Powered by TypePad

« Keep On Believing | Main | For What Kind Of Compliant Fools Does Obama Take The Press? »

July 28, 2008



Actually, Mickey Kaus has made a good argument that with a Dem Congress Obama is likely to sign into law the bill authorizing union shops on the basis of card checks instead of the longstanding law requiring secret ballot election.
There are other laws like this waiting in the hopper that he'd be hard pressed to veto, TM.

bio mom

Heard an interview this morning that opened my eyes to another aspect of the Obama campaign. David Axelrod has led the campaigns of Mayor John Street in Philly, Harold Washington, and Duval Patrick all using a subtle racial theme designed to make the white guy running against them seem like the bad guy against the good black guy. So much for all of Obama’s post-racial nonsense. He knows exactly what his campaign is doing. But the American muddle, as usual, is clueless and gullible.

bio mom

Obama down to +3 in rasmussen this morning.


Yeah, let's do what Bill Kristol says. He is one of a handful of people I hold responsible for the 2006 loss, so let's follow him off another cliff.


First identify a wrongdoer:

McCain Says Wall Street `Villain' in Subprime Crisis

``Wall Street is the villain in the things that happened in the subprime lending crisis and other areas where investigations and possible prosecution is going on,'' McCain said during a taped appearance on ABC's ``This Week'' program.

Wow. That's really good news, when you think about it. By identifying Wall Street as the "villain," doesn't McCain absolve Congress from any share in the blame--I mean, when there's a genuine villain on the loose, enablers and such like skate, right? How reassuring to know that we have a Congress we can trust. Or at least one that doesn't contain villains. Right?

And to confirm that a Prez McCain would know how to deal with Congress (from a little later in the article):

McCain said, if elected, he would support broad bipartisan negotiations with Democrats over the future of Social Security and other economic issues, with ``everything on the table.'' Asked if that includes payroll tax increases, which McCain opposes, he replied: ``There is nothing that's off the table.''

``I have my positions, and I'll articulate them,'' McCain said. ``I don't want tax increases.''

More good news. A principled Prez will sit down with the Congress that we can trust (no villians there!), they'll hash out their viewpoints and come up with a "broad bipartisan" package on Social Security that will be good for the country and good for everyone in it--except special interests, of course. This Prez and that kind of Congress wouldn't allow any of that kind of fiddle faddle. A clever, tough negotiator he'll be: nothing is off the table but ``I don't want tax increases.'' See. No way to roll this guy.

Bob Novak captures the depressing character of this campaign well, and adds some perspective: Can McCain Back in Again?

And it's not just McCain:

Clearly, Obama has not yet closed the deal with the people to accept a young, inexperienced African-American as their president. Obama had virtually clinched the nomination when white working men in Pennsylvania, Ohio and West Virginia poured out to vote and carried their states comfortably for Hillary Clinton. It was not because of unalterable affection for her.

Obama's difficulty in reaching the 50 percent mark reflects an overwhelmingly white undecided vote at 10 to 15 percent.

These were target voters for Obama when he ventured into the war zones to demonstrate his mettle as a future commander in chief. He looked good, sounded good and committed no serious gaffes. But sitting by the popular Gen. David Petraeus and disagreeing with his military judgment may not have been the way to win over undecided white working men.



Well, there are some differences as this WSJ piece shows:
"The profound failure of inner-city public schools to teach children may be the nation's greatest scandal. The differences between the two Presidential candidates on this could hardly be more stark. John McCain is calling for alternatives to the system; Barack Obama wants the kids to stay within that system. We think the facts support Senator McCain. "Parents ask only for schools that are safe, teachers who are competent and diplomas that open doors of opportunity," said Mr. McCain in remarks recently to the NAACP. "

And yesterday McCain said he opposed AA which O does not.


Yes, clarice, but you left out the punch line: Obama's not waiting for reform at the local public schools. Like all principled liberals with money he and la Michelle and their daughters have voted with their foots:

"A visitor to Mr. Obama's Web site finds plenty of information about his plans to fix public education in this country. Everyone knows this is a long, hard slog, but Mr. Obama and his wife aren't waiting. Their daughters attend the private University of Chicago Laboratory Schools, where annual tuition ranges from $15,528 for kindergarten to $20,445 for high school."



Perhaps Barry O doesn't know any history, because he does seem intent in a really weird way on repeating it. From Byron York today:

Just a few weeks ago, it seemed nobody could make a joke about Barack Obama. The New York Times published a front-page story declaring that “there has been little humor” about Obama because “there is no comedic ‘take’ on him, nothing easy to turn to for an easy laugh.” Television comedy writers fretted that audiences didn’t want to hear anything even slightly negative about the Democratic nominee. The political press corps went nuts over a satirical New Yorker cover that wasn’t even directed at Obama.

And this was about a man who made up his own pretend presidential seal and motto, Vero Possumus; a man who, upon securing the Democratic nomination, said, “I am absolutely certain that generations from now, we will be able to look back and tell our children that this was the moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow and our planet began to heal”; a man who has on a number of occasions seemed to forget that he is not, or at least not yet, the President of the United States, who has misstated the number of states in his own country, who has forgotten on which committees he serves in the U.S. Senate. Professional comedians — and their audiences — couldn’t find anything funny about any of that?

Doesn't this sound strangely like the old King Canute and the tides story? Except Canute was trying to make a serious point and maybe, just maybe, this guy believes himself.


I for one am heartened by Tom Coburn:

Democrats Try to Break Grip of the Senate’s Dr. No


Rick Ballard

Try Cuil as a search engine. I like the layout - and putting a bullet in Google's quivering corpus will be fun for months. GOOG should get to sit next to NYT A in the 'not a bargain bin' for a few years.

And attacking a Wall Street full of companies dumb enough to fill their boards with lefty academic idiots (such as CITI, for example) isn't a bad idea. McCain can always run against Congress on energy.


"McCain can always run against Congress on energy."

I'm holding my breath--please tell me "when" without delay.

"Wall Street ... companies dumb enough to fill their boards with lefty ... idiots"

Steve Sailer has something interesting to say about that, but you have to read down a way to get the real flavor of Crony Capitalism that a Prez Barry "Vere Possumus" O would bring to DC.


"But on the legislative front, the right ought to be braced for four long years whomever wins."

They will be a lot longer for conservatives if Obama wins, believe me.....

But hope springs eternal..as noted by bio mom above, Obama's lead is back down to 3, the photo op tour might not be so memorable...

"Following his speech in Berlin, Obama enjoyed two very strong nights of polling on Thursday and Friday. His lead grew to six-points for results released on Saturday (see recent daily results). However, polling on Saturday and Sunday showed the candidates much closer with single-day results similar to polling from before the Berlin speech.
- Rasmussen


If the Bradley effect holds +3 is actually -2 to 7.


Obama consistently polled better than actual results in the primaries. And as a reminder, pollster struggle to reach Republicans so that polls almost always understate Republican support as Jay Cost once showed in 2004 quite dramatically.


It's kinda funny, my thoughts when I saw that article title were similar to Kristol's - except that I thought it was a reference to Reggie Jackson.


Also these polls reflect big leads for Obama in populous states like NY and California...a close election is going to be decided in Ohio, Missouri, Iowa, Wisconsin as usual...in 2004 Kerry consistently led in Iowa and Wisconsin which ended up essentially tied, Bush winning Iowa and Kerry Wisconsin by a nose. My guess is that if these states are close by election day McCain will win them.

Daryl Herbert

An occasional compromise with Reid/Pelosi by McCain is nothing like the wholesale sellout that Obama would be. The man is spineless. As soon as Reid and Pelosi start telling him what to do, he will fall right into line.


Well, running against an unpopular Congress is not a bad idea, but...

McCain should run against the leadership, meaning Pelosi, Reid, AND Obama.
Those three agree that we shouldn't drill for our own oil, that the war was lost, that we need higher taxes.

I think, the idea that Obama is not part of the leadership of Congress is what's keeping him afloat.

I'd like to see an ad with Pelosi promising lower gas prices in 2006, then with Obama,Reid, and Pelosi saying "no way" to drilling. Then remind people that oil prices have more than tripled under their leadership.

Likewise, I'd like to see video of Obama, Reid, and Pelosi saying no to the Surge and yes to higher taxes.


Try Cuil as a search engine.

Dumb question alert: Is there a link to download it, or do you just have to bring it up as a bookmark?

Rick Ballard


Just bookmark Cuil. No download involved.

No lefty propaganda involved either.


Just type cuil.com and bookmark it.
It's graphically better but misses a great deal I'm sorry to say...



Clinton did the Gingrich/Dole ads (paid for with an illegal fundraising operation) which were pretty successful. The Clinton campaign didn't run them in the NYC or DC media markets so the MSM didn't bother reporting on them much. The McCain Campaign probably doesn't want to hurt Madam Pelosi's or Reid's feelings so they are not bothering with a Pelosi/Reid/Obama campaign.


The McCain Campaign probably doesn't want to hurt Madam Pelosi's or Reid's feelings...

That brought a tear to my eye!


I'd like a good alternative to google too, but cuil, at least for now, is downright bad.

The very first thing I searched for to test it, I got back: "We didn't find any results . . ." And then after I varied the search slightly, the results actually show pages that have the exact thing I looked for originally, when I was given the "We didn't find any results" message.

I hope they get cuil working a lot better and soon.


Likewise. cuil stinks. If they don't do better soon no one will go there twice.



That brought a tear to my eye!

Me too. I hope that McCain is allowing the Obama Campaign to just burn itself out by convention time, but I'm not so sure. McCain could at least be hammering away on some general election themes instead of letting voters know that the media is in the tank for Obama.

Take drilling for oil: He can make the jobs argument in MI, PA, OH (steel, autos, oil services, infrastructure). He can make the national security argument (ie not drilling here gives oil market power to firmstates like Ven., KSA, Russian, Iran which collaborate and destabalize their neighbors and making global terrorism worse).

Take housing: Hit housing pork, the pressure on the dollar because of US real estate weaknesss (which also makes oil and food more expensive), and the self-dealing of democrats (which brings to mind Rezko, Obama, and ACORN).


Still holding my breath--please, for God's sake, say "when" without delay.



Your lungs crave oxygen anduril, and it would be cruel to have hope that Team McCain will get its act together.


I think whether by design or not, his laying back in the weeds is working for him. And his call for federal law to end AA is a very popular position --one which O cannot pretend to endorse as he's done with others of McCain's positions that were more popular than ones O expressed in the primary period.


McCain could at least be hammering away ...

My expectations on McCain hammering anything are low. The guy seems much better at taking a punch than delivering one. I just hope that can be a winning strategery.

Would like to see a solid national defense group take on the serious risks for the middle east of another Carter-like disaster and get the kind of meida attention the SwiftVets did.


Running out--two bits of news--Bob Novak's been diagnosed with a brain tumor and has been hospitalized for treatment.

I was angry when O's prayer was published but today it's reported that he gave reporters copies of it before he left Jerusalem. PHEH I don't know what's worse--purloining someone's written prayer and making it public or having that person publicize it himself. UGGHHHH


Thanks, Rich. That feels much better.

boris, at least a Prez McCain wouldn't allow this deplorable situation to occur--after all, that's what this election is ultimately about for conservatives, right? The judges? I mean, we can trust him on that, just like we can trust his "I don't want taxes" non-pledge?



That is sad news about Novak. And utterly unsurprising about O's prayer.

glenda waggoner

The way I see it, if you release something to the press, it cannot be purloined. What a tool he has turned the press into!!

Why won't McCain go after Axelrod and others around "O" who are plainly lying and making up his experience from whole cloth?

And, doesn't the "O" realize he is being led from position to position by advisors who want the power of the presidency for themselves? Axelrod makes the magnificent B,Rove, seem Washingtonian.

Charlie (Colorado)

I mean, we can trust him on that, just like we can trust his "I don't want taxes" non-pledge?

Of the two choices, which do you trust less?


And his call for federal law to end AA is a very popular position --

This is an issue that really resonates with college kids and their parents. Free money based on ethnicity regardless of financial need is hacking off some folks.


Look at it this way--Barry "Vere Possumus" O will never betray me. That's both the good news AND the bad news. There's no issue I trust him on because there's no issue I agree with him on. As far as I'm concerned he's totally predictable (good) but also totally wrong (bad).

On the other hand, how far should I trust McCain? On most issues I care about I can't say I would ever trust him. He might blunder into the right policy just because he's somewhat unpredictable, but as far as I've ever been able to predict him I've (mostly) been disappointed. As far as I'm concerned, he's probably a tougher choice than Papa Bush.


The thing about his position on AA is that it may well up the white turnout--He already has the majority of white voters--esp the men--but so far support for him is somewhat lukewarm..this is a get them off the barcalounger and into the precincts issue.

Charlie (Colorado)

So, Anduril, you're saying that you know Obama will be uniformly wrong, and you think McCain will or may sometimes be right.

I don't think I'm seeing the problem here.


He's holding his knees together until Prince Charming comes along, Charlie. (wink--just teasing Anduril).


USA Today has McCain up by 4, I guess the bounced faded fast.....


ACRI has gotten an inititive on the ballot in Colorado too, so McCain's support of the one in his home state should help there. I imagine the Democrats think he's handing them the Latino vote.


Charlie, the problem is your "may." Yes, I can imagine McCain being right sometimes, but on the other hand I can also imagine him being wrong on every single issue that matters to me. Bummer. I understand all about choosing the lesser of two evils and so forth, but some of those issues are big ones.

Take two that we can probably agree on: more drilling and the current "housing" bill that McCain says he supports. I don't trust him on energy issues--and those are important to the nation and hit me in the pocket book. And the current "housing" bill looks to me to be setting up the next scandal, maybe even the next bubble--it's business as usual in the midst of an ugly situation that should be causing the legislative branch to do some real introspecting. McCain says he supports that bill. 'Nuther bummer.

Am I supposed to be jumping for joy at the opportunity to vote for that? And of course there's more.

For those of us for whom the current election isn't enough to worry about, the thought of what state the GOP could be in after 4 years of Prez McCain is another sobering consideration. I'm saying there's no good choice in this election--there's a real downside to having to pick the less untrustworthy guy: he's still a huge risk.

I see a problem there.


He already has the majority of white voters--esp the men--but so far support for him is somewhat lukewarm.

The more the press tries to ram Obama down our throats, the more resistance you'll see from the voting blocks he is already in trouble with. He has pretty much lost the military/vet vote, the white male vote, and I have a feeling the over 45 or 50 vote. We might not feel much passion for McCain, but BHO reminds us of everything we don't want or that we feel is just out and out wrong.

For me, O's arrogance and refusal to ever admit he isn't the perfect one drives me crazy. I think he is a liar, a typical manipulator, someone with no historical perspective and certainly no values that I would call American core principles.

I could give a rat's a$$ whether Europe or anywhere else likes us. America has done quite well for itself and, frankly, Obama going over to Germany and apologizing for us being who we are is offensive to the extreme. Obama is nothing but a spoiled little brat who has gotten everyone around him to go to great lengths to keep him happy and mollified so that he doesn't take a temper tantrum. He is not a nice person and some of the ways he deals with those he feels are trying to obstruct him in his quest is vicious. Here in the blogosphere, we are so used to vicious lefties, he seems mild, but not so much to those who lead more normal lives.


Charlie, the one thing that might get me to positively look forward to a McCain presidency is the thought of the Democratic recriminations. That'd be fun for a while.

And in fairness (!) to McCain, he wouldn't be such a problem if the GOP legislators hadn't made such a hash of their majority position.



"Am I supposed to be jumping for joy at the opportunity to vote for that?"

No, you're just supposed to reach for the lever. I'd just like to know, are you a conservative first, or an American first? It makes a difference because McCain is simply a maverick who tries to do what's best for the country and you may not always agree, but Obama can do real harm to America.

Look, Obama hasn't a clue what the consequences of a strategic defeat might be--he doesn't have the capability to think things through. And that is f-in' dangerous!


And here I thought I just gave two reasonable examples of how McCain could help do real harm to America. And others could be given, too.



Bubbles come and go. As do illegal immigrants. There are consequences to any domestic policy but the fact remains that fixing things we previously broke always breaks them in different ways which require further fixing. I don't hold any illusions about the perfect way to legislate anything. We just deal with it, whatever comes.

National security is another matter entirely, mistakes can be deadly not merely uncomfortable.

That's my bottom line.


McCain is an American Republican first and therefore both liberals and conservatives can't stand him.


And yet there are those who think that the way we handle illegal immigration is a national security issue, too. And that McCain's preferences in that regard are a national security problem.

The comments to this entry are closed.