"Barack is one of the smartest people you will ever encounter who will deign to enter this messy thing called politics." —Michelle Obama
Deign: to condescend reluctantly and with a strong sense of the affront to one's superiority that is involved : stoop
A little bit of advice to the Obama campaign: it's never a good idea for anyone connected to a campaign to use the word "deign" when describing their own candidate.
(h/t Ed Morrissey)
Comments (if any):
When McCain backers consider labeling conservative opposition to His Maverickness as "McCain Derangement Syndrome" (MDS), I wish they'd get a clue as to what Derangement Syndrome really is.
Consider a measure passed in Battleboro, VT this Tuesday:
"Shall the Selectboard instruct the Town Attorney to draft indictments against President Bush and Vice President Cheney for crimes against our Constitution ... [and to] arrest and detain George Bush and Richard Cheney in Brattleboro if they are not duly impeached, and prosecuted or extradite them to other authorities that may reasonably contend to prosecute them?"
Now that, friends, is derangement.
Comments (if any):
"[F]or the first time in my adult life I am proud of my country..." —Michelle Obama
Ok, everyone's heard the quote. The rebuttals almost write themselves.
People need to take a step back, and understand the spirit in which Michelle's statement was intended. It was no more than an attempt to connect with her audience. It must be understood that speaking dismissively of America is a bonding ritual among liberals. Nothing says to a liberal audience, "I'm one of you," more than expressions of disdain for America.
When reading Michelle’s statement in the cold, impersonal medium of print, it's easy to miss it’s meaning, and mistake it as a gratuitous slap at America. That's not what it was at all. She was just working the crowd, getting them fired up to rally behind Team Obama.
Her husband tried to spin her statement, for the sake of damage control, explaining, "What she meant was, this is the first time that she's been proud of the politics of America." Of course that came off sounding lame, because Michelle was talking about America in general, not about American politics.
What her husband should have said, but couldn't, is: "Lighten up, people. My wife didn’t mean anything by it. Of course she's been proud of America—every time liberalism has triumphed. But you must understand, she had to say that she was never proud of America: In the circles we travel, that’s just how you roll.”
Comments (if any):
Now that Fred has withdrawn, we can pause a moment to a look back on his belated campaign.
Ah, what might have been.
Comments (if any):
The kids at Boulder High are walking out of classes, rather than be subjected to the dreaded ‘G-word' found in the Pledge of Allegience.
They have a new Pledge now:
"I pledge allegiance to the flag and my constitutional rights with which it comes. And to the diversity, in which our nation stands, one nation, part of one planet, with liberty, freedom, choice and justice for all."
These non-aborted youngsters “pledge allegiance to … choice abortion?” What sublime irony.
All in all this Pledge is a supercilious little exercise in secular sanctimony from these young skulls full of mush. Our brave new schools must be made safe from—in the words of Boulder High's Student Worker Club President—the "almost religious oppression" of the traditional Pledge of Allegiance.
Their efforts, however, are inevitably and inescapably amateur. Several deficiencies immediately present themselves.
The first cardinal error occurs in the very first phrase—namely pledging allegiance to the flag. Uncool; very uncool. Pledge allegiance to your Che Guevara T-shirt … but the flag?, Ptooey! The American flag is to be burned, spat upon, trod underfoot, or hung upside down; in no event or circumstance is it to be shown honor or “allegiance.” The students have badly bungled their Pledge right off the bat.
Even worse is their next offense, pledging allegiance to the rights guaranteed in the Constitution. Ouch! Oh no; don't pledge to that. The true force of these rights are for progressive jurists to degrade, even while they presume to broaden. Maybe pledge allegiance to the edicts of a liberal Supreme Court jurist citing Zimbabwean law in place of the Constitution, but to the Constitution itself?—Never!
My proposed fix-it for their Pledge:
I pledge derision to the flag, and to the Constitution, at which I thumb my nose, but alliegance to the global community, and to international law, by which it stands. One world, with liberty, freedom, choice, justice, peace-love-joy, and the fuzzy warm glow of feel-good liberalism to all ... as decreed by a duly recognized World Court.
Really, though, the entire construct of their Pledge is altogether timid and limiting. Here is my suggestion for Boulder High’s dream Pledge:
I pledge allegiance not to the flag, or the base republic for which it stands, but to Mother Gaia—All hail!—on whose breasts all nations suck. And to the global community of nations (of which my own is least) with liberty from homophobes, freedom from religion, choice for dilation and curettage, and justice for all people groups deemed especially oppressed.
