February 23rd, 2013

The sequester: Bob Woodward say Obama’s a liar

No, he doesn’t use the l-word. But he says it nonetheless, and in the WaPo.

Of course, the days when Bob Woodward could make presidents shake in their shoes are long gone. Not sure anybody cares now.

There’s much more detail on the story of the sequester here:

Why lie about this? Woodward explains that shifting blame is a necessary part of moving the goal posts…

Of course, there’s blame to go around on both sides. But the funny thing (and not funny-ha-ha) is that the public blames the Republicans and trusts Obama. Go figure.

I guess it’s hard to give up on a charming con man (although I, for one, have always failed to perceive Obama’s charm). But the Republican leaders in Congress lack even the charm.

34 Responses to “The sequester: Bob Woodward say Obama’s a liar”

  1. Sam L. Says:

    I note how popular Slick Willie Clinton remains.

  2. G Joubert Says:

    But the funny thing (and not funny-ha-ha) is that the public blames the Republicans and trusts Obama. Go figure.

    And for that we can thank Bush. Not necessarily for anything he affirmatively did (although we could go there), but for what he didn’t do– defend himself and his policies. He left that canvas blank and allowed the leftists to occupy the void. This is nothing but a further emanation from that.

  3. Occam's Beard Says:

    Yeah, I don’t get the “charming con man” thing either. Obama’s mendacity couldn’t be more apparent if he wore a sandwich board sign admitting it. I’ve slammed the front door in the faces of con artists who were a lot better at it than this bird.

  4. Occam's Beard Says:

    Cases in point: Obama’s bleating about a) his mother being denied health insurance when she was sick, or b) his being denied coverage for his damaged auto, when in case a), his mother had health insurance, but was denied disability insurance because she was disabled when she applied, and in case b), Obama only had liability insurance, not comprehensive, and so of course the insurer wouldn’t pay to repair his car.

    These incidents admit of only two interpretations: Obama is either a raging dumb ass for not knowing the difference, or is utterly meretricious.

    The tie-breaker between these competing hypotheses was his assertion that his parents met on the bridge at Selma, at which time he was already four years old. (And not a single reporter present called him on this outrageous lie.)

  5. Ymarsakar Says:

    If Obama had been in Nixon’s shoes, those two journalists would have ended up on a one way trip to Afghanistan, FBI puppet master or not.

  6. Ray Says:

    Barack Obama has been playing the black victim card for the past 4 years. First he was the victim of the evil George Bush. For the next 4 years he will be the victim of the evil white republicans in the congress. Bill Clinton was right, he’s playing the race card.

  7. Mr. Frank Says:

    Now Obama is going around saying the budget cuts will cause teachers and first responders to lose their jobs. Those folks are state and local employees. How does he get away with such BS?

  8. Charles Says:

    Occam’s Beard says:

    “Obama is . . . a raging dumb ass.”

    I concur, wholeheartedly.

    Further, his supporters are even bigger raging dumbasses for not seeing what a charlatan, faker, liar, racebaiter, etc. that he is.

  9. Geoffrey Britain Says:

    IMO, Obama’s continued popularity is due to three factors, all of which reinforce each other. They are in ascending order of importance; race, people are afraid of being labeled racist if they express personal dislike for him. Of even more importance is pride. No one likes to admit they were played for a fool.

    And most of all, greed. Yes, greed; the article linked to, mentions Obama’s con-man aspect with which I fully agree and then mentions that a con-man must instill confidence in his mark in order to fleece them. That is very true.

    A salesman once told me that all sales ultimately depend upon one of two emotions; fear or greed. Initially I rejected that view as too cynical, time has convinced me of its accuracy.

    In Obama’s case he instilled confidence that liberals could finally gain what they seek above all else; Obama would bring them a ‘fair’ world, the utopia they yearn for, where life’s essential unfairness is held in abeyance.

