Left wing rhetoric (wishful thinking)

Some of the left wing persuasion just cannot admit and see the facts on the Arizona shootings.  In their minds full of wishful thinking there absolutely must be a reason they can blame conservatives and their "hateful, murderous rhetoric for this tragic happening.  No other reasons need apply. Bookworm Room has a good article on this.

Progressives live in the past when it comes to shaping the message *UPDATED*
by Bookworm

Some Democrats, either more honest or loose-lipped than others, have explicitly stated that, in making anti-Tea Party and anti-Palin statements about the Tucson shooting, they are attempting to replicate the stunning success they had with shaping the spin following the Oklahoma City bombing, back in 1995:

One veteran Democratic operative, who blames overheated rhetoric for the shooting, said President Barack Obama should carefully but forcefully do what his predecessor did. “They need to deftly pin this on the tea partiers,” said the Democrat. “Just like the Clinton White House deftly pinned the Oklahoma City bombing on the militia and anti-government people.”

Indeed, whole articles are now being written about Obama looking to the Oklahoma City bombing as an inspiration to reshape his ability to control the political agenda in this nation. It is Obama’s 9/11 (and the Dems don’t mean that in a tragic way, they mean that in a politically opportunistic way).

I have mentioned before, haven’t I, that a defining characteristics of Progressives is that they live in the past?

UPDATE (3:10 p.m. PST): Speaking of finding history on the internet, here’s a great screen shot from today’s Big Hollywood:

Look what you get if you search for an Eric Holder/ Al Jazeera story in the Washington Post

Site Search


No Results Found


Please Try Another Search

We guess they really don't want you to know about it.  I didn't try any other MSM sites, maybe they have finally put it up. In case you missed it, here's the video.



Jonah Goldberg has this to say about it in his newsletter:

 Dear Reader (and members of the radical faction of Up with People that dances out this "news"letter with life-affirming, family-friendly performances that make all decent people want to blow their brains out),
By now everyone knows about the NASA cheif propeller-head who never seemed to think twice (until this week, at least) about the fact that he was hired to be the Stuart Smalley of remedial-math-and-science students in Sudan. "Listen up, little Muhammeds, as the head of NASA, let me tell you: You're good enough, you're smart enough, and doggone it, we rocket scientists like you."
What I'm hoping is that Charles Bolden, a decorated Marine, just sucks at diplomacy and was basically making it up, because it's actually a little scary to imagine that the president of the United States actually told the chief administrator of NASA any such thing. Did he tell the head of the Social Security Administration to remind gays of their rich history of interior design and keen fashion sense? Has the poobah of OSHA been informed that his foremost priority is to buck up Chinese living abroad about their entrepreneurial achievements?

If you don't get his newsletter, you should try it. Join the Goldberg File mailing list. Click here.
Also go read what Paul at Power Line blog has to say about it., He is a much better writer than I am.

VDH recognizes a ministry from Harry Potter

In his Works and Days column for Pajamas Media.

The Ministries of Truth Weigh In
The Hope and Change Edicts
What are we to make of our current NASA chief, the distinguished retired Marine Corps major general and astronaut, Charles Bolden, who, in an interview with al Jazeera, listed a “foremost” NASA objective as finding “a way to reach out to the Muslim world and engage much more with dominantly Muslim nations to help them feel good about their historic contribution to science, math, and engineering.”?
All of this, Bolden adds, expands the Obama “Cairo initiative,” those lofty revisionisms that the president offered to the Muslim world last summer in Cairo.
Surely, there is some mistake? Did a right-wing satirist hijack the transcript and insert “to help them feel good”?
[.......]
Groupspeak
We could do this all day — Van Jones and his various lunacies, Anita Dunn and her Mao worship. The real point is, however, that Obama has set a revolutionary tone, and everyone beneath him is falling all over themselves to trump it — and thereby gain traction and approval from their leader.
“We are the moment we’ve been waiting for” means that federal officials no longer worry about their tasks within their job description, but, in varying degrees and according to their station, must chant along in a holistic revolutionary process, one that sees traditional American strength as weakness, and sympathizes with those abroad who feel wronged by America. At home, the government is now on occasion one with those who break federal law for revolutionary purposes, against those who have capital and have found success. The law becomes malleable while the rhetoric reflects the higher calling of social justice.
Notice to truth ministries: on race, we got the message from “stupidly,” “typical white person,” “clingers,” “cowards,” and “wise Latina.” From now on it’s all redundant.
On capitalism and free enterprise, we got the message from the Chrysler broken contracts; the slurring of surgeons, Las Vegas, and insurance companies; “kick ass” and “boot on the neck”; “redistributive change”; “spread the wealth”; “them”; and “they,” etc. No need for any more.
Overseas, on day one it was the al Arabiya interview. After that, the Cairo speech and the NASA al Jazeera interview were just relish.

