Susan Estrich once again puts forth the notion that the only reason Barack Obama might lose this election is because of racism. She cannot for the life of herself, understand how anyone could be troubled by Senator Obama’s dubious funding, or his campaign’s race-baiting, or his system gaming thuggery during the primaries. Nope, it’s racist alright, to be even a teensy bit uncomfortable with Obama’s lack of experience and accomplishment, or to question the character of a man who would lie about how often he went to church. He made the “Greatest Speech On Race In The History Of America, Nay The World” to explain it, didn’t he? Doesn’t bother Ms. Estrich at all that said senator withdrew from said church on the same day his party’s Rules and Bylaws Committee violated their own rules to award him delegates he didn’t even bother to compete for. Uh-uh, it’s race.
Golly, gosh, gee whiz, Susan, give it a rest, will ya? It’s not now, nor has it ever been, about race. To think so, is just stupid.
Okay, I’ve been following African Press International’s claims of being the recipients of an angry phone call from Michelle Obama since day one. They claim to have tapes of said call that will be aired on FOX News’ Sean Hannity and Greta Van Susteren’s shows. Greta has called such claims an outright lie. Now, API is calling Greta a liar right back. API’s Chief Editor Sammy Korir, as he likes to be called, has been accused of being, shall we say, less than truthful on occasion, here on this blog, and here, on Mountain Sage. Yet, he continues to proclaim that the tapes will be released and all details will be revealed.
Many people have been occupied with the Michelle Obama tape, wondering whether it will be made public by Fox News Network.
API would like to inform the readers that the denials by some people that there is no agreement to air the tape has no basis in truth.
API has a valid agreement with Fox News Network. The negotiation was done secretly between API’s 3 representatives and Fox News Network�represented by two people. If any one comes out there and denies that we have a deal, such denials must be ignored.
The parties involved in the negotiations exchanged many emails in a 8 days period and that resulted in a written agreement. API is pleased to have Fox News Network as a partner on the Michelle Obama tape issue.
Despite denials by some people, we assure the readers that the tape, according to the agreement, is supposed to be aired by 2 Fox News Network shows, namely: The Sean Hannity Show and On the Record show by Greta Van Susteren.
We assure the readers that if Fox News Network does not do as stipulated in the�agreement, API will breach the secrecy deal stating that – there shall be no publicity of the details in the agreement page, by any of the parties involved in the deal. If that happens, API will make public all the email correspondences and the whole agreement with Fox News Network.
If things do not�go as planned between API and Fox News Network, API will ensure that the contents of the tape will be released one way or another so that the People who have believed in us will continue putting their trust on us. The release of the tape is also important for API’s credibility
CNN is reporting that Barack Obama is warning his followers that those mean ol’ Republicans are going to try to do everything they can to make him lose. Duh.
“Don’t believe for a second this election is over. Don’t think for a minute that power concedes anything. It’s gonna get nasty, I’m sure, in the next four days,” Obama told a crowd in Columbia, Missouri, on Thursday night.
“They will throw everything at us like they’ve been doing, and we’re gonna have to work like our future depends on it in this last week. You know what? Because it does, and every single young person here tonight — I’ve gotta have every single one of you voting, and you’ve gotta grab five more, all of you, have gotta vote,” he said.
FOX News says, because Obots are delusional, Camp O knows they’ve got to take pains to let them down easy, even if Obie wins:
Barack Obama’s senior advisers have drawn up plans to lower expectations for his presidency if he wins next week’s election, amid concerns that many of his euphoric supporters are harboring unrealistic hopes of what he can achieve.
The sudden financial crisis and the prospect of a deep and painful recession have increased the urgency inside the Obama team to bring people down to earth, after a campaign in which his soaring rhetoric and promises of “hope” and “change” are now confronted with the reality of a stricken economy.
One senior adviser told The Times that the first few weeks of the transition, immediately after the election, were critical, “so there’s not a vast mood swing from exhilaration and euphoria to despair.”
Gee, I wonder why you would have to lower expectations of what a novice, junior senator with no practical experience doing anything but running for office and rabble rousing could potentially accomplish if a rock star obsessed nation actually elected him president? Hmmmm, it’s a puzzlement, all right. I guess you don’t want too much truth too soon to assault the senses of true believers, kinda like you don’t want to force drug addicts to quit cold turkey. System overload leads to massive breakdowns or something. Anyway, one way to “massage the message” is to manage the messengers. Politico’s Ben Smith verifies Drudge’s report that Team Obama is doing just that:
Obama spokesman Bill Burton confirms Drudge’s report that two right-leaning papers, the Washington Times and the New York Post, have lost their seats on the Obama plane, along with the Dallas Morning News.
“We’re trying to reach as many swing voters that we can and unfortunately had to make some tough choices. but we are accommodating these folks in every way possible,” he said.
The Post and the Morning News are both read primarily in states that aren’t in play, but the Washington Times is read in Northern Virginia.
Burton said the Chicago Tribune and the Chicago Sun-Times had returned to the plane, and confirmed that Ebony and Jet magazines have seats on the plane. (The Tribune has had a reporter on the plane for most of the cycle, but recently added a photographer.)
Makes you wonder why the Sun-Times, Tribune, Ebony and Jet, Chicago publications all, were not all on the plane to begin with. The move pissed the Washington Times off, the Dallas Morning News was just a little miffed, and the New York Post doesn’t seem to care much at all, as far as I can tell.
Some Obama apologists pointed out the fact that “McCain did the same thing,” referring to the ejection of Maureen Dowd and Joe Klien from the Straight Talk Express, but it seems nobody wants MoDo aboard:
New York Times columnist Maureen Dowd said in an email that, contrary to Drudge’s suggestion, she won’t be on Obama’s plane.
But Dunn insisted that editorial criticism was not a factor. She said her staff is working with the excluded reporters to find them hotel accommodations if they can catch up with Obama on their own, and has offered them space on the plane of running mate Joe Biden. “It’s not like we’re trying to block coverage of our campaign,” she said.
Naaaah, and it’s not like anybody should have any unreasonable expectations of truth, logic, and fairness from your guys, either. Right?
Good Lord! Erica Jong, the woman who literally wrote the book on doing it with strangers on airplanes, is now running around telling the foreign press that if Barack Obama is not elected, look out for another Civil War. Obviously, the woman needs a new prescription for whatever she’s not taking at the moment. Running out of meds right before an interview, as Jong apparently did before talking to Italian paper Corriere della Sera, can be a bitch. The New York Observer writes:
Basically, Jong says her fear that Obama might lose the election has developed into an “obsession. A paralyzing terror. An anxious fever that keeps you awake at night.” She also says that her friends Jane Fonda and Naomi Wolf are extremely worried that Obama will be sabotaged by Republican dirty tricks, and that if an Obama loss indeed comes to pass, the result will be a second American Civil War.
Shamelessly name-dropping, Jong is quoted as having said:
“My friends Ken Follett and Susan Cheever are extremely worried. Naomi Wolf calls me every day. Yesterday, Jane Fonda sent me an email to tell me that she cried all night and can’t cure her ailing back for all the stress that has reduces her to a bundle of nerves.”
“My back is also suffering from spasms, so much so that I had to see an acupuncturist and get prescriptions for Valium.”
“After having stolen the last two elections, the Republican Mafia…”
“If Obama loses it will spark the second American Civil War. Blood will run in the streets, believe me. And it’s not a coincidence that President Bush recalled soldiers from Iraq for Dick Cheney to lead against American citizens in the streets.”
“Bush has transformed America into a police state, from torture to the imprisonment of reporters, to the Patriot Act.”
Over on RedState (yeah, yeah, I know) they have a post up from someone going by the name Anonymous_14 who claims to be a former Clinton staffer, now a researcher for the Obama campaign. Supposedly, her/his conscious is getting the better of him/her, and he/she must come clean and purge her/his soul. You get the idea. Anyway, here’s the story; like I said, take it for what it’s worth:
After a long and careful consideration of all the implications and possible consequences of my actions today, I have decided to go through with this in the hope that our country can indeed be guided into the right direction. First, a little personal background… I am a female grad student in my 20’s, and a registered Democrat. During the primaries, I was a campaign worker for the Clinton candidacy. I believed in her and still do, staying all the way to the bitter end. And believe me, it was bitter. The snippets you’ve heard from various media outlets only grazed the surface. There was no love between the Clinton and Obama campaigns, and these feelings extended all the way to the top. Hillary was no dope though, and knew that any endorsement of Obama must appear to be a full-fledged one. She did this out of political survival. As a part of his overall effort to extend an olive branch to the Clinton camp and her supporters, Obama took on a few Hillary staff members into his campaign. I was one such worker. Though I was still bitterly loyal to Hillary, I still held out hope that he would choose her as VP. In fact, there was a consensus among us transplants that in the end, he HAD to choose her. It was the only logical choice. I also was committed to the Democratic cause and without much of a second thought, transferred my allegiance to Senator Obama.
I’m going to let you in on a few secrets here, and this is not because I enjoy the gossip or the attention directed my way. I’m doing this because I doubt much of you know the true weaknesses of Obama. Another reason for my doing this is that I am lost faith in this campaign, and feel that this choice has been forced on many people in this country. Put simply, you are being manipulated. That was and is our job – to manipulate you (the electorate) and the media (we already had them months ago). Our goal is to create chaos with the other side, not hope. I’ve come to the realization (as the campaign already has) that if this comes to the issues, Barack Obama doesn’t have a chance. His only chance is to foster disorganization, chaos, despair, and a sense of inevitability among the Republicans. It has worked up until now. Joe the Plumber has put the focus on the issues again, and this scares us more than anything. Being in a position to know these things, I will rate what the Obama campaign already knows are their weak links from the most important on down.
1 – Hillary voters. Internal polling suggests that at best, we are taking 70-75% of these voters. Other estimates are as low as 60% in some areas – particularly Ohio and western PA. My biggest problem with this campaign’s strategy was the decision NOT to offer Hillary the VP slot. She was ready and able to take this on, and would have campaigned enthusiastically for it. This selection would have also brought virtually all of her supporters into the fold, and the Obama campaign knew it. Though I have no way of knowing this for certain, and I do admit that I am relying on internal gossip, Senator Obama actually went against the advice of his top advisors. They wanted him to choose her, but the only significant opposition to this within the campaign came from Barack and Michelle Obama. In short, he let personal feelings take precedence over what was the most logical thing to do. Biden, by the way, has been a disaster inside the campaign. Everyone cringes whenever he gives an interview, and he creates so many headaches as the campaign has to stay on their toes in order to disseminate information and spin whatever it was he was trying to say.
2 – Sarah Palin. Don’t believe what the media is telling you about how horrible a choice she was. Again, our internal polling suggest that though she has had a minimal impact on pulling disaffected Hillary Democrats to McCain, she has done wonders in mobilizing the base for McCain. Another thing – we were completely taken by surprise with her pick. In my capacity in the research department, I looked into the backgrounds of Leiberman, Romney, Pawlenty and Ridge, and prepared briefs. I don’t mind bragging that we had pretty good stuff on all of them. With Leiberman, the plan was to paint him as an erratic old-timer who didn’t have a clue as to what he was doing (pretty much a clone of McCain). In Romney, we had him pegged as an evil capitalist who cut jobs. Pawlenty was going to get the “Quayle treatment”, or more precisely: a pretty face, with no valid experience. Tom Ridge was going to be used to provide a direct link from McCain to Bush. As you can see, we were quite enamored of all of them. Then the unexpected happened – Sarah Palin. We had no clue as to how to handle her, and bungled it from the start. Though through our misinformation networks, we have successfully taken some of the shine off. But let there be no doubt. She remains a major obstacle. She has singlehanded solidified “soft” Republican support, mobilized the McCain ground game, and has even had some appeal to independents and Hillary voters. This is what our internal polling confirms.
3 – Obama’s radical connections. Standards operating procedure has been to cry “racism” whenever one of these has been brought up. We even have a detailed strategy ready to go should McCain ever bring Rev. Wright up. Though by themselves they are of minimal worth, taken together, Rev. Wright, Bill Ayers, Father Pfelger, and now, Rashid Khalili, are exactly what the campaign does not need. The more focus on them, the more this election becomes a referendum on Obama. The campaign strategy from the very beginning was to make this election a referendum on Bush. Strategists have been banging their head on how successfully McCain has distanced himself from Bush. This has worked, and right now the tide is in his favor. People are taking a new look at Barack Obama, and our experience when this happens tells us this is not good news at all. When they take a look at him, one or more of these names are bound to be brought up. McCain has wisely not harped on this in recent weeks and let voters decide for themselves. This was a trap we set for him, and he never fully took the bait. Senator Obama openly dared him to bring up Ayers. This was not due to machismo on the part of Obama, but actually due to campaign strategy. Though McCain’s reference to Ayers fell flat in the last debate, people in the Obama campaign were actually disappointed that he didn’t follow through on it more and getting into it. Our focus groups found this out: When McCain brings these connections up, voters are turned off to him. They’d rather take this into consideration themselves, and when this happens, our numbers begin to tank.
4 – The Bradley Effect. Don’t believe these polls for a second. I just went over our numbers and found that we have next to no chance in the following states: Missouri, Indiana, North Carolina, Florida, New Hampshire and Nevada. Ohio leans heavily to McCain, but is too close to call it for him. Virginia, Pennsylvania, Colorado, New Mexico and Iowa are the true “toss up states”. The only two of these the campaign feels “confident” in are Iowa and New Mexico. The reason for such polling discrepancy is the Bradley Effect, and this is a subject of much discussion in the campaign. In general, we tend to take a -10 point percentage in allowing for this, and are not comfortable until the polls give us a spread well over this mark. This is why we are still campaigning in Virginia and Pennsylvania! This is why Ohio is such a desperate hope for us! What truly bothers this campaign is the fact that some pollsters get up to an 80% “refuse to respond” result. You can’t possibly include these into the polls. The truth is, people are afraid to let people know who they are voting for. The vast majority of these respondents are McCain supporters. Obama is the “hip” choice, and we all know it.
As part of my research duties, I scour right wing blogs and websites to get somewhat of a “feel” as to what is being talked about on the other side. Much of it is nonsense, but there are some exceptions which give the campaign jitters. A spirited campaign has been made to infiltrate many pro-Hillary sites and discredit them. A more disorganized, but genuine effort has also been made to sow doubts among the unapologetically right wing sites such as redstate.com. Don’t you guys get it? This has been the Obama campaign’s sole strategy from the very beginning! The only way he wins is over a dispirited, disorganized, and demobilized opposition. This is how it has been for all of his campaigns. What surprises me is that everyone has fallen for it. You may point to the polls as proof of the inevitability of all of this. If so, you have fallen for the oldest trick in the book. How did we skew these polls, you might ask? It all starts with the media “buzz” which has been generated over the campaign. Many stories are generated on the powerful Obama ground game, and how many new voters were registered. None of this happens by coincidence. It is all part of the poll-skewing process. This makes pollsters change their mixes to reflect these new voters and tilt the mix more towards Democratic voters. What is not mentioned or reported on is not the “under-reported cell phone users or young voters” we hear so much about. What is underreported is you.
I changed my somewhat positive opinion of this campaign during the unfair and sexist campaign against Sarah Palin. I will never agree with her on the issues and will probably never vote for her, but I am embarrassed of what has happened. I can’t ignore our own hand in all of this. What I do know is that I will not be voting for Obama this time around. Treat that as you will.
Not exactly earth-shattering information since we all know this stuff to be true already, that’s why we’re PUMAs. So, even if this is some kind of reverse psychology “astrofucking,” it’s unlikely to change anybody’s mind or resolve.
Well, they never! HuffPo, Kos, and TPM are sporting twisted knickers and are sp…sp…spittin’ mad at a GOP mailer featuring Hillary Clinton in a McCain/Palin lovefest, designed to appeal to disaffected HRC supporters in Pennsylvania. Though a Clinton spokesperson denounced the ad, it’s safe to say that those to whom the ad is targeted, might have very comfortable, untwisted knickers, and absolutely no trouble swallowing.
Responds Hillary spokesperson Kathleen Strand: “It is safe to say Hillary Clinton does not approve this message. She made history earning 18 million votes and has urged everyone who supported her to vote for Barack Obama because they have so much more in common with him than they do with Senator McCain. Voters should not be distracted by last minute, desperate attempts that claim otherwise.”
Nothing last minute about it, Katie. From where I sit, this looks like a very smart, not-desperate-at-all move.
First, Team O moved the day-to-day operations of the DeaNC to their home turf in Chicago, now, he’s filling his yet-to-be-assembled cabinet with homeboys. According to “sources unauthorized to say shit they’re going to say anyway,” Barack Obama is planning to reward Rep. Rahm Emanuel (D.-Ill) for services rendered by making him White House Chief of Staff, says Politico:
All sides deny, but AP has the buzz:
Barack Obama’s campaign has approached Illinois Rep. Rahm Emanuel about possibly serving as White House chief of staff, officials said Thursday, looking ahead as the marathon presidential race entered its final, frenzied stretch with a Democratic tilt.
The Democrats who described the contact with Emanuel spoke on condition of anonymity, saying they were not authorized to be quoted by name.
Think Politico and AP’s own personal Deep Throat would back down just because some Democratic scrub said the original AP story was “way too forward?” Nope. Politico says, “it’s in the news, so we believe it:”
But there’s little question–and press reports already –of potential interest in Emanuel.
For their part, AP says, “yeah, they said it wasn’t true, but we don’t believe ‘em:”
The Democrats who described the Obama campaign’s approach to Emanuel spoke on condition of anonymity, saying they were not authorized to be quoted by name. An aide to the congressman, Sarah Feinberg, said in an e-mail that he “has not been contacted to take a job in an administration that does not yet exist. Everyone is focused on Election Day, as they should be.”
Asked about Emanuel after touching down in Colombia, Mo., on Thursday night, Obama said only: “I’m trying to win an election.” Then, referring to campaign manager David Plouffe, he said: “Plouffe is my chief of staff.”
Obama campaign spokesman Bill Burton earlier had said: “There’s no news because there’s no job to offer.”
The article then goes on forever as if no denial had been issued. I guess when it comes to the truth, the news media doesn’t believe Obama any more than the rest of us do.
Speaking of denials, in another AP account, and on a completely unrelated topic, Michael Jackson is denying reports that he and his brothers are reuniting.
“My brothers and sisters have my full love and support, and we’ve certainly shared many great experiences, but at this time I have no plans to record or tour with them,” the self-proclaimed “king of pop” said a statement.
Thank God! Who wants to see 50 – 60 year old men hopping around in loud clothes and Afro wigs singing “I Want You Back?” Whether you do or not though, Jermaine says they’re going through with it, Michael, too, no matter what he says:
“It is going to be more like a family affair,” he was quoted as saying by the Australian Associated Press. “(Younger sister) Janet’s going to open and, of course, the original Jackson 5 … Michael, Randy and the whole family. … We’re in the studio, we’re planning on being out there next year.”
Anybody else noticing a pattern here? I mean besides the fact that the Jacksons are originally from the Chicago area, too? Seems you can get somebody to say anything you want them to and the media will report it. Then you can deny it, but, if the media doesn’t believe you, or doesn’t like what you said, or just doesn’t give a shit, they’ll keep reporting it until the truth comes out and they have to stop. Boy, what a great gig! Once you eliminate legwork and fact checking, that journalism thing is a cinch.
Some obviously visually impaired, or possibly extremely over-caffeinated, or otherwise unrealistically imaginative, and/or artificially stimulated people have put forth the notion that Michelle Obama is somehow reminiscent of Jacqueline Kennedy. However, I cannot imagine surviving the ingestion of a sufficient amount of hallucinogenics required to seriously entertain such a thought. Jackie O? Why not Mamie Eisenhower? Rosalynn Carter? I can get there from here, but Jackie Kennedy, uh uh.
He does have some suggestions for Michelle Obama: He’s thinking Carolina Herrera or Oscar de la Renta. “Michelle, call me!” he yelled into our tape recorder. “I will hook you up, girl. I will not charge.” He’s even got a slightly off-color nickname for his First Lady pick. “Forrest Whitaker’s wife and I always joke about this,” he said. “We were at the convention and I said, ‘Oh, girl, you’re looking like Jackie O!’ And she said, ‘Hell no, baby, I’m looking like Blackie O.’ When I say this, I don’t want this to come out as I’m making a derogatory remark, but Blackie O: in the White House!’”
Bloch also defended Sarah Palin against the media’s unfair Wardrobe-gate attacks:
“Image is everything,” he opined at the Central Park Conservancy’s Halloween Ball at the park’s Naumburg Bandshell last night. “To give her a hard time about spending $150,000 on the wardrobe — she didn’t make up the prices, she didn’t hire a big stylist and say get me the most expensive things.” Although he approves of her look — “chic and elegant; age appropriate” — he said he wasn’t sure the RNC absolutely had to blow that much money on it. “Her stylist should’ve asked for a discount,” he said. “If she were working with me, I would’ve gotten her a discount.”
Yeah, Phil, and coupled with your (I assume) standard no-charge offer, Sarah probably could have come in way under a hundred and fifty grand with you as her stylist. Then again, maybe SP should call Star Jones for “how to get free stuff” tips.
In other news, protesters did what protesters do, that is, protested the L.A. Times today, demanding the release of tapes showing Michelle and Barack Obama at a dinner honoring Rashid Khalidi. For all the good it apparently did.
Okay, we all know Chris Matthews has a…”thing” about Barack Obama, right? As far back as January he was gushing about how “attractive” Obama is:
“I did think he looked incredibly attractive up there with his wife, his beautiful wife, Michelle. Again — they are one hell of an attractive couple up there. When they took the stage there it reminded me a bit of Jack Kennedy and Jackie back in ‘56. … There’s something nice about it.”
Jack and Jackie Kennedy? Was Matthews on acid in the 60’s? You’ve got to be looking at history through a seriously distorted lens to get a Kennedy-esque vibe from the Obamas. Then, there’s the famous “tingly leg” comment Matthews should rightly never live down:
I have to tell you, you know, it’s part of reporting this case, this election, the feeling most people get when they hear Barack Obama’s speech. My, I felt this thrill going up my leg. I mean, I don’t have that too often. No, seriously. It’s a dramatic event. He speaks about America in a way that has nothing to do with politics. It has to do with the feeling we have about our country. And that is an objective assessment.
“Objective?” C’mon, Chris. The saddest part of that statement, though, is Matthews’ assertion that he doesn’t get that feeling too often. Wonder what his wife thinks about that? I also wonder what was happening to Chris’ leg when he said this:
I thought it was Hollywood. It was romance. It was realism. The technical quality of it, the production values were perfect, the way they timed going to live, the biographical material. But most important, the connection with the average person in the economic turmoil we face right now I thought was fabulous. Of course, there we see the setting, which is very much like an Oval Office setting, showing that he’s comfortable and we should be comfortable and will be with him in such a setting. I thought everything was just right.
READ BELOW: THIS IS SIMPLY A LIE ABOUT ME AND I HAVE NO IDEA IF A LIE ABOUT FOX AND / OR SEAN HANNITY BECAUSE I HAVE NO IDEA WHAT THIS STUFF BELOW IS. I HAVE NO IDEA WHO API (AFRICAN PRESS) IS…this is the first I have heard about them….BUT I DO WANT TO “KILL THE VIRUS” LYING ABOUT ME.(Note that I lifted only part of the quote below because I just wanted to correct the lie about me..the website goes on and on.)
Greta left this in the comment section.
i wonder how they even come up with this stuff…if you don’t confront it as a lie, it goes all over the internet and people think it true..so, when i see this stuff, i fight back
I don’t know how they come up with this stuff, either, but maybe next time, you could check the nifty links I provided and deny the source.
Oh, man, the self-writing jokes just keep coming. The highly offensive West Hollywood Halloween effigy of Sarah Palin has thankfully been removed. That’s not the funny part. The funny part is why. Seems it had something to do with the Secret Service, enterprising neighbors, the mayor, and an effigy of the “artwork’s” creator that did it. Here’s the AP story as reported by BayNews9:
Amid a growing frenzy of protesters and media surrounding his home, Chad Morrisette decided his noosed Sarah Palin mannequin should be cut loose.
He and his partner had created the effigy of the GOP vice presidential hopeful three weeks ago and vowed to keep it outside their home until Halloween, despite widespread criticism from neighbors and local officials. On Wednesday the mayor convinced Morrisette the mannequin should come down.
“I explained to them that this could be dangerous to you and your neighbors,” said Mayor Jeff Prang, noting that he received hundreds of venomous e-mails from people offended by the display. “They were totally unprepared for this kind of international attention, for the amount of impact on their home and their neighborhood.”
Besides a constant flow of angry callers, the homeowners had received a visit from the Secret Service and criticism from a Los Angeles County supervisor who ordered an investigation into whether the effigy constitutes a hate crime.
Then, on Wednesday, neighbors covered up the Palin mannequin with sheets, and more protesters showed up later in the day accompanied by a man driving a vehicle adorned with an effigy labeled “Chad,” with a noose around its neck, said sheriff’s spokesman Steve Whitmore.
“This evening, it wasn’t as friendly,” he said.
Prang said he drove by after work and saw protesters and media around the home with helicopters overhead. Morrisette saw the mayor and waved him inside for a talk.
Afterward, the mannequin came down, but Morrisette kept the rest of his Halloween decor intact, including a display of Palin’s running mate, John McCain, popping out of a flaming chimney.
Poor Johhny Mac. At least Sarah got cut loose. And just so you know, an effigy of Barack Obama found hanging on the University of Kentucky campus was immediately cut down by police, and, as far as I know, no photos were taken. Fair’s fair, right?
Golly gee whiz, darn it to heck, I was so busy thinking about watching my imaginary friend play Tic Tac Toe with her imaginary friend, I forgot all about watching Barack Obama’s “Not Ready For Primetime But I’m Going For It Anyway” three million dollar mega-media extravaganza. Majorly bummed, I immediately went looking for reviews of this epic, once-in-a-lifetime event. The L.A. Times seems to say I didn’t miss much. What do they know, though? They won’t even release the tapes they have of him, so I couldn’t watch that instead. Plus, they’re on their, what, fortieth round of layoffs?
Chances are, tonight’s 30-minute Barack Obama infomercial will have minimal effect on the final outcome of the 2008 presidential election.
Those leaning against the freshman Illinois senator were unlikely to be swayed by it (or even watch it).
Well, at least they got that right. They also said Obama didn’t even mention John McCain or Hillary Clinton.
As befits a front-runner’s status, Obama saw no reason to spend any time during the half-hour directly attacking John McCain. Indeed, the Republican’s name was never uttered.
We were struck by another omission. Several prominent Democrats had cameos in the ad — Ohio Gov. Ted Strickland, Kansas Gov. Kathleen Sebelius, New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson and Sen. Claire McCaskill of Missouri, among them. Conspicuously absent (at least to us) — Sen. Hillary Clinton of New York.
“Me, me, me,” huh? What else is new? Well, I guess he’s entitled, since he’s paying for it. Michelle Malkin anticipated the text of Obama’s “Greatest Show On Earth” before live-blogging it:
Higher purpose…blahblahblah…Change We Need…blahblahblah…Every American must play a role…Take care of one another…blahblahblah…
Just doing a little pre-liveblogging of the Obama-mercial, which begins in just a few minutes.
Say what you will about Ms. Malkin, it takes guts to sit through thirty minutes of Obama self-love to validate your pre-conceived notions about him. Me, I just spent the time contemplating belly lint. AP-Yahoo News, though, says I could have had a rollicking good time dizzying myself from all the spin, but I thought, and still think, that examining my cuticles for fungus was a lot more fun.
“I do know him because I taught at the University of Chicago,” Obama said. “And he is Palestinian. And I do know him and I have had conversations. He is not one of my advisors; he’s not one of my foreign policy people. His kids went to the Lab school where my kids go as well. He is a respected scholar, although he vehemently disagrees with a lot of Israel’s policy.
“To pluck out one person who I know and who I’ve had a conversation with who has very different views than 900 of my friends and then to suggest that somehow that shows that maybe I’m not sufficiently pro-Israel, I think, is a very problematic stand to take,” Obama said. “So, we gotta be careful about guilt by association.”
If you said William Ayers, you blew it. He’s a terrorist, not a Palestinian. According to ABC News’ Jake Tapper, Obama was explaining his relationship with Rashid Khalidi at a May 22 appearance before a group of Jewish voters in Florida. This is what Obama said about Ayers in the ABC Philadelphia debate as reported by Media Matters:
George, but this is an example of what I’m talking about. This is a guy who lives in my neighborhood, who’s a professor of English in Chicago who I know and who I have not received some official endorsement from. He’s not somebody who I exchange ideas from on a regular basis.
And the notion that somehow as a consequence of me knowing somebody who engaged in detestable acts 40 years ago, when I was 8 years old, somehow reflects on me and my values doesn’t make much sense, George.
Ben Smith of Politico reported in February that it was David Axelrod who said this about Obama/Ayers:
“Bill Ayers lives in his neighborhood. Their kids attend the same school,” he said. “They’re certainly friendly, they know each other, as anyone whose kids go to school together.”
Seems Ben had raised the Ayers question in an article a few days before. Good excuses are hard to come by, might as well recycle ‘em.
Note: the Tapper piece explores a McCain/Khalidi connection which Camp Johnny Mac doesn’t seem to deny, they just claim it’s beside the point.
Asked to respond to this seeming contradiction, McCain-Palin spokesman Michael Goldfarb writes, “It’s long been clear that Obama and Khalidi have a close relationship — that they were frequent dinner companions. It is another in a series of questionable associations, but it is not the focus of our request that the LA Times release this tape. It’s clear from the Times story that the evening featured speeches that were anti-Semitic in tone and anti-Israel in nature. As our initial statement said, ‘This campaign wants to know how Barack Obama responded to that hate-speech, whether he was mingling with Ayers, who he once described as ‘just a guy in my neighborhood,’ and anything else that might be of interest to voters now deciding who to support in this election.’”
African Press International says they have tapes of Michelle Obama having a hissy fit about them and their coverage of her husband’s campaign, where she lets it slip that he was adopted by his stepfather, and so what? Supposedly, she said lots of other things Camp O would rather not have people hear, and according to API, they’ve gone to great lengths to see that these tapes never see the light of day. Also according to API, they are just as determined to see that the tapes are released, and have entered into an agreement with FOX News, the terms of which apparently include a clause that FOX will not confirm the deal until 15 minutes before airtime. Now, API says, due to phenomenal pressure, they’re revealing the names of the FOX reporters involved: Sean Hannity and Greta Van Susteren. You now know what I know and here’s how I know it, straight from the horse’s mouth, so to speak:
Many have been wondering about what will happen to the Michelle Obama tape, now that API has received death threats for planning to have the tape aired. Death threats mounted after API refused an offer of 3 million US dollars by Senator Obama’s Campaign manager.
There has been speculations that Fox News may deny that there is an agreement already reached that gives the them permission to air the tape. The public who are aware of the existence of a tape should be aware that some elements in our society would not like the message in the tape to come out.
The agreement stipulates that any information on the day and hour the tape will be aired will only be announce 15 minutes to the airing time. This was agreed upon to avoid any pressure being directed to Fox News Network by individuals who would want to get the details about the tape in question.
The airing of the tape can take place any time from this day and due to its sensitivity, people who will inquire from Fox News and API for details will either get a no comment answer or that there is no agreement on the table.
We are aware of the fact that some people made inquiries today by emailing or telephoning Fox News and may have been disappointed with the answers they got. API is not here to mislead anyone and takes the responsibility to inform�its loyal readers�that the tape will be aired unless pressure wins over�any of the parties involved, of which case that will amount to a�breach of contract. �Such a thing�is unacceptable because API is committed to let the American people get the information in the tape and judge for themselves what value it may have in their political lives.
Although the parties had agreed that the particular shows going to air the tapes should not be made public before�15 minutes to airing of the tapes, public pressure has forced us to make this revelation earlier than we should.� Both parties, API and Fox are in agreement that no further details will be released on the subject.
�While we struggle to have the Michelle Obama tape, the McCain camp is struggling to have another tape that has information relevant to the campaign. The taped conversation has Mr obama when he was dining with friends considered radicals and supporters of terrorism.
The second tape in question is of a dinner for Rashid Khalidi, attended by the Obamas and possibly by William Ayers and Bernadine/Bernadette Dohrn, among others. The Los Angeles Times reported on the dinner in April, and have confirmed possession of a videotape of the evening’s event, which they refuse to release to the public.
I am sick of the Undemocratic Party, who thinks that because I refuse to accept a dubiously funded, novice Senator who can’t compose complete sentences unless they’re ghost-scripted and read from a TelePrompter, who thinks all black people look alike, who seems to believe that over-exposure is a sure-fire method of convincing people to vote for him, and who was force-fed to an unwilling rank-and-file in a completely undemocratic process, that means that I’m a bitter, deadend, racist bitch, no matter who I really am, or what I believe.
I am sick of the mainstream media, in conjunction with a self-appointed gang of blogger bullies, trying to cram illogical bullshit down my throat as if it’s calorie-free Snickers bars, while they ignore any hint of negative truth about their fake Messiah. News articles from “reputable” news sources promoting the blarney that because there are racists in America who don’t like black people, we should all vote for the black candidate in order to give these bigots a giant electoral “noogie,” are embraced by an ill-informed electorate gung-ho to put a charlatan in office in order to assuage their neatly Madison Avenue packaged and sold inherited racial guilt. Black people allow themselves to be played by these same co-conspirators in this unholy coup, simply to give a metaphorical finger to the society who would, and still will, continue to ignore their needs once they’ve been sufficiently exploited by a candidate who doesn’t even pretend to give a damn about them since it might piss off the other voters he needs to exploit.
Those of us who reject the notion that democratic principles are expendable in an “ends justifies the means” modus operandi, are villified for holding onto dearly held principles. The fact that we became Democats because we believe that these principles are the bedrock of everything this country is supposed to stand for makes us unwelcome dinosaurs in the party we helped to build before it was hijacked by thieves and liars willing to make a mockery of our faith in fairness for their own benefit. We’re supposed to be the good guys, the champions of the little guy, not the “yield to expedience, anything to win” guys.
Barack Obama was rejected by half of his party, probably more if the gamed caucusses were ever fairly evaluated, for a reason. He does not represent us. The fact that he is not a Republican is not a reason to vote for him, it is the singular reason not to.
Like Al Pacino, PUMAs say, “I’m gonna get him.” We don’t care how many self-produced American Idol episodes his ill-gotten gains allow him to purchase and air, how many voters take the day off to be bussed around making astroturf crowds designed to give the media and blogger boyz enough ammunition to back up their fairy tales of overwhelming support, or how many glassy-eyed acolytes “get in our faces” to badger us to set our principles aside so their Messiah can hoodwink and bamboozle us the way he’s done to them. We see the tricks so clearly that even when, and if, a rare moment of sincerity were to slip in, we would dismiss it, willing instead to believe every bad thing we hear. That happens when you lie, cheat and steal.
So, we don’t believe that a candidate willing to game the system and use unethical means to create the illusion that an unaccomplished politician who by all rights should be obscure, should be the standard bearer of the party we once loved. We don’t believe such a person could really love this “imperfect” country enough to properly lead it in spite of its’ flaws. We believe that anyone who would employ the sort of tactics used by Barack Obama and the corrupt Democratic Party elite who enable him, can not be rewarded in the name of our party. Some of us would rather break with our party altogether rather than co-sign that.
Therefore, a lot of Democrats and newly independent former Democrats will vote for John McCain. We will not watch infomercials and/or endless ads designed to shame and coerce us to toe the party line. Many will speak out, some, more convincingly than others, like the guy in the following video who makes some good points before he dives off the deep end; if you listen to us you will find nuggets of pure gold in our anger. Your clever tricks should all fail. Your party might win, but you’re no Democrats.
Da daaaa da dum… or nuh nuh nuhnuhnuhnuh…pick the dumdum music of your choice, you need something to lead in to the latest development in the Michelle Obama Audiotape Drama. African Press International says that there are some really unhappy people willing to do them grave bodily harm over releasing tapes they claim to possess of Michelle O ranting about this and that, and these people have made their displeasure known. Therefore, the API guy might have to delay his departure for a trip to New York for a “few hours” while authorities investigate. Whether that means that the airing of the tapes will also be delayed is unclear. Anyway, the drama continues:
The Obama camp is not saying anything publicly now, but have chosen to work behind the scenes in their efforts to influence the release of Michelle Obama tape. The impact the tape is expected to have on National Security�when finally released will be huge.
Peaceful approach to have the tapes not to be released has now turned into direct threats directed against API.
API on the other hand does not want to surrender to the pressure being mounted, even though faced with danger for ignoring the warnings not to allow the release of the tape. API is being bombarded with death threats from people who say have been�hired to silence API and those involved in the plan to have the tapes released.
The US embassy in Norway together with the Norwegian Security Service has been duly informed of the situation and has promised to give the matter the priority it deserves.
Due to the situation that has arisen, and security considerations, API reprentative’s trip to New York today to participate in a� planned live interview�will be temporarily delayed for some hours while the Embassy�looks into the matter.
Now that the situation has become so dangerous because some people are afraid to let the American people know the truth about Michelle Obama’s stand exhibited by her in the tape, API will thread carefully and will classify details on what is going on, especially details on when the API representative�will fly to New York, which flight�and where he will be housed while in the US. This will be done to avoid exposing him to any danger while on US soil
API will not rest until the tape is aired so that the American people may judge for themselves whether the contents of the tape is of relevance to the elections taking place�November the 4th.
Oh, baby, bay-bay! It’s getting hot in herre! African Press International claims they’ve been offered 3 million dollars for tapes they swear to possess of Michelle Obama spilling the beans about her husband’s adoptive status during a far-ranging general rant at them and the world. Angered that a black site would question Barack about anything, Ms. O supposedly strongly implied that if they played nicer, she’d hook ‘em up once hubby became prez. Now that API has reported a deal in place with FOX News to air the tapes, they say the O Team is in a panic:
Six hours after the release of information by API on the planned broadcast by Fox News Network of�the Michelle Obama tape, in accordance with an agreement that has been reached between API and Fox News Network, API� was contacted by Obama’s Campaign Manager.
Those who are close to the democratic presidential candidate must be�desperate to win the elections no matter what, otherwise they would not have taken such bold step to contact API with an offer of a bribe in order to stop the airing of the tape.
�Obama’s campaign manager�contacted API by telephone and�email offering 3 million US dollars followed with a request to�API to�cancel the deal with Fox News Network.
Ten days ago API�received the first request�to accept 2 million US dollars�by Mr Ed Hale, President�of Plains Radio, Texas -�USA, in an effort to suppress the information from reaching the public before the coming US Presidential elections.
�API has now taken a decision to contact the American Embassy in Oslo, Norway as soon as possible in order to report the matter and hand over the�evidence�for investigative purposes.
API’s Canadian lawyer is expected to fly�to Oslo shortly in order to assist in the legal matters that arise from the bribery attempt.
API’s Chief editor is expected to travel to New York, together with the Canadian lawyer, where he will appear live in one of the shows that� will air the Michelle Obama tape.
Okaaaaay? Wonder if they’ve got a tape of that?
Gotta hand it to API, though. If this is a hoax, it’s a damned good one.
The following videos and lyrics come directly from the You Tube site, no editorial commentary from me, followed by T.I.’s “Whatever You Like” lyrics.
The kids from the Ron Clark Academy performing live “You Can Vote However You Like,” a parody to TI’s “Whatever You Like”. Atlanta Georgia Ron Clark Academy.
for full interview click http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oEKNAZ…
Lyrics:
Obama on the left
McCain on the right
We can talk politics all night
And you can vote however you like
You can vote however you like, yeah
Democratic left
Republican right
November 4th we decide
And you can vote however you like
You can vote however you like, yeah
(McCain supporters)
McCain’s the best candidate
With Palin as his running mate
They’ll fight for gun rights, pro life,
The conservative right
Our future is bright
Better economy in site
And all the world will feel our military might
(Obama supporters)
But McCain and Bush are real close right
They vote alike and keep it tight
Obama’s new, he’s younger too
The Middle Class he will help you
He’ll bring a change, he’s got the brains
McCain and Bush are just the same
You are to blame, Iraq’s a shame
Four more years would be insane
Lower your Taxes – you know Obama Won’t
PROTECT THE LOWER CLASS – You know McCain won’t!
Have enough experience – you know that they don’t
STOP GLOBAL WARMING – you know that you won’t
I want Obama
FORGET OBAMA
Stick with McCain and you’re going to have some drama
We need it
HE’LL BRING IT
He’ll be it
YOU’LL SEE IT
We’ll do it
GET TO IT
Let’s move it
DO IT!
Obama on the left
McCain on the right
We can talk politics all night
And you can vote however you like
You can vote however you like, yeah
Democratic left
Republican right
November 4th we decide
And you can vote however you like, I said
You can vote however you like, yeah
I’m talking big pipe lines, and low gas prices
Below $2.00 that would be nice
But to do it right we gotta start today
Finding renewable ways that are here to stay
I want Obama
FORGET OBAMA,
Stick wit McCain you gone have some drama
MORE WAR IN IRAQ
Iran he will attack
CAN’T BRING OUR TROOPS BACK
We gotta vote Barack!
Obama on the left
McCain on the right
We can talk politics all night
And you can vote however you like, I said
You can vote however you like, yeah
Democratic left
Republican right
November 4th we decide
And you can vote however you like, I said
You can vote however you like, yeah
Earlier today, I said the whole African Press International “we got Michelle Obama tapes, nyah, nanna, na na” thing appeared to be a dead issue, and it well may be. Then again, maybe not. API has a new post up, claiming they have entered into an agreement with FOX News to air a significant portion of a 54 minute tape of Michelle His Belle talking politics she shouldn’t have been talking. Hey, I’m just the messenger:
A final�agreement has been�reached between African Press International�(API) and Fox News Network (USA) on the dates to air the Michelle Obama tape arising from a discussion Mrs Obama had with the API�two weeks ago. The show will take place any day/time from now, with a 15 minutes alert�on when it is to take place. Other programmes will be interrupted. This is a precaution taken to avoid interference from any quarter.
