GREAT READ! Spread to your friends on the blogs! Major H/T to Mike @ Mike’s America for putting me on to this nugget. Go and download the document that McCain supporters handed to reporters leaving on the trip with the messiah, excuse me, Senator.
It is laughable that Obama supporters pretend his opinion regarding Iraq even approximates reality. Simply put, General David Petraeus - with the considerable assistance of John McCain - crafted the current SUCCESSFUL strategy. Obama has proven to be wrong over and over, except on the occasions when he arrives at positions long held my McCain.
McCain is fit, qualified, tested and ready to be President and Commander in Chief. Obama is fit, qualified, tested and ready for bu tone job: Poseur in Chief.
—Media Lizzy
ARLINGTON, VA — Today, McCain 2008 Senior
Foreign Policy Advisor Randy Scheunemann issued the following statement:“The difference between John McCain and Barack Obama is that Barack Obama advocates an unconditional withdrawal that ignores the facts on the ground and the advice of our top military commanders. John McCain believes withdrawal must be based on conditions on the ground. Prime Minister Maliki has repeatedly affirmed the same view, and did so again today. Timing is not as important as whether we leave with victory and honor, which is of no apparent concern to Barack Obama. The fundamental truth remains that Senator McCain was right about the surge and Senator Obama was wrong. We would not be in the position to discuss a responsible withdrawal today if Senator Obama’s views had prevailed.”
###
Some of Washington’s best and brightest conservative writers can be found at The American Spectator, a daily online magazine (often mentioned by el Rushbo who frequently includes it in his “stack of stuff’) that features conservative perspectives and analyses on the day’s events and issues.
ON THE RADIO! Tonight at 9 ET we’ll be talking to two of these sharp political writers.
Robert Stacy McCain asks the question: Is there a clear reason for Republicans’ defeatist mood? His take… not quite. A Rasmussen Presidential polling shows the candidates are head-to-head.
“Despite the dispirited state of the GOP, the ideological muddling of the McCain campaign, and the media accolades for Obama, it is far from a foregone conclusion that Hope and Change will triumph Nov. 4.”
“Obamamaniacs were thrilled by last month’s Newsweek poll showing their candidate ahead by 15 points. Alas for the apostles of Hope, either that poll was a statistical mirage or else the mass movement toward Obama quickly receded, and Newsweek reported last week that his lead is now an insignificant 3 percentage points.”
***
Midway through the program, Philip Klein will join us to add to the conversation. He was quoted this week in USA TODAY’s article on controversial The New Yorker magazine cover. Philip also attended Senator Obama’s Iraq speech in D.C. and will give us his take on the man and the speech. What’s the worst that could happen?
Tonight he’ll lay it out for us. Just click the button below at 9 to join us.
*****
Because threda is betta, and the Messiah is STILL spinning so rapidly that he’s about to phase out of the space-time continuum, and I finally found a way for all this crapola to be crammed into a single hour.
And because….
….absent a laptop, he’ll be off on another family obligation next week. Further bulletins as they happen.
Saturdays, 1PM Eastern/10AM Pacific
WASHINGTON, July 10, 2008 – The Senate has confirmed Army Gen. David H. Petraeus as commander of U.S. Central Command and Army Lt. Gen. Raymond T. Odierno to receive his fourth star and succeed Petraeus as commander of Multinational Force Iraq.
95-2 Victory, so I decided to see if my logic was correct and if the “2″ were democrats. Sure enough Senator Byrd (WV) and Senator Harkin (IA) opted to give the middle finger to the good General. And even though Kennedy came in to vote this week he opted not to vote, but given his medical condition I give him a pass. In addition Harkin said “nay” to Odierno.
HOWEVER, Both Presidential Candidates opted not to vote. Now I am not sure where in the country or world they are right now but I think that is pathetic. Granted we know where McCain would have stood “yea” in both counts. But Senator Obama…wonder where he would have been. I guess just add this to another group of “not present” or “present” votes which hold no real conviction.
