So here’s hoping everyone has a wonderful Memorial Day weekend, and please remember the ultimate sacrifice paid by those who fought and died for our freedom.

Another “price of arugula at Whole Foods” moment from a man who’s been detached from the “real world” his entire life.

Anywho…

Yes. Chris Matthews is sick of people making fun of him for declaring on national television that he got a “thrill up his leg” after listening to President Obama.

Fishbowl DC notes that Matthews unleashed on CSPAN’s Steve Scully, after asking about the “thrill up his leg” comment during a media panel at a convention in Boston.

“Is the thrill still there?” asked Scully.

Matthews wasn’t thrilled with the question.

“I hope that you feel satisfied that you’ve used the most obvious question that is raised by every horse’s ass right-winger I ever bump into,” Matthews responded, after defending the comment.

Matthews said that he made the comment because he has “traditional values” and loves his country. “I do have physical reactions when people are talking about my country,” he added, noting that a news anchor like Tom Brokaw wouldn’t have said it. …

Ah, I see.  The tingle was just he loves his country so much, you wingnuts.  He’s just a true patriot, or something.

Oh, and if you refer to him as Tingles (or to the leg “thrill” as a tingle), then you’re gay.  Neener neener!

“Perhaps I shouldn’t have said so because I’ve given a lot of jackasses the chance to talk about it,” Matthews continued.

“And usually they say ‘tingle’ which says something about their orientation, but that’s alright,” he added. Later he interjected, “Not that there’s anything wrong with that, of course. I have to throw that in.”

Remember when liberals used to pretend that being gay was OK?

I dunno.  Maybe Tingles is still bent on his less than flattering display of mental acumen on Jeopardy!, and that’s why he’s in such a foul mood.

President Barack Obama continued to have trouble on Tuesday performing in Democratic primaries in traditionally conservative states, barely eking out wins in Kentucky and Arkansas.

The president didn’t even have an opponent in Kentucky, but with 99 percent of the vote counted, Obama took just 57.9 percent of the vote, with the remaining more than 42 percent of ballots cast for “uncommitted.”

In Arkansas, with 70 percent of the vote tallied, Obama nabbed just 59 percent of the vote. His opponent there, John Wolfe, was able to take 41 percent of the vote at that point, according to The Associated Press.

Wolfe, an attorney from Tennessee whose platform includes repealing “Obamacare,” was able to win several counties.

I’m gonna go out way on a limb and predict that the kneejerk defense from the left or the MSM (pardon the redundancy) will be to attack the electorate in these states as racist.

Is GOP trying to sabotage economy to hurt Obama?

Read the intro:

By CHARLES BABINGTON | Associated Press – Sat, May 19, 2012

WASHINGTON (AP) — Are Republican lawmakers deliberately stalling the economic recovery to hurt President Barack Obama’s re-election chances? Some top Democrats say yes, pointing to GOP stances on the debt limit and other issues that they claim are causing unnecessary economic anxiety and retarding growth.

ObaMao’s big government borrow-and-spend policies have been crap, with no positive results and a plethora of negative results.  So Americans elect the GOP to control the House, as their way of expressing displeasure with (among other things) B.O.’s and the Dems’ way of dealing with the economy.  So when the Republican House - again, elected by the people to stop Obamanomics - decides to stop the runaway borrow-and-spend Greece-like policies…they’re trying to sabotage the economy?

Um, yeah.  They’re trying to sabotage something that hasn’t friggin’ worked in nearly four years, and the AP treats it as though it’s a given that Obamanomics works and those mean ol’ Republicans are trying to “sabotage the economy” just to hurt Obama.  Because Obama’s economic policies couldn’t possibly harm Obama…nope, it’s those economy-sabotaging Republicans!

Nope…no liberal media bias!

A YouTube video uploaded on Monday afternoon apparently shows a schoolteacher from the Rowan-Salisbury school district in North Carolina informing a student that failing to be respectful of President Obama is a criminal offense. Breitbart News has uncovered that the student is a high school junior, and that the teacher is apparently one Tanya Dixon-Neely.

