With Friends Like This...

...who needs Democrats?

Obviously, Scott McClellan (former White House press secretary) yearns for attention. In his forthcoming book, according to reports, McClellan rips into the Bush Administration for deceiving the American people, and engaging in never-ending campaigning. I only have three things to say about this before I put this topic where it belongs (in the deeply discounted bin at your local Barnes & Noble, along with It Takes a Village and The Audacity of Hope):

1. McClellan is trying to portray himself as the victim of the Administration's deception because it's politically expedient to do so. What's really coming through is that McClellan is a spineless jellyfish who wants to play a part in what he perceives as a Democratically-controlled government. Good luck finding a job with Pelosi and her crew.
2. Unfortunately, our government and representatives have been engaging in continuous campaigning for more than a decade. Have we all forgotten about the first Clinton term, when the entire 4-year period appeared to be driven by a thought process centered on "so what will get me re-elected in 1996?" (OK, most of us would like to forget about those years, but...) To take a jab at the Bush Administration for this is absurd; for the liberal press to jump all over it, especially given their roles in the evolution of 24 x 7 x 365 campaigning, is comical.
3. If President Bush and his staff were this God-awful for the country, why did McClellan follow Bush to Washington, and accept a promotion to Press Secretary? Why would he stay as long as he did, if he truly believed all of this drivel that he's claiming in his Al Franken-esque novel? And why would he slink away from Washington for nearly two years, without saying a word about how "wronged" he was? Oh, wait... to sell books and make more money. I get it now.

The only upside from all of this - I get to look forward to seeing the hypocrites, namely Reid and Pelosi, make total fools out of themselves.

-- Submitted by R Wellesley

Doomed to Repeat It (LINK)

How quickly will the press get this one buried? Obama managed to tell a lie like Bill Clinton and show knowledge of world history like....well 'pick your favorite democrat'. All in one statement.

By claiming that his uncle (I am assuming the white side of his family - who he has disowned for all practical purposes) helped to liberate Auschwitz, which was liberated by the Red Army, he proved he can match Hillary lie for lie. His weakness in foreign policy just got more obvious. While most of us were studying history, Obama and the current flock of democrats were ignoring it.

He later said he 'mis-spoke.' Count me out. First, he wants to sit down with the worlds most dangerous leaders, giving them a badly needed stage and some attention - and now he shows a lack of knowledge of the best example in history of the failure of appeasement. And he wants to run my country? I don't think so.

I don't expect that many people know the subtleties of WWII and when and where what was liberated, I am not naive. The government schools have their own agenda and it is not history. But I'll say what many have said to this point...Is this guy the best we can do?? A country of 200 million eligible candidates and we have a schmuck who won't wear a flag pin, attended anti-American churches for twenty years, has two years of national experience and has a wife who hit middle age before she could find something about her country to be proud of? This is the best?

Let's hope Johnny Mack turns up the heat and buries this guy in a McGovern-like landslide.

Submitted by D. B. Jackson

Death by a Thousand Cuts

Despite the media-engendered, Kennedy-esque aura around him...despite his support from the legions of left-wing radicals in the Democrat Party...despite the phalanx of young college kids willing to serve as his foot soldiers and the masses of African Americans who have made his candidacy their own cause, Barack Hussein Obama is damaged property. Nothing shows that more than his pathetic performance in the West Virginia and Kentucky primaries where the primary electorate was working class white folks, the people that any Democrat must have to win the presidency. Obama has failed miserably to reach this vital demographic and his failure goes beyond those two states. His performance in that demographic was similar in Ohio and Pennsylvania; once again, states the Democrats must have.

There are many reasons offered as to why Obama cannot connect to working class whites. There is the elitism factor, the Wright factor, the Michelle factor, the Hillary factor, and...for those kool-aid drinkers who see no flaws in their candidate...the racist factor. To these supporters, racism prevents these working class whites from voting Obama (as they are clinging to their guns and religion, but I digress...). However, Obama's performance in Iowa and in the early western state caucuses brings this assertion into great question.

The real answer is simple...it is all of the above in combination (except perhaps the racist part) and none of them individually. Obama has been exposed. He came into the campaign as a veritable tabula rasa, a blank slate. This coupled with a pleasing personality, lofty-sounding rhetoric, and a careful and slick but undefined message, enabled millions of people to see him as the personification of their hopes and dreams. As any good actor knows, a skillfully-handled, underdefined persona allows the viewing public to project themselves (their hopes, dreams, fears, etc.) onto the actor such that he or she is seen to be the exact person that exists in the mind of the observer. The actor cannot help but be admired because he is them. The same happened to Barack Obama. All people...rich, poor, white, black, brown...saw themselves and their hopes in Obama. He was both their everyman and their savior.

