Abortion As Social Injustice

Conservative groups begin highlighting one of Barack Obama's more extreme positions: his views on abortion. CBN reports this from the Christian Defense Coalition:

"Senator Obama talks about bringing hope, faith and change to American politics. We now see this is all just political 'doublespeak.' One of his top priorities as President would be protecting abortion rights and even expanding them. If elected, Senator Obama would become 'The Abortion President,' with the most extremist policies on abortion of any President in history.

"Senator Obama's views on abortion are so radical that he even wants American citizens to pay for them. This would include Catholics, Evangelicals and all people of faith. He would also expand abortion rights through his passionate support of The Freedom of Choice Act.

David Brody says:

This is Obama’s challenge with Evangelicals. He can talk about the social justice issues all he wants and yes, it resonates to a certain extent but unless he moves on abortion (not likely) he’ll have a problem. If he shows some support for parental notification laws or the annual fetal pain bill that moves through Congress then that will help insulate him to a degree on the extremist abortion tag.

Abortion as social injustice undermines a key Democratic tenet that matter to conservative Christians: taking care of the poor and neediest and being a voice for those who don't have one. All sorts of individuals find a home in the Democrat party because together, they have more power. But still, these people have voices and often loud mouths--which, in itself, calls into question how oppressed they truly are when everyone knows exactly what they think feel.

Still, Christians believe their mission includes clothing the poor, feeding the needy, tending the sick, visiting the imprisoned, caring for the widows and orphans, and on it goes. Jesus told his followers that "whatever you do to serve the least of these, you've done for me." To a conservative Christian, it doesn't get more "least" than a helpless unborn child.

Hope and changeyness sounds wonderful--even to evangelical ears, but upon closer inspection, it rings hollow. Democrats will find their social justice messages a tough sell when the greatest social injustice, abortion, is a central plank of their social platform. Their only hope is to try to deceive conservatives into believing that Obama really is against abortion. Which, of course, he isn't.

Cross posted at Right Wing News and Melissa Clouthier.com

Around The Web

British children are forced to bow to Allah. The two who didn't get detention.

And you thought Republicans were dumb. They have some wimpy competition.

Intelligent design stuff.

Greta Van Susteren smacks down Anderson Cooper. Anderson has a staff of 60. A couple are dedicated to peeling his grapes and fanning him no doubt.

James Lileks smacks down M. Night Shamalayan:

The trailer doesn’t spell out the message, but Gort – played by Keanu Reeves – says “if the earth dies, you die. If you die, the earth lives.” Well, there’s a message we can all get behind. And if the film flops, you get the Malibu beach house. Seems win-win for everyone except, well, the poison-belching peons who will queue up for another sermon. Gentle cautionary tales are one thing; this groveling self-hatred is another. Same with the M. Night film that has the trees emitting pollen that makes us all kill ourselves – apparently the trees took a big wait-and-see attitude towards deforestation in the late 19th century, and finally decided to kill people when we were just starting to get the point.

The taxing work of being rich and finding enlightenment. Sigh. Aimless and dough-filled make for such trying times. Via Alarming News

Barack Obama's pedigree includes forged papers? Is it possible he doesn't really exist?

Speaking of Obama, if he really is an American citizen, which is in question (see above), he's not patriotic. I question, very openly, his patriotism as does Jonah Goldberg. But the true believers question the questioners. It's amusing.

Tigerhawk on loving America....and those who hate it.

Patterico honors Jesse Helms and thanks the Left for their sympathy.

This is what the world is coming to and Rachel Lukas has a solution. She's going soft.

And on that outrageous note, I'm going for a walk, because my blood pressure is up again from watching the video at Rachel's link.

McCain's Military Experience Not As Good As Obama's Self-Assessment

McCain's time as POW meant a big zip when compared to Obama's vast record of stellar character and communication. Hey, I'm not an enthusiastic fan of McCain, but that's a tough sell even for me. I think the Obamatons might want to choose a different subject on which to attack McCain.

