Byron York has a very funny post about Barack Hussein Il Jong Obama. His intro:
Maureen Dowd is worried that the Republican smear machine is at it again, attacking Barack Obama by using…his middle name. It seems Ed Rogers referred to Obama by his full name on "Hardball" a while back, setting off indignation among some on the left. I don't know why it came to Rogers' mind, but it is true I included Obama's middle name in an NR story (not available on the web) in early November:
Obama has joked that he worried his political career was over after 9/11 because his name sounded too much like Osama. In fact, it's better than that: Named after his father, his full name is Barack Hussein Obama Jr.
Maureen Dowd and Keith Olbermann are foaming (this is news?), so you know we are having fun now.
Folks old enough to remember gibes at 41 as George Herbert Hoover Bush may not be too impressed with the current complaints. But fair's fair! If Obama, the People's Choice as the Anybody But Hillary Alternative, must carry the burden of his names, the Evil Republican Noise Machine really ought to come up with a suitably scary monicker for Hillary! as well.
I suggest - brace yourself - Hillary Clinton.
Mrs. William Jefferson Clinton.
Posted by: bgates | December 02, 2006 at 09:17 PM
Boy, Maureen Dowd played the SMEAR game against the republicans. Now she's worried?
What a hypocrite.
Posted by: lurker | December 02, 2006 at 09:39 PM
I assume that the reason that Maureen and Keith are upset is because, in fact, Obama's middle name is not Hussein. Right?
You mean his name really is Hussein? Fine. Exactly when was I supposed to learn that fact for the first time, if not sometime right around now? On the day of his second inauguration?
Posted by: Crew v1.0 | December 02, 2006 at 10:43 PM
Is that Keith Douchebag Olbermann?
Posted by: SmokeVanThorn | December 02, 2006 at 10:54 PM
Is that Keith Douchebag Olbermann?
No, it's Keith-I'm-a-news-anchor-of-the-news-program-Countdown-and-never vote-and don't-care-about-politics-or-who-wins-elections-Olbermann.
That one.
SMG
Posted by: SteveMG | December 02, 2006 at 11:21 PM
Very good.
SMG
Posted by: SteveMG | December 02, 2006 at 11:28 PM
Who put the Felix in George Allen's name (and that one was not even his real middle name)?
Posted by: clarice | December 03, 2006 at 12:19 AM
Happy Birthday Clarice...I've been meaning to say so...just arrived from a lovely dinner out!
You are top drawer Madame!
Posted by: topsecretk9 | December 03, 2006 at 01:54 AM
--Maureen Dowd is worried that the Republican smear machine is at it again--
No worries here, way-back when, MODO?
OH? MODO don't carey if "anything on the rocks" actually does mangles the name...it's really worrisome if a republican could?...I see, makes so much sense now. Send the women a bottle of anything and tell her it's a man, it seems to be the only solution. And question, why do faithful liberals let their "dear leaders" fubar so badly, so consistently and ignore it? Seems a bit "greenwaldist" to me.
http://www.reason.com/blog/show/108084.html
Posted by: topsecretk9 | December 03, 2006 at 02:10 AM
Thanks--I just saw your message at AJ's--It's your birthday, too, if my failing memory still holds..Happy back at ya..and many thanks.
Posted by: clarice | December 03, 2006 at 02:26 AM
Happy Birthday Clarice!
Posted by: Bob | December 03, 2006 at 06:57 AM
Now I think Obama presents the same problem for the Democrats, that Lamont did in CT. Like Lamont as the anything but Lieberman candidate, Obama has the "anything but Hillary" appeal, but I think the Dem party's "brain trust" (that's if the Dems even have anyone with brains anymore)knows this... or a least learned something from CT 2006. So I would expect to see the Hillary supporters go all out to keep Obama out the "masters" house!
Posted by: Bob | December 03, 2006 at 07:04 AM
Exactly when was I supposed to learn that fact for the first time, if not sometime right around now? On the day of his second inauguration?
Well, when did we learn it was Hillary "Rodham" Clonton? First inauguration, IIRC.
Posted by: Tom Maguire | December 03, 2006 at 07:35 AM
Hmmmm.
Well that's liberal facism again. To think I'd hold a guy's name against him.
I think what we're seeing is a bit of liberal projection because we all know that's exactly what they would do ... because they've already done it.