Go here to read it all, he makes the facts stand out. It is a fairly long post and all very relevant.

NASA is reaching out to the Muslim World

According to this article in the Washinton Examiner

Charles Bolden says President Obama has ordered him to pursue three new objectives: to “re-inspire children” to study science and math, to “expand our international relationships,” and to “reach out to the Muslim world.” Of those three goals, Bolden said in a recent interview with al-Jazeera, the mission to reach out to Muslims is “perhaps foremost,” because it will help Islamic nations “feel good” about their scientific accomplishments.

Read more at the Washington Examiner

Revenge? Reform? Both?

This is the gist of Robert Samuelson's op-ed in the Washington Post. the last paragraph says it all:

What's called "financial reform" has twin motivations: to stabilize financial markets and to punish "Wall Street" for the crisis. So much in the legislation (a consumer protection agency, restrictions on "proprietary" trading by banks) is left to regulators that no one can now know the full outcome. It could be greater stability, overregulation or a scattering of risky activities into lightly regulated institutions. History will judge whether this qualifies as genuine "reform" -- or just revenge.

Obama shows every symptom of being anti-business, so why would anyone ask why CEO's are frightened

From the Washington Post Opinion section.

Obama's CEO problem -- and ours

By Fareed Zakaria

The American economy is sputtering and we are running out of options. Interest rates can't go any lower. Another burst of government spending -- whether a good or bad idea -- looks politically impossible. Can anything protect us from the dangers of stagnation or a double dip? Actually, there is a second stimulus that could have a dramatic effect on the economy -- even more so than government spending. And it won't add to the deficit.

..........

But government spending can only be a bridge to private-sector investment. The key to a sustainable recovery and robust economic growth is to get companies investing in America. So why are they reluctant, despite having mounds of cash? I put this question to a series of business leaders, all of whom were expansive on the topic yet did not want to be quoted by name, for fear of offending people in Washington.

Economic uncertainty was the primary cause of their caution. "We've just been through a tsunami and that produces caution," one told me. But in addition to economics, they kept talking about politics, about the uncertainty surrounding regulations and taxes. Some have even begun to speak out publicly. Jeffrey Immelt, chief executive of General Electric, complained Friday that government was not in sync with entrepreneurs. The Business Roundtable, which had supported the Obama administration, has begun to complain about the myriad laws and regulations being cooked up in Washington.
........

Most of the business leaders I spoke to had voted for Barack Obama. They still admire him. Those who had met him thought he was unusually smart. But all think he is, at his core, anti-business. When I asked for specifics, they pointed to the fact that Obama has no business executives in his Cabinet, that he rarely consults with CEOs (except for photo ops), that he has almost no private-sector experience, that he's made clear he thinks government and nonprofit work are superior to the private sector. It all added up to a profound sense of distrust.

Read it all here. And again I ask, why would anyone bother to ask the question, the answer speaks for itself.

He Really is trying to kill the oil industry, and a by product is our economy

Yahoo news has this AP headline

Volunteers ready but left out of spill cleanup
By Tom Breen
NEW ORLEANS – BP and the Obama administration face mounting complaints that they are ignoring foreign offers of equipment and making little use of the fishing boats and volunteers available to help clean up what may now be the biggest spill ever in the Gulf of Mexico.
The Coast Guard said there have been 107 offers of help from 44 nations, ranging from technical advice to skimmer boats and booms. But many of those offers are weeks old, and only a small number have been accepted, with the vast majority still under review, according to a list kept by the State Department.
And in recent days and weeks, for reasons BP has never explained, many fishing boats hired for the cleanup have done a lot of waiting around.