In the agreement, Fox News Network will broadcast 39 minutes�of the �54 minutes long tape. The whole tape cannot be aired unedited due to security reasons and especially due to the explosive political temperature in the country because of the�Presidential elections that is just around the corner, November 4th.
The tape will be aired in two portions by two�separate units in the Network. API’s representative will appear live in one of the shows.
The parties have agreed that the information to be released to the public on the agreement will not include the naming of the units at Fox News Network that will air the tapes in order to avoid outside pressure and influence of any kind before the show has taken place. Nondisclosure of the name of the shows that will air the tapes has become necessary due to pressure�from�groups interested to block the release of the contents to the public.
Due to a huge interest in the tapes�shown by some private individuals, groups belonging to some political camp(s) and persons connected to a section of�an intelligence network, it has been decided that the 54 minutes long unedited tape is to be kept outside the United States�in safe custody of one of API’s�Lawyers based in Ontario, Canada.
The day and time schedules of the�broadcast will only be announced 15 minutes before the Show begins in order to avoid attempts to block the Show from airing the tapes.
Any pressure from any outside forces that may want to know the exact day and�time schedule of the Show before-hand or any other details in the agreement will get no answers to their requests either�from API or Fox News Network.
The decision to have the above information public was a difficult one due to the�sensitivity of the case and huge interest against, and for, the release of the�contents of the tape for public consumption.
So far, there’s nothing about any of this on FOX News’ website, and we can’t ask them about it, we’ve been warned. But, look, if API’s got ‘em, I wanna hear ‘em. If they don’t, they should quit screwing around. Whether they do or not, I’m still not voting for Barack Obama. But, either way, this whole thing is a hoot and a lot of fun to watch.
At one time, I actually tried to follow primary election coverage by reading Slate Magazine as one of my news sources. Boy, was that short-lived. Took almost no time at all to realize that those guys were so far in the tank for Obama that getting out of bed in the morning should give them the bends. Tempted by attention-grabbing headlines declaring that I, as a PUMA, am a harridan, I have also occasionally peeked in to see if the Obamalove tank had been drained and refilled with journalistic impartiality, and lo and behold!
Nope.
Seems they took an internal office poll on the election, and guess who won? G’head, guess. I’ll wait.
Hmmm hmmmm hmmmm hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm…
Give up? Well, his initials are “I Have Less Experience Than Sarah Palin But Slate, HuffPo And Kos And All My Other Homies Make Fun Of Her For Me And Make It Look Like I’m Winning.”
Today, Slate’sstaff and contributors reveal how they’re voting in next week’s presidential election. This continues a tradition we began in 2000 and repeated in 2004. It will come as little surprise to many of our readers—and certainly as no surprise to Sarah “Media Elite” Palin—that Barack Obama won Slate in a landslide. In capturing 55 of our 57 votes, with 1 to McCain and 1 to Libertarian Bob Barr, Obama won an even bigger Slate majority than Al Gore in 2000 (29 of 37 votes) or John Kerry in 2004 (46 of 52 votes). Incidentally, this is a voluntary project: Our staff and contributors can reveal how they voted, but they are not required to.
But, they’re not journalistically compromised, no way, uh uh, no sireee Bob.
Why did Obama win the swing state of Slate? Like Mike and Jacob before me, I don’t think a candidate’s Slate victory reflects a bias that has corrupted the magazine during the campaign. There are obvious reasons why Slate would lean heavily toward Obama: Most of our staff and contributors live in extremely Democratic cities on the East and West Coast. (It’s worth noting that our lone McCain voter, Deputy Managing Editor Rachael Larimore, lives in Ohio.) Slate’svoters tend to skew young, and all polls show younger voters favoring the Democrat. Also, a significant number of former Slate contributors, among them Austan Goolsbee, Jason Furman, and Phil Carter, are now advising Obama. It’s understandable that our affection for them and respect for their views may be accruing to Obama. (He’s taking Jason and Austan’s advice on the economy? Then he must be pretty smart.) And, finally, we are journalists, and, to quote Kinsley:
No doubt it is true that most journalists vote Democratic, just as most business executives (including most media owners) vote Republican, though neither tendency is as pronounced as their respective critics believe. This is a natural result of the sort of people who are attracted to various careers. It is not the product of any conspiracy. There is no Liberal Central Committee drafting young liberals into journalism against their will or blackballing young conservatives. And there is nothing that can be done to change this disparity, unless conservative press critics would like to see the media institute a political quota system, favoring conservatives over better-qualified liberals (affirmative action for opponents of affirmative action).
But—for the millionth time!—an opinion is not a bias! The fact that reporters tend to be liberal says nothing one way or another about their tendency to be biased. It does suggest that when political bias does creep in, it is more likely to tilt liberal than conservative. But there are so many other pressures and prejudices built into the news—including occasional overcompensation for fear of appearing biased—that raw political bias plays a fairly small role. …Of course it is not easy to persuade folks of this, and many will never believe it. No doubt it is easier just to keep your political opinions secret and imply that you don’t have any. But that absurdity or dishonesty itself undermines your credibility. Or it ought to.
Now, do you really, really, finally get it? All right. In case you’re interested, though I can’t imagine why, you can click here to see why your favorite, impartial, rationalizing, lying Slate writer voted for Obama in their office poll. Or you can watch this cool video.
Every time you turn around there’s a new “Obama Tape Drama.” A couple of weeks ago now, African Press International claimed to have tapes of Michelle Obama reading them the riot act for questioning her husband’s citizenship eligibility, especially with them being black and all. It’s pretty obvious by now to even the most ardent Obama hater that these potentially explosive tapes do not exist, since API’s self-imposed deadline, Oct. 27, has come and gone all over the world. Unless I hear differently, that’s a dead issue.
But there are potentially explosive tapes that do exist, or rather one tape, of Obama in the company of Palestinian University of Chicago/Columbia professor Rashid Khalidi, said to be in the possession of an L.A. Times reporter, Peter Wallsten, who says he said all he’s gonna say about the matter in April:
CHICAGO — It was a celebration of Palestinian culture — a night of music, dancing and a dash of politics. Local Arab Americans were bidding farewell to Rashid Khalidi, an internationally known scholar, critic of Israel and advocate for Palestinian rights, who was leaving town for a job in New York.
A special tribute came from Khalidi’s friend and frequent dinner companion, the young state Sen. Barack Obama. Speaking to the crowd, Obama reminisced about meals prepared by Khalidi’s wife, Mona, and conversations that had challenged his thinking.
Now, since John McCain’s camp has a thing about who Obama “pals around with,” they’re demanding that a videotape of the evening’s events be released immediately. So says Politico’s Ben Smith:
John McCain’s campaign is demanding that the Los Angeles Times release a video of a party for a prominent Palestinian activist that Barack Obama attended in 2003.
The Times described the going-away party for former University of Chicago professor, and Obama friend, Rashid Khalidi, in a story in April. The story reported that Palestinians thought they might have a friend in Obama because of his friendships in that community, despite the fact that his positions have never been particularly pro-Palestinian.
“A major news organization is intentionally suppressing information that could provide a clearer link between Barack Obama and Rashid Khalidi,” said McCain spokesman Michael Goldfarb, citing Obama’s friendship with Khalidi, who is now a professor at Columbia University.
He said the video could, among other things, show how Obama responded to a poem recited at the party accusing Israel of “terrorism” and warning of consequences for U.S. support for Israel, which Goldfarb described as “hate speech.”
“The election is one week away, and it’s unfortunate that the press so obviously favors Barack Obama that this campaign must publicly request that the Los Angeles Times do its job — make information public,” he said.
The campaign hadn’t previously demanded the video, though conservative bloggers have, and neither other reporters nor McCain’s researchers have been able to dig up a copy.
Khalidi is a controversial figure, reviled by pro-Israel activists, though not a marginal one. A former professor at the University of Chicago, he’s now Edward Said Professor of Arab Studies at Columbia, and respected by many in academia. He’s been criticized most for saying that Palestinians have a right to resist Israeli occupation and has been described as a former P.L.O. spokesman, a label he has denied.
Wallsten basically says, “bite me,” in an email response to requests to release the video, but won’t say why:
“Over six months ago the Los Angeles Times published a detailed account of the events shown on the videotape. The Times is not suppressing anything. Just the opposite — the L.A. Times brought the matter to light,” wrote the readers’ representative, Jamie Gold.
L.A. Times spokeswoman Nancy Sullivan wouldn’t discuss the decision not to release the tape in detail.
Whatever the reason for Wallsten’s reticence, you gotta wonder why so much Obama info is kept so assiduously under wraps. Why not show the original birth certificate, college transcripts and Illinois Senate records? What’s in there? Who or what’s on the tapes that Wallsten doesn’t want people to see? Whos’ he protecting, if anyone, and at whose direction? Obama wants to be president; it’s only natural that people want to know exactly who he is. If papers, records and tapes can help shed some light, it makes people suspicious when he seems so determined not to allow people access to them.
Screw Barack Obama. Can you say that about “god” and get away with it? Guess I’ll find out. Anyway, screw Barack Obama. Who is he to ask people to take the day off work to badger and try to hoodwink people to vote for his still inexperienced behind? He still can’t make complete sentences without a TelePrompTer, nowadays he doesn’t even try. And just because his over-funded campaign can make slick commercials saying whatever people want to hear, people are supposed to lose a day’s pay? It’s not enough to vote for him, now they want you to work for him, too? For free? He’s raised the equivalent of the national debt and he wants free labor? Screw that.
Oh, man, I’m finding myself in the Twilight Zone so often nowadays that I’m starting to like it here. This latest Leary-like trip is thanks to the Denver Post:
Colorado Springs police say a deer head found in the parking lot of a Barack Obama campaign office is “a very disturbing event” that is being investigated as a threat.
Police Lt. David Whitlock said the deer’s antlers were cut off to make the head resemble a donkey, the Democratic Party’s emblem.
Police say campaign volunteers found the head Saturday night.
Tom Kise, a spokesman for Republican John McCain, says the incident is “despicable” and compared it to hate speech. Police say they have no suspects.
C’mon, first a bear, now a deer mutilated to look like a donkey? Hello? Anybody out there? Then TPM graciously points the way down the Yellow Brick Road to Kookooville with this gem:
Some three dozen workers at a telemarketing call center in Indiana walked off the job rather than read an incendiary McCain campaign script attacking Barack Obama, according to two workers at the center and one of their parents.
Nina Williams, a stay-at-home mom in Lake County, Indiana, tells us that her daughter recently called her from her job at the center, upset that she had been asked to read a script attacking Obama for being “dangerously weak on crime,” “coddling criminals,” and for voting against “protecting children from danger.”
Puh-leeze. We’re supposed to believe that dedicated McCain supporters, who have been subjected to one-sided media abuse, in addition to the fanatical Obama canvassers, blogger bullies and paid posters spewing filth + talking points on every website with the gall to actually try to hold their unqualified, lying candidate to some semblance of some sort of competency standards, were so freaked out by these rather bland “attacks” that they walked out en masse? I’m not buying it.
I’m not buying that “assassins” planning to dress up in white tuxedos and top hats and drive really fast at Barack Obama while shooting at him, after shooting 88 black people and decapitating 14 others without getting caught at oh, say, 2, 3 murders at the most, are credible, either. Gimme a fucking break.
Obama’s campaign manager, David Axelrod, King of Astroturfing,” has incorporated Republican “ratfucking” principles into his Felix the Cat bag-o’-tricks and “astrofucked” his candidate through the primaries and almost to the White House. “Astroturfing” is the “art” of building fake grassroots support in order to bullshit the gullible into thinking there’s real grassroots support, and “ratfucking” is just what it sounds like. All of the incidents cited above sound like “astrofucking” at it’s best, which is the same as at it’s worst.
A commentor over at HillBuzz, calling herself “Sarah P,” claims to be a paid “astrofucker,” though the descriptive appellation is mine. Sarah P’s allegations however, leave no doubt that the name fits:
Ok, I want to clear my conscious a little. Hopefully you could make a blog post to help some fellow clinton supporters out.
I work for a campaign and can’t wait for this week to be over.
I was doing it for a job. I was not a fan of any candidate but over time grew to love HRC.
The internal campaign idea is to twist, distort, humiliate and finally dispirit you.
We pay people and organize people to go to all the online sites and “play the part of a clinton or mccain supporter who just switched our support for obama”
We do this to stifle your motivation and to destroy your confidence.
We did this the whole primary and it worked.
Sprinkle in mass vote confusion and it becomes bewildering. Most people lose patience and just give up on their support of a candidate and decide to just block out tv, news, websites, etc.
This surprisingly has had a huge suppressing movement and vote turnout issues.
Next, we infiltrate all the blogs and all the youtube videos and overwhelm the voting, the comments, etc. All to continue this appearance of overwhelming world support.
People makes posts to the effect that the world has “gone mad”
Thats the intention. To make you feel stressed and crazy and feel like the world is ending.
We have also had quite a hand in skewing many many polls, some we couldn’t control as much as we would have liked. But many we have spoiled over. Just enough to make real clear politics look scarey to a mccain supporter. Its worked, alough the goal was to appear 13-15 points ahead.
see, the results have been working. People tend to support a winner, go with the flow, become “sheeple”
The polls are roughly 3-5 points in favor of Barack. Thats due to our inflation of the polls and pulling in the sheeple.
Our donors, are the same people who finance the MSM. Their interests are tied, Barack then tends to come across as teflon. Nothing sticks. And trust, there were meetings with Fox news. The goal was to blunt them as much as possible. Watch Bill Oreilly he has become much more diplomatic and “fair and balanced” and soft. Its because he wants to retain the #1 spot on cable news and to do that he has to have access to the Obama campaign and we worked hard at stringing him a long and keeping him soft for an interview swap. It worked and now he is anticipating more access. So he is playing it still soft.
This is why nothing sticks.
The operation is massive, the goal is to paint a picture that is that of a winner, regardless of the results.
There is no true inauguration draft or true grant park construction going on. There will be a party, but we are boasting beyond the truth to make it seem like the election is wrapped up.
Our goal is to continue to make you lose your moral. We worked hard at persuasion and paying off and timing and playing the right political numbers to get key republican endorsements to make it seem even more like it was over and the world was coming to an end for you all.
There is a huge staff of people working around the clock, watching every site, blogs, etc. We flood these sites. We have had a goal to overwhelm.
The truth is here. I could go on and on, but you get the picture.
I am saying this because I know HRC was better for the country, and now realize this. I was too late by the time I connected to her. To me Barack was just a cool young dude that seemed like a star. I didn’t know him or his policies, but now I understand more than I care to and I realize his interests are more for him, and the DNC and all working like puppets with dean. I always thought a president wanted the better good for the country. The end result I see is everyone dependent on the government, this means more and more people voting for the DNC. This means the future is forever altered. I don’t see this as america, so I am now supporting John Mccain.
Sarah Palin is a huge threat, and our campaign has feared her like you can’t imagine. If it seems unfair how she has been treated, well its because she has had a team working round the clock to make her look like a fool.
this is a big conspiracy and I am so shocked that its not realized.
We released a little blurb the other day that the Obama campaign was already working on reelection and now putting our efforts towards 2012. This was to make it seem like it was above us to continue caring about 2008. Trust me, its a lie. David is very smart, but its a sticky ugly not very truthful kind of intelligence.
Its not over yet, but I think the machine is working. And its a hill to climb.
I will be quitting my post on nov 5th and my vote will be for John Mccain. Fortunately, my position has been a marketing position and I don’t feel I had any part of anything I would feel guilty for. But I look forward to getting out of this as the negativity and environment upsets me.
I wish you all well, and goodluck.
PS my name is not really sarah. but I am a female and I understand your plight.
Whether “Sarah P” is real or not, what she describes has been observed by everyone paying attention since the primaries began. Way back, before a single vote was cast, an internet search of “Hillary Clinton” netted hundreds of mostly negative hits, while “John McCain” pretty much took you to his website. But “Barack Obama” got back oodles and oodles of Obamalove spewing forth from one’s computer screen, threatening to drown an unwary information seeker in it’s ooey-gooey goodness. One could not help but be impressed that a relatively unknown junior Senator with only one major speech/sermon (okay, maybe two if you count his announcement speech) to his credit could generate such an outpouring of affection from so many cyberlovers. Clicking on one g-spot disguised as keyboard key after another, the sheer magnitude of magnificence one experienced by learning of his already unprecedented fundraising power and compelling charisma, took one’s breath away. Remember Obama Girl? Add a few rock star rallies, some celebrity-filled, creepy love chants, a bunch of fainting chicks, throw in a couple dozen “impartial analysts,” a little race-baiting, and who could not love the guy?
Me.
I thought it was bullshit then, and I think it’s bullshit now.
Old bullshit might stop stinking, but it’s still not something you want to keep around the White House.
I know, I know. It’s a provocative headline. But I couldn’t bring myself to use the title of the article to which I refer, which, in my opinion, is much worse:
White people shouldn’t be allowed to vote
It’s for the good of the country and for those who’re bitter for a reason and armed because they’re scared.
For the good of the country? If the author, Jonathan Valania, chief editor of the blog, Phawker.com, really cared about the “good of the country” he would stop blogging. What is it with these “chief editors,” anyway? At any rate, here’s why Valania thinks white people shouldn’t vote, in his own words, ‘cuz I’m not that good:
As a lifelong Caucasian, I am beginning to think the time has finally come to take the right to vote away from white people, at least until we come to our senses. Seriously, I just don’t think we can be trusted to exercise it responsibly anymore.
I give you Exhibit A: The last eight years.
In 2000, Bush-Cheney stole the election, got us attacked, and then got us into two no-exit wars. Four years later, white people reelected them. Is not the repetition of the same behavior over and over again with the expectation of a different outcome the very definition of insanity? (It is, I looked it up.)
Exhibit B is any given Sarah Palin rally.
Exhibit C would be Ed Rendell and John Murtha, who in separate moments of on-the-record candor they would come to regret, pointing out that there are plenty of people in Pennsylvania who just cannot bring themselves to pull the lever for a black man – no matter what they tell pollsters.
These people are ruining things for the rest of us white people who are ready to move on. Sure, they have their reasons, chimerical though they may be: He’s a Muslim. He’s a terrorist. He’s a Muslim terrorist. He’s going to fire all the white people and give their jobs to blacks.
But those are just the little white lies these people allow themselves to be told, a self-induced cognitive dissonance that lets them avoid saying the unsayable: I cannot pull the lever for a black man.
Uh, Jonny, white people should be scared, even though, “black” and “Muslim” have nothing to do with it. “Inexperienced” and “liar” are much more compelling, fear-inducing reasons to oppose Barack Obama. And before you “move on” to the “she must be racist” rigmarole, for your information, I’m a life-long African American. Maybe if you did “move on,” you might get to the place where you lost your freaking mind and pick it up and use it, if it’s not too damaged.
According to African Press International, the once obscure website now famous for their claims to be in possession of inflammatory tapes of Michelle Obama going off, if we elect Barack Obama there “will be blood.” Now, there are more than enough reasons for black people not to vote for a dubiously funded, freshman senator who barely knows how to find the bathrooms in the Capitol Building, let alone how to legislate, and whose main qualification for president seems to be the ability to read ghost-written sermons from a TelePrompTer, but threats of violence are not among them. However, API says we can count on being “brought to our knees” as a nation if not enough people wake up in time; look at what happened in Kenya:
It may sound as a dream. It may sound as fiction and it may sound as fantasy, but it is around the corner. Bloodshed can only be stopped by the Americans themselves by execising their voting right wisely. Personally, I do not have any agenda or intention to bring forth confusion only days to the election, but the truth must be told to the Americans and the world.
America, the only powerful nation in the world right now, will be brought to its knees between the 5th of November 2008 and January 20th 2009 if the American people do not vote wisely on the 4th of November.
Looking at what happened in Kenya during last year’s Presidential elections, one may understand why bloodshed is around every street corner and home in America. In Kenya last year, everybody sang the song of change and change was to be at whatever cost, people said. Those who wanted some excitement wanted immediate change, but got bloodshed in the end and lost families. Kenyans were not prepared for the bloodshed that followed, bringing the country to a standstill for 4 months. People were killed. Neighbours murdered neighbours in the name of change. So Americans should be prepared for that which may come in the name of change.
It is good to have change, but change�that people are prepared to deal with. Kenya did not get the change promised by some leaders, even after�brainwashing their followers making them to believe that President Mwai Kibaki was a old man who could die of health reasons. Some were brainwashed that the best thing for Kenya was to have change by electing a younger man in the name of Raila Odinga to be the President of the Republic. My fear is coming from here, now that Americans have been brainwashed that McCain is old and may die in office and the best for America is to have a younger man in the name of Obama. Most of those who were brainwashed in Kenya got wild when they did not get Raila as the president. Some chose to accept defeat while others chose to go on rampage raping and killing their neighbours. If Kenyans were ignored by the international community when the bloodshed started, the country would be very unstable today. The country was rescued from a brink of collapse, thanks to the international community. Who will rescue America, the most powerful Nation in the world if they start travelling on the road of bloodshed?.
For some it did not matter that people were dying. There was only one was in their mind, “Change”. They were, however surprised not to get the change they had been promised, but instead they lost their loved ones killed by those who were funded by�some of the leaders who had promised them change. Those who killed for some leaders are now languishing in Kenyan jails waiting to be prosecuted. Where are the leaders who promised them change? Some are now having high positions in Kenya’s coalition government and making a good living for themselves and their families.
The same shall surely befall America if they do not vote wisely.
When people talk about change it is�a very good thing. But the question they should ask is, yes we want change, but,�change from what to what? People should know where they are heading to and should not be blinded and misled to fight for change they do not know where it is leading them to.
There’s more to this post, but enough is enough. Chief Editor Korir may be well-intentioned, or he may be an unscrupulous hoaxter, but either way, indulging in racial fear-mongering makes him no better than any of the other rabble rousers using threats to blackmail voters. Barack Obama is a lousy candidate, unworthy of overwhelming support from anybody. Make that case, and everything else will take care of itself.
Looks like another tv station asking Joe (Yeah, I Said It) Biden questions he didn’t like, has been banned by the Obiden campaign at Joe’s request. I say, “looks like,” ‘cuz, this one kinda smells. You decide.
Since, according to AP-Yahoo News, the Feds have proven that some loony white skinhead guys were determined to kill Barack Obama by driving really fast and shooting at him, after they killed over one hundred other black people for no reason, I guess I have to vote for him now, huh?
Federal agents have broken up a plot by two neo-Nazi skinheads to assassinate Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama and shoot or decapitate 102 black people, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco Firearms and Explosives said Monday.
In court records unsealed Monday in U.S. District Court in Jackson, Tenn., federal agents said they disrupted plans to rob a gun store and target a predominantly African-American high school in a murder spree that was to begin in Tennessee. Agents said the skinheads did not identify the school by name.
Jim Cavanaugh, special agent in charge of ATF’s Nashville field office, said the two men planned to shoot 88 black people and decapitate another 14. The numbers 88 and 14 are symbolic in the white supremacist community.
The men also sought to go on a national killing spree after the Tennessee murders, with Obama as its final target, Cavanaugh told The Associated Press.
“They said that would be their last, final act — that they would attempt to kill Sen. Obama,” Cavanaugh said. “They didn’t believe they would be able to do it, but that they would get killed trying.”
An Obama spokeswoman traveling with the senator in Pennsylvania had no immediate comment.
The men, Daniel Cowart, 20, of Bells, Tenn., and Paul Schlesselman 18, of West Helena, Ark., are being held without bond. Agents seized a rifle, a sawed-off shotgun and three pistols from the men when they were arrested. Authorities alleged the two men were preparing to break into a gun shop to steal more.
Attorney Joe Byrd, who has been hired to represent Cowart, did not immediately return a call seeking comment Monday.
Cowart and Schlesselman are charged with possessing an unregistered firearm, conspiring to steal firearms from a federally licensed gun dealer, and threatening a candidate for president.
The investigation is continuing, and more charges are possible, Cavanaugh said.
The court records say Cowart and Schlesselman also bought nylon rope and ski masks to use in a robbery or home invasion to fund their spree, during which they allegedly planned to go from state to state and kill people.
For the Obama plot, the legal documents show, Cowart and Schlesselman “planned to drive their vehicle as fast as they could toward Obama shooting at him from the windows.”
“Both individuals stated they would dress in all white tuxedos and wear top hats during the assassination attempt,” the court complaint states. “Both individuals further stated they knew they would and were willing to die during this attempt.”
Cavanaugh said there’s no evidence — so far — that others were willing to assist Cowart and Schlesselman with the plot.
He said authorities took the threats very seriously.
“They seemed determined to do it,” Cavanaugh said. “Even if they were just to try it, it would be a trail of tears around the South.”
I can understand the rope, ski masks, etc., but they would both wear white tuxedos and top hats? My other question, if the records were unsealed in court today, when did this happen? Well, according to KAIT in Jonesborough, Arkansas, last week:
The pair was arrested on October 22, 2008 by the Crockett County, Tennessee Sheriff’s Department.
Good thing they didn’t tell us about all this last week, we might have missed all that Biden stuff.
I have learned so many things this election cycle. I learned that just running for president qualifies as presidential experience, since the guy who didn’t have enough to run in the primaries now has enough to win! Boo-yah! I have also learned that girls can’t spend a lot of money on clothes if they want to be taken seriously as major party candidates for high offices they won’t win anyway, since they’re girls. Alllllrrriiiiight! And, I learned, just today, in fact, that it’s okay to depict women as lynching victims, but if you show black men hanging from a chimney, that’s bad. Who knew? If I didn’t read news stories, I know I wouldn’t know that.
See, some guy in West Hollywood has a mannequin dressed as Sarah Palin hanging from his chimney below another mannequin dressed as John McCain surrounded by flames (which, of course, would mean that his house was on fire, since flames aren’t supposed to shoot out of chimneys) as, get this…a Halloween gag! That not only makes it okay, that makes it “art.” From KTLA:
The creator of the display, Chad Michael Morrisette says the mannequin may be unacceptable any other month, but he says it’s Halloween and that makes it okay.
“It should be seen as art and it should be seen within the month of October. It’s time to be scary and spooky,” Morrisette said.
“I know if we had done it with Barack Obama, people would’ve probably thrown things through our windows,” Morrisette said. “The image of a hanged black man is a lot more intense than the image of a hanged white woman — for our country — in the history of our country.”
From what I can gather, the whole thing is okay because they guy who put it up is gay:
The Republican vice presidential candidate is not considered to be a friend of the gay community and has been the subject of rumors throughout West Hollywood in recent days. First, there was word the city was going to ban Sarah Palin drag queens at its upcoming costumed street party, which draws some 500,000 people annually. But, that rumor turned out to be false.
So, I guess, if you’re gay and working under false assumptions, it’s fine and dandy to express your misplaced faux outrage by depicting the person not responsible for your misconceptions as a lynching victim, if it’s Halloween. Who the hell knew?
What’s next, burning “fag” giggles? Fun with witches? The possibilities boggle the mind. With so much hilarity to pursue, I sure am relieved it’s not a problem as long as the “fags,” witches, whatever, aren’t black.
Some say Barack Obama has a “socialist agenda.” I have no idea what that means, let alone if it’s true. In this video, he talks about the “redistribution of wealth.”
In this one, he talks about a “Civilian National Defense.” The longer video with the entire speech can be found here, for context, with the money quote coming about 16:42.
He also talks about AmeriCorp, damned near compulsory “volunteering,” putting old people to work, and making kids work off their college loans. And who can forget Michelle Obama’s words?
“Barack Obama will require you to work. He is going to demand that you shed your cynicism. That you put down your divisions. That you come out of your isolation, that you move out of your comfort zone . . . Barack will never allow you to go back to your lives as usual – uninvolved, uninformed.”
Yet, how do you then account for his financial backing from people like Penny Pritzker, JP Morgan Chase’s Jamie Dimon and William Daley, both of whom are on his finance team and who I have written about here, here,here,and here, among others. Earl Ofari Hutchinson, in a piece for the Huffington Post, lambasted Obama and McCain equally for their part in the finacial crisis, given the amount of money both have recieved from prime players, though Obama has gotten far more, which can be validated here, here, here,and here.
When Obama talks about “spreading the wealth around” is he really talking about “redistributing the wealth” to the “middle class,” or is he talking about restructuring the financial industry to the benefit of the big money donors who bankroll him?
This lovely, yet typical, email was received by and posted on over on PUMA Pac. Hardly persuasive, one can only hope that these sorts of communications are somebody’s idea of a joke. However, given the kinds of emails, photos and comments often illustrated on other PUMA friendly sites, like HillBuzz and Cannonfire, it’s far more likely that whoever composed and distributed this, with the subject line, “You need some penis,” was dead serious:
Why don't you bitter lonely chicks give this crap up?
Obama will be your President so bend over and enjoy it
If Obama was a socialist/terrorist why do so many Americans support him
Bill and Hill
Al gore
Colin Powell
Dick Lugar
Scott McCllelan sic
Chris Buckley
Etc. Are all these people stupid?
Face it, you are a bitter broad who is upset your candidate lost and now support
Palin who goes against all of Hillarys views. She does have a pussy though. So I
guess she qualified
What a bunch of stupid irrational BITCHES you are
And you should be ashamed the way you con these maladjusted chicks. out of their
money. I bet you have made a nice comeup huh?
Sent via BlackBerry by AT&T
And now, a couple of examples cited on Cannonfire, in a post entitled “Let’s Look At The History,” this one sent to radio talk show host, Steve Corbett:
In the thousands of emails I’ve received in the year that “Corbett” has been on the air, I have not received a single death threat – until yesterday.
“We will kill you when Obama become PRESIDENT OF USA.,” the email reads. “You would see!!!”
Most death threats do not result in death.
But some do.
What makes this threat to kill me all the more mysterious is that it appears to have been sent through Barack Obama’s official campaign website – barackobama.com – the website that sends me official announcements of Obama’s campaign comings and goings.
Another one, supposedly also sent from Obama’s official website, re: Hillary Clinton:
“Just slit her throat, lock her in a car boot, and drive the car into river in West Virginia. Ain’t gonna let no whore screw with the man”
And people wonder why we found Ashley Todd believable. I don’t support McCain/Palin, but behavior like this should not be rewarded. For people like me, who are uncomfortable voting for McCain, but can’t see themselves voting for Obama under any circumstances, this stuff turns a third party vote into a “screw you back” vote. Too many of those and polls become meaningless.
Is this him? The picture on the left is from a Dagbladet.no newspaper article referred to me by a commenter identifying him(her?)self as “umm yeah” in the comment section of my post, entitled African Press International Conference Call. “Chief Editor Sammy Korir” is the supposed editor of African Press International, a WordPress website claiming to be based in Norway and in possession of potentially explosive audio tapes of Michelle Obama. API now claims to have reached an agreement with an American cable news company for the release of these tapes:
We hope our readers understand how difficult some negotiations can be especially when there are considerations to be taken into acount�as a result of wishes of the people involved. However, things have moved very fast and we can now confirm that API is in agreement with A US Cable TV Network and the Michelle Obama tapes will be aired without unnecessary delay.
However, the Norwegian news report seems to indicate that Mr. Korir has a history of misrepresenting himself. The translated-into-English article is rather difficult to follow, but as near as I can figure, Dagbladet says that Korir’s claims of being some sort of agent for some kind of police agency, are untrue. Mr. Korir has asserted on his website that he has been in contact with the CIA regarding the Michelle Obama tapes. The Dagbladet story calls all that into question, though:
Sammy Korir will not talk to Dagbladet, but in a letter to several chief says he openly that he has been with the Police Immigration Unit (PU) from February 2007, and until he said the job and ended as police agent at the end of April this year.
While police servants in the PU failed to identify the African asylum seekers in Norway, will Korir soon identified many of the African men – and got them out of the country.
Korir has traveled around in Norway and abroad with its own police ID issued by the Immigration Police unit.This has happened without the senior leadership team of PU have been aware that Korir operated for the police.
It is entirely possible that I have misinterpreted the translated article; I encourage anyone interested in the story to follow this link and read it for themselves. I have chronicled events from the beginning, anyone who wants to can search my archives for African Press International or follow the link I’ve provided to their website for more information. Or, you can just kick back with a beer and watch TV.
The editor of The African Press International website, known as Chief Editor Korir, is inviting any and all to join him in an “online discussion” (whatever that is) at 16:15 Norwegian time (whenever that is) to discuss the Michelle Obama “leave my husband the hell alone” tapes he claims to possess. In case you’re interested (still) here’s the info:
We have noted your concern as readers. It is important that you understand�we are doing our best and our interest is to ensure that we do the right thing so that nobody handling or who has handled the tapes gets hurt. It serves no purpose to continue speculating whether we have the tapes or not, or whether we are genuine or not.
The answer is simple: The tapes exists and will be aired. We also�want you to know that we are genuine in all this and API has had not intention to mislead anyone. The truth of the matter is that there has been a delay, yes we understand, but there is nothing wrong being careful in situations like this one.
There is no question in our minds that you as a reader understand why it is important to� be careful when dealing with information that touches on the security situation of any nation.
There has been a lot of pressure from the readers and the same from those who represent Nations in question. API has to way and balance its act so that nobody is put into an embarrassing situation and for that matter danger to any ones life.
We are not about to drop airing the tapes. It will be done even if some continue to place obstacles on our way.
If you want to join in our short discussion at 16.15 Norwegian time, please email us on africanpress@getmail.no and place your number so that we can call you. Your number and name will not be made public in any way.
�If you join, it cost you nothing at all to participate!
Apparently Team Obama/Biden has their knickers in a twist about an interview Biden graciously gave to a spiteful inquisitor who unfairly asked questions she should have known Joe would rather not be asked. Questions a Republican, or anybody who challenged the “inevitable” Obama/Biden coronation might ask, instead of the “how can I help you make your case to the American people?” questions they usually get. This is clearly not acceptable, as we who opposed Senator Obama in the primaries know all too well.
Predictably, the Obamanation has lashed out at WFTV’s treacherous infidel, Barbara West with a vengeance. She, as well as her employers have been cut off from access to anyone associated with Camp O for the duration. In canceling an upcoming Jill Biden interview, the campaign said this:
“This cancellation is non-negotiable, and further opportunities for your station to interview with this campaign are unlikely, at best for the duration of the remaining days until the election,” wrote Laura K. McGinnis, Central Florida communications director for the Obama campaign.
Why did Barack Obama’s campaign cancel a WFTV-Channel 9 interview with Jill Biden, wife of Sen. Joe Biden? The campaign cited “an unprofessional interview” WFTV’s Barbara West did Thursday with Joe Biden. In a statement Friday, Adrianne Marsh, Florida spokeswoman for Obama’s campaign, said the station, in talking with Sen. Biden, was “both combative and woefully uninformed about simple facts.” Marsh said West’s insistence that Obama was an organizer for ACORN was “100 percent false.” “In a line of questioning that would make Rush Limbaugh proud, West even went as far as to quote Karl Marx, a Communist icon, in a disturbing attempt to associate Barack Obama with socialism,” Marsh wrote. West said, “I think I asked him some pointed questions. . . . I don’t think I was rude or inconsiderate to him.” –
The ABC moderators found themselves under fire for focusing on campaign gaffes and training most of their ammunition on Obama. Huffington Post blogger Jason Linkins called the debate “utterly asinine.” Washington Post television critic Tom Shales called the duo’s performance “despicable.” Philadelphia Daily News columnist Will Bunch said the moderators “disgraced the American voters, and in fact even disgraced democracy itself.”
The Obama campaign issued a statement blaming anybody but Obie for his “performance”
“Tonight we saw a real choice between the old politics of point-scoring and distraction and a politics that focuses on bringing us together to actually solve the challenges we talk about every single election. Continuing the theme of her campaign, Senator Clinton used every single opportunity she had to launch misleading attack after misleading attack against Barack Obama, which is why polls show that most Americans think she’s running the most negative campaign and don’t believe she’s trustworthy. Barack Obama spoke about the issues that actually matter in people’s lives, like how he plans to end the war in Iraq, cut middle-class taxes, help people stay in their homes, and provide a secure retirement for our seniors. That’s why more Americans are putting their trust in Barack Obama to bring about the change we need in Washington.”
Barack Obama, in his first appearance on “FOX News Sunday,” says there will be no more debates before the two May 6 primaries despite repeated challenges from Hillary Clinton to meet him face-to-face.
That Obama/Biden team, fool them once, shame on you. Fool them twice…ain’t gonna happen. You won’t get another chance. They’ll see to that.
The stupid media is at it again. Do they think we can’t read? Obviously, they think we’re stupid. Headlines everywhere are screaming, McCain Guarantees Victory. Here’s the quote from Politico:
“I guarantee you that two weeks from now, you will see this has been a very close race, and I believe that I’m going to win it,” McCain told interim “Meet” moderator Tom Brokaw. “We’re going to do well in this campaign, my friend. We’re going to win it, and it’s going to be tight, and we’re going to be up late.”
He guaranteed a close race. He believed he would win.
I guarantee you that most people are stupid enough to buy this crap. I believe they should be smacked.
She’s a witch, she’s incompetent, she’s inexperienced, she’s entitled, she’s Hillary Clinton, she’s Sarah Palin, she’s…any woman with the nerve, the temerity, the unmitigated gall, the huevos to actually challenge Barack Obama. How dare she? Who does she think she is? Doesn’t she know who he is? How come she’s not fainting? Hasn’t she seen his crotch?
We supporters of Hillary Clinton for president have seen this movie before, up close and personal, in black and white, in living color. In fact, everybody’s seen it, the same tactics are used against anyone, male or female, unwilling to act like they’re dying to fellate the Democratic candidate at the drop of a hat.
You can’t blame Obama for generating this media-enforced, mandatory, must-jock-Barack, love doctrine all on his own, rather, it seems that the subconscious fantasies of the press, blogosphere and fan base also power this love train. “As badly as I want to do him, why don’t you? What’s wrong with you? You must be gay! Or just really, really mean! Or, worse, a stupid girl, who only cares about herself! Nobody likes you anyway!”
Now Palin is bearing the brunt of the attack. According to CNN, Palin-hate has entered the “diva” phase.
McCain sources say Palin has gone off-message several times, and they privately wonder whether the incidents were deliberate. They cited an instance in which she labeled robocalls — recorded messages often used to attack a candidate’s opponent — “irritating” even as the campaign defended their use. Also, they pointed to her telling reporters she disagreed with the campaign’s decision to pull out of Michigan.
A second McCain source says she appears to be looking out for herself more than the McCain campaign.
“She is a diva. She takes no advice from anyone,” said this McCain adviser. “She does not have any relationships of trust with any of us, her family or anyone else.
“Also, she is playing for her own future and sees herself as the next leader of the party. Remember: Divas trust only unto themselves, as they see themselves as the beginning and end of all wisdom.”
There is something weird going here. Hillary is the diva, the fabulous woman who is fabulous just because she says so. She’s the woman who is abused (by her husband), ridiculed (by the press), hated (by Republican mouth-breathers), yet she’s still standing. She’s like from some exploitation film where the heroine is beaten and barely raped before pulling a knife out of her sock and slicing the mean guy’s balls off. Her supporters have stood by her and fought her battles with her – and sometimes for her – since the 1990s. The emotional connection runs too deep. R-e-s-p-e-c-t, she shakes her finger. Find out what it means to me. And the crowd eats it up.
Next thing you know, somebody will claim McCain is a “girly-man” who thinks he’s entitled to be president.
This election, like most recent Democratic elections, is supposed to be determined by the “youth vote.” Like they do every year, the Dems are pulling out all the stops to motivate the young voters who traditionally can’t be bothered enough to stop having fun being young long enough to actually vote. According to everybody under the sun, this year, like every year, is different. If this 24 year-old young lady, Bree Barton, writing an opinion piece for the L.A. Times is typical, all I can say is, Lord, I hope not:
Both presidential candidates offer their own brand of hope for the future. I chose to believe in Barack Obama’s promise of change. That’s why I put an Obama ‘08 bumper sticker on my car. I saw it as a symbol of hope — my hope — that the political process is worth my time and energy. A sticky strip of plastic was my statement that yes, I’m young, but I give a damn.
So when someone smeared an “N” on my sticker and slashed through the “O” — making it NØBAMA ‘08 — it felt like a slap in the face. All it took was a purple marker to transform my message of hope into something ugly.
So, basically, Bree’s faith in Barack Obama is reinforced by vandalism. And she’s defiant about not letting the vandals “win.”
I won’t let a coward with a purple marker defile my beliefs — that’s old school.
On Nov. 4, I vote for the future of my country.
Tomorrow, I buy Wite-Out for my car.
Bree, who blogs here, used a slightly different word to describe how her car was damaged in this post. What was “smeared,” is here, “slashed.”
As I was leaving with my miscellaneous bunch of goods, something caught my eye in the parking lot. My “Obama ‘08” bumper sticker, bright white against my burgundy Honda, looked slightly amiss.
That’s right: someone put a nice fat slash through my “O,” and squeezed in an “N” to the left.
Wonder if she knows Ashley Todd. Todd, 20, is the young “McCain supporter” who made up a story about being attacked by a big, black Obama supporter. But, if she lied about that, who knows whether she’s lying about who she’s voting for, if anyone.
In March, Ms. Todd was asked to leave a grass-roots group of Ron Paul supporters in Brazos County, Texas, group leader Dustan Costine said. He said Ms. Todd posed as a supporter of former Arkansas governor and presidential candidate Mike Huckabee and called the local Republican committee seeking information about its campaign strategies.
“She would call the opposing campaign and pretend she was on their campaign to get information,” Mr. Costine said last night. “We had to remove her because of the tactics she displayed. After that we had nothing to do with her.”
About a month earlier, he said, Ms. Todd sent an e-mail to the Ron Paul group saying her tires were slashed and that campaign paraphernalia had been stolen from her car because she supported Mr. Paul.
It’s no wonder that young people “think differently.” With professors like William Ayers, and this guy, “Truth First,” who claims to be a Central African Republic history professor, how could they not?
Very soon Barack Obama will be your new President. This is a reality you cannot alter or escape from. It is fact. It is history. It is justice for the world.
Many of you have seen the light and have accepted the truth. And we thank you for your support and aid in electing Barack Obama.
To those who have rejected the truth you have no reason to fear Barack Obama. He is wise and just and he will follow the principals followed by his African forefathers. Barack Obama is the son of Kings and Queens who started human civilization thousands of years ago. Barack Obama remembers his heritage and his obligations to the Truth, Justice and the Future.
Barack Obama understands what is wrong and what needs to be done. Barack Obama has intelligence and vision that has lasted for over a millennium. Barack Obama was born with the appropriate ways of thinking, speaking, and acting and this will inspire you to be liberated for now there is no shackle which can keep you enslaved.
An African Proverb tell us: “Then command the servant, thusly: Make an Elder’s staff causing my son to stand in my place I will instruct him through the speech of the listeners and the counsels of the first of the ancients who listened to the divinities. In so doing troubles will be removed from the people.”
Barck Obama is here now to listen, to instruct and will lead you to your new life.
America will have a new start. A change to right itself. A change to correct its wrongs and address its sins. If you support change that will bring forth social and economic justice, you will stand with Barack Obama. Those who have been denied justice in America will get justice. Those will have been denied opportunity will be given opportunity. Those will falsely imprisoned will be freed. Those who are guilty will be punished. America’s salvation is at hand.
Those who have profited in America will play a role helping others. Justice requires equality and fairness and those who have the means will now be fair and will contribute to equality.
Stand with Barack Obama and you will be honored you for your work, sacrifice, dedication and devotion on behalf of all oppressed peoples.
Stand with Barack Obama and you will be honored and celebrated and remembered in song and praise and by your children.
Okay, everybody knows by now that the Philip Berg lawsuit was thrown out. The rest of them probably will be, too. And now, Greta Van Susteren says all four people in the race should show their birth certificates because she wants people to stop e-mailing her about it, and it’s not fair that Obama should be the only one. Bullshit. Obama has no problem demanding all kinds of stuff from other people, why should any slack be cut for him?
He should cough up his real birth certificate, not his Certificate of Live Birth; we know he was born alive, if he wasn’t, he definitely couldn’t run for president, and the question would be moot. I wanna see the real deal copy, the one with the baby’s weight and doctor’s name and stuff. The way Camp O issues demands and then stamps their feet and whines until they get their way, they’ve got a fat lot of nerve trying to fudge the birth certificate thing.
The Obots bitched and moaned about Hillary Clinton’s First Lady papers for months on end. Any time anybody said “boo” to them, they sicced their blogger bullies on Hillary and her papers. Then, when they got them and some parts were redacted, naturally, the cyberthugs went rabid. “See, she cheats!” She lies!” “You cant trust her!” “All hail the Obamessiah!”
Obama’s DeaNC henchmen went after McCain’s tax returns too. Then, they went after Cindy. Since Camp O and his Deaniac army of pseudo-journalists and cyber warriors can demand everybody else “show their papers,” when it comes to Obi-WanNaBePresident’s birth certificate, they should just get off the stick and put up, shut up, or get out.
Say you’re the Obama campaign team (okay, I know that’s distasteful, but play along, I won’t hurt you) and you’re (rightly) worried that whenever Joe Biden opens his mouth, he’s going to stick your foot in it. What would you do? Limit him to untelevised fundraisers? Appearances at VFW halls? Local TV interviews? Probably. But what if that didn’t work? What if no matter what you tried, Joe (You Really Wanna Elect My Guy?) Biden found a way to screw it up? Well you could try punishing shows that ask hard questions and then blame the station for it. And, according to The TV Guy, Hal Boedecker, in Orlando, Florida, that’s exactly what Camp O did:
Why did Barack Obama’s campaign cancel an interview Jill Biden, wife of Sen. Joe Biden, was going to do with WFTV-Channel 9?
The campaign cited “an unprofessional interview” that WFTV’s Barbara West conducted with Joe Biden (pictured) on Thursday. WFTV news director Bob Jordan has defended the interview as hard-hitting and unlike many satellite interviews where softball questions are posed.
In a statement Friday afternoon, Adrianne Marsh, Florida spokeswoman for Obama’s campaign, said the station, in talking with Sen. Biden, was “both combative and woefully uninformed about simple facts.”
Marsh said West’s insistence that Obama was an organizer for ACORN was “100 percent false.” “In a line of questioning that would make Rush Limbaugh proud, West even went as far as to quote Karl Marx, a Communist icon, in a disturbing attempt to associate Barack Obama with socialism,” Marsh wrote.
Saying that since Jill Biden wasn’t running for anything, they weren’t going to put her through that kinda stuff, the O Team also said they weren’t going to let anybody on their side play with WFTV anymore:
The Obama campaign earlier Friday suggested that future interviews with WFTV were unlikely before Election Day.
Poor Joe. They could always try limiting his press availability to his campaign plane. No chance of a screw-up when you’re talking to yourself.
African Press International is either in possession of some highly explosive tapes of a phone call with Michelle Obama, or they’re the best pranksters in the history of journalism. According to API, Mrs. Obama called them about ten days ago, railing about the “unfairness” of their coverage regarding her husband. In the call, she supposedly admitted that Barack Obama was adopted. Now, API says she also discussed foreign policy with them, specifically matters concerning Kenya’s election and Raila Odinga:
The Michelle Obama tapes lasting for 54 minutes discusses many important issues. The tape will most probably be released to the American people and the world at large, before the US Presidential elections because many people are pushing for that to happen and API does not want to disappoint the majority in the name of democracy and being transparent. The tape is expected to be aired by a reputable US network who will determine the best time for the public to get the information and if it should be aired unedited or partly edited.
Although the contents in the tape is sensitive, API is of the opinion that the US people have a right to know their leaders and what to expect from them once they get to the highest office in the land. The tape, when made public, will reveal the immediate tasks and where the new administration will give priority. Africa, Iran and Venezuela will end up in the priority list of the “chosen” to be attended to and Kenya will play a very important role through Kenya’s Prime Minister Mr Raila Odinga who is said to be a distant cousin of Obama.
Kenya has very good trade relationship with Iran and Obama’s first priority is to have high level discussions in the Kenyan capital. The first meeting will be chaired by Raila Odinga. The US is said to be represented in such a meeting by the US Ambassador in Nairobi. Iran is one of those to attend the meeting, but as an observer so that Obama will not be accused by his opponents for dramatically changing US Foreign policy.
To work with the Kenyans, the Obama administration will have Colin Powell, the former US Secretary for State as Obama’s Special envoy to Africa and the Middle East.
The first meeting will take place in central Nairobi in the newly Libyan purchased Hotel, that has now changed the name from Kenya Regency Hotel to a new name proposed by the new owners., Libya.
The tape further reveals why the meeting should take place in the Libyan owned hotel. By doing it this way, the outside world will not view Raila’s engagement negatively as a move to connect Kenya, Iran and the US.
The Kenyans and the Libyans (Now US friends) will not be accused of initiating relationship between the US and Iran in any way.
API challenges Mrs Obama to personally deny the information if she believes that she has not been quoted by us in a correct manner.
The information has for sometime now caused headache within the intelligence circles fearing that if Obama really got the presidency, will totally change the US foreign policy by having US-Iran trade relationship.
Adjust your tinfoil hats, kiddies, you might want to get a face mask, too. ‘Cuz, either something is about to hit the fan, or we’re all going to end up with egg on our face. Either way, best to cover your…face.
Now that the Ashley Todd story has been disproved, Obama supporters seem to be celebrating anew, curiously rationalizing not only that, since this story about a mythical Obama supporter is false, all stories about Obama must be similarly false, and that if any blame is to be assigned, it’s to John McCain. On some planet, in some universe far, far away, that might make sense, but where I sit, it’s pretty ridiculous, so I’ll leave that alone.
Instead, I’ll ask the question that has intrigued me for a long time, but doesn’t seem to bother people who follow Barack Obama at all. What if all, or any, of the allegations that have been made against the Senator turn out to be true? It’s possible, none of them have actually been factually proven to be wrong, rather, the available facts have been spun to Obama’s advantage. This, in itself, is curious.
It seems that nowadays “rumor” and “conspiracy theory” are negative characterizations about anything potentially affecting Barack Obama. Yet, the truth is, all conspiracy theories are based on rumor until they’re proven. Watergate was a rumor, Monica Lewinski was a rumor, John Edwards’ affair was a rumor. Once the facts were revealed, a conspiracy to cover-up the truth became obvious. That’s where the word “cover-up” came from.
But, all rumors about Barack Obama are “evil lies” designed to derail the noble aspirations of a near-saintly, yet, simultaneously, traditionally oppressed, black man. What the fuck? We know for a fact that he is a liar. Every step of the Rev. Wright way, Obama lied. He never told any more truth than he needed to to get away with his lie, in fact, he even gave a forty-five minute national speech designed to make every American citizen complicit in his lies; but those devoted to him still see no problem. And that wasn’t the end of his lying. It wasn’t until Rev. Wright told one unforgivably inconvenient truth about him that Obama stopped lying and admitted that Rev. Wright didn’t mean that much to him, after all. Because you see, the biggest lie, and the one Rev. Wright objected to, was that Jeremiah Wright was ever really important to Obama.
“He’s a politician.”
That was Jeremiah Wright’s sin; telling the world that Obama was not “more than a politician” to him. Did Wright ever refer to Obama as a “devout Christian” or a “cherished member” of his “flock”? Why did he make such a big deal about classifying him by his job description and not by his status in Wright’s church? On March 27, 2008, Huffington Post did post a March 11, 2007, letter from Wright to the New York Times claiming that he had indeed said those things about Obama in an interview, but the NYT writer chose not to use those quotes. You would think that by that time, Wright’s support of Obama would be so well established, HuffPo wouldn’t need to post a year-old letter to illustrate it.
“Ya better watch him.”
Every black person who has spent any time in a black church has heard a black preacher utter those words as a warning against everything from Mr. High Cholesterol Foods, to Mr. Street-Slick Hustler, to the Devil himself. “He’s gon’ getcha, if ya don’t wach out. Watch ‘im.” That’s what Rev. Wright’s comments to the National Press Club sounded like to me:
Politicians say what they say and do what they do based on electability, based on sound bites, based on polls, Huffington, whoever’s doing the polls. Preachers say what they say because they’re pastors. They have a different person to whom they’re accountable.
As I said, whether he gets elected or not, I’m still going to have to be answerable to God November 5th and January 21st. That’s what I mean. I do what pastors do. He does what politicians do.
“Watch ‘im.”
But this isn’t about Jeremiah Wright, or about the persistent “Muslim” rumors, this is about Barack Obama being a liar. Who cares if he is a Muslim, but why would he lie about it? There’s no record of his being baptized, since leaving his church in return for Hillary Clinton’s Michigan votes he hasn’t joined another, there’s enough evidence of his being enrolled in Indonesian schools as “Muslim,” he’s the one who said the Muslim call to prayer was “one of the prettiest sounds on Earth,” and his Freudian, “my Muslim faith” slip is enough to give one pause. Given that he is a liar, why is the media so reluctant to investigate any of this fully? On Oct. 20, Newsmax reported that their investigation indicates the “smears” Camp O is so dedicated to fighting, are largely based on fact. Of course, the Obots will dismiss such an article out of hand since it’s Newsmax, and unflattering. However, if you’re convinced there’s nothing to the “smears” why object to having them fully, instead of superficially, investigated, and thus, exposed as the lies you believe them to be?
What accounts for the media’s reluctance to investigate Obama fairly? Journalist Michael S. Malone admits to being “ashamed” to even call himself a journalist anymore due to the one-sided, biased coverage of this year’s election:
The traditional media is playing a very, very dangerous game. With its readers, with the Constitution, and with its own fate.
The sheer bias in the print and television coverage of this election campaign is not just bewildering, but appalling. And over the last few months I’ve found myself slowly moving from shaking my head at the obvious one-sided reporting, to actually shouting at the screen of my television and my laptop computer.
But worst of all, for the last couple weeks, I’ve begun — for the first time in my adult life — to be embarrassed to admit what I do for a living. A few days ago, when asked by a new acquaintance what I did for a living, I replied that I was “a writer”, because I couldn’t bring myself to admit to a stranger that I’m a journalist.
Many people will attribute everything to race. Some will chalk it up to the partisanship of the “liberal media.” I think the Obama campaign’s successful “Messiah-zation” of the candidate is the more likely reason.
A Light Will Shine Down
A website called Obamamessiah chronicles the many times early in the primaries that Obama used a variation of the “light will shine down” “joke” in his stump speech. Every time he made the statement, it was reported, sometimes mockingly, sometimes admiringly, but always reinforcing the “Messiah” narrative. On January 9, 2008, The Washington Post ran this quote:
“I am going to try to be so persuasive, so that those of you who are still wavering…will suddenly come to the conclusion — a light beam will shine through — will light you up — and you will experience an epiphany — I have to vote for Barack!”
“A light will shine”…”epiphany?” Can anyone argue that this was not deliberately messianic? “If you believe,” “this is the moment,” “yes we can,” “hope,” deliberately oft-repeated in sermons disguised as speeches, these phrases plant specific seeds in the minds of those receptive to serving as vessels. They’re even more scary if the candidate really believes them, himself. At a fundraiser in May, 2007, MensVogue reported this quote:
When Morgan Freeman comes over to greet Obama, the senator begins bowing down both hands in worship. “This guy was president before I was,” says Obama, referring to Freeman’s turn in Deep Impact and, clearly, getting a little ahead of his own bio. Next, a nod to Bruce Almighty: “This guy was God before I was.” (Okay, more than a little ahead.)
Once the “messiah” seed takes root, criticism becomes unacceptable. “Don’t Swiftboat me,” becomes “Don’t Swiftboat Jesus.” While some dismiss such observations as over-reactions to what they consider to be obvious jokes, the reality is a little more complex.
“Many a true word spoken in a joke.”
My mother liked to speak in homespun, old school idioms like that. Though she was very young when I was born, she embraced the traditions passed down from generation-to-generation of African American women known as “mother wit,” kind of a cross between common sense and women’s intuition. Another favorite saying of hers was, “Child, don’t be no fool.” When acolytes are commonly described as “KoolAid drinkers,” the messianic, cult-like status of the one being served is no longer in question. Believers were so convinced of Jim Jones’ godliness, they followed him to a foreign country to their deaths. No amount of pleading admonitions by fearful loved ones deterred these true believers, true faith trumps common sense.
In the case of Barack Obama, his god-like, rock star (same thing) status has insulated him from scrutiny. That is the purpose. Dubious associations, legitimate criticisms, in-your-face flaws and weaknesses are not only forgiven, but defended, due to the flat out refusal of the faithful worshippers to entertain such heresy against their god. “There are none so blind as those who will not see,” is a particularly apt description of Obama followers; it’s not really Biblical, either.
Therefore, when it comes to Tony Rezko and Obama’s proven lies about their “boneheaded” realtionship, and William Ayers, and Obama’s obvious lies about their relationship, Obots don’t see. Videos like this one, might as well not exist:
When it comes to the fact that Obama refuses to show his true birth certificate, even to a judge, preferring to offer the less official Certification of Live Birth, which contains much less information and may be forged, devout Obamabots question the legitimacy of those making the request. Why? Why not show the original document, easily obtainable from the State of Hawaii Bureau of Vital Statistics, and be done with it? If he is indeed the son of Frank Marshall Davis, why not say so. What difference does it make if Andy Martin is a kook? And how does attacking a website like African Press International’s claims of a phone call from Michelle Obama alluding to her husband’s adoptive status mitigate against the truth? Even if it’s a hoax, that doesn’t answer the basic citizenship questions at the heart of all the allegations.
The bottom line is, if Barack Obama is elected November 4, he will not get a record contract, he will become President of the United States. Any of the allegations against, and questions surrounding, Senator Obama would be enough to get him kicked off American Idol; should our standards for the highest office in the land be less? This is not a reality show, this is reality. If any or all of the “smears” turn out to be facts, how will those who blindly vote for him justify their devotion? Maybe before we cast our votes in “solidarity” to “the brother,” or in “hope” for a “better future,” maybe we should honestly assess who Barack Obama is today, and was yesterday. Because if any of the “smears” are true, what happens after he is elected will be on your heads.
The mythical “black assailant” strikes again, it seems. Ashley Todd, who told police she was attacked by a big black Obama-loving guy who became enraged by a McCain sticker, made the whole thing up. So says WTAE-TV, The Pittsburgh Channel, on their website:
Pittsburgh police said a 20-year-old woman who originally said she was robbed and assaulted at knifepoint in Bloomfield because of her political views made the story up. Ashley Todd — who has a backward letter “B” scratched into her right cheek — confessed to faking the story and will be charged with filing a false report, Assistant Police Chief Maurita Bryant said at a news conference Friday. Todd, of College Station, Texas, admitted there was no robbery or attacker and said she had prior mental health problems, according to Bryant. It’s not yet clear whether Todd’s face was mutilated by her, or if she had somebody else do it, because a police report states that she told them she can’t remember. Todd said she was driving around in her car, looked in her rear-view mirror, saw a “B,” and the first thing she thought of was Democratic presidential nominee Sen. Barack Obama, according to a police report obtained by WTAE Channel 4 Action News.
Todd may be nuts, but she’s not the first to blame stuff on a scary “black man.” Remember Susan Smith, the woman who killed her kids because she wanted to date, then went looking for “pen pals” in prison?”
The 31-year-old inmate wants to hear from those willing to forgive her for pushing a car containing sleeping children into a lake, placing blame on an imaginary black man and crying for the American public to help search for the victims.
Then there was the guy in Boston, Charles Stuart, who killed his pregnant wife and blamed it on a “black man” and damned near started a riot:
Perhaps the most famous case of a conjured attack story is Charles Stuart, who inflamed racial tensions in Boston, when he killed his pregnant wife, Carol, on Oct. 24, 1989, but blamed it on a black man who jumped into their car as they left a childbirth class at a hospital. Mr. Stuart, 29, who claimed he was seriously wounded from the attack, drove her to a hospital. The infant son, delivered eight weeks premature by Caesarean section and named Christopher, died about two weeks later.
In the intensive manhunt that followed, the police arrested William Bennett, a black man with a criminal record. The arrest, the release of his name in the news media and the resulting hubbub resulted in the commission of a 300-page report.
When Mr. Stuart himself became the lead suspect in the killing, he ultimately committed suicide. His brother, Matthew Stuart, was charged with aiding in the murder but ultimately pleaded guilty to a lesser charge of insurance fraud.
Michelle Malkin, among others, was suspicious of the Ashley Todd story from the start. I, on the other hand, will always give the victims the benefit of the doubt, even when, as in this case, they clearly don’t deserve it. That being said, I cannot condone or abide inflaming racial tensions by placing blame on stereotypical characterizations black male savages straight out of Birth of a Nation. That our society encourages these stereotypes through it’s popular culture, consciously or not, is a huge part of the problem. And while Barack Obama, his supporters and black people in general have been vindicated in this instance, any entity that condones or exploits racial disharmony for it’s own advantage, black or white, must be held accountable. Personally, for me, the Obama campaign’s tactics in this regard have always been worrisome, and a big part of the reason I do not support him. However, in this case, he is owed an apology.
Joe Biden is “likable” like that uncle every family has who only shows up once every couple of years or so, out of the blue, with a bottle of Scotch, so they let him in, and everybody seems to like him well enough, even though nobody really knows him very well, except whichever parent he’s related to, and they don’t talk about him much. He’s easy to make fun of because he talks too much, really loudly, and he always says something he shouldn’t have because your parents didn’t want the kids to know.
About a month ago “comedienne,” Sarah Silverman made this You Tube video encouraging young Jewish voters to “schlep” to Florida and annoy their grandparents into voting for Barack Obama.
There’s even a “Great Schlep” webpage paid for by the “Jewish Council for Education and Research, www.jcer.info, not authorized by any candidate or candidates committee.”
The Great Schlep aims to have Jewish grandchildren visit their grandparents in Florida, educate them about Obama, and therefore swing the crucial Florida vote in his favor. Don’t have grandparents in Florida? Not Jewish? No problem! You can still become a schlepper and make change happen in 2008, simply by talking to your relatives about Obama.
Stereotypical? Naaaah. All elderly Jews live in Florida, right? And everybody else in the state has probably already voted for him, huh? Besides, as Silverman says, black people and Jews have sooooo much in common, like Cadillacs and the use of the word “yo.” And, hey, who knows more about guilt? Both blacks and Jews have been guilt-tripping white people for decades, everybody knows that. Anyway, they’ve got that neat little disclaimer saying you don’t have to actually be Jewish, you can just…pretend, by being…annoying and guilt inducing? For a day. Kinda like Democrat For A Day.
On October 17th, Rep. Jan Schakowsky wrote a “hey, what a great idea!” piece for the Huffington Post, ripping Silverman off, and adapting her idea for all ethnicities of annoying young Obama supporters. Like it was something new. Entitled, “Even If You Can’t Schlep, Talk To Your Grandparents About Obama,” this was a combination of Silverman’s “Great Schlep” and Obama’s “The Talk,” another already-in-place mini-campaign with it’s own webpage on BarackObama.com.
Then, on the 22nd, if that wasn’t bad enough, some guy named Christopher Haas decided that the idea needed more reinforcement and started a second “Annoy Your Grandparents Whether You Have To Schlep Or Not, HuffPo Says So” webpage on the Obama site. Claiming that “you are Barack’s most effective advocate,” Haas quotes Schakowsky:
The one thing most grandparents have in common is that they have the most wonderful grandchildren in the world – so clever, so handsome, so pretty, ever so precious. Even if you are still unsure of your path in life, and even if your parents and friends occasionally wonder about you, your grandma and grandpa love you and have faith in you.
That is your weapon! “Precious” needs to get on the phone and say, “Grandpa, Grandma, I am asking you to vote for Barack Obama. This is really important to me. It’s about my future. It’s about the world I will be living in. It’s about the world I want for my future children. (They will love that one!) Please! Do it for me!”
…The really great part of this strategy is that everything you could possibly say to your grandparents about how important Barack’s election is for you is one hundred percent true.
“That’s your weapon?!” Isn’t that sweet? For those of you who don’t think so, either, take heart. I already wrote a “how to survive a visit from your Obot grandkids” piece a few days ago, to provide you with enough ammunition to deflect their most determined efforts and keep your relationship intact. Remember, you love them, and you did stupid things at their age, too. Maybe you could even show them your old fishnet, or window pane stockings, platform shoes, wineskins, and bong, if you’ve still got ‘em, to prove it. A picture of their grandfather in Bob Newhart-style flowered pants and a checkered plaid jacket with a big, fat tie might work, too. Or just show them a clip from Match Game or Soul Train and tell them you used to dress like that. Even if they don’t make the “stupid” connection, you’ll take their mind off that Obama bullspit. If all else fails, pull out your high school yearbook; works every time. It may be painful to re-live those “when I was skinny” moments, but remember, no price is too great to pay for relief from Obamanosis.
If it gets too oppressive, just think about Obama visiting his own grandmother for “perhaps the last time,” according to AP-Yahoo News, and take heart that at least your grandkids’ll probably never pimp you out like that.
Barack Obama left the campaign trail Thursday to visit his ailing grandmother, perhaps for the last time.
Although it’s a crucial period in the presidential race, the Democratic candidate said he is making time for the visit because he doesn’t want to risk his grandmother dying before he has a chance to say goodbye — something that happened when his mother succumbed to cancer.
And even if they do, strangers, who couldn’t possibly know your phone number or e-mail address, will write and call:
At a rally Thursday in Indianapolis, a minister asked the crowd to pray for Dunham as a “source of comfort, healing and courage.” And in an interview with ABC’s “Good Morning America,” Obama said his grandmother “has been inundated with phone calls and e-mails and flowers from total strangers.”
See, when it comes to Obama, there’s always “hope.” And, on the bright side, since you’re not voting for him, you’re probably a bitter old deadend witch, so if the grandkids get too obnoxious, you can always wiggle your nose and “change” ‘em into something.
*Note: My apologies, in advance, to any and all who might be offended by my ethnic chacterizations. If it is not clear, please be assured I am mocking the insensitivity of those who exploit stereotypes, not the people being so demeaned.
Alright! Earlier today I was lamenting the lack of drama coming from African Press International re: the bitchy tapes they supposedly have of Michelle Obama ranting and raving about evil white people and her husband’s “adoption.” Well, the drama has arrived, straight from the clouds. Or, at least, one cloud. Really, from somebody calling themselves “Cloud,” but, I digress. Whatever. Here’s the skinny, straight from the source:
The tape is less than an hour. That’s new news for you all. I can validate that the tapes arrived 2 hours ago plus which would be about 4-6pm EST. I was not able to get how or where when asked. His lawyer has restrictions on what he can and can’t say and how I can talk about this to others.
He is a gentleman and a caring and considerate man based on our discussions concerning his site. His language is definitely not American. His terminology was such that I had to verify what he was saying and express them in my terms so he could agree.
We could not discuss anything about the tape content. I understand and did NOT force the issue.
He is concerned about the abuse between the visitors on this site and wishes that folks would treat each other better.
He is confident about this issue and therefore isn’t necessarily concerned about the doubters. Also, he absolutely doesn’t want censorship on this site.
There is a contract/deal in place with a media source. I was not given the details of that. I don’t think that he will mind me telling you that the eagle has landed.
From what I can understand and perceive from the CIA contact story, he is comfortable with CIA folks.� That’s all I can remark about that.
I will be at a meeting for a couple of hours and will not be able to respond if you ask a question until I return.
Okay, who else has mental images of somebody in tinted Groucho glasses and a Bogie-style Fedora, with the collar turned up on his trenchcoat, whispering, “the eagle has landed” to a shadow figure who answers back, “but the tree has no ACORNs” before the tapes are surreptitiously exchanged?
This article from Conservative Badlands asks the question a lot of us have been considering lately, “what’s up with all these polls?” It seems that they’re all over the map, with the consensus being that Obama’s on the way to a landslide victory. For many of us, that just doesn’t feel right. Some have wondered if the discrepancies are due to over- or under-sampling one group or another, others have blamed the “Bradley effect,” (the assumption that racists lie) still others have offered up the theory that the 80% hang-up rate supposedly reported by Gallup is responsible.
The Conservative Badlands guys consider all that, and come to the conclusion that the polls are likely unfairly weighted, with a lot of that being due to the under-representation of “the PUMA effect.”
Yet Gallup Polling claims that the Bradley Factor is a wash at best and could actually be adding an extra 3 points to Obama’s total in a kind of reverse Bradley Effect. Looking at where the McCain folks are competing when they would seem to have no chance, they all have one thing in common. They were carried by Hillary Clinton and in some cases even after it was obvious that Obama had it locked up. Clearly the McCain folks think that there is a Hillary Factor in play which is a variation of the Bradley Factor. The results that Hillary got simply cannot be explained by race alone. It was the positions that she took that were different than Obama’s that resonated with these voters. Because Obama has such an extremely liberal voting record, there were some issues where even Hillary agreed with McCain more than she did with Obama.
McCain was bound to pick up some of Hillary’s supporters anyway after the way Hillary was treated by the Obama campaign. These are the so-called PUMA (Party Unity My Ass) folks. This effect was heightened by the selection of Sarah Palin which gave these folks an even better reason to vote for McCain and Palin. These supporters are primarily female and given the political differences between Sarah and Hillary, one would think that the PUMA people would be few and far between. What is missing in all of this is the males who voted for Hillary over Obama. They are far less inclined to be upset about how Hillary was treated. On the other hand, Sarah Palin is more their kind of woman than even Hillary is. They are blue collar Democrats who are into hunting and fishing just like Sarah is. They were not buying what Obama was offering then and they still feel the same way.
The key point here is that these people are actually Democrats who plan on voting for McCain. Because such people are being called racists for this by people like John Murtha of Pennsylvania, they are not telling the pollsters that they are planning to vote for McCain. Most of the pollsters are weighting their samples based on the usual voting splits between Democrats and Republicans. If the Hillary Factor is upsetting this voting pattern, the pollsters are giving too much weight to the Democrats in their samples. If the polling firm for the McCain campaign has figured out how to adjust for the Hillary Factor, then they are getting radically different results and that is especially so in some blue states that Hillary carried by wide margins. This same adjustment has caused them to realize which red states are not good bets any more and which blue states are up for grabs in spite of what other pollsters are showing.
There’s more mumbo-jumbo info over on the CB site, it’s worth a read; I only call it mumbo-jumbo because number stuff makes my eyes bleed. But basically, the article says what PUMA’s have been saying all along: nope, ain’t gonna vote for him, ignore us if you want to. And contrary to what some would like to believe, it’s not about spite, or over-reaching Hillarylove. The bottom line is, we don’t want to be represented by an un-Democratic Democratic party, which is what it would be if Obama wins. We’d rather have an earnest Republican than a crooked pseudo-Democrat.
What’s so hard to understand about that?
Now, I don’t know anything about Russia Today, except the info on their You Tube page, but hey, this video is interesting, so, here goes:
Thanks to HillBuzz via Politico via Drudge via a Pittsburgh news station, it has been “confirmed” that the violence between warring campaign supporters is reaching unprecedented stupid levels. Here’s the Politico report:
Here’s the most serious actual violence, via (natch) Drudge:
Pittsburgh police spokeswoman Diane Richard tells Channel 4 Action News that the victim was robbed at knifepoint on Wednesday night outside of a Citizens Bank near Liberty Avenue and Pearl Street just before 9 p.m.
Richard said the robber took $60 from the woman, then became angry when he saw a McCain bumper sticker on the victim’s car. The attacker then punched and kicked the victim, before using the knife to scratch the letter “B” into her face, Richard said.
Richard said the woman refused medical treatment after the assault, which happened outside the view of the bank’s surveillance cameras.
UPDATE: Richard confirms the account to Politico, and says the victim was from Texas, and didn’t know the area.
Rog Coverely said several pellets pierced his Longwood home. Coverely showed several spiderwebbed-holes in the front windows of his home.
The Republican manager said he is convinced he was targeted because of new McCain signs he added around his home.”All I can tell you is this, I have a very good relationship with my neighbors,” Coverely said. “I mow my lawn. The only thing that has changed is I have two McCain signs in my front yard.”Coverely said he has taken about 300 calls concerning stolen or vandalized McCain signs in the area.”It says this campaign is getting vicious,” Coverely said.
Then there was the AP-Yahoo News story of a Cullowhee, Fla. brown bear shooting reported here Monday:
Police at Western Carolina University and wildlife officials were investigating the discovery early Monday of a dead bear cub draped with a pair of Barack Obama campaign signs.
C’mon, people. Sure, this is an important election, they all are. And passions run high. But violence, beatings, shootings, animal cruelty and the like have no place in our society, let alone our elections. People are being hurt, and no minds are being changed.
First of all, Andrea Mitchell was wrong. Surprise! Joe Biden has not been muzzled and sent to a neutral corner after his, “vote for my guy and you’ll be sorry” comments this weekend. Nope, no how, no way, baby. Joey’s still talking, and nobody’s yet sure about what. Campaigning in Charlotte, N.C., Joe took aim at “John McClain,”
“John McClain. John McClain. Excuse me, John McCain. John McCain — I don’t recognize him anymore,” Biden said to laughter from several hundred supporters in attendance.
Biden also said this:
“What worries me most is the McCain campaign seems to have gotten a little loose,” Biden said. “John’s getting a little loose. He doesn’t have much of a steady hand these days. Now’s the time we most need a steady hand.”
Wonder what’s got Joe talking double? Anyway, with Barack Obama heading out of Indianapolis lickety-split to run and see his gravely ill “Toot,” Biden and Michelle Obama are left to do all the heavy campaign lifting. Look for a couple of “this country sucks, so elect my husband,” and “if I wasn’t scared to death my guy would win, I could remember my lines,” comments from the Dynamic Duo over the next two days.
Moving on, I don’t believe Alan Greenspan is “shocked” about shit. The “Bankers are greedy? Say it ain’t so!” routine sucks, and is about as believable as Joe Biden’s teeth. And whether you’re “shocked” or not, Al, it’s still partially your fault.
African Press International is pissing me off. Not because they haven’t released any tapes of Michelle Obama yelling at them about being black and oppressed, like they promised, I didn’t expect them to really do that. What I’m pissed about is, they’re letting the story get stale. Where’s today’s “twist”? I was all ready for a juicy development and…nothing. And the “Chief Editor Korir’s going to be on MommaE’s radio show” report hardly counts. Bummer. I need drama, dammit!
And lastly, Andy Martin, a bit of a professional yahoo, is claiming that Barack Obama is really the son of Frank Marshall Davis, based upon the fact that he (Martin) is in Hawaii, and…well, it really, really makes sense. Whatever. But, in his bugle-blowing statement Martin says a lot of things that don’t make sense. (Okay, that’s redundant. Andy Martin, don’t make sense. I know. It’s the residual Biden influence from above.) Anyway:
“Ironically, what I have to say today dilutes the ‘Muslim’ theory that has propagated. Davis was not a Muslim.
There’s other stuff about Martin’s “investigation” to nitpick, but enough about him, and that. I want to talk about the current media narrative of Barack Obama’s “inevitability.” They can write and report all the “McCain sucks” stories they want, Obama’s not inevitable in my house. Unlike the unseen “great unwashed” the media selectively depicts, through their creative coverage, of a nation of seemingly hypnotized, if not lobotomized, Obots determinedly clomping to the polls, chanting, “Must vote Obama, must vote Obama,” the members of my household are far more likely to throw something at any television screen showing such reports, and if asked about voting for Obama, are likely to respond by throwing the question back in the infidel’s face. “Me, vote Obama? You must be joking. I know you’re not talking to me!” This is only the beginning, the opening strains of a litany of incredulity and rejection of an objectionable, unacceptable premise, unworthy of consideration. “What time was it when you lost your mind? And who let you in?” Those are typical of the sort of questions one who bespake the unthinkable might be asked in return.
And we’re black. Democrats, until this year. So, I don’t know what kind of polls they’re taking, but they sure haven’t asked me.
With Joe Biden being sent to his room without supper for being an idiot in front of company, and Barack Obama “rushing” off to Hawaii to visit his “gravely ill” grandmother after a quick campaign stop in Indianapolis, Thursday, who’s minding the store? Monday, Joe Scarborough and Mika Brzezinski (Mika Brzezinski?!) were commenting about the lack of mainstream media attention to Biden’s “gird your loins, they’re comin’ after Barack” comments…
MIKA BRZEZINSKI: Well you know it’s interesting, because I’m going through the papers. I figure there’s got to be, just as you analyzed, Joe, political ramifications to that comment, gaffe, however you want to make it—two in a row, though—but I’m seeing spotty media coverage. I feel like half the media covered this. I’m just going through the papers and seeing if it plays highly, and I’m not finding it in the [Washington] Post so far.
and yesterday, Andrea Mitchell said he’s been spanked.
We know Biden was in Colorado Tuesday because AP-Yahoo News reports he warned us off the whole “birth certificate/who’s your daddy?” stuff:
“If it’s about the economy, talk about the economy, not about Barack Obama’s heritage,” he thundered to a crowd at the University of Northern Colorado.
We also know he was in Richmond, Va. Wednesday, because Politico’s Ben Smith says so:
Answering questions after a meeting with Biden and national security advisers, Obama insists that Joe Biden intended to say that the next president will be tested by foreign powers, regardless of who is elected.
“Joe sometimes engages in rhetorical flourishes, but i think his core point was that the next administration is going to be tested, regardless of who it is,” he said at the Richmond, Va., event.
Talk about “rhetorical flourishes.” Notice, it says Obama met with Joe, but he didn’t let him come out and talk. But, according to Lynn Sweet, who claims to have audio of Sunday’s Seattle fundraiser, that ain’t quite what Joey said, anyway. This is kinda long, but it’s important. Lest we forget:
“We’re gonna find ourselves in real trouble when we get elected. This is gonna be really hard. This is gonna be really, really, really hard. We’re gonna have the largest systemic deficit in modern – not modern – in the history of the world. Literally. Literally. We’re gonna find ourselves inheriting a debt, yearly debt this year, that may approach three-quarters of a trillion dollars. You hear me? We left this guy with a $232 billion surplus. At a minimum when we take office – God willing – we’re gonna have a $450 billion deficit. And the way the economy is tanking the way it is now it may be as high as $750 billion.”
“28 states are in serious trouble and they’re about to contribute to the economic downward spiral because what are they doing? Cutting services, laying people off as they lose their tax base. So there are going to be a lot of tough decisions Barack’s gonna have to make, a lot of tough decisions, including on foreign policy.”
“And here’s the point I want to make. Mark my words. Mark my words. It will not be six months before the world tests Barack Obama like they did John Kennedy. The world is looking. We’re about to elect a brilliant 47-year old senator president of the United States of America. Remember I said it standing here if you don’t remember anything else I said. Watch, we’re gonna have an international crisis, a generated crisis, to test the mettle of this guy. And he’s gonna have to make some really tough – I don’t know what the decision’s gonna be, but I promise you it will occur. As a student of history and having served with seven presidents, I guarantee you it’s gonna happen. I can give you at least four or five scenarios from where it might originate. And he’s gonna need help. And the kind of help he’s gonna need is, he’s gonna need you, not financially to help him, we’re gonna need you to use your influence, your influence within the community, to stand with him. Because it’s not gonna be apparent initially, it’s not gonna be apparent that we’re right. Because all these decisions, all these decisions, once they’re made if they work, then they weren’t viewed as a crisis. If they don’t work, it’s viewed as you didn’t make the right decision, a little bit like how we hesitated so long dealing with Bosnia and dealing with Kosovo, and consequently 200,000 people lost their lives that maybe didn’t have to lose lives. It’s how we made a mistake in Iraq. We made a mistake in Somalia. So there’s gonna be some tough decisions. They may emanate from the Middle East. They may emanate from the sub-continent. They may emanate from Russia’s newly-emboldened position because they’re floating in a sea of oil.”
After again touting Cantwell’s judgment, Biden told the crowd to “gird your loins.”
“Only thing I’m asking you is, you know, gird your loins. We’re gonna win with your help, God willing, we’re gonna win, but this is not gonna be an easy ride. This president, the next president, is gonna be left with the most significant task. It’s like cleaning the Aegean stables, man. This is more than just, this is more than – think about it, literally, think about it – this is more than just a capital crisis, this is more than just markets, this is a systemic problem we have with this economy.”
That’s not even all the scary stuff Joe said, Lynn’s got more. Now, The Prophet of Doom did say that the “next president” was gonna have a huge task, but he also made it abundantly clear that he believes that next president is Barack Obama, when he said, “It will not be six months before the world tests Barack Obama.” Kinda hard to fudge the meaning of that one. And here’s the thing, just like Andrea said, Biden said it twice! From Fox News:
Biden made the comments over the weekend to two fundraising audiences, saying he expects that Obama will face an international challenge early in his presidency if he is elected on Nov. 4.
See? Remember, the long quote is from a Seattle fundraiser, this site refers to the earlier San Francisco one:
At a recent fundraiser in San Francisco, Joe Biden dazzled his audience with his grasp of foreign policy: “Mark my words, ” he said. “Within the next, first six months of this administration, if we win, they’re going to — we’re going to face a major international challenge. Because they’re going to want to test him, just like they did young John Kennedy. They’re going to want to test him.”
No wonder they sent him home. Hasn’t it dawned on Camp O, though, that they might want to send somebody with a leash and a muzzle out with Joe to these things? That is, once they let him out. It’s not like there’s no room on the plane. If I was Obama, I’d want to take some time off, too. Maybe, he’ll stop in Vegas, see what Mark Davis has to say about things. Compare COLB’s, perhaps?
Citizen Wells has posted a column by Andy Martin alleging that Barack Obama is the illegitimate son of Frank Marshall Davis. The form of the column is the same as that used on Martin’s website, but the column in question is not yet posted there. Rather than capsulize the information, I’ll just post the whole durned thing now and try to pick it apart later.
From Andy Martin in Hawaii:
“ANDY MARTIN
Executive Editor
ContrarianCommentary.com
“Factually Correct, Not
Politically Correct”
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:
“OPERATION ALOHA OBAMA” YIELDS UP THE TRUTH ABOUT BARACK OBAMA
PART THREE: BARACK OBAMA IS NOT BARACK OBAMA
“OBAMA’S FATHER WAS FRANK MARSHALL DAVIS. OBAMA IS REALLY FRANK MARSHALL DAVIS, JR.,” SAYS ANDY MARTIN
OBAMA’S ‘DREAMS FROM [HIS] FATHER] WAS REALLY A BOOK ABOUT HIS REAL FATHER, FRANK MARSHALL DAVIS
OBAMA WAS THE VICTIM OF A HISTORICAL ANOMALY, AND ROBBED OF HIS BIRTHRIGHT AS THE SCION OF CIVIL RIGHTS ROYALTY
OBAMA’S ORIGINAL “VAULT” BIRTH CERTIFICATE IS EITHER INCOMPLETE OR TAMPERED WITH, WHICH IS WHY IT HAS NEVER SURFACED.
MARTIN SAYS OBAMA SHOULD SUBMIT TO DNA TESTING WITH HIS BROTHERS
WAS OBAMA THE “VICTIM” OF A PRO-LIFE MOTHER?
(HONOLULU, HI)(October 22, 2008) Internet powerhouse Andy Martin told a Honolulu news conference today that after an intense international investigation he is convinced that Barack Obama, Junior, the presidential candidate is really the son of Obama’s controversial mentor Frank Marshall Davis.
“Mendacious adults ’switched’ Obama at birth. That is why he has refused to allow access to the original or ‘vault’ birth certificate,” Martin told a Honolulu news conference. “We believe the original certificate did not list a father. Barack Obama became the father as a result of an agreement between Ann Dunham, Frank Marshall Davis and Barack Obama, Sr.
“Davis was already married to a White Woman. He did not need a nonmarital child by a second one. Ann probably refused to have what was then called a ‘back alley’ abortion. Davis may have felt that ‘Obama’ would face less stigma with an ‘African’ background than a Negro one. The civil rights revolution, of course, turned that gambit upside down. In discovering and understanding what happened we cannot forget we are dealing with events in 1961, not 2008.
“The irony in all of this is that Obama once stated he did not want his daughters to be ‘victimized’ with a child. And he is alive because his mother took the contrary view.
“Barack Obama has known this since adulthood, and the shock of this discovery still reverberates in his psyche.
“Ironically, what I have to say today dilutes the ‘Muslim’ theory that has propagated. Davis was not a Muslim. If Obama had told the truth at some point in his life, instead of living endlessly with the lies that were imposed on him by the adults in his life, we would have avoided a great deal of confusion. I, for one, have deep compassion for Mr. Obama. He is not the first person in history to be caught up in this kind of family fraud.
“The disclosure by the two women in his life that he was not the ’son’ of his ‘father’ also explains why he manifests such extreme ambivalence to both his mother and grandmother. He is angry because he was cheated of his real father.
“Obama was robbed of his birthright of being the son of civil rights royalty, and of a father with whom he was completely simpatico. He could have grown up the son of Frank Marshall Davis, civil rights pioneer and activist, cutting-edge journalist, poet and man of letters. Mr. Davis was an extraordinary man in a dark period of this nation’s history, the pre-dawn of the civil rights era.
“Obama has probably suspended his campaign and is flying to Honolulu because he is deathly afraid his grandmother may make a ‘dying declaration’ and blow the whistle on his family fraud. Dying people often blurt out the truth. The true facts of Obama’s parentage also reflect why there has been so much tension and alienation, as well as genuine love, in Obama’s relationship with his grandmother.
“There has been a great deal of confusion and misconception about Frank Marshall Davis. A brief history lesson is essential to understanding the bizarre facts of Obama’s provenance.
“During the 1920’s and 30’s many Negros (African-Americans) became ‘communists’ because the Soviet Union and the Communist Party USA promised to end racial segregation and Jim Crow laws in the United States. The Democratic Party, of course, was the powerful force behind segregation and Jim Crow. So it is a twist of fate that the same party that oppressed Blacks has now nominated one for president.
“Madelyn Dunham is the last surviving person who knows the truth about the switch. That is why as we closed in on Dunham, Obama went ballistic, cancelled his campaign and came to Hawai’i to head us off.
“I actually carry an official, certified pocket-sized birth certificate on me at all times [Andy shows a copy to media]. But this is NOT my ‘birth certificate.’ The original certificate is held in the City Clerk’s vault in Middletown, Connecticut. That is what has come to be known as the ‘vault copy.’
“Likewise, the document that Obama has plastered over the Internet is NOT his original birth certificate or even a copy of his original certificate. It is a computer generated facsimile of an official record and nothing more. The original certificate was either handwritten or typewritten, not computer-generated in 1961. No one has ever seen that original certificate except the people that are working so hard to keep it hidden from the American people.
“I am asking Judge Ayabe to impound the value certificate and have the court hold it for safekeeping.
“By the time Barack Obama learned who he was, it was too late to change his identity. He was who he was, so he continued the ruse of being the son of an ‘African herder,’ which was yet another lie. ‘Dreams From My Father’ bears no connection to dreams from Barack Obama; there were none. It was Frank Marshall Davis who communicated his dreams to his secret son.
“There is a simple way for Obama to resolve this controversy: he can either admit the truth of these facts and order the immediate release of his vault certificate; or he can submit to a DNA test. We can conduct a Maury Povich-style DNA test to determine filiation between Obama and his brothers, one of whom blogs at BarackObama.com.
“In closing, I can only say that we used the fictional ‘Hawai’i Five-O’ as our dramatic template for this investigative operation. We could have as easily used the great, real-life Hawai’i detective Chang Apana as our polestar. He was featured in yesterday’s newspaper.
“As for Mr. Obama, all I can say is ‘Book’em Danno.” Case solved. Barack Obama the presidential candidate is the son of Frank Marshall Davis.” Martin stated.
“I bear Mr. Obama no ill will and no animus. I have only been a faithful servant of the search for truth, and I believe we finally know the secret truths about who Barack Obama really is: the son of Frank Marshall Davis.””
Okay, there you have it. A bio of Frank Marshall Davis can be found here.
Sarah Palin, speaking in Henderson, Nevada, invoked Hillary Clinton’s reference to “the highest, hardest glass ceiling,” and verbally smacked Barack Obama upside the head for his lack of commitment to feminist values. As reported by The Washington Post:
Palin surrounded herself onstage with two higher-profile defectors from Sen. Hillary Clinton’s camp — Lynn Rothschild, a member of the Democratic Platform Committee, and Elaine Lafferty, a former editor-in-chief of Ms. Magazine — along with Shelly Mandell, the president of the Los Angeles chapter of the National Organization for Women, Linda Klinge, the vice president of Oregon’s NOW chapter and Prameela Bartholomeusz, a small business owner and member of the Democratic National Platform Committee. The L.A. chapter of NOW has endorsed Palin’s bid.
The Post amended it’s original article, lining out the L.A. chapter of NOW endorsement, without noting that Shelly Mandell, NOW’s L.A. chapter president, did indeed endorse Palin, as an individual. Palin went on to say:
“When the time came to make a decision, Barack Obama couldn’t bring himself to pick the woman who got eighteen million votes in the primary,” Palin said of Obama’s vice presidential pick, comparing it to the discrimination women face in the workplace every day. “The qualifications are there, but for some reason the promotion never comes … You’ve got to ask yourself, why wasn’t Senator Hillary Clinton even vetted by the Obama campaign?”
“Our opponents think they have the women’s vote all locked up, which is a little presumptuous,” she said, as the crowd’s roar of approval drowned her out. “A little presumptuous, and only our side has a woman on the ticket.”
While it is true that Obama did not choose Clinton as a running mate, it is also true that she has served as a better surrogate advocating for his campaign than Joe Biden, the man who was actually chosen, and who has by his own admission, acknowledged Clinton’s superior qualifications, if not her efforts. It is likely that Clinton will be responsible for delivering far more votes to the ticket than Biden ever could, especially when his tendency to spew gaffes is considered in tandem with his general lack of popularity.
When Sarah Palin called Obama out about “equal pay for equal work”…
“There is a difference between what Barack Obama says and what he does,” she declared. “Out on the stump, he talks about things like equal pay for equal work, but according to Senate records, women on his staff get just 83 cents for every dollar that the men get. What is with that? Does he think that the women aren’t working as hard? Does he think they’re 17 percent less productive?”
…she missed the opportunity to point out that in the injustice of using Senator Clinton as a de facto running mate, he was reaping the benefits of using a woman’s considerable services and not paying her anything at all. In fact, she’s paying him.
The details of Barack Obama’s Columbia/New York years (1981 – 1985) are pretty sketchy. We know, that for some reason, Obama decided to leave California’s Occidental College in favor of New York’s Columbia in 1981. We know from this article, that Obama lived at 339 E. 94th St. for most, if not all of that time.
While no residents, current or past, who were contacted by The Times remembered Mr. Obama, they shared tales of a building with low rents and dicey circumstances during the early 1980s, when Mr. Obama apparently lived there, before and after he graduated from Columbia University in 1983. (“B. Obama” was listed in telephone directories at 339 East 94th Street in the early 1980s. Mr. Obama did not specify the building number in his memoir, and his campaign has said that he has forgotten specifics of his youth.)
The apartment building is described as being located on East 94th Street, between First and Second Avenue. The National Review says that while Obama was studying at Columbia, William Ayers came out of hiding and started going to school in the neighborhood.
Said had a wide circle of radical acquaintances. That circle clearly included Bill Ayers and Bernadine Dohrn. When they came out of hiding in the early 1980s (while Obama was attending Columbia), Ayers took education courses at Bank Street College, adjacent to Columbia in Morningside Heights — before earning his doctorate at Columbia’s Teachers College in 1987.
After leaving the underground, he earned an M.Ed from Bank Street College in Early Childhood Education (1984), an M.Ed from Teachers College, Columbia University in Early Childhood Education (1987) and an Ed.D from Teachers College, Columbia University in Curriculum and Instruction (1987).
The college gets its name from its former location on Bank Street in Greenwich Village. It moved to its current location in the early 1970s.
What’s interesting about the Greenwich Village location is that Ayers and the Weathermen also had a ’70’s connection to the Village. From The New York Observer:
On March 6, 1970, five members of the radical Weather Underground accidentally detonated dynamite at a makeshift bomb factory in the basement of 18 West 11th Street. The bombs were, according to rumors, destined for a military compound in New Jersey and for Butler Library at Columbia University.
Ayers now teaches at the University of Illinois in Chicago. That’s an outrage in and of itself, but at least he does not teach bombmaking, the craft that what made him infamous. Ayers was a Weatherman, and was resident in a Greenwich Village townhouse where his lovely group was working on a bomb intended to kill army personnel at Fort Dix in 1970. Fortunately, the device destroyed the Greenwich Village townhouse where it was being assembled and killed three of the bomb assemblers instead of innocents.
The question that remains, however, is where exactly did Ayers live while he was at Bank Street College and Teachers College of Columbia, presumably during the same years Barack Obama lived and studied there? Understandably, Ayers Columbia years are shrouded in mystery, but curiously, Obama’s Columbia years are also murky, at best. Another New York Observer article:
NOT MANY PEOPLE AT Columbia between 1981 and 1983 seem to remember Senator Obama when he was a student.
edit
In fact, there is not a single picture of Senator Obama in any of the yearbooks from the period when he was a student–he is not even listed as absent in the BSO photo from 1983.
No one from the library in the School of International Public Affairs, the building he would have had most of his classes in as a political science major, remembered him. The chairman of the Political Science Department when Senator Obama was an undergraduate, Mark Chalmers, wrote in an e-mail that he did not remember him, and the two alumni I managed to reach from the class of ‘83 refused to answer any questions about their old classmate.
So, if Obama lived at 339 E. 94th during the same time Ayers was studying close by, where did Ayers live? When he says, “he’s just a guy in my neighborhood,” which neighborhood is he talking about? That little piece of information might answer quite a few pertinent questions once and for all.
Well, well, well. African Press International, API, they of the “Michelle Obama called us pissed about people questioning her husband’s citizenship status” tapes “scandal,” is now saying they have officially retained attorney Philip Berg, he of one of the “If you’re really a citizen, Barack, prove it,” lawsuits fame. Here’s API’s statement, or should I say, latest installment of As The WORM Turns:
“Parties involved -LAW OFFICES OF PHILIP J. BERG (USA)
and African Press International – API (Norway) have agreed on the wording of the notice below now being made public”
To whom it may concern
CONFIRMATION OF ATTORNEY/CLIENT RELATIONSHIP
This is to inform members of the public that there is Attorney/Client relationship between:
LAW OFFICES OF PHILIP J. BERG
555 Andorra Glen Court, Suite 12,
Lafayette Hill, PA 19444-2531
Office: (610) 825-3134
Fax: (610) 662-3005
Att: Phil J. Berg or Lisa Liberi
email: philjberg@gmail.com
email: lisaliberi@gmail.com
and
AFRICAN PRESS INTERNATIONAL – API, Oslo – Norway
Subject matter: The Michelle Obama tapes.
In case of legal questions pertaining to the above subject, members of the public are asked to contact the Law Offices directly.
Any other matters of no legal character may be directed to API’s Chief
Editor Korir by email: africanpress@getmail.no or +4793299739.
Okay, this started on the 15, and now it’s a week later and we’re still waiting for some mythical tapes. Sounds fishy. But, then again, we’re still waiting for Obama to produce his birth certificate in any one of the lawsuits demanding it. Maybe he’ll find it while he’s in Hawaii.
HIS GRANDMOTHER’S STRANGE SILENCE IS THE KEY TO UNLOCKING THE MYSTERY OF BARACK OBAMA
(HONOLULU, HI)(October 21, 2008) Where his white grandmother is concerned, Barack Obama talks the talk but he does not walk the walk. The presence of our investigative team in Honolulu, the first media investigation of Obama’s Hawai’i heritage in the entire presidential campaign, triggered panic attacks in Obama’s organization. Obama has suspended his campaign and plans to arrive in Hawai’i Thursday in a desperate attempt to blunt the thrust of our reporting.
In this article dated December 11, 2006, Susan Milligan of the Boston Globe waxed poetic about the awesomeness of The Newly Chosen One. Filled with quotes attesting to the wonderfulness of the The One Who Voted Present, it’s a wonder how she wrote it with all the stars in her eyes. Or, were those dollar signs?
Barack Obama , a national political newcomer with an uncomplicated message of hope and promise, won standing ovations from enthusiastic crowds yesterday as he tested the New Hampshire landscape for support for a 2008 Democratic presidential run.
edit
And while the 45-year-old freshman senator offered no detailed solutions — “this is not a 10-point plan to solve every problem,” he said of his new book, “The Audacity of Hope,” at an earlier appearance in Portsmouth — the New Hampshire crowds cheered for what many see as the freshest face in Democratic politics.
“We had scheduled the Rolling Stones to perform here today,” Governor John Lynch of New Hampshire quipped at the Manchester rally, welcoming Obama in the senator’s maiden visit to the Granite State as a potential candidate. “But we canceled it when we realized Barack Obama would sell more tickets.”
So little has changed in the Obama coverage that one must wonder if the above referenced article was really written by Ms. Milligan or did David Axelrod have her sign a campaign memo and submit it under her byline? The over-fawning Obama coverage was skewered at the time by NewsBusters, who offered up this gem:
Despite the fact that Barack Obama hasn’t really done anything of substance, he will continue to receive overwhelmingly reverential coverage in the media. Of course, such uncritical reporting leaves itself wide open for satire. In response to a suggestion in a recent edition of the DUmmie FUnnies that the lyrics of I Don’t Know How To Love Him from the musical, Jesus Christ Superstar be updated for Barack Obama Superstar, Charles Henrickson, a Lutheran pastor in St. Louis, MO came up with these brilliant parody lyrics titled, I Don’t Know Why I Love Him:
I don’t know why I love him,
My Barack, my Obama;
I’ve been charmed, yes really charmed,
By his trim physique, so slim and sleek–
I’m awed by his mystique.
I don’t know why he’s running,
I don’t see any substance;
No real plan, flash in the pan,
And I’ve heard such empty words before
That when I close my eyes
He’s just a bore.
But I like his face,
And I like his voice;
Makes my heartbeat race!
Makes me feel all moist!
I never thought I’d come to this:
Obama is my choice.
Don’t you think it’s rather shallow
I should vote for this fellow?
I’m the one who’s always been
So pure, so pissed, so feminist;
I don’t need men, oh no–
He scares me so.
But I like his face,
And I like his voice;
Makes my heartbeat race!
Makes me feel all moist!
I never thought I’d come to this:
Obama is my choice.
Yet, like in a romance novel,
I’m in love with a male model;
I’ve got to look! He signed my book!
My heart runs wild! I’ll bear his child!
I want the world to know:
He’s my “Big O”!
Obama, go!
I love you so!
Obama’s finest speeches do not excite. They do not inform. They don’t even really inspire. They elevate. They enmesh you in a grander moment, as if history has stopped flowing passively by, and, just for an instant, contracted around you, made you aware of its presence, and your role in it. He is not the Word made flesh, but the triumph of word over flesh, over color, over despair.
On February 5, Kathleen Geier felt the need to state the obvious in a TPM piece entitled, “Barack Obama Is Not Jesus,”
That said, I’m getting increasingly weirded out by some of Obama’s supporters.
On listservs I’m on, some people who should know better – hard-bitten, not-so-young cynics, even – are gushing about Barack, raving about his “game-changing” politics, about his “power to inspire,” about how they wept while viewing the now-famous Dipdive video, and on and on.
edit
Excuse me, but this sounds more like a cult than a political campaign. The language used here is the language of evangelical Christianity – the Obama volunteers speak of “coming to Obama” in the same way born-again Christians talk about “coming to Jesus.”
The “Dipdive video” is a reference to “Yes, We Can,” one of will.i.am’s creepy hymns to Obama. Jake Tapper wrote this about the Obanomenon on Feb. 7, in an article chronicling all the other creeped out commenters at the time:
Inspiration is nice. But some folks seem to be getting out of hand.
It’s as if Tom Daschle descended from on high saying, “Be not afraid; for behold I bring you good tidings of great joy which shall be to all the people: for there is born to you this day in the city of Chicago a Savior, who is Barack the Democrat.”
Website, after website has made note of the deliberate “Making of the Messiah” Obama campaign, yet noting it has done nothing to derail it. Who can forget this quote by Spike Lee on the inevitability of Obama’s election:
“When that happens, it will change everything. … You’ll have to measure time by `Before Obama’ and `After Obama,’” Lee said during the panel. “It’s an exciting time to be alive now.”
Louis Farrakhan called Obama, “the Messiah” in a Founder’s Day speech, as if it was the most natural thing in the world. The Washington Posts trips over itself writing such glowing articles about the Unaccomplished One that it’s a wonder that none of the writers have had to take medical leave from being blinded by the Light. And, of course, we all threw up a little in our mouths when we watched this video of innocent children singing the praises of He Who Is Rewarded For No Reason. Those of us whose jaws dropped open at the sight of such a thing almost choked on our own vomit.
Now, here’s a charming little hymn from Beliefnet:
Lord, prepare me to be a sanctuary, pure and holy, tried and true. With thanksgiving, I’ll be a living sanctuary for You.Here’s the updated version from the video:
“Love prepare me to be a sanctuary, pure and holy tried and true. With thanksgiving, I’ll be a living sanctuary for you.”
Yesterday, it was reported that Barack Obama’s grandmother was “gravely ill.” Obama spokesman, Robert Gibbs issued this statement:
“Senator Obama’s grandmother, Madelyn Dunham, has always been one of the most important people in his life. Along with his mother and his grandfather, she raised him in Hawaii from the time he was born until the moment he left for college. As he said at the Democratic Convention, she poured everything she had into him. Recently, his Grandmother has become ill, and in the last few weeks, her health has deteriorated to the point where her situation is very serious. It is for that reason that Senator Obama has decided to change his schedule on Thursday and Friday so that he can see her and spend some time with her. He will be returning the the campaign trail on Saturday.”
First of all, she raised him “from the time he was born until the moment he left for college?” So he never went to Indonesia, now? Second, is she “ill,” “seriously ill,” or “gravelly ill?” According to Chicago Tribune, two out of three:
Barack Obama will suspend campaigning for a day and a half so that he can fly to Hawaii to be at the side of his gravely ill grandmother, a campaign aide said late Monday.
Madelyn Dunham, 86, was released from the hospital at the end of last week and returned to her home in Honolulu with a health condition the aide described only as “very serious.”
At any rate, why is he still campaigning?
But Obama’s decision to cancel campaign events “underscores the seriousness of the situation,” communications director Robert Gibbs told reporters during an evening flight following a campaign event in Orlando.
Uh, Bobby, the seriousness of the situation would be underscored had he left yesterday, when those stories came out. Campaigning for 2 full days after such an announcement underscores something else. Obama’s great-uncle, Charles Payne, explains the situation this way:
Barack Obama’s 85-year-old grandmother broke her hip recently and is “gravely ill,” her brother said Tuesday.
Madelyn Payne Dunham, who helped to raise Obama, “has not been well for a long time. Then she fell and broke her hip fairly recently,” Charles Payne said in a telephone interview from his home in Chicago. “She’s unhappy with the condition that she’s in, I can tell you that.”
Payne, who is Obama’s great-uncle, said his sister was hospitalized briefly but is back home in her Honolulu apartment, where Obama’s sister, Maya Soetoro-Ng, cares for her. Obama plans to suspend campaigning later this week to visit his grandmother, and Payne is planning to fly there for her 86th birthday, which is Sunday.
While my prayers go out to the Dunham, Payne and Obama families, I would be less than honest if I didn’t admit that I find Obama’s foot dragging in this situation, as it has been described, puzzling. Given his reported lead in the polls and his record-breaking fundraising, it doesn’t seem like he should be desperate to squeeze in as many campaign stops as possible before dashing off to tend to his “gravelly ill” grandmother. With so many news outlets issuing testimonials to her life, as if the end is imminent, Obama’s behavior doesn’t make a lot of sense.
Here’s audio of Joe [Urkel (Did I Say That?)] Biden’s “you sure you wanna vote for this guy?” Seattle moment. If anyone has video, or knows where I can find it, please let me know.
And here’s Sarah Palin’s “gee, thanks for the endorsement, Senator Joe (Have You Been Drinking Again?) Biden!” Reno, Nevada response.
Will the now famous Michelle Obama “I’ve got a bug up my butt about the way my husband’s been portrayed in the media” phone call to African Press International soon be available via Fox News? That’s what API says:
API has an ongoing discussion with FOX NEWS on the best way forward in the process of releasing Michelle Obama tapes to the American people.
API hopes the negotiation will be completed as soon as possible so that the tapes can be made available to FOX NEWS in the next few days and specifically before the voting day – the 4th of November.
API will make use of Legal Representation in the US when finalising the hand-over of the tapes and on any�legal matters that may arise after the contents of the tapes become public.
It will be filled with expletives, swear words, cursing, cussing and every other way to fucking say I’m going to use the word “fuck” a lot. I’m fucking sick of this election and just about everybody associated with it. I’m furious at both major political parties, the mainstream media, the blogger bullies, and all the self-interested entities masquerading as being “compassionately concerned” about our “rights” and “freedoms” and “well-being” when all they really want is the post masturbatory good feeling that comes from the greaseless rape-by-proxy butt fucking of the electorate for profit.
The Democrats force-fed us an unacceptable novice whose running mate thinks is a clueless jerk, yet the rah-rah boys employed to keep us informed think it’s a-okay to pump and prop him up because he’s black and if they don’t people might think they’re “racist,” and Lord help us if that happens because all those just-shy-of-savage black folks who never had a president before might get mad and riot.
The Republicans basically washed their hands of the whole affair from the beginning and figured they might as well give their least favorite perennial loser a shot since they don’t have a chance in hell to win anyway given the fact that their last “shoot first and ask questions later” standard bearer is a total bungler and just slightly more popular than herpes.
The mainstream “infotainment” media abandoned all pretense of journalistic objectivity in favor of leg-tingling partisanship, gleefully fudging inconvenient facts whenever well-aimed mud-slinging wasn’t enough, while the misogynistic bullies of the blogosphere adopted a “by-any-means-necessary” mindset to promote the candidate they flipped a coin to decide to promote over the qualified candidate they hated for being born female.
Then there are the fucking fringe elements, disguised as relevent, nobodies, pushing their personal career agendas down the throats of the “let’s get Mikey, he hates everything” minded public in an attempt to secure their extraneous phony-baloney jobs, whether we like them or not.
And let’s not forget the corporate rapists-turned-extortionists holding our global finances for ransom, boldly demanding 7, 8, 9 hundred billion dollars a pop or they won’t let us borrow any of our own money back from them so we can pay too much for things we need, and their fox in the hen house government homeboys who laid the foundation and greased the wheels and paved the way for the scheme to work. But fuck us, what do we know?
African Press International, Larry Sinclair, Joe the Plumber, Keating 5, William Ayers, Fannie, Freddie, and all the “spaghetti against the wall” distractions that have been thrown out to divert attention from the fact that we are being asked to choose a fucking president from a 2 man pool of Tweedledum and Tweedledee, piss me off too. When a guy can’t form whole sentences without help, who cares if he was born in a manger or in a Muslim country, and who cares if a man called his wife a “cunt” when people can wear t-shirts calling his running mate the same thing, and everything’s hunky-dory?
The head-in-the-sand public is no better. Don’t you guys get it? When you hear a candidate say, “vote for me early, you never know what might happen,” doesn’t that set alarm bells off in your head? When somebody raises enough money to bail out Wall Street, but won’t name his donors, doncha get at least a little bit suspicious? When one side says. “you’re cheating,” and the other side says, “no I’m not, I’m winning so your guys might as well stay home,” don’t you see the game on both sides?
If you’ve been following the presidential election at all, you know there have been some, odd, shall we say, stories from both sides of the aisle, hell, from everywhere, since the beginning of the primaries til today. But nothing is as sadly weird as this one from North Carolina:
Dead bear covered with Obama signs found at school
CULLOWHEE, N.C. – Police at Western Carolina University and wildlife officials were investigating the discovery early Monday of a dead bear cub draped with a pair of Barack Obama campaign signs.
Leila Tvedt, associate vice chancellor for public relations, said Monday night that maintenance workers found the 75-pound bear cub shot to death in front of the school’s administration building at the entrance to campus. The Obama yard signs were stapled together and placed over the bear’s head, Tvedt said.
The bear had been shot in the head, Tvedt said.
“Western Carolina University deplores the inappropriate behavior that has led to this troubling incident,” Tvedt said. “We cannot speculate on the motives of the people involved nor who those people might be. Campus police are cooperating fully with authorities to investigate this matter.”
University police called in state Wildlife Resources officials to remove the body and help in the investigation.
Bear season is under way in western North Carolina.
What the hell is the point of that? What the hell could a person be trying to prove by shooting a baby bear? And what’s up with the Obama signs? Political protest is one thing, but this, this is on a whole ‘nother level. No innocent animal deserves to die to make a political point. That’s just wrong.
Things are getting completely out of hand. People are actually afraid to speak their minds, for fear that some nut is going to harm them for backing the “wrong” candidate. Have we all lost our minds? Physical violence against people who hold different political views is as unacceptable as physical violence should always be. It’s inexcusable:
CALEDONIA, Wis. — Police in Caledonia are investigating the assault of a campaign volunteer as she was canvassing for Senator Barack Obama Saturday afternoon.In an exclusive interview with 12 News, 58 year-old Nancy Takehara of Chicago says she was going door-to-door when she came across a disgruntled homeowner.“The next thing I know he’s telling us we’re not his people, we’re probably with ACORN, and he started screaming and raving,” Takehara said. “He grabbed me by the back of the neck. I thought he was going to rip my hair out of my head. He was pounding on my head and screaming. The man terrified me.”
Politico’s Ben Smith got confirmation from the Manhattan DA’s office about an incident last month where a female McCain supporter was assaulted at Lexington Avenue and 51st Street. According to conservative blog The Silent Majority, a man–without provocation–grabbed the woman’s McCain sign, ripped it up, and hit her with it, bruising her face. The victim followed him into the 6 train subway station and found police officers on the platform; she added that he was only arrested after she showed the cops her bruised face. The assailant allegedly said, “I don’t know why I did this. It’s just those signs, and this election, it has me so upset.” Smith reports that the man, Bernard Feuerman, was charged with second degree assault and has a January 23 court date.
My primary reason for not supporting Hillary Clinton right now is two-fold. One, she’s not running for anything at the moment, and, two, she’s stumping for Barack Obama.
I decided very early on in the primary season that I did not like Barack Obama, at all, and have always felt that he would make a lousy president. I agreed when Joe Biden said so, and, unlike FootMouth Joe, I have seen no reason to change my mind. In fact, as the election process plays itself out, my resolve not to vote for Obama, under any imaginable, or unimaginable, circumstances, grows ever stronger.
My initial reaction to the Oily One was, “eh.” The only thing he inspired in me, once he appeared on my radar, was mild curiosity, at best. If that. I’ve never heard him say anything that gave me confidence, let alone hope, and his canned, generic, ghost-written speeches, read from a TelePrompTer, nose-in-air, drone on interminably, and have grown from the mild annoyance associated with sharing living space with a housefly, to the full-out rage and frustration of living with that same pest for over a year.
Lacking any accomplishment of note, surrogates tout his “policies,” yet his inability to articulate them in off-the-cuff situations only serves to highlight his inadequacy. Incessant media drumbeats attesting to his wonderfulness, coupled with nonstop ads intruding every avenue of modern day entertainment and intellectual pursuit, ratchet up the annoyance factor to intolerable levels. Especially since they’re all lies.
Hey, HuffPo, Who’re You Callin’ Conservative?
As evidence of the “it must fit the narrative” media mindset, I offer up my own experience. On Sunday, upon hearing of Colin Powell’s “officializing” his “help a brother out, hook a brother up,” Obama endorsement, I immediately posted my opinion on my blog. Imagine my surprise when I noticed a dramatic traffic uptick on my small little site, linking here from Huffington Post. Peeking into the situation, since I’m reluctant to expose myself too fully to the rancor against all those not pledging allegiance to He Who Must Not Be Examined, I found that my site was included as an illustration of conservative racism in a post by Sam Stein.
There were, down the conservative line, other voices who gave credence to the race-over-politics theory. A prominent Republican attorney in Maine, Dan Billings, accused Powell of racism, stating: “If Obama was a white man, Powell would not have made the endorsement.”
I’m the “other voices.” Obviously, Mr. Stein didn’t bother to read my post, had he, he might have noticed the PUMA/Just Say No Deal tags I use to label each one. Heaven forbid he read my “About” page which features a short paragraph identifying me as a black woman so fed up with the faux nominating process employed by the Democratic party to coronate their “selectee,” that I now have no affiliation to any political party. As far as being a “George Will/Rush Limbaugh” conservative is concerned, had HuffPo not included me in their post, I probably would not have known what either man thought. The only thing I can see that we have in common is…well…we all walk on two legs, and at least two of us still have hair on our heads. This sort of “racism to prove racism” narrative of the Obama campaign and their mainstream media/blogger boyz enablers is one of the main reasons I could never vote for him. Having experienced it for over a year, as a Hillary Clinton supporter, not only can I attest to the ugliness, I lament the coming to fruition of the fears I’ve had since first becoming aware of the Obama practice of pouring gasoline on smoldering racial fires and encouraging his pre-pubescent-minded bullies of the blogosphere to climb on chairs and point gleeful fingers at the flames.
Which brings me to Hillary Clinton. That she stumps for Obama distresses me, though she obviously has her own reasons for doing so. Given what she experienced at the hands of the Obama thugs, what those reasons might be, boggles the mind. Since I haven’t seen or heard about the whereabouts of Chelsea lately, I’m of the mind that David Axelrod has her locked away in a secure location, only to be released once her parents have done his bidding to his satisfaction. Whatever, that’s Hillary’s business, not mine.
So, since Hillary Clinton is not running for anything, and she, for her own reasons, sees the benefit of supporting Barack Obama, a man I will never vote for, I cannot support her. At this time. If she were to run for national office again, I’d probably be the first one aboard the bandwagon.
That “Party Unity My Ass” thing still works for me just fine, though.
Man, oh, man, “As The World Turns” has got nothing on this story. After promising to release audio tapes of Michelle Obama going off on white people at 16:00 hours Norway time, now African Press International (API) is giving her an unspecified amount of time to come clean, or they’re going to spill the beans all over her. Baby, bay-bay! In their “Open Letter to Michelle Obama,” someone who I assume is Cheif Editor Korir, says they’ve talked to a CIA official in Norway:
The intention of writing to you this open letter is to appeal to you to confirm that we had a talk because it is the only right thing to do now, so that we avoid any embarrassment should the whole tape be aired unedited. You are well aware of our discussions touching on thorny issues like Iran’s good trade relationship with Kenya and the fact�Kenya may play a role in mending the relationship between Iran and the US so that healthy trade relationship may be achieved if your husband gets the presidency. Remember the length and the depth of our talk on�other issues of importance in this hotly contested election where as you have stated – is an opportunity for the black people to start being proud of America and to be patriotic.
API was disappointed that one of your husband’s spokespersons rushed to the press to deny that you had called API. It is best that they check with you first before jumping to conclusions as if they control your private calls everyday.
Heh, heh, heh.
We have decided to write to you after our discussion today with a US CIA official�in Oslo.
Is Joe Biden working for the McCain camp undercover, or what? Why else would he try to scare people about Barack Obama? After months of Camp O telling us the world looks forward to Obama’s election with bated breath, now his running mate says the world can’t wait to test his mettle. From ABC News:
“Mark my words,” the Democratic vice presidential nominee warned at the second of his two Seattle fundraisers Sunday. “It will not be six months before the world tests Barack Obama like they did John Kennedy. The world is looking. We’re about to elect a brilliant 47-year-old senator president of the United States of America. Remember I said it standing here if you don’t remember anything else I said. Watch, we’re gonna have an international crisis, a generated crisis, to test the mettle of this guy.”
WTF, Joe? And we should elect him because…why, exactly?
“I can give you at least four or five scenarios from where it might originate,” Biden said to Emerald City supporters, mentioning the Middle East and Russia as possibilities. “And he’s gonna need help. And the kind of help he’s gonna need is, he’s gonna need you – not financially to help him – we’re gonna need you to use your influence, your influence within the community, to stand with him. Because it’s not gonna be apparent initially, it’s not gonna be apparent that we’re right.”
And we should believe you Joe, because…?
“I’ve forgotten more about foreign policy than most of my colleagues know, so I’m not being falsely humble with you. I think I can be value added, but this guy has it,” the Senate Foreign Relations chairman said of Obama. “This guy has it. But he’s gonna need your help. Because I promise you, you all are gonna be sitting here a year from now going, ‘Oh my God, why are they there in the polls? Why is the polling so down? Why is this thing so tough?’ We’re gonna have to make some incredibly tough decisions in the first two years. So I’m asking you now, I’m asking you now, be prepared to stick with us. Remember the faith you had at this point because you’re going to have to reinforce us.”
I don’t know about anybody else, but I can’t think of a better argument for electing John McCain than that.
African Press International, the news site that swears they have audio tapes of Michelle Obama ranting and raving about her husband being adopted and evil white people, now swears (again) that they’re going to release those tapes to the public, just as soon as they find the right venue. To prove it, they’ve even retained counsel, attorney Phillip Berg, the guy with a bug up his butt about Obama’s birth certificate. They claim to have been forced to do so by unscrupulous people acting on their behalf, against their wishes, as evidenced by this email:
Hi Will: I have been in contact with the African Press International, who ran the Michelle Obama story. I have talked to them about releasing the audio tape they have of her. It would appear that this is going to happen. The format will be, I will bring the reporter on and let them tell us how they obtained the tape, and then I will run the audio tape, and bring the reporter back on to verify that it is the real thing. Once I have this done, I will place it on my web site, file for and get a copyright on it. Once I have this done, I will contact you with the link. What I would like for you, since you live in Washington DC,�to do is contact CNN, Fox, NBC, CBS, ABC and MSNBC. Let them listen to the audio tape. I will then take bid on this tape. The starting bid will be 2 million dollars. Once you have received the high bid, we will break the money down this way, 45% to Bar H Farms Inc, parent copy of Plains Radio network, 45% to African Press International and 10% for yourself. If you can do this, please call me at 806-447-0010. Thanks Ed
The editors categorically deny that they are selling the tapes, and continue to stand by their story.
API wants the readers to know that we are for the truth and such�email being circulated in the US makes us look bad. This serves to further delay the release of the tapes because we�do not know who we can trust to air the tapes unedited and without cashing in on them.
The same group of people we thought we could trust have gone ahead and signed�unilateral agreements binding them and API, agreements stating that API surrenders all the rights to the tapes to them and that the tapes will belong to them and they are the one to decide who should listen to the tapes on cost. This is against API’s principles.
Now that we have an agreement for representation with a US law firm, we think things will move faster in the direction of releasing the tapes. The Law firm will help us get out of the unilateral agreements not signed by us.
We ask the readers to bear with us. We owe you the truth and the tapes being released.
Well, for whatever it’s worth, you gotta admire one thing, they’re still not backing down:
The tapes are there and the truth must be told. If some people want to continue imagining that this may be an hoax or something connected with Nigerian scam, then let them continue believing so because we cannot force any one to believe in us.
On November 17, 2007, Barack Obama issued the now-famous, “Don’t Swiftboat Me” statement in response to a viral rumor planted by Robert Novak that Hillary Clinton possessed damaging information about him and was going around telling everybody she was going to use it. No details were given by Novak, and no one corroborated the story. Howard Wolfson said the HRC camp had no idea what Obama was talking about. From a Politico report on that date:
Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) took the rare step of issuing a statement in his own name on Saturday to call attention to a report by columnist Robert D. Novak that New York Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton’s campaign is sitting on “scandalous” information about Obama.
edit
Howard Wolfson, Clinton’s campaign communications director, said she has “no idea” what the item is about.
“Once again Sen. Obama is echoing Republican talking points, this time from Bob Novak,” he said in an e-mailed statement.
“This is how Republicans work. A Republican-leaning journalist runs a blind item designed to set Democrats against one another.
Experienced Democrats see this for what it is.
Others get distracted and thrown off their games. Voters should be concerned about the readiness of any Democrat inexperienced enough to fall for this.
There is only one campaign in this race that has actually engaged in the very practice that Sen. Obama is decrying, and it’s his.
We have no idea what Mr. Novak’s item is about and reject it totally. Instead of pointing fingers at us, Sen. Obama should get back to the issues and focus on what this election is really about.”
edit
Later, Obama campaign manager David Plouffe said in a statement that Wolfson’s comments represented the “Washington art of evasion and deflection”: “Are ‘agents’ of their campaign spreading these rumors? And do they have ’scandalous’ information that they are not releasing? Yes or no?”
Sound familiar? It should, Camp O has used similar tactics repeatedly throughout this election cycle. But the question remains, what was Obama so afraid of? It does not seem logical that a completely innocent victim would react that way. If there are no known skeletons in your closet, why panic if someone threatens to open the door? Especially if all you’re going by is a rumor that someone told somebody else, who heard that another person is telling people they know what you’ve got in there.
“This is a guy who lives in my neighborhood, who’s a professor of English in Chicago who I know and who I have not received some official endorsement from,” Obama said. “He’s not somebody who I exchange ideas from on a regular basis.
“And the notion that somehow as a consequence of me knowing somebody who engaged in detestable acts 40 years ago, when I was 8 years old, somehow reflects on me and my values doesn’t make much sense, George.”
This is, as reported by PolitiFact, Obama’s response to Charlie Gibson’s question, posed to Obama during the much lampooned April 16 Philadelphia debate, about his relationship with William Ayers. Widely acknowledged to be Obama’s worst debate performance, it is notable for the follow-up question and answer. When pressed by Clinton about his continued relationship with Ayers, the Boston Globe says Obama responded thusly:
Obama said Clinton was not one to talk about guilt by association because “President Clinton pardoned or commuted the sentences of two members of the Weather Underground, which I think is a slightly more significant act than me serving on a board with somebody for actions that he did 40 years ago.”
For a guy who seemed rattled by the question, Obama certainly had a specific response at the ready. While visiting No Quarter, I came across a link to a Newsweek article detailing David Axelrod’s “genius,” crediting him with developing a “war games” strategy four months ago, whereby mock attacks would be thwarted by campaign operators for practice, in an attempt to ready them for anything that might come down. However, from the looks of things, Newsweek got the dates wrong:
Four months ago—when the presidential race was still in its polite phase—Axelrod conducted war games. Campaign consultants drafted a “vulnerability study,” and produced a series of mock attack ads against Obama, to get a sense of what might be coming. They tested the mock commercials in focus groups. Later they developed a series of real ads to defend Obama and take on John McCain, including several that paint the Arizona senator as being “out of touch” on the economy. When the McCain campaign started blasting Obama on his relationship with Bill Ayers, a 1960s radical with the Weather Underground who later became a college professor, Axelrod’s team had its own attack ad ready to go: a 13-minute Web video (complete with sinister whispers and menacing shadows) about McCain’s relationship with Charles Keating, the disgraced 1980s financier.
Seems like the O Team has put a considerable effort into defending Obama about Ayers. Why? If it’s so innocent, what’s the harm? This deleted scene from the film, Indoctrinate U, chronicles the activites of Mark Rudd, Bernadine Dohrn and William Ayers and the splintering from the Students for a Democratic Society into the Weather Underground/ Weathermen at Columbia University:
A Google search for “SDS Columbia” directs you to the above-referenced generic “SDS history” Wikipedia entry. Stating that the original national office was located in Manhattan, a more specific location is not given, however. The more direct SDS/Columbia connection is chronicled here in this Wikipedia entry about the “Morningside Park” protests. We know that Barack Obama attended Columbia between 1981 and 1983, spending two additional years in New York/Harlem, which is adjacent to Columbia’s Morninside Heights neighborhood. William Ayers attended the Bank Street College of Education, located in Morningside Heights, recieving an M.Ed in 1984, then earning an M.Ed from Teacher’s College, Columbia, in 1987.
The Woods Fund, in many ways, is responsible for helping start Obama as an organizer and shaping his political identity. In 1985 the foundation gave a $25,000 grant to the Developing Communities Project, which hired Obama, at 24, as an organizer on Chicago’s economically depressed South Side.
Though Obama left for Harvard in 1988, this Washington Post article says he met Michelle at the law firm the both worked at, in 1989:
In the summer of 1989, Michelle Robinson told her mother she was going to concentrate on her law career and not worry about dating. She was 25 and had just finished her first year as an associate at Sidley & Austin, a corporate law firm in her home town of Chicago. Not long after, the firm assigned her to mentor a summer associate named Barack Obama.
