Twitter Catches Another Politician Showing His True Colors (Pun Intended)

What a circus American politics has become. Barnum and Bailey can’t top what goes on under the Capitol rotunda on almost a daily basis.

Another zany Liberal has shown that he has just as much integrity in dealing with women as he does with the poor, beleaguered taxpayer. Use them for what ever selfish and corrupt end result you have in mind and then lecture them on what you believe THEIR character faults are.

What a hypocrite! Weiner was arrogant and condescending in every interview I ever saw him doing and all the while this horn dog was out there marketing himself as being available for something other than representing the people of his district.

These folks have got some world class chutzpah when they go “tsk, tsk” if a Republican goes south but expect the country to be “understanding and forgiving” when one of their big spenders gets caught in his jockey shorts.

Well, as I sometimes end my phone calls with Solid Principles Co-Founder, Craig Edwards, we’ll just have to wait and see what new outrage tomorrow will bring!

~~John Cronin~~

By: Josh Gerstein
POLITICO

Fox News has filed an unusual lawsuit against the Democratic nominee for Senate in Missouri, Robin Carnahan, over a campaign ad that uses video from “Fox News Sunday” to take a shot at her Republican opponent, Rep. Roy Blunt.

In the suit filed Wednesday in U.S. District Court in Kansas City, Mo., Fox contends that the 30-second TV spot violates copyright law. Fox host Chris Wallace, who is named as a plaintiff in the case, is also claiming that the Carnahan camp misappropriated his likeness and invaded his privacy by suggesting that he favors Carnahan in the Senate race.

“In a smear ad against political rival Roy Blunt, Defendant Robin Carnahan for Senate, Inc. usurped proprietary footage from the Fox News Network to made it appear – falsely – that FNC and Christopher Wallace, one of the nation’s most respected political journalists, are endorsing Robin Carnahan’s campaign for United States Senate,” the suit says.

Carnahan’s campaign is striking a defiant stance in response to the suit—insisting that the ad is legal and vowing to keep it on the air.

“We stand behind our ad,” said Carnahan campaign press secretary Linden Zakula. “It’s unclear why Fox News refuses to stand by its own content that simply asked questions about Congressman Blunt’s Washington record and ties to convicted felon lobbyist Jack Abramoff.”

Carnahan, currently Missouri Secretary of State, is also trying to raise money off the move by Fox. “Late last night, Fox News filed a lawsuit against our campaign. We’re fighting back. We’re not backing down,” her website says. “Donate.”

Read more at politico.com/blogs……

[Editor's Commentary:  Anyone who has read this blog for any length of time can probably guess exactly what I am about to write, so let’s all say it together:  one, two, three aaannnddd….Can you imagine the outcry if this had been a Republican who said this??  OMG!  24/7 cable coverage on these crazy, religious, right-wing nuts and their fundamentalist beliefs.  How backward, how Luddite, how caveman can these people be!!

But…..a Republican didn’t say this.  A Hollywood star said this.  Therefore we will be respectful and ponder this man’s insight and wisdom in political affairs.  Or maybe the author of this post will insert a hookey image of a horned devil to try to display his complete contempt for the lunacy that is inherent in much of Tinsle Town.

~~John Cronin~~

Actor John Cusack went on a caustic Twitter rampage Sunday evening, attacking former House Majority Leader Dick Armey, former House Speaker Newt Gingrich and Fox News.

“I AM FOR A SATANIC DEATH CULT CENTER AT FOX NEWS HQ AND OUTSIDE THE OFFICES OR DICK ARMEYAND NEWT GINGRICH-and all the GOP WELFARE FREAKS,” Cusack tweeted.

Cusack has long been outspoken about politics. He supported Barack Obama in the 2008 presidential election and has contributed to The Huffington Post, but this is the first known time he has stooped to the level of making threats.

And while the U.S. Constitution protects Cusack’s right to speak his mind, some critics say he should be more careful about what he says, since he has more than 200,000 Twitter followers.

