There is something incredibly wrong when the White House and the Democratic Party cares more about going after critics in the media like Rush Limbaugh, Rick Santelli, and Jim Cramer than going after terrorists.

What can we take from these acts of desperation? Well I think the obvious thing is that the Obama campaign didn’t end on Election Day… it is still in full force. The difference between now and before the inauguration is that Obama can (and will) use government resources to bully and/or silence his critics. I fully expect that conservative pundits will find themselves audited at least once over the next four years… a similar intimidation tactic used by the Clinton administration.

In the end this tactic of attacking Obama’s critics, especially Rush Limbaugh, will backfire.

The strategy took shape after Democratic strategists Stanley Greenberg and James Carville included Limbaugh’s name in an October poll and learned their longtime tormentor was deeply unpopular with many Americans, especially younger voters. Then the conservative talk-radio host emerged as an unapologetic critic of Barack Obama shortly before his inauguration, when even many Republicans were showering him with praise.

Soon it clicked: Democrats realized they could roll out a new GOP bogeyman for the post-Bush era by turning to an old one in Limbaugh, a polarizing figure since he rose to prominence in the 1990s.

Limbaugh is embracing the line of attack, suggesting a certain symbiosis between him and his political adversaries.

“The administration is enabling me,” he wrote in an e-mail to POLITICO. “They are expanding my profile, expanding my audience and expanding my influence. An ever larger number of people are now being exposed to the antidote to Obamaism: conservatism, as articulated by me. An ever larger number of people are now exposed to substantive warnings, analysis and criticism of Obama’s policies and intentions, a ‘story’ I own because the [mainstream media] is largely the Obama Press Office.”

The Democrats, now lead by Barack Hussein Obama, are attempting to make up for their lack of leadership by making Rush Limbaugh their scapegoat… But the notion that Rush leads the GOP is just as silly as saying Chris Matthews or Keith Olbermann lead the Democrat Party.

Any President should have bigger fish to fry than his critics in the media. He fooled a lot of people on Election Day into thinking he was ready to be president, but he has yet to act presidential while in office.

You don’t have to take my word for it… the market speaks for itself.

UPDATE, by Mark Noonan:

From the Wall Street Journal:

…after five weeks in office, it’s become clear that Mr. Obama’s policies are slowing, if not stopping, what would otherwise be the normal process of economic recovery. From punishing business to squandering scarce national public resources, Team Obama is creating more uncertainty and less confidence — and thus a longer period of recession or subpar growth.

The Democrats who now run Washington don’t want to hear this, because they benefit from blaming all bad economic news on President Bush. And Mr. Obama has inherited an unusual recession deepened by credit problems, both of which will take time to climb out of. But it’s also true that the economy has fallen far enough, and long enough, that much of the excess that led to recession is being worked off. Already 15 months old, the current recession will soon match the average length — and average job loss — of the last three postwar downturns. What goes down will come up — unless destructive policies interfere with the sources of potential recovery.

Day after day, it gets clearer that a) Obama doesn’t have a clue and b) isn’t committed to protected this country…

Washington has told Moscow that Russian help in resolving Iran’s nuclear program would make its missile shield plans for Europe unnecessary, a Russian daily said on Monday, citing White House sources.

U.S. President Barack Obama made the proposal on Iran in a letter to his Russian counterpart, Dmitry Medvedev, Kommersant said, referring to unidentified U.S. officials.

Nixing our missile shield based on the good will of Russia and Iran?

I am blogging from Buffalo-Niagara International Airport… On my way to Dulles Airport via JFK in New York. I will mostly be posting updates via my Twitter account (@mattmargolis) so you can see how things are going there.

After one month in office, Barack Obama sees his approval drop, disapproval jump, and all claims of him being “post-partisan” go right down the toilet.

Increased public disapproval of Obama over the past month is mainly offset by a decrease in the percentage of Americans saying they have no opinion of his job performance. The latest figures are based on Gallup Poll Daily tracking from Feb. 19-21.

These shifts result in a slightly different profile for Obama relative to past presidents than what he enjoyed in the immediate afterglow of his inauguration. While Obama’s initial 68% job approval rating was one of the highest in Gallup polling history (from Dwight Eisenhower through George W. Bush), his current 63% job approval rating is typical of how the last several presidents have fared at the one-month mark.

So, as Republicans were clearly willing to give Obama a chance, Obama’s My-Way-Or-The-Highway Style “Bipartisanship” brought his historically high initial approval rating to a historically average approval rating.

According to Gallup, most presidents see an initial rise in their approval.

All newly elected presidents start off with a relatively high approval score, as well as a high percentage of Americans expressing “no opinion” about their job performance. As they start to make decisions, deliver speeches, and work with Congress, fewer Americans have “no opinion” about their performance, and most presidents see an initial rise in their approval rating. Historically, that rise has been evident after a month, and continues at least through the first 100 days.

So what can we make of this? What does this say about the potential approval ratings for Obama in the longterm? I think all presidents from now on will see their approval ratings teeter around 55% after an appropriate time has passed where the presidents performance can be properly judged on his presidential record. I expect Obama’s ratings to hit that mark within the 2009 calendar year. Obama clearly has decided to abandon his promise of bipartisanship, and thus the good will shown by Republicans will bleed away.

UPDATE: Today Gallup reports that Obama’s approval rating has now dipped below 60% for the first time, with independents now starting to see the light:

The drop below 60% approval within the past week — from 63% in Feb. 18-20 polling to 59% in Feb. 21-23 polling — has mostly come among independents. Late last week, 62% of independents approved of Obama, compared with 54% in the last three days.