    Liberal yearning for that condition is lustful in character, they can literally taste it in their minds and thus, a kind of greed emerges that allows them to dismiss any fact, or logic or rationale that disputes it as unreasonably naive.

    Why such investment? Well, when people reject belief in a creator and afterlife, all that is left is to make the best of things in this short life remaining to them. Creating their imagined paradise on earth is a fitting legacy, yes?

  10. Capn Rusty Says:

    Best idea I’ve heard on how the Repbublicans can play the sequester is for the House to pass a bill immediately that precisely defines where the $85 billion in reductions will be implemented. The bill would specify the agencies, departments, etc. where the funding would be eliminated — there are billions of dollars of fat that can be cut without biting into any muscle. Pass that and send it to the Senate asap. Oh, and buy time in the middle of whatever drivel the low-info voters watch to tell them about, probably better use simple words . . .

  11. expat Says:

    Capn Rusty,

    If they started cutting out all federal money that supports diversity administrators and sensitivity training they would probably get a lot of support. Just this evening, a female German scientist with a great tenured job was complaining about having to listen to a women’s equality bureaucrat whose expertise was gender studies. Halfway smart people of all leanings hate having their time wasted by credentialled idiots.

  12. Occam's Beard Says:

    there are billions of dollars of fat that can be cut without biting into any muscle

    A more apt metaphor would be a colonic resection.

  13. J.J. formerly Jimmy J. Says:

    Cap’n Rusty said, “Best idea I’ve heard on how the Repbublicans can play the sequester is for the House to pass a bill immediately that precisely defines where the $85 billion in reductions will be implemented.”

    Unfortunately, they’ve sent two such bills to the Senate. Both have been pocketed by Harry Reid. Nothing will happen except at the last minute, if at all. Obama believes he has laid the groundwork for blaming the Republicans for the sequester and whatever affects it may have.

    It is an $85 billion cut. Only 2.4% of the total budget. However, the bulk of the cuts, $44 billion, fall on the DOD and will cause some pain in that area. Obama doesn’t care about that. He wants to cut the DOD anyway. My guess is that he wants the sequester to happen because he believes the Republicans will be blamed for “gutting” defense. No matter what the Republicans do, short of complete surrender, it won’t be enough.

    Actually, if the cuts were done in a rational fashion, it could be done with no fuss or muss – no obvious pain. That’s not going to happen with Obama.

  14. Capn Rusty Says:

    JJ: I’m glad to hear the Republicans in The House have sent such bills to the Senate. The problem, as I point out, is that they haven’t made the public aware that there’s a way to effect the sequester without cutting core functions. The Reppublicans seem to think the world ends at the Beltway.

  15. csimon Says:

    Sometimes I wish comments here had a “Like” button because I agree I agree very enthusiastically with just about all that’s said above, and I hate to take up space to echo it again.

    That being said, with “polls” reflecting the continuing popularity (personal popularity, that is, tho’ that is rarely specified) of O. supposedly at 55% +, I often wonder who they actually poll for results like these especially when other polls indicate that everyone is not in brain-dead Obama-love comas and 84% + of the population know the country is going in the wrong direction. I have to wonder if the geniuses in social media who got this guy re-elected are able to affect the polling? Then again, maybe it’s as simple as making a call to any media outlet and telling them what their poll is going to reflect. But what do I know? Certainly a lot less than I thought I did about people and their ability to think.

  16. SteveH Says:

    You get to govern like crap and remain a popular President by being presented to the public strictly as an item of fashionableness.

  17. ziontruth Says:

    A few days ago, an Israeli lefty columnist on one of the Israeli lefty MSM newspapers wrote of Obama that “he is an orator of God-given talent.” Apart from the gall of the otherwise religion-scoffing MSM columnist to put God’s name in this context of all of them, I could only stand dumbfounded at the fact that he could think such a thought while I’ve known for over four years about Obama’s dependency on the teleprompter for his “oratorial talent.”