“His provocative tweets could easily incite a rabid fan to commit violent acts against Fox News Headquarters and others he names,” said Dr. Carole Lieberman, a Beverly Hills-based psychiatrist and author of “Coping With Terrorism: Dreams Interrupted.”

“Fans could not only be influenced because of their devotion to Cusack, the man, but also because of their love for one of the characters he plays,” she told Fox411.

Cooper Lawrence, the author of “Cult of Celebrity” told Fox 411: “The fear isn’t that a celebrity will influence someone to do something violent or out of character due to the sheer devotion to the celebrity, the fear is that someone who is already vulnerable, mentally disturbed, already considering something dangerous, may be encouraged to do so if it is advocated by their favorite star,”

Lawrence explained that while celebrities don’t make healthy people do things they wouldn’t normally do, they could impact someone who is on the fence or mentally unstable.

“John Cusack has to know that his words carry weight because he is an actor beloved by many generations of folks who may not get his humor and might think he is calling for something more sinister. The responsibility is on him to not abuse his fame to influence something negative on the off chance that even one person takes his words to heart,” Lawrence said.

Cusack could also be doing his career some damage. Image consultant Michael Sands says that Cusack should be worried that his vituperative words could turn off some of his fans.

“I think his fans will not appreciate his tone. They will be turned off to his rhetoric,” Sands told Fox411. “John Cusack is taking his fame too seriously. He is having delusions and his anger towards Fox News may get him arrested!”

Ironically, Cusack has just been signed to play Edgar Allen Poe in “The Raven”, a movie about a serial killer who uses Poe’s stories as inspiration for his killing spree.

Read More at Fox News

CUERNAVACA, Mexico (AP) — The decapitated bodies of four men were hung from a bridge Sunday in this central Mexican city besieged by fighting between two drug lords.

A gang led by kingpin Hector Beltran Leyva took responsibility for the killings in a message left with the bodies, the attorney general’s office of Morelos state said in a statement.

The beheaded and mutilated bodies were hung by their feet early Sunday from the bridge in Cuernavaca, a popular weekend getaway for Mexico City residents.

Cuernavaca has become a battleground for control of the Beltran Leyva cartel since its leader, Arturo Beltran Leyva, was killed there in a December shootout with marines.

Mexican authorities say the cartel split between a faction led by Hector Beltran Leyva, brother of Arturo, and another led by Edgar Valdez Villarreal, a U.S.-born kingpin known as “the Barbie.”

The message left with the bodies threatened: “This is what will happen to all those who support the traitor Edgar Valdez Villarreal.”

Authorities said the four men had been kidnapped days earlier. The family of one of the men reported the abduction to police.

In western Mexico, police found the body of a U.S. citizen inside a car along the highway between the Pacific resorts of Acapulco and Zihuatanejo.

A report from Guerrero state police said the man was shot to death and had identification indicating he was from Georgia.

The U.S. Embassy could not be reached to confirm the man’s identity.

Police said they had no suspects and had not determined a motive.

Guerrero state has been wracked by drug-gang violence, including the strife within the Beltran Leyva cartel. There have also been a series of deadly carjackings this year along highways in the state.

Mexico has seen unprecedented gang violence since President Felipe Calderon stepped up the fight against drug trafficking when he took office in December 2006, deploying thousands of troops and federal police to cartel strongholds.

Since then, more than 28,000 people have been killed in violence tied to Mexico’s drug war.

The most destructive gap for President Obama is not the Republican lead on the generic congressional ballot or even a job disapproval that has surpassed approval — it is the gap between aspiration and reality.

The Manhattan mosque controversy showed the problem in compressed form. First came the Obama of high-toned principle (largely the right principle, in my view). Then a politically motivated recalibration. Then a scrambling staff explanation. Then an embarrassed silence, since it is difficult to clarify the clarification of a clarification. Then the president’s regretful assertion of “no regrets.”

