David Corn

I think she it too smart to not know how over it really is.

She might want to go out on a high note? I might be giving her too much credit.

Obama Chief Strategist Writing Off West Virginia and Michigan in November?

Well, He Still Has 55 States Left
By Dan McLaughlin

With Barack Obama expecting to get crushed in West Virginia today and having engaged in his protracted battle to keep Michigan's delegates from being seated at the convention, his chief strategist, David Axelrod - who not so long ago suggested that Obama would be planning to do without white working-class voters on the theory that they are Republicans anyway - seems to be implicitly conceding on MSNBC this morning that those two states are not part of Obama's plans for the fall election:

MSNBC 5/13/2008 8:37:10 AM ET:

AXELROD: There are a lot of states that are going to be pivotal in the general election...

QUESTION: But the big ones seems to me is West Virginia, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Michigan, Florida. That’s probably going to decide it, is it not? Those states?

AXELROD: I think we are going to do well in Pennsylvania. We’re going to do well in Ohio. I think we’re going to be competitive in Florida, as well.

I guess Obama's down to 55 states, now. And really, I wouldn't advise him to get too confident about Florida, either. Then again, maybe it's just time for him to blame another advisor.

~~~~

Hey Pansy, when you finish trying to convince Diff that Obama has real issues to run on rather than just spewing what "WHITE ELITIST WANNABEES" like you, want to hear, maybe you can tell us how he is going to win over the 60% of hispanics that don't like him.

Obama "understands" why Hamas endorsed him

By Soren Dayton
From the NY Daily News:

While maintaining an ironclad commitment to Israel's security, Barack Obama says he understood why a top Hamas adviser voiced support for his presidential bid.

"It's conceivable that there are those in the Arab world who say to themselves, 'This is a guy who spent some time in the Muslim world, has a middle name of Hussein and appears more worldly and has called for talks with people, and so he's not going to be engaging in the same sort of cowboy diplomacy as George Bush,'" Obama said in an interview with The Atlantic.
"That's a perfectly legitimate perception as long as they're not confused about my unyielding support for Israel's security," Obama said.

I remind you of the statements of an Obama support from Chicago who runs the website Electronic Intifada:

The last time I spoke to Obama was in the winter of 2004 at a gathering in Chicago's Hyde Park neighborhood. He was in the midst of a primary campaign to secure the Democratic nomination for the United States Senate seat he now occupies. ... As he came in from the cold and took off his coat, I went up to greet him. He responded warmly, and volunteered, "Hey, I'm sorry I haven't said more about Palestine right now, but we are in a tough primary race. I'm hoping when things calm down I can be more up front." He referred to my activism, including columns I was contributing to the The Chicago Tribune critical of Israeli and US policy, "Keep up the good work!"

Or to quote the LA Times story entitled "Allies of Palestinians see a friend in Barack Obama":

And yet the warm embrace Obama gave to Khalidi, and words like those at the professor's going-away party, have left some Palestinian American leaders believing that Obama is more receptive to their viewpoint than he is willing to say.

Maybe the answer is just that where there is smoke, there is fire. Any maybe his long-time supporters know him better than the reporters infatuated with him.

She's out after Oregon/KY next week.

Question is: Should we turn the "Clinton Machine" loose on McSame?

Bubba's shown he can't be trusted off the leash and there's that nagging feeling that Shrillary's gunning for another shot in 2012 or (gasp) 2016, when she'll STILL be decades younger than the embalming fluid-dependent, Senator "Living Dead" McShame.

Best to just send 'em all home, I think.

Yo Pansy, you better hurry and get the message out that Obama has real issues to your fellow Dems:
~~~~

One in Five Democrats Set to Defect to McCain, Polls Show

By Fred Lucas
May 12, 2008

A string of polls conducted by the Suffolk University Political Research Center over the past month--in Pennsylvania, Ohio, Indiana and, now, West Virginia--show that roughly 20 percent of Democratic primary voters are ready to vote for Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) in November if their choice candidate isn't the nominee.

In his letter to the Catholic League today, Hagee said he now understands that other terms he used to describe the church - "the great whore" and the "apostate church" - are "rhetorical devices long employed in anti-Catholic literature." He said he had gained a better understanding in recent weeks of the Catholic Church's relationship to the Jewish faith. Hagee wrote of his "profound respect for the Catholic people" in the letter and said he hoped to advance "greater unity among Catholics and Evangelicals."

****

Wright never used any rhetorical devices? I think Wright is right - God damn America and their Kkkristian Radicla Clerics - they are every bit as bad (or good) as the radical Islamic clerics.

The M$M will move on - hey Hagee is white so he only scares the thinking folks. What a country, eh ?

Indiana Rep. Joe Donnelly endorsed Obama this morning, moving Barack's gap to the nomination 149 delegates.

UPDATE: New Orlean Mayor Ray Nagin, another superdelegate, has also endorsed Obama (statement below). Also, the Washington Post reports that one of Clinton's pledged delegates from Maryland has announced that he will support Obama at the convention.

UPDATE: Former DNC Chair (and Colorado governor) Roy Romer makes three.

UPDATE: Anita Bonds, the chairwoman of D.C.'s Democratic party came out, rather unexpectedly, for Obama late last night.

*****

Barack has received as many superdelegates this week as the whole state of WV.

John McCain won 1 percent of the Caucus Vote in West Virginia

When you hear the attacks made tomorrow about Barack Obama losing in West Virginia by a wide margin, please take a moment to remember that John McCain lost during the West Virginia caucus on Feb 5, 2008.

Mike Huckabee scored the first Super Tuesday victory, winning all 18 delegates at stake in West Virginia.

