never to kill Stevens (who necessarily remained out of the loop). Rather, Ansar al-Sharia was ordered by Morsi to abduct the ambassador, and hold him hostage. He would be sequestered (you should forgive the expression) by members of Ansar al-Sharia (posing as irascible local cinema critics), and the Blind Sheikh would be demanded in exchange for his safe release.

Back in Washington DC the following course of events would unfold: Obama would announce that locals, incensed by an anti-Muslim film made by a gosh-darned Coptic Christian, hadObamaWinkingAPwideCrpd250.jpg.cms gotten lucky and seized the ambassador on the spur of the moment. The CIA under the direction of General Petraeus who, (regardless of whether he was or was not aware of the scheme) was fully aware that the Administration had the drop on him and could leak his affair to the press on a whim, would prove obligingly sluggish at ascertaining where Stevens was being held by the ostensibly seething locals, so that —gloriosky!—our loyal friends and trusted allies in the Morsi government would establish communications with spokespeople representing the Ambassador’s kidnappers, and through Cairo’s good offices we would learn that Ambassador Stevens was unharmed, and could be repatriated for the low, low price of one slightly used blind sheikh!  At this juncture, the full voice of the lap-poodle media would be lent to yammering unqualified support for the exchange on humanitarian grounds. Stories would appear extolling the wisdom of  allowing diplomacy to triumph over the obdurate bellicosity of the Bush era, and reminding Americans that, heck, the Sheikh was about half dead anyway, never really posed a threat, was just an old, misguided, half nutty one-eyed fuddy-dud, and besides—we wouldn’t be negotiating with terrorists because the aggrieved “locals” were just—well–aggrieved locals, furious about that awful Islamophobic film that nobody ever saw, but which was probably our fault to begin with. Thus, by the time the Sheikh was exchanged for a grateful if haggard Christopher Stevens, even the more moderate opinionists at FOX would be calling it a show of good faith to the Arab Street, and a moment of heroic statesmanship in which compassion o’er ruled our militaristic impulses while those intractable habitudes of yore that Hillary liked to sneeringly denounce as “cowboy diplomacy” yielded to the enlightened wisdom of our brave young President. .

Murphy’s Law

Glen Doherty and Tyrone Woods--SEALs killed defending Ambassador Stevens

Glen Doherty and Tyrone Woods–former SEALs killed defending Ambassador Stevens

That’s how it was supposed to go, but some “friction,” as Clausewitz would say, showed up in the plan. President Obama has never had much luck with SEALs. Early in his presidency they shot a bunch of Somalian pirates without direct presidential orders– and Rappin’ Preezy, while taking credit for the gutsy action, retaliated by bringing other SEALs up on trumped up charges, most notably for giving a captured terrorist a fat lip. After SEAL Team 6 killed Osama in Pakistan some of them were undiplomatic enough to differ with the presidential version of events. Subsequently, Team 6 members were killed in a shoot down of a helicopter in Afghanistan, said to be the recipient of a “lucky hit” by unknown ground forces. Family members held a press conference suggesting that, at minimum, the government placed the SEALs in unnecessary danger by violating security policies and publicizing the unit’s role in the bin Laden raid.

God only knows…

The President certainly seems to suffer from bad SEAL karma. As almost everyone now knows, on the night of the encounter two former SEALs rallied to the Ambassador’s aid in defiance of the stand-down orders from Washington, thus wrecking the plan by throwing everything off-script and defending the Ambassador so tenaciously that a vastly more violent exchange of fire and a far greater Muslim body count than anticipated knocked the swap scenario into a cocked hat. The exact cause of Steven’s death has never been revealed, but it is possible that he was wounded in the fight, or simply slaughtered in the immediate aftermath by terrorists who, having been promised a cake walk, were furious about the unexpectedly savage nature of the SEALs’  resistance. Whatever the details of Stevens’s death, the first “press leak” that the events of 9/11/12 were an abduction scenario gone bad came not from the bobble-heads at the major networks, but rather from Al Qaeda itself, whose affiliate website Dhu-al-Bajadin lamented back in March that:“The plan was based on abduction and exchange of high-level prisoners–however, the operation took another turn, for a reason God only knows.”

"The operation took another turn." and Ambassador Stevens

“The operation took another turn.” and Ambassador Stevens health took a turn for the terminal. Maybe somebody didn’t brief Dear Leader about Murphy’s Law?

Yes, gentle readers, however bizarre, we live in an era in which one can learn more from Dhu-al-Bajadin than from CNN, NBC, CBS or ABC. Things “took another turn” for Obama too—no prisoner exchange, a dead ambassador, a blanket stand-down order to explain, and even worse, no more Morsi, whose staying power the White House clearly over-estimated. So what happens if Morsi, whose own army had the good sense to drag out of the presidential palace and toss into a jail cell, goes on trial and talks about all this? Is it any wonder Our Beloved Helmsman is sparing no effort in negotiating his release? State Department spokeswoman Jen Psaki, who seems to catch all the duty at State whenever something ludicrous needs to be said, has repeatedly called for Morsi to be released from custody, urging Egypt to “end…all restrictive measures considering Morsi.” Psaki refused to say why the U.S. seeks Morsi’s freedom so anxiously—especially when people like Dr. Shakil Afridi, the hero who helped the CIA zero in on Bin Laden and was then given up by Team Obama without so much as a backward glance, continue to rot in prison.  Psaki (who presumably  knows absolutely nothing about anything) would only say that the U.S. is always concerned with “politically motivated, arbitrary arrests” which assertion may come as a shock to filmmaker Nakoula Nakoula, imprisoned for making the movie nobody ever saw but that Team Obama intended to blame for the Ambassador’s abduction. In the event, the Regime was forced to pivot and blame Nakoula’s obscure video for Stevens’s unanticipated rape, beating, mutilation, and murder–which was a harder sell, obviously.

Watch Syria!

And as for the crew here in the WOOF cave—if our theory of events as presented above is shown to be incorrect, we will apologize (of course) and be adjudged wildly paranoid, no doubt, but that’s nothing new! And if, on the other hand, we are born out by subsequent leaks and revelations—well, that would amount to treason on the parts of Obama, Mrs. Clinton, and everyone else who was aware of the scheme. It can get pretty tricky in the genius business!  (Hint: If the heat from revelations of this type becomes uncomfortable for the White House, you will see Obama getting suddenly tough with Syria–the perfect distraction!) WOOF PRINT


In Let's call the whole thing off forum on August 17, 2013 at 3:23 pm

snake oil By now most of us are well aware that a funny thing happened on the way to socialized medicine in the United States. So funny a thing, in fact, that it is funny in a variety of ways!  Let’s begin with the funniest part—as in funny-peculiar, not funny-ha ha—and we speak now of the “passage” of Obamacare into law.  How did this occur when at the time of passage a Rasmussen poll showed likely voters, by a margin of 13 points, opposed to the idea? Well that’s kind of funny too. While most Americans were debating the probable meaning of LOST, riveted to the regal engagement of Prince William and Kate Middleton, or focused with profound intensity on Lady Gaga’s meat dress, the Democrat party got away with “deeming” that the “Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act,” (previously and hereinafter referred to as Obamacare) was the law of the land. How did that happen? Like we said, it’s funny-peculiar. If you have a particularly mordant sense of humor, it’s even funny-ha-ha.

Great Caesar’s ghost, it’s Supermajority!

Senator Al Franken--the other ass remains unidentified.

Senator Al Franken–the other ass remains unidentified.

When Barack Obama was running for the presidency in 2008 he made health-care reform central to his campaign. He solemnly promised at every whistle stop that reform would grow out of bipartisan negotiations. He insisted repeatedly that the discussions in congress would be televised on C-Span for all the world to see, rather than held “behind closed doors.” He was lying, naturally–but, to a vast, preoccupied, semi-conscious electorate, it all sounded plausible. The nauseous details of the 2008 election need hardly concern us here. For our immediate purpose we may now move forward to that moment when the detestable Arlen Specter (no relation to the comparatively salubrious and vastly more talented Phil Spector) declared himself a Democrat (after decades of uninterrupted de facto Democratism).  Immediately following Specter’s moment of reification, the shatterpated pantaloon Al Franken was rather arbitrarily declared the winner of a hotly contested senatorial race in Minnesota (which was decided after several of those untrustworthy recounts so dear to the hearts of progressives, especially since unions supervise the voting machines), and thus the Democrats achieved a “super majority,” meaning enough votes in the House and Senate to drive the nation all the way to the dump without a single Republican bothering to climb aboard the dump truck. But wait!