In response to Obama’s claim that Republicans will use race to stoke fear, Lt. Col Allen West, candidate for Congress in Florida’s 22 District (Broward County) said this:
My advice to Senator Obama is to run as a Man and Leader, and the American people will evaluate you as such, not as a victim. This is a Presidential race, based solely on a capacity to lead the United States of America. It is not about skin tone…however, perhaps we should come to expect these immature statements.
It also seems rather humorous that the Presidential candidate who was supposed to be such a “uniter” and transcend race is the one talking about it the most. If Senator Obama was confident in his abilities and character, he would not need to create a crutch for failure. Senator Obama has just tipped his hand, any criticism of him and his policies will be directly attributed to racism. I congratulate Senator Obama for taking race relations in America back some 30 years.
West has faced down the world’s terrorists: in Operation Desert Storm, in Operation Iraqi Freedom, where he was battalion commander for the Army’s 4th Infantry Division, and in Afghanistan, where he trains Afghan officers to take on the responsibility of securing their own country.
In 2004, when it was time to retire from more than twenty years of service in the US Army, he brought his wife and two young daughters to Broward County, Florida, where he taught high school. He then returned to Afghanistan as an advisor to the Afghan army, an assignment he finished in November 2007.
In his Army career, Col. West has been honored many times, including a Bronze Star, three Meritorious Service Medals, three Army Commendation Medals (one with Valor), and a Valorous Unit Award. He received his valor award as a Captain in Desert Shield/Storm, was the US Army ROTC Instructor of the Year in 1993, and was a Distinguished Honor Graduate III Corps at Fort Hood, Texas Air Assault School.
Tonight at 9 pm ET, we’ll spend some time with Col. West, getting his views on the War, our dependence on foreign oil, illegal immigration, Israel, Iraq, and Congress’ dismal approval rating, today at an all time low of 9%.
Join us. Click the link below …
*****
Behold, another tell-tale area in which Barack Hussein Obama is, indeed, an honorary Kennedy.
First, the loudly proclaimed theory:
Obama spoke in Albuquerque, N.M. last week about his commitment to the issue and his support of a Senate bill to make it easier to sue an employer for pay discrimination.
“Mr. McCain is an honorable man, we respect his service. But when you look at our records and our plans on issues that matter to working women, the choice could not be clearer,” Obama told the audience in New Mexico, a voter-swing state. “It starts with equal pay. Sixty-two percent of working women in America earn half or more than of their family’s income. But women still earn 77 cents for every dollar earned by men in 2008. You’d think that Washington would be united it its determination to fight for equal pay.”
He continued, saying that he is proud to have supported the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Restoration Act, which would extend the limit on how long an employee can wait before suing an employer for pay discrimination.
It is beyond tiresome to have to point out anew that there are other reasons for “pay inequality” besides “sexism.” Predominantly the fact that women do not stay in the workforce as long as men because of that biological clock thing and the urge to stay home with the families they eventually choose to have. For people who claim such unshakably blind faith in naturalism, their stubborn unwillingness to acknowledge this maternal instinct of species propagation and preservation is most curious.
Okay, blatantly hypocritical. But no more so than Lucifer’s application of his theory to his own shop:
While Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama has vowed to make pay equity for women a top priority if elected president, an analysis of his Senate staff shows that women are outnumbered and out-paid by men.
That is in contrast to Republican presidential candidate John McCain’s Senate office, where women, for the most part, out-rank and are paid more than men.
On “equal pay,” at least, John Sith McCain is not just straight talk, but straight walk as well, while his front-running opponent is, as on every other issue, full of Barack.
Makes me look forward to his first sex scandal, just to see how closely the Enemy Media’s protection of him on that parallels their interference-running for Sick Willie. So far, the template is being followed to the tiniest detail.