His approval with Democrats has dipped (although to a statistically insignificant degree) while approval from Republicans, which has already took a big hit, remains unchanged from the last poll.

Binyam Mohamed, an al Qaeda trained terrorist was released from Guantanamo Bay and freed in England.

His release is unprecedented, and an example of Barack Obama’s lack of committment to the War on Terror. All previously released Gitmo detainees had been declassified and determined to no longer be a threat. Mohamed is still classified as an  “Unlawful Enemy Combatant.”

Militray Families United has responded with ad “to bring attention to the dangerous decision the White House has made in releasing Binyam Mohamed, a known member of al-Qaeda and alleged collaborator with the 9/11 mastermind, Khalid Sheikh Mohamed.”

According to a release from Military Families United:

Under the dark of night the Administration chartered a plane from Guantanamo Bay, Cuba to Britain to release this known terrorist as a free man. Actions speak louder than words in the War on Terror, and releasing dangerous terrorists as free men isn’t a way to keep America safe and secure,” said MFU’s Executive Director Brian Wise.

 In addition to the new advertisement, Military Families United distributed a petition to its members to urge President Obama to not release dangerous detainees from Guantanamo Bay if they still pose a threat to the United States. Military Families United will present this petition to the President and urge him to stop freeing terrorists. To see the petition visit http://www.dontfreeterrorists.org/

 “It is important the American people know how dangerous this decision is and how it will affect the ability for our brave men and women in uniform to win the War on Terror. This ad is designed to mobilize the American people to voice their opinions to the President that they do not want these terrorists released back into society where they pose a threat to America and its allies,” continued Wise.

Here is the ad:

Ouch.

Today marks the one-month anniversary of President Obama’s inauguration. In his brief time in office, the president has overseen three massive new spending initiatives — the $787 billion stimulus bill, the trillion-dollar financial stability initiative and, most recently, the $275 billion mortgage assistance program.

That’s a lot of activity, and a ton of money, but so far the reaction to the new administration’s programs has been decidedly negative. Investors, among others, have panned the plans; the stock market is off nearly 10% from the day before the inauguration, or more than 800 points on the Dow Jones Industrial Average.

All sorts of accusations flew around regarding the missing emails of the Bush Administration.

So, one has to ask, why is Mr. Hope-and-Change siding with Bush on it?

The Obama administration, siding with former President George W. Bush, is trying to kill a lawsuit that seeks to recover what could be millions of missing White House e-mails.

Two advocacy groups suing the Executive Office of the President say that large amounts of White House e-mail documenting Bush’s eight years in office may still be missing, and that the government must undertake an extensive recovery effort. They expressed disappointment that Obama’s Justice Department is continuing the Bush administration’s bid to get the lawsuits dismissed.

So, my liberal friends, what is your excuse for Obama on this?

Mark and I have been saying for a long time that the Democrats phony tough stance on ethcis and corruption would come back to bite them… and it looks like they are about to get bit really hard.

The Obama administration and the new Congress are quickly handing over to Republicans the same “culture of corruption” issue that Democrats used so effectively against the GOP before coming to power.

Freshman Sen. Roland Burris, D-Ill., is only the latest embarrassment.

Senate Democrats accepted Burris because they believed what he told them: He was clean. Burris now admits he tried to raise money for Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich, who authorities say sought to sell President Barack Obama’s former Senate seat.

“The story seems to be changing day by day,” Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., said Wednesday.

The political mess for the Democratic Party, however, isn’t Burris’ conduct alone; it’s the pattern that has developed so quickly over the past few months.

• The chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee, Rep. Charles Rangel, D-N.Y., is the subject of a House ethics investigation. It’s partly focused on his fundraising practices for a college center in his name, his ownership financing of a resort property in the Dominican Republic and his financial disclosure reports.
• Federal agents raided two Pennsylvania defense contractors that were provided millions of dollars in federal funding by Rep. John Murtha, D-Pa., chairman of the House Appropriations defense subcommittee.
• Blagojevich was arrested Dec. 9 on federal charges, including allegations he schemed to sell the Senate seat to the highest bidder.
• Tom Daschle, the former Senate majority leader from South Dakota, abandoned his bid to become health and human services secretary and the administration’s point man on reforming health care; and Nancy Killefer stepped down from a newly created position charged with eliminating inefficient government programs. Both Daschle and Killefer had tax problems, and Daschle also faced potential conflicts of interest related to working with health care interests.
• Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner was confirmed after revealing he had tax troubles.
• Obama’s initial choice for commerce secretary, Bill Richardson, stepped aside due to a grand jury investigation into a state contract awarded to his political donors.
• While the Senate voted overwhelmingly to confirm William Lynn as deputy defense secretary, Obama had to waive his ethics regulations to place the former defense lobbyist in charge of day-to-day operations at the Pentagon.

The No. 2 Senate Democrat, Richard Durbin of Illinois, expressed his anger about the Burris case Wednesday while he was on an official visit to Greece.

On that note, I am scheduled to do a book signing at CPAC 2009. If any of our reader will be there, bring your copy of Caucus of Corruption (or buy one there) and check the final schedule and I will sign your book!

And of course, bookmark Democrat Corruption, which, as the name suggusts, chronicles corruption in the Democratic Party.

Roland Burris, who was picked to fill Barack Obama’s barely used Senate seat, let the cat out of the bag this past week that Rod Blagojevich wanted him to raise $10,000 for his campaign in exchange for the Senate appointment. 

Should he stay or should he go? Obviously this news, which he did not reveal during testimony during the impeachment trial of Blagojovich, really puts a bigger stain on his record, but I for one don’t see him resigning, but I do see him having a number of primary challengers in 2010 and probably getting knocked out.

Thoughts?