(h/t: MM)
UPDATE:
Snapshots of America's tomorrow. We're doomed.
OTHER REACTIONS—
[Leaving out "under God" is] never enough for liberals. They ensure that if one person is offended, we all suffer the consequences.
The ability of ACLU-types to be offended by any and all public references to Christian faith is legendary. Such will be their state of constant umbrage until or unless all references to the Christian God are scrubbed from the last vestige of public life. They'll stand for nothing less, so help them ... uh, so help them.
Comments (if any):
Barack Obama explained his refusal to vote on a Senate amendment which condemned MoveOn.org’s recent hit piece on General Petraeus:
"This amendment was a stunt designed only to score cheap political points while what we should be doing is focusing on the deadly serious challenge we face in Iraq. It's precisely this kind of political game-playing that makes most Americans cynical about Washington's ability to solve America's problems. By not casting a vote, I registered my protest against this empty politics. I registered my views on the ad itself the day it appeared."
I'm not entirely unsympathetic to the notion of a member of Congress bowing out of what amounts to a resolution tally. Resolutions are often more chic than substance.
I'm entirely unsympathetic—however—regarding Obama's sanctimony, as well as his too evident hypocrisy.
We're to believe that Obama would never stoop to any "stunt designed only to score cheap political points?" Obama can shovel scat with the best of them if he can rail against ‘cheap politics’ with a straight face.
(h/t Allahpundit)
Earlier sanctimony from Obama.
Comments (if any):
Ok, so we all know that the New York Times was 'Cooking the Invoice' for MoveOn.org's 'Cooking the Books' ad.
When you think about it, though, MoveOn was getting gypped at any price.
As one GOP staffer surmised:
"I'm surprised they had to pay anything at all for the ad. They could have just asked the editorial page to run it and it wouldn't have cost them a cent."
Indeed.
One can only imagine the pandemonium that broke out when MoveOn's ad first hit the NYT's office—ecstatic staffers erupting into a mad cacophony of hoots, hollers, and high fives. It's a wonder the Times didn't waive the fees in a glow of generous feeling for their leftist MoveOn soulmates. It's not like the Times wasn't dying to print it anyway. Leftist advocacy is the Time’s raison d'être; in this sense the NYT and MoveOn.org are working partners.
If any money changed hands, it should have been the Times paying MoveOn a tidy sum as heartfelt 'thank you' for the privilege of running such a tour de force of leftist boilerplate.
Ed Morrisey called the MoveOn/Times article:
[...] a nasty hit piece on the honor of a serving commander in a theater of war. [...] surely one of the worst moments in modern American media.
The 'worst moments in modern American media' is just business as usual at the New York Times.
Comments (if any):
Understanding Chuck Hagel In One Simple Paragraph
Mark Noonan provides perhaps the best synopsis of Chuck Hagel's Senate career ever written:
The only thing I can figure about Hagel is that once upon a time he must have counted up how many Republicans and how many Democrats there are in Nebraska and decided that "Republican" was the way to go for a man with political ambitions in his State. Other than that, there's no way to explain the way he's been nothing but a bother to the GOP - never sticking with us, and always playing up to the most anti-GOP elements in the MSM.
Comments (if any):
“And among the most capable of those from your own side who speak to you on this topic and on the manufacturing of public opinion is Noam Chomsky…” —Osama bin Laden
That’s a real keeper; much better, even, than a recommendation from the venerable Castro. It amounts—unquestionably—to the absolute zenith in leftist street cred. Truly Chomski has earned the eternal doffing of Kosite and DU tinfoil hats everywhere.
I hope Chomsky doesn’t relegate OBL's ringing endorsement to the back cover of his next book. I hope he proudly displays it on the front cover.
Somewhere—count on it—Michael Moore is in a jealous funk.
"To conclude, I invite you to embrace Islam. ... There are no taxes in Islam, but rather there is a limited Zakaat [alms] totaling 2.5 percent.”
So if we surrender now, he'll go easy on us; now that's one heckuva guy.
As Captain Ed retorts:
Isn't that sweet? If we just agree to live as slaves under our new Taliban masters, we can finance our homes at a flat 2.5% fee. Think of how liberating that will be! Well, except for the burqas, the barbers, the end of music, dancing, Judaism, Christianity, voting, the press, the 13th-21st centuries, science ...
