We've lost a great American. Colonel(Ret) Jack 'Bulldog' Moroney went to be with the Lord today. Jack was a decorated veteran who had served in various CONUS units in addition to his assignments to Special Forces Camps at Mang Buk and Ben Het in Vietnam. The link provides an article he wrote for the Rutland Herald.
Unfortunately, it's just The Onion.
The blunder, captured by all major media outlets and broadcast live on CNN, occurred when the typically polished Obama fielded a question about his health care policy. Obama answered by saying he would give small business owners a tax credit to help them provide health care for their employees, and then added, "Now, I'm not completely certain that my plan would work because, overall, I think I would make a bad president."
According to sources, before those on hand could fully process what Obama had said, the Illinois senator continued to stumble, claiming that, were he to win the general election, he'd have absolutely no idea what to do.
"My youth and inexperience would definitely make me an awful president," said Obama, whose seven-minute misstep was further exacerbated when he called himself "no expert" on the economy. "To be perfectly honest, I'd be worried about putting me in charge of the most powerful military in the world because I'm not any good when it comes to making important decisions. Also, I'm not sure how much I care about keeping this great nation of ours safe."
"I'm an elitist, I hate Israel, and I want to lose the war in Iraq," Obama concluded, and then, seemingly unaware of the magnitude of his blunder, smiled, gave a thumbs-up to the stunned crowd, and urged his supporters to get out and vote on Nov. 4.
Immediately following the speech, Obama campaign officials released a written statement alleging that their candidate's comments had been taken out of context. In addition, Obama's top adviser David Axelrod claimed that the senator was quoting former president Abraham Lincoln when he said, "I am not the guy to head the executive branch of the United States government. Trust me. I'm really not." . . . On the other hand, is there any way we could spike his argula with truth serum? Hilarity would ensue.
You just need to get to his teleprompter ...
Posted by: Mike ||
10/29/2008 17:15 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
Heres all you need to know about Sen. Barack Obama and his campaign. He taped the video portion of his half-hour TV special, which airs across your dial at 8 p.m. Eastern tonight, last week.
Now, a week is a year and a year is a lifetime in presidential campaigns. But it is characteristic of Obama to plan ahead in the heat of the battle. The cool, collected senator has known from the start (nearly two years ago) pretty much what he has wanted to say. He kept his eyes on the prize. The small stuff didnt distract him.
That is why his campaign and its staff, which I have checked in with twice in the last week here in Chicago, remain relatively calm as they head into the final lap of a national NASCAR race that has not quite turned into the rout that history and other factors would lead you to predict.
By all accounts and by all odds, Obama is fairly comfortably ahead in the Electoral Collegewhich, as Al Gore will tell you, is what matters.
On TV Wednesday night, Obama will give what one aide described to me as a meaty discourse on his basic tax and health-care proposals. No high-flown rhetoric, but rather a briefing paper for wary undecided swing voters---most of whom, the campaign thinks, are soft Republicans who kind of want to vote for Obama but need reassurance.
And yet, in the meantime, Sen. John McCain has not quite disappeared in the rear-view mirror.
I find that astonishing. And, if you are in the Obama campaign, you have to find that at the very least a teeny bit troubling in these last days.
Let me repeat the following litany, just for the sake of wonder if nothing else:
Consumer confidence is at an all-time low. The job performance rating of the outgoing Republican president is at Nixon-Carter levels. Nine out of ten voters think the country is off on the wrong track. The Democrats lead in the generic congressional preference vote by a double-digit margin.
Obama has outspent McCain on TV advertising three or four to one (though McCain is matching him in some key states here at the end). Obama has four thousand paid organizers in key states, an unheard of number. Most voters think that McCains running mate is not qualified to be president. Many people wonder aloud if McCain is in fact too old (72) to be president. Much of the media coverage of Obama has been fawning to say the least, and with good reason. He is one of the most winsome, charismatic candidates to have appeared on the scene in decades.
Still, in todays traditional Gallup Daily Tracking Poll (the one that screens likely voters most rigorously, based on past votes), Obama leads McCain by only two percentage points, 49 to 47 percent.
Here in Chicago, they say that they expected a close race at the end, as one staffer put it. They are steady as she goes on ad spending, and they are fighting the end game on Red State turf, which is what the frontrunner does. They scoff at the idea that McCain could win Pennsylvania, and they are almost certainly right about that.
Its hard to make the Electoral College numbers add up for McCain. He has to win all of the current tossup states (Montana, North Dakota, Missouri, Indiana, North Carolina and Florida), plus Ohio and Virginia and one of the following three: New Hampshire, Colorado or New Mexico. That isnt just drawing one inside straight; thats
drawing a whole casinos worth of them.
Why hasnt Obama run away with this?
Because the country remains culturally divided. Because the more it looks like Democrats will score huge gains in Congress, the more worried soft Republican voters get. Because McCain has succeeded, in the minds of some of those voters, in raising the hoary specter of tax-and-spend liberals. Because Obama hails from a place (South Side Chicago) and background (the son of professional academics) more reminiscent of Democratic losers like Michael Dukakis, Al Gore and John Kerry than winners like LBJ, Jimmy Carter or Bill Clinton. Because some voters remember the hate-filled sound bites of the Rev. Jeremiah Wright.
And, to a degree we cannot measure and may never fully know, because Obama is an African-American---and one with a Swahili name at that.
There is nothing that the staffers here in Chicago can do about any of that at this point. Up on the 11th floor of the office building here, staffers are hard at work. They arent thinking about those things. Their campaign manager, David Plouffe, wont let them. We expected this to tighten, one of them said to me a few hours ago.
#1
The race is not tightening. The polls are tightening.
What's the difference? The MSM has been publishing polls which show Bammo ahead, and gaining momentum, in an effort to make it so. The polls have been aspirational, not representative of reality.
Still, no pollster wants a record of being grossly inaccurate. What to do? Narrow the gap as election day approaches. You can be as wrong as you like a month before the vote, so long as you are only a few points off by election day. After all, who can prove you were wrong when you showed Bammo winning by 12 points in September?
