Whoa, nellie.  BP (formerly British Petroleum) really “hearts” Barack Obama. (h/t – HotAir.com)

During the 2008 election cycle, individuals and political action committees associated with BP — a Center for Responsive Politics’ “heavy hitter” — contributed half a million dollars to federal candidates. About 40 percent of these donations went to Democrats. The top recipient of BP-related donations during the 2008 cycle was President Barack Obama himself, who collected $71,000.

BP regularly lobbies on Capitol Hill, as well. In 2009, the company spent a massive $16 million to influence legislation. During the first quarter of 2010, it spent $3.53 million on federal lobbying efforts, ranking it second (behind ConocoPhillips) among all oil and gas industry interests.

Is this why Obama has been so slow to react to BP’s oil rig disaster?  Is this why the media has been fairly timid in their criticisms of BP?

Doubtful.  But Lord only knows how CNNNYTIMESNBCCBS would be screeching about BP-Bush, Bush-BP if George W. was President now.

Cassy Fiano at HotAir has this additional insight:

It’s funny, because the left still brings up President Bush’s “slow” response to Hurricane Katrina. Here we have another disaster, in the same area, and an even slower response. The only difference is that now, the liberal media is dutifully looking the other way.

And let’s not forget how “Halliburton & Cheney” ruled the world for eight years!

Cassy continues..

On top of that, you won’t ever hear about Obama being in the pocket of “Big Oil”. That was always hurled at President Bush, but never at Obama. Yet here is Obama, taking the largest amount of donations from BP related PACs and individuals. I assume that it’s, of course, just coincidence that he dragged his feet in responding to this catastrophe. Now that he has, though, BP should prepare themselves. They may have donated heavily to Democrats and to Obama, but that won’t keep them from being thrown under the Obama bus. Loyalty has no home in this White House.

That bus has gone through a LOT of tires since Rev. Wright.

-Bruce (GayPatriot)

There is no denying this fact:  After 9/11/2001 up until the day President George W. Bush left office, there was no successful effort or attempt to attack the United States homeland by Islamic terrorists.  Yet since Jan. 20, 2009 — there have been MULTIPLE successful Islamic terror attacks. 

Here they are — the ones we know of:

6/1/2009 Little Rock, AR: A Muslim with ‘religious motives’ shoots a local soldier to death inside a recruiting center. (1 killed, 1 injured)

11/5/2009 Ft. Hood, TX: A Muslim psychiatrist and Army captain guns down thirteen unarmed soldiers while yelling praises to Allah. (13 killed, 31 injured)

12/25/2009 Detriot, MI: An Nigerian Muslim man attempted to ignite an explosive device on a Northwest Airlines Flight from Amsterdam to Detroit. The would-be terrorist was subdued by passengers and crew. (No death, minor injuries)

It is critical to note, that the Ft. Hood and Christmas Day bombings are linked through Al-Qaeda in Yemen and through Anwar Awalkai, an Islamic cleric and spiritual advisor to a number of the 9/11 plotters.

Today, the White House admitted that the weekend near disaster in Times Square is another part of the post-Bush terror pattern.

The failed car bombing in Times Square increasingly appears to have been coordinated by more than one person in a plot with international links, Obama administration officials said Tuesday.  Another U.S. official, recounting a conversation with intelligence officials, said: “Don’t be surprised if you find a foreign nexus. . . . They’re looking at some telltale signs and they’re saying it’s pointing in that direction.”

If you think strategically (as you should) and realize that Afghanistan and Iraq are part of the Global War on Islamic Terror, then 2009-10 are not good ones for President Obama on those fronts.  US casualties are up in both war zones since President Bush left office and AQ has become increasingly brazen in their attacks on civilians and military targets alike in both countries.

Now the question is “why”?  The answer is obvious.  Our enemies (not just Al Qaeda) see President Obama as weak and they are trying to test him repeatedly to see how (or if) he responds.  So far, his response is eerily similar to the quid pro quo missile attacks of the Clinton era.  We know what that led to.

The more scary thought is how Obama’s weakness is being exploited by rogue nations.  Iran has become increasingly defiant.  And now the FOREIGN media has reported this gem over the past few days (Katie Couric, where are youuuuu?)