Obama specifically warned voters to "forget about the truck" Brown drove--maybe it was a Ford?

Obama specifically warned voters to “forget about the truck” Brown drove–maybe it was a Ford?

This is the part where Ted Kennedy dies and, (just to make things even more funny-peculiar), Massachusetts goes into some sort of fit of extremely temporary lucidity and elects Republican Scott Brown to replace the newly defunct Hero of Chappaquiddick. Brown ran as a conservative’s conservative and handily rolled over liberal hack-ette Martha Coakley (despite or perhaps as a partial result of Obama jetting into the state to noisily endorse her candidacy).

Ever notice Teddy Kennedy's obsessive use of water metaphors? He even named his dog "Splash."

Ever notice Teddy Kennedy’s obsessive use of water metaphors? He even named his dog “Splash.”

Thus Brown triumphantly departed for Washington as the favorite of Tea Partiers, renascent commonwealth conservatives, libertarians, and the wonderfully gimlet Boston radio personality, Howie Carr. Brown was confidently expected to vote a solidly-right-of-center slate given the tenor of his campaign. Funnily enough, however, Brown immediately demonstrated a tone-deaf tendency to “cross the aisle” a la John McCain, and vote in ways contrary to the best interests of the Republic. Nevertheless, Brown remained emphatic about his opposition to Obamacare, and his presumptive “no” vote torpedoed the Dems’ supermajority. In a less surreal epoch, this would have crippled the drive for socialized medicine because the Republicans could have filibustered it to death.

Now you might think, beloved readers, that it hardly mattered if Scott Brown vouchsafed a senatorial filibuster given the fact that the Democrats infamously slipped through the Senate version of their bill on Christmas Eve (take that, America!) before Scott Brown could arrive. But wait! The threat of filibuster loomed anyway, because the House refused to pass the Senate version of the bill despite extreme pressure from the White House, AARP, Big Labor, Hollywood, and, hilariously enough, the American Health Insurance Plans (AHIP), the health insurance industry’s massive lobby. (The AHIP later woke up, smelt the borscht, and spent a frantic 100 million trying to stop the initiative—they being a bit slow) So, given that the House refused to rubber stamp the Senate’s bill and expected to negotiate a better version in conference with the Senate, and given that whatever sort of bill might ramify from such a conference, it would have to go back to the Senate for approval and would therefore fall victim to a GOP filibuster—are you with us, gentle readers?  —it appeared that the surprise slime attack of December 24th had been neutralized. But wait!

Reconciliation, thy name is irony!


“You’ll have to pass the bill to find out what’s in it!”

Comes now the infamous “reconciliation” ploy, which ploy became necessary because Democrats, as we have observed, no longer had 60 votes in the senate by which to impose cloture (shut down any debate, that is) and the House naturally wanted to add its own contributions to the looming national disaster of mandated socialist health care. It is, by the way, a safe conjecture that nobody at this juncture had any idea what the legislation contained in full…in fact it was at this juncture, readers will recall, that Nancy Pelosi cheerfully explained that her colleagues would “have to pass the bill to find out what’s in it!” Reconciliation meant that when enough “Blue Dog” Democrats had been lied to, threatened, coerced and bought off, the House could pass a version that could then be “deemed to have passed” by the Senate. This was done through reliance on the time-honored principle of reconciliation. But wait!

What the heck is reconciliation? Good question! Reconciliation is a special legislative process established by Congress in 1974 to provide for expedited consideration of important budgetary legislation. When an obstructive minority determined to stage an indefinite filibuster threatens legislation, reconciliation limits debate to 24 hours after which a final vote is called. A simple majority is all that is required, at that point, to pass the legislation…so the Democrats had only to “deem” the bill passed, and the law became a fait accompli to the chagrin of the out-maneuvered Republicans in both houses of congress.  But wait!

miss us yetDid you make note, gentle readers, of the adjective “budgetary” in our description of the reconciliation process? That’s right—the whole idea of reconciliation is strictly limited to budget changes. It was meant to assist lawmakers in passing budgets for a single fiscal year. Nobody ever dreamt it might be jury-rigged to rationalize the passage of hugely controversial and unpopular legislation by nullifying the power of the filibuster, an historic institution of the senate intended to ensure the rights of the minority. Put plainly, the pounding of the square peg of reconciliation into the round hole of multipart legislation is not Constitutionally supportable– and confronted with this appalling abuse of the Constitution, the Republicans in congress did what you might expect they’d do: They stared at their shoes and muttered to one another that if the Tea Party would just go away, they could go about the important business of capitulation without all the right-wing interference!

Long before he became Speaker, John Boehner was already practiced in the art of standing up to the liberals in Congress!

Long before he became Speaker, John Boehner was already practiced in the art of standing up to the liberals in Congress!

Well, here it is 2013, and as of this month’s Gallup poll Our Beloved Helmsman’s approval rating on the economy officially dipped to a new low of 35 percent. How can this be happening right in the middle of “Recovery Summer IV”? Don’t folks know that Rappin’ Preezy is focused like a laser beam on jobs for the American people? (And has been for five years now with no discernible result?)  His Gallup ratings on the economy have fallen 7 points just since June, so obviously there’s no gratitude out there—possibly further evidence of racism!  But what of Obamacare? What of program that millions of establishment-trained low-information voters believe will result in free healthcare forever?

Honest Max Baucus: Ooops! Whata ya know--it's a train wreck!

Honest Max Baucus: Ooops! Whata ya know–it’s a train wreck!

After all, it passed back in 2009 and here we all are, still paying for prescriptions and medical insurance—what’s with that? Well, to understand the problem in the simplest possible terms, let us examine one of our favorite recent examples of abject (yet unchallenged) liberal hypocrisy. Remember Senator Max Baucus? Sure you do, he was Obamacare’s most enthusiastic advocate.  In fact the Associated Press adoringly identified him as the man who “who helped write President Barack Obama’s health care law,” at least until 2010 when Baucus told reporters he’d never read the bill. (Let’s face it, nobody who voted for the bill ever read the bill—it’s the size of War and Peace and considerably less engaging.) Still, you might think the man who helped write it would have some nodding familiarity with it! Not Baucus—he snarled that it would be “a waste of [his] time!” Apparently he subscribed to the Pelosi theorem that with passage would come edification—and apparently it did, because by May of 2013 Baucus felt obliged to opine, “‘I just see a huge train wreck coming down.” A shame, really, that Senator Baucus didn’t see this sooner, like maybe while he was ramrodding the bill through the Senate. But wait!

The Revenge of Chuckie

Charles Grassley: Hee hee hee hee hee...

Charles Grassley: Hee hee hee hee hee…

The next big stumbling block was the Grassley amendment. It seems that old Chuck Grassley sneakily planted a rider requiring Congress and its staff to get its own insurance under Obamacare. Somehow this slipped past the Democrats during the febrile run-up to the bill’s passage. When Grassley’s mischief was belatedly discovered, congress freaked out, scrambling to find a way to quash the amendment, since nobody who voted for this stuff ever expected to be subjected to it.  So even as the mentally random Nancy Pelosi was reassuring her constituents that, “Members of Congress and their staffs must enroll in health marketplaces as the Affordable Care Act requires,” her colleagues were pounding on the White House door begging to be omitted from the mess. And Rappin’ Preezy arbitrarily patched up the problem with one of his special, extra-constitutional, creative decretals; but not before the media subjected us to daily lamentations about how unfair Congressional inclusion in Obamacare would be. After all, the media explained, forcing Congressional staffers into Affordable Health when they clearly could not afford Affordable Health would be inhumanly cruel, not to mention the poor Congressmen themselves who make much too much for inclusion in taxpayer-provided subsidies and would pay around 20,000 annually for family insurance outside the system. This too, the media cried, was inhuman and unjustifiable. All of which begs the observation that all these horrendously unjust impositions upon the ruling elite are precisely what the rest of us are expected to accept unquestioningly—a healthcare system designed to bankrupt the wealthy and enslave everyone else. Beyond Congress, a survey of 2, 500 federal employees has just issued, indicating that only 2.9 percent favor shifting to Obamacare. We have already reported the fact that the head of the IRS is happy to opt out. Yet the Leftwing Establishment Media continue to insist that Obamacare is going to prove itself a miracle tonic for America’s ills.


