Big Trouble in Little Obama

Baracka Obama’s pledge to take only public financing was recently abandoned.  He claims he needs private money to battle the eeeeeviilllll 527s that the Republicans are organizing in their shadow rooms, plotting with Satan, Kali, Shiva, Tiamat, Loki, Walt Disney, and any other evil superpower of the universe.

Seriously,  he thinks that the Republicans (the same Republicans who are floating a candidate that can’t rouse the base) are plotting against him.

And Obama said he refused to let the Democrats be hampered when the Republican National Committee (RNC), political action committees and “527″ groups plan to spend millions on “smears and attacks.”

He’s even played the race card already.

“[The Republicans are] going to try to make you afraid of me. He’s young and inexperienced and he’s got a funny name. And did I mention he’s black?”

It’s exquisite paranoia.

So, he’s using this excuse to justify reneging on his pledge to take only public money so he can continue to take gobs and gobs of private money (and if you think this money is coming exclusively from “concerned citizens”, you’re an idealistic fool).  Considering he’s already pledged not to have any lobbyists on his staff (and that was quickly disproven), he’s losing any credibility as a reformer.  And it seems editors of newspapers, those who elevated him during the primary campaign, are steamed that he is such a boldface liar.  We’ll see if they start a more critical evaluation of their paper messiah, or if they’ll continue to be loyal soldiers and attack McCain and leave Obama alone.

I’m guessing the hurt the editors are feeling is going to trump party loyalty.  When you lie like that, the “Straight-Take Express” is looking pretty darn good.

McClellan: I Don’t Know What Happened

But the book has already been ordered and shipped to thousands to deluded Left-wingers. Suckers!

At least he had the integrity to tell Congress he didn’t really have any idea what was happening.

Played. Like. A. Fiddle.

Liberals Aren’t Nice

At least according to a post over at the Daily Mail. Here’s some choice excerpts:

The full-scale embrace of the importance of self-awareness, self-discovery and being ‘true’ to oneself, along with the idea that the State should care for the less fortunate, has created a swathe of Left-wing people who want to outsource their obligations to others.

The statistics I base this on come from the General Social Survey, America’s premier social research database, but they are just as relevant to the UK, as I believe political belief systems drive one’s attitudes, regardless of where you happen to live.

I’ve also noticed these particular quirks of liberalism. In charity, one gives of what they have to another without expectation of reward. In the liberal world, charity is a tax-deduction. Tally up how much you’ve given, then get it back from the government somehow. That’s not charity.

What’s worse is that it doesn’t put a face on the problem. If you want to help the poor, then help the poor. Don’t demand the government help the poor, then have the government tax everyone (even those who don’t want to help, or those who can’t afford to help) and then help the poor by 3rd part extension. There is no charity there, and that’s the essence of socialism. Charity by society, and society’s needs are driven by the elected. So, that means you give to the government and expect the government to give charitably, it’s all moot, as the money you give to the government to assist those you think it’s assisting may not be assisted at all.

Let’s see some more from the article:

Those surveyed were asked: ‘Is it your obligation to care for a seriously injured/ill spouse or parent, or should you give care only if you really want to?’ Of those describing themselves as ‘conservative’, 71 per cent said it was. Only 46 per cent of those on the Left agreed.

Liberalism, at least the progressive, neo-hippie version, is very self-centered. Feminism was incredibly selfish (and still continues to be). Dodge the draft, blame your crime on a disease-du-jour, blame all of society’s evils on conservatives but none on Democrats– it’s all about shifting the blame off their shoulders in any way, as it’s perfect realization of individual and empowerment of individual Conversely, this means there is necrosis of society and community, as those who look out only for A#1 are not going to contribute to the well-being of the community unless there’s something in it for them. Oddly enough, this is a complaint liberalism has of conservatism. Let’s move on…

To the question: ‘Do you get happiness by putting someone else’s happiness ahead of your own?’, 55 per cent of those who said they were ‘very conservative’ said Yes, compared with 20 per cent of those who were ‘very liberal’.

Mmm hmm… More:

When asked by the World Values Survey whether parents should sacrifice their own well-being for those of their children, those on the Left were nearly twice as likely to say No.

Ouch.

Scholars at Oxford and Warwick Universities found the same sort of behaviour when they conducted an experiment.

Setting up a computer game that allowed people to accumulate money, they gave participants the option to spend some of their own money in order to take away more from someone else.

The result? Those who considered themselves ‘egalitarians’ (i.e. Left of centre) were much more willing to give up some of their own money if it meant taking more money from someone else.

Much of the desire to distribute wealth and higher taxation is motivated by envy - the desire to take more from someone else - and bitterness.

