President Bush chides Democrats for their unconditional surrender stance on the war in Iraq, comparing it to the appeasement of the Nazis. Obama strikes back, calling Bush’s comment the “politics of fear.”

How… trite.

George W. Bush is right

Speaking before the Knesset, Bush said that “some people” believe the United States “should negotiate with terrorists and radicals, as if some ingenious argument will persuade them they have been wrong all along.”

“We have heard this foolish delusion before,” Bush said. “As Nazi tanks crossed into Poland in 1939, an American senator declared: ‘Lord, if I could only have talked to Hitler, all this might have been avoided.’ We have an obligation to call this what it is — the false comfort of appeasement, which has been repeatedly discredited by history.”

Understandably, Barack Obama doesn’t like his policies being aptly compared to one of the largest strategic blunders in world history. But then, the truth often hurts. If Obama has a better description of his Iraq withdrawal plan, based in reality and not fueled by hopeful irrationality, I would sure like to hear it. The sadness is that there is no other accurate description of it. One certainly cannot say he strongly opposes the terrorist forces in Iraq while advocating that we cease confronting them. Instead, he wants to “talk” with those who are uninterested in reason. With Obama, it’s as if that “positive parenting” nonsense would become our foreign policy.

Anyhow, not to say Obama supports Hamas, but there are certainly good reasons Hamas supports him.

Technorati tags: barack obama, road to the white house, politics, Iraq, Del.icio.us tags: barack obama, road to the white house, politics, Iraq, LiveJournal tags: barack obama, road to the white house, politics, Iraq

UPDATE More Democrats act indignant

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said Thursday that Bush’s remarks were “beneath the dignity of the office of the president and unworthy of our representation” at the celebration of Israel’s 60th anniversary.

…

As Pelosi was speaking, House Democratic Caucus Chairman Rahm Emanuel issued a statement in which he said: “The tradition has always been that when a U.S. president is overseas, partisan politics stops at the water’s edge. President Bush has now taken that principle and turned it on its head: for this White House, partisan politics now begins at the water’s edge, no matter the seriousness and gravity of the occasion. Does the president have no shame?”

Both are peculiar things to say, especially from leaders of the legislature, which remains significantly less popular than the president. If anyone knows what it means to be “beneath the dignity of the office”, it would be Nancy Pelosi, the most incompetent House speaker in recent memory, whose recent field trip to Syria makes her seem more than just a little bit ridiculous. Second to all that, I am sure that Congressman Emanuel realizes that the president is the commander-in-chief and chief diplomat. Encouraging one of our staunchest allies of his commitment to the region, and his hatred of appeasement, can only be a good thing. If that makes you feel bad, tough luck.

All the same, I find this amusing. When wimps are called out for being wimps, they get mad. Certainly they can find a way to channel that rage, and in the process, stop being wimps. These Democrats are rightly noted for their appeasement tendencies and they feign the most comical of outrage. You wanted to leave Iraq yesterday? That is called surrender. Or the redeployment of courage, or whatever euphemism you can concoct to hide the bitter tasting truth that today’s Democrats haven’t the stomach to fight for much of anything.

Related posts: Should We Kick West Virginia Out of the Union?, Taxing Crazy, Not-So-Great Expectations, Rosalind, Oh Rosalind, Obama, Testy - Hillary, Feisty

The military junta ruling Burma is the most evil entity on the planet. We hear the term “evil” tossed around a good bit these days. Then there is that certifiable moron on MSNBC who hosts the “Worst Person in the World” segment on his show every night, seemingly thinking that only conservatives qualify as bad people. How Bill O’Reilly is worse than Kyin Nyunt is something only the most neurologically deficient can fathom. Somebody needs to take a potassium supplement.