Posted by: ed | December 03, 2006 at 08:42 AM
OT: watching MTP - Jimmah Cawtah is insane.
Posted by: SunnyDay | December 03, 2006 at 09:51 AM
Thanks, Bob.
Posted by: clarice | December 03, 2006 at 10:23 AM
Happy birthday, Clarice and AJStrata!
Captain's Quarters thinks that
Heck, the last six years were already difficult!
And Robert Spencer implied that the Crusades against Islamofascism were difficult enough!
Posted by: lurker | December 03, 2006 at 10:26 AM
I wonder why his father named him in this way. Who was he thinking of when he did so? I read somewhere, and it needs to be substantiated, that Obama's father and grandfather are both Farrakhan Muslims.
Posted by: jeff m | December 03, 2006 at 10:37 AM
Thanks, lurker. Is it AJ's birthday, too?
Posted by: clarice | December 03, 2006 at 12:13 PM
I don't want to make a bigger deal out this than it is (because it's pretty small potatoes), but I don't think reminding people that Obama's middle name is Hussien is at all comparable to reminding people that George Allen's middle name is Felix or that George Bush Sr.'s middle name is Herbert. The latter two were done in order to tease the candidates because they didn't like their names. It was light-hearted ribbing.
If Republicans make it a habit of reminding everyone that Obama's middle name is Hussien, however, it will be pretty hard to see that is simply light-hearted ribbing. It will be seen, correctly I think, as an attempt to paint Obama as a foreigner and a Muslim. In other words, it will be an appeal to people's baser instincts. It's just qualitatively different.
Posted by: Anonymous Liberal | December 03, 2006 at 12:31 PM
It will be seen, correctly I think, as an attempt to paint Obama as a foreigner and a Muslim.
Seeing as he's neither, this would seem an exercise in futility, no?
Posted by: R C Dean | December 03, 2006 at 12:36 PM
It will be seen, correctly I think, as an attempt to paint Obama as a foreigner and a Muslim.
And in the opposite direction, keeping that information on the hush-hush is seen as an attempt to downplay his father is a foreigner and a Muslim. Why not get it in the open and the ability to paint it in a bad light is minimized?
Posted by: Sue | December 03, 2006 at 12:42 PM
And in the opposite direction, keeping that information on the hush-hush is seen as an attempt to downplay his father is a foreigner and a Muslim. Why not get it in the open and the ability to paint it in a bad light is minimized?
I agree. The best thing for Obama would be to try to turn this into old news as quickly as possible. I think that's what is happening now actually.
Posted by: Anonymous Liberal | December 03, 2006 at 12:51 PM
We should check to see what our favorite Berkeley etymologist says:
--------------quote-------------
December 19, 2002
A Question That Has No Good Answer
Why does our President--the child of two yankees--have a brother named after Confederate cavalry general J.E.B. Stuart, a guy who would round up free Blacks during Confederate invasions of Maryland, ship them back to Virginia, and sell them as slaves?
Posted by DeLong at December 19, 2002 09:42 AM | Trackback
-----------endquote------------
Posted by: Patrick R. Sullivan | December 03, 2006 at 12:53 PM
I wonder why his father named him in this way. Who was he thinking of when he did so? I read somewhere, and it needs to be substantiated, that Obama's father and grandfather are both Farrakhan Muslims.
His father was a Muslim from Kenya, so it was not surprising that he gave his child a traditional Muslim middle name. IIRC, Obama was raised by his grandparents, and converted to Christianity as a teenager.
Posted by: Doug | December 03, 2006 at 12:53 PM
I'd also note, Sue, that Obama has never tried for a second to hide the fact that his dad was a foriegner and a Muslim. His best-selling book was entitled "Dreams from My Father: A Story of Race and Inheritance." It was all about his attempts to learn more about his Kenyan father.
Posted by: Anonymous Liberal | December 03, 2006 at 12:54 PM
His father was a Muslim from Kenya, so it was not surprising that he gave his child a traditional Muslim middle name. IIRC, Obama was raised by his grandparents, and converted to Christianity as a teenager.
It's especially not surprising given that his father's name was Barack Hussein Obama, Sr.
Posted by: Anonymous Liberal | December 03, 2006 at 12:58 PM
Happy B-day Clarice and TS (is it your birthday too?) And was it yesterday and I missed it?