And that’s the key. There’s rarely a “oneness of giving” from the modern liberal. They give, but they want something back in the process. That’s not charity– that’s investment!

I know liberals who are exceptions to these general patterns (as you will find in any political group), but mine the Hollywood crowd, the local Ivory Tower University, or a Democratic fundraiser, and you’ll discover that the majority believe in giving to charities that support ideological progress rather than assistance to the poor, homeless and sick.

Conservatives, the surveys say, are generally nicer, and have a softer edge, regardless of how much money it could possibly make them.

Jimmy Carter, Liability

Not a surprise Jimmy Carter was out badmouthing the US embargo of Gaza. He was out spilling the beans about the Israeli nuclear arsenal. We should all be thankful– he could have told people where they were.

So the Nobel Peace Prize now goes to people who can badmouth US Foreign Policy the best? In that case– the US State Department is a bunch of half-trained baboons, and Bush is a McChimpy Hiterperson. Down with Israel! And Up with Terrorism! Israel has 200 nukes, all located in Tel Aviv!

There, now can I have my million buck Nobel Peace Prize?

Obama’s Tax Code

Baracka wants to make it easier for you to file taxes.  In fact, he’s proposing something that lets the Federal Government calculate your taxes for you!

Here’s the synopsis:

(1) Create a new “Making Work Pay” tax credit of up to $1,000 for America’s working families
(2) Create a new universal mortgage interest credit that will benefit low and middle-income
homeowners
(3) Honor America’s seniors by eliminating income taxes for those making less than $50,000 per year
(4) Simplify tax filings so millions of Americans can do their taxes in less than 5 minutes
(5) Eliminate special interest loopholes and tax breaks and crack down on international tax
havens

The “making work pay” idea is OK, but it rewards two-working parent families, and barely assists single-income families.  The $1000 isn’t going to cover much day care.
The “new, universal mortgage interest credit” is a boondoggle.  His policy states “The current mortgage interest deduction excludes nearly two-thirds of Americans who do not itemize their taxes.”  Who owns a home and doesn’t itemize their deductions? Effectively he wants to give a 10% mortgage credit to people who earn less than $50,000 a year.  People who earn that little aren’t typical homeowners, especially on the West and East Coasts.  And if you do own a home and itemize deductions, odds are you’ll be passing 10% if you earn $50,000 a year in deductions.  Bear in mind this is a tax deduction, so you don’t get any credit from the government.  This just bottoms out at 0 tax owed, and most families I know that earn under $50K hit that every tax cycle.

3)  Eliminating the need for seniors to pay income tax.  Fine.  That was Clinton’s idea anyway.  But we’ve had 3 tax credit programs.  Where is that money going to come from?  Notice how that magic number is always $50,000?  Well, guess what happens when you earn more than $50,000 a year?  That’s right.  You’ll be paying the difference, middle class.

4).  Simplify tax filings.  Let the government do it for you!  What a BRAINDEAD STUPID IDEA.  Seriously, I want the IRS determining how much I owe?  No thanks.

5)  Tax the rich!  Hey, someone’s got to pay for all these new tax incentives he’s throwing at voters.

Obama’s tax code proposal states, right near the top, this:

Barack Obama will stand up to the special interests and restore fairness to the tax code. Obama’s tax fairness plan will reward work and provided needed tax cuts to America’s workers. His five-part plan will provide a tax cut to over 150 million workers and their families.

Remember– when a politician starts asking for fairness, he/she realyl wants to be as unfair as possible.  150 million may get a break, but the other 150 million are going to have to cough up to balance this “cut”.

If You Oppose Obama You Are a…

gun-toting, Jesus freakin’,  fear-mongering racist that opposes trade.

Well, that’s what I got from something Obama said on Sunday in the small town of San Francisco.  Here’s the exact quote (thanks to Ben Smith):

You go into these small towns in Pennsylvania and, like a lot of small towns in the Midwest, the jobs have been gone now for 25 years and nothing’s replaced them…And they fell through the Clinton Administration, and the Bush Administration, and each successive administration has said that somehow these communities are gonna regenerate and they have not.

And it’s not surprising then they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren’t like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations.

Nice work, Baracka Obama.  “Baracka attacks supporters in the Midwest.  Fatality!”

That’s a pretty big paintbrush.  And notice the context he’s putting it in.  “Government didn’t provide people these jobs or money, so they’re angry and bitter.  That must explain why they don’t like me.  That and they’re ignorant racists.”

So says the nuanced communist running for President.