A grim report circulating in the Kremlin today written by Russia’s Northern Fleet is reporting that the United States has ordered a complete media blackout over North Korea’s torpedoing of the giant Deepwater Horizon oil platform owned by the World’s largest offshore drilling contractor Transocean that was built and financed by South Korea’s Hyundai Heavy Industries Co. Ltd., that has caused great loss of life, untold billions in economic damage to the South Korean economy, and an environmental catastrophe to the United States.

This definitely feels like a much dangerous world since Bush and VP Cheney left Washington.

-Bruce (GayPatriot)

While the U.S. delegation to the United Nations did nothing to block the election of Iran to its Commission on the Status of Women, they did stand up to the angry oligarch today:

The U.S. delegation walked out of a United Nations conference on nuclear nonproliferation during a speech by Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad in which he asserted Iran’s right to enrich uranium for peaceful purposes and slammed Western powers, especially the U.S., for allowing Israel to maintain undeclared nuclear weapons. . . .

The U.S. delegation filed out of their seats in the hall of the U.N. General Assembly a little less than halfway through Ahmadinejad’s 35-minute speech. The French were missing altogether from the opening session of the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty Review Conference. There were also protests outside the U.N. against Ahmadinejad’s presence there.

Given that “Secretary of State Hillary Clinton is scheduled to take the podium later in the afternoon”, she’s likely at the United Nations right now.  I wonder if she lead the American exodus from the conference.

In any case, whoever is responsible for the walkout deserves our heart-felt appreciation.  And kudos to the Administration for countenancing such an action.  No American sit silently while the Iranian hegemon launches into an angry outburst against nations, unlike his, committed to freedom and opposed to aggression and oppression.

Via Jim Geraghty comes this great ad for Tim Burns running in the special election in Pennsylvania’s 12th Congressional District:

A piece by Mark Tapscott in the Washington Examiner reminds me of something I read about the Katrina disaster:

Why didn’t federal officials implement an oil spill clean up plan they’ve had on the books since 1994 as soon as possible after crude began pumping into the Gulf of Mexico following the explosion and sinking of BP’s Deepwater Horizon drilling platform 53 miles south of Louisiana in the Gulf of Mexico?

The Mobile Register reports that Ron Gouget, who formerly managed the oil spill cleanup department of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, as well as a similar unit for the state of Louisiana, is criticizing the Obama White House’s failure to act according to existing government plans in the event of a spill in the area now being deluged with thousands of barrels of crude oil every day.

Emphasis added.

Who failed to follow an existing government plan as a hurricane now nearly five years ago, not an oil slick, threatened to make landfall on the Gulf coast?  Was it the Bush Administration?  Oh yes, that’s right, it wasn’t a Republican who failed to follow a government plan, but a Democrat.  It was ten-New Orleans Mayor Ray Nagin who failed to follow his own evacuation plan.

Remember these:

The mark of a great actor is that he or she can so disappear into a part that you don’t recognize her.  When I first saw Gods and Monsters on the big screen, I had forgotten than Lynn Redgrave was in the move until the closing credits.  And every time I watch the movie again on DVD, I am blown away by her performance.

That great lady died last night “at her Manhattan apartment“.  She was 67.  It has been a particularly sad year for her family, one of the great British acting dynasties: “Her death comes a year after her niece Natasha Richardson died from head injuries sustained in a skiing accident and just a month after the death of her older brother, Corin Redgrave.”

And yet she clearly ranked among the greatest in a very talented family.  In addition to her nomination for Gods and Monsters, she was also nominated  Georgy Girl in 1966, facing off against her sister Vanessa, nominated that year for Morgan: A Suitable Case for Treatment.  She distinguished herself in numerous other films and TV shoes, including Shine and most recently Kinsey where she played a lesbian.

Never a leading lady, she soared in the smaller roles she played.  The world is diminished by her loss.

Let me leave you with a happy image of this woman’s talent:

FROM THE COMMENTS:  My friend Tracy writes:

I saw her on stage in a one woman show she did years ago. I was in the first row and believe me she acted her heart out. She was wonderful!! RIP Lynn. Thanks for shining your light while you were here with us.

Let us hope that we are not the only gay people to denounce police in Wokington, Cumbria (in the UK) for arresting Dale McAlpine, a Christian street preacher who was “reciting a number of ‘sins’ referred to in the Bible, including blasphemy, drunkenness and same sex relationships“:

Police officers are alleging that he made the remark in a voice loud enough to be overheard by others and have charged him with using abusive or insulting language, contrary to the Public Order Act.