Anyway, many happy returns!
Posted by: Jane | December 03, 2006 at 01:00 PM
Happy birthday Clarice and TSK9. You're not getting older, just getting better. Can't count the number of times I've wanted to ask yas to marry me, but I'm already married, dagnabbit.
You heard it here first: The USA will never have a president whose middle name is Hussein.
Posted by: Larry | December 03, 2006 at 01:14 PM
Thanks Jane and Larry, I may be getting Younger but it was amusing to have my mom ask if I'd remembered to sign up for Medicare..
Posted by: clarice | December 03, 2006 at 01:21 PM
Scratch "younger", substitute "better" HEH!
Posted by: clarice | December 03, 2006 at 01:26 PM
To quote the Bard; "WTF is in a name?"
Posted by: Semanticleo | December 03, 2006 at 01:36 PM
So much is made of appearances. How about comparing names and words to......Behaviors?
Naw, too radical.
Posted by: Semanticleo | December 03, 2006 at 01:38 PM
It was light-hearted ribbing
Born of deep affection no doubt.
Feel the love.
Posted by: boris | December 03, 2006 at 01:46 PM
Clarice, I don't think you have to sign up. My card came in the mail, from big brother, I guess.
Posted by: Larry | December 03, 2006 at 01:51 PM
A friend of mine from church converted to Christianity while in high school in Iran. It was chilling to hear him tell of (and this is a direct quote) "fleeing across the desert" to avoid a death sentence for apostasy.
Chilling, I tell you.
I wonder if Mr. Obama has heard from any of his former co-religionists about his decision.
Posted by: Walter | December 03, 2006 at 02:19 PM
I think that's testimony that economists can be just as dumb as Atrios where it comes to performing a cursory Google search.
Jeb Bush = John Ellis Bush
JEB Stuart = James Ewell Brown Stuart
Maybe even dumber. And yes, I am aware that Atrios is an economist.
Posted by: Slartibartfast | December 03, 2006 at 02:22 PM
clarice and TS9 -Happy Birthday to you both and thank you for another year of great informative comments and in your case clarice-insightful columns. You both are always worth reading and I have learned a great deal this past year. Your excellent contributions to this blog have kept discussions at a very lively and interesting level!
On topic, MODO needs to cool her jets. Nobody is dissing Barack Obama though Hil would do well to try to line him up as her V.P. running mate.
Posted by: maryrose | December 03, 2006 at 03:47 PM
So now it is a smear to call a spade a spade, so to speak.
Posted by: Borat Obama | December 03, 2006 at 04:02 PM
Olberman would complain if someone slighted Muhommed Atta. This is a guy who believes that if the terrorists in GITMO don't get all the rights in the Constitution, the Constitution has been torn up.
Posted by: Anonymous | December 03, 2006 at 04:05 PM
Thanks, maryrose.
Posted by: clarice | December 03, 2006 at 04:39 PM
Happy Birthday to two people who brighten the board!
TSK9 and Clarice!
Remember birthday spankings? I'll bet they don't do those anymore.
xoxox,
m
Posted by: MayBee | December 03, 2006 at 04:54 PM
Hussein for President?
Hell, he's got the Ramsey Clarke vote nailed down already.
Posted by: richard mcenroe | December 03, 2006 at 05:01 PM
Anyway, the Hussein bit reminds me of a scene from Crash. I'm sure MoDo and KO have both seen it, so they understand how real people would respond to such a name.
Posted by: MayBee | December 03, 2006 at 05:13 PM
The Webb campaign didn't mention George Allen's middle name "Felix" because Allen didn't like it. They called him Felix to link him to his grandfather, right before the "bombshell" was dropped that grandpa Felix was a joooooooooooooooo.
Posted by: Buzz | December 03, 2006 at 05:15 PM
Clarice and TSK9: Happy birthday to both of you.
Barack Hussein Obama... where to start?
Name makes him unelectable. Not even the Hussein part. Sounds too...foreign. Hell, Barack sounds Klingon or something.
Experience (more properly, the lack thereof) makes him unelectable.
And, I'm sorry to be the one who has to point it out, he's ethnic looking. There are still lots and lots of people out there who would be bothered by that.
End result: a lot of liberal swooning but no candidate. Guy's not really smear worthy when you get right down to it.
