Only to an addled mind could the McCain advertisement below, which compares Barack Obama to Britney Spears and Paris Hilton in terms of experience, qualification to lead, and sheer celebrity, be conceived as race-baiting.

Unfortunately, the New York Times and their fellow Obama-at-any-cost diehards are just addled enough to try to make that argument. Today the Times‘ editorial board wrote:

The presumptive Republican nominee has embarked on a bare-knuckled barrage of negative advertising aimed at belittling Mr. Obama. The most recent ad compares the presumptive Democratic nominee for president to Britney Spears and Paris Hilton — suggesting to voters that he’s nothing more than a bubble-headed, publicity-seeking celebrity.

The ad gave us an uneasy feeling that the McCain campaign was starting up the same sort of racially tinged attack on Mr. Obama that Republican operatives, some of whom work for Mr. McCain now, ran against Harold Ford, a black candidate for Senate in Tennessee in 2006. That assault, too, began with videos juxtaposing Mr. Ford with young, white women.

The Ford claim, of course, refers to a Bob Corker ad that reflected Ford’s reputation as an extremely eligible bachelor, and the racist “assault” on Ford made in that ad was the inclusion of (*gasp!*) a white woman in the spot. The claim of racism there rings every bit as hollow as the current ludicrous gripe.

Obama seized on the opportunity that an ad daring to question his fitness to lead presented him, and spent the bulk of his Wednesday claiming the McCain campaign (and “Bush,” whom Obama loves to try to rope into discussions despite the fact the two-term Republican president is not — some popular lefty conspiracy theories notwithstanding — running for an unconstitutional third term) is:

going to try to say that I’m a risky guy, they’re going to try to say, ‘Well, you know, he’s got a funny name, and he doesn’t look like all the presidents on the dollar bills and the five dollar bills,’ and they’re going to send out nasty e-mails.

(As an aside, Obama has spent far more time claiming he knows what “they” are “going” to do to him this campaign — silly me, I thought the campaign was already ongoing — and talking about how McCain spends too much time talking about him and not enough time talking about his policies, than he has spent talking about his own policies — something he clearly hopes to milk all the way to the election.)

Read More →

On May 16, Barack Obama bravely declared that he would debate John McCain, the presumptive Republican nominee “anywhere, anytime.”

“If John McCain wants to meet me anywhere, anytime, to have a debate about our respective policies in Iraq, in Iran, in the Middle East or around the world, that is a conversation I am happy to have,” said Obama to an adoring audience of “reporters” in Waterstown, South Dakota. “I believe that there is no separation between John McCain and George Bush…and I think their policy has failed.”

Of course, the McCain campaign responded to this with an immediate call for ten town hall-style “debates” — a style and quantity unheard of in recent presidential campaigns, when most candidates want to be able to limit the damage that can occur as a result of going off-script at any time.

The Obama campaign responded with a North Korea-style offensive, refusing to participate (clearly, they too have heard Obama speak without a TelePrompTer — it is not pretty) but claiming that it was the McCain campaign that actually declined the opportunity.

“It’s disappointing that Senator McCain and his campaign decided to decline this proposal,” said Obama campaign manager David Plouffe, who was either the most confused man on the planet at the moment he released that statement, or simply a bold-faced liar (those aren’t “new” in politics, Barry, just FYI).

Monday, McCain continued his attempt to get Obama in the same room talking issues — something the Democrat has been too slippery for so far — with the editorial board of the San Francisco Chronicle. The editors write:

Sen. John McCain came up with a terrific idea Monday when he was handed an invitation to meet with our editorial board as part of our endorsement process.

“Why don’t you invite Senator (Barack) Obama to join me?” McCain suggested.

McCain noted that he has been frustrated in his attempts to have “just the two of us stand there and answer questions” in a town-hall format.

“Unfortunately, he (Obama) has refused to do so,” McCain told our colleagues Debra J. Saunders and Carla Marinucci at the start of an interview at San Francisco’s Fairmont Hotel.