As for why the "poll" gap narrowed in the final days, make up any story you like. Blame it on swiftboaters, voter intimidation, racism or whatever. Just never admit that your polls were bullshit all along -- designed to influence the result and nothing more.
Witness the Zero camp's not-so-hidden fear - Rendell even publicly admitted he's nervous about Penn., which they've been claiming is all sewn up. I've read several other stories too about the Nobama camp being nervous about various states - I have no doubt their internal polls do not reflect the public ones their fellow-travelers are pushing publishing.
Posted by: Barbara Skolaut ||
10/29/2008 19:32 Comments ||
Top||
#3
How delicious it would be if the whole thing came down like a house of cards built by the MSM.
I'm not counting on it as I'm doing my best to manage expectations. But I must admit, the cognitive dissonance would be startling to witness.
As the Fates would tell us...
"The Gods make proud first those they intend to strike down."
#4
"Nine out of ten voters think the country is off on the wrong track."
Funny how the political know-it-alls always equate the above statistic with a Republican/Bush approval rating. BTW...hows them Democrat controlled congress approval ratings workin for ya? Hmmm...I thought so.
#1
JohnQ the Pollster says there is a lot funny about most of the polls. Some of the pollsters who work for the networks are in the bag for Obama. If one pollster took a sample on the weekend for one candidate and the same or another pollster took a sample for the other candidate on a weekday, you could get a large spread between the two candidates. Don't believe the pollsters. I will believe this election results when the final vote is verified as legitimate and then counted.
#2
Voter: Hello
Pollster: Hello, would you participate in a poll for the 2008 election?
Voter: Well, I suppose ...
Pollster: Do you favor our Lord and Messiah Barack Obama or that weasel McCain?
Voter: Well, uh ...
Pollster: Another vote for Obama, thank you. CLICK
(CNN) -- Election Day is still days away, but Republicans are already caught up in a heated debate about Sarah Palin's future role in the party should the GOP ticket fail to win the White House.
In one corner are some conservatives who believe the Alaska governor has been a detriment to John McCain's presidential bid and threatens to lead the party astray for the foreseeable future.
Another faction says Palin's core-conservative beliefs, demonstrated political acumen, and compelling frontier biography position her to reshape the face of a party now viewed by many voters as out of touch.
It's a debate, somewhat ugly at times, that is beginning to play out in public view as Republicans brace themselves for the possibility of losing the White House and a significant number of seats in Congress come Election Day. And that may leave the party in shambles with drastically reduced influence in Washington. iReport.com: Share your thoughts on Palin
Should that happen, political observers say, the party will face its biggest identity crisis in more than a generation, and Palin may well be caught squarely in the middle of it.
"A civil war that is simmering will break out into the open if McCain loses, and the party will have to decide what they want to be in the post-Reagan world," said Gloria Borger, a senior political analyst for CNN. Watch whether Palin is making a power play »
Palin, whose campaign rally crowds have been noticeably larger than McCain's, will certainly have legitimacy to run for president in four years should she want to. Some McCain operatives, claiming Palin repeatedly veers off script and often disregards the campaign's advice, already believe she is more interested in positioning herself for the future than helping the party win this year.
"She is such a compelling figure, and she has helped, without a doubt, with the Republican base," CNN Chief National Correspondent John King said. "But she's also hurting with key constituencies, like suburban women and independents, and there's a big question that, if McCain loses, does she try to emerge as the leader of the party heading into the 2012 cycle?"
Should Palin ultimately decide to launch her own presidential bid, she will face a massive headwind from an influential group of conservatives who believe the Alaska governor represents the very reasons why the Republican Party finds itself in retreat.
"She is a person of great ambition, but the question remains: What is the purpose of the ambition? She wants to rise, but what for? It's unclear whether she is Bushian or Reaganite. She doesn't think aloud. She just ... says things," conservative columnist Peggy Noonan wrote in a recent Wall Street Journal column.
It's an argument that has been echoed by a string of conservatives -- including David Brooks, George Will, Kathleen Parker, and David Frum -- who believe Palin exhibits a poisonous anti-intellectual instinct of the party that threatens to ultimately destroy its foundations.
"Reagan had an immense faith in the power of ideas. But there has been a counter, more populist tradition, which is not only to scorn liberal ideas but to scorn ideas entirely. And I'm afraid that Sarah Palin has those prejudices," said Brooks, a conservative columnist for the New York Times.
Frum, a former speechwriter for President Bush who has written that Palin is woefully inexperienced to be president, told CNN the Alaska governor's chances might be slim in a general election matchup.
"She will face the classic problem of being a strong candidate for the nomination, but not such an appealing candidate across party lines," he said. "She has a very intense following among core Republicans, but at the same time, non-core Republicans have reached a very negative verdict."
Frum also pointed to recent polling that suggests Palin's unfavorable ratings have sharply risen in the last two months, and predicted it will be extremely difficult for her to combat a perception among many voters that she is a lightweight, ill equipped for the burdens of the presidency.
"This is a moment where people have formed impressions, they have been watching her closely and paying a lot of attention," he said. "Even if she spends the next two and a half years delivering worthy speeches at the Council on Foreign Relations, the cumulative work that she will do will be seen by fewer people than probably watched the Katie Couric interview or the Charlie Gibson interview, or the debate with Joe Biden."
But even as one corner of the party predicts dire consequences if Palin becomes the Republican standard-bearer, another is strongly behind her.
"I hope and expect that she stays involved nationally, and she can play pretty much whatever role she wants to. She's got momentum now, and I'd be surprised if she didn't play a leadership role in the party," Richard Viguerie, a prominent cultural conservative and chairman of conservativehq.com, told CNN.
Viguerie, as well as many other cultural conservatives, point to Palin's core beliefs on key issues such as abortion and same-sex marriage and say she represents a fresh face, from a different region of the country, who has the potential to reshape the conservative movement.
"Palin, as best I can describe it, exudes a kind of middle-class magnetism. It's subdued but nonetheless very powerful," Weekly Standard editor Fred Barnes recently wrote. "Whether they know it or not, Republicans have a huge stake in Palin. If, after the election, they let her slip into political obscurity, they'll be making a tragic mistake."
Factors out of Palin's control could ultimately control her fate.