Posted by: Soylent Red | December 03, 2006 at 06:51 PM
Thanks, Soylent.
Posted by: clarice | December 03, 2006 at 07:03 PM
I think the Republican smear machine has been mistaken for the Republican sneer machine--but then that's the left wing for you. Facts, even facts as simple as a man's name, are inconvenient when mythologizing Republican politics.
Posted by: Forbes | December 03, 2006 at 07:36 PM
If Republicans make it a habit of reminding everyone that Obama's middle name is Hussien, however, it will be pretty hard t to see that is simply light-hearted It will be seen, correctly I think, as an attempt to paint Obama as a foreigner and a Muslim. In other words, it will be an appeal to people's baser instincts. It's just qualitatively different.
Anon Lib -
Somehow I don't imagine it's a stretch to think that most people will think the name 'Barack Obama" has a foreign - muslimish name.
Also, my understanding from the Left is that Saddam Hussein's Iraq was a secular non-Islamist country where kite-flying was enjoyed by small children and, per Riverbend, Iraqi women had rights that made the gals in Madison, Wisconsin envious.
So why would reminding people about 'Hussein' be a bad thing?
Also, if you could reconcile the concern MoDo and Keith have about the dopey public and names with Hillary Rodham Clinton and Theresa Heinz Kerry I'd appreciate it.
Sure, TH(K) wasn't an actual candidate, but still - you'd agree she started using her husband's last name for political purposes ... right?
.
Posted by: BumperStickerist | December 03, 2006 at 07:52 PM
This is how we planned it!
First build up Obama so he is the choice above and beyond the she-devil. Then pummel him with name-calling. We took it right out of the VLWC web site - DNC.org
The plan is working. Paranoia in the Dem ranks abounds - especially amongst the ranking Dems. Bwahahahahaha
Posted by: VRWC #1 | December 03, 2006 at 08:17 PM
Barack Hussein Obama Jr. - the junior, 1st-term Senator from Illinois is a dishonorable and untrustworthy man.
Here's why:
After graduating from Harvard Law, the then utterly unknown Obama was contacted by a bright aggressive NYC literary agent who thought - because of Obama's mixed heritage and modest background - BHO Jr might have an interesting story to tell. They signed a contract. After much work, the agent sold Obama Jr's book. It was Obama Jr's first.
After Obama Jr's pretty and pretty well-received convention speech in 2004 - (and before he was elected to the Senate) - he broke this contract with this agent, (the one who picked him up out of nowhere and got him his first book deal), in order to sign with a bigger agent, (to whom he was introduced by perjurer Bill Clinton).
Instead of being loyal to the agent who helped put him on the map, he dumped her the first chance he got, and jumped on to the roster of a bigger bigshot - who didn't have to break a sweat in order to sell Obama Jr's SECOND book! (Barack Hussein Obama Jr. eventually agreed to a settlement for breaking his contract with his first agent.)
Personal behavior like this reveals lot; it reveals that in Barack Hussein Obama Jr's world, trust and honor mean NOTHING. Which is exactly what McCain's wrote of Barack Hussein Obama Jr, not too long ago.
SURE: Barack Hussein Obama Jr. does have a nice voice, and he's very loquacious. He may even seem charming to some. Nice qualities all. Essential, too, if you want a career as a singer or a game show host. But being president requires more. More than Barack Hussein Obama Junior has. It matters not what his name is; it matters only that he possess the right stuff. Obama does not.
I think Barack's very smart and smooth - so so smart and so smooth that he could replace Pat Sajak AND Vanna White!
Posted by: reliapundit | December 03, 2006 at 08:27 PM
It will be seen, correctly I think, as an attempt to paint Obama as a foreigner and a Muslim.
Well he is pretty much a foreigner to government, and he is clearly a foreigner to foreign policy.
I like him. I like his attitude and I like a lot of what he says and he hasn't been around enough to be caught in a slew of lies, or for me to really understand what he stands for - which seems the state most people are in when they vote. That being said, I'd have to think really really hard at this point about electing anyone with a Muslim heritage, and I consider myself pretty darn tolerant. The problem as I see it is that Muslims are patient, there are lots of sleepers and they want us dead. So for me, that's a very big risk.