Senator Obama: Consider this an official invitation for a debate with McCain before The Chronicle’s editorial board.

While Obama’s RSVP to that invitation appears to have been lost in the mail, the Democrat’s empty claims of bravery and willingness to debate haven’t gone away.Yesterday, in his second attempt of the day at bringing back losing lines of attack from the spring, apparently hoping that enough people had forgotten about their earlier failed use, Obama went back to the “I’ll debate John McCain anywhere, anytime” well — and, when called out on it yet again, tried the whining, “everybody’s out to get me” routine that makes him look so darn presidential.

Read More →

Barack Obama’s campaign strategy of purposely distorting his opponent’s statements, then running for cover claiming that he is being “attacked,” was on full display today at a Springfield, Missouri campaign stop.

“[A]nxieties seem to be growing with each passing day,” said Obama, taking a page from the oldest book that Democratic politics-as-usual has to offer (the one in which the sky is always falling, and can only be held in place by the Atlas that is a Democrat-run government). “We can either choose a new direction for our economy or we can keep doing what we’ve been doing. My opponent, John McCain, thinks we’re on the right track.”

With that claim, Obama returns to the blatant distortion of (or lie about, if you prefer) an April interview in which McCain said that, “if you look at the overall record …you could make an argument that there’s been great progress economically over that period of time. But…that’s no comfort to families now that are facing these tremendous economic challenges.” In April, Obama was called out for strategically eliding that interview response to claim McCain was saying, in Obama’s beautifully articulate prose, “that we are, that, that during George Bush’s tenure, the economy actually made great progress.”

Apparently Obama thinks three months is long enough for the world to so completely forget his dishonest April misquoting of McCain that it is now safe to re-insert it into his increasingly politics-as-usual stump routine.

Read More →

Republicans in Congress have been pressing the lower House’s Democrat leadership to consider realistic solutions to the energy crunch to no avail for weeks now.

50-mile-or-more offshore drilling? Off the table. Using a fraction of ANWR to provide America with years’ worth of fuel? Also off the table. Nuclear energy? Waaaay off the table. About the only thing Speaker Pelosi and her band of merry men have allowed even to grace the table’s presence is a “use it or lose it” legislative demand that oil companies drill on land they already own, which isn’t currently being drilled because it doesn’t have any oil under it. Now that‘s a good way to help folks like you and me pay less at the pump.

With Congress due to take a monthlong recess beginning this weekend, the House Republican leadership decided to make energy solutions — with an emphasis on the solutions — their first and only priority this week.

Further, putting their money (or, more correctly, their vacation time) where their mouths were, Republicans decided to do everything they could to keep the House in session past this week and into the August recess, until such a time as the energy situation had been, in some way, dealt with.

Needless to say, House Democrats, far more inclined to continue blaming the Bush administration for high gas prices while doing everything in their power to block legislation that would affect them in any meaningful way, weren’t in favor of the plan.

Read More →

The ACLU and (No-)ThinkProgress are up in arms over their utter ignorance the perceived double standard being demonstrated by Kansas Senator Sam Brownback’s (R) condemnation of the totalitarian ChiCom government’s wiring of athletes’ and journalists’ hotels with listening and recording devices.

“Foreign-owned hotels in China face the prospect of ’severe retaliation’ if they refuse to install government software that can spy on Internet use by hotel guests coming to watch the summer Olympic games,” said Brownback in an appearance on CNN this morning.

This is UnacceptablyHypocritical™ to the ACLU, you see, because Sen. Brownback (*Dun-dun-DUN!!!*) had the audacity to cast votes in support of the Bush administration’s terrorist surveillance program (“once last year for the Protect America Act and just last month for the FISA Amendments Act,” according to the ACLU).

Some ACLU blogger I’ve never heard of writes:

According to Senator Sam Brownback (R-Kan.), wholesale government spying on Americans? A-ok. But surveillance of Internet use in foreign-owned hotels in China? Not if he can help it!