The former Arkansas governor won with the support of 52 percent of the state’s GOP convention delegates on the second round of balloting. Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney came in second with 47 percent of the vote, and Sen. John McCain was backed by 1 percent of the delegates.

While I know caucuses are a bit different, the 1 percent of voters supporting McCain is so outrageous that nobody can question the fact that West Virginians -- do NOT LIKE John McCain.

So when you hear Hillary Clinton's camp claiming that no President has been elected without winning West Virginia, just remember McCain's in a lot worse shape then Barack Obama is there.

*****

Gramp's - the agent of change, loved by one and all.

"maybe you can tell us how he is going to win over the 60% of hispanics that don't like him."
Posted by: LBH | May 13, 2008 1:48 PM

"Because Hillary Clinton has tended to do better with Latinos in the primaries, there is a perception that this group is not a strength of Barack Obama's. In fact, however, Obama held leads over John McCain by margins of 57-33 and 51-41 among Hispanic voters in recent sets of Gallup polling. Increasing the share of the electorate that is Latino would definitely be to Obama's benefit...."
http://tinyurl.com/5h3xuh

Obviously he can win over the latino vote by running against a republican, even an immigration-softie like Gramps. It's almost as if you're trying to make Gramps look bad on purpose. What gives?

"One in Five Democrats Set to Defect to McCain, Polls Show"
"A string of polls conducted by the Suffolk University Political Research Center...."
Posted by: LBH | May 13, 2008 2:18 PM

I'll start worrying about Suffolk polling when their results start to match up with reality.

As the simplest example, they picked Romney to win NH. They were the only polling group to do so. And boy were they wrong.
Check it out: http://tinyurl.com/ysme4x

Out of the 45 or so races, Suffolk has only come close in about 8 of the races. They stink.

Look at the actual results. McCain can't even get above 75% in his own party with nobody running against him when the race has been over for months. One fourth of the DMW party (what little is left of it) cannot bring itself to vote for Gramps. As Ace of Spades, Malkin, Rush, and other Dingbat pundits have said before, nobody's buying what he's selling. This is why poll after poll shows McBush running behind both HRC and Obama. As Diff said yesterday, it's over. Gramps is done.

Diff, how's it coming with your homework? Almost done?

Obviously he can win over the latino vote by running against a republican.
~~~

Just like Kerry did?

Pansy, come on you and I both know that hispanic voters have family values unlike a white elistist wannabee like you. I guess not every Hispanic was as luck as you to be indoctrinated in college by white liberal leftist like Willaim Ayers.

Pansy,

So why can''t Obama close the deal in your own party?

The dimwit dems are about to implode because of the disfunction. Obama should be crushing McCain by now and can't even beat Hillary. WV is an embarrassment for you trolls.

Look at the actual results. McCain can't even get above 75% in his own party with nobody running against him when the race has been over for months.

Posted by Pansy

~~~

McCain is only getting 75% of the vote exactly because no one is running against him. It's a protest vote that won't carry over to the general.

When Obama runs against him he will not only increase this number but also carry 25% of Dems that can't stomach Obama.

When the voters figure out that Obama wants to raise taxes on the poor and middle class by getting rid of Bush's tax cuts they will turn on him.

Remember Gore lost because of little ol Tennessee, his home state. So dissing WV cuz your boy is getting slaughtered there isn't a valid argument, but I can see why you would be so embarrssed by such a poor showing. even with all that Obama magic you keep bragging about.

Look at the actual results. McCain can't even get above 75% in his own party with nobody running against him when the race has been over for months.