There is more on volunteers here.

But that's not the only reason for my headline.  There is also this showing they have gone to war against Texas. Again it is from Yahoo news, AP.

 EPA overturns 16-year-old Texas permit program
By RAMIT PLUSHNICK-MASTI,
HOUSTON – The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency on Wednesday officially overturned a 16-year-old Texas air permitting program it says violates the Clean Air Act, leaving some of the country's largest refineries in a state of limbo.
The move comes after years of backdoor bickering, negotiations and public arguments between the EPA and Texas. The argument recently escalated from a battle over environmental issues into a heated political dispute over states' rights.
Gov. Rick Perry has been using it to drive home his contention that President Barack Obama's administration is overreaching, saying in a statement Wednesday that "Texas will continue to fight this federal takeover of a successful state program."
The EPA's decision, announced in a statement, will force some 125 refineries and petrochemical plants to invest millions of dollars to get new permits. Many of the plants may also have to invest in updates to comply with federal regulations.
The decision did not come as a surprise to Texas or the industries. EPA regional director Al Armendariz has said for months he would disapprove the permits if Texas did not comply with the Clean Air Act.
The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality's chairman Bryan Shaw insisted Wednesday the state's permitting program complies with the Clean Air Act and has improved air quality in Texas. However, in an effort to satisfy the EPA's concerns, Shaw said the commission recently changed the rules but apparently the EPA "did not take them into consideration."
Texas can challenge the ruling in court, but a commission spokesman said it hasn't decided whether to go that route.

It doesn't matter what laws we change it is hard to fight a takeover of our way of life.

Radical Islam by other names - self described

Charles Krauthammer writes about this in the Washington Post:

Terror -- and candor in describing the Islamist ideology behind it

The Fort Hood shooter, the Christmas Day bomber, the Times Square attacker. On May 13, the following exchange occurred at a hearing of the House Judiciary Committee:

Rep. Lamar Smith (R-Tex.): Do you feel that these individuals might have been incited to take the actions that they did because of radical Islam?

Attorney General Eric Holder: There are a variety of reasons why I think people have taken these actions. . . .

Smith: Okay, but radical Islam could have been one of the reasons?

Holder: There are a variety of reasons why people --

Smith: But was radical Islam one of them?

Holder: There are a variety of reasons why people do these things. Some of them are potentially religious-based.

Potentially, mind you. This went on until the questioner gave up in exasperation.

A similar question arose last week in U.S. District Court when Faisal Shahzad, the Times Square attacker, pleaded guilty. Explained Shahzad:


"One has to understand where I'm coming from . . . I consider myself a mujahid, a Muslim soldier."


Well, that is clarifying. As was the self-printed business card of Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan, the Fort Hood shooter, identifying himself as SoA: Soldier of Allah.


Holder's avoidance of the obvious continues the absurd and embarrassing refusal of the Obama administration to acknowledge who out there is trying to kill Americans and why. In fact, it has banned from its official vocabulary the terms jihadist, Islamist and Islamic terrorism.

This head in the sand tactic does nothing to help make us more secure. It does make us less secure and an angry populace to boot.  Eric Holder knows the truth, he also knows he doesn't dare say it.
There is more, read it here.

Let's meet at the coffee house across the street and see who shows up

Michelle Malkin in NRO writes about the way the lobbyists manage to meet the Obama people to circumvent having meetings in the White House.

Obama’s Coffee-House Loophole for Lobbyists
K Street influence peddlers routinely meet with Team Obama — outside the White House, in an effort to circumvent the public’s right to know.

President Obama is finally uniting the Left and the Right — in joint opposition to his administration’s chronic sabotage of transparency and public-disclosure rules. It won’t be long before liberals disillusioned by Dear Leader’s reveal-as-we-say-not-as-we-conceal policies link arms with me and join in on my two-year-old chant: Obama lied, transparency died.