Read More →

“Senator Train Wreck,” also known as Tom Coburn, M.D. (R-OK), was the subject of two not-so-fawning stories this morning — one in the New York Times and one in the Washington Post — addressing both his reputation as a stickler on frivolous government spending, and his current holds on thirty-five separate, expensive, wasteful Senate bills. Quoth the Post:

Coburn has become best known as the lawmaker who says no — no to increased funding for unsolved civil rights crimes, no to creation of a national registry for victims of the disease ALS, no to more money for child pornography prosecutions.

Using every parliamentary tactic at his disposal, Coburn has tied the Senate in so many knots that [Reid] has decided on an extraordinary tactic: He will devote most of the Senate’s time this week to breaking the one-man stranglehold.

Read More →

Please forgive me for going a bit off-topic here. This diary has nothing to do with politics, conservative or liberal; nor does it have to do with national security, economics, health care, or even law. Rather, this is a bit of a personal recounting of a couple of events in my life from the last year or so, and how a pair of the most wonderful animals ever created by the hand of God came to be a part of it.

Last week, without warning or prior planning, the population at my house was increased by one. It’s interesting how that happens — last October 30, I had no idea that, two days later, Katie and I would be walking by the local pet store, see a shelter’s adoption setup, and be so taken with a black lab mix puppy that we’d become dog owners. Adopting Emma, a dog with the traits and brains of a Labrador retriever and the size of a medium dog, is a decision we’ve never regretted.

Similarly, when I woke last Tuesday morning, the thought never entered my mind that, twelve hours later, I’d be adopting a second dog — a stunningly beautiful 15-month-old, 75-pound white lab (now) named Eva (think Wall-E). It’s funny how these things work out.

Read More →

“The safe political choice” for some time now has been “to support some sort of retreat” in Iraq, John McCain acknowledged today in a speech to veterans and media. “Many observers said my approach [of advocating victory in Iraq no matter what the political cost] would ruin my hopes of becoming President,” he said. “My choice was not smart politics. It didn’t test well in focus groups. It ignored all the polls.”

“I told the truth,” McCain declared. “Sen. Obama told the American people what he thought you wanted to hear.”

He continued:

…The country I love had one final chance to succeed in Iraq. The new strategy was it. So I supported it. Today, the effects of the new strategy are obvious. The surge has succeeded, and we are, at long last, finally winning this war.

Senator Obama made a different choice. He not only opposed the new strategy, but actually tried to prevent us from implementing it. He didn’t just advocate defeat, he tried to legislate it. When his efforts failed, he continued to predict the failure of our troops. As our soldiers and Marines prepared to move into Baghdad neighborhoods and Anbari villages, Senator Obama predicted that their efforts would make the sectarian violence in Iraq worse, not better.

And as our troops took the fight to the enemy, Senator Obama tried to cut off funding for them. He was one of only 14 senators to vote against the emergency funding in May 2007 that supported our troops in Iraq and Afghanistan. …

Three weeks after Senator Obama voted to deny funding for our troops in the field, General Ray Odierno launched the first major combat operations of the surge. Senator Obama declared defeat one month later: “My assessment is that the surge has not worked and we will not see a different report eight weeks from now.” His assessment was popular at the time. But it couldn’t have been more wrong.

Continued below the fold.

Read More →

Real money saved at the pump, even for a time as brief as the summer season? It’s “a gimmick,” according to Democratic nominee Barack Obama, “that would save you half a tank of gas over the course of the entire summer so that everyone in Washington can pat themselves on the back and say they did something.”

Exemption from gas taxes just for Barack Obama himself and those involved in the Denver stop in the Obama Coronation Roadshow, though? Now that‘s a plan the freshman Senator from Illinois and his Democrat Convention host committee chums can get on board with!

The committee hosting the Democratic National Convention is using the city’s gas pumps to fill up on fuel, avoiding state and federal highway taxes, officials said today.