[cross-posted at 
]
Barack Obama is on fire. The presumptive democratic nominee for president has thoroughly defeated Hillary Clinton in the race for the White House, the two of them have apparently kissed and made up, she’s now on the campaign trail hawking his wares, and all is right with the world as far as the Democratic National Committee is concerned. All polls seem to indicate that Obama is beating his republican rival John McCain. McCain himself has indicated that he is the underdog in this race, and has a lot of work to do between now and November. Obama is the oncoming juggernaut that cannot be stopped.
Hold the phone.
Obama may not even be qualified to run for president. And I don’t mean because of his lack of experience in any of the areas that the commander-in-chief and the leader of the free world has to deal with. No, I mean he may not meet constitutional requirements to run for the highest office in the land.
You see my friends, there is a little question of his citizenship. And Obama may be covering up the truth.
For several weeks now, the Internet has been abuzz with reports that Obama may not meet the citizenship requirements as laid out in the United States Constitution. Those requirements state that a candidate must be a natural born citizen. Obama’s status has come into question. Supposedly, Obama was born in Hawaii in 1961, after it became a state on August 21, 1959. Obama became a citizen at birth under first section of the 14th amendment.
“All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside….”
Case closed. But wait.
Some questions have arisen about whether there is proof that Obama was really born in Hawaii in 1961, as well as the legal status of his mother at that time, and what is exactly on his original birth certificate…which by the way, may not even exist. When bloggers brought Obama’s citizenship into question, the Daily Kos published what purported to be the original State of Hawaii birth certificate. The problem is…the document appears to be a fake, and a poorly executed one at that. Examination of this document indicates it has been modified with Photoshop or other image-editing software, rendering it a forgery.
This could prove very troubling for the Obama campaign for a number of different reasons. If a true certificate of live birth cannot be produced to prove that Obama is a natural born citizen rather than a naturalized citizen, one would have to question whether Obama is qualified under the constitution to run for president.
So why wouldn’t the Obama campaign just lay all of this suspicion to rest by producing the real documentation rather than this cheap imitation which doesn’t cut muster? Could it be that The father listed on the birth certificate is not Barack Hussein Obama? Or the father’s race is listed as something other than African, perhaps Muslim or Arab? Or the mother was no longer at that time an American citizen? Or the child’s name is not listed as Barack Hussein Obama II?
Jim Geraghty, reporting on the Campaign Spot blog of the National Review, cited the “rumor” that Obama was born not within the United States, but elsewhere, possibly Kenya.
Geraghty stated that “If Obama were born outside the United States, one could argue that he would not meet the legal definition of natural-born citizen — because U.S. law at the time of his birth required his natural-born parent (his mother) to have resided in the United States for ‘10 years, at least [f]ive of which had to be after the age of 16.’”
He then points out that Ann Dunham, Obama’s mother, was 18 when Obama was born “so she wouldn’t have met the requirement of five years after the age of 16.”
If the rumors that Obama is not a natural born U.S. citizen are true, it would stop the campaign in its tracks. So far, no major news organization appears to be following this important story. The blogosphere appears to be the only quadrant of the journalistic universe that is attempting to bring this story to the forefront.
And this most recent development regarding the fake documentation published by the Daily Kos and touted by the Obama campaign as enough evidence to lay these “smear rumors” to rest only adds to the mystery.
Someone had better pick up the ball on this story and run with it.
If Obama is truly eligible under our constitution to run for president, then let’s get the proof out there and move on to finding other ways to prevent Obama from being elected. But if this story has legs, let’s expose it and stop Obama dead in his tracks.
Now.
Listen to America Talks Monday through Thursday at 6 pm eastern time at www.blogtalkradio.com/americatalks. Visit our website at www.americatalks.com.
Because twice is nice, and the Messiah is spinning so rapidly that he’s about to phase out of the space-time continuum, and there’s so much of this crapola that it can’t be crammed into a single hour….
….he’s doing double-duty, as only he can.
Saturdays, 1PM Eastern/10AM Pacific
Sunday, 6PM Eastern/3PM Pacific
When I was a boy, I was a huge Star Trek fan. Now that I’m a middle-aged man….I’m still a huge Star Trek fan. But now I can afford real starships and real phaser rifles and a real holodeck and a real clone of Counselor Troi (thanks to George W. Bush’s tax cuts, natch).
