From politics (moderates who lean to the right) to Pogo (drools during poker stare) to rants (Whatcha expect from savvy, sassy sexagenarians?) to raves (Have you had your kudo today?) -- we never take ourselves too seriously.
We do, however, reserve the right to slaughter an occasional sacred cow. And in case we fail to mention it -- we will never forget....
From The Corner, in responding to Obama's ad about McCain not being able to send email ....
The reason he doesn't send email is that he can't use a keyboard because of the relentless beatings he received from the Viet Cong in service to our country. From the Boston Globe (March 4, 2000):
McCain gets emotional at the mention of military families needing food stamps or veterans lacking health care. The outrage comes from inside: McCain's severe war injuries prevent him from combing his hair, typing on a keyboard, or tying his shoes. Friends marvel at McCain's encyclopedic knowledge of sports. He's an avid fan - Ted Williams is his hero - but he can't raise his arm above his shoulder to throw a baseball.
In a similar vein I guess it's an outrage [to Obama, at least] that the blind governor of New York David Patterson doesn't know how to drive a car. After all, transportation issues are pretty important. How dare he serve as governor while being ignorant of what it's like to navigate New York's highways.
Here's the Obama ad: (wonder how long it will be before they take it down?)
Knock the elderly and now the disabled -- and a disabled vet, at that? Not good, Oblahma .... not good.
As a senior citizen who uses email (that's another insult to us older folks, Oblahma) and who writes approximately 12 blogs, let me add my 65-cents worth ....
Not only am I tired of Oblahma's new theme song, "Daze of Whine and Poses" --- I was highly offended by his reference to "old fish" (the second metaphor behind the lipstick smear). My offense was that fish is a derogatory term for women AND Oblahma was referring to the elder-statesman Sen. McCain.
"Enough" Oblahma cries? He ain't seen nuttin' yet! And it won't be delivered by email, but by the ballot box.
Sarah Palin has given her first interview since being picked as the Republican's vice-presidential candidate. The media has scrabbled for evidence of fumbles, and evidence that a shootin', cussin' redneck is about to plunge the world into war.
And away they go. From the Toronto Globe and Mail:
Indeed, 3AW's Neil Mitchell this morning scoffed that a President Palin would have already started "four wars", to judge by the interview.
Really? Let's check.
The first war a President Palin would allegedly start was with Pakistan, by invading it in the hunt for terrorists, and perhaps from the transcript you might agree the words are indeed naive and alarming:
We should start with the premise that the United States, like all sovereign nations, has the unilateral right to defend itself against attack. As such, our campaign to take out Al Qaeda base camps and the Taliban regime that harbored them was entirely justified… (I)f we've got (Osama bin Laden) in our sites, we should ask for Pakistan's cooperation, we should ask Pakistan to take him out. But if they don't, we shouldn't need permission to go after folks that killed 3,000 Americans.
Oops, sorry. That was actually Barack Obama. This is Palin:
ABC News Anchor Gibson also asked Palin several times whether or not U.S. forces have the right to make cross-border attacks into Pakistan with or without the approval of the Pakistani government…
The other war a President Palin would start, according to Mitchell, was with Russia over Georgia (should Georgia be a NATO member, which it isn't). Again, the transcript might sound alarming:
I would also argue that we have the right to take unilateral military action to eliminate an imminent threat to our security— so long as an imminent threat is understood to be a nation, group, or individual that is actively preparing to strike U.S. targets (or allies with which the United States has mutual defense agreements)...
Asked whether the United States would have to go to war with Russia if it invaded Georgia, and the country was part of NATO, Palin said: "Perhaps so."
"I mean, that is the agreement when you are a NATO ally, is if another country is attacked, you're going to be expected to be called upon and help," she said.
Pressed on the question, Palin responded: "What I think is that smaller democratic countries that are invaded by a larger power is something for us to be vigilant against ... We have got to show the support, in this case, for Georgia. The support that we can show is economic sanctions perhaps against Russia, if this is what it leads to."
War three, fretted Mitchell, would be one with Iran, now seeking nuclear weapons, according to most assessments. Go to the scary transcript:
(T)he global community should offer "big sticks and big carrots" to persuade Iran to halt its nuclear programme.
"A nuclear Iran would pose a grave threat and the world must prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon..."
