The Clintons Don’t Owe Obama Anything

And they know that.  So do most rational people.  The only people who seem to be confused are the Obama camp and their henchmen in the Obamedia and Barackosphere.  These Nervous Nellies, anxious to assure an increasingly unlikely victory for their empty-invisible-suit wearing Emperor, continuously put forth the offensive equivalent of an adult fairy tale that the objects of their irrational Clinton Derangement Syndrome machinations should prostrate themselves in supplication to their whip weilding dominator.

Fat freaking chance.

Both Bill and Hillary Clinton have done more than enough stumping on Obama’s behalf.  Far as I’m concerned, they could go off on a well deserved family vacation to an undisclosed remote island location until November 5, and should.  Let the guy who branded them as racially insensitive, high-minded, incompetent, self-entitled heirs to a fraudulent dynasty, fend for his damned self.

But, being the good Democratic soldiers they are, they won’t.

The latest episode of the “Bill/Hill Help A Brother Out Tour” starring the former president on CNBC’s Closing Bell, with Maria Bartiromo is already being unflatteringly reviewed by the Obamedia.   ABC News’ Jennifer Parker takes Bubba to task for speaking more highly of his wife than of the Democratic presidetial nominee.  The nerve!  But then the Big Dawg did say that Obi-Wan NaBePresident should win…unless something bad happens between now and the election, like, the debates:

“Barring some unforeseen development like in– something happens in the debates we don’t know about. I– I– I– it may not be apparent in the polls until last week or two of the election. But, I believe that it will be apparent on election day. I think that– I think Senator Obama will win this election,” Clinton said.

Meanwhile, the day after two prominent former Hillary backers, Donald Trump and Lynn Forrester, Lady de Rothschild, announced their respective endorsements of John McCain, Senator Clinton was promptly pressed into service to try to put a stop to Obie’s bleeding.  According to Newsday:

After most members had left the Democratic state committee meeting on Monday evening, Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton greeted a small gathering of party regulars and activists in a penthouse suite at the Sheraton New York in midtown and talked about Barack Obama’s presidential campaign.

“She thanked those who traveled so far for her in her own campaign, and said they need to do the same for Obama because the race is closer than we’d have liked,” a Clinton loyalist said on the way out of the hotel. Another person who’d been in the room confirmed that was the essence of her remarks, but was careful to stress that any reference to the close race was conveyed with the most earnest intentions.

Proving themselves to be card carrying media Obamaniacs, the article goes on to put Clinton’s loyalty on the defensive.  Whatever.  Last I heard, Barack Obama was supposedly the “nominee,” making the task of convincing people to vote for him his responsibility.  Typically, the delusional Barackophiles refuse to accept the obvious; they picked the wrong guy.

Get over it.

PUMA

Just Say No Deal

TelePrompTing To Victory?

Three days ago, CNN announced that Barack Obama was taking his TelePrompTer on the road.  People, including me, scoffed.  How could anyone take a candidate seriously who suddenly needs such a device to deliver a 2 year old stump speech?  (If you don’t count the first variation delivered at the 2004 Democratic convention.)  Yet, it seems that, once again, Campaigner Extraordinaire has prevailed and proven himself Master Wizard In Chief.

Sept. 15, the day of the Monumental TelePrompTer Announcement, Rasmussen Reports had John McCain up 2 points.  Today, the two candidates are tied.  Gallup has Obama +4, but on the 15th, they were virtually even.  Coincidence?  I think not.  AP attributes Obama’s recent “surge” in the polls to a number of factors, chiefly the candidates’ response to our recent economic crisis.  AFP via Yahoo News, reaches similar conclusions regarding the across-the-board reversion to pre-convention polling levels.  However, since neither candidate seems to have much of a handle on the problem, I’m not so sure.

No, I’m convinced it was the novel, strategic inclusion of the groundbreaking TelePrompTer-On-The-Campaign-Trail tactic that did it.  What vision!  What leadership!  Recognize a potentially disastrous problem and take action to fix it!  No more “57 states!”  No more “lipsticked (stuck?) pigs!”  That’s what we need in a president.  Problem solving.  Though…

…Politico’s Jonathan Martin says the problem just might not be quite solved, yet.

