Oh my, David Brooks and David Frum.  They were once Republicans — now they are Obamicans.  They’ve been taken in by Teh One.  Since before the election, they have been held up by the Left and the media as Conservative dissidents to show just how great Obama is at bringing people together.  They’ve both gotten more attention and recognition than at any other time.  Honestly, had most of you heard of them before the campaign?

So this week, David Frum has the cover of Newsweek with an article on how wrong Rush is.  He calls himself a conservative, even going so far as to list his bona fides.  He once wrote for National Review Online until he made many true believers mad because he bought into the media’s portrayal of Sarah Palin.  Some of his writings are classic conservatism, but I think he wants to move the party away from the “religious element” that has formed the social policies of the party. He mentions those factions that want to change the party in his article as if he’s not one of them.   But the party of fiscal conservatism and social liberalism already exists with the Libertarians, and he should go join them.

So, this article.  Gosh.  What an ass-kissing piece.  Frum even drags out the Obama-is-buff drivel.  He helps the Obama faithful in their goal of calling Rush the leader of the Republican party.  He says Rush has a “history of drug dependency.”  I think he chose that word — dependency — very carefully.  If he would have said “drug use,” it would have been dishonest not to point out Obama’s own problems with drugs, as so deftly pointed out by a Hot Air commenter.  The only part of this article I agree with comes on the last page when he suggests that Republicans need to bring creative alternatives to the table instead of just voting no.  I’m not sure if his idea of an alternative means breaking with principles, since earlier in the article he called for the Republican platform to revolve around health care reform and not tax cuts.  My idea of alternatives means getting more creative solutions to daily problems USING conservative principles.

Now on to David Brooks.  He went on Stephanopoulos’s show “This Week” to help Stephanopoulos’s little gossip group perpetuate their “Rush Rules Republicans” mantra.  He says that the GOP are insane for channelling Rush and Reagan in calling for a spending freeze during a recession.  He says other Republicans feels the same way he does — like David Frum. 

Brooks also jumped on the Obama bandwagon early.  He also blamed it on Palin.  But, I don’t think that was the case.  Recall Michelle Malkin’s aptly titled piece “David Brooks’ Ivy League Ejaculations.”  I think he was upset that the government was being run by people he saw as lesser than him, even though Bush also has an Ivy League education.  I wonder what he thinks of all those expensive diplomas now?

Update: I completely forgot the three-day excursion out into the wilderness that is NObama Land.  He ventured out by announcing that Obama wasn’t who he thought he was (duh!), then quickly returned when he realized that being out in the cold wasn’t so nice (look at how former Obamaton Jim Cramer was treated after criticizing Obama’s economic plan).

Update II: Ace has some insights into the ego of David Frum and his lack of pertinent arguments.  It’s a good read.

Burger King apparently has an Angry Whopper that they are trying to advertise.  So, they’ve allowed visitors to make Angry-Grams to send off to someone that is annoying.  The messages are created like a rigid Mad Lib — fill in the blanks, but only certain phrases are allowed. 

Even with the lack of choices, I made one for Obama.  (It was funny that “Osama” was available but “Obama” wasn’t.  I settled on “Barry.”)

And you wouldn’t listen to us.  Conservatives told you he wasn’t ready. He has never RUN anything besides a campaign until he was elected POTUS.  And now, he’s surprised at “at the sheer volume of business that crosses his desk.”  This article, coming of course from real journalists over in England, details the reasons why Obama snubbed PM Brown — he was just too overwhelmed with domestic policy to care about foreign policy protocol. And if you think I called them “real journalists” just because of this story, I would point out that they were the ones who also found Auntie Zeituni before election day.

If you click through to the actual Telegraph article, you’ll see that it’s not just Obama who doesn’t care — it’s his whole administration.  Some peon at State told the Telegraph that PM Brown was no more important than the head of any other of 190 countries.  I would say unbelievable, but it’s not.

I linked to the Hot Air article mainly for the comments.  There are some very interesting ones if you have time to scroll through.  Someone lists the people in line for the presidency, and it’s scary.  Others also suggest that the “prominent African American [backer], whose endorsement he spent two years cultivating” quoted in the article is none other than Gen. Colin Powell.

Update: Heh, Mark Steyn writes a funny article that begins with the DVD gaffe.  He points out that the UK has a different movie format than America, wondering if Obama took that into consideration.  He ends the article with this line:

The prime minister flew 8,000 miles for dinner and a movie. But the president says he’ll call. Next week. Next month. Whatever.

Update II: On his FNC program today, Glenn Beck gave out the address to the British Embassy so we could apologize for Obama’s snub of PM Brown.

British Embassy
3100 Massachusetts Ave, NW
Washington, DC 20008

A couple of days ago, I wrote an article about the smooth stylings that distract from the real agenda of Obama and his Omies.  Today, both Karl Rove and Charles Krauthammer have penned articles on the same subject. 

In his article, Mr. Rove reaches the same conclusions I did but uses better examples, and he’s a much better writer.  Mr. Krauthammer’s article focuses more on Obama’s rhetoric regarding the budget and economic issues.  Both are great reads.

Whatever you want to call this game — bait and switch, play action fake, sleight of hand — Obama has the rules down pat.  He and his Omies (his staff, other Dems, and the media) play it very well.  And the only thing not in his control is something he can still count on — his loyal voters don’t pay attention.

Right now, the media seem consumed with the Limbaugh / Steele confrontation, which came out of the “Limbaugh is your leader” Democratic talking point.  Even Hot Air has managed to pen 17 articles since Limbaugh’s “first national address” at CPAC.  Many of them are merely feeding the Dems’ goal – is Steele ready?  I think that’s the real point of the whole distraction. 

Don’t get me wrong — we need to question Steele’s abilities in his new role, and we need to point out his shortcomings, even if just to let HIM know that we are watching.  But, the attacks on Steele have been non stop since this flareup, and it’s doing just what Operation Rushbo wanted — putting Limbaugh, a man loved by many and hated by just as many, as the new face of the Republican party (since W. isn’t there to kick around anymore) instead of Steele, a guy who has the potential to connect to many Obama independents and really sell the GOP as the “big tent” party we are.  Putting Steele in the position of either agreeing with Rush’s “inflammatory” remarks or denouncing him was job the media tacitly, and eagerly, agreed to do. 

No question, Obama is taking advantage of his current popularity  — he’s ramming through all of these new programs before his faithful begin to question his motives (although one of his most ardent supporters might be getting tired of shilling for him).  But he is also relying on their inattention.  At his address to the joint session of Congress, Obama railed against earmarks while he pointed out the lack of them in Porkulus and his upcoming budget.  However, there was nary a mention of the 9,000 earmarks in the omnibus spending bill hanging out there.  And the only thing discussed by the MSM after the speech was how eloquent and uplifting he was. 

His ardent faithful only listen to him — they hear him: attack earmarks while he silently condones them; scold CEOs for junkets on the taxpayer dime while he heads to a spa in Virginia courtesy of us; promise the mortgage bailout plan will only help those in need while his party members admit that people who were irresponsible will benefit; and the day after the Senate passed his no-bid-contract-earmark-laden omnibus spending bill, pledges to end “wasteful spending” and open up the contract process.  And his faithful still don’t want to question him!!!  It drives me insane every time I hear one of these new Hopenchange promises.  I’m trying to give up cursing for lent, and it isn’t working.

But what do we do about it?  No matter how many times his hypocrisy is pointed out and no matter how far the Dow falls, his poll numbers remain in the 60s.  They’ve got conservatives arguing amongst themselves, and they’ve all but discredited our promising RNC leader (well, he did help that along quite a bit).  We protest, we plan more protests, but the GOP is still seen as just the party of NO.  WHAT THE HELL ARE WE GOING TO DO?!?!

I’m just hoping for change — and soon.  Meanwhile, I might just need to slap my troubles away to put me in a better mood.

Unbelievable.  So much for not wanting to live in the past.  The Obama administration released years of Bush administration documents regarding the war on terror. 

Attorney General Holder was quoted as saying, “Too often over the past decade, the fight against terrorism has been viewed as a zero-sum battle with our civil liberties.”  While this might be true, and some of the things revealed are scary, this premature release does nothing but fuel the anti-Bush fire only weeks after he left office.

This doesn’t even begin to scratch the surface of my ire toward this action.  How dare the administration claim Bush’s fight against people willing to do anything to kill us as a “zero-sum battle with our civil liberties” on one hand then turn right around and back legislation such as card check, the fairness doctrine, increased rendition, and enslavement of the upper-middle and upper classes to confiscate wealth to fund their populist agenda. 

At least if Bush did violate civil liberties, he did it to protect Americans from being killed by fanatics; Obama’s administration is only trying to do it to crush dissent and retain power.

Update: Ace agrees, at least with my first rant.   Redstate also has links to the documents released.

Update II: Ed over at Hot Air gives his take on at least one of the scary possibilities the lawyers thought up to get around the Fourth Amendment.  He also points out, something many are NOT reporting, that these “loopholes” the lawyers thought up were never implemented by Bush.

I want to link to Michelle Malkin’s coverage of the Kentucky ice storms that initially left close to three quarters of a million people without power.  There are still many without power.  FEMA took FIVE days to get there.  The Democratic governor of the state didn’t call out the National Guard until FIVE days later.  People were forced into shelters because authorities didn’t have the resources to get them warmth and food on an ongoing basis.  Fourty-two deaths have been attributed to the storms. There’s no Shep Smith, no Anderson Cooper.  I see hardly any more than passing mention of this disaster on the news.  And no one is calling Obama a racistsbecause the people in trouble here are Caucasian.

I guess the difference is that these hearty residents aren’t crying out for the government to come save them.  They’ve managed to slog through it themselves.

Update: More from Kentucky via Michelle.

John Stossel has an interesting piece over at ABC (H/T: Hot Air) railing Obama over his arrogant belief he alone (acting as The Government) can fix our economy.  Obama wanted to be the next Lincoln; now he wants to be the next FDR.  Unfortunately, FDR is put on a pedestal, but as economists remind us (via Michelle), he probably doubled the amount of time we suffered through the Great Depression.  I sure hope that 80 years from now we aren’t looking back at this time “fondly” remembering BHO and the Greater Depression that was actually twice as long as it might have been if he didn’t have the attitude that “only government” can get us out of this.

Despite reporting during the Clinton years of the potential Freddie / Fannie bust, the New York Times spent 5000 words blaming the economic collapse ENTIRELY on the Bush administration.  The White House, understandably, was not too thrilled.

While Bush should have pressed harder for reform (he mentioned it yearly in the budget but didn’t really do anything about it), he is by no means the catalyst that deflated this economy.  Here’s the report from one of Brit Hume’s last “Special Report” broadcasts on FNC.

Later in the broadcast, Nina Easton from Fortune Magazine said, quite aptly, “You cannot write a story about affordable housing policies and blame it on George Bush instead of the Democrats!  I mean, it’s just, it’s outrageous!”

More from Michelle Malkin.

Bush has been keeping a secret.  No, he isn’t tapping our phones without warrants again.

He’s been secretly visiting families of soldiers who were killed in the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan by going off the grid and making appointments with families off his official record.  V.P. Cheney has been, too.  Bush has also made more trips to visit the wounded than had been thought.  He wanted these moments to be private and not have the press asking lots of questions of those he visited.  It’s reported he visited more than 500 families behind the scenes.  He told a journalist that he’s not just Commander in Chief but Comforter in Chief.  Laura says these visits took an emotional toll on the President.

I hope Obama continues the tradition; however, I’m afraid he won’t if he can’t have the press by his side.