The political landscape in 2012 may look markedly different than it does now, depending on the success of a President Obama should the Illinois senator win. Unforeseen developments in the economy and the war in Iraq will also likely have an effect on whether Palin rises to the forefront of her party in the next election cycle.
But one thing is clear: If Palin wants to mount a serious bid for her party's nomination in 2012, she has a lot of groundwork to do.
She has yet to form relationships with many key conservative groups at the local level, whose support would be instrumental in ultimately capturing the Republican presidential nomination. She knows few party chairman in the key early primary states where the race will likely be decided.
"She needs to get out there and get to know conservative leaders at the national, state, and local level," Viguerie said. "She needs to introduce herself in a way she hasn't had the opportunity to do so far."
And should McCain lose next Tuesday, the Alaska governor will have little time to take a breath.
"She would have to start the day after the election if she wants to run for president -- there is no period where the election isn't going on," Frum said.
#2
not to mention that the fact that they ass-u-me that McCain lost. Last I looked at the polls, they are tightening like they always do before the Republicans win.
#3
After editing for context, its shoudl read this way:
In one corner are someManhattan-DC cocktail-party & media conservatives who believe the Alaska governor has been a detriment to John McCain's presidential bid and threatens to lead the party astrayback to its conservative/populist Reagan roots thereby denying the elites their influence and access to power for the foreseeable future.
... as if McCain's constant blundering and lackluster campaigning is not enough of a cause of failure in itself.
The only reason Gov Palin may be "hurting" certain demographics is that the mass media has been savaging her and painting a false portrait on behalf of the Obama campaign, instead of telling the truth.
#6
I agree with 3dc. I'm voting more for Palin than I am for McCain. One thing that so-called Republican "leaders" overlook is that conservatives by and large vote Republican because there is nowhere else for them to go, not because they are in love with the party.
Posted by: Infidel Bob ||
10/29/2008 13:50 Comments ||
Top||
#7
I agree with 3dc.
I'm voting for Palin and against Obama.
If Mac can pull off the upset he'd be well advised to understand that Palin won the election for him.
History shows that "elite conservatives" were dismissive and harshly critical of Mr. Reagan and Mrs. Thatcher long before those two giants came into their own.
#8
Had the VP been Tom Ridge or Mitt, I think McCain would have had a stronger hand. I won't be voting for Palin in 2012, maybe Mitt.
"I'm going to be honest: I know a lot less about economics than I do about military and foreign policy issues. I still need to be educated." Wall Street Journal, 11/26/05
"The issue of economics is not something I've understood as well as I should." Boston Globe Political Intelligence, 12/18/07
"I might have to rely on a vice president that I select" for expertise on economic issues. GOP Debate, 11/28/07
#9
However it turns out Tuesday, i think the RNC would be terminally stoopid not to include SP in future plans. She has connected with so many folks and shaken up the conventional wisdom that that momentum should be capitalized on.
#10
Palin is not ready to be President - but nobody is. She does impress me as a 'quick study' though.
I can't remember where I saw this, supposedly from a former Dem speechwriter:
Governor Palin and I dont agree on a lot of things, mostly social issues. But I have grown to appreciate the Governor. I was one of those initial skeptics and would laugh at the pictures. Not anymore. When someone takes on a corrupt political machine and a sitting governor, that is not done by someone with a low I.Q. or a moral core made of tissue paper. When someone fights her way to get scholarships and work her way through college even in a jagged line, that shows determination and humility you cant learn from reading Reinhold Niebuhr. When a mother brings her son with special needs onto the national stage with love, honesty, and pride, that gives hope to families like mine as my older brother lives with a mental disability. And when someone can sit on a stage during the Sarah Palin rap on Saturday Night Live, put her hands in the air and watch someone in a moose costume get shotthats a sign of both humor and humanity.
#11
The only thing that the republicans can blame for McCain losing (which is very, very far from certain), is McCain. He has not inspired me and I was only going to vote for him as a anti-Obama vote.
#14
I'm not a Palin fan or a Palin skeptic. But the way the media has gone after her has gotten my hackles up. Some pundits may dislike her because she doesn't have an Ivy League degree and hasn't served in the military. Let me point out that Reagan wasn't an Ivy League alumnus either.
#17
Palin has more executive experience than ohbama, unless you count spending a ricockulous amount of money for a such a narrow lead and choosing joe "I'm Joe Biden" biden as encouraging.
Personally I'm more comfortable voting for the BlueDog/Repulican ticket than the 2 shifty lawyers.
#18
I think the media campaign against Palin has been effective. I believe her "brand" is severely damaged, perhaps beyond repair. She is a dumb hick who depends on voices from the heavens to make her decisions (not what I think, but what the media has created). It will be very, very hard for her to overcome that. She will always be fighting the headwinds of that image.
I am not a McCain fan, other than I absolutely believe in his love of country and his dedication to same. But he is a populist and will do some very stupid economic things unless he listens to smart people around him.
There are times when I think that we should just let Obama win because he is going to be such a train wreck that it will expose the idiocy of the dem party. But I fear the damage he will do, or the damage he will let happen through his inaction.
I will pull for McCain/Palin. Screw the lying, sack-o-shit media.
#19
I already voted against Obama (absentee). Mitt would've been my choice for VP. Actually I would've loved to see Mitt & Fred or Mitt & Palin in the future on a ticket.
#21
As I recall, people used to think Ronald Reagan was some kind of a kooky, right-wing fringe element. But after four years in office Jimmuh Carter had so weakened himself with his own record of incompetence that people couldn't vote for Reagan fast enough.
If McCain loses it will be his own fault, not Palin's. Choosing her as his running mate was one of the smartest decisions he ever made.
And after four years of Obama my bet is people will be chomping at their bits to vote for anybody but him. And who would run in the Republican primaries against Palin? Huckleberry? Giuliani? Thompson? What's his name from Massachusetts? (I got so excited about him that I forgot his name.) I don't think so. Palin doesn't need intellect because she has something better: common sense. She's the breath of fresh air that this country needs.
#22
There are times when I think that we should just let Obama win because he is going to be such a train wreck that it will expose the idiocy of the dem party. But I fear the damage he will do, or the damage he will let happen through his inaction.
