Some major figures in the Obama Administration will be gone soon, including Hillary Clinton, Joe Biden, Tim Geithner, and press secretary Robert Gibbs. In fact, Biden, Geithner, and Gibbs will be shoved out. Mrs. Clinton will leave because she's become invisible and irrelevant, a Secretary-of-State in name only.
Hawaii political analyst Jill Rethman and I both wrote (see below for yesterday's column) that Hillary's tenure as Sec. of State will be a short one. On Biden's coming resignation for "health reasons," he is a human gaffe machine and, as such, major liability to the Obama crowd. In his comments yesterday on supposed health care "savings," the V-P appeared ill and lifeless.
Robert Gibbs? He may limp along for a few more months. Warren Buffet blasted Geithner this morning on ABC, and that is very bad news for the hapless Treasury Secretary -- of course, Buffet was an important early supporter of Obama.
The only thing more "troubled" than the TARP program is Geithner himself, a man clearly out of his league. As unemployment continues to skyrocket, Obama and Axelrod will need to look for a scapegoat, and odds are that Geithner will be "their man."
If both cap-and-trade and healthcare reform fail this summer, the designated scapegoat in that case could be Rahm Emanuel. He could either lose his job, or much of his power.
The dropping of Biden as V-P nominee was a real possiblity during the general election campaign. What saved Biden's role was the collapse of the economy, which occurred around Sept. 15 and eradicated McCain-Palin's lead in the polls. If Obama had then replaced Biden with Hillary, she would have spent the next four years in "an undisclosed location."
I also believe Bernanke is in trouble in the Fed. Jim Demint and others are calling for an "audit" of the Fed, which would be about as pretty as nude pictures of Barbara Mikulsi.
I'm sure Hillary is delivering some ultimatums, now that she must recognize Obama's goal is to shut her up and marginalize both her and Bill Clinton. Of course, the MSM responds to all these emerging developments by drooling out of both sides of its mouth.
Showing posts with label Joe Biden. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Joe Biden. Show all posts
Thursday, July 9, 2009
Thursday, April 9, 2009
Joe Biden: Liar, Liar, Liar
Joseph Biden, vice-president of the U.S., is as close as it comes to being a pathological liar. In that, he's an appropriate companion for Obama, who claimed falsely that, as an American soldier, one of his relatives "liberated Auschwitz." In fact, Auschwitz was liberated by the Soviet Union's Red Army.
As some of you know, I'm in contact with Pamela Hamill, whose father was the truck driver in the accident that cost the lives of Joe Biden's first wife and his daughter. As you may also know, Pamela has asserted -- correctly, verifiably -- that Biden's lies over the year have defamed her father and misled tens of millions of Americans about the circumstances of the accident. I'll be writing more about later this week.
Frankly, Joe Biden, vice-president of the United States, is a chronic liar. Or, as Karl Rove recently put it, Biden is "a lair and a blowhard." Currently, the vice-president is lying about a private meeting he supposedly had with George W. Bush, where the former Delaware Senator claims he criticized the then-President for lack of leadership. As Rove and others affirm, no such meeting ever took place. Biden made it up.
In the vice-presidential debate, Biden even lied about the Wilmington, Delaware restaurant where he supposedly met with the common folk of that city. In fact, said restaurant -- Katie's Diner -- had been closed for more than 15 years. Biden's contact with the common people of Wilmington was a fantasy.
At another point in the debate Biden scolded Gov. Palin, a supporter of the Iraq War, for ignoring the financial costs. He said that, every month, the struggle in Iraq was costing more than the entire war in Afghanistan. In fact, the Iraq War was costing $10 billion per month. The total cost of the war in Afghanistan had been $172 billion.
He also told a perplexed Gov. Palin that he hadn't really voted for the war in Iraq. That was an outright lie. In fact, at the time when the War Authorization was being debated, Biden had asserted that Saddam Hussein "must be eliminated."
But Biden's worst lies -- and he has a multitude of them throughout his career -- are the ones he told about the accident that killed his wife and daughter, which I'll write more about this weekend.
You may ask, "Gee, why aren't we hearing about Biden's lies in the MSM?" That's a very good question. The answer may be that the MSM is so in the tank to people like Obama and Biden that they have no interest in informing the public. Katie Couric repeated the Biden lies about the Hamills as recently as the last Demcoratic Convention. (More tomorrow)
As some of you know, I'm in contact with Pamela Hamill, whose father was the truck driver in the accident that cost the lives of Joe Biden's first wife and his daughter. As you may also know, Pamela has asserted -- correctly, verifiably -- that Biden's lies over the year have defamed her father and misled tens of millions of Americans about the circumstances of the accident. I'll be writing more about later this week.
Frankly, Joe Biden, vice-president of the United States, is a chronic liar. Or, as Karl Rove recently put it, Biden is "a lair and a blowhard." Currently, the vice-president is lying about a private meeting he supposedly had with George W. Bush, where the former Delaware Senator claims he criticized the then-President for lack of leadership. As Rove and others affirm, no such meeting ever took place. Biden made it up.
In the vice-presidential debate, Biden even lied about the Wilmington, Delaware restaurant where he supposedly met with the common folk of that city. In fact, said restaurant -- Katie's Diner -- had been closed for more than 15 years. Biden's contact with the common people of Wilmington was a fantasy.
At another point in the debate Biden scolded Gov. Palin, a supporter of the Iraq War, for ignoring the financial costs. He said that, every month, the struggle in Iraq was costing more than the entire war in Afghanistan. In fact, the Iraq War was costing $10 billion per month. The total cost of the war in Afghanistan had been $172 billion.
He also told a perplexed Gov. Palin that he hadn't really voted for the war in Iraq. That was an outright lie. In fact, at the time when the War Authorization was being debated, Biden had asserted that Saddam Hussein "must be eliminated."
But Biden's worst lies -- and he has a multitude of them throughout his career -- are the ones he told about the accident that killed his wife and daughter, which I'll write more about this weekend.
You may ask, "Gee, why aren't we hearing about Biden's lies in the MSM?" That's a very good question. The answer may be that the MSM is so in the tank to people like Obama and Biden that they have no interest in informing the public. Katie Couric repeated the Biden lies about the Hamills as recently as the last Demcoratic Convention. (More tomorrow)
Thursday, March 12, 2009
John McCain: Naive, Lousy Campaigner
"She is the CHANGE . . . He just talks about."Yes, John McCain spent 5 1/2 years in the "Hanoi Hilton," but somehow he never fully understood Sarah Palin's toughness, indomitable spirit, and loyalty to , , , him. In all his years as a Washington Insider, he apparently had never met anyone quite like her.
John McCain is now speaking out against the Obama Omnibus Spending Bill, but his words demonstrate the same naivete that has characterized him for decades. In recent days, he's sent a new fundraising letter, which is what he did best in his campaign. In those days, I contributed approximately $500 to McCain and organizations backing him. In gratitude, I guess, the McCain Campaign sent me approximately 50 fundraising appeals.
For my contributions, I got two pictures of Cindy and John. She looked great; he looked old tired, and generally clueless.
Don't get me wrong: I love John McCain as a man and revere his service as an American hero, but the fact that he now is surprised by Obama's actions -- ones The Anointed One has engaged in his entire poitical career -- establishes that John is hopelessly naive. Of course, he won't go so far as to call Obama a "socialist." He wouldn't do so if BHO started wearing whiteface, donning a Karl Marx wig, and carrying around a copy of "The Communist Manifesto."
John McCain is now speaking out against the Obama Omnibus Spending Bill, but his words demonstrate the same naivete that has characterized him for decades. In recent days, he's sent a new fundraising letter, which is what he did best in his campaign. In those days, I contributed approximately $500 to McCain and organizations backing him. In gratitude, I guess, the McCain Campaign sent me approximately 50 fundraising appeals.
For my contributions, I got two pictures of Cindy and John. She looked great; he looked old tired, and generally clueless.
Don't get me wrong: I love John McCain as a man and revere his service as an American hero, but the fact that he now is surprised by Obama's actions -- ones The Anointed One has engaged in his entire poitical career -- establishes that John is hopelessly naive. Of course, he won't go so far as to call Obama a "socialist." He wouldn't do so if BHO started wearing whiteface, donning a Karl Marx wig, and carrying around a copy of "The Communist Manifesto."
John will go to his grave disbelieving that "going across the aisle" isn't necessarily a good thing. In practice, it's a one-way street, with Democrats -- the daffy Joe Lieberman doesn't count -- never doing any such thing. John continues to talk of Joe Biden as his "friend," although Biden portrayed McCain as erratic and even dangerous during the campaign. That doesn't seem to have registered with John, alas. Clearly, he has very low standards when it comes to choosing friends.
When McCain staffers like Mark Salter (and, apparently, John's daughter, Meghan) came out with nasty and made-up rumors about Sarah Palin, it demonstrated that, for all his life experience, McCain isn't a good judge of character. John adores Meghan -- even though she generally deserves a spanking and a sharply reduced allowance.
For months, Gov. Palin ferociously and consistently defended Senator McCain. However, when he had opportunities to reciprocate and defend Sarah, he decided to go on "Letterman" instead. The general hostility in McCain quarters for the heroic Gov. Palin was that she drew huge crowds . . . while McCain couldn't draw flies if he was buried up to his head in a landfill.
He has chronically exaggerated the character of Barack Obama. When John told the woman in Wisconsin that we "have nothing to fear from an Obama presidency," he was -- as we've learned -- just plain wrong. People fear Obama because he has greater allegiance to the Democratic Party and its electability than to his country. Hey, he's from Chicago, right?
In the primary season, McCain regularly said that he "would rather lose the presidency than lose a war [in Iraq]." With his dismal, lackluster campaign he apparently succeeded in losing both.
I'll always believe that if Sen. McCain had run a more forceful campaign, a few GOP Senators might have come through with victories. Perhaps there would have been enough to defeat the omnibus bill that now concerns him.
Instead, he chose to wage a "gentleman's campaign," while his opponents trashed him and his V-P choice at every opportunity. He never knew what hit him. He smiled a lot, almost oblivious to the political thrashing he was receiving. When he lost -- badly -- he refused to let Gov. Palin speak to the nation, perhaps fearful she would upstage him one last time.
And oh, by the way, no more requests for money, John. I'm giving it all to your former running mate.
Saturday, February 28, 2009
Obama: Forgotten Men, Forgotten Women
Barack Obama shortly after delivering State of the Union Address
If they ever build a monument to political cynicism, the shining face on it should be that of Barack Hussein Obama. In Amity Shlaes brilliant historical study of the Depression era (The Forgotten Man: A New History of the Great Depression), she talks about the people who got left out of FDR's effort to rescue the American economy.
Who were the people who didn't get help? Basically, those in the middle class. The poor got help. The unions got help. Even the lawyers busily helping people sue one another got assistance. The government bureaucrats and political poohbahs made out well. Who got left out? The people who went to work everyday and struggled to feed their families. They didn't demand help. They didn't even ask for it. They were -- and are -- the Forgotten Americans.
[Note: One my other blog, I compare Sarah Palin to Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama. I noted that "Barack Obama being Commander-in-Chief is about the same as Madonna being Mother Superior at a nunnery."]
In the following William Sumner quote (in italics), assume that "A" is the President, "B" is another politically powerful individual (Pelosi?), and X is the person who would benefit from government bailouts.
"As soon as A observes something which seems to him to be wrong, from which X is suffering, A talks it over with B, and A and B then proposed to get a law passed to remedy the evil and help X. Their law always proposes to determine what C shall do for X . . . What I want to do is to look up C. I want to show what manner of man [or woman in our time] he [or she] is. I call him the Forgotten Man. Perhaps the appellation is not strictly correct. He is the man who never is thought of . . . . He works, he votes, generally he prays -- but he always pays . . . . (William Graham Sumner, Yale University, 1883)
I have a friend in Illinois who is an emergency room physician. He went to school for many years in order to develop the skills he needs for his important profession. He works many hours of overtime in an area that has more than its share of emergencies. His wife also has a good job.
In the view of Obama and many other left-wing Democrats, my wife and his are Public Enemies Number 1? Why? Because their net income exceeds $250,000 annually. Obama and his allies ("B," which in this case means Pelosi, Reid, and their cohorts) want to increase their taxes sharply.
Oh, and Obama also wants to reduce the deduction for mortgage interest on their home. Since they do own equities, he also wants to increase their tax on capital gains.
My friend and his wife certainly qualify as "C" in Sumner's analysis. Obama has decreed that it is their duty (Joe Biden would call it their "patriotic duty") to bail out X. In their case, "X" would be the hospital employee (unionized, unlike my friend) armed wtih a mop-and-pail. Obama's (and our "B" category, Reid's and Pelosi's) view is that X needs the money more than A (the emergency room physician) and his wife (call her "A1").
Does the fact that there are a lot more Xs than Cs -- that is, a lot more voters -- have anything to do with Obama's policies? Silly question. It has everything to do with it.
My emergency room friend likes his job, but the hours (he mostly works through the night) can be crushing. He calculates that the increased federal tax rates, the increased capital gains tax, the reduced mortgage interest deduction, along with high state income taxes and hefty sales taxes in Illinois would be a problem. For every additional dollar he and wife earn, they'd get to keep perhaps 40 cents (if they're lucky).
Does he really want to spend a lot more time with sick, injured, and dying people for that additional 40 cents? Does he want, as a doctor in a high-risk area, to pay ever-skyroceting premiums for malpractice insurance? Should he ignore the fact that America has five-six times as many trial lawyers grasping for big settlements as any other industrialized nation?
The question is: how much does Barack Obama care about C, my friend? Alas, my friend is the one Sumner talks about as "the man who never is thought of . . ." He is a strong wage-earner and a vital component of civilized society. But he has only limited political power. As the pollsters can tell us, there are a lot more "mop-and-pail" people than there are first-rate emergency physicians.
My friend is the the Forgotten Man. His wife is the Forgotten woman. We generally forget about him also -- that is, until we unexpectedly end up in the emergency room. Then, we hope -- and pray -- he is working those additional hours. And when he saves our life -- or those of a friend or family member -- we don't begrudge him a nickel of his earnings.
Who were the people who didn't get help? Basically, those in the middle class. The poor got help. The unions got help. Even the lawyers busily helping people sue one another got assistance. The government bureaucrats and political poohbahs made out well. Who got left out? The people who went to work everyday and struggled to feed their families. They didn't demand help. They didn't even ask for it. They were -- and are -- the Forgotten Americans.
[Note: One my other blog, I compare Sarah Palin to Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama. I noted that "Barack Obama being Commander-in-Chief is about the same as Madonna being Mother Superior at a nunnery."]
In the following William Sumner quote (in italics), assume that "A" is the President, "B" is another politically powerful individual (Pelosi?), and X is the person who would benefit from government bailouts.
"As soon as A observes something which seems to him to be wrong, from which X is suffering, A talks it over with B, and A and B then proposed to get a law passed to remedy the evil and help X. Their law always proposes to determine what C shall do for X . . . What I want to do is to look up C. I want to show what manner of man [or woman in our time] he [or she] is. I call him the Forgotten Man. Perhaps the appellation is not strictly correct. He is the man who never is thought of . . . . He works, he votes, generally he prays -- but he always pays . . . . (William Graham Sumner, Yale University, 1883)
I have a friend in Illinois who is an emergency room physician. He went to school for many years in order to develop the skills he needs for his important profession. He works many hours of overtime in an area that has more than its share of emergencies. His wife also has a good job.
In the view of Obama and many other left-wing Democrats, my wife and his are Public Enemies Number 1? Why? Because their net income exceeds $250,000 annually. Obama and his allies ("B," which in this case means Pelosi, Reid, and their cohorts) want to increase their taxes sharply.
Oh, and Obama also wants to reduce the deduction for mortgage interest on their home. Since they do own equities, he also wants to increase their tax on capital gains.
My friend and his wife certainly qualify as "C" in Sumner's analysis. Obama has decreed that it is their duty (Joe Biden would call it their "patriotic duty") to bail out X. In their case, "X" would be the hospital employee (unionized, unlike my friend) armed wtih a mop-and-pail. Obama's (and our "B" category, Reid's and Pelosi's) view is that X needs the money more than A (the emergency room physician) and his wife (call her "A1").
Does the fact that there are a lot more Xs than Cs -- that is, a lot more voters -- have anything to do with Obama's policies? Silly question. It has everything to do with it.
My emergency room friend likes his job, but the hours (he mostly works through the night) can be crushing. He calculates that the increased federal tax rates, the increased capital gains tax, the reduced mortgage interest deduction, along with high state income taxes and hefty sales taxes in Illinois would be a problem. For every additional dollar he and wife earn, they'd get to keep perhaps 40 cents (if they're lucky).
Does he really want to spend a lot more time with sick, injured, and dying people for that additional 40 cents? Does he want, as a doctor in a high-risk area, to pay ever-skyroceting premiums for malpractice insurance? Should he ignore the fact that America has five-six times as many trial lawyers grasping for big settlements as any other industrialized nation?
The question is: how much does Barack Obama care about C, my friend? Alas, my friend is the one Sumner talks about as "the man who never is thought of . . ." He is a strong wage-earner and a vital component of civilized society. But he has only limited political power. As the pollsters can tell us, there are a lot more "mop-and-pail" people than there are first-rate emergency physicians.
My friend is the the Forgotten Man. His wife is the Forgotten woman. We generally forget about him also -- that is, until we unexpectedly end up in the emergency room. Then, we hope -- and pray -- he is working those additional hours. And when he saves our life -- or those of a friend or family member -- we don't begrudge him a nickel of his earnings.
Tuesday, February 24, 2009
Obama: Anatomy of Failed Presidency
Barack H. Obama, disconnected perpetually from America and Americans (that is, from the kind of Americans who would actually fight for their nation).
If Barack Obama and his cohort in economic crime, Nancy Pelosi, would each wear a bell, taxpayers would know when they're coming.
Obama, listen up: "Hopelessness is not a strategy. And terrifying people is a recipe not for recovery, but rather for national paralysis."
Obama, listen up: "Hopelessness is not a strategy. And terrifying people is a recipe not for recovery, but rather for national paralysis."
"We cannot continue to spend as we please." (Barack Obama)
"He's [Obama's] amplifying this [national] fear." (Jeffrey Rosenzweig, Associate Professor, Emory University)
Obama needs to present "some hope, some vision for the future." (Rosenzweig)
If Obama continues as he has since January 20, his presidency will be a monumental failure. His constant fear mongering is not only decimating financial markets, but also depressing the spirits of the American people, where consumer confidence is in the toilet. Scaring people is not a manifestation of leadership, although it might in the short-term be "good politics."
As you see in the quotes above, Obama recently said, "We cannot continue to spend as we please." Unfortunately, the "we" seems to apply both to individuals and Congress. Frankly, individuals in a free society exercise their liberty through making economic choices, either spending or saving. It's none of Barack Obama's concern what you do -- legally and reflectively -- with your money. He is the President (sadly), not the dictator of economic decisions.
In Congress, their has been wild overspending, plunging the nation into huge deficits and enabling huge trade deficits. Who's responsible for the profligate spending? Why, the most liberal members of Congress, since "liberal" is a synonym for "spend more."
And who are the extreme liberals? According to the non-partisan National Journal, the most liberal Senator was. . . Barack Obama. The second most liberal is Obama's Illinois colleague Dick Durbin. The third most liberal is avowed socialist Bernie Sanders of Vermont. The fourth most liberal is . . . Joe Biden.
In a few short years in Congress, Obama was responsible for nearly a billion in "earmarks," pet projects that are a hallmark of wasteful spending. The purpose of most earmarks has nothing to do with advancing national interests, but rather buying votes from a legislator's constituents.
Barack Obama's entire career consists not of solving problems, but rather at ensuring he's always on the government payroll. He has almost no real accomplishments either as an Illinois Senator or U.S. Senator. Why? Because he spent most of his time -- years -- positioning himself and running for higher office. What's next? Emperor of the Western Hemisphere?
Most people will grant that Obama is an excellent public speaker. By that, they apparently mean he has a nice baritone voice. In fact, his speeches are dreadful, devoid of any intellectual content. In one recent speech, he used the word "crisis" 26 times. Unfortunately, the "solution" to the "crisis" was to do more of what generated it -- over-spending and devaluing the worth of a dollar.
With his fear obsession, Obama reminds us of a famous statement by humorist Woody Allen. He said, "We are at a crossroad. On one side lie insoluble problems. On the other side lies the abyss and utter destruction. God grant us the wisdom to choose wisely."
"He's [Obama's] amplifying this [national] fear." (Jeffrey Rosenzweig, Associate Professor, Emory University)
Obama needs to present "some hope, some vision for the future." (Rosenzweig)
If Obama continues as he has since January 20, his presidency will be a monumental failure. His constant fear mongering is not only decimating financial markets, but also depressing the spirits of the American people, where consumer confidence is in the toilet. Scaring people is not a manifestation of leadership, although it might in the short-term be "good politics."
As you see in the quotes above, Obama recently said, "We cannot continue to spend as we please." Unfortunately, the "we" seems to apply both to individuals and Congress. Frankly, individuals in a free society exercise their liberty through making economic choices, either spending or saving. It's none of Barack Obama's concern what you do -- legally and reflectively -- with your money. He is the President (sadly), not the dictator of economic decisions.
In Congress, their has been wild overspending, plunging the nation into huge deficits and enabling huge trade deficits. Who's responsible for the profligate spending? Why, the most liberal members of Congress, since "liberal" is a synonym for "spend more."
And who are the extreme liberals? According to the non-partisan National Journal, the most liberal Senator was. . . Barack Obama. The second most liberal is Obama's Illinois colleague Dick Durbin. The third most liberal is avowed socialist Bernie Sanders of Vermont. The fourth most liberal is . . . Joe Biden.
In a few short years in Congress, Obama was responsible for nearly a billion in "earmarks," pet projects that are a hallmark of wasteful spending. The purpose of most earmarks has nothing to do with advancing national interests, but rather buying votes from a legislator's constituents.
Barack Obama's entire career consists not of solving problems, but rather at ensuring he's always on the government payroll. He has almost no real accomplishments either as an Illinois Senator or U.S. Senator. Why? Because he spent most of his time -- years -- positioning himself and running for higher office. What's next? Emperor of the Western Hemisphere?
Most people will grant that Obama is an excellent public speaker. By that, they apparently mean he has a nice baritone voice. In fact, his speeches are dreadful, devoid of any intellectual content. In one recent speech, he used the word "crisis" 26 times. Unfortunately, the "solution" to the "crisis" was to do more of what generated it -- over-spending and devaluing the worth of a dollar.
With his fear obsession, Obama reminds us of a famous statement by humorist Woody Allen. He said, "We are at a crossroad. On one side lie insoluble problems. On the other side lies the abyss and utter destruction. God grant us the wisdom to choose wisely."
Hopelessness is not a strategy. And terrifying people is recipe not for recovery, but rather for national paralysis.
As Emory University's professor Rosenzweig pointed out today on CNN, Obama's main oratorical accomplishment seems to be engendering panic. In short, Obama is a very scary man. He never misses an opportunity to evoke gloom and suggest darkly that we're on our way to doom. If his favor word is "crisis," it's followed closely by "catastrophe."
In another difficult time, Ronald Reagan offered a vision of "a shining city upon a hill." In Obama's case, his calls for "hope" and "change" didn't survive the presidential campaign. If he sees a city on hill, it apparently lies in ruins. If it shines at all, it does so in the manner of a dead mackerel.
The U.S. will survive the presidency of Barack Obama, the man who, with a straight face, can have U.S. governors attend a "Summit on Fiscal Responsibility. Obama lacks the rhetorical skills, experience, and vision to offer this country the kind of leadership it so desperately needs. Yes, we will survive the reign of Barack H. Obama . . . but just barely.
In another difficult time, Ronald Reagan offered a vision of "a shining city upon a hill." In Obama's case, his calls for "hope" and "change" didn't survive the presidential campaign. If he sees a city on hill, it apparently lies in ruins. If it shines at all, it does so in the manner of a dead mackerel.
The U.S. will survive the presidency of Barack Obama, the man who, with a straight face, can have U.S. governors attend a "Summit on Fiscal Responsibility. Obama lacks the rhetorical skills, experience, and vision to offer this country the kind of leadership it so desperately needs. Yes, we will survive the reign of Barack H. Obama . . . but just barely.
Saturday, January 31, 2009
Comparing Sarah Palin with Obama
Never, never understimate Sarah Palin's toughness . . .Right now (8 p.m. ET Saturday), Barack Obama and Sarah Palin are at the Alfalfa Club dinner in DC. Like you, I'd love to be a fly on the wall for that event.
Today, I was reading John Brady's superb biography of political genius, Lee Atwater (Bad Boy: The Life and Politics of Lee Atwater). Brady opens the book with the following quote: "The things we admire in men [and women, hopefully], kindness and generosity, openness, honesty, understanding and feeling are the concomitants of failure in our system. And those traits we detest -- sharpness, greed, acquisitiveness, meanness, egotism and self-interest -- are the traits of success. And while men [and women] admire the quality of the first, they love the produce of the second." (John Steinbeck, Cannery Row)
Is that true? For the most part, it is. Someone like Sarah Palin falls mainly in the first category, while Barack Obama -- and the men around him -- fall mainly in the second. Obama's campaign manager, David Axelrod, is a specialist in smearing -- defaming -- his client's opponents. Axelrod was the primary sources for the flood of lies about Palin. To a degree, his tactic worked, driving down Sarah's "favorables," which was Axelrod's intent.
I've talked about Joe Biden uttering one falsehood after another during the campaign. He's now the vice-president of the U.S. No one has yet identified one lie told by Sarah Palin. She's the one who's not the vice-president.
Does all this mean that Obama inevitably defeats Palin in a head-to-head match? Not necessarily. We cannot ignore Sarah's toughness, which far exceeds that of Barack Obama. Also, as former Ms. editor Elaine Lafferty observed, Sarah is infinitely curious and a fast learner.
How much exactly she learned in 2008 -- and continues to learn -- we're beginning to see. Perhaps at tonight's Alfalfa Club dinner, Obama will begin to see it also.
Today, I was reading John Brady's superb biography of political genius, Lee Atwater (Bad Boy: The Life and Politics of Lee Atwater). Brady opens the book with the following quote: "The things we admire in men [and women, hopefully], kindness and generosity, openness, honesty, understanding and feeling are the concomitants of failure in our system. And those traits we detest -- sharpness, greed, acquisitiveness, meanness, egotism and self-interest -- are the traits of success. And while men [and women] admire the quality of the first, they love the produce of the second." (John Steinbeck, Cannery Row)
Is that true? For the most part, it is. Someone like Sarah Palin falls mainly in the first category, while Barack Obama -- and the men around him -- fall mainly in the second. Obama's campaign manager, David Axelrod, is a specialist in smearing -- defaming -- his client's opponents. Axelrod was the primary sources for the flood of lies about Palin. To a degree, his tactic worked, driving down Sarah's "favorables," which was Axelrod's intent.
I've talked about Joe Biden uttering one falsehood after another during the campaign. He's now the vice-president of the U.S. No one has yet identified one lie told by Sarah Palin. She's the one who's not the vice-president.
Does all this mean that Obama inevitably defeats Palin in a head-to-head match? Not necessarily. We cannot ignore Sarah's toughness, which far exceeds that of Barack Obama. Also, as former Ms. editor Elaine Lafferty observed, Sarah is infinitely curious and a fast learner.
How much exactly she learned in 2008 -- and continues to learn -- we're beginning to see. Perhaps at tonight's Alfalfa Club dinner, Obama will begin to see it also.
Saturday, January 24, 2009
Joe Biden: A National Disgrace
Tomorrow, Sunday (Jan. 25), I'll continue the column on Joe Biden as a national disgrace. One reporter called the new Vice President "a human gaffe machine," and that's accurate.
Sometime ago, Biden was discussing the fast food and convenience store situation in his home state of Delaware. He commented, "You cannot go to the 7/11 or Dunkin Donuts unless you have a slight Indian accent." Can you imagine the response if, say, Sarah Palin had made such an idiotic statement?
In the campaign, Biden once introduced his running mate as "the next President of the United States . . . Barack AMERICA." Is this a manifestation of some sort of brain disorder?
(Much more tomorrow. Hope you'll come back.)
Sometime ago, Biden was discussing the fast food and convenience store situation in his home state of Delaware. He commented, "You cannot go to the 7/11 or Dunkin Donuts unless you have a slight Indian accent." Can you imagine the response if, say, Sarah Palin had made such an idiotic statement?
In the campaign, Biden once introduced his running mate as "the next President of the United States . . . Barack AMERICA." Is this a manifestation of some sort of brain disorder?
(Much more tomorrow. Hope you'll come back.)
Thursday, October 2, 2008
Joe Biden: Wrongheaded Windbag
http://votebitter.com/debate/vp/ Join us at the debate "watch party" by clicking on the link above. My prediction? "Sarah will mop the floor with him." "
We've tried the military surge option before and it failed. If we try it again, it will fail again." (Joe Biden, December, 2006) As the banking industry's "main man in Washington," Biden has a heap of 'splaining to do.
Yes you can, Sarah. Beat the tar out of the Senate's leading windbag, human gaffe machine Joe Biden.
We've tried the military surge option before and it failed. If we try it again, it will fail again." (Joe Biden, December, 2006) As the banking industry's "main man in Washington," Biden has a heap of 'splaining to do.
Yes you can, Sarah. Beat the tar out of the Senate's leading windbag, human gaffe machine Joe Biden.JOE BIDEN: OBAMA’S MR. WRONG, GIVES A
WINDY SPEECH AT DEM CONVENTION
In noted windbag Joe Biden’s speech at the Democratic National Convention, the only crystal-clear truth he uttered came in the first sentence: “I've never been called a man of few words.” [1]
Joe’s speech has as a leitmotif the words “John McCain was wrong. And Barack Obama was right.” In many cases, he forgot to add that, if McCain was wrong, Biden was also wrong. In most cases, he was just wrong on his own.
For example, wasn’t it Obama that labeled Hillary Clinton a warmonger for voting in October, 2002, for the authorization of the use of force in Iraq? Joe Biden forgot to mention – as Obama has – that Biden also voted for the authorization.
Earlier, he had said that the U.S. “has no choice but to eliminate” Saddam Hussein. We didn’t hear that point made in the speech – of course. [2]
In the remarks, Biden praised Obama for being willing to “talk” to various despots and rogue leaders. However, he sang a very different tune in the primaries.
Then, Biden said about Obama’s “talkathon politics,” the following: “Would I make a blanket commitment to meet with the leaders [noted by BHO] in the first year after I was elected President? “Absolutely, positively no!” [3]
Of course, since Obama has no experience, Biden talked about the Obama’s supposed “judgment.” In fact, judgment doesn’t appear the strong suit of man who befriended not only crackpot preachers, but also various terrorists, Communists, and gangsters.
Biden put it this way: “Now, let me ask you: whose judgment should we trust? Should we trust John McCain's judgment when he said only three years ago, ‘Afghanistan we don't read about it anymore because it's succeeded?’”
Those whose memory extends three years or more might remember that, yes, we didn’t read – or see – much about Afghanistan. The reason: because at that point, as McCain noted, we had succeeded. Most of the Taliban had been killed, captured, or sent on the dead run to the tribal areas of Pakistan.
Biden apparently confused 2008 with 2005, in which year McCain was dead right about the Afghan situation.
Biden’s speech also “forgot to mention” The Iraq Surge,” which John McCain has long supported. Of course, Barack Obama doesn’t talk about the Surge except in ways that suggest he doesn’t have eyes to see – and ears to hear.
Who was right on the surge? John McCain. And who was wrong? Barack Obama was. And, lest we forget, so was Joe Biden – terribly wrong.
Biden said in 2006, “We’ve tried the military surge option before, and it failed. If we try it again, it will fail again.” Gee, Joe, who was wrong – and who was right? [4]
Biden also opposed the multilateral negotiations the Bush Administration pursued with North Korea. He called for bilateral negotiations. Of course, as much as any negotiations can work with the North Koreans, the multilateral approach worked. [5]
Perhaps that’s why North Korea was absent from the speech.
The Obama Campaign presented Joe Biden as an “expert” on foreign policy and national security. As I’ve demonstrated, he’s neither. He’s a longwinded gentleman who’s been wrong on nearly every major issue in his lifetime – he even voted against the first Gulf War resolution back in the previous century.
Joe Biden talks a great deal and says very little. John McCain apparently has decided to treat Biden as a pompous irrelevancy.
For reasons unknown, Barack Obama apparently saw Biden as Mr.-Right. Actually, Joe is turning out to “Mr. Wrong,” someone wildly off-base on all the things that matter.
[1] http://www.realclearpolitics.com/news/ap/politics/2008/Aug/27/joe_biden_s_speech_at_the_democratic_convention.html
[2] Michael Barone, The Almanac of American Politics, National Journal, 2008, p. 365
[3] http://townhall.com/columnists/CalThomas/2008/08/26/bidens_toughest_opponent_himself
[4] Almanac of American Politics, p. 365
[5] Almanac of American Politics, p. 366.
Joe’s speech has as a leitmotif the words “John McCain was wrong. And Barack Obama was right.” In many cases, he forgot to add that, if McCain was wrong, Biden was also wrong. In most cases, he was just wrong on his own.
For example, wasn’t it Obama that labeled Hillary Clinton a warmonger for voting in October, 2002, for the authorization of the use of force in Iraq? Joe Biden forgot to mention – as Obama has – that Biden also voted for the authorization.
Earlier, he had said that the U.S. “has no choice but to eliminate” Saddam Hussein. We didn’t hear that point made in the speech – of course. [2]
In the remarks, Biden praised Obama for being willing to “talk” to various despots and rogue leaders. However, he sang a very different tune in the primaries.
Then, Biden said about Obama’s “talkathon politics,” the following: “Would I make a blanket commitment to meet with the leaders [noted by BHO] in the first year after I was elected President? “Absolutely, positively no!” [3]
Of course, since Obama has no experience, Biden talked about the Obama’s supposed “judgment.” In fact, judgment doesn’t appear the strong suit of man who befriended not only crackpot preachers, but also various terrorists, Communists, and gangsters.
Biden put it this way: “Now, let me ask you: whose judgment should we trust? Should we trust John McCain's judgment when he said only three years ago, ‘Afghanistan we don't read about it anymore because it's succeeded?’”
Those whose memory extends three years or more might remember that, yes, we didn’t read – or see – much about Afghanistan. The reason: because at that point, as McCain noted, we had succeeded. Most of the Taliban had been killed, captured, or sent on the dead run to the tribal areas of Pakistan.
Biden apparently confused 2008 with 2005, in which year McCain was dead right about the Afghan situation.
Biden’s speech also “forgot to mention” The Iraq Surge,” which John McCain has long supported. Of course, Barack Obama doesn’t talk about the Surge except in ways that suggest he doesn’t have eyes to see – and ears to hear.
Who was right on the surge? John McCain. And who was wrong? Barack Obama was. And, lest we forget, so was Joe Biden – terribly wrong.
Biden said in 2006, “We’ve tried the military surge option before, and it failed. If we try it again, it will fail again.” Gee, Joe, who was wrong – and who was right? [4]
Biden also opposed the multilateral negotiations the Bush Administration pursued with North Korea. He called for bilateral negotiations. Of course, as much as any negotiations can work with the North Koreans, the multilateral approach worked. [5]
Perhaps that’s why North Korea was absent from the speech.
The Obama Campaign presented Joe Biden as an “expert” on foreign policy and national security. As I’ve demonstrated, he’s neither. He’s a longwinded gentleman who’s been wrong on nearly every major issue in his lifetime – he even voted against the first Gulf War resolution back in the previous century.
Joe Biden talks a great deal and says very little. John McCain apparently has decided to treat Biden as a pompous irrelevancy.
For reasons unknown, Barack Obama apparently saw Biden as Mr.-Right. Actually, Joe is turning out to “Mr. Wrong,” someone wildly off-base on all the things that matter.
[1] http://www.realclearpolitics.com/news/ap/politics/2008/Aug/27/joe_biden_s_speech_at_the_democratic_convention.html
[2] Michael Barone, The Almanac of American Politics, National Journal, 2008, p. 365
[3] http://townhall.com/columnists/CalThomas/2008/08/26/bidens_toughest_opponent_himself
[4] Almanac of American Politics, p. 365
[5] Almanac of American Politics, p. 366.
NOTE: THIS PIECE, WRITTEN BY ME, ORIGINALLY APPEARED IN A WONDERFUL SITE CALLED: http://talkstraight.org/.
Wednesday, September 24, 2008
John McCain: A Winning Strategy
This message will go out to 1,000 bloggers and other onliners tomorrow. It's about how we are going to win this election for John McCain and Sarah Palin. Tracy (a political ally), Tracy, I'm going to distribute your site (http://talkstraight.org) widely tomorrow. I think we need to emphasize more and more practical steps (phone calls, contributing money, going door-to-door), the ground game, needed to win the election.
There are several issues that will continue to be "big," including William Ayers, Rev. Jeremiah Wright, and Obama's ties to the people (Franklin Raines, Jim Johnson, Goldman Sachs executives, etc.) that caused the financial crisis. (Also, we need to continue branding Obama as vaguely alien, un-American.)
In PA and Ohio, Biden's anti-clean-coal remarks will be significant. I'm finding a lot of practical benefits in going into the Beaver GOP office, making some calls (not a lot), and urging people who come in -- many -- to volunteer their time. To win the election, Obama MUST carry Pennsylvania, and it increasingly looks like he will not be able to do so.
We've got to emphasize the McCain Online Phone Bank (http://www.johnmccain.com/PhoneBank/NoPhoneBank.aspxand) and actually get people to use it.
The key is not to overwhelm people (volunteers) -- and to give them simple instructions on what to do . . . and say. I'm emphasizing McCain's "creative and dynamic leadership" in choosing a qualified woman -- a fellow maverick -- as his running mate. For most voters, that will be enough.
It's a big task. We need a million people to make an average of 25 phone calls each -- and then for them to make another 25 in the last 10 days of the election. If we do that, we will win.
We really need to get simpler and simpler as the campaign proceeds.
People like Paul, who has great material on the ground game, Kathy Morrison, and Wendy are going to play more and more important roles. We also need to energize people in New Jersey (and perhaps even NY) to win those states.
This is a rather sobering message for bloggers, who like to debate sexy "issues," many of which are of little interest to the public. The election is now about character, who has it (John and Sarah) and who doesn't (Barack and Joe). McCain and Palin are atypical elected officials, while Obama and Biden are more of the same.
There are several issues that will continue to be "big," including William Ayers, Rev. Jeremiah Wright, and Obama's ties to the people (Franklin Raines, Jim Johnson, Goldman Sachs executives, etc.) that caused the financial crisis. (Also, we need to continue branding Obama as vaguely alien, un-American.)
In PA and Ohio, Biden's anti-clean-coal remarks will be significant. I'm finding a lot of practical benefits in going into the Beaver GOP office, making some calls (not a lot), and urging people who come in -- many -- to volunteer their time. To win the election, Obama MUST carry Pennsylvania, and it increasingly looks like he will not be able to do so.
We've got to emphasize the McCain Online Phone Bank (http://www.johnmccain.com/PhoneBank/NoPhoneBank.aspxand) and actually get people to use it.
The key is not to overwhelm people (volunteers) -- and to give them simple instructions on what to do . . . and say. I'm emphasizing McCain's "creative and dynamic leadership" in choosing a qualified woman -- a fellow maverick -- as his running mate. For most voters, that will be enough.
It's a big task. We need a million people to make an average of 25 phone calls each -- and then for them to make another 25 in the last 10 days of the election. If we do that, we will win.
We really need to get simpler and simpler as the campaign proceeds.
People like Paul, who has great material on the ground game, Kathy Morrison, and Wendy are going to play more and more important roles. We also need to energize people in New Jersey (and perhaps even NY) to win those states.
This is a rather sobering message for bloggers, who like to debate sexy "issues," many of which are of little interest to the public. The election is now about character, who has it (John and Sarah) and who doesn't (Barack and Joe). McCain and Palin are atypical elected officials, while Obama and Biden are more of the same.
Monday, September 15, 2008
10 Reasons Biden's Out
Sarah Palin in red outline addresses huge crowd at Colorado Springs Airport. On the same evening, Joe Biden dined alone . . .In Barack Hussein Obama's Own Words . . .
1. Barack: "Joe, when Sarah Palin said you were a "Beltway Insider and a pompous windbag,' the correct response was NOT 'Hey, will you look at the legs on that gal.'"
2. Barack: "Joe, I forgave your remark about my being 'clean' but did you then have to go and sniff me?"
3. Barack: "Joe, when I said 'presidents don't look like me,' you weren't supposed to shout out, 'No, they look like ME!'"
4. Barack: "Joe, when you reported you drew a crowd of 49 adoring voters, you WEREN'T supposed to include the Secret Service detail."
5. Barack: "Joe your 'lipstick on a pig' line about Palin was NOT WELL RECEIVED."
6. Barack: "Joe in the whole vetting process you claim you 'forgot to mention" that Delaware's number of electoral votes is a grand total of THREE?"
7.Barack: "Joe, a gaffe now then is okay, but why did you introduce me as 'our country's first Arab-American President?"
8: Barack: "Joe, I don't think the best way to get on Michelle's good side is with a stream of 'Yo Mama' jokes.
9: Barack, "Joe, I admit it: when you said you got 9,000 votes in the primaries I misheard it as 9 MILLION votes."
10. Barack: "Joe, why did you tell an African-American audience that 'Even though Barack is more than 90% Caucasian and Arab, I can assure you his heart is Black?'
Sunday, August 24, 2008
Obama Picks Biden the Blowhard
"Presumably a President Obama would put Biden over in some corner, adjacent to a potted plant."
At videoboard, you can find out how to get great videos of Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, Joe Biden, John Edwards, Chris Dodd, and various other Democrats during the Primaries. They're the videos and images Obama doesn't want you to see.
In picking Joe Biden, Obama went with one of the biggest blowhards in the history of the Senate. When Biden announced in 2007 that he was running for President, one columnist described him as a "human gaffe machine." Democrats nationally have never been impressed by Biden. In the Democrat Primaries in 2008, Biden got a grand total of 9,000 votes. Hillary Clinton got in excess of 18 million. Presumably a President Obama would put Biden over in the corner, adjacent to a potted plant.
If you want a video widget for your blog, please go to the same site: http://videoboard.gop.com. There, you can copy and paste the code. Notice the VideoBoard widget on my sidebar. At the web site, you'll find links to many videos. You'll also find out what Joe Biden and Hillary Clinton really think about the inexperienced Sen. Obama.
If you're looking for the shocking new piece on how the Obama campaign has gone after Cristi Adkins, co-founder of Clintons4McCain and Nobama Mission, please scroll down to the previous column. It has drawn thousands of visitors, and I appreciate your interest in this story of the Obama Campaign's thuggery
If you want to support Cristi, please join Clintons4McCain and Nobama Mission. As you may know, the Obama text-messages about the Biden announcement were a scam. They had nothing to do with informing people. They had everything to do with using surreptitious means to grab information -- esssentially to get individual's cell phone numbers. The "announcement" came several hours after the media had broken the news.
Hopefully, millions of people's cell phones will not be awakening them regularly at 3 a.m.
NOTE: One of the best sites for revealing Obama's constant prevarications about his life and career is at: http://talkstraight.org. It's definitely worth many visits.
At videoboard, you can find out how to get great videos of Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, Joe Biden, John Edwards, Chris Dodd, and various other Democrats during the Primaries. They're the videos and images Obama doesn't want you to see.
In picking Joe Biden, Obama went with one of the biggest blowhards in the history of the Senate. When Biden announced in 2007 that he was running for President, one columnist described him as a "human gaffe machine." Democrats nationally have never been impressed by Biden. In the Democrat Primaries in 2008, Biden got a grand total of 9,000 votes. Hillary Clinton got in excess of 18 million. Presumably a President Obama would put Biden over in the corner, adjacent to a potted plant.
If you want a video widget for your blog, please go to the same site: http://videoboard.gop.com. There, you can copy and paste the code. Notice the VideoBoard widget on my sidebar. At the web site, you'll find links to many videos. You'll also find out what Joe Biden and Hillary Clinton really think about the inexperienced Sen. Obama.
If you're looking for the shocking new piece on how the Obama campaign has gone after Cristi Adkins, co-founder of Clintons4McCain and Nobama Mission, please scroll down to the previous column. It has drawn thousands of visitors, and I appreciate your interest in this story of the Obama Campaign's thuggery
If you want to support Cristi, please join Clintons4McCain and Nobama Mission. As you may know, the Obama text-messages about the Biden announcement were a scam. They had nothing to do with informing people. They had everything to do with using surreptitious means to grab information -- esssentially to get individual's cell phone numbers. The "announcement" came several hours after the media had broken the news.
Hopefully, millions of people's cell phones will not be awakening them regularly at 3 a.m.
NOTE: One of the best sites for revealing Obama's constant prevarications about his life and career is at: http://talkstraight.org. It's definitely worth many visits.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
