Monday, March 31, 2008

Play Ball

President Bush Inaugurates New Washington, DC Ballpark!

WASHINGTON - MARCH 30: US President George W. Bush walks on the field to throw out the first pitch during the Washington Nationals opening home game against the Atlanta Braves at Nationals Park March 30, 2008 in Washington, DC. President Bush attended the home opener which was the Nationals first game in their new stadium. (Photo by Brendan Smialowski/Getty Images)

President George W. Bush throws the ceremonial first pitch before a sold out crowd at the Washington Nationals season opener, as they host the Atlanta Braves Sunday, March 30, 2008, at their new home field at Nationals Park in Washington, D.C. White House photo by Chris Greenberg

Residents of Washington who were familiar with what this part of town used to look like (photos here) can only be pleased at the change.

Saturday, March 29, 2008

Clinton Campaign Releases Unseen Video of Bosnia Trip

It appears she was under fire from more than Ken Starr!

Thanks to Unskilled Labor for this great find!

Friday, March 28, 2008

Rush Limbaugh Will Not Be Prosecuted for Encouraging GOP Voters to Vote for Hillary

They'd also have had to prosecute Democrats!

By now you've likely heard of Rush Limbaugh's "Operation Chaos" (buy your official Operation Chaos gear here.)

It was Rush Limbaugh's answer to all the Democrats and Independents who crossed party lines and made sure we got stuck with John McCain as our GOP nominee. Rush encouraged GOP voters to re-register as Democrats, or otherwise vote for Hillary Clinton to keep Barack H. Obama from clinching the nomination anytime soon.

At least one Mike's America fan did just that in Texas.

Well, Democrats who usually say they want every vote to count, even if you are a felon or an illegal alien, apparently don't want Republicans to have the same rights so many of their party members enjoyed in GOP primary contests.

In Ohio, there were calls for investigations of Rush Limbaugh and threats to prosecute GOP voters who may have crossed over, even though Barack H. Obama's campaign was making phone calls to suggest they vote for him (and his campaign continues to do that in states like Pennsylvania).

But Rush need have no fear:

"We have no intention of prosecuting Rush Limbaugh because lying through your teeth and being stupid isn't a crime," said Leo Jennings, a spokesman for Democratic Attorney General Marc Dann. --The Columbus Dispatch, March 28, 2008
Put aside the nasty smear at Limbaugh. If Democrats started prosecuting people who were stupid liars, they'd have to prosecute their own candidates and most of their voters!

Obama Still Spinning on Reverand Wright

He sounds more like a Clinton every day!

Barack. H. Obama was on the chick-chat show "The View" today offering yet more spin on his questionable 20 year association with the disgraced Reverand Wright. Here's the video.

With each of his denials, it becomes more clear that Obama did know about Rev. Wright's hate filled rantings and more to the point, it had a major impact on his character.

"White Man's Greed"
Obama's very first service at Wright's church was ... controversial.
By Mickey Kaus
Friday, March 28, 2008

On his radio show yesterday, Hugh Hewitt played excerpts of Barack Obama reading from his autobiography, Dreams of My Father. In one, Obama remembers a sermon by Rev. Jeremiah Wright:

[T]he pastor described going to a museum and being confronted by a painting title Hope.
"The painting depicts a harpist," Revernd Wright explained, "a woman who at first glance appears to be sitting atop a great mountaintop. Untill you take a closer look and see that the woman is bruised and bloodied, dressed in tattered rags, the harp reduced to a single frayed string. Your eye is then drawn down to the scene below, down to the valley below, where everywhere are the ravages of famine, the drumbeat of war, a world groaning under strife and deprivation.

It is this world, a world where cruise ships throw away more food in a day than most residents of Port-au-Prince see in a year, where white folks' greed runs a world in need, aprtheid in one hemisphere, apathy in another hemisphere ... That's the world! On which hope sits."

And so it went, a meditation on a fallen world. While the boys next to me doodled on their church bulletin, Reverend Wright spoke of Sharpesville and Hiroshima, the callousness of policy makers in the White House and in the State House. ... [E.A.]

Sounds ... controversial! Keep in mind: a) Obama isn't disapproving of this sermon. In the book he weeps at the end of it; b) Demonstrating that at least some blaming of "white greed" for the world's sins--which Obama now criticizes-- isn't an exceptional topic for Rev. Wright in a few wacky sermons ("the five dumbest things") that Obama may or may not have missed. It's at the quotidian core of the Afrocentric philosophy that Obama says drew him to the church; c) Indeed, in his big March 18th race speech Obama reads the passage from his book that describes his emotional reaction to this very sermon (his "first service at Trinity")--how it made "the story of a people" seem "black and more than black." d) This is also the sermon that gave Obama the title of his next book, The Audacity of Hope. e) The "profound mistake" of this sermon is not that Wright "spoke as if our society was static"--Obama's analysis on Feb. 18th. The problem is that "white folks' greed" is not the main cause of a "world in need."

I'm not saying voters shouldn't cut Obama a lot of slack on Wright's anti-white fulminations. But the Senator should have spoken up publicly against the semi-paranoid "white greed" explanation a long time ago, no? And he could show a little humility. Again, this wasn't the occasion for him to be lecturing everyone else. ...

Update: On The View, Obama suggests Wright has sort of apologized:
"Had the reverend not retired, and had he not acknowledged that what he had said had deeply offended people and were inappropriate and mischaracterized what I believe is the greatness of this country, for all its flaws, then I wouldn't have felt comfortable staying at the church," Obama said Thursday during a taping of the ABC talk show, "The View." [E.A.]
placeAd2(commercialNode,'midarticleflex',false,'')

Tom Maguire is on the case, noting that Obama has now left the rarefied air of transracial elevation and entered conventional political BS-land, given that there is no evidence of any sort of Wright apology (though maybe now one will be produced) or a previous Obama inclination to leave the church. ... Meanwhile, Perry Bacon of WaPo tries to figure out which "controversial" or "objectionable" sermons Obama heard. Again, I don't think this is necessary. Wright's sermon at Obama's very first service, highlighted in his book and his 3/18 speech as an epiphanal moment, was controversial and objectionable enough. And it didn't make him leave the church. It made him join the church. At least a bit of self-criticism seems in order. ... [via Instapundit and JustOneMinute]
When the new Reverand in my hometown Methodist Church used the pulpit to promote a petition demanding a Nuclear Freeze, I walked out the door and never went back. But before I did, I sent the minister a letter explaining how inappropriate I found his behavior. Obama could have done the same but failed to do so. It can only be because he agrees with Reverand Wright.

Thursday, March 27, 2008

Who Cares More? Liberals or Conservatives?

Guess who puts their money where their mouth is?

With the revelation that Barack and Michelle Obama have given so little of their significant income to charity over the years we were reminded that conservatives as a rule give more to help more people than the libs who shout so loudly about how much they care.
Conservatives More Liberal Givers
By George Will
Real Clear Politics
March 27, 2008

WASHINGTON -- Residents of Austin, Texas, home of the state's government and flagship university, have very refined social consciences, if they do say so themselves, and they do say so, speaking via bumper stickers. Don R. Willett, a justice of the state Supreme Court, has commuted behind bumpers proclaiming "Better a Bleeding Heart Than None at All," "Practice Random Acts of Kindness and Senseless Beauty," "The Moral High Ground Is Built on Compassion," "Arms Are For Hugging," "Will Work (When the Jobs Come Back From India)," "Jesus Is a Liberal," "God Wants Spiritual Fruits, Not Religious Nuts," "The Road to Hell Is Paved With Republicans," "Republicans Are People Too -- Mean, Selfish, Greedy People" and so on. But Willett thinks Austin subverts a stereotype: "The belief that liberals care more about the poor may scratch a partisan or ideological itch, but the facts are hostile witnesses."

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.

-- In the 10 reddest states, in which Bush got more than 60 percent majorities, the average percentage of personal income donated to charity was 3.5. Residents of the bluest states, which gave Bush less than 40 percent, donated just 1.9 percent.

-- People who reject the idea that "government has a responsibility to reduce income inequality" give an average of four times more than people who accept that proposition.