It was always the case that the most awful aspects of the president’s health care plan were calculated to kick in well after the passage of the bill. Despite the fact that Americans were told health care had to be rushed into law because thousands of lives hung in the balance; because children were being denied vital treatments, and because the elderly were losing their homes en masse and becoming street people as their medical expenses rendered them destitute, the law was always slated to take effect between 2013 and 2014. The president’s handlers knew full well that once socialized medicine was inflicted on the U.S. population the mood would get ugly– so the president’s only shot at a second term required that implementation occur some time after the election of January 2012. But wait!

Suckered again! That's okay Teamsters, now you know what keeps happening to Black democrats!

Suckered again! That’s okay Teamsters, now you know what keeps happening to Black Democrats!

In the afterglow of defeating yet another moderate Republican presidential candidate, it dawned on Dear Leader & Company that all would be lost if the 2014 interim elections brought the Senate under Republican control and failed to recapture the House of Representatives for the Left. And the mood among Obama’s partners in crime was souring quickly as the former henchmen began to take second looks at what their exertions had won them. Foremost among these defectors were the major labor unions. Three of the biggest, the Teamsters, the United Food and Commercial Workers, and UNITE-HERE  wrote a frantic letter to Harry Reid, of all people, saying, in part, that:  “The unintended consequences of the ACA are severe. Perverse incentives are already creating nightmare scenarios: First, the law creates an incentive for employers to keep employees’ work hours below 30 hours a week. Numerous employers have begun to cut workers’ hours to avoid this obligation, and many of them are doing so openly. The impact is two-fold: fewer hours means less pay while also losing our current health benefits.” Well, duh!  It is only WOOF’s detestation of the cliché that obstructs us from asking the American Labor Movement, ‘what was your first clue?’

Look out unions! here comes the fasted "scab" in all Meximericanada!

Look out unions! here comes the fastest “scab” in all Meximericanada!

And the fact that illegal aliens will be omitted from such “perverse incentives” just as soon as Obama and John McCain get “immigration reform” passed, (or just as soon as Obama decides it’s the law regardless) has yet to occur to these poor union schlubs; but how much can one expect, really, from people so dumb they think Harry Reid gives a tinker’s damn about them?  Obama, meanwhile, continually issues fiats to the effect that this or that portion of his own plan will be delayed, or that this or that exemption from it will be made, as though he had any authority whatsoever to postpone or alter laws passed by congress…and the Republican “leadership” continues to stare fixedly at its shoes.

Something wicked this way comes.

Here are more insights into what the president’s plan will do for you and your family: Obama’s plan will require your private insurer (you know, the one you thought you could keep if you preferred to) to accept people with pre-existing conditions —and simultaneously caps how much insurers can charge.  While sophomoric liberals hear this and rejoice that “corporate rip-offs” will be banished by a benignant government, the proposition is untenable. First private insurance premiums will skyrocket making private insurance worthwhile only for the privileged few—and the Left needn’t worry that those evil one-percenters will be content with their private insurance because there won’t be any private insurance companies to pay within a year or two. See, rates will quickly shoot up to their respective caps, even as the number of payers into the system will be dramatically reduced by the high, largely unpayable rates, even as the number of conditions covered will be quadrupled by government mandate. Unless you’re a Utopian Democrat you can see the problem here, right? No income, plus governmentally required coverage and payouts equals closing up shop. The idea, as Obama makes perfectly clear in the now infamous 2003 video tape of his speech to the AFL-CIO’s Civil, Human and Women’s Rights Conference, is to move toward, “…a single-payer universal health care program…a single-payer health care plan, a universal health care plan. That’s what I’d like to see. But as all of you know, we may not get there immediately.” But, he might have added, we can get there pretty fast by driving the private insurers to ruination! What about the states? Obamacare requires all states to expand their Medicaid program to 133% of the federal poverty level. Sounds great, right? Except that expansion will cost the states at least 120 billion dollars—which comes from where? Obama’s stash?

Obama forgot to tell them they'd all be standing in the single payer line in the end!

Obama forgot to tell them they’d all be standing in the single payer line in the end!

No, from taxpayers paying through the nose, and through cuts in services provided. The fun is never ending! What about your work-related insurance? A leaked  administration document estimated that under the rules, about fifty-one percent of employers would have to give up their coverage for employees as early as 2014. (The rest, obviously, to follow thereafter.) The exception, you will not be surprised to learn, is union healthcare plans. They’re safe from interference for now.  Sound unequal and unfair? Now come the waivers. For instance, Section 2711 waivers supposedly guarantee businesses and labor unions the ability to hang onto their private insurers , but a) there won’t be any private insurers soon for the reasons mentioned above, which is why the waivers are deemed temporary, by the way, and b) the Department seems only to grant such waivers to unions, leaving businesses twisting in the wind as befits exploiters of the proletarian masses, of course. At any rate, all waivers expire by 2014, which is when WOOF predicts unions will get a reprieve and an extension and business will …well, there won’t be any businesses by then—except for the huge (and largely liberal democratic) big businesses that are being granted waivers willy-nilly….which sounds like an equal protection problem, except somebody would have to have the temerity to say so.

Death panels anyone?

We actually liked Screamin' Jay Hawkins better--but here's Howard.

We actually liked Screamin’ Jay Hawkins better–but here’s Howard.

Of course there are death panels, Virginia, although Obamacare prefers to call them Independent Payment Advisory Boards (IPAB). The role of these budgetary oversight and case-review panels, which will function as mini-fiefdoms,  is so obviously what Sarah Palin was talking about that several Democrats are starting to get a case of the heaves over them, and Howard Dean, former DNC Chair, medical doctor and  screaming presidential candidate overcame his chronic lunacy long enough to pen an op-ed piece for the Wall Street Journal calling for a repeal of the boards.

Nice try lady, but WOOF is on to you!

Nice try lady, but WOOF is on to you!

Even Screamin’ Howie Dean realized that, “the IPAB will be able to stop certain treatments its members do not favor by simply setting rates to levels where no doctor or hospital will perform them.”  (Which process would actually be a fallback position in case of unexpected resistance, since the IPAB can simply deny payment on a cost efficiency basis up front!)  Death panels? Of course there are death panels—and if you thought that stuff requiring end-of-life counseling had been taken out of the law under a storm of protest, WOOF knows that sneaky old Katherine Sebelius slipped mandatory end-of-life counseling back into Obamacare after Obama’s great show of removing it. That the plug can indeed be pulled on granny is so blatantly obvious that the flood of denials in the liberal blogosphere is almost touching it its frantic intensity. But death panels that gauge the practicality of one’s medical treatment in terms of how old and expensive one has become, are only the exposed dorsal fin of a far more predacious beast.

Ohhh yeah, that's a death panel all right!

Ohhh yeah, that’s a death panel all right!

Why stop with ethnicity?

The IRS: You liked them in control of your income--you loved them in control of your politics--you'll rave about them in charge of your literal survival!

The IRS: You liked them in control of your income–you loved them in control of your politics–you’ll rave about them in charge of your literal survival!

A chilling section of the Affordable Care Act calls for the study of how cost-effective various treatments are for “subpopulations,” among which the law includes racial and ethnic minorities, women, senior citizens, and groups with certain comorbidities, genetic and molecular sub-types, or “quality of life preferences.” The CATO Institute has sagely remarked that “Unlike market-generated research, a federal comparative-effectiveness agency would be subject to political manipulation, which could block the generation of any useful research.”  Block research? The good folks at CATO are too sanguine. Once studies into subpopulations have been undertaken, opportunities exist for institutional racism, regionalism, ageism, and yes, homophobia (by which we mean a sensible accounting of the fact that the Gay lifestyle is often one that conduces toward health risks). But wait!

The buck never stops at this president's desk--ever! And it probably shouldn't!

The buck never stops at this president’s desk–ever! And it probably shouldn’t!

The risk of political manipulation of a more direct and intimidating variety seems equally possible. Registered Republican voters are, for example, a subpopulation—and if you think it unthinkable that any American administration would use healthcare to target its political rivals for demise by calculated neglect, consider that the Administration has already used the IRS to target rival organizations for destruction, and the NSA to spy on all of us. Consider also that it is the same IRS that leapt to sustain the liberal cause by targeting Tea Party groups at Obama’s behest that will be implementing Obamacare. Consider another point in closing: Liberalism is ceaseless in its proclivity for naming initiatives that are fundamentally inimical to the commonweal in ironic ways. Examples: The Marriage Equality Act—an effort to destroy the 20,000-year-old concept of marriage.

