Back Talk

The more exposure Barack Obama gets, the more chances he has to extemporize, so the more he makes bonehead statements.

He has flailed pathetically to spin out of his statement that he would meet without preconditions and shake hands with Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, who supplies weapons to kill American troop, supports terrorist groups Hezbollah and Hamas and said he would destroy Israel, calling Israelis "filthy bacteria." Obama spin: he said Iran, regardless of whether or not they possess a nuclear weapon is a tiny threat to America. Fact: a nuclear device in the hands of this nutcase leader is a huge threat to us and the Middle East.
Obama spin: he tried to justify his stupid remark by saying Presidents Franklin Roosevelt and Harry Truman met with our enemies. Fact: neither Roosevelt nor Truman ever met with any of the leaders of the Axis powers. History-challenged Obama was probably thinking of pictures of Roosevelt and Stalin at Yalta, and Truman and Stalin at Potsdam when Stalin was an ally. Obama spin: he pointed out that John Kennedy met with Nikita Khrushchev as another example of a President meeting the enemy. Fact: the Vienna summit between the young inexperienced president with the blustery Khrushchev was ruinous. It convinced Khrushchev that Kennedy was weak and ineffectual and emboldened the Soviets to put missiles in Cuba which lead to the famous crisis. The Soviets then almost immediately started building the Berlin Wall. Assistant Secretary of Defense Paul Nitze said “the meeting was just a disaster.” Kennedy told James Reston of The New York Times that “Khrushchev just beat the hell out of me, and I’ve got a terrible problem if he thinks I’m inexperienced and have no guts.”
Does Obama think if he points out his middle name is Hussein and exchanges family snapshots with Ahmadinejad for a few minutes, the Iranian lunatic will give up his nuclear weapon development? A pundit, violating the unwritten media law against asking Obama hard questions, posed the following: “What concessions does Obama imagine Ahmadinejad will make to him on Iran's nuclear program, and what new concessions will Obama offer? To abandon Lebanon? To recognize Hamas? Or perhaps to stop supporting Israel?

Posted by Jim at 04:51 PM | Permalink

The Democrat Party’s new messiah, Barack Hussein Obama has suffered some chinks in his halo in the last couple of months: his 20 year relationship with racist Wright, his association with domestic terrorist William Ayers, his shady real estate deal, and his wife’s outrageous statements.

Obama, with plenty of help from the media, has responded in typical DemPol fashion by playing the victim and crying racism if anyone asks questions about the above issues. The messiah’s latest edict is “Thou shalt not criticize my wife, Michelle.” He is offended that Republicans have questioned lady Obama’s patriotism and warned, “If they think that they're going make Michelle an issue in this campaign, they should be careful because that I find unacceptable,” and, “these folks should stay off my wife.” Get the picture? Wife Obama can campaign hard for her husband and pretty much shoot her mouth off as she wishes, but nobody can criticize or even question her remarks. She said she had never been proud of her country. The New Yorker magazine quoted her as saying, “we’re a divided country - a country that is just downright mean, we are guided by fear, we’re a nation of cynics, sloths, and complacents, and Americans have become cynical, mean, and have broken souls." Golly, how could those mean old Republicans actually have the nerve to say these statements are unpatriotic? The DemPols and their lapdog media have cautioned us not to mention certain Obama topics: his middle name, his Muslim school attendance, his pals Reverend Wright, and William Ayers, and now his wife is off-limits. This stuff is not all that surprising. DemPols always draw on their playbook and accuse their critics of unfairness, bigotry, homophobia, and insensitivity. It has always worked for them.

Posted by Jim at 10:04 AM | Permalink

Both the House and Senate Judiciary Committee DemPols have now put on their show trial where they call up five or six oil execs and interrogate and insult them while they posture and preen for the video cameras.