Posted by Pansy

~~~

McCain is only getting 75% of the vote exactly because no one is running against him. It's a protest vote that won't carry over to the general.

When Obama runs against him he will not only increase this number but also carry 25% of Dems that can't stomach Obama.

When the voters figure out that Obama wants to raise taxes on the poor and middle class by getting rid of Bush's tax cuts they will turn on him.

Remember Gore lost because of little ol Tennessee, his home state. So dissing WV cuz your boy is getting slaughtered there isn't a valid argument, but I can see why you would be so embarrssed by such a poor showing. even with all that Obama magic you keep bragging about.

Hey Pansy, heres some sunday funnies for ya!

WEST VIRGINIA ELECTIONS - May 13 primary results

WEST VIRGINIA SEC OF STATE WEBSITE.

THINGS TO WATCH:

Will Hillary convince Supers to let her get back in the race?

Will Hillary cry?

Will Howard Dean say something insane?

Will Rev. Sharpton use the can of gasoline and matches I sent him and threaten to burn down the place?

Will Robert KKK Byrd have the klan out to vote for the white candidate?

Will Bill say something stupid or incendiary to sabotage her again?

Will dishes be flying?

Will Bill have an incident with a female while his evil wife gives a victory speech?

Will Obama wear a flag pin?

Will Michelle tell us how much of a problem she has with whitey?

Will the Hamas candidate do better than expected?

Will Jeremiah Wright tell us how construction is going on his palacial home in the gated white community?

Will Bill Ayers stomp on a flag?

Diff, since Pansy couldn't answer your question with an honest answer, I thought I would help out:
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

The Obama Change We Really Can Believe In

American Thinker ^ | May 13, 2008 | Peggy Shapiro

Barack Obama's call to action is "Change we can believe in." I would love to believe it, but until now I haven't even been able to understand it. What is going to change? With his latest about face on direct talks with Iran's Ahmadinejad, Obama has finally clarified what he is going to change: his opinion. From terror to funding for tots, where there's controversy and two sides to be wooed, there is the Obama about-face.

On unconditional presidential meeting with terror-sponsoring states: Yes to No

This week, Obama's key foreign policy advisor, Susan E. Rice, told the New York Times that Obama never claimed he would be willing to meet "unconditionally" with Iran's president Mr. Ahmadinejad. Dr. Rice said that Obama would not meet at the presidential level with this Iran or any other so-called "rogue" state without the preparation to use such a meeting as leverage for change. In fact, it was only right-wing machinations or imagination that "distorted and reframed" Obama's views.

That was certainly a change from numerous statements candidate Obama made on the same topic. Did John McCain enter the following posting on Obama's campaign website? "Obama is the only major candidate who supports tough, direct presidential diplomacy with Iran without preconditions."

Nothing could have been clearer than Obama's response to Anderson Cooper during the YouTube debate. (transcript)

COOPER: In the spirit of that type of bold leadership, would you be willing to meet separately, without precondition, during the first year of your administration, in Washington or anywhere else, with the leaders of Iran, Syria, Venezuela, Cuba and North Korea, in order to bridge the gap that divides our countries? Senator Obama?

OBAMA: I would..

On talking with the terrorist group Hamas: No to Yes (but it wasn't really me)

Obama has repeatedly stated that he would not engage in talks with Hamas until the group stopped its terror campaign against Israel, yet on May 9, 2008 the Times of London reported that Obama adviser Robert Malley, a noted critic of Israel, had been conducting talks with Hamas. Of course, Malley's position of advisor was downgraded to "informal." How did Obama fire Malley if the man never worked for him?

On driver's licenses for illegal immigrants: Yes to huh?

As an Illinois state senator, Obama voted to require illegal immigrants get a license. His position seemed cleared, yet when Wolf Blitzer questioned Obama about his stance, the response was anything but clear. From the November 15, 2007 debate:

BLITZER: "I take it, Senator Obama, you support giving driver's licenses to illegal immigrants. Is that right?" OBAMA:"...I have to make sure that people understand the problem we have here is not driver's licenses. Undocumented workers don't come here to drive. (Laughter) they don't go - they're not coming here to go to the In-N-Out Burger. That's not the reason they're here. They're here to work. And so instead of being distracted by what has now become a wedge issue, let's focus on actually solving the problem that... this administration, the Bush administration, has done nothing about."

BLITZER: "Do you support or oppose driver's licenses for illegal immigrants?"

OBAMA: "I am not proposing that that's what we do. What I'm saying is that we can't - No, no, no, no, look, I have already said I support the notion that we have to deal with public safety and that driver's licenses at the state level can make that happen.

Whatever the response really meant, it does not sound like a man who sticks to his convictions.

Funding child welfare: No to Yes

Sometimes the change of opinion is framed as an accidentally incorrect vote; for example, there was the time Barack Obama voted to cut millions of dollars from a Chicago-area child welfare office. When angry Democrats rebuked him, Obama claimed that he was not aware that he had voted no. It may have been a mistake or an easy way to placate both sides of an issue.

Freer rules for riverboat casinos: Yes to No

When Chicago churches were opposing looser rules for riverboat casinos in 1997, Obama cast his vote with the gambling industry. After the measure passed, Obama stated that he wanted to be recorded as voting "no." Voting both sides of an issue could perhaps garner him support from both churches and casinos.

Reverend Wright: Didn't say it, didn't hear it, isn't accurate, is justifiable, is unacceptable

The number of opinion reversals on Reverend Wright are mind-spinning: his church is not especially controversial, he never heard the hate-speech, the snippets of the sermons are "charicatures peddled by some commentators," the pastor's remarks were akin to those made by Obama's white grandmother, rejecting the anti-American and anti-Semitic minister would be rejecting all of black America, and on and on. Obama thus courts the radical left by participating comfortably in its extremism and mollifies middle American with a range of excuses.

Iraq War: It's dumb, I might be wrong, We can win, Failure would be a disaster, Failure's inevitable, I don't know, Reduce troops, not withdraw, Withdraw troops, Maybe?

Although Obama boasts that his is the Democratic candidate that has not changed its tune on the Iraq War, he has been quoted singing different lyrics. The Boston Globe online tracks some of Obama's variations.

October 2, 2002, Chicago Wearing a war is not an option pin, Obama called to the crowd," The Iraq war is a dumb war. A war based not on reason but on passion, not on principle, but on politics."

When America was obtaining clear victories on the ground in Iraq, Obama wrote in The Audacity of Hope, "I began to suspect that I might have been wrong [about the war]"

On March 28, 2003, on CNN, Obama claimed, "I absolutely want to make sure that the troops have sufficient support to be able to win."

At the Democratic National Convention that July, 2004, his only mention of the war was, "There are patriots who opposed the war in Iraq and patriots who supported it."

July, 2004 "The failure of the Iraqi state would be a disaster...It would dishonor the 900-plus men and women who have already died. . . . It would be a betrayal of the promise that we made to the Iraqi people, and it would be hugely destabilizing from a national security perspective.".

July 26, 2004 "I'm not privy to Senate intelligence reports. What would I have done? I don't know." The New York Times

2004 "I'm always careful to say that I was not in the Senate, so perhaps the reason I thought [the war] was such a bad idea was that I didn't have the benefit of U.S. intelligence," The New Yorker

November 2005 speech, he called for a gradual withdrawal of forces. "Notice that I say 'reduce,' and not 'fully withdraw [troops]'"

December, 2005), "It is arguable that the best politics going into '06 would be a clear, succinct message: 'Let's bring our troops home...But whether that's the best policy right now, I don't feel comfortable saying it is." Chicago Tribune

July 2007 "Presidential hopeful Barack Obama said the United States cannot use its military to solve humanitarian problems and that preventing a potential genocide in Iraq isn't a good enough reason to keep U.S. forces there."

March, 2008 Obama's website states, "Obama will remove one to two combat brigades each month, and have all of our combat brigades out of Iraq within 16 months."

March 7, 2008 Obama's then key foreign policy advisor Samantha Power, spoke on the commitment to get combat forces out in 16 months. "You can't make a commitment in March 2008 about what circumstances will be like in January of 2009."

Although I still don't know how a President Obama would change the nation or if these "changes" would benefit or harm the country, I now know that there is a change I can believe in. Just present Barack Obama with a controversial issue which requires a firm stand on principle, and we are guaranteed change.

From Rasmussen:

American voters now trust the Democrats on all ten key electoral issues tracked regularly by Rasmussen Reports. Last month, the GOP’s had an advantage on two issues.

Not surprisingly, the economy is still seen as the most important issue in this year’s presidential campaign--76% of voters say it is a Very Important issue. The Democrats now have a 14-point advantage over the Republicans on this issue, up from eight-points a month ago. Data from the Rasmussen Consumer Index shows that consumer confidence is currently hovering near record lows. Not only is confidence low, three-out-of-four Americans believe that economic conditions are getting worse.

Government Ethics and Corruption is a Very Important issue for 71% of Likely Voters. The Democrats have a huge advantage on this issue—45% now trust them while just 26% prefer the GOP. That lead has also widened since last month, when the Democrats had only a six-point advantage.

Perhaps the biggest surprise comes from the fact that Democrats are now trusted more when it comes to National Security and the War on Terror, an issue long considered a GOP stronghold. The latest polling, however, shows that 49% of voters now trust the Democrats more on this issue while 42% trust the Republicans more. This shift comes at the same time that confidence in the War on Terror has fallen significantly.

Its not over until the Fat Lady sings.

Ha!

Just in on Drudge:

SHOCK: 2/3 OF WHITES CITING RACE WON'T VOTE OBAMA IN GENERAL...

You can thank Gen. KKK Bird for that one folks!

"Obviously he can win over the latino vote by running against a republican.
~~~
Just like Kerry did?
I guess not every Hispanic was as luck (sic) as you to be indoctrinated in college by white liberal leftist like Willaim Ayers."
Posted by: LBH May 13, 2008 4:39 PM