Brooks demonstrates a correlation between charitable behavior and "the values that lie beneath" liberal and conservative labels. Two influences on charitable behavior are religion and attitudes about the proper role of government.

The single biggest predictor of someone's altruism, Willett says, is religion. It increasingly correlates with conservative political affiliations because, as Brooks' book says, "the percentage of self-described Democrats who say they have 'no religion' has more than quadrupled since the early 1970s." America is largely divided between religious givers and secular nongivers, and the former are disproportionately conservative. One demonstration that religion is a strong determinant of charitable behavior is that the least charitable cohort is a relatively small one -- secular conservatives.

Reviewing Brooks' book in the Texas Review of Law & Politics, Justice Willett notes that Austin -- it voted 56 percent for Kerry while he was getting just 38 percent statewide -- is ranked by The Chronicle of Philanthropy as 48th out of America's 50 largest cities in per capita charitable giving. Brooks' data about disparities between liberals' and conservatives' charitable giving fit these facts: Democrats represent a majority of the wealthiest congressional districts, and half of America's richest households live in states where both senators are Democrats.

While conservatives tend to regard giving as a personal rather than governmental responsibility, some liberals consider private charity a retrograde phenomenon -- a poor palliative for an inadequate welfare state, and a distraction from achieving adequacy by force, by increasing taxes. Ralph Nader, running for president in 2000, said: "A society that has more justice is a society that needs less charity." Brooks, however, warns: "If support for a policy that does not exist ... substitutes for private charity, the needy are left worse off than before. It is one of the bitterest ironies of liberal politics today that political opinions are apparently taking the place of help for others."

In 2000, brows were furrowed in perplexity because Vice President Al Gore's charitable contributions, as a percentage of his income, were below the national average: He gave 0.2 percent of his family income, one-seventh of the average for donating households. But Gore "gave at the office." By using public office to give other peoples' money to government programs, he was being charitable, as liberals increasingly, and conveniently, understand that word.
And let's not forget that in 2006 Vice President Cheney and his wife Lynne gave 75% of their annual income to charity! This was a few years after Hillary Clinton claimed a charitable deduction for donating Bill and Chelsea's used underwear.

Some people care. Some people talk about it!

Tuesday, March 25, 2008

More on Global Cooling

Another couple of years and the Global Warming hoax will be exposed! Science doesn't lie even if environmentalists do!

Climate facts to warm to
by Christopher Pearson
The Australian
March 22, 2008

CATASTROPHIC predictions of global warming usually conjure with the notion of a tipping point, a point of no return.

Last Monday - on ABC Radio National, of all places - there was a tipping point of a different kind in the debate on climate change. It was a remarkable interview involving the co-host of Counterpoint, Michael Duffy and Jennifer Marohasy, a biologist and senior fellow of Melbourne-based think tank the Institute of Public Affairs. Anyone in public life who takes a position on the greenhouse gas hypothesis will ignore it at their peril. [full interview audio here]

Duffy asked Marohasy: "Is the Earth stillwarming?"

She replied: "No, actually, there has been cooling, if you take 1998 as your point of reference. If you take 2002 as your point of reference, then temperatures have plateaued. This is certainly not what you'd expect if carbon dioxide is driving temperature because carbon dioxide levels have been increasing but temperatures have actually been coming down over the last 10 years."

Duffy: "Is this a matter of any controversy?"

Marohasy: "Actually, no. The head of the IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) has actually acknowledged it. He talks about the apparent plateau in temperatures so far this century. So he recognises that in this century, over the past eight years, temperatures have plateaued ... This is not what you'd expect, as I said, because if carbon dioxide is driving temperature then you'd expect that, given carbon dioxide levels have been continuing to increase, temperatures should be going up ... So (it's) very unexpected, not something that's being discussed. It should be being discussed, though, because it's very significant."

Duffy: "It's not only that it's not discussed. We never hear it, do we? Whenever there's any sort of weather event that can be linked into the global warming orthodoxy, it's put on the front page. But a fact like that, which is that global warming stopped a decade ago, is virtually never reported, which is extraordinary."

Duffy then turned to the question of how the proponents of the greenhouse gas hypothesis deal with data that doesn't support their case. "People like Kevin Rudd and Ross Garnaut are speaking as though the Earth is still warming at an alarming rate, but what is the argument from the other side? What would people associated with the IPCC say to explain the (temperature) dip?"

Marohasy: "Well, the head of the IPCC has suggested natural factors are compensating for the increasing carbon dioxide levels and I guess, to some extent, that's what sceptics have been saying for some time: that, yes, carbon dioxide will give you some warming but there are a whole lot of other factors that may compensate or that may augment the warming from elevated levels of carbon dioxide.

"There's been a lot of talk about the impact of the sun and that maybe we're going to go through or are entering a period of less intense solar activity and this could be contributing to the current cooling."

Duffy: "Can you tell us about NASA's Aqua satellite, because I understand some of the data we're now getting is quite important in our understanding of how climate works?"

Marohasy: "That's right. The satellite was only launched in 2002 and it enabled the collection of data, not just on temperature but also on cloud formation and water vapour. What all the climate models suggest is that, when you've got warming from additional carbon dioxide, this will result in increased water vapour, so you're going to get a positive feedback. That's what the models have been indicating. What this great data from the NASA Aqua satellite ... (is) actually showing is just the opposite, that with a little bit of warming, weather processes are compensating, so they're actually limiting the greenhouse effect and you're getting a negative rather than a positive feedback."

Duffy: "The climate is actually, in one way anyway, more robust than was assumed in the climate models?"

Marohasy: "That's right ... These findings actually aren't being disputed by the meteorological community. They're having trouble digesting the findings, they're acknowledging the findings, they're acknowledging that the data from NASA's Aqua satellite is not how the models predict, and I think they're about to recognise that the models really do need to be overhauled and that when they are overhauled they will probably show greatly reduced future warming projected as a consequence of carbon dioxide."

Duffy: "From what you're saying, it sounds like the implications of this could beconsiderable ..."

Marohasy: "That's right, very much so. The policy implications are enormous. The meteorological community at the moment is really just coming to terms with the output from this NASA Aqua satellite and (climate scientist) Roy Spencer's interpretation of them. His work is published, his work is accepted, but I think people are still in shock at this point."

If Marohasy is anywhere near right about the impending collapse of the global warming paradigm, life will suddenly become a whole lot more interesting.

A great many founts of authority, from the Royal Society to the UN, most heads of government along with countless captains of industry, learned professors, commentators and journalists will be profoundly embarrassed. Let us hope it is a prolonged and chastening experience.


With catastrophe off the agenda, for most people the fog of millennial gloom will lift, at least until attention turns to the prospect of the next ice age. Among the better educated, the sceptical cast of mind that is the basis of empiricism will once again be back in fashion. The delusion that by recycling and catching public transport we can help save the planet will quickly come to be seen for the childish nonsense it was all along.

The poorest Indians and Chinese will be left in peace to work their way towards prosperity, without being badgered about the size of their carbon footprint, a concept that for most of us will soon be one with Nineveh and Tyre, clean forgotten in six months.

The scores of town planners in Australia building empires out of regulating what can and can't be built on low-lying shorelines will have to come to terms with the fact inundation no longer impends and find something more plausible to do. The same is true of the bureaucrats planning to accommodate "climate refugees".

Penny Wong's climate mega-portfolio will suddenly be as ephemeral as the ministries for the year 2000 that state governments used to entrust to junior ministers. Malcolm Turnbull will have to reinvent himself at vast speed as a climate change sceptic and the Prime Minister will have to kiss goodbye what he likes to call the great moral issue and policy challenge of our times.

It will all be vastly entertaining to watch.

THE Age published an essay with an environmental theme by Ian McEwan on March 8 and its stablemate, The Sydney Morning Herald, also carried a slightly longer version of the same piece.

The Australian's Cut & Paste column two days later reproduced a telling paragraph from the Herald's version, which suggested that McEwan was a climate change sceptic and which The Age had excised. He was expanding on the proposition that "we need not only reliable data but their expression in the rigorous use of statistics".