“There’s something there that just doesn’t seem right to me because, in a sense, you’re saying then that the officials who pass the laws are not willing to live by them, and that concerns me,” Councilwoman Jeanne Faatz said.

Read More →

Members of the Democrat Congress are dusting off their handy rubber stamps (or unwrapping new ones, inscribed with the new Presidential motto, “Vero Possumus”) in preparation for the round of tax hikes their assumed President-in-Waiting is promising to send down the pipe next Spring in the name of “making the rich pay their fair share.”

Not to let real facts get in the way of their red-headed stepsibling KnownFacts™, but the latest tax data from the IRS have been released and, as a Wall Street Journal editorial says today, “it’s going to be hard for the rich to pay any more than they already do.”

According to the National Center for Policy Analysis, which released a summary of new tax information this morning, “The new IRS data show that the 2003 Bush tax cuts caused what may be the biggest increase in tax payments by the rich in American history.”

According to the IRS data, the top 1 percent of taxpayers paid 40 percent of all income taxes in 2006, the highest share in at least 40 years.

Further, the top 10 percent of income-earners paid 71 percent, and the top 50 percent in income paid 97.1 percent.

On the other end of the spectrum, Americans with an income below the median paid a record-low 2.9 percent of all income taxes. So much for the fabled unbearable tax burden on the lower-middle and lower classes, from whom the “rich,” who refuse to “pay their fair share,” are so wantonly stealing.

More very revealing information is available to the open-minded below the fold.

Read More →

A quick flip through the classified ad section of the Stuart News, one of the TCPalm family of newspapers, reveals an interesting job listing (see right; click for larger image).

That’s right — Congressman Tim Mahoney (D-FL), offering people money to support his candidacy.

If that doesn’t send the signal that this one-term incumbent who beat the disgraced Mark Foley’s name in 2006 is secure in his support and reelection chances, well, I don’t rightly know what does.

Wait — I just thought of something. Not having to pay people off the street to tell people to vote for you — that might send a better signal about security of support and reelection chances.

You think?

As far back as December 21, 1924, the wise and knowing New York Times was getting claims and analyses wrong with regard to evil and violent actors around the world.

Look upward, and take in once again the title of this post. It is a real headline from a 12/21/24 Times article, in which a Times reporter explains that Hitler, released on parole from the Landsberg fortress where he had been sent for trying to overthrow the German government (in what has come to be known as the “Beer Hall Putsch“), had been “moderated” by prison to such a degree that German authorities were convinced that he presented no further danger to the existing society.

In fact, according to the article, it was expected that he would abandon public life and return to his native land of Austria to live quietly and, likely, never be heard from again in any meaningful way.

Barry Rubin, director of Israel’s Global Research in International Affairs (GLORIA) Center, sees a parallel between that catastrophic 80-year-old misunderstanding of how “tame-able” the world’s evil persons are, and the current line being taken by the Times on the importance of Israel being willing to negotiate — and to compromise — with hostile entities, such as Hamas, Hezbollah, and the PLO.

“Few countries can afford the luxury of limiting their diplomacy to friendly countries and peace-loving parties,” wrote the NYT’s editors in a June 30 column. “National security often requires negotiating with dangerous enemies.”

Rubin responds:

Right. And believing their protestations of moderation, making concessions to them, ending sanctions, blaming ourselves for problems, and never using force is the actual content of such negotiations.

Then the leaders of Hamas, Hizballah, Syria, Iran, the Muslim Brotherhoods, al-Qaida, North Korea, Zimbabwe, Sudan, etc., will no doubt be tamed, abandon public life, and go back to their homes.

Henry Kissinger once told the joke–or at least is credited for doing so–that it is very easy to have the lion lay down with the lamb, as long as you put in a new lamb every day. Kissinger no doubt little expected at the time that this would become the democratic world’s favored strategy. No surprise that the main villain for the politically correct West is Israel, the lamb that refuses the honor.