Obama, on the trail in New Mexico, had this to say of McCain:

“And today he accused me of not supporting what the Treasury and the Federal Reserve Bank did with AIG despite no evidence whatsoever that that’s what I had said.”

To recap, when I wrote earlier today that Obama supported the bailout, I quickly was instructed by his staff that this was not the case.  He just didn’t oppose it, I was told.

Now he’s so adamant about not opposing the Fed’s move that he’s complaining about McCain’s portrayal.

Where, I wonder, is the line between not opposing and, ya know, supporting.

Got a feeling there might be a couple of used TelePrompTers for sale by the Obama camp in the near future.  That is, if those polls don’t hold.

PUMA

Just Say No Deal

Obama’s Supporters Likely To Get Smacked

Many a Barack Obama supporter is likely to face rejection on a grand scale, not to mention increased potential for a good, old-fashioned beatdown, if they do what Obama tells them to do.  At a TelePrompTed rally in Elko, Nevada yesterday, the good senator ended his scripted remarks by encouraging people to “get in the faces” of their neighbors and friends and make his case for him.

This seems to me to be a very bad idea.  Personally, I loathe Senator Obama and all he stands for, and I’m a black (former) Democrat.  You’d think that I would be ripe for persuasion since I “fit the demographic,” but you would be very, very wrong.  The very idea of someone, anyone, getting in my face about why I should support Mr. “I Can Barely Win Even When All The Big Shots In My Party Cheat For Me” Obama makes a large vein somewhere in the vicinity of my left eye start to twitch, causing me to squint uncontrollably.  It’s happening right now, and the attendant fist clenching, shortness of breath and increased heartrate make it difficult to finish this post.

How dare he say something like this with a straight face?  All of his other gaffes have been excused and explained away by the fact that he didn’t have a  TelePrompTer handy.  The fact that this is a monumentally lame excuse in the first place is not important, I’ll just concede the point that while such a deficiency in any other candidate would be grounds for disqualification as a contender, it is perfectly acceptable as a justification for any St. Obama misspeak.  But he had a TelePrompTer here.  Let’s even pretend that a TelePrompter for a political candidate at an outdoor rally in a baseball stadium is the norm, there’s still no excuse for irresponsibly inciting people who aren’t even there to violence.

Obamaniacs are obnoxious enough as it is.  The last thing they need is permission from their “Dear Leader” to be moreso.  Even non-confrontational ones, like the guy in the following video, make you want to smack them upside the head repeatedly, with enthusiasm, like Desi Arnaz playing “Babalu.”  This guy thinks it’s cute to vent his wrath at a McCain supporter he overheard at the Post Office.  Nevermind the fact that he was eavesdropping, what’s striking is, the man this guy is so offended by was obviously so intimidating that running home and making a snarky video was seen to be the most attractive option available.  Maybe instead of making a You Tube video, he should have watched Obama’s You Tube video so he could learn from The Most Obie On-High that the proper thing to do was “get in Post Office Man’s face.”  I’m sure whatever offering Video Guy put out after he recovered would have been lots more entertaining and interesting.

PUMA

Just Say No Deal

Bradley Effect + PUMA Effect – Welby Effect = NoBama

Everybody’s heard of the “Bradley effect,” which is based on the premise that white Americans are wimpy, racist liars at heart.  From Wikipedia:

The term Bradley effect, less commonly called^[1] the Wilder effect, refers to a frequently observed discrepancy between voter opinion polls and election outcomes in American political campaigns when a white candidate and a non-white candidate run against each other.^[2][3][4] Named for Tom Bradley, an African-American who lost the 1982 California governor’s race despite being ahead in voter polls, the Bradley effect refers to a tendency on the part of white voters to tell pollsters that they are undecided or likely to vote for a Black candidate, when, on election day, they vote for his/her white opponent.^[5]

Now, it should be noted that the “Bradley and Wilder effects” were terms coined by a loser and a barely-winner to rationalize their unexpected results.  Conversely, there is no “Patrick effect” or “Kilpatrick effect” to explain wins by Deval and Kwame and the impact that race may or may not have had in their elections.  We also don’t have a “Kerry effect” to explain how big a role Swiftboating, or a “Gore effect” explaining how to lose before all the chads are unhung, can play.

