On July 17th, I wrote a post about why I thought Kennedy decided to endorse Barack Obama.
The basic premise was that….
The Rest Of This Article Has Been Moved To My New Home. Please CLICK HERE
The big question that has been getting me in the wake of Barack Obama’s election is, “Will he name a woman to a top cabinet position?”
As I listen to the names of his transition team and cabinet begin to leak out, with others being talked about, the one thing I do not hear is the name of a woman.
Chief of Staff – Rahm Emanuel
Sec State – Bill Richardson or John Kerry
Sec Def – Chuck Hagel (a Republican no-less)
Sec Treas – Paul Vockler
Sec EPA – RFK Jr
Notice the lack of a woman’s name? And I am not even talking about Hillary Clinton, who many Democrats, including Joe Biden himself, think deserved to be named AT LEAST Vice President.
And now, Obama is likely to even pass her up in considering who to name to top cabinet spots?
Hell, the Republicans named Sarah Palin to the VP slot, Condi Rice to the NSA and then Sec State slots… and yet Obama, even as a Senator….
For The Rest Of The Post, Please CLICK HERE
Note From Texas Hill Country – CT is a blogger and a dedicated Conservative Republican. This is the story about how (s)he came to know the PUMA movement and subsequent impressions. I found this very interesting, wonderfully written and asked if I could cross-post the article here. CT was kind enough to allow me to do so, and here you go…
A few days ago one of the contributors on Conservative Badlands did a piece called the PUMA Factor, it was a look at how this block of voters might be one of the groups to decide the Presidential election in 08’. It made me realize that I didn’t know much about their movement or philosophies, other than the obvious. PUMA means Party Unity My Ass and they were angry because HRC got lambasted in the primaries and there was a SERIOUS possibility of caucus manipulation. So, I had an out of the ordinary idea, I figured go into their virtual community and ask them if anyone would be interested in answering a few questions for this post. Well I got some takers.
Most of the PUMA’s that answered the call of the wild in my open thread were female but the composite of their whole movement, I imagine, is a little harder to determine. One very pleasant and intelligent woman, who goes by the SN, Angrynana said this, “Also, there is a mistake in thinking all Pumas and Puma types are older, white women. There are men, people of many religions, all races, gays and lesbians, young, middle-aged, and older Pumas. There are groups from the West and the East. There are Native American Pumas and African American Pumas.” I can honestly say I believe this assessment. Since there were about 18 million people who voted for Hillary in the primaries and the Democratic Party is noted for its pluralism, it makes sense they are a very diverse lot.
What I was more curious about was what brought them to this point and what were they going to do after the election. Their responses ranged from moving to the GOP, going Independent, to retaking the Democratic Party. Judging the answers, Ereizindian sums the majority of their thoughts up well, “If the Dem leadership continues to deprecate its members who were slandered and vilified in the primaries and GE, I shall become an Indie, possibly on my way to becoming a Republican.” This is not to say all of sudden they identify with the Republican or Conservative movement. For them, however, it will be a near strategic impossibility to retake the Democratic Party. It has slid too far into an abyss of identity politics and viral cult worship, it is no longer about issues, it is about one man.
Despite their obvious visceral anger towards the Democratic Party establishment a single theme reigned supreme in the great majority of their posts and emails. Helen put it best, “IT IS COUNTRY AND PRINCIPLES BEFORE PARTY.” I was absolutely, jaw droppingly, astounded to hear a Hillary supporting Democrat in Exile say this. These responses gave me the insight to look at them as I have never looked at a political opponent before, I saw Americans who care about their country. This got me thinking, who am I to judge whether they can love their country just because they are Democrats. Neither Republicans nor Conservatives have the copyright or moniker on patriotism. After all aren’t PUMA’s demonstrating this by standing by our sides?
They have become apostates to their party but not their country, that speaks volumes to me. PUMA’s have recognized that this is about America, not a singular person. They also understand this has nothing to do with the sweeping change and one man, little m, cannnot shoulder this all by his lonesome. That goal is far too lofty and enchanting to be anywhere near reality. Truth be told, he is neither Atlas nor Prometheus, even if he thinks he is.