    The problem isn’t low-information people, it’s wrong-information people. Those who know so much that isn’t so (as the quoted attributed to Reagan goes).

  18. RickZ Says:

    The media lies, supporting Owebama’s lies about sequestration: Owebama wanted sequestration and signed it into law. If he didn’t like sequestration, why did he sign it into law in the first place? In that law, Owebama has latitude over the specifics of what gets cut; he pushed for and demanded that he have that control which he is now using to club ‘obstructionist’ Pubbies like baby seals. If he wants to cut DoD, or teachers, or whatever, instead of cutting foreign aid (for starters), that’s his call. To claim the Republicans are somehow responsible for this ‘end of the world of big government as we know it’ is absurd. But we are talking about the Fellatio Media and their knobslobbering love affair with the communist Grifter-in-Chief.

    A political cartoon from the Chicongo Tribune, no less:


    Capn Rusty,

    The problem, as I point out, is that they haven’t made the public aware that there’s a way to effect the sequester without cutting core functions.

    You assume they have the means to get that message out. With the Fellatio Media lying about this every step of the way, there is no avenue for the Republicans to get the truth out. Again, how many people know sequestration was all Owebama’s idea?

    When living in a time of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a radical act. And us telling the truth is one more reason why the far left radical Owebama wants our guns. He not only can’t handle the truth, he’s told so many lies that he wouldn’t know the truth if it jumped up and bit him on the ass.

  19. Ymarsakar Says:

    If any Republican member thought about stepping off the beaten track, there is a Democrat blackmailer ready to pull him back in.

    If they can’t find something, they will send investigators after you, like they did with Alaska.

  20. Don Carlos Says:

    The reason Woodward doesn’t have an impact is, IMO, because he has been a Dem apologist for decades, and even Dems see this.

  21. M of Hollywood Says:

    Dostoyevsky’s “The Grand Inquisitor” is a free download for your Kindle or your Kindle app.
    It offers some (small) solace to know that great minds have long known both the needful gullability of the masses and the curlish devices of those who seek power.
    Little can be done but to kiss those who seek power and to laugh at all of us who try to figure it out. Enjoy Sunday: press your gowns and de-lint your tuxedos.

  22. Occam's Beard Says:

    If they can’t find something, they will send investigators after you, like they did with Alaska.

    Or, if necessary, just make it up, from an “unimpeachable source,” as with the Bush ANG memos. Call it “Protocols of the Elders of the Republican Party.”

  23. carl in atlanta Says:

    I have never been more acutely aware of the propaganda with which we are now bombarded in this country. Although cynics will say that “it has ever been thus”, I believe we’ve turned a corner with this administration and its sychophantic press. Has there ever been a time — other than wartime — when the American press has acted as the willing agent of any administration?

    Not in my lifetime ( until now).

  24. n.n Says:

    He lost me at “redistributive change.” That’s not a solution, but an avoidance of reality and morality.

  25. sergey Says:

    This reminds me how all opponents of Bolsheviks believed that they can have reasonable discussions with them, or how Old Bolsheviks some time lately believed that Stalin is going to obey any ethic rules or principles of the Party. They all were utterly wrong by failing to recognize that they were dealing with nihilists to whom no rules were sacred and who can do everything at all, commit any crime without remorse if this will advance their “cause”. And the cause always was ultimate concentration of power first in the Party and than in the hands of its leader.

  26. Mr. Frank Says:

    sergey: Bullseye!

  27. Mike Says:

    “Of course, there’s blame to go around on both sides.”

    Really? Details please.

  28. artfldgr Says:

    Alcoholism in Russia has been a problem throughout the country’s history due to drinking being a pervasive element of society. Moreover, it has also been a major source of government revenue for centuries. It has repeatedly been targeted as a major national problem, with mixed results.