But this post isn’t about now, it’s about then. Actually, it isn’t about my Trekkerdom at all - that’s an analogy for what the post is about. But you probably knew that.
One of my older cousins (they were ALL older, actually) knew I was a huge Trek mark and got me a model of the U.S.S. Enterprise for my birthday. Not the Constellation-class NCC-1701-A; not the Excelsior-class NCC-1701-B; not the Ambassador-class NCC-1701-C; not the Galaxy-class NCC-1701-D; not the Sovereign-class NCC-1701-E; not even Jonathan Archer’s original NX-01. I mean the original, the classic, the Constitution-class NCC-1701. For a five-year old Trek nut the year after 2001: A Space Odyssey and the year Neil Armstrong took that giant leap for mankind, that was the equivalent of sex.
I carried that model around with me everywhere. And I do mean EVERYwhere, if you know what I mean. It was my answer to Linus’ blanket. I’d have gotten it welded onto my body if I could have.
There was only one other thing I wanted as much as I loved that Enterprise model: a model of a Klingon K’tinga-class battlecruiser to go with it so I could stage the epic space battles that NBC didn’t have the budget or the special effects technology to depict forty years ago. The problem was, this was in the days before Klingons were cool, even before Gene Roddenberry had the resources to create the forehead crest prosthetics that weren’t seen until Star Trek: The Motion Picture ten years later. There were no Klingon starship models to be had.
I was heartbroken. But I also had a robust imagination. So I did what any other lower middle-class kid would have done in those circumstances: I used a fly swatter and pretended it was a K’tinga-class heavy instead.
FWIW, my IKS GhIlab Ghew outlasted Captain Kirk’s ship by years, won many battles, and brought great honor and glory to the Klingon Empire. But it was still, underneath all that Kahlessness, a fly swatter.
And Barack Obama came up with his equivalent:
What the hell? What is this? He’s so impatient to be president that he makes up his own personal seal? What is he, twelve? Sheesh, when I was fifteen and refused my learners’ permit because I was too nearsighted and stupidly went joyriding in my dad’s 1968 Ford Galaxy without my too-weak glasses and got away with everything except the big scratch I put in the side chrome when I tried to back it into the driveway and cut the corner where my mother’s painted rock was, my mother told me that was the stupidest thing I’d ever done. My father wanted to run me through with his d’k tahg, but Mom always kept the family bat’leth handy for just such emergencies. This is one of BO’s PR equivalents. One of many.
I mean, look at it. It’s the size of a monster truck hubcap. Make a saucer out of it and he could take his kids sledding, or pirate DirecTV. And what’s with the Dukakis pose at that podium - is he standing in a hole?
And did this little exercise in premature ego gratification run afoul of the law? The Weekly Standard considers the possibility:
18 USC Sec. 713 …
(a) Whoever knowingly displays any printed or other likeness of the great seal of the United States, or of the seals of the President or the Vice President of the United States, or the seal of the United States Senate, or the seal of the United States House of Representatives, or the seal of the United States Congress, or any facsimile thereof, in, or in connection with, any advertisement, poster, circular, book, pamphlet, or other publication, public meeting, play, motion picture, telecast, or other production, or on any building, monument, or stationery, for the purpose of conveying, or in a manner reasonably calculated to convey, a false impression of sponsorship or approval by the Government of the United States or by any department, agency, or instrumentality thereof, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than six months, or both.(b) Whoever, except as authorized under regulations promulgated by the President and published in the Federal Register, knowingly manufactures, reproduces, sells, or purchases for resale, either separately or appended to any article manufactured or sold, any likeness of the seals of the President or Vice President, or any substantial part thereof, except for manufacture or sale of the article for the official use of the Government of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than six months, or both.
