Most Read
Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

Obama kisses the ring for Jarrett “wedding of the year”

Obama kisses the ring for Jarrett “wedding of the year”

Chicagoans will (once again) have to put up with road closures, traffic backups, and helicopter “noise pollution” when Barack Obama comes (once again) to the Windy City this weekend.

White House adviser Valerie Jarrett will also be in town for the wedding of her daughter, Laura Jarrett, to Tony Balkissoon. It appears likely that the Obamas will be attending the wedding, which takes place in Hyde Park, the President’s old stomping grounds.

From the Chicago Sun-Times:

A contingent from the president’s Cabinet including Attorney General Eric Holder and U.S. Trade Representative Ron Kirk, as well as Chicago attorney Allison Davis and Valerie’s close friend Susan Sher — Michelle Obama’s former chief of staff — also made the invited list.

“It could be the wedding of the year — considering how many powerful people may attend,” said a top Obama insider.

Obama’s very close relationship with fellow Saul Alinksyite Valerie Jarrett has been extensively researched by Breitbart’s Joel Pollak:

As more moderate, pragmatic voices have abandoned the White House to attend to the actual business of governing–Chicago mayor Rahm Emanuel being only one of many defectors–Jarrett has remained and her influence has grown….Jarrett endorses the idea that Obama is still a “community organizer” in the White House, and the administration’s Alinksyite tactics of race and class division bear her fingerprints as much as his own.

At least one former Obama administration official, Bill Daley, is skipping town in advance of the nuptials. Jeremy Segal of Breitbart News reports that Daley boarded a plane from O’Hare Airport this morning, where Segal questioned him about whether he left the White House because of Valerie Jarrett:

Segal provided the following transcript of his exchange with Daley (who boarded in first class, naturally) just a few minutes ago:

Breitbart News: Jeremy Segal with Breitbart News. I wanted to ask you two quick questions.

Bill Daley: OK, sure.

Breitbart News: I wanted to know if it disappointed you that the president took on the Catholic Church?

Daley: Who are you with again?

Breitbart News: Breitbart News.

Bill Daley: Is that a blog or something?

Breitbart News: Yes, and a national news site. You know Andrew Breitbart?

Bill Daley: Oh yeah, isn’t that the guy that died?

Breitbart News: What are your feelings about–or were you disappointed that the president took on the Catholic Church?

Bill Daley: He didn’t take on the church…

Breitbart News: He didn’t?

Bill Daley: No, there are some differences in view on certain issues, but he didn’t take on the church.

Breitbart News: Did you leave the White House because of Valerie Jarrett?

Bill Daley: No.

Breitbart News: Would you care to elaborate on that?

Bill Daley: No, it had nothing to do with Valerie Jarrett.

No evidence to support this is why Bill Daley’s getting out of town, but wouldn’t you?

As Obama kisses the ring of his Chicago king-makers, the taint of the city’s dirty politics continues to surround the president.

DONATE

Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.

Comments

Next to Holder, Jarrett may be the single most dangerous person counseling Obama.

Oh, and Daley is a big, fat liar. Duh.

I think I’ll follow Daley out of town this weekend and get away from the ill winds of change.
****

Why as a nation do we keep electing Democrats?
Maybe it’s because it feels sooo good when we stop (electing democrats).

I was friends with a cop from Chicago(now retired) and a hotel owner.
Imagine how corrupt Chicago is, then TRIPLE it.
They don’t have a government in Chicago, they have a mafia.

From what I hear about Daley’s relationship with Jarrett, I’m not surprised that he skipped town.
The stench of commies is pretty nasty.

Even Daley is worried that if he crosses Jarret that he’ll sleep with the fishes of Lake Michigan.

We keep electing because the media is in the tank for the dims and praise them to the skies and denigate republicans at every opportunity. Also, because half of these dims are of the same persuasion as obama and jarret and the other half have failed to realize the democrate party is not the same as it was in the days of their fathers. Thanks, again to the media. The female democrats think the party will look after their interests and they ignore the rough treatment of Hillary’s supporters in the last convention. And, of course, they are all against the big, bad republican party which is made up of old rich white men. /sarc. As soon as the dim party can no longer throw our money and goods at all their special interst groups, these groups will desert the party in a minute. This will never happen. This administration can still borrow from foreign counties and put us under obligation to these countries and egregious concessions made to them not in our best interests.

Thank you for the link to the wedding registry. I went to laugh, but stayed to appreciate the selections…I think I want everything on that list – especially these pretty wine glasses:

http://www.williams-sonoma.com/products/7943657/?registryId=2889810&fromrgl=1

They are $75 apiece, and she wants 15 of them for a total of $1125. So far four have been purchased, leaving 11 more to buy for $825.

Anyone care to chip in?

Frank Scarn | June 12, 2012 at 3:03 pm

Jarrett is to Obama as “Colonel” House was to Wilson.