Watchdog groups and Republicans on Capitol Hill want an investigation into hundreds of White House meetings with corporate lobbyists at D.C. coffee houses. K Street influence peddlers told the New York Times last week that they’ve met routinely with Team Obama officials over the past 18 months to discuss policy matters — at Starbucks, Caribou Coffee, even on a side lawn — with the express purpose of circumventing the public’s right to know.

Much more here. Transparency, does it mean anything?

Yucca Mountain is back? Maybe for a while..

From Just One Minute:

More Change I Hope They Didn't Believe In
Despite Obama's campaign promises the Yucca mountain nuclear waste repository lives!
WASHINGTON -- The Yucca Mountain nuclear waste plan was kept alive Tuesday when a panel of judges ruled the Obama administration does not have the authority to withdraw the project without permission from Congress.
Federal law requires the Department of Energy to apply for a waste repository license and for the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to evaluate the application and rule on its merits unless lawmakers decide otherwise, according to a three-judge board that hears commission licensing matters.

Of course he does have a friendly congress, but it will be interesting to see how this plays out.  Read the rest of this to see how Sen. Reid's opponent, Sharron Angle, thinks it could be used.

The Internet Kill Switch

I've recieved a lot of emails concerning this possiblity.  This article is from Tech World.

Obama 'Internet kill switch' plan approved by US Senate panel
President could get power to turn off Internet

by Grant Gross

A US Senate committee has approved a wide-ranging cybersecurity bill that some critics have suggested would give the US president the authority to shut down parts of the Internet during a cyberattack.

Senator Joe Lieberman and other bill sponsors have refuted the charges that the Protecting Cyberspace as a National Asset Act gives the president an Internet "kill switch." Instead, the bill puts limits on the powers the president already has to cause "the closing of any facility or stations for wire communication" in a time of war, as described in the Communications Act of 1934, they said in a breakdown of the bill published on the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee website.

The committee unanimously approved an amended version of the legislation by voice vote Thursday, a committee spokeswoman said. The bill next moves to the Senate floor for a vote, which has not yet been scheduled.

Be sure to read the link to the breakdown of the bill  then read the rest of the article here. 

The G20 Summit

This Financial Times article and cartoon says it all.
Fiscal disarray is the least of the G20’s sins
By Clive Crook


The first Group of 20 summit in November 2008 proclaimed a new era of “global solutions to global problems”. Less than two years later, with the economic crisis barely contained, the partners are at odds. Reaching agreement was not the main challenge in Toronto this weekend. They knew that was not going to happen. Mainly, they hoped to put the best face they could on disunity.

How much do these divisions matter? The main bone of contention in Toronto was fiscal policy. Here, I would argue, simple ineptitude seems to be a bigger problem than disinclination to co-operate.

Read more here.

Wizbang's Jay Tea has a little list

You would probably like to read it.

I've Got A Little List...
Wow.
It seems everyone's reading "Avertible Catastrophe," the Financial Post's amazingly analysis of the BP oil spill in the Gulf Of Mexico. As I read it, I started putting together a list of the identifiable errors and mistakes the Obama administration made. And as I made that list, I noticed that they had hit so many of the classic categories of blunders that it could almost serve as a textbook example of how NOT to do things.
1) The Perfect Is The Enemy Of The Good.
The Dutch government owns quite a few oil-skimming vessels that have tremendous capacity. They can suck up huge amounts of oil-laden water and remove most of the oil.
But the EPA won't let them work on this disaster. The Dutch ships don't meet US standards. According to those rules, water returned to the sea must be 99.9985% clean. The Dutch ships fall short of that metric, and don't have the capability to store and carry that water ashore for more thorough cleaning.
Let's say that the Dutch ships remove only 95% of the oil in the water. Isn't that still a hell of a lot better than nothing?
2) We Are The Smartest In The World.
Also known as the "NIH" syndrome -- "Not Invented Here." To acknowledge that others might have good ideas -- even, possibly, better ideas -- would be to acknowledge that the Obama administration does not have all the answers, and that others might have a good idea or two. And if those outsiders are part of the oil industry, that's even worse.
4) Never Let A Crisis Go To Waste.
There's a school of thought that every crisis is also an opportunity. Indeed, there's an old urban legend that the Chinese word for "crisis" is formed by combining the characters for "danger" and "opportunity."
The Obama administration has indeed seized on this crisis as an opportunity to push its own agenda. It's trying like hell to impose a ban on all offshore drilling in the Gulf, which will throw thousands and thousands out of work and seriously bone the US economy.