The last years of the Weimar Republic were plagued by political deadlock, increasing political street violence, and economic depression. These years were also marked by leaders who, lacking firm commitment to democracy, were willing to invoke emergency legislation as a substitute for parliamentary consent.
#26
If McCain loses, I think the 2012 Republican challengers are 1) Palin 2) Jeb Bush 3) Romney and 4) Bobby Jindal. Not sure who'd win that, but I'd place my marker on Palin.
If McCain wins, he's almost certainly not going to go for a second term. If his term goes reasonably well, Palin is a lock. If it doesn't, it won't matter who the Republicans nominate.
Posted by: Steve White ||
10/29/2008 18:35 Comments ||
Top||
#27
Steve, I think the Bush family ran the wrong son first. Had Jeb ran first, the family might have had 3 presidents.
I think the Bush name can't be overcome for at least 8 years.
Posted by: Mike N. ||
10/29/2008 20:07 Comments ||
Top||
#28
Had it been Romney, the original plastic FAKE con and slime merchant, the campaign would have been over long ago and Obama's margins woudl be even bigger, mcCains funds even smaller. No conservative base, etc. Same goes for Pro-Choice Ridge, and grey and vanilla as it gets.
You need to wake up and get out amongst the people the LIVE conservatism instead of talk about it -- that's Palin country.
#29
Palin and Jindal will be going head to head but in a CONSTRUCTIVE way. One will be the Pres the other the VP, and we will have a great ticket no matter which of those is top of the ticket.
#30
Fred! is done. He only ran because a lot of us pulled him in against his will. He makes a good speaker and great on commercials, but not a campaigner.
Jeb Bush, if he were named Joe Briggs instead, would be a shoe-in based on abilities to campaign, his fairly solid conservative philosophy, his performance record, and his ability to fund raise.
Its a shame his brother valued loyalty over ability and had no real philosophy of government (liek hsi father), and ruined the family name.
3dc Rote,
"This election I am voting for Palin and whomever she is running with."
Me Rote,
"YEP IMA CONCUR WID 3dc."
Posted by: Red Dawg ||
10/29/2008 20:35 Comments ||
Top||
#32
Palin made it very clear in Minneapolis that she had no use for the Wash/NY media or the political elite, both Dem and Repub. That was a challenge they could not ignore.
The media have spent the campaign trying to destroy her. A degree of survival depends upon it.
Her populist meme depends on going to the people over their heads.
Now that the campaign is winding down, politcos of various persuasions are adding their voices to the take down. Win or lose, she is a threat to business as usual in DC. Her record in Alaska makes it clear that she doesn't play party favorites.
If McCain wins, she carries her populace message to the White House. She might not find a lot of friends in Congress. She has demonstrated that only makes her stronger.
If McCain loses, she is free to start her 2012 campaign immediately. She takes her message to directly the people. Something she has shown that she is very capable of doing, and based on the crowds she pulls, someone whom with they want to connect.
#33
Agree with OS on the '12 ticket. The biggest question is whether, if Mc Cain wins, he will step aside voluntarily or be subjected to a humiliating primary defeat.
The courts are poised for a takeover by the judicial left.
One of the great unappreciated stories of the past eight years is how thoroughly Senate Democrats thwarted efforts by President Bush to appoint judges to the lower federal courts.
Consider the most important lower federal court in the country: the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. In his two terms as president, Ronald Reagan appointed eight judges, an average of one a year, to this court. They included Robert Bork, Antonin Scalia, Kenneth Starr, Larry Silberman, Stephen Williams, James Buckley, Douglas Ginsburg and David Sentelle. In his two terms, George W. Bush was able to name only four: John Roberts, Janice Rogers Brown, Thomas Griffith and Brett Kavanaugh.
Continued on Page 49
As soon as A observes something which seems to him to be wrong, form which X is surrering, A talks to B, and A and b then propose to get a law passed to remedy the evil and help X. Their law always proposes to determine what C shall do for X, or in the better case, what A,B, and C shall do for X... What I want to do is to look up C. I want to show you what manner of man he is. I call him the Forgotten Man. Perhaps the appellation is not strictly correct. He is the man who never is thought off...
He works, he votes, generally he prays - but he always pays....
But that is the main stay of the Obama campaign, to take from the small business that finally succeeds and gives it to those who won't even try.
An American Creed
I Do Not Choose to Be a Common Man
It is my right to be uncommonif I can.
I seek opportunitynot security. I do not wish to be a kept citizen, humbled and dulled by having the state look after me.
I want to take the calculated risk; to dream and to build, to fail and to succeed.
I refuse to barter incentive for a dole. I prefer the challenges of life to the guaranteed existence; the thrill of fulfillment to the stale calm of utopia.
I will not trade freedom for beneficence nor my dignity for a handout. I will never cower before any master nor bend to any threat.
It is my heritage to stand erect, proud and unafraid; to think and act for myself, enjoy the benefit of my creations and to face the world boldly and say, This I have done.
Is Joe Biden the foot-in-mouth candidate - or is he the Obama campaign's designated teller of inconvenient truths? First, the Democratic veep hopeful declared that America's enemies will generate "an international crisis, to test the mettle of" a President Obama. Scary - but likely true.
And yesterday Biden let slip that he and Obama apparently have a sliding scale to determine who's "super-rich." Obama, after all, has been promising a tax cut for the "middle class" - those making $200,000 a year or less. I thought it was $250,000?
Biden yesterday lowered that bar. He does that every time he opens his mouth.
"What we're saying," he told a Pennsylvania TV interviewer, "is that [our] tax break doesn't need to go to people making . . . $1.4 million. It should go to [people] making under $150,000 a year." I thought it was $200,000?
Oops. That's a 25 percent downward redefinition of "middle class." Just trying to "level the playing field", right, boys?
An Obama mouthpiece quickly dismissed the discrepancy as just another one of Joe the Senator's gaffes. Oh, that Joe...
But consider: The campaign has a new TV commercial out declaring that families - not individuals - earning $200,000 or less would qualify for a tax cut. Two incomes - not one. So that would make it a $100,000?