    According to the WHO 2011 report, annual per capita alcohol consumption in Russia is about 15.76 litres, fourth highest volume in Europe.


    nothing you do matters
    nothing you do can change it
    each of your actions are cut off, as your not connected
    some detail about you is the excuse ‘race, history, etc’

    and there isnt much to do that is allowed, as the state woudl have to pay for hte medical care of accidents.

    so women whore around for “gifts”, a hobby that is not available to most men, so they drink… (or if they really want to do something nasty to themselves they use Krocodile)


    In the early 1980s, an estimated “two-thirds of murders and violent crimes were committed by intoxicated persons; and drunk drivers were responsible for 14,000 traffic deaths and 60,000 serious traffic injuries”

    In 1995, about three quarters of those arrested for homicide were under the influence of alcohol, and 29% of respondents reported that children beaten within families were the victims of drunks and alcoholics

    A 1997 report published in the Journal of Family Violence, found that among male perpetrators of spousal homicide, 60–75% of offenders had been drinking prior to the incident

    In 2008, suicide claimed 38,406 lives in Russia With a rate of 27.1 suicides per 100,000 people, Russia has one of the highest suicide rates in the world, although it has been steadily decreasing since it peaked at around 40 per 100,000 in the mid-late 90s, including a 30% drop from 2001 to 2006.

    Vodka Belt
    Being an informal term, the “vodka belt” has no established definition. However, the general definition tends to include the following states:

    Nordic States (including Finland, Norway, Iceland, Sweden and Greenland, but not Denmark.)[1]
    Baltic states (Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania)
    Rusyn areas of Slovakia and Hungary bordering Poland and Ukraine.

    My introduction to this level of drinking was interesting, as my uncle Tali drank so much Vodka that he lost the use of his legs… then stopped drinking, and got his legs back… to which he celebrated and lost his legs again…

    other incidents were watching a man who gave me a job enjoy challenging kids who worked for him to drinking games. Izzy was his name…. he could drink a quart of Vodka at one seating… so no one could beat him but another Izzy…

    how bad does it get?
    hows this for bad.. they have a list!!!!
    despite alcoholic hollyweird, and advertising industry, we do not have such a list…

    List of federal subjects of Russia by incidence of substance abuse

    look to history to see your future…

  29. artfldgr Says:

    Barack Obama has been playing the black victim card for the past 4 years

    no.. he is not.. he is playing the role of the negative space that shapes the other side…

    ie. topping from the bottom…

    he is playing the white oppressor card, which then puts him in the role of victim…

    this is what happens when you have a girlfriend that lives with you who acts like a child. having to be talked to and all that stuff that happens between children and adults… and then resents it… but without the role, the result is too destructive to live with! (putting feminist law aside to make the point)…

    it reminds me of my sister and myself when i was a young lad. i would mind my business and play, and my sister would work the mechanics of things to have fun. (note that this is a girl under 3)…

    my family was wondering why i was not getting along with my sister. like most parents they assumed that i was responsible, given my age… but since this was out of character for me, they decided to watch first.

    what they discovered was that my sister was using the situation and the rules to orchestrate things. she would get up from the other side of the room, walk up behind me, and strike me in the head… then run back to where she was. this would then get the natural fairness of kids to go into play and i would get up to chase her to give her what i got from her for nothing. but it was timed just right, with her screaming the whole way, so that my parents would enter the room before she got hers.

    by acting a certain way, she was able to take a negative space position, and so cause others to drop into their roles of positive space.

    the only way that this situation would change would have to rely on a few things NOT dependent on the person playing puppet master.

    1) my parents would have to blindly believe me, and so the power of the situation would flip to my favor all the time. and so thats not fair, so thats not an option. so unless you have uncrackable reputation, the others don’t give you this.

    2) i would refuse to be baited… but that would mean being hit from time to time, and harder and harder, but having to ignore it. this is the position that white men are in today thanks to feminism and racialism.