In closing I would like to thank all of the ladies and gentlemen who so graciously accepted my invite to participate in this undertaking, I hope I did you justice. Sometimes we get reminders of things from unexpected sources and that is what the PUMA’s did for me. My suggestion to Republicans and Conservatives, alike, try and understand them. Politically we may need them as much as they need us, we are rapidly becoming a house that is acquiring vacancies and they may need a home. More importantly, they are Americans who love their country enough to look past partisan lines. That, my friends, is the miracle of being an American first.
Pic cred to The Confluence, I violated some internet copyright laws by snagging them. Hopefully in the spirit of the post they won’t mind.
Since I started writing speeches more than ten years ago, I have always believed in the Democratic Party. Not anymore. Not after the election of 2008. This transformation has been swift and complete and since I’m a woman writing in the election of 2008, “very emotional.”
See campaigns get complicated when you’ve written for so many Democrats. Not only had I written for Senator Edwards, but I had also been Senator Hillary Clinton’s speechwriter. Senator Joe Biden is a “good looking” man and his care after my father almost died from an aneurysm is the kind of kindness you never forget. When I saw Edwards at a traffic light in D.C. about a year after our meeting, he asked for help and I did and it was an honor to help him with his concession speech. And when the primary ended, it was a privilege to help Michelle Obama with a stump speech, be considered as a speechwriter for the V.P. nominee again, and send friends in Chicago ideas until the financial crisis hit. This is what the Democratic Party has been for me; it’s family. Now, it doesn’t even feel like a distant cousin.
This drift started on a personal level with the fall of former Senator John Edwards. It got stronger during the Democratic National Convention when I counted the substantive mentions of poverty on one hand and a whole bunch of bad canned partisan lines against Senator John McCain. Some faith was lifted after Senator Hillary Clinton’s grace during a difficult hour. But that faith was dashed when I saw that someone had raided the Caligula set and planted the old columns at Invesco Field.
The final straw came the other week when Samuel Joseph Wurzelbacher (a.k.a Joe the Plumber) asked a question about higher taxes for small businesses. Instead of celebrating his aspirations, they were mocked. He wasn’t “a real plumber,” and “They’re fighting for Joe the Hedge-Fund manager,” and the patronizing, “I’ve got nothing but love for Joe the Plumber.”
“I didn’t leave the Democratic Party; the Democratic Party left me.”
The party I believed in wouldn’t look down on working people under any circumstance. And Joe the Plumber is right. This is the absolutely worst time to raise taxes on anyone: the rich, the middle class, the poor, small businesses and corporations.
Governor Palin and I don’t agree on a lot of things, mostly social issues. But I have grown to appreciate the Governor. I was one of those initial skeptics and would laugh at the pictures. Not anymore. When someone takes on a corrupt political machine and a sitting governor, that is not done by someone with a low I.Q. or a moral core made of tissue paper. When someone fights her way to get scholarships and work her way through college even in a jagged line, that shows determination and humility you can’t learn from reading Reinhold Niebuhr. When a mother brings her son with special needs onto the national stage with love, honesty, and pride, that gives hope to families like mine as my older brother lives with a mental disability. And when someone can sit on a stage during the Sarah Palin rap on Saturday Night Live, put her hands in the air and watch someone in a moose costume get shot—that’s a sign of both humor and humanity.
I can no longer justify what this party has done and can’t dismiss the treatment of women and working people as just part of the new kind of politics. It’s wrong and someone has to say that. And also say that the Democratic Party’s talking points—that Senator John McCain is just four more years of the same and that he’s President Bush—are now just hooker lines that fit a very effective and perhaps wave-winning political argument…doesn’t mean they’re true. After all, he is the only one who’s worked in a bipartisan way on big challenges.
Please go to the article and read the whole thing. It is a wonderful insider’s view of the party.
I would love to see some more elaboration on a few points, especially about the manufactured inanity of the narrative on Palin and the intentionality of it, but I guess that will have to wait for her next installment.
“When it came time for choosing, somehow Barack Obama just couldn’t bring himself to pick the woman who got 18 million votes in his primary, and that seems to be too familiar a story isn’t it?” Palin said at a rally in Henderson, NV yesterday. “How it is for so many American women that the qualifications are there, but for some reason the promotion never comes?
