David Corn

HUGS FOR THUGS COULD SINK NAIVE OBAMA

May 16, 2008 -- WASHINGTON - What is it about the word "appeasement" that got Barack Obama's ears ringing?

Without once uttering the freshman anti-war senator's name, President Bush warned against negotiating with terrorists on the futile hope that a little more dialogue will turn these satanic beasts from their death pact to wipe Israel off the map and kill as many American men, women and children as possible.

Obama, who has proposed meeting with the leaders of Iran, Syria and North Korea just as soon as he gets into the White House, heard his name somewhere in the president's speech and quickly issued a press release.

The White House insisted Obama was simply suffering from the narcissism that convinces so many politicians that everyone is talking about them.

Top Democratic leaders, including Sen. Chuck Schumer, called it a below-the-belt political attack.

It is beyond comprehension that anyone would suggest that this is somehow not a pressing matter of political discussion in an election year.

Or maybe Democrats are just now figuring out that Obama's position here might leave him open to withering attacks.

Well, it's a little late for that.

He's their nominee and they've got to go with it.

If Obama doesn't add a little muscle to his approach to dealing with evil in the world, Republicans are going to be offering a suggested running mate for his ticket.

Someone, say, to beef up Obama's thin foreign-policy résumé and who agrees with his world philosophy: Sounds like a job for Jimmy Carter.

~~~~

Obama is a Pansy~~~

Are terrorists phone banking for Barack (Hussein Obama)?

The City Paper (Nashville) ^ | May 16, 2008 | Steve Gill

The Obama campaign claimed to be "flattered" by the Hamas endorsement, and Obama himself told the Atlantic magazine that he understands why Hamas would support him.

So what have Barack's Hamas newfound supporters been up to lately? Well, on the very day President Bush arrived in Israel to mark the nation's 60th anniversary and to renew his push for a Palestinian state as part of elusive Israeli-Palestinian peace process, a rocket was fired into an Israeli shopping mall. The mall was devastated, and 14 innocent civilians were seriously injured. The Popular Resistance Committees, which has Hamas members, was one of two organizations that claimed responsibility for the attack.

The Hamas endorsement of Obama is even more interesting when viewed against the backdrop of the group's aggressive promotion of violence among young Palestinians in Gaza and in the context of a recent Al-Jazeera story about how young Palestinians in Gaza have banded together to call American voters at random asking them to vote for Obama! Rockets by night, Obama phone banks by day?

"It all started at the time of the U.S. primaries," says the pro-Obama Palestinian organizer, 23-year-old Ibrahim Abu Jayyab. "After studying Obama's electronic campaign manifesto I thought this is a man that's capable of change inside of America. As for potential change in the Middle East, he can also do that if he can bring peace to the area. At least this is what we hope."

The Al-Jazeera television report can be viewed at www.youtube.com/watch?v=21YF7ggCG6g.

Barack Obamas America. Fast forward to 2012

National Review ^ | May 15, 2008 | Michael Novak

If the United States shows signs of weakness, surrender, and a one-sided departure from Iraq, the rejoicing of those who predicted that they would in the end defeat us will profoundly strengthen their resolve for the next battle. Further, without an offensive thrust in Iraq, any military forts or airfields of ours would be sheltered in a defensive enclave -- announcing to those who hate us that they should keep killing two or more Americans every day, drip, drip, drip, until the American people cannot stand it any more. Weakness once shown invites fiercer aggression.

Iran will thus have its nuclear weapon by 2012, secure in the knowledge that Americans have no heart to do battle to prevent it.

In Pakistan, forces of economic and political development will know that they can no longer count on the Americans as a last resort. They would soon - to save their families - begin to yield more and more space to jihadists, terrorists, and promoters of sharia law.

Meanwhile, if Obama keeps his pledge to raise taxes on the top 10 percent of income earners (or even on the top 2 percent), he will give them enormous incentives to alter their behavior, so as to show lower income. Since the top 1 percent of earners pay over 35 percent of all income taxes paid by all Americans, any decline in their income means a steep decline in tax revenues. Obama seems to have no comprehension that raising tax rates at the top dramatically lowers revenue coming in. He will learn the hard way.

His policies on quasi-universal health care will change all the incentives in our current health system - and for the worse.

The Obama Campaign Goes Completely Insane

Commentary Magazine ^ | May 15, 2008 | John Podhoretz

If you look a few posts below, you will find the text of President Bush’s powerful and moving speech to the Knesset today. In the course of it, he says something very general:

Some seem to believe we should negotiate with terrorists and radicals, as if some ingenious argument will persuade them they have been wrong all along. We have heard this foolish delusion before. As Nazi tanks crossed into Poland in 1939, an American senator declared: “Lord, if only I could have talked to Hitler, all of this might have been avoided.” We have an obligation to call this what it is – the false comfort of appeasement, which has been repeatedly discredited by history.

Bush here is arguing in very broad brush against a generally meliorist view of foreign policy — one, moreover, that is held by many people who work inside his own government. For some reason, people who work for the almost-certain nominee of the Democratic party have decided that Bush was attacking him. As Kate Phillips writes on the New York Times website:

In a telephone interview on CNN just a few minutes ago, Robert Gibbs, the communications director for Senator Barack Obama, called Mr. Bush’s remarks “astonishing” and an “unprecendented political attack on foreign soil.”

An “unprecedented attack on foreign soil”? That is completely deranged. Not only did Bush not mention Obama by name, it is doubtful he or his people were thinking about Obama. The argument that negotiating with terrorists is appeasement akin to Europe’s appeasement of Hitler is a standard view among hawks on the Right — decades old, dating back even before Barry Obama found the audacity to hope in the pews of Jeremiah Wright’s church. It is exactly the sort of thing a man with Bush’s politics would say in a speech before the Knesset, whether Obama had run for president or not.

The Obama campaign has even issued a statement on the matter in Obama’s name:

It is sad that President Bush would use a speech to the Knesset on the 60th anniversary of Israel’s independence to launch a false political attack. It is time to turn the page on eight years of policies that have strengthened Iran and failed to secure America or our ally Israel. Instead of tough talk and no action, we need to do what Kennedy, Nixon and Reagan did and use all elements of American power - including tough, principled, and direct diplomacy - to pressure countries like Iran and Syria. George Bush knows that I have never supported engagement with terrorists, and the President’s extraordinary politicization of foreign policy and the politics of fear do nothing to secure the American people or our stalwart ally Israel.

I’m not sure what this all says about Obama. Is this smart politics, getting his base riled up on his behalf? Is he trying to use Bush as a wedge to make the case to the Jewish community in the United States that the bad man in the White House is mischaracterizing him and therefore Jews should like him more? Is he trying, for the millionth time, to rule any criticism of himself out of reasonable bounds by complaining about something that isn’t even criticism of him?

Or is this just another example of Obama’s thin-skinned-ness?

DC,

Excellent piece.

But - Shhhhhh - don't warn them - maybe they are as unleashed from reality as we always feared.

Thanks

Pity Party

[...]

What happens to the Republicans in 2008 will likely be dictated by what didn't happen in 2005, and '06, and '07. The moment when the party could have broken, on principle, with the administration – over the thinking behind and the carrying out of the war, over immigration, spending and the size of government – has passed. What two years ago would have been honorable and wise will now look craven. They're stuck.

Mr. Bush has squandered the hard-built paternity of 40 years. But so has the party, and so have its leaders. If they had pushed away for serious reasons, they could have separated the party's fortunes from the president's. This would have left a painfully broken party, but they wouldn't be left with a ruined "brand," as they all say, speaking the language of marketing. And they speak that language because they are marketers, not thinkers. Not serious about policy. Not serious about ideas. And not serious about leadership, only followership.

This is and will be the great challenge for John McCain: The Democratic argument, now being market tested by Obama Inc., that a McCain victory will yield nothing more or less than George Bush's third term.

That is going to be powerful, and it is going to get out the vote. And not for Republicans.

http://tinyurl.com/6xlfo6

******

All true enough, eh?

Can WaPo editors read?

By Soren Dayton

The Washington Post should either fire their editors or send them to remedial education. They should be ashamed that they let this garbage get printed.

Despite his reputation in the media as a charming maverick, McCain has shown that he is also happy to use Nixon-style dirty campaign tactics. By charging recently that Hamas is rooting for an Obama victory,

McCain isn't "charging". A senior Hamas leader said that "actually we like Mr. Obama. We hope he will (win) the election [...] and he has a vision to change America." Why isn't that the story, rather than a distortion of McCain's statement?

This clown James Rubin continues:

I asked: "Do you think that American diplomats should be operating the way they have in the past, working with the Palestinian government if Hamas is now in charge?"

McCain answered: "They're the government; sooner or later we are going to have to deal with them, one way or another, and I understand why this administration and previous administrations had such antipathy towards Hamas because of their dedication to violence and the things that they not only espouse but practice, so . . . but it's a new reality in the Middle East. I think the lesson is people want security and a decent life and decent future, that they want democracy. Fatah was not giving them that."

"Deal with" is not the same as "unconditional" talks at the level of heads of state. The President of Iran says that Israel should be destroyed and their weapons are being used to kill American soldiers. Indeed, yesterday on the blogger call McCain pointed out that Ryan Crocker regularly interacts with Iranians in Baghdad.

How could the Washington Post's editors let this garbage get printed in their paper? Are they illiterate or just biased beyond belief?
~~~~