I guess one reason the West and East Coasts are so Democrats.  They cling to abortion, or atheism, or they’re rich white people who hate rich white people and want to give all the money of rich white people other than themselves to everyone else.  That type of stereotype explains their frustrations.

What’s up at Obama’s website?

You’ll never know because there’s a memory hole there.

Good thing LGF does screencaps.

Passing the Torch

Finally, a San Francisco protest that’s meaningful. Well, sort-of. Given the protests in London and Paris, Chinese officials and SF Mayor Gavin Newsom (D) conspired to mislead the crowds and run a secret torch route somewhere in San Francisco, while fans of the Olympics and protestors lined the parade route to object to China’s abyssmal human rights record.

The Olympics has always been a ceremony of the individuals of countries that are expressing peaceful competition for the sake of unity. The best athletes represent their countries, and we’ve seen some of the best of the nations give remarkable statements in their triumph.

But now enter China, which routinely stifles free speech, and even stifles the lives of those grasping for freedom. Such was the case recently in Tibet. Is China truly a forum that promotes the Olympian ideal? Or is it merely a money/publicity stunt for a brutal regime?

I think we all know what the answer to that is. We should all also recognize that the mayor of San Francisco, the place of my birth, willingly conspired with Communist officials to safeguard their interests as well as deny fans and protesters alike meaningful discourse. When the torch is diverted in a clandestine manner, it really smacks of a “government that knows better than the rabble”.

But such is the nature of the spineless weasel that was elected in San Francisco. At least the mayors of London and Paris let the masses show their distaste for the Olympic games in China with a direct embarrassment of the Chinese. Mayor Newsom is too interested in appeasing the Communists than to let freedom-loving people show their abject disgust with the oppressive Chinese government.

Democrats Abandoning Democracy

It seems the party elders have had enough of this “primary” business. Half of the Democrats want Obama, another half want Hillary, and it doesn’t like anyone is going to secure the delegates needed, by the convention. So will the Superdelegates side with Hillary out of loyalty to the Clinton way? Will they side with Obama and the majority of the party’s delegates?

Or will they say “Screw it!” and just nominate someone else altogether?

If neither Mr Obama nor Mrs Clinton has the 2,025 delegates needed to win the nomination, and if both appear unable to beat Mr McCain, under one scenario a group of about 100 party elders - the “super-delegates” - could sit out the first ballot in Denver, preventing either candidate winning outright, and then offer Mr Gore the nomination for the good of the party.

Tim Mahoney, a Democrat congressman from Florida, said last week: “If it goes into the convention, don’t be surprised if someone different is at the top of the ticket.” This suggests the party would accept a Gore-Clinton or a Gore-Obama pairing.

So let me get this straight. Instead of throwing their support behind the first woman presidential nominee or the first black presidential nominee, they’re going to throw their support behind a white male! One who wasn’t even on the ballot!
All for the good of the party, of course. So how about we request a name change from “Demo”crats to “Oliga”crats to represent that yes, the party is actually run and controlled by a very small group of power brokers?

But I’m looking forward to seeing President Gore. I can’t wait until roving gangs of environmentalists are peeking in my window, making sure I’m using compact fluorescent bulbs, composting my garbage, and running my TV with a hand-crank.

We Didn’t Land on the Moon

I’m a Moon Landing Denialist.  And a Nazi.  To some, it’s because I look like one (and they would be stereotyping nimwits).  But it’s Al Gore who’s calling me out on it.  He’s comparing those who challenge Anthropomorphic Global Warming (AGW) to those who think in conspiracies.

I find the connection hilarious.  Al Gore, who’s fat like me (but I look like a conservative), said on the upcoming broadcast of 60 Minutes that everyone believes in Global Warming is a small minority.  He’s saying this at the same time the computer models are failing and the temperature of the earth is plummeting.  Evidently, if everyone believes it, there’s no reason to make AGW films, or do a press tour on 60 Minutes, or buy ad time condemning you for being so wasteful.  Hey, we’re all on board, right?  Oh, except those of us who have problems with the “perponderance” of scientific evidence and the “consensus” of the IPCC (and all 5 of the climate scientists who signed amongst their hundreds of members).

It’s funny that the Left is so concerned with labeling people who don’t agree with them.  AGW nazis or denialists.  Fat conservatives.  White male misogynists.  Of course, I don’t resort to such stereotyping because it’s illogical– appearance doesn’t make the person.  But the Left seems to think so, and is happy to label people left and right, although you try and label them and all hell breaks loose.

How about you interview me, Leslie Stahl?  I’ll tell you all about the problems with the AGW theories.  I’ll debate Al Gore on the show.  And I’ll do it from the set of the Moon Landing.