    3) the power that is, decides to look closer and so unseats the game. this is all well and good and can even stop a false rape charge. but what if the power and the puppet master are in cahoots? then each pretends their role, knowing the real victim is who?

    other responses are not at all socially acceptable, and generally escalate situations, and range from the Richard the III solution… if they treat me bad for nothing, i might as well be bad a be real bad in excess…

    the point being that those NOT raised on bugs bunney, foghorn leghorn and others childrens lessons, wont get how the view of the situation si not the same as the actual situation…

    we do not see the negative space that his positive action creates… so we say that he is playing the race card… no.. he is not… he is playing the get whitey the oppressor status quo of the USA…

    if he does not act that way, we wont believe the other side of it… byt if he plays the role, we will intuit without argument what is the other half of it.

    you see water frozen in a certain shape.
    you intuit it came from a glass of a certain shape.

    so rather than call the opposition racist white oppressors, he takes up the other role…

    its passive aggressive…
    but like my sister… and later feminists
    he defines the other by defining himself this way

    the way feminists define the men by how they act and believe they are… not how the men are… in this way, the more they act like X, the more the men are believed to be a certain way….

    its like watching a nice man try to calm down a woman who is acting wacked out that he is going to hurt her and so on… the crowd doesnt think she is nuts, they think she is sane and he is doing something.

    the audience doesnt think that potus is nuts, tey think that the other is doing something…

    its a form of the big lie…

  30. artfldgr Says:

    i have been trying to explain that to them for ages.
    they dont get it
    they wont get it

    they keep defaulting to the self imposed limits they ahve, aqnd then projecting them onto the other. then they figure that this limit then would stop the other.

    so,they think that china wont do X cause it will hurt china. no. china will do X if it wants to do X and it wont matter if it hurts 100 million people in one year!

    this is inconceivable to most people, and most will NOT accept it. they do not get that this is at the core of what i mean when i say that the understanding will change your behavior…

    because the understanding changes you

    this is at the heart of “if only stalin knew”

    the idea that obama would have limits and would not act on something… why? just because..

    if they really understand your paragraph.
    then the 20 to 50 million that may get killed if Obama acts, dont mean anything… they are no more a restriction than toilet paper across the victory line stops the victor!!!!!!!!!

    ONLY when neo gets this part, will she get how deep we are in… as long as ehe doesnt, she will pretend that some of the old games and rules apply and will fantasize about the next election, and no war, and on and on…

    ie… the realization has not fully been accepted.

    not only that, but this realization would make it EASY to believe in whats going on!!!!!!!!

    and explains my point that they hide in ambiguity because your inability to accept reality creates the smoke that hides what they do.

    all one had to do was accept that they meant what they said and said waht they meant, and you can trust that 100% (and it applies to more than horton hears a who)

    what is the Hegelian version of the camel and eye of a needle?

    I tell you the truth, it is hard for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven. Again I tell you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God. When the disciples heard this, they were greatly astonished and asked, “Who then can be saved?” Jesus looked at them and said, “With man this is impossible, but with God all things are possible.” Matthew 19:23-26

    it presupposes that a person wants to go to heaven

    but to a person who loves pain, torture, victims suffering, what does heaven offer them? Oppression? Prohibition? Forbidden from pleasures?

    what if a man does not want to be saved? does not beleive in god, savior, devil or any of that? then i tell you, the camel need not even approach the freaking needle…

    what if pragmatism was taken to the full end result of it..
    no limits…

    Pragmatism is a philosophical tradition centered on the linking of practice and theory. It describes a process where theory is extracted from practice, and applied back to practice to form what is called intelligent practice

    so hitler stumbles on a formula, and the left then uses it.. feminists love disparate impact… the same power of the industrial revolution, but rather than applied to production and happiness, its applied to power resulting in losers misery

    Pragmatism as a philosophical movement began in the United States in the 1870s. Its direction was determined by The Metaphysical Club members Charles Sanders Peirce, William James, and Chauncey Wright, as well as John Dewey and George Herbert Mead.

    and once again… back to the same people
    John Dewey (/ˈduːi/; October 20, 1859 – June 1, 1952) was an American philosopher, psychologist and educational reformer whose ideas have been influential in education and social reform. Dewey was an important early developer of the philosophy of pragmatism and one of the founders of functional psychology. He was a major representative of progressive education and liberalism.

    Functional psychology or functionalism refers to a general psychological philosophy that considers mental life and behavior in terms of active adaptation to the person’s environment. As such, it provides the general basis for developing psychological theories not readily testable by controlled experiments and for applied psychology.


    and this is all why we ignore the rightgs of the programmed people
    what rights do you have if you are not who you are as a function of who you are?

    under feminisms ideas, you are not you because there is a you inside.
    you are you because of progreamming..

    so what rights do you really have?
    they are but a function of what programming made you
    and that can be eraased and replaced.

    this is why under feminism women have no rights.

    the collective does, and women think thats their rights. but women have no choice any more… and without choice, you have no rights! circumstances define choices under the dominant psychology.

    just give the boys some more drugs, they will becoem gurls
    and dont worry, today gillibrand is up in arms as to using VAWA and othe such things to now remold the military!!!!!!!!!!!

    just think… they remolded society, family, and work.
    and now we are on the verge of democide and desptosm

    bet you cant wait to see what happens when the same is done to the defensive forces!!!!!!!!!


  31. neo-neocon Says:


    who is this “they” of whom you speak when you write:

    i have been trying to explain that to them for ages.
    they dont get it
    they wont get it

    I’m actually quite curious; it’s not a rhetorical question.

    Do you mean people you run into in general? Friends of yours? I’m really not at all sure to whom you’re referring.

    On this blog, for example, what sergey wrote is non-controversial. If there is a regular commenter here who disputes it, I can’t recall who it might be, and that person would certainly be in the tiny minority.

    I wrote posts that compared Obama to Chavez back when Obama first became president, for example, And the discussions here have for years revolved around this administration’s quest for power above all else.

    Just as an example, back in July of 2009 (only a few months after Obama took office) I wrote:

    How did I come to the point of agreeing that Obama is a socialist who only cares about our economy as a vehicle for income redistribution, has no interest in promoting or even supporting liberty either abroad or in this country and in fact considers liberty to be his bitter enemy, is intent on gaining more power for himself by rewarding his constituents with money earned by others, and wants to make America over into a European-style social welfare state at best and a Chavez-style banana republic at worst?

    The rest of the post describes how and why I came to those conclusions. And as time has gone on, I really see very little disagreement with ideas that like among the commenters here.

    So that’s why I’m curious who that “they” and “them” is of whom you speak.

  32. artfldgr Says:

    what does No Limit really mean to you neo?
    is there such a thing as no limit?

    what does NL mean to truth telling?
    what does NL mean in terms of ideas?
    what does NL mean in terms of acceptable outcomes?

    lets see if we really do understand what sergey means by no limit…

  33. Ymarsakar Says:

    I don’t think understanding it or not will defeat the evil that currently exists. I mean, perhaps in the past it might have prevented it, but not now.

    I searched back in the thread for “no limit”, and all the results ended up under Art as the author. I don’t see where sergey introduced or illustrated the subject. If he did, then it is up to sergey to explain what he means by no limit. But if not, it’s up to the person who introduced the subject to explain what he means by the term.

    Overall, the eventual end goal here for the LEft’s tyranny is the ability to kill anyone, rape anyone, loot any property, and make it theirs, without a word of sanction, an act of rebellion, or anything else besides what the rulers deem fit.

    But if you think that if Americans understood this, that they would do something about it, I would say that would be the wrong conclusion. It doesn’t matter what people understand, only what they are willing to die for, kill for, and that is an emotional decision more than a logical one.