For those who think sua sponte military invention is inherently a bad thing, perhaps the relief effort in Burma deserved just that sort of response. The supplies were there. The need was there. The only thing standing between some of the most destitute individuals on the planet and survival were the four hardly working helicopters of a morally bankrupt and illegitimate military government. One aerial raid would have enabled the survival of thousands. In the interim, a government that has a vested interest in killing a sizeable portion of its population has continued to kill a sizeable portion of its population, through systematic neglect and theft.

For very little cost, the United States military (and the former countries of SEATO, to include Australia - oh, for John Howard!) could easily have diverted a humanitarian crisis of near-biblical proportions, and weakened one of the most horrific regimes on the planet. If there was a time for justifying the most minor of military interventions, the tsunami that devastated Burma is it.

That seems to be the sentiment of the media powers-that-be. Silly, sure. However, it shows you just how sincere the liberal wing of the Democrat Party actually is. We want to help you, you poor, stupid, uneducated, and (gasp) white people. But really, stand aside - let us get to the business of helping you without your input. Don’t you know it’s time to give in, and promote a man unqualified for the presidency because we said so?

Hillary Clinton is winning West Virginia because Barack Obama is unpalpable to its citizenry. He is a metrosexual socialist, and that doesn’t play with real Americans. That’s right - real Americans. Not the fair-weather Americans willing to toss their country into the deep just to be “cool”, who aren’t proud of their country until something truly self-interested happens in a campaign cycle that has the side-effect of disempowering individual liberty. Because, well - West Virginians (and many in the South, by presumption) are too ill-informed to realize the brilliance of Barack Obama.

Brilliant, hell.

The point is, whatever racist bigots may unfortunately exist, the reasons for opposing Obama are not racially based. His judgment is thoroughly suspect, and his ideology belongs more in Havana and Caracas, than Washington, DC. He chose to rise to prominence in Illinois by exploiting racial undertones, and willfully and joyfully embracing an anti-Semite reverse-racist “man of God” as his mentor. He now advances himself by saying nothing more than the bare minimum, employing substance only when required, and reluctantly even at that.

Obama will lose West Virginia tonight. He will lose it in November. And consequently, he will lose the presidency. We as a country, as lost as I sometimes think we might be, are not going to elect someone whose entire public career is Exhibit A in the Left’s case affronting the very spirit of the United States Constitution.

Related posts: Taxing Crazy, Not-So-Great Expectations, Rosalind, Oh Rosalind, Obama, Testy - Hillary, Feisty

There are cries of outrage over the racism and sexism that are supposedly dominating the nominating process in the Democratic Party.

White people won’t vote for Barack Obama because he’s black. I guess we’re supposed to use West Virginia as our star witness to prove this point, but never call Idaho to the stand. (I know … the people in Idaho have more formal education and those pieces of paper make them more enlightened and able to choose a leader. We need to pity those poor, simple folks of West Virginia who don’t understand what is best for them.)

The sexist pigs who run this misogynistic society won’t vote for Hillary Clinton because she doesn’t have a pair and men enjoy making comments like, “I don’t trust anything that bleeds for five days and doesn’t die” while spitting and grabbing their crotches.

So, let’s all lament the racist and sexist nature of our country. At the same time, however, bias against the elders of our population is downright legitimate and acceptable.

John McCain can’t run our country … he’s almost 72 years old! Do you hear that, senior citizens across the land? The Democrats want to put you out to pasture. You can no longer be trusted to make important decisions. Your years of experience are not valued. You are senile and out of touch. You could die at any moment. Now, go away quietly and let the younger people run this country. Just worry about your upcoming bridge tournament and what time the mail is going to arrive. There, there now. Isn’t that better?

John McCain is in good health and wore out the much younger reporters who were following him on the campaign trail during the Republican primaries. He has not given any evidence that should make us fearful of his age. Yet, liberal pundits everywhere love to mock that he’s “older than color TV” and has “senior moments”.

So, will Democrats use McCain’s age against him? You shouldn’t vote for him simply due to the year of his birth? How is that any different than not voting for someone based on race or gender?

