My Apologies

Before the election, I thought we needed to know the truth about Obama, because the media seemed to be ignoring the many problems.

When he won anyway, I decided to close the blog, in the hopes I was wrong and he would turn out to be competent.

I apologize. It turns out that in my blogging last year, I was much too generous in not pointing out his flaws. I really didn't think he could screw up this bad. I really thought the doom-and-gloomers were over the top.

I really thought the Democrats wouldn't be that stupid, when they had a competent candidate in Hillary Clinton, to pick a person that was incompetent and would destroy the country.

I was wrong. As I expect every person who used to have money and voted for Obama's "change" and "hope" now says on a daily basis. Becuase change we got, and hope has gone.

The question remains -- will people with money survive until we can throw out the Democrats in 2010, or will by that time the only people left be people who need the government to save them (although with all the people with money properly 'punished' by Obama/Biden/Pelosi, i don't know who they get next to pay).

I remember Albright once saying that the problem in the world was that the United States was the only superpower. It seems Obama and the Democrats want to fix that problem, at the expense of every hard-working American who saved their money instead of spending it or donating it to Barack's Election.

In 2006, when we threw out the Republicans for overspending and for "corruption", we didn't realize we were punishing ourselves. But since that fateful day in November, everything that was great about this country has been turned around by the Democrats.

It's our fault. Democrats promised change, and they gave it. Bush had to spend his political power keeping the Democrats from losing the war in Iraq, so other than marginally holding back their attempts to destroy the country (like SCHIP expansion which they have now done), or some social things like keeping them from killing quite as many babies, Bush didn't stand in the way as the Democrats detroyed our economy.

What might have been. Too many conservatives disliked Romney, because he wasn't conservative enough, or he was too Mormon. But it would sure be nice to have someone in the White House now who knew how to work with both sides of the aisle (Obama has never done that, and is ignoring half the country today). It would be nice to have someone who understands business, understands the economy, and had real ideas about how to solve health insurance and other issues without destroying the basic nature of our economic strength.

But even Moderate John McCain would have been better. He also could bring the country together. He would have brought in people who paid their taxes and who knew how to fix things. He wouldn't be expanding government at the expense of hard-working americans.

I don't expect to post any more to this blog, but it can stand as a testament to the basic fact that sometimes, things are worse than they seem at the time.

If it's September, time for Obama to lie about Social Security

Every September, Democrats around the United States pause to scare Seniors by lying about nefarious "plots" to take away their Social Security.

This year, Obama decided to use last week's market turmoil to frighten the poor seniors in Florida half to death.

The Obama ad is SO OUTRAGEOUS that even factcheck.org, which is owned by the Annaburg foundation, the foundation he is closely associated with and run by his friends, had to call him on it.

From Factcheck.org, harsh words for the candidate who promised he would run a clean, positive campaign, in their article "Scaring Seniors":

An Obama-Biden ad says McCain supports "cutting benefits in half" for Social Security recipients. False!

That's not "Misleading", that's "Lie".

A new Obama ad characterizes the "Bush-McCain privatization plan" as "cutting Social Security Benefits in half." This is a falsehood sure to frighten seniors who rely on their Social Security checks. In truth, McCain does not propose to cut those checks at all.

Remember, on Friday Obama said that in these difficult times, we shouldn't be playing politics, or scaring people with our economic plans.

But now we find out that Obama is quietly running these ads, using the current turmoil to scare our parents, grandparents, and others, by lying about what McCain has supported, and will do as President.

I say "quietly" because apparently Obama's campaign didn't announce these ads. Normally, the campaign makes a big deal about ads. It's clear they knew these ads were false, and they wanted to keep their "distance". As FactCheck says:

The Obama campaign made no announcement of this ad and won't say where they intend to run it. It was first aired on a station in Flint, Mich. on Sept. 16, where it was recorded by the Campaign Media Analysis Group of TNSI Media Intelligence. According to CMAG, the ad has been running in Florida, Michigan, Nevada, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Virginia and Wisconsin.

Factcheck had to get a recording of the ad. I don't know if that means it isn't on YouTube. If it was NOT put out on YouTube by the campaign, that would be further evidence that the campaign was trying to hide the ad for as long as possible, to take maximum advantage of last week's stock market turmoil to scare seniors, McCain's best voter group, into voting for Obama instead.

Here are the MANY DIFFERENT WAYS that Obama's secret ad lies:

The three votes featured in the ad are from 1998 and 2006. ... None would have actually resulted in changing Social Security without additional, specific legislation.
...
The ad implies that Bush's plan bets the whole lot of Social Security funds on unstable stocks. In fact, it would have "privatized" only a small portion of Social Security taxes that Americans could have invested in private accounts, if they chose to do so.
...
The ad goes on to claim that the Bush (and McCain) plan would cut "benefits in half." This is a rank misrepresentation: Nobody now getting benefits, or even close to retirement, would have seen any reduction in benefits or cost-of-living adjustments under the plan Bush proposed in April, 2005.

Factcheck also explains that only future higher-income workers would see a reduction in benefits from the current unpayable projections. Low-income people would not have a reduction. And that reduction doesn't include the extra money from the private accounts.

Factcheck then examines the "cut in half", and shows that it's based on a false premise from one of Obama's MANY economic advisors:

The Obama-Biden campaign attempts to document their "cutting benefits in half" claim by citing a report by the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities written by Jason Furman, who is currently one of Obama's top economic advisers. This won't do.

What Furman's study actually says is quite different from what the ad claims. Furman's report says that the "progressive price indexing" plan Bush supported would result in benefits for the average worker who retires in 2075 that are 28 percent lower than under the current formula. Obviously 28 percent is not "half."

The Obama-Biden campaign notes that Furman's paper also says that full price indexing of benefits – even for low-income workers – would result in benefits 49 percent lower than the current formula in 2075. But that's not the plan Bush supported, and we find no evidence that McCain ever supported it either. We asked the Obama campaign to show us where McCain has ever supported full price indexing of benefits, but so far they have not done so.

Note that they don't even raise the objection of a campaign citing the statement of their own campaign worker as "proof", just that they couldn't even get that right. Now, think about that -- what kind of economic advisor would allow a campaign to misuse his own supposedly scholarly work? Is that the kind of economic advisor we need right now, when our system is teetering precisely because economic advisors allowed the decisionmakers to misuse their scholarly work?

Factcheck closes with an admission that while McCain is TRYING to fix Social Security, Obama is making it harder by playing politics:

The system isn't exactly "going broke." But the latest official projection is that the trust fund will be exhausted by the year 2041, after which current tax rates will finance only 78 percent of currently scheduled benefits. We agree that "straight talk" is needed and that finding solutions will be hard. Ads like this, however, misinform the public and make the job of fixing the system more difficult.

Obama lies about McCain, Born Alive Act.

I think Obama says so many things wrong so that we can't possibly keep up.

In this latest news, Obama is really upset about an advertisement which truthfully exposes his vote against the Born Alive Act in Illinois, which I wrote about some months ago.

So Obama has lashed out, attacking McCain for "lying" about Obama's position.

Two problems. First, as I've shown before, it's not a lie. Heck, even the Obama campaign itself had to admit it's true he opposed the bill, and that the bill was exactly what was in the Federal bill. And there is tape of Obama specifically saying he opposed the bill because it might force government between the doctor and the patient if a baby is born alive after an abortion -- which clearly shows he's fine with the doctor killing an aborted baby, without interference from the government.

But more importantly, John McCain has NEVER attacked Obama about the Born Alive bill. In fact, the advertisement running against Obama is from a woman who actually WAS born alive, and is paid for by a 527, not the McCain campaign.

But the media has printed Obama's charges against McCain, and not one mainstream media outlet has chosen to inform their readers that Obama can't even listen to a 30-second advertisement without getting it's facts wrong. That's a pretty important thing if you want to be President, and the readers and voters deserve the truth, not the whitewash the media is doing.

Could Obama still be on drugs?

It might explain how, in the middle of the biggest crisis our economy has faced since 9/11, he can't make up his mind whether a bailout that happened on tuesday is good or bad.

It may explain why he thinks he didn't ask Iraq's foreign minister to delay negotiations, when a month earlier he told a news reporter that he had;

It may explain why he thinks Raines isn't his advisor, when the Washington Post reported it in July and it's been in Raine's Wikipedia entry for months (until tonight).

It may explain why Obama thought it would be a good idea to attack McCain for the injuries he sustained during his torture in Vietnam.

It may explain why Obama said the Sex Ed program for kindergartners that he voted for wasn't actually going to teach the Kindergartners anything about sex, when the bill explicitly said otherwise and the sponsore eventually changed it because of the outrage.

It may explain why Obama thinks that quoting his record is lying.

It may explain why Obama sat in a church "every sunday" for 20 years, and never noticed his pastor denouncing white people and America, even though he actually wrote a book about it.

It may explain why Obama hardly ever showed up for work, and why his subcommittee never held a single hearing.

And maybe he was afraid there would be a drug test if he showed up at a military base in Germany to visit the troops.



No, I don't think Obama is still on drugs (it's possible he still sneaks a smoke, but smoking is legal for now). I just think he has an audacity that makes him think he can lie all he wants, and nobody will care.

And figures if anybody DOES call him on it, he can always denounce them as racist.

Obama insists he has idea what to do.

Jonathan Marks, from the Politico, who has done his share of trying to cover for Obama, seems to have become quite exasperated at the thankless task.

Which leads him to post this, part of an article titled "Obama outraged at being accused of not supporting something he doesn't support":

Obama, on the trail in New Mexico, had this to say of McCain:"And today he accused me of not supporting what the Treasury and the Federal Reserve Bank did with AIG despite no evidence whatsoever that that’s what I had said."

To recap, when I wrote earlier today that Obama supported the bailout, I quickly was instructed by his staff that this was not the case. He just didn't oppose it, I was told.

Now he's so adamant about not opposing the Fed's move that he's complaining about McCain's portrayal.

Where, I wonder, is the line between not opposing and, ya know, supporting.

The fact is that in all of Obama's speeches, he has yet to say if he supported the AIG bailout, or opposed it. He is afraid to take a position, in case (like the surge) he comes up completely wrong again.

On the other hand, the much more experienced Sarah Palin, who has HAD TO MAKE REAL DECISIONS in her job, has made a clear statement on the bailout, as has John McCain. (Joe Biden said something about giving people toasters and how we are unpatriotic if we don't pay more taxes).

We can't afford a President who votes "Present". I guess since Obama has betrayed his economic advisor, he can't really say what position he holds until he finds somebody on the Democratic side who isn't hopelessly tainted by the corruption that led to our current monetary crisis.

Of course, by next week we'll hear how Obama actually caused the bailout to happen. Because if there is ONE THING that Barack Obama is good at, it is denying what he has done, and taking credit for good things he had nothing to do with.

Obama: I am an instrument of God's Will

Well, he did say those "exact words". By Charles Gibson's standards, which the left seems to really support now, those are the "exact words" of Barack Obama. Which sounds like Obama thinks he is a devine messenger sent from God to work HIS will on America, like it or not.

Here is the original source:

The prayer that I tell myself every night is a fairly simple one: I ask in the name of Jesus Christ that my sins are forgiven, that my family is protected and that I am an instrument of God's will.

See? You too can be Charles Gibson. Just find something perfectly reasonable that the candidate said, like that he is praying to do God's will, or that she is praying that our leaders would do God's will. Then skip the part about it being a prayer, or about asking God, and just quote the part about God's will.

Then accuse the candidate of being some holy warrior.

It's easy. We can say Barack is a muslim, since he talked about "my muslim faith". Never mind that he was talking about people who were NOT talking about him BEING a Muslim -- just quote the part you like.

You can do this with the interview results to. If the candidate makes you look silly, just edit that part out. If she gives a great answer, erase it -- or better yet, edit it in the middle so it looks like she is clueless.

If none of that works, you can use the Charles Gibson Mindreading Special:

"Sarah, what number am I thinking Of?"

Scott Ott responds: Barack Obama -- Still Crazy

John Bachelor : Obama in meltdown

John Bachelor covers the story of Obama's false attack on McCain's technological prowess:

After a year of starving and abusing 32 year old John McCain, no medical attention, abandonment and isolation in a windowless cell at the North Vietnamese Potemkin Village of a prison called the Plantation, the sadistic boss of the camp, Major Bai, called "Cat" by the POWs, ordered that the torturers break the admiral's son and force him to sign a confession.
...
The torturers started by rebreaking his left arm. Then he was trussed in ropes and beaten every two or three hours. According to the definitive Naval Institute Press volume on the POWS, "Honor Bound: American Prisoners of War in Southeast Asia, 1961-1973," this sadism continued for four days.
...
What also stays with John McCain is the damage to his arms. When he was released in 1973, (left, returning to US care) his right arm was two inches shorter than his left. He cannot lift his arms above his breast. He cannot comb his own hair. And he is not dexterous enough to type at a keyboard.

But some democratic supporters say we should just get over this, that this is just whining, that a "real man" wouldn't worry about this kind of thing.

Bachelor continues:

This meltdown explains how it is possible for the Obama-Biden campaign to issue, on the eve of Hurrican Ike that will dominate the news for twenty-four hours, the most cynical and stupid of webads that attacks John McCain for not being in the economy enough to use the internet. The webad is the worst of postures-- it is snide:

"1982, John McCain goes to Washington," an announcer says over chirpy elevator music. "Things have changed in the last 26 years, but McCain hasn't. He admits he still doesn't know how to use a computer...

Bachelor tries to explain how Obama could let this happen:

Perhaps the webad writers were unaware of John McCain's disability. Perhaps they skipped the detail that John McCain depends upon Cindy McCain to type his e-mail messages. Perhaps it just does not make sense, to a campaign headed by the fresh-faced forty-something David Plouffe, that there are men walking around who have been tortured and permanently disabled by the enemy.

Perhaps, as I have been told by my best Democratic Party source, the Obama-Biden campaign is in meltdown, there is no single message, there is no unity, there is no vision, and so separate but equal parts with lots of cash but not much learning are just wandering off the trail.

Was it just last week that Obama said that his ability to run his campaign proved he was ready to be President?

Will the Obama supporters complain that Obama's ability to not mock disabled vets has nothing to do with being President?

Obama refuses to apologize for ridiculing wounded veteran

It's now been almost 24 hours since Obama, who keeps promising he's going to talk about real issues, instead ran a paid advertisement falsely mocking John McCain for his war injuries.

This was an ad which lied about McCain's knowledge of technology, making fun of him because he had someone else type into his computer. McCain does this because it hurts him to type, because of injuries inflicted on him when he was a Prisoner of War.

Stories have been written about McCain's trouble with the use of his arms, and also about how technologically savvy McCain actually is. If Obama's campaign had done ANY research, they would have known that in the Senate, McCain is a leader on technology issues (Obama might have known that if he had spent any significant time actually IN the senate).

Instead, they picked up some news item where McCain, self-deprecating as always, made fun of his injuries, talking about how he needed others to do his e-mail. And Obama, being an elitist, and looking down on anybody who isn't Obama, immediately thought -- "What a great idea for a commercial -- we can make fun of McCain and make him look stupid".

Which itself deserves an apology. For whatever else you can say, McCain has never said Obama was stupid.

But if Obama wants to make fun of every old person who doesn't use the internet, I guess that's a "campaign strategy". Some would call that age warfare, pitting his largely young and inexperienced supporters against the older, wiser general populace.

Some can't believe Obama would be ignorant of McCain's injuries -- which would suggest he purposely attacked McCain for being disabled. Yesterday, I didn't think so. I figured Obama was simply to naive to realise what he was doing.

But if that were the case, Obama, once it was pointed out that he had committed the unpardonable sin of mocking an injured war hero, would have pulled the ad and apologized. And frankly, I expected him to do so. Obama may be naive, may be inexperienced, and certainly is in no way ready to be President. But he's not suicidal.

But shockingly, we have now gone 24 hours, and Obama has NOT pulled the false, dispicable ad from YouTube. And he has not issued an apology to the wounded veterans of our country who are unable to do what people like Obama, who never served, can do easily.

As someone said, it would be like attacking the blind governor of New York because he can't drive.

So, Obama has an advertisement that says that wounded Veterans who can't use their arms to get on the internet are not qualified to be President, and are instead to be objects of ridicule. And he has refused to apologize. And that is NOT someone we want as President of the United States.

Raising Kaine: We aren't electing an American Idol Winner

I guess it had to happen. After months of the Democrats pushing an American Idol candidate (Obama), even when they had a perfectly competent, experienced candidate (Hillary Clinton), they find themselves "out-idoled" by the Republican ticket.

And so NOW they figure out that the Presidency is not about popularity, but about experience, ideas, judgment, and who can actually LEAD.

Of course, the problem with this belated reality check from the left is that, on all those counts, John McCain beats their candidate hands down.

In fact, in rankings of the "ready for President" status of the 4 candidates, Obama ranks last, even below his own VP pick.


Of course, the simple fact is that Governor Sarah Palin is not really an "American Idol" pick. She is a serious candidate. She has been in government longer than Obama, and has executive experience.

In fact, if you were trying to figure out what "experience" you would want heading into the job of President, it makes sense that you want someone who first gets a job running a small government, and then gets promoted up to running a larger executive branch, before trying out for the biggest executive lead position.

Of course, Palin is the only one running with that kind of experience. At least McCain has some leadership training, having been an Officer in our military. Was Obama even a Boy Scout?

Obama did lead the Harvard Law Review. So far as I know, they managed to publish every month, so at least he made the trains run on time, so to speak.

Why Hasn't Obama apologized and pulled the Ad?

Obama is not completely illiterate, and he has a nationwide campaign staff.

So, if I know that he lied about McCain and mocked him for his war wounds, surely Obama knows this as well.

This story has been available for over 5 hours.

What is Obama waiting for? His only POSSIBLE chance to save his career is to apologize and pull the ad right away. He needed to do this within an hour of when the story broke.

Now we are going on 4 hours. Remember how when Allen said "Macaca", each hour was considered another hour where he didn't react quickly enough.

I presume that the Washington Post will have a front-page story about how Obama has not apologized for ridiculing a war hero for his disability.

Obama Mocks McCain's War Injuries

Obama is done. If he wasn't done before, surely he is done now that he has attack John McCain for his war injuries.
In Obama's latest ad, "still", Obama approves the "message" that McCain doesn't "know how to use E-mail", saying that McCain is just technology impaired.

But it turns out that McCain not only knows how to use E-mail, but does so extensively, as we find in this Forbes article from 2000, Net Vs. Norm:

In certain ways, McCain was a natural Web candidate. Chairman of the Senate Telecommunications Subcommittee and regarded as the U.S. Senate's savviest technologist, McCain is an inveterate devotee of email. His nightly ritual is to read his email together with his wife, Cindy.

If that was all there was to the story, it would just be another of the many times Obama has lied about McCain, has made a false personal attack while pretending he is some new kind of candidate. I mean, it's pretty stupid to attack someone for being "technologically in the past" when they are known as one of the savviest technologists in the Senate. You'd think Biden could have helped Obama here -- isn't that why he picked Biden, to fill in for Obama's youthful inexperience.

But there is a kernel of truth here -- McCain doesn't actually do his OWN e-mail. And the reason why is also the reason why Obama is done. This is Obama's "Macaca" moment, except that "Macaca" was a 3-second mistake by a candidate, and Obama's "Macaca" was a premeditated advertising buy:

The injuries he incurred as a Vietnam POW make it painful for McCain to type. Instead, he dictates responses that his wife types on a laptop. "She's a whiz on the keyboard, and I'm so laborious," McCain admits.

Got it? The reason McCain does not use a computer keyboard is because HE WAS TORTURED AS A POW IN VIETNAM. Obama just attacked a Veteran for his disabilities, he just RIDICULED the Senate's Technologist because of his war injuries.

This is the left's "new politics"? No, this is the worst kind of politics of personal destruction. Mocking a man for not using a keyboard was already juvenile. Mocking a man who CAN'T use a keyboard because he gave up his mobility in service of his country is a DISQUALIFIER for the Presidency.

Of course, if Obama knew how to use the internet, as he falsely mocks McCain, he'd have been able to find this story, and others, like THIS BOSTON GLOBE STORY:

McCain gets emotional at the mention of military families needing food stamps or veterans lacking health care. The outrage comes from inside: McCain's severe war injuries prevent him from combing his hair, typing on a keyboard, or tying his shoes. Friends marvel at McCain's encyclopedic knowledge of sports. He's an avid fan - Ted Williams is his hero - but he can't raise his arm above his shoulder to throw a baseball.

The AP of course is in bed with the Democrats. They ran THIS STORY allowing the Obama campaign to falsely mock McCain, and didn't even bother to research to see if Obama was lying:

"Our economy wouldn't survive without the Internet, and cyber-security continues to represent one our most serious national security threats," Pfeiffer said. "It's extraordinary that someone who wants to be our president and our commander in chief doesn't know how to send an e-mail."McCain has said he relies on his wife and staff to work the computer for him and that he doesn't use e-mail.

That's it. The AP never bothered to call McCain and ask WHY he didn't work the computer, or to search for old stories that would explain it. Nor did they even THINK to question the absurd notion that McCain is a technological idiot.

So, the question is, when the Democrats replace Obama, will Hillary keep Biden as VP?

Yes, Obama voted for Sex Ed for Kindergartners

Barack Obama's campaign has attacked John McCain's honor, for apparently no good reason.

According to the Politico, The Obama camp was upset at a hard-hitting McCain ad:

"Obama's one accomplishment?" the narrator asks. "Legislation to teach 'comprehensive sex education' to kindergartners. Learning about sex before learning to read? Barack Obama. Wrong on education. Wrong for your family."

But apparently not having any substantive complaint about the facts in the advertisement, they instead decided to personally attack John McCain:

Bill Burton, Obama's press secretary, responded in a statement: “It is shameful and downright perverse for the McCain campaign to use a bill that was written to protect young children from sexual predators as a recycled and discredited political attack against a father of two young girls – a position that his friend Mitt Romney also holds. Last week, John McCain told Time magazine he couldn't define what honor was. Now we know why."

The reason they couldn't attack the ad on substance is that Barack Obama DID vote for a bill that did exactly as McCain claimed. Here is the bill's text:

23-33 (a) The program established under this Act shall include, but not be limited to, the following major educational areas as a basis for curricula in all elementary and secondary schools in this State: human ecology and health, human growth and development, the emotional, psychological, physiological, hygienic and social responsibilities of family life, including sexual abstinence and prevention of unintended pregnancy until marriage, prevention and control of disease, including age appropriate instruction in grades K 6 through 12 on the prevention of sexually transmitted infections, including the prevention, transmission and spread of HIV AIDS, public and environmental (???) health, consumer health, safety education and disaster survival, mental health and illness, personal health habits, alcohol, drug use, and abuse including the medical and legal ramifications of alcohol, drug, and tobacco use, abuse during pregnancy, sexual abstinence until marriage, tobacco, nutrition, and dental health.

Note that they even changed the law to cover Kindergarten, where it used to start at 6th grade.

Campaign commercials tend to cast the opponent in a bad light -- it's the point. So it's normal to respond by noting what you really intended. It's not normal to go off the deep end and personally attack your opponent as dishonorable simply because you can't think of a good reason to teach the "prevention of sexually transmitted infections" to a 5-year-old.

Will Obama Return Thief Jodie Evan's money?

Jodie Evans is a big-money bundler for Barack Obama. Jodie Evans is also with Code Pink. That apparently doesn't bother Obama.

Last week, at the RNC convention, Jodie Evans stormed the stage when Governor Sara Palin was speaking. She had to be subdued by Secret Service agents.

This apparently does not bother Obama either, as he has not returned her money.

Now, we find out that Jodie Evans got into the RNC convention by STEALING the credentials of a convention delegate, and then lying and saying the credentials were given to her.

From Channel 21 in Fort Wayne, Indiana: Ft. Wayne RNC Delegate gets ID stolen by Protest Group:

Fort Wayne realtor Annie Eckrich says her stolen identification was used by operatives to illegally gain entry onto the convention floor.

Eckrich, who was an alternate delegate to the Republican Party extravaganza in Minneapolis- St. Paul, says she didn't know anything about what happened until a reporter called her, asking if she'd handed over her credentials to protesters.

The story notes that Code Pink used it, but does not mention Jodie Evans by name:

Instead, it appears the "Code Pink" members got their hands on it, and got in the convention to make a scene.
...
Eckrich is particularly upset that a “Code Pink” press release suggested credentials were handed over by a disgruntled republican delegate.

She says she's firmly behind McCain, especially after the selection of Sarah Palin as McCain’s Vice-Presidential running mate.

Some of us thought it was Ron Paul supporters, but we were wrong.

Just Obama supporters willing to lie and steal for their candidate, along with bundling large amounts of money.

How much has Jodie Evans gotten for Obama? From Jonathan Martin's blog in June:

A co-founder of the anti-war group Code Pink, which has made a name for itself by interrupting hearings on Capitol Hill, is a fundraising bundler for Barack Obama.Jodie Evans has pledged to raise at least $50,000 for Obama, according the Democrat's campaign site.

According to research being circulated by GOP sources, Evans has a record of inflammatory statements such as saying that women were better off in Iraq under Saddam Hussein, "Men are dying in their Hummers in Iraq so you can drive around in yours" and, my favorite, that the invasion of Iraq amounted to "global testosterone poisoning."

Obama Lies about Selective Service

Today, when George Stephanopolis was so busy kissing Obama's behind that he tried to correct Obama's misstatements for him, Obama lied about his selective service.

From the transcript as provided by the Newsbusters:

BARACK OBAMA: You know, I had to sign up for Selective Service when I graduated from high school. And I was growing up in Hawaii, and I had friend whose parents were in the military, there were a lot of Army, military bases there. And I always actually thought of the military as some ennobling and honorable option. But keep in mind: I graduated in 1979. The Vietnam War had come to an end. We weren't engaged in an active military conflict at that point. So it's not an option that I ever decided to pursue.

Barack Obama admits he graduated high school in 1979. But Selective Service was terminated by Gerald Ford in 1975:

On March 25, 1975, Pres. Gerald Ford signed Proclamation 4360, Terminating Registration Procedures Under Military Selective Service Act, eliminating the registration requirement for all 18-25 year old male citizens. Then on July 2, 1980, President Jimmy Carter signed Proclamation 4771, Registration Under the Military Selective Service Act, retroactively re-establishing the Selective Service registration requirement for all 18-26 year old male citizens born on or after January 1, 1960.

In 1980, as it says, Carter put the registration requirement back. For people who turned 18 between 1975 and 1980, the rules were as follows:

Only men born between March 29, 1957, and December 31, 1959, were completely exempt from Selective Service registration.[2] The first registrations after Proclamation 4771 took place on Monday, July 21, 1980, for those men born in January, February and March 1960 at U.S. Post Offices. Tuesdays, Wednesdays and Thursdays were reserved for men born in the later quarters of the year, and registration for men born in 1961 began the following week

As Barack was born in August of 1961, he was required to register starting around July 28, 1980 -- almost a full year after his graduation.

Now, a lot of people have asked if he ever really signed up for Selective Service. I have no idea, but I would be surprised if he didn't.

But what I am completely certain about is that he is lying when he says he had to sign up when he "graduated high school" in 1979.

I suppose he could just be really stupid -- but since this was obviously a planned question and Obama had all the time in the world to write the answer, you have to wonder if he is so completely stupid that he would mess up a simple fact like this in an answer that otherwise was so unbelievable that it needed SOME hook to reality.

I mean, nobody believes Obama really wanted to be in the military. And since Obama wrote two books about himself and never ONCE said he wanted to be in the military, it's likely that he only wants to HAVE BEEN in the military now that he is running for President as a totally unqualified candidate against a decorated war hero.

Sorry, Barack, but wishes aren't deeds -- and wishes aren't even wishes when you make them up 30 years later.

Obama is like a walking gaffe track

This morning on ABC, Obama stumbled through a simple explanation after he was called out for falsely implying that John McCain had anything to do with people thinking Obama was a Muslim.



Obama is having to admit that John McCain has never claimed Barack was a Muslim. So he says: "What I was suggesting is, You are absolutely right that John McCain has not, uh, talked about my Muslim faith, and you're absolutely right that is not come....

It's clear George is expecting Barack to say the wrong thing, because he quickly tries to "correct" Obama by saying "Your Christian Faith".

And Obama, clueless as always, takes George's command and repeats it, and them stumbles around until he remembers that he really DID mean "Muslim".
"What I am saying is that he has not suggested that I'm, um, that I am a Muslim."

This is another GREAT example of how, when you get Barack Obama away from a teleprompter, he is an idiot. His whole hand-waving, um-um'ing through even simple answers to trivial questions shows that he is NOT the man we want to stand up to our enemies, or to represent us to our allies.

If you can't put it on a teleprompter, Obama doesn't appear to be able to say it.

Obama Took $700 million in earmarks.

Obama continues to act like he's running against VP candidate Palin. It's not a bad strategy -- he certainly can't compare himself to John McCcain. But he compares poorly to Palin as well.

According to Politico, Obama today attacked Palin for accepting money from Congress when she was a mayor:

Barack Obama took his first direct swipe at Republican vice presidential nominee Sarah Palin on Saturday, criticizing her for supporting congressional earmarks before opposing them. “I know the governor of Alaska has been, you know, saying she is change,” Obama said at a town hall meeting here. “And that is great. She is a skillful politician. But when you [have] been taking all these earmarks when it is convenient and then suddenly you are the champion anti-earmark person.

“That is not change, come on,” Obama continued. “I mean, words mean something. You can’t just make stuff up. You can’t just make stuff up. We have a choice to make and the choice is clear.”

(Once gain, a great example of how the "orator" Obama can't speak clearly, but I digress).

So, Obama says that it isn't change if you took earmarks. Then how to explain this from the New York Times? Obama Lists His Earmarks:

Senator Barack Obama on Thursday released a list of $740 million in earmarked spending requests that he had made over the last three years, and his campaign challenged Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton to do the same.

SEVEN HUNDRED FORTY MILLION DOLLARS. That's a lot of "change". Come on Obama, you can't "make stuff up". The choice is clear. McCain asked for ZERO dollars for earmarks.

Obama has a history of getting taxpayer money for his friends and supporters, first in the illinois state senate and then as a U.S. Senator. He wouldn't vote against earmarks, and the ethics reforms he supported didn't include earmarks.

Even today, the Democratic congress has allowed earmarks to be added to bills in secret in the conference committees.

Obama made a big mistake discussing earmarks. He is tainted on that subject, and it is clear he is not the change we need.

Obama is Half White

I'm not a fan of the politics of race. But apparently, the Democratic Party is.

And apparently, in parts of Pennsylvania, they believe that being black is a negative. And so, when appealing to the white blue-collar base of their supposedly colorblind party, they have a solution to their problem of a "black candidate" -- point out that Barack Obama isn't all black:

Mike McAleer, the veteran Democratic ward leader of the 66th ward in the far Northeast, said Obama and Biden haven't closed the deal yet.

"The Dunkin' Donut crowd tells me that we've got everything going for us but Obama," McAleer said. "They can't give me a direct answer. Do I have them right now in the 66th ward? No. But I got 60 days to get them."

Asked what the problem is with Obama, McAleer paused and said: "It's his color . . . I tell them he's half white and half black. "

Oh, I hear the defender's say "That's just one Democrat, it doesn't reflect our entire party." And as one who has to put up with the left's constant petty attacks on all republicans as racist, I can sympathise.

But it's not just one guy. The story continues:

Joe Dougherty, business manager for Ironworkers Local 401, which hosted Biden's morning event, also said race is an issue for many Democrats.

"I hear it in the neighborhood, and I hear it in the union," Dougherty said. "But I remind them (Obama's) mother was white.

This is the mother that Obama said was a "typical white person", a racist who was scared of black people on the street. But sure, that somehow shows that Obama understands "both sides".

Maybe the problem isn't Obama's race, but his 20-year-association with a church with a racist pastor who preached that white people were the enemy.

Barack Obama, Fighting for the "Little People"

The L.A. Times decides Obama needs some help on his resume, so they give us an article about Obama's time as a lawyer, in an article helpfully titled "Obama's law days effective but brief":

Senior attorneys at the small firm where he worked say he was a strong writer and researcher, but was involved in relatively few cases – about 30 – and spent only four years as a full-time lawyer before entering politics.

[off-topic, but once again indicating that those around Obama never saw him as leadership material]

So what kind of clients did he represent?:

In one instance, Obama defended a nonprofit corporation that owns low-income housing projects against a lawsuit in which a man alleged that he slipped and fell because of poor maintenance. Obama got the suit dismissed.

Wait a second. Obama defended the owner of a building against a poor tenant who was injured because the property wasn't maintained?

In another case, Obama appeared on behalf of a nonprofit corporation that provided healthcare for poor people. A woman who claimed income of less than $8,000 a year had sued Obama’s client to obtain a $336 payment for baby-sitting services; Obama’s client paid up, and the case was settled.

And he represented another corporate client who had failed to pay a poor woman for services rendered -- a client that had to pay up?

In 1994, Obama appeared in Cook County court on behalf of Woodlawn Preservation & Investment Corp., defending it against a suit by the city, which alleged that the company failed to provide heat for low-income tenants on the South Side during the winter.

Whoa. He defended another building owner who failed to provide heat for poor people?

Apparently, Obama was the lawyer for the slumlords. I suppose having a young black community-organizer lawyer to defend the clients who have wronged poor black people is a good move for a law firm.

But mostly he was just an average worker:

“He was doing the work that any first-year or second-year associate would do,” Miner said. “In litigation, he was doing basic research and writing memos… . In the first couple years he would play a very minor role. He wouldn’t know [much], so he would take the lead from whoever was supervising his work.”

Obama was a good follower. Other lead, Obama followed. Palin took over her PTA, Obama had his work supervised.

And while nobody who knew him from then seemed to think he would be a good leader, they all seem to know that his REAL goal was to get elected to public office:

People who knew Obama in the early 1990s said he made it clear that he aspired to run for public office. For that, the firm, now called Miner, Barnhill & Gallard, was a good place to start.
The firm has been a force in Chicago politics. Carol Moseley Braun, one of Obama’s predecessors in the U.S. Senate from Illinois, briefly worked there.

One thing he apparently did not learn in his time as a lawyer is a real day's labor for a day's pay, a lack of concern for showing up for work that he carried with him into the U.S. Senate, where he's absent more than he's present:

The law firm says Obama logged 3,723 billable hours during his tenure from 1993 to 2004, most of it during the first four years.

That's about 310 hours a year. For comparison, according to this article, the standard minimum billable hours at a typical law firm would be about 2000, but for small and solo firms you would expect about 1200:

Back in my law factory days I regularly billed 2200 - 2400 hours per year. 2000 hours per year was considered the absolute minimum acceptable number of billable hours for associates. Since opening my solo office in 1998, I have been billing and collecting around 1200 hours per year, though I work more hours than I did at the law factories (there is a lot to be said for having staff members waiting on you hand and foot so you are free to bill, bill, bill).

Obama's excuse was that for many years, he was also a legislator (which means he treated the state senate job as another part-time position). But note that he worked 4 years before becoming senator, and if you assume he worked ALL of his hours during that first 4 years, and did NOTHING the last 8 years for the money he was paid, that's still less than 1000 hours a year. In case you didn't know, the number of hours available a year for a typical 8-hour, 5-day-a-week job is 2000 hours.

So, you can ask the question, what did Obama do those last 8 years to earn his money, since he apparently wasn't actually working billable hours for the law firm. Well, this article explains that as well -- he WAS working for his clients, in his job as State Senator (which kind of ruins his "different kind of politician" meme):

In some instances, Illinois state Sen. Obama took action that could have benefited some of his firm’s clients. In 1998, for instance, he used state Senate stationery to urge that state and city officials provide tax subsidies to help a partnership consisting of Davis and Rezko develop low-income housing, the Chicago Sun-Times reported last year.

In 2001, Obama was coauthor of a law that created a tax credit for people who donate land, buildings or construction material to help develop low-income housing.

Illinois state Rep. Jack D. Franks, a Democrat, lauded the bill, which garnered near-unanimous support. But Franks said that while the measure helped Obama’s low-income constituents, it raises questions because his law firm’s clients could have benefited from it.

Franks says he understands why Obama did this, but it does show a lack of judgment:

“I can’t fault him for the idea. But he is wearing two hats. He is a legislator, and he is serving as a private attorney whose client interests benefited here. This goes to the judgment issue.”

In the end, the Obama campaign tries to defend him against these actions Obama took, by explaining Obama's socialist philosophy that the government exists to solve people's problems for them:

Obama strategist Axelrod scoffed at the notion that Obama should have avoided such legislation. ...
“His view of public policy is that you should use the tools of government to deal with some of the crying social needs that we have.”

A bunch of old white guys

Several times during the RNC convention, the media made fun of how we were all "old white guys", even when half tha major speakers were black or women. Truth doesn't matter much to the media when they are spinning their tales.

Anyway, that's why I like this commercial from John McCain. Forget the words -- it's the same stuff you've heard before about what Obama's plan is for America. Turn down the volume and just watch.

It's all old white guys. And these are all the leaders of the Senate where Barack occasionally works when he's not running for Office. The party of inclusion is run by a bunch of old white guys. And Barack Obama picked an old white guy as his VP pick.