In stronger language than Palin has used on the campaign trail before, the comments were part of a broader attempt to sell herself as an advocate for women and working numbers at a time when Palin’s support among women has slipped dramatically in national polls since becoming the Republican vice presidential nominee.
“You’ve got to ask yourself why was Senator Hillary Clinton not even vetted by the Obama campaign?” Palin continued. “Why did it take 24 years, an entire generation from the time Geraldine Ferraro made her pioneering bid until the next time that a woman was asked to join a national ticket?”
“In the long history of our country, 74 people have held the position of President or Vice-President, and why have the major parties given America only two chances to even consider a woman for either office?” Palin asked. “This glass ceiling, it is still there, but it’s about time that we shattered that glass ceiling once and for all.”
This is a fantastic article and I am glad someone took the time to put this up!
From Mountain Sage
There have been allegations by Hillary Clinton supporters of Caucus fraud on the part of the Obama campaign in various states. While this may have been the case in many of the states they cite, it can not be true in one of them… Texas.
The reason it cannot be true it Texas is that Texas does not have a Caucus.
Oh, I know that is what the media has told you and what everyone would like you to believe, but Texas does not have a caucus, you don’t get to “vote twice” for the nominee, and most importantly… no one “wins” part two of the Texas Two-Step the night of the primary.
Contrary to what the media, the pundits and the Obama campaign would have liked you to believe, Texas is no different than any other state in the delegate selection process. Texas has a primary and then a series of conventions that select the delegates to the national convention, just like every other state. There are small differences in how this selection is conducted though. But one of the differences is most certainly NOT a caucus.
First, lets talk about two mythical states and how they conduct their elections… each one has 100 delegates that they send to the national convention, but one has a primary and one has a caucus. These generalizations are true for every single state. Including Texas.
Follow the link… the rest of the article explains how Texas’ primary really works, what happened and offers some really interesting questions at the end.
Good stuff from Mountain Sage as usual!
I must thank my dear friend Shtuey for seeing the bigger picture for all of us. And I must say thank you for helping me recover some of my memories of Denver. Shtuey you are my hero!
From Shtuey, our guest for the day:
How did we get here? How is it that “subprime mortgages” have brought us to the brink of economic collapse? Most people believe it is due to the predatory lending practices of financial institutions. That is the lie you have been sold. The truth is far more insidious. We are in fact on the brink of economic disaster because of the people who have sent Barack Obama.
In order to understand how this happened we must begin with Saul Alinsky , the radical socialist who, after spending a great deal of time with the Al Capone crime family in Chicago, realized that the same shakedown tactics used by the mob to extort business, and control politicians, could be used by activists to shakedown banks and political institutions to advance a socialist agenda. These were tactics utilized by groups like ACORN, in an effort to lobby the government to pass laws that forced lending institutions to issue mortgages to low income/”at risk” borrowers who often had no way of paying the money back.
But ACORN members probably did not lobby for these laws to bring down our economy, at least not knowingly. I believe that, apart from the leaders at the top, rank and file ACORN members legitimately believed they were fighting for low-income housing. But ACORN’s backers were simply using Alinsky’s method (never reveal your real agenda) to serve their own purposes. Who are these people? You know the names of two of them: Bill Ayers and Barack Obama. I suspect that they are more front men than anything else, though who knows who Ayers was with while he was in hiding?
Where did ACORN get the funds to engage in the widespread lobbying (read extortion) that allowed them to shakedown lenders and politicians? From the money diverted to them by Bill Ayers and Barack Obama, via the Chicago Annenberg Challenge, and the Woods Fund, as well as with your tax dollars allocated by Congressional Democrats; the same Congressional Democrats that have received hundreds of thousands of dollars from Freddie and Fannie in the form of campaign contributions; the same Congressional Democrats that ignored Republican calls for the regulating and reform of Freddie and Fannie–the institutions that took subprime mortgages, bundled them, and infected financial institutions worldwide…all in the name of granting minorities and low income families access to housing (always the trouble begins with the most honorable of intentions, or at least it is made to seem so), but with the Leftists’ hidden purpose of initiating a worldwide economic collapse. All of it accomplished with ACORN as the muscle.
“compels banks to make loans to low-income borrowers and in what the supporters of the Act call “communities of color” that they might not otherwise make based on purely economic criteria.”