What The Age decided to spare its readers was the following: "Well-meaning intellectual movements, from communism to post-structuralism, have a poor history of absorbing inconvenient fact or challenges to fundamental precepts. We should not ignore or suppress good indicators on the environment, though they have become extremely rare now. It is tempting to the layman to embrace with enthusiasm the latest bleak scenario because it fits the darkness of our soul, the prevailing cultural pessimism. The imagination, as Wallace Stevens once said, is always at the end of an era. But we should be asking, or expecting others to ask, for the provenance of the data, the assumptions fed into the computer model, the response of the peer review community, and so on. Pessimism is intellectually delicious, even thrilling, but the matter before us is too serious for mere self-pleasuring. It would be self-defeating if the environmental movement degenerated into a religion of gloomy faith. (Faith, ungrounded certainty, is no virtue.)" ...

Informed readers may also wish to add Dr. Roy Spencer's excellent article, which also forms the foundation for his new book to their reading list.

The problem with the hype of Global Baloney is that it was founded on the basis of flawed and imperfect models for understanding climate change. That overreach has been apparent to anyone who understands how flawed a daily weather forecast is, let alone one that attempts to make predictions for climate change over the next one hundred years without a solid scientific foundation.

But no matter, the enviro-zealots will be exposed for the big lie socialists they have always been with a few more years of hard data. Let's hope they are held to account for the fraud they have perpetrated on humanity!

Sunday, March 23, 2008

Pope Baptisizes Former Muslim on Easter Eve!

Muslim baptized by pope says life in danger
By Philip Pullella
Reuters
Mar 23, 2008

VATICAN CITY (Reuters) - A Muslim author and critic of Islamic fundamentalism who was baptized a Catholic by Pope Benedict said on Sunday Islam is "physiologically violent" and he is now in great danger because of his conversion.

"I realize what I am going up against but I will confront my fate with my head high, with my back straight and the interior strength of one who is certain about his faith," said Magdi Allam.

In a surprise move on Saturday night, the pope baptized the 55-year-old, Egyptian-born Allam at an Easter eve service in St Peter's Basilica that was broadcast around the world.

The conversion of Allam to Christianity -- he took the name "Christian" for his baptism -- was kept secret until the Vatican disclosed it in a statement less than an hour before it began.

Writing in Sunday's edition of the leading Corriere della Sera, the newspaper of which he is a deputy director, Allam said: "... the root of evil is innate in an Islam that is physiologically violent and historically conflictual."

Allam, who is a strong supporter of Israel and who an Israeli newspaper once called a "Muslim Zionist," has lived under police protection following threats against him, particularly after he criticized Iran's position on Israel.

He said before converting he had continually asked himself why someone who had struggled for what he called "moderate Islam" was then "condemned to death in the name of Islam and on the basis of a Koranic legitimization."

His conversion, which he called "the happiest day of my life," came just two days after al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden accused the pope of being part of a "new crusade" against Islam.

The Vatican appeared to be at pains to head off criticism from the Islamic world about the conversion.

"Conversion is a private matter, a personal thing and we hope that the baptism will not be interpreted negatively by Islam," Cardinal Giovanni Re told an Italian newspaper.

Still, Allam's highly public baptism by the pope shocked Italy's Muslim community, with some leaders openly questioning why the Vatican chose to shine such a big spotlight it.

"What amazes me is the high profile the Vatican has given this conversion," Yaha Sergio Yahe Pallavicini, vice-president of the Italian Islamic Religious Community, told Reuters. "Why could he have not done this in his local parish?"

ANOTHER DEATH SENTENCE

Allam, the author of numerous books, said he realized that his conversion would likely procure him "another death sentence for apostasy," or the abandoning of one's faith.

But he said he was willing to risk it because he had "finally seen the light, thanks to divine grace."

Allam defended the pope in 2006 when the pontiff made a speech in Regensburg, Germany, that many Muslims perceived as depicting Islam as a violent faith.

He said he made his decision to convert after years of deep soul searching and asserted that the Catholic Church has been "too prudent about conversions of Muslims."

At a Sunday morning Easter mass hours after he baptized Allam, the pope, without mentioning him, spoke in a prayer of the continuing "miracle" of conversion to Christianity some 2,000 years after Christ's resurrection.

The Vatican statement announcing Allam's conversion said: "For the Catholic Church, each person who asks to receive Baptism after a deep personal search, a fully free choice and adequate preparation, has a right to receive it."

It said all newcomers to the faith were "equally important before God's love and welcome in the community of the Church."
Muslim fanatics have made it clear: They demand we either convert to Islam, submit to being ruled under Sharia Law or die! Mitres off to Pope Benedict for refusing to accept that demand.

On the Lighter Side

The Easter Bunny hates you!

Saturday, March 22, 2008

Amidst Sadness Comes Gladness

Happy Easter!

Early in my musical education I learned to play Bach's "In Dir Ist Freude" which translates roughly to "In thee is gladness Amid the sadness."

The music portrays the comforting promise behind the Easter season which guarantees that the gloom of winter and the sadness of death witnessed in Christ's cruxifiction will be lifted soon.

The promise has already been fulfilled in the garden at Mike's America where this display is just part of the ongoing miracle of rebirth:

Those who have enjoyed the Pie Jesu in the post below, may also wish to hear this version, which I find to be even more sublime:

And I hope you'll understand if I share with you one more photo of my cat Hobbes who left this world for a better place on St. Patrick's Day.

Hobbes, Washington, DC, 1992

Friday, March 21, 2008

Good Friday

Matthew 27:24-26 (King James Version)

24When Pilate saw that he could prevail nothing, but that rather a tumult was made, he took water, and washed his hands before the multitude, saying, I am innocent of the blood of this just person: see ye to it.

25Then answered all the people, and said, His blood be on us, and on our children.

26Then released he Barabbas unto them: and when he had scourged Jesus, he delivered him to be crucified.

01 - Pie Jesu.mp3

Pie Jesu, pie Jesu, pie Jesu, pie Jesu
[Merciful Jesus]

Qui tollis peccata mundi
Dona eis requiem, dona eis requiem

[Who takes away the sins of the world
grant them rest]

Pie Jesu, pie Jesu, pie Jesu, pie Jesu

Qui tollis peccata mundi Dona eis requiem,
dona eis requiem

Agnus Dei, Agnus Dei, Agnus Dei, Agnus Dei

[Lamb of God]

Qui tollis peccata mundi
Dona eis requiem, dona eis requiem

Sempiternam
[Grant them everlasting rest]

Sempiternam

Requiem

Happy Easter ALL!

Tuesday, March 18, 2008

Mike's America Blog Assistant Passes Away

If you wondered how I kept up the pace of blogging all these years, I admit, I had help!

Hobbes on the job in Hilton Head

Hobbes
Devoted and loyal companion
August 8, 1992- March 17, 2008





Here he was on Capitol Hill in Washington, DC showing the colors to passersby at his residence on "A" Street Southeast, a few blocks behind the Capitol and Library of Congress.

He is already much missed.

Obama Admits Lying in Philadelphia Speech

Then goes on to give a speech filled with the same old failed class warfare rhetoric.

“The statements that Rev. Wright made that are the cause of this controversy were not statements I personally heard him preach while I sat in the pews of Trinity or heard him utter in private conversation,” --Barack H. Obama, March 14, 2008

"Did I know him to be an occasionally fierce critic of American domestic and foreign policy? Of course. Did I ever hear him make remarks that could be considered controversial while I sat in church? Yes."
Barack H. Obama, March 18, 2007
Excerpts from:
A MORE PERFECT UNION
by Barack H. Obama
remarks as prepared for delivery
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
March 18th, 2008

...And yet words on a parchment would not be enough to deliver slaves from bondage, or provide men and women of every color and creed their full rights and obligations as citizens of the United States. What would be needed were Americans in successive generations who were willing to do their part – through protests and struggle, on the streets and in the courts, through a civil war and civil disobedience and always at great risk - to narrow that gap between the promise of our ideals and the reality of their time.