The video shows a classroom discussion about the Washington Post hit piece about Mitt Romney bullying a kid some five decades ago. One student says, “Didn’t Obama bully someone though?” The teacher says: “Not to my knowledge.” The student then cites the fact that Obama, in Dreams from My Father, admits to shoving a little girl. “Stop, no, because there is no comparison,” screams the teacher. Romney is “running for president. Obama is the president.”

Uh…what?

Scary: people like this lady are molding impressionable young minds.

Well, she could not have done any worse than Matthews’ last place finish and puny total of $2,300. You MUST see the short video of Tingles embarrassing himself here at the MRC web site, as it is short yet hilarious.

I’m gonna guess his leg was kinda numb after this! 

The NBC Investigative Unit has raised questions about two grants totaling nearly $1.5 million dollars distributed to the University of California San Francisco. The money was part of the federal stimulus program and went to studies into the erectile dysfunction of overweight middle aged men and the accurate reporting of someone’s sexual history.

Of course it’s in San Fransicko.  Where the h3ll else would it be?

Our elected (almost said “erected”) leaders thought it would be a good use of money forcibly removed from the producers of society in order to study sexual history and flaccid schlongs.  Because that’s clearly a federal role, right?

See, though, she’s just telegraphing the left’s and the MSM’s (pardon the redundancy) intention: get the ADHD public focused on shiny objects to distract them from the colossal failure of Oba-Mao’s government-controlled central planning economic policies.  Sure, jobs have hemorrhaged since he took over, more people have abandoned looking for work, gas prices have more than doubled, foreclosures have spiked, and…oooo, look, gay marriage/medical dope/dog on a car roof!

An obscure federal prison inmate gave President Obama an unexpected run for his money in the West Virginia Democratic Primary Tuesday, highlighting the deep dislike for the president in the Appalachian heartland.

With 96% of the precincts reporting Tuesday night, Keith Judd was holding steady at 41% of the vote and had won ten counties.

Judd is also known as federal prison inmate Number 11593-051 at the Beaumont Federal Correctional Institution in Beaumont, Texas, where Judd is serving a 210-month sentence for extortion and making threats at the University of New Mexico in 1999.

According to both state and national Democratic Party rules, Keith Russell Judd is entitled to receive at least one delegate from West Virginia for the Democratic National Convention in Charlotte, N.C. because he received 15% of the vote.

Dude couldn’t get 60% of West Virginia Democrats on board in a primary with a joke of an opponent.  A convict.  How friggin’ awesome is that? 

So last night, he became the first incumbent Senator this election cycle to lose a primary.  And it wasn’t even close.

If you want another reason to be glad he’s gone, his loss is being lamented by Jean-Francois Heinz-Kerry, who is rumored to have served in Vietnam.  If Kerry laments a Republican losing his seat, it’s probably a good thing.

“That’s one thing George Bush said that was right:  the President is the Decider-in-Chief.  Nobody can make that decision for you.  Look, he knew what would happen.  Suppose the navy SEALs had gone in there and it hadn’t been bin Laden?  Suppose they’d been captured or killed?  The downside would have been horrible for him.  But he reasoned, ‘I cannot in good conscience do nothing.’  He took the harder and more honorable path, and one that produced, in my opinion, the best result.”

So Bubba opines that had the raid gone awry, the fallout would have been disastrous…for Obama!  Yeah, screw the SEALs and the country, the real issue would have been Obama’s re-election chances!  Way to keep your eyes on the prize (and off of the interns), BJ!

Well, Time magazine had an article, by former Newsweak hack Jon Meacham, with a slightly different (but highly significant) quote from Bubba:

“That’s one thing George Bush said that was right:  the President is the Decider-in-Chief.  Nobody can make that decision for you.  Look, he knew what would happen.  Suppose the navy SEALs had gone in there and it hadn’t been bin Laden?  Suppose they’d been captured or killed?  The downside would have been horrible (???? – CL).  But he reasoned, ‘I cannot in good conscience do nothing.’  He took the harder and more honorable path, and one that produced, in my opinion, the more honorable and best result.”