How about it Corn, can you read?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=icooZ4PTM60

"If George Bush and John McCain want to have a debate about protecting the United States of America, that is a debate that I'm happy to have any time, any place, and that is a debate that I will win because George Bush and John McCain have a lot to answer for," Obama said in a campaign speech in South Dakota.

*****

Seems I'm not the only one that looks forward to the debates.

McCain on Chris Matthews said on April 23, 2003"We know the Syrians allowed, or sent Syrians in to fight Americans." But McCain said that:

"I think it's appropriate that Colin Powell is going there...

MATTHEWS: So you don't agree with Newt Gingrich dumping all over him? You don't agree with Newt Gingrich dumping on the Powell trip?

MCCAIN: You know, Dick -- Richard Armitage is Powell's deputy. And he's a wonderful guy. He served in Vietnam. And he's a really tough guy. And he was quoted someplace today that Newt Gingrich is out of therapy.

McCain added:

Colin Powell is going to look Bashar aside in the eye and say, look, you know. You better clean up your act here. It's a new day in the Middle East. And I think it's entirely appropriate to do that.

*****

Would that be a flip or a flop?

Five days earlier on the Today Show on April 18th (2003), McCain said the same thing. When asked how he would proceed with Syria - a country that he believed to be a state-sponsor of terrorism - McCain said he would talk first.

LAUER: Let me ask you about Syria.

Mr. McCAIN: Sure.

LAUER: They have denied possessing weapons of mass destruction, they've also denied harboring any senior members of the Iraqi leader. The US administration says they have evidence to the contrary. How would you proceed with that situation?

Mr. McCAIN: I think it's very appropriate that Colin Powell is going to Syria. I think we should put diplomatic and other pressures on them. It's also a time for Mr. Asad Bashar to realize that he should be more like his father was. I think he's too heavily influenced by a lot of the radical Islamic elements and--and militant groups.

LAUER: Do you think Syria meets the criteria set forth by the president in his post-9/11 address to Congress that they pose an imminent threat to the US in that they are either sponsoring or harboring terrorists?

Mr. McCAIN: I think they're--they're sponsoring and harboring terrorists. I think they have been occupying Lebanon, which should be free and independent for a long time, but I don't think that that means that we will now resort to the military action. We--we can apply a lot of pressure other than military--than the military action. So what I'm saying, we're a long way away from it.

LAUER: Under what circumstances--under what circumstances would you back military action?

Mr. McCAIN: When we've exhausted all other options. And we have a lot of options to--to exercise. And I'm glad Colin Powell's going there, but the Syrians have got to understand there's a new day in the Middle East.

*****

Talking to heads of states we don't like, state sponsors of terrorism, go figure.

McSame's problem is his record and the video of his previous positions. Hard to hide from his pandering, eh?

The president did not name Sen. Barack Obama or any other Democrat, but White House aides privately acknowledged to CNN that the remarks were aimed at the presidential candidate and others in his party.

(CNN)

How Bush's grandfather helped Hitler's rise to power

George Bush's grandfather, the late US senator Prescott Bush, was a director and shareholder of companies that profited from their involvement with the financial backers of Nazi Germany.

The Guardian has obtained confirmation from newly discovered files in the US National Archives that a firm of which Prescott Bush was a director was involved with the financial architects of Nazism.

His business dealings, which continued until his company's assets were seized in 1942 under the Trading with the Enemy Act, has led more than 60 years later to a civil action for damages being brought in Germany against the Bush family by two former slave labourers at Auschwitz and to a hum of pre-election controversy.

The evidence has also prompted one former US Nazi war crimes prosecutor to argue that the late senator's action should have been grounds for prosecution for giving aid and comfort to the enemy.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2004/sep/25/usa.secondworldwar

*****

Bush should be careful about bringing up Hitler and Nazi connections. Talk about the trouble with grandpa - the question is which gramps is worse?

George Bush called me an appeaser~

WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!

"I'm Barack Obama and I apporove of this message"

McCain = Peace through strength

Obama= Peace through appeasement

We've got a winner folks~~~

SEXFAIRY talks~~

By Dan NoyesSAN FRANCISCO (KGO) -- We're finally hearing from the woman at the center of the child pornography case against former KGO Radio host Bernie Ward.

Until now, you haven't seen her face and didn't know much about her except that she went by the screen name "Sexfairy" and called police when Ward sent her child porn.
Please note: Understand that before reading this story or watching the interview that the topic is graphic and may be disturbing to some.