The Democrats’ utterly ridiculous nomination campaign seems to be (about) wrapped up.

Hillary can still cause trouble - and I hope she does. But the fact of the matter is, unless Obama is caught with a communist gay goat, Hillary Clinton has lost the nomination.

Now the adults can discuss things. And in a frank discussion, real matters of global import must be discussed. Is Obama ready for this discussion?

Well, decidedly, no. Since Barack Obama has decided to equate the leader of the Islamic Republic of Iran with the office of the President of the United States, its president has stated that (well, since denying the Holocaust in 2005) Israel is “a stinking corpse.”

His desire to sit down with anyone, anywhere, and “talk” brings memories of the initial John Kennedy / Nikita Krushchev meeting in Vienna, where Kennedy was kicked around and viewed as weak by the Soviet premier. This perceived weakness empowered Krushchev, and directly resulted in the Soviets’ gambit in the Cuban Missile Crisis. What is most puzzling is that Obama has learned nothing from history, and apparently understands little about the inherent value of a diplomatic meeting at the highest levels when a president of the United States is involved. As far as Obama seems concerned, the president is a pedestrian commoner, fit to mingle with the nuttiest, most oppressive authoritarian governments. Let’s just talk, and understand.

How utterly stupid.

This has been done, and it does not work. The same liberal press that derided George W. Bush for looking into Vladimir Putin’s eyes and seeing his soul ought to be dicing and mincing Obama’s foreign policy intentions into the proper insignificant, trifling little bits they so deserve. Unsurprisingly, that is not the case. He gets a pass - and it’s not because he’s otherwise qualified.

Always, no matter the time in history or the year of election, foreign policy is the most important public policy factor in a presidential election (but not always the most important politically, unfortunately). It’s the sort of thing serious thinking people ought to agree on. Domestic policy lies irrelevant if national security is left unchecked. The left chides Bush for being diplomatically inept. Whether you agree with Bush’s actions, at least Bush was able to justify and confirm his diplomatic posture through the use of force. If we get Barack Obama, not only will he be diplomatically inept, he will refuse to use force (remember, he has already taken the nuclear option completely off the table), which further marginalizes his diplomatic advances, and has the added bonus of diminishing the stature of the United States in the process.

I don’t want our country to necessarily be liked. I am perfectly fine with being feared and respected - being “liked” is a high school emotion. With an Obama presidency, we will be hated not for our arrogance, but for our weakness, and the world would suffer because of it. The Bush presidency has deposed two of the planet’s most awful regimes, both in one term. Given odds, I would take the under on two terms of Obama.

Perhaps Obama should check out Ahmadinejad’s blog.

I read a short article today on CNN’s website sharing the big lead that Hillary Clinton is enjoying in West Virginia. The latest polls have her up 66% to 23%. What could be the reason for such a disparity in support? Why, it has to be that the hillbilly white people who populate West Virginia are racists and would never vote for a black man, right? (Let’s put aside the fact that West Virginia became its own state largely in protest of slavery) It couldn’t be that the message of Barack “Clinging to Guns and Religion” Obama just doesn’t resonate with the hard-working folks in those magnificent mountains.

My mom’s side of the family is from West Virginia, and I have quite a few relatives who live in that fine state. They all own multiple pairs of shoes, are literate, and enjoy friendships with every color and creed. Bizarre, isn’t it?

I had to see if the “Comments” section following the article was filled with the ridiculous, hateful stereotypes that many people hold for the people of West Virginia. Here is a sampling of the posted comments, maybe of which ended with something like “OBAMA ‘08!!”. (Way to unify, by the way)

Remember the movie ‘Deliverance’ ? Need I say more ?

Wrong state … wrong part of the country. This movie took place in Georgia … a state that went for Barack Obama.

Well of course she holds a 60% lead in WV, their all related to one another over there…

First of all, I don’t get the connection. Why does Clinton naturally get the inbred vote? Second, your argument loses more water when you confuse “their” with “they’re”. Apparently even those without jumbled genetic compositions encounter difficulties with grammar.

I’m so glad the bigoted WVs dont’ represent the rest of this wonderful country.

Again, a proofreader would have serious issues with this post. And, I am so tired of the assumption that a person is a bigot if he chooses Clinton over Obama. Is the African American population bigoted for choosing Obama in overwhelming numbers?

What the people of WV should be doing, is working to educate themselves on the issues, and not the color of someone’s skin.

What a condescending remark! There are countless reasons not to vote for Obama, and none of them involves the color of his skin.

West Virginia is, and always will be, backwards. Perhaps she’ll hold a victory speech on the back of a pickup at a Klan rally.

As I mentioned earlier in the post, I don’t think they seemed so backwards in 1863.

That’s because people in West Virginia are poor and uneducated.

You see, Mountaineer simpletons. If you just had more book learning, you wouldn’t be duped by this woman.

Who cares? It’s just a bunch of “backwards” country racist hicks!! They probably think having shoes is elitest. Look for HRC to be barefoot a lot this week!

This is showing true concern for the poverty-stricken who may not be able to afford shoes. Mock them! Why put the “backwards” in quotes? Just wondering. That must be some elitist technique of which I am not aware.

Hmmm West Virgina who really freakin cares. That state is dominated by republicans and if she wins the state who really cares

Really? Are Byrd and Rockefeller aware of that? Or, how about the Democratic governor Joe Manchin? How about the fact that the state went for Michael Dukakis and Bill Clinton twice?

There are many more comments from which to choose, but I believe the above sampling is sufficient. West Virginia is a swing state, Obama voters. But, please, be as offensive and bigoted as you can … I’m sure the good people of the Mountaineer State won’t mind come November.

An interesting bit of info hit my Inbox this afternoon via Web Pro News. New York has declared war on e-commerce, and Amazon is hitting back

Amazon.com is suing the New York State Department of Taxation and Finance (DTF) over a new state law that requires Internet retailers to collect sales tax on purchases shipped to state residents.

Amazon has argued that since it does not have a physical presence in the state that it should not be required to collect taxes on shipments going to New York. “Amazon has no physical presence in New York,” according to the suit. “It does not own, lease, or otherwise occupy any physical property in the state, and none of its employees works or resides in the state.”

In addition Amazon says the New York law is unconstitutional based on a 1992 U.S. Supreme Court ruling that claims states are prohibited from requiring out of state retailers to collect sales tax unless the company has a physical presence in the state.

In the Quill v. North Dakota case, the Supreme Court re-established the rule that a state could not impose sales tax collection on a business unless the company had employees or property in the state.

New York defends the law by arguing that the Amazon Associates program, which allows Web site publishers to receive commissions by promoting Amazon items through their sites make Amazon liable to collect taxes on its behalf for those affiliates who live in New York.

I’d think that if New York could legally screw anyone, it would be the Amazon affiliates. That, however, is too difficult a task. The affiliates are hard to track, and most make supplemental income at best (or typically, not even that). The commerce clause be damned, then. That’s not where the deep pockets are.

Amazon is likely to prevail, but not before the grace period for registration passes, leaving them (potentially) on the hook for back due taxes and penalties if they do in fact end up losing the fight. These kinds of attempts at taxation are akin to imposing tariffs between and among the states. One of the central and most overlooked reasons the United States has been such a successful country is that the fifty states are the largest free-trade zone in history. Regional comparative advantage, the free flow of capital and the unrestrained flow of labor is built-in to the domestic American economy on an unparalleled scale.

New York is hurting the rest of us by doing this. The Department of Justice should step in and put the impetuous Empire State in her place.

