An adorable three-year old dressed up as Sarah Palin. Awww….
I hope someone brings the video to Palin’s attention.
My state’s governor, Arnold Schwarzenegger, went to Columbus, Ohio to speak at a rally for John McCain today. Now, I’ve been disappointed in Arnie as governor, even though I voted for him in 2003 and 2006. However, few people toss populist red meat to the masses better than the Governator, and his introduction of McCain in Columbus is a classic. Tito’s finally done cheering and has the video queued up. Roll’em!
Oh, and bonus points for Arnie for mentioning card check, the Orwellian "Employee Free Choice Act" that guts the right to a secret ballot in union certification elections. How can the Democrats and Obama claim to be the party of the working man when they support anti-labor measures like this?
And maybe I’m just seeing what I want to see, but the enthusiasm and size of the crowds both McCain and especially Palin are drawing make me think momentum is on our side.
(hat tip: Ace)
LINKS: Ed Morrissey.
People in southeast Ohio aren’t "quite as progressive" when it comes to "accepting diversity."
In other words –say it with me– if you don’t vote for Obama, you’re racists!
For more about Ohio Secretary of State Brunner, click here.
(hat tip: Ace)
Oh, my. Sweetness and Light has reprinted a Daily Kos diary entry written by The One, himself, in which he discusses the strategy for opposing Chief Justice John Roberts’ confirmation and writes the following:
According to the storyline that drives many advocacy groups and Democratic activists – a storyline often reflected in comments on this blog – we are up against a sharply partisan, radically conservative, take-no-prisoners Republican party. They have beaten us twice by energizing their base with red meat rhetoric and single-minded devotion and discipline to their agenda. In order to beat them, it is necessary for Democrats to get some backbone, give as good as they get, brook no compromise, drive out Democrats who are interested in “appeasing” the right wing, and enforce a more clearly progressive agenda. The country, finally knowing what we stand for and seeing a sharp contrast, will rally to our side and thereby usher in a new progressive era.
Remember, Obama has run as a post-partisan agent of change, a man with a track record of reaching across the aisle. This letter to the far-Left Daily Kos gives the lie to the whole charade. Obama is a Progressive in the style of the Progressives of the 1920s and 1930s, who formed the left wing of FDR’s administrations. He would feel right at home with IWW founder and Socialist leader Eugene Debs.
Obama makes it clear his goal is to take control of the Democratic Party and purge it of its moderates and mainstream liberals. These are not the goals of a bridge-building moderate, but of a hard Left ideologue.
Be sure to read the whole thing. It’s an eye-opener.
(hat tip: Gateway Pundit)
Sean Hannity (ugh) interviews Sarah Palin before a rally in Pennsylvania. Mostly softballs, but it's clear that Alaska's governor is no dummy, regardless of the smears the elite media and the cocktail conservatives throw her way. Roll tape, Tito!
Oh, and Piper makes an appearance early on. If I'm still around, I've voting for her in 2040.
Aside: Who chose that awful picture for the thumbnail in the video player? Palin as fuehrer??
London gets its first October snow in 74 years.
Can you imagine the suffering they must be going through in those greenhouse conditions? Oh, the humanity! If only George W. Bush had signed the Kyoto Treaty. If only we had listened to the Goracle!
Maybe, just maybe, it will one of these days hit the global warming alarmists that their computer models are crap and the empirical evidence just isn’t breaking their way.
Nah. Not when religion is masquerading as science.
(hat tip: Pax Parabellum)
The Prophet Barack "could no more disown" this man than he could his own White grandma. Let's hear what words of spiritual wisdom this wise pastor had to offer to the man who may well be our next president:
Obama claims that he never heard these terrible, ugly, anti-American, racist things from his pastor. The pastor whose church he attended for 20 years, who performed his wedding, who baptized his children. Somehow, he missed all these beautiful sermons. Let's assume, for argument's sake, that Obama was only a casual member of the church and attended just once a month. Over 20 years, that 240 services, 240 sermons, and yet he expects us to believe he never knew Jeremiah Wright's real beliefs?
Would you like to buy the Brooklyn Bridge, too?
I was born and raised Catholic. In my life, I've also attended Lutheran, Baptist, Eastern Orthodox, Jewish, and Hindu services. And I have never, ever heard the kind of racist, flame-throwing garbage that spews from Jeremiah Wright's mouth. And, if I had, I'd have damned well walked out.
But Obama just sat there. And by sitting there and not objecting, he gave tacit approval.
Do you want a President of the United States who in any way tolerates, let alone approves of this crap?
I don't, either.
(hat tip: Hillbuzz)
I’m sure you will all be as stunned as I to learn that Ohio Secretary of State Jennifer "Boss" Brunner shares a close campaign advisor with
voter fraud shop community activist organization ACORN, and that Brunner has taken advice on election strategy from ACORN arm Project Vote. Like … no way!
An investigation into ACORN’s alleged fraudulent election activity revealed yesterday that one of the national directors, Karyn Gillette, may have collaborated with the Obama campaign to raise funds for the group’s voter registration efforts.
So what does this have to do with Brunner? Gillette is identified on Jennifer Brunner’s 2006 campaign website as a consultant. A blog entry by Brunner’s husband Rick talks about that relationship, saying: "our candidate had gone earlier in the day to have some meetings and work out of Karyn Gillette’s office." He also describes Gillette as "very helpful to the campaign."
According to campaign finance reports that were filed, Gillette was paid $21,250 by Brunner’s campaign. She has a longtime history of serving as a fundraising consultant to Ohio Democrats.
An ACORN whistle blower testified in a Pennsylvania state court that "in November 2007 Project Vote development director Karyn Gillette told her she had direct contact with the Obama campaign and had obtained their donor lists." Project Vote is the voter registration arm of ACORN. (Wall Street Journal, 10/29/08)
But that’s not all. Gillette is not Brunner’s only tie to ACORN. Members of the group’s voter registration arm, Project Vote, regularly advise Brunner on election strategy, previously serving on her Voter Rights Institute and even recently issuing a news release claiming credit for Brunner’s directive banning challenges to suspected fraudulent voter registrations.
For the full story, read Maggie Thurber’s very interesting blog post.
And remember, kiddies, the Secretary of State’s job in Ohio and most of rest of the 50* states is to ensure the smooth operation and integrity of the state’s elections. Secretary Brunner’s close working relationship with an ACORN director is like the Treasury Secretary hiring Fast Eddie the Forger as consultant on best practices.
*(57, if you’re an Obamaton)
This just stinks, and Brunner’s corrupt relationship with ACORN and her constant stonewalling of any effort to validate over 200,000 questionable registrations calls into question the integrity of Ohio’s elections, regardless of the result. Ohio voters should vote her out of office at the next election in 2010, and maybe even look at recall or impeachment. At the very least, she’s monumentally incompetent.
For more about Jennifer Brunner, click here.
(hat tip: The Jawa Report)
For all the last summer, the Prophet Barack has been promising he won’t raise our taxes if we make less than $250,000 per year. Now, just a few days before the election, he lowers it without fanfare to $200,000. Then his running-mate declares $150,000 to be the boundary of "rich." Naturally, the Republican National Committee can’t resist:
Obama and Biden think about all those spending promises they made, and then they think about your paychecks, dividends and capital gains. And then what do they see?
Tell me another funny one.
(hat tip: Jennifer Rubin)
I didn’t watch the Half-Hour of Obama Power last night, but one of the stranger items he mentioned (and which he’s mentioned before), is the ominous sounding Civilian Security Force:
“We cannot continue to rely only on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives that we’ve set,” he said Wednesday. “We’ve got to have a civilian national security force that’s just as powerful, just as strong, just as well funded.”
The US military is funded at about $500,000,000,000 per year. Just what does Candidate Obama have in mind for such a richly well-funded civilian "security force" that’s as strong as our military?
(hat tip: LGF)
The Los Angeles Times is sitting on a videotape of then-State Senator Barack Obama at a dinner honoring former PLO spokesman(and therefore an apologist for terrorists) Rashid Khalidi. They have offered one lame excuse after another for not releasing the tape, even though, with Obama’s sketchy public record, it could have a material bearing on a voter’s choice.
This is unacceptable and verges on journalistic malpractice. Write the LA Times and let them know that, for the sake of the public, for their profession, and for their own integrity, they must release that tape.
Reporter Peter Wallsten, who wrote the original article that mentioned the tape, can be reached here: email@example.com
The LA Times Reader Representative can be reached here: firstname.lastname@example.org
Write them politely, though. We don’t want to act like a bunch of screaming Kos Kidz, now do we?
But write them. Demand the truth.
LINKS: Center-Left news site Politico says they would have released the tape. Jennifer Rubin reminds the Times of its obligations and has suggestions for what the once-great paper could do even without releasing it.
UPDATE: (via LGF) Doug Ross has received tips regarding quotes from Obama that are on the tape. If accurate, this would qualify as genuinely explosive. If. This should provide more pressure on The Times to release the tape and settle the mystery. Unless Ross is right and they’re covering for The One:
Saw a clip from the tape. Reason we can’t release it is because statements Obama said to rile audience up during toast. He congratulates Khalidi for his work saying "Israel has no God-given right to occupy Palestine" plus there’s been "genocide against the Palestinian people by Israelis."
It would be really controversial if it got out. Tha’s why they will not even let a transcript get out.
Trotting out their latest excuse for suppressing a tape of Barack Obama at a dinner honoring former terrorist spokesman Rashid Khalidi (at which were also former yet proud terrorists Ayers and Dohrn), the Los Angeles Times
-Democrat has a new excuse:
“The Los Angeles Times did not publish the videotape because it was provided to us by a confidential source who did so on the condition that we not release it,” said the newspaper’s editor, Russ Stanton. “The Times keeps its promises to sources.”
I think we have a new winner in the "how gullible do you think we are" contest. Does anyone truly believe the Times would be so scrupulous if the tape featured Sarah Palin or John McCain?
I didn’t think so.
Whatever is on it, this stonewalling by the Times will only make it look worse for Obama when it does come out.
Which is why we probably won’t see it until next Wednesday.
It's been fashionable among liberals to bash Sarah Palin as not very bright, which isn't surprising — it's been a standard insult hurled against conservatives in general since at least Eisenhower's time. It makes elitist Lefties feel good when they lose elections: "Well, we're still smarter. Nyah!" But even the "cocktail conservatives" like Peggy Noonan and David Brooks, those conservatives who have been tamed and are allowed to attend elite parties as long as they bash their own side or remain quiet, have joined in the Palin bash — Brooks infamously calling her a "cancer" on the party.
Well, Elaine Lafferty, former editor-in-chief at Ms. Magazine and devout liberal, begs to differ. Sarah Palin is smart:
Now by “smart,” I don't refer to a person who is wily or calculating or nimble in the way of certain talented athletes who we admire but suspect don't really have serious brains in their skulls. I mean, instead, a mind that is thoughtful, curious, with a discernable pattern of associative thinking and insight. Palin asks questions, and probes linkages and logic that bring to mind a quirky law professor I once had. Palin is more than a “quick study”; I'd heard rumors around the campaign of her photographic memory and, frankly, I watched it in action. She sees. She processes. She questions, and only then, she acts. What is often called her “confidence” is actually a rarity in national politics: I saw a woman who knows exactly who she is.
Be sure to read the whole post. There are interesting observations also about reactionary feminists. (Face it. The real reactionaries are on the Left, these days.)
There was a video included with Lafferty's article of the speech Governor Palin gave at UNLV on women's rights, but it seems to have vanished. Not to fear, however, for Tito's crack team of ninja techs found it on YouTube. He's tried his best to queue it up for you, but the embed doesn't seem to be working properly tonight. You can, however, watch it here. About 25 minutes long, it's a good speech that should go a long way toward dispelling the "not intelligent" calumny.
About the "cocktail conservatives," however, the less said the better.
In a 1995 interview about his book, Dreams from my father, Barack Obama praises his pastor, Reverend Jeremiah "God damn America" Wright:
And yet he expects us to believe he sat in Wright’s pews for 20 years and had Wright perform his wedding and baptize his daughters, but he never knew about his preacher’s anti-American, racist, hateful beliefs.
(hat tip: LGF)
The conservative blogosphere is abuzz today with the revelation that US Senator and Democratic presidential nominee Barack Obama compared the United States in the late 1950s to Nazi Germany. This happens in the same 2001 radio interview in which he said the Supreme Court under Earl Warren was not radical enough and that we needed to move beyond the constraints placed on the Constitution by the Founders. The comments in question occur at about 15:30 into the interview:
“…just to take a, sort of a realist perspective…there’s a lot of change going on outside of the Court, um, that, that judges essentially have to take judicial notice of. I mean you’ve got World War II, you’ve got uh, uh, uh, the doctrines of Nazism, that, that we are fighting against, that start looking uncomfortably similar to what we have going on, back here at home.”
Okay, I’m going to go out on a limb here and say I think I understand what Obama was getting at, even though he botches the comparison horribly.
At the time of Brown vs. Board of Education, a large swath of the United States comprising, but not limited to, the old Confederacy were under Jim Crow laws. These laws enforced ethnic segregation, mostly against Blacks, to the point of separate schools, bathrooms, eating counters, and drinking fountains. In the hard-core areas, Blacks had their voting rights violated and were terrorized with the threat of murder by lynching. The Jim Crow statutes and the terrorist threat of extra-judicial killing combined to create a repressive regime, especially in the Old South, that can be fairly compared to the apartheid regime of South Africa.
(For a good book on the Democratic Party’s role in creating and defending Jim Crow, see Bartlett’s Wrong on Race.)
But not to Nazi Germany, Senator Obama. There’s are whole orders of magnitude of difference here. I don’t recall it being national government policy to exclude Blacks from public life, to gather them in concentration camps, to exterminate them. Pray, tell me when the US equivalent of the Wannsee conference was held? At what point did the Federal government propose a final solution to the "Black question?" In fact, the history of race relations in the United States often shows the Federal government trying to defend Blacks from the depredations of racists in and out of state government: indeed, soon after Brown, President Eisenhower sent the Army into Little Rock to enforce school desegregation.
How Nazi-like of him. One can almost see Ike raising him arm in salute to Der Fuehrer.
I’m not one of those who’d going to scream in outrage at the comparison. However, I do think it is damn stupid: it shows a stunning ignorance of what was really going on in both the US and in Germany, and it demonstrates a mind too willing to draw easy analogies that do nothing to enlighten. Just like Obama’s ignorance of how the Berlin crisis of 1948-49 ended (hint: it was not through the "world standing as one"), it shows a lazy, superficial, and naive understanding not only of History in general, but of his own country. And it’s yet another illustration of why he should not become President.
By the way, is there something in the water in Illinois? Obama isn’t the only senator from the Land of Lincoln to compare the US to the Nazis and other genocidal maniacs…
(hat tip: LGF)
Stop and think for a minute, will you?
Michael Barone on Obama’s lead in the Keystone State:
The irony here is that voters motivated by anger at the decline in their wealth seem about to elect a president who has promised to embark on wealth-destroying policies.
Let’s not do anything stupid, okay?