Dan Noyes first contacted the woman known as "Sexfairy" three months ago. She agreed to speak with him once the Bernie Ward Case was over.
"Sexfairy's" real name is Linda Figueiredo. She told Dan Noyes she wanted to do the interview to clear up a lot of misconceptions, primarily newspaper reports characterizing her as a dominatrix.
Dan Noyes: "Is that in any way accurate?"
Linda Figueiredo: "Not at all. I am a simple woman. I work, I'm a mother of three, it was a part of my life, I was exploring something, who hasn't, and I just got caught up in something that was not at all fun."
Dan Noyes: "It was online, though, in your personal life, were you ever..."
Linda Figueiredo: "No, not at all."
Dan Noyes: "...being a dominatrix in real life?"
Linda Figueiredo: "No, uh-hmm. No, I never wielded a whip."
Figueiredo tells the I-Team she was a 29-year-old stay-at-home mother with three young daughters when she went online as "Sexfairy" to explore her sexual boundaries. A friend gave her the screen name of a man who appeared to be submissive -- "Vincentlio."
Only later would she find out it was KGO Radio host Bernie Ward.
Linda Figueiredo: "I was interested in doing the domination thing and he was submissive, so she introduced me to him, chatted back and forth and that's when this whole melee' happened."
Figueiredo says she chatted online from her home in the Central Valley town of Oakdale with Bernie Ward at his home in San Francisco for two to three weeks. Then there was a turning point.
A transcript of the chat from December 2004 starts with Ward's "Good afternoon, mistress." "Sexfairy" answers, "How was your day, slave?"
Ward describes having gay, group sex at a San Mateo porn theater in the past and then asks:
"Are you going to make me feel dirty, mistress?"
"Sexfairy" answers, "Yes, I am."
Then Ward types, "I love trading pictures." "Sexfairy answers: "And why haven't I gotten any pics, slave. Send me some." Ward answers, "you have mail, mistress."
Linda Figueiredo: "And up in my mail came up child porn."
It was a picture of a naked 14 year old boy, a clothed 12 year old girl, and a topless woman in her 30s, all touching in a sexual way.
Dan Noyes: "When you saw that, what went through your mind?"
Linda Figueiredo: "Oh my god, basically, I was, my stomach wrenched, my stomach turned, I was trying to figure out what do I do? It was the most disgusting thing I've ever seen, children shouldn't be put in sexually compromising positions at all, and then to be taking pictures of and sent around the Internet was just mind-blowing to me."
Dan Noyes: "I just want to be clear, at any point before Bernie Ward sent you child porn had you expressed an interest in children?"
Linda Figueiredo: "Absolutely not."
Within minutes, Figueiredo is on the phone with the Oakdale police. They instruct her to keep chatting with Ward to help build a case. It's a stressful assignment. In the days that follow, Ward discusses sexual activity with children and sends several more images of child porn.
Dan Noyes: "You said that seeing those images had a lasting impact on you. How so?"
Linda Figueiredo: "I still have nightmares."
Dan Noyes: "Really?"
Linda Figueiredo: "Uh-hmm. I still have nightmares. They'll be burned in my memory forever, forever that and the IM chats of him telling me what he was doing to his own children and I couldn't really at that point do anything about it."
Through his attorney, Ward says the online chat was 100 percent false, that he was role-playing as part of research for a book about hypocrisy and Republicans.
Linda Figueiredo: "I think it's the most absurd thing I have ever heard, number one, I'm not even a Republican, number two, you don't send somebody child porn to do research for a book."
The Ward child porn case went from the Oakdale police to the FBI to federal court, and one week ago, he pleaded guiltyto distributing "between 15 and 150 images" of "prepubescent children engaged in sexually explicit conduct, some with sadistic, masochistic or violent conduct."
Dan Noyes: "With your help, Bernie Ward's been prosecuted, he's lost his career, he's going to prison. What do you think about that?"
Linda Figueiredo: "I think that he needs to sit in that prison cell and I think he needs to think about what he did. What he did didn't affect just one person, it affected those children that he had on that computer screen that are all over the Internet. It affected me, I was highly stressed, it put me into a deep depression for four years. And I think he needs to sit there and I think justice has been served."
Figueiredo might not have sympathy for Bernie Ward, but she does for his wife and four children. After all, she knows how important family is. Her parents have helped her through a tough four years, since "Sexfairy" first met "Vincentlio" online.
Dan Noyes: "Anything else you want to say, anything else you want people to know?"
Linda Figueiredo: "No, I'm just a normal girl that tried to do the right thing and no children should be harmed that way and no children should be taken pictures of that way and I just had to do what I had to do."
Figueiredo tells us she had no idea "Vincentlio" was, in fact, Bernie Ward until the FBI told her. There's much more to her story, including how she came up with the name "Sexfairy."

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I see a new name for Pansy on the horizon~~

McCain - We can have victory by 2013

Obama - We can have defeat by 2009

When John McCain said that he was "fine" with staying in Iraq for 100 years, he proved that he doesn't have the judgement to be the Commander in Chief, and with his hypocritical attacks on Barack Obama over Hamas, he proves that he doesn't have the character either.

Obviously.

Bush Lied About Giving Up Golf: Video Proof

President Bush said with a straight face this week that he gave up golf in honor of the fallen soldiers in Iraq, claiming that he quit after the bombing of the UN headquarters in Baghdad in August 2003:

"I don't want some mom whose son may have recently died to see the commander in chief playing golf," he said. "I feel I owe it to the families to be in solidarity as best as I can with them. And I think playing golf during a war just sends the wrong signal."

Bush said he made that decision after the August 2003 bombing of the United Nations headquarters in Baghdad, which killed Sergio Vieira de Mello, the top U.N. official in Iraq and the organization's high commissioner for human rights.

"I remember when de Mello, who was at the U.N., got killed in Baghdad as a result of these murderers taking this good man's life," he said. "I was playing golf -- I think I was in central Texas -- and they pulled me off the golf course and I said, 'It's just not worth it anymore to do.'"

In fact, Bush went golfing two months after the bombing the UN headquarters, and Keith Olbermann found the video:

http://tinyurl.com/5gnkcs

*****

Bush a liar? I am shocked, shocked I tell you!

lol

Appeasement has worked sooooo well for Jimmy Carter.

"The United States and Saudi Arabia have agreed to cooperate in safeguarding the kingdom's energy resources by protecting key infrastructure, enhancing Saudi border security, and meeting (its) expanding energy needs," a White House statement said.

"The U.S. and Saudi Arabia will sign a memorandum of understanding in the area of peaceful civil nuclear energy cooperation."

The announcement came as Bush ended a three-day trip to Israel where he vowed to oppose Iran's nuclear ambitions. Tehran says its program is peaceful but Bush said it would be "unforgivable" if Iran were allowed to get the bomb.

So we're giving Saudi Arabia nukes while still refusing to allow Iran nukes.

And for all that, Saudi Arabia isn't even willing (though I question whether, at this point, they are able) to lower gas prices?

While Bush is likely to find common ground on Iran when he meets King Abdullah, the Saudi monarch is expected to rebuff for the second time this year Bush's face-to-face call to get OPEC pumping more oil to world markets.

Wasn't it just yesterday that Bush was decrying negotiations with evil dictators? Does giving them nuclear technology while getting nothing in exchange count as "appeasement"?

(kos)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VjCYmjjxp8I

John McCain's chief adviser, lobbyist Charlie Black, worked for some of the world's worst dictators -- mass murderers, terrorists, and tyrants. McCain should fire Charlie Black.

The ad features haunting black-and-white photos of the consequences of the regimes of Ferdinand Marcos of the Philippines and Mobuto Sese Seko of Zaire, both heads of governments that Black's lobbying firm once represented. (Black stepped down from his role at firm BKSH & Associates in March of 2008 to serve McCain's campaign full-time.)

A spokesman for the GOP called the MoveOn ad an "outrageous personal smear job" and blamed the Democratic Party's likely new standard-bearer for failing to control its foot soldiers

I call Bullshit... Jeremiah Wright said a few things that pissed a few blowhards off... Charlie Black lobbied for Murders and Profited from it. Charlie Black is the Campaign Manager of John McCain. Charlie Black is an accomplice to these attrocities.

Obama's camp responds:

Obama spokesman Hari Sevugan responded to that. "John McCain's failure to stop his closest advisors from advocating on behalf of some of the most corrupt governments, dictators and tyrants in the world is evidence of his failed judgment and his inability to change the way Washington works and bring the change we need," he said.

(kos)

*****

Let's see, lobbyists meeting with terrible dictators is professional appeasement?

Obama Hits Back at Bush for ‘Appeasement’ Remarks (Update McCain responds and punks Obama)

Fox News ^ | 05-16-08 | John McCain

McCain spokesman Tucker Bounds fired back that Obama’s retort was a “hysterical diatribe in response to a speech in which his name wasn’t even mentioned.”

McCain campaign responds: 'Hysterical diatribe'

politico.com ^ | 05/16/08 | bensmith

This general election campaign is getting off to a rollicking start.

From McCain spokesman Tucker Bounds:

It was remarkable to see Barack Obama’s hysterical diatribe in response to a speech in which his name wasn’t even mentioned.

These are serious issues that deserve a serious debate, not the same tired partisan rants we heard today from Senator Obama. Senator Obama has pledged to unconditionally meet with Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad -- who pledges to wipe Israel off the map, denies the Holocaust, sponsors terrorists, arms America’s enemies in Iraq and pursues nuclear weapons. What would Senator Obama talk about with such a man? It would be a wonderful thing if we lived in a world where we don’t have enemies.

But that is not the world we live in, and until Senator Obama understands that, the American people have every reason to doubt whether he has the strength, judgment and determination to keep us safe.

Oddly, McCain's response also contained the claim he'd distorted Defense Secretary Robert Gates' willingness to meet the leaders of Iran, but didn't contest Obama's point that McCain had suggested meeting with Hamas.

UPDATE: Cancel that. The McCain campaign sends over video of a second 2006 interview from the same day in Davos in which, unlike in his interview with Jamie Rubin, McCain suggests that aid and the peace process can only "resume" when Hamas agrees to "renounce" their commitment to the state of Israel.

For Obama, there's no better way to argue that McCain represents a third Bush term than to talk about the unpopular Iraq war and his saber-rattling about Iran. This excites Obama's base, which, according to a recent Los Angeles Times poll, lists the Iraq war as its greatest concern—above even the economy. And it also helps him push McCain back into the arms of the president with independents who might be susceptible to seeing him as distinct from Bush.