Mr McAlpine, who was taken to the police station in the back of a marked van and locked in a cell for seven hours on April 20, said the incident was among the worst experiences of his life.

Now, we don’t agree with what Mr. McAlpine said, but we certainly support his right to say it.  He should not have been arrested.  If people were offended by his words, then they should have challenged him, mounting their own stepladders (as Mr. McAlpine) had done and taking issue with his arguments point by point.  Indeed, one woman did just that, only to find herself approached by a “homosexual police community support officer (PCSO)”.

After this PCSO spoke with this woman who had engaged the preacher “in a debate about his faith”, he confronted McAlpine who

. . . claims that the PCSO then said he was homosexual and identified himself as the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender liaison officer for Cumbria police. Mr McAlpine replied: “It’s still a sin.”

This PCSO sounds like a real busybody while the woman sounds like she pretty much knew how responsible people deal with disagreement in a free society.  They engage in debate.  If this PCSO is going to lock up someone offering an alternative point of view, he must suffer from a severe case of inecurity.  Where else have we see such behavior, locking up our intellectual adversaries?

Authorities should drop the charges, fire the PCSO and ask him to attend tolerance training sessions while we should all follow the example of that woman who engaged the street preacher in debates about faith.  (Though she would have been wise not to inform this PCSO about her conversation.)

Just before I learned we got hacked on Friday, I had planned a couple of posts, the first on immigration, pointing out my ambivalence on the Arizona law which has caused such hysteria in the media.  In an ideal world, I would oppose such legislation, but, in the real world in states like Arizona, I understand that sometimes we must take drastic action to confront an increase in crime.

The Arizona legislature thought this action was necessary to protect their citizens.  Provided safeguards are in place to ensure that police do not randomly stop citizens because of their ethnic background or foreign accent, a law requiring an individual to provide verification of his immigration seems a reasonable precaution.

If it’s such a bad thing to ask for such verification, Mark Hemingway wonders why “Democratic leaders have proposed requiring every worker in the nation to carry a national identification card with biometric information, such as a fingerprint, within the next six years, according to a draft of the measure.”

The Arizona law would like be unnecessary if the federal government secured our border.  And U.S Senator Lamar Alexander (R-TN) is right on the money when he says, “President Barack Obama should force on securing the border before bringing up immigration reform“, saying

. . . that border security would have to precede any conversations on comprehensive immigration reform, for which an outline of legislation was released by Senate Democrats this week.

“When the border’s secure, then we can deal with people illegally here, and how they become citizens or not,” Alexander said on NBC’s “Meet the Press.”

Once the border is secure, we can move onto the more difficult issues of how to deal with those who are already here.  The problem with “amnesty” is not just rewarding those who have broken the law to come here, but also that it encourages other people to follow suit.  If the border is closed, that would make such journeys much more difficult.

So writes Jim Treacher about the “car bomb that forced the evacuation of New York’s Times Square“:

The bomb, which failed to detonate, was left in a sport utility vehicle close to a Broadway theatre where a production of The Lion King was showing.

It contained three propane tanks, fireworks, two five gallon gasoline containers, two clocks with batteries, electrical wires and a 4ft by 2ft metal box.

The dark green Nissan Pathfinder with tinted windows was parked near the junction of 45th Street and Broadway.

The location is also adjacent to the Viacom building, fuelling speculation that it might be linked to the company’s controversial South Park cartoon which recently depicted Prophet Muhammad in a bear suit.

Ed Driscoll has this report from Breaking News Online:

It is unclear who was driving the SUV, which had a license plate that did not match the vehicle, and no arrests were made as of early Sunday. Officials said the vehicle was seen driving west on 45th Street at 6.28 p.m. EDT in security camera footage. Additional footage from security cameras is being sought.

New York Police Commissioner Raymond Kelly said the car contained three propane tanks, consumer-grade fireworks, two filled 5-gallon gasoline containers, and two clocks with batteries, electrical wire and other components. A black metal box resembling a gun locker was also recovered.

