Dear Hillary

In case you thought we were leaving Madame “Not Gonna Be” President out of the daily floggings

Dear Hillary,

I hope you are schizophrenic. I just wanted to tell you that I think Jeb Bush would be a wicked cool king. At this point, we need moar money in Bohemian Grove. When this circus started, I was very giddy, but now I’m craptastic. My delusional wish is for you to shoot the shit. I will ping Jeb Bush a bourbon.

Sincerely,
Beth C.

(The one that MacStansbury sent me was even nuttier than mine.)

Dear Hillary

UPDATE: Forgot to mention, I did edit mine slightly in this post to make it a little more to my liking (Jeb Bush a wicked grave-digger? No.) I needn’t have bothered, because it can’t possibly compete with this one from Shawn. HAHAHAHA!!!!


Barack Obama - Endorsements

BWAHAHAHAHAHA!!! Barack Obama endorsements wallpaper, even! :D

Barack Obama - Endorsements

I ♥ the Dissident Frogman. [Note to self: Must make a Mickey Mouse Obama for him.]

stein hoiststein hoiststein hoiststein hoiststein hoiststein hoist Lance


Michael Totten on Michael Yon's New Book [Dan Collins] pinged back with Michael Totten on Michael Yon's New Book [Dan Collins]


More intellectual dishonesty from Democrats: McCain and Hamas

While I was at TPM earlier reading the Greg Sargent piece on the McCain blogger call, I noticed they’re pushing yet another lie - that McCain wanted to “negotiate with Hamas.” Haha. As if.

Thankfully, I don’t have to tear that lie apart, because Ed Morrissey has already done it.

The Left has had a field day with an expertly-clipped YouTube excerpt from a John McCain interview in January 2006, shortly after Hamas won the Palestinian Authority election. Former Clinton official James Rubin uses it for a dishonest attack on McCain, calling him a hypocrite for tying Barack Obama to Hamas while McCain supposedly supported diplomatic contact with the terrorist group. In doing so, Rubin and McCain’s opponents misrepresent both the Hamas issue and the larger context of McCain’s remarks.
[...]
The context here is crystal clear. McCain envisioned a possible change in Hamas from a terrorist group to a legitimate political party, one that recognized Israel and renounced violence. Under those conditions, McCain said that we could engage them in talks designed to establish peace, and only under those conditions.

More of the same distortions of the truth (aka lies) from the Lefty Liars, as usual. Nice try, chumps.

I wonder, will they go with this lie during the next blogger call?

Here’s the part they conveniently “forgot.” Notably, so did Obama (biggest liar ever to seek the Presidency, perhaps?)


James Rubin: Lying, inept hack | McCain Blogs pinged back with James Rubin: Lying, inept hack | McCain Blogs


More on that blogger call: “McCain widens dialogue on blogs”

Via Tech Republican, The Washington Times has an article today about the McCain campaign inviting more kinds of bloggers, and it’s rather enlightening, seeing the lefty reaction that I saw yesterday is exactly what I thought it’d be.

The strategy was in full swing yesterday when Mr. McCain invited non-conservative bloggers to join his regular blogger conference call, just hours after he delivered a major speech previewing his war strategy and other priorities for a first presidential term.

It already has started a war among liberal bloggers over how to react to Mr. McCain’s overture.

In answering the first question on the call, Mr. McCain said his likely Democratic opponent, Sen. Barack Obama, lacks the judgment to be commander in chief, which set him up for a bruising from the readers at TalkingPointsMemo.com, a liberal-leaning site that joined in the call. [Link here; be sure to read it and the comments - Beth]

Blogger Greg Sargent said it amounted to “what may be [Mr. McCain's] most direct attack yet on Barack Obama’s national security credentials.” But commenters were split: Some took aim at Mr. McCain, some said they were thankful for the intelligence on “what the enemy is planning,” and others lashed out at Mr. Sargent, saying he should have been harsher in evaluating Mr. McCain’s attack.

“This IS a Democratic blog, and as such, it would seem to me that there SHOULD be SOME bias with regards to how YOU report of McCain’s craziness, as opposed to treating his ranting and attacks with a sort of dignity they and he DO NOT deserve,” wrote one emphasis-abundant reader.

Mr. McCain’s campaign said the Web outreach is a logical extension of an attempt to reach voters beyond his base. It also builds on his successful use of conference calls with conservative bloggers during the Republican primary, which blunted many of the harshest criticisms of the senator.

“The plan is to take the work we’ve already built on with conservative bloggers and to open up a dialogue with non-conservative bloggers and even nonpolitical bloggers,” said Patrick Hynes, Mr. McCain’s point man for blog outreach.

“We hope to be the most accessible and transparent campaign in history, to take advantage of what we think is one of the campaign’s strongest assets, which is Senator McCain himself, and frankly to empower voters who are also bloggers to get the answers they need to decide who to vote for.”

And this:

“I don’t think the people at DailyKos are going to treat John McCain mercifully, but I think the fact that people get their question heard makes them dial it back a bit,” said Soren Dayton, a blogger who worked briefly for the McCain campaign and now works at a public affairs company, New Media Strategies.

Oh, how I wish I shared my friend Soren’s optimism on this one. I seriously doubt they’re going to do so. It would certainly be nice, but when have lefty bloggers ever been fair, intellectually honest, or reasonable? These are the people pushing the “100 year war” and “McSame” memes, after all.

I don’t fault the McCain campaign for doing this - I think it says a lot about him and the kind of Presidency he’d have (i.e., far better communication of his agenda than we’ve seen from the Bush administration, at the very least). And really, he’s welcomed detractors (as in, from the right) all along and has taken tough questions from conservatives all along, especially in the earlier blogger calls. I just think the Left is being given more credit than they deserve, based on their rhetoric and behaviour over the last eight years. I’m thinking they’re waiting for a “macaca” incident. They’ll have a long wait, although they’re masters at distortion, and I won’t be surprised when they use these blogger calls regularly against McCain. Just watch.

To Erin Kotecki’s credit (she’s the one who asked the stupid “timetable” question), at least she didn’t respond to the opportunity with the ingratitude and nastiness that some did.

She said she doesn’t expect bloggers to be as nice as some of the traditional media have been in asking him questions, and was thankful for the chance.

“The fact that I could ask my question and have it smacked down is farther than a lot of people could get,” she said.

Not that I expect she’ll change her vote, but at least she didn’t repay the opportunity with bile. What bothers me, though, is that it appears some are merely using this to push the DNC agenda. In fact, right after the blogger call, I emailed rightwingprof saying “who invited the DNC?”–not realizing that the McCain campaign had invited lefty bloggers. It just seemed so obvious that they were pushing DNC talking points–even the “2013 speech = withdrawal timetable” meme had already been pushed out to libs and the media. That said, John McCain answered it forcefully and without any way to honestly distort the meaning of what he’s said. Not that it’s stopped some people from trying, though.

Again: “We hope to be the most accessible and transparent campaign in history, to take advantage of what we think is one of the campaign’s strongest assets, which is Senator McCain himself, and frankly to empower voters who are also bloggers to get the answers they need to decide who to vote for.”

More of this, please - but expect more of the Democrats using his accessibility and transparency - you know, the same things they’ve said Bush doesn’t have - against him in the future. Their hypocrisy knows no bounds.


James Rubin: Lying, inept hack | McCain Blogs pinged back with James Rubin: Lying, inept hack | McCain Blogs
More intellectual dishonesty from Democrats: McCain and Hamas | MY Vast Right Wing Conspiracy pinged back with More intellectual dishonesty from Democrats: McCain and Hamas | MY Vast Right Wing Conspiracy


McCain VP Sweepstakes Final Four!

Time to vote in the Final Four!

Here are the results from the Elite Eight, from the email sent by CQ Politics:

More than 14,000 votes have been cast and competition is getting intense. The Elite Eight saw our most competitive races yet, with Rob Portman barely edging Charlie Crist, winning by a mere 4 votes:

* Mike Huckabee (58%) vs. Mark Sanford (41%)
* Tim Pawlenty (59%) vs. Kay Bailey Hutchison (40%)
* Sarah Palin (54%) vs. Bobby Jindal (45%)
* Rob Portman (50%) vs. Charlie Crist (49%)

Bad call on Huckabee vs. Sanford from the voters, if you ask me. On this round, I’m going with Pawlenty over Huckabee and Portman over Palin. If my picks get through, I’ll go for Portman over Pawlenty as well.

I’ll find the links to the case(s) for Rob Portman and add them here later. Or you could just google it yourself. ;-P The Wall Street Journal has had stuff, just off the top of my head - and I’m personally angling for a conservative economist. YMMV. Not that I’m against Sarah Palin (or Pawlenty); she’s just too new (like Bobby Jindal), too unknown, and she’s got her hands full right now. Don’t just pick her because she’s got ovaries, either - people who vote based on identity politics don’t vote Republican anyway. Picking an unknown because of gender looks like pandering, and it’s just pointless. She will, of course, be an excellent candidate in the future, after a few more years of experience.


DNC and Obama: Quit talking about us!

I know everyone’s already talked about this, but I’d feel criminally negligent if I failed to pile on. Besides, has anyone even BOTHERED to consider the fact that Bush was in Israel and was likely also referring to the suicidal Left (cough Olmert cough) in Israel that wants to appease Hamas, Hizb’allah, and Ahmadinejad?

Nevermind that, though - Obama and the Democrats, like everyone else, obviously saw themselves in this. Truer words never spoken, if you ask me. Waaaah! The truth huuuurts!

If the shoe fits…

More shoes for fitting -

Jim Geraghty: Obama: I Won’t Negotiate With Terrorists, Just Their Sponsors

Ed Morrissey at Hot Air: I wonder where he got that idea? Oh, yeah!

Quin Hilyer at the American Spectator: Obama Accepts Guilt, With Fellow Dems’ Help

Right Truth has a whole lot more: Know what happens when you ‘assume?’

Maybe it’s time to update my Twitter icon. Heeee!

Barack Obama Ahmadinejad logo


Bloggers Unite Action: Save Abdulkarim Al-Khaiwani

Bloggers UniteI’m re-posting this for Bloggers Unite for Human Rights today in hopes of getting some more eyes on this issue, and also to make sure you’ve gone to sign the letter to the Yemeni government and international human rights groups expressing opposition to the Yemeni governments suppression of freedom. Please also see this post with Abdulkarim Al-Khaiwani’s thanks to those who have and who will sign the letter.
Please DO THE RIGHT THING - stand up for democracy and freedom.
Re-posted text follows.

Show More >


BUSTED - Obama supporters, again!

I knew it. I knew it, I knew it, I knew it. So did Rightwingprof.

I don’t know if Joanne Bamberger and Erin Kotecki-Vest were invited to today’s blogger call or if they lied to try to “infiltrate” a blogger call with a man who is well-known for being open to answering questions from anyone anyway, but I f’n knew two of the questions in today’s McCain blogger call came from Obama supporters. HA! I’d be okay with Democrats calling in with honest questions because McCain wasn’t out of the question for them, but this crap? NO.
Snip:

Let’s Keep ‘Em Poor & Uneducated

This afternoon I participated in a blogger teleconference with John McCain to discuss the statements he made earlier today about how he foresees his first term in office. Because apparently it’s very presidential to pretend that you’ve already won the election before you even officially have the Republican nomination.

First, I have to mention that MOMocrat Joanne Bamberger got a scoop on the call. In response to her questions and several follow up questions, he stated that he will appoint Democrats to his administration. (Assuming he has one. And you know what happens when you assume? You make an ass out of u and me.) After listening to her dogged questioning, I can understand why Joanne is such a great journalist. I bet she was a hell of a lawyer too!

The big news in John McCain’s remarks this morning was, of course, his statement that,

By January 2013, America has welcomed home most of the servicemen and women who have sacrificed terribly so that America might be secure in her freedom…. The Iraq War has been won. Iraq is a functioning democracy, although still suffering from the lingering effects of decades of tyranny and centuries of sectarian tension….

Senator McCain didn’t get to my question (although he did answer questions from MOMocrats Erin Kotecki-Vest and Joanne Bamberger). I couldn’t believe that not one person asked exactly how McCain intends to change the course of the war so dramatically in 5 years. Because, despite McCain’s claims that he’s going to focus on what’s “doable” I’m not seeing victory in Iraq, particularly in 5 years, as “doable.”

This part is particularly rich:

I admit that this post is snarkier than usual because John McCain managed to really piss me off during the call. Why? Erin asked him a hard question he didn’t want to answer, so he was patronizing and condescending to her, telling her she either hadn’t read or didn’t understand his statement earlier today and, “I’ll try to clear it up for you.” But I’m sure Erin will have plenty to say on this topic over at the Huffington Post, so I’ll leave it to her to tell the whole story.

****You have no idea how much I had to fight the urge to name this post, “McCain you ignorant slut!”

I guess they think they’ve succeeded in their mission, “infiltrating” the blogger call. I suppose when your candidate is too busy dismissing questions with “sweetie” and “I just want to eat my waffles,” it probably does seem like a big deal to get to ask your questions. LOL.

GAWD, the Left is desperate and stupid. BWAHAHAHAHA!!!!

UPDATE: The environmentalist question from Kate Sheppard was rewarded with only slightly less bitterness. I guess it doesn’t really pay to reach out to non-supporters, after all. Maybe what the Left wants is someone more like their candidates, who are afraid of Fox News and wouldn’t dream of welcoming non-supporters to ask questions, as John McCain has always done (whether the non-supporters are to the left or right of him). Silencing dissent is nothing new to the Left, of course.

Frankly, I’m about sick and f’ing tired of the trolls that constantly gather around McCain and his supporters (hi!). Desperation draws out trolls like flies to honey, I guess. If trollage levels are any indication of the state of campaigns, we should be in excellent shape in November.


More on that blogger call: “McCain widens dialogue on blogs” | MY Vast Right Wing Conspiracy pinged back with More on that blogger call: “McCain widens dialogue on blogs” | MY Vast Right Wing Conspiracy
McCain Blogger Call | MY Vast Right Wing Conspiracy pinged back with McCain Blogger Call | MY Vast Right Wing Conspiracy


McCain Blogger Call

I just got finished at today’s blogger call with John McCain. I take horrible notes from these things anyway, and I don’t have time at the moment to clean things up (gotta go get the little one from school) so I’ll post my raw, unedited notes below the fold, and send you to Fausta’s blog for a much more coherent version. I’ll probably add more links (as well as links to the questioners’ sites) later.

NOTES:

Talked about this morning’s speech, what he wants America to look like after his first term in office. Aware that this depends on the good will of Congress, but he thinks these things are DOABLE and that Americans are tired of gridlock and partisan bickering.
We will have won in Iraq - Winning = Maliki govt in control, sporadic problems with terrorists, but IA will be handling the problems, will have security arrangement w/Iraq akin to Korea, post Gulf War I, etc. but troop presence is way down.
Wants to debate Obama on whether we are winning, surge is working.

Jennifer Rubin:
1. What is view of developments in Lebanon?
Proxy war btw US and Iran; UNSCR calling for Hez disarmament has never been enforced. BO wants to sit down with the guy who calls Israel “a stinking corpse,” WHY? What does he expect to accomplish with the state that sponsors terrorism and is responsible for the deaths of Americans?
2. Bush speech in Israel made DNC/BO go nuts
Bush said he wasn’t talking about Obama, he was talking about appeasement and there are plenty of examples to point to it. Reaction because it takes the highest degree of naivete and inexperience to think sitting down and chatting with the likes of the Iranians is going to help.

Michael Goldfarb (TWS):
What should be discussed w.r.t Iran?
Have Iran renounce intentions to “wipe israel off the map”
Get Iran to renounce ambition for nukes
Get them OUT of Iraq’s business
End state sponsorship of terrorism i.e. Hezbollah
Only then can negotiations take place - “preconditions” - Iranians can signal such intentions easily
Crocker says Iranians haven’t shown the slightest inclination to do this. What does BO expect to accomplish with these people? What do you want to talk to them about?
Chatting w/them enhances their prestige.

Jim Geraghty:
On Monday, NYT article said it’s not true that BO wants to negotiate with rogue states, how to combat these lies?
Hopefully rely on media and new media to tell the truth, and the American people knowing the difference? Plenty of examples where Obama isn’t held accountable for things he’s said and that are ON THE RECORD. Not just inconsistency, but outright contradiction

Weekly press conferences? Blogger calls too?
Will try to do them, because it’s very important to keep contact

Doug Lambert (Granite Grok):
“Doing what is doable” - sounds like what Newt’s said; have you been talking to Newt?
I’ve talked to him for years, and have listened to him on TV and read him. Would be pleased to have more conversations with him; he is a great thinker. Intends to talk to him more because he is a very smart person.
Not modeling Contract with America, nor the Reagan Revolution. Just believes in the same need for change and vision for the future.

Kate Shepard:
Climate change: not for subsidies but for nuke power?
- Problems with nuke power are our own making - goes back to Carter years, overregulation after Three Mile Island and Chernobyl ended up killing nuclear power generation; also Yucca Mountain issue
Wants to encourage research & development, including electric/battery powered cars
Unashamed and unembarrassed about support for nuke power.
Also for R&D on clean coal technology, as well as other tech.

Erin Kovicka(?) Kotecki -
Why announcing withdrawal timeline in 2013?
NOT a withdrawal timeline - see the speech. The withdrawal is an expected natural consequence of progress in Iraq. NOT a withdrawal timeline, and 2013 would be the end of his first term. Facts on the ground will dictate withdrawal.
Announce a date for w/d - enemy sits back and waits, then brings chaos and genocide when we’re gone and Iran moves in. Announcing date = announcing surrender.
What to do for troops?
Rec’d highest support from veterans organizations because they know he cares about not just nat’l security but their needs. Improving health care for vets, increase education benefits. GI Bill (Webb) - wrote letter to Webb about making it where it will encourage retention.

Joanne Bamberger:
Bipartisanship - what dems would you consider in your administration?
I don’t id specific posts for Democrats in my administration. I want best and brightest, and if it does happen to be a Dem, then okay.
Specifics?
No, haven’t considered it. Wants to get a VP first.
Open to D’s?
Will appoint a D if he or she is the best candidate for the position.


A post-call note from me:
Anyone here think someone from Red State or LGF or whatever would be allowed to ask questions in a hypothetical Barack Obama blogger call? FAT CHANCE. Take note of where Joanne Bamberger writes. I’m still looking for where Erin Whatever writes, but I strongly suspect she’s either a journalist or a Democrat (redundancy is redundant!), since they’re going with the meme that the 2013 speech and ad means a timetable. I saw on FNC earlier that journalists had asked McCain repeatedly today about it being a “timetable for withdrawal.” I mean, how freaking stupid and/or dishonest do you have to be to actually ask such a question? Honestly, John McCain was a whole lot more respectful in his response than I’d have been, although he did ask if the questioner had heard or read the speech.

I should note that I’ve seen talk around the moonbatosphere lately that a good tactic for them would be to drive a wedge between the angry conservatives and John McCain. CLEARLY, Bamberger was desperately trying to get McCain to commit to naming a Democrat to his cabinet, but he didn’t bite. Too bad, Joanne - you FAIL.

Now to track down the Timetable for Withdrawal Genius. If you were in on the Blogger Call and caught her name, please let me know.

UPDATE: BUSTED. Big time.
(Also updated to add links to other questioners.)


More on that blogger call: “McCain widens dialogue on blogs” | MY Vast Right Wing Conspiracy pinged back with More on that blogger call: “McCain widens dialogue on blogs” | MY Vast Right Wing Conspiracy
BUSTED - Obama supporters, again! | MY Vast Right Wing Conspiracy pinged back with BUSTED - Obama supporters, again! | MY Vast Right Wing Conspiracy
Right Wing Nation pinged back with The Call


Dumbest Veepstakes Ever?

McCain Veepstakes at Salon.com. Shocking, I know. Choose how the candidate parts his or her hair carefully! (Idiots!) I got Kay Bailey Hutchison, oddly enough (I told you this quiz was silly), but Jeb was in my top 3. woot!

Here’s Obama’s veepstakes. My result was Senator Bill Nelson for him and Hillary’s pointless veepstakes. No surprise there - none of the Salon’s lib readers ended up with him on Obama’s veepstakes, although 1% did on Hillary’s. LOL.

So predictable that lefty Salon would have a vapid veepstakes to accompany their mindless adoration of a vapid candidate. LOL.


Barack Obama’s Brave New World in 2013

Just in case you were wondering - via The Mad Irishman’s Conservative Consortium comes the comparison between Obama’s 2013 and McCain’s 2013. (Reprinted with permission.)

For the sake of comparison, what would America’s economy and national security look like after four years of an Obama presidency?

  • Middle East

Obama’s premature withdrawal of troops from Iraq would lead to “devastating consequences,” according to our commanders in Iraq. As a result we could be re-entering a more chaotic situation in 2013 after an Obama Administration.

Gen. David Petraeus Testified Before The Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Of Which Obama Is A Member, That A Premature Withdrawal From Iraq Would Have “Devastating Consequences.” Gen. Petraeus: “In describing the recommendations I have made…I believe Iraq’s problems will require a long-term effort. … Our assessments underscore, in fact, the importance of recognizing that a premature drawdown of our forces would likely have devastating consequences. … Lieutenant General Odierno and I share this assessment….” (Gen. David Petraeus, Committee On Foreign Relations, U.S. Senate, Testimony, 9/11/07)

Chairman Of The Joint Chiefs Of Staff Adm. Mike Mullen: “I do worry about a rapid withdrawal… in a situation that wouldn’t call for that in terms of the conditions on the ground, which would then… basically turn around the gains we have… struggled to achieve and turn them around overnight.” (Jim Garamone, “Mullen Says Rapid Withdrawal >From Iraq Would Negate Security Gains,” American Forces Press Service, 2/28/08)

  • Nuclear Terror

Obama’s pledge to unconditionally meet with Ahmadinejad would strengthen a regime pursuing nuclear weapons and threatening our allies.

Obama’s Foreign Policy Pledge Would Strengthen Ahmadinejad. “Middle East experts said Obama’s strategy holds potential pitfalls. In Iran, they said, Sen. Obama could strengthen Mr. Ahmadinejad if as U.S. president he moves too quickly to hold direct talks with Tehran’s leader. They note Mr. Ahmadinejad is facing presidential elections in 2009 and could use a summit with Sen. Obama as proof of his enhanced stature. They said Mr. Ahmadinejad also could seek to sell to his people that talks with Washington were a direct result of his hard-line stance. ‘If Obama comes into office in January 2009, I wouldn’t advise him’ to hold talks with Mr. Ahmadinejad quickly, said Karim Sadjadpour, an Iran specialist at Washington’s Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, who said he is generally supportive of Sen. Obama’s agenda. ‘Only two things can rehabilitate Ahmadinejad politically: bombing Iran or major efforts to engage’ him ahead of the vote.” (Jay Solomon, “Obama’s Foreign-Policy Pledge Sparks Criticism from Rivals,” Wall Street Journal, 3/26/08)

  • Energy Independence

Obama’s windfall profits tax would reduce domestic oil production and increase U.S. dependence on foreign oil, just as it did under Jimmy Carter.

The Non-Partisan Congressional Research Service Found That The Windfall Profits Tax Reduced Domestic Oil Production And Increased Our Dependence On Foreign Oil By As Much As 13 Percent. “From 1980 to 1988, the WPT may have reduced domestic oil production anywhere from 1.2% to 8.0% (320 to 1,269 million barrels). Dependence on imported oil grew from between 3% and 13%.” (Salvatore Lazzari, “The Crude Oil Windfall Profit Tax Of The 1980s: Implications for Current Energy Policy,” Congressional Research Service, 3/9/06)

The Wall Street Journal: The Windfall Profits Tax Reduced Domestic Oil Production, Increased U.S. Dependence On Foreign Oil, And Increased Prices At The Pump. “The last time Congress imposed a form of the windfall tax was the final gloomy days of Jimmy Carter, and the result was: a substantial reduction in domestic oil production (about 5%), thus raising the price of gas at the pump; and a 10% increase in U.S. reliance on foreign oil. A windfall profits tax is the ultimate act of economic masochism because it taxes only domestic production, while imports and foreign oil subsidiaries bear almost none of the cost.” (Editorial, “Windfall Accounting Tax,” The Wall Street Journal, 11/30/05)

  • Wasteful Spending

Budgets are bloated, wasteful spending continues, as Obama continues his poor Senate record on pork.

Citizens Against Government Waste Gave Sen. Obama A Lifetime Rating Of 22 Out Of 100. (Citizens Against Government Waste, “CCAGW Challenges Presidential Candidates On Earmarks,” Press Release, 12/27/07)

The Club For Growth Gave Obama A Score Of 33 Percent For His Votes Against Anti-Pork Amendments. “[T]he Club for Growth released its 2007 Senate RePORK Card, compiling a scorecard of all senators’ votes on fifteen anti-pork amendments throughout 2007. … Obama (D-IL) Score: 33% Ratio: 2/6.” (Club For Growth, “The Club’s 2007 Senate RePORK Card,” www.clubforgrowth.org, 11/5/07)

  • Economic confidence

Consumers struggle as Obama’s increases on income taxes, Social Security taxes, investment taxes, and corporate taxes, and his “massive new domestic spending,” undermine economic confidence.

“Obama’s transformation, if you go by his campaign so far, would mean higher income taxes, higher Social Security taxes, higher investment taxes, higher corporate taxes, massive new domestic spending, and a healthcare plan that perhaps could be the next step to a full-scale, single-payer system. Is that what most Americans want, someone who will fulfill a Democratic policy wish list?” (James Pethokoukis, “Barack Hussein Reagan? Ronald Wilson Obama?,” U.S. News & World Report’s “Capital Commerce” Blog, www.usnews.com, 2/12/08)


This is why you need to vote for McCain - the future

What the year 2013 will look like after a (first) McCain term. Make a note of this one, y’all. This one isn’t about empty promises of “change” and “hope” for things that nobody really believes will happen.

I’m just a Joe Schmo voter, but I’ll say one thing: THIS is what a campaign ad should look like. This is what voters want to know - what the nation will look like after a candidate has served his or her term. This is masterful.

John McCain also gave a speech today in Columbus, Ohio, about this, and the full transcript is below the break. READ IT. Please.

Show More >


Barack Obama’s Brave New World in 2013 | MY Vast Right Wing Conspiracy pinged back with Barack Obama’s Brave New World in 2013 | MY Vast Right Wing Conspiracy


The Reason Hillary is Still in the Race

Ever wonder the real reason why Hillary hasn’t dropped out yet? A lot of people have said that you won’t get rid of the Clintons, that at the end of the world it will be the Clinton’s and cockroaches fighting to be the last living species. I think ( and am suprised no one has thought of this) that the real reason is a bit more clever.
The Clinton’s have loaned the campaign almost $11 million so far from their private savings. I would like to look at the contract and see how much interest they are charging. Just think of it; they can loan the campaign money, charge 6%, and then in essence, turn campaign contributions into personal profit, something they can’t do otherwise. You have to give it to them, they are wily.


Pimps & Hoes for Obama - Throwing Up

I’m throwing up too. Srsly. (Via QuitterMacStansbury.)


Vote Obama TISA from derrick jeffrey on Vimeo.


 
Jesus wept. Almost as sickening: this cult shit. No, wait. More sickening, because at least we can laugh at the trash above. The culty stuff, not so much. Screw you, Obamatards; yes I can think Hope™ is a fraud for gullible idiots.
(Via TC.)

We. Are. Doomed.

I wonder, do the idiots who make these videos have ANY idea how ridiculous they look? Do they have any sense of how much these look like parody? (They actually aren’t parody. Really.)


VP Madness Round 3 - The Elite Eight

More than 10,000 votes have been cast and the Elite Eight has emerged:

* Mike Huckabee (54%) vs. Condoleezza Rice (45%)
* Mark Sanford (53%) vs. Mitt Romney (46%)
* Tim Pawlenty (55%) vs. Colin Powell (44%)
* Kay Bailey Hutchison (52%) vs. Tom Ridge (47%)
* Sarah Palin (62%) vs. Sam Brownback (37%)
* Bobby Jindal (52%) vs. Michael Steele (47%)
* Rob Portman (60%) vs. Joe Lieberman (39%)
* Charlie Crist (60%) vs. John Thune (39%)

Make your picks (mine are in boldface):

* Huckabee vs. Sanford
* Pawlenty vs. Hutchison
* Palin vs. Jindal
* Portman vs. Crist


Older Entries