When asked to respond to McCain's charge about Ahmadinejad, one of Obama's senior advisers simply forwarded a comment by Defense Secretary Robert Gates from today's Washington Post. "We need to figure out a way to develop some leverage," said Gates, "and then sit down and talk with them. If there is going to be a discussion, then they need something, too. We can't go to a discussion and be completely the demander, with them not feeling that they need anything from us."

That's Obama position, articulated by Bush's defense secretary, say his aides. McCain's Manichean view of negotiations, on the other hand, is the same one that bogged down the United States in the Middle East and squandered our international prestige. McCain doesn't just share Bush's policy positions on foreign affairs, goes this line of accusation—he shares his reckless neoconservative mindset. Addressing McCain and Bush's remarks directly on Friday in a press conference, Obama said, "I was offended by what is a continuation of a strategy from this White House—now mimicked by Senator McCain—that replaces strategy and analyses and smart policy with bombast exaggerations and fear mongering."

(slate)

*****

So all Obama has to do to get Bush to change position is to take the same position as Bush's Sec Def?

People notice little things like that.

John McCain's campaign asked a prominent Republican consultant, Craig Shirley, to leave his official campaign role Thursday after a Politico inquiry about Shirley's dual role consulting for the campaign and for an independent 527 group opposing the Democratic presidential candidates. The campaign also released a new conflict-of-interest policy barring such arrangements.

(huffpo)

*****

Just can shed those loser lobbyists fast enough.

A new conflict of interest policy? Hmmmm one might start with that kind of thing if one was really trying, eh?

Wasn't it just yesterday that Bush was decrying negotiations with evil dictators? Does giving them nuclear technology while getting nothing in exchange count as "appeasement"?

Posted by Capt

~~~~

Now Sweetie, thou protestest too much!

When you hear McCain talk about how he has no control over swift-boat like groups, he may be right, but you’d also do well to remember this story.

From TPM:

A few weeks ago, Media Matters’ David Brock announced to great fanfare that he was taking over Progressive Media USA, a third-party group that would, he vowed, raise $40 million for ads to soften up John McCain in advance of the general election.

Now the group is quietly shuttering those efforts with barely a whimper.

Barack Obama’s fundraising team has been quietly putting out word to major donors that they didn’t want any money to go to such third-party groups. Instead, they wanted the cash to go to the Obama campaign, so Obama advisers could be in sole control of the campaign’s message.

The message is clear: we don’t want your kind of “help.”

A new kind of politics? It’s a good sign.

So all Obama has to do to get Bush to change position is to take the same position as Bush's Sec Def?

People notice little things like that.

~~~~

News Flash~ Bush isn't running and Obama said;

"READ MY LIPS"

"I WILL SIT DOWN WITH ROGUE DICTATORS WITH NO PRE-CONDITIONS"

no-preconditions = appeasement

~~~~~~

I can understand that a major screw up by Obummer would set off the attack dogs on the left, but why don't you try and defend his position instead of attacking a speech that wasn't even about him?

A weak candidate = scared little trolls

How exactly does Bush explain his speech when his own defense secretary’s opinions seems to place him in the “appeasement” camp with Obama?

Here’s what Gates said…

The United States should construct a combination of incentives and pressure to engage Iran, and may have missed earlier opportunities to begin a useful dialogue with Tehran, Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates said yesterday.

“We need to figure out a way to develop some leverage . . . and then sit down and talk with them,” Gates said. “If there is going to be a discussion, then they need something, too. We can’t go to a discussion and be completely the demander, with them not feeling that they need anything from us.”

Note the emphasis…”sit down and talk with them.”

Note the emphasis…”sit down and talk with them.”

Gates
~~~~

Note the emphasis.... "sit down and talk with them with no preconditions."

Obummer

Note the emphasis…”sit down and talk with them.”

What's Obummer the appeaser gunna say that Carter the Mac Daddy of appeasers hasn't already said?

40+ years of Carter appeasement and all its's gotten is money in Carters pocket!

Obummer wants to sit down and appease dictators with no preconditions but won't even sit down and appease Hillary with no preconditions.

I guess LBH doesn't have enough work to do today...

I guess LBH doesn't have enough work to do today...

