Friday, July 31, 2009

More on the Birthers

Mark Joseph has a post up on the Huffington Post (of all places) about the Obama birth certificate controversy which actually makes a great deal of sense:

The only thing weirder than the Birthers are the anti-Birthers, who blame the Birthers for being conspiracy theorists yet actively feed the conspiracy by refusing to call for President Obama to release his birth certificate.

The state official in Hawaii who manages such things has reiterated that there is indeed an original birth certificate on file which would confirm President Obama's having been born in Hawaii and that she has seen it, but state law won't allow her to release it unless the president authorizes it.

So what's the problem here? Release the original and let's be done with this madness.

I realize there are some faith-based Obama supporters who believe without seeing, but the rest of us in the reality-based world are starting to get that strange feeling we got when Mark Sanford tried to convince us that he was away from his family on Father's Day, hiking the Appalachian trail in order to clear his head and write a book.

During the last campaign, John McCain faced similar questions and promptly responded by releasing his original birth certificate. That's how normal people with nothing to hide handle these things.

Most American's aren't Birthers or anti-Birthers, but we are beginning to wonder why the president doesn't put this one to rest once and for all. Every day he allows this circus to continue is another day that he behaves less like the President of the United States facing weird accusations from fringe groups and more like a strange politician flying to Argentina to visit his soul-mate while pretending to be hiking the Appalachians.

As I said, a great deal of sense.

When the issue of Obama's birth certificate first came up there was some speculation that the real birth certificate might have listed Muslim as baby Bamma's religion. However Hawaii does not include a box for "religion" on their birth certificates so it must be something else that the little tin messiah is trying to hide.

What could it be? If we assume that the state official who says that she has seen the actual birth certificate and that it does say that Obama was born in Hawaii is telling the truth then why won't Obama make the "Birthers" look like a pack of barking mad wingnuts by authorizing the release of the document?

What information is included on Hawaii's long form birth certificate which Obama might not want the American people to see? I doubt that the name of the attending physician is something that Obama is desperate to keep secret and we already know the name of his mother.

Could it be that the birth certificate lists another name for "father" besides Barack Obama Sr.?

Could Obama be trying to hid the fact that he is not the son of a noble African Marxist but is just the accidental by-product of a drunken one-night-stand with some black guy his mom met in a bar?

I'm not saying that is what Obama is hiding, but what other kind of information could be listed on his birth certificate that he would be trying to cover up?

Thursday, July 30, 2009

To ask is to answer

In today's Front Page Magazine is an article by Otto J Reich in which he discusses the situation in Honduras and the actions of the US regime in response to it. Toward the end of the article he asks this question:

Is the Obama administration prepared to accept the consequences of returning an
undemocratic, corrupt, and anti-American, even if elected, strongman to power in
Honduras? That would put the United States clearly in the same camp as Cuba's
Castro brothers, Venezuela's Chavez, and other regional delinquents.

The answer, of course, is yes.

The fact is that B. Hussein Obama is himself an undemocratic, corrupt and anti-American, even if elected, strongman.

As far as putting the US into the same camp as Castro, Chavez and other Marxists like Ortega goes this is exactly where Obama wants to be.

Israel alone

John Bolton explains the problems facing Israel in regard to Iran's nuclear program:

Legions of senior American officials have descended on Jerusalem recently, but the most important of them has been Defense Secretary Robert Gates. His central objective was to dissuade Israel from carrying out military strikes against Iran’s nuclear weapons facilities. Under the guise of counseling “patience,” Mr. Gates again conveyed President Barack Obama’s emphatic thumbs down on military force.

The public outcome of Mr. Gates’s visit appeared polite but inconclusive. Yet Iran’s progress with nuclear weapons and air defenses means Israel’s military option is declining over time. It will have to make a decision soon, and it will be no surprise if Israel strikes by year’s end. Israel’s choice could determine whether Iran obtains nuclear weapons in the foreseeable future.

Mr. Obama’s approach to Tehran has been his “open hand,” yet his gesture has not only been ignored by Iran but deemed irrelevant as the country looks inward to resolve the aftermath of its fraudulent election. The hardliner “winner” of that election, President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, was recently forced to fire a deputy who once said something vaguely soothing about Israel. Clearly, negotiations with the White House are not exactly topping the Iranian agenda.

Beyond that, Mr. Obama’s negotiation strategy faces insuperable time pressure. French President Nicolas Sarkozy proclaimed that Iran must re-start negotiations with the West by September’s G-20 summit. But this means little when, with each passing day, Iran’s nuclear and ballistic missile laboratories, production facilities and military bases are all churning. Israel is focused on these facts, not the illusion of “tough” diplomacy.

Israel rejects another feature of Mr. Obama’s diplomatic stance. The Israelis do not believe that progress with the Palestinians will facilitate a deal on Iran’s nuclear weapons program. Though Mr. Gates and others have pressed this fanciful analysis, Israel will not be moved.

Worse, Mr. Obama has no new strategic thinking on Iran. He vaguely promises to offer the country the carrot of diplomacy—followed by an empty threat of sanctions down the road if Iran does not comply with the U.S.’s requests. This is precisely the European Union’s approach, which has failed for over six years.

There’s no reason Iran would suddenly now bow to Mr. Obama’s diplomatic efforts, especially after its embarrassing election in June. So with diplomacy out the door, how will Iran be tamed?

Mr. Gates’ mission had extraordinary significance. Israel sees the political and military landscape in a very inauspicious light. It also worries that, once ensnared in negotiations, the Obama administration will find it very hard to extricate itself. The Israelis are probably right. To prove the success of his “open hand,” Mr. Obama will declare victory for “diplomacy” even if it means little to no gains on Iran’s nuclear program.

Under the worst-case scenario, Iran will continue improving its nuclear facilities and Mr. Obama will become the first U.S. president to tie the issue of Israel’s nuclear capabilities into negotiations about Iran’s.

Israel understands that Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s recent commitment to extend the U.S. “defense umbrella” to Israel is not a guarantee of nuclear retaliation, and that it is wholly insufficient to deter Iran from obliterating Israel if it so decides. In fact, Mrs. Clinton’s comment tacitly concedes that Iran will acquire nuclear weapons, exactly the wrong message. Since Israel, like the U.S., is well aware its missile defense system is imperfect, whatever Mr. Gates said about the “defense umbrella” will be politely ignored.

Relations between the U.S. and Israel are more strained now than at any time since the 1956 Suez Canal crisis. Mr. Gates’s message for Israel not to act on Iran, and the U.S. pressure he brought to bear, highlight the weight of Israel’s lonely burden.

Striking Iran’s nuclear program will not be precipitous or poorly thought out. Israel’s attack, if it happens, will have followed enormously difficult deliberation over terrible imponderables, and years of patiently waiting on innumerable failed diplomatic efforts. Absent Israeli action, prepare for a nuclear Iran.

It is deeply saddening that one of the key problems facing Israel it the American presidential administration.

Israel's problem is that it needs help from the outside to survive and the United States is the only nation on earth which has been willing to provide that assistance. Other nations are either too poor, too dependant on Muslim oil or too antisemitic to take Israel as an ally and subsidize its defense.

Now that the US is in the grip of a regime which is as mired in Jew hatred as any in Old Europe (unless you really believe that Obama could sit in Jeremiah Wright's "church" for 20 years and not figure out that the old bastard hated Jews as much as he hated the United States) it seems that Israel must stand alone.

I wonder if now America's Jewish population will wake up and realize how out of place they are in the Democrat party.

Of course it is very possible that God has decided to stop using the USA as a shield to protect Israel and is intending to start doing the job personally. If this is the case then I pity Israel's enemies.

Wednesday, July 29, 2009

Miss Ann is talking

That means that YOU are listening!

You could not ask for a more perfect illustration of the thesis of my latest book, "Guilty: Liberal Victims and Their Assault on America," than the black president of the United States attacking a powerless white cop for arresting a black Harvard professor -- in a city with a black mayor and a state with a black governor -- as the professor vacations in Martha's Vineyard.

In modern America, the alleged "victim" is always really the aggressor, and the alleged "aggressor" is always the true victim.

President Barack Obama planted the question during a health care press conference, hoping he could satisfy the Chicago Sun-Times, which has been accusing him of not being black enough. He somehow imagined that the rest of the country might not notice the president of the United States gratuitously attacking a cop in a case of alleged "racial profiling."


Suddenly, with the glare of the national spotlight being turned on a small local story, it became clear that there was no "racial profiling" involved -- other than by the black Harvard professor, who lorded his credentials and connections over a white working-class cop.

We wouldn't have known about this case at all if the professor, Henry Louis Gates Jr., hadn't blast e-mailed the universe that he was harassed by racist cops. Gates thought it would be a feather in his cap, not realizing there are huge areas of the country where people don't think it's heroic to browbeat cops checking on you after you break into your own house, such as 99 percent of the country outside of Cambridge.

Contrary to liberals' ardent desire, Sgt. James Crowley was not on tape saying, "I know it's his house, but let's stick it to this uppity negro." (Curiously, the tape of Gates' call demanding to talk to the chief of police to "report" Crowley has been withheld. Some watchdog group has got to demand that tape.)

But what if Crowley hadn't been a model policeman who taught diversity classes and once famously gave mouth-to-mouth resuscitation to a black athlete?

What if the 911 caller had identified the suspected burglars as black, which it turns out she did not?

What if Crowley hadn't been fully supported by other cops at the scene, one Hispanic and one black? (Liberals will say cops stick together, but I say liberals stick together.)

What if, at some point in his life, Crowley had been accused -- falsely or not -- of racism?

His life would be ruined.

Desperate to blame the cop, despite the facts, some liberals have begun making up their own facts. Radio talker Opio Sokoni claimed Crowley told Gates to "shut up" and "I'm going to win, you're going to jail." Even Gates doesn't claim the cop said that.

On MSNBC's "Hardball," Chris Matthews said that Gates did not say, "I'll speak with your mama outside," as stated in the police report.

"He didn't say this," Matthews asserted as fact. This invented fact allowed Matthews to accuse the cop of engaging in "projection" and to conjure Crowley's psychological state, saying, this is "what a white guy thought a black guy would say."

Eugene Robinson endorsed Matthews' invented fact, saying: "I cannot imagine in this universe Skip Gates saying, 'I'll speak with your mama outside.'" As proof, Robinson explained that Gates "rolls with kings and queens and Nobel Prize winners." (I'm not "projecting" what I think a black man would say; he really said that.)

And then they both had a laugh about the cop applying racist stereotypes to such an esteemed figure as Professor Gates, who apparently would NEVER use the phrase "your mama."

First, unlike these aesthetes, I don't consider "your mama" such an implausible expression for someone to use.

Second, Sgt. Crowley wrote his police report, including the "your mama" line, long before he, or anyone else, could have imagined the arrest was going to become nationwide, front-page news.

Third, there's a video of Gates using the N-word all over the Internet, and in that short, three-minute video, Gates uses the phrase "your mama."

The only contrary evidence is that Gates recently denied that he told the cop he'd "speak with your mama outside." He also desperately wants to drop the subject.

The left's last-ditch attempt to defend a powerful black man's attack on a powerless white man is to say the arrest was improper. In Time magazine, Lawrence O'Donnell factually announced, "Yelling does not meet the definition of disorderly conduct in Massachusetts."

You can argue the facts in court, but there's no question that the police report described the misdemeanor offense of "disorderly conduct" under Massachusetts law, which includes engaging in "tumultuous behavior" in "any neighborhood," thereby causing public "inconvenience, annoyance or alarm."

As everyone who's read the police report knows, Gates is described as going on an extended tirade against the officer, calling him a racist, saying the officer didn't know who he was messing with, acting irrationally, following the officer outside to continue haranguing him, and engaging in "tumultuous behavior" in and outside his house, drawing a small crowd of alarmed onlookers and police.

Suppose a cop didn't arrest a guy who was ranting and raving -- in his own home -- and, an hour later, the hothead assaults someone. Policeman: I was as surprised as anyone that he shot his girlfriend! Every liberal in the country would demand the cop's head.

And by the way, try screaming at a judge that he's a racist and see what happens. Why should police officers deserve less protection than judges? They're in more danger.

The disorderly conduct charge was not dropped because it wasn't a good arrest. It was dropped, according to Gates' own lawyer, because of Gates' connections.

Before liberals declare that this a case of racial profiling and move on, how about liberals produce one provable example of racial profiling that isn't a hoax?

Giving credit where credit is due the best answer to this was found on The Daily Show:

The Daily Show With Jon StewartMon - Thurs 11p / 10c
Henry Louis-Gate - Race Card
Daily Show
Full Episodes
Political HumorJoke of the Day

With Iowahawk coming in a close second.

H/T to KisP.

The least of our worries

Thomas Sowell on the disastrous consequences of electing a know-nothing, done-nothing, narcissistic Marxist armature twit to the White House:

After many a disappointment with someone, and especially after a disaster, we may be able to look back at numerous clues that should have warned us that the person we trusted did not deserve our trust.

When that person is the president of the United States, the potential for disaster is virtually unlimited.

Many people are rightly worried about what this administration’s reckless spending will do to the economy in our time and to our children and grandchildren, to whom a staggering national debt will be passed on. But if the worst that Barack Obama does is ruin the economy, I will breathe a sigh of relief.

He is heading this country toward disaster on many fronts, including a nuclear Iran, which has every prospect of being an irretrievable disaster of almost unimaginable magnitude. We cannot put that genie back in the bottle — and neither can generations yet unborn. They may yet curse us all for leaving them hostages to nuclear terror.

Conceivably, Israel can spare us that fate by taking out the Iranian nuclear facilities, instead of relying on Obama’s ability to talk the Iranians out of going nuclear.

What the Israelis cannot spare us, however, are our own internal problems, of which the current flap over President Obama’s injecting himself into a local police issue is just a small sign of a very big danger.

Nothing has torn more countries apart from inside than racial and ethnic polarization. Just this year, a decades-long civil war, filled with unspeakable atrocities, has finally ended in Sri Lanka. The painful irony is that, when the former British colony became an independent nation in 1948, its people were considered to be a shining example for the world of good relations between a majority (the Sinhalese) and a minority (the Tamils). That all changed when politicians decided to “solve” the “problem” that the Tamil minority was much more economically successful than the Sinhalese majority. Group identity politics led to group preferences and quotas that escalated into polarization, mob violence, and ultimately civil war.

Group identity politics has poisoned many other countries, including at various times Kenya, Czechoslovakia, Fiji, Guyana, Canada, Nigeria, India, and Rwanda. In some countries the polarization has gone as far as mass expulsions or civil war.

The desire of many Americans for a “post-racial” society is well-founded, though the belief that Barack Obama would move in that direction was extremely ill-advised, given the history of his actions and associations.

This is a president on a mission to remake American society in every aspect, by whatever means are necessary and available. That requires taking all kinds of decisions out of the hands of ordinary Americans and transferring them to Washington elites — and ultimately the number one elite, Barack Obama himself.

Like so many before him who have ruined countries around the world, Obama has a greatly inflated idea of his own capabilities and of what can be accomplished by rhetoric or even by political power. Often this has been accompanied by an ignorance of history, including the history of how many people before him have tried similar things with disastrous results.

During a recent TV interview, when President Obama was asked about the prospects of victory in Afghanistan, he replied that it would not be victory like in World War II, with “Hirohito coming down and signing a surrender to MacArthur.” In reality, it was not Emperor Hirohito who surrendered on the battleship Missouri. American troops were already occupying Japan before Hirohito met Gen. Douglas MacArthur for the first time.

This is not the first betrayal of his ignorance by Obama, nor the first overlooked by the media. Moreover, ignorance by itself is not nearly as bad as charging full steam ahead, pretending to know. Barack Obama is doing that on a lot of issues, not just history or a local police incident in Massachusetts.

While the mainstream media in America will never call him on this, these repeated demonstrations of his amateurism and immaturity will not go unnoticed by this country’s enemies around the world. And it is the American people who will pay the price.

Our enemies are already noticing. This is why little Kim in North Korea is celebrating our national holidays by test firing the kind of ballistic missiles into which he can mount his brand new nuclear warheads.

This is why the insane mullahs in Iran and their even more insane handpuppet Ahmadinejad are counting down the seconds till they can turn Tel Aviv into a sea of molten glass. They know that not only won't Obama lift a finger to stop their nuclear weapons program but that he will also actively prevent Israel from doing anything to stop them either.

It is a terrifying commentary on the little tin messiah's administration that the least disastrous thing he is likely to do to the nation is to bring about economic ruin.

But then what else can you expect when you elect a Marxist Chicago street thug to run the nation?

Why not, it got him elected?

From The Washington Times:

Facing the first real rough patch of his presidency, President Obama and his supporters are once again resorting to a tried-and-true tactic: attacking George W. Bush and Dick Cheney.

In his White House press conference last week, Mr. Obama referred to the Bush era at least nine times, three times lamenting that he "inherited" a $1.3 trillion debt that has set back his administration's efforts to fix the economy.

With the former president lying low in Dallas, largely focused on crafting his memoirs, Mr. Obama has increasingly attempted to exploit Mr. Bush when discussing the weak economy, the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and the difficulty closing the military prison at U.S. Naval Base Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.

As he took power, Mr. Obama promised a "new era of responsibility" that would transcend partisan politics.

"For a guy who campaigned on taking responsibility and looking forward, he spends an awful lot of time pointing fingers and looking backward," said former Bush deputy press secretary Tony Fratto, who has begun defending the previous administration.

The problem with Obama's "poor pitiful me - look what I inherited" line is that the bulk of Bush's trillion dollar deficit is due to the massive spending in the closing days of the Bush presidency which Barack Obama supported and voted for as a Senator.

Since taking office Obama has increased the "Bush debt" by several orders of magnitude and is attempting to increase it even more.

Mr. Obama, if George W Bush spent too much money then wouldn't the answer be to spend less not more?

As for the wars. Iraq - we won and now we are withdrawing on the schedule that the Bush administration worked out with the Iraqi government. Afghanistan - during the campaign you said that was the "real war", the only one we should have been fighting all along and that if we made you president you would focus on Afghanistan and win the war that mattered.

Well you're the president so show us what you got. . .

And as for the "difficulty closing the military prison at U.S. Naval Base Guantanamo Bay" perhaps you are finding it "difficult" because you now are beginning to realize that president Bush was right to create a place under US control but off US soil where these filthy subhuman savages could be warehoused.

So all this pissing and moaning about "difficulty" in closing Gitmo is just you thrashing around in your incompetent empty-headed way trying to avoid admitting that you were wrong and Bu$Hitler was right.

The job of President of the United States calls for a person of integrity, intelligence and experience. Barack Hussein Obama is nothing but a Marxist gutter street agitator whose only real skill is taking a disorganized rabble of worthless parasitic ghetto trash and training them (like Orwell's sheep) to bleat in unison for more handouts and bigger government.

Putting a creature such as this in the Oval office and backing him up with a congress run by the sorry likes of Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid can have no other conceivable result than the mess we find ourselves in now.

Monday, July 27, 2009

A conservative alternative

One of the bogus arguments that leftists use against conservatives who oppose the president's Marxist health care takeover is that we don't have any plan of our own. That we're just being critical with nothing constructive to bring to the debate.

The reason that this is a bogus argument is that you don't need an alternate plan of your own in order to point out that someone's proposed solution to a problem will only make things worse, not better.

After all if someone is claiming that drinking a quart of chlorine bleach will cure inoperable lung cancer one does not need to have a cancer cure of his own in order to point out that downing a bottle of Clorox will not make anyone better, it will only kill them quicker.

However since conservatism does offer actual solutions to problems here are some common sense market-based actions which will begin to reduce health care costs in this country.

1. Meaningful tort reform. Things like loser pays and capping the amount of punitive damage awards will bring down the exorbitant premiums doctors are forced to pay for malpractice insurance and put a stop to much of the "defensive testing" which adds as much as 15% to health care costs.

2. Medical Savings Accounts. This reintroduces market forces back into the health care equation and encourages patients to make wise choices about how and when they seek medical care. By letting the account holder keep the unspent portion of the MSA at the end of the year running to the doctor for every hangnail or sniffle is discouraged.

3. Free insurance companies from regulatory mandates to provide expensive additions to basic health insurance policies. For example many states require insurance companies to include coverage for services like acupuncture and marriage counseling in all policies they write. This is done in order to spread the cost of those "boutique" items out over the entire population of insurance buyers but it jacks up the price of policies to the point where many find them difficult to afford.

Let insurance companies write bare bones policies which cover serious injuries and serious illnesses only and you will see a great many people who currently choose not to purchase insurance enter the market. A policy which covers only catastrophic events would be much more affordable than one which must also cover visits to herbalists and past life regression counselors.

By removing the dead hand of government and the greedy hand of the trial lawyers from our health care system we will bring about significant reductions in cost. I suggest we do this and then step back and wait a decade and then reevaluate the situation. If something more is needed then we can work on it then.

Some good news

The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Monday shows that 30% of the nation's voters now Strongly Approve of the way that Barack Obama is performing his role as President. Forty percent (40%) Strongly Disapprove giving Obama a Presidential Approval Index rating of -10. Yesterday and today are the only time that Obama's Approval Index ratings have fallen to double digits in negative territory (see trends).

Fifty-six percent (56%) of Democrats Strongly Approve of his performance while 72% of Republicans Strongly Disapprove. See other recent demographic highlights.

The Presidential Approval Index is calculated by subtracting the number who Strongly Disapprove from the number who Strongly Approve. It is updated daily at 9:30 a.m. Eastern (sign up for free daily e-mail update). Updates also available on Twitter.

Obama is now seen as politically liberal by 76%. That's up six points from a month ago, 11 points since he was elected, and the highest total to date. Forty-eight percent (48%) now see him as Very Liberal, up 20 points since he was elected (Premium Members can see trends and crosstabs).

The President received generally poor grades for his response to a question about a Cambridge police incident involving a black Harvard professor. However, the results show a huge divide between black Americans and white Americans on all questions.

Overall, 49% of voters say they at least somewhat approve of the President's performance. Fifty percent (50%) disapprove. It is important to remember that the Rasmussen Reports job approval ratings are based upon a sample of likely voters. Some other firms base their approval ratings on samples of all adults. President Obama's numbers are always several points higher in a poll of adults rather than likely voters. That's because some of the President's most enthusiastic supporters, such as young adults, are less likely to turn out to vote.

I have been genuinely afraid that the public was going to be so desperate to prove that they were "post racial" that they were just going to stick their fingers in their ears and hum "hope and change" real loud whenever any bad news came along.

It seems that the public is willing to change their minds about the little tin messiah when he fails to deliver the prosperity that he promised.

In another positive bit of news from Rasmussen it seems that Obama isn't doing well in 2012 matchups:

If the 2012 presidential election were held today, President Obama and possible Republican nominee Mitt Romney would be all tied up at 45% each, according to a new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey.

The president, seeking a second four-year term, beats another potential GOP rival, Alaska Governor Sarah Palin, by six points – 48% to 42%.

Romney gets an edge right now because he is the one who came closest to beating McCain out for the Republican nomination. This makes him "the one who got away" in some minds.

And in even more positive news:

The health care reform legislation working its way through Congress has lost support over the past month. The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey shows that 44% of U.S. voters are at least somewhat in favor of the reform effort while 53% are at least somewhat opposed.

Today’s 44% level of support is down from 46% two weeks ago, and 50% in late June.

Opposition has grown from 45% in late June to 49% two weeks ago and 53% today.

As in earlier surveys, those with strong opinions are more likely to oppose the plan rather than support it. The current numbers: 24% strongly favor and 37% strongly oppose.

And finally:

Support for Republican congressional candidates has reached its highest level in over two years as the GOP lengthens its lead over Democrats in the latest edition of the Generic Ballot.

A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey shows that 42% would vote for their district’s Republican congressional candidate while 38% would opt for the Democratic candidate.

Add to this that fact that far more Americans consider themselves to be conservative than liberal and it would seem that a Republican party which can successfully define itself as the nation's stalwart defenders against the radical attacks of Barack Obama and his ultra-left-wing congressional supporters like Nancy Pelosi (San Fran Nan) is well positioned to retake the House in 2010.

Saturday, July 18, 2009

Saying goodby to a dream

I remember this from the National Lampoon. It may be in bad taste but it sure as hell gets the point across.

40 Years Ago Today

40th anniversary of Mary Jo Kopechne’s drowning at Chappaquiddick...Kennedy's story still doubtful

Sometime around midnight, on July 18, 1969 Kennedy drove his Oldsmobile 88 off of a small bridge on Chappaquiddick island, into eight feet of chilly water. The vehicle landed upside-down. While Kennedy managed to free himself from the wreck and swim to safety, his passenger, 28-year-old Mary Jo Kopechne was left in the car to drown.

Once he reached shore, Kennedy claims to have made seven or eight attempts to rescue Kopechne, but could not free her.

Kennedy then walked back to the cottage where he and four other men, were partying with several young women known as the “Boiler Room Girls“ who had worked on Robert Kennedy‘s campaign. Though Kennedy passed by a fire station and a private home to return to the cottage, he never stopped to ask for help for the trapped Kopechne.

He returned to the party and according to Kennedy himself, informed his cousin and a friend of the situation. The two men, Joseph Gargan and Paul Markham claim to have returned to the scene of the accident and made several unsuccessful attempts to free Kopechne.

Then Kennedy’s story takes an even stranger turn.

After the failed rescue attempts, Kennedy claims to have jumped back into the water and made the 500-foot swim across the channel back to Edgartown. He then walked back to his hotel and spent the night. He even took the time to change clothes and pay a visit to the front-desk, to complain about a noisy party--no doubt Kennedy's sloppy attempt at securing an alibi.

The next morning, Gargan and Markham around 8:00 a.m., and were supposedly shocked to discover that Kennedy never reported the accident to police. According to Kennedy‘s own testimony, he told them: "about my own thoughts and feelings as I swam across that channel ... that somehow when they arrived in the morning that they were going to say that Mary Jo was still alive"

The two men along with Kennedy went back to Chappaquiddick, where Kennedy spent some time making phone calls, seeking advice from various individuals as to how to proceed.

Meanwhile, two fisherman had discovered the submerged car and notified police. At 8:45a.m. a diver recovered the lifeless body of Mary Jo Kopechne.

It was not until 10a.m., over nine hours after driving-off of the bridge that Ted Kennedy went to the police station in Edgarton to report the accident.

Kennedy then gave the following prepared statement to police: “On July 18, 1969, at approximately 11:15 p.m. in Chappaquiddick, Martha's Vineyard, Massachusetts, I was driving my car on Main Street on my way to get the ferry back to Edgartown. I was unfamiliar with the road and turned right onto Dike Road, instead of bearing hard left on Main Street. After proceeding for approximately one-half mile on Dike Road I descended a hill and came upon a narrow bridge.

The car went off the side of the bridge. There was one passenger with me, one Miss Mary [Kopechne], a former secretary of my brother Sen. Robert Kennedy. The car turned over and sank into the water and landed with the roof resting on the bottom. I attempted to open the door and the window of the car but have no recollection of how I got out of the car. I came to the surface and then repeatedly dove down to the car in an attempt to see if the passenger was still in the car. I was unsuccessful in the attempt. I was exhausted and in a state of shock.

I recall walking back to where my friends were eating. There was a car parked in front of the cottage and I climbed into the backseat. I then asked for someone to bring me back to Edgartown. I remember walking around for a period and then going back to my hotel room. When I fully realized what had happened this morning, I immediately contacted the police”

In a move which must have been rather tortuous for her parents, Kennedy attended Mary Jo's funeral, wearing a neck brace (which he reportedly never wore again) and looking rather pathetic.

The diver who recovered Kopechne’s body, John Farrar testified at the official inquest that her body was found where the air pocket would have formed. He said: “Had I received a call within five to ten minutes of the accident occurring, and was able, as I was the following morning, to be at the victim's side within twenty-five minutes of receiving the call, in such event there is a strong possibility that she would have been alive on removal from the submerged car.”

A week after the incident, Kennedy pleaded guilty to leaving the scene of an accident and received a suspended two-month sentence. Kennedy then went on national television to repeat his rather implausible story, and to ask for the public’s “prayers.”

The ensuing scandal and questionable details given by all of those involved is now left to speculation. It was obvious to most people that Kennedy had allowed a young girl to drown, in a desperate and self-serving attempt to protect his political career.

The incident all but guaranteed that Kennedy could never be a serious candidate for President of the United States.

The Kennedy family is connected to organized crime through the patriarch Joe Kennedy, who made the family fortune bootlegging during Prohibition.

It is a practice in such circles to require someone to "make his bones" by committing a murder, a capital crime from which there can be go going back, in order to prove his loyalty and cement him firmly into the organization.

I strongly suspect that Ms. Kopechne was for some reason potentially dangerous or embarrassing to someone in the Kennedy family or to one of its criminal associates. Ted was required to make his bones by getting rid of the young woman.

Doing this forced him to abandon any realistic presidential aspirations but in return he was guaranteed a lifetime seat in the US Senate.

In this life Ted Kennedy's name and family wealth has protected him from any real consequences of his actions (other than never being president). He is now an old man who is dying from cancer and has but a short span upon this earth left to him.

He will very soon face One whose wheels of justice grind slow but grind exceedingly fine.

Wednesday, July 15, 2009

Are the "Birthers" right?

I haven't gotten involved in the great "where was Obama born" brouhaha for one reason. That nothing can be PROVEN and that means that as far as the American electorate is concerned it doesn't exist. That kind of speculation only gets you labeled as a wako, a "birther" no more sane than the "truthers" who maintain that 9/11 was an "inside job".

But THIS makes me think that I ought to reconsider. From WorldNetDaily:

<span class=WND Exclusive" width="181" border="0" height="20">
Bombshell: Orders revoked for soldier challenging prez
Major victory for Army warrior questioning Obama's birthplace

Posted: July 14, 2009
9:53 pm Eastern

By Chelsea Schilling and Joe Kovacs
© 2009 WorldNetDaily

A U.S. Army Reserve major from Florida scheduled to report for deployment to Afghanistan within days has had his military orders revoked after arguing he should not be required to serve under a president who has not proven his eligibility for office.

His attorney, Orly Taitz, confirmed to WND the military has rescinded his impending deployment orders.

"We won! We won before we even arrived," she said with excitement. "It means that the military has nothing to show for Obama. It means that the military has directly responded by saying Obama is illegitimate – and they cannot fight it. Therefore, they are revoking the order!"

She continued, "They just said, 'Order revoked.' No explanation. No reasons – just revoked."

A hearing on the questions raised by Maj. Stefan Frederick Cook, an engineer who told WND he wants to serve his country in Afghanistan, was scheduled for July 16 at 9:30 a.m.

Join the petition campaign to make President Obama reveal his long-form, hospital-generated birth certificate!

"As an officer in the armed forces of the United States, it is [my] duty to gain clarification on any order we may believe illegal. With that said, if President Obama is found not to be a 'natural-born citizen,' he is not eligible to be commander-in-chief," he told WND only hours after the case was filed.

"[Then] any order coming out of the presidency or his chain of command is illegal. Should I deploy, I would essentially be following an illegal [order]. If I happened to be captured by the enemy in a foreign land, I would not be privy to the Geneva Convention protections," he said.

The order for the hearing in the federal court for the Middle District of Georgia from U.S. District Judge Clay D. Land said the hearing on the request for a temporary restraining order would be held Thursday.

Want to turn up the pressure to learn the facts? Get your signs and postcards asking for the president's birth certificate documentation here.

Cook said without a legitimate president as commander-in-chief, members of the U.S. military in overseas actions could be determined to be "war criminals and subject to prosecution."

He said the vast array of information about Obama that is not available to the public confirms to him "something is amiss."

"That and the fact the individual who is occupying the White House has not been entirely truthful with anybody," he said. "Every time anyone has made an inquiry, it has been either cast aside, it has been maligned, it has been laughed at or just dismissed summarily without further investigation.

"You know what. It would be so simple to solve. Just produce the long-form document, certificate of live birth," he said.

Cook said he was scheduled to report for duty tomorrow, on July 15, to deploy to Afghanistan as part of President Obama's plan to increase pressure of insurgent forces there.

He told WND he would be prepared for a backlash against him as a military officer, since members of the military swear to uphold and follow their orders. However, he noted that following an illegal order would be just as bad as failing to follow a legal order.

Before news of the orders being revoked were reported, MSNBC anchor Keith Olbermann tonight called Cook a "jackass" and Taitz a "conwoman," as he labeled both of them the "worst persons in the world." He flayed the soldier as "an embarrassment to all those who have served without cowardice."

Named as defendants in the case are Col. Wanda Good, Col. Thomas Macdonald, Secretary of Defense Robert Gates and Obama, described as "de facto president of the United States."

According to the court filing, Cook affirmed when he joined the military, he took the following oath: "I, Stefan Frederick Cook, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the president of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to the regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God."

According to the claim, "Plaintiff submits that it is implicit though not expressly stated that an officer is and should be subject to court-martial, because he will be derelict in the performance of his duties, if he does not inquire as to the lawfulness, the legality, the legitimacy of the orders which he has received, whether those orders are specific or general."

The military courts offer no option for raising the question, so he turned to civilian courts to consider "a question of paramount constitutional and legal importance: the validity of the chain of command under a president whose election, eligibility, and constitutional status appear open to serious question."

"Barack Hussein Obama, in order to prove his constitutional eligibility to serve as president, basically needs only produce a single unique historical document for the Plaintiff’s inspection and authentication: namely, the 'long-form' birth certificate which will confirm whether Barack Hussein Obama was in fact born to parents who were both citizens of the United States in Honolulu, Hawaii, in or about 1961," explains the complaint.

Taitz said she will attend the hearing to amend the temporary restraining order to an injunction because more members of the military have joined the cause.

"We are going to be asking for release of Obama's records because now this completely undermines the military. It revoked this order, but it can come up with another order tomorrow. It can come up with orders for other people," she said. "Am I going to be flying around the country 1,000 times and paying the fees every time they issue an order?"

Taitz said the issue "must be resolved immediately," and she will continue working to ensure Obama proves he is eligible for office.

"We're going to be asking the judge to issue an order for Obama to provide his vital records to show he is legitimately president," she said. "We're going to say, we have orders every day, and we'll have revocations every day. This issue has to be decided."

She said there cannot be any harm to the president if he is legitimately holding office.

"If he is legitimate, then his vital records will prove it," Taitz said. "If he is illegitimate, then he should not have been there in the first place."

Asked what this decision means for every other serviceman who objects to deployment under a president who has not proven he is eligible for office, Taitz responded:

"Now, we can have each and every member of the military – each and every enlistee and officer – file something similar saying 'I will not take orders until Obama is legitimately vetted.'"

Multiple questions have been raised about what that would mean to the 2008 election, to the orders and laws Obama has signed and other issues, including whether he then is a valid commander-in-chief of the military.

The mystery letter

Press Secretary Robert Gibbs refused to confirm the authenticity of the alleged Jan. 24, 2009, letter from President Obama to his purported place of birth, Kapi'olani Medical Center. His remarks begin at the 55:27 mark of the press briefing. (Click photo to view)

Obama has maintained he was born in Hawaii, and at least one hospital, Honolulu's Kapi'olani Medical Center for Women and Children, claims it received a letter from the president declaring his birth there.

As WND reported, White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs refused to confirm that the letter which was used by the hospital to solicit donations is, in fact, a real correspondence.

When WND exposed doubts about the authenticity of the letter because it was created with HTML computer code and had no presidential or White House seal, the hospital which for nearly six months proudly declared Obama was born at its facility commenced an active cover-up, hiding that White House letter from its original webpage and refusing to confirm such a letter actually exists.

WND also reported that just within the last week, at least two reports have cited Obama's birth in Kenya. Wikipedia also was found to have been reporting on Obama's birth in Kenya, before a series of scrubs placed his birth in Honolulu.

And that came on the heels of several online information sites changing the president's supposed birthplace from one hospital in Hawaii to another, after WND broke the news of the letter said to be from the White House.

Barack Obama states in this purported letter from him on what appears to be White House stationery that he was born at the Kapi'olani Medical Center for Women and Children in Honolulu. The letter was posted by the medical center for nearly six months on its website and used for fundraising before electronically hidden once WND disclosed it was not an actual paper letter, but merely HTML coding. The hospital and White House now refuse to confirm that a real document even exists.

The question over Obama's eligibility now also is being raised on billboards nationwide.

The billboard campaign follows an ongoing petition campaign launched several months ago by WND Editor and Chief Executive Officer Joseph Farah.

The billboards are intended to raise public awareness of the fact that Obama has never released the standard "long-form" birth certificate that would show which hospital he was born in, the attending physician and establish that he truly was born in Hawaii, as his autobiography maintains.

Send a contribution to support the national billboard campaign that asks a simple question: "Where's the birth certificate?"

WND has reported on dozens of legal challenges to Obama's status as a "natural born citizen." The Constitution, Article 2, Section 1, states, "No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President."

Some of the lawsuits question whether he was actually born in Hawaii, as he insists. If he was born out of the country, Obama's American mother, the suits contend, was too young at the time of his birth to confer American citizenship to her son under the law at the time.

Other challenges have focused on Obama's citizenship through his father, a Kenyan subject to the jurisdiction of the United Kingdom at the time of his birth, thus making him a dual citizen. The cases contend the framers of the Constitution excluded dual citizens from qualifying as natural born.

Complicating the situation is Obama's decision to spend sums estimated in the hundreds of thousands of dollars to avoid releasing a state birth certificate that would put to rest all of the questions.

The "Certification of Live Birth" posted online and widely touted as "Obama's birth certificate" does not in any way prove he was born in Hawaii, since the same "short-form" document is easily obtainable for children not born in Hawaii. The true "long-form" birth certificate – which includes information such as the name of the birth hospital and attending physician – is the only document that can prove Obama was born in Hawaii, but to date he has not permitted its release for public or press scrutiny.

Oddly, though congressional hearings were held to determine whether Sen. John McCain was constitutionally eligible to be president as a "natural born citizen," no controlling legal authority ever sought to verify Obama's claim to a Hawaiian birth.

Although Obama officials have told WND all such allegations are "garbage," here is a partial listing and status update for some of the cases over Obama's eligibility:

  • New Jersey attorney Mario Apuzzo has filed a case on behalf of Charles Kerchner and others alleging Congress didn't properly ascertain that Obama is qualified to hold the office of president.

  • Pennsylvania Democrat Philip Berg has three cases pending, including Berg vs. Obama in the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, a separate Berg vs. Obama case alleging he wasn't qualified even to be U.S. senator and Hollister vs. Soetoro a/k/a Obama, (now dismissed) brought on behalf of a retired military member who could be facing recall to active duty by Obama.

  • Leo Donofrio of New Jersey filed a lawsuit claiming Obama's dual citizenship disqualified him from serving as president. His case was considered in conference by the U.S. Supreme Court but denied a full hearing.

  • Cort Wrotnowski filed suit against Connecticut's secretary of state, making a similar argument to Donofrio. His case was considered in conference by the U.S. Supreme Court, but was denied a full hearing.

  • Former presidential candidate Alan Keyes headlines a list of people filing a suit in California, in a case handled by the United States Justice Foundation, that asks the secretary of state to refuse to allow the state's 55 Electoral College votes to be cast in the 2008 presidential election until Obama verifies his eligibility to hold the office. The case is pending, and lawyers are seeking the public's support.

  • Chicago lawyer Andy Martin sought legal action requiring Hawaii Gov. Linda Lingle to release Obama's vital statistics record. The case was dismissed by Hawaii Circuit Court Judge Bert Ayabe.

  • Lt. Col. Donald Sullivan sought a temporary restraining order to stop the Electoral College vote in North Carolina until Barack Obama's eligibility could be confirmed, alleging doubt about Obama's citizenship. His case was denied.

  • In Ohio, David M. Neal sued to force the secretary of state to request documents from the Federal Elections Commission, the Democratic National Committee, the Ohio Democratic Party and Obama to show the presidential candidate was born in Hawaii. The case was denied.

  • Also in Ohio, there was the Greenberg v. Brunner case which ended when the judge threatened to assess all case costs against the plaintiff.

  • In Washington state, Steven Marquis sued the secretary of state seeking a determination on Obama's citizenship. The case was denied.

  • In Georgia, Rev. Tom Terry asked the state Supreme Court to authenticate Obama's birth certificate. His request for an injunction against Georgia's secretary of state was denied by Georgia Superior Court Judge Jerry W. Baxter.

  • California attorney Orly Taitz has brought a case, Lightfoot vs. Bowen, on behalf of Gail Lightfoot, the vice presidential candidate on the ballot with Ron Paul, four electors and two registered voters. She also has brought forward several other cases and has conducted several public campaigns to generate awareness of the issue.
  • In Texas, Darrel Hunter vs. Obama later was dismissed.

  • In Ohio, Gordon Stamper vs. U.S. later was dismissed.

  • In Texas, Brockhausen vs. Andrade.

  • In Washington, L. Charles Cohen vs. Obama.

  • In Hawaii, Keyes vs. Lingle, dismissed.

In addition, other cases cited on the RightSideofLife blog as raising questions about Obama's eligibility include:

  • In Texas, Darrel Hunter vs. Obama later was dismissed.

  • In Ohio, Gordon Stamper vs. U.S. later was dismissed.

  • In Texas, Brockhausen vs. Andrade.

  • In Washington, L. Charles Cohen vs. Obama.

WND has reported that among the documentation not yet available for Obama includes his kindergarten records, his Punahou school records, his Occidental College records, his Columbia University records, his Columbia thesis, his Harvard Law School records, his Harvard Law Review articles, his scholarly articles from the University of Chicago, his passport, his medical records, his files from his years as an Illinois state senator, his Illinois State Bar Association records, any baptism records, and his adoption records.

Note: Members of the news media wishing to interview Chelsea Schilling, Joe Kovacs, Joseph Farah, Jerome Corsi, Les Kinsolving or Bob Unruh on this issue, please contact WND.

There does seem to be more here than the ravings of conspiracy loons.

The military has never backed off of prosecuting a serviceman who refused to deploy before, at least not since Gulf War I. So why now?

Why won't Obama just produce a proper certified birth certificate showing that he was born in Hawaii?

I could give you a certified birth certificate proving that I was born in Rutherford County, North Carolina.

Anyone reading this who was born in the USA could do the same.

So why can't Obama?

Sunday, July 12, 2009

Hope n' Change

He couldn't get a security clearance either

Barack Obama, with his past associations, literally could not get the security clearance that he would need in order to be a janitor in the FBI building or CIA headquarters in Langley.

And we made him president.

MCLEAN, Virginia - The federal government's most secure prison has determined that two books written by President Barack Obama contain material "potentially detrimental to national security" and rejected an inmate's request to read them.

Ahmed Omar Abu Ali is serving a 30-year sentence at the federal supermax prison in Florence, Colorado, for joining al-Qaida and plotting to assassinate then-President George W. Bush. Last year, Abu Ali requested two books written by Obama: "Dreams from My Father" and "The Audacity of Hope."

But prison officials, citing guidance from the FBI, determined that passages in both books contain information that could damage national security.

This is no great surprise. A comparison of the writing style in the books which have Obama's name on them and books which William Ayers is known to have written reveals a strong likelihood that Obama's books were ghost written by Ayers.

Also Ayers is a prolific writer but during the times in which the two Obama books were being written Ayers published nothing, not even a short article in an academic journal.

Ayers is an unrepentant communist terrorist who planned and participated in terrorist bombings on US soil. He belonged to a terrorist organization which had as a goal staging a communist revolution which would carve the United States into several zones (like Germany after WWII) some of which would be under the control of the USSR, Cuba and North Vietnam. The Weather Underground, Ayers communist terrorist group, believed that large numbers of Americans would have to be sent to "reeducation camps" where at least 22 million of them would die in order to cement the new regime's control over the nation.

So the fact that passages from two books written by Ayers have been found to be a threat to national security does seem to be something to be expected.

I am a bit surprised that anyone in the federal prison system or the FBI had the courage to step up and call a spade a spade, but sometimes miracles do happen.

Thursday, July 09, 2009

You really can't fool all of the people all of the time

From Rasmussen Reports:

The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Thursday shows that 30% of the nation's voters now Strongly Approve of the way that Barack Obama is performing his role as President. Thirty-eight percent (38%) Strongly Disapprove giving Obama a Presidential Approval Index rating of –8. The President’s Approval Index rating has fallen six points since release of a disappointing jobs report last week (see trends).

Thirty-nine percent (39%) now give the President good or excellent marks for handling the economy while 43% say he is doing a poor job. Those are by far his lowest ratings yet on the economy Premium Members can see crosstabs, trends, and Scott Rasmussen’s Daily Briefing.

There is a gender gap when it comes to perceptions of Obama’s performance. By a 46% to 27% margin, men Strongly Disapprove. Women are more evenly divided—33% Strongly Approve and 30% Strongly Disapprove.

Thirty-four percent (34%) of voters nationwide say the U.S. is heading in the right direction, the lowest level of optimism since mid-March. The Rasmussen Index shows consumer and investor confidence are down again today reaching the lowest level in three months. The Discover U.S. Spending Monitor fell for the first time in three months. A Rasmussen video report notes that 46% want the government to stay out of the housing market.

The Presidential Approval Index is calculated by subtracting the number who Strongly Disapprove from the number who Strongly Approve. It is updated daily at 9:30 a.m. Eastern (sign up for free daily e-mail update). Updates also available on Twitter.

Overall, 51% of voters say they at least somewhat approve of the President's performance so far. Forty-eight percent (48%) now disapprove. For other barometers of the President’s performance, see Obama By the Numbers or review recent demographic highlights from the tracking polls.

A White House meeting recently gave a boost to immigration reform, but public opposition remains high. There is a huge gap between the views of most voters and the Political Class when it comes to immigration.

As the little tin messiah continues to fail the numbers will continue to fall. And I can't tell you how happy that makes me. I was deeply afraid that the average American's desire to be "post-racial" would force them to close their eyes and stick their fingers in their ears and say "hope and change" real loud every time evidence of this pathetic little know-nothing, done-nothing Marxist empty suit's incompetence was put in front of them.

I guess fear of things like job loss, foreclosure and lunatics with nukes is enough to make people call a fool a fool even if he is black.

P.S. Note the part above about the gender gap. More evidence to my contention that giving women the right to vote was the biggest mistake Western Civilization ever made.

Miss Ann is talking

That means that YOU are listening!

Sarah Palin has deeply disappointed her enemies. People who hate her guts feel she's really let them down by resigning.

She's like the ex-girlfriend they're SO over, never want to see again, have already forgotten about -- really, it's O-ver -- but they just can't stop talking about her.

Liberal: Ha, ha ... Sarah who? She's over, she's toast, a future Trivial Pursuit answer, nothing more.

Normal person: Whatever. How about the North Korean missiles?

Liberal: Can you believe she just resigned the governorship like that? What a quitter!

Normal person: Speaking of quitting, how's work?

Liberal: Did you hear she might get a TV show? There's no way Sarah Palin's getting a TV show! No way! I can't believe stupid Sarah Palin could get her own stupid TV show now. Well, I'm sure not gonna watch it -- that's for sure!

Normal person: Have you seen all the Michael Jackson coverage on TV?

Liberal: How does she think she can run for president in 2012 if she can't finish her term as governor of a Podunk state? She's finished.

Normal person: OK, then! You won't have to vote for her.

Liberal: I was never going to vote for her! But now I'm not going to vote for her twice. And I will never watch her TV show. I am so over her.

Reporters had already written their stories on Palin's press conference -- "rambling!" "incoherent!" -- before she even stepped to the podium.

Whatever you think of Palin, her argument for resigning was the opposite of "rambling" and "incoherent."

Palin's basketball analogy couldn't have been clearer, even to prissy liberal pundits who get uncomfortable when the subject turns to sports: She decided to destroy the other team's game plan, which has been to obsessively focus on her, by resigning.

This is particularly apt here -- she's passing the ball to a fantastic right-wing lieutenant governor, who shares her principles but doesn't set off the left's neuroses.

This is better for him, better for the state, better for the conservative program and better for Palin personally, whose family is sick of all the crap. Now she can make a lot of money and promote conservatism on a national stage.

It certainly won't be held against Palin by people who don't already loathe her. (On the other hand, her approval ratings among people who think she's worse than Hitler are down to 48 percent.)

With the left frenetically filing ethics complaint after ethics complaint against Palin, costing her state millions of dollars and her personally half a million dollars, citizens of Alaska must be asking, "Can we please have our state back?"

But to read the news reports -- which actually were rambling and incoherent -- you would think Palin was speaking in tongues.

The truth is liberals are furious they won't have Sarah Palin to kick around anymore -- at least not with Palin's hands tied behind her back by her public office.

Something tells me Keith Olbermann isn't going to be pulling any big numbers this summer attacking Eric Cantor and Michele Bachmann. I don't anticipate any sudden outbreaks of "Mitch McConnell Derangement Syndrome."

Soon we'll only hear about Keith when his creepy e-mails using his mother's death to hit on chicks start making the rounds again. (Tip to Keith: When a girl refuses to give you her phone number, her assistant's phone number or her personal e-mail address, and only gives you her assistant's e-mail address, you're not halfway in the sack.)

Bonus: If Olbermann gets canceled as a result of Palin's resignation, that will put her in a really good position for 2012.

But instead of being honest and saying, "Oh well, it was a good ride while it lasted," liberal chatterers indignantly demand: "Is this not the greatest betrayal a public servant ever committed against the people?"

On one hand, liberals are enraged at the heinousness of Mark Sanford -- whom they didn't vote for -- for not resigning and, on the other, they're enraged at Palin -- whom they also didn't vote for -- for resigning.

The peculiarly venomous hatred of Palin is driven by women of the left and their whipped consorts. All that needs to happen is for a feminist to overhear two Nation readers saying, "I hate to admit it, but Palin is kind of hot" and ...


Democrats are a party of women, and nothing drives them off their gourds like a beautiful Christian conservative. (How much money has that other beautiful born-again, Carrie Prejean, been forced to spend on lawyers to respond to liberal hysteria?)

So the motives are clear, but the money is not. Who is paying the rent for the losers filing all these frivolous complaints against Palin?

At least when Richard Mellon Scaife was funding investigations of Bill Clinton, we knew who Scaife was, he was an American citizen, and his money was accessible to U.S. tax authorities and not stashed in offshore accounts like a certain Hungarian Nazi-collaborator I can name.

How about some modern-day Scaife investigate the investigators?

On some level the left knows that their hysterics over Sarah Palin only reveal how frightened they are of her. But they can't help themselves.

This is what it is like to be in the grip of mindless panic.

It's going to be fun to watch the left falling to the ground in paroxysms of foaming madness next year when most of the congressional candidates she campaigns for beat the crap out of their Democrat rivals.

The propaganda organs of the Obama administration (otherwise known as the mainstream media) will not want to credit any kind of "Palin effect" yet the alternative will be massive dissatisfaction with the little tin messiah's job performance.

Chris Matthews may implode into a quantum singularity.

Wednesday, July 08, 2009

A softball pitched in from left field

A left wing reader left this comment on one of my posts about Sarah Palin:

She's done. If you can't finish up your term as Governor, what should we expect as President? Don't get me wrong, I hope she does run.
I was hoping someone would try making that argument so that I could make a few points about the left's little tin god.

B. Hussein Obama -
- Ran for a seat in the Illinois legislature and abandoned it before his first term ended in order to run for the United States Senate.
- Abandoned his seat in the US Senate before serving even two years of his six-year term in order to run for the presidency. In point of fact during Obama's career in the Senate he only bothered to show up and do the job he was elected to do fewer than 200 days total.

So if Mrs. Palin is unfit to be president because she failed to complete her term as governor of Alaska then Mr. Obama is twice as unfit to be president.

I would also point out that Mrs. Clinton promised the people of New York that she would be a full time Senator and would not abandon her job in order to campaign for the presidency and that Mr. Clinton made the same promise to the people of Arkansas when he ran for governor.

I would also like to point out to anyone who thinks that I'm making the argument that Palin is just as fickle and unfit as Obama (actually it would be half as fickle and unfit since she has only done once what he did twice) that there is a critical difference between her actions and his.

When Sarah Palin was elected governor of Alaska she entered a political climate which had been dominated by entrenched political interests for decades. Human nature being what it is those entrenched interests had become corrupt (think of the pre-Gringrich House of Representatives which had been controlled by the Democrat party for 40 years).

Palin made it her mission to challenge that corruption and bring about long needed reforms. She renegotiated the terms of the arrangement between the state and the oil companies which gave the people of Alaska a more equitable share of the oil revenues those companies were deriving from Alaska's natural resources. And she did this in a way which put the money into the pockets of the people of Alaska rather than into the government's pocket where it could be squandered on vote-buying pork projects.

Palin also managed to complete the negotiations for the natural gas pipeline which had been in limbo for years. In doing this she was able to bring Native Alaskan tribes, the state government of Alaska, the government of Canada and multinational corporations to the table and get them all to work and play nicely together in order to bring energy resources to the lower 48.

These two things, taking on the political cesspool of Juneau and completing the pipeline deal were Mrs. Palin's primary reasons for seeking the governorship in the first place. She got them both done with nearly a year and a half to spare.

What great projects was Mr. B. Hussein Obama pursuing when he ran for the Illinois State Senate? Other than building a platform from which to reach for higher office of course? About all he got done of any note was killing a law which would have required that children born alive after a failed attempt to abort them would be given medical care like the human beings they are (That's really something to be proud of).

What did Mr. Obama accomplish during the 180 or so days that he managed to show up in the US Senate? Well he did manage to rack up a record as the most liberal Senator. That is something of note since he managed to beat out left-wing loons like Ted Kennedy who had been there for decades.
Oh, and here's something else while I'm thinking about it. As I mentioned Governor Palin attacked the corruption she found in Alaska's state government. When Obama became active in the politics of the city of Chicago, county of Cook, state of Illinois he encountered a political machine which has held power for more than a century and has reached levels of corruption not seen since the intrigues in the court of Byzantium.

Did Mr. Obama respond to this corruption in Illinois the same way that Mrs. Palin did to the corruption in Alaska?

Hardly. Where Sarah Palin rolled up her sleeves and started fighting Mr. Obama found that he had landed in the company of like-minded men. In the almost unbelievably foul sewer of the Illinois Democrat machine Obama found a place where he was comfortable. Where he fit in and could be himself.

Let us pause here for a bit and give our noses a break by stepping away from the stench rising off of Mr. Obama and his Chicago friends and associates and look at a few more facts about Sarah Palin and her decision to resign her office.

Sarah Palin fought corruption and that earns one enemies, even in one's own party.

She is also the most beloved living conservative political figure in the nation. She has "it" the same "it" that Ronald Reagan had and she has shown ambition to reach for higher office. She has a solid record of accomplishment as mayor and then governor. It was her presence on the GOP ticket which made the 2008 race relatively close rather than a Reagan/Mondale type blowout for Obama.

For all these reasons and more Sarah Palin is the most dangerous person in the world to the political left. They realize that unless they destroy her she could attain the Oval Office with the kind of popular mandate that would allow her to undo vast amounts what the left has managed to accomplish in their goal to ruin and destroy the nation.

This is why Mrs. Palin has been subjected to an endless stream of utterly baseless ethics complaints. Defending against these complaints has cost her family anywhere from half a million to a million dollars and investigating the complaints has cost the state of Alaska over 2 million dollars. If governor Palin stays in office she has nothing but more of these groundless accusations to look forward to, further draining her and her husband's assets and further burdening the treasury of Alaska.

Mrs. Palin has a book coming out which she is going to need to tour to promote. She is also going to be the single most in demand GOP speaker who will need to crisscross the nation campaigning for conservative Republican candidates. Can you imagine what a fertile ground for false accusations of misuse of state funds all that travel would give to her enemies in Alaska if she were still governor? Can you imagine what would be said about all the time she will be spending out of Alaska if she were still governor?

She would be accused of drawing the governor's pay while not doing the governor's job. It would be said that she was abandoning her post and that the honorable thing to have done was resign.

It is also possible that the attacks on Mrs. Palin will take the form of attacks upon the state of Alaska itself. After all if the economy of Alaska can be damaged badly enough it would be bound to hurt her popularity within the state and give her critics grounds to accuse her of incompetence in any national race.

In a recent piece on American Thinker J.R. Dunn had this to say:
Chicago would put Alaska through the grinder, a very easy thing to accomplish from Washington. In fact, it could be argued that this campaign has already begun, with the slow death-by-cuts action against the National Missile Defense center at Fort Greely. Even as the ballistic missile threat from North Korea and Iran grows more urgent, Obama is dismantling the sole serious defense against it. (Am I implying that O would jeopardize the country's safety to assure his political career? Well, what do you think?) In a real sense, Palin's resignation at this time can be viewed as yet another service to her state.
Yes, Barrack Hussein Obama is an utterly corrupt political thug who would not hesitate for an instant to place his nation in peril in order to take out a dangerous - to him - domestic political opponent.

And if he is willing to do that what else might he do harm the people of Alaska in order to make their governor look bad?

Mrs. Palin is doing the honorable thing (something utterly alien to B. Hussein Obama and his ilk) and letting the position of governor be taken up by someone who would be less of a lightening rod. She is freeing herself to serve not only the people of Alaska but the entire nation by helping the GOP regain control of the legislature in 2010 and in all likelihood broadening the base of support she will have for a run at the White House in 2012 or 2016.

In their decisions to leave office before the end of their terms the differences between Sarah Palin and Barack Obama are shown to be the differences between doing what is right and wrong, honorable and dishonorable.

P.S. To the person who said "If you can't finish up your term as Governor, what should we expect as President?" Can point us to somewhere that you asked the same rhetorical question about Obama - who couldn't finish either his term as state Senator or US Senator - when he announced his candidacy for president?

Your opinions are already worthless because you are a left-wing moron (sorry, redundant) but now we can add abject hypocrite to the reasons why you are an oxygen thief.