The interrogators sit up on their raised throne asking tough and commanding but mostly just display their dishonest motives and unbelievable ignorance of economics. Responding to the point that rising demand coupled with static supply forced oil prices up, Wisconsin Senator Herb Kohl was skeptical about this supply and demand stuff and said he didn’t believe that demand had increased anyway. One of the execs patiently explained that a massive increase in demand for gas and oil in countries such as China and India have occurred in the last two years. A couple of Senators display a basic concept of world oil economics, but I am convinced the House members, such as John Conyers, Zoe Lofgren, Sheila Jackson Lee, Robert Wexler, and Maxine Waters are economically brain-dead as well as politically dishonest. Maxine actually proclaimed that the government should “socialize” the oil companies. She stammered and struggled to say “nationalize” but couldn’t think of the word. Is there a feminine version of the noun ignoramus? Even back when I was a Liberal, the woman embarrassed me and I could never comprehend how the voters in her district could keep returning her to office. With her little outburst, however, she did, reveal her true Socialist feelings of government control of our lives. Jackson-Lee is another fine example of Democrat Judiciary Committee statesmanship; she has the distinction of being the only person in Congress that an airlines has banned (Continental Airlines) because of bullying airlines staff. John Conyers spends his dementia-fogged days trying to figure out a way to impeach President Bush to get even for the Clinton impeachment. It is sad but the fact is that these Senate and House Judiciary Committee DemPols do not care a whit that gas has gone to $4.00; they don’t care if it goes to $10. They have chauffer-driven, government limousines, filled with government gas, and government-provided first first-class air tickets for their various taxpayer paid junkets. What they care about is appearing sincere in an effort to alleviate fuel costs for us poor schlumpfs, who have to pay for our own gas, so that we will vote for them and they can retain their cushy positions of power. Some wag said that sincerity is a politician’s best asset; once he learns to fake that, he has it made.

Posted by Jim at 11:01 AM | Permalink

The DemPols have just engaged in another one of their Dog and Donkey Shows. Pathetic Pat Leahy and his Judiciary Committee have once again called up a few oil company executives to drag over the coals and attempt to embarrass them so the committee blowhards can posture, make inane speeches, and scam the public into thinking they are doing something about the gas prices.

You remember Pathetic Pat, sometimes called leaky Leahy because he was kicked off the Senate Intelligence Committee for leaking secrets, a crime for which any of us would have gone to jail. Every time I watch one of these shows, I ponder whether committee members Leahy, Shumer, and Durbin are really ignorant about the oil market or if they are merely lying lawyer-politicians trying to gain favor with the public. We know that Senator Biden mostly just loves to hear the sound of his own voice. Committee members, practiced at demagoguery as they are, always accuse the CEOs of price gouging although not once, after many attempts, has the committee ever found any evidence of price gouging. These political shows are a disgrace. Big Oil is not our problem; big government is our problem. Leaky Leahy and his Democrat colleagues, who make scapegoats of the oil companies, are themselves the reason that we are faced with the high oil and gas prices. They have repeatedly voted against any American oil exploration or any new refineries for 30 years. One of the oil executives pointed this out but, of course, nobody listened; too busy thinking about their next chance to preen before the cameras. A curious fact that came out of the hearings: Attempting to spin his votes to block oil exploration in ANWAR, Senator Schumer claimed that coercing Saudi Arabia to increase oil production by 1 million barrels a day would drop barrel price by $25, saving Americans 62 cent per gallon at the gas pump. Yet, if we took a million barrels from Alaska’s Arctic National Wildlife Refuge it would lower the price by only a penny. Say what?
Aside from pressuring Saudi Arabia to pump more oil, the only suggestion these ignoramuses have is to sue OPEC. I’m not sure who they mean by “we” nor do I know in what court, but I imagine the OPEC nations are getting a kick out of it.

Posted by Jim at 08:48 AM | Permalink

Remember the incident at the University of Colorado involving the hideous Professor Ward Churchill, who argued that the Americans who died in the 9/11 bombings were “legitimate military targets because they were ‘little Eichmanns’ who formed a technocratic corps at the very heart of America’s global financial empire,” and that “they deserved it.”