Dog B

~~~~

Hey Dog, it's called multi-tasking. I only need about 10% of my brain to straighten out a few misguided Cornnuts.

Hey how's that bio fuel thing going for ya?

World starvation vs global warming, ahh who cares about a few 3rd world starving children anyway?

Besides, I had to respond to Capts 'Hysterical diatribe'

Earlier, while reading the thread of ideas it occurred to me that someday individuals are going to be held accountable for the war crimes of Vietnam. Like Henry Kissinger, John McCain and others who ordered illegal bombing and participated in bombing. McCain was on his 23 bombing mission when he was shot down over Hanoi. He admitted to the North Vietnamese that he was a war criminal, but renounces that as having been confessed under torture. Since he now renounces the concept of torture his excuse for admission is gone.

Later in the thread I read that Prescott Bush, a known Nazi collaborator, is still involved in litigation from survivors of the Nazi slave camps. Since the nut falls close to the tree, it is no wonder that Bush, while spouting his nonsense in Israel, again denounced the International Criminal Court. We are still hunting down Nazi participants from 66 years ago. What will the future bring?

You can't just declare yourself done with the past. McCain and Bush seem to think they can. This war is a criminal act. The only way to win this war is to get away with it since the only enemy to defeat is the face of reason, and that face is never fooled. McCain supported the war and still does. This is a war crime. Hillary supported the war, says she doesn't now, but is ready to cave to the military establishment if elected - she still does.

When power shifts, which it is poised to do, the abandoned treaties and failed policies of the past eight years are going to reverse themselves and that includes the holding out of support for the International Criminal Court.

I doubt that there will be a hunt for war supporters that goes after Colin Powell, Donny Rumsfeld, DIck Cheney and every army prison guard and repatriated vet, but if I were an infantile, whiney little blogger bolstering support for our winning this war crime I would move to Europe and blend in before being arrested for my involvement.... but feel free to join in our conversations from abroad. We have no age limits and as long as your mom doesn't catch you blogging and watching porn at the same time you should be okay.

In case that wasn't clear, LBH, your support of the war is criminal, and you shouldn't expect to just walk away from this as free as the swinging little twit you think yourself to be.

George W. Bush: Appeaser

In April of 2003, in the midst of "Mission Accomplished" fanfare, President George W. Bush gave in to terrorist demands and promised to withdraw U.S. troops from the Arabian Holy Land. The following excerpt is from the April 30, 2003 issue of the New York Times:

The United States said today that it would withdraw all combat forces in Saudi Arabia by this summer, ending more than a decade of military operations in this strategic Middle East nation that is America's largest oil supplier.

http://tinyurl.com/4a9wju

After Endorsing Bush’s Comments, McCain Camp Claims ‘We Never Used The Term Appeasement’
While speaking to the Israeli Knesset yesterday, President Bush compared those who advocate speaking directly to our enemies to Nazi appeasers, a comment interpreted as a hit at Sen. Barack Obama (D-IL). Speaking on MSNBC this afternoon, Nancy Pfotenhauer, a policy adviser to Sen. John McCain (R-AZ), stood by Bush’s comparison even as she tried to claim that McCain had never used the word appeasement:

PFOTENHAUER: Senator McCain responded directly himself and said he took the president at his word, that those comments were not directed toward Senator Obama. […]

SHUSTER: Nancy, does the McCain campaign believe that talking to our enemies is the same as appeasing them?

PFOTENHAUER: We have never used the term appeasement and you know that.

SHUSTER: But the president did. […]

PFOTENHAUER: We have specifically not used the term appeasement.

****

And the back-tracking begins. How is anybody going to take gramps seriously?

And today Bush asks the Saudis for a relief from high oil prices. Anybody surprised they said no?

Anybody surprised that he doesn't understand the concept of a big stick?

I bet he got a donation for his pwesidential liberry.

So not a total loss.

CNN’s Ed Henry reported, “White House aides are acknowledging that this was a reference to the fact that Sen. Obama and other Democrats have publicly said that it would be ok for the U.S. President to meet with leaders like the Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmedinejad.” And NBC’s John Yang also spoke with a White House official who said Obama was one of Bush’s intended targets.

Lame Brained Halfwit seems inclinded to be personally insulting today as well.

Maybe needs to be institutionalized.

But really, really ought to consult a clinical psycologist about whatever is so unsatisfactory in his life.

Whats with all the idiotic posting from Republicans flacks? Go fix your party. It's sinking. You need new leadership.

*dons tinfoil hat*

IIRC, in 2005, Chimperor Dubya tried to push through Social Security "reform" [code for "giving the Wall Street jackals the keys to the SS fund"], and received one of his all-too-rare rebukes from Congress.

It has become obvious to all but the blindest of us that the Elephascist Party is now an asylum run by the inmates, and has been such at least since the Gingrich Congress came in after the Nov. '94 elections.

The economy performed better under Big Dog than under either of the Bushes, while Dubya has presided over historic budget deficits.

The barbaric foreign policy of the Busheviks is creating oceans of ill will against the USA. This is going to affect business adversely, if it is not already doing so.

In general, it is plain that the Elephascists are steering the ship of state straight for the rocks.

Maybe the economic elite [I will use the traditional collective term "Wall Street" henceforth], or at least a major faction of it, has decided it would prefer a nominally Democratic president?

Obama, a fellow who only came onto the national scene 4 years ago with a speech, who has served part of one term as a federal Senator decides to run for President--AND HE QUICKLY BECOMES THE BEST-FUNDED CONTENDER? WTF? "He got it from a netroot network of small donors."
Riiiiight, and David Vitter's used diapers smell like freshly-baked cinnamon rolls. I would like to know where he's really getting all the Benjamins--Wall Street, maybe?

With this huge war chest and an eerily dedicated and intense corps of activists, he bolts to a series of early victories. Then, when the previous favorite recovers from the shock and begins gaining ground, almost the entire corps of the party's elder statesmen start shrieking that she should drop out in favor of the newbie. WTF?

Only Nixon could go to China.

Only Bill Clinton could have "ended welfare as we know it".

Only a nominally Democratic President could end Social Security as we know it.

Obama has repeated right-wing talking points about the need to "reform" Social Security at times. I suspect he may be Wall Street's "Trojan Horse" to raid SS. His ethnicity would help him in that goal--"Thou darest criticize the Messiah, er, President? Thou blasphemous sinner, thou art verily a racist!"

If Obama is nominated, watch the behavior of the Corporate Holodeck Media.

The CHM jackals have been kissing both McCain's and Obama's butts for months now.

If they keep kissing McCain's butt but start kicking Obama's butt, forget I said anything.

But if they keep kissing Obama's butt while turning on their old pal McCain like the jackals they are--

"He's too old"
"His health is questionable"
"He wants to spend 100 years in Iraq"
"He has a hair-trigger temper; do you want his finger on THE BUTTON?"

--then, folks, the fix is in.

With Wall Street deciding for Obama, the crooked voting machines will be rigged to favor the Democrat THIS time.

Wall Street's Trojan Horse President Obama will hand Wall Street the keys to the SS money, and also otherwise dismantle what pathetic shards remain of social insurance for the common citizen, and common defense against corporate predation, not to mention continuing the assault on the Bill of Rights.

Say howdy to the New Democratic Party, folks, with the same Chicago School economic policies as the Elephascist Party: sink-or-swim for the common citizen and socialism for the fat cats, but without all that buzz-killing church stuff. You'll be free to smoke pot and have sex with consenting farm animals, but the FSM help you if you get too sick or injured to work, or just can't find work--it's off to the workhouse or debtor's prison with you, deadbeat! [giving our plutocratic masters the slave labor they want back so badly without their having to go overseas for it] Meanwhile, the old business class elite and the new "creative class" elite will party the night away on the upper floors, as in Fritz Lang's "METROPOLIS".

Selah.

From the swamps of the Arkanshire, Ivory Bill Woodpecker

Ivory Bill, do you suppose that the Patriot Act was just a ruse to set up the Department of Homeless Security? Between Wall Street selling our mortgages like lottery tickets, our jobs being sent to Asia and the conspiracy to shut down social security we better pick out a good shopping cart now before all that remain are the ones with a bad wheel.

pwesidential liberry! Sounds like a terrorist attack site in the making. I'll be cwacking up all day.

You all have a gweat Saturday.

After three special Congressional election losses in a row, Interior Secretary "Dirty" Dirk Kempthorne announced that he was placing all Republicans on the Endangered Species List. Kempthorne also started a series of legal actions to prevent any more Special elections from being held that could possibly lower the GOP numbers any further. "The president really doesn't give a rat's ass about the environment, global warming or some damn bird like the bald eagle, but when his crony buddies are in danger of extinction, all bets are off," said an enraged Kempthorne to reporters.

http://tinyurl.com/3mph6v