Interestingly, Bernadine Dohrn, Ayers’ wife, supposedly worked at Sidley Austing from 1984 to 1988. Just reading the Wikipedia articles on The Chicago Annenberg Challenge and William Ayers will document many associations since 1988 between the two men through the Woods Fund, The Alliance for Better Chicago Schools Coalition, (ABCs) The Small Schools Project, and CAC. Even CNN documents their numerous ties. Both men’s paths would naturally overlap given their mutual commitment to school reform. From Slate, April 2, 2008:
Obama’s links to local school councils began more than 20 years ago, when they were first being created. His South Side community organizing group, the Developing Communities Project, supported the 1988 reform act that created the councils.
This graphic of The Alliance for Better Chicago Schools (ABCs) Coalition from 1988 lists Obama’s Developing Communities Project as a member as well as William Ayers as a contact man for the group. This website, VerumSerum, says that a few years later the guys were sharing office space.
Bill Ayers and Barack Obama shared an office. Ayers’ Small Schools Workshop, the one Obama directed all that money to is located at 115 S. Sangamon Street, Chicago, Illinois 60607
edit
In 1998, the address for the Chicago Annenberg Challenge, where Obama presumably worked, was 115 S. Sangamon Street, Chicago, Illinois 60607.
Newsbusters also has a report on the VerumSerum findings.
While Barack Obama is busy crying “foul” at every turn, often-times even before anyone says anything defense-worthy about him, he might want to consider that a lie oft told, is still a lie. And pre-emptive attempts to deflect criticism can many times increase curiosity. Whatever you think about the nature of the Ayers/Obama relationship, it is clear that for some reason, Barack Obama feels an almost desperate need to lie about it. Unfortunately, Obama may run out of lies before he manages to run out the clock.
The New York Times says Barack Obama shattered fundraising records in September, raising somewhere in the neighborhood of 150 million dollars:
Senator Barack Obama’s announcement on Sunday of his record-shattering $150 million fund-raising total for September underscored just how much his campaign has upended standards for raising money in presidential campaigns.
His campaign has now raised more than $600 million, almost equaling what all the candidates from both major parties collected in private donations in 2004.
It is a remarkable ascent to previously unimagined financial heights — Mr. Obama’s September total more than doubled the record $66 million he collected in August — that has been cheered by some and decried by others concerned about the influence of money in politics.
snip
David Plouffe, the Obama campaign manager, said in a video message sent to supporters that Mr. Obama had 632,000 new donors in September, bringing the campaign’s total to 3.1 million. The average contribution, Mr. Plouffe said, was less than $100.
632,000 new donors, huh? Name ‘em. Of course, that’s not something Camp O is likely to do. In a Newsweek article about dicey campaign contributions dated Oct. 4, it was reported that Obama flat-out refused to name small donors:
This summer, watchdog groups asked both campaigns to share more information about its small donors. The McCain campaign agreed; the Obama campaign did not. “They could’ve done themselves a service” by heeding the suggestions, said Massie Ritsch of the Center for Responsive Politics.
However, all the money in the world might not buy Obama the White House. A few days ago, it was announced virtually everywhere that the Obama campaign was pushing into traditionally red states. Politico, on Oct. 16, said:
With the markets in turmoil and the real economy starting to suffer, Obama will spend the final 19 days working to connect with voters who are “voting their pocketbooks, voting their interests,” said Gov. Jennifer Granholm (D-Mich.). He’ll be making that case, however, on what has long been Republican turf. The Democrat heads out Friday on what aides are calling a “red state tour,” taking in Virginia, Missouri, North Carolina and Florida.
However, today, Politico is reporting that not everyone in those red states is exactly rolling out the welcome mat. At a food stop in Fayetteville, N.C., the reception “turned ugly:”
Barack Obama’s stop at Cape Fear BBQ and Chicken in Fayetteville, N.C., this afternoon underscored the continued resistance of some voters to his candidacy — and his identity. The trip, according to a pool report, offered “some powerful and at times ugly interaction.”
Campaigning in a traditionally Republican state, the Democratic nominee found lots of supporters of John McCain, at least one woman who believes the Illinois senator is a “closet Muslim” — and another who repeatedly shouted “Socialist.”
According to pool reporters contributing to the story, some of the patrons clearly are not buying the Obama media love spin:
Fanning said she’d heard that former Secretary of State Colin Powell had endorsed Obama but said that “Colin Powell is a RINO, R-I-N-O, Republican In Name Only.”
Later, Obama came to the long table where Fanning and other members of a local First Presbyterian church were gathered. He held out his hand to her and asked, “How are you, ma’am?” but she declined to shake his hand.
Fanning, first name, Dianne, was the patron who yelled “Socialist!” and also commented that she still thought he was a “closet Muslim” when he left her table. Some patrons were receptive to varying degrees, especially a woman named Sheila Evans, identified as bi-racial:
Sheila Evans, 39, who is biracial, told Obama, “I’m so proud of you.” She told your pooler Obama had chosen a restaurant frequented more by whites, while one a couple of doors down had predominantly African-American diners on Sundays.
Curious. Equally curious is the itemization of Obama’s order that ended the article:
Obama ordered some food to go for himself and his aides. They ordered chicken, collards, baked beans, slaw and wings. The tab was $13.91. The visit lasted about half an hour.
Stark contrast to that Michelle Obama $450.00 “snack” the other day, huh?
Maybe that was the point.
Wonder why NYT used that “shadow man” photo in its’ Obama money story, though.
AP-Yahoo News reports that ratings for Sarah Palin’s quick shot appearance on Saturday Night Live were durned good:
Although a complete audience estimate for the rest of the country won’t be available until later in the week, it is likely to be around 14 million.
For the first half-hour, when Palin first came out, the audience was about 17 million. That’s pretty impressive for a TV program around midnight. The week before, only two other shows in prime time had a bigger audience, Nielsen said.
The linked article suggests that SNL and NBC/Hulu owe Palin big-time:
Michaels owes Palin a debt of gratitude. “Saturday Night Live” so far this season has been up 76 percent over last year at this time, Nielsen said.
Even beyond that, the Fey skits have gone viral over the Internet, drawing more attention to the show. One study last week said only one-third of people who had seen Fey’s impersonations did so on live TV; the rest saw them on DVRs or on their computers.
I bet most of that increased internet viewership was due to the airing/retracting Freddie Mac/Fannie Mae sketch.
And/ oh, by the way, some people think this is funny.
According to the AP-Yahoo News story quoted here, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac hired a Republican consulting firm to lobby Republican senators, in an effort to kill a Republican-sponsored regulatory bill Democrats opposed:
Freddie Mac secretly paid a Republican consulting firm $2 million to kill legislation that would have regulated and trimmed the mortgage finance giant and its sister company, Fannie Mae, three years before the government took control to prevent their collapse.
In the cross hairs of the campaign carried out by DCI of Washington were Republican senators and a regulatory overhaul bill sponsored by Sen. Chuck Hagel, R-Neb. DCI’s chief executive is Doug Goodyear, whom John McCain’s campaign later hired to manage the GOP convention in September.
Freddie Mac’s payments to DCI began shortly after the Senate Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs Committee sent Hagel’s bill to the then GOP-run Senate on July 28, 2005. All GOP members of the committee supported it; all Democrats opposed it.
In the midst of DCI’s yearlong effort, Hagel and 25 other Republican senators pleaded unsuccessfully with Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, R-Tenn., to allow a vote.
“If effective regulatory reform legislation … is not enacted this year, American taxpayers will continue to be exposed to the enormous risk that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac pose to the housing market, the overall financial system and the economy as a whole,” the senators wrote in a letter that proved prescient.
Unknown to the senators, DCI was undermining support for the bill in a campaign targeting 17 Republican senators in 13 states, according to documents obtained by The Associated Press. The states and the senators targeted changed over time, but always stayed on the Republican side.
In the end, there was not enough Republican support for Hagel’s bill to warrant bringing it up for a vote because Democrats also opposed it and the votes of some would be needed for passage. The measure died at the end of the 109th Congress.
McCain, R-Ariz., was not a target of the DCI campaign. He signed Hagel’s letter and three weeks later signed on as a co-sponsor of the bill.
Once again, African Press International promises to release tapes it claims to have of Michelle Obama screaming at them about the lack of significance attached to her husband’s adoptive status on his citizenship qualifications. Once again, they do not actually do so. Now, they want us, the American public, to advise them as to which news outlet would best showcase their wares. Heh, heh, heh.
The legal hurdles that API feared in connection with the release of the tape has now been settled. The American people has soon to be treated to the truth about the true personality of their (probably) incoming first Lady.
API is soon to conclude an agreement on which of the media channels in the US is to air the Michelle Obama tapes. This has come about because many news channels have shown great interest in getting the tapes so that they air to the American people before the elections.
Many Americans are waiting and we promise to satisfy their desire very soon. The delay in releasing the tapes is due to two things:
1. The legal issues that may arise after we release the tapes.
This one has now been cleared and API feels safe and is no longer in fear when it comes to a legal battle that may come when the information gets out.
2. Choosing one media channel to air the tapes in the USA.
When we wrote the story, many people contacted us asking for the verification. At the same time, many media outlets have contacted API and would like to be the sole network to air the tapes. What we are finalising now is to come to an agreement with one channel that will have to air the tapes unedited.
After noticing the desire that has been exhibited – to have the tapes out, may be you Americans would like API to air the tape through a particular news channel. Your advice will be appreciated.
Chief Editor Korir, just go with the one with the biggest checkbook. Heh, heh, heh.
Racism is alive and well in America, a truth that has manifested itself repeatedly in this year’s election cycle. While small fires of bigotry have popped up repeatedly in the last year or so, the flames have mainly been fanned by those sympathetic to (say it with me) “the historic nature of the first viable African American candidate, blah, blah, blah,” obsessively pointing fingers and calling out all incidents of perceived racism, real or (mainly) imagined, while the candidate himself stereotypes Popeye’s chicken-eating people named “Pookie” and equates presidential blackness with minstrel-esque dancing ability.
In this news story that I was lead to via the comments section of Sugar N Spice, a California women’s organization (like the creators of Obama Waffles) feigns innocence regarding their blatantly racist email.
The latest newsletter by an Inland Republican women’s group depicts Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama surrounded by a watermelon, ribs and a bucket of fried chicken, prompting outrage in political circles.
The October newsletter by the Chaffey Community Republican Women, Federated says if Obama is elected his image will appear on food stamps — instead of dollar bills like other presidents. The statement is followed by an illustration of “Obama Bucks” — a phony $10 bill featuring Obama’s face on a donkey’s body, labeled “United States Food Stamps.”
The group’s president, Diane Fedele, said she plans to send an apology letter to her members and to apologize at the club’s meeting next week. She said she simply wanted to deride a comment Obama made over the summer about how as an African-American he “doesn’t look like all those other presidents on the dollar bills.”
The article quoted is from an Inland California newsletter, Press-Enterprise.com and was picked up by the LA Times, which links to an anti-Sarah Palin site for equal time. These examples of racism and misogyny are without a doubt deplorable, and should have no place in any civil discourse. Period. However, the fact they they do exist does not justify support for or against anything but the fact that they exist. For anyone to make the leap that because some bigot is indeed a bigot, means that they should vote for whoever the bigot hates, is just stupid.
As expected, Colin Powell “endorsed” Barack Obama for president of the United States because they’re both black and he’s still pissed at the Bush administration. Of course, he denied that, but, get real. Though Powell denied that race had anything at all to do with anything, his answer to Tom Brokaw’s “race question” doesn’t really make a lot of sense:
Moderator Tom Brokaw said: “There will be some … who will say this is an African-American, distinguished American supporting another African-American because of race.”
Powell, who last year gave the Arizona senator’s campaign the maximum $2,300, replied: “If I had only had that in mind, I could have done this six, eight, 10 months ago. I really have been going back and forth between somebody I have the highest respect and regard for, John McCain and somebody I was getting to know, Barack Obama. And it was only in the last couple of months that I settled on this.”
“I can’t deny that it will be a historic event when an African-American becomes president,” Powell continued, speaking live in the studio. “And should that happen, all Americans should be proud — not just African-American, but all Americans — that we have reached this point in our national history where such a thing could happen. It would also not only electrify the country, but electrify the world.”
So, it couldn’t be a black thing because he didn’t do it months ago, and he didn’t even tell anybody when he decided, months ago. Instead, Powell says it’s about Supreme Court appointments, Obama’s rhetorical skills, and Sarah Palin.
“She’s a very distinguished woman, and she’s to be admired,” he said. “But at the same, now that we have had a chance to watch her for some seven weeks, I don’t believe she’s ready to be president of the United States, which is the job of the vice president. And so that raised some question in my mind as to the judgment that Senator McCain made.”
Camp O, predictably, lied, when contacted about the announcement:
Obama spokeswoman Jen Psaki said the campaign had not been told of the endorsement: “We didn’t know until General Powell spoke on Meet The Press.”
Powell will always be the guy who blocked LGBT equality in the military as far as I’m concerned:
Prior to Clinton taking office, the rule barring gays from serving was set solely by the President — and could be lifted by him, or her, as well. But once Clinton came in pledging to lift the ban, the opposition of his chairman of the Joint Chiefs — Colin Powell — and the hapless efforts by his first defense secretary, the late Les Aspin — ignited a firestorm on Capitol Hill. As the “don’t ask, don’t tell” compromise was hammered out, Congress took the extraordinary step of removing the policy from the President’s hands and writing it into law.
According to Wkipedia, Powell drafted “don’t ask, don’t tell”:
The policy was introduced as a compromise measure in 1993 and approved by then President Bill Clinton who, while campaigning for the Presidency, had promised to allow all citizens regardless of sexual orientation to serve openly in the military, a departure from the then complete ban on those who are not heterosexual. The actual policy was crafted by Colin Powell and has been maintained by Clinton’s successor, George W. Bush.
Now he has trouble with conservative judges? And, the guy who lied us into war is now concerned about civility. From CNN:
Powell said he was concerned about what he characterized as a recent negative turn of Republican candidate Sen. John McCain’s campaign, such as the campaign’s attempts to tie Obama to former 1960s radical Bill Ayers.
“I think that’s inappropriate. I understand what politics is about — I know how you can go after one another, and that’s good. But I think this goes too far, and I think it has made the McCain campaign look a little narrow. It’s not what the American people are looking for,” he said.
So, bottom line is, the black guy endorsed the black guy he has nothing else in common with, but race has nothing to do with it.
Go to just about any news site and you’ll probably see this headline:
“Voters Souring On McCain, Obama Stays Steady”
You will then read an AP Yahoo News story, identical to thousands of other stories carried on thousands of other outlets, with the last line:
AP News Survey Specialist Dennis Junius contributed to this report.
The info in this story will tell the woeful tale of the latest McCain poll misfortunes. However, this one story, essentially Xeroxed around the country, and, probably the world, bears closer inspection. The poll in question, conducted by Knowledge Networks, literally reflects the opinions of the same people who gave us the “White People Hate Obama” headlines last month, as well as “Dog Owners Like McCain Better” and “Football Fans Would Rather Watch The Super Bowl With Barack.” I’m paraphrasing, but not by much.
You see, Knowledge Networks, the company that conducted the polls, just might be David Axelrod’s personal astroturf machine. I have no proof of that, but given the firm’s history, and the polling results they’ve released this cycle, it doesn’t take a tinfoil hat and Twilight Zone music to go there. Founded in 1998 by 2 Stanford University professors, Norman H. Nie and Douglas Rivers, the Menlo Park, California-based company’s founders could plausibly boast but a scant few degrees of separation from both Axelrod and Obama, if they were so inclined.
One of the nation’s leading figures in survey research, quantitative social science and political science, Dr. Nie co-founded and is Chairman of SPSS (NASDAQ: SPSS), the leading vendor of statistical and survey software to the market research industry. For twenty-five years, Dr. Nie was a Professor of Political Science at the University of Chicago and a Senior Study Director at the National Opinion Research Center. Currently he is also Chairman of Knowledge Networks, a Professor (Research) of Political Science at Stanford University and Director of the Stanford Institute for Quantitative Studies in the Social Sciences. He received his B.A. from Washington University and a Ph.D. from Stanford University.
Douglas Rivers is co-founder and CEO of Knowledge Networks, and a leading authority on the application of statistical methods to social science. He has been a faculty member at Harvard, Caltech, UCLA and, most recently, Stanford, where he is a Professor of Political Science and Senior Fellow at the Hoover Institute. He is a Director of Preview Systems (NASDAQ: PRVW), a leading provider of digital rights management solutions. Dr. Rivers holds a B.A. from Columbia University, and a Ph.D. from Harvard University.
Hmmm…Harvard, Columbia, University of Chicago…where have I heard those names before? Could these 2 guys be among those oh, so generous Stanford donors Obama has? Or would their donations (if any) be listed elsewhere? Nope. Anyway, about AP- Yahoo News/Knowledge Networks poll methods:
The AP-Yahoo! News Poll is a unique study that will track the moods and opinions of a group of more than 2,700 people throughout the presidential election campaign. The study involves an extensive national survey of 2,714 people who will be re-contacted several times during the next year to see how their attitudes and opinions change over time. The survey is being conducted by Knowledge Networks of Menlo Park, Calif., under the direction and supervision of AP’s polling unit.
The survey is conducted online with a sample drawn from a panel of respondents Knowledge Networks recruited via random sampling of landline telephone households with listed and unlisted numbers. The company provides Web access to panel recruits who don’t already have it. With a probability basis and coverage of people who otherwise couldn’t access the Internet, the Knowledge Networks online surveys are nationally representative.
Of couse, KN goes into a lot more mumbo-jumbo sounding detail to explain why their sample is statiscally accurate, but…
For this series of polls for AP, The Knowledge Network number of people polled has fluctuated, for reasons which are unclear. For this latest poll, the number sampled was 841 out of the original 2,714.
So, basically, KN gave some people some computers, then polled those same people over and over again, then told whichever guy showed up from AP what they found, who then wrote one story about each survey and passed it around. The country. And the world.
And, lest you think I just make stuff up, this is a list of recent AP-Yahoo News/Knowledge Network Polls from the KN press release website:
10/17/08
Voters souring on McCain, Obama stays steady – The Associated Press | Yahoo! News Poll
10/08/08
Undecided voters not satisfied with both candidates – The Associated Press | Yahoo! News Poll
09/23/08
Obama struggling to win over Clinton voters – The Associated Press | Yahoo! News Poll
09/22/08
Poll shows gap between blacks and whites over racial discrimination – The Associated Press | Yahoo! News Poll
09/20/08
Racial views steer some white Dems away from Obama – The Associated Press | Yahoo! News Poll
09/19/08
People prefer Obama over McCain as teacher – The Associated Press | Yahoo! News Poll
09/19/08
Obama tops McCain as football-watching buddy – The Associated Press | Yahoo! News Poll
07/18/08
Poll: McCain’s backers less fired up than Obama’s – The Associated Press | Yahoo! News Poll
07/08/08
Poll: Pet owners prefer McCain over Obama – The Associated Press | Yahoo! News Poll
I have watched, listened to, endured approximately four hundred eighty-three million, two hundred forty-seven thousand, six hundred twelve and a half Barack Obama ads since the beginning of the primaries, give or take a few hundred thousand, and, frankly, I can’t take any more. Not only do I not believe anything that comes out of his mouth, if I wanted to watch him read canned remarks from a TelePrompTer, I’d go to one of his rallies.
Children can’t even play video games and annoy their parents in peace anymore without Obama’s face popping up somewhere. He doesn’t even have the decency to appear as one of the role-playing characters so they could have the pleasure of trying to zap him off the screen. He wouldn’t have to even award points, ridding the game of his face and message would be it’s own reward. Since I haven’t played an RPG since the early days of The Sims2 Nightlife, I almost missed this bit of news on Salon.com’s Machinist site:
It increasingly looks like Barack Obama is going after bigger and bigger stakes — and (hopefully) a bigger and bigger win. After recently putting down no less than $2 million on 30 minutes of airtime on CBS and NBC, it’s just been confirmed that Obama has released what appears to be the first in-game political advertisement. You can find the ad while playing Electronic Arts’ “Burnout Paradise” on XBox 360. National Public Radio also reported this morning that the Obama campaign is “running ads in 18 video games, targeting 10 states that allow early voting.”
The ad features the visage of the junior senator from Illinois, and has the text “Early Voting Has Begun/Voteforchange.com/Paid for by Obama for President.” It appears in the game just as a billboard would on a highway.
Now, I did take note of this story from Monday, but only with the same passing annoyance I experience most things Obama. I had no idea he was not only all over radio, TV and every freaking website I visit, but in just about every video game subject to be released, sold, and played in the next millennium. No wonder so many people are walking around with vacant, dazed, and eyes glazed expressions, muttering “Must vote Obama, must vote Obama,” unable to provide a coherent reason for doing so, even if the mental haze can be penetrated long enough for a question to penetrate their freshly pressed and laundered brains.
Since, as I said, I don’t play video games, I’m spared from that particular hellish scenario, however, it is occasionally necessary for me to peruse the internet and turn on the television, if only to experience firsthand the mainstream media group-grope Obama lovefest that passes itself off as journalism these days. In those instances, my only defense against brainwashing is to vote “fuck no” in every online poll inquiring whether I plan to vote for The Omnipresent One, and furiously jab the mute button whenever clips or ads featuring his face and/or voice come on. Needless to say, my exposure to actual television/internet viewing content nowadays is quite minimal.
Unfortunately, my future electronic usage will be further limited due to the fact that I think my mute button is now irreparably damaged from overuse.
African Press International, or API, the news site that claims to have tapes of Michelle Obama admitting her husband was adopted, is promising an “update” on the story on October 19th. Due to time differences and nuances in language, it is unclear exactly when this will occur or whether the tapes will be released at that time. At any rate, here’s their story:
We would like to inform all our readers that update on Michelle Obama story will be released tomorrow.
We have understood the importance that the American people put into electing the right candidate for the Presidency.
It is important that the tapes be released and all can judge for themselves what Mrs Obama meant and why it has come at the near-end of electioneering. The fact that the mainstream American media has been reluctant to reveal what they know about Obama is very unfortunate.
The American mainstream media seems to be interested in excitement and we all know that the only excitement at present is for some to say they witnessed history of some kind – the election of a black man to govern the only powerful nation in the world.
All the readers should exercise patience. We in API promise that you will get to know the truth when the recordings are finally released.
Well, while not exactly forthcoming, they’re not exactly backing off, either. Oh, well, we shall see what we shall see, shan’t we?
Whenever I hear “change the world” in relation to Barack Obama, nowadays, I can’t help but wonder why they keep saying that. What does it mean? There are those who throw words like “Socialist” and “Communist” around, but to those of us without political science backgrounds, those people just sound like right-wing drama queens. Yet, the “change the world” mantra is starting to sound mega-alarm bells in my head.
“Change the world?” The man is running for president of one country out of hundreds. “Changing the world” is not just representative of an ego run rampant, as Amy Poehler joked:
“With just 19 days left until the election, Barack Obama warned supporters today to guard against overconfidence. Then he boarded Air Force One, blasted ‘We Are The Champions’ and shouted ‘I’m King of the World.’”
There was a carnival atmosphere among the crowd of some 4,000, who almost drowned Mr Obama out as he reached his crescendo and said: “I promise you. We won’t just win New Hampshire. We will win this election and, you and I together, we’re going to change the country and change the world.”
Confidence, over- or otherwise, is one thing. However this constant world-changing drumbeat is beginning to become reminiscent of “B-movie” hand-rubbing villains determined to “take over the world,” or “rule the world.” After a while, common sense would seem to indicate that a healthy dose of skeptism might be advised.
Asking what Obama means by “changing the world” might not be a bad thing to do before we go much further in this process. “Fixing what’s wrong” makes sense, but fundamental change on a global scale indicates to me that Obama has a bit more than tax cuts in mind. A guy who sees the country as a hopeless place in need of systemic change in order to restore the world’s favorable opinion, begins to get a little worrisome after a while. Kicking out lobbyists, moving the DeaNC headquarters to Chicago, changing the way Washington does business, all might seem like positive steps to better government to some people. But without knowing the extent or degree of change Obama has in mind, “changing the world” just might be an ominously vague, last fair warning.
This is the first record I could find of contact between the man who is soon to be the most powerful man in America and Barack Obama. Yep, if Obama is elected, Howard Dean will become kingmaker, and as usual, he will have bungled his way to “the top.”
When I went looking into the connections between Howard Dean and Barack Obama, I fully expected to find evidence of Dean’s vengegence-fueled, behind-the-scenes machinations driving Barack Obama’s 50-state bus to the White house, with the aid of compliant Netroots mechanics, and I did. What I didn’t expect to find was the degree of Dagwood Bumstead-style, hapless bungling involved.
Don’t get me wrong; I always knew that neither Dean or Obama really had any reason to believe their convergent, novel approaches would work, or that either of them would really have a clue how to govern if their efforts were rewarded. In fact, in two previous “Runnin’ On Theory” and “Runnin’ On Theory: The Beauty Shop Campaign,”posts, I said so. However, it wasn’t until recently, after days of internet surfing, searching and Googling, that I found out just how clueless both men are. Especially Howard Dean.
The story of Dean’s unsuccessful presidential bid, as well as his innovative fundraising and grassroots campaigning, has been chronicled to death. So has his now famous feud with the more “centrist” factions of the Democratic party. What’s not been so well chronicled is the fact that Dean calls himself a “centrist,” and he lucked into the internet innovation that propelled him to the forefront of a contest he never expected to win. And while Dean may appear to have hand-picked Obama to be the vehicle of his revenge, it’s just as true, if not moreso, that Obama’s camp used Dean’s blind spot to hijack the party.
Dean’s Dean For America campaign organization which later morphed into Democracy For America, a grassroots coalition which tapped Barack Obama as one of Dean’s Dozen almost as soon as it transitioned after he dropped out of the presidential race in 2004, embraced the internet early. From a website called Lessig, July 14, 2003:
Hello from the Dean for America campaign. Governor Howard Dean will be posting later today, here and at the official campaign blog, Blog for America. It’s our policy that whenever Governor Dean posts anywhere on the Internet, his posts will also be crossposted to our site.
Lawrence Lessig is still involved in internet politics, recently spearheading a “bi-partisan” letter-writing campaign urging debate format reform, as well as an earlier, similar “bi-partisan” effort requesting that the DeaNC make debate footage free. Barack Obama also wrote a separate letter of his own. The cast of internet characters in both instances overlaps quite a bit.
Though Dean has been quoted as advocating for “the Democratic wing of the Democratic party,” decrying what he perceived to be the rightward shift in ideology, in this interview with Mother Jones, October, 2004, Dean, promoting his just completed book, “You Have The Power: How To Take Back Our Country And Restore Democracy In America,” said this:
MJ.com: In the book, you say your positions haven’t changed much from when you were a delegate for Jimmy Carter, but that the party has shifted to the right around you.
HD: It’s true. And the remarkable shift didn’t really occur to me until after I ran for president, because in Vermont I was very much a centrist. I mean, my positions on gun control are probably a little more conservative than most people in the Democratic Party, although I did support the assault-weapons ban and all that. But my position on the death penalty is disturbing to some of my liberal friends, because I do support it in a few instances. I balanced twelve consecutive budgets. And yet, I was the most liberal guy out there other than the three candidates who really didn’t have a chance at winning! Well, that’s ridiculous. What happened to the spectrum of opinion in the Democratic Party? If I’m the most liberal guy and I’m in the center, that means the entire party is moving to the right — except for those who supported me.
Since that makes no sense to me, it seems that Dean was merely attempting to justify his anger at the “centrists” who mocked him, and in his mind, caused him to lose. If he was indeed, a “centrist” and had won, it’s likely he would have embraced the political shift as natural evolution. Yet, it was those old school “centrists” who weren’t yet sold on his theory with whom he had a beef. In the same article, Dean once again sang the praises of the young Illinois state senator, whom he had earlier endorsed, who was running for the national office he now holds, and for whom Dean was campaigning at that time.
MJ.com: Who else have you supported?
HD: Barack Obama was an early one, because a lot of our people in the Illinois primary were working for him at the same time they were working for me. So we kind of discovered Barack before he was Barack. (laughs)
Since by this point, Dean was stumping for Kerry and the only thing Obama had done of note was speak at the convention, one wonders if Dean was responsible for the Kerry/Obama hook-up.
Howard Dean’s presidential campaign was notable for it’s fundraising and internet usage, though there was no real reason to expect any of them to work. I found an interactive Howard Dean For Iowa game, and a Dean For America fundraising bat. However, by all accounts, it was stumbling upon Meetup.com that made the difference. According to Joe Trippi, Dean’s former campaign manager, it was all an accident.
The Dean movement was another beast entirely. According to the conventional wisdom, it managed to raise both far more money and far more enthusiasm than its rivals because it used the Internet. In The Revolution Will Not Be Televised, his bombastic but instructive memoir, Dean’s campaign manager, Joe Trippi, stands that formula on its head. “We were not using the Internet,” he writes. “It was using us.”
He has a point. An election professional who entered presidential politics working for Ted Kennedy in 1980, Trippi had also toiled for several tech companies during the Clinton years. With one foot in the political world and the other in cyberspace, he didn’t invent his candidate’s Internet offensive so much as he discovered and magnified it. Every political junkie knows that Trippi and Dean built their movement by embracing Meetup.com, a company that arranges get-togethers for people who share a common interest–anyone from disgruntled Scientologists to fans of Angelina Jolie. What isn’t as widely appreciated is that Dean’s supporters were already using Meetup.com to find each other before the campaign even knew the service existed.
Indeed, when Trippi first saw the site, “the first thing I noticed was that Howard Dean–dead last among the Democratic candidates in almost every other meaningful measurement–was actually leading in this one category, the number of his supporters who wanted to meet up.” He added a link to Meetup.com from the campaign Web site, and with that small piece of HTML code the number of Dean backers in the system suddenly leaped from 432 to 2,700. “For months,” Trippi recalls, “Meetup.com would run its own parallel campaign, the number of people meeting up growing from that initial 432 to more than 190,000. Eventually, we’d even have to create our own, specialized version of Meetup–the GetLocal tools, which would grow to 170,000 people on its own.” When Trippi persuaded Dean to attend a meetup himself during a stop in Manhattan, the number of fans planning to attend started to multiply; he ended up speaking to 500 people in a fully packed hall, with another 300 or 400 waiting outside.
Trippi also has other insights into the Dean phenomenon. In this July 2004 MSNBC piece, Trippi alleges that it was not Dean’s famous scream, nor his centrist enemies that did him in, it was Howard himself. In quotes from his book, “The Revolution Will Not Be Televised,” Trippi claims to have known Dean was doomed in Iowa. He also says that Howard Dean knew it, too. One of the many mistakes Dean made, besides barging uninvited into a Martin Luther King celebration, and being thrown out, was to refuse to release his medical records, undermining his claims of a new kind of transparent politics. After debating the point with his staff one night in December of 2003, Dean once again refuses, effectively sealing his ultimate doom, and after retreating to a quit corner to confer with Trippi, makes this confession:
“This. I never thought it would go this far. I was going to raise my profile, raise health care as an issue, shake up the Democratic Party. Help change the country. But I never thought this would happen. Don’t you understand?” He turns and faces me. “I never thought I could actually win. I wanted to . . . but I never really thought it could happen.”
This was not to be the last time Dean underestimated himself and his strategy. In an October, 2006 article, when it looked like Dean’s strategy would lead to unprecedented Democratic election success, Dean seemed shocked:
“I didn’t expect much to come of this strategy for four or even six years,” Dean told TIME.
Neither did anyone else. In June of this year, The Huffington Post ran a story detailing the relationship between Obama’s “nomination” (selection) as Democratic presidential nominee and Dean’s 50 state strategy. Referring to Dean’s uphill climb for acceptance within his own party, HuffPo quoted Paul Begala:
“He says it’s a long-term strategy,” said Paul Begala, the longtime Clinton aide and Democratic strategist. “What he has spent it on, apparently, is just hiring a bunch of staff people to wander around Utah and Mississippi and pick their nose.”
If Obama is indeed elected president, Dean will finally be fully vindicated. And while he most assuredly had a hand in Obama’s success, it could be argued that Obama is far more significant to him than he is to Obama. Camp O recognized Dean’s techniques as tools to be used to their benefit. Dean sees Obama’s success as vindication. But once vindicated, instead of being venerated, he is most likely to be relegated to obscurity. For Howard bought the shiny new Obama car without bothering to kick the tires. Obama has no intention of sharing the spotlight, in fact, he is not at all the “breath of fresh air” Dean initially presumed him to be. Obama/Axelrod and Co. have a far different, not so innocent agenda for which Dean provided the road map they’ve used to pursue it. And while Obama’s success may vindicate the strategy, the O Team is not likely to allow it to elevate the man.
This time, Dean may have convinced himself he could win, and this time, again, he’ll be wrong.
Next up: Howard, Barack and the Bad Boyz of the Blogosphere
Okay, the world is spinning backwards and only people who can wiggle their ears and belly dance are going to be able to stay on. Well, maybe that’s not true, but given the amped up craziness factor in this election cycle, it could be. As has been reported everywhere imaginable, Colin Powell might be endorsing Barack Obama for president soon, primarily because they’re both black. Or half-black. Or married to black women. Or have used black ink. Or wear black pants a lot. I’m not sure, but then, I’m wiggling my ears and belly dancing as I type this and try to keep from falling off the planet.
Then, there’s Fox News. They think Powell will endorse Obama because there are African Americans in London. And Colin P busted a move wit’ ‘em.
Colin Powell has his dancing shoes on, fueling speculation that he’s gearing up to do the Obama Two-Step.
The normally staid former U.S. secretary of state and chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff performed an impromptu hip-hop dance alongside well-known rap stars Tuesday following a speech at a festival in London celebrating African-American music and fashion.
Powell, who had obviously been drinking heavily, then went on to say, for no apparent reason:
“I stand before you as an African-American. Many people have said to me you became secretary of state of the USA, is it still necessary to say that you are an African American or that you are black? And I say yes, so that we can remind our children.”
“It took a lot of people struggling to bring me to this point in history,” Powell told the audience. “I didn’t just drop out of the sky. People came from my continent in chains.”
This guy was Secretary of State and he thinks dancing with a group of Nigerian rappers at a hip-hop concert for Africa in London, for an audience who is obviously blind, is an appropriate setting for a “legacy of American slavery” history lesson? Because his children don’t know he’s black? Are they blind, too? Or do they think black people came from outer space? And, Obama wants his endorsement…why? Oh, yeah, I’m spinnin’.
Anyway, for some reason, Fox thought it would be nice of them to share the following video of Karl Rove rapping in honor of…a…white Republican looking silly, too? Separate, but equal time? At any rate, I thought, just to keep things balanced, I’d provide the video of Donna Brazile and Roland Martin gettin’ d-double-dog-down at the Democratic National Convention, celebrating Donna’s contributions in stealing the nomination. And hey, since she and Karl are such tight homies, it’s all just most perfectly righteous, boo.
Politico reports just what the headline to this post says, under their headline, “Colin Powell May Endorse Obama.”
Retired Gen. Colin Powell, once considered a potential running mate for Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), now may endorse his opponent, Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.), according to Republican sources. But an air of mystery surrounds Powell’s planned live appearance Sunday on NBC’s “Meet the Press,” and no one is sure what he will say.
Which “Republican sources?” Doesn’t matter, they don’t know anything, anyway:
The general’s camp is being coy about what he might or might not say on Sunday. But some McCain advisers suspect, without being sure, that Powell will endorse Obama.
Gosh, I’m glad I can read. Where’d Politico get the story? Coulda gotten it anywhere since a gazillion outlets are reporting it under the exact same headline; the only difference being some say “Powell May…” while others say, “Colin Powell May…” Everybody, including Politico, claims the first they heard of it was from Andrea Mitchell:
NBC’s ‘Andrea Mitchell broke the news of Powell’s surprise “Meet the Press” appearance on the “Today” show Friday.
“In what promises to be a dramatic moment Sunday, Colin Powell — a lion of the Republican establishment, whom McCain and Obama both have courted for months — will finally speak out on a variety of issues, appearing exclusively on ‘Meet the Press,’” Mitchell said. “Of course, years ago, he was talked about as the possible first … African-American nominee of a major party.”
Robert Novak, in a Washington Post column about “Obamacons Who Worry McCain,” wrote this paragraph, which was interpreted to mean a Powell/Obama endorsement was forthcoming, and was picked up by everybody, including HuffPo, in late June:
Neither Powell, first-term secretary of state for George W. Bush, nor Hagel, retiring after two terms as a U.S. senator from Nebraska, has endorsed Obama. Hagel probably never will. Powell probably will enter Obama’s camp at a time of his own choosing. The best bet is that neither of the two, both of whom supported President Bush in 2000 and 2004, will back John McCain in 2008.
In July, after hitting a pedestrian, Novak announced he had a tumor.
BTW, is Colin Powell the same “lion of the Republican party” Bush fired? Wasn’t there a little sumpin’ sumpin’ about overstating the Iraq threat, or something like that?
Just like they did in the primaries against Hillary Clinton, the OBoyz are sending out the “Barack’s got it locked so you might as well stay home election day” vibe. Talk about voter suppression. Barack and the DeaNC conspired against HRC to try to get people not to vote for her, claiming, “it’s the math,” holding victory rallies before the polls closed, blasting the blogosphere with venomous “she can’t win” post after post, saturating the airwaves with tsk-tsking, head shaking “impartial” or ‘undeclared” “strategists,” all totally bewildered as to why this madwoman insisted on prolonging the nation’s agony as well as her own. What on earth could be wrong with the poor dear witch? Can’t she see she’s wrong and how much it’s hurting Barack to let her continue to embarrass herself this way?
Oh, yeah, the psychological warfare waged against Hillary Clinton and those of us who supported her left it’s permanent scars. Our memories make us hyper-sensitive to the plight of those who suffer a similar fate at the hands of our common abuser. Thus, the unholy alliance between Republicans and PUMA. We get it. We feel your pain.
But make no mistake, this is not a love thing. We just know what it’s like to be abused by a smug jerk and his bands of blogger boyz making sure they’re caught passing nasty “you know she puts out” notes to each other in class, so they can be read aloud to max effect. Puffed up jocks roaming the campus, snickering and pointing, while they stage whisper about mythical conquests can have a lingering negative effect, especially if they’re successful.
So, buck up, Republicans. The truth is, they’re really the AV guys and the debate team, only allowed to wear letter sweaters because they had the real jocks disqualified on a technicality. Sooner or later, the grown-ups will intercede, or the cheerleaders will band with the home-ec class and the chess team and the discredited former athletes to take back the cafeteria. Either way, the nerds and their friends on the school newspaper are going down.
If Barack Obama comes to your neighborhood, lock the doors, hide the children, and try to be as quiet as possible. When he leaves, count to one hundred twice, then send the dog upstairs to make sure he’s left the vicinity. Or send a dove and wait for it to come back. Only when the emergency radio issues the all-clear should you even think about abandoning shelter. Otherwise, you might be tempted to ask the Ill-Begotten One a question, and woe be unto he who tries that.
When Baracco went door-to-door in an Ohio neighborhood the other day, Joe Wurzelbacher decided to seize the moment and ask a typically smart-assed question of the Democratic presidential nominee. I say typical because it’s the kind of thing you would expect a Republican average Joe to ask a Democratic presidential nominee who was invading his neighborhood for a photo-op. On October 13, The LA Times reported that Joe, identified simply as “one man” at the time, opened his big mouth and said the wrong thing:
One man shouted to Obama: “Do you believe in the American dream?”
Well, as you might expect, all hell broke loose after that. Believing he had found his real-life “Joe Six-pack,” the mythical “married to a Wal-Mart-shopping hockey mom” that Sarah Palin so recently made famous, John McCain used the story of the beleaguered middle-American to bolster his argument against Obama’s tax plan during their final debate. What the hell did he go and do that for?
Wounded by the exchange, Camp Obama used the scent of their own blood in the water to go into attack mode. Dispatching their blogosphere battle troops alongside their mainstream media corps to seek and destroy, the Obots soon made it their business to take Joe down.
Bloomberg News, AP News, The New York Times, even The Gaurdian UK, all ran stories ripping poor Joe for not having a license, owing back taxes and, horrors! being a Republican! How dare he question Barack Steve Obama, son of Jor-El? Jonathan Martin calls Joe “the new Palin” in a remarkable use of “pretzel logic,” DailyKos released his personal info, and the San Francisco Chronicle tells us that Joe has, wait for it, lived in Arizona…and Alaska! I guess that’s how he knew he should take his kid and move to Ohio in time to be home so he could ask Obama a question about taxes when he came by.
Since nobody really heard Barack’s “spread the wealth around” statements at first, Obama, for his part, stayed mostly on the sidelines, letting others fight his battles, like always, probably hoping it would go away. Kinda like that “we gotta have a Civilian Defense Force equal to the military” thing that he said, then didn’t say. Ever. Besides, he’s not really that concerned about Joe because plumbers don’t make $250,000 a year anyway. From The Washington Independent:
“How many plumbers do you know making over a quarter of a million dollars?” he asked the crowd, arguing that average Joes would fare much better under Obama’s tax cut plan.
To hammer home how his middle-class tax cuts would help most Americans — in contrast to Sen. John McCain’s emphasis on corporate and capital-gains taxes — Obama also asked for a show of hands for who makes less than $250,000. Most of the hands in the crowd shot up.
See? He toldja. So, Joe, can it with the “slippery slope to socialism” stuff you talked to Dianne Sawyer about. You’re just the embodiment of Sarah Palin’s delirious anti-Obama fantasies; you don’t really exist. Sheesh! ‘Cause if you did, you woulda taken your kid and a six-pack in the basement the other day and enjoyed some quality time blotting out your problems like the rest of us good Americans.
The editors at a website called African Press International have claimed to be the recipients of a phone call from Michelle Obama stating that her husband’s adoptive status does not make him ineligible for the presidency, that many Americans find difficult to believe. Not only do people express skepticism that Mrs. Obama would make the statements reported by API, they find it impossible to believe that she would share such sentiments with the staff of a small blogsite they’ve never heard of. Being typically arrogant Americans, such attitudes are not surprising at all.
What is surprising is the defiant way API is standing by it’s story. Claiming to have audio recordings of the original call, API is being bombarded from all sides to release them immediately. Instead, today, Chief Editor Korir released this statement:
API is disturbed by the way many have reacted to the story on Mrs Obama’s call. Many have shown us by the way they have behaved towards API that they only think of their own interests because they have demanded that the audio recordings should be released immediately. We understand that the tapes should be released, but those who have demanded the release of the tapes seem not take into account that API may become a suing target.
Predictably, folks both pro- and anti-Obama are making all kinds of threats and offers of support and/or encouragement/derision. While pushing back against those attacking them for their own selfish reasons, API continues to hold it’s ground, basically saying they will release the tapes when they’ve sufficiently covered their behinds. They also claim not to care one way or the other how things play out:
When the legal concerns are cleared, which is happening in a short while, API will make public all the recordings available. This will also include comments, not yet published, which will most certainly put the Obama Campaign spokesperson who had dismissed the story off balance.
Even if our recordings or any other recordings had surfaced after the elections�and� if the contents were damaging to the elected person that still could have�caused any�elected president�to vacate the White House. We all know that the tapes released in the US in 1974 forced President Richard Nixon out of office. The truth is the truth. The tapes during Nixon time did not lie.
The same here. The recordings that API will release soon will not lie to the American people. Most probably, it will change the political landscape, something the Americans should start getting prepared to face.
API has also posted contact info for anyone wishing to verify their story.
Verification of the story:
We have found it necessary to publish a telephone number that can be used to reach us should anyone doubt the story. We are doing this because of many requests by many people who want to know more abouth the story.
We are able to receive calls tomorrow the 16th of October through to the 18th October. We find it important that our readers get the truth and not be misled in any way. This is a true story and we stand by everyone written.
NB: For verification, we can be reached on 004793299739
My take? Who knows whether there’s any truth to the story until the tapes come out? However, for those who say, why would Michelle Obama call an obscure website and say anything, I say, why wouldn’t she? Besides, the real question is, is Barack Obama adopted or not? And, does it matter?
Barack Obama likes to tout his community organizing and associations except when it becomes inconvenient to do so. When they can be used to bolster his weak resume, or counter-mock those who ridicule him, he proudly trots out his “experience.” Yet when anyone questions him about Ayers or ACORN, as John McCain did in last night’s debate, Obama runs as far way as he can semi-credibly get, as fast as his Mac Daddy long legs can take him. How can the fact that Obama “was only eight years old,” when William Ayers committed the crimes he still has not repented, excuse his subsequent association with him as a grown man? Repeating the same mantra whenever questioned about the issue not only underscores the ridiculousness of the denial, it soon becomes tedious. The same is true for the ACORN affiliation. Any self-professed “community organizer” who would try to distance himself from the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now, either thinks his detractors are stupid, or is stupid, himself.
Now, unlike people such as Michelle Malkin, I don’t have a giant bowling ball sized ACORN stuck up my butt in my craw. I’m just not sure this organization is the spawn from hell some folks make it out to be. It’s also doubtful that they’re overly effective at any rate, since if they were, Democrats might actually win presidential elections once in a while. And as far as being significantly responsible for the housing crisis is concerned, I’ve already gone on record here, here, and here with my feelings about the unlikelyhood of that.
Yet, Obama is definitely tied to ACORN and he simply cannot credibly claim pride in his community organizing roots without embracing the group. It is common knowledge that Obama was directly involved with Project Vote in Chicago. Chicago Mag.com, January, 1993:
The most effective minority voter registration drive in memory was the result of careful handiwork by Project Vote!, the local chapter of a not-for-profit national organization. “It was the most efficient campaign I have seen in my 20 years in politics,” says Sam Burrell, alderman of the West Side’s 29th Ward and a veteran of many registration drives.At the head of this effort was a little-known 31-year-old African-American lawyer, community organizer, and writer: Barack Obama.
edit
Within a few months, Obama, a tall, affable workaholic, had recruited staff and volunteers from black churches, community groups, and politicians. He helped train 700 deputy registrars, out of a total of 11,000 citywide.
On ACORN’s front page at their website their affiliation with Project Vote is touted right under their denunciation of McCain’s “attacks.”
The goal of ACORN and Project Vote’s voter registration drives is to empower low-income and minority communities by giving them a voice in the political process. ACORN hopes that expanding the electorate will result in more candidates who appeal to historically underrepresented voting populations.
On Project Vote’s homepage, the ACORN story is the fourth one down. In another article, this one from The Chicago Reader, 1995, we have mention of the Woods Fund being involved with the Developing Communities Project, as well as an Obama connection with ACORN:
Woods was the first foundation to underwrite Obama’s work with DCP. Now that he’s on the Woods board, Rudd says, “He is among the most hard-nosed board members in wanting to see results. He wants to see our grants make change happen–not just pay salaries.”
edit
Another strong supporter of Obama’s work–as an organizer, as a lawyer, and now as a candidate–is Madeline Talbott, lead organizer of the feisty ACORN community organization, a group that’s a thorn in the side of most elected officials. “I can’t repeat what most ACORN members think and say about politicians. But Barack has proven himself among our members. He is committed to organizing, to building a democracy. Above all else, he is a good listener, and we accept and respect him as a kindred spirit, a fellow organizer.”
Obama continues his organizing work largely through classes for future leaders identified by ACORN and the Centers for New Horizons on the south side.
The Washington Post has been debunking the Obama/Ayers connection on his behalf since February of this year, but given the early endorsement by the Woods Fund Obama enjoyed, makes you wonder whether he may have been responsible for Ayers’ later involvement, not the other way around. This website, Discover The Networks, claims Project Vote is the voter mobilization arm of ACORN, and claims both groups were instrumental in the implementation of the Motor Voter law Obama referred to in last night’s debate.
Obama has tried the same “with ‘em while agin’ ‘em” tactics regarding his blackness. Yes, he wants credit for being black enough for black voters to empathize with him and reward him with our votes, yet he also wants to keep us at enough distance to re-assure nervous white voters that he is not an agent of black empowerment. He will even go so far as to denounce the relevance of our continued struggle, chastise us for our lack of responsibility, and exploit our legacy, all for his own political gain.
There are not only just too many coincidences to explain away, the connections are so obvious they seem to speak for themselves. They speak for Obama, too, but when he deigns to speak of them, all too often, he’s lying. And it’s beginning to seem that his lies just might catch up to him.
UPDATE: This website suggests that Obama and Ayers might have crossed paths many times when they both had offices in the same building.
Bill Ayers and Barack Obama shared an office. Ayers’ Small Schools Workshop, the one Obama directed all that money too is located at 115 S. Sangamon Street, Chicago, Illinois 60607 [Note the link is to a year 2000 version of their website].
edit
In 1998, the address for the Chicago Annenberg Challenge, where Obama presumably worked, was 115 S. Sangamon Street, Chicago, Illinios 60607. Here’s a copy of their 1998 tax return with that address.
Who’s Kenny Smith? Well, according to John McCain, he’s “unethical.” And, according to John, so is Alison Davis and Tony Rezko. What’s more, they’re all friends of Obama who got beau coup de bucks, and Johnny’s “gonna stop ‘em.”
On Sept. 26, The New York Post reported that the Illinois Attorney General was investigating the Obama/Smith connection:
The Illinois attorney general is looking into a $100,000 state grant for a never-built botanic garden that then-state Sen. Barack Obama gave to a group led by a former campaign volunteer, officials said yesterday.
The inquiry by Attorney General Lisa Madigan came after a Chicago Sun-Times story about the $100,000 member-item grant that Obama steered toward a group run by campaign volunteer Kenny Smith to help a blighted neighborhood.
The garden was never built, and the AG’s Office is looking into how the Chicago Better Housing Association, a nonprofit run by Smith, spent its money.
In June 2007, The Chicago Sun-Times reported that Obama once helped Rezko get 14 million dollars from Illinois taxpayers. Alison Davis got some moolah, too:
As a state senator, Barack Obama wrote letters to city and state officials supporting his political patron Tony Rezko’s successful bid to get more than $14 million from taxpayers to build apartments for senior citizens.
The deal included $855,000 in development fees for Rezko and his partner, Allison S. Davis, Obama’s former boss, according to records from the project, which was four blocks outside Obama’s state Senate district.
Obama’s letters, written nearly nine years ago, for the first time show the Democratic presidential hopeful did a political favor for Rezko — a longtime friend, campaign fund-raiser and client of the law firm where Obama worked — who was indicted last fall on federal charges that accuse him of demanding kickbacks from companies seeking state business under Gov. Blagojevich.
Which means, Obama lied both to the Chicago Tribune, whom he told, “I’ve never done any favors for him,” and to the American people when he denied working with Rezko during an early primary debate.
Clinton: …I was fighting against those ideas when you were practicing law and representing your contributor, Rezko, in his slum landlord business in inner city Chicago. …
CNN’s Wolf Blitzer: Senator Clinton made a serious allegation that you worked for a slumlord. And I wonder if you want to respond.
Obama: I’m happy to respond. Here’s what happened: I was an associate at a law firm that represented a church group that had partnered with this individual to do a project and I did about five hours worth of work on this joint project. That’s what she’s referring to.
Uh, not quite, Barocco. GOP.com lays out the whole house of cards; not a race one in the deck. Looks like maybe Obama walked into a trap when he so vigorously decried the “guilt-by-association” attacks during the debate with his predictable “I was only eight years old” stock answer to the William Ayers question.
The Washington Times ran an article on the sixth of this month detailing the Alison Davis deal:
Sen. Barack Obama, who vows to change Washington by trimming wasteful spending and disclosing special-interest requests, wrote the Bush administration last year to seek a multimillion-dollar federal grant for a Chicago housing project that is behind schedule and whose development team includes a longtime political supporter.
Mr. Obama’s letter, however, was never disclosed publicly. In fact, the letter was ghostwritten for him by a consultant for the Chicago Housing Authority, which wanted the money – a practice ethics watchdogs have frequently criticized.
edit
The Bush administration obliged Mr. Obama’s request, awarding a $20 million competitive grant last month from the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). It called the project a “shining example” of urban revitalization. The Washington Times learned of the letter from Republican operatives.
As Mr. Obama campaigns for president as an agent of change who promises to clean up Washington’s money game, his role in the Stateway project raises questions about the appearance of a conflict of interest and whether he has been participating in the very system he criticizes, watchdogs say.
edit
But complicating the picture, one of developers for the Stateway Project is a firm headed by Allison S. Davis, one of Mr. Obama’s early mentors and a longtime political supporter. A founding partner at the firm where Mr. Obama practiced law, Mr. Davis and his family have given the senator from Illinois tens of thousands of dollars in political contributions over the years.
Aides to Mr. Obama said he did not know of Mr. Davis’ involvement in the Stateway project when he sent the letter. They noted that none of the HUD money will flow to Mr. Davis or his business. They also said other lawmakers – including fellow Illinois Democrats Sen. Richard J. Durbin and Chicago Mayor Richard M. Daley – sent similar letters to HUD.
“Guilt by association,” or just guilt?
Is McCain merely taking cheap shots in the dark or putting the pieces of a puzzle together? And will it stick? Like his strategist, Nicole Walker said, when it comes to Obama and the press, “it’s like running against God.”
In a report about the Secret Service looking into “death threats” against Barack Obama during McCain/Palin rallies, AP/Yahoo News lets it slip that the media is solely responsible for the allegations.
The Secret Service is looking into a second allegation that a participant at a Republican political rally shouted “kill him,” referring to Democratic presidential nominee Barack Obama.
The Scranton Times-Tribune reported that someone in the crowd shouted “kill him” after the mention of Obama’s name during a rally Tuesday for GOP vice presidential nominee Sarah Palin in Scranton, Pa.
Last week, The Washington Post reported a similar incident during a Palin rally in Clearwater, Fla. The Secret Service investigated that allegation and found no indication that “kill him” was ever said, or if it was said, that the remark was directed at Obama.
Didja catch that? That’s two allegations of a “death threat” involving the Secret Service, for goodness’ sakes, both initiated by the press. Is “responsible journalism” an oxymoron now? Or is the “oxy” part superfluous? Don’t believe me? Here are two more sentences clearly pointing the finger at the media.
In both the Clearwater and the Scranton instances, the Service only learned of the alleged threats through media reports.
edit
So far, the Secret Service has not found anyone else who heard “kill him” Tuesday except for the Times-Tribune reporter.
Carrying this kind of water for the race-baiting Democratic nominee and his camp should come with a fine and jail time. Maybe then the “poor-pitiful-black-guy-being-victimized-by-those-big-bad-closet-racists” routine would stop being relied upon so heavily by the wannabe Crybaby in Chief. But then, Dick Durbin and Harry Reid would be facing incarceration, too, since they starting this whole “let’s-play-up-the-black-angle” when they went to the Secret Service and requested protection for Obama in May of 2007, even though no credible threat had been recieved. They never showed proof, they just “expressed concern” about “racially motivated” information, and not only got the protection they sought, they got one helluva milkable story out of it in the process.
African Press International stands by it’s original story of receiving an angry phone call from Michelle Obama berating them for their negative coverage of her husband, and revealing his adopted status in the process.
1. API had a telephone call from Mrs Obama after consultations with Nairobi. We will avail all the details and what transpired so that all interested parties may understand that the story is not fake.
2. API has no interest in the outcome of the US elections and we do not partner with any group in the promotion of any candidate for the presidency.
3. Our recordings will be released when we are satisfied it is not intended to be misused in any way or for any gains by an group.
The Obama Campaign, via ABC News’ Jake Tapper, contends that the story is a bald-faced lie:
Obama campaign senior adviser Robert Gibbs says the interview is a complete and utter fabrication. “It’s bogus, she didn’t call, it’s all a lie,” he says.
Tapper (surprise, surprise) buys the Obama Team’s position. Others are content to wait and see. I, for one, don’t really care. I just think it’s funny.
I love Politico. Sometimes, when they act like schmoos, they piss me off, but for combination political news/dishing/commentary, you can’t beat ‘em. Today, Ben Smith passes along an email from “a Republican consultant” who, believing Obama has a “glass jaw,” wanted the McCain camp to “hit harder.” So, this unnamed, yet amazingly perceptive, Republican guy, creates a scathing anti-Obama ad and conducts a focus group somewhere in the Midwest. Here’s his email:
Reagan Dems and Independents. Call them blue-collar plus. Slightly more Target than Walmart.
Yes, the spot worked. Yes, they believed the charges against Obama. Yes, they actually think he’s too liberal, consorts with bad people and WON’T BE A GOOD PRESIDENT…but they STILL don’t give a f***. They said right out, “He won’t do anything better than McCain” but they’re STILL voting for Obama.
The two most unreal moments of my professional life of watching focus groups:
54 year-old white male, voted Kerry ‘04, Bush ‘00, Dole ‘96, hunter, NASCAR fan…hard for Obama said: “I’m gonna hate him the minute I vote for him. He’s gonna be a bad president. But I won’t ever vote for another god-damn Republican. I want the government to take over all of Wall Street and bankers and the car companies and Wal-Mart run this county like we used to when Reagan was President.”
The next was a woman, late 50s, Democrat but strongly pro-life. Loved B. and H. Clinton, loved Bush in 2000. “Well, I don’t know much about this terrorist group Barack used to be in with that Weather guy but I’m sick of paying for health insurance at work and that’s why I’m supporting Barack.”
I felt like I was taking crazy pills. I sat on the other side of the glass and realized…this really is the Apocalypse. The Seventh Seal is broken and its time for eight years of pure, delicious crazy….
Heh, heh, heh, Oh, Unknown Republican Consultant Guy, we PUMAs feel your pain. Join us under the bus. It’s kinda stuffy and waaaay too crowded under here, but if you promise to say nice things about Obi-WanNaBePresident once in a while, they let you out until you go off again; then back to your spot next to Granny, between Jesse (NutCuttin’) Jackson and Uncle Jerry you go. The good thing is, the nice things you say don’t have to be true, or even make sense, and you certainly don’t have to really mean them. Ask Hillary. Then ask Bill. Naah, just ask Ed Rendell.
As reported by Politico, McCain strategist Nicole Wallace told MSNBC’s “Morning Joe” crew that because of media bias in favor of Barack Obama, their side had “lost the spin war.”
“Well, look, it’s like running against God,” Wallace said. “You know, the media has anointed [Obama]. Many, many places in the media, present company excluded, and he’s got more money. He opted out of public funds. No one cares about that.”
“Present company excluded?” What planet does she live on? Anyway, Wallace railed against claims that McCain is running a “dirty campaign.”
“The truth is they play dirty politics, and maybe we haven’t been quick enough. Maybe we don’t have enough friends in the media to carry the message,” Wallace said on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe” show. “We certainly lost the spin war about his fighting a more negative campaign. The truth is that Barack Obama has spent more money on negative attack ads against John McCain than any politician, Democrat or Republican, in history.”
Complaining that while racial bias against Obama is widely discussed and denounced, gender bias seems to get a pass.
“The truth is we’ve had a lot of thoughtful discussions about race in this campaign, and that is entirely appropriate. We should continue to do so. We have spent far less time talking about the gender bashing that happens, not only out of the Obama campaign, but on the far left,” the strategist added.
Gee, Nicky, you don’t have to tell us Clinton supporters anything about that.
Okay, Ohio.com tells the tale of George Manos, 75, (Republican) an elderly poll worker at a senior citizen’s facility, getting his lights punched out by an equally elderly female poll worker, Edith Walker, 73, (Democrat) upset because he called her out for cheating. Oh, yeah:
The board and Cuyahoga Falls police are investigating the incident, which occurred about noon Friday at the Gardens of Western Reserve nursing home. Manos told police that Democratic poll worker Edith Walker jumped on his back and struck him in the head three or four times after he confronted her for allegedly mismarking a female resident’s ballot — showing her voting for Sen. Barack Obama, instead of Sen. John McCain.
Both parties were put on leave, which sucks in my opinion. The GOP’s deputy director Bryan Williams, agrees.
”He served as the whistle- blower,” Williams said. ”This sends the wrong message that if you call into question someone who may have done something wrong, your reward is to get sent home for a week.”
Mr. Manos agrees, too.
Manos, who has been a poll worker for several years, said he will be at the board meeting with his attorney.
It seems Ms. Walker is something of a hellcat when crossed. After Manos witnessed her marking a female resident’s ballot for Obama, even though he heard the woman say she wanted to vote for McCain, he grabbed the ballot from Walker and took it to two other poll workers. This was obviously the wrong thing to do as far as Edith was concerned.
Manos said Walker jumped on his back, wrapping her legs around his legs. He said she put her left arm around his neck, while using her other hand to hit him on the head. He said the other poll workers pulled Walker off him.
Manos said Walker ran over, grabbed the ballot and ran back to her table. When Manos and the other poll workers looked at the ballot, he said both Obama and McCain were marked.
Okay, I’m trying not to laugh, here…these are very serious issues…but…I’m sorry, what I wouldn’t give for video. Oh, boy…I’m cool now.
Manos, a former stockbroker who served in the military, said his neck has been sore since the incident and he might go to the doctor to be examined. He said he thinks Walker intentionally mismarked the ballot and tried to cover it up.
”It was obvious,” he said. ”She knew what she was doing.”
Yeah, she was cracking me up. Sorry, George, but that shit’s funny.
According to African Press International, headquartered in Norway, the wife of the Democratic nominee for president had a few choice words for them regarding their coverage of her husband. Railing about “racists” and “internet bloggers” and saying Obama was born in Hawaii and adopted by his stepfather, Michelle Obama insisted that fact did not make him “unpatriotic.”
“African press International is supposed to support Africans and African-American view,” and she went to state that, “it is strange that API has chosen to support the racists against my husband. There is no shame in being adopted by a step father. All dirt has been thrown onto my husband’s face and yet he loves this country. My husband and I know that there is no law that will stop him from becoming the president, just because some American white racists are bringing up the issue of my husband’s adoption by His step father. The important thing here is where my husband’s heart is at the moment. I can tell the American people that My husband loves this country and his adoption never changed his love for this country. He was born in Hawaii, yes, and that gives him all the right to be an American citizen even though he was adopted by a foreigner; says Michelle Obama on telefon to API.”
So, is the only “news” associated with this story Mrs. Obama’s personal phone call, or is the adoption admission a bombshell, of sorts? After all, Barack’s “Fight the Smears” site has already admitted his Kenyan dual citizenship. What’s up with all that? How does Phillip Berg’s lawsuit demanding proof of citizenship fit into all this? And why did M.O. call API? No offense, but how many Americans use API as their primary news source? Anyway, they don’t seem to be afraid to ask questions, that’s for sure. Inquiring about Dr. Jerome Corsi’s recent detainment in Kenya, Michelle Obama had this to say:
When API asked Mrs Obama to comment on why Dr Corsi was arrested by the Kenyan government and whether she thought Kenya’s Prime Minister Mr Raila Odinga was involved in Dr Corsi’s arrest, she got irritated and and simply told API not to dig that which will support evil people who are out to stop her husband from getting the presidency.
When asked who she was referring to as the evil people, she stated that she was not going to elaborate much on that but that many conservative white people and even some African Americans were against her husband, but that this group of blacks were simply doing so because of envy.
Michelle O also had something to say about the persistent Muslim rumors surrounding her husband:
On Farakhan and his ministry, Mrs Obama told API that it was unfortunate that Mr Farakhan came out the way he did supporting her husband openly before the elections was over. That was not wholehearted support but one that was calculated to convince the American people that my husband will support the growth of muslim faith if he became the president, adding “even if my husband was able to prove that he is not a Muslim, he will not be believed by those who have come out strongly to destroy his chances of being the next President. Do real people expect someone to deny a religion when 80 percent of his relatives are Muslims?; Mrs Obama asked.
I have pretty much left this Odinga/Obama story alone until now, not really knowing what to make of it. Besides, whether or not all, or any, of the dirt currently being thrown at Obama sticks, my reasons for rejecting his candidacy have more to do with what I’ve personally witnessed that he has said and done. But since Michelle has so graciously opened the door…
*NOTE: I knew something about this story was tickling my brain! Remember when Michelle Obama “let it slip” that Barack’s mother was unwed when he was born? Now this. What’s up with the “accidentally on purpose” dribbling out of personal information by the candidate’s wife? Curiouser and curiouser, hmmmm? From MSNBC, July 10, 2008:
His own mother, she said at the beginning of her remarks, was “very young and very single when she had him.”
Yeah, tough guy Camp O is at it again. It seems Team Teflon is once again jukin’ and jivin’ out of trouble with the grace and agility of a nimble Heisman Trophy winner. The proud former community organizer and his No Paper Trail Troops are glibly denying any association with the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now.
“We’ve got the best voter registration and turnout and volunteer operation in politics right now, and we don’t need ACORN’s help,” he told reporters at the secluded leafy resort outside Toledo where he is preparing for Wednesday’s debate.
And, even if they are corrupt, so what?
“So there’s been fraud perpetrated probably on ACORN, if they paid these individuals and they actually didn’t do registrations, but this isn’t a situation where there’s actually people who are going to try to vote, ‘cause these are phony names, and it’s doubtful Tony Romo is gonna show up in Ohio to vote, so this is another one of these distractions that gets stirred up in the course of a campaign.”
In another nifty, shifty move, the Oboyz let Jesse Jackson out the doghouse and out from under the bus just long enough to take one for The Team and put his foot in his mouth so The Great redeemer could repudiate his statements before shoving him back under the bus.
NOTE: In light of today’s Chicago Sun-Times article by Mary Mitchell confabulating about Obama’s “Muslim dilemma,” I decided to repost this piece I wrote in April addressing the issue. While Ms. Mitchell bemoans the “lies” about Obama’s religion, and somehow manages to blame the McCain/Palin camp for stoking racial/religious fires by raising questions about the Obama/Ayers connection, it still seems to me that the core issue is Obama’s convictions and not his race or religion.
Frankly, I don’t care what anybody’s religious affiliation is. Ultimately, in my opinion, every relationship with God is personal, unique and sacred, whether one subscribes to any organized religion or not. However, I do care about a person’s convictions. What are their values? What do they care enough about to fight for? What principles do they believe in?
In the case of Barack Obama, it’s hard to know. His tendency to flip-flop on issues aside, he has shown a disturbing penchant for abandoning people and things one would believe should be dear. When it became politically expedient to denounce his pastor, Jeremiah Wright, the man he proclaims brought him to his faith, he did so. Not only did he renounce his pastor, but, one month later, his church. The timing of his resignation from Trinity United Church of Christ is forever suspect, coming as it did on the day of the DNC’s Rules and By-laws Committee meeting where he was awarded votes not directly cast for him. Was that his reward? If so, what does that say about the man’s character? The strength of his commitment?
Then, there are the persistent Muslim rumors. Though Obama has repeatedly denied any allegiance to the Muslim faith, the rumors refuse to die. On his website there are numeous denials, none of them in his own words, at least as far as I could see in the limited time I allowed myself to peruse it.
“Obama’s campaign aides have emphasized his strong Christian beliefs and downplayed any Islamic connection. The Illinois senator was raised ‘in a secular household in Indonesia by his stepfather and mother,’ his chief spokesman, Robert Gibbs, said in a statement in January after false reports began circulating that Obama had attended a radical madrasa, or Koranic school, as a child. ‘To be clear, Senator Obama has never been a Muslim, was not raised a Muslim, and is a committed Christian who attends the United Church of Christ in Chicago,’ Gibbs’ Jan. 24 statement said.” [Los Angeles Times, 3/16/07]
Considering how long his relationship with Trinity lasted after that denial, along with the behavior of his surrogates regarding the seating of two Muslim women at one of his rallies, it’s no wonder that people remain skeptical. To be fair, he apologized directly to the women, but the question remains, what was his staff so afraid of? Why the seeming paranoia? Either he’s a Muslim or he’s not, no big deal. Or is it?
Many people seem to have taken it upon themselves to prove beyond a doubt that he is a Muslim. A blogger by the name of Texas Darlin, claims to have confirmation that on Obama’s registration to an Indonesian school, under the name Barry Sotero, his religion was listed as Muslim. A number of recent books make the same or similar allegations, but again, who cares?
Obama’s refusal to take a definitive stand on core character issues, like his own religion, is troubling. This is 2008, if Obama cannot stand up for who he is, whoever he is, that says more about him as a man than it does about America as a nation. Because more than forty years ago, another black man took on the world, and won.
In 1964, a 22 year old Olypmic gold medal winning boxer-turned-pro named Cassius Clay announced that he had adopted the Muslim faith. Taking the name Muhammad Ali, he faced the wrath of white America, the media, and more than a few black Christians, who felt that the Black Muslims, as they were known at that time, was a radical group of dangerous heretics hellbent on destroying America. In the face of tremendous pressure, young Ali refused to renounce his faith and even stood on it’s principles when he declined to be inducted into the Army 3 years later. Though stripped of his title, deprived of his livelyhood, convicted of a felony and sentenced to five years, he would not give up or give in, and after appealing his conviction all the way to the Supreme Court, ultimately prevailed.
Whether one agrees with Ali’s choices in his life, one cannot help but admire the strength of his convictions. That inner strength undoubtedly helped him achieve success in his boxing career, but it was his steel core that endeared him to people who didn’t care about boxing at all, and earned him begrudging respect from even some of the most hard-core racists of his time. He stood up, proud and alone, willing to take on all challengers, both in his life and in the ring.
“I am America. I am the part you won’t recognize. But get used to me. Black, confident, cocky; my name, not yours; my religion, not yours; my goals, my own; get used to me.”
The world not only got used to him, they grew to love him. He was the “Peoples’ Champ” when he wasn’t allowed to be a champion in the ring. When he proclaimed himself to be “the Greatest,” the world agreed. Not because he was a great boxer, there have been other great boxers. Not because, or in spite of, his religion. Because he was Muhammad Ali. And he wasn’t afraid to be.
Can the same be said of Barack Obama?
The Greatest Love of All, written for the biographical film of Muhammad Ali’s life, The Greatest, by Michael Masser and Linda Creed, and performed live by George Benson.
Yep, Obama is literature. At least, his 2004 convention speech, “Out Of Many, One” seems to be. Seems a concerned parent contacted the folks at Real Debate Wisconsin to inform them about her outrage at discovering that one of her son’s textbooks had a section devoted to The One:
My 8th grade son is in an advanced English class at a public middle school here in Racine, Wisconsin. I just found out that my son’s new (copyright 2008) Wisconsin – McDougal Littell Literature book has 15 pages covering Barack Obama.
I was shocked – No John McCain, no Hillary Clinton, no George Bush – Just Barack Obama. I’m wondering how it is that Obama’s story gets put into an 8th grade literature book? It would be one thing, if it was just the tidbit about his boyhood days, but 15 pages, and they talk about his “Life of Service”. Honestly, what has Obama really done to be included in this book? Not only that, but on page 847 there is a photo of Obama at the 2004 Democratic Convention with at least 8 Obama signs in the background! Front & center is an www.obama2004.com sign.
The self-described “PTA Mom” wishes to remain anonymous for fear of reprisal. Ain’t that a bitch? That this is a country where an unaccomplished junior Senator running for president can be studied in school by kids whose parents are too afraid to publicly condemn such a thing represents such a heavy dose of irony that I find myself incapable of properly quantifying or characterizing it. WTF? Anyway, the article goes on to point out that the book’s publisher, McDougal Littell out of Chicago (no way!) is, according to the mom, affiliated with an Obama supporter, Alfred McDougal.
Gee, with his Xbox 360 ad buys, his email solicitation to college kids directing them to his website for instructions on how to have “The Talk” with their reluctant parents, his Kids For Obama webpage, and the creepy viral You Tube clip of kids singing allegiance to him, a person could get the idea that this guy was trying to indoctrinate your kids through brainwashing.
While I’m happy for Politico, I’m delighted that somebody is finally looking at the issue of race and racism realistically, and not through the distorted lens of the Obama campaign. For Camp O, America’s racial legacy is a well to be drawn from for their advantage. Obama has not explored race, he has exploited it. CNN, sadly, is still in enabling Obama mode:
“When it gets real bad, and they never — with this one — look you in the eye, ‘Well, I can’t vote for him,’ ” McEntee told the diverse union audience. “This doesn’t even come out in code — it comes out like this: ‘I can’t vote for him because he is a black man. He’s not one of us.’ Well, sisters and brothers, when you hear that, you know what you ought to say? This is what I say: ‘That is bull—-! That is total, absolute bull—-!’ “
While I’m sure whoever the union guy is who quoted these unknown racists has heard this kind of garbage before, Politico explains the reality:
First, many pundits disregard, or at least undervalue, the share of voters who will vote for Obama because of his race. This group includes not only moderate and conservative blacks who otherwise might have voted for McCain but also (and more significantly) blacks who otherwise would not have voted at all. It also includes whites across the political spectrum who will vote for Obama at least in part because they wish to place the legacy of slavery and racism behind us. Indeed, six percent of white voters indicated as much in a recent AP-Yahoo! Poll.
edit
Never mind that Obama has a tissue-thin resume, that he repeatedly voted against laws to protect babies born alive after botched abortions or that he has ties to unrepentant terrorists and radical pastors. And never mind that Obama compiled the most liberal voting record in the Senate last year and is running one of the most liberal campaigns in modern American history. The media elites seem unable to imagine that Obama’s extreme liberalism might trouble voters in a country that remains fundamentally conservative. This is the same party that has lost five of the last seven elections by serially nominating liberal presidential candidates.
Look, the truth is, both articles contain a kernel of truth. There are certainly people who will vote for Obama because he’s black and there are also people who will not vote for him for the same reason. Some would even like to point to all kinds of charts and graphs and polls that show that it’s a wash. It’s not. Black people, if we indeed turn up in record numbers at the polls, which is by no means guaranteed, see Ohio early vote totals, will all be voting for Obama because he’s black. If asked, most will lie and try to make up justifications where none exist. White people who vote for him will do so for precisely the same reasons, primarily because there aren’t any others. Those Americans who, regardless of color, refuse to be guilt-tripped into sacrificing their vote for appearances sake, will not only not vote for him, they will cast their votes, in protest, where they will be most effective.
Oh, those wacky, horny politicians. Just when you thought it was safe to go back to Florida, another scandal breaks. This one, though familiar, is rich in irony, too, too rich, in fact. See, the cleanup guy got caught wick dipping, too. Let me explain.
ABC News (and every other news service in the country) is reporting on it’s investigation page, that Nancy Pelosi is calling for an investigation into allegations that Rep.Tim Mahoney, who was elected to replace page palling Mark Foley, paid off his mistress after firing her, to avoid a lawsuit.
Whew!
“I just learned today about the serious allegations concerning Congressman Tim Mahoney,” Pelosi said in a statement. “These charges must be immediately and thoroughly investigated by the House Ethics Committee.”
Right, Nan, sure, whatever. The Republicans, naturally, are eating this up, so to speak. From what I could gather reading my favorite scandal rag, Politico, Mahoney is a quite piece of work. Seems the Congressman is a hypocrite, too.
The scandal could have repercussions far beyond the Sunshine State, where Mahoney ran under the slogan “Restoring America’s values begins at home.”
House Democrats flayed the GOP leadership for covering up Foley’s inappropriate behavior with pages two years ago — and Republicans are eager to return the favor.
Yeah, Timmy, but it’s what begins at the office that got you in trouble. But wait, there’s more! Referencing ABC, the article explains the $121,000 payoff to the woman, Patricia Allen, who broke off the affair after learning she wasn’t the only “other woman” in homeboy’s life, and the 2 year job he got her at his communication firm, which immediately kicked him straight to the curb:
“FRCR Inc. has resigned from Tim Mahoney’s campaign and permanently ended our relationship with him,” Fletcher wrote in an e-mail. “According to ABC News, Tim Mahoney apparently included our company in a secret legal settlement without the knowledge of our firm. Our firm did not agree to any legal settlement. If these allegations are true, Tim Mahoney’s actions are unacceptable and not in line with FRCR’s business ethics.”
All the articles have good juicy details and are worth a read, but I want to move on to the “doin’ a little sumpin’-sumpin’” rumors surrounding the Democratic nominee for president. I’ve mostly left those accounts alone, not neccessarily because I don’t believe them, I just prefer not to think about it, but the last few days have been interesting, and since we’re dishing…
I’ve never known quite what to make of Larry Sinclair, the man who claims to have done drugs in addition to that thing-thing in the back of a limo with Barack Obama. Anybody can say anything, of course, but Sinclair has been saying the same thing for a long time. He even got arrested by Joe Biden’s son for trying to get the media to listen, and I just learned from my friends over at HillBuzz, he’s at it again. What’s up with that? Normally, I’d just file the info and be done with it, but…
In the last couple days I’ve read stories on HillBuzz, No Quarter and other sites about some chick Barack Obama was supposed to be banging until Michelle found out and exiled her to a distant island. It seems Vera Baker was Obama’s campaign finance director until, one day, she wasn’t anymore, and then, she was in Martinique. Now, like I said, thinking about the Big O playing “hide-the-salami” with anybody is a lunch losing proposition for me. But with the election looming, The Lifestyles of the Corrupt and Greedy soap opera is getting verrrrry in-ter-rest-ink.
Just when I thought the Obama cheerleading was as bad as it could possibly get, it suddenly got stupid. John Lewis playing with George Wallace fire was bad enough, Bill and Hillary Clinton enthusiastically stumping for the guy they lost friends over for saying “he can not win” is painfully disappointing, and Joe Biden’s “back off McCain” threats are infuriating, but Sherrod Brown’s “make O’Reilly cry” rah-rah is just too much.
Now, I’m no big Bill O’Reilly fan; the “loofah incident” is too deeply and permanently etched in my memory banks for that to ever happen, but trying to encourage people to vote for Obama just because it would piss O’Reilly off is just…juvenile. “What’s next, na nanna boo boo?” Anyway, here’s Ohio Senator Sherrod Brown, in his own words:
“About quarter till 12 on election night, it’s gonna be Bill O’Reilly sitting there with Sean Hannity,” he said, drawing another cascade of jeers from the crowd at the mention of another popular conservative Fox host.
“No, no wait a sec, this is gonna be too much fun. You’re not gonna be booing ‘cause you know what’s coming next. So Hannity – they’re going through all these numbers and Barack’s won California, New York and Illinois and Michigan and Wisconsin, Pennsylvania and all these others. And, you know McCain wins Utah or something,” Brown said, drawing appreciative laughs and claps from the energized crowd.
“Then Hannity’s sitting there next to O’Reilly, and they’re looking at each other, and O’Reilly says, ‘You gonna do it?’ And Hannity says, ‘No.’ So O’Reilly – sweat’s coming, tears are coming down his cheeks – you can see ‘em on your flat screen. And O’Reilly says, ‘Well, Ohio went for Barack Obama. He’s gonna be president of the United States!”
Please PUMAs, let’s not tell Sherrod that if that happens, Hannity and O’Reilly won’t be the only ones crying. Let’s save the truth for election day; see who’s crying then.
The last line in a Politico article lamenting the sorry state of affairs that is modern-day presidential debates is a quote attributed to “debate expert” Alan Schroeder, who attempts to explain the debate commission’s reluctance to implement much needed changes in format:
“They have been a little slow in reacting to potential improvements but at the same time I have to appreciate the fact that they don’t want to turn this thing into a game show,” he added.
Why not? I like game shows. A lot. And in this post-”Making of the President,” American Idol campaign era, game show-style debates fit right in. The only question is, what kind of game show?
Would a “Survivor” style “lock-em-up-in-an-undisclosed-location-and-see-who-can-figure-his-way-out” kind of format work better than say, a Jeopardy-type question and answer show? How about a test of macho skills? I’d like to know which candidate could best wrestle a bear or consume the most oyster shooters fastest. Maybe they could just put a bunch of questions in a barrel and have each blindfolded “contestant” pull one out to be read by the moderator, with the guy who’s quickest on the buzzer answering first. Or put ‘em in a soundproof dunking booth and let the audience throw baseballs at a target if they don’t like the responses. Since the whole election process has come down to an interminable pissing contest anyway, why not have some fun with it?
In June, the Washington Post ran a story blaming the whole “Obama is a Muslim” brouhaha on a guy named Andy Martin. Why bring it up now? That’s what I’d like to know. But that’s just what the New York Times did today:
Until this month, the man who is widely credited with starting the cyberwhisper campaign that still dogs Mr. Obama was a secondary character in news reports, with deep explorations of his background largely confined to liberal blogs.
But an appearance in a documentary-style program on the Fox News Channel watched by three million people last week thrust the man, Andy Martin, and his past into the foreground. The program allowed Mr. Martin to assert falsely and without challenge that Mr. Obama had once trained to overthrow the government.
I didn’t know WaPo was a liberal blog. Anyway, let me be clear, as I have stated before, I don’t care whether Barack Obama is a Christian, Buddhist, Muslim or a chicken entrails reader; he’s free to worship (or not) as he sees fit. I’d be willing to bet most Americans feel the same way, one nutty lady at a McCain rally notwithstanding. And goodness knows Andy Martin is not baggage-free. I first became aware of him through some pro-Hillary articles he wrote and posted on his blog during the primaries, but he’s not the kind of guy whose logic inspires one to take whatever he says at face value, know what I mean? So why is the New York Times giving this story air?
Seems the “Andy Martin is an anti-Semite who hates Barack” theory is attributed to Obama supporter, Danielle Allen. From WaPo:
The e-mail landed in Danielle Allen’s queue one winter morning as she was studying in her office at the Institute for Advanced Study, the renowned haven for some of the nation’s most brilliant minds. The missive began: “THIS DEFINITELY WARRANTS LOOKING INTO.”
Laid out before Allen, a razor-sharp, 36-year-old political theorist, was what purported to be a biographical sketch of Barack Obama that has become one of the most effective — and baseless — Internet attacks of the 2008 presidential season. The anonymous chain e-mail makes the false claim that Obama is concealing a radical Islamic background. By the time it reached Allen on Jan. 11, 2008, it had spread with viral efficiency for more than a year.
Allen, however, seems to have a bit of bias of her own:
As an Obama supporter — she had met the senator while she worked as a dean at the University of Chicago — it made her angry. And curious.
“I started thinking, ‘How does one stop it?’ “
Allen set her sights on dissecting the modern version of a whisper campaign, even though experts told her it would be impossible to trace the chain e-mail to its origin. Along the way, even as her hunt grew cold, she gained valuable insight into the way political information circulates, mutates and sometimes devastates in the digital age.
Look, they’re all a bunch of kooks, in my opinion. But the question remains, why are these two “bastions of journalism” acting as “Fight The Smears” surrogates? Why now? The percentage of people convinced that Obama is a Muslim is said to have risen from 8 to 13 percent since Martin began his “witch hunt.” But, how many of those people were predisposed to vote for him anyway, and how many are likely to change their minds now that WaPo, NYT, and Ms. Allen have gone to such links to “debunk” a kooky guy’s theory? And who sent Allen the clarion call email in the first place?
The Barack Obama campaign wants your kids to “get in your face” for him, and even provides handy-dandy tip sheets and blueprints full of nifty ideas for steamrolling your ass to his side. Think I’m kidding? C’mon, you know me better than that. From Ben Smith’s blog:
A reader forwards on an email from the Obama campaign to his .edu email, suggesting he try to bring his parents, as well as “grandparents, aunts, uncles, and cousins,” on board, and offering tips as to how:
If your family isn’t already supporting Barack, it’s time for you to have “The Talk.”
With so many rumors and misperceptions out there, it’s incredibly important that you sit down with parents or other family members. Tell them who Barack is, what he stands for, and why you’re supporting him.
You may be the only person who can convince them.
Also from the email: “Breaking the ice can be hard. Start by asking if they saw the debate on Tuesday and what they thought about it.”
Okay, you have been sufficiently forewarned. Beware the over-solicitous college-aged Obamabot in your family and his/her “oh-so-sweet” stealth attack. Be on alert for telltale KoolAid breath, and be sure to properly arm yourself with steely resolve. If all else fails, threaten to cut them off financially, even going so far as completely taking them out of the will, if necessary. If you’re too squeamish for reverse blackmail, a home cooked meal with their favorite fresh baked dessert has been known to disarm the most determined youthful Obot from their mission. Humming standard gospel hymns while you rock back and forth and pretend to nod can serve to dissuade them on occasion. Show naked baby pictures to their friends, if you have to. Stories of long, painful labor experiences and nursing them through childhood illnesses could potentially serve as a deterrent, feel free to embellish as much a you deem appropriate. Whatever you do, DO NOT ENGAGE. Repeat: DO NOT ENGAGE. Keep the nightmare image of morphing into Claire McCaskill uppermost in your mind, and you should survive relatively unscathed. Remember, you love them, and their only real sin is youth. Given time, they should recover fully.
To be fully prepared, go to this website and scope out the competition. You’ll need all the advance prep you can get. For starters, here’s the full email they’ve been sent, complete with marching orders:
Dear xxxx,
If your family isn’t already supporting Barack, it’s time for you to have “The Talk.”
With so many rumors and misperceptions out there, it’s incredibly important that you sit down with parents or other family members. Tell them who Barack is, what he stands for, and why you’re supporting him.
You may be the only person who can convince them.
But it can be difficult to bring up the subject, so here are a few tips:
* Send an email. You can scroll down for some talking points, but feel free to add your personal touch.
* Breaking the ice can be hard. Start by asking if they saw the debate on Tuesday and what they thought about it.
* Have some information handy. We have one-page summaries of Barack’s positions on various issues. Look for the issues you know are important to your family.
* Share Barack’s speech from the Democratic National Convention or Meet Barack, a video about who Barack Obama is, where he comes from, and what his values are.
For more resources, and to share your story about talking to family members, go to:
http://my.barackobama.com/thetalk
Earlier this year, as one national leader after another announced support for Barack, there was a common refrain — they said their kids persuaded them that Barack was the right candidate to bring about real change.
Family members talking to one another about Barack is one of the ways this movement has grown so large. Even if your parents are already convinced, talk to your grandparents, aunts, uncles, and cousins.
There are only 25 days until Election Day. So have The Talk, and do it soon. Then tell us how it went, and what advice you would offer fellow supporters.
Thanks for all that you’re doing,
Obama for America
——– Suggested email ———
Hi,
I’ve been thinking a lot about the election and how important it is to our family.
I’ve decided to support Barack Obama, and wanted to let you know why.
There are many rumors floating around out there, so here’s some information about Barack’s positions on things I know are important to you:
– Economy: http://my.barackobama.com/EconomyFlyer
– Health Care: http://my.barackobama.com/HealthcareFlyer
This is probably going to be the most important election in my lifetime, and it’s something I strongly believe in. So let’s talk about it. Ask me anything.
Thanks.
Remember, and I can’t stress this enough, to be forewarned is to be forearmed. And if you have to, don’t be afraid to use one of those four arms to smack them upside the head. As unpleasant as such a prospect may seem, desperate times call for desperate measures.
The question, “what if Obama loses?” has been asked over and over, and over again, with the inevitable answer being, “black people will riot.” But nobody asks, “what if he wins?” Will white people riot, or will rainbows of peace and love rain down upon us? I mean, with all the “good vibrations” emanating from the Obama side, how could they not?
Well, if these types of incidents are any indication, we’re in for a bumpy ride. From Politico:
Republicans aren’t the only ones losing control of some of their supporters these days. A reader sends in a picture, taken outside Palin’s Philadelphia fundraiser yesterday, of four protesters whose (ironically intended, no-doubt) black and neon green T-shirts use the C-word in reference to Palin.
A couple other anecdotes from the last couple of days: Vandals spray-painted the words “Republican means slavery” on South Carolina county GOP headquarters Friday. Outside Portland, Ore., two men were arrested for throwing Pacifico beer bottles stuffed with gasoline-soaked rags onto the lawn of a local McCain supporter, incinerating his large McCain sign and risking his house.
Of course, Ben Smith puts all the onus for bad behavior on McCain. I guess he missed the “get in their faces” thing from Obi-WanNaBePresident.
Now, this stuff always happens. And there’s been quite nasty, often overtly racist, anti-Obama vandalism going on all cycle, occasionally noted here, but never publicized by the campaign. What’s more, the
way in which the anti-Obama sentiment last week became the main public message of the McCain campaign, then overtook his rallies, is unique: Democrats at Obama rallies tend to be focused on him, not on despising McCain.
Barack Obama likes to characterize any legitimate criticisms of him as mere “distractions.” His surrogates dismiss those same criticisms as racism. This nimble attention diversion tactic has been the single most effective tool in Team O’s limited box. Exploiting America’s racial angst for political gain is a nifty way to avoid inspection.
Don’t like Obama’s muddled economic policy? It’s because he’s black. Got a problem with the company he keeps? You just don’t like black people. Think his resume’s thin? Whaddaya tryin’ to do, repeal Affirmative Action? Calling him out for his association with known terrorists is akin to calling him a terrorist, even though, for the life of me, I can’t recall the last time I heard the phrase “well-known black terrorist.” What if you’re black and you see through this race-baiting con man’s game? Well, of course, that makes you a “house nigger.” As if there’s some greater nobility and intellect inherent in the legacy of field work.
Why does this transparent con work so well? Well, once you buy the “personal friend of Jesus” as-close-as-we’re-gonna-get-to-the-Messiah hype, any word spoken against The One, is by definition, blasphemy. And, since Jesus is unlikely to have “palled around” with the less than perfect, all criticisms are damned lies to be dismissed out of hand. The fact that those making such heretical observations are obviously in league with the devil goes without saying, it is enough to imply that anyone who would reject the premise that Jesus would anoint a black man must be immediately, and vehemently, denounced. Doesn’t matter that this is a complete revision of New Testament history, we’re talking salesmanship, here.
“O-Bah-Mah!”
This is the set-up to the “you’re just racist” defense. How could you hate “hope?” What’s wrong with you? Don’t you want “change?” How can you speak against “He Who Will Deliver Us,” just because he’s black? Amazingly, large numbers of supposedly sensible people are buying this tripe.
Barack Obama is a publicly proven liar. Let me repeat. Barack Obama is a liar. All one need do is revisit the Jeremiah Wright affair, or “Trinity-gate” and chronicle the lies we all witnessed from his mouth. He never heard any of those horrid things being said, until he admitted he did. The lies snowballed from there, but hey, what’s the big deal? You’re just picking on him because he’s black.
Now, anybody who says they won’t vote for him is a bigot, racism itself is now defined in terms of Obama support. In fact, there is no other acceptable reason for a potential loss of the election. Yet, Obama has gained no presidential experience or training on the campaign trail, he has not magically morphed into an imminently qualified president-in-waiting. He is being elevated to all-but-what-it-lacks status simply because he’s black. Don’t believe me? That’s because you’re just an Archie Bunker loving house Negro.
James Brown once famously sang, “Say It Loud, I’m Black and I’m Proud.” He’s somewhat less famous for singing, “Talkin’, Loud, Sayin’ Nothin’.” One of those song titles describes Barack Obama.
Politico, in their now-customary cautiously critical style, when it comes to Obama, tiptoes around the Democratic presidential candidate’s tendency to fence-sit and talk out of both sides of his mouth about everything. Regarding the current economic crisis, the article calls him “cautious” and “vague,” but does so in a way that makes the writer seem reluctant to hurt widdle Barwy’s feelings.
The result is that while virtually all observers agree that he has benefited from the crisis, his allies and critics alike remain a bit hazy on what exactly he would do if he takes office Jan. 20, 2009.
“A bit hazy?” The entire flickin’ world is going broke because of our financial practices, and “a bit hazy” is the best description these guys could come up with for “he doesn’t have a freaking clue?” The article ends with this ridiculous quote from some Obama suckophant, totally dismissing the voter’s right to a realistic basis of consideration:
“He’s being cautious, and he’s doing everything he can to leave his options open at this point,” said Baker. “I don’t think he sees any money in getting out there and saying, ‘Here’s my 47-point plan.’”
Didn’t Baker just say Obama doesn’t want to commit to anything so nobody can accuse him of reneging, or changing his mind? How could a “responsible journalist” let that go unchallenged? Never mind, we are talking Politico, here. Wouldn’t want to piss off the black guy’s peeps, would we guys?
To be fair, it’s not just Politico’s writers who seem intimidated by Obama’s blackness. The Boston Globe, in an article dated January 28, 2007, euphemistically refers to Obama’s characteristic equivocating as “even-handed.”
While other students were determined to prove the merits of their beliefs through logic and determination, Obama preferred to listen, seek others’ views, and find a middle way.
edit
Obama was so evenhanded and solicitous in his interactions that fellow students would do impressions of his Socratic chin-stroking approach to everything, even seeking a consensus on popcorn preferences at the movies. “Do you want salt on your popcorn?” one classmate, Nancy L. McCullough, recalled, mimicking his sensitive bass voice. “Do you even want popcorn?”
The fact that Obama never takes a difinitive stand he can’t wiggle out of is a symptom of a severe character flaw, not a virtue. The fact that the media is so reluctant to call him on it, or anything else, is a symptom that Obama’s intimidation by blackness tactics have been effective. Fearful of being called “racists” everybody grants this confidence man far more leeway than he deserves. The truth is, when he’s not fudging and dodging, he’s flat-out lying. The press should man up and call him on it. That’s not racist; racist is accepting that Barack’s black friends are scary enough to prevent you from doing your job.
There’s not much more to say, is there? But, once again, reading the totally unbiasednews reports of all the really, really unfaircriticism of a poor, misunderstood, totally decent fellow, I couldn’t help but feel compelled to publicly admit that my well-thought out reasons for not supporting such a deserving chap are obviously misguided. Let’s face it, if so many spectacularly intelligent political analysts feel such a deep-seated need to apologize for this all-around good guy, any problems I have with him must lie with me.
Therefore, my disappointment with people like John Lewis for the following comments is just plain wrong:
“What I am seeing reminds me of too much of another destructive period in American history,” Lewis said in a statement released to FOX News. “Senator McCain and Governor Palin are sowing the seeds of hatred and division, and there is no need for this hostility in our political discourse.”
“George Wallace never threw a bomb. He never fired a gun, but he created the climate and the conditions that encouraged vicious attacks against innocent Americans who were simply trying to exercise their constitutional rights,” Lewis added. “Because of this atmosphere of hate, four little girls were killed on Sunday morning when a church was bombed in Birmingham, Alabama.”
Since it is reasonable to compare criticism of Barack Obama to the murder of four little girls during the Civil Rights Movement, I must be crazy.
So be it.
But, in my book, John Lewis just cost Barack Obama the nut vote.
John McCain now knows how Bill and Hillary Clinton must have felt during the primaries. The making of Barack Obama as president is the dangedest thing anybody’s ever seen. Nothing sticks to the guy. Despite the fact that he has never accomplished anything of note, the mainstream media-fueled mania that surrounds him inoculates him from even the most righteous criticism. Not only do lame excuses work for this man; “He didn’t know,” “It happened a long time ago,” “That was him, not me,” and other sorry-assed alibis you wouldn’t accept from a mischievous child or errant boyfriend, they are indignantly presented to the skeptical public as unassailable truths by credentials-pushing “experts” as if they should be given the full weight of canonical law. “I have been a journalist, writer, commentator, lackey, hack, whatever, for umpty-ump years, and I have never seen such scurrilous attacks…” Blah, blah, blah. Those of us on the Democratic side of the “won’t ride the Obama train” have heard it all before.
Frankly, we’re sick of it.
Now, the Republicans are suffering the same incredulous, impotent fury we’ve lived with for so long. And though we feel for you, trust us, there’s not much you can do about it. At the moment. But on November 4, you can give Obama, his toe-sucking media puppies, his mystery-money-men hiding in the shadows, and all the “O-Bah-Mah” chanting, micro-brained idolizing idiots who just have to vote for him, even though they have no earthly idea why, the biggest middle finger salute in the world.
Don’t vote for him.
Show those goons, whoever they are, that manufacturing, and/or exploiting a global economic crisis just to make the “any old Democrat defeats the Republican” maxim they’ve been living by come true, is not acceptable. Let the world know that the anger and frustration Republicans are feeling is not irrational, racially motivated, or even partisan. It’s the only logical reaction to being force-fed such inferior Pablum as an adult.
So, mainstream media, Obama lackeys, and any and all assorted, sundry, generic, Obamabots, keep shoving. We’ll spit him right back up and send him back to you just as soon as we get the chance.
Even John Grisham would have a hard time selling the events of the 2008 Democratic election as a novel, but if anybody could, it would probably be him. Lord knows, he’d have a lot to work with. Think about it, a political thriller about an African American candidate coming up out of nowhere, with the mega-buck backing of unknown benefactors hidden by the illusion of unprecedented internet support, to secure the nomination even though he was resoundingly rejected by more than half of his party. Wow! Add the element of a shady Chicago cabal of disparate entities hellbent on remaking the American government and moving the seat of power from Washington D.C. to their home city, through the restructuring of the banking industry, bringing down the global economy in the process. Exploiting a rift in the party, a coup of sorts could be executed, resulting in the overthrow of the party’s ruling family with help from the candidate vanquished early in the last election. Throw in a little organized crime, a few ‘60’s radicals, some local machine politics and the greed and corruption of a major political party, and you’ve got a best-seller on your hands. Wrap the whole thing around a civil court case, and let Mr. Grisham loose. The fictional consequences would present no real-life repercussions and it would be a whole lot more entertaining than what we’re experiencing now.
Who might the cast of characters in this fictional drama be?
Barack Obama – Charismatic, up-and-coming, Harvard educated, junior senator from Illinois; this character would overwhelmingly appeal to the under-represented black community, who could then easily be manipulated into supporting “one of their own.” Hiding a radical socialist agenda under a glib persona, he would be slickly packaged and sold as a messianic redeemer of the underclasses. Coupled with the support of the far-left academic intellectual community, the appearance of a “base” could be built, allowing the candidate to be skillfully marketed, through the use of the internet. Preaching a “non-partisan” platform, unlimited corporate funding could then be funneled to the candidate’s campaign under the guise of massive small donor, across-the-board, grassroots support.
Michelle Obama – First Lady wannabe wife of the candidate, more radical than even her husband, this politically ambitious mother of two, often mistaken as the power-behind-the-throne, relishes the opportunity to further her extremist ideas that her husband’s candidacy presents, though less successful at masking them than he. Fashioning herself a modern-day Jacqueline Kennedy, she would become as well known for her more than occasional public lapses into radicalism as for her sense of style.
David Axelrod – Well-known political kingmaker, the reigning “king of Astroturfing” as he is known, this PR man extraordinaire would spectacularly succeed in his effort to “make a president” out of whole cloth. Known for shaping public opinion by creating the illusion of grassroot support (astroturfing) for his public- and private-sector clients through his two separate firms, Axelrod would plot the course of the candidate’s campaign, writing his TelePrompTer-read speeches, designing campaign strategy exploiting loopholes in existing party rules, and creating a Beatlemania-like atmosphere through the use of artfully stage-managed public appearances. Staying primarily in the background, Axelrod would only appear publicly to explain what Obama really meant (WORM) in order to extinguish one of numerous fires inevitably resulting from trying to pull off the daunting prospect of deluding the country and the world.
William Ayers – unrepentant ’60’s radical bomber turned respected university professor, the combination terrorist/academic/fat cat provides a bridge to the candidates multiple bases of support. Hiding his unreleased radicalism in plain sight, this son of privilege and original architect of the grand scheme to overthrow the government provides entree into the right circles for his hand-picked Manchurian candidate. He also ghost-writes the candidate’s bestselling first memoir which later serves as the basis for the candidate’s legitimacy.
Bernadine/Bernadette Dorhn – even more radical wife of subversive Ayers, this frustrated still mad bomber serves as marriage broker for the candidate by introducing him to her law firm protege before re-entering academia.
Jamie Dimon – CEO JP Morgan Chase, member of candidate’s finance committee, said to be on the short list for Treasury Secretary in candidate’s administration, Dimon turns public humiliation for being unceremoniously dumped by his mentor at Citigroup into a triumph of revenge by heading up Chicago’s BankOne through a merger with JPM after a sixteen month layoff to plot and sulk. The resulting pissing contest between the two firms leads to Dimon’s apparent victory in the market restructuring game.
This motley crew of characters, plotting to move the government’s base of operations to Chicago, could consolidate their political and financial power once Wall Street and the global market has been destroyed, and their candidate has been elected. Though I’m not at all knowledgeable about economics, maybe a Dow Jones/Chicago Mercantile Exchange power shift might be an interesting plot twist.
Today, as reported in Politico, the Open Debate Coalition released the following letter to Senator McCain and Obama — asking them to follow through on open debate principles in time for the October 15 debate.
Open Debate Coalition
www.opendebatecoalition.org
Dear Senator McCain and Senator Obama,
Thank you for your recentletters affirming our coalition’s open debate principles, designed to make this year’s presidential debates more “of the people” than ever before. As we approach the final debate on October 15, we ask you to proactively implement such principles right away.
The closed nature of the recent debates has been universally criticized. The editors of Politico wrote, “The presidential debate commission’s rules are a scandal” resulting in “a format designed to limit improvisation, intellectual engagement, and truth-telling.” 83% of Obama supporters and 75% of McCain supporters agree that tough follow-up questions were lacking. Even Saturday Night Live spoofed the lack of follow-up questions in the debates, and the watered-down “town hall” questions chosen.
Therefore, we ask you to jointly announce the following in advance of the October 15 debate:
1)That the debate moderator has broad discretion to ask follow-up questions after a candidate’s answer, so the public can be fully informed about specific positions.
2)That after a “town hall” debate full of questions handpicked by the moderator, none of which were outside-the-box, you will allow Bob Schieffer to ask some Internet questions voted on by the public in the fashion outlined in our previous letter – which you agreed to. Existingtechnology will make this easy.
3)That, as a stipulation of the next debate, the media pool must release all 2008 debate footage into the public domain – as you agreed would be in the public interest. CNN, ABC, and NBC agreed to release video rights during the primary, and CBS agreed more recently. But Fox threatened Senator McCain for using a debate clip during the primary, and NBC invoked copyright law against Senator Obama to stifle political speech recently. The public deserves to know debate video can be reused without fear of breaking the law.
4)That you agree to work with the Open Debate Coalition after the election to reform or create an alternative to the Commission on Presidential Debates, so that the debate process is transparent and accountable to the public. Despite both of your agreement with the open debate principles, the Commission did nothing to implement them – or even to engage in dialogue about potential implementation. Also, the “31-page memo of understanding” with debate rules is nowhere on the Commission’s website, and has not been turned over despite requests.
The signers of this letter don’t agree on every political issue. But we do agree that in order for Americans to make the best decision for president, we need open debates that are “of the people” in the ways described above. You have the power to make that happen, and we ask you to do so.
Thank you for your willingness to take these ideas to heart. If you have any questions, please contact: OpenDebateCoalition@gmail.com
For over a year, Hannity’s concerns were met with ridicule as mere racist right-wing rantings. After Wright’s sermons ignited a firestorm in March 08, Barack Obama denounced him. From HuffPo’s transcript, dated the 14th:
The statements that Rev. Wright made that are the cause of this controversy were not statements I personally heard him preach while I sat in the pews of Trinity or heard him utter in private conversation. When these statements first came to my attention, it was at the beginning of my presidential campaign. I made it clear at the time that I strongly condemned his comments. But because Rev. Wright was on the verge of retirement, and because of my strong links to the Trinity faith community, where I married my wife and where my daughters were baptized, I did not think it appropriate to leave the church.
Notice Obama doesn’t mention being baptized himself. On the 15th, Jake Tapper questioned Obama’s version of events:
But according to a New York Times story from a year ago, the Obama campaign dis-invited Wright from delivering a public invocation at Obama’s candidacy announcement.
“Fifteen minutes before Shabbos I get a call from Barack,” Wright told the Times. “One of his members had talked him into uninviting me.”
In a phone call with Wright, Obama cited a Rolling Stone story, “The Radical Roots of Barack Obama,” (the name of which has curiously been changed on the RS website) and told him, according to Wright, “You can get kind of rough in the sermons, so what we’ve decided is that it’s best for you not to be out there in public.”
Three days later, Obama threw Wright under the bus:
After claiming Wright was not his spiritual adviser, and even if he was, Obama never heard him say any of those bad things, and even if he did, he didn’t agree with him, and even if he did, he couldn’t disown him, and even if he could, he couldn’t leave his church, the bottom line is he was, he did, and he could.
Now, the same thing is playing out in the Ayers case. Obama doesn’t know him, at least, not well. Months ago, the issue was raised in the infamous Philadelphia debate Obama fared so poorly in against Hillary Clinton. As McCain is being characterized as employing a desperate “Hail Mary” unfair tactic against St. Obama, Clinton was similarly lampooned in the media. That was the first time we heard the “just a guy in my neighborhood” excuse. Now, the right-wing guys are challenging Obama’s Ayers excuses as they did his Wright ones. Predictably, Obama has leaned on the “neighborhood guy” thing as far as it would take him, which was to the “I didn’t know about him” stage, then to the “we’re not that close,” phase of “Obama Denial, 101.”
If history is any sort of teacher, we won’t have to wait long for the “Greatest Really Important Ayers Speech Ever.”
According to Politico, Republican vice-presidential nominee, Sarah Palin, says Barack Obama is lying about his associations with William Ayers. Doggonit.
“Barack Obama hasn’t told the American people the total truth about that, about his association with Ayers,” Palin said on conservative radio host Laura Ingraham’s show. “Doggonit, he fails to tell the American people with candor and with truthfulness what his associations are and we have to know.”
In the same article, Obama retaliated predictably:
“I’ll repeat again what I’ve said many times. This is a guy who engaged in some despicable acts 40 years ago when I was eight years old. By the time I met him, 10 or 15 years ago, he was a college professor of education at the University of Illinois,” Obama said.
I call bullshit, Barack. I believe Sarah. Here’s the thing; since neither Obama or Ayers is forthcoming with relevant information, one must dig. And that’s a problem right there. Why is it that trying find out the truth about simple things takes so much work? Like, when, exactly, did Barack Obama graduate from Columbia? This story in The Nation, says 1985:
In 1985, freshly graduated from Columbia University and working for a New York business consultant, Barack Obama decided to become a community organizer. Though he liked the idea, he didn’t understand what the job involved, and his inquiries turned up few opportunities.
Obama says he was two years out of college, though when he became a community organizer:
I was just two years out of college when I first moved to the South Side of Chicago to become a community organizer.
Okay, so as many sources attest, he graduated Columbia in 1983. What did he do for two years? The Nation says he didn’t know what a community organizer was, CBS News quotes his autobiography, Dreams From My Father:
Even Obama didn’t know when he first gave it a try back in 1985. “When classmates in college asked me just what it was that a community organizer did, I couldn’t answer them directly,” Obama wrote in his memoir, Dreams from My Father. “Instead, I’d pronounce on the need for change. Change in the White House, where Reagan and his minions were carrying on their dirty deeds. Change in the Congress, compliant and corrupt. Change in the mood of the country, manic and self-absorbed. Change won’t come from the top, I would say. Change will come from a mobilized grass roots.”
So, two years out of college, he doesn’t know what a community organizer is, but he knows he wants to be one? Right. How does he know “change” comes from “grassroots?” Maybe the year he spent community organizing in Harlem might have something to do with it. From the New York Times:
Mr. Obama graduated in 1983. In his memoir, he says he had decided to become a community organizer but could not persuade anyone to hire him. So he found “more conventional work for a year” to pay off his student loans.
edit
After about a year, he was hired by the New York Public Interest Research Group, a nonprofit organization that promotes consumer, environmental and government reform. He became a full-time organizer at City College in Harlem, paid slightly less than $10,000 a year to mobilize student volunteers.
Mr. Obama says he spent three months “trying to convince minority students at City College about the importance of recycling” — a description that surprised some former colleagues. They said that more “bread-and-butter issues” like mass transit, higher education, tuition and financial aid were more likely the emphasis at City College.
So, he spent a few months doing a job he wanted, but didn’t know anything about, doing something no one can remember him doing the way he says he did it. This article chronicles Obama’s journey this way:
A year after graduating from Columbia, Obama spotted an intriguing help-wanted ad in The New York Times. The Calumet Community Religious Conference (ccrc), a group that aimed to convert the black churches of Chicago’s South Side into agents of social change, was looking for a community organizer to run the group’s inner-city arm, the Developing Communities Project (DCP). Obama soon arranged to meet in New York with the organizer heading up the job search.
Obama had spent the previous year on a fruitless quest. He worked briefly for a Ralph Nader outfit in Harlem teaching college kids about recycling and then on a losing assemblyman’s race in Brooklyn.
Now, the meeting was in New York, after he worked on somebody’s political campaign. Obama’s webpage bio doesn’t mention anything between Columbia and Chicago:
Barack’s father eventually returned to Kenya, and Barack grew up with his mother in Hawaii, and for a few years in Indonesia. Later, he moved to New York, where he graduated from Columbia University in 1983.
The College Years
Remembering the values of empathy and service that his mother taught him, Barack put law school and corporate life on hold after college and moved to Chicago in 1985, where he became a community organizer with a church-based group seeking to improve living conditions in poor neighborhoods plagued with crime and high unemployment.
Why are the two years between 1983 and 1985 so glossed over that even national magazines make the leap from college to community organizing in Chicago as though they were contemporaneous? A UAW.org profile mentions Harlem, but says community organizing came in Chicago:
After graduating from Columbia University, Obama worked for a Harlem environmental and consumer advocacy organization in New York City. In 1985 he was hired in Chicago as a community organizer for $10,000 and a used car.
Obama’s links to local school councils began more than 20 years ago, when they were first being created. His South Side community organizing group, the Developing Communities Project, supported the 1988 reform act that created the councils.
DCP was part of the Alliance for Better Schools, or ABC Coalition in 1988, which, at some point was chaired by, if not founded by William Ayers. From Wikipedia:
Ayers is also listed by name in the last column of the graphic above. While there are no straight lines here, to anything, there’s enough missing to raise questions, which to this point, are unanswered. So when Sarah Palin says Obama is not telling the truth about his association with Ayers, she’s right.
Man, oh, man, don’t you just hate “teasers?” When somebody says, “I’ve got something to tell you, but you have to wait,” it ticks me off. Especially if they do it in that annoying sing-song voice people use. Well, that’s exactly what John McCain and his running mate, Sarah Palin are doing right now. Politico’s Jonathan Martin reports that the McCain camp is making news in the morning:
On what, they won’t say.
“We’ll have something to talk about,” is all a campaign aide would allow.
Check back again in this space or over on our front-page in the morning.
HillBuzz reports that the National Enquirer is supposed to release an Obama “sex scandal” tomorrow, and that they’ve heard of another scandal about to break of the RICO variety, involving Obama and ACORN. Don’t know what to make of all this, but McCain and Palin sure are “having fun.” Time’s Mark Halperin reports on their interview with Fox’s Sean Hannity:
On the advice McCain and Palin give each other before the debates:
McCain: “Well, the only advice we give each other is to have fun — two words. And we talk before the debates and just — have fun. And it was obvious that certainly Sarah was having fun at her debate, and I was trying to have fun at mine. And I think we did.”
The Dynamic Duo had a lot to say about Obama’s judgment and readiness to be president, especially as it relates to his associations with William Ayers:
“It’s about Senator Obama being candid and straight forward with the American people about their relationship. He has dismissed it by saying he was just a guy in the neighborhood. You know it’s much more than that. Let’s reveal all the details of that relationship and then the American people can make a judgment.”
This is the edited version of the controversial Saturday Night Live bailout sketch. It seems, believe it or not, that the reason the sketch was originally pulled is because neither Lorne Michaels, the show’s creator and producer, nor the NBC legal team, knew that the Sandlers, a couple depicted in the sketch, were real people. According to the L.A. Times:
“I, in a state of complete ignorance, thought they were characters in the piece,” he said. “I did not know they were real, up until somebody called me about it on Monday. And I went, what? Now, that’s entirely my fault. Entirely.
“When I spoke to them, I can assure you this: They are very, very real. I think they were angry, I think distraught, I think they were not expecting to turn on the television and see that. First of all, I pleaded incompetence, which is not a thing I do often, and the fact that I did not know they were real is 100% my responsibility.”
The unflatteringly depicted couple, accused in the skit of exploiting the subprime mortgage crisis, did not complain; the decision to remove the bit was simply the show’s attempt to excercise an abundance of caution. You buying any of this? Another L.A. Times story says this:
A “Saturday Night Live” skit that skewered President Bush, Democrats, homebuyers and subprime lenders for their roles in the mortgage meltdown was removed from the program’s website because it “didn’t meet out standards,” a spokesman for the show said Tuesday. An edited version of the skit will be re-posted online soon, the spokesman said.
In an interview with Gold, the show’s executive producer, Lorne Michaels, said the Sandlers were distraught but had not demanded the changes. He noted the “People who should be shot” line was deleted as was a reference to their “corrupt activities.”
But a comparison of the two versions shows that actually a little more than that was cut. What also was excised was any mention of the involvement of Massachusetts’ Rep. Frank in the Sandler subprime mess.
It’s getting harder and harder to tell the Democratic presidential candidate from the Republican one. If you’re not looking at them, that is. Just listening to them talk, or reading about their proposals, you’d swear they either switched sides, or sides don’t matter anymore.
Last night, though the “we’re smarter than you” pundits near and far scored the debate for Obama, saying since McCain didn’t deliver a knockout, Obie wins on points, in the light of day, it looks like McCain may have knocked them all silly at the opening bell. In answer to the first question presented to him, McCain said this:
You know that home values of retirees continues to decline and people are no longer able to afford their mortgage payments. As president of the United States, Alan, I would order the secretary of the treasury to immediately buy up the bad home loan mortgages in America and renegotiate at the new value of those homes — at the diminished value of those homes and let people be able to make those — be able to make those payments and stay in their homes.
Now, the first I heard of this plan was from Hillary Clinton, but nobody paid attention to her. Last night, immediately after the debate, Obi-WanNaBePresident seemed to take credit, at least according to a press release published by Politico:
The statement, “John McCain Lies Tonight,” began: “McCain today said he had a new plan to allow the Treasury to purchase and restructure mortgages. The truth is that this is not a new proposal and is already part of the rescue plan that was signed into law. It was Obama, not McCain who called for this move two weeks ago.”
But today, Camp O is singing a different Dixie; from AP:
The plan would cause the government “to massively overpay for mortgages in a plan that would guarantee taxpayers lose money, and put them at risk of losing even more if home values don’t recover,” Obama economic adviser Jason Furman said in a statement. “The biggest beneficiaries of this plan will be the same financial institutions that got us into this mess, some of whom even committed fraud.”
I can’t underscore enough what a rotten idea John McCain’s ACORN-like government mortgage buy-up is. I said it during my liveblog. And I’ll say it again: “HE WANTS TO EXPAND THE BAILOUT. He wants to do what ACORN wants to do. We’re Screwed ‘08.”
And, even though Obama slammed McCain just last night for saying the fundamentals of the economy are strong, today the O-man said:
“America still has the most talented, most productive workers of any country on Earth,” Obama said. “We’re still the home to innovation and technology, colleges and universities that are the envy of the world. Some of the biggest ideas in history have come from our small businesses and our research facilities.”
Having trouble keeping “who’s who” straight? Well, let me tell you, whatever you do, don’t call the black one “Hussein.” I know it’s his name, but it seems to really piss his friends off.
Or something like that. During last nights’ complete waste of time “debate,” Obama asserted that the invention of the computer was due to a government defense project of some sort. Per The Washington Times:
“The same way the computer was originally invented by a bunch of government scientists who were trying to figure out, for defense purposes, how to communicate,” he said.
The mistake was reminiscent of Mr. Gore’s comments about the Internet. When running for the Democratic presidential nomination in 1999, he told a CNN interviewer: “During my service in the United States Congress, I took the initiative in creating the Internet.”
The first computers were created by teams of professors and graduate students. The two teams with the strongest claim to the invention were from Iowa State University and the University of Pennsylvania, where the research originally was funded by the Army during World War II.
Maybe Brokaw’s “Manhattan Project” question helped muddle Obama’s thoughts. Nah, this question came after. From CNN’s transcript:
Should we fund a Manhattan-like project that develops a nuclear bomb to deal with global energy and alternative energy or should we fund 100,000 garages across America, the kind of industry and innovation that developed Silicon Valley?
What the hell does that even mean? I get the “Manhattan Project” part, it’s the “100,000 garages” that stumps me. Why not a couple thousand shoe stores, or 1,500 beanie factories? Anyway, in response, John McCain said, “Blah, blah, blah, you know who voted for the Bush-Cheney energy bill, that one,” and pointed at Obama. (I’m paraphrasing here.) This seemed to be part of McCain’s strategy to portray Obama as “not-yet-ready-for-primetime.” It clearly rattled Obama, because later, he took a “nyah nanna-na-nah, same goes for you!” approach, when he said this:
Now, Sen. McCain suggests that somehow, you know, I’m green behind the ears and, you know, I’m just spouting off, and he’s somber and responsible.
McCain: Thank you very much.
Obama: Sen. McCain, this is the guy who sang, “Bomb, bomb, bomb Iran,” who called for the annihilation of North Korea. That I don’t think is an example of “speaking softly.
Now, Obama’s media supporters are predicting that other sources will soon be calling McCain racist for the “that one” comment. While Grampa Mac was clearly being dismissive, it’s much less clear that his derision was racially motivated. But then, I guess whenever an old white guy, in essence, calls a younger black guy, “Sonny,” you could make the racism case. Whatever. All I know is, I would have cared a lot more about the whole race thing a few months ago, before racism itself became a stereotype.
Besides, the “green behind the ears” thing makes Obama a Vulcan. And, he called himself that.
Where’s the outrage about the William Ayers/Barack Obama association? Not from concerned voters, from William Ayers? Shouldn’t a guy who’s having his name dragged through the mud scream in protest? You’d expect a truly reformed, former radical to tell anybody who would listen, “Hey, can it with the terrorist stuff!” I’m a respected academic; a professor of education, for Chrissakes, with a wife and grown kids! Leamme alone, willya? So, I know the guy, so what?”
But that’s not the kind of response we get from Ayers or Obama. Ayers refuses to discuss it at all, and Obama avoids the issue as much as possible. When Obama’s forced to respond, he says something stupid, like “He’s an English professor who lives in my neighborhood.” Just the fact that they both work at the same university puts them in a little more proximity than that. And neither of them are English professors, by the way.
Obama’s surrogates are even stupider. In response to questions about Obama and Ayers’ supposed “first meeting” at a political coming out party in Ayers and his wife, Bernadette Dohrn’s home in 1995, David Axelrod actually tried to pass this bit of whimsy off as truth:
“When he went he certainly didn’t know the history,” chief Obama strategist David Axelrod told CNN – arguing for the first time since the story surfaced early this year that Obama was unaware of Ayers’ past.
Hello?
Exactly when was that first meeting anyway, Dave? I guess when you’ve “astroturfed” half the country into believing a guy whose profession is running for a different office every few years is ready to be president, you start to believe people will buy your bullshit as milk chocolate if you say so. This is not the first time Axelrod has said something in Martian to explain Obama/Ayers. In February, he told Politico’s Ben Smith:
“Bill Ayers lives in his neighborhood. Their kids attend the same school,” he said. “They’re certainly friendly, they know each other, as anyone whose kids go to school together.”
When it was pointed out that Ayers kids are damned near Obama’s age, their campaign tried to sell Ben this:
There’s been a bit of confusion about Axelrod’s line on the kids, who — as the Guardian’s Daniel Nasaw noted — aren’t the same age. Obama’s kids went go the the University of Chicago Lab Schools, where Ayers kids, who are much older, had gone. However, Bernardine Dohrn is still active at the school, and an Obama aide said that was the connection.
So, in cleaning up the “kids in school” cow pie, Camp O admits to a previously unreported Obama family/ Ayers family connection.
Then he got a call from Jerry Kellman, an organizer working on Chicago’s far South Side for a community group based in the churches of the region, an expanse of white, black and Latino blue-collar neighborhoods that were reeling from the steel-mill closings. Kellman was looking for an organizer for the new Developing Communities Project (DCP), which would focus on black city neighborhoods.
William Ayers, associate professor of education at the University of Illinois at Chicago; co-director of the Small Schools Workshop; co-director of the Chicago Forum for School Change—an affiliate of the Coalition of Essential Schools;[20] chairman of the Alliance for Better Chicago Schools (ABCs) coalition;[21][22] former Chicago assistant deputy mayor for education (1989–1990);[22] brother of John Ayers, executive director (1994–2004) of Leadership for Quality Education (an affiliate of the Civic Committee of the Commercial Club of Chicago) and former associate director (1987–1994) of the Civic Committee of the Commercial Club of Chicago; son of Thomas Ayers, former president (1964–1980), chairman and CEO (1973–1980) of Commonwealth Edison and former vice president (1980) of the Chicago School Board (my emphasis)
So, while it’s obvious these two guys go way back, if it’s innocent, why not just ‘fess up and be done with it? But, hey, the same could be said about Obama’s official birth certificate, or baptismal records, or college transcripts, or medical reports; we haven’t seen any of those things, either. Makes you wonder, what’s the big deal? Why do people have to go to court to get access to documents you’d think the “transcendent candidate for hope and change and transparent governing” would be only too happy to lay his cards on the table about? Only, Obama doesn’t just keep his cards close to the vest, he’s stuck half the deck up his sleeve to the elbow.
Now you’ve got this Barackaphile Robert Gibbs guy, mocking what the Obama boyz call “guilt-by-association smears,” ranting at Sean Hannity about Obama basher, Andy Martin, making the claim that since Hannity has interviewed Martin, who has been accused of anti-Semtism, that makes Hannity an anti-Semite, too. The fact that unlike Obama and Ayers, Hannity probably doesn’t even know where Martin lives, let alone visit the man, escapes these geniuses.
The only thing I learned in tonight’s presidential debate is that John McCain wants to buy everybody a house. If Barack Obama had only said he wanted to teach the world to sing, we not only could have had a Coke commercial, there’s a chance we might actually have been engaged, if not exactly entertained. What a snoozefest. Meandering intros to chopped up, well-worn talking points for ninety minutes is not my idea of letting the good times roll. I am not Mccain’s “friend,” and listening to Obama ramble into a series of “uh, uh, like I’ve said” statements makes my wisdom teeth ache. And I don’t have any.
Watching the “contest” on CNN, I couldn’t help but notice the squiggly lines on their pointless people meter moving, for no apparent reason, in Obama’s favor, even when all he said was that he basically agreed with his opponent. McCain hit Obama a couple of times on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, but not hard enough to do any real damage. Obama tried to tie McCain to Bush, but who really cares, since nobody even remembers that Bush is nominally still president.
The AP says they both lied like dogs about just about everything they said, but I probably nodded off. Being AP, they implied McCain lied more, but the checks they gave mainly just split hairs. ABC has a slightly different take.
How many of these things do we have left?
Couldn’t we get rid of both of them and start over?
Jeremy Zilber, the self-published author of “Why Mommy Is A Democrat” and it’s sequel (I assume) “Why Daddy is a Democrat,” has a new book, “Mama Voted For Obama.” Zilber, on his webpage, describes himself thusly:
I’ve been interested in politics ever since I was about 6 years old, when my parents agreed to
host a fundraiser for presidential candidate George McGovern. They never told me I should
be a Democrat or adopt a specific political ideology, but they explained why they were
supporting the Democratic candidate in that election, and I’m grateful they did. My early
exposure to partisan politics sparked a lasting interest in political issues and American
government, and by the time I entered college, I was already a political activist with very
strong political opinions.
CNN wants to excuse Barack Obama’s relationship with Bill Ayers and dismiss it as a desperate campaign gimmick by John McCain, they really do, but they just don’t seem to be able to. Poor guys. I feel their pain.
Not.
Just like Obama’s enigmatic rise is more problematic than he would like you to believe, there’s more than enough reason to believe Camp Johnny Mac had this particular gun cocked months ago.
Wow! 3 out of 4 of the ladies of The View (Joy Behar was not there, Sheri Shepherd was) think the Ayers-Obama connection is A-Okay. I mean, he’s not a terrorist now, for Goodness’ sakes, sheeesh! But, in this article I found from January 27, of this year, a website called Working Life, published by the Labor Research Association, takes psychic exception to Whoopi, Inc. There’s lots of good stuff there, most of which we already know, but it lays things out before Rezko was convicted, and months before this current Ayers stuff has fit the fan.
But behind the story, the federal case against Rezko is based on a detailed picture of the web of influence Rezko and his cohorts exerted over state agencies managing Illinois’ financial assets. Barack Obama’s political career was spun out in tandem with this Rezko apparatus, particularly through Rezko’s partner and Obama’s former boss, Allison S. Davis.
Start with U.S. Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald’s December 21, 2007 proffer in the Rezko case, with its charges of extortion and kickbacks taken in 2004 from the Illinois Teachers’ Retirement System: $10,000 from this crime was channeled to a “political candidate” not named by the prosecutor. The fact that Rezko was on the finance committee of Obama’s campaign for U.S. Senate, and the other facts in the case, make it clear that Barack Obama was the candidate in question.