DiLorenzo goes on to explain:
The original lobbyists for the CRA were the hardcore leftists who supported the Carter administration and were often rewarded for their support with government grants and programs like the CRA that they benefited from. These included various “neighborhood organizations,” as they like to call themselves, such as “ACORN” (Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now). These organizations claim that over $1 trillion in CRA loans have been made, although no one seems to know the magnitude with much certainty. A U.S. Senate Banking Committee staffer told me about ten years ago that at least $100 billion in such loans had been made in the first twenty years of the Act.
So-called “community groups” like ACORN benefit themselves from the CRA through a process that sounds like legalized extortion. The CRA is enforced by four federal government bureaucracies: the Fed, the Comptroller of the Currency, the Office of Thrift Supervision, and the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation. The law is set up so that any bank merger, branch expansion, or new branch creation can be postponed or prohibited by any of these four bureaucracies if a CRA “protest” is issued by a “community group.” This can cost banks great sums of money, and the “community groups” understand this perfectly well. It is their leverage. They use this leverage to get the banks to give them millions of dollars as well as promising to make a certain amount of bad loans in their communities.
A man named Bruce Marks became quite notorious during the last decade for pressuring banks to earmark literally billions of dollars to his organization, the “Neighborhood Assistance Corporation of America.” He once boasted to the New York Times that he had “won” loan commitments totaling $3.8 billion from Bank of America, First Union Corporation, and the Fleet Financial Group. And that is just one “community group” operating in one city – Boston.
Banks have been placed in a Catch 22 situation by the CRA: If they comply, they know they will have to suffer from more loan defaults. If they don’t comply, they face financial penalties and, worse yet, their business plans for mergers, branch expansions, etc. can be blocked by CRA protesters, which can cost a large corporation like Bank of America billions of dollars. Like most businesses, they have largely buckled under and have surrendered to their bureaucratic masters.
Consequently, banks in every community in America have been forced to hold a portfolio of bad loans, euphemistically referred to as “subprime” loans. In order to compensate themselves for the added risk of extending these loans, many lenders have increased the lending fees associated with mortgage loans. This is simply an indirect way of doing what banks always do – and what they must do to remain solvent: charging effectively higher rates of interest on riskier loans.
But this is discriminatory!, complained the “community organizations.” Thus, if one browses the ACORN web site, one can read of their boasts of having “predatory lending laws” passed in numerous states which outlaw such fees, prohibiting banks from protecting themselves from the added risk involved in making forced loans to “subprime” borrowers.
Filed under: Barack Obama, General Politics, Hillary Clinton, John McCain, Mortgage Bailout | Tagged: acorn, ACORN Housing Corporation, Community Organizers, Community Reinvestment Act of 1977, George Soros, McCain, New World Order, Obama | 3 Comments »
As the McCain campaign ratchets up the intensity of its attacks on Barack Obama, some black elected officials are calling the tactics desperate, unseemly and racist.
“They are trying to throw out these codes,” said Representative Gregory Meeks, a Democrat from New York.
“He’s ‘not one of us?’” Mr. Meeks said, referring to a comment Sarah Palin made at a campaign rally on Oct. 6 in Florida. “That’s racial. That’s fear. They know they can’t win on the issues, so the last resort they have is race and fear.”
“Racism is alive and well in this country, and McCain and Palin are trying to appeal to that and it’s unfortunate,” said Representative Ed Towns, also from New York….
….Ms. Palin told donors in Englewood, Colo.,…. “This is not a man who sees America like you and I see America,” she said. “We see America as a force of good in this world. We see an America of exceptionalism.”
An Associated Press analysis characterized those remarks as “unsubstantiated” and carrying “a racially tinged subtext…..”
“Some may say their true colors are showing,” said Representative Yvette Clarke of New York. “Others may say they’re just not being thoughtful. But certainly a lot of the language I’ve heard I consider to be incendiary. I believe it is meant to generate a certain sentiment within their base that engenders fear and certainly appeals to a group of people within our society who would pursue this along racial lines.
“It’s very clear,” she said.
Ms. Clarke also found a racial subtext in Ms. Palin’s repeated appeals to “Joe Six-Pack” and “hockey moms.”