Neither of these two ultra-close-to-the-president “advisors” had the best interests of the US at heart. It should go without saying that the two “advisors” and the two presidents were all Democrats. To this day Democrats do not pursue the best interests of America.

“In this capacity, House quickly developed an extraordinarily intimate relationship with the president as political advisor, personal confidant, and frequent social companion. He engaged actively in the extended politicking that ultimately led to passage of the Federal Reserve Act, and in the ticklish matter of U.S. relations with Mexico, then in the throes of violent revolution. As war clouds began to gather over Europe, House, with Wilson’s approval, undertook to head off hostilities by bringing about an understanding among the three greatest powers, the United States, Great Britain, and Germany, making them jointly the guarantors of world peace. He met with Kaiser Wilhelm II and with British foreign secretary Sir Edward Grey, among others, to work up interest in the plan, but this attempt at preemptive reconciliation obviously never came to fruition.
. . .
House shared Wilson’s vision of a League of Nations, and at the conference he did as much as anyone to make this vision a reality, albeit one born with a congenital defect, owing to the ultimate U.S. refusal to join it. Twenty-six years later, the creation of the United Nations, a second try at the establishment of an international peace-keeping league, may therefore be traced in part to back to House.”

Who Was Edward M. House? Robert Higgs (August 13, 2008),
http://www.independent.org/newsroom/article.asp?id=2294

To this day constitutionally-minded Americans object to the Federal Reserve, the posturing the USA to be a guarantor of so-called world peace, the involvement of the USA in WW1, the membership of the USA in the League of Nations cum the United Nations.

Jarrett and her president support all of that and a whole lot more to advance an “internationalist” agenda which would see the USA cede away even more sovereignty. This is good for America?

While she might hold a US passport, Jarrett is most definitely not an American.

    Ragspierre in reply to Frank Scarn. | June 12, 2012 at 3:21 pm

    The Frankfurt School never figured out how to issue their own passports.

    Otherwise…

    Milhouse in reply to Frank Scarn. | June 13, 2012 at 3:24 am

    To this day constitutionally-minded Americans object to the Federal Reserve, the posturing the USA to be a guarantor of so-called world peace, the involvement of the USA in WW1, the membership of the USA in the League of Nations cum the United Nations.

    There is nothing in the least unconstitutional about any of those things. Some of them may be unwise, and ought to be opposed on policy grounds; which ones these are depends on ones perspective. But opposing any of them on constitutional grounds is the hallmark of a crank. Birchers are every bit as bad as Truthers.

Henry Hawkins | June 12, 2012 at 3:25 pm

I’m a huge fan of Valerie Jarrett. She’s the advisor most responsible for advising Obama right into a one-term failure. A better advisor might have prevented Obama from pursuing all these things that are leading directly to a November electoral implosion. One year ago I thought Obama would, by now, have been repositioned (if only in appearances) to the center left, and believed Bill Daly had been brought in to do just that. But no… Daly is gone, Jarrett reigns supreme, and the results are killing Obama’s reelection prospects and tainting the progressive movement beyond redemption.

Thank you, Ms. Jarrett.

    full-throated support in reply to Henry Hawkins. | June 12, 2012 at 6:43 pm

    Long live Jarrett, the communist queen!

    Barack failed her and the ultimate in egalitarian-leaning dictatorship elitist systems, not the other way around.

    Juba Doobai! in reply to Henry Hawkins. | June 13, 2012 at 9:21 am

    Obama is kitty whipped. Michelle in the bedroom. Valerie in the office. What’s a male to do? Take his whipping with a smile. He’s too lazy and too incompetent to take charge for himself.

TrooperJohnSmith | June 12, 2012 at 3:40 pm

As one Chicagoan commented on Jarret: “I’d call her a piece of sh!t, but sh!t ain’t never done nothin’ to me.”

As for electing Democrats, they pander to the lowest common denominator: what’s in it for me? The appeal of this is to both the amoral givers and the equally amoral recipients. Such a quid pro quo relationship is inherently honest on a dishonest level, because it establishes a cause/effect process, holding each side both accountable and tight-lipped. There is none of that Social Contract mumbo-jumbo, and the consent of the governed is based on something tangible and personally beneficial. In short, it’s a criminal compact with which criminals are inherently comfortable.

Is “ring” Chicago-speak for ass?

Twice already, I have been late for doctor’s appointments because of this man. As a heart transplant recipient, I have regular appointments at the University of Chicago Hospital (regardless of Michelle Obama’s “involvement,” it truly is a wonderful hospital). And as I said, I’ve been late to these twice because the President is in town.

I have another appointment Monday. He better get his and her big rears (especially hers) out of town by Sunday night, or I will be really ticked off.

Did my invitation get lost in the mail?

Here’s some information on the lucky groom. I wonder what minority he selected to gain admission to Harvard.

http://www.martindale.com/Tony-Balkissoon/46647561-lawyer.htm

Font Resize
Contrast Mode
Send this to a friend