What happened? Simply, the blanks on Obama's slate began to be filled in. His twenty-year association with Jeremiah Wright, a preacher of radical leftist, anti-American, and possibly racist views, called into question the belief by some that Obama was the "post-racial" candidate. His statements in liberal San Francisco that working class persons were "clinging to their guns and religion" demonstrated elitist views that, while welcome in San Francisco, were anathama to middle class America. Michelle Obama's comments that she was proud of her country for the first time and that America in 2008 was a "downright mean country," were poorly received in most of the country where America is still seen as a land of opportunity. Lastly, Hillary Clinton's continued presence has given many in the Democrat electorate something that, while unattractive, looks much better than Obama. Obama's position is unenviable.

Will Obama lose? Probably, but nothing is certain in such an anti-Republican year. While McCain holds little attraction to the large majority of conservative Republicans, he is the perfect candidate for them in such a bad year. The question is not whether he can win or not but what will a McCain victory do for the future of the Republican party. That is an entry for another day.

As for Obama, if he loses he has no one to blame but himself. The blank slate approach was wise because an otherwise filled-out slate in his case was unelectable. Now, the real Barack is being seen and much of the public is getting buyer's remorse. The super-delegates fear to vote for him but also fear not to because of his delegate lead. Hillary has seen the weaknesses and hangs around like a circling buzzard over a wounded and dying animal. The only difference...the wounded animal has the Democrat nomination all wrapped up.

Barack Obama, we hardly knew ye and thank God for that.

-- Submitted by B. Bryant

I had not considered the end

For anyone that knows me better than a little, they know that Ted Kennedy has become something of a arch-enemy to me. As he lay in intensive care and takes in the remaining minutes of the Celtics victory over the Cavs, it is not the time to critique a litany of his faults, sins and bad political ideas. This probably won't be the end for Teddy. For a guy who is eighty pounds overweight, drinks and eats more than two to three normal folk and hasn't let any of that slow down his libido...he has a churchillian-like ability to outlive much healthier men. Even so, age is catching up on the liberal icon and senior senator from Massachusetts.

Around 1971 or 2, I received a letter from Senator Kennedy thanking me for my contribution to an ecology event organized by my school. It was a thrill to receive it and I kept it for many years (I am not sure what happened to it). At the time, I had no knowledge of Chappaquiddick, Abortion (Roe vs. Wade was still a couple years away), his Harvard cheating scandal (et. al.) and I had no prognosticating ability to see this loud-mouthed hypocrite attack the characters of Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush.

When Ted finally passes on, he will be immortalized in a funeral fit for a king. He will be eulogized by Caroline Kennedy, Harry Reid, George McGovern, Sargent Shriver, Mike Dukakis, Jimmy Carter and droves of Republicans, who will commend him on the passion of his ideas and his fighting spirit.

To me, he is just the guy that made it 'okay' for Catholics to be pro-abortion. He was the horsepower for thirty years for the great society - a war on poverty that has left the poor - poorer, unwed and without values. At this point, I still maintain hope that those thousands of rosaries that Rose Kennedy said for her children will take hold and he will become a champion of freedom, life and Catholicism.

In the meantime, we wait and wonder the outcome of this setback for the seventy-six year old senator. And we wonder which Kennedy will slip into his Senate seat for the next thirty years. The people of MA will have it no other way.

Submitted by D. B. Jackson

The Chickens Have Come Home to Roost, Senator Obama

It's May 12, 2008. The writing is - and has been, for months now - on the wall. Superdelegate-nominee Barack Obama and his pack of media elites are headed to a showdown with the Republican (popular vote) nominee, John McCain. The problem on the Superdelegate side is that Hillary Clinton either can't read, or steadfastly refuses to read, the writing on the wall.

For months, the Superdelegate Party built up Hillary Clinton as the presumptive nominee, propping her up as the "most electable" candidate out there. Then the Superdelegate Party fell out of love with Hillary, and started a dalliance with Obama that blossomed into full-fledged love and lust. (Sidebar: Poor Hillary was publicly scorned and shamed yet again. Once again, she's refused to kowtow to public demands - "leave that cheating husband of yours, for the sake of Chelsea and yourself!" turned into "drop out of the race for the sake of all Superdelegates!". At least she's consistent.)

To quote Obama's "former" pastor, the chickens have come home to roost.

Hillary's perceived support from within the establishment continues to give her hope that she can somehow swipe the election from the Superdelegate powers-that-be. She's refusing to see the facts that the establishment has turned its back on her. And yet, as establishment spent so much time building her up as "the best candidate to beat back the Republicans", she truly believes it's best that she continues on. She drank the kool-aid, fellas; you forgot to send her the serum that will break the kool-aid's hold on her!

Let's address this issue for the final time. Hillary, it's been nice knowing you, but your time is done. Your run is over. The time has come for the final throwdown. The country needs you to step down quickly, so we can all focus on what's really important here:

• Populace-sanctioned candidate versus Superdelegate-sanctioned candidate.
• Experience versus youth.
• 'Security through Strength' versus 'Peace through Appeasement'.
• A candidate that stands up to questioning versus a candidate that is offended by questioning.