It was more than a lapse. From the firing of Shirley Sherrod to the obsession with Fox News to lashing the “professional left,” the Obama administration engages in a daily hypocrisy. It attacks the sound and fury of the cable news cycle while being entirely captive to its rhythms. In the process, it often appears reactive, windblown and unprincipled.

This gap between ideals and practice is becoming a defining narrative of the administration. Obama once promised, for example, to end the “divisive food fight in Washington.” Apparently there is an exception for sugary, frozen beverages. In his new stump speech, he says: “We’re slipping and sliding and sweating, and the other side, the Republicans, they’re standing there with their Slurpees watching us.” In Seattle, the president of the United States pantomimed drinking a Slurpee to mock his opponents. A campaigner such as Ronald Reagan could draw political blood with a wink and a smile. Obama’s partisan rhetoric manages to be prickly, mean-spirited and unfunny. On the campaign trail, he taunts and whines. He does not charm.

But this much can be said: The rhetoric fits the message. Having spent beyond the dreams of Franklin Roosevelt to produce 9.5 percent unemployment, Obama has reached an ideological dead end. His natural policy inclination would be even more stimulus spending, now a political impossibility. So he is left with attacking Republicans. This is a natural political instinct. But it leaves Obama looking like any other beleaguered, partisan politician.

The tensions accumulate. The candidate who pledged to reach across party lines passed his agenda in a steady march of party-line votes and strong-arm legislative maneuvers. The candidate who sought to transcend partisan divisions is viewed in a recent Democracy Corps poll as “too liberal” by 56 percent of likely voters. The candidate who said he would “fundamentally change the way Washington works” has seen public distrust of government grow to pre-French Revolutionary levels.

The failure to change, or even to challenge, the culture of Washington rankles on right and left. Here is Lawrence Lessig writing in the Nation: “Obama will leave the presidency, whether in 2013 or 2017, with Washington essentially intact and the movement he inspired betrayed.”

The height of Obama’s political fall is measured by how awkward the echoes of his past rhetoric now seem. When he said recently, “Let’s reach for hope,” it was indeed a stretch. It sounded like an aging pop singer, grown paunchy and out of tune, stumbling through an old favorite. Obama is pursued by the memories of his own promise.

Politicians have been known to say one thing and do another. And high ideals and high rhetoric always create the potential for hypocrisy. But the disappointment with Obama is especially acute. He won office by providing new voters with intoxicating hopes. America was tipsy with idealism — resulting in a particularly difficult hangover.

Few presidencies have been built so consciously or completely on an idealistic brand, with its own distinctive language and icons. But this “new kind of politics” has proved conventional in its conduct, predictable in its content and exceptional only for the depth of division it has inspired. The Obama administration is presented not just with the prospect of electoral repudiation but also with a question: How will it adjust to the death of the belief that gave it birth?

For some, this is merely a confirmation of their preexisting view of politics — that idealism is a fraud, that rhetorical inspiration is a con. It is true that many politicians do not improve upon closer acquaintance — that no man is a hero to his valet. But a nation of valets would lose its capacity for great purposes. So it should be a source of sadness that Obama, for many, has become a source of cynicism.

All politicians fall — but not from such a height.

[Editor's Commentary:  I think this piece is very significant, not only for the conclusions the author comes to, but from the source of the article, one of the Liberal Establishment's flagship papers, the Washington Post.

This is an article, with some exceptions, that could have been written by a staffer from the National Review.  This bodes ill for Obama's and the Democrat Party's re-election prospects, indeed.  I heard Karl Rove say on Hannity's radio show last night that it is possible that even considering the Democrat's current campaign money advantage, the Pubbies could pick up 70 seats in the House!  Just several months ago that figure was 35.

Mr. Rove also said that he believes this election could surpass 1994 in it's depth and breath.  I believe we are witnessing what could become one of the most sweeping electoral defeats in American history.

Hope, change?  Let's try competence, experience.]

~~John Cronin~~