Marriage Equality! It may not be pretty, but it's ...um...equal!

Marriage Equality! It may not be pretty, but it’s …um…equal!

And how about Gun Safety Laws—laws that make us all less safe by taking our guns away. Or the Voter Rights Act:  Laws that promote the rights of non-Americans to get away with voting illegally while doing nothing whatsoever for the rights of voters. “Choice”:  a funny name for the political support of infanticide leaving the unborn baby with no choice whatsoever because his mommy made the wrong choice in getting pregnant and another wrong choice in killing her child. And now we have “the Affordable Care Act” which is expected to jack up monthly premiums insanely, hitting the young most severely when they are least able to afford the insurance offered or the penalties for not buying the insurance, and further devastating the economy so that inflation will make things still less affordable and joblessness will place even affordable products beyond most peoples grasp.  And while we’re on the subject of irony, you know the APA is also called the Patient Protection Act?  Hmmm?  …probably calling it the Politically Permissible Genocide Act wouldn’t have the same snap, right?

Remember all those doctors wearing lab coats in the Rose Garden? Did you ever see the close-ups?

Remember all those doctors wearing lab coats in the Rose Garden? Did you ever see the reverse-angle close-ups?


In "The Media are the Massage" forum on August 12, 2013 at 4:18 pm

14166914-front-view-of-one-vintage-tv-with-text-news-on-screen-3d-render What do WOOF and Marshall McLuhan have in common? Why, we both spend a lot of time thinking about media, of course. Well, okay, not McLuhan so much anymore, he being dead and all, but we still do. And we would like to share these thoughts with you—but they are, as you might have supposed, agonizingly lengthy—so we decided to share them in portions. These will come in the form of “white paper” reports and will roll in from time to time, under the rubric A WOOF WHITE PAPER REPORT, because that will make them sound important. They will be serialized as installments of “Why All the News is Bad,” and focus on why the American news media today are so hopelessly moronic, yet simultaneously, and dedicatedly, seditious. This will require a bit of a romp through recent history—but let’s begin with some even more recent history, just to make an exordial point.

McLuhan explained media to the world (or "global village") in the '60s, but Breitbart understood it with greater concison: "It's the enemy!"

Marshall McLuhan may have explained media to the world (or “global village”) in the ’60s, but Breitbart understood it with greater concision: “It’s the enemy!”

With Michele in New Hampshire

Bachmann, on the occasion of issuing the faux pas heard 'round the networks, round the news cycle, again, and again, and again....

Bachmann, on the occasion of issuing the faux pas heard ’round the networks, round the news cycle, again, and again, and again….

Remember when the beautiful and talented Michele Bachmann was running for the Republican nomination in 2011—and she committed that horrendous gaffe? No? If you ransack your memory you may recall that while speaking in New Hampshire, Congresswoman Bachmann told an assemblage of citizens that,”You’re the state where the shot was heard around the world at Lexington and Concord.”  Well, not exactly, right? Because the “shot heard ‘round the world” was fired in Massachusetts. (This would be impossible nowadays, of course, because nobody in Massachusetts could own a musket, but we digress.) The point is, the major networks plus CNN and MSNBC jabbered for a complete news cycle about the manifest ineligibility of any Republican female so dunderheaded as to publicly commit so horrendous a blooper! The viewers of this blood frenzy– given that they presumably had mush for brains to begin with as evidenced by their viewing preferences– came away believing that Bachmann was only slightly less ding-batty than Edith Bunker, and a thousandfold more dangerous, because she sought her party’s nomination despite demonstrating such appalling stupidity.  And why are we reviewing this lapsus linguae on the part of the brilliant and beauteous Bachmann? For contrast, dear readers, for contrast! And thus we depart the sublime subject of the congresswoman from Minnesota and trudge into the vastly less enticing but equally necessary realm of Obama’s treatment by these self-same media outlets…let’s restrict ourselves for brevity’s sake to a single instance, however! (Those seeking further instances of presidential folly should click here!)

And now, herrrrrrre’s Barry!


On the night of August 6th, President Barack Obama, our beloved helmsman, appeared in one of his favorite news formats—an entertainment broadcast. He took a seat adjacent Jay Leno on NBC’s Tonight show and did so despite the fact that guests on the Tonight program are not permitted the use of teleprompters—they are, in fact, expected to speak extemporaneously. One might wonder what the president’s handlers were thinking given his established record of waxing incoherent when not reading from the aforementioned device; but why should they have fretted? A virtual avalanche of presidential ludicrosities emanated, as anyone might have predicted, from the president’s ungoverned lips, but the networks seemed oblivious of them—Shall we review? When asked about Benghazi, the president hastily elided into a separate issue, assuring Leno’s audience that, “the odds of people dying in a terrorist attack obviously are still a lot lower than in a car accident,” and then inexplicably adding, “Unfortunately.” But no anchor person at any Liberal Media outlet raised an eyebrow over this baffling adverbial choice–not a one!

Sorry, Vlad! Seventeen years in the KGB and you came out a bottle-cap colonel!

Sorry, Vlad! Seventeen years in the KGB and you came out a bottle-cap colonel!

Next, in an effort to explain Vladimir Putin’s “cold war mentality,” Obama pointed out that the Russian president had, after all, “headed up the KGB.” But this is baloney. Putin was in the foreign intelligence branch of that dastardly organization, but never made it higher than Lieutenant Colonel.  Attending intelligence briefings might have helped clarify this for Barack, but might also have resulted in a missed golf game or two, one supposes. The difference between the summer and winter Olympics also befuddled the leader of the Free World. In lecturing the Russians (in case they were watching Leno, one gathers) on how to run their sports contests in a manner fair to homosexual athletes, the Bamster made recommendations regarding numerous summer games, apparently unaware that the Moscow games will be held in winter.  And then, most embarrassingly, the topic of geography was broached. This is always an unsafe area for the man who thinks we have 58 states and believes that Austrians speak Austrian, but the president held forth bravely, declaring that the Panama Canal was being widened, so we should do likewise because “If we don’t deepen our ports all along the Gulf — places like Charleston, South Carolina, or Savannah, Georgia, or Jacksonville, Florida — if we don’t do that, those ships are going to go someplace else.” Obviously, gentle readers, Charleston, Savannah, and Jacksonville are not Gulf ports. The president seemed to have mislaid the Atlantic Ocean. Additionally, the Panama Canal is in fact being widened, but the president could not have meant that the Gulf of Mexico should be widened, could he? The difference between increased depth and increased width eluded him in this regard—but enough of all this! The point is, none of the Liberal Media Establishment touched on any of these gaffes, except, to be fair, the Associated Press, which dutifully doctored the Gulf quote by adding language unspoken by Obama, so that he wouldn’t look like a total nincompoop. (They got caught, however, and looked like total nincompoops, finally issuing a predictably petulant apology in fine print.)

Seen an anti-communist comic book lately? Nahhh---the superheros are all fighting big corporations!

Seen an anti-communist comic book lately? Nahhh—the superheros are all fighting big corporations! (But we digress.)

Look, the president appoints known communists like Van Jones, Valerie Jarrett, Cass Sunstein, and David Axelrod (to name a handful) to vital positions within his government, sets up Americans for execution via his domestic drone program, vanishes from duty during an eight-hour battle in Benghazi that burns down his consulate and kills his ambassador, and sets about unilaterally disarming the United States of America while Iran and North Korea are developing ICBMs. He blatantly and routinely lies about anything that seems convenient to lie about, from his health care policy to the economy to his energy program to the daft idea that he shoots skeet “all the time,” and the press cannot bring itself to carefully examine an  iota of this—in fact, it attacks anybody who does—Yet when the President takes Tiger Woods golfing without allowing the press to traipse along lovingly in his footsteps, they howl like jilted lovers, agonizing for the first (and almost certainly the last) time ever over the shocking lack of transparency in the Obama Administration. Are they insane? Were they always like this? Why do we put up with these dolts? Well, that is what these white papers will concern themselves with! Beloved readers, WOOF realizes that many of you are young and cannot fathom a time when television was not crammed with blathering liberals trashing everything and everyone you believe in while waxing orgasmic over every left-of-center cause or radical jackanapes that appears on the scene. Some of you, on the other hand, recall a day long ago in which it was possible to watch the evening news without having to deprogram yourself afterwards– to cleanse your weary brain of the harmful effects of no-holds-barred left-wing propagandizing.

“Yes, and it’s all true, too!”

High on WOOF's out-of-print summer reading list:   Logan Robinson's romp through soviet Russia!

High on WOOF’s out-of-print summer reading list: Logan Robinson’s romp through Soviet Russia!

Back in the ‘80s an American law student named Logan Robinson published an absolutely hilarious bit of travel literature entitled “An American in Leningrad,” Robinson having been an exchange student in the Soviet Union during the Brezhnev era. Robinson describes a scene in which he watched a rehearsal for a major speech by Brezhnev in Red Square.  The Soviet Army positioned several rows of soldiers directly behind the Russian Premiere’s podium. Their task was to shout in manly unison, “Yes, and it’s all true, too!” every time Brezhnev asserted a point. Nowadays it is almost impossible to watch the procession of painstakingly coiffured, elegantly attired media mouthpieces spouting exactly identical talking points in the wake of each new Obama-era travesty without bethinking oneself of the that Soviet Army chorus, greeting each of Brezhnev’s prevarications with a shouted reminder of, “Yes, and it’s all true, too,” just in case the masses harbored any doubts. This is precisely the function that the American televised media now serve. It is also descriptive of the vast majority of print media and the Entertainment Industry, but for the sake of brevity we will focus in this particular screed on the TV propagandists who haunt our small screens. Was it always like this? Was it ever this bad in the ‘old days’? Actually, no. It was always in a condition of becoming this way, and it was often nearly this bad—but we are now in an era of absolute, wall to wall, collectivist agitprop, and in order to best understand where we are, it is essential to first examine where we started!

Elvis was a good thing, by the way; the "Hit Parade" was a snore fest!

Elvis was a good thing, by the way; the “Hit Parade” was a snore fest!

As moviegoers who recall the scene from “Contact” are aware, the first ever TV broadcast was propagandistic in nature, starring, as it did, Hitler—making a speech at the 1936 Olympic Games in Berlin. But if he was the first socialist totalitarian to turn the medium to his purpose, he was in no respect the last. In America, following World War II, television began to take hold and grew into a house-to-house phenomenon by the early ‘50s. Americans huddled in front of the flickering shades of grey on their cathode-ray-lit sets yukking it up with “Uncle Milty” or glued to the fights on the “Gillette Cavalcade of Sports,” or getting hep to Patti Page and Snooky Lanson on “Your Hit Parade” before the name Elvis was abroad in the land. And verily, one could watch all the entertainment programming of that era without any fear of being brainwashed by Communists. Brain deadened, perhaps, by cultural pabulum, but washed?—no! And the first newscasts of the day were pretty dull—just recitations of the day’s notable events, (imagine that!) plus sports scores and weather forecasts, all without the benefit of visual aids apart from the weather map and usually emanating from some carefully enunciated gent with a collection of clocks behind him on a soundproofed studio wall with a massive mike in his face bearing the network logo of ABC, CBS, or NBC. Once upon time, young Americans, those were our only choices!  Call it an age of innocence if you like, but whether or not it was too good to last, it certainly didn’t!


Genial Uncle Dave

"Peace!" (It is a sad commentary that NBC's "Today" show was at its best when co-hosted by a chimp!)

“Peace!” (It is a sad commentary that NBC’s “Today” show was at its best when co-hosted by a chimp!)

It will shock the young to discover that once a man named Dave Garroway hosted the NBC Today program, his main assistant a chimpanzee named J. Fred Muggs, but it is true—and equally true that since Dave Garroway left the Today program, it has not been worth looking at. In fact, a quick viewing of Matt Laur and team will suffice to persuade the unbiased observer that Today had more dignity and gravitas when it was co-hosted by a chimpanzee than it possesses nowadays. Dave Garroway finished last in his class at NBC Announcer’s school, and it showed. Instead of sounding like some stentorian stuffed shirt, he came across cool and casual—communicative and human. Heck, J. Fred Muggs seemed more human than the average network announcer of that era. In the ‘70s, this formula for early morning news programming was called “cope,” but when Garroway introduced it, the critics called it terrible and unprofessional, except for TV critic Richard F. Shepard who differed, writing, “He is pleasant, serious, scholarly…and not obtrusively convivial.”


Dave Garroway–big on clocks, bow ties, and keeping cool.

Garroway knew TV was a “cool medium” before communications guru Marshall McLuhan so dubbed it—and he made it work wonderfully. He also closed each show with his palm raised in the cliché Indian “how!” position. These days, white liberals who never met an Indian would call it an insult to “Native Americans” (which presumably means all of us) and make short work of such insensitivity! In those days, hand aloft, Dave always intoned the single syllable, “Peace!” But he was just as relaxed and natural doing a remote from an airborne B-52 on a practice bombing run—and if he had a political; slant, he only told J. Fred Muggs.  So was the Garroway persona widely emulated by up-and-coming TV reporters in 1952? Sadly, no—at least not for long. Because by 1953 a greater call to glory had been sounded, and by most perceptions (at least in New York), a great evil thereby disposed of—and about this we shall say more next time, when WOOF White Papers presents: Confronting the great evil! (Don’t miss it!)

to be continued


How Red was my Valerie (or) I can see Russia from my White House!

In Just say HUAC forum on August 8, 2013 at 4:17 pm

alternate splash

Gentle readers, WOOF hates like poison to publish two consecutive pieces on the same topic, more or less, but here we are again, stuck in Benghazi because the newest buzz is that Valerie Jarrett, whom WOOF has repeatedly identified as one of the most ardently committed communists in the Obama White House, is now a leading suspect in the abandonment of our people during the assault on the consulate and nearby “secret” safe house that resulted in the deaths of Ambassador Christopher Stevens, an aid, and two Navy SEALS.

The SEAL Team Six assault on bin Laden's compound depicted in "Zero Dark Thirty," which readers will recall WOOF reviewed positively, although we haven't seen it.

The SEAL Team Six assault on bin Laden’s compound depicted in “Zero Dark Thirty,” which readers will recall WOOF reviewed positively, although we haven’t seen it.

Many others were wounded in the Al Qaida assault, but the administration has squirreled them away with tremendous efficiency–efficiency of a caliber not otherwise exhibited by the Obama White House. ..unless you count efficiently destroying the economy and dividing the country into balkanized populations of “victims” asserting their various entitlements.  And Valerie Jarrett has been at Dear Leader’s side from the inception of his presidency, ensuring the smooth, steady dismantling of the American Dream while “force multiplying” welfare recipients.  Even in light of such dedication and ingenuity, the newest Jarrett story lacks face validity. In fact, it seems absurd on several counts, but this hardly rules it out, conditions being as they are…and may even lend it a certain credence. The information, furthermore, seems to have been selectively leaked, which makes it all the more piquant, especially if the leaks are emanating from certain disgruntled Clintonista, which is WOOF’s working premise. Valerie Jarrett, remember, is also widely reputed to have thrice quashed the mission that killed Osama bin Laden. WOOF can state with certainty that it was she who scuttled the first scheduled Bin Laden raid, although we cannot substantiate precisely three such instances; but WOOF knows that the raid on Bin Laden’s safe house in Pakistan was scrubbed more than once, and that President Obama was finally pressured into making the “go” decision by numerous military and DOD higher-ups who bluntly told Dear Leader that if he allowed Bin Laden time to escape to a new location, news of his inaction would certainly leak—and his limp-wristed unwillingness to drop the hammer on America’s number one enemy at large would cost him the election in 2012. Woof knows that it was in this light that Our Beloved Helmsman reluctantly agreed to go ahead with SEAL Team Six’s now famous assault on Osama’s country estate despite what now appear to be Jarrett’s earlier efforts to kill the plan instead of the terror kingpin.

Spokesman Dan Pfeiffer--

Spokesman Dan Pfeiffer–sensing Obama “through” the situation room.

Fast forward now to the night of September 9, 2012. At 5 PM, coded or scrambled reports began to flood the signals offices in Washington to the effect that the Special Mission in Benghazi had come under heavy assault. WOOF is now certain that early in the Benghazi crisis the president, whom we previously suspected of resting up following his strenuous appearance on the Pimp with a Limp radio program, was in fact wide awake, and underwent a thorough briefing courtesy of Secretary of Defense Panetta. The president’s immediate action in the wake of this briefing, as best as WOOF can ascertain, was to have dinner in his sumptuous private quarters. White House spokesman Dan Pfeiffer was pointedly asked by Chris Wallace on Wallace’s FOX News program to divulge the president’s whereabouts during the hours of the attack. Pfeiffer refused to say where the president was.  WOOF knows for certain that Obama was not in the situation room, where of course any other president in modern history would have been on such an occasion. The closest Pfeiffer came to fallaciously placing the president in the situation room that night was his magnificently aphasic remark, desperately emitted under Wallace’s verbal pummeling, that “[The president] was kept up to date through the situation room,” as though he were somehow immanent in the very air.

confused terror

Oppose Al Qaida? Support Al Qaida? Even the terrorists seem confused by Obama’s policies…

Glenn Beck has theorized that President Obama was “kept out of the loop so he wouldn’t be a witness to a situation that involved running guns to the rebels in Syria,” but as WOOF has pointed out previously, it is difficult to imagine this president living in such trepidation of a news media that performs poodle devotions at his bidding—besides which, the administration’s verbal support for the rebels was a known commodity, so why not arm them? For heaven’s sake, John McCain was even then demanding that they be armed, so how do you get blander than that?  No, there is more to this than brother Beck’s suspicion portends! Panetta is, in his heart of hearts, an unregenerate Clintonista, and his stronger instinct would be to throw Obama under the bus if it meant saving Hillary’s reputation, besides which, why keep the president above suspicion when, absent any curiosity or criticism from the comatose press, the average American would be no more perturbed by arms smuggling to Syrian rebels than by—oh, let’s say—a 1.7% uptick in the economy being ballyhooed by the media as a veritable rebound.  And now, into the bargain, comes this bizarre leak to the effect that Valerie Jarrett,  the Iranian-born communist ideologue who is President Obama’s most trusted adviser, single handedly killed any rescue attempts during those agonizing eight hours last September.

How can a clandestine policy arouse controversy if John McCain supports it?

How can a clandestine policy arouse controversy if John McCain supports it?

Really? The story seems superficially implausible because Valerie Jarrett, besides being a deranged anti-American fruit loop, is also un-elected and unconfirmed by congress to any position—she being titularly the “Assistant to the President for Public Engagement and Intergovernmental Affairs,” whatever one makes of that jabberwocky, and in reality simply one of the many hard-core communist conspirators with whom Our Dear Leader prefers to surround himself. She cannot issue orders to call off American military rescues—she has no constitutional authority to tell the lowliest Lance Corporal to say hey, let alone cancel an AC-130 strike.

And yet, it seems increasingly probable that Comrade Jarrett is the authority who called off the AC-130 gunship that could easily have eliminated the attackers in a burst of its conglomerate armament of 25 mm Gatling fire, 40 mm auto-cannon shells, and, (just to add insult to injury), a 105 mm Howitzer—kind of a punctuation mark at the end of the good-bye message. Much has been made, in many excellent though significantly less amusing blogs than ours, of the denial of cross-border authority. This order was obviously withheld, which is insane in and of itself, and yes, without a presidential order to cross international borders on a hostile mission, American forces cannot advance in an international rescue attempt, or any other armed salient. But WOOF has long maintained that an AC-130U “Spooky” was in the area that night, which is to say already in Libyan airspace, and this is why SEALS Woods and Doherty used laser targeting devices to pinpoint the mortars that subsequently killed them—because they expected the gunship to respond by opening fire with its laser-following weaponry. The SEALS probably could not have imagined in their wildest nightmares that anyone matching the philosophical profile of Valerie Jarrett was in charge back in Washington DC—no, they would not have known her name. But WOOF knows her name, and we have mentioned her before now!

The AC-130U addressing a problem on the ground--this sort of problem resolution could have saved Ambassador Stevens and the others.

The AC-130U addressing a problem on the ground–this sort of problem resolution could have saved Ambassador Stevens and the others.

Valerie Jarrett has been President Obama’s closest adviser since she was insinuated into his midst by her father-in-law—and her father-in-law was a fellow traveling Marxist who worked hammer-in-sickle with Obama’s mentor and truest father figure, Frank Marshall Davis, a hardened and unyielding communist.  Her family tree is also intermarried with that of Bill Ayers—the retired terrorist bomber, lifelong communist, and ghostwriter of Obama’s first book—the readable one. She is also comrades with former Obama adviser Van Jones, who was exposed in 2010 as a full blown communist, but who was dismissed from overt association with the White House only after he was taped saying that the Bush Administration colluded in the attacks on the World Trade Center on 9/11.

Bill Ayers's interest in educating youth is justly famous.

Bill Ayers’s interest in educating youth goes back decades!

Readers who recall WOOF’s warnings about the CSCOPE conspiracy (click here) will be especially interested to know that Jarrett’s mother, Barbara Taylor Bowman, joined forces with bombin’ Bill Ayers and his urban terrorist wife, Bernardine Rae Dohrn (now a professor of law at Northwestern, of course) to found a massive “educational reform initiative” aimed at Sovietizing the American public education system—to the extent that that’s even necessary nowadays. This monstrosity eventually sprouted a tentacle in the form of the subversive CSCOPE program that your local public school is probably adopting even as you read this. And where did Ayers and Jarrett’s mom come up with the cool 4.5 million needed to fund such an ambitious demolition job? It was handed to them by President Obama, of course—they got a sizable slice of the stimulus funding that most Americans thought was going to revive the economy hee, hee, suckered again!

Jarret is best known on the Right for her assertion that, “After we win this election, it is payback time. For those who supported us, there will be rewards, for the ones who opposed us, they will get what they deserve. There will be hell to pay. Congress won’t be a problem for us this time. With no election to worry about, we have two judges ready to go.”

(Why— just as an aside here— are communist sympathizers and communists so fond of adverting to Hell? Karl Marx reminded us in Capital that “the road to hell is paved with good intentions;” putting every one of his acolytes on notice for all eternity, one might think. Hillary “Her Magnificence” Clinton is famous for insisting there would be “Hell to pay,” when aroused by her critics, and now we have Comrade Jarrett using the same phrase—surely the close affiliation of Marxists and the infernal regions is worthy of note, but we digress…)

A peculiar obsession with Hell seems characteristic of the Marxist intellect

A peculiar obsession with Hell seems characteristic of the Marxist intellect

So, in fairness, let’s examine how America’s journal of record, the subversive New York Times, sees Valerie Jarrett—they seem to have experienced a completely different version of her than we. When they profiled her in 2012 they spent more time gushing about her “magic” than her ties to former Weather Undergrounder Ayers. According to the Times profile, Valerie and Barack “met more than two decades ago, when Ms. Jarrett – a lawyer, like both Obamas – offered Mrs. Obama a job in the Chicago mayor’s office.” But the truth seems to be that Valerie met Barack, as we mentioned earlier, through the auspices of her subversive father-in-law who worked shoulder to shoulder with arch Red, Frank Marshall Davis, the closest thing Barack had, sadly, to a real dad. The Times ignored this, seeking out new levels of viscosity on the fulsomeness scale, trilling that “The magic of Valerie is her intellect and her heart. She is an incredibly kind, caring and thoughtful person with a unique ability to pinpoint the voiceless and shine a light on them and the issues they and the President care about with the ultimate goal of making a difference in people’s lives.”  And then, perhaps just to save readers from looming insulin shock, the Times managed the sole hint of criticality in this otherwise uninterrupted drizzle of syrup, admitting that “Some of Mr. Obama’s most senior advisers worry – perhaps not entirely without jealousy – that her direct access to the president has at times led to half-baked decision making and unclear lines of authority.” And therein lies the rub, Woofketeers, at least so far as Benghazi is concerned!

Valerie working her special magic--"loook into my eyes!"

Valerie working her special magic–“loook into my eyes!”

And where Benghazi is concerned, we return to the night of the battle, and we continue to do our utmost to trace the steps of the President of the United States as he remains, by every indication, sublimely insouciant to the violence in Libya imperiling his consulate and his ambassador. We can be reasonably certain that Obama dined in private and then Readers who recall WOOF’s warnings about the CSCOPE conspiracy (click here) will be especially engaged in a two-hour-long telephone conversation with Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu.

Hillary's 9/11 whereabouts remain mysterious, but "what difference, at this point, does it make?"

Hillary’s 9/11 whereabouts remain mysterious, but “what difference, at this point, does it make?”

The purpose of the call, from President Obama’s standpoint, was to create the illusion of bonhomie between the White House and Netanyahu’s government, since the president’s previous abuses of Netanyahu, including an unconscionable snubbing back in 2009 and a ridiculous subsequent call for a return to the borders of 1967 which would be suicidal for Israel, had resulted in a noticeable level of disaffection on the Jewish American Left, which is to say the Jewish American population, which invariable, if inexplicably, marches as a man to the voting booths each election to vote for Democrat politicians who would rather hug a PLO terrorist than give Israel the time of day. The evidence shows that Valerie Jarrett was also present during this conference, and that she made her way subsequently, either at Obama’s behest or of her own volition, from the private quarters to the situation room where the events on the ground in Benghazi were being monitored in real time by, among others, secretary of Defense Panetta, and . Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Martin Dempsey. So far as can be reasonably substantiated, Hillary Clinton was not at the scene.

On the job! Panetta, Dear Leader, and General Dempsey, looking out for you!

On the job! Panetta, Dear Leader, and General Dempsey, looking out for you!

It is precisely at this point that Conservative Report insists Valerie Jarrett assumed the leadership role for the administration, and like we said at the beginning, this would seem palpably absurd if it were not for three vexing points of fact. First, WOOF is confident that Valerie Jarrett was the person who scrubbed the raid on Bin Laden’s hideout more than once before the press of events finally forced Our Beloved Helmsman to give SEAL Team Six a reluctant “go.” Second, an increasingly compelling series of leaks reaching WOOF’s ears from sources in Qatar seem to verify the idea that Jarrett somehow managed to impose a kibosh on the AC-130U strike depended on that night by SEALs Woods and Doherty. Third, the order to “stand down” is not synonymous with an order to avoid crossing borders on a tactical mission. Forces at the airport in Tripoli or already in the skies of Libya didn’t need to cross borders, so a stand-down order would have sufficed. The waters are muddy enough regarding such an abortive order that browbeaten personnel in the situation room might have assumed Jarrett spoke for the president, as so often in the past, and as indeed she may have. That the military sycophantically carries water for the Administration to conceal these points is best evinced by Gen. Martin Dempsey’s denial that any stand-down order was issued. On the contrary, General Dempsey explained, “They weren’t told to stand down. A stand down means don’t do anything. They were told to — that the mission they were asked to perform was not in Benghazi but was at Tripoli Airport.” Did you get that, Woofketeers? The strike force wasn’t told not to go, they were only told to stay put!  So not doing anything was their mission, get it? This is the caliber of wisdom that comes from the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff in the Age of Obama.

These are the men who dies while American rescuers weren't standing down. just staying where they were at the airport in tripoli.

These are the men who died while American rescuers weren’t standing down. just staying where they were at the airport in Tripoli.

And finally, there is what one might call the devil in the details—the weirdly impelling character of skulking, conspiratorial malevolence that permits its janissaries to impose their will against all reason, especially in the most critical circumstances. To this end, we note that Tad Cronn, writing for Before it’s News.com, has offered that “Jarrett has always been Morgan le Fey to Obama’s Mordred.”  Perfect! And as we already know from the New York Times, “The magic of Valerie is her intellect and her heart.”

"When I clap my hands, you will remember nothing!"

“When I clap my hands, you will remember nothing!”


In "Intelligence Design" forum on August 5, 2013 at 3:38 am
Remember when the CIA was pro-American? And yes, youngsters, that's Bill Cosby.

Remember when the CIA was pro-American? And yes, youngsters, that’s Bill Cosby.

Despite the initial reaction many of you may experience, gentle readers, WOOF means this headline seriously. Must President Obama corrupt our most trusted guardians throughout the Cold War—the CIA and the NSA, together with such other beloved institutions as NASA and SAC? Oh, wait a minute; it was actually Bill Clinton who got rid of the Strategic Air Command, he having overdosed on Dr. Strangelove, and Fail Safe; and what with the enormity of his own scandals weighing upon him in tandem with his loathing for fbi downloadthe U.S. military, America’s super-competent Air Force deterrent to Russian aggression must have struck him as insufficiently “cute and adorable” to be retained. Whatever the case, Curtis LeMay’s shining tribute to monomaniacal professionalism proved a bellwether for other institutions on the cusp of decay or extinction. For example, presidents and politicians once sensibly demurred at the notion of arousing J. Edgar Hoover’s ire (tutu or no tutu), and his agents were accorded the respect due G-men whom Jimmy Stewart and Efrem Zimbalist Jr. portrayed on film  In the glory days of the FBI it struck terror into the hearts of gangland renegades and communists alike, only to deteriorate over recent decades into politically-correct disarray—the sort of disarray that nowadays allows a tip from Russian intelligence agencies recommending a close look at Tamerlan Tsarnaev (one the now-infamous Tsarnaev brothers who attacked the Boston Marathon with loaded pressure cookers) to fall through the cracks…

Efrem Zimablist Jr. in TV's "The FBI" --we liked him better in 77 Sunset Strip, though--that was a good show.

Efrem Zimbalist Jr. in TV’s “The FBI” –and everybody drove Fords, did you ever notice that?

…or fields the profoundly phlegmatic current director, Robert Mueller, to Benghazi to “investigate the scene” nearly 5 months after the attack on our consulate, and long after all the evidence has been scooped up by locals and CNN reporters. Upon his return, you will recall, Director Mueller announced that the violence in Libya could possibly be the work of Al Qaida. He then proceeded to testify in June before a congressional committee respecting the FBI’s investigation of the IRS scandal, informing the committee that he had no idea who was leading the investigation, how many agents were assigned to it, when it started, who if anyone had been interviewed, what if anything had been learned, or why the bureau targeted victims of the IRS probes for investigation before its investigation had officially begun, or whether this was done in coordination with the IRS. He just didn’t know. WOOF knows, but not Director Mueller.

three livesWell, in the wake of Ruby Ridge and Waco, it seemed almost reassuring to suppose that Meuller’s stint as director had led to a new era of feckless inanition at the FBI, but the bureau’s political partisanship became manifest in its director’s studied obliviousness before congress, and it made WOOF sentimental for the days when the FBI was on the side of the angels…the 50’s, when American kids turned on their TVs and saw the truth of the communist menace laid bare in programs like I Led Three Lives. That was a good show!  Every episode started out with Richard Carlson belting some Red creep in the jaw—knocking him over a fire escape landing, while the narrator solemnly intoned, “This is the story of how America strikes back!”  WOOF gets tingles up and down its legs just thinking about it!

Goodbye, Good Spies!

Meanwhile, the Central Intelligence Agency seems to be suborned, at least in its loftiest strata of command, by the creeping ooze of socialist totalitarianism. This slide began with Jimmy Carter’s appointment of the moronic Admiral Stansfield Turner as CIA director in 1977. Henry Kissinger once quipped that, “Stansfield Turner couldn’t command a row boat.” And under his mismanagement the agency’s devotion to battling communism internationally began to erode, even as the clandestine action force was denuded of its potency and essentially put out to pasture. William Casey led a brief renaissance during the Reagan administration, but Casey’s death signaled an end to the days of enlightened, hard-line directors—a farewell to the ethos of Allen Dulles, Richard Helms, Jim Schlesinger and William Colby. Instead the Carter years ushered in the era of top-level sycophancy at Langley that extended through the Clinton years with the arrival of John M. Deutch (a Democrat chemist) and was most recently exemplified by the sad example of General Petraeus shrugging off his Benghazi findings, soft-soaping his criticisms of the administration, and scooting out the door with Obama holding a stack of private emails over his head.

Zbigniew Zabriskie cuddles up to Stansfield Turner in the Carter White House--subversive meets simpleton on the road to a left-wing CIA.

Zbigniew Zabriskie cuddles up to Stansfield Turner in the Carter White House–subversive meets simpleton on the road to a left-wing CIA.

This unhappy devolution at the CIA was interrupted briefly by  President (“W”) Bush’s appointment of Porter Goss as DCI. Goss attempted to halt the Agency’s slide into political correctitude and fangless multicultural analysis, but by then the fix was in. Goss was ousted by a rebellion of his own lieutenants, most of whom have since served the cause of uniting the agency with the Department of State and the Department of Homeland Security, which is merely to say they have functioned as janissaries of Obama-ism. The result is a shift of the CIA’s focus from standing watch against the adversaries of freedom abroad to suppressing details related to the administration’s malefactions and derelictions at home and abroad.