Comments (if any):
What was once worth a thousand words will soon be worth nothing.
Comments (if any):
On August 22nd, Riverside district attorney Rod Pacheco filed a Complaint for Permanent Injuction to Abate a Public Nuisance with the Riverside Superior Court against East Side Riva, Riverside's most notorious gang.
East Side Riva Injunction Safety Zone Map.
On the 24th, Pacheco served "Summons to the East Side Riva Criminal Gang" via a full page ad in the Riverside's The Press Enterprise (page B6), as well as their Spanish language version, La Prensa [no link available]:
You have 30 CALENDAR DAYS after this summons and legal papers are served on you to file a written response at this court and have a copy served on the plantiff. [...]
Through this lawsuit, the Riverside County District Attorney's Office seeks to prevent East Side Riva and its gang members from engaging in numerous activities within the Safety Zone (see adjacent map). The lawsuit requests the court to order the following:
*No Associating with East Side Riva Gang Members*No Drugs
*No Blocking Access
*No Trespassing
*No Curfew Violations
*No Lookouts/ Do Not Warn of Police
*No Reckless Driving
*No False Information
*No Intimidation
*No Public Consumption of Alcohol
*No Guns or Illegal Weapons
*No Graffiti or Vandalism Tools
*No loitering
*No Gang Apparel
*No Gang Signs
*No Fighting
*No Police Scanners
*No Two-Way Radios
*No Violations of Law
Apparently East Side Riva didn't take too kindly to that:
RIVERSIDE - Police are investigating a yard sale ad that appeared in the classified section of The Press-Enterprise on Saturday as a possible gang-related threat to Riverside County District Attorney Rod Pacheco. [...]
The listing was printed under the location heading "East Riverside" and advertised a weeklong "BIG BLOWOUT Going Out Of Business" event, adding that "Proceeds benefits Rod Pacheco Memorial Fund." The ad also supplied personal information [i.e.; cell phone number and home address] about the district attorney.
As for the Ron Pacheco Memorial Fund:
The penalty for threatening a public official is a maximum of three years in state prison with eligibility for probation [...]. However, if gang members are shown to have made the threat to benefit the gang, they could face up to four additional years in prison [...].
The article goes on to say of the original injunction:
Those found in violation can be fined or receive six-month jail terms. Pacheco said Friday that injunctions against gangs have been successful in Oxnard, Los Angeles and San Bernardino, which has had such a court action in place since 1995.
We can only hope some Rivas see jail time soon. Couldn't happen to a more deserving gang of thugs.
Comments (if any):
I can forgive the legend of Laker Showtime hoops immortality almost anything, but not this:
Hillary Clinton's campaign will announce any minute now that Magic Johnson will host a fundraiser for her at his house six days later on Sept. 14. [...]"Senator Hillary Clinton understands the domestic and international issues better than anyone," Johnson will say in the release. "and has the experience and knowledge to help lead our country and get us to a better place. We need a winner as our next president."
(h/t: MM)
Comments (if any):
It's official—a dirty player has juiced his way past Hank Aaron's record.
ESPN--[Hank Aaron's] legacy might even be strengthened because, as far as we know, he hit 755 home runs naturally, legally and honestly.
"Naturally, legally, and honestly:" Three words that will never be used to describe the steroid-induced exploits of Barry 'Roids.
In the link cited above, one Barry 'Roids apologist admonishes us, "Record books should be free of moral judgments or other subjective criteria." This is why record books are soulless—they care not whether an athlete cheated his way onto its hallowed pages.
Fortunately, moral judgment still impels us to care about right and wrong, to differentiate between records nobly attained, and those ignobly attained. It is for this reason Barry 'Roids will always merit a neon asterisk in the record book of public opinion.
(h/t: Hot Air)
Comments (if any):
I was unsure which side on the Prop 87 debate was lying more, so I had planned not to vote on it at all.
Then on TV today I saw a ‘Yes on Prop 87’ commercial starring Al Gore! (Here’s proof, via a Google search)
Gore is for Prop 87. Is there really anything else you need to know?
Comments (if any):
Please instead of Paying ATT. to Prop 87 try Paying attendtion on the war stop the war!!
oh my lord no on prop 87
oh my gosh ness no
Created with Snazz by PromoGuy.net, ScriptyGoddess.com and MovableType