Notice how the quote was totally altered to remove the pesky and problematic “for him” part, and how “honorable” was added a second time, despite the fact that Bubba never used it the second time.  Isn’t the purpose of the quote to, oh I dunno, quote something that someone actually said?

Nope…no liberal media bias!

So much for the idea of West is best. In an annual survey, executives ranked California as the worst place to do business for the eighth year in a row.

Chief Executive magazine has only been conducting its survey for eight years. Texas has been top-ranked every year.

The survey considered responses from 650 business leaders, who graded states on factors such as taxes, regulations, living environment and more.

Texas and second-ranked Florida have the highest migration rates in the nation for 2001 through 2009. California has lost 1.5 million people over the same period.
…
Its 10.9% unemployment rate is only lower than Nevada’s and Rhode Island’s. A third of U.S. welfare recipients live in California, the report noted. High state taxes and bundles of red tape make operating a business in the state unaffordable to many companies, critics say.

Last year, 254 California companies moved some or all of their work and jobs elsewhere — 26% more than 2010. Most chief executives in Silicon Valley said they won’t expand in the state, according to the survey.

Interesting observations here.  Note the performance of the red/reddish states…

Also in the top 10: North Carolina, Tennessee, Indiana, Virginia, South Carolina, Georgia and Utah.

… and blue states.

California narrowly edged out New York in what the survey called “the ninth circle of business hell,” sharing the bottom five spots with Illinois, Massachusetts and Michigan.

I’m sure the crushing regulations and taxes of the blue states have nothing to do with their rankings whatsoever.  Right?

Large wind farms might have a warming effect on the local climate, research in the United States showed on Sunday, casting a shadow over the long-term sustainability of wind power. …

Researchers at the State University of New York at Albany analysed the satellite data of areas around large wind farms in Texas, where four of the world’s largest farms are located, over the period 2003 to 2011.

The results, published in the journal Nature Climate Change, showed a warming trend of up to 0.72 degrees Celsius per decade in areas over the farms, compared with nearby regions without the farms.

“We attribute this warming primarily to wind farms,” the study said. The temperature change could be due to the effects of the energy expelled by farms and the movement and turbulence generated by turbine rotors, it said.

“These changes, if spatially large enough, may have noticeable impacts on local to regional weather and climate,” the authors said.

The Times needs to offer an aggressive look at the president’s record, policy promises and campaign operation to answer the question: Who is the real Barack Obama?Many critics view The Times as constitutionally unable to address the election in an unbiased fashion. Like a lot of America, it basked a bit in the warm glow of Mr. Obama’s election in 2008. The company published a book about the country’s first African-American president, “Obama: The Historic Journey.” The Times also published a lengthy portrait of him in its Times Topics section on NYTimes.com, yet there’s nothing of the kind about George W. Bush or his father.

According to a study by the media scholars Stephen J. Farnsworth and S. Robert Lichter, The Times’s coverage of the president’s first year in office was significantly more favorable than its first-year coverage of three predecessors who also brought a new party to power in the White House: George W. Bush, Bill Clinton and Ronald Reagan.

Writing for the periodical Politics & Policy, the authors were so struck by the findings that they wondered, “Did The Times, perhaps in response to the aggressive efforts by Murdoch’s Wall Street Journal to seize market share, decide to tilt more to the left than it had in the past?”

I strongly doubt that. Based on conversations with Times reporters and editors who cover the campaign and Washington, I think they see themselves as aggressive journalists who don’t play favorites. Still, a strong current of skepticism holds that the paper skews left. Unfortunately, this is exacerbated by collateral factors — for example, political views that creep into nonpolitical coverage.

Nope, we’ve been right down the middle, no favoritism on our part.  How do we know?  Because we just checked ourselves.  And as luck would have it, we’re clean.  So there.

So nope…no liberal media bias!

White House Press Secretary Jay Carney announced that White House legal counsel has concluded no White House staff engaged in any “misconduct” in Cartagena.

Oh.  Well, h3ll, issue resolved.

How did you guys properly observe Mother Gaia’s holiday?