Ed adds, “Allahpundit updates his post at Hot Air to include quite an interesting item from milblogger Bill Roggio: ‘A top Pakistani Taliban commander took credit for yesterday’s failed car bomb attack in New York City.’”  No wonder.  As Mark Steyn opines, “The important thing to remember about Iraq and Afghanistan is that, from the jihad’s point of view, they’re sideshows: The real battlefield is New York and Chicago and London and Paris.”

UPDATE:  With “Pakistani Taliban claim responsibility for Times Square bomb“, let’s bear in mind what Richard Fernandez wrote about this bombing and militant Islam: (more…)

Earlier today, Glenn Reynolds linked a piece which gets at the real problem of gay marriage perhaps better than anything I’ve read in the past few weeks. In his post, Why Can’t a Man Be More Like a Woman?, Stuart Schneiderman writes “about experiments in Germany and the United Kingdom where men were treated with a nasal spray containing the hormone oxytocin . . . a hormone that men and women possess, but that women possess in larger quantities”:

According to the article, it triggers labor pains, helps mothers to bond with their babies, and produces enhanced sensitivity and empathy.

The article fails to mention that when a woman has a sexual experience her body produces extra oxytocin, thereby drawing her closer to her lover. Researchers call oxytocin the “cuddle hormone.”

Oxytocin is one of the primary reasons why women who make a habit of hooking up cannot detach their emotions from their sexual experience as easily as men can.

Emphasis added.

And this difference why making the case for lesbian marriage is a heck of a lot easier than making the case for gay marriage, given that women more readily make an emotional commitment to their relationships than men do.  And seem to more innately understand the link between sexual fidelity and emotional commitment.  That said, our culture is replete with stories of women “taming” men, where the Lothario becomes a Romeo under the influence of a woman.

Marriage serves to resolve the natural tension between the sexes.

Now, this is not to say that we should not consider gay marriage because of the absence of sex difference between the partners, but instead that we should address that absence in our conversations on gay marriage.  And, in our personal lives, find means to incorporate the qualities contained in that tension in our relationships.

Thanks to a bill passed by the Republican House of Delegates, Democratic state Senate and signed into law by the Republican Governor, life just improved for gay people in the Commonwealth of Virginia.  And all without spending one dime of taxpayer money or limiting the freedom of private enterprise.  Indeed, this law expands their freedom, allowing companies to offer a greater range of benefits:

Previously, state law permitted Virginia residents to take out group life insurance coverage only for a legal spouse or a child under age 25. But the new statute, which takes effect July 1, broadens that group of people to include anyone with whom a Virginia resident has a substantial and economic interest, including a same-sex partner.

A Republican Delegate Tom Rust of Fairfax served as this bill’s “patron”.  Strikingly,

Previous versions of the bill allowed Virginia residents to designate someone from “any other class of persons” they wanted as a life insurance beneficiary, while the enacted version changes this language to “any other person” with whom the insured group member has an insurable interest.

The legislation notably failed in the two previous sessions when there were a greater number of Democratic lawmakers in the General Assembly and a Democratic governor. It passed during the administration of a Republican governor who’s not considered gay friendly.

Emphasis added.

Whether or not Governor Bob McDonnell is gay friendly or not, he does appear to be “freedom friendly”.  This elimination of a regulation benefits a lot of people, gays in particular.   Gay men and lesbians in the Old Dominion can now take out policies benefiting their partner.

We don’t need gay friendly Governors to improve life for gay people.  We just need Governors who are opposed to laws which limit our freedom.  So, let’s hope legislators in other states follow the lead of the Virginia counterparts and eliminate those laws which limit the freedom of people to enter into contracts.  ”Gay rights” then would not be gay rights per se, but just rights — getting the government out of our way so we can live our lives as we choose.

RELATED:  On Equal Rights & “Equality”: One Means Eliminating Bad Laws, the other Enacts New Ones.