The PUMA effect, which is a new phenomenon, will not be fully appreciated until the impact of disaffected Hillocrats can be assessed, examined and evaluated after the election.  A number of relatively high-profile women who supported Hillary Clinton for president have been quite vocal about their disenchantment with the Democratic Party and it’s eventual “selectee.”  The latest, Lynn Forrester, Lady de Rothschild, joins Wisconsin delegate, Debra Bartoshevich, Rules and Bylaws Committe ejectee, Harriet Christian, whose invective filled rant fully expressed what most of us awakening PUMAs were thinking and feeling, and Ann Price Mills, whose heartfelt disappointment with the sham roll call vote at the Democratic National  Convention was preserved forever on tape by CNN.  (To clarify, I do not agree with every word spoken by each of these women, what I do agree with is the overwhelming sense of outrage brought about by the Democratic Party’s betrayal of it’s principles.)  Though not identifying themselves publicly as PUMAs, they exhibit all the known characteristics; a disdain for this season’s nominating process, enmity for the party elite who orchestrated the charade, and a total, flat-out, complete rejection of Barack Obama.  That these women do not call themselves PUMAs is not surprising; though there is a real PUMA coalition online, the movement has always been a reflection of a shared sentiment, not a dues-paying political action entity.  Not all of those qualifying as PUMAs will ever be identified as such, nor will they all vote the same way.

That’s the DeaNC’s problem.  When trying to quantify the resistance to their chosen one, they rely on unreliable methodology, like polling and website traffic.  That might work in other areas of assessment, to a degree, but it is unlikely to yield them any real usable data in this instance.  Most of the people (not just women, not just white, not just old) who are resistant to Obama’s “charms” because he is an illegitimate candidate with a postage stamp sized resume who has to carry a TelePrompTer around to stump speeches or else he forgets how many states there are, don’t fall into neat, tidy, categories, and most don’t blog even if they are online.  They are not racists, they are not bitter, and a lot of them aren’t even Democrats anymore, at least not in their hearts, no matter what their voter’s registration card says.  The one thing they have in common is, they’re heartbroken.

The Welby effect is my own terminology for the potential for voters to subconsciously prefer the image of a white-haired, older, seasoned Marcus Welby-type professional in matters of grave importance, over the leap of faith required to entrust one’s country or health-care to a promising newcomer like the one played by James Brolin on the old ABC series.  Some might conclude that such a preference is due to racism, and while there is an element of that in play, it is small.  I’m not sure there would be much difference if McCain were black and Obama white, the imagery holds.  We like to put our lives, when necessary, in the hands of those we imagine know what the hell they’re doing, having done it hundreds of times before.  No matter how many other doctors refer us to the young Doogie Howser-like genius innovating exciting new techniques in just the areas we need addressed, we still want to know that when our procedure is being done, our old trusted family physician will be there, too.  The Obama camp is hoping that the selection of Joe Biden will offset this reality, but that begs the question, is Joe Biden trustworthy?  Do voters think so?

Then there are the “issues.”  Everyone wants to pretend this election, unlike any other, is about “issues.”  “Issues,” schmissues.  “Issues” never win elections because the “issues” candidates lie about in this phase of the campaign are far different than the ones that will define their presidency.  Nixon didn’t say “Vote For Me and I’ll Betray Yor Trust,”  Cater didn’t say “Hey, Y’all I’m A Pushover,” Clinton didn’t promise to be impeached for lying about being a bad husband, and George Bush didn’t get a single vote because he promised to take us to war within 2 years of taking office.  Screw “issues,” who can I trust my country to?  That choice comes down to gut feeling just as much as handicapping horses does.  No matter how many variables you factor, how much rainy-day research you do about history and conditions, that damned mudder is probably going to show.  At best.  If that.

So, if any of these “effects” are real and come into play, Obama will have a hard time winning.  If all of them do, he loses in a landslide.

Unless he’s a mudder.

And it rains.

PUMA

Just say No Deal