This was one of the tasks we set forth at the beginning of this campaign – to continue the long march of those who came before us, a march for a more just, more equal, more free, more caring and more prosperous America. I chose to run for the presidency at this moment in history because I believe deeply that we cannot solve the challenges of our time unless we solve them together
...
I am the son of a black man from Kenya and a white woman from Kansas. I was raised with the help of a white grandfather who survived a Depression to serve in Patton’s Army during World War II and a white grandmother who worked on a bomber assembly line at Fort Leavenworth while he was overseas. I’ve gone to some of the best schools in America and lived in one of the world’s poorest nations. I am married to a black American who carries within her the blood of slaves and slaveowners – an inheritance we pass on to our two precious daughters. I have brothers, sisters, nieces, nephews, uncles and cousins, of every race and every hue, scattered across three continents, and for as long as I live, I will never forget that in no other country on Earth is my story even possible.

It’s a story that hasn’t made me the most conventional candidate. But it is a story that has seared into my genetic makeup the idea that this nation is more than the sum of its parts – that out of many, we are truly one.

Throughout the first year of this campaign, against all predictions to the contrary, we saw how hungry the American people were for this message of unity. Despite the temptation to view my candidacy through a purely racial lens, we won commanding victories in states with some of the whitest populations in the country. In South Carolina, where the Confederate Flag still flies, we built a powerful coalition of African Americans and white Americans.
...
On one end of the spectrum, we’ve heard the implication that my candidacy is somehow an exercise in affirmative action; that it’s based solely on the desire of wide-eyed liberals to purchase racial reconciliation on the cheap. On the other end, we’ve heard my former pastor, Reverend Jeremiah Wright, use incendiary language to express views that have the potential not only to widen the racial divide, but views that denigrate both the greatness and the goodness of our nation; that rightly offend white and black alike.

I have already condemned, in unequivocal terms, the statements of Reverend Wright that have caused such controversy. For some, nagging questions remain. Did I know him to be an occasionally fierce critic of American domestic and foreign policy? Of course. Did I ever hear him make remarks that could be considered controversial while I sat in church? Yes. Did I strongly disagree with many of his political views? Absolutely – just as I’m sure many of you have heard remarks from your pastors, priests, or rabbis with which you strongly disagreed.

But the remarks that have caused this recent firestorm weren’t simply controversial. They weren’t simply a religious leader’s effort to speak out against perceived injustice. Instead, they expressed a profoundly distorted view of this country – a view that sees white racism as endemic, and that elevates what is wrong with America above all that we know is right with America; a view that sees the conflicts in the Middle East as rooted primarily in the actions of stalwart allies like Israel, instead of emanating from the perverse and hateful ideologies of radical Islam.
...
I can no more disown him than I can disown the black community. I can no more disown him than I can my white grandmother – a woman who helped raise me, a woman who sacrificed again and again for me, a woman who loves me as much as she loves anything in this world, but a woman who once confessed her fear of black men who passed by her on the street, and who on more than one occasion has uttered racial or ethnic stereotypes that made me cringe.
...
Understanding this reality requires a reminder of how we arrived at this point. As William Faulkner once wrote, “The past isn’t dead and buried. In fact, it isn’t even past.” We do not need to recite here the history of racial injustice in this country. But we do need to remind ourselves that so many of the disparities that exist in the African-American community today can be directly traced to inequalities passed on from an earlier generation that suffered under the brutal legacy of slavery and Jim Crow.

Segregated schools were, and are, inferior schools; we still haven’t fixed them, fifty years after Brown v. Board of Education, and the inferior education they provided, then and now, helps explain the pervasive achievement gap between today’s black and white students.

Legalized discrimination - where blacks were prevented, often through violence, from owning property, or loans were not granted to African-American business owners, or black homeowners could not access FHA mortgages, or blacks were excluded from unions, or the police force, or fire departments – meant that black families could not amass any meaningful wealth to bequeath to future generations. That history helps explain the wealth and income gap between black and white, and the concentrated pockets of poverty that persists in so many of today’s urban and rural communities.

A lack of economic opportunity among black men, and the shame and frustration that came from not being able to provide for one’s family, contributed to the erosion of black families – a problem that welfare policies for many years may have worsened. And the lack of basic services in so many urban black neighborhoods – parks for kids to play in, police walking the beat, regular garbage pick-up and building code enforcement – all helped create a cycle of violence, blight and neglect that continue to haunt us.

This is the reality in which Reverend Wright and other African-Americans of his generation grew up. They came of age in the late fifties and early sixties, a time when segregation was still the law of the land and opportunity was systematically constricted. What’s remarkable is not how many failed in the face of discrimination, but rather how many men and women overcame the odds; how many were able to make a way out of no way for those like me who would come after them.

But for all those who scratched and clawed their way to get a piece of the American Dream, there were many who didn’t make it – those who were ultimately defeated, in one way or another, by discrimination. That legacy of defeat was passed on to future generations – those young men and increasingly young women who we see standing on street corners or languishing in our prisons, without hope or prospects for the future. Even for those blacks who did make it, questions of race, and racism, continue to define their worldview in fundamental ways.
....
Just as black anger often proved counterproductive, so have these white resentments distracted attention from the real culprits of the middle class squeeze – a corporate culture rife with inside dealing, questionable accounting practices, and short-term greed; a Washington dominated by lobbyists and special interests; economic policies that favor the few over the many. And yet, to wish away the resentments of white Americans, to label them as misguided or even racist, without recognizing they are grounded in legitimate concerns – this too widens the racial divide, and blocks the path to understanding.
...

For we have a choice in this country. We can accept a politics that breeds division, and conflict, and cynicism. We can tackle race only as spectacle – as we did in the OJ trial – or in the wake of tragedy, as we did in the aftermath of Katrina - or as fodder for the nightly news. We can play Reverend Wright’s sermons on every channel, every day and talk about them from now until the election, and make the only question in this campaign whether or not the American people think that I somehow believe or sympathize with his most offensive words. We can pounce on some gaffe by a Hillary supporter as evidence that she’s playing the race card, or we can speculate on whether white men will all flock to John McCain in the general election regardless of his policies.

We can do that.

But if we do, I can tell you that in the next election, we’ll be talking about some other distraction. And then another one. And then another one. And nothing will change.

That is one option. Or, at this moment, in this election, we can come together and say, “Not this time.” This time we want to talk about the crumbling schools that are stealing the future of black children and white children and Asian children and Hispanic children and Native American children. This time we want to reject the cynicism that tells us that these kids can’t learn; that those kids who don’t look like us are somebody else’s problem. The children of America are not those kids, they are our kids, and we will not let them fall behind in a 21st century economy. Not this time.

This time we want to talk about how the lines in the Emergency Room are filled with whites and blacks and Hispanics who do not have health care; who don’t have the power on their own to overcome the special interests in Washington, but who can take them on if we do it together.

This time we want to talk about the shuttered mills that once provided a decent life for men and women of every race, and the homes for sale that once belonged to Americans from every religion, every region, every walk of life. This time we want to talk about the fact that the real problem is not that someone who doesn’t look like you might take your job; it’s that the corporation you work for will ship it overseas for nothing more than a profit.

This time we want to talk about the men and women of every color and creed who serve together, and fight together, and bleed together under the same proud flag. We want to talk about how to bring them home from a war that never should’ve been authorized and never should’ve been waged, and we want to talk about how we’ll show our patriotism by caring for them, and their families, and giving them the benefits they have earned.


A couple of thoughts:

Obama goes to great lengths to point out his own sensitivity to racial issues, especially considering his mixed race and heritage. He talks about his white grandmother and some of the racial remarks she uttered that made him "cringe."

Yet, he admits he sat in Trinity Church and embraced a pastor who essentially blamed his white mother and grandparents for the ills of the black community.

Throughout the speech he made references to the poor quality of education available to African Americans. Yet, throughout his campaign he has embraced the teacher's unions which continue to block any and all effective solutions put forward to deal with the problem.

He complained that "the most segregated hour in American life occurs on Sunday morning." But he had a choice on whether or not to attend that church. And he denies poor families the choice of where to send their children to school. If you want to help poor families educate their children, embrace school choice, not the current apratheid of government run schools.