The college initially defended the tenured Churchill, who spent most of his time traveling around giving anti-American, Marxist speeches at colleges, until someone, outside the university, found that he lied about his educational background, lied about his American Indian heritage that he made so much of and, the real sin to the university elite, repeatedly plagiarized others in his writings. They had no choice but to fire Churchill and have been trying ever since to recover a little dignity and repair their reputation as a left-biased institution staffed with liberal indoctrinators. Now, Chancellor G.P. Peterson plans to create an endowed chair for a Professor of Conservative Thought and Policy. He said “a college must think beyond courses in gay literature, Chicano studies and feminist theory,” and “We should also talk about intellectual diversity.” Some faculty and students have not looked kindly on Mr. Peterson’s announcement, and have protested that it is “too radical.” Not a surprising reaction considering that, of the 800-member staff, only 32 are registered Republicans. That’s only 4% - an even lower figure than the 8 or 10% we usually see about university faculties. The political science department head said that “while he supports the concept of intellectual diversity, he has reservations about the university’s strategy.” Of course he does. Liberals always give lip service to free speech and diversity but draw the line at conservatism, just as Liberals across the country, spearheaded by Congressional Democrats have been trying to push their “Unfairness Doctrine” to stifle conservative talk radio.
David Horowitz, who wrote the seminal book on bias in our schools, “Indoctrination U:The Left's War Against Academic Freedom,” said that setting up a token Conservative will accomplish nothing and brand the person as a curiosity, like “an animal in the zoo.”

Posted by Jim at 11:27 AM | Permalink

Geraldine Ferraro was right when she said that Obama is where he is because he’s black, but, for her trouble, the political correctness police clamped a vice on her lips and had her fired from her job as Hillary Clinton’s advisor.

Obama makes a weekly statement betraying his unbelievable ignorance of world affairs, economics, or national defense. He should have adhered to the aphorism, “A closed mouth gathered no foot.” Latest installment: Feeling the political necessity to do some damage control because of his statement that he would meet - free of preconditions – with Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, who supplies weapons to kill American troop, supports terrorist groups Hezbollah and Hamas and said Iran would wipe Israel from the map, Obama said that Iran is not a serious threat to America. Even Hillary Clinton voiced concern over the danger from Iran as a “State sponsor of terrorism,” and John McCain said, “It is reckless to suggest that unconditional meetings with terrorist regimes will advance our interests,” and, "The biggest national security challenge the United States currently faces is keeping nuclear material out of the hands of terrorists; should Iran acquire nuclear weapons, that danger would become very dire.” The President also made a statement that one cannot negotiate with an unbalanced terrorist and that such actions would be appeasement? The Democrat Party, so touchy about national defense since they are historically so weak there, went bonkers over this, even though the President did not specifically mention Obama. They immediately exhumed a few of their old-line DemPols, had them put on their indignation faces, hit the talk shows, and cry foul. Lawyer/politicians bellow the loudest when someone nails them with the ugly truth.

Posted by Jim at 04:49 PM | Permalink

It’s a mighty long stretch, and only Liberals could make such a stretch, to suggest that we increase free speech by censoring the speech to which they disagree.