Dr. Benson, all of the issues that the Homeschooler is dealing with can be directly traced to a form of chemical dependency. As I've mentioned previously, he has a special enema tube which efficiently shunts the KoolAid directly to his brain, which like most Dingbats is located closer to his ass than his mouth. He supplements the power of the KoolAid by ingesting various forms of Zombie Chow. Given the power of the KoolAid enema, the Zombie Chow is superfluous and the Homeschooler is free to disgorge himself on this blog.

He suffers from the Delirium Tremens and, to varying degrees, all of the other classic symptoms of the depression that follows from having his hopes dashed, his dreams shattered, and watching his enemies trample over his hero, Mr. 20%. The DTs should build to a fever pitch around November, after which it should subside as it did after the 2006 election. The asskicking should dislodge or at least damage the Enema Tube sufficiently to allow the Homeschooler time to heal and get his head straight. I'm sure when he comes to his senses, he will apologize for being such a dumbass. I've seen it happen on this blog before. The 2006 election was a cathartic (we can use that word in the medical sense, here as well) event for the Dingbats. A kinghell dose of Reality will do that to them.

Taking a break from the Late Nite Funnies, I turn to the master of disaster himself, Mr. 20%

"How can you possibly have an international agreement that's effective unless countries like China and India are NOT full participants?"
--Camp David, April 19, 2008

"Oftentimes people ask me, 'Why is it that you're so focused on helping the hungry and diseased in strange parts of the world?'"
--Washington, D.C., April 18, 2008

"We want people owning their home -- we want people owning a BUSINESSES."
--Washington, D.C., April 18, 2008

"Thank you, your Holiness. Awesome speech."
--to Pope Benedict, Washington, D.C., April 15, 2008

"A lot of times in politics you have people look you in the eye and tell you what's not on their mind."
--Sochi, Russia, April 6, 2008

"Afghanistan is the most daring and AMBITION mission in the history of NATO."
--Bucharest, Romania, April 2, 2008

"Soldiers, sailors, Marines, airmen, and Coastmen -- Coast Guardmen, thanks for coming, thanks for wearing the uniform."
--at the Pentagon, March 19, 2008

"I thank the diplomatic corps, who is here as well."
--Washington, D.C., March 12, 2008

"Removing Saddam Hussein was the right decision early in my presidency, it is the right decision now, and it will be the right decision EVER."
--Washington, D.C., March 12, 2008

"Let me start off by saying that in 2000 I said, 'Vote for me. I'm an agent of change.' In 2004, I said, 'I'm not interested in change --I want to continue as president.' Every candidate has got to say 'change.' That's what the American people expect."
--Washington, D.C., March 5, 2008

And in a brazen effort to win over the Dingbat sector of the population that are reluctant to support him, I give you Obama's Bushism:

"…over the last 15 months, we traveled to every corner of the United States. I have now been in 57 states…I think…with 1 left to go…1 left to go…Alaska and Hawaii, I was not allowed to go to…I really wanted to visit, but my staff could not justify it."
--May 9 - Barack Obama, Beaverton, Oregon

I don't think it will work to win the Dingbats over; but it's either that or destroy the economy or promise to start another war.

Right wing loon fires a warning shot, Dingbats blind to their imminent destruction:

"What happens to the Republicans in 2008 will likely be dictated by what didn't happen in 2005, and '06, and '07. The moment when the party could have broken, on principle, with the administration – over the thinking behind and the carrying out of the war, over immigration, spending and the size of government – has passed. What two years ago would have been honorable and wise will now look craven. They're stuck.

Mr. Bush has squandered the hard-built paternity of 40 years. But so has the party, and so have its leaders. If they had pushed away for serious reasons, they could have separated the party's fortunes from the president's. This would have left a painfully broken party, but they wouldn't be left with a ruined "brand," as they all say, speaking the language of marketing. And they speak that language because they are marketers, not thinkers. Not serious about policy. Not serious about ideas. And not serious about leadership, only followership," - Peggy Noonan.

Sullivan: Some of us tried - and were vilified for it. Others chose to write books about "liberal fascism." Over here! Over here! Shiny silver things!
Andrew Sullivan: http://tinyurl.com/6p9djw

With the few dead-enders like the Homeschooler and the Tims still defending the good name of the DMW, it's rather amazing that they still have not learned the lessons that Peggy Noonan and other Dingbat pundits have pointed out: tying Mr. 20% like a millstone around your neck is a sure, slow, and very painful death. This is what you get when you take Mr. 20% and try to build off of his idiotic statements:

MATTHEWS: You don’t know what you’re talking about, Kevin. You don’t know what you’re talking about. Tell me what Chamberlain did wrong.

JAMES: Neville Chamberlain was an appeaser, Chris. Neville Chamberlain was an appeaser, all right? […]

MATTHEWS: I’ve been sitting here five minutes asking you to say what the president was referring to in 1938 at Munich.

JAMES: I DON'T KNOW.

MATTHEWS: You don’t know, thank you.

Substitute the homeschooler or any other talkradio-educated fool, and you get the same conversation. The Koolaid Enema is working at full capacity and they are unable to think or get a grip on Reality.

Watch the video of what it's like to listen to a Dingbat loudmouth make an
ass of himself: http://tinyurl.com/4h7rju

Just when the DMW figure out that they're about to get slaughtered for linking themselves to Mr. 20% and his disastrous administration, they watch their presidential nominee fall into the trap laid by the Obama campaign: Gramps ties himself to those words and goes for a third term for Mr. 20%. It's almost as if Karl Rove brought his clown act to the McBush's campaign. Oh, wait, he already did, didn't he? Geeeenius!

"Jon Stewart teed off on President Bush last night for the ridiculous and controversial statement he made in Israel about his detractors wanting to “negotiate with terrorists” by noting that Reagan, Rumsfeld, and even Bush himself have “negotiated with terrorists.” He also slams his good for the bold sacrifice he made by quitting golf."

Watch Jon Stewart rip the DMW and Mr. 20% for their idiocy:
C&L: http://tinyurl.com/5w82ts

Chuck Todd states the obvious: Gramps gets hogtied and thrown on the rails in front of the Obama Express:

Bush’s gift to Obama:
When President Bush -- thousands of miles away in Israel -- decided to fire his thinly veiled shot at Obama yesterday, it was a giant gift to the Illinois senator and his campaign. Why? One, it essentially kept Clinton on the sidelines just two days after her big West Virginia victory. Two, Obama’s opponent was no longer Clinton or McCain, but the man with the 27% job-approval rating. And three, it rallied Democrats to Obama’s side. Even neutral Dems, like Joe Biden, Rahm Emanuel and Harry Reid, quickly leapt to Obama’s defense. Some Democrats might be deeply divided right now. Pro-choice women are angry at NARAL’s endorsement of Obama; Clinton supporters are upset that Obama is looking like the eventual nominee; and some African Americans are unhappy with the Clintons. But what’s the best way to unify them all? Give them an excuse to turn their attention to Bush.
MSNBC: http://tinyurl.com/63xtv3

Wouldn't it be funny if this episode got traced back to Rove? After personally doing more than any other person to destroy the Administration of Mr. 20%, he tries to torpedo the McBush campaign. Geeeenius.

McCain’s 2013 Economy: $780 Billion Deficit

McCain’s “magic carpet ride” speech yesterday asked us to consider America in 2013 in the fourth year of a John McCain presidency.

We did. Here’s what we found:

In 2013, after McCain’s four years of Bush-style fiscal irresponsibility, tax breaks for corporations, and more tax cuts for the wealthy, America would have a $780 billion deficit (4.3% of GDP) and national debt of $8.5 trillion (47% of GDP). That’s over $1.5 trillion more debt than would be accumulated under a continuation of current Bush policies.

John McCain’s 2013: More of the same, but worse.

*****

Ergo - McSame . . . . Whoop's! Talk about hitching your star to a loser in every way.

How much political acumen can any person have that continues to believe Bush never lied?

Paulites have more political insight.

Nuff said

Obama On Iran

There is not an observer of Middle East politics that would not say that the single biggest contributor to Iran’s expanding in the Middle East is George Bush’s policies and our invasion in Iraq.

The approach I am suggesting, the tough but engaged diplomacy that I am suggesting is the kind that was carried out by John Kennedy, it was carried out by Richard Nixon, and it was carried out by Ronald Reagan. There is a strong bipartisan tradition of engaging in that kind of diplomacy. You mirror military strength with aggressive, effective, tough diplomacy. That’s what’s been lacking.

(MSNBC)

Obama On the Failed Bush/McCain Foreign Policy:

the American people can look back at the track record of George Bush, supported by John McCain, and say to themselves, let’s see, we were told that there were weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. There were none. We were told that we would be there relatively briefly. We have been there over five years. We were told that this would cost maybe 50 billion, 60 billion.

We are now on $600 billion. We were told this would make us safer and that this would be a model of democracy in the Middle East. Hasn’t turned out that way. We were told this would not serve as a distraction in Afghanistan. You have Bin Laden sending out videotapes, today. And our own intelligence estimates say that Al Qaeda is stronger now in Afghanistan and in the foothills of Pakistan than in anytime since 2001. And Iran is stronger now than before we invaded. So the American people are going to look at the evidence and they are going to say to themselves, you know, we don’t get a sense that this has been a wise foreign policy or a tough foreign policy or a smart foreign policy. This has been a policy that often times has been revolved around a lot of bluster and big talk but very little performance. What the American people want right now is some performance.