There's more. Go read it here.

UPDATE: So just after posting this, I ran into this from AJ Strata in Stratsphere:
Incompetence Writ Large: Obama Puts Top Donor In Charge
Go read it, too.  Be sure to follow the links.

Oil Spill Politics Part 2

They are fed up with the feds in Louisiana.  Bureacracy has run amok. This Bayou Buzz blog tells some of it.  Notice how they feel about the bureaucrat who doesn't know how things work, um.... that would be all of them.

BP Oil Spill: Louisiana’s Nungesser Blasts Interior Officer Over Dredge Email

As the BP oil hits more of the Louisiana shore, state officials are becoming more frustrated by the day with the federal response. On Wednesday, Louisiana Plaquemines Parish President, Billy Nungesser, blasted the feds and a top Interior Department official in reaction to an email a top Interior official sent to Nungesser, state and other federal offficials. Louisiana has been in a dispute with the Obama administration and the federal government over the response to the BP oil spill. This week, Governor Bobby Jindal blasted the federal government for their stopping dredging that the state was doing to build barrier islands.
Below is a correspondence from Jane Lyder (Deputy Assistant Secretary For Fish and Wildlife and Parks, Department of the Interior) to various Louisiana and federal government officials.
After that email from Lyder, Nungesser issued the “Nungesser Dredge statement”, followed by even another statement below:
From: Lyder, Jane

Sent: Wednesday, June 23, 2010 4:41 PM

To: Lee, Alvin B COL MVN; Garret Graves; Kyle Graham; charlie hess; Serio, Pete J MVN; Accardo, Christopher J MVN; Colletti, Jerry A MVN; Ulm, Michelle S MVN; Mayer, Martin S MVN

Cc: Robert Routon; steve mathies; Jeff Jenkins; George bevan; Mark Zimmerman; ancil taylor; Mike Flores; Harris, James

Subject: Question about manpower

I’ve been asked if we could get more people out there to help lay the pipe would it go faster. It was suggested that we should help the State find volunteers to make a 5-7 or 9-10 day job a much shorter job. Is that feasible at all? We would be willing to contact folks in Houma & round up volunteers if it would help at all. note from Rockport Conservative, are you kidding?

Jane
Nungesser Dredge Statement

Wednesday, June 23, 2010
“Every minute we waste makes us more and more vulnerable to the oil attacking the marsh and the breeding grounds for the pelicans. It’s a shame that the bureaucrats once again fight us instead of helping us in this war against the oil,” said Plaquemines Parish President Billy Nungesser.
Below is an email from Jane Lyder of the Department of the Interior. She’s the one holding up the dredging. This is one piece of correspondence in a chain with the State of Louisiana, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, DOI, and others.
(2nd Nungesser statement from June 23)

“You don’t move sediment pumping pipe with volunteers. This is the lady that Thad Allen and President Obama are allowing hold up dredging to save our wetlands—God help us. What planet is this lady from? In the conference today Lyder was worried about the pelican nesting grounds. Obviously, she hasn’t been out there to see the birds dying, covered in oil, just like the other people who make ridiculous comments. Maybe she should go sailing on a yacht in England with Tony Hayward, it would be a great place to send her on vacation. I’ll pay her way,” said President Nungesser.

Bayoubuzz Note: The above email and nungesser statements were sent to Bayoubuzz (and others) by Nungesser's press office
by Stephen Sabludowsky

Unintended consequences re McChrystal? Or intended?

I vote for the unintended but desired, by the war hating magazine that had the story.  I have not read the story but I do not remember them ever writing a story showing any military  in a good light. (actually, if they did I would not have seen it as I never read it.)  The author says he didn't intend, nor did he expect anyone would be fired.  If that was the case what DID he intend with his story.  I'm sure he personally did not expect the repercussions to go quite this far.
This was written for Pajamas Media by Soerem Kern who is Senior Analyst for Transatlantic Relations at the Madrid-based Grupo de Estudios Estratégicos / Strategic Studies Group.

Europeans React Skeptically to McChrystal Debacle

There's a feeling that the departure of McChrystal is an indictment of Barack Obama’s strategy in Afghanistan, and may increase the pressure on European governments to withdraw their troops from the country.

U.S. President Barack Obama’s decision to remove General Stanley McChrystal as commander of U.S. forces in Afghanistan has generated considerable media commentary in Europe, where governments are facing an uphill struggle to reverse dwindling public support for the Afghan deployment.

Most European opinion-shapers say that Obama had no choice but to relieve McChrystal of his command after the general and his associates publicly ridiculed Obama’s war cabinet in a magazine article. But the overarching theme in European newspaper commentary is that McChrystal’s insubordination is a symptom of a much larger problem, namely that Obama’s counterinsurgency strategy in Afghanistan is not working.

Read it all along with its embedded links.

Soros makes out like a bandit - no surprise there!

This is definitely a read it and weep piece from The Hill blog briefing room, a credible source.

GOP lawmakers echo Beck's claims against Soros
By Elise Viebeck
Two GOP lawmakers seemed to echo talking points from Fox News host Glenn Beck about a deal made by investor George Soros..
Reps. Dan Burton (R-Ind) and Louie Gohmert (R-Texas) questioned whether Soros, who backs a number of liberal causes and Democratic candidates for office, had invested in a Brazilian oil company, Petrobras, with the knowledge that President Barack Obama might temporarily ban deepwater drilling in the Gulf of Mexico.
"We don’t need to be spending Mr. Soros's money in Brazil, so he can make more money by doing offshore drilling with our taxpayer’s money," Burton said.

If you don't know this whole story read it all here.

Do You Have Confidence in the President?

I didn't think so.  Neither do many others.  This is from American Thinkers Blog.

American's confidence in Obama at an all time low
Rick Moran
A new Wall Street Journal/NBC poll out today shows the public becoming increasingly disenchanted with President Obama and his ability to address the crisis in the country:

Sixty-two percent of adults in the survey feel the country is on the wrong track, the highest level since before the 2008 election. Just one-third think the economy will get better over the next year, a 7-point drop from a month ago and the low point of Mr. Obama's tenure. 
Amid anxiety over the nation's course, support for Mr. Obama and other incumbents is eroding. For the first time, more people disapprove of Mr. Obama's job performance than approve. And 57% of voters would prefer to elect a new person to Congress than re-elect their local representatives, the highest share in 18 years.
[...]
Some 30% in the poll said they "do not really relate'' to Mr. Obama. Only 8% said that at the beginning of his presidency. Fewer than half give him positive marks when asked if he is "honest and straightforward.'' And 49% rate him positively when asked if he has "strong leadership qualities,'' down from 70% when Mr. Obama took office and a drop of 8 points since January.
Just 40% rate him positively on his "ability to handle a crisis," an 11-point drop since January. Half disapprove of Mr. Obama's handling of the oil spill, including one in four Democrats.
The precipitous drop in Obama's leadership numbers is quite significant. Coupled with the "honesty" factor, they show a public becoming distrustful of what the president says and does. The drop is most significant among independents who seem to be abandoning the president in droves.
The poll also shows a widening gap between the GOP and Democrats with 45% now wanting to see a Republican majority in Congress.
Hat Tip: Ed Lasky, who adds:
Do you think it might have something to do with being in the hands of people who lie to us, ignore our wishes, engage in tricks and bribes to get legislation passed that most Americans don't desire? The fact that we are looking at being stuck with a debt that will be a drag on us for decades (regardless of the current state of the economy)? Do you think having a President who is a hypocrite who name-calls and finger points and hectors us makes us cheerful and optimistic?
How about a President who is ashamed of America and apologizes for our history when he is overseas? How about having an Attorney General who calls us a nation of cowards on race, a First Lady who was never proud of America until her husband was nominated to be President? How about an administration that will push tax raises while enacting a raft of anti-growth initiatives? How about a President who lets our adversaries run roughshod over our allies and us?
Any of those facts induce cheer and optimism? Everyone liking that changey-thing?
The cure comes in November-one hopes.

What did You think of Obama's speech from the Oval Office UPDATED

I didn't watch and to tell the truth I have not read all the articles. Nor have I watched all the commentators on TV.  But I watched some and I read some.  These are all links referring to the speech, not all the links there are, just the ones I ran across.  Some from the original posts,  some via Lucianne. All are interesting.

LA Times by Andrew Malcolm via Lucianne:
Obama's speech: There's a pipe spewing a gazillion gobs of oil into the gulf, so let's build more windmills

Washington Post, by Michael Gerson:
Obama's address: grand setting, weak policies

Washington Post online Front page by Scott Wilson and Anne E. Kornblut:
In address, Obama presses for clean energy
(note: this is supposedly a news item, not an editorial)

Washington Post Business Opinion by Steven Pearlstein:
Bring on the Barack and Tony Show

Washington Post "The Fix" by Chris Cillizza:
Obama hammers BP in Oval Office Speech  (definitely opinion)

From the Washington Examiner by Byron York via Lucianne:
Obama's disastrous Gulf disaster team

From Newsweeks's Ben Adler via Lucianne: ( a blog)
Obama Chickens out on Energy

the American Thinker blog by Thomas Lifson:
Obama's First Oval Office Speech a 'Flop'

Michelle Malking doesn't like having a new Czar:(definitely a right wing blog)
Stuck on stupid: Obama’s czar fetish

From L A Times via Lucianne: (not  actually about the speech)
The gulf tragedy doesn't negate the fact that oil is a green fuel
By Jonah Goldberg

From American Thinker Blog by W. R. Wansley:
What we didn't hear from Obama last night

What’s next, Mr. Podesta? asks the Wall Street Journal

From WSJ's Washington Wire blog:

WH Takes Cues from Liberal Think Tank on Spill

By Jonathan Weisman

If you want to see where President Barack Obama’s response to the Deepwater Horizon disaster is heading, try following the urgings of the Center for American Progress.

The liberal think tank with close White House ties appears to have more influence on spill policy than the president’s in-house advisers. On May 4, for instance, the CAP’s energy and environment expert, Daniel Weiss, called on the president to name an independent commission to look at the causes of the Deepwater Horizon disaster. On May 22, he did just that.

On May 21, CAP president, John Podesta, privately implored White House officials to name someone to be the public point person for the spill response. A week later, the White House announced that Coast Guard Adm. Thad Allen would hold daily briefings on the spill, wherever he would be on any given day.

On May 26, Weiss said the White House needed to demand that BP immediately set up an escrow account with billions of dollars from which claims for Gulf state residents would be paid out.

Monday’s headlines proclaimed the president’s latest get-tough stand: BP needs to set up a billion-dollar escrow account.

What’s next, Mr. Podesta?

Memorial Service? Fundraiser? What to do, What to do?

Well, if you are President Obama you go to the fundraiser.  After all Barbara Boxer needs all the help she can get.  From CNN and posted by Gateway Pundit:

Obama Blew Off Gulf Memorial Service to Attend Fundraiser for Boxer

by Jim Hoft

CNN reported tonight (CNN?) that President Obama skipped the Memorial Service for the 11 workers who died in the Deepwater Horizon explosion because he was attending a fundraiser for Barbara Boxer.

According his official schedule, President Obama did not attend the May 25 memorial service in Jackson, Mississippi for the workers who died in the Deepwater Horizon explosion because he was en route to a fundraiser for Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-California, in San Francisco.

At Thursday’s White House briefing, Press Secretary Robert Gibbs was asked why Obama did not attend the service. The president’s spokesman answered, “I’d have to look at the schedule. I don’t know the answer.”

CNN examined the president’s schedule for that day, and according to it, the president left the White House at 2:55 p.m. EST en route to Andrews Air Force Base for the cross-country flight to the San Francisco fundraiser.