Check it out. he misspelled "William" but he got "indoctrinated." I guess Hooked on Phonics is all the rage in the Homeschooling scene. Kudos.

Unfortunately, the facts elude you. Hispanics have been running, screaming in the opposite direction from the DMW party.

"Just two years after 40% of Hispanic Americans voted for Republican President George W. Bush’s reelection, far fewer say they think the Republican Party understands them best, a new Zogby/Hispanic PR Wire telephone poll shows.

Barely one in five Hispanic voters – 23% – said they felt the Republican Party understands them best, compared to 56% who said they think Democrats know them better, the new survey shows. "
Source: http://tinyurl.com/68gv83

I think the last one was from 2006. Here's a more recent one:

Latinos increasingly abandoning GOP
Posted December 6, 2007 1:18 PM
But while Bush and his chief political strategist Karl Rove made gains in 2004 in that area, those gains have largely eroded since then.

The Pew Hispanic Center has a new report that indicates Latinos are increasingly aligning with the Democratic Party, mirroring a shift in party affiliation that his happening generally in the U.S.
Source: http://tinyurl.com/yun6dc

And another from eyeon2008:

Evangelical, Republican Hispanics angry over immigration

Recall that Catholic Hispanics are more likely to be Democrats while Evangelical Hispanics, especially Pentecostals, are more likely to be Republican. Of course, if they think that the Republican Party is a bunch of racists, the ball moves, or so says the head of a national Hispanic evangelical organization:

Mr. Rodriguez presides over the National Hispanic Christian Leadership Conference, which is the sister of the prominent National Association of Evangelicals. He is plugged in enough to participate in weekly White House conference calls. …

The defeat [of the comprehensive immigration reform bill] has Mr. Rodriguez wondering whether "the GOP is the party of Jeff Sessions, Tom Tancredo and James Sensenbrenner or the party of George W. Bush and John McCain?" In other words, those like Mr. Tancredo who strongly opposed immigration reform or those like Mr. Bush who strongly favored it.

Right now, Mr. Rodriguez thinks, "xenophobia has triumphed over an appreciation for diversity. They completely abandoned us."

Hint to the GOP. Moderate evangelicals are swing voters, as are evangelical Hispanics.

Source: http://tinyurl.com/3w3jlq

More bad news for the DMW...this one hot off the presses:

Florida Hispanics Now Lean Toward Democrats
May 9, 2008
William March
Advertisement

TAMPA--Florida now has more Hispanic voters registered as Democrats than Republicans.

The difference is small -- less than a percentage point. But it reflects a long-term demographic shift that could benefit Democrats: the increasing dominance of non-Cubans, particularly Puerto Ricans, among Floridians of Hispanic descent.

For years, conservative, anti-Castro Cubans, mainly in South Florida, have made the Hispanic vote a GOP bastion in Florida. But waves of Puerto Ricans, Mexicans, Colombians, Venezuelans and others are turning Florida's Hispanic cohort into more of a swing vote, experts say.