That’s exactly what our own Jack Jamison does in his article, “Talk Radio lacks a Liberal Perspective.” I am disappointed in Jack who, as an old hand in the information business, should appreciate that any form of censorship or control of ideas is not the answer. Jack quoted a line - I assume he would be embarrassed to make such a silly statement himself - from a Sacramento Bee article by Sue Wilson, “Why are corporate dollars the sole arbiter of what information people get to hear on publicly owned airwaves." For starters, does anyone want to take a wild guess at where Sue Wilson stands in the political spectrum? Only desperate left-wingers, such as Dennis Kucinich and a few other Congressional Lefties have tried to re-institute the jokingly name “Fairness Doctrine” which would use government fiat, place a bureaucrat in control, tell the networks what and how much of liberal versus conservative radio they can air, and essentially destroy talk radio. Jack knows that corporations do not and will not let political feelings get in the way of the bottom line, and the bottom line is that corporations syndicate and put on the air radio programs that bring in the most listeners who then hear the commercials, buy the products, and make a profit for everyone. Liberal Democrats have struggled for years trying to make a go of Liberal talk radio, ala Air America, the dopey stand-up comedian who is running for congress from Minnesota and whose name escapes me, and many others. Al Gore and other deep pockets Democrats even dumped thousands of their own money into the effort. They failed to compete in the free market of ideas, so now they want the government, as Liberals always do, to step in and force the outlets to air liberal shows. They all failed or are failing, because they have nothing to say except to trash the President and Republicans. They are boring. Conservative radio shows, when they are as popular as Limbaugh, Hannity, and Medved are a terrible thorn in the Liberal backside because of their immense popularity and because they break the stranglehold that the major media outlets ABC, CBS, NBC, NPR, PBS, and CNN who claim to present news as opposed to talk radio, which are opinion shows, has had on information presentation. This bunch has been in the tank for the Democrat Party for years, although, ironically, they are now giving Hillary Clinton a taste of their bias since they have chosen Obama over her. The Conservative radio listening audience still amounts to only a fraction of the combined liberally biased audience of the above behemoths yet the liberal bellyachers never suggest we censor them. The Fairness Doctrine that was tossed out in 1987 has nothing to do with fairness. It has everything to do with shutting down opposing viewpoints.

Posted by Jim at 10:12 AM | Permalink

Are we ever going to able to stop the dancing around the racism issue in America?

The answer is not until people like Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton, who make their living off race-baiting, go away. Not until we stop with the hyphenating, labeling people African-Americans or Black-Americans and we start having only Americans. Not as long as we still have the NAACP, The Congressional Black Caucus, and all the other race connected organizations. Not until Black communities stop using the victimhood blame game excuse and start cleaning up their cultural problems as suggested by a few brave men like Bill Cosby. We certainly will never get to a color blind society as long as the Democrat Party keeps playing the race card every single election cycle in order to hold the Black voting bloc in place, and the Blacks stop delivering their 90% vote. I confess I had no idea of the depth of racism in country until the Barack Obama, Reverend Wright incident shook us awake, and Michelle Obama, a privileged, Black, Harvard graduate told us America is a “mean” country of which she had never been proud. I had naively assumed it was inevitable a few White and Black people would hold racist feelings in a country of 300 million but that it would always be a small minority. The Iowa Caucuses even confirmed my naïve viewpoint when Iowans selected Barack Obama over Hillary Clinton, in spite of the fact that Iowa is only 1.5% Black. However, since the Obama/Wright mess, Blacks have almost unanimously been calling the political talk shows with the same message: they have no problem with Reverend Wright’s anti-white sermons, they make credibility-stretching excuses for Obama’s 20-year relationship with the racist minister, and they vow they will vote for Obama without regard to what he stands for or what he plans for America.

Posted by Jim at 11:24 AM | Permalink

Four people on the California Supreme Court have taken upon themselves the task of redefining the definition of marriage.

They are erasing the special distinction that exists in a marriage between a man and a woman regarding procreation and morality. This is a great victory for Liberals but a huge hit on traditional values. These four Liberals, who never flinch at trampling upon individual rights by ignoring and overruling popular choice, have made this decision in direct contradiction to the popular will as evidenced by their vote in 2000. They Supreme Lefties are following the lead of that wonderful exemplar of where we want the country to go, Sillyville, known by most as San Francisco, which, in 2004, issued marriage licenses to men marrying me, women marrying women, and, for all I know, homeless people marrying their shopping carts. I understand the homosexual marriage applications are already queuing up in San Francisco. The limp-wristed California Legislature voted for legalizing same sex marriage but Governor Schwarzenegger, back when he still had some principles, vetoed it. That case at least went through the painstaking legislative process. Here, we have a case where seven judges sit around and discuss a culture changing concept and end up with: “Screw you Californians; we don’t care what you want.”

Posted by Jim at 07:29 AM | Permalink

Barack and Michelle, possible future residents of the White House and top representatives of our country, are gradually showing their true natures - even though the media is doing its best to help usher them in - and I pray that American voters are paying attention.

Obama initially passed himself off as a moderate, fair-minded, proponent of change. Truth usually surfaces, although with great difficulty in this case, when it comes to lawyer politicians like Obama, and several ugly truths have fought their way through the media blockade. Obama is ranked the most liberal member of Congress, he had a 20-year close relationship with anti-American, anti-White racist Jeremiah Wright, whom he cast aside in two weeks for political reasons, his friendship with domestic terrorist William Ayers, his emerging shady involvements in Chicago, and dealings with real estate developer Tony Rezko who is on trial for fraud, bribery, money laundering, and attempted extortion. Michelle Obama has a big mouth, loves to hear her own voice, is also a lawyer but, unfortunately for Barack, lacks the politician sense, has been making speeches telling us what a horrible racist, greedy, unfair country we live in. She told us we are “struggling to survive,” and that we have a “poor quality of life.” Someone should ask her why so many outsiders are clamoring to immigrate here – many risking their lives to sneak in. Every strident sentence that comes out of her mouth confirms that she is more anti-American than her husband and establishes which of them has been the more willing dupe to Jeremiah Wright’s rantings. In my view, the Obamas have replaced the Clintons as the worst combination to become America’s premier couple.

Posted by Jim at 08:28 AM | Permalink

A few blogs ago, I took off on one of my most irritating gripes – the fact that the Democrat politicians respond to every perceived problem by passing a law and raising taxes.

I iterated a case of the Democrat legislature in my home state, Iowa, imposing a huge increase on tobacco, congratulating themselves for their acumen in decreasing smoking, while, all the while, they are obtusely unaware that Iowans are simply driving across the Missouri border for their tobacco products. Our California Democrats are second to none in legislative idiocy; Representative Jim Beall proposed a new beer tax of $1.80 per six-pack which would amount to an unbelievable 1,500 percent increase. His fellow California DemPol, Tom Torlakson, introduced an amendment to make it easy for the Democrat majority legislature to raise taxes by getting rid of the two-thirds vote requirement. I asked the question, “When are DemPols going to stop with the knee-jerk tax-raising?” And, “when are they going to get in touch with the public instead of operating on their own biases and taking actions that continually chip away at our freedoms?” Let me answer my own question. The special interests have bought and paid for these lawyer politicians so we will never see changes until the American taxpayer finally becomes aware of what the slime balls are doing to our country and throws them out of office.

Posted by Jim at 03:18 PM | Permalink

Three small-town eighth-graders in Minnesota were suspended for a day by their principal for not standing Thursday morning for the Pledge of Allegiance, violating a district policy.

Given today’s popular culture, failure to teach respect for values, and lack of discipline in our schools, it is not that surprising that 12 or 13 year-olds might have a little fun protesting something or other. However, how did these young people chance upon the idea that pledging allegiance to their country is somehow objectionable? Back when teachers still taught kids honor, patriotism, love of country, that we are lucky to live in America, this incident, in the unlikely event that it happened at all, would have resolved itself instrantly. The teacher would have explained that standing for our Pledge of Allegiance was the honorable thing to do and a school board rule, the students would have cooled their heels for one day, and the incident would have been history. What has changed? Today, we have the ACLU to insure nobody’s rights are abridged – to watch that noone is asked to honor our flag and country or says a harsh word to child molestors, pornographers, terrorists, or traitors. On cue, the ACLU jumped in, declared the action unconstitutional, threatened lawsuit, and said the school's tradition must change. School kids now have contempt for traditional values. Another article about a Minnesota school appeared a couple of weeks ago which, in addition to possibly making a statement about Minnesota politics and schools, demonstrates what the overwhelming majority of liberal teachers have accomplished. A Forest Lake, Minnesota High School cancelled a scheduled visit by decorated war veterans making a national tour because it was determined “too political.” It is easy to see why more and more parents are home schooling their kids; of course, the California Legislature is doing their best to curtail that.

Posted by Jim at 03:38 PM | Permalink

Our nanny government, confirming that it is remarkably easy to spend someone else’s money, is going to give away $300 billion in taxpayer money for new mortgages to bailout homeowners who, for one reason or another, agreed to irresponsible or unwise loans.

Financial Services Committee Chairman Democrat Barney Frank has proposed bill H.R. 3221 which actually pays homeowners to stay in their homes by giving them a 10 percent equity stake in their home. It takes a long time for a home buyer to build 10 percent worth of equity and a lot of money to pay someone for being stupid. How fair is this giveaway to the person who has been patiently saving up until he had enough for a sensible down payment and is insuring that he can satisfy the contract? Congress is rewarding borrowers who took out loans they hoped they could get lucky enough to pay back or got into a home beyond their means completely. Some buyers took out an unrealistic mortgage on a home they intended to resell at a profit in, what was at that time, a booming market. The free spending government has no business getting involved in this kind of bailout. Stupid should hurt; greed-inspired unrealistic gambles should hurt worse.

Posted by Jim at 12:00 PM | Permalink

Some wise wag said about politicians: “In critical situations, when there are alternative choices to make, a politician will invariably choose the wrong one.”

Our two Democrat presidential contenders are doing their best to validate that statement. Barack Hussein Obama (there, I used his middle name. Oh well, the thought police already have my name on their list of P.C. violators) has promised to raise taxes to punish all those businesses and individuals who make too much money. He and Hillary vow to raise capital gains taxes and allow the Bush tax cut to die; i.e. a tax increase. They both want to levy a windfall profits tax on the oil companies and are strong opponents of oil exploration subsidies and are always pushing for restrictive demands on the companies. With our economy going through a down cycle, our national leaders should be taking every possible measure to restore it, but our Democrat politicians seem intent upon driving it further down for the simple but repulsive reason that they feel this is a way for them to regain power. Raising taxes and increasing the capital gains penalty has never, will never, and can never help the economy. Applying special taxes and restrictions upon oil companies has never, will never, and can never lead to more exploration and development and ultimately lower prices; in fact, the opposite occurs. Higher taxes take money away from capital investment, savings, and growth and put in the hands of inept bureaucrats who toss it into the pork barrel. DemPols either believe, or want us to believe, they are doing something sympathetic by raising taxes on businesses, when, if fact, businesses do not pay taxes; they factor them into the price of their product as one more expense, and, as usual, we consumers pay for them.

Posted by Jim at 03:47 PM | Permalink

We don’t hear much from the Presidential candidates about one of our most pressing issues – the Iraq war – except that both Hillary and Hussein (oops, I said it; the thought police will pounding on my door) promise to bring the troops home and leave Iraq to the terrorists or Iran, whoever wields the biggest stick.