Though Ayers is not mentioned by name, the “Hyde Park Mafia” is:
The “Hyde Park Mafia” purportedly backing Obama’s rise was centered in the University’s campaign for school reform, along the lines of the Ford Foundation and British efforts to corral American slum residents into blind, self-defeating local politics.
This pdf report on The University of Chicago website, (U of C is in Hyde Park) concerning the first three years of the Chicago Annenberg Challenge, entitled “Improving Chicago Schools,” does acknowledge “Bill Ayers” as a founding member. The connections between Ayers, Rezko and Obama have been explored in many places, notably Evelyn Pringle’s Board Games, which have been summarized here and here, among lots of others.
Is Tony Rezko singing for his supper? Maybe. AP-Yahoo News is reporting that the convicted Chicago fundraiser and Obama “pal” (don’t tell Sarah Palin! Shhhhh) has had his sentencing delayed, usually a sign that a felon is giving somebody up.
Federal prosecutors moved Monday to delay indefinitely the sentencing of convicted fundraiser Antoin “Tony” Rezko, sending their strongest hint yet that he is ready to spill his political secrets.
The filing asks for a postponement while prosecutors and defense attorneys “engage in discussions that could affect their sentencing postures.”
Rezko has donated to Obama’s political campaigns in the past, supposedly Obama has returned all donations for his presidential run:
Obama’s campaign says it has sent to charity $159,000 traceable to Rezko’s past fundraising.
Notice the use of the word, “traceable?” While Obama has admitted his real estate dealings with Rezko were “boneheaded,” it seems Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich is the big fish in prosecutors’ sights. But, one can hope.
A week long period in which Ohioans could register to vote and immediately cast a ballot ended Monday with turnout that didn’t quite match the expectations of election officials — or the campaign predictions that preceded it.
Early returns showed about 3,000 voters in Ohio’s four largest counties took advantage of the disputed policy, a surprisingly low turnout to some elections officials.
The article doesn’t mention how many of the early voters were Republicans. Or Independents. Or tinfoil hat wearing alien descendants responding to the voices in their heads. Just six days ago, AP reported on the breathless anticipation Ohioans were experiencing:
Voters in this crucial swing state began casting absentee ballots Tuesday, after state and federal courts upheld a ruling that allows residents to register and vote absentee on the same day during the first six days of voting.
Five people were waiting at the Cuyahoga County Board of Elections when doors opened at 8:30 a.m. Two in line said they were voting for Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama, including John Fuller, 73, a retired hospital orderly from Cleveland.
Talk about a “silly season.” Barack Obama’s favorite line for characterizing political attacks against him by his opponents appears to apply especially well to him. Angered by Republican VP nominee Sarah Palin’s “palling around with terrorists” comments, the Obama campaign is threatening once again, to take off the gloves and attack back. This time, they’re focusing their now famous laser-like offensive intensity on John Mccain’s decades old involvement with the “Keating 5,” a group of politicians accused of influence peddling. Camp O will be making the case in a 13 minute internet video scheduled to air at noon, that McCain’s behavior in that instance is not only indicative of his inability to handle the current economic crisis, it laid the groundwork for it.
“I was judged eventually, after three years, of using, quote, poor judgment, and I agree with that assessment.”
Meanwhile, AP-Yahoo News, in it’s “rapidly-becoming-famous” ridiculously illogical defense of Obama’s associations with radical William Ayers, quotes an Obama surrogate calling Palin a “fluffy bunny.” Way to get tough, guys:
“It’s a giant changing of the subject,” said Jenny Backus, a Democratic strategist. “The problem is the messenger. If you want to start throwing fire bombs, you don’t send out the fluffy bunny to do it. I think people don’t take Sarah Palin seriously.”
“Fluffy bunny?” Okaaaay. Maybe you shouldn’t send a “fluffy bunny” to throw firebombs, but you certainly shouldn’t use the phrase “fire bomb” in a defense of a guy who’s proud of setting them. And, you might not want to bring up a case implicating your own party in economic shenanigans as an indictment against your opponent. Ya think?
But AP’s Douglass K. Daniel goes one (or 20) step further by accusing Palin of what the New York Times calls “racism without racists,” or subliminal racism, in bringing to mind post 9/11 images of “dark skinned radical Muslims”. According to Daniel, any mention of terrorism is an attempt to smear Obama with racially based xenophobia. But, the terrorist in Palin’s comments was Ayers, not Obama, and that terrorism association is more likely to bring to mind Timothy McVeigh than Mohammed Atta. Unless Dougie knows something the rest of us don’t about Obama’s religion and extra-curricular activities, the racism charge is more than a stretch, it’s a trip down the rabbit hole.
And that “fluffy bunny” thing is just weird.
But then, the whole Obamanon (Obama phenomenon) is getting weird. In Virginia, a state Obama won handily in the primaries, his supporters are pulling out all the stops to head off potential racist voting by “getting it out in the open:”
When Cecil E. Roberts, president of the coal miners union that shapes politics in much of this mountain region, talks to voters, he tells them that their choice is to have “a black friend in the White House or a white enemy.” When Charlie Cox, an Obama supporter, hears friends fretting about Obama’s race, he reminds them that they pull for the nearby University of Tennessee football team, “and they’re black.”
Union organizer Jerry Stallard asks fellow coal workers what’s more important: improving their work conditions or holding onto their skepticism of Obama’s race, culture or religion. “We’re all black in the mines,” he tells them.
That oughta put those racists’ minds at ease. And, Lord knows, that “subliminal racism” is not always so “subliminal,” so you gotta fight it wherever you see it. Because if you get enough of it, and you let it go by, it might offset the 90+ percent of black people voting for Obama.
Maybe it’s just the fact that according to The Washington Post, the Republican National Committee is planning to call for an investigation into Obi-WanNaBePresident’s fundraising is what’s gotten Team O so discombobulated. Or maybe the Rasmussen Report that almost 60% of Americans polled are fed up with Congress, with almost half convinced that people picked randomly from the phone book could do a better job, that’s just got all politicians spooked.
Personally, I think we all walked through the looking glass and fell down the rabbit hole on our way to The Twilight Zone. Hope there are no “fluffy bunnies” down there; if there are, somebody might make a porno movie about them. And I imagine that could ruin Peeps for me forever.
Sarah Palin has been calling attention to Barack Obama’s association with ’60’s radical, Bill Ayers. For those of us who have been following the election since the primaries, this relationship is one of which we are well aware. Steve Diamond, and others, in articles like this, discussed it, and Jake Tapper even made fun of it here. The examination of it began long before The New York Times article diminishing it. Primarily, Obama’s position on the boards of The Woods Fund and The Chicago Annenberg Challenge show a working relationship with Ayers, at the very least. Yet, it seems the mainstream media is up in arms that anyone would dare bring it up.
Obama’s association with ACORN has also been pooh-poohed by the media. However, this Chicago Reader article about Obama’s community organizing roots from 1995 mentions The Woods Fund, Annenberg, and ACORN:
He sits on the boards of two foundations with long histories of backing social and political reform, including his own community work–the Woods Fund and the Joyce Foundation. Recently he was appointed president of the board of the Annenberg Challenge Grant, which will distribute some $50 million in grants to public-school reform efforts.
edit
Obama continues his organizing work largely through classes for future leaders identified by ACORN and the Centers for New Horizons on the south side.
Stanley Kurtz examined Obama’s lost years through the use of newspaper archives and, of course, Ayers’ name came up:
Crime is also a key contact-point between Obama and his most celebrated radical associate, William Ayers. We’ve heard a good deal of late about Ayers’s Weatherman terrorism back in the 1960s and his lack of repentance. Ayers refuses to answer questions about his relationship with Obama, while Obama has dismissed Ayers as just “a guy who lives in my neighborhood.” Yet several Obama-Ayers connections are known: Obama’s 1995 political debut at the home of Ayers and his wife (and fellow former terrorist) Bernardine Dohrn, Obama’s joint service with Ayers on the board of the Woods Fund of Chicago, a couple of appearances with Ayers on academic panels, and what the New York Times called Obama’s “rave review” (not actually a full review, but a warm endorsement) of Ayers’s book on juvenile justice, which Obama dubbed “a searing and timely account” in the Chicago Tribune.
Politico discussed the issue in February, admitting a working relationship, though not a close friendship:
Neither Ayers nor the Obama campaign would describe the relationship between the two men. Dr. Young described Obama and Ayers as “friends,” but there’s no evidence their relationship is more than the casual friendship of two men who occupy overlapping Chicago political circles and who served together on the board of a Chicago foundation.
The article claims that the 1995 meeting was a chance to introduce Obama to the influential Hyde Park liberal crowd. The Chicago Reader, in 2000 related that those liberal associations have come back to haunt him before, in this instance, during his unsuccessful bid to unseat Congressman Bobby Rush:
There are whispers that Obama is being funded by a “Hyde Park mafia,” a cabal of University of Chicago types, and that there’s an “Obama Project” masterminded by whites who want to push him up the political ladder.
Sarah Palin’s characterization of “palling around with” seems fair to me; that statement doesn’t indicate bosom buddy-ness, it merely acknowledges that the two men are associates. That hardly seems worthy of debate. Therefore, the hair-splitting being done by media outlets like AP, is kinda silly:
But while Ayers and Obama are acquainted, the charge that they “pal around” is a stretch of any reading of the public record. And it’s simply wrong to suggest that they were associated while Ayers was committing terrorist acts. Obama was 8 years old at the time the Weather Underground claimed credit for numerous bombings and was blamed for a pipe bomb that killed a San Francisco policeman.
First of all, who cares how old Obama was when Ayers was setting bombs? In fact, since Obama was so young when it happened he had to be well aware of Ayers’ reputation and chose to work with him, anyway. Questioning his judgment in doing so is fair game, and to say it’s not, is again, just silly. But it’s not as silly as the charge that criticizing Obama’s associations is tantamount to racism, as another AP pooh-pooh story claims:
Whether intended or not by the McCain campaign, portraying Obama as “not like us” is another potential appeal to racism. It suggests that the Hawaiian-born Christian is, at heart, un-American.
Any criticism of Obama is going to be a criticism of a black man. Duh. But to claim that any critique is racially tinged or motivated is to diminish the reality of racism to the point of irrelevance. Obama knows and worked with William Ayers. William Ayers is a self-admitted terrorist. How well Obama knows people like that is important to ascertain, and just because some members of the mainstream media don’t like it, is not good enough reason to ignore it. My advice to the MSM: grow up and do your freaking jobs.
UPDATE: From a University of Chicago article, 1997, comes this report of a conference organized by Michelle Obama with a panel including William Ayers and Barack Obama.
Ayers, who spent a year observing the Cook County Temporary Juvenile Detention Center in Chicago, is one of four panelists who will speak on juvenile justice at 6 p.m. Thursday, Nov. 20, in the C-Shop. The panel, which marks the 100th anniversary of the juvenile justice system in the United States, is part of the Community Service Center’s monthly discussion series on issues affecting the city of Chicago. The event is free and open to the public.
Ayers will be joined by Sen. Barack Obama, Senior Lecturer in the Law School, who is working to combat legislation that would put more juvenile offenders into the adult system; Randolph Stone, Director of the Mandel Legal Aid Clinic; Alex Correa, a reformed juvenile offender who spent seven years in Cook County Temporary Detention Center; Frank Tobin, a former priest and teacher at the Detention Center who helped Correa; and Willy Baldwin, who grew up in public housing and is currently a teacher at the Detention Center.
edit
Michelle Obama, Associate Dean of Student Services and Director of the University Community Service Center, hopes bringing issues like this to campus will open a dialogue between members of the University community and the broader community.
I don’t like you Senator Obama, and I never have. Unlike millions of my fellow Americans, I was completely unimpressed with your 2004 convention speech. As an African American woman who grew up around lots of intelligent, articulate black people, I didn’t see anything special about you, or anything you said. Or should I say, anything you read, since it was obvious to me you were reading from a TelePrompTer. In fact, when you spoke of your Kenyan father and white mother from Kansas and how the fact that they got together and made you meant that America was a special place, or however you phrased it, I was annoyed. “Here we go again,” was my first thought, since I’ve met a lot of seditty black people who thought that since they were light-skinned, or college educated, or from another country, or half white, or whatever, that they were “better” than other people, especially blacks, just because they were “different.” But you’re not any more “different” or “better” than anybody else, and your birth doesn’t make you “uniquely American.” You’re just hustling white people who don’t know your game any better.
In the primaries, I freely admit I supported Hillary Clinton. Because. She. Was. The. Best. Candidate.
PERIOD
But, I watched you game the caucuses, blatantly courting Republicans and Independents and anybody else suffering from Clinton Derangement Syndrome, calling her divisive, mocking her perfectly legitimate comments about racial issues as “unfortunate,” and in Pennsylvania, actively encouraging those delusional CDS sufferers to help you game the system with your “Democrat For A Day” ad. I didn’t like you for that. I didn’t like your surrogates inappropriately dropping the race card left and right, either, and when you made your minstrel-esque “I’d have to see him dance” comment about Bill Clinton’s honorary black man status, I think I began to hate you. See, I understand the damage stereotypes can cause, and watching a black man use such a trite one for his own political gain, and get away with it, pissed me off.
It was by no means the last time you worked my nerves, by a long shot. Dissing your pastor, calling black men irresponsible “boys,” telling Hillary Clinton she was “likable enough,” saying you were confident you could get my vote, brushing your own bad performance off your shoulders, as if you should only be expected to answer questions you’ve been properly coached on, and all the other smug, arrogant, uppity (yes, uppity) things you’ve said and done make me dislike you so much that my sphincter clinches whenever I’m too slow to get to the remote, and thus forced to listen to your annoying, nasal voice.
You told some reporters in Virginia today that people will like you once they get to know you:
“I think that it’s just a matter of people getting more familiar with me and knowing what my track record is.”
You keep saying that, but it’s just not true. I’ve been to your website; I refuse to read any of your books, because, like I’ve said, I don’t like you, and the thought of spending the time it would take to complete the drivel I’m sure you write, in your virtual presence, makes me physically ill. I have, however, forced myself to listen to you read your proposals in public, over and over again, and all I can say is, so what? I don’t believe anything you say since you say so many different things depending on who you’re talking to, and who wrote your speech. I’ve heard you described as far left, liberal, centrist, corporatist, and Bush’s twin, and with a minimum of research, one can find validation to back up every one of those allegations.
Listen, I admit I’m no political science major, or activist, or even an overly political person in my normal life, but you, Senator Obama, scare me. I’m just a voter, but there are things about you that have never made sense. Where do you really get your money? How does an undistinguished junior Senator raise the kind of cash you claim to? How did it start? Even if I bought the “small donor” crap, which I don’t, who gave you the start up money you needed to fleece the little guys in the first place?
Some people say your a Socialist, some go so far as to imply that you have Communist leanings. I don’t know about any of that, but there are things about you that concern me. If you are a Socialist, that in itself would be a problem because all my life I heard socialism is the bridge to communism, and communism is anti-American. That’s about all I know about that, and pretty much, all I care to know. That being said, some of your campaign tactics creep me out.
I was going to write about how disturbing I find your Camp Obama stuff, but the good people over at The Real Barack Obama beat me to it, and did it better than I could ever hope to. Using Alinsky-style tactics to build “grassroots support” bothers me, because from what little I’ve read about Mr. Alinsky, he sounds like he was a nut. In my opinion, he didn’t advocate community organizing, he taught community agitation. That’s dangerous, and I want no part of it, or of anyone who would encourage those kinds of actions on his behalf. Teaching people to “get in the faces” of skeptical voters they wish to convert is a recipe for a beatdown and should not be rewarded, as far as I’m concerned.
You said that, Mr. Obama. That statement alone should disqualify you from holding any office, anywhere. That’s B-movie thug talk, not the level of discourse expected of the country’s Diplomat-in-Chief.
The bottom line is, Barack, I have never liked you, and nothing you’ve done since I first became aware of you has changed my mind at all. In fact, everything you do reinforces my deeply held, heartfelt desire to see you defeated as resoundingly as any unqualified, inexperienced TelePrompTer reader has ever been trounced. And since such a woefully under-prepared person has never before run for president, it is my hope that your loss is also unprecedented in scope and scale.
You see, Senator, no matter how many times you assert otherwise, I just don’t like you.
Last night, Joe Biden cried. Again. With a month to go before the election, were those the tears that were supposed to melt America?
How does a white woman attack a white man?
That was the challenge facing Sarah Palin in last night’s debate. A strong, powerful woman going up against a sensitive man has to be careful how she approaches such a delicate situation. Does she attack? Or, does she simply allow for his vulnerability? Now that the debate is over, I feel we must examine Joe Biden’s tears.
While recounting the story of the tragic loss of his wife and daughter and the serious injuries to his two sons, Biden became understandably emotional at the memories of the grief and hardship he experienced as a single father and widower.
He cried for himself.
He did not cry for the victims of Hurricanes Katrina or Gustav. He did not cry for the women disenfranchised in the primaries that lead to his being tapped as vice-presidential nominee. What of their suffering?
What of the sense of loss felt by the parents of the 125 people murdered in the streets of his running mate’s hometown, or those of the parents of more than 4,000 American casualties of the Iraq war? Did he cry for them?
No.
He shed not one tear for the thousands of women who are injured or killed at the hands of husbands and lovers, or even for the rape victim his campaign sought to exploit for a negative ad. No emotion was shown for women like Britney Spears, who face the loss of custody of their children just because they don’t like to wear panties when they take their kids for a drive.
The things written here are almost too shameful to type, and certainly don’t reflect the sympathy I feel for the victims, and the families of the victims, mentioned. If I offended anyone, I humbly apologize. However, in light of the fact that similar statements made by Obama campaign surrogate, Jesse Jackson Jr. against Hillary Clinton, a woman Joe Biden himself admitted would have been a better VP pick than him, and who, I believe, would have made a much better president than either he, or Barack Obama could ever hope to be, were allowed to stand, Biden’s tears must be examined.
And considering that Biden shed no tears over that, he, Barack Obama, and the Democratic party, come up seriously lacking.
Obviously the press has received it’s official Camp O “what we’re supposed to tell them to think” memo about last night’s debate, since article, after article, struggles to find new and clever ways to make their tediously predictable, “she was great, but…” spin seem tolerably credible. Espousing David Axelrod’s astroturf seed, these happy yappers are running off at the keyboard in gleeful abandon of reality.
Truth is, she smoked him. No matter how many stories are written about what the squiggly lines on the rigged little meters mean, or what all the drunks in the bar the writer was in, said, when it comes to perception, Palin won hands down.
As I said all along, my mind is not changed one iota about who I’m going to vote for. “None of the above” is still my personal choice, so far. But looking at the debate, it’s easy to separate the wheat from the chaff, or to be more descriptive, manure from the bull shit.
Joe Biden, and those who love him, are touting his superior foreign policy credentials as proof he “won.” But it was not a foreign policy debate. In fact, there’s no real reason to expect a vice-president to be overly-knowledgeable about…much of anything, really. Besides, every time Biden opens his mouth, one is reminded of his tendency to insert foot, or say someone else’s words, or flat-out lie. So, even if he “wins,” he loses, because the legacy of his own big, mouth-juicy foot will always follow him around, just to trip him up and make him fall flat on his Pinocchio nose. Every time.
Palin, on the other hand, came across as everything Barack Obama claims to be; a wide-eyed, innocent, Washington outsider, hell-bent on reform. More importantly, she projected small town all-America to…all America. She was mom and apple pie standing on a stage taking up for the little people, just because, gee whiz, it’s the right thing to do. The fact that stats and facts didn’t roll off her tongue worked in her favor; she was a female Jimmy Stewart, and while she may not have been around as long as her debate opponent, she sure knows moose patties when she sees ‘em, and gosh darnit, knows how to turn ‘em into fertilizer, too.
So, the Camp O team can spin themselves dizzy laying fake grassroots seed from here to Alaska with their, “she did okay, but…” stories. Hockey and soccer moms shopping in Wal-Marts for tube socks for Joe Sixpack all across the land just found themselves a shero.
And yeah, there’s an element of racism in the fact that Sarah Palin is so appealing to some voters simply because she’s an All-American White Woman, but so what? If Barack Obama hadn’t tried to win the presidency by race-baiting and girl-bashing, it wouldn’t make any difference at all. She probably wouldn’t even be in the race.
Claiming imminent global economic disaster, the nation’s financial industry held a gun to the country’s head and demanded 700 billion dollars, or they would stop loaning money to each other. It worked:
With the economy on the brink and elections looming, Congress approved an unprecedented $700 billion government bailout of the battered financial industry on Friday and sent it to President Bush for his certain signature.
In news more closely related than people are paying attention to, Wells Fargo is throwing a monkey wrench in government plans to restructure the banking industry.
A battle broke out for control of Wachovia Friday as Wells Fargo signed a $15.1 billion agreement to buy the Charlotte, N.C.-based bank, while Citigroup and the federal regulators backing its earlier deal insisted that Citi’s takeover bid go forward.
The surprise announcement early Friday by Wachovia Corp. that it had agreed to be acquired by San Francisco-based Wells Fargo & Co. in the all-stock deal — without government assistance — upended what had appeared to be a carefully examined arrangement and caught regulators off guard.
When the endless analyses and commentaries have all been written about tonight’s debate between vice-presidential candidates, Sarah Palin and Joe Biden, and they will, one thing will stand out in America’s mind as it does in mine. With the benefit of a few hours of reflection, I can process that which is most memorable to me about tonight’s events into some sort of perspective.
From the moment the two combatants greeted each other, she owned him.
“Nice to meet you. Can I call you Joe?”
With that simple phrase, she took over the debate, set the terms and served notice, “I will take no shit from you, Mister.”
“Of course,” Biden replied with a smile.
Biden, clueless, had no idea he had just surrendered any advantage he might have imagined he had. However, her charmingly dismissive embrace of him was the most effective weapon she had, and she deployed it liberally.
It came late in the debate when Biden had made one of his pre-designed points, bashing the Bush administration and tying the miscreants in power to his would-be Republican successor John McCain. With the sprightliness of a quarterback calling a gimmick play designed for a certain kind of defense, she offered this: “I say it ain’t so, Joe. There you go again, pointing backwards.”
Sure, on the surface, it was a cute Shoeless Joe-Ronald Reagan call back, but in reality, it was much, much more. That was Sarah-speak for, “You’re not so tough, big guy, and I’m not scared of you. At all.”
Again, and again, Governor Palin gently chided, scolded, and nudged her “more experienced” opponent back into the place in which she wanted him to stay. Over and over, she made her point, “I don’t care what you say, I’m in charge of me.” She didn’t try to outdo him in his area of expertise, it wasn’t neccessary.
“I like being able to answer these tough questions without the filter … of the mainstream media kinda telling viewers what they just heard,” she said. “I’d rather just be able to speak to the American people.”
All she had to do was exactly what she did; tell America directly, who she was. Joe Biden was incidental to Sarah Palin’s debate, and to anybody who was paying attention, she made that abundantly clear at “hello.”
*UPDATE: Believe it or not, I hadn’t seen this Peggy Noonan video when I wrote my post, in fact, most of the time, I write my impressions, then search for support data, primarily looking for direct quotes or salient facts. There are times however, when I will write commentary about something I’ve read, like in the post about the CNN/Rock The Vote debate event. In the case of Palin’s “can I call you Joe” moment, it caught my attention as soon as she said it, but I didn’t really think about it until later. Anyway, looks like Ms. Noonan saw things pretty much the way I did.
CNN, always looking for an angle, camped out for tonight’s VP debate at Atlanta’s Hard Rock Cafe, where Rock The Vote held a debate night registration drive. While young people drank themselves silly, they tried to stave off boredom by playing “Palin Bingo.”
The game was the focus of a group of four friends, all in their 20s and early 30s, as they put Xs in boxes containing keywords they anticipated Gov. Sarah Palin might say during Thursday’s vice presidential debate.
Words like: Special needs, Wasilla, maverick, Main Street, Washington outsider.
“Special needs … I won bingo!” shouted Laura Butler, 30.
Satisfied with her win, and a full hour into the debate between Republican Palin and Democrat Sen. Joe Biden, she headed for the door.
“I thought it was entertaining and so, you know, it was fun,” she said, a White Stripes song blaring in the background.
Can you say, “predictable?” The word applies to both candidates, too. Joe Biden pulled out most of the familiar stops: loose facts, manufactured tears, and unfortunately, managed to do it without committing a major faux pas. Bummer. Sarah Palin, also avoided “foot-in-mouth” disease, relying on “hockey mom” and other suburban colloquialisms that went a long way to help her connect with the little people, “you betcha.”
The young people were not only bored, they were, like me, completely unmoved. No minds were changed, in fact, they were, on the whole, way unimpressed. One of them, Daryll Cordeiro, summed things up this way:
“I’m disgusted by the whole process because I don’t see a difference between either of them: Obama, McCain, Palin or Biden,” Cordeiro said. “[Biden and Palin] are agreeing on so much. You take tax reform, for instance. What did they say that was different, really? They aren’t speaking to me. There’s all this talk about change, change, change. It’s all gimmicks.”
Ahh, there’s hope for the youth of today, after all. Laura Butler, the young lady who won the “Palin Bingo” game, claims to be an Obama supporter, but if I was Team O, I wouldn’t be popping any champagne about the “youth vote,” if she’s typical:
“If it really mattered, if it was really close between Obama and McCain, I would go with Obama,” Butler said, sipping a tall peach drink. “But that’s not because I like him or that he speaks to me. He doesn’t. They are all the same. But I don’t like McCain. It’s a matter, to me, of who you don’t want.”
Though the Rock The Vote representative claimed the event to be a success, and that young people really care what’s going on, a strong case could be made that he’s either deliriously clueless, or trying to protect his phony-baloney job:
The Rock the Vote event was intended to register new voters. But no one registered to vote during the debate, according to volunteer Demarcus Peters, and most of the tables cleared out before the debate was over.
Good to know my faith in America’s future is not misplaced.
Well, we all just watched a debate that will change absolutely nobody’s mind, and I, for one, am glad it’s over. Listen, my mind’s made up; I hate Joe Biden and I don’t hate Sarah Palin. I hate Joe Biden because he’s Barack Obama’s running mate. I don’t care about Sarah Palin because she’s John McCain’s running mate. I hate Barack Obama because he’s a creepy, curiously funded, incompetent, inexperienced joke of a candidate who wants to change America in fundamental ways. I don’t like John McCain because he’s a Republican.
Nothing I saw or heard tonight changed my mind one bit.
All that’s left is to sit back and watch the spinmeisters lay Axelrod’s astroturf.
ACORN Caused The Housing Crisis! Democrats To Blame For Mortgage Meltdown! Bank Industry Didn’t See This Coming!
Those and other, similar headlines are total bull shit. ACORN may be a lot of things, but a community service organization, no matter how large and nefarious, simply cannot generate trillions of dollars worth of debt. Democrats do deserve a share of the blame for the whole mess, they’re just as guilty as the Republicans, the only difference being the modus operandi of the criminals, not the level of criminality itself. And, if the bank industry didn’t see this coming, they are some lousy bankers.
Let’s say all of the things that have been alleged in all the viral videos and indignant blogs are true. You’re still missing the bigger picture. The housing market was flooded with product at the same time that product was being over-valued and massive loans were extended based on that inflated valuation, across the board. USA Today reported in July about the problem in Miami:
Yet, even seen in the most favorable light, the Miami area is still suffering from the rampant speculation that triggered overdevelopment and galloping home prices, followed by a collapse of the mortgage market. What followed was a surge of foreclosures and short sales, in which owners, with a lender’s agreement, sell a home for less than the value of the mortgage and thereby avoid foreclosure.
Therefore, gazillions of dollars worth of second and third mortgages, and renegotiated mortgages were extended based on nothing. If a home is worth 100,000 dollars, but appraised at 200,000 dollars, 100% financing means that somebody just took out a loan for 100,000 dollars worth of air. And everybody, from the realtors, to the mortgage holders and all the other credit rapists in between, knew it.
The housing boom that began in 2000 and lasted a full five years looked certain to set up homeowners for a better retirement. Median home values rose dramatically and millions of Americans felt much wealthier because of it.
The problem was that for many their newfound wealth was only on paper. Only homeowners who got the money out by selling their homes actually built wealth.
Sharply rising home prices are making a risky housing market even riskier. Six hot markets now face a greater than 50% chance of price declines the next two years, says a study to be released today by PMI Mortgage Insurance.
Rapid price escalation has outpaced income gains and rent increases, making homes less affordable and increasing the odds of a price correction, PMI found.
edit
“Certain markets … are getting riskier,” says Mark Milner, PMI’s chief risk officer. “Prices can’t keep going up at the current rates of appreciation. It doesn’t have to end badly, but it is pretty clear there will be a flattening out.”
edit
PMI economist Marco Van Akkeren says the use of exotic mortgages, such as interest-only loans and those that allow borrowers to pay lower monthly payments for an initial period, is creating greater risks for buyers and inadvertently pushing prices even higher. If interest rates rise, “Affordability is going to be much more of an issue,” he says.
U.S. home sales and prices surged again last month, an industry group reported yesterday, as Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan warned that the growing use of riskier new mortgages could result in “significant losses” for lenders and borrowers if the market cools.
And some cooling is likely, Greenspan suggested in remarks delivered via satellite to the American Bankers Association convention in Palm Desert, Calif., repeating his view that “home prices seem to have risen to unsustainable levels” in certain local markets.
edit
One driver behind price appreciation, Greenspan said, is the popularity of new types of mortgages that enable many borrowers to buy houses at prices they could otherwise not afford — and that may be hard for some borrowers to repay if interest rates rise and home prices stabilize or fall. He mentioned as examples interest-only mortgages, 40-year mortgages and “option ARMS” — adjustable-rate mortgages that permit borrowers to decide how much to pay, how long the loan term should be, and when they can convert between a fixed rate and a variable rate.
“These products could be cause for some concern both because they expose borrowers to more interest-rate and house-price risk than the standard 30-year, fixed-rate mortgage and because they are seen as vehicles that enable marginally qualified, highly leveraged borrowers to purchase homes at inflated prices,” Greenspan said.
The article goes on to warn about the consequences of issuing so many “exotic” loans (approx. 1 in 5) at inflated prices, but doesn’t mention ACORN, the Community Reinvestment Act or Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac at all. In fact, another analyst, U. S. Comptroller of the Currency, John C. Dugan, speaking directly to the banking industry, echoed Greenspan’s concern:
Dugan reinforced Greenspan’s message to the banking industry, expressing concern that “looser underwriting standards and the more widespread penetration of riskier mortgage products have raised questions about how these loans will fare in the event of a rise in interest rates or a softening in house prices.”
The banking industry, in concert with the real estate industry, deliberately took advantage of the public for fun and profit. Period. Now that the debt has come due, the bankers are resorting to extorting the government to cover their asses, and everybody else wants to point fingers and assign blame away from the guilty guys who grease the wheels on their gravy train. And the gullible public gets screwed again. By everybody.
If that’s not bad enough, if elected, this “politician” would preside over a country undergoing a complete restructuring of it’s banking industry, a country that is about to bailout Wall Street with 700 billion dollars plus of taxpayer money. This comes after re-naming the “bailout” a “rescue” in an attempt to placate disgruntled voters who expressed their displeasure to lawmakers, only to seem to change their minds after the overloaded House website was shut down. Makes you wonder how Congress got the message.
Yet, nobody mentions the other bailouts, like the one in March for JP Morgan Chase, or the 630 billion the Fed pumped into the global financial market Sept. 29, or the other 630 billion dollar government spending bill, including 25 billion bucks for automakers, that Bush signed Tuesday. And, heaven forbid anyone from talking about monies paid to Congress by companies involved in the big bailout, or question donations to the “politician” benefiting most with voters from the country’s economic troubles, even when those donations come from the same banking industry whose executives advise him, like Jamie Dimon and William Daley (Chicago mayor, Richard’s brother) of JP Morgan Chase. If you’re not going to ask about those guys, you certainly won’t pay attention to donors to the “politician” like Mr. Good Will or Mr. Doodad Pro. Naaah, everything’s fine.
So, while I may seem to be a tad irrational in my daily ranting about this “politician,” I assure you, I am not. In a society gone mad, when the deck seems stacked against you, and the other side is just as bad, insanity is relative, anyway.
And, when it comes to matters of global importance, you can count on them to work together to screw you:
After one spectacular failure, the $700 billion financial industry bailout found a second life Wednesday, winning lopsided passage in the Senate and gaining ground in the House, where Republicans opposition softened.
Senators loaded the economic rescue bill with tax breaks and other sweeteners before passing it by a wide margin, 74-25, a month before the presidential and congressional elections.
Like the momentous 2002 decision authorizing the invasion of Iraq, Congress’ vote on a $700 billion financial industry bailout figures to reverberate unpredictably, both for the economy and for the politicians vowing to protect it.
Oh, and then there are Obamacans, that’s a whole different kettle of fish. They’ve got their own TV channel, doncha know? Michelle Malkin says she’s gettin’ letters, she gets letters, and Politico reports:
Channel 73 on the Dish Network is now The Obama Channel.
Obama’s media buying strategy has been marked by a willingness to work the angles, and to try to pick up a few votes at the margins. The decision to go to everything from extensive radio buys to odd-hour infomercials reflects the fact that the campaign media buyers spend a lot of time thinking about how much persuasion any given dollar can buy, and given a very cheap format — late night cable channels that need filler, for instance — will settle for a thimblefull of persuasion.
The satellite channel is the latest of these marginal gambits: Three readers from different parts of the country email that Channel 073-00 on the Dish Network is now labeled OBAMA. (“What is up with Sen. Obama having his own channel?” asks a St. Louis reader.) The channel plays his two-minute ad laying out his economic plan on a loop, over and over.
Yes, Virginia, there really was an Obamacrat infomercial. If anyone can find it, let me know.
Once upon a time, there was a television show called Good Times. As created by Eric Monte, (Cooley High) Good Times was a sincere attempt to tell the story of an American family’s struggles together to make ends meet. That this family happened to be black and live in the projects was both important and incidental. Yet, in the hands of Norman Lear, (All In The Family) Good Times became minstrel-esque, with exaggerated characterizations, and a de-emphasis on the positive interactions of people united in a common struggle against external forces beyond their control. In the view of the creator of the show, life was good, even in rough circumstances; in the minds of the producers, however, such a thing is not credible. If you’re black and living in the projects, life has to be bad.
I pitched ‘Good Times’ in 1971; it didn’t go on the air until 1974. In those three years we had about 20 meetings. The one note I got in every meeting was, “Get rid of the father, a strong black man in a sitcom won’t work.” All the white writers on the show wanted to do stereotypes and I refused, so we’d argue and fight. They would ignore what I suggested and take all that “Yassuh Boss” stuff to the cast, and John Amos and Esther Rolle would have a fit. Then they’d give them what I wrote and the cast would like it, shoot it and it would go on the air. Originally I pictured J.J. as a street-smart hustler who drove his honest, hard-working parents crazy. His character became a buffoon.
Why the trip down memory lane? Well, when I think of Good Times, the theme song automatically comes to mind. Purportedly optimistic and upbeat, in reality it is a put-down.
Temporary layoffs, good times!
E-Z credit ripoffs, good times!
Scratchin’ and survivin’, good times!
Hangin’ in and jivin’, good times!
Ain’t we lucky we got ‘em?
Good times!
It is this kind of perversion of racial reality that drives the Barack Obama campaign, however this not-so-subtle skewing of the truth is not limited to any one segment of society. In Obamaland, everything sucks. The past eight years have been an unmitigated disaster on every level, devastating every American’s hopes, dreams and chances, in every arena, in every aspect of life. But, there is “hope” for “change.” Vote for Obama and everything will be fine.
Because if we are willing to work for it, and fight for it, and believe in it, then I am absolutely certain that generations from now, we will be able to look back and tell our children that this was the moment when we began to provide care for the sick and good jobs to the jobless; this was the moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow and our planet began to heal; this was the moment when we ended a war and secured our nation and restored our image as the last, best hope on earth. This was the moment—this was the time—when we came together to remake this great nation so that it may always reflect our very best selves and our highest ideals. Thank you, God bless you, and may God bless the United States of America.
Good times! Without question, this view of America as a troubled nation helps Obama. But, seriously, think back. Ask yourself a variation of the question Ronald Reagan asked Americans during his debate with Jimmy Carter, “are you better off,” or worse…than you were 2 years ago, before the presidential campaigns started? Back then, were you consumed with worry about your financial future? The financial future of the country? The entire freaking world? Remember, this was 2006, the year the Democrats swept the elections. Weren’t we all just a little bit optimistic that things would soon get better? And wasn’t our primary concern back then, the war?
Don’t get me wrong, we had, and continue to have, problems and real, legitimate concerns. But, whose fault are they, really? Now, it seems that, according to Obama and the Democrats (sounds like a soul band) we’re all teetering on the brink of total collapse, and only he, like Mighty Mouse, can sweep in and save the day. Where the promise of Obamaland goes wrong, in my opinion, is not only the misplacement of blame, but, like Good Times, de-emphasis on priorities from the celebration of what we have that is good, in favor of persistent lamentation about that which is not.
Slate Magazine, which I grew to hate during the primaries for it’s incessant Obama cheerleading, has an article by Walter Shapiro claiming voters are angry, but too stupid to know why.
A Pew Research Center poll released Wednesday found that 43 percent of all voters admitted that they feel “confused” by the proposed plan to stabilize the financial markets. At the same time, voters grasp that something important is happening — 54 percent say, in response to another question, that they are paying “a lot” of attention to the bailout debate in Washington. Pollster Andy Kohut, the director of the Pew Research Center, said that it was virtually “unparalleled” to have this simultaneous level of interest and confusion in a policy debate. “It’s a tough one to get into the nitty-gritty of,” said Kohut. “It is not like gay marriage that is easy to grasp no matter what your point of view is.”
Hey, Walter, wanna buy a clue? Maybe what voters are “confused” about is the reason people who get paid to figure stuff out spend so much time looking up their own asses for answers to obvious questions. We’re “confused” by the fact that the media is so obviously trying to elect a raving lunatic, which Barack Obama is, that they applaud him for doing absolutely nothing to deal with the current economic mess but repeat, over, and over again, that he’s not the guy he’s running against, whose biggest sin, according to Obama, is that he knows the guy who’s been engineering the money train for the last eight years. The candidate who said, “call me, I got my cell,” the guy who has collected more money from the companies profiting from the restructuring of our financial market than any other, who has also taken more money in his brief tenure from those identified as the major culprits involved in this mess than just about anybody, is for some reason, the media’s fair-haired boy. Oops, I said, “boy.” I must be a latent racist, since that’s the only reason I could possibly have to use that particular phrase in that particular instance, or to criticize the Golden Child at all, at least, according to the media. Never mind that if I am a racist, I must hate myself, ’cause I’ve been black a long time, too.
We’re confused alright, Walter. It’s hard to figure out how the Democratic party could produce a bill in the House to address the crisis of the imminent collapse of our free market system, or however they framed their “fire-in-a-crowded-theater” clarion call, and then not only not push it through, deliberately sabotage it. We don’t get that, Walter. Silly us.
Then there’s David Gergen, who I find considerably more annoying than I would imagine a nest of vipers hatching in my underwear, or a swarm of bees building a hive in my ear to be, who, in a blog post for Anderson Cooper 360 on CNN, bemoans America’s lack of trust in it’s leaders, not just in government, but pretty much, across the board:
Four of the five lowest rated groups in the index were business, Congress, the executive branch, and the press. No wonder the “leaders” of these institutions had so much trouble persuading the general public about the seriousness of our financial mess.
David cites research from The Harvard Center for Public Leadership, which he claims to direct, done in partnership with U.S. News and World Report, and Yankelovich, which states this erosion of trust has been going on for a while:
In the fall of 2005, some 65% said we have a leadership crisis in the country. By 2006, the number had risen to 69%. And last fall, no less than 77% declared there was a crisis of leadership. Moreover, 79% said the United States would decline unless we get better leaders.
Gergen goes on to bitch and moan about the challenges facing Barack Obama and John McCain, as well as all the other pseudo-leaders in other fields, in the face of this growing crisis of confidence, blah, blah, blah. Maybe we’d have more confidence in “leaders” if they didn’t have to commission a stupid study to see what’s right in front of their faces. The government does a lousy job; that’s why their approval ratings suck. Both parties are full of corrupt liars. They always promise “change” in exchange for votes; they get the votes, nothing changes. “Business” wants 700 billion dollars of taxpayer money to prop up the house of cards they’ve been ripping off those same taxpayers from, and the media is a joke. Those are pretty good reasons for people to stop trusting them. And, as far as that “better leaders” thing is concerned, we had one running on the Democratic side that I would have trusted in this crisis with my future, but you guys, Walter and David, were among the worst character assassins out there helping to torpedo her chances to be an effective leader. That’s why we hate you and your kind.
No, we’re not “confused” about the inefficiency of government, or the complicity of the press, or the greed of the financiers. We’re “confused” that you seem so surprised that we don’t trust them, or you, as far as we could spit at you from.
Susan Estrich once again puts forth the notion that the only reason Barack Obama might lose this election is because of racism. She cannot for the life of herself, understand how anyone could be troubled by Senator Obama’s dubious funding, or his campaign’s race-baiting, or his system gaming thuggery during the primaries. Nope, it’s racist alright, to be even a teensy bit uncomfortable with Obama’s lack of experience and accomplishment, or to question the character of a man who would lie about how often he went to church. He made the “Greatest Speech On Race In The History Of America, Nay The World” to explain it, didn’t he? Doesn’t bother Ms. Estrich at all that said senator withdrew from said church on the same day his party’s Rules and Bylaws Committee violated their own rules to award him delegates he didn’t even bother to compete for. Uh-uh, it’s race.