He denounced evil corporations and their "short-term greed" and went on to condemn the current political culture as "a Washington dominated by lobbyists and special interests; economic policies that favor the few over the many." He goes on to suggest that this and lingering prejudices has left us with the resulted that "black families could not amass any meaningful wealth to bequeath to future generations." And yet, Democrats like him have voted consistently to block the transfer of wealth to future generations through their insistence on the death tax, which strikes hardest at the small business owner.

Next, "Even for those blacks who did make it, questions of race, and racism, continue to define their worldview in fundamental ways." No doubt they do when they look around their world and see this:
A lack of economic opportunity among black men, and the shame and frustration that came from not being able to provide for one’s family, contributed to the erosion of black families – a problem that welfare policies for many years may have worsened. And the lack of basic services in so many urban black neighborhoods – parks for kids to play in, police walking the beat, regular garbage pick-up and building code enforcement – all helped create a cycle of violence, blight and neglect that continue to haunt us.
Does it need to be pointed out again and again and again that Black voters continue to elect Democrats to office in those urban areas and fail to hold them accountable for the continuing failures of government which are so evident? Blaming white people and racism on the problem hasn't solved it.

A good speech will not make the current Obamanation over Pastor Wright's remarks go away. Especially when the only solutions Obama offers to the problems he describes are the same failed class warfare politics that Democrats have used to keep poor black voters on the plantation for years.

Obama isn't offering anything new. But he sure makes the old whine sound better as he pours it from the bottle.

Monday, March 17, 2008

The Obama Bargain

Shelby Steele is a brilliant writer and a self-described Black conservative. This is one of the best summations of the Obama problem:

The Obama Bargain
By SHELBY STEELE
Opinion Journal
March 18, 2008

Geraldine Ferraro may have had sinister motives when she said that Barack Obama would not be "in his position" as a frontrunner but for his race. Possibly she was acting as Hillary Clinton's surrogate. Or maybe she was simply befuddled by this new reality -- in which blackness could constitute a political advantage.

But whatever her motives, she was right: "If Obama was a white man, he would not be in this position." Barack Obama is, of course, a very talented politician with a first-rate political organization at his back. But it does not detract from his merit to say that his race is also a large part of his prominence. And it is undeniable that something extremely powerful in the body politic, a force quite apart from the man himself, has pulled Obama forward. This force is about race and nothing else.

The novelty of Barack Obama is more his cross-racial appeal than his talent. Jesse Jackson displayed considerable political talent in his presidential runs back in the 1980s. But there was a distinct limit to his white support. Mr. Obama's broad appeal to whites makes him the first plausible black presidential candidate in American history. And it was Mr. Obama's genius to understand this. Though he likes to claim that his race was a liability to be overcome, he also surely knew that his race could give him just the edge he needed -- an edge that would never be available to a white, not even a white woman.

How to turn one's blackness to advantage?

The answer is that one "bargains." Bargaining is a mask that blacks can wear in the American mainstream, one that enables them to put whites at their ease. This mask diffuses the anxiety that goes along with being white in a multiracial society. Bargainers make the subliminal promise to whites not to shame them with America's history of racism, on the condition that they will not hold the bargainer's race against him. And whites love this bargain -- and feel affection for the bargainer -- because it gives them racial innocence in a society where whites live under constant threat of being stigmatized as racist. So the bargainer presents himself as an opportunity for whites to experience racial innocence.

This is how Mr. Obama has turned his blackness into his great political advantage, and also into a kind of personal charisma. Bargainers are conduits of white innocence, and they are as popular as the need for white innocence is strong. Mr. Obama's extraordinary dash to the forefront of American politics is less a measure of the man than of the hunger in white America for racial innocence.
...
And yet, in the end, Barack Obama's candidacy is not qualitatively different from Al Sharpton's or Jesse Jackson's. Like these more irascible of his forbearers, Mr. Obama's run at the presidency is based more on the manipulation of white guilt than on substance. Messrs. Sharpton and Jackson were "challengers," not bargainers. They intimidated whites and demanded, in the name of historical justice, that they be brought forward. Mr. Obama flatters whites, grants them racial innocence, and hopes to ascend on the back of their gratitude. Two sides of the same coin.

But bargainers have an Achilles heel. They succeed as conduits of white innocence only as long as they are largely invisible as complex human beings. They hope to become icons that can be identified with rather than seen, and their individual complexity gets in the way of this. So bargainers are always laboring to stay invisible. (We don't know the real politics or convictions of Tiger Woods or Michael Jordan or Oprah Winfrey, bargainers all.) Mr. Obama has said of himself, "I serve as a blank screen on which people of vastly different political stripes project their own views . . ." And so, human visibility is Mr. Obama's Achilles heel. If we see the real man, his contradictions and bents of character, he will be ruined as an icon, as a "blank screen."

Thus, nothing could be more dangerous to Mr. Obama's political aspirations than the revelation that he, the son of a white woman, sat Sunday after Sunday -- for 20 years -- in an Afrocentric, black nationalist church in which his own mother, not to mention other whites, could never feel comfortable. His pastor, Rev. Jeremiah Wright, is a challenger who goes far past Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson in his anti-American outrage ("God damn America").

How does one "transcend" race in this church? The fact is that Barack Obama has fellow-traveled with a hate-filled, anti-American black nationalism all his adult life, failing to stand and challenge an ideology that would have no place for his own mother. And what portent of presidential judgment is it to have exposed his two daughters for their entire lives to what is, at the very least, a subtext of anti-white vitriol?

What could he have been thinking? Of course he wasn't thinking. He was driven by insecurity, by a need to "be black" despite his biracial background. And so fellow-traveling with a little race hatred seemed a small price to pay for a more secure racial identity. And anyway, wasn't this hatred more rhetorical than real?

But now the floodlight of a presidential campaign has trained on this usually hidden corner of contemporary black life: a mindless indulgence in a rhetorical anti-Americanism as a way of bonding and of asserting one's blackness. Yet Jeremiah Wright, splashed across America's television screens, has shown us that there is no real difference between rhetorical hatred and real hatred.

No matter his ultimate political fate, there is already enough pathos in Barack Obama to make him a cautionary tale. His public persona thrives on a manipulation of whites (bargaining), and his private sense of racial identity demands both self-betrayal and duplicity. His is the story of a man who flew so high, yet neglected to become himself.
People have started to look beyond the attractive candidate who makes inspirational speeches and ask themselves: who is this guy? Many of them are discovering Obama is not what he represents himself to be.

Another Great Paul Shanklin Parody

"Jeremiah Was My Pastor "

Latest Dance Craze!

Who knew Walruses made such good dance partners?


Juan Williams on Obama's "Character and Judgment"

Hot Air found this video of Juan Williams on Fox News Sunday who reminds viewers that Obama found it convenient to embrace Rev. Wright when Obama was trying to become black enough to run for office in Illinois and now distances himself from that same man when that also suits his purposes. Juan concludes that this says a lot about Obama's "character and judgment."


Link: sevenload.com

Sunday, March 16, 2008

Democrat Nomination Race a Quagmire, a Civil War with No Exit Strategy

Democrats show they cannot even run a political party, let a lone a country!

For Democrats, Increased Fears of a Long Fight
By ADAM NAGOURNEY and JEFF ZELENY
New York Times
March 16, 2008

WASHINGTON — Lacking a clear route to the selection of a Democratic presidential nominee, the party’s uncommitted superdelegates say they are growing increasingly concerned about the risks of a prolonged fight between Senators Hillary Rodham Clinton and Barack Obama, and perplexed about how to resolve the conflict.
...
“It would be nice to find a way to wrap it up,” said Representative Chris Van Hollen of Maryland, chairman of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, who has not committed to either candidate. “If the current trajectory of the debate continues, the divisions will make it more difficult for many of our candidates.”
...
“This was everybody’s worse nightmare come to fruition,” said Richard Machacek, an uncommitted superdelegate from Iowa, who said he was struggling over what to do.
...
Eileen Macoll, a Democratic county chairwoman from Washington State, is expecting something different — and not exactly looking forward to it. “I think it’s going to go all the way to the floor,” Ms. Macoll said. “We will take the vote and that will be the nominee. We’re going to see that happen.”
...
“Every day that this continues, people can surmise that this is going to the convention in Colorado and it could be decided by the superdelegates,” said Gov. Joe Manchin III of West Virginia, the head of the Democratic Governors Association. “There is not a superdelegate that I have spoken to who wants that to happen.”