“Bring the troops home” has a nice sound bite quality to it but would be the worst possible thing for America and the Middle East. In his new book, David Horowitz wrote that the Democrat Party has “sabotaged the war effort from the very beginning.” They did this is spite of the fact that they overwhelmingly voted to grant President Bush the power to invade Iraq. Bill Clinton himself called for the overthrow of Saddam. Congress, by large majority, crafted 23 formal “causes for war,” and only one of them mentioned Weapons of Mass Destruction as a cause, yet, now, the Democrats use the inability of our troops to find WMDs as the reason it was a mistake to enter Iraq. Our top Congressperson and Senator Majority Leader declared the war lost months ago. The DemPols publicly proclaimed the troop Surge a failure before they had even heard the plan details. Her military expertness, Hillary Clinton, virtually called General Petraeus a liar when he told Congress our military was having success. No Democrat congressman or senator has ever presented any kind of proposal for winning in Iraq – only proposals of surrender, ala Harry Reid. It seems our Democrat politicians are our WMDs. Horowitz wrote that the Democrats have “deliberately undermined” the efforts of the President and the military in their effort to win the war. A reviewer wrote: “The book is an eye-opening account of one of the greatest political betrayals in American history: the unprecedented attack by leaders of an opposition party on a war they authorized and on America’s commander-in-chief while America’s troops are still in harm’s way.”

Posted by Jim at 03:52 PM | Permalink

It’s a matter of public debate whether Barack Obama can shake off the hit he took for his 20 year intimate relationship with the America-hating, anti-white racist minister, and his wife’s revealing statements along the same lines.

He is still ahead largely because the leftist media has taken sides and given him a free ride. With the media aiding and abetting and a following of young Liberals that he has completely taken in with flowery, populist rhetoric, he appeared to have an easy stroll to the Democrat nomination until his association with the racist minister hit the scene and still looks pretty solid to win race. This is worrisome because of the gradually clarifying image of what Obama, the senator that The National Journal ranked the most Liberal in Congress, will do to America if he resides in the top office. As president and commander of our military he would have automatic access to the highest level of military and national secrets. Ironic since, if he were a scientist applying for a position dealing with top secret information, the FBI would never grant him a top secret clearance because of his Muslim past and loyalty issues regarding his close relationship with anti-American Jeremiah Wright and former Weather Underground member and domestic terrorist, Bill Ayers.
To many Americans, the economy is our most pressing issue. Obama’s comments on the economy are a mix of crowd pleasing populism with the usual liberal class struggle rhetoric, but, in the final analysis, he seems completely ignorant of what it means to have a market economy. In fact, everything he says is anti-free market. He talks of price controls, trade restrictions, subsidies, and government control of business – in short, Socialism.

Posted by Jim at 04:13 PM | Permalink

That laugh riot we know as the Democrat presidential race is a lot of fun to watch – more entertaining than any I can remember.

The first woman running against the first Black was enough to provide plenty of new wrinkles, but then along came Obama’s mentor extremist anti-white racist Jeremiah Wright to really throw things into confusion. All kinds of angst is at work.
The first woman House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has endorsed Obama and some individuals think she is denying support to Hillary only because a Hillary win would deny Pelosi the prestige of holding the Queen Bee position she now feels she owns in government.
Some conspiracy theorists of the Machiavellian school believe that Hillary is making a large effort running for the nomination, even though she knows she can’t win. That this allows her to at last make a notable public presence after having done nothing of note in politics except be married to the President, and it gives her a chance to improve her poor public favorability enough that she can rerun in 2012 with better odds.
Some say that race-monger Jeremiah Wright knows his continued eruptions are damaging Obama but he will persist because he is so self-possessed he thinks he can be the new Black leader – the new Jesse Jackson. My favorite politically-thinking opposite, Jack Jamison even speculated that Wright is conspiring with Rush Limbaugh to keep the contest hot in order to damage both contenders. Like two boxers bloodying each other to a final draw. Unlike a couple of the other liberal Post opinion writers whose pieces are so full of Bush hatred and America bashing, they read like translations of the rantings of Kim Jong Il, Jack’s pieces are thought-provoking although, in this case, a little over the top. A tag team of Limbaugh/Wright is would beat each other to dust before they ever got out of their own corner.

Posted by Jim at 03:32 PM | Permalink

Barack Obama picked up three more super-delegates, and almost daily another DemPol publicly endorses him even though Hillary Clinton keeps fighting and maintaining a foothold of possibility.