Source: http://tinyurl.com/65v4su

McCain is only getting 75% of the vote exactly because no one is running against him. It's a protest vote that won't carry over to the general.
Posted by: LBH May 13, 2008 5:14 PM

Yup. In 2006, they protested by staying home. Why should they vote for Gramps when Rush is telling them that he'll just be a puppet for Pelosi and Reid? As Diff said, McBush is done. Only you and a few other dead-enders are left to defend the DMW. It' s so sad.

"When the voters figure out that Obama wants to raise taxes on the poor and middle class by getting rid of Bush's tax cuts they will turn on him."
Posted by: LBH May 13, 2008 5:14 PM

You think that Bush's tax cuts went to the poor and middle class? LOL. Even Gramps thought they were a bad idea and called them unconscionable. He said they were tax breaks for the rich. Your enema tube just fell out. Time for a refill.

So why can''t Obama close the deal in your own party?
Posted by: LBH May 13, 2008 4:51 PM

If any of the Republican nominees had even one tenth of the fire and gumption that HRC has, they'd fight for the soul of the Republican Party. Everybody cleared the field when they realized that the DMW want a third term for Mr. 20% and they'd rather see Gramps go down in a ball of flames rather than get dragged down the sewer-hole with him. It's not Obama's fault that the DMW is being led by a pack of spineless cowards. Dead. Man. Walking. Even Rush sees it.

Diff, since Pansy couldn't answer your question with an honest answer, I thought I would help out:
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The Obama Change We Really Can Believe In
American Thinker ^ | May 13, 2008 | Peggy Shapiro
Posted by: LBH May 13, 2008 5:29 PM

So many lies. So little time. I've seen the homeschooler post some fairly large piles of BS. This one wins hands down for the most lies per paragraph.

Let's go graph by graph.

Lie: This week, Obama's key foreign policy advisor, Susan E. Rice, told the New York Times that Obama never claimed he would be willing to meet "unconditionally" with Iran's president Mr. Ahmadinejad.

This is the quote from the article: "Susan E. Rice, a former State Department and National Security Council official who is a foreign policy adviser to the Democratic candidate, said that “for political purposes, Senator Obama’s opponents on the right have distorted and reframed” his views. Mr. McCain and his surrogates have repeatedly stated that Mr. Obama would be willing to meet “unconditionally” with Mr. Ahmadinejad."
source: http://tinyurl.com/6p52v3

More from Rice from the same article: Mr. Obama believes “that engagement at the presidential level, at the appropriate time and with the appropriate preparation, can be used to leverage the change we need,” Dr. Rice said. “But nobody said he would initiate contacts at the presidential level; that requires due preparation and advance work.”

Not "preconditions" just preparations. Rather than tell the truth about Obama's policy they twist Rice's words to mean the exact opposite. Lies is all they have.

Lie: That was certainly a change from numerous statements candidate Obama made on the same topic.

Truth: Read Rice's own words and compare them to the ones Obama said and are found on the Obama web site. They are identical. There has not been one iota of change.

Rices words: "Obama has stood up against the march to war with Iran. Instead, he is committed to direct diplomacy, without preconditions, and to increasing pressure on Iran, including through his legislation that would allow states to divest their holdings in companies that do business with Iran."
Source: http://tinyurl.com/5plq3o

More lies from the Homeschooler:

On talking with the terrorist group Hamas: No to Yes (but it wasn't really me)

Truth: Obama has repeatedly stated that he would not engage in talks with Hamas until the group stopped its terror campaign against Israel,

Lie: yet on May 9, 2008 the Times of London reported that Obama adviser Robert Malley, a noted critic of Israel, had been conducting talks with Hamas.

Truth: "In reporting analytic reports he wrote for ICG (International Crisis Group, a nonpartisan conflict-resolution think tank), Malley would interview Hamas officials, as well as Israeli, American, European and other Palestinian officials. The reports, which made clear he had met with Hamas, feature recommendations for key players in the peace process. Malley said he informed the State Department before he met with Hamas and then briefed State afterwards on what he had learned."
source: http://tinyurl.com/3t8uao

Did he meet with Hamas as a rep for Obama? No. Who did he report back to after meeting with reps of Hamas? Mr. 20%'s State Department. It is clear that he was working on behalf of the DMW and Mr. 20% and NOT representing Obama. Now the reason for the lies becomes evident. They are trying to hide their ties to terrorist organizations and their dealings with them (when they claim they don't deal with them).

Lie: Of course, Malley's position of advisor was downgraded to "informal." How did Obama fire Malley if the man never worked for him?

Truth: Malley resigned.
From the same article: "An informal Middle East adviser to Sen. Barack Obama's campaign resigned...."

On driver's licenses for illegal immigrants: Yes to huh?

Truth: As an Illinois state senator, Obama voted to require illegal immigrants get a license.

Lie, well only true if you are too big an idiot to understand the idea of State's Rights: His position seemed cleared, yet when Wolf Blitzer questioned Obama about his stance, the response was anything but clear.

BLITZER: "Do you support or oppose driver's licenses for illegal immigrants?"

OBAMA: "I have already said I support the notion that we have to deal with public safety and that driver's licenses at the state level can make that happen.

As a STATE legislator he voted for the people of his state. STATES issue DLs. They make the rules about how it is done. Period. It's a simple matter if you aren't a flaming ultramaroon.

Funding child welfare: No to Yes

Lie: was against child welfare.

Truth: Sponsored or cosponsored 233 bills for health care for poor adults and children. Sponsored or cosponsored 125 bills to fight poverty. Sponsored or cosponsored 122 bills to improve education for children and civil and human rights.
Source: http://tinyurl.com/37kxxo

This accusation is purposely vague to avoid scrutiny. These guys are excellent liars. It shows.