(MSNBC)

Mr. 20% finally gets around to fulfilling his promise of being a "uniter" not a "divider." At a time when the Democratic party is pulled into two camps by a hi-powered primary, he takes a poke at Democrats and gets he head kicked in by a vicious attack:

Joe Biden:
"This is bullshit, this is malarkey. This is outrageous, for the president of the United States to go to a foreign country, to sit in the Knesset . . . and make this kind of ridiculous statement. He is the guy who has weakened us," he said. "He has increased the number of terrorists in the world. It is his policies that have produced this vulnerability that the U.S. has. It’s his [own] intelligence community [that] has pointed this out, not me."

Nancy Pelosi:
"I think what the president said in that regard is beneath the dignity of the office of the president and unworthy of our representation at that observance in Israel.... I would hope that any serious person would disassociate himself from the president's remarks who aspires to leadership in our country."

John Kerry:
"What an irony to have the current president in Israel blasting Democrats from the Knesset when his policies have actually seen al Qaeda get strengthened, they've seen al Qaeda be reconstructed, they've seen Hezbollah get stronger, they've seen Hamas get stronger, Israel more threatened, Iran is stronger and Iraq is in chaos."

Harry Reid:
"Not surprisingly, the engineer of the WORST foreign policy in our nation's history has fired yet another reckless and reprehensible round. More than seven years into his Presidency and in the sixth year of the directionless Iraq war, President Bush has yet to learn that his brand of divisive partisan rhetoric is precisely what has made America and our allies less secure.... He has relied on negotiations with North Korea and Libya, two state sponsors of terror. And by conducting discussions with Russia, China, Libya, North Korea and Iran in recent years, President Bush has demonstrated his belief that negotiations can be a tool to advance America and Israel's national security interests."

Howard Dean:
"Bush's outrageous comments are an embarrassment to our country, not based in fact and bring us no closer to our goal of ending terrorist attacks against Israel and bringing peace to the region. If John McCain is really serious about being a different kind of Republican, he'll denounce these remarks in the strongest terms possible."

Hillary Clinton:
President Bush’s comparison of any Democrat to Nazi appeasers is both offensive and outrageous on the face of it, especially in light of his FAILURES in foreign policy... this is what we’ve come to expect from President Bush.
DKos: http://tinyurl.com/4yy8h9

Just when the DMW devotes itself to splitting the Dem party, he ruins their plans. As for the "Mr. 20%" moniker, at least he came by it honestly. Pendejo.

he head? Even simply copying and pasting bushisms infects you with his special brand of "humor."

I tried to warn the Dingbats that their party was coming undone back in 2006. I tried to warn them that they were so focused on the Lieberman race and "staying the course" with Mr. 20% that the entire GOP, from top to bottom was rotting from corruption and ineptitude. My tag line was "give to Lieberman. Give till I die laughing." Two years later and I'm still laughing my azz off at them.

Everything for them was hyperpartisanship and questioning the patriotism of the Democrats. It was never about solving the problems of our country and its citizens.

I read this lament from a poster at RedState

What happened between "Permanent Republican Majority" and now.
RS: http://tinyurl.com/623qob

and it made me nostalgic for the days when the GOP was NOT DMW. But if you look at its tone and POV, you can see that Libertarians and moderates are no longer welcome in the GOP. The party has been coopted by hyperpartisan hacks that catered more to K Street rather than main street. In one fell swoop they gave Democrats a majority that was greater than any they themselves held between '94 and 2006.

The DMW faithful have become so trapped in their rhetoric that they wind up asking questions like this:

Specifically WHICH "hyper-partisan" Elected Republicans Was McCain Referring To?
RS: http://tinyurl.com/6pecmp

It is a diatribe against McBush and his recent speech that noted the hyper-partisan tone of the remaining GOP members of congress. The Dingbats don't want him to work with Democrats. They want him to shun them. An argument for gridlock.

And they wonder why they are in the minority (and likely will be for another generation). Can't say I didn't warn ya'.

The deadenders at RS read the Peggy Noonan quote that I linked above and disagree to agree.

First a head-in-the-sand approach:

Stop the Funeral
"...In the meantime, let's remember that political tides shift and change rather rapidly and today's near-extinct party has an interesting tendency to become tomorrow's sociopolitical dynamo. Again, this is not to say that the GOP does not have very real problems. It does. The brand needs serious reworking, morale on the Hill and throughout the party in general needs a boost of major proportions and the leadership needs to be changed. But even at their weakest, major political parties have vast amounts of reserve strength and energy that allows them to wait out the bad times. Sure, there are parties that go the way of the dinosaur, but these are rather rare events. More often than not, remarkable comebacks are the story of the day."
RS: http://tinyurl.com/3fsd2b

Then there are the Realists:

Peggy Noonan's Pity Party
"This was a real wakeup call for us," someone named Robert M. Duncan, who is chairman of the Republican National Committee, told the New York Times. This was after Mississippi. "We can't let the Democrats take our issues." And those issues would be? "We can't let them pretend to be conservatives," he continued. Why not? Republicans pretend to be conservative every day.

The Bush White House, faced with the series of losses from 2005 through '08, has long claimed the problem is Republicans on the Hill and running for office. They have scandals, bad personalities, don't stand for anything. That's why Republicans are losing: because they're losers.

All true enough!

"Wakeup call" is right! It's time for this party to wake up, stand up, and demand new leadership from those younger men within our party who serve this great nation, not for self, but to make real change. That's right I said it -- Real Change away from old guard Party Politics into a fresh new way of doing business free from back room deals where everyone's out to keep their respective seat. A new way free from corruption and overindulgence. Free from spending the people's money like it grew on trees and most of all... free from holding one's tongue for political correctness.
RS: http://tinyurl.com/4rmcy6

Good luck to them in their endeavor. We need an opposition party that will represent its constituency and not its party leaders.

IF there is a pocket of support for McBush on the other side, I can't find it. There are Obama haters to be sure; but that is rooted in racism and a cynical approach to politics that lacks faith in the power of Americans to make this country better, all Americans, Ds and Rs.

I wondered out loud if anyone was taking McBush's hallucinations seriously when he promised we'd win and be out of Iraq in 5 years. Check this post out. Even if I went line by line and tore it apart, I couldn't do as thorough a job as this person did:

McCain’s Columbus Speech: “I Will appoint Democrats To My Cabinet” and Other Flights of Fancy!
RS: http://tinyurl.com/5eykvy
"This speech was creative and as entertaining as McCain is capable of making it, but most of all, it’s long on promises and short on how he’s going to get us there!"

Read the whole thing. It's a riot. Nobody on the Dingbat blogs likes McBush. They're just too partisan to vote for the best candidate. Or maybe they're just racists. That case could be made. But I won't.

"There are Obama haters to be sure; but that is rooted in racism and a cynical approach to politics that lacks faith in the power of Americans to make this country better, all Americans, Ds and Rs."

Dude, it is like political poetry.

Right on the money.

McCain also has that supposed maverick-thing to cite (Look--omigod--a Republican talking seriously about global warming!)

All this does is hurt McCain with the GOP's base. Almost ALL the radio gasbags deny there is such a thing as global warming.

Rush, Ann Coulter, Hannity, et al actually personify how far the GOP has fallen.

I said it before Bush was elected in 2000 - nothing conservative about Dumya - the neocons are radicals.

People are better informed than a decade ago - that more than anything else scares the crap out of them. A well informed electorate is their worst nightmare.

Pande --- Aha. He eats Zombie Chow and disgorges it here.

Now I understand everything.

:-)

After a day of walking my "hometown"...I feel like the old Sam Kinnison schtick about his face in the mirror, the morning he woke up married...

AAAAAARRRRRRRRRAAARRRHHHHHRRRRHH!!!!

-T

Huckabee: ‘I apologize that my comments were offensive.’

Earlier today, while speaking at the NRA convention in Louisville, KY, former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee made an offhand joke after being interrupted by an offstage noise. In his joke, Huckabee claimed that Sen. Barack Obama (D-IL) “dove for the floor” when “somebody aimed a gun at him.” Huckabee has released a statement apologizing for the remark:

During my speech at the NRA a loud noise backstage, that sounded like a chair falling, distracted the crowd and interrupted my speech. I made an offhand remark that was in no way intended to offend or disparage Sen. Obama. I apologize that my comments were offensive, that was never my intention.

Obama was placed under secret service protection last year — the earliest ever for a U.S. presidential candidate — because of racially motivated threats.

http://tinyurl.com/5ql6ug

*****

This is how the professional politicians do it, make the smear or racial comment then pretend you were joking.

Huck was going to be president - he knew exactly what he was saying and the effect it would have.

Clinton continued to make her argument that she is ahead.