"Peace" Fascists

And they say Bush is Hitler?

There is no difference between this:

Milwaukee Sentinel, March 2007: Officers were called to the 3100 block of Oakland Ave. around 8 p.m., where Iraq War protesters clad in black, carrying torches and wearing ski masks were reportedly setting off smoke bombs and throwing paint as they approached an Arm recruiting center on the block, Sgt. Eric Pfeiffer, of the Milwaukee Police Department, said last night.

Someone threw an object through the recruitment center's window and spread what appears to be human waste inside before running off, Pfeiffer said.

Of the 21 arrests, three were juveniles with the youngest 13 years old.
And this:

On the nights of November 9 and 10, gangs of Nazi youth roamed through Jewish neighborhoods breaking windows of Jewish businesses and homes, burning synagogues and looting.
Both are examples of political violence waged by a small, violent minority. History teaches us a painful lesson of the consequences of ignoring political violence.

Saturday, March 15, 2008

Obama's Bad Judgment

Is this the kind of experience he would bring to Washington as President?

Trinity United Church of Christ/Religion News ServiceSen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., and the Rev. Jeremiah Wright Jr., senior pastor, Trinity United Church of Christ in Chicago, March 2005.

“The statements that Rev. Wright made that are the cause of this controversy were not statements I personally heard him preach while I sat in the pews of Trinity or heard him utter in private conversation,” --Barrack H. Obama


Barrack Believeable?
Only to people who's sipped a bit too much of the leftie Kool Aid!

Barrack Obama has made the case to his supporters that he represents change from the politics of the past as represented by his rival for the Dem nomination. We all know how expert both Clintons are at turning a phrase, or defining "is" to suit their needs. But apparently, that's one characteristic Obama does not intend to change.

Look back at the text: "not statements I personally heard him preach while I sat in the pews of Trinity or heard him utter in private conversation." This begs the question did you KNOW about these statements. In an interview on Fox News Obama said: "they weren't things that I was familiar with. "

When asked if he would have quit the church if he had heard those statemements Obama gave a long rambling non answer. When pressed he said "If I had heard them repeated, I would have quit."

So, we are led to believe that Obama never heard directly, or was even "familiar" with Pastor Wright's hate filled sermons. The next question would be: did others in the church ever come and talk to you about these sermons? Had you heard that Wright was saying these things, why didn't you go and confront him?


A Typical Sunday When Obama Was in Wright's Church

REV WRIGHT: Blessed are the meek: for they shall inherit the earth.

USHER: signals Wright that Obama has left the sanctuary and is headed to the restrooms.

WRIGHT: "The government gives them the drugs, builds bigger prisons, passes a three-strike law and then wants us to sing 'God Bless America.' No, no, no, God damn America, that's in the Bible for killing innocent people. God damn America for treating our citizens as less than human. God damn America for as long as she acts like she is God and she is supreme."

USHER: signals Wright Obama is coming back down the hall. As Obama enters...

WRIGHT: Blessed are the peacemakers, for they will be called sons of God.
As usual, Victor Davis Hanson sums up the problem well:


Race and the Democrats, Part III
by Victor Davis Hanson
The Corner
March 14, 2008

Betrayed?

3) Sen. Obama has proclaimed a new politics of hope and change that were supposedly to transcend such venom and character assassination of the past. Thus besides being politically dense, he suffers—unless he preempts and explains in detail his Byzantine relationship with the Reverend—the additional charge of hypocrisy in courting such a merchant of hate. And then he compounds the disaster by the old-fashion politics of contortion and excuse by suggesting the Rev. Wright is not that controversial, or is analogous to the occasional embarrassing outburst of an uncle—some uncle.

4) There is a growing sense of betrayal among some of his supporters. Sen. Obama promised to transcend race; millions of sincere people of both parties took him at his word and invested psychologically and materially in his candidacy. Part of his message was that collectively America had made great progress, and their Ivy League and subsequent careers, in addition to his rhetoric of inclusiveness and tolerance, bore witness to that progress in racial equality. Now we learn, that for much of his career, he was not only attending hate-filled sermons against “rich white people” and the “g-d d——d America” (in hopes of solidifying his racial fides in regional Chicago politics?), but subsidized that ministry of intolerance. So while he promised an evolution beyond the race-identity politics of Jesse Jackson or the Rev. Sharpton, his own minister trumped anything that either one of those preachers might have sermonized. All in all—a betrayal.
...
So now in place of a critical discussion of issues from taxes to the war, welcome to the Politics of Change.


Judgment to What?

What've learned this past week is that the man who claimed the "judgement to lead" and promised "change we can believe in" is nothing more than a good speechmaker. His Clintonesque phrasing and attempts to distance himself from the man he embraced as friend and mentor for 20 years is more of the same from the Democrat Party.

And for Barack Hussein Obama, it gives us insight into his true character and perhaps better explains the photo below where Hillary Clinton and Bill Richardson both stood with hands over their hearts as the national anthem was playing at an Iowa event last year.

Thursday, March 13, 2008

Obama's Pastor: "God Damn America!"

It's no wonder that Michelle Obama has never been proud of her country before or that Barrack Hussein Obama refuses to wear an American Flag pin on his lapel.

This is a sermon by Jeremiah Wright, Chief pastor at theTrinity United Church of Christ where Obama and Michelle were members.. In it he describes how a black Jesus was oppressed by white people and goes even deeper down that well.

A "Damning" Indictment of Left Wing Hate

And if you really want to see the hate filled influence that is so pervasive within the circle of liberals that Obama represents, this video of Jeremiah Wright is DAMNING:

God Damn America
Excerpted from the Sermons of Jeremiah Wright
video

Sen. Barack Obama's pastor says blacks should n...
(more)
Added: March 13, 2008
Sen. Barack Obama's pastor says blacks should not sing "God Bless America" but "God damn America."

The Rev. Jeremiah Wright, Obama's pastor for the last 20 years at the Trinity United Church of Christ on Chicago's south side, has a long history of what even Obama's campaign aides concede is "inflammatory rhetoric," including the assertion that the United States brought on the 9/11 attacks with its own "terrorism."

In a campaign appearance earlier this month, Sen. Obama said, "I don't think my church is actually particularly controversial." He said Rev. Wright "is like an old uncle who says things I don't always agree with," telling a Jewish group that everyone has someone like that in their family.

Rev. Wright married Obama and his wife Michelle, baptized their two daughters and is credited by Obama for the title of his book, "The Audacity of Hope."

An ABC News review of dozens of Rev. Wright's sermons, offered for sale by the church, found repeated denunciations of the U.S. based on what he described as his reading of the Gospels and the treatment of black Americans.

"The government gives them the drugs, builds bigger prisons, passes a three-strike law and then wants us to sing 'God Bless America.' No, no, no, God damn America, that's in the Bible for killing innocent people," he said in a 2003 sermon. "God damn America for treating our citizens as less than human. God damn America for as long as she acts like she is God and she is supreme."

In addition to damning America, he told his congregation on the Sunday after Sept. 11, 2001 that the United States had brought on al Qaeda's attacks because of its own terrorism.

"We bombed Hiroshima, we bombed Nagasaki, and we nuked far more than the thousands in New York and the Pentagon, and we never batted an eye," Rev. Wright said in a sermon on Sept. 16, 2001.

"We have supported state terrorism against the Palestinians and black South Africans, and now we are indignant because the stuff we have done overseas is now brought right back to our own front yards. America's chickens are coming home to roost," he told his congregation.

Great Parody of Disgraced NY Governor Spitzer

Rush Limbaugh's own Paul Shanklin put this parody of the old song "Love Potion Number 9" together:

"Love Client Number 9" *

"He should have given her an internship...."

*Soon to be former Governor Spitzer was refered to in court documents as "Client-9."

Wednesday, March 12, 2008

Hand Me My Broom You Oaf!

