Powered by TypePad

« Don't Know Much About History... | Main | That Was Easy! »

May 07, 2008



"He's got 99 percent of the voting shares. There's no point in taking a vote."

So it's admirable for Obama and a telling criticism of Bush. Yep, Bush lives in a bubble. Ron Suskind, in the NY Times Magazine wrote a hit piece called "Without a Doubt". My observation at the time:

Suskind's whole article hangs on accusing President George Bush of "easy certainty" that comes from faith, which, for Suskind, must be irrational. Suskind's own "easy certainty" is that he can bank on convincing voters that Bush is driven by messianic fervor. Then Suskind won't have to look at the rational underpinnings that support Bush's positions on issues. Suskind's is a lazy argument.
I am embarrassed for the field of journalism, and tired of having to repeat it.

hit and run

Well the left tells us all the time that the highest form of patriotism is to have your dissent stifled.


Buford Gooch

So, Obama is now his own campaign manager? Why not just dispense with top staff and just go with Barrack and Michelle?


99%! Well, that's a relief. Now we know who is responsible for his late/lame response to all sorts of debacles - Wright, Ayers and Michelle.


You beat me to it , sbw.

Danube of Thought

Rick Moran at American Thinker:

"She is the biggest loose cannon in either campaign. She's got a chip on her shoulder the size of a redwood and an overweening sense of entitlement that makes her one of the more unattractive advocates for Barack Obama - despite the fact that she's his wife.

"Michelle Obama is a disaster waiting to happen. Unless Obama sends her on a very long cruise or tries hiding her in a closet until after the election, there is little doubt in most observer's minds that she will eventually, detonate a bomb or two that will require major damage control."


I, for one, am relieved to know that Brocko is not dependent on the advice of a bunch of experts.

Charlie (Colorado)

Okay, this guy is officially beginning to freak me out.


I, for one, am relieved to know that Brocko is not dependent on the advice of a bunch of experts.

To be honest, with some of the experts he has surrounding him, I'm happy to hear he isn't listening to them.


Right, ChuckCo, his hope and change is part and parcel with his Christianity and his new found patriotism. This is very old style autocrat. Devious and dangerous old style.

Paul Zrimsek

Really makes our prospective National Conversation on Race snap into perspective, doesn't it?


Really makes our prospective National Conversation on Race snap into perspective, doesn't it?

Would that be the one that ends with reparations?

I'm feeling more thankful for the 2nd ammendment all the time.

Charlie (Colorado)

Look, I really try not to fall for the usual cant (or Kant, but that's another story), but I'm beginning to suspect that the Obamas are telling us exactly what his program will be.


Consider: "Barack Obama will require you to work. He is going to demand that you shed your cynicism. That you put down your division. That you come out of your isolation. That you move out of your comfort zones. That you push yourselves to be better. And that you engage. Barack will never allow you to go back to your lives as usual; uninvolved, uninformed." ... as quoted on the previous thread.

Consider the demands for unity --- and the apparent insistence that we unify, not behind an idea, but behind a person. The constant theme that criticism is a "distraction" that isn't legitimate.

I think he's running for Caudillo.


Off topic, but some good news from Rasmussen:
"The survey also found that 37% of voters believe the federal government needs more tax revenue to fund important national programs such as highway repairs and health care reform. Forty-six percent (46%) disagree.

Democrats, by a 46% to 35% margin, say that new revenue is needed. Republicans, by a 59% to 27% margin, disagree. Among voters not affiliated with either major party, 34% believe more the government needs more revenue while 50% disagree.

Fifty-six percent (56%) of all voters are at least somewhat worried that the next President will raise taxes too much and harm the economy. That figure includes 77% of Republicans, 59% of unaffiliated voters, and 39% of Democrats."

So here is something McCain can run on. Start on the 60% of unaffiliated voters who are against raising taxes.

Charlie (Colorado)

Kim, honey: "Charlie". Thanks. "Chuck" is something that ups.

Soylent Red

By virtue of my current assignment I have been able to get some perspective on this general subject.

Historically, "visionary" leadership is rarely an indicator of success. Success occurs at the operational and tactical level by guys who effectively leverage individual and shared wisdom. Put another way, the guy at the top is rarely the guy who comes up with the best plan, it's the lower level guys, and then only when "groupthink" is avoided.

If Joint military can get on board with this idea, that means it's probably pretty conservative thinking that the rest of the world bought into 20 years ago.


Unless this is staffer hyperbole, Obamessiah is setting himself up for failure in two ways.

First, as the 99% voting share, the planning and idea chains become heavily dependent on His wisdom and experience. The fact that he would allow an organization to devolve into that points to a Messiah complex a mile wide.

More to the point, the system becomes self-selecting. Only those willing to work in an intellectual autocracy will work for the Prom King, and thus only those people who will be least likely to challenge the conventional wisdom will be available to cast the 1% vote. Therefore, whatever dissent there is rapidly dwindles down to an effective 0%.

It's not specifically an echo chamber, wherein many voices echo the one. It's really more of a selection process by which dissenting opinion simply dies on the vine.

The effect is a rapidly tightening decision loop, that institutionalizes bad decisions and false assumptions and builds on them at each new cycle. Think of it like a cognitive version of what pilots call a "Death Spiral".

If this WaPo piece is true, the Obamessiah/Bulldoggy axis will become incapable of making course corrections to the campaign, with the effect becoming exponential over time.

IOW, it's gonna get ugly for them and once it does, it's gonna get ugly fast.


How's ChunderCo?

Danube of Thought

You're being magnanimous, Charlie. "Chuck" is fightin' words for the Charlies I know. Along with Joe and Sam, Charlie is one of my favorite names. Plus Danube, of course.

Soylent Red


Charlie (Colorado)

ChazCo works for me.

I probably know more "Chuck" Charles's that "Charlie" Charles's (and there's my mother's favorite, "Charley") but I've an Uncle Chuck, so there's a disambiguating aspect here too.

Charlie (Colorado)

Soylent, I think you're on to something there, and would like to quote/riff off you in my blog. Along those lines, check my post on "the SNAFU Principle" back at Explorations. Hadn't really gotten around to talking/thinking about the OODA loop though.

Soylent Red

Riff on Chaz. My knucklehead meanderings are fully open source.


Okay, this guy is officially beginning to freak me out.

Man, only just now, Chip? I've preferred Hillary to him for a couple of months now.

Charlie (Colorado)

Man, only just now, Chip?

I make a distinction between "troubled" and "freaked out".


John Podhoretz has some sage advice for those of us certain that the voters will never elect such a far left candidate with no real resume and a cast of unsavory associates:
[quote] In 2004, John Kerry, the most liberal member of the Senate and nobody’s idea of a good candidate, received 59 million votes. He bettered Al Gore’s 2000 vote total by 17 percent. He only lost because George Bush generated 62 million votes, the greatest number in American history. Who received the second greatest number of votes in American history? John Kerry.

A left-liberal can win, and will win, unless he is defeated by his rival. Barack Obama will not defeat himself. He’s already too strong a candidate for that to be a possibility[/quote]

Rick Ballard

Hasn't the Chairman of the Politburo always had 99% of the vote?


As for the role his lame management style will play, this is not the WH, this is a campaign and to date he has figured out the rules and their weaknesses in his favor far better than his rivals.
McCain and the assclown RNC are his rivals in the general.
It ain't going to be a cakewalk beating him.

Soylent Red


Good stuff you wrote, and on track. I recommend to you the following:

"The Logic of Failure" - Dorner

"The Psychology of Intelligence Analysis" - Heuer

"Sources of Power" or "The Power of Intuition" - Klein

All of which are right on point with what we are talking about here, and what you were talking about with the SNAFU principle.


This is fiction. You think that a guy with absolutely no executive excperience, no experience running a national primary, and who can't operate effectively off script is calling all of the shots?

Charlie (Colorado)

Soylent, thanks.

Soylent Red

It ain't going to be a cakewalk beating him.

Not saying it will be Clarice. In fact I would argue that Hillarity would have been the easier candidate to whip up on.

Much harder to beat up on wonkish policy than on a Movement or a Dream

But as far as Obamessiah not beating himself, I disagree that it is improbable. I would put it at a 50% proposition.

McCain and the RNC are going to have to put some energy into Obamessiah's cycle, and at the right places (centers of gravity). But if the staffer can be believed, Obamessiah will have the same kind of meltdown all autocratic decision systems have when you put pressure on them.


Food for thought

The Audacity of What?



Brother, that is an awful small data set to be drawing giant conclusions about Obama's decision making style.


Soylent, I adore you adn hope beyond hope that you are right. I'm looking at a very weird Rep candidate and a party so stupid it funnelled money in the last election to Lincoln Chafee without even getting a single promise from him in return.


While I agree that Axelrod and the Chicago machine have waged a good fight against Hillary, it has effectively taken the nonpartisan, nonracial veneer off Obama. WSJ polling showed that Hillary won the experience criteria hands down, Obama obviously won the black vote by 85%, and Obama had trouble with white males, winning only 36% in NC. Several observers point out that 1) Obama is now a leftist candidate, with support dwindling as the voter spectrum moves right and that 36% of voters are undecided. How many more black voters and clueless college students can Obama penetrate? I think McCain has something to work with. He'll need it.

Soylent Red


I would never say I'm "right", particularly since, as Appalled aptly points out, it is a miniscule data set I'm making assessments on.

However, what I would say is that if Obamessiah is operating in this manner, it points to a structural flaw in his decision-making process that can be exploited to catastrophic effect.

I probably should have just said that in the first place.

JM Hanes

Axelrod is clearly the genius here. The only time Obama actually had to run a real campaign, he lost. His state election wins were a triumph of legal maneuvering, which might be worth some oppo research since he happens to be a lawyer, and he didn't even need a strategy to beat Alan Keyes.

The 99% here is pure PR. It's all about "looking Presidential" and projecting the same kind of leadership image Obama's trying to cultivate when he says (firmly!), "As CiC, I'll set the mission." He'll listen to his generals, but they'll do what he tells them to do. I have no doubt that Axelrod & Co. are listening to Obama. That's part of tailoring the campaign to the candidate, but I don't believe Obama came up with his campaign's stunningly successful caucus strategy, or any other strategy, for a second. Shifting tone is a tactic, and shifting back into optimistic gear is my idea of a no brainer.

I'm getting the creeps too, Charlie. Mostly because nobody is addressing the actual content of his speeches. He's not just promising to redistribute portions of the American pie dream and demonizing the engines of the American economy (We're the demons we've been talking about!). With the single exception of chatting up the enemy, the guy is a flagrant isolationist who is promising us the Great Wall of China in reverse. When is somebody going to ask him about Japan or India or Russia or Brazil or about somebody other than his grandmother in Africa?

McCain seems to have a pretty solid team in place at this point, but unfortunately, I'm afraid that the candidate himself is not smart enough, not adept enough and not idealogically consistent enough to effectively burst Obama's rhetorical bubble.


[OT] " I've an Uncle Chuck"

My sister didn't like to be called "Aunt Nancy" so her nieces and nephews always called her "Uncle Nancy." [/OT]


I'm all for piling on, but the window of the timeframe was "the next two weeks" and the issue at hand was strictly campaign related.

In such a case I'm all for the "screw it, we're doing this" approach.

Remember, Tom et al, the fun we had at the expense of Kerry's campaign management style? Committees, subcommittees, twenty-seven advisors for every issue ...

Danube of Thought

I think McCain just may be stupid enough to lose this thing. But any of the "smart" Republicans would have done worse.

The GOP has no one but itself to blame. When I get their phone calls these days, I respond with vituperation and billingsgate, to the point where the calls have begun to dwindle.

Maybe it's time to get that place up in Idaho, put up a satellite to catch the NFL, and load the place up with 180-grain boat-tails, Springfields, Weatherbees, Winchesters and Unertl scopes. Maybe a Claymore or two...


I can't help but think this is what happens when things come too easily for someone. Obama has been handed stuff his whole life so he somehow thinks that is a result of his great wisdom. He doesn't need any imput from the likes of advisers.

Part of me wants him to win so no other democrat will take office for decades after. But I think the price is too high to really wish for that.

Soylent Red

Well..whatever the case on his decision processes, one thing we can always hang our hat on is his inexperience.

See what he says himself about that here.


Well, a small ray of sunshine:Hill says she's staying in. I expect she's cream him in Puerto rico where she owns the terrorists; W Virginia etc.
I expect she's banking on him making a really fatal error or she has another shoe she has not yet dropped.


Drudge has it that the superdelegates are refusing to take the Clintons' phone calls. Think Hillary could get ballistic enough to morph back into the Goldwater Girl of her teens? There's a thought.

"Charlie". Thanks. "Chuck" is something that ups.
I have a good friend named Robert who points out that the problem with nicknames for guys is that they tend to be verbs.
Soylent Red

There's a thought.

**In best Emperor Palpatine voice**

"Yeeeeees. She would make a powerful ally."

/StarWars geekiness


**she'll cream him*****

Ralph L

I think TM has misinterpreted the comment about Obama's style:
The candidate and henchpeople hashed over the presidential campaign's history, looked at the upcoming primaries and decided....
I don't think it was a monologue thoughout. Per Lindak, he's just trying to look decisive and forestall the wimp label.

HOUSTON, May 5 -- The oil and gas industry will need to invest $50-100 trillion to rebuild its ageing infrastructure within the next 7 years and stave off a serious drop in oil and gas production, Matt Simmons, chairman of Simmons & Co. International, told OGJ May 5 at the Offshore Technology Conference in Houston.

In a worst-case scenario, Simmons said, oil and gas output could fall by 10-20% by 2013 if industry does not replace its rusting, corroded assets. Spare capacity also has run out because formerly cheap prices for oil and gas precluded upgrading and construction of new facilities.

So much for those "wind far profits".


Trauma can produce stange results.


Happy Birthday Sara!!

Clarice, I don't know if you saw this, but it made me think of you:

"And she looked tireless and energetic and full of vim and vigour in her – ill advised I felt – electric blue trouser-suit. It’s this amazing love of combat for its own sake that has won her so much grudging respect even from many Republicans.
However, just take a look at the speech and notice the lugubrious, white-haired, red-faced, scowling and bored figure standing so listlessly just behind her.
How can a campaign once renowned for slickness and spin have permitted such a horrid spectre at the feast?
And this dreary, resentful and shambolic person was once himself described as the country’s first black president. If his wife loses we shall know why."

LOL...Well I'm off to our undefeated Lacrosse team game. Everyone cross your fingers. :)


I did see it. Just once I wish Hitchens would say what he really means!


who is promising us the Great Wall of China in reverse.

Yeah, well, except the actual
wall with Mexico.


Does anybody have a sort of Red/Blue map of the Dim primary? It would be interesting to see where the candidates are winning, turnout, etc. I have a feeling what we are seeing here is the Urban area's deciding the Dim contender, with the outlying area's being rather disenfranchised. Could be some nasty surprises hidden in there come general election.


There are some book titles here somewhere:

Obama: "The Audacity of Audacity"

Hillary: "It takes a village of lazy thinkers to elect someone with audacity."

Will Durant: "The lessons of Not Learning History"

William Burroughs: "There's no such thing as a free lunch"


The team of Reagan/Carter so utterly discredited Liberalism and the Democrat Party in the 70s and 80s, that the party had to 're-brand.'

They began substituting the word Progressive for Liberal and the New Democrat faction was born of the Democratic Leadership Council. To this day Dems are still pretending to be Progressives and New Democrats.

It may be that the Republicans could now benefit from a similar re-branding. I would like to see some Repubs. apologize for behaving like liberal Democrats and pledge to return to the policies and values of the 80s, in a sort of GOP Renaissance.


I expect she's banking on him making a really fatal error or she has another shoe she has not yet dropped.
The people waiting for Hillary to bring out the real dirt on Obama are welcome to sit over here with the people waiting for Fred to campaign energetically.

I think he's running for Caudillo.
Odd complaint from a guy arguing the virtues of unlimited Latino immigration a few threads back.


I think he's running for Caudillo.

So, ... that's not what a codpiece covers?

troy mcclure

Some observations, was that a case of ballot stuffing or what; only surpassed by the 100% voter turnout in Urban Philadelpia.
Next point, when George McGovern gets in on your campaign; isn't that not just a 'jump
the shark' moment, but "Jump the GreatWhite"
Congratulations, they've recreated the McGovern coalition, that has hung around the
Democratic party's electoral hopes for a generation. Only white Southerners (Clinton & Carter)have gotten them out of their quarter century hiatus from the White House.
And as pointed out before, Obama doesn't have any of the working class signifiers. Hard to imagine any close analogue in Presidential history. Cleveland despite his
liberal social arrangements, was as blue chip a Wasp as you can get. Jackson, the farthest thing from. FDR for more similar
reasons. Now $4.50 a gallon, does concern the hell of out me, and that's really the trump card, that might tip the election toward Barry "The Sumatran" Candidate. That
and any shortselling of dollars by Soros and or Buffett.


Very funny,bgates. And probably right.

Charlie (Colorado)

Odd complaint from a guy arguing the virtues of unlimited Latino immigration a few threads back.

Dude, if you can't tell the difference between a "Caudillo" and the nice Mexican guy down the street, then you're... what's the phrase I'm looking for ...

ignorant? Nah, not strong enough.

Completely lacking in reading comprehension and the ability to grasp an argument?

Pretty close. Not quite it... ah, I know.

You're a fucking moron.

Kindly never ever respond to any comment I make again. You're not equipped.


Go Charlie. Macanudo, che.


Dude, if you can't tell the difference between a "Caudillo" and the nice Mexican guy down the street, then you're... what's the phrase I'm looking for ...

ignorant? Nah, not strong enough.

Jeez charlie.. I'm a ashamed to say i had to google the whole Caudillo thing..
You guys are borderline brilliant..never heard of Caudillo..but i think from my limited knowledge that this could refer to any nationality.. Would Hitler be considered to be a Caudillo in Germany? How about tojo in Japan? or Stalin in Russia?
I'm not sure but it sure is an interesting concept...Please explain more of this concept..
( We were in Denver Saturday on the way home when the mrs. hoopster ordered a beer at the airport..all they had was Coors beer..what's up with that charlie? Is this free market at work? Gawd..what a beautiful state you live in.)


Last time I suggested that importing huge numbers of people from a political culture prone to charismatic autocracy was a bad idea, you just ducked the argument. You haven't gotten more convincing. I'm sure we're all impressed by the profanity, though. You must be the hottest thing in the fourth grade.


Well there's a cause/effect thing -- would Mexico still be prone to charismatic autocracy if they didn't export a disproportionate number of their best people? Is importing a huge number of people so disgusted with charismatic autocracy that they left their homes and risked their lives to come here with nothing but what they could carry a good idea? Well, maybe it's good for us while bad for Mexico...


No, McCain is a charlatan. If he had a campaign team worthy of a warm bucket of spit, he would have found a way to raise decent money by now, instead of going around like a Buddhist Monk at Al Gore's house with a begging bowl.

And yes, Clarice is right, it is the Assclown RNC.

A close look at the amateurishness of the McCain team can be seen in the gas tax stunt. McCain shouldn't have come out for it. It was transparently political, and Obambi was able to come out looking like a sober, green eyeshade Eisenhower Republican in the bargain. Fortunately, Hillary took most of the flack.

I mean, I don't blame JMC for trying to make a silk purse out of a sow's ear, but let's face facts: this is the same Republican Party that was so wildly successful in 2006. As a result, the only guy who has a chance is the guy who's running as Not A Republican.

When you run your brand into the ground, you become only slightly more popular than the tobacco lobby. Out in the country, we're doing better-people like Crist, Arnold, Perry, and the incomparable Bobby Jindal will stand us in good stead in future. Unfortunately, we look to be fated to wander in the desert for the time being. There's that Assclown RNC and the McCain Campaign that's raised several *cough* tens of thousands of dollars....

Of course, the fact that the Obama Campaign is a Torchlight Parade past the Fuhrer's Balcony could actually turn people off. I mean, McCain could actually back in to the White House.

Then what the heck would we do?..

Rick Ballard

"Then what the heck would we do?.."

Watch the majority of Rep Senators who despise him thwart him at every turn? There really is a very good reason why he has never been entrusted with a leadership position within the party.


The WaPo piece is obviously an attempt to inflate the decision making abilities of BO. But for anyone who applies a modicum of rationality, the obvious question jumps off the page. What has the guy ever done/been in charge of? If he makes all the decisions then we are safe to assume he made all the decisions WRT Wright/Ayers/Rezko etc.

If he wins more than ten states I'll be flummoxed. McCain should be able to phone this one in. And I mean that (nearly) literally.

Someone (JMH?) made the point that McCain's lack of any ideological consistency could be problematic. I concur. He has blind spots galore and Axelrod/BO will attempt to exploit those. Hopefully JM will be prepared for this inevitability.



Does anybody have a sort of Red/Blue map of the Dim primary?

Hope this works

You can click on the states and get the state-level data. Barone did a good article back a few weeks ago calling the Hillary coalition "Jacksonian" (think over here Rick narrowed it down to Reagan Democrats).


Jesus Rick, a McCain Presidency would be no fun at all, as the long knives from the likes of Mitch McConnell, et al, started coming out while his good friend, Majority Leader Hillary Clinton, played tag team.

There are all sorts of nightmarish possibilities.

Chris-you are giving waaaaaaaaay too much credit to the McCain campaign. McCain is where he is because Mitt Romney ran an inept campaign, Rudy Giuliani couldn't find a plane ticket out of Florida, the Huckster connected with the Redneck Rampage Crowd, and, to be generous, Fred went back to sleep.

And you know how everyone just loved Fred.

McCain should be raking in the Big Buckaroo Banzais. He's not because the Pioneers aren't stupid. They know a loser when they see one. I mean, does anyone recall how much money Bush had at this point in 2000?

They're saving their money for Bobby Jindal.

McCain got better rations from the North Vietnamese!


"Out in the country, we're doing better-people like Crist, Arnold, Perry, and the incomparable Bobby Jindal will stand us in good stead in future."


JM Hanes


Don't look now, but per ABC News:

Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., raised $7 million for his campaign and the Republican National Committee Wednesday night at a fundraiser in New York City.
Not too bad for a one night stand.


Wow - $7 million - that's great.

Good Morning everyone! Let the games begin!


McCain is where he is because Mitt Romney ran an inept campaign

Romney was absolutely savaged for being a Mormon by the same press that thinks that Black Liberation theology is just peachy. Sans all that, I think Romney would be the nominee. The press wouldn't even COVER Thompson. I'd love to see him in a vice-presidential debate.


Thanks for the link, Rich.


I shudder the way you guys are promoting Hillary for McCain's Veep.


Romney could have been stronger on Iraq. He gave McCain an opening to sleaze him before Florida and in the California debate. But the media worked him over pretty well, that can't be denied. The tipping point might have been the Florida endorsements (Martinez, Crist.)


The Tax Trickery Spreads

It was bad enough when Senators Hillary Rodham Clinton and John McCain decided to engage in some petty pandering by calling for a suspension of the federal gas tax over the summer. What they suggested would reduce needed tax revenues and hamper efforts to combat global warming.

.. and here I thought we had a need for more energy, but obviously this is all about Global Warming prevention. No wonder Congress has been unable to generate any new oil .. instead concentrating on conservation and ethanol.

Gee .. it's great to know that the Church of the IPCC now runs the world economy.


Even Jay Leno jokes about Democrat delay of ANWAR.


I'm pretty sure Jay is not one of those reality based folks.

While he [Rather] was once a hot property coveted by CNN to be its "face," the fallout from his report on President Bush's Air National Guard service resulted in him being turned away from even part-time jobs at CNN, ABC, NBC, Fox, HBO, the History Channel, A&E, Discovery and National Geographic channels ...

... now we know why the unemployment rate is up a bit.


Nice link, Neo. It seems Rather also documents his own dishonor; he apparently agreed to shut up.

Charlie (Colorado)

bgates, I didn't duck it, you just didn't understand it. This is because you aspire to wit, but only made it halfway.

Hoosier, in answer to your question, nope, not the free market at all: the airport is owned byt he city, and the city sells concessions. With Denver city government, this has *no* relation whatsoever to a free market.


Now who's the Caudillo of the Laugh Room?


No, let's be clear. Good campaigns know how to handle media inquiries and smears on religion. If Romney was such a good candidate, he would have known how to handle McCain's obvious sludge on the war. Romney should have been able to handle the religion question early by sitting down with the liberal editors at the NYT and Time early on and inoculating himself.

But Gumby was NOT a good candidate, he was a PHONY with several hundred million dollars to play with. McCain was the better candidate who won by the default process of Romney's ineptitude and Thompson's sleeping habits. And that's not saying much.

BTW, I'm pleasantly surprised to see that JMC raised a boatload of cash, but I'm wondering where GW was at this point in time in 2000 and 2004. Ahead of McCain's numbers, I suspect.

Now, let's compare the real stakes: where is McCain relative to Obama-because that's what matters. Obama has the money to do several tens of millions of dollars in negative defining advertising beginning now. The ads against McCain are already in the can. You will start seeing them roll out in Ohio, Michigan, PA, NJ, FL, and other battlegrounds.


Romney may have been a lot of things, but I'm not sure Phony was one of them.

With that said, I think the only authentic candidates on the ballot were Thompson and Paul.

Patrick R. Sullivan

OT, (but I'm sure we're talking about an Obama voter), our old friend J. Bradford has provided an excellent example of what happens when you ban dissenting adults from your comments section; you become intellectual flabby and embarrassingly self-congratulatory

He admits to not knowing the facts, but he has no problem continually referring to the 'torture memo'.

Back in the day we wouldn't have let him get this out of shape.


So far, McCain has managed quite well with a fraction of the money the others ran thru. I agree it's going to be difficult to do this in the general but them's the facts.

Off topic--a little morning sherbet:


I have long felt that Obama is RFK reborn. Someone who promises rainbows and unicorns and harmony for all, and has a passionate following that think he is the savior. The difference is that RFK was killed before he had to actually govern, where his promised "Camelot 2" would have been a total failure, and history would have viewed him as a poor president. Obama may now complete that role, and on Day 1 in office, will have to face a lot of voters saying "OK, now unite us." It will not be pretty.


Support for Obama is a Cult-of-the-Leader thing and always has been. His supporters don't care much what his policies might be. They just "feel inspired" and we're expected to unite behind whatever they might be and not get "too bogged down in details". Just support him and his "call for change and unity." Whatever that change may be.

He wants to change America - that's what his campaign is based on - and they don't ask "into what", and dislike it when others question his authoritah by asking such questions. He calls for unity and they will give it to him and insist we do so as well.

Questioning it or disagreeing is "divisive".

The change we're being presented with is a bunch of rods being clamped together with an axe in the middle.

Rick Ballard

McCain Cash on Hand (3/30/08) $11,579,713
BHO COH (3/30/08) $51,073,999

Bush COH (3/30/00) $6,845,591.83
Gore COH (3/30/00) $3,802,537.10
Bush COH (3/30/04) $86,638,900.92
Kerry COH (3/30/04) $32,223,273.17

McCain has to compete in the same battleground states as Bush defended in '04. OH-FL are the key. I sure hope BHO dumps scads of dough into getting that puss in front of as many voters as possible. His jug ears, smarm and sanctimony need as wide an exposure as possible. "more charming than Kerry" isn't exactly a high hurdle.

Andrew Lale

I am usually the first to shy away from allusions to Nazis, Nazism or indeed WWII, but my first thought when I read this was how similar it was to Hitlers management style. One of the biggest things going for the allies was that Hitler would not listen to his high command- he overruled them constantly, and sacked the ones who disagreed with him too many times. He believed he was a military genius. Events proved that wrong.
If Obama is a political genius, he might just get away with this style of management, but its a big 'if'.



Given the disenfranchisement of the Florida vote, how do you think it stacks up for Obama in November? At this point we know McCain has Clarice's mother, so that's a start.


Napolean was a military and political genius, and he wound up imprisoned on an island. We can only Hope!!!


Aren't you all begging the question? Must we really assume that the quoted anonymous staffer was present at and accurately recounting how the highest-level talks between Obama and 1 to a very few aides went?

It would seem more likely to me that such a leak would come from the sort of mid-level or lower staffer who was at the second-level meeting. In these, it is normal for the meeting to be more of a talking-point dissemination and pep rally, and for there not to be any policy debate or input from the underlings. (Such as in the scene early in "The War Room" of a meeting at the Clinton headquarters in New Hampshire before the '92 primary.)

Rick Ballard


The overall demographics in FL favor McCain. The black bloc (15.4% against 12.4% national) is fairly dispersed, the two prog plantations, FL-3 and FL-19, don't carry near the heft of the CA, IL or NY plantations. Hispanics aren't going strongly for BHO and neither are the Jews (60% v 85-90% typical). The age of the electorate trends higher than average - contra BHO. The percentage of veterans and active duty military is higher than average - contra BHO.

FL is McCain's to lose - and he'd have to work pretty hard at it.

The Hammer

... but the President of the United States can't possibly be expected to know the answer to every question that will arise during his Administration.

Yes He Can!

If only he had changed his name from Barack Hussein Obama to something more American-sounding, something stronger and more inspiring, you all wouldn't be doubting him.

Something like ... Joe Steel.


Wait a minute, how about BHO change his name to....


....that would work.

BTW, the notion that BHO is going to spend 11 million dollars of his own cash paying off HRC's debt is laughable. The guy's as coldblooded as a Corleone. Better to let the Shebeast pay her own debts. He needs that money to define McCain as McBush.


Ah yes, "Barak the Decider"


Posted by: MikeS | May 07, 2008 at 07:08 PM

"They began substituting the word Progressive for Liberal and the New Democrat faction was born of the Democratic Leadership Council. To this day Dems are still pretending to be Progressives and New Democrats."

I think your messing up the history. The new dems really were new... and better / moderate IMO. The left wing of the party (not the DLC new dems) started the rebranding... and now have pushed out the moderate DLC / new dems aside.. and now we have a really left wing kook dem party.

But yeah, the republicans need to do something.. but they don't seem willing. They could have seen all this before the 06 elections and didn't choose to do anything. Same now.

The comments to this entry are closed.