Technorati tags: economics, politics Del.icio.us tags: economics, politics LiveJournal tags: economics, politics

Related posts: Rosalind, Oh Rosalind, Obama, Testy - Hillary, Feisty

Hillary Clinton’s campaign has already begun the spin cycle, declaring as the polls open this morning that they expect to get decimated in North Carolina. From Drudge

Hillary Clinton’s inner circle now fears a stinging defeat is likely in North Carolina.

“Look, we worked hard and gave it our best shot, but the demographics, well, they are what they are,” a top campaign source explained to the DRUDGE REPORT as voting began Tuesday morning.

The campaign now believes a 15 point loss, or more, would not be surprising. Her team will work hard throughout the day to lower all expectations in North Carolina.

The campaign hopes media attention will stay fixated on the competition in Indiana, where 72 delegates are on the line, and Clinton internals show a victory!

So, if she loses by only five in North Carolina, her case regarding electability remains strong (which I think it was, anyway, lowered expectations or no).

Technorati tags: hillary clinton, democrats, road to the white house, Del.icio.us tags: hillary clinton, democrats, road to the white house, LiveJournal tags: hillary clinton, democrats, road to the white house

Some bugs are likely to be a problem. I just moved all of my web assets to Bluehost from GoDaddy, and this blog, with over four years of posting and files, became a bit tricky. I’m quite aware the MooreThoughts header is missing - some image files got corrupted in the transfer, so we’ll get to those cosmetics shortly.

I have a sneaking suspicion it’s GoDaddy’s revenge for canning their hosting services, though I have no proof whatsoever.

I’m glad Tennessee politics is getting interesting again. I was becoming concerned. Now The Tennessean (best known for offering minimal content at the largest font size available) has made itself the focal point of the story out of a non-story run in today’s paper.

For those not from around here, there has been a multi-year debate regarding cable television and franchise uniformity in the state. Before, providers had to obtain numerous local franchises to operate in Tennessee. Once the so-called “AT&T bill” becomes law (because AT&T has been pushing for its passage), cable providers need only get one franchise license from the state. Some oppose it, but for the life of me, I cannot find a logical reason why.

Back on point - the bill passed 29-0 in the state senate. Senator Bill Ketron, a Republican, has been targeted and lambasted by Nashville’s largest circulating daily because his wife works for AT&T’s wireless division and he didn’t wear a sandwich board declaring it. Or at least, that’s what they imply they would have needed to be happy

What the Murfreesboro Republican didn’t mention then was that his wife, Theresa, works for AT&T Mobility, the company’s wireless unit, which he had noted on his ethics disclosures this year. Nor did Ketron mention the tie when he earlier acted as an unofficial spokesman for behind-the-scenes wrangling over the bill.

Wait a minute. He disclosed it, but then … what? He also disclosed his wife as an income souce. I am failing to see the ethical travesty here. What’s worse, the headline The Tennessean chose is an outright lie: “Senator discloses AT&T link after vote”.

As if any more criticism is necessary, what makes this story even more irrelevant is that the AT&T bill passed 29-0. If the vote had only been 15-14, I very well could see (somewhat) the paper’s point. But that’s not what happened and the possibility of Ketron’s recusal from the vote, which would have been voluntary in this case under the ethics rules, would have made no difference whatsoever. The Tennessean saw a chance to smear an up-and-coming Republican senator, and they jumped at the opportunity.

Technorati tags: msm, tennessee politics, Del.icio.us tags: msm, tennessee politics, LiveJournal tags: msm, tennessee politics

State Senator Rosalind Kurita has sponsored legislation banning advertising by DUI lawyers

The bill in question has a provision sponsored by Sen. Rosalind Kurita (D-Clarksville) that explicitly prohibits attorneys from advertising that they specialized in DUI cases, from advertising a discounted rate for DUI defense, guaranteeing a certain judgment in the case or claiming that the attorney had more expertise than another on drunken driving defense.

Well, guaranteeing an outcome is already prohibited by the rules of ethics. The rest of it simply reeks from a variety of directions. But why did Senator Kurita introduce this obviously unconstitutional bill?

In response to the [Attorney General's] opinion, Kurita said she’ll “have to find another way” to curtail drunk driving.

Kurita sponsored the amendment because she said she was tired of seeing suspected drunk drivers not be convicted.

Her response to increasing DUI convictions is to curtail the accused’s right to counsel, which is dubious on a variety of fronts, including the commercial speech aspect that Attorney General Bob Cooper noted in his opinion.

Anyhow, what’s the real reason for Kurita’s amendment?

Her opponent in August’s Democratic primary, Tim Barnes, is an attorney whose practice area includes DUI defense.

I hope he kicks her derriere.

Technorati tags: politics, democrats, LiveJournal tags: politics, democrats, Del.icio.us tags: politics, democrats

AC Kleinheider, affixed and blogging over at the Nashville Post, reports on some procedural tomfoolery in the Tennessee House of Representatives today.

While the issue of SJR127 (the bill to amend the Tennessee Constitution to un-protect abortion) was being addressed, Representative Odom (Speaker Naifeh’s Democrat nemesis) brought forward a motion to amend the House schedule. Representative Dunn then moved to amend that motion to also bring up SJR127 for its first of the required three readings. Speaker Naifeh then called Dunn’s motion out of order.

The House voted, and by one vote, declared that it was Naifeh, not Dunn, who was out of order.

After a recess and some leadership wrangling, Dunn’s motion won out. A further effort to skip the committee process and bring SJR127 straight to the House floor failed

The two-thirds majority required to bring the resolution to the floor bypassing the committee process was not reached. SJR 127 was not brought to the floor for a vote.

Rep. Moore then called for a moment of prayer and silence for “what just went on here today.” Republican Glen Casada praised the motion and the events of the day as a true expression of representative democracy.

A moment of prayer and silence? I hate to call a Moore out, but grow some more skin. That is, unless the moment of silence extends only to House Democrats and lasts throughout the session - then, and only then, count me in.

Byron York has good analysis in National Review Online

That, not Wright’s wide-ranging social theories, is what forced Obama to denounce Wright at a hastily arranged news conference Tuesday. By questioning Obama’s honesty, Wright was striking at the heart of the Obama campaign. The most damaging thing Wright could ever say is that he knows, based on his long personal relationship with Obama, that Obama agrees with him but can’t say so publicly for political reasons. Put another way, if voters believe that Obama fundamentally rejects Wright’s views, they might question Obama’s judgment in remaining close to Wright for 20 years. But if voters believe that Obama secretly agrees with Wright but is putting on another face to win an election, then all is lost. “People could ask why somebody with good judgment would take so long to do this,” a Democratic strategist told me Monday night. “But that’s certainly better than the subtext being that Obama is an angry black man, because if he’s an angry black man, then he simply cannot win, period.”

It’s a Democrat contortionist’s nightmare, and a Republican strategist’s Utopia. Obama’s greatest asset - his credibility - has been challenged in a most distructive way. He has had tried to have it both ways, and in the effort, has shown himself nothing more than an average politician, rising above absolutely nothing. The hope (sic “hype”) is dead. Long live the reality.

Not to say I don’t appreciate larger-than-life political leaders. We n�ed more of them, but Barack Obama never was in that class. He gave a good speech or two, rested on his laurels, and attempted to fly-over the Wright controvery as if his level of accountability rose above that of a mere mortal’s. His mentor is an unapologetic leftist, no different than the padowan Obama, but the learner has refused to pitch his true colors as part of his presidential campaign. He is being forced to decide. And in his speech yesterday, finally decrying Wright as a nut job, has left thinking people wondering what Obama is really about anyway.

Barack Obama has confirmed the old canard about a star that shines twice as bright lasts for half as long. In his case, his brightness was inflated by a complicit cheap-date media. Now we see him for what he is - a lightweight. I do hope he wins the nomination.

Kim McMillan’s interest in the governorship throws her in with already-declared (sorta) Congressman Lincoln Davis,likely candidate Harold Ford, Jr., and the lingering former Nashville mayor, Bill Purcell. Bill Frist and Ron Ramsey have shown interest on the Republican side, and there are rumors that Marsha Blackburn and Knoxville Mayor Bill Haslam are also considering a run as well.

I am curious to see McMillan’s income tax spin, as she was a vocal supporter back during the tax revolt days. Even better, with the state’s budget this year and next in the tank. If the state needed an income tax in 2002, when the last budget deficit loomed, why now does the state not need an income tax in in 2009 and 2010? Consistency and expediency are often cantankerous bed fellows, as McMillan will soon to find out.

This is utter poppy cock.

First, we are told by Obama himself that that he didn’t know much bad about Jeremiah Wright. Obama had no disdain for Wright at the beginning of the disclosure, only the things he said, which (ludicrously) Obama claimed to have not heard. Then, we heard that Wright isn’t just about what we hear - that his offensive remarks were outside his usual message of hope (hear Arizona, ocean front property, and bridge, Brooklyn). Finally, we are told by Obama today that Wright is “rambling”. Obama has thrown Wright under the bus, and Wright counters with a mean ECW move and tosses Obama under the bus. Both come off flat.

Take note. This is the Democrats’ frontrunner’s relationship with his pastor and mentor. Say that again. Hear it for what it is, not the utterly inane spin that Obama’s campaign is pushing.

Indeed, judge for yourself, those of you who have mentors, and /or pastors. Make a quick conclusion as to whether you’d entertain such a relationship in the first place. After twenty years of courting Wright’s church for political gain, Obama bails. Good move, Barack. You should have done it yesterday.

As the man who speaks to 20 million from noon to three said today, Obama is synonymous with “toast”.

This post is the result of my observations over the last month.

Barack Obama has had trouble in his quest to, well - be a politician. As in, not in the negative qualities we always project upon our pols, but in the everyday, rough and tumble aspects of public service. When he was politically spawned under the North Star at the Democrat convention in 2004, he was beyond reproach. During most of the campaign, and his legendary string of eleven primary victories, he was beyond reproach. An entire cable news network panted after him on a nightly basis.

Now, things are different. And they are largely different because Obama wasn’t ready for the sure-fall. He’s more Buffalo Bills than New England Patriots.

The Jeremiah Wright controversy is all his, and grows with every Robin Williams-like appearance his mentor makes. The total disregard he demonstrated about rural values, and the simultaneous dismissal of certain valued constitutional rights, is an ongoing liability. Even worse, whenever he is asked entirely relevant questions regarding these self-made issues, he gets perturbed. It’s as if, in running for the highest office in the land, anything that has veered off-script that may indicate his true views is beyond comment. That is, to twist the magic carpet he rode in on, truely hopeful.

Hillary Clinton is the tortoise. She has plodded along, but she has been there before. She is the beneficiary of Obama’s arrogance. None of Obama’s troubles have directly stemmed from the Clinton campaign. In fact, despite her husband’s apparent onsetting dementia, Hillary is still afloat. What was initially her biggest asset has turned into a straight-up liability, and she is still on the cusp of swaying the super delegates (see also the endorsement of North Carolina’s governor today). She had no money, she was in dire straights, and now she’s back.

Obama wasn’t ready for this. He faked it for awhile, but he isn’t prepared for this sort of campaign. If he does end up in the general, I hope all my liberal friends can make peace with the phrase “President McCain.”

Technorati tags: hillary clinton, democrats, barack obama, road to the white house, politics

Del.icio.us tags: hillary clinton, democrats, barack obama, road to the white house, politics

LiveJournal tags: hillary clinton, democrats, barack obama, road to the white house, politics

Jeremiah Wright’s rambling screed yesterday in front of the NAACP can’t be good for Obama. Jim Henson himself would be proud, and maybe a little jealous, of the array of voices he has mastered. Wright does a mean Kennedy. He’s operatic, too.

Sadly for Obama, Wright spent a great portion of his remarks making excuses for the academic failure of black children in urban schools, focusing on the legitimization of ebonics and the differences in learning styles, as if that somehow explains high illegitimacy rates, fatherless homes, gang appeal, and a victim mentality. Yeah, it’s just that they’re different, and the white man doesn’t understand.

Barack Obama has lost the reigns on his mentor. Throwing the pastor under the bus seems to have rankled the relationship. Wright has scheduled a bona fide speaking tour, and is set for the National Press Club today. Presumably the message will be the same. Anyhow, it is clear that Jeremiah Wright no longer has a vested interest in a Barack Obama presidency.

Boggling the mind, there is apparently a Christian backlash against bottled water

Church groups (National Council of Churches, National Coalition of American Nuns, Presbyterians for Restoring Creation) are stirring opposition to ever-rising bottled water sales. They worry about a disturbing shift: If water becomes just another commodity or something expensive that only some people can afford, then the basic human right to water gets sold down the river.

Next week, Christ Church Cathedral downtown will remind worshippers that water is a divine gift, not just retail gold. The monthly First Friday service at 6 p.m. on May 2, called “Streams of Living Water,” will feature prayers, Bible readings, dance and visual arts — alternative expressions of spirituality and sacred space that mark this popular, unusual monthly cathedral ministry.

“Water is at the heart of our sacred story and of physical life,” says the Rev. Anne Stevenson of the cathedral, “and we are called to protect it and nourish it.”

Nourish it? Not “just another commodity?” If there was, in fact, a vast global water crisis, I daresay it could not be laid at the feet of Dasani. Then there is some throw-in about the 1.5 million barrels of oil annually it takes to transport bottled water. Anyone who knows the American economy uses nearly 21 million barrels per day can only chuckle at the attempted emotional appeal.

God help us rational Christians if bottled water coalesces into some new, crusade-like Christian movement. Woodmont Baptist, you’re on notice! If I hear a bottled water sermon, I’m getting up and leaving.

Barack Obama, take notes.

Never has ten points loomed larger than its number than it does right now for Hillary Clinton. The New York Times (who, one may remember, endorsed Ms. Clinton earlier on) is pissy this morning. Chris Matthews and Keith Olbermann did everything last night but strike up a Hillary pinata and then burn her in effigy.

She is clearly going to lose North Carolina. However, outside of that and Oregon, she ought to be able to do well with the states that are left (Indiana, West Virginia Kentucky, Montana and South Dakota). She will go out on a winning streak. And if you count the Florida popular vote, which is a colorable proposition, Hillary and Obama are separated by approximately 200,000 votes.

The popular vote only gets one so far. Even if Obama keeps the popular vote lead, anything can happen with the super delegates. That’s what they exist for, anyway - the argument they should follow the popular vote is a silly one. The whole purpose of the Democrats’ super delegate system is to not follow the popular vote. It is designed to save the Democrat Party from the irrational exuberance of its base. As Democrats generally tend to be more emotional creatures, I give the 1968 era Democrat leadership kudos for their foresight.

Here is what Hillary’s campaign is doing right now. She has done all the opposition research on Obama. Her campaign knows as much as the Republican National Committee about his past and his skeletons. In the Democrat primary, there are a lot of attacks she cannot make, that the Republicans rightly will. The super delegates are the adults of the party. She is shopping this opposition research with the super delegates right now, attempting to sway all but the most enamored Obama supporters by convincing them that Obama will be shredded in the general election. But that argument can only be made if she is keeping things close.

The end is in sight. If she beats expectations in North Carolina, and wins the states she should win, carrying that momentum through Oregon, she can make her plan work. No longer is it just a numbers game.