That is some very well-prepared food for thought.

Updated below the fold.

Read More →

International newswire activity spiked two mornings ago when word came from Afghanistan that nine U.S. troops had been killed in an attack on a remote coalition base.

“A multi-pronged militant assault on a small, remote U.S. base killed nine American soldiers Sunday in one of the deadliest attacks on U.S. troops since the 2001 invasion,” crowed the Associated Press. “Militants fired machine guns, rocket-propelled grenades and mortars from homes and a mosque in the village of Wanat in the northeastern province of Kunar, a mountainous region that borders Pakistan.”

Reporters were quick to point out that this battle, which began in the wee hours of the morning on Sunday and lasted well into the day, resulted in the highest number of American casualties in Afghanistan since sixteen were killed when a helicopter was downed by RPG fire.

However, when the smoke of the battle cleared, and there was no mounting total of dead Americans to cover, news agencies lost interest, and moved along to cover other, bloodier developments in Afghanistan and elsewhere.

Had those mainstream reporters continued paying attention, chances are they would have noted something remarkable about Sunday’s battle.

Read More →

The pure awesomeness in the video below comes to us courtesy of http://www.runcynthiarun.org/ (where should she run to? who knows?), a Web site dedicating to making sure you know to “Elect Cynthia McKinney, President of the United States.”

What you’re watching is the rally at which McKinney and her running mate, Rosa Clemente, accepted their POTUS and VP nominations from “the most progressive, innovative political party in the country.”

Watch (at least) the first five minutes, as Clemente, dressed in what I can only assume is her version of traditional African garb, offers such oratorical gems as:

“We are suffering from structural racism, instittutional racism, capitalism, and militarism — we are fighting for survival!”

as well as:

“I’m a vessel. A representative of the work of an entire thirty-year movement — a hip-hop movement that is radical…a hip-hop, radical, progressive, activst movement that uses the vote to bring what we need in public policy.”

and

“My friend [Omar Wally? Can't understand the name here...] emailed me from the grassroots aretist’s movement — a hip-hop organization dedicated to unionizing rappers, so that they would have health care.”

The best, though?

Today my words will hopefully continue to express my honor, my humbleness, but also my intellect and readiness to take on this task — and Dick Cheney, bring it on, I’m ready to debate you aga…”

That intellect sure is shining through. By the way, what office is Cheney running for this year, again?

It doesn’t look like the GOP will be getting any electoral help from the left this year. We’d better hope that Bob Barr’s campaign flames out as brightly, and as quickly, as this Green campaign is sure to do.

Updated below the fold

Read More →

RedState-endorsed Congressman Paul Broun, Jr. (R-GA), elected in 2007 to fill the rest of the late Rep. Charlie Norwood’s term, faced an all-out assault from his own party this primary season in the form of business-as-usual, big-government Republican Barry Fleming.

Fleming has been attacking Broun from the left on fiscal policy, Constitutional authority, and social issues for months. Today, primary voters in Georgia’s 10th Congressional District got to have their say in which brand of Republicanism they favored — the big-government kind that attacks conservatives and seeks to be little other than Democrat-lite, or the small-government, personal freedom-advocating kind that fights for the core conservative beliefs of freedom, choice, and limited government.

Today, the voters in Georgia’s 10th CD sent an overwhelming message about which brand of Republicanism they favor, nominating Broun the District’s GOP standard bearer by a staggering 71-29 margin.

We at RedState would like to congratulate Paul Broun on his overwhelming victory in today’s primary, and to publicly commend him for sticking to his guns when a fellow party member was attempting to beat him to a pulp with attacks from the left.

Conservatism can win, as Rep. Paul Broun has demonstrated once again. Congratulations, Congressman.

President Bush may not have governed as a TrueConservative™ down the line for the last seven years, but this exchange with AP Radio’s Mark Smith highlights President Bush’s belief in those core conservative principles of Freedom and Choice.

Shorter Mark Smith: “Why aren’t you emulating the Magi Emeritus, Jimmy Carter, and asking Americans to wear sweaters and eschew heat and air conditioning, and sit at home instead of driving places?” [raised nose, satisfied look]

Not shorter, but actual, President Bush: “Well, they’re smart enough to figure out whether they’re going to drive less or not.”

“The consumer’s plenty bright, Mark,” Bush continued. “The marketplace works.”

Well said, President Bush. Well said. As The Directors said on Monday, the essence of the GOP as a Party, and Republican Conservatism as an ideology, is Republicans’ belief that “People must be free to decide how to direct their lives for themselves, and then be responsible for their choices.”

It was a nice lesson in conservatism for Mr. Smith, AP Radio savant. I wish we’d gotten a chance to view his reaction to Bush’s response, so that we could have seen whether he was still gazing down his nose at the President, or was studiously ignoring the very necessary lesson.

h/t Ace

“Do you think Barack Obama says what he believes most of the time, or does he say what he thinks people want to hear?” asked the New York Times in a recent poll — and Fifty-One percent of respondents said Mr. “New Politics” Obama says “what he thinks people want to hear.”

Further, Fifty-Seven percent said Obama “has changed his position on important issues in order to get elected” — something that 41% credited with lowering their opinion of Obama.

Perhaps, as Ed Morrisey says, “the “new politics” halo is officially off” of the Chosen One.

The more Obama talks, the worse this should get.

Pennsylvania Congressman Paul Kanjorski (D) has made news for both accidental honesty and ill-timed, transparent duplicity in the last couple weeks.

Now, in an attempt to control that damage and prevent further gaffes (which would cause damage to his apparently Keystone State-sized ego), Kanjorski is refusing to answer any questions about the statements that previously got him into trouble with the media, the voters, and his Congressional Democrat masters.

Video below [Note: Watch the female staffer's face when she realizes what "Charlie" is about to ask her boss.]:

Read More →

Rep. Paul Kanjorski (D-PA), who recently gained media attention for his videotaped admission that, due to “temptation to want to win back the Congress,” Democrats “stretched the facts” regarding their ability to actually end the war in Iraq, appears to be back for a video encore. This time, the Democratic Congressman appears in a video making two distinct statements regarding the ‘Surge’ strategy that has been so effective in Iraq.

The video is below; below that is a transcript.

In February 2007, Kanjorski went to the floor of the House to say:

Ms. Speaker, I rise today to join the overwhelming majority of the American people, the Congress, and many top U.S. military commanders to voice my opposition to President Bush’s ill-conceived plan to send more American troops into the middle of an ongoing Civil War in Iraq

Then, in an interview from just days ago, Kanjorski said:

We’ve taken public positions which have now forced the president to go into the surge mentality, which is somewhat working

Recently, it was his unfortunate honesty that hurt him; this time, it will be that honesty combined with a penchant for duplicitousness that will come back to haunt him.

Read More →

Congressman Paul Kanjorski (D-PA) has been a fairly undistinguished member of the House of Representatives for nearly a quarter of a century. He is a career member of the Financial Services Committee who has made little or no name for himself since his first electoral victory, and has maintained incumbency through the funneling of pork back to his district. Even his Wikipedia entry says that Kanjorski “usually plays behind-the-scenes roles in the advocacy or defeat of legislation and steers appropriations money toward improving the infrastructure and economic needs of his district.”

Never one to stand out in a crowd outside of his own district if he could help it up until now, Rep. Kanjorski’s public life may be about to change in a major way very, very quickly, and for a very big reason.

You see, Paul Kanjorski has an honesty problem.

More specifically, Paul Kanjorski’s problem is that he was publicly honest about the intentional dishonesty of Congressional Democrats (and Democrat candidates) in the run-up to the 2006 election — particularly with regard to the War in Iraq.

Watch the video below (a transcript follows):

Read More →