Damn, that's Obama again. Here is Palin:
PALIN: No, no. I agree with John McCain that nuclear weapons in the hands of those who would seek to destroy our allies, in this case, we're talking about Israel, we're talking about Ahmadinejad's comment about Israel being the "stinking corpse, should be wiped off the face of the earth," that's atrocious. That's unacceptable.
GIBSON: So what do you do about a nuclear Iran?
PALIN: We have got to make sure that these weapons of mass destruction, that nuclear weapons are not given to those hands of Ahmadinejad, not that he would use them, but that he would allow terrorists to be able to use them. So we have got to put the pressure on Iran and we have got to count on our allies to help us, diplomatic pressure.
And the fourth war? Over Israel. To the transcript:
I will always keep the threat of military action on the table to defend our security and our ally, Israel.
You guessed it. Obama again. Here is Palin:
GIBSON: What if Israel decided it felt threatened and needed to take out the Iranian nuclear facilities?
PALIN: Well, first, we are friends with Israel and I don't think that we should second guess the measures that Israel has to take to defend themselves and for their security.
If Mitchell is alarmed by Palin, running for vice president, he should be terrified by Obama, running for president. Either that, or he should accept that nothing Palin said was particularly bellicose, extreme or unreasonable. He's just fallen for the Palin=redneck spin of the Left.
In fact, when you read the transcript of Palin's discussion with reporter Charlie Gibson on foreign affairs, you realise how the gotcha cherry-picking of quotes from it, and the spin given to it, completely misrepresents Palin's general ease with the subject. The Left dreamed of her making a fool of herself - "er, who's Putin?" - but she most certainly did not.
--------------------------
Sarah Palin would disagree with Judy Woodruff, as does Clarice.
In last night's event at Columbia University, Judy Woodruff peddled some old tripe about the military being largely composed of poor and minorities. Not so and it's about time more "informed" people knew that:
When it comes to the demographics of the U.S. military, conventional wisdom alleges the armed forces are a magnet for poorly educated and disadvantaged minorities who enter the service because they lack better options. However, a new Heritage Foundation report debunks those assumptions. According to the study's findings, 95 percent of military officers earned at least a bachelor's degree and more than 98 percent of enlisted members have obtained a high-school degree—numbers far greater than their civilian peers. The report also found that minorities are not overrepresented in the military, with officers and enlisted troops more likely to come from high-income neighborhoods than from disadvantaged backgrounds.
In addition, the data revealed that states with a high recruit-to-population ratio tend to be more conservative politically than states with a low recruit-to-population ratio. Among so-called red states are 23 states with a high military concentration ratio, while only six blue states have a high ratio."
----------
I been thinking ..... (which can be dangerous):
Obama really is a man of faith: he's asking us to have faith that he can do more than his resume reflects and that we have faith that John McCain won't.
Eight days after the tragedy of September 11, 2001, Obama -- the man who would be Commander in Chief -- blamed the terrorist attacks on "a failure of empathy."
The July 20 issue of the New Yorker magazine got a lot of attention for its cover, which carried a "satirical" cartoon depicting Michelle and Barack Obama that Obama supporters found tasteless and offensive. Buried inside that issue's feature story, however, was a reaction by Obama to 9/11 that all voters should find even more tasteless and offensive.
The article reprised a piece published in Chicago's Hyde Park Herald on Sept. 19, 2001, and written by a then-unknown and otherwise undistinguished state senator from Illinois. The senator, a former community organizer, wrote that after tightening security at our airports and repairing our intelligence networks, we "must also engage . . . in the more difficult task of understanding the sources of such madness."
According to Barack Obama, the madness that drove terrorists to turn passenger jets into manned cruise missiles aimed at our centers of finance, government and military power "grows out of a climate of poverty and ignorance, helplessness and despair."
As if the answer to the attacks should have been food stamps for al-Qaida.
Sen. Obama advised caution and warned of overreacting. "We will have to make sure, despite our rage, that any U.S. military action takes into account the lives of innocent civilians abroad," he wrote. "We will have to be unwavering in opposing bigotry or discrimination directed against neighbors and friends of Middle Eastern descent."
We should also be just as concerned, he felt, with American anger and bigotry as we were about al-Qaida.
In an opinion piece in Commentary magazine, writer Abe Greenwald commented on Obama's belief that the 9/11 attacks were rooted in poverty and despair. "Strange," he called it, "considering our attackers were wealthy and educated, connected and ecstatic."