Michelle Malkin says:

And Barack Obama’s “executive responsibility” would be…what exactly? Oh, yeah. Conducting leadership training seminars for ACORN shakedown artists!

The Anchoress notes this (read the whole thing):

The current president has shown he can take many punches. Can Obama handle one?

Oh, here’s an idea - let’s suggest that John McCain’s war record is irrelevant. That won’t make you look too hypocritical, will it, after you spent 2004 suggesting John Kerry’s turn in Vietnam defined his worthiness to sit in the Oval Office? Nah, of course not.

Ann Althouse cites examples of Obama's leadership and wonders why Hillary didn't more effectively use this information. My short answer is that the campaigns were so non-stop and had a helter-skelter quality. And did Hillary fear that going after Obama's "experience" would expose her own stellar public service--health care pops to mind.

Don Surber notes Obama's leadership when it comes to women:

Democratic Sen. Barack Obama pays women staffers 87¢ for every $1 he pays his men.

I laughed when Obama said: “Women still earn only 77¢ for every dollar earned by men.”

Where, I wondered, would that be?

Little did I know he was talking about his own Senate office.

What about McCain's leadership? Well, the women on his staff make $1.04 for every $1.00 a man makes.

Tom McGuire ponders Obama's lack of "cowering." Obama the he-man. He will. Not. Break.

If you listen to Barack Obama and his surrogates, he's the man of steel while McCain is a lily-livered guy with no record of public or military service. It's quite a trick to try to turn this around.

So She Had A Bad Day

Can we all commiserate with Hillary Clinton just for a moment and consider how utterly galling it must have been to stand by her man, once again?

She's used to dancing and gazing. She's taken it to an art form, really, but still, yesterday had to suck for her.

Hard.

Summer Is Here And Let's Face It, We're Tired Of These Guys

This campaign season could not have been more fatiguing. As much fun as it was to watch the sissy fight between Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, it's over now. As an aside, I've had to chuckle about the talk of the "brutal campaign season". What? The Democratic primary candidates hardly disagreed policy-wise and when things got to stressful, Hillary cried and Obama lamented the "distraction" and demanded an apology. What a bunch of weenies. It's not like we were watching Lincoln and Douglas or anything.

So now, we have what we have. Looking at the candidates, one can only sigh and ask, "Is this the best we could do?" Since the answer seems to be yes, and that in itself is depressing, might as well enjoy the lovely weather outside and ignore the bleak implications of either a McCain or Obama candidacy (and this post will make my friend mad who thinks everyone should be enthusiastically rallying to McCain's banner, to which I responded, "isn't it enough that I'm going to hold my nose and vote for this man?" Evidently not.).

I'm wondering about how you're spending your time these days.

Now that the Democratic primary is over, I'm spending .....
	more time looking at political blogs
	less time looking at politcal blogs
	about the same amount of time looking at political blogs
pollcode.com free polls

Cross-posted at Right Wing News

Climate Cultists

The world could end tomorrow....for you. Hell, it could end today. That's right, every moment you're living, you're avoiding the apocalypse and have escaped the inevitable doom all humans face. It's called death and it's appointed to all of us.

Christians though, believe that a catastrophic end is inevitable, and through the ages, different dates and times have been set. Currently, people are nervous because the Mayan calendar ends in 2012. The Dutch seem to be particularly concerned:

The Dutch-language de Volkskrant newspaper said it spoke to thousands of believers in the impending end of civilization, and while theories on the supposed catastrophe varied, most tied the 2012 date to the end of the Mayan calendar, Radio Netherlands reported Monday.

De Volkskrant said many of those interviewed are stocking up on emergency supplies, including life rafts and other equipment.

Some who spoke to the newspaper were optimistic about the end of civilization.