Was it the long arm of justice or the avalanche of ridicule (His Latin version of “From many, one”: “Truly, we are able” - aka “Yes we can!”) that would get him first? We’ll never know, because Team Hussein has already pulled it:
Succumbing to an avalanche of criticism, Senator Barack Obama’s campaign has apparently decided to back away from its trial balloon of a new presidential seal.
Newsmax’s lead story Monday morning reported on Obama’s new version of the presidential seal, but a campaign spokesman now says it won’t be used again.
“That was a one-time thing for a one-time event,” Robert Gibbs asserted to CNN about the rather intricately designed seal that made its debut last Friday.
Yeah; kind of like a quadrapelegic going streaking, or meeting your girlfriend’s parents and asking her mother if she’s up for a threesome. And the best part of all? It’s another Obama flip-flop! Man, he doesn’t even stand by his own mountainous conceit, even if it does keep humping his leg.
I think I’ll design my own seal. It’ll look like a dinner plate with a pudgy, dozing eagle holding a TV remote in one foot and a teriyaki New York steak in the other, and the paunch covered by a shield featuring this handsome fellow….
….and the tlhIngan Hol motto, “DaHjaj ghaH QaQ jaj Daq Sop” (”Today is a good day to eat!”).
It’ll blow away Possumus Playa’s pathetic plate….
[cross-posted at ]
OBAMA’S PAL BILL AYERS WIPES HIS SHOES ON OUR FLAG. And he did it while hangin’ with “LeBron, baby”.
The blog swarm began with Marathon Pundit’s post last night. Picked up by Michelle Malkin, it has gone viral. We’re kicking it up a notch with this post. TWD said he’d been waiting for a shoe to drop on Obama this weekend, causing Barack Hussein to stumble in the Indiana and N.C. primaries tomorrow. ThirdWaveDave had no idea how prophetic his instincts were. The shoe dropped, alright. Right on Old Glory.
The political bloggers are ALL OVER IT. Now let’s see how long it takes the mainstream media and the radio talkers to bring it forward to the rest of America. Barack’s buddy — still crapping on America.
It’ll be the topic of discussion on my show tonight. Douglas V. Gibbs joins me for the full hour before hosting his show immediately following (see post below). Doors open at 9p ET. “A Conversation with Andrea… on Blog Talk Radio”
****
Barack Obama has finally repudiated Wright’s racialized theology. Now can Obama win in November?
Joining us tonight — Robert Stacy McCain, contributing reporter to The American Spectator magazine, who says Barack Obama’s “hope for change” campaign could’ve been salvaged for the Democrats, but now finds his Rev. Wright crisis reminiscent of George McGovern’s fatal 1972 campaign.
Read more at The Radio Patriot!
“…while those who call me unpatriotic have used their positions of privilege to avoid military service while sending [standing applause] while sending over 4,000 American boys and girls of every race to die [dramatic pause] over a lie.”
“Louis Farrakhan is not my enemy. He did not put me in chains, he did not put me in slavery, and he didn’t make me this color.”
During this speech and questions and answers period he managed to not answer almost all questions on the basis that the person asking had not heard the entire sermon.
Then on the War note, “he lied they died” comes to the rescue.
So Farrakhan didn’t “put him in chains” or make him a slave I would like to know WHO did!?!? When was HE in chains? And on the color part he seems to be complaining about the color of his skin…I would have to say he has to go take that one up with GOD not the white man.
It seems appropriate that tonight’s guest on my radio show is a black reverend that preaches in the inner-city neighborhoods of Seattle. I didn’t realize the connection until after the interview date had been established.
Martin Luther King, Jr. was assassinated 40 years ago today in 1968 in Memphis, Tennessee. He lead a campaign for civil rights, known for his non-violent marches and demonstrations.
The evening prior to his death, in a sermon that seemed to forsee his fate, Martin Luther King, Jr. said, “Llike anybody I would like to live a long life. Longetivity has its place. But I am not concerned about that now. I just want to do God’s will. And He has allowed me to go up to the mountain, and I have looked over, and I have seen the promised land.”