Latest D/CIA John "Chuckles" O. Brennan--okay, that's not really his nickname.

Latest D/CIA:  John “Chuckles” O. Brennan–okay, so that’s not really his nickname…

Phony scandal, real cover-up

The latest evidence of this amounts to what even CNN calls “an unprecedented attempt to keep the spy agency’s Benghazi secrets from ever leaking out.” Under the direction of newly arrived Obama-ite, John O. Brennan (who was confirmed despite Rand Paul’s valiant filibuster) the CIA seems determined to hound its own personnel into abject silence despite a general desire among the ranks of field operatives to testify before congress regarding the administration’s blunders and willful, criminal acts. The effect of this has been numerous leaks within CIA about the massive amounts of coercion being brought to bear against potential leakers of the Benghazi facts.

Beginning in January, WOOF knows that CIA operatives involved in the agency’s Libyan operations have been subjected to massive intimidation by Brennan and his managerial cadre who have made it “vividly clear” as one operative told WOOF, that any effort to testify honestly before a congressional committee should be considered an immediate career ender. Lifestyle and loyalty polygraphs are routine at the agency, but are normally administered bi-annually and in many cases less frequently than that. Agency personnel in the know about Benghazi are now being polygraphed monthly or even twice a month at Brennan’s direction, with the stated objective of discovering whether anyone is talking, or thinking of talking, to congress. WOOF knows that the threats bandied about include insinuations regarding the “health” of spouses and children.

A peculiar silence has descended on CIA agents who formerly seemed eager to testify.

A peculiar silence has descended on CIA agents who formerly seemed eager to testify.

It seems that as many as 40 CIA operatives may have been on the ground the night of the battle in Benghazi. Several are said to have been wounded. Congressman Frank Wolf (R-VA), whose district covers Langley, Virginia, where the CIA makes its home, accurately characterized the agency’s shenanigans as “…a form of a cover-up,” adding, “… it’s an attempt to push it under the rug, and I think the American people are feeling the same way.”  Of course, the majority of the American people, as WOOF has repeatedly pointed out, remains focused like a laser on the Zimmerman/Martin case, whether Johnny Depp intends to quit acting, and the shocking recent arrival of Britney at LAX sans make up. Most Americans still think Ben Ghazi is that actor who played the evil rich guy in Road House. But we forgive Congressman Wolf his unfounded optimism, because he continues to insist that, “We should have the people who were on the scene come in, testify under oath, do it publicly, and lay it out. And there really isn’t any national security issue involved with regards to that.” Wolf insists that hundreds of agency personnel were outspokenly eager to testify before his committee, only to go chillingly silent as the lid was lowered from on high.

One more time: This man is NOT the third largest city in Libya.

One more time: This man is NOT the second largest city in Libya.

Republican members of congress have also officially requested that James Comey, the new head of the FBI, brief them on any Benghazi findings next month. WOOF predicts that James Comey will prove himself as blissfully ignorant as his predecessor. He won’t know much about who really oversaw the Flying Tsarnaev Brothers’ assault on the Boston Marathon, either—trust us!

A conspiracy so glaring, even CNN noticed!

Bashar Assad-- see what we mean?

Bashar Assad– see what we mean?

In a special report, CNN floated the notion that a CIA team was operating out of an annex to the American consulate transferring missiles from Libyan armories to Syrian rebels fighting to overthrow Bashar Assad, (the psychopathic Syrian despot who has the really pretty wife even though he has a very small head, which fact he emphasizes by wearing ridiculously large neckties). But, while replacing Assad with the better organized and more grandly malevolent Al Qaida is certainly an outcome dear to the hearts of the Obama regime, the idea that the CIA would go to such lengths to disguise its participation as to stash possible witnesses around the country replete with brand new identities and professions, a la “witsec,” seems improbable. Why engage in such exertions to cover up a relatively routine, even arguably salubrious, operation in Libya? No, Wooferians, the intent is to hide Obama’s dirty laundry, and WOOF suspects it has nothing to do with a scheme to shoot rockets at Assad, which although injudicious in the circumstances, would hardly seem scandalous, winning as it would, the predictable support of John McCain and the timorously compliant RNC presence in both houses.

John McCain--again, dangerous visions!

John McCain–again, dangerous visions!

We remain, as a people, ignorant of the actual reason that Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans were killed in Benghazi during an eight hour battle to which the Obama administration responded by telling its available forces in the vicinity to do nothing whatsoever. WOOF knows also that by September 14th the White House had collaborated with the State Department and the CIA to evolve the infamous “talking points,” designed to convince the world that a few street ruffians became exercised over an amateur movie about the prophet Mohammed that nobody ever saw and went spontaneously berserk–the cover story Susan Rice was then dispatched to sell the nation on the Sunday shows even as Our Beloved Helmsman repeated the same drivel to the United Nations. We also now know that nobody in Arabia ever heard of that movie until the Administration made sure they knew about it. But all of this, terrible and treacherous as it is, is not the main thrust of WOOF’s current complaint.

The infamous film maker -WOOF's 2012 person of year--framed for Benghazi and still in jail!

The infamous film maker -WOOF’s 2012 person of year–framed for Benghazi and still in jail!

No, the gravamen of this column, gentle readers, is that organizations once committed to fighting the bad guys of the world on behalf of the American people are now increasingly devoted to picking on citizens of the united States who displease the Obama Regime for any of numerous reasons. Similarly, drones used to kill terrorists (good) are now becoming drones used to spy on American homes (bad) and the WOOF cave (really bad), while the National Security Agency, once an agency devoted to monitoring the communications of our multifarious adversaries abroad has now moved into an expanded, modernized facility in Utah the purpose of which is primarily to store all the communications of America’s citizens for potential political cherry picking. This highlights the difference between what the NSA was created to be, namely an organization dedicated to the global monitoring, decoding, translation and analysis of foreign signal intelligence for the purposes of counterintelligence–and what it is now becoming, namely a high-tech American Gestapo.

The new NSA digs in Utah--finally, a place where your voice can be heard!

The new NSA digs in Utah–finally, a place where your voice can be heard!

Defending the indefensible?

While WOOF appreciates the old-school defense-oriented conservatism of patriots like Michele Bachmann and Peter King who perceive the defense-related benefits of a nearly omniscient NSA, and also appreciates the desire of Republicans like Justin Amash to severely curtail the NSA’s power through legislation, given its recent abuses, the sad fact is that they are all mistaken. Amash’s looming 11 propositions to clearly delimit the NSA’s prerogatives won’t work, because Obama won’t enforce them even if he signs off on them, and patriotic intentions won’t suffice to prevent the administration’s manipulation of the massive power of the NSA to subjugate Obama’s American critics, even as it used the IRS to identical purpose. No, the only hope for any of us is to recreate the days in which American presidencies were committed to battling America’s adversaries rather than America’s advocates. Sadly the Obama administration (and liberalism generally) has long held that the greatest threat to the sovietization of the United States emanates from the population of the United States and must be ruthlessly suppressed.

Michele Bachmann--hot but misguided. But even 11 new strictures won't stop that big Obama Phone in the sky!

Michele Bachmann–red hot and blue, but misguided vis the NSA…though even 11 new congressional strictures won’t stop that big Obama Phone in the sky!

How do we return to the days of James Jesus Angleton at Langley, and Herbert Philbrick at the FBI? How do we restrain these cold-war juggernauts from imposing on us the very style of communist oppression they were created to combat?  Only by re-establishing the primacy of constitutional law and electing presidents who respect the Founders’ vision—and that means hard work, Woofketeers. The enemy is well inside the gates, and the eleventh hour is at hand. But we can do it, fellow reactionaries! We can do it, like-minded libertarians, awakened independents, and patriotic remnants amid the hoi polloi! And as always you can count on Watchdogs of Our Freedom to lead the fight, so rally to us and let us advance en masse toward the election of 2014, and the shining triple constellation of capitalism, constitutionalism, and liberty!  And don’t forget to breathe!

"Good heavens, Solo, it appears that THRUSH is not the problem after all!"

“Good heavens, Solo, it appears that THRUSH is not the problem after all!”

%d bloggers like this: