It’s obvious to me now why the Miss America pageant is no longer televised on a major network. The Sunday morning talking head shows have taken their place.

Exhibit A is Barack Hussein Obama’s appearance yesterday on “Meet the Press” hosted by former dem apparatchik/”journalist” Tim Russert. I take that back. The use of the phrase “former dem apparatchik” is completely inappropriate in this context. Tim is still in there pitching for the home team.

Check out this question about He Who Walks on Water and the Radical Pastor of the Church of the Black Panther, Rev. Jeremiah Wright, and ask yourself whether it was designed to elicit information or to give the candidate a chance to have a do-over:

Tim Russert Impersonates Bert Parks
“What’s the most important thing you’ve learned from this?” Who does Russert think he is–Ward Cleaver? Or better yet, Bert Parks? What’s next asking him why U.S. Americans can’t locate countries on a map, along of course, with a federal program for the mapped-deprived?

This exchange reminded me of the time in 2004 a television producer gave John Kerry a do-over. Remember that?

Here’s another delicious little morsel from yesterday’s interview:

Tim Russert completely misses the point (again!)
Notice how BHO tries to keep the focus on the key to his meteoric rise, race, saying it’s in his DNA to believe that we can bring this country together and that people are the same under the skin. That’s a beautiful sentiment, Senator, but the issue is not the raving fruticake’s racist beliefs, as offensive as they are, and as revealing as they are about what a phony you are. They are secondary to the Amerika is always wrong world view, one that he shares with your other buddy, Billy Ayers, and also with your loud-mouth wife, Malignant Michelle.

During the interview, B-HO (thanks, Dave) also patted himself on the back for not challenging John McCain’s patriotism. Way to go, Barack Hussein! If you change your mind, and decide to challenge McCain’s patriotism, good luck with that.

Trackback URL

This morning’s news reminded me again of the consequences of government-sanctioned racism, otherwise known as “affirmative action”: the whiny sense of entitlement, the enormous chip on the shoulder, the need to pretend that the mediocre are really the most excellent among us. The reminder came in the person of the poster girl for the above-referenced characteristics, Michelle “how am I supposed to pay for ballet lessons on my lousy $300,000 a year salary?” Obama. Malignant Michelle wants everyone to know that it’s time to change the subject and stop talking about the Church of the Black Panther that her politician husband used to help launch his career in Chicago, and do you know why? Think for a second. These are liberals we are talking about, remember. Why else? For the children, of course! Yesterday in Indianapolis, she said that talking about the racist, Black Liberation rev doesn’t do anything for her children’s education. I think that’s all taken care of, Mrs. O. Don’t they attend the University of Chicago lab school, an expensive private school? I don’t know how you manage to afford it in this mean country!

Here’s the video.

When the libs pull out the “for the children” card, you know their critics are on to something. Anyone who buys that baloney He Who Walks on Water was trying to peddle on Tuesday, that he didn’t know what Rev. Wright was all about, must also believe in the Tooth Fairy. He disinvited him to this presidential announcement. Then on Tuesday, he just dissed him. Six weeks ago in Philadelphia, Obama said Rev. Wright was like family, and I guess he meant it. After all, if you can throw your grandma under the bus, anyone is fair game, no?

Trackback URL

On March 18, Barack Obama (D-Hamas) said “I can no more disown him than I can disown the black community.” Now, suddenly, today based on the speech that his spiritual advisor/mentor Rev. Jeremiah Wright, gave yesterday to the National Press Club, has disowned, disavowed, and just generally dissed the man, saying:

“The person I saw yesterday was not the person that I met 20 years ago. His comments were not only divisive and destructive, but I believe they ended up giving comfort to those who prey on hate.”

The person I saw yesterday, and Friday night on Bill Moyers’ show, was definitely not the person I saw screeching “God damn America!” and “Barack knows what it’s like to live in country controlled by RICH WHITE PEOPLE!!!” Yesterday Jeremiah Wright seemed to be having a veritable lucid interval compared with the raving lunatic Obama kept by his side for 20 years. He appeared almost rational the last three days, as opposed to the way he appeared behind the pulpit.

