Of course I watched last night’s debate on ABC, and I will probably have a lot more to say about it later, but here’s an initial impression. As mentioned in a previous post, if Barack Hussein Obama gets elected, we’re going to need a new cabinet post, Secretary of Explaining What the President Really Meant. I realize that most of the Obamaniacs watching last night probably think that both George Stephanopoulis and Charlie, oh excuse me, Charles, Gibson were being mean to He Who Walks on Water, but I have a different take. I think that they have been angling for that Explainer job in the Obama administration. They weren’t giving him a hard time. They were yet another stop in his do-over tour, giving him a chance to try to once again rationalize, elucidate, and tap dance his way around the seemingly endless pieces of evidence that he is a typical crypto-Marxist and charter member of the America-is-always-wrong club, along with his mentor Jeremiah “Show Me the Money!” Wright and former Weatherman/terrorist Billy “We Didn’t Do Enough” Ayers. (Remind me to tell all of you about the last time University of Illinois-Chicago, where I got my Master’s and where Bomber Billy teaches asked me for money, but I digress …) Their mission was to lay to rest, once and for all, those pesky issues about his association with these two characters, his disdain for wearing a flag pin, and his condescension toward those of us who take our faith seriously and who dare to demand our god-Given 2nd amendment rights.

How stupid do these MSM types think we are? Do they expect us to believe that because they asked Mr. Not Ready for Prime Time about why he disinvited Jeremiah Wright to the announcement of his presidential run in February 2007 that they were trying to get at the truth? If Charles Gibson wanted to know the truth, he would not have been happy with the answer he got. Obama mentioned that the reason for the disinvitation was not the “offensive remarks” that aired repeatedly on YouTube and everywhere else, but some remarks that were in Rolling Stone. Maybe Charlie figures we all read Rolling Stone and know what he’s talking about, but I for one would have appreciated his following up with the question “What did he say in Rolling Stone?” He didn’t even ask him when Obama returned to the subject and said that the disinvitation was due to “something different.” C’mon, Charlie, where’s that dogged journalistic determination to get the truth? In all the changing stories we’ve gotten from BHO regarding the racist, raving moonbat who served as his pastor for 20 years (I never heard what he said, I wasn’t there, I heard about it later), we’ve never heard the specific comments from Rev. Wright with which Obama disagrees. Will one you pinheads please ask him what SPECIFICALLY he and Mr. Wrong disagree on? No, I’m not holding my breath. I realize that this is yet another example of the MSM’s desire to pretend to ask liberals penetrating questions, when in reality just providing cover for them to say “I’ve answered that question a million times” without having to answer at all.

He also mentioned that he believes in increasing taxes “for purposes of fairness., and “how we need to restore a sense of economic fairness to this country because that’s what this country has always been about, providing upward mobility.” The last phrase was part of his answer about patriotism, when he was tap dancing around his disdain for wearing a flag pin. Translation: I believe that it’s the federal government’s job to confiscate the fruits of one person’s labor at gunpoint and give it to another person. Patriotism means socialism. I think I read something like this from the American Communist party.

When it comes to economics, once again he demonstrates, this is one confused guy. Senator, the upward mobility you mention would be destroyed by the socialistic, big government, confiscatory tax increase policies that you advocate. I’m sure you were shocked when Charlie and George didn’t mention that.

Last night as he always does, Barack Obama characterized his disdain for the flag pin, his association with Bill Ayers and Jeremiah Wright as “manufactured issues.” He mocked the notion of his friendship with the unrepentant terrorist Bill Ayers as ridiculous because he was only 8 years old when Ayers was actively trying to bomb the U.S. Capitol. Unfortunately for Obama on September 11, 2001, when Obama was 40 years old, his pal Ayers asked about his terrorist past said he thought they hadn’t done enough, a statement that Ayers stands by today, when Obama is what–47 years old?

I’ll say it again. Jeremiah Wright. Bill Ayers. First time I’m proud of my mean country. What does it take? These Obama apologists constantly trying to explain away the mounting evidence of who this guy is are like a bunch of imbeciles trying to cover up the stench of a rotting corpse with cans of air freshener. Last night, Charlie and George were spraying away along with the rest of them.

Trackback URL