New Mexico MVD audit finds 63 dubious licenses

The state has come under fire from some quarters for making it relatively easy for foreign nationals to get a New Mexico driver's license.

But an audit of about 30,000 New Mexico driver's licenses issued to foreign nationals since 2003 has found fewer than 65 that raised questions.

http://tinyurl.com/5le5j8

*****

Here in NM we have had licenses issued to foreign nations and no problem to speak of.

NBD - AGAIN the cons are playijng to fears.

We white folks are in the minority here in the ABQ - trust me, you can't tell the difference.

Sorry. Spurs are on. They are struggling against NO.

Freer rules for riverboat casinos: Yes to No

Lie: Voting both sides of an issue could perhaps garner him support from both churches and casinos.

Except that he has voted against expansion of gambling on many occasions. His backers make money in gambling business and he has no problem leading the fight against gambling.

Ah, there's the source of the issue.
http://tinyurl.com/2x6auf
He goofed on 6 votes out of over 4,000 because he was hiding his true intentions? OK. One tenth of one percent of his votes were to appease a bloc that never gave him an advantage. So his mis-votes are counted as being for and against.

More intellectual dishonesty from the DMW, piling the bullshit deeper and wider.

Just checked the score on that special election in Mississippi. The DMW strikes out again. They can run against Pelosi, Obama, the scary black preacher, they can even throw some Clinton into the mix. Even in the deep south, nobody's buying the Zombie Chow.

from the Dkos front page:
Results for the Mississippi First District special election, filling the seat of Senator Roger Wicker.

93% of Precincts Reporting

Travis W. Childers (D): 53% (54029)
Greg Davis (R): 47% (47361)

Update: The AP has called the race for Travis Childers. Mississippi now has three Democratic Representatives...out of four.

Update #2: Congratulations to Rep.-elect Travis Childers, his staff and volunteers, the voters of Mississippi's First District, the DCCC...and the good people at Swing State Project, Cotton Mouth Blog, The Thorn Papers, Will Bardwell, and anyone I'm forgetting :)

Update #3: The NRCC spent over $1.3 million in this race, and that's not counting what shadow groups like Freedom's Watch put in. It's an R+10 district. They ran some ads which were nasty as hell. And their candidate, if not outstanding, was not especially controversial.

We beat them anyway, on their turf.

Update #4: Turnout was astronomical. Especially for a runoff. It's likely that it will exceed 100,000 votes, which is insane; turnout was around 64,000 in the first election.

Astronomical turnout for the Dems spells disaster for Gramps McBush. Dead. Man. Walking.

Only one or two dead-enders left for the DMW. You can tell 'em from the enema tube hanging out the back, muttering about those danged CornNuts. Poor things.

Back to the lies....

Reverend Wright: Didn't say it, didn't hear it, isn't accurate, is justifiable, is unacceptable (more nonsense from the DMW)

Lie: The number of opinion reversals on Reverend Wright are mind-spinning:

Lie: his church is not especially controversial
Truth: Parsley, Hagee, Robertson, etc. Etc. Ad nauseam.

Lie: he never heard the hate-speech,
Truth: Obama never uttered those words.

Snuck in a truth: the snippets of the sermons are "charicatures peddled by some commentators,"
3 minutes out of thousands of hours of sermons are charicatures.

Snuck in another truth: the pastor's remarks were akin to those made by Obama's white grandmother. Lots of hard-working Americans think like Obama's grandma.

Lie: rejecting the anti-American and anti-Semitic minister would be rejecting all of black America,

That one is too funny for words.

If the DMW thinks that they can make race an issue and win, they are stupider than they look after losing 4 out of the last 4 special elections in Blood Red districts.

Americans have had it with the GOP and their idiotic race-baiting. They are in a hole and digging like madmen. Poor buggers.

This is the funniest part of the whole thing: the DMW thinks that running against Obama on the war is a winner. Because it was so effective in winning Americans over to the GOP in the last election, right? Pen. Day. Hoes.

October 2, 2002, Chicago Wearing a war is not an option pin, Obama called to the crowd," The Iraq war is a dumb war. A war based not on reason but on passion, not on principle, but on politics."

And he was right. Americans dig that principal.

When America was obtaining clear victories on the ground in Iraq, Obama wrote in The Audacity of Hope, "I began to suspect that I might have been wrong [about the war]"

He suspected he might be wrong; but no, he proved to be correct after all. Americans like it when a politician gets things right in the end.

On March 28, 2003, on CNN, Obama claimed, "I absolutely want to make sure that the troops have sufficient support to be able to win."

If only the idiotic chickenhawks in the WH didn't screw things up so spectacularly, the troops might have had a chance. Might be able to win if the Dingbats in Mr. 20%'s war planning room weren't the stupidest fucking men on the face of the earth (as Tommy Franks once said). Obama was right again. The DMW is seriously incompetent in nation building.

At the Democratic National Convention that July, 2004, his only mention of the war was, "There are patriots who opposed the war in Iraq and patriots who supported it."

In a speech to nominate someone other than himself, he didn't need to grandstand. Americans like that about him.

July, 2004 "The failure of the Iraqi state would be a disaster...It would dishonor the 900-plus men and women who have already died. . . . It would be a betrayal of the promise that we made to the Iraqi people, and it would be hugely destabilizing from a national security perspective.".

Again. He was right. And the DMW is drawing attention to this.... why? To make Gramps McBush look bad? Obviously. And they wonder why they lose election after election.

July 26, 2004 "I'm not privy to Senate intelligence reports. What would I have done? I don't know." The New York Times

Again, the DMW points out that Obama relies on facts, not on the word of a serial liar and congenital thief like Cheney. Chalk up another point for Obama.