McCain vs Obama. Bring it on.

-- Submitted by R Wellesley

Michelle vs. Michelle

hmmm...America's unhappiest millionaire




Obama's Bitter Half
Michelle Malkin
Wednesday, May 7, 2008

Are you ready for hope and change? Barack Obama better hope his bitter half has a change of attitude if she expects to assume the title of first lady in November. She's been likened to John F. Kennedy's wife, what with her chic suits and pearls and perfectly coiffed helmet hair. But when she opens her mouth, Michelle O is less Jackie O and more Wendy W -- as in Wendy Whiner, the constantly kvetching "Saturday Night Live" character from the early 1980s.

When last our worldviews collided, back in February, the other Michelle was expounding on her lack of pride in America. I gave her myriad reasons to cheer up -- from America's role in the fall of communism to our unparalleled generosity to our nation's superior economic system, cultural resilience, entrepreneurial spirit and ingenuity. But since then, Mrs. Obama has dug in her $500 Jimmy Choo heels and solidified her role in the 2008 presidential campaign as Queen of the Grievance-Mongers.

In one of her few (unintentionally) funny moments during a recent sit-down with comedian Stephen Colbert, Mrs. Obama claimed, "Barack and I tend to look at the positives." That's a side-splitter. As National Review's Yuval Levin put it, Michelle Obama is "America's unhappiest millionaire." And she has the audacity to extrapolate her misery and her husband's alleged victimization to the "vast majority of Americans."

In South Carolina, she called America "just downright mean" and bemoaned "a nation of struggling folks who are barely making it every day." And in case you hadn't heard enough of her carping about how hard it is for a seven-figure-earning family to pay for ballet lessons and piano lessons and pay off college loans, Mrs. Oh-Woe-Is-Me was at it again on the campaign trail in Indiana and North Carolina before Tuesday's primary.

On the stump, she warmed up (or rather, berated) supporters by complaining about how her husband is an underdog even after he keeps winning primary and caucus after primary and caucus. With a scowl etched on her face, she bellyached that "the bar is constantly changing for this man." Call the waambulance, stat.

Barack Obama, the missus explains, is Everyman who has ever been put down by The Man. And "understand this" (a condescending verbal tic shared by both Obamas): Mrs. Obama is here to make sure you feel their pain. Which is really your pain. Because the hardships of a privileged Ivy League couple are "exactly" the same as the travails of miners or service workers or small-business owners: "So the bar has been shifting and moving in this race," she grumbles, "but the irony is, the sad irony is, that's exactly what is happening to most Americans in this country."

Don't tell Miss Michelle about the Great Depression or the Carter Malaise. "Folks are struggling like never before," she seethes.

Well, yes, gas prices are up. Some food prices are rising. And borrowers who bought more housing than they could afford are underwater. But "struggling like never before"? Didn't they teach her about Hoovervilles and stagflation?

In Mrs. Obama, the fear-mongering pot meets the angst-stirring kettle: "Fear," she froths, "creates this veil of impossibility and it is hanging over all of our heads."

But what Mrs. Obama lacks in pride for her country and its promise she more than makes up for with bottomless pride for her husband. Her standard campaign speeches include at least a dozen references to how "proud" she is of him. And of herself. And of everyone who has overcome The Man and pierced the "veil of impossibility" to get to the polls and vote Obama. An online MSNBC report on a joint appearance by the Obamas on the "Today" show in the wake of the Jeremiah Wright debacle included this tellingly narcissistic passage:

[Mrs. Obama]: "'I'm so proud of how he has maintained his dignity, his cool, his honor.'

"Obama gently tried to interrupt, admitting to being embarrassed by the praise.

"'But I am proud of you,' she said.

"'I know,' he replied."

We all know. So get over yourself already, haughty spirit. Pride doesn't photograph well. And bitterness leaves frown lines. Which means Botox bills. Which "struggling folks" like you and your husband simply cannot afford.

Try smiling for once. It's cheaper.

Submitted by D.B. Jackson

And the winner is... The SuperDelegates!

Today is the day that Indiana and North Carolina voters go to the polls. I say...it doesn't matter. It really doesn't. The ridiculous process used by the "Democrats" (Aristocrats?) is proving to be a total farce.

If someone had asked you to devise a nominating process that would guarantee that no one wins the nomination based on the vote of its citizens, this is the process you would design. Let's face it - if the Mainstream Media outlets disagree on delegate counts more than 2 weeks after the last primary, how transparent can the system be? (Check out the "official" delegate counts from AP and NBC. Seriously. They're different.)

Citizens of Indiana and North Carolina...your vote today will not help to select a candidate for November. Rather, it merely validates the SuperDelegate process. Remember this in November, when a SuperDelegate-chosen candidate faces off against a popular vote-chosen candidate. In my country, I trust the popular vote more than any "Super"Delegate vote.

-- Submitted by R Wellesley