Over at Big Government, Danielle Avel is taking feminists to task for their silence in the wake of Evangelical Rev. Franklin Graham’s disinvitation from the National Day of Prayer event at the Pentagon “because of his remarks about Islam which included, ‘When you look at what the religion [Islam] does to women and women alone, it is just horrid’“:

Feminists certainly could have come out in support of Franklin Graham’s truthful remarks and brought attention to some simple facts, like how women who live under Shariah Law are virtual prisoners and are not allowed to leave their home unless accompanied by an appropriate male guardian.  Or perhaps, start a discussion on the fact that over 90% of married women in supposedly “moderate Islamic” countries like Pakistan report being “kicked, slapped, beaten, or sexually abused” for crimes like failing to cook or clean to their husbands’ approval or for giving birth to a girl instead of a boy.  Maybe it would have been a good time to mention that now even here in the United States, fathers, brothers, and sons sometimes feel they have the right to viciously attack and murder their own female relatives in order to preserve their so-called “honor.”  At the very least, it would have been an appropriate moment for some feminist group to denounce the heinous practice of female genital mutilation or the stoning to death of women who are raped.  What about the Islamic tradition of forcing children to “marry” adult men who then take complete control over their little bodies — control enough to rape little girls to death as we saw in Yemen just weeks ago.

Even though feminists generally remain silent about this issue, the treatment of women in Islam can be, as Franklin Graham stated, “horrid.”

Guess the feminist groups fear that if they dare condemn the violence against women in Islamic cultures, they might forfeit their membership in the “Coalition of the Oppressed.”  Seems these feminist groups have a lot in common with European gay groups — and indeed gay groups in the United States.

Now, a number of conservative pundits and libertarian bloggers and even headline writers at the New York Times are comparing the Gulf Oil Spill to Katrina.  And there are numerous similarities.  A crisis coming from the Gulf, with Louisiana most severely hit.  And while the Administration has clearly blundered, acting too slowly, it was not entirely to blame for the mishap.

Even the New York Times and Bill Maher (Bill Maher!) have chastised the Administration, with the latter asking, “Why isn’t Barack Obama getting more s–t’ for the oil spill in the Gulf?”

In asking the question, he’s pretty much giving us the answer.  The president is not getting more grief for the spill for the same reason reporters didn’t catch l’Affaire Poney Soyeux (John Edwards’ mistress story):  He’s a Democrat.

We would see more hyperventilating news anchors and more screaming headlines a Republican president acted exactly as Obama had.  And they’d ramp up the stuff about W carrying water for the oil companies.

Defense Secretary Bill Robert (d’oh! thanks, Kurt…I do decaff) Gates’ letter yesterday to Ike Skelton, Chairman of the House Armed Services Committee urged Congress to postpone any legislative action on reversing Don’t Ask Don’t Tell.

Here’s the main part:

I believe in the strongest possible terms that the Department must, prior to any legislative action, be allowed the opportunity to conduct a thorough, objective, and systematic assessment of the impact of such a policy change; develop an attentive comprehensive implementation plan, and provide the President and the Congress with the results of this effort in order to ensure that this step is taken in the most informed and effective manner.

What the Secretary was saying is just what I’ve said many times (and speifically here): The military doesn’t change it’s toilet paper without an exhaustive investigation into its impacts on effectiveness and performance.

Naturally, the Leftist blogosphere is apoplecitc. The paragon of measured and rational thought, Pam Spaulding calls the letter “incredibly offensive and craven”. Then she goes on to completely miss the point I make above by basically dismissing the role of the Pentagon in the recinding of the rule.

What’s more, by choosing to demonize Gates (and the entire Pentagon, apparently), she’s alienating an ally who’s already stated his desire to see DADT repealed. It’s the unhinged lunacy of people like Pam and other “advocates” who clearly put “gay” “rights” above National Defense who are debasing the actual discussion.

Don’t Ask Don’t Tell should be repealed and gays and lesbians allowed to openly serve. But it needs to be done because it’s in the best interest of our defense, not because it’s unfair. What’s more, if we make this change simply because it’s the “fair” thing to do, we’re setting a very dangerous precedent: That our National Defense decisions are not a carefully determined series of choices based on what will best protect our Nation and her interests; rather they’re politically and socially motivated reactions to certain civillian cultural pressures. That is no way to run a military nor defend a country.

Would that such vocal opponents had more rationality behind their arguments, we’d likely have solved this long ago.

(As a self-promoting whore, I’d like to once again direct you to my series on the topic from a few years ago.)

-Nick (ColoradoPatriot, from HQ)

How Did Reporters Not See Their [John Edwards & mistress] Affair?

Caught this headline on AOL. The answer is easy. It’s that (D) after his name.

Reporters were busy chasing down non-existent conservative scandals.