Posted by: Jane | December 03, 2006 at 08:32 PM
Barack Obama is not ready for primetime yet. That said; he probably will make a run for it and will be pummeled in the primaries just like Dean was. He has nothing to lose by running and has a good shot at the V.P. slot.
Posted by: maryrose | December 03, 2006 at 08:42 PM
Jane, I am with you. I would not trust someone with a Muslim heritage.
Funny about Obama's voice versus having the right stuff. Clinton had the right voice but not the right stuff as a US president. Bush did not have the right voice but the right stuff as a US president, in spite of a few mistakes he made. At least he did something and tried something with great risk.
Posted by: lurker | December 03, 2006 at 09:27 PM
Jane, I am with you. I would not trust someone with a Muslim heritage.
Sad, isn't it? In many ways I can't believe I said that. But at this point, with what is going on in the world, that's how I feel. It's really too bad.
Posted by: Jane | December 03, 2006 at 09:48 PM
One: anyone want to place an over and under bet on the thickness of the file the Clintons have built up on Barack Al-Hussein Al-Mahdhi Al-Jihad Al-Obama?
Two: Maureen is becoming a royal pain-in-the-cornholio again. Time to send her out for "On the Record Movie Nite" with Condi. Then she can find out who the Boss Lady is. God MoDo, just shut up!
Posted by: section9 | December 03, 2006 at 09:59 PM
Gotta agree with Jane and lurker.
Did you read about the DJ who did a spoof on his radio show? Said all muslims should be tattooed with a crescent. Most people who called in agreed. He finally said it was a spoof, and chewed them out. Sorry, but I think it's how most Americans feel.
And the airplane dry runs? I would refuse to fly with them. Kudos to the pilot who had them taken off. These people may have judged our government correctly, but they underestimate the people.
Posted by: SunnyDay | December 03, 2006 at 10:45 PM
Wow, there are some really bizarre comments toward the end of this thread. This was my favorite, though:
That being said, I'd have to think really really hard at this point about electing anyone with a Muslim heritage, and I consider myself pretty darn tolerant. The problem as I see it is that Muslims are patient, there are lots of sleepers and they want us dead. So for me, that's a very big risk.
I especially love the "I consider myself pretty darn tolerant" part. Which is then immediately followed by a suggestion that maybe Obama is some kind of terrorist Manchurian candidate. Putting aside the sheer lunacy of that suggestion, Obama has never even been a Muslim. He never even knew his father. He was raised in Hawaii by his mother and maternal grandparents. He's been a practicing Christian for all of his adult life. Paranoid much? Good grief.
Posted by: Anonymous Liberal | December 03, 2006 at 11:00 PM
I don't care what you think. ;)
Posted by: SunnyDay | December 03, 2006 at 11:12 PM
"Did you read about the DJ who did a spoof on his radio show? Said all muslims should be tattooed with a crescent. Most people who called in agreed. He finally said it was a spoof, and chewed them out. Sorry, but I think it's how most Americans feel."
Oh how I feel sorry for you. You choose to hate. That's quite a choice.
Posted by: stan | December 04, 2006 at 01:50 AM
I notice in a straight news story today the Chicago Tribune identifies him as B. Hussein Obama.
LOL
Posted by: clarice | December 04, 2006 at 01:51 AM
Wonder what "the Gingrich Who Stole Christmas" thinks about partisan attacks on a politician's name.
Posted by: Daddy | December 04, 2006 at 04:47 AM
I read yesterday about the extreme distrust towards the Muslims in general. The problem is their Sharia law. As long as they keep pushing for the establishment of Sharia law for their own "UMMAR", then why trust them?
Britain is being challenged to either convert to Sharia Law or allow the Muslims establish their own Islam courts in parallel to the UK legal court system.
Europe just may capitulate to Sharia law.
Paranoid? No, I don't think so. It is real and we are seeing the beginnings here in USA.
Posted by: lurker | December 04, 2006 at 06:40 AM
I especially love the "I consider myself pretty darn tolerant" part. Which is then immediately followed by a suggestion that maybe Obama is some kind of terrorist Manchurian candidate.
What I especially like is your holier than thou attitude. I can state with impunity than I'm a hell of a lot more tolerant than any liberal I know.
There is no way of knowing if Obama is a manchurian candidate. I'm certain you don't know and it's not as if the terrorists wouldn't do it if they could. Personally I doubt he is a manchurian candidate, but I'm not taking any chances.
You have a problem with that, take it up with the Imans.
Posted by: Jane | December 04, 2006 at 07:01 AM
lurker:
Europe will not capitulate to sharia. They like partying too damn much. They might not feel the need todefend western civilization, but sunbathing in the nude? Hell yes, that is worth dying for.
Posted by: Terrye | December 04, 2006 at 07:04 AM
ROFL, terrye!
How about this one?
Australian Mosque Seeks Police Protection From Bikinis
Jane, don't you feel that someone's putting words in your mouth?
Posted by: lurker | December 04, 2006 at 07:19 AM
Jane -
of all the reasons to not vote for Obama, his potential 'manchurian candidate of the Muslim' status isn't among them.
As anon lib said, Barack's a Christian - to the point where he was smacked around by some lefty blogs for his overt professions of faith - his personal professions are Christ-centered, but he tosses in enough of the ecumenical stuff to keep his political viability.
fwiw, my impression is that Barack is actually a religious person, while HRC manages to appear to be religious only at politically opportune times.
.
Posted by: BumperStickerist | December 04, 2006 at 07:52 AM
Happy Birthday! To my wife, that is (also on Dec 2)
Oh, and to all you other people who were blessed to be born on the same day as her.
I love you all!!!!! Much, much less than my wife.
Posted by: hit and run | December 04, 2006 at 08:10 AM
Oh how I feel sorry for you. You choose to hate. That's quite a choice.
You are mistaken. But, as I said, I do not care what you think, nor do I feel any need to defend myself.
These manipulative leftist tactics of taking a simple matter of personal distrust, and claiming it is discrimination or hate on our part, don't work with most of us. But again, no point in going into it. It allows you to feel superior, and to dismiss what anyone says if you do not agree with it. Feel free - it doesn't change the facts, though.
I do not trust Muslims. Their religion tells them it is good to lie to and mislead nonmuslims.
Reminds me of the old proverb about the man who picked up the rattlesnake. The snake was lying in the woods, freezing to death. The man wals by and snake begs to be rescued. After much pleading and crying, the man puts the rattlesnake inside his coat to save it's life. When the snake feels better, it bites him. As the man is dying in th ewoods, he asks the snake "I saved your life, why did you bite me and kill me?" The snake says "you knew what I was when you picked me up."
I know I know, now I hate animals, hahahaha.
Posted by: SunnyDay | December 04, 2006 at 08:38 AM
Sunny,
Your point would approach validity if Barack was, or had been, a practicing Muslim.
Your argument is the updated version of 'JFK's a Cath-a-lic' ... only in this case while the name "John Kennedy' sounds Irish Catholic, the man running for office is not.
-
Posted by: BumperStickerist | December 04, 2006 at 08:51 AM
I wasn't talking about Barack, I was responding to Jane's comments about not trusting muslims.
Jane is the one who implied that Barack was muslim. I never said that. I just agreed with her that I don't trust muslims.
Posted by: SunnyDay | December 04, 2006 at 09:06 AM
Bat Ye'or has an article at NRO about Mark Durie's book that addresses the question whether Christianity, Judaism, and Islam pray to the same God or not. Go read it.
Both Bat and Mark referred to a surprise for Christianity when the book of Koran stresses that Jesus (Isa) will be the destroyer of Christianity.
Makes sense as more people learn more about Islam and its Shari'a law.
Posted by: lurker | December 04, 2006 at 09:08 AM
BTW, AJStrata has a new post up indicating that Litveniko is a Muslim working with the Islam Chenyans.
Posted by: lurker | December 04, 2006 at 09:09 AM
Your point would approach validity if Barack was, or had been, a practicing Muslim.
Is that because it is hard to imagine someone lying in wait, appearing to be something they are not, and patiently waiting for their time when they can get us?
Yeah that is really hard to imagine.
There is a big difference between the prejudice against Catholics at the time of JFK - the catholics were not trying to kill us.
You may be satisfied that Obama is exactly what he says he is, (he would probably be the first politician to meet that criteria), but I'm not willing to take the chance.
I'm just not willing to take that chance.
Posted by: Jane | December 04, 2006 at 09:10 AM
Parental belief systems (ie Mel Gibson) can influence people in unexpected ways. It may not be "fair" or PC to take them into account, but when threatened it happens regardless.
Frankly I worry more about McCain. Some of his policy positions seem driven by forces slightly unhinged.
Posted by: boris | December 04, 2006 at 09:15 AM
Did you see the nonsense published in the Washington Post yesterday? The so-called "historians'" analysis of the Bush presidency. Here is my take:
Just as scientists do not use faulty data and uncontrolled experiments and still deserve the mantle of "scientist", so do serious historical scholars not attempt to make judgments until sufficient time (say 50 years or more) has passed for evaluation. Therefore, by agreeing to contribute to this farce in the Post this Sunday, the so-called "historians" have lost their credibility to call themselves thus. They have become just another group of political pundits running around in sheep's (historian) clothing. Douglas Brinkley is particularly egregious. This John Kerry hagiographer and frequent guest on Hardball and Scarborough has lost all academic credibility. It is an abomination to true historians to call him one.
Posted by: Florence Schmieg | December 04, 2006 at 09:20 AM
Let's be realistic here and look at 2 specific candidates that the dems might give the nomination to in the primaries. Obama or Clinton have too polarizing images to go the distance in rural America or the South. They are just not mainstream enough. I'm reminded of McGovern who was the flavor of the month with the anti-war crowd and look how that turned out. I like Obama as a spoiler to Hillary. If he wins a few primaries so what? Edwards or Bayh are the more mainstream candidates. I see many more people voting for them.
Posted by: maryrose | December 04, 2006 at 09:22 AM
If there were an unaccounted for period of time during which Barack could have been programmed to become a Manchurian candidate, you - again - might have a point.
Using your logic George Dubya Bush is the perfect Manchurian Candidate.
-- Bush's family was in national politics
-- Dubya's late high school / college career left him open to potential blackmailing
-- There are unaccounted for periods of time throughout Bush's early adulthood.
mooo-who-wah-ha-ha-ha-ha
But that's just crazy talk.
right?
-
Up until Osama shows up on television wearing a Queen of Diamonds halloween costume.
-
Posted by: BumperStickerist | December 04, 2006 at 09:26 AM
OT:
John Bolton has tendered his resignation as UN ambassador. What a shame. Of course Annan 's recent comments just show what an incredibly ineffective leader he has been for the full extent of his tenure. Stop funding the UN now!
Posted by: maryrose | December 04, 2006 at 09:39 AM
Florence - a lot of people I once respected, have, in their BDS, destroyed their credibility. It's astounding that they lost all objectivity in their hatred of this man.
I think it's because Bush symbolizes the turning of our society back to more traditional values. For many years most of us were completely silent. As we watched (rather than participating), our government, media, educational system, etc gradually moved further and further to the left.
Then, one day, the rest of us, silent for so long, said "enough." The left has been frustrated - nearly stopped.
After all those years of moving us in the direction they wanted us to go, without anyone saying much about it, they are enraged that we decided to speak up.
Their rage has obliterated their logical thinking. I can't think of any other reason for seemingly intelligent people to go off the deep end this way, and destroy themselves publicly.
When their true agenda is revealed, most Americans do not support it. They can't believe it - they go around crying that they speak for the majority. When defeated they cry foul. When opposed they resort to calling us "hater, racist, intolerant."
The truth is out, now, and the only way a dem can get elected is to pretend that their agenda is not their agenda. They can't go on like before. As soon as they start to enact their real agenda, they will get booted. I really think most Americans have had it with the PC, internationalist, hate-America crap.
Posted by: SunnyDay | December 04, 2006 at 09:43 AM
Up until Osama shows up on television wearing a Queen of Diamonds halloween costume.
HAHAHAHAHAHA!!! Too funny!
Posted by: SunnyDay | December 04, 2006 at 09:49 AM
If there were an unaccounted for period of time during which Barack could have been programmed to become a Manchurian candidate, you - again - might have a point.
So account for all his time for us, will you?
Using your logic George Dubya Bush is the perfect Manchurian Candidate.
I don't get your logic. We have the first president willing to actually address the biggest threat facing us, and you somehow think that is contrary to our interests? What side are you on?
Posted by: Jane | December 04, 2006 at 10:26 AM
John Bolton has tendered his resignation as UN ambassador. What a shame.
That is truly horrible news. He has simply been a great ambassador.