"You know, maybe it's really not that bad that the Netherlands will be destroyed," Petra Faile said. "I don't like it here anymore. Take immigration, for example. They keep letting people in. And then we have to build more houses, which makes the Netherlands even heavier. The country will sink even lower, which will make the flooding worse."

Earlier this year, some Russians holed up in caves and had to come out for health reasons. They'd be spared from the coming darkness while you suckers got torched. Last month, an American cult leader, convinced that he is one of the two witnesses (his wife is the other one, evidently) of Revelation fame, came back from Israel without embarrassment when the world didn't end according to his predictions.

At the one end of the spectrum, there's the manipulative cultists preparing for the world's end. Lead by a narcissistic and ego-driven (usually) man the one truth that can be counted on is this: his followers will make him very rich. Money seems to go hand-in-hand with the absolute power the disciples cede to the cult leader.

While I have a visceral dislike for cults generally, I figure the biggest harm is to the followers themselves. They usually turn on their families and give enormous amounts of cash to some idiot, but oh well. That's their choice and they are usually adhering to some fairly strict dogma which can make them decent citizens if they're following the Bible. As long as they aren't interested in imposing their skewed worldview on everyone else, they can worship how they want. It's a free country.

At the other end of the spectrum, there are secular cultists. Big sums of money, emotionalism, exclusionary status, gurus, saviors, and dogma define these guys as much as the "christianists" they like to mock. Maxed Out Mama says this:

Well, actually, I haven't seen the Pope demanding that those who are sure that God doesn't exist be put on trial. That's why I think this brand of climate science is a cult. It's not just a religion, it's a cult. And on DU, there are some true believers:

7. We're talking about CRIMES against humanity, the planet - billions of lives are at stake

Spreading doubt about climate change IS a crime, IMHO. Climate change is a PROVEN FACT, and unless we take immediate steps to rein it in, will kill BILLIONS of people over the next century. That doesn't even begin to take into account the countless species that will become EXTINCT.

This isn't about free speech. The time for debate is OVER, there is no more debate - how can you debate something that is a proven scientific fact? But unlike the "debate" over evolution, this one is going to have deadly consequences.

Darned if I know whether to laugh or cry. Hundreds of years of the Enlightenment dumped in one fell swoop.

Maybe there will be a transcript to which we can refer for the real story. I've explained as simply as possible why I believe the IPCC runaway CO2-forced warming theory is falsified, but I'd never claim that people who disagree with me should be tried for crimes against humanity!!!

Here's the problem with the global warming zealots: they don't believe in God or divine law or an overarching morality. They are god, they make the law and it is their morality that counts. In addition, not only do they want to adhere to their wacked out belief system they want to impose it on everyone.

The scary part: it's working.

In the absence of a cogent belief system, any old idea will march in take roost. Because so much is on the line and because no real Savior is coming, according to the secularists, they toss out reason to believe in a man, a myth, a legend. So Obama gets messianic status. Global warming is the religion of true believers. And socialism is the saving grace of humanity.

Christianity can be misused and abused and as the world gets more topsy-turvy, cults will abound. The absence of God has not been the presence of scientific enlightenment, unfortunately. Just the contrary. The Climate Cultists prove that.

Cross-posted at Right Wing News

Obama's Grandiosity

I was watching a rerun of Saturday Night Live where the comedian playing Campbell Brown actually orgasms on camera during an Obama debate answer. I don't think it was parody. The press is beyond parody.



As sickening as the press' weepy adoration can be, though, it doesn't approach the emetic power of Obama's autophilia. Cassy Fiano went to the Obamassiah's website and found his interpretation of the Declaration of Independence. So, now, Obama has his own re-worked presidential seal which Mickey Kaus notes (via Glenn Reynolds):

Is Obama's new faux-presidential, alternative-reality seal his "Mission Accomplished"? If you wanted to emphasize to voters that the Democrats' nominee is a bit stuck up, it would be hard to do better. I suppose he could start requiring reporters to stand when he enters the room. ... The seal probably started out as a bit of fun. But unless David Axelrod is insane, the thing will never be seen again. .. 2:15 A.M.

and, Obama wants history to start now, with him. Cassy says:

I especially love the line “the first presidential election truly funded by the people”. In that sentence, Barack Obama is smearing every single former President as illegitimate. Amazing. It’s as if Obama is actually starting to believe the hype, that he’s starting to actually see himself as the Obamamessiah. And I have to wonder, does he really believe that every other President was not funded by the people? Does he really think that? With that sentence, he’s painting even our Founding Fathers as swindlers and con-artists who cheated the people to get the Presidency, and himself as the benevolent Savior breaking away from that tradition.

I don't think that Obama is just believing the hype. He's been high on his own noxious emissions for a long time now. He's becoming more, well, exhibitionistic, since he's ostensibly clinched the Democratic nomination. Before it's all over, the emperor will be running around naked and doing back bends while in discussions with Ahmedinejad so we can appreciate him in his unfettered, diplomatic glory.

Obama is his own hope he can believe in.

Comparing Obama and Limbaugh

Ann Althouse does and says this:

I'm inclined to say Rush is wrong, but I note that he's only asking a series of questions, so I can't. I'll have to say that, ironically, Rush is a bit like Obama, wandering aimlessly for syllabic combinations that will equal a cogent, salient thought. Both men mesmerize their listeners and move them along on a current of verbiage.

Well. Limbaugh is a radio personality and entertainer. His schtick is his ability to craft a sentence and provoke. Obama's ability to "mesmerize" and "move them along on a current of verbiage" is a little more distressing because the President actually has to stand for something as he will represent the country. Limbaugh represents his capitalistic imperative. More power to him, but he won't be representing me or America or defining foreign policy or imposing government solutions. (And I'm not saying that Althouse believes this, only that the comparison seems odd. Liberals pick fights with Limbaugh all the time--and Ann is no liberal. The compare and contrast should be with McCain.)

Believing Barack--UPDATED

We can expect more tap dancing on a grand scale from a future President Obama based on his response to the women banned from his photo op the other day. Gateway Pundit via Debbie Schlussel finds that the women are not sweet little Muslim girls who were discriminated against by Obama but rather radical anti-Israel activists and friends. That's interesting enough, but it's Obama's response to these two yahoos that's more interesting. When CAIR suggested he personally call them and apologize, he did.

Obama stepped in it over the unpartitioned Jerusalem and backtracked. Obama just generally seems befuddled a lot. Like most politicians, he'll say anything to anyone for one reason: to get elected. Perhaps the most disturbing thing about this though, is that no one will believe him. People need to believe the word of the Commander-in-Chief.

George W. Bush is hated because of his policies and because of his beliefs. He also has the temerity to follow through with his word. So, conservatives are angry about illegal immigration and No Child Left Behind, but can anyone act surprised? Bush did what he said he was going to do.

Barack Obama says anything to anyone. As President, he's preside like he's campaigning: appeasing everyone. It worked for Bill Clinton, but this is not Bill Clinton's world. America, for all the Left's denial, is at war and will still be in November should the Savior take the helm. Tough decisions requiring coherent ideas will make enemies. Maybe, at that point, Obama won't care. I suspect he won't. He will have won the prize and that's the goal. America's standing is secondary to the symbolic magnificence of Obama in the White House.

He appeases now. He will appease later. It's a disturbing thought.

Cross-posted at Right Wing News

UPDATE:

Right Wing Sparkle notes how the Brits see Obama:

My guess is that British voters would really prefer a dual presidency, with Obama handling domestic policy and McCain in charge of foreign policy. Obama could make America more like Britain with universal, government-managed health care; higher taxes on the "rich" and on capital gains; expanded social services; trade unions made more powerful; continued preferences for blacks seeking university places and government jobs; gay marriage or some variant thereof; abortion on demand.

He goes on to describe what McCain would do in foreign policy, but has anyone in America ever described so well Obama's domestic policy????

Simple, brief, and completely scary.

I think it's safe to believe this is what Obama wants domestically. And it is completely scary.

The First Sacrifice On Obama's Altar: Giving Up Impure Thoughts

Oh, there will be many sacrifices. If the Dems have their way, teensy things like taking over private companies in the oil industry (because it's worked so well for Russia and Venezuela) and socializing medicine will be the new and better way, because the government never f@cks up anything they touch. Nosirreee, the government is super fantastic awesome!

There will be joy at the oil prices because well, middle class people can walk to work or take public transportation, never mind that there isn't transportation in the suburb where they live. Suburbs are suboptimal anyway. I mean, real people live in the cities and don't birth children. It's the lame people's fault for being breeders and being so stupid. Stop having kids and use something besides incandescent bulbs, people. And stop eating cheeseburgers and driving your SUV, pigs. Loving thoughts like that.

So, there will be that. There will be the little thing of saving the world with some sweet, huggy love. It will get even better, though, because it won't be enough to control business, your personal life and your way of life. No, your very thoughts and words will have to comply, friends, because there are good thoughts and there are bad thoughts and bad thoughts and ideas are not acceptable. Jeff Goldstein shares one example of an ideological debate that really isn't about ideas at all, you can go read the details, and concludes:

As progressivism moves forward, free speech will almost surely be murdered on the altar of political correctness — if only because that ploy rids progressives of the messy business of having to deal with what they consider unpleasant and untoward opposition to their ideas.

Which they can only do because they believe their ideas are inherently right and just by virtue of their holding them.

Circular and dangerous, but the state of nature in this, Obama’s America.

Well, it's not Obama's America, yet, but it's disturbing how many freedoms Americans seem willing to give up for the false security progressives promise but have never, since Marx himself, delivered.

Cross-posted at Right Wing News

Obama and Absent Fathers

So, Barack Obama gave a resounding sermon, in a church (not Jeremiah Wright's), on Father's Day Sunday about the importance of fathers. The black community suffers disproportionately with fatherlessness and the results of this cultural phenomenon manifest many, many social ills from crime, to drug use, to drop-out rates, to incarceration, to teenage pregnancy etc. It's a mess. Obama's speech included some gems:

“Don’t get carried away with that eighth-grade graduation,” he said, bringing many members of the congregation to their feet, applauding. “You’re supposed to graduate from eighth grade.”

His themes have been also been sounded by the comedian Bill Cosby, who has stirred debate among black Americans by bluntly speaking about an epidemic of fatherless African-American families while suggesting that some blacks use racism as a crutch to explain lack of economic progress.

John Hawkins quips, "Clap, clap, clap. I guess, even a blind squirrel grabs a nut every once in a while...". But earlier Hawkins called the speech "spot on". Well, the speech might have been spot on, but it's the actions of the candidate that matter most and I'm not thrilled with how Obama proposes to solve the problem that has been a scourge in the community:

On Friday, Mr. Obama announced that he would be a co-sponsor of a bill with Senator Evan Bayh, Democrat of Indiana, that his campaign said would address the “national epidemic of absentee fathers.” If passed, the legislation would increase the enforcement of child support payments and strengthen domestic violence prevention services.

Mr. Obama cited the need for stronger law enforcement services and resources for education, more job opportunities and other resources for communities.

Laws already exist to encourage enforcement of child support. Laws already exist to address domestic violence. How does any of this get men back with their families? Obama was in a church, after all. He could have spoken about the moral failings of the community, because surely, that's what's lacking.

The cycle is vicious. Part of the problem is a simply a lack of supervision. Children have a working mom, come home to an empty house. They are hungry and lonely. They eat junk and they seek comfort. A girl gets pregnant too young. Now we can talk about birth control, but even if it's being used, a 16 year old girl is extraordinarily fertile, so any slip up will likely result in a baby. She has to choose between abortion or a child. She will be making a life-changing decision either way. If she chooses to have the child, she will likely not be in the position to marry. She's in High School. The father is probably a boy, too. How will he support her? What does he have to offer at that point? And then, he's going to go work, make minimum wage and the government is going to come after him?

Reversing the problem means finding an adequate substitute for the lack of a father now, in this generation. The hopelessness and loneliness, the lack of discipline and structure when the mother is gone, needs to be filled somehow. The government is woefully inadequate at finding solutions that require, essentially, love. Churches, though, are really good at this. The problem, I'm wondering at, is whether the mothers want their children to hear that premarital sex is a moral failure. It will indict them.

When pastors like Jeremiah Wright externalize blame on the government and white people generally, the congregants feel better but don't look within. But the fact is, the problems within the family both black and white are moral in nature and won't be solved by blaming someone else. Only when women and men take responsibility will things get better, but personal responsibility isn't a very sexy message.

Enforcing child support may ease the difficulty of daily lives for the women trying to raise children. Just paying for child care straps single mothers who have to work to pay for food and shelter. Still, it doesn't solve the underlying problem. Will liberals start sharing the uncomfortable message of abstinence, personal responsibility, self-sacrifice, delaying gratification, etc.? Somehow I doubt it. It goes against all their ideals, and actually runs directly counter to their policies of intervening so a person doesn't have to deal with the consequences of bad decisions. The liberal message is all about self-gratification and indulgence.

As usual, Obama's words are pretty, but his actions are the same old same old.

Cross-posted at Right Wing News

Michelle Obama's Baby's Daddy

There's a big stink because Fox News ran a segment about Michelle Obama and the caption included the words "Barack Obama's Baby Mama". One could argue that the phrase further dumbs down the American language and is a racial epithet unsuitable for prime time. Or, one could argue that the hip hop culture has come to define at least part of the culture at large and embrace the language. Or, one could do either depending on the circumstances.

Michelle Obama used the term "baby daddy" to introduce her husband, so clearly she does not find the language offensive. I'm guessing that increases her cred on the street, yo. Or, maybe it's just a fun, light hearted thing to say. Wait, I think it might be the latter.

However, is it wrong for others to describe Ms. Obama as Barack's "baby Mama"? Is baby Mama like the "N" word, only appropriate in the black man's mouth? (Which I disagree with, by the way--to me the "N" word is offensive no matter who uses it, but anyone who wants to use it can.) Firedog Lake is characteristically hysterical,"2008: She's well-educated, a lawyer, and a black woman -- unleash the hounds!" Is saying "baby Mama" unleashing the hounds?

Now, I'll grant you, that no one is probably going to describe McCain's wife Cindy as a "baby Mama", but I doubt you'll hear Cindy McCain introduce her husband as her "baby's Daddy". She knows how silly it would sound coming from the potential future president's wife's mouth. Oh wait......

Cross-posted at Right Wing News

Democrats Just Say No To Drilling

Because it's a good thing to put $99 of gas in your truck (which I did yesterday). And Obama thinks a gradual increase would have been better. This is awesomeness! Speak it, Barry! High gas prices are just what the Dems want. If the economy can go in the shitter, more the better. If people are absolutely miserable, while the planet gets saved even better than better. And if people give up their modern way of life: Hallelujah! Praise Gaia!

Best of all: If America ceases to exist as a super power and the rest of the world crumbles because Americans stop consuming, heaven will have been created on earth. Thanks Democrats! Our lives suck shit but at least the barren tundra of Alaska is pristine.

Oh, and McCain is stupid about this, too.

Obama In His Own Words

You need to watch this video:



Is Obama racist? You decide.

H/T John Hawkins

Obama's Candidacy Is A Win For Liberals Even If He Loses

According to liberals, the only reason a man so great as Obama could possibly lose is because he's black and Americans are racist. What a convenient belief. If Obama loses, Americans will hear for the next twenty years about their racism and badness. His loss would be further proof of America's evil. If Obama wins, America will hear about the perfection and lightness of Obama's being. His greatness will make America great.

I found this over at Ebonypolitics:

In America, Barack Obama can be a lot of things: a law professor, a state senator, a United States Senator and a presidential candidate, but one thing he can not be is white, and that is what might stop him from becoming president.

So, if he loses, it's America's fault. If he wins, it's because he's a Savior. It's a win-win for Liberals who cling to identity politics like a baby blanket. An Obama loss would be fuel for their discontent for years.

I'd like to put forth the notion to our liberal brethren that Barack Obama might lose not because of the color of his skin, but the content of his character, content of his socialist philosophy, and the lack of content of his resumé. Maybe liberals could also consider that Americans will choose the next president based on who they think is best for America.


Cross-posted at Right Wing News.

Obama Campaign: "The Israeli Connection to 9/11"--UPDATED

You have got to be kidding me. More at LGF. The link magically disappeared. Thankfully Charles got it before it was gone.

Update:

Jim Hoft has more of Obama's Jew-hate. The Jews are corrupting politics, according to Obama's website. This is just lovely. I would be very worried to be Jewish and have Barack Obama as president.

"I'm not totally sure we can"

Brendan has the whole funny quote. For the record, I'm pretty sure Obama can't, but time will tell.

A Question for Obama: Isn't America Great Now?

The line that said it all:

We're going to make America great again.

It isn't great already? Nope, because Obama wasn't here before. Well, he was here. He just here, here. You know what I mean.

Oh, and with Obama the ocean will cease to rise, the planet will heal, children will not get sick and America's image will be restored. He's the miracle man (text of speech here):

Because if we are willing to work for it, and fight for it, and believe in it, then I am absolutely certain that generations from now, we will be able to look back and tell our children that this was the moment when we began to provide care for the sick and good jobs to the jobless; this was the moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow and our planet began to heal; this was the moment when we ended a war and secured our nation and restored our image as the last, best hope on Earth. This was the moment -- this was the time -- when we came together to remake this great nation so that it may always reflect our very best selves, and our highest ideals.

This was the moment? Now that Obama is nominated we've entered the promised land. Hope! Change! I believe! I believe!

The scariest line: "remake this great nation". If it's great, why does it need to be remade? And how, exactly does he plan to remake it besides taking profits from oil companies (how?), forcing clean energy (how?), forcing car companies to make more efficient cars (how?) and creating millions and zillions of jobs that won't go overseas (how?).

Did you like the speech as much as I did? I mean, besides the vapid substance, the form was pretty great.

Oh, and one more thing: My least favorite tick of Obama's is the nose-in-the-air-gazing-in-the-distance look. He does it when he's soaking in the adoration. Bleh.

Cross-posted at Right Wing News

Hell Hath No Fury....

.....like a woman scorned.

So what will the scorned Hillary Clinton do at the convention? Will she stand by submissively like she did for her husband? She has been well-schooled that way. Her supporters might not be too happy about seeing her docile this time around. Even a Vice Presidency is unlikely to appease them.

My guess is that she'll maintain her dignity, but her followers won't be so dignified.

It's amazing to me, really. This is how emotional the Democrats are all around: Hillary is the stronger candidate. Obama keeps revealing himself to be tone-deaf and rather dull-witted not to mention perniciously narcissistic and unqualified, but there is no way in hell that he's not going to be the candidate even though he polls weaker against McCain.

In this election year, almost any Democrat would have been stronger than almost any Republican and yet, the Democrats put up the one candidate who can be beat. I'm glad they aren't rational. It might spare the country some serious harm.

Cross-posted at Right Wing News

Hope! Change!

Ah, the good old days.