And, as most middle-class wage-earners know, that's a huge difference. Just "spreading the wealth around". Y'all be cool...
As Sen. John McCain said yesterday: "At this rate, it won't be long before Sen. Obama is right back to his vote that Americans making just $42,000 should get a tax increase." What, you think that wasn't the plan all along?
We wouldn't be surprised - what with leading congressional Democrats like Rep. Barney Frank licking their chops at the chance to raise taxes. "We'll have to raise taxes, ultimately," Frank declared over the weekend.
Don't say you weren't warned. ...like we didn't know?
You want low taxes, get to keep your 401(k) and retire, keep your wealth and give it to your kids... vote republican. Otherwise, you get the government you deserve.
Posted by: Redneck Jim ||
10/29/2008 11:11 Comments ||
Top||
#4
Reverend Wright must at this moment be shouting "GOD DAMN OBAMA!!!" in his $1.6 million mansion.
Posted by: ed ||
10/29/2008 11:33 Comments ||
Top||
#5
Obama, Biden and Wright Own Million Dollar Homes Biden also has a scandal surrounding the SALE of his previous house. Joe Biden sold his house to a top executive of the Delaware-based credit card company MBNA. The price was twice the home's value, suggesting that MBNA had bought off Biden as well as his house.
Biden has often been accused of being in bed with the MBNA. MBNA's top executives contributed generously to his campaign in a series of coordinated donations that sidestepped the limits on contributions by the company's political action committee. And then, a short time after the election, MBNA hired Biden's son for a lucrative job in which, according to bank officials, he is being groomed for a senior management position.
You'd think the news media would be interested in a scandal like this.
Posted by: ed ||
10/29/2008 12:04 Comments ||
Top||
#6
get ready for socilized USA boys, George W has already started us on our way with his "bailout" for the banks and insurance companies. Accept it, George W. Bush has started to Socialize the United States, no denying the facts. Now we'll get the real thing to tack onto Georges legacy of Socialism, Obama and Scandanavian Style ( successful) socialism.
Posted by: Eric the Red ||
10/29/2008 12:12 Comments ||
Top||
#7
I'm still a full time student, that means I'm technically poor. Does this mean I get free bling if Obama is elected? Like maybe a new Escalade? How about a free section 8 condo right downtown. With all the bitches and ho's I can pimp while I roll fat in my lifted black Cadillac?
Maybe I could get this whole thing going my way.
Or maybe I'll be lucky to afford food if this jerkoff gets elected.
#11
Are his tax cuts for 95% before or after the tax increases generated by the expiration of the Bush tax cuts? (Please do remember those, all you who think Bush worthless.)
#12
So mister Red what was W going to do? Veto the bail out legislation and then watch the banking system go into oblivion with assholes like Schumer creating multiple bank runs? Remember Paulson and Greenberg are democrates and Barney, Freddie, and the gang including democrate investment bankers created the danger. This was a set up and I don't blame W for trying to save the economy even if it meant "sort term" nationalization of the banking bastards.
#13
Yes, W should've VETO'd the first couple of iterations of the pork inherent there in & then named the pork stuffers publicly. $700B probably could've been knocked down quite a bit.
Individually, the extra-electoral efforts are irrelevant. But in the aggregate, they start to add up. In 1996 Obama goes to court, challenges the petition signatures of mostly African-American voters, and gets all his rivals eliminated from the ballot and so de facto runs unopposed.
In 2004 sealed divorce records were strangely released destroying the chances of his chief Democratic rival Blair Hull; then in the general, lightning again struck, and Republican front-runner Jack Ryan's sealed divorce records were likewise mysteriously releasedand he too crashed, in effect, leaving Obama without a serious primary or general election rival.
In this campaign, Acorn galvanizes to register voters and almost immediately runs into serial charges of voter registration fraud. Now an Obama ad runs asking Americans simply to take the day off to help get out the Obama vote: apparently American businesses, universities, and the government all are supposed to sacrifice hundreds of millions of dollars in lost collective work days to subsidize the Obama campaign in order "to change history"?
When one marries all that with the swarming of radio stations when someone like Stanley Kurtz goes on, the threats to go to court to stop ads, or the blacklisting of TV stations who dared to conduct tough interviews, the same old pattern reappears of by any means necessary. And in turn the explanation for all that?
The messianic stylethe cosmic tug to "change history", or stop the seas from rising or the planet from heating, juxtaposed with the creepy faux-Greek columns, Michelle's "deign to enter" politics snippet, the fainting at rallies, the Victory Column mass address, the vero possumus presidential seal, and the 'we are the change we've been waiting for' mantrareflects the omnipresent narcissism: the exalted ends of electing a prophet always justify the often crude and all too mortal means.
If this is considered 'right', I'd rather be wrong with McCain.
Posted by: Mike ||
10/29/2008 09:54 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
From what I can tell BO and his fellow travelers will do ANYTHING to get elected.
#2
The messianic style--the cosmic tug to "change history", or stop the seas from rising or the planet from heating,
Credits to the following from the Wik:
At the age of 27, Axelrod became the City Hall Bureau Chief and a political columnist for the Chicago Tribune. He worked at the Tribune for eight years, covering national, state and local politics. He became the youngest political writer there in 1981.[4] Unhappy with his prospects at the Tribune, in 1984 he joined the campaign of US Senator Paul Simon as communications director; within weeks he was promoted to co-campaign manager.[5]
He formed a political consultancy, Axelrod & Associates, in 1985. In 1987, he worked on the successful reelection campaign of Harold Washington, Chicago's first black mayor. This established his first experience in working with black politicians and he later became a key player in similar mayoral campaigns of blacks, including Dennis Archer in Detroit, Michael R. White in Cleveland, Anthony A. Williams in Washington, D.C., Lee P. Brown in Houston, and John F. Street in Philadelphia.[6] Axelrod is a longtime strategist for Chicago mayor Richard M. Daley and styles himself a "specialist in urban politics."