King was shot in the neck the following day while standing on the balcony of the Lorraine Motel. He died later that day in the hospital.
Riots broke out, sweeping through several major U.S. cities. On April 9, 1968 more than 50,000 people attended King’s funeral in Atlanta, Georgia. His legacy, even 40 years after his death, continues. His message remains strong, and in our memories.
tonight Reverend Wayne Perryman joins Political Pistachio Radio at 10pm Eastern/7pm Pacific.
We’ve all seen the bumper stickers….”Better a Bleeding Heart Than None At All” and “Republicans Are People Too….Mean, Selfish, Greedy People” but how accurate are those statements?
Sixteen months ago, Arthur C. Brooks, a professor at Syracuse University, published “Who Really Cares: The Surprising Truth About Compassionate Conservatism.” The surprise is that liberals are markedly less charitable than conservatives.
If many conservatives are liberals who have been mugged by reality, Brooks, a registered independent, is, as a reviewer of his book said, a social scientist who has been mugged by data. They include these findings:
Although liberal families’ incomes average 6 percent higher than those of conservative families, conservative-headed households give, on average, 30 percent more to charity than the average liberal-headed household ($1,600 per year vs. $1,227).
Conservatives also donate more time and give more blood.
Residents of the states that voted for John Kerry in 2004 gave smaller percentages of their incomes to charity than did residents of states that voted for George Bush.
Bush carried 24 of the 25 states where charitable giving was above average.
The Logical Household is not “rich” by any stretch of the imagination but we do faithfully give to charity. Last year, we gave almost 14% of our total income to church and charity (Lupus Foundation, DAV and others). I don’t say this to brag - I say it as confirmation of the thesis of the article. I also know from conversations past that there are many liberals here whose actions blow this thesis apart….however, in general, the thesis is valid. Which leads us to…Barack “We Can Be Better” Obama.
Recently Sen. Obama released his tax records for the last 1o years. For a man who bitterly complains about how poorly certain portions of the country are treated…who exhorts us to do better, the records are another example of a politician who couldn’t “walk the talk” if their lives (or careers) depended on it.
In 2002, the year before Obama launched his campaign for U.S. Senate, the Obamas reported income of $259,394, ranking them in the top 2 percent of U.S. households, according to Census Bureau statistics. That year the Obamas claimed $1,050 in deductions for gifts to charity, or 0.4 percent of their income.
That amount increased when Senator Obama hit the financial “lottery” by signing two book deals.
Their giving rose to a laudable five percent in 2005 and six percent in 2006, with the explosion of their annual income to near $1 million, and the advent of Mr. Obama’s national political aspirations (representing a rare case in which political ambition apparently led to social benefit).
What is so laughable (and hypocritical) about this is how the campaign tries to excuse this miserly giving…
According to an Obama spokesman, the couple’s miserly charity until 2005 “was as generous as they could be at the time,” given their personal expenses. In other words, despite an annual average income over the period of about $244,000, they simply could not afford to give anything meaningful.
Before we dismiss this explanation, it is worth noting that this is not an uncommon upper-income excuse for not giving. According to 2000 data from the Independent Sector (a trade group for nonprofit organizations), among people with above-average incomes who do not give charitably, a majority actually say it is because they don’t have enough money.
Well if I may be so bold as to borrow a piece of advice you give all of us poor working stiffs when we dare to complain about or tax burdens “maybe you should find somewhere to cut back”.
The release of this data can backfire on the candidate as the Chicago Tribune (a REAL newspaper) points out…
Candidates who skimp on personal donations risk a political price, said Lehane, a former spokesman for Gore who also worked in the Clinton White House.”For a Democrat in particular, given that they tend to be professing a ‘we, not me’ message, it’s always an opportunity to step on the third rail if your charitable contributions don’t stack up,” Lehane said.
It is especially dangerous for a candidate like Barack Obama who has made the inequity of America the lynchpin of his political career and his Presidential run.