The day before she got skunked in the Mississippi Primary, Democratic presidential hopeful, Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, D-N.Y., arrived at the Wilkes-Barre Scranton Airport in Avoca, Pa., Monday, March 10, 2008.

Hillary on Her Broom

She cackled and rose as her broom swirled the dust:
"Obama has not seen the last of us!"
"On Rezko, on Iran on Cocaine" she cried.
"For this nomination I shall not be denied."

"I'll tar him here, I'll smear him there."
"Obama will rue the day he messed with my hair."

But Obama's not through.
He racks up votes and delegates too.
When he's finished, what will be left for the Shrew?

Republicans watch with glee and some dread.
Fearing what new lows lie ahead.
As yet, no one in this latest Clinton saga has turned up dead.

Doomsday Called Off

Never fear socialists... you can always latch unto some new big lie scare to advance your agenda!


Also available in five parts on You Tube(part one here).

And here's a host of links to add to your reference file on the subject:

Tuesday, March 11, 2008

A Light Unto the Nations

Space Shuttle Endeavor in spectacular night launch!

From the left (front row) are Pilot Gregory Johnson and Commander Dominic Gorie. From the left (back row) are mission specialists Richard Linnehan, Robert Behnken, Garrett Reisman, Michael Foreman and Takao Doi, a Japanese Aerospace Exploration Agency astronaut. Credit: NASA

Photobucket

Monday, March 10, 2008

New York Governor, Elliot Spitzer (D) Target in Federal Prostitution Ring Bust

Will Dems show the same compassion and tolerance for Spitzer that they did to Republican Senator Larry Craig?

The Drudge Report is gathering the latest links on this story. Governor Spitzer has made a public statement apologizing to his family and the public but did not resign.

The outfit he frequented is known as the Emperor's Club (web site down due to traffic).

Will Democrats sweep this under the rug as they did with Bill Clinton's predatory sexual behavior?

Stay tuned!

Update: Read the details in the criminal complaint (PDF) starting about page 29 details the arrangements Spitzer "Client-9" made for his tryst at the Mayflower Hotel in Washington, D.C. last February. Considering his ever present security and other prying eyes it seems foolhardy for him to make such an arrangement. It also appears that this wasn't the first time Spitzer used this particular service, the Emperors VIP Club.

Florida Democrats "Victims" of GOP in Primary Problem?

Somehow it's our fault that Democrats in Florida are in a mess!

Brit Hume Interviews Congresswoman Debbie Wasserman-Shultz (D-FL)
Fox News Sunday
[video here]
March 9, 2008

HUME: The Democratic presidential nominee could be decided not in the remaining primaries but in the outcome of the bitter fight over what to do about Michigan and Florida.

Both states lost all their convention delegates when they were penalized by the Democratic National Committee for moving up their primary dates earlier this year in violation of party rules.

For more on this, we turn to Debbie Dingell, a DNC committee member and a superdelegate from Michigan, and, from Florida, Congresswoman Debbie Wasserman-Schultz, who is also a convention superdelegate.

Thanks to both of you for being with us.

First let me start with you, Congresswoman. What do you think is the fairest way to settle this question?

WASSERMAN-SCHULTZ: Well, I think when you're talking about fairness, we have to remember that this was started by the Republican- led legislature here that actually set the date of our primary.

So the victims here in all of -- in the decision by the DNC to strip us of our delegates are Democratic voters in the state of Florida.

HUME: Can I stop you there? Just let me stop you there for a second, if I can.

WASSERMAN-SCHULTZ: Sure.

HUME: In the Florida state senate, who introduced the bill to move the primary forward?

WASSERMAN-SCHULTZ: The bill was introduced by a Democratic member, a new Democratic member of the state senate.

HUME: And in the legislature, senate and house as well, how many Democrats voted against it?

WASSERMAN-SCHULTZ: Well, that's an inappropriate line of questioning, Brit, because that bill ultimately...

HUME: Well, wait a minute. Well, inappropriate or not...

WASSERMAN-SCHULTZ: Excuse me, Brit.

HUME: ... could you just answer the question?

WASSERMAN-SCHULTZ: Can I answer your question?

HUME: Yes. How many?

WASSERMAN-SCHULTZ: I would like to answer your question without you asking me another one, if you don't mind.

The legislation that was originally sponsored was amended into an overall election package that included the major provision to ensure that we could have manual recount and a paper trail. So this is a major election package that the change of a date in our primary was included in.

So the vote total was unanimous, but that was because there's no one in the Florida legislature that was going to vote against changing our voting system so that you could have a paper trail and make sure that every vote can be counted, unlike our touchscreen voting system right now which doesn't allow for that.

So to try to hang a unanimous vote on the fact that Democrats supported that -- that's misleading, because they supported it because they certainly weren't going to vote against making sure there was a paper trail in Florida.
Democrats proposed the legislation and voted for it UNANIMOUSLY and Ms. Wasserman-Schultz says it "misleading" to suggest they supported it? Correction Ms. Wasserman-Schultz: it's not only misleading but WRONG to suggest that somehow Democrat voters in your state are the VICTIMS of the Republican legislature. Democrats in Florida were warned in advance not to move up their primary date and like the Florida 2000 recount you boobs messed it up again and are now trying to change the rules.

Ms. Wasserman-Schultz: qualified for what?

As readers can probably tell, I'm not a big fan of Debbie's. I first saw her on C-Span a few years ago and my first thought was that I had flipped to the nearby Home Shopping channel by mistake. Like some presenters on the shopping channel, Ms. Wasserman is an empty-headed pretty face trying to sell you something you don't need.

And this time, she just makes Florida Democrat voters look even more foolish than they already are.

Sunday, March 09, 2008

More Global Warming Consensus Melts in The Face of Scientific Fact

What a shame (or should I say SHAM) for Al Gore. It seems every shibboleth of global warming that he used to scare the world and the Nobel Prize committee into believing that manmade global warming was real is coming under fire from REPUTABLE scientists who aren't in the business of selling carbon credits.

First it was Gore's quickly disproved suggestion that manmade global warming would cause hurricane seasons worse than the 2005 season which saw Hurricanes Katrina and Rita devastate the U.S. Those of us who live at the water's edge along the Atlantic Ocean were happy to note that the last two years were among the quietest hurricanes seasons in a decade.

Now, the rest of Gore's scaremongering is being exposed to the light of scientific scrutiny. Here's a summary of recent reports:

And of course let's not forget that the scientific understanding of the Sun's role in warming the earth is slowly catching up to the common sense of anyone who has warmed themselves this winter by sitting in a sunny window.

Honest scientific exploration about the role of variable solar radiation, gamma rays and a host of other factors is still ongoing.

But one thing is clear: there is no valid "consensus" on the role man's activity plays in global warming or cooling.

Thanks Timothy, Thanks Rivka.

Clinton Obama Contest Charts Course for GOP Victory

Exposing the fundamental weak points in Dem electoral strategy!

While both Hillary and Obama tear into each other, reminding voters why both are unqualified to serve as President of the United States, their various state primary victories are revealing a roadmap that the GOP can use to win in November, despite who the Democrat nominee is.

Old School Dems vs. New Libs

It's long been a fact that the Democrat Party is nothing more than a collection of special interest groups: unions, environmentalists, social activists etc. These folks don't always play well together and the differences between them are becoming clearer as this closely contested nomination fight in their party proceeds.

The older Democrat voter, coming from middle class, union households tends to be more comfortable voting for Hillary Clinton. Younger voters, or newly minted liberals fresh out of college, as well as the hardcore activist types vote more heavily for Obama.

Hillary Clinton does well in states like Ohio and Rhode Island where the old school Dems still vote in great numbers. Barrack H. Obama did well in nearby Vermont and earlier in more newly minted liberal Wisconsin. It's likely that Hillary will do well when Pennsylvania Democrats vote on April 22nd.

Hillary the Stronger General Election Candidate?

Thus far, Obama has held the lead in delegates by winning mostly smaller states and ones which usually end up in the Republican column in the general election. His weakness in Ohio and other large states may mean that Hillary would be a better candidate for the Dems against John McCain.

Both Michael Barone and the Washington Post have extensive analysis on that point.