Posted by: Jane | December 04, 2006 at 10:28 AM
He has been.(This was Chafee's most spiteful move.) Kofi BTW is pitching for a BIG pension and the UN is being investigated in both Greece and Australia. Fox also had a big story up last night about yet another peculation--this time involving outside contracting. Let's tell John to turn off the lights, lock up and throw away the key when he leaves. The outfit is beyond redemption.
Posted by: clarice | December 04, 2006 at 10:42 AM
He has been.(This was Chafee's most spiteful move.) Kofi BTW is pitching for a BIG pension and the UN is being investigated in both Greece and Australia. Fox also had a big story up last night about yet another peculation--this time involving outside contracting. Let's tell John to turn off the lights, lock up and throw away the key when he leaves. The outfit is beyond redemption.
Posted by: clarice | December 04, 2006 at 10:43 AM
Remember when Dan Rather insisted on referring to Dan Quayle as "J. Danforth Quayle?" Nice to see the shoe on the other foot.
Posted by: Other Tom | December 04, 2006 at 10:44 AM
Remember when Dan Rather insisted on referring to Dan Quayle as "J. Danforth Quayle?" Nice to see the shoe on the other foot.
Posted by: Other Tom | December 04, 2006 at 10:46 AM
OT: The USCRC( a week before the SCOTUS case on the issue) has found no benefit to minorities in diversity in elementary and secondary schools. This is a biggie, I think.http://www.usccr.gov/press/2006/061128PressReleaseK-12.pdf
Another CW bites the dust.
Is there any reason to believe that wha t is true in elementary and secondary education is not equally true a t the college level?
Posted by: clarice | December 04, 2006 at 11:03 AM
Let's tell John to turn off the lights, lock up and throw away the key when he leaves. The outfit is beyond redemption.
Amen to that. Does someone have a link to the recent comments by Kofi? I missed something, I think.
Posted by: SunnyDay | December 04, 2006 at 11:33 AM
I wish the President had the cajones to withdraw from the UN - of course then that would just become a campaign mantra of the Kumbaya crowd.
Posted by: Jane | December 04, 2006 at 11:48 AM
I think we'd need--and probably could easily get--a nationwide grassroot movement to force this. At a minimum we could demand a sharp reduction in payments to the UN until it exercises more fiscal accountability and transparency in its own operation and a sharp reduction in its mission and personnel.
Posted by: clarice | December 04, 2006 at 11:59 AM
No Bolton? Fine dammit, if that's the way you want it, I hearby nominate Claudia Rosett to be UN Ambassador.
Posted by: hit and run | December 04, 2006 at 12:04 PM
Whatever happened to the Oil for Food scandal or the Abuse allegations about UN workers? All swept under the rug? With dems in charge we will get nowhere in enforcing fiscal discipline or accountabilty.
Posted by: maryrose | December 04, 2006 at 12:14 PM
"With dems in charge we will get nowhere in enforcing fiscal discipline or accountabilty."
I have to ask. That was meant to be ironic,
wasn't it?
Posted by: Semanticleo | December 04, 2006 at 12:17 PM
Whatever happened to the Oil for Food scandal or the Abuse allegations about UN workers? All swept under the rug? With dems in charge we will get nowhere in enforcing fiscal discipline or accountabilty.
Posted by: maryrose | December 04, 2006 at 12:18 PM
George Mitchell seems to be next up. ::frown:: I am about lose all hope in Bush.
Posted by: Sue | December 04, 2006 at 12:21 PM
I think we'd need--and probably could easily get--a nationwide grassroot movement to force this.
I'm in. What do we do?
Otherwise, Bush should just not appoint anyone. And stop any fungding of the UN. Let it rot.
Posted by: SunnyDay | December 04, 2006 at 12:57 PM
OT
What is the connection between Brent Scowcroft, Richard Clarke, Michael Scheuer, and Rand Beers?
Add to the group Anatol Lieven and John Hulsman?
/OT
Posted by: sbw | December 04, 2006 at 01:03 PM
I wish the President had the cajones to withdraw from the UN - of course then that would just become a campaign mantra of the Kumbaya crowd.
Posted by: Jane | December 04, 2006 at 01:08 PM
Jane:
You and I have become pete and repeat on this thread.
Posted by: maryrose | December 04, 2006 at 01:15 PM