In 2004, Axelrod worked for the presidential campaign of John Edwards. During the campaign, he lost responsibility for making ads, but continued as the campaign's spokesman. Regarding Edwards' failed 2004 presidential campaign, Axelrod has commented, "I have a whole lot of respect for John, but at some point the candidate has to close the deal andI cant tell you whythat never happened with John."[7] [8]
In 2006, Axelrod consulted for several campaigns, including for the successful campaigns of Eliot Spitzer in New York's gubernatorial election and for Deval Patrick in Massachusetts's gubernatorial election. Axelrod also served in 2006 as the chief political adviser for Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee chair U.S. Representative Rahm Emanuel for the U.S. House of Representatives elections, in which the Democrats gained 31 seats.
#5
from AP News: Two viewers who don't seem excited about all the exposure are Obama's two young daughters.
Appearing on Jay Leno's talk show Monday, Obama's wife, Michelle, said 10-year-old daughter Malia got a little worried to hear that her dad's infomercial would blanket TV.
"'You're going to be on all the TV? Are you going to interrupt my TV?'" her mother said Malia asked.
Michelle Obama said the presidential candidate assured his daughter that he hadn't bought time on the Disney Channel.
#6
Who 'owns' Obama? Starting in 1996 strange things have happened to quickly move him up the ladder. No outsider or newcomer could possibly accomplish that. He is seriously beholden to somebody powerful behind the scenes.
Posted by: Barbara Skolaut ||
10/29/2008 15:07 Comments ||
Top||
#8
Ditto Barb. With a little help from nameless overseas money launders, this entire Obama exercise is a Soros funded, David Axelrod produced Hollywood event.
Orrin Judd comments on the LAT's suppression of the Obama tape:
...on the one hand the press maintains that its obligation to publish that which is newsworthy is so weighty that it even trumps national security and the possibility that lives would be endangered, but, on the other hand, now asks us to accept that a paper's promise is more important than newsworthiness? So, unless my math is screwy, they place self-interest above the national interest and human life? No?
Posted by: Mike ||
10/29/2008 08:35 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[4 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Yes but we had to be 'entertained' by every rumor and smack about Palin within a week of her nomination and personal data about Joe within two days. All so newsworthy. /sarcasm off
#2
Nuwt had it right yesterday when he said, "Lay
$ 50,000. out there and the tape will mysteriously appear on your desk the next day." Unfortunately, I don't think it would make any difference if you had Obama his wife, and Bill Ayers manufacturing Zyklon B in their basement, the left would still maintain his innocence and qualification to be president.
#3
Makes no sense - why would a source in the first place give a tape of something very newsworthy to the LAT & then ask them not to show it? The LAT couldn't be lying could they?
#4
Answer: Source to LAT. Oh by the way, we filmed that event. I got it. You want it? Yes, I DO like Maserati sports cars. Please keep my name out of it.
#5
As someone noted, the response makes little sense. If the source wanted the tape kept a secret, why give it to a loud-mouthed newspaper jonesin' for a cash infusion? Burning it would have kept the secret a lot better.
#7
You can bet that if the LA Times had a tape on McCain, it would have been out for public consumption faster than yesterday. The LA and NY Times are a bunch of scurrilous rats trying to rig the election by withholding information and printing their biases as truth.
#9
Why would a source not have a copy of the tape. There is a lot of money floating around out there, and I predict we see the tape. Obama is already trying to deflect it, and he sure wants a lot of people to vote early.
#13
At some point, when are these people (NYT, LAT CBS etc.) held accountable to the public for their attempts at manipulating elections? Government won't do a thing against them because more than half of the government is interested in their continued complicity.
Some time in the future, I fear we'll see real violence done to some of these characters, and when that starts, I don't think we'll ever be the same.
#14
If an individual had a tape that could damage the electability of a messiah, then they might want to turn it over to a large public institution, in trust of course, anonymously, to avoid getting measured for those famous Windy City Concrete Sneakers™.
And that large public (but very unprofitable) institution might wish to get free publicity test the market for such a commodity. Value may decline precipitously in the next seven days. Conversely, value may significantly appreciate over the next four years. Your broker makes no guarantees of success.
If a certain campaign had about $600mil to spend, it could probably find seven figure cash to spend on, say, polling research in California or Nevada by a large institution.
And said campaign might even suggest future considerations to the institution for 'protecting' such documentation. Perhaps a Doctrine to regulate internet fairness, so that large public (but very unprofitable) institutions would not have to compete with pajama clad non dues paying advertising stealing editor free circulation robbing heathens bloggers typing in basements.
So yeah, self-interest would be a strong motivator to all involved.
We already have the list of international supporters for Sen. Obama. Said list includes the head of every terrorist nation and organization that's been in the news in the past year.
If that won't make a difference, why would airing this mystery tape?
A bit unhinged, but some interesting stuff on the al durah bloodlibel (proving once again that you CAN get away with lying to the whole world).
By now, everyone knows about the infamous "Mohammed a-Dura" incident. This was the event in which a French television crew staged a fake death of a Palestinian boy, pretending to be shot by Israeli gunfire in a firefight with terrorists, dying in his father's lap like a Palestinian Pieta figure taken down from the cross. Nope, not "staged by french teevee"; actually, it was run-of-the-mill paleos street theater to fuel the propaganda machine (Youths throwing stones into thin air, acting as if they were wounded, gunmen pretending to be in firefights while the nearby israelis were not even acting hostile,...), covered by a paleo stringer of a french (jewish, leftist, peace-activist and IIRC, israeli binational) journalist, which got a life of its own, probably beyond the paleos' wildest dreams, thanks to the complicity of the State-owned France 2 teevee channel (think galouzeau "de villepin" & shirak).
He became the overnight symbol of Palestinian "martyrdom," a child gunned down by Israel. The Iranians made him a state icon and Arab students at Israeli universities display him in their pro-terrorism campus activities. Of course, in the sense that it was all fake, a-Dura really WAS indeed the appropriate symbol for Palestinian "martyrdom."
The entire a-Dura Gaza incident was staged and faked by the France 2 television crew, as the media later proved and as a French court officially declared. I'd say, enderlin aired that knowning at least tacitly it was probably fake coverage by his stringer (as demonstrated by the raw footage of pallywood follies), in true peace-activist journalist fashion, and commented by attributing the shootings to the israelis... BUT, it snowballed, became enormous, and from there, french politics went in (STATE-owned France 2 gave away the rights to the footage), and he became involved in the cover-up, if only so not to show he was an interested party, as was his stringer.