2004 "I'm always careful to say that I was not in the Senate, so perhaps the reason I thought [the war] was such a bad idea was that I didn't have the benefit of U.S. intelligence," The New Yorker

Again, Obama points out that if he had been closer to the propaganda machine it might have changed his way of thinking but he turned out to be right anyway. If the DMW want to point out that their lies can be effective (but didn't manage to dupe Obama) they can go right on ahead and make fools of themselves. Who am I to stop them from blowing one election after another?

November 2005 speech, he called for a gradual withdrawal of forces. "Notice that I say 'reduce,' and not 'fully withdraw [troops]'"

Notice that he was trying to get the DMW from self-destructing and going along with any proposal that might keep them from being reviled by the American people. Even Obama can't save the DMW from themselves. They are just too stupid. He tried to compromise with the DMW and they wound up getting scrood.

December, 2005), "It is arguable that the best politics going into '06 would be a clear, succinct message: 'Let's bring our troops home...But whether that's the best policy right now, I don't feel comfortable saying it is." Chicago Tribune

Again, when the DMW majority was intent on destroying itself by blocking troop reductions, even Obama couldn't stop them from destroying their hopes in 2006. I get the feeling they are self-destructing again in '08.

July 2007 "Presidential hopeful Barack Obama said the United States cannot use its military to solve humanitarian problems and that preventing a potential genocide in Iraq isn't a good enough reason to keep U.S. forces there."

And again, the DMW scrood the pooch and wants Obama to save their bacon. They made their bed and wished that Obama could rescue them. The war on terror (in Afghanistan and Pakistan) had to wait while the DMW destroyed any hopes of saving Iraq.

March, 2008 Obama's website states, "Obama will remove one to two combat brigades each month, and have all of our combat brigades out of Iraq within 16 months."

Good plan. Americans love that.

March 7, 2008 Obama's then key foreign policy advisor Samantha Power, spoke on the commitment to get combat forces out in 16 months. "You can't make a commitment in March 2008 about what circumstances will be like in January of 2009."

I would strongly urge Americans NOT to vote for Samantha Powers. She hurts the feelings of the Dingbats on the right and make them resent her intelligence. Obviously Americans know that Mr. 20% is capable of snatching defeat from the jaws of victory and any plan that Obama makes could easily be undone by DMW idiocy. Just when you think that government has been made idiot-proof, the DMW build bigger and better idiots.

Again, if the DMW want to run in 2008 as "getting out" versus 100 more years of war....

please.

please.

Be my guest. Nothing would make Democrats happier.

Re: Results for the Mississippi First District special election...

Wahoo! Another AWESOME result... The racist tactics are going down in flames!!!!

This November is going to be an amazing BLOWOUT year for Democrats...

(Sorry, but I got behind on the last nine hundred posts... please repeat my homework assignment if I have one).

Do you think Hillary's current maneuvering on the battlefield is actually in pursuit of FORCING herself onto the ticket as VP?

After all, she's won 98.1% as many votes as Obama so far...how can Obama now reject the "will of the people?" Is he afraid of her?

I still think that Obama is not as strong a candidate as he should be for the General...and the current polls do show the national matchup neck and neck, and the state-poll-based Electoral College trial heat shows him actually losing...

But it's way early.... And all polling is going to be super-problematic this year. Statistically trying to model turnout ("likely voters") is going to depend on way too many unpredicted variables...

On Super Tuesday, back when both races were still competitive, Democratic turnout DOUBLED the Republicans.... 14 MILLION to 7 MILLION... That is such a bad, bad, bad sign for the miserable R's...

So many formerly "likely" R voters are now in the mode of "Aw f*** it...all politics sucks anyway..." (stay at home, stay at home, stay at home).

On my way back from making Hillary calls tonight I was listening to right-wing gasbag radio.... They were all outraged by McCain's visit to a windmill plant in Oregon and giving a speech that they thought sounded like Al Gore! They are so pissed!

Back to the data... young voters are now utterly shattering every precedent for turnout.... In some recent primaries, their turnout is actually exceeding oldsters... Trying to model YOUNG turnout "likely" turnout is going to require just plain wild guessing...

And the critical "Reagan Democrats" who make me so nervous, are a smaller slice of the overall electorate than ever...

BLOWOUT, LBH... BLOWOUT....

Meanwhile, my best pal Max, a passionate Obama man, took the time to explain to me a few crucial facts about the "chosen" one...

Did you know...

Barack Obama's tears cure cancer.

And the stubble from his electric razor? If you shake it out and rub it on an amputees stump... The limb will grow back!

When he was young, Barack Obama once caught a unicorn. And when he climbed on it's back? It grew wings!

(I haven't checked it out on snopes yet, but I'm sure when I do... It'll all be true!)

Best to all!

P. S. Good job Pandemoniac on deconstructing and debunking the American Thinker piece. Thanks. That can be hard work.

"A lie will go round the world while truth is pulling its boots on."
(often attributed to Mark Twain, but actually by Charles Haddon Spurgeon [1834-92] who himself attributed it to an old proverb in a sermon delivered on Sunday morning, April 1, 1855. Spurgeon was a celebrated English fundamentalist Baptist preacher.)

Hey, someone fill me on why Obama voted for the Bush/Cheney Energy Bill? (Hillary voted against it). I know Obama gets tons of money from nuclear energy corporate fat cats, but the bill meant that he got to force Oregon to re-open and restart the leak-plagued Trojan nuclear plant. The plant promptly leaked again and it's now going to cost as many hundreds of millions to shut it down again and it cost to open it up again in the first place! Of course, if you're a nuclear corporation fat cat, getting paid is getting paid... Kind of like Halliburton... all war is profitable, win or lose...

Hey! Straighten me out you guys!

Obama and Exelon

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/03/us/politics/03exelon.html

Mick....uhm, I mean DIFF,

You have to leave home to phone for Shrillary? How very 2006!

You forgot (in a shout-out to Kentucky, my next stop) "Kilt a Barr when he was only 3"!

(working it in to current events is more funnier!)

-T

MS-01 is the big news.

Someone has to tell Tracy Flick the movie is over . . .

Obama got more votes in WV than McCain did. Obama got 91,652 votes, while McCain got 89,683. The Popular Vote Tally has been updated. This seems important to me, considering how she likes to manipulate the numbers...

Yes, I like to call from Hillary HQ. I like the comraderie. Have gotten kind of used to it over the years... Actual face-to-face human contact with all the other shrill racists is a big part of the fun in getting involved in election race. I've kind of gotten hooked on it over the years...

But then any kind of political interaction with something other than one's own keyboard is sooo 2006 also...

Sorry I don't know all the codes... Fill me in on the inside jokes...

MS-01? Mick?

...election race[s]... Freudian slip?

MS-01... The Mississippi whopper, of course, So cool.

re: MS-01

So cool.... unless, of course, you care about abortion rights... or think that gun nuts are, well... nuts....

Winning power by mimicking conservatives.... Isn't that why the leftie blogosphere all decided they hated the Clintons in the first place?

"I like to call from Hillary HQ"

What is the address of HQ? I never heard of such a thing.

No wonder HRC is losing, we Obama supporters phone bank from home, our cell phones or VOIP.

The difference is the top down versus the bottom up.

That is the old politics in the last throes, if you will.

lol

My local HQ. I could call from home if I wanted to, they've got the same technology, but like I said, I'm kind of "old politics" that way... you know, shoe leather and actual human contact... Kind of like blog politics via keyboard... a nice diversion, but basically irrelevant...

Does gee-whiz gizmo "new politics" mean Obama only talks to his nuke industry money men through his cool Blackberry?

And what's Obama's popular vote margin now? .9%?

Obamans remind of GWB in 2000. Squeaked in by the narrowest set of flukes imaginable... And thought he'd won a sweeping mandate...

The Presidency (let alone just the nomination) isn't like Capt. Kirk's chair on the Enterprise... He's not going to suddenly have a bunch of photo torpedoes and phasers to unleash on the nation's problems...

So far, all his vague promises and platitudes have built zero political capital for anything substantive. It sure looks to me like he's still basically at square one... Hasn't even begun the REAL work yet...

Hey bottom-uppers!

Give me the political strategy for actually achieving health care reform? Cost control without universality? How does that work again?

Or extricating ourselves from Iraq? Is the Sadr cease-fire on or off?

And how 'bout that "Cedar Revolution" in Lebanon? How's that going?

And talking with our enemies? Is it "preparations" or "preconditions"? I've forgotten again... Is that code for "talking only with enemies approved by the Israel Lobby?" (Talking with our enemies... except Hamas.... and now....except Ahmadinejad too...)

Now that he's exempted from tax increases any "middle class" folks making $200-250K per year or less... How much money WILL he actually be able to raise with tax increases on those above that? Any idea at all?

Actually, all kidding aside, I hope the contacts and networks created by the election process carry over into the general, and then on to the sort of community activism that BHO has encouraged his entire professional career.

Block by block, neighborhood by neighborhood, town by town and region by region is probably the only REAL path to change in this nation.

Working out of HQs, campaign offices and staging locations has been a great boon to planting the seeds of such community involvement. The folks in Washington can encourage such activism, but it'll be the people like Diff and the rest, who get out in their own neighborhoods and towns, to nurture the seeds as they flourish who will be the agents of real change.

Kudos, for that.

...now on to Kentucky... I hear there's been some racially-charged activity against Obama canvassers and offices. Nothing new where I'm headed.

I grew up surrounded by that sort of fecal flinging on a regular basis...and I can't say, yet, that it'll be GOOD to be back in my Hometown!

-T

Hard to think with all this ongoing sniper fire... Somebody get me a tissue, I'm fixin' to "find my voice"!

Sniff....

Re MS 01...

Repugnicon or Dem, Senators and Representatives are SUPPOSED to be in tune with their constituents' issues and concerns.

Problem is, they forget that they're supposed to be representing both those who vote AGAINST them as well as those who vote FOR them and to give the views and desires of the people at least SOME weight against the wishes and desires of the money-tossers who got 'em elected in the first place. This, sadly, is far from the case in South Carolina.

That's why I find myself stuck with Graham-cracker and DeMented... and the rest... but I DID choose to live here!

-sigh...

Hajji,

You're wasting your time, my friend.

"The great enemy of clear language is insincerity. When there is a gap between one's real and one's declared aims, one turns as it were instinctively to long words and exhausted idioms, like a cuttlefish spurting out ink."

~ George Orwell (1903 - 1950), "Politics and the English Language", 1946

Did you mean that sincerely, Capt?

Mmmm....Cuttlefish ink pasta....mmmm

-T

"My local HQ"

No address? I want to send some much needed help?

I think you know better!

lol

Here's the picture:

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/185/470387743_7196fad06a_b.jpg

LOLOLOLOLO

"No matter how cynical you get.... it's never enough."
(Lily Tomlin)

Portland, OR for the last couple years.

For forty years before that, Tucson, AZ

and Little Rock , AR also.

Jack

http://www.lobbydelegates.com