As Greenwald put it, Obama "could have asked (terrorist and colleague) Bill Ayers, 'Bill, did your 'failure of empathy' stem from your impoverished upbringing as the son of the CEO of Commonwealth Edison?" Did poverty and despair also cause the Weather Underground member and host of Obama's first fundraiser to bomb government buildings?
Fact is, the roster of terrorists and their handlers reads like a list of of Ivy Leaguers:
Osama bin Laden, the son of a Saudi billionaire, studied engineering. Khalid Sheik Mohammed, architect of 9/11 and other major attacks, has a degree in mechanical engineering. Mohammed Atta, who flew a jet into the World Trade Center, is the son of a lawyer and earned a master's degree in urban planning at Hamburg University. Ayman al-Zawahri is an eye surgeon. Seven doctors were involved in the London-Glasgow bomb plots.
You get the idea, even if Barack Obama doesn't.
In a speech before a joint session of Congress on Sept. 20, 2001, President Bush pointed out the real reasons Islamofascists hate us: "They hate what they see right here in this chamber — a democratically elected government. Their leaders are self-appointed. They hate our freedoms: our freedom of religion, our freedom of speech, our freedom to vote and assemble and disagree with each other."
Bush aptly called the 9/11 terrorists and their ilk "the heirs of all the murderous ideologies of the 20th century."
"By sacrificing human life to serve their radical visions, by abandoning every value except the will to power, they follow in the path of fascism, Nazism and totalitarianism," he said.
Knowing the nature of your enemy is the key to victory. On the seventh anniversary of 9/11, we should all thank President Bush for keeping America safe. Along the way, he brought freedom and democracy to the Middle East, draining the terrorist swamp.
Bush gets it. So does John McCain. This is one thing we shouldn't want to change.
I have no idea how Obama's comments have failed to resonate with the American people. Hopefully, those words will nowresonate before it's too late.
----------------------------
On September 11, 2006 I honored the memory of Lynn C. Goodchild May each of the 2,996 victims rest in peace ....
Obama stooped to a new low today, poking fun at possibly John McCain (?) and definitely Sarah Palin with pig and fish metaphors:
Transcript:
"You can put lipstick on a pig," he said as the crowd cheered. "It's still a pig."
"You can wrap an old fish in a piece of paper called change. It's still gonna stink."
"We've had enough of the same old thing."
No one misunderstood the references: Lipstick on pig = Palin; old fish = Palin and/or McCain ......
If this is Obama's reaction to being upstaged by the McCain-Palin team --- he's history in the un-making. Such vile references (especially toward women and the smell of fish) are befitting high school locker room talk.
Nice ride, kid. Too bad you didn't have the class to hang on to the honor.
MORE:
In a McCain conference call tonight (just now), former Massachusetts governor Jane Swift accused the Obama campaign of "playground" politics for calling opponents "rotten old fish or a pig."
Swift accused the Obama campaign of taking "the same old low road" with the comments.
Asked by bewildered press why she was certain the pig comment was referring to Palin, she pointed out that Palin is the only one of the four running who wears lipstick.
Additionally, she said that it was "pretty clear that it was aimed at Governor Palin" and the crowd thought so too. Swift said that Senator Obama owes Governor Palin an apology.
The Over-the-Hill bloggers group (see blog roll in sidebar) is gearing up for a sprint to November 4!!! We're gonna be doing our bestest to show our united support of John McCain and Sarah Palin.
Anyone having suggestions is invited to comment below .....
Most likely -- had I been offered a ticket to the extravaganza in Denver, I would have attended. Had I been given a flag, I would have accepted it. I wouldn't, however, have tossed it away.
And nor should have the democrats.
Fortunately, a clean-up contractor salvaged approximately 12,000 US flags from dumpsters at the stadium and the democrat convention center last week.
Here's what the same flags look like when held by citizens attending a rally for McCain-Palin in Colorado Springs today:
Less than a month ago, the Public Editor of the New York Times, Clark Hoyt, addressed his paper's failure to cover the John Edwards "love child" story until after Edwards' interview with ABC News, in which he confessed to the Rielle Hunter affair. Hoyt explained that this kind of story just isn't up the Times' alley:
I do not think liberal bias had anything to do with it. But I think The Times — like The Washington Post, USA Today, The Wall Street Journal, The Los Angeles Times, major networks and wire services — was far too squeamish about tackling the story. ...
It is ... the kind of story that The Times seems instinctively to recoil from, just as it ignored such stories in its own backyard as A-Rod and Madonna and Christie Brinkley’s ugly divorce, and played down the “love child” scandal involving New York City’s only Republican congressman, Vito Fossella, earlier this year. ...
Edwards-Hunter was “classically not a Times-like story,” said Craig Whitney, the standards editor.
That's not all: the Times has limited resources to cover the Presidential campaign, and it has to devote itself to the stories that are really important:
“Edwards isn’t a player at the moment,” said Richard Stevenson, who directs the newspaper’s campaign coverage. “There are a lot of big issues facing the country. The two candidates are compelling figures, and we have finite resources.” He said he agreed that Edwards was “fair game for journalism of this sort, but this hasn’t seemed to me to be a high priority for us at this moment.”
Today, the Times has three front-page stories about Bristol Palin. It's nice to see that they've gotten over that squeamish feeling. Seems like we've learned something about their priorities, too.
She's a maverick from Alaska. She's also the woman who is likely to be the first female Vice President of the United States.
There will be much written about her in the coming days .... In the coming days and weeks, she will become as much as a household name in the lower-48 as she is in her state of Alaska.
Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin is a God-fearing, gun-toting former beauty queen who could just become America's next vice president.
In Alaska, the right to bear arms means staying on top of the food chain. Palin, a lifelong member of the National Rifle Association, hunts, shoots, and fishes.
Husband Todd holds a commercial fishing license for salmon. In the mid-1990s, when Todd got a job working on Alaska's North Slope, Palin decided to occupy herself by becoming mayor of Wasilla, the state's fastest-growing community.
As mayor, she gradually grew frustrated with Alaska's "good ol' boy" style of governance -- so she decided to do something about it. She ran for governor in 2006 and won, defeating popular former Democratic Gov. Tony Knowles.
Palin's victory made her Alaska's first female chief executive, and its youngest.
Now, many insiders believe this 44-year-old mother of five would add a strong conservative presence to the GOP ticket.
Palin tells Newsmax that it's high time Congress allows the development of Alaska's wealth of oil and gas. She doubts global warming stems from human activity, and she considers herself both a fiscal and social conservative.
Are you open to running as McCain's vice president?
Palin: I have so much on my plate as governor, it's hard to even imagine such an offer. I would just have to cross that bridge when it comes.
What do you think of McCain's chances, and what should he and the GOP do to win in November?
I believe John McCain will be our next president. To win, he needs to continue his message that America needs leadership devoted to the public interest -- not the special interest. The GOP needs to live the planks of its platform, not just offer lip service.
How did you pull off your election victory as governor?
Alaska was ready for a positive change and tired of the good ol' boy network. It caused many Alaskans to lose faith in their government. People want faith in their government. I have been able to pass a comprehensive reform law and place the state's checkbook online. You can be a reformer and also be a conservative.
And your stand on abortion?
I'm pro-life. I'll do all I can to see every baby is created with a future and potential. The legislature should do all it can to protect human life.
Politically, how would you describe yourself?
Fiscally and socially, I am a conservative. My respect for the three different branches of government and the balance between them has been my guide.
If you were running for president, what causes would you champion?
I would push for a strong military and a sound energy policy. I believe that Alaska can help set an example on energy policy.
Speaking of energy, how much oil and gas does America really have?
We have billions and billions of barrels of oil and trillions of feet of natural gas. We have so much potential from tapping our resources here in Alaska. And we can do this with minimum environmental impact. We have a very pro-development president in President Bush, and yet he failed to push for opening up parts of Alaska to drilling through Congress -- and a Republican-controlled Congress, I might add.
I thought when we hit $100 a barrel for oil it would have been a psychological barrier that would have caused Congress to reconsider, but they didn't. Now we are approaching $200 a barrel. It's nonsense not to tap a safe domestic source of oil. I think Americans need to hold Congress accountable on this one.
What is your take on global warming and how is it affecting our country?
A changing environment will affect Alaska more than any other state, because of our location. I'm not one though who would attribute it to being man-made.
Something tells me Biden and the Washington establishment better get ready for a Barracuda in the House ....