Among those helping to expose the lies was a young French Jew named Phillippe Karsenty. He was then sued by the French TV station for "libel' but eventually won in court. For details, see this. This did not stop the usual Jewish leftists from denouncing Karsenty. Leftist Larry Derfner from the Jerusalem Post said that Karsenty and people like him are mentally ill and are equivalent to the 911 "deniers," those who say the US government itself blew up the WTC buildings. Derfner did not issue an apology after the French court declared Karsenty was entirely correct.
By now, numerous excellent articles have exposed the whole story. In French, the best may be this. In English, this may be the best.
But there is one aspect of the case that has NOT been widely exposed. That is the collaboration by Prof. Raphael Walden with the French television station's fraud and cover-up. Walden is a far-leftist anti-Zionist medical doctor with specialty in surgery, at Tel Hashomer hospital. He is active in the pro-terror anti-Israel propaganda group "Doctors for Human Rights," a group once run by anti-Semite Neve Gordon and which does not believe that Jews should be entitled to any human rights. He is also the son-in-law of Shimon Peres and often described in the press as Shimon Peres' personal physician. He signs all the usual leftist proclamations . His email is (at link)
Ben-Dror Yemini this week described the role of Walden in the French forgery in his weekly column. Walden prepared a professional medical report that backed the lies and fabrications of the French TV station and the attempt to "prove" the Arab propaganda version of the a-Dura shooting, based on the injuries to a-Dura's father. Only problem is that the good doctor never examined the a-Dura father and based his expert conclusions on some paperwork he got from a Jordanian office. A different Israeli doctor who DID examine the poppa, Dr. Yehuda David, discovered that all the injuries the father was claiming to have suffered when his son was pretending to be shot were in fact injuries from at least 8 years earlier.
More about Walden's toadying for the French TV station and his attempt to defend the lies about the a-Dura "killing" can be read here, by an Arab propaganda news service.
While the U.S. and NATO forces are struggling against Taliban in Afghanistan, Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE), the worlds deadliest terrorist organization fighting for a separate state in Sri Lanka, is on its knees. Inventors of the modern suicide jacket, the LTTE, mastered the use of female suicide bombers and carried out more suicide attacks than any other terrorist organization in the world. A terror outfit responsible for assassinating two world leaders and the largest number of politicians is losing its war. An organization that effectively controlled about half of the country is confined to mere twenty square miles and shrinking. How it was possible for the Sri Lankan military to beat the number one terror organization in the world?
It started with a proactive, aggressive foreign policy. Sri Lankan government employed a remarkably successful foreign relations mission through its foreign minister, Mr. Laxshman Kadirgamar, to expose the LTTE and to improve the image of the Sri Lankan government. Thanks to his relentless efforts, until his death in 2005, LTTE was proscribed in the U.S., Canada, U.K. and E.U. and its fund-raising mechanism suffered a major blow.
Sri Lankan military changed its tactics and deployed small, specialized commando type units called Deep Penetration Units (DPUs) or Long Range Recon Patrols (LRRPs). These units proceed deep into the terrorist held territory and attack. In early 2002, they exploded a grenade targeting the LTTEs leader V. Prabhakaran, who narrowly escapedthe war has taken to LTTEs backyard, and long and behold, LTTE initiated peace talks though the government of Norway in September 2002.
In 2004, LTTEs eastern commander and then second in command, Colonel Karuna Amman, broke away with his carders. This defection was not an isolated event or a coincidence, but a result of years of intelligence work involving Sri Lankan Army and regional intelligence agencies. With the ceasefire still in operation, LTTE fought back killing all but one of the members of the Deep Penetration Unit and its Tamil spies, but this victory was short-livedwith the help of Karunas faction government regained the control in the east and held Provincial Council elections after eleven years.
Sri Lankan Armys Deep Penetration Unit was reformed as the Mahasohon Brigade later, and, as before, it took the war to the LTTE controlled areasan eye-to-eye military tacticwhich made the LTTE very nervous and panicky because it hadnt happened during the last 20 years of war. The Sri Lankan military was able to speak in a language terrorists understood. In 2007, LTTEs second in command, S. P. Tamilselvan, was killed in a precision air strike, effectively utilizing ground intelligence, as one of the many LTTE leaders fell to the DPU attacks.
Supplementing the military success, Sri Lankan government collaborated with the Indian government to enforce strong security in the Indian Ocean using regular patrols and state-of-the-art radar facilities. Unmanned Surveillance Drones were deployed to monitor traffic in the 30-mile strait separating India and Sri Lanka. One by one Sri Lankan Navy destroyed all eight of the cargo vessels used by the LTTE to smuggle arms into the countrythe end was on sight.
The Sri Lankan government boosted the morale of the military by unequivocally supporting the war. The strong stand taken by the hard-lined Sri Lankan President, Rajapaksha was a major factor of the LTTEs imminent defeat. President Rajapaksha never backed off from the military campaign amidst consistent dissatisfaction by number of countries claiming human rights violations and threatening to cut aid. As a result, Sri Lanka lost its seat in the United Nations Human Rights Council while Bahrain, Zambia and Pakistan retained theirs, but the war continued.
The pressure was intense on the India government to intervene by the furious Tamil Nadu politicians, mainly, Chief Minister Karunanidhi and Vaiko, the leader of MDMK, who organized rally after rally in favor of a terrorist organization banned in India. However, Sri Lankan government maintained close ties with India; assured the safety of Tamils and continued to receive military assistance. President Rajapaksha established a political culture where minorities received fair and equal treatment, full protection of the law and freedom to fully engage in the government. He gave the military stern orders to minimize civilian casualties, a task which was impossible as LTTE used civilians as a shield. His message to the country was clear and loud this is not a war between Sinhalese and Tamils, but terrorism and normalcy; no development is possible without ending this war. This message received a clear mandate as the LTTE took to heels.
Sri Lankan story is a myth-buster. Setting precedence, a carefully laid down plan is dismantling the worlds deadliest terrorist organization. Effective foreign policy; innovative military tactics; excellent intelligence; strong political will and latest technology have taken down the LTTE. Though it is possible to defeat a terrorist organization, military, the final solution is a political one. A terrorist turned politician, Sivanesathurai Chandrakanthan alias Pillayan, is the Chief Minister of the Eastern Province and Karuna Amman is a Member of the Parliament. Democracy is taking shape in once LTTE held areas, and soon it would engulf the whole country. After twenty-five years, losing over 75,000 lives and billions of dollars in destruction, Sri Lanka is seeing the end of the tunnel, where a new path begins for the country: a path of unity, understanding and nation-building.
#1
There is a Military Solution to Terrorism: The Iraqi Example.
Thanks to President Ô we may never see the Afghan Example, The Gaza Example, The Iranian Example, The Pakistani Example, The Saudi Example, The Syrian Example.....
After sponsoring terrorism against three of its neighbors, Syria plays the victim when its own border is breached.
It was interesting to observe the wails of outrage from Syrian officials yesterday (Monday)following a raid on a target near the country's border with Iraq, carried out by helicopter-borne U.S. commandos. "Criminal and terrorist aggression," charged Foreign Minister Walid al-Moualem. "The law of the jungle," bemoaned spokesman Jihad Makdissi at the Syrian Embassy in London. This from a regime whose most notable activities of the past few years have been the serial assassination of senior Lebanese politicians, including former prime minister Rafik Hariri; the continuous and illegal supplying of weapons to the Hezbollah militia for use against Israel and Lebanon's democratic government; the harboring in Damascus of senior leaders of Hamas and other Palestinian terrorist groups; and - most relevant - the sheltering of an al-Qaeda network that dispatches 90 percent of the foreign fighters who wage war against U.S. troops and the Iraqi government.
The logic of Syrian dictator Bashar al-Assad seems to be that his regime can sponsor murders, arms trafficking, infiltrations and suicide bombings in neighboring countries while expecting to be shielded from any retaliation in kind by the diplomatic scruples of democracies. For most of this decade that has been lamentably true: U.S. commanders and Iraqi officials have over and over again pointed to the infiltration of al-Qaeda militants through the Damascus airport and the land border with Iraq, and Syria's refusal to curtail it, without taking direct action. Yet in the past year Israel has intervened in Syria several times to defend its vital interests, including bombing a secret nuclear reactor.
If Sunday's raid, which targeted a senior al-Qaeda operative, serves only to put Mr. Assad on notice that the United States, too, is no longer prepared to respect the sovereignty of a criminal regime, it will have been worthwhile.
Mr. Assad's government has lately taken a few cautious steps toward breaking out of its isolation, participating in indirect peace talks with Israel and granting formal diplomatic recognition to Lebanon for the first time. European governments have been quick with rewards, and the next U.S. president - if it is Barack Obama - may also hasten to upgrade contacts. If the Syrian regime is genuinely interested in making peace with Israel, distancing itself from Iran and the terrorist movements it sponsors, and rebuilding ties with the West, that is to be welcomed. What Damascus should not be allowed to do is reap the diplomatic and economic rewards of a rapprochement while continuing to plant car bombs, transport illegal weapons and harbor terrorists. Israel has let Mr. Assad know that it is prepared to respond to his terrorism with strikes against legitimate military targets. Now that the United States has sent the same message, maybe the dictator at last will rethink his strategy. And this was Tuesday's house editorial in The Washington Post. Anybody else creeped out about that?
Posted by: Bobby ||
10/29/2008 06:24 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[7 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
I guess kicking Syria around is something that brings us all together in this difficult time.
Can we go again?
#2
Syria, we just did that because we love you. You are destroying your life among peaceful nations by your self destructive behavior with your friends. Radical terrorists have a hold on your life that we are going to help you break. We are here standing by you to help you face the truth. Not buying the terrorist dependency schick, eh? Oh well, the helicopters will return, then.
Posted by: Richard of Oregon ||
10/29/2008 10:03 Comments ||
Top||
#3
I'm impressed by WaPo. Liberal as they are they seem to retain some common sense.
Posted by: Steve White ||
10/29/2008 11:45 Comments ||
Top||
#4
Well, doctor, when compared with the NY or LA Times I have to agree with you.
#6
Clearly President W is employing the No Safe Haven Doctrine espoused by our future President Ô. Pakistanis, Syrians, they are just bitter people clinging to their guns and religion.
Bishop Robert W. Finn of Kansas City-St. Joseph compared the upcoming presidential election to the Battle of Lepanto, in which Christian forces against overwhelming odds defeated Ottoman Turkish invaders bent on the conquest of Europe.
Together with the other Bishops of Missouri I am calling on all the faithful to make this last week before the election a week of prayer for our nation-- a week of prayer for the protection of Human Life, Bishop Finn wrote in an October 24 diocesan newspaper column.
Join me in calling upon Mary in this month of the rosary. In In 1571, in the midst of the Battle of Lepanto, when the future of Christian Europe was in the balance and the odds against them were overwhelming, prayer to Our Lady of the Rosary brought the decisive victory. We ask her now to watch over our country and bring us the victory of life.
Our Catholic moral principles teach that a candidates promise of economic prosperity is insufficient to justify their constant support of abortion laws, including partial-birth abortion, and infanticide for born-alive infants, Bishop Finn noted.
Promotion of the Freedom of Choice Act is a pledge to eliminate every single limit on abortions achieved over the last thirty-five years I ask you to join me in invoking the Guardian Angels of 47 million babies lost through abortion in our country in the last thirty-five years.
This horrendous loss of life remains one of the greatest threats to human civilization we have ever faced.
#1
Actually, forces were about equal, Christians had superior ships and crews and most importantly - Christians only used non-slave crewmen - who were allowed to wield weapons, etc. Turks were out-techno'd by the west. Plus, the Turks were light in the jannisaries at the time.
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
(CNN) -- Election Day is still days away, but Republicans are already caught up in a heated debate about Sarah Palin's future role in the party should the GOP ticket fail to win the White House.
After sponsoring terrorism against three of its neighbors, Syria plays the victim when its own border is breached.