Senator, what changed? In your statement severing ties with the man who mentored you and helped facilitate your political career, you mentioned Rev. Wright’s praise of wackjob/anti-Semite Louis Farrakhan. You mean the guy your church gave an award to in December of last year? Are you suggesting that you didn’t know about that either? You didn’t know that your pastor blamed the United States for 9/11–”AMERICA’S CHICKENS have come home to roost!!!”–in much more virulent terms than he did when he reaffirmed that opinion yesterday? You never heard his claim that the evil racist American government created the AIDs virus to kill black people? Apparently, there was a lot about this guy that Mr. Good Judgement didn’t know. Yet he was a member of the church for 20 years, was married by Rev. Wright, who also baptized his children. Senator, WHAT ABOUT THE CHILDREN?

I think that the BHO Kool-Aid drinkers, the emotionally-driven Cult of the Personality crowd who couldn’t tell you at gun point what position Obama has on the issues, will be placated by this blatantly expedient, hasty 180 by their guy. The apparatchiks, who share Jeremiah Wright’s opinion of our country, will spin this speech as putting the matter of Obama’s anti-American world view to rest. Nothing to see here. Move on. This bitter clinger doesn’t see it that way. I agree with what Sen. Obama said Sunday during that kid glove appearance on Fox News Sunday: his pastor’s views are an a legitimate political issue, as his relationship with unrepentant former terrorists and current America haters Bill Ayers and Bernadine Dohrn. Repeating: connect the dots, people.

Apparently the thing that most irked BHO was that Wright claimed that Obama’s previous half-assed denunciations of Wright were politically motivated. That was the last straw. Dare I point out once again that the way to really anger a liberal is to tell the truth about him?

Trackback URL

I had a problem pulling the video off my Tivo, that problem being that I inadvertently erased it. Duh! So I don’t have the video of Pres. Bush’s press conference this morning as I hoped. I’m sure I’ll be able to get it later from the Charlie Gibson newscast because the response came after question, or rather a series of questions, came from Martha “I look like someone told me my dog just died” Raddatz on ABC.
Here’s the exchange:

QUESTION: Thank you, Mr. President.
And I’d like to switch to Afghanistan.
There was another attempt on President Karzai’s life. There are operations going on there right now. Is the strategy succeeding? Are we winning in Afghanistan?
BUSH: Yes, I think we’re making progress in Afghanistan. But there’s a very resilient enemy that obviously wants to kill people that stand in the way of their re-imposition of a state that is — which vision is incredibly dark.
I mean, it’s very important for the American people to remember what life was like in Afghanistan prior to the liberation of the country. We had a government in place that abused people’s human rights, they didn’t believe in women’s rights, they didn’t let little girls go to school and they provided safe haven to al-Qaida.
In the liberation of this country, we’ve achieved some very important strategic objectives: denying al-Qaida safe haven for which to plot and plan attacks and replacing this repressive group with a — you know, a young democracy.
And it’s difficult in Afghanistan.
I mean, if you know the history of the country, you understand it’s hard to go from the kind of society in which they had been living to one in which people are now responsible for their own behavior.
But I’m pleased with a lot of things. One, I’m pleased with the number of roads that have been built. I’m pleased with the number of schools that have opened up. I’m pleased that a lot of girls — young girls are going to school. I’m pleased health clinics are now being distributed around the country.
I’m pleased with the Afghan army that when they’re in the fight they’re good.
You know, I wish we completely eliminated the radicals who kill innocent people to achieve objectives, but that hasn’t happened yet. And so I think it’s very much in our interest to continue helping the young democracy, and we will.