"Right now I am leading in the popular vote –- more Americans have voted for me," she said. "Right now if you add up the states that I have won, it totals 300 electoral votes you have to have 270 to win -– now there are some states I've won that maybe won't go for the Democrat, like Texas or Oklahoma, but I still have a comfortable margin. My opponent has won states totaling 217 electoral votes and lots of states like Alaska, Idaho and Utah that haven't voted for a Democrat in a long time. So if you look at the states we have to win, if you look at the big states, if you look at the swing states, I am the stronger candidate."

(ABC)

Electoral-vote.com tells a similar story. While a lot can change between now and Nov. 4, the most recent polls show that McCain would defeat Obama, but Clinton would defeat McCain.

A lot of articles about Obama can be found at blackagendareport.com, including one on page 2 that somewhat supports my scenario back at 3:03am.

Testing the submit button--I think the blog ate my last post.

OK, I was wrong; I just needed to refresh. I am SUCH a Luddite. :)

"Our will to achieve must be larger than our opportunities or we will not grow"

IBW,

I don't think you are wrong but assuming the worst.

If not him who? If not now when?

Barack is a politician, politicians suck. All have their negatives and issues. I already have a long list of substantial issues where I differ from Barack but what is the option, McSame?

I will reserve my differences with the candidate and address those differences to the next president.

The primary is over for all intent and purposes on Tuesday night - Barack will have the majority of elected delegates.

There are no perfect candidates. At this point it is a choice between Barack and McSame, for me it is a no brainer.

Mccain Vs. Lobbyists

Stung by the news that two aides once lobbied for the Burmese junta, John McCain last week rolled out a sweeping new conflict-of-interest policy for his campaign, requiring all staffers to fill out questionnaires identifying past or current clients that "could be embarrassing for the senator." Aides say that McCain was furious over the Burma connection (which he learned from a NEWSWEEK story) and was "adamant" about banning campaign workers from serving as foreign agents or getting paid for lobbying work.

But the fallout may not be over. One top campaign official affected by the new policy is national finance co-chair Tom Loeffler, a former Texas congressman whose lobbying firm has collected nearly $15 million from Saudi Arabia since 2002 and millions more from other foreign and corporate interests, including a French aerospace firm seeking Pentagon contracts. Loeffler last month told a reporter "at no time have I discussed my clients with John McCain." But lobbying disclosure records reviewed by NEWSWEEK show that on May 17, 2006, Loeffler listed meeting McCain along with the Saudi ambassador to "discuss US-Kingdom of Saudi Arabia relations."

Another potential problem: Loeffler's firm started paying $15,000 a month last summer to one of its lobbyists, Susan Nelson, after she left to become McCain's full-time finance director, said a source familiar with the arrangement (who asked not to be identified talking about sensitive matters). Campaign officials were told the payments were "severance" for Nelson and that they ended by November. But in "February or March," Loeffler rehired Nelson as a consultant to "help him with his clients" while she continued on the McCain payroll, according to a campaign official who asked not to be identified talking about personnel matters. Federal election law prohibits any outside entity from subsidizing the income of campaign workers. McCain's officials say they have been assured that Nelson did actual work for Loeffler's lobbying clients—and that the payments were proper. But after NEWSWEEK posed questions about the matter, they confirmed Loeffler's resignation and the termination of Nelson's consulting contract. (Loeffler and Nelson did not respond to requests for comment.) Also last week, energy adviser Eric Burgeson was ousted.

If other staffers are not in compliance with the new rules, "they will become so or they will leave the campaign," said McCain spokeswoman Jill Hazelbaker. She also accused the Obama campaign of an "absurd double standard" because it has not disclosed the names of all advisers who may have lobbying ties. Responded Obama spokesman Bill Burton: "Washington lobbyists don't give money to our campaign, and they're not going to run our White House."

http://www.newsweek.com/id/137522

MADDOW: Do you think this is something new? Do you think this is something specific to our current, contemporaneous politics that we have these sort of buzzwords and bumper sticker slogans, whether it’s ‘appeasement,’ or ‘fight over there so we don’t fight them here’ or ‘they hate our freedom,’ any of these terms. Are they designed to be repeated and not to be interrogated?

MATTHEWS: Well, just look at the way people are basically exterminated or tried to be exterminated. Bill Maher makes a comment –which may not have been the right comment–but he was making a point he was trying to make, about stand back weaponry compared to people killing themselves. You can argue about the niceties of that. The Dixie Chicks say something about the war—and they shouldn’t have said it overseas, but they said it. The shutting up of opposition is critical to running a country in an undemocratic way, let’s put it that way. And so you have buzzwords like ‘appeasers’ or ‘cut and run’ and they’re used over and over again by the most mindless people. The trouble with them is they tend to work. The dittoheads can use them. Anyone can use them and they seem to have the same effect. They cause people to run from criticism.

(C&L)

******

Add "Wall Street's Trojan Horse President Obama"

And repeat until you believe it, eh?

Where does that crud come from? McSame and HRC worth hundreds of millions, Barack and his wife started to make money when Barack's books sales started kicking in.

The CHM kissing Obama ass?

WTF? Where was the CHM running non-stop 24/7 clips of the Bosnian gaffe? The Mark Penn BS, Columbia, Bubba?

McSame AND Hillary have very little negative coverage yet Barack has been ROASTED over Wright, Bittergate, proud to be an American, flag lapel pins, etc.?

I guess it depends on your point of view.

From my POV the CHM wants Hillary as a candidate or they would be roasting her, she has no chance, BHO has been the nominee since Feb. Why would the CHM keep her fantasy alive? Why would the CHM pretend she has had the slightest chance?

Why has the CHM not reported that HRC's plane is only met by reporters (less than a dozen) her speeches are to a few hundred on a good day? She has gone from three buses to one. Bill Clinton is speaking to high school auditoriums?

I can't see how that helps Barack but maybe I am missing something.

ALERT: The Stealth Campaign to Delegitimize Obama

[...]

On the call last night, she reiterated her claim that she is ahead in the popular vote, which is only true if you give her her votes from Michigan but give Obama 0 AND don't count the four caucus states that don't release vote totals. This would mean ignoring 4 states when she claims it would be a travesty to ignore 2. In addition, she encouraged bloggers to push the idea that caucuses are undemocratic, and she continues to talk about Michigan and Florida, both on the conference call and in her public appearances.

She said that if Michigan and Florida are not seated, "it will undermine the legitimacy of our nominee". She knows that Michigan and Florida will not put her ahead in the delegate count, and that the only chance of them helping her with the popular vote is if the will of Michigan voters is misconstrued by giving Obama no votes despite thousands of people there who wanted to vote for him. But by continuing to harp on Michigan and Florida, she can continue to, as she said, undermine the legitimacy of our nominee.

(kos)

*****

To have one candidate delegitimize the other from within the same party is insane from my POV.

Hillary has created a monster in her supporters. She has turned their good wishes for her into a campaign to delegitimize her opponent even though she knows he is the nominee.

Now, who on earth does that benefit? Her party, her supporters or just her blind entitlement and uber-ambition me-or-nobody mentality?

Hmmmmm

LA Times wields the "elitist" hatchet

On Saturday the LA Times' Dan Morain produced what charitably can be described as a hit piece on Barack Obama. The ostensible point was summed up in the article's title, "Obama's wealth has skyrocketed". Here is the lede:

Barack Obama's wealth has more than doubled during his presidential campaign -- and has shot up tenfold since he entered the U.S. Senate three years ago, his financial disclosure filed Friday shows.

No doubt true - but hardly surprising given that he's sold many books since 2004 and no longer draws a modest Illinois Senate salary. Why not just say how much Obama is worth and leave aside the nearly meaningless rate of increase since 2004? Because the McCains' and Clintons' vastly higher wealth, both in 2004 and now, would make Obama's look pretty modest by comparison. In fact, the reader can't interpret the rate of increase for Obama because Morain doesn't indicate the rate at which the McCains', Clintons', or other Senators' assets increased.

(kos)

*****

Elitist, uppity - beyond his station?

Maybe "Wall Street's Trojan Horse President Obama"

That about sums it up?

CHM?

From IBW's post:

Corporate Holodeck Media.

I assume it to be close to M$M.

The New Majority: 75,000 Rally in Portland for Obama

PORTLAND, Ore. -- Sen. Barack Obama has seen his share of large crowds over the last 15 months, but his campaign said they have not approached the numbers gathered along the waterfront here right now.

The campaign, citing figures from Duane Bray, battalion chief of Portland Fire & Rescue, estimated that 75,000 people are watching him speak.

The scene suggests this is not an exaggeration. The sea of heads stretches for half a mile along the grassy embankment, while others watch from kayaks and power boats bobbing on the Willamette River. More hug the rails of the steel bridge that stretches across the water and crowds are even watching from jetties on the opposite shore.

http://tinyurl.com/6cgj5e

*****

Amazing pictures at the link

Yes, CHM = M$M.

If the Democrats nominate Plastic Jesus,as it appears they will, I will vote for Cynthia McKinney in November, as I can't bring myself to vote for an Elephascist.