“Who exactly is Joe Six-Pack and who are these hockey moms? That’s what I’d like to know,” she said. “Is that supposed to be terminology that is of common ground to all Americans? I don’t find that. It leaves a lot of people out.”
New York State Senator Bill Perkins, an early supporter of Mr. Obama, said, “They are obviously playing on people’s fears and prejudices in a desperate way. While not explicitly relating to race, they are clearly creating the opportunity for those inclined to come to those conclusions. I think it is going to become more explicit as we move forward. It’s subtle now, but not so subtle as to be mistaken.”
And Kevin Parker, a New York state senator from Brooklyn, said, “If you have to remind people that Barack Obama is African-American, you have reached the bottom.”
I have a very serious question…
Have all the Democrats that drank the Obama koolaid become paranoid schizophrenics? I really wanna know. If you tell me yes, it will make me feel much better.
I will understand that they have a mental illness that they can’t help… the delusions of persecution from an oedipal female mother figure archetype would just be the product of a disease and not what these people REALLY think…
Or perhaps they all share a strikingly similar form of Tourette’s Syndrome where “code words” and “racist” gets blurted out at nonsensical times…
I don’t know, but this bullshit is friggin crazy, it is incredibly irresponsible, and to be honest, it is incredibly dangerous.
Add this to the coments of other Democrats of all races that have screamed the word “RACISM!!!” and pointed their fingers at everyone from all the Republicans to Bill Clinton of all people!!! (Holy God, was that some serious dumb.)
Regardless… This is only further dividing our society and creating a dangerous sentiment of suspicion and anger… and in this case, it can create a very different situation where, if these irresponsible politicians and the media that perpetuates their message continue to push this idea that there is rampant racism in white America and that racism could be the only explanation as to why Obama would not win the election… we could very well see irreparable damage done to race relations in the country AT BEST, and at worst we will see racial violence and rioting.
It’s almost as if that is what they want? They may not, but they are definitely not hiding the fact that violence and repercussions are what they are threatening.
The anger these people are toying with is real, it is dangerous and it is explosive. There are historical precedents to situations with much less gravity than the Office of the President that have sparked violence that we can point to, so we know the threat is real.
The saddest part of this whole thing is that it is THE standard campaign tactic in Obama campaign manager David Axelrod’s playbook. Axelrod has done this same thing many times before, and in many campaigns, even as recently as the primary versus Hillary Clinton.
Inciting racial hatred and suspicion to gain power is what these people do. This is quite literally David Axelrod’s niche in political campaign management. This is his job and this is why Obama hired him.
This is dangerous and they need to stop. It is wrong and irresponsible.
Am I saying racism does not exist, no I am not. It does still exist, regrettably.
But the vast majority of Americans are not racist, and when they cry racism in an undeserved context, they are actually diminishing not only themselves but the one they sought to defend.
When these people cry racism in such situations, they remove the humanity and the complexity of the man that Barack Obama is and reduce him to his skin color.
There are a great many reasons to love Barack Obama, just as there are innumerable reasons to really dislike him.
When they reduce the reasons why people feel about Obama the way they happen to down to just skin color, THEY are the ones dehumanizing him, not Palin, not McCain.
When they reduce Obama to his skin color, THEY are the ones that have issues with race, not Palin, not McCain.
McCain campaign spokesman Peter Feldman said it best:
“It is disappointing that Barack Obama and his supporters continue to play the race card from the bottom of the deck. This is a tactic that the Obama Campaign has used before, and which McCain campaign manager Rick Davis correctly called ‘divisive, shameful, and wrong.’ It is legitimate for John McCain to ask questions about Barack Obama’s relationship with the unrepentant domestic terrorist William Ayers because Senator Obama has not been truthful about this relationship. Many Americans want these questions answered. Despite the fact that Barack Obama has been running for president since joining the Senate, many Americans are still wondering, ‘who is Barack Obama?’ These comments are a sure sign of a flailing campaign that refuses to be honest with voters and that is bordering on desperation.”
Instead of Obama bringing us together like he promised to do when he gave his rhetorically brilliant yet somehow empty speech on racism, it seems his sole aim is to divide us as much as possible to gain a political advantage.
He wants power so bad, he is willing to wreck America to get it.
Hell No, No Bