Why did Obama lie about transparency? "Where's a Karl Rove when you need one?"

.

I have feared all along that President Obama lacked the chops to get the job done. With every unforced error (and they're starting to pile up... kinda like lead poisoning) he's been confirming my conclusion.

Let's review, briefly, shall we? As a country, we have elected someone completely unqualified as our president. He has no experience, no depth, no plan and no clue. He has repeatedly slighted the military, demands a lying Treasury Secretary who engaged in tax-dodging that would make Mark Rich blush while he hired an illegal alien, lied about personnel in his Administration, and continues in his plans to bury this Nation in debt as part of his increasingly socialist program. ($1 trillion and not one job created?) The change he believes in includes getting what appears o be a stone-alcoholic for VP, recycling every Clinton appointee he can find and paying off every union and gay lobby he possibly can, all while putting our nation's security at risk, both because he's keeping his BlackBerry and by closing down Gitmo without any alternative to keep these people locked up.

Not bad for a 3-day old tenure.

This article focuses on the playground idiocy of White House Communications, wherein the media beat Mr. Obama's press secretary like a rented mule over the moronic requirement that senior White House briefers only be referred to by first names... particularly idiotic given that these same briefers had been identified before... and Robert Gibbs, the new press secretary, had been using their names through out the briefing in the first place.

I try not to speak for anyone else, but it would seem that this frightening level of incompetence is beginning, finally... and far too late, to concern the Empty Suit's allies. So, I ask: "Where's a Karl Rove when you need one?"

CURL: Obama press aide gets bashed in debut
Joseph Curl (Contact)Friday, January 23, 2009

The White House press operation got off to a fumbling and stumbling start Thursday, with the day's opening briefers insisting on being identified only as "senior administration officials," followed swiftly by the new president's spokesman accidently outing one of the secret aides less than two minutes into his first White House briefing.

Although President Obama swept into office pledging transparency and a new air of openness, the press hammered spokesman Robert Gibbs for nearly an hour over a slate of perceived secretive slights that have piled up quickly for the new administration. It wasn't pretty.

MARY F. CALVERT/THE WASHINGTON TIMES White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs was peppered with questions from reporters at his first press conference for the Obama administration on Thursday. The stormy session prompted one reporter to ask Mr. Gibbs if the honeymoon was over.

"Why did the administration believe it was important for the American people not to know the name of the two senior administration officials who briefed us this morning on Guantanamo?" one reporter asked in the packed and steaming hot briefing room just off the White House West Wing.

"I hope that you all found the exercise that we did this morning helpful," Mr. Gibbs offered helpfully.

"Do you know," the reporter followed, "that you've used ... one of those senior officials' first names several times in this briefing?" A very long pause ensued.

"I do," the spokesman said, his cornflower-colored tie suddenly looking a bit too tight. "Are we allowed to repeat that name?" Mr. Gibbs answered by citing as precedent of Brazilian soccer stars being known only by a single name - sure to one day be a classic White House non-answer.

Then it got uglier.

"How is it transparent," another reporter asked, "when you control the only image of the re-swearing - there's nobody in there but four print reporters, there's no stills, there's no television? And the only recording that comes out, as I understand it, is one that a reporter made, not one that the White House supplied."

More:
.

Leavitt continues to blow it: He's demanding a 12 lane bridge when we don't want any bridge of any size at all.

.
Leavitt continues to shoot himself in the foot with his outrageous demands for an unneeded and unwanted $4 BILLION I-5 Bridge replacement.

Today's hissy fit was over Portland's demands that the bridge be no larger than 10 lanes.

Councilman Tim Leavitt said the data clearly support a 12-lane crossing. Advocating for a smaller bridge is “politics, pure and simple,” he said.

Since, precisely like the current bridge, there will only be 6 through lanes; and since the only reason to replace this bridge is to bring Loot Rail into the nest of Vipers known as the Downtown Mafia's sphere of influence; AND, since the bigger bridge will waste additional millions, Leavitt has no reason to support any bridge replacement, period... but continues to do so, snarling like a Pit Yorkie who's lost his bone.

The government of the City of Vancouver must understand that the PEOPLE do NOT want this bridge replaced and the PEOPLE do NOT want Loot Rail.

That they already know this is behind the reason for their utter failure to ask us if we want to pay for this nonsense... because they already know the answer.



Vancouver braces for fight over new span
Council favors 12 lanes; Portland wants smaller bridge
Monday, January 12 9:33 p.m.

BY JEFFREY MIZE
COLUMBIAN STAFF WRITER

If Portland is going to insist a new Interstate 5 bridge have no more than 10 lanes, Vancouver intends to push right back for a 12-lane option.

Several Vancouver council members, irked by the comments Portland Mayor Sam Adams made last week, indicated their strong preference Monday for a 12-lane bridge that would cost more to build but experts say would result in fewer accidents and less congestion.

Councilman Tim Leavitt said the data clearly support a 12-lane crossing. Advocating for a smaller bridge is “politics, pure and simple,” he said.

Councilwoman Jeanne Harris said there appears to be political desire to restrict the number of lanes as a way to increase transit use. The bridge, Harris said, needs to be designed to serve the community’s needs for the next 100 years.

“If we build anything less, we are going to have to come back and do something about it,” she said. “It just makes sense to me we should be talking about the highest capacity we can build.”

“It’s funny,” Councilwoman Pat Jollota said. “When you start getting input, you find out everyone out there is a traffic engineer.”

More:

Mielke wins!

.
Tonite, the Clark County Elections Office officially certified Tom Mielke as the winner in the Clark County Commissioner's Election for seat 1!



It was a fascinating race, by any measure. Tom was obviously underfunded, the democrats were clueless at the county level and completely stuck on stupid over the casino (where Barnett paid good money for a friendly majority) the idiotic I-5 Bridge replacement and light rail.

That and all of the other tax/fee increasers local dems love to foist on us so they can pay off their union buddies killed the deal... and for the first time in 30 years, the Clark County Commission is under Republican control.

Is this the shape of things to come in 2010, when people have had 2 years to soak in the disaster that is democrat control of government?

Stay tuned!
.