After the president threatened to cut off her mic, she got this off:

QUESTION: A couple of weeks ago you said that in Iraq, in 2006, you said we were winning and the strategy was working…
BUSH: Yes.
QUESTION: … to keep up troop morale. How can we believe that you’re not doing the same thing here?
BUSH: You tried to ask me that question before as a repeat.
Look, I said…
(CROSSTALK)
BUSH: Can I finish please?
The question you asked me before, at the exclusive I gave you on the ranch, was, You said that we were winning in the past.
I also said that there was tough fighting. Make sure you put the comments in place.
So what I’m going to tell you now is we’re making progress in Afghanistan, but there’s tough fighting. I’m under no illusions that this isn’t tough. I know full well we’re dealing with a determined enemy.
I believe it’s in our interests that we defeat that enemy.
And so, yeah, we’re making progress. But it’s also a tough battle.
We’re facing people who are willing to strap bombs on themselves and walk into places where the innocent dwell or the innocent shop and kill them.
Is there an interest to confront these people now, whether it be in Afghanistan or Iraq or Europe or anywhere else? And the answer is absolutely it’s in our interests.
And the notion that somehow we can let these people just. kind of. have their way or, you know, just don’t stir them up, is naive or disingenuous, and it’s not in our nation’s interest.
We are in a global struggle against thugs and killers. And the United States of America has got to continue to take the lead.
And so in Afghanistan, yes, we’re making progress.
Does that mean, you know, that it’s over? No, it doesn’t mean it’s over. We’re in a long struggle, as I’ve told you many a time, against these jihadists.
You defeat them ultimately by the advance of democracy.
See, this is an ideological struggle. These aren’t isolated law enforcement moments.

He gets it. They don’t.

Trackback URL

The president had a press conference this morning, and he was really terrific, particularly when he was trying to explain the existential struggle we’re in with the Islamic fanatics. I’ll post the video in a few minutes.

Trackback URL

I hope a few things are obvious now. Barack Hussein Obama is the “post-racial” candidate who, but for his gynormous ride on the white guilt train, would still be pontificating in anonymity in Springfield. He’s the product of the Chicago democrat machine who “transcends politics.” He’s the baby boomer who wants to “turn the page” on the tumultuous arguments of the 1960’s, personified by fellow baby boomers Bill and Hillary Clinton on the left and Newt Gingrich on the right, who is surrounded by a collection of vintage 60’s domestic terrorists and rage-filled, America-hating racists, one of whom shares his bed. It should be clear what he means when he says he wants to put the upheaval of that time behind us. In his world, the debate is over, and those who despise imperialist Amerika won. Let’s get on with pouring more tax money down social welfare ratholes, imposing speech codes, normalizing every social pathology the most deviant among us can imagine, and making sure no one harms a hair on the head, during questioning, of one of the headchopping maniacs who want to murder every last one of us.

Still, one group of BHO supporters, the Cult of the Personality crowd, don’t get it. They are those who don’t share his crypto-socialist, pro-surrender views, and who insist that the insane ravings of his pastor of 20 years, the contemptible remarks of the lippy broad he married, and his friendship with unrepentant bombers Bill Ayers and Bernadine Dohrn are either completely irrelevant, ancient history or, my personal favorite, isolated incidents. We’ve all had friends like this, of course. I mean those with cheating husbands, in pathetic denial, greeting every additional piece of evidence of what they’re really married to with another rationalization, each of which requires straining credulity even more than the last time, absolutely determined to pretend that reality is an optional construct. Connect the dots, honey.

Meanwhile, those who do share his left-wing, pro-surrender point of view, including the MSM pinheads’ have two concerns: (1) whether the reveal of Obama’s circle of lunatic, lefty fanatic friends will derail his mission to become President, and waste no time surrending to our enemies, and raising our taxes and (2) trying to get inside the tangled mass of fevered and twisted neurons residing in Jeremiah Wright’s crackpot head to figure out why he’s such a “dick,” which is what Bill Maher called him on his silly show last Friday night. He earned that name from Maher because he is willing to hurt Mr. Not Ready for Prime Time’s chances to win the nomination or the general election. I’ve been thinking about that last one myself, and I think it boils down to three things. First, and most obvious, the Wrong Rev. is writing a book, and these provocative speeches are the beginning of the book tour. In addition, maybe his parents didn’t pay enough attention to him, but for whatever reason, it’s clear that he needs to be the center of attention. Narcissism ain’t pretty. Finally, perhaps he resents the fact that Obama wants to have it both ways. When he needed the street cred of belonging to a church back when he was a “community organizer” (paid troublemaker/race baiter), he came to Jeremiah Wright, and it helped launch is political career. Now that He Who Walks on Water is in the Big Show, he wants to hide Rev. Wright in the basement, as he did before his announcement in Springfield in February 2007. You Obama supporters shouldn’t be angry at Rev. Wright for saying that BHO is behaving like a politician, but I know. The truth hurts.

Trackback URL

Or was there a back room deal, setting conditions? I don’t know. I do know that Barack Hussein Obama’s appearance this morning on “Fox News Sunday” laid another canard to rest, that being the old saw about Fox being an unapologetic tool of the Vast Right Wing Conspiracy. I hope you libs were paying attention. Chris Wallace should be your new best friend. I haven’t seen such a softball interview since the Miss America pageant. I think I finally understand how Obama’s going to end all this “polarizing debate where we’re always trying to score cheap political points.” No one else will get a word in edgewise! Chris Wallace barely did, but that was just as well. Chris let this elitist gas bag, who he referred to as a “former law professor,” which BHO is not, blather away in his typical sound-and-fury-signifying nothing style that is nauseatingly familiar, with no follow up, even when the answers were laugh-at-loud ridiculous. What a disappointment! Perhaps this kid glove treatment was part of the agreement that ended the “Obama Watch,” a 24-style ticking clock showing that it had been 772 days since Obama promised to grace FNS with his majestic presence and his soaring rhetoric before finally getting his Alfred E. Newman mug on camera this morning.

I can think of no other explanation for the textbook journalistic malpractice Chris committed in this interview, except what I have dubbed the “ Stephanopoulos Effect,” that is, the terror that strikes supposedly “objective journalists” silent when they think of a tough question that should be asked of a liberal candidate. It is named after the excrement storm that came down on George S after he asked BHO questions about the collection of anti-American whack jobs that advise, mentor and befriend him, and who no doubt as a result had to eat lunch all alone at his desk for at least a week.

No questions about Michelle’s “mean country” or “not proud of my country” comments. No questions about the man my friend John Kass of the Chicago Tribune calls Obama’s personal real estate fairy, Tony Rezko. No demand for specifics on his repeated promise to lower gas prices. No mention of “typical white person,” even when CW asked Obama whether race was a factor in this election, naturally avoiding the obvious: but for his race, BHO would still be a “community organizer” in Chicago. Speaking of which, why doesn’t anyone ever ask this empty suit why he considers that gig such a major resume enhancement? I was a community organizer; that is, I went to a place where people were poor, uneducated and irresponsible, and explained to them that their circumstances were not their fault. I explained to them that they are victims and that it’s Mr. Charlie’s fault. When I left, they were still poor, most of their kids were still born out of wedlock and still dropped out of school, but now they had someone else to blame. This is a job to be proud of? What am I missing? This morning BHO cited his work as a “community organizer” (read paid trouble maker) as a reflection of his values. OK.

On Being “a Uniter”
Here’s an example of one of those laugh-out-loud answers to a question. This question had potential to rip the mask off the phony “post-partisan” scam that BHO has hypnotized the MSM into promoting for the last two years. Chris started out well by citing John McCain’s “maverick” views on several hot button issues, and asked “As a president, can you name a hot button issue where you would be willing to buck the democratic party line and say ‘you know what, Republicans have a better idea here?’” BHO started to ramble, and finally settled on that issue that has people in this country passionately engaged, regulation, specifically “cap and trade” to regulate pollution. There’s a hot button issue if I ever heard one. Then he babbled about supporting merit pay for teachers, while at the same time doing his usual two step, as in when he says that he supports the individual right to keep and bear arms, but wait, that doesn’t mean I don’t think cities shouldn’t be able to absolutely prohibit law-abiding citizens from owning hand guns. Or when he says he says “everything is on the table” when it comes to reforming Socialist Security, and then in the next breath says not letting us keep a dime of our own money in private accounts. That’s a bridge two far for the crypto-Socialist BHO. On education he says he supports merit pay, IF the criteria for “merit” aren’t limited to some sort of mean standardized test because sometimes kids are 3 or 4 years behind when they get to school. Let me translate: if the teachers’ unions can live with the way it’s structured, I’m all for it.

But here was the really hilarious answer I’ve been leading up to. Chris cited the Gang of 14, opposition to partial birth abortion and support for defense of marriage acts as bipartisan acts that BHO avoided, and asked He Who Walks on Water “do you really want a partnership with Republicans or do you really want unconditional surrender from them?” at which point I burst out laughing just at the question. Good grief, Chris, what do you think? The answer was priceless. Watch for yourself.

Barack Obama Explains What it Means to Be \"Post-Partisan\"
Can you believe that? He votes the way the Daily Kos and Moveon. Org dictate, but he writes a blog posting they don’t like, and that’s supposed to cancel out the vote? Maybe after he surrenders to our enemies he’ll write a devastating op-ed about them in the New York Times. I loved the cut to Chris while BHO was pontificating. I wonder if he was thinking “will he ever shut up?” I know I was.

Speaking of abortion, an interesting follow-up question might have been about Obama’s opposition as a state senator to an Illinois law mandating that an infant fortunate enough to escape a botch abortion receive medical care. It wasn’t asked.

On “Bitter Clingers”
CW displayed a graphic showing that in Pennsylvania Hillary had beaten BHO like a borrowed mule with two groups that Chris called “pillars of the democrat party,” white union households and white Catholics. She won 72% to his 28% in these groups, known to many as “Reagan democrats,” and known to Barack Obama as bitter people who cling to guns and God. At no point did Chris ask the man-god about the specific remarks he made about them in San Francisco, and whether that could explain why the people he looks down his nose at didn’t vote for him. Rather than addressing his pounding at the hands of Mrs. Clinton, BHO said he actually does well with those voters, citing Wisconsin, Virginia and Iowa as examples, and that they will vote for him in November.

On Bill Ayers
CW asked “do you really see a moral equivalency between what Ayers did and Tom Coburn said?” BHO replied “Of course not,” denied that he was claiming there was a moral equivalence, and repeated the lame explanation that he barely knows Ayers, and that just because you have dinner or serve on a board with someone means that that’s an “endorsement.”

Chris did not repeat Bill Ayers’ unfortunately timed remark reported in the New York Times on 9/11/2001, or show it on the screen, in which he stated that he was not only unrepentant about his terrorist acts, he felt that they hadn’t done enough. Nor did he press Barack Obama when he said that he deplored actions Ayers committed when BHO was “six or seven years old.” BHO was considerably older in 2001, and in 1995 when Ayers hosted a fundraiser for the him in the home he shares with his wife, fellow former Weatherman Bernadine Dohrn, something Chris didn’t ask him about. Thanks to Power Line, and the work of Guy Benson of the Sandy Rios’ show, we can hear the anti-American remarks Obama’s buddies made not 40 years ago, but in 2007. Here’s another link to Mr. Benson’s great collection of clips showing the Ayers and Dohrn haven’t changed a bit. I guess Chris Wallace couldn’t find these. In addition, as recently as April 6, less than 3 weeks ago, Mr. Ayers wrote that “Day in and day out,” “I go about my business, I hang out with my kids and my grandchildren, take care of the elders, I go to work, I teach and I write, I organize and I participate in the never-ending effort to build a powerful movement for peace and social justice.” Obama keeps trying to pretend that the problem is what Ayers did 40 years ago. Chris Wallace should have asked “Isn’t the issue not the terrorist acts that Bill Ayers, his wife and their cohorts committed 40 years ago, but rather the fact that he remains absolutely unrepentant about those acts and that his views of this country haven’t changed? Can voters be blamed for wondering whether your friendship with Mr. Ayers reflects poorly on your judgment?”

Obama seems to think that he pretends that Ayers actions are “ancient history” because now he’s a college professor–and we all know what a patriotic group college professors are–that should be the end of the discussion. That’s what liberals mean by ending “partisan bickering.” Discussion over. Issues decided. Submit and pay. He also seems flummoxed by the fact that people keep bringing up his mentor, the raving lunatic Rev. Wright and the unrepentant terrorist Bill Ayers, rather than all the Republicans who has befriended. Why? Why? He whines like Nancy Kerrigan. Ah, …let me think, could it be that maybe because being friends with people like Tom Coburn doesn’t indicate that you hate your country, but being friends with the kook fringe characters that surround you does?

On Jeremiah Wright
He did ask BHO about him, of course, since Wright is currently on tour, a fact that CW noted can’t be helpful to BHO’s campaign. When asked what specific things that BHO heard Rev. Wright say that he found objectionable, at first BHO tap-danced, first trying to sell the idea that Rev. Wright can use street vernacular or talk tough about parental responsibility. When pressed, he went back to that whole “it’s generational” routine; that is, it’s OK for Rev. Wright to screech “God damn America” because of his life experience.

On Taxes
Chris allowed BHO to repeat another media myth regarding taxes, absolutely unchallenged; that is, that lowering taxes lowers revenues to the government, when in fact whenever taxes are lowered revenues go up. Where is Charles Gibson when you need him?

Note to Fox News: I don’t know who that guy was hosting your Sunday show today, but please bring back the real Chris Wallace, you know, the one who questioned Bill Clinton in September, 2006.

Trackback URL

One sure-fire way to enrage most people is to slander them. The one exception to that rule is liberals, who can stand almost anything but when people tell the truth about them, their fringe wacko America-hating friends, their voting records, and their future plans to surrender to our enemies, and take over every aspect of our lives. So avoiding exposure is Job One. One of the most overused weapons that the libs, both the elected variety and those who aren’t elected (commonly called “journalists”), use to attempt to deceive those they seek to enslave and control is the accusation that anyone who opposes their sinister schemes is a “racist.” The most recent examples are two truth-tellers that I want to single out for kudos this morning. The first is Linda Daves, Chairwoman of the North Carolina GOP for standing up to the predictable shrieking over an ad featuring the Rev. Jeremiah “God Damn America!” Wright and two Obama supporters currently running for office. Apparently this ad contains two much straight talk for even Mr. Straight Talk himself, Sen. John McCain, who reacts with the revulsion the this sort of yucky, unvarnished truth usually elicits from prissy, county club Republican types. He has condemned the ad, and asked the NC GOP to stop running it. Ms. Daves refuses to be cowed, pointing out that the ad is about judgement and patriotism, not racism, dirty campaigning or any of the other ruses the Left uses to try to silence anyone who points out what they are really all about.

Speaking of the Left’s intimidation strategy, the other truth-teller that this bitter clinger wants to single out for praise is Floyd Brown. Many of you probably know that for the last twenty years Mr. Brown has been demonized for creating an ad that Al Gore used in the 1988 dem primary against his opponent, and eventual dem nominee and loser, Massachusetts governor Michael “Tank Commander” Dukakis. The ad featured a convicted murderer named Willie Horton. Like any good liberal, Gov. Dukakis opposes the death penalty and believes in the value of “rehabilitation,” so he gave Willie the opportunity to prey on unsuspecting people by giving him a weekend pass. Willie took that 48 hour pass and never looked back. In his pursuit of rehabilitation, he eventually ended up in Maryland, where he took the opportunity to beat, pistol-whip and cut 28-year-old Clifford Barnes for about 20 hourss before he repeatedly raped Mr. Barnes’ fiancee Angela and stole their car. This ad was an accurate account of what happened, and it sounds like a pretty good example of why we shouldn’t put liberals in charge of anything, especially for keeping vicious, evil sub-humans from interacting with civilized society. And yet, for twenty years we’ve been told by the MSM, and liberal politicians that this ad was absolutely unacceptable, an example of the “gutter politics” and contemptible “smears” that are destroying our political system and our country. Not only that, it is racist. Why? Why because the perp, Willie Horton, is black of course! You can’t talk about the crimes committed by a black guy! Haven’t you learned anything yet?!

Now, Mr. Brown has turned his truth detector on He Who Walks on Water, and the MSM is in full cry. Chris “the Screamer” Matthews was beside himself when talking about this ad about Barack “You Can’t Say My Last Name” Obama’s vote against the death penalty for gang bangers while an Illinois state senator. How dare anyone talk about BHO’s voting record! Don’t people know that this election is about “hope” and “change?” Why do some people always have to bring us down with these pesky discussions about actual votes and what these politicians really believe?

Meanwhile, Rev. Wrong is going to be doing the Eddie Haskell tonight on Bill Moyers’ show. Gee, Rev. Way to go into a really challenging arena to respond to concerns about your racist, anti-American sermons. I’m sure that Bill Moyers will ask all the challenging questions that we’ve come to expect whenever a liberal appears on PBS.

Once again, it’s time to connect some dots. Is it really a stretch from Rev. Wright’s “racist Amerika” world view and Barack Obama’s unwillingness to impose severe punishment on gangbangers? In Mr. Not Ready for Prime Time’s view, it’s not their fault. It’s racism, it’s the lack of “economic justice,” and it’s Mr. Charlie, the White Man, so how can they be subjected to the death penalty for killing people?

Here’s the video. You can judge for yourself. While you’re at it, please check out this one, too, also about BHO’s record as a typical sleazy, Chicago pol.

Trackback URL

When I woke up on Sunday, March 30, I realized that the Husband and I had missed that idiotic “Earth Hour,” when people were supposed to engage in yet another in what seems to be an endless series of pointless symbolic gestures to show their concern for the planet that we are gradually destroying with our air conditioners, our plastic bottles and our old-fashioned light bulbs–talk about “excuse me for living’–by turning off our lights for an hour. It had been my intention to make up for all that darkness on March 29 by turning on all the lights inside and outside of my house, and leaving them on all night. After all, if it’s better to light one little candle than to sit and curse the darkness, how much better to turn on all my lights and sit and curse the socialists who have duped some well-intentioned, emotionally-driven types to participate in these silly self-congratulatory rituals. Sadly, I completely forgot, and so we had only our usual few dozen lights on. Today, I have another chance, it being Earth Day and all. I know it’s Earth Day because I saw that half-wit who does the weather on ABC’s Good Morning America, Sam Champion, babbling about it this morning before I had a chance to dive for the remote. Speaking of Spacey Sam, check out this story. Last Friday, when presented with the fact that alarmist scenes of collapsing glaciers in Al Gore’s “Aa Inconvenient Truth” crockumentary was completely fake and computer-generated, he said “Audiences expect Hollywood to twist fact into fiction. But Gore’s documentary does the opposite, using a fake shot to make a real point, that ice shelves are disappearing, and vanishing ice means global warming.” I am not making this up. Yes, I believe he is allowed to walk around off the leash. If this quote doesn’t prove once and for all that all this man-made global warming stuff is a secular religion to its devotees, I don’t know what does. By the way, I wonder if anyone has asked John McCain about this phony footage?

Speaking of presidential politics, and tough questions, today, in PA, which is holding its big dem primary today, presumptive loser Barack Hussein Obama had another one of those cranky moments, which you may have noticed happens whenever anyone asks him anything more challenging than “Senator, is it difficult to always be the smartest person in the room?” or “Senator, what’s it like to know that everyone is depending on you to ensure the survival of humanity?” This time, he was asked about another one of his anti-American supporters, this one notable for the fact that he is a former president of the United States, the King of the Useful Idiots, Jimmy Carter. As most of you know, his latest demonstration of his claim to the title is his meeting with leader of the bloodthirsty terrorists group Hamas, Khaled Meshaal. As you would expect, since BHO is the 2nd coming of JC (no, not that one, despite what his followers believe, but rather Jimmy Carter), Carter is supporting Obama. In an annoying, coy sort of way, he’s made that clear. So today when asked about Carter’s latest dumbass move, Obama refused to answer, instead pleading “Why can’t I just eat my waffle?” Boo-hoo, Big Ears. Let me see …why can’t you just eat your waffle? MMM …how about because you’re running for president?

I will be watching the returns tonight, of course, but part of me wishes the whole thing would turn out like it did last night on the WWE.

I forgot how much fun wrestling can be.

As far as Earth Day goes, I have to stop now so I won’t miss my chance to celebrate this time. I’m going to go run some errands, and even though it’s only about 70℉, I plan to turn up my car A/C full blast. Don’t worry: I have a sweater.

Trackback URL

Readers of my scribblings know that yesterday I ripped the mask off the supposedly “tough” questioning of Barack Hussein Obama in Wednesday night’s ABC debate, by pointing out that even though George Stephanopoulous and Charles Gibson did ask him about those “manufactured issues” like his friendship with unrepentant terrorist Bill Ayers, his mentoring by a racist raving lunatic named Jeremiah Wright and his disdain for wearing an American flag pin, they never held his feet to the fire when he didn’t answer. As usual, I’m out of step with my friends in the MSM. Check out the WaPo TV critic Tom Shales foaming at the mouth. They are apoplectic because Barry was even asked the questions. My lefty friends, you guys don’t know what tough questions are. If I could ask Barry a few questions, you’d see this TelePrompTer-dependent empty suit stammering like Ralph Kramden, which come to think of it, was pretty close to what happened Wednesday night. Even more hilarious, even though he’s been an “objective journalist” for several years, suddenly the left-wing moonbats are concerned that George might not be objective because he helped Bill Clinton get elected. When was the last time you heard the phrase “conflict of interest” describing any of these fugitives from the democrat party (Tim Russert, who used to work for Mario Cuomo, Chris “the Screamer” Matthews, who, God help him, used to write speeches for the King of the Useful Idiots, Jimmy Carter and others)? We’re hearing it now applied to George S, who probably is going to have to eat lunch by himself for a while.

I think I realize the real reason that they are so upset. Yes, they didn’t like the questions about Obama’s radical pals or his embrace of the liberal idea that “patriotism” means the ability to point out all the bad things about America you, Hugo Chavez or Ahmanidenijad can dream up, which is why last October Obama said, as opposed to what he said Wednesday night, that he wouldn’t wear a flag pin. No, George and Charlie didn’t point that flip-flp out. No matter. The Obamaniacs are still seething with rage. The following video snippet illustrates it:

Barack Obama Admits He\'s a Socialist

In this clip, BHO demonstrates that when in comes to economics, he’s a blithering idiot.

Barack Obama Couldn\'t Pass Econ 101 at Gunpoint
If I, then a wet-behind-the-ears, fairly clueless undergraduate, had turned in this answer in my Econ 101 class, I would have received the “F” it deserves, but then my professor wasn’t a brainless left-winger who responds to the endless repetition of meaningless buzzwords (“Wall Street” “Halliburton” “neocon”) like my dogs respond to Beggin’ Strips. “Bush lied people died.” A+!

What do you suppose got into Charlie? He stated the fact that when you reduce taxes, revenues go up, and he got Barack Hussein Obama to admit that in his view tax policy is less about revenue and more about “fairness,” so even if you collect less money for all those beneficent government programs, it’s better to punish the evil “rich” (anyone with a job basically under liberals’ definition) than to let people enjoy the fruits of their labor. Maybe one of you libs can do me favor and answer the following questions: (1) where does the government get the moral authority to take the fruits of one person’s labor and give them to another? In 1850, we had a system like that in the southern states. We called it slavery. (2) Why is letting someone keep the money he or she earns “giving” them something, as in the hackneyed and idiotic liberal mantra “tax cuts for the rich?”

I know that the barking moonbats are upset that ABC pulled back the curtain a bit, fearing that the public may finally learn who Barack Obama really is, but I think this tax question really sent them over the edge. If people understand that liberals are lying when they claim that raising taxes is “for the children,” and realize that it’s really about their belief that it’s their role in life to make everyone equal in their happy socialist utopia, they aren’t going to compliantly submit and pay.

Trackback URL