GOP Roadmap

If Hillary is the Dem nominee, Obama will have supplied all the fresh ammunition necessary to remind voters just what another Clinton presidency would mean. She'd be very competitive in big states like Ohio and Pennsylvania, but factor in the disaffected Obama voters who are likely to be appalled at the way Hillary claws her way to the nomination and the GOP has a good shot at winning.

If Obama is the nominee, old school Dems with concerns about his experience and patriotism may well cross the aisle and vote for McCain. His weakness in Ohio would be particularly hard for him to overcome. The same is likely true in Pennsylvania.

The longer the Democrat nominating process continues, the more supporters of either Obama or Hillary dig in their heels and reject support for any other candidate. Republicans have their own buyer's remorse problem, but it may be magnified among Democrats.

Thursday, March 06, 2008

Dead Terrorist & Hugo Chavez Ally a Fan of Obama?

Obama's message of change and hope cheers terrorists!

By now, you may be aware that Colombia, Ecudaor and Venezueala are on the brink of war after Colombia tracked down and killed the leader of FARC (Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia) a Communist/terrorist group responsible for kidnapping, murder, terrorism and drug trafficking inside Colombia and linked to support from neighboring Ecuador and Hugo Chavez in Venezuela.

Worse yet, Gateway Pundit has evidence that showed FARC was working on creating a dirty bomb with recently acquired uranium.

Worst of all, Raul Reyes, the FARC terrorist leader killed by Colombia in the attack had a letter on his computer suggesting that Barrack Obama would be elected U.S. President and he would would look more favorably on the communist terrorists and less favorably on the democratically elected Colombian government which has been a strong ally of the United States in this troubled region.

Despite the Cuban flag with mass murderer Che Guevara prominently displayed in an Obama campaign office in Houston, Texas there is nothing to suggest that Obama has any sympathy with communist terrorists. But apparently, Obama's message to America's enemies that he is willing to talk to them at the same time he undermines our allies has gotten through, even to the jungles of South America.

More proof, as if any were needed, that Obama's foreign policy would be a disaster and create more troubles around the world and encourage terrorists and violent aggressors like Chavez.

Wednesday, March 05, 2008

Time to Bury the Hatchet

President Bush Welcomes John McCain to the White House and promises every assistance in the fall campaign.

President George W. Bush and Senator John McCain (R-Ariz.) wave after delivering a statement Wednesday, March 5, 2008, in the Rose Garden of the White House. In welcoming Senator McCain and his wife, Cindy, the President said, "A while back I don't think many people would have thought that John McCain would be here as the nominee of the Republican Party -- except he knew he would be here, and so did his wife, Cindy." White House photo by Joyce N. Boghosian


In a scene filled with symbolism, John McCain steps up to meet President Bush after arriving at the White House.


The younger man, Bush 61, leads 71 year old John McCain to the Rose Garden for their joint press appearance.

President Bush promises his full support!

In a lighter moment, President Bush shows off some dance steps on the North Portico of the White House as he waits for Senator McCain to arrive.

Tuesday, March 04, 2008

Big Wins for Hillary and McCain

Texas and Ohio Go for Hillary!

Democratic presidential hopeful Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-NY) speaks during a primary election night party at The Columbus Athenaeum as her daughter Chelsea Clinton look on, March 4, 2008 in Columbus, Ohio.

Quick Quiz: Who wasn't on the stage with Hillary on her BIGGEST night yet?

I scoffed when the news promoters named March 4 Super Tuesday II. But the excitement and political theater lived up to that name and more.

Just days before what looked like the end for Hillary Clinton's campaign turned around last night with major wins. By any measure it was a huge night for Hillary. In the process, Obama's campaign momentum has been blunted and with reporters smelling blood over some of Obama's recent statements, the contest between the two will intensify.

While the results are still being tallied, it's clear that Obama's delegate lead was reduced significantly last night as was the overall popular vote advantage he enjoyed over Hillary the last month or so.

A Keystone Victory for Hillary?

Next up is Wyoming with 12 delegates votes on March 8, Mississippi with 33 delegates on March 11. But the next big prize is Pennsylvania with 158 delegates on April 22nd. Pennsylvania sits between Ohio and New Jersey which Hillary won.

Unless something unforeseen happens, the Democrat nominating contest will likely go all the way to the convention and the entire divisive issue of Florida and Michigan delegates will now be in play.

It will be fun to watch and the question is: will Obama's followers start to drift away as he becomes less inevitable and becomes just another politician scrambling for votes while both Hillary and the news media go after him relentlessly?

McCain Hits the Magic 1191!

Republican presidential hopeful Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) and wife Cindy greet supporters at a campaign rally at the Fairmont Dallas hotel March 4, 2008 in Dallas, Texas. McCain has clinched the Republican presidential nomination with projected wins tonight in Texas, Ohio, Vermont and Rhode Island. (Photo by Rick Gershon/Getty Images)

Last night John McCain got what he has wanted for more than eight years . He is now the undisputed Republican nominee for President of the United States.

As he easily won victories in all Super Tuesday II states, he passed the magic number of 1191 delegates necessary to win the nomination.

Mike Huckabee also took the cue and finally left the stage.

McCain plans to head to Washington, D.C. and meet with President Bush and begin organizing the Republican National Committee apparatus which he will now direct.

The big problem for McCain is that with so much excitement in the Democrat race, who is going to cover him?

Are You a Taliban?

It's an old internet gag, but I've added something at the end:
YOU MAY BE A TALIBAN IF..........

1. You refine heroin for a living, but you have a moral objection to beer.

2. You own a $3,000 machine gun and $5,000 rocket launcher, but you can't
afford shoes.

3. You have more wives than teeth.

4. You wipe your butt with your bare left hand, but consider bacon
"unclean."

5. You think vests come in two styles: bullet-proof and suicide.

6. You can't think of anyone you HAVEN'T declared Jihad against.

7. You consider television dangerous, but routinely carry explosives in your
clothing.

8. You were amazed to discover that cell phones have uses other than setting
off roadside bombs.

9. You've ever uttered the phrase, "I love what you've done with your cave."


10. You have nothing against women and think every man should own at least
one.

11. You bathe at least monthly whether necessary or not.

12. You've ever had a crush on your neighbor's goat.
13. You may be a Taliban if you think Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi's defeat and surrender talking points make sense!

Globaloney!



More at Glen Beck.

Obama Getting Tough Questions from Media-- At Last!

As Harry Truman famously said: "If you can't take the heat, stay out of the kitchen?" Obama has started running from the kitchen when the news media turns up the heat.

Ask Tough Questions? Yes, They Can!
By Dana Milbank
Washington Post
March 4, 2008

SAN ANTONIO It took many months and the mockery of "Saturday Night Live" to make it happen, but the lumbering beast that is the press corps finally roused itself from its slumber Monday and greeted Barack Obama with a menacing growl.

The day before primaries in Ohio and Texas that could effectively seal the Democratic presidential nomination for him, a smiling Obama strode out to a news conference at a veterans facility here. But the grin was quickly replaced by the surprised look of a man bitten by his own dog.

Reporters from the Associated Press and Reuters went after him for his false denial that a campaign aide had held a secret meeting with Canadian officials over Obama's trade policy. A trio of Chicago reporters pummeled him with questions about the corruption trial this week of a friend and supporter. The New York Post piled on with a question about him losing the Jewish vote.

Obama responded with the classic phrases of a politician in trouble. "That was the information that I had at the time. . . . Those charges are completely unrelated to me. . . . I have said that that was a mistake. . . . The fact pattern remains unchanged."

When those failed, Obama tried another approach. "We're running late," the candidate said, and then he disappeared behind a curtain.

Before he beat his hasty retreat, however, Obama found time to assign blame for the tough questions suddenly coming his way. "The Clinton campaign has been true to its word in employing a 'kitchen sink' strategy," he protested. "There are, what, three or four things a day?"

Spoken like a man who had just been hit on the head with a heavy piece of porcelain.
Another big rookie mistake is to cut short a press conference and run from the room. It only amplifies the importance of the questions and Obama's lame response.

The sharks are in the water and they smell blood! It's about time.
fsg053d4.txt Free xml sitemap generator