Obama’s 20 year relationship with anti-white racist Reverend Wright has undoubtedly damaged him; without the controversy, he would have locked up the nomination long before now. Like any lawyer-politician, He has taken the expedient route which, in this case, meant throwing his friend, mentor, and pastor down the stairs by saying he shares no views with the Reverend and he denounces Wright for "divisive and destructive" remarks on race.” He said, "I am outraged by the comments that were made and saddened over the spectacle that we saw yesterday," referring to Wright’s TV appearances. Moderate Whites may question why it took a Harvard graduate 20 years of listening to Wright’s wild sermons to recognize that he does not share his views. Obama mania has not gone away; he still has the Blacks, Liberals, and the swooning media on his side; he could be Idi Amin reincarnate and they would still support him. In fact, there is no fact, deed, or act that would drive away this adoring group. However, the Democrat Party has a serious problem with this election – a problem that is giving DNC Chairman ulcers – because the longer this in-fight continues, and the more exposure Clinton and Obama get, the more unlikable they become. Moreover, it is a no-win deal for the party. If the super-delegates go with Obama, he cannot win the general election with only his above mentioned constituency, even with help from the media, because of doubts about his inexperience, extreme liberal views, and possible racist core. If they select Clinton, the riots already promised by Black racist Al Sharpton and others, may make the 1968 Chicago Democrat convention riots seem tame.

Posted by Jim at 09:54 AM | Permalink

The Wright/Obama soap opera plays on. Let me recap for those of you who have been living in a monastery for the past year.

Senator Barack Obama stepped up from nowhere to challenge for the Democrat Presidential nomination. We heard he has a minor Muslim background such as his attending an Islamic school, and noticed that his middle name is Hussein, but the P.C. police told us we are not allowed to repeat that because it might mean we are anti-Muslim or anti-Black – I’m not sure which. He has no leadership experience, is a half-term senator, has never authored any legislation, but he is an excellent speaker, well groomed, young, knows how to deliver a slick political speech as long as he has a chance to practice it, and, most importantly, he is Black. Therefore, every Black in the country was ecstatic, vowed to vote for him regardless of issues, and the lap dog media wagged its tail and licked his feet in support because he is running on a promise of change, even though he has never explained what kind of change. He proudly swore he’d run a campaign free of any Black, White, or Brown issues of race. Then an odd thing happened. A couple of news outlets such as Talk radio and the Drudge Report exposed Obama’s of 20-year relationship with America-hating, anti-white racist Reverend Jeremiah Wright - a man he called his mentor, friend, and spiritual advisor. He donated $27,000 to Wright’s church last year. Way-out Wright – he makes Jesse Jackson appear moderate - sells videos which capture his hate-America rantings including his notorious lies such as the statement that the White man intentionally introduced AIDS into the Black community. Initially, Obama feigned ignorance of all the hate sermons and that Wright had honored Black Muslim Louis Farrakhan with an achievement award. Then Michelle undiplomatically said she had never been proud of America, and it was a “mean country.” Obama facts keep surfacing; he is ranked the most liberal senator, and participated in anti-white extremist Farrakhan’s Million Man March. The polls showed that the Messiah image had been burst and his lead over Clinton was narrowing. Now, in the span of 48 hours, Obama has realized he and Wright do not share the same views and values whatever – a fact that had escaped his notice during the prior 20 years. The media swallowed this turnabout completely and dived back into the tank for Obama. The repudiation incensed Wright who is fighting back by making the rounds of whatever talk show will have him. One of his appearances was an interview on leftist PBS with even more leftist Bill Moyers, and, as expected, was a pathetic example of how to interview a controversial figure with such probing questions as, “When did you hear the call to ministry? How did it come?” Almost no questions about racist Wright’s notorious sermons that created this firestorm. The Democrat base and the media, admittedly a willing constituency, not only fawn over Wright but have re-opened their arms to Obama proving once again how easy it is for a slick politician to gull a compliant audience into believing anything.

Posted by Jim at 08:25 AM | Permalink