  34. Ymarsakar Says:

    P.S. Most of the Cold War communists inside the US, believed in socialism, and were willing to fight for it, die for it, maybe kill for it too. Until they saw some of the unclassified reports of what was really going on in the Utopian experiment of Russia. So they, of course, didn’t understand the master they served, but serve it they did. The same can be spoken of citizens in a democracy.

    The Ancient Greeks and ANcient Chinese found what I thought was a great balance between opposite extremes: harmony. It didn’t matter to them how well someone understood something intellectually, if their spirit and body were deficient in power and health. Thus the combination of a strong mind and a strong body were seen as prerequisites of the other. Socrates and Plato, were warriors before they were philosophers. And only became great philosophers because of how much they were personally willing to risk, rather than debate about.

    No matter how fully a person understands, fear and brutal force can make him bend to the will of the tyrant. No matter how stupid a person is, courage and will can make that person into a dangerous weapon against the tyrannical regime.

    By not utilizing the power of emotions and getting to the truth using out instincts and feelings, we have abdicated much of the battlefield to the enemy in this war. If feelings destabilizes civilization, if feelings don’t lead to the truth, if emotions render someone illogical, that is only because the Left uses it as a tool for evil. If we fight the LEft because we believe justice is on our side, then it doesn’t do us much good to partition tools into good and evil. The Left partitions guns into things only rulers and criminals may use. There’s no particular reason that philosophy needs to be mimicked for human engineering and emotions.

    All the righteous fury directed against Islamic terrorists for killing Americans. How much of it is directed against our domestic terrorists that have been killing, torturing, and raping Americans for decades?

About Me

Previously a lifelong Democrat, born in New York and living in New England, surrounded by liberals on all sides, I've found myself slowly but surely leaving the fold and becoming that dread thing: a neocon.

Monthly Archives


Ace (bold)
AmericanDigest (writer’s digest)
AmericanThinker (thought full)
Anchoress (first things first)
AnnAlthouse (more than law)
AtlasShrugs (fearless)
AugeanStables (historian’s task)
Baldilocks (outspoken)
Barcepundit (theBrainInSpain)
Beldar (Texas lawman)
BelmontClub (deep thoughts)
Betsy’sPage (teach)
Bookworm (writingReader)
Breitbart (big)
ChicagoBoyz (boyz will be)
Contentions (CommentaryBlog)
DanielInVenezuela (against tyranny)
DeanEsmay (conservative liberal)
Donklephant (political chimera)
Dr.Helen (rights of man)
Dr.Sanity (thinking shrink)
DreamsToLightening (Asher)
EdDriscoll (market liberal)
Fausta’sBlog (opinionated)
GayPatriot (self-explanatory)
HadEnoughTherapy? (yep)
HotAir (a roomful)
InFromTheCold (once a spook)
InstaPundit (the hub)
JawaReport (the doctor is Rusty)
LegalInsurrection (law prof)
RedState (conservative)
Maggie’sFarm (centrist commune)
MelaniePhillips (formidable)
MerylYourish (centrist)
MichaelTotten (globetrotter)
MichaelYon (War Zones)
Michelle Malkin (clarion pen)
Michelle Obama's Mirror (reflections)
MudvilleGazette (milblog central)
NoPasaran! (behind French facade)
NormanGeras (principled leftist)
OneCosmos (Gagdad Bob’s blog)
PJMedia (comprehensive)
PointOfNoReturn (Jewish refugees)
Powerline (foursight)
ProteinWisdom (wiseguy)
QandO (neolibertarian)
RachelLucas (in Italy)
RogerL.Simon (PJ guy)
SecondDraft (be the judge)
SeekerBlog (inquiring minds)
SisterToldjah (she said)
Sisu (commentary plus cats)
Spengler (Goldman)
TheDoctorIsIn (indeed)
Tigerhawk (eclectic talk)
VictorDavisHanson (prof)
Vodkapundit (drinker-thinker)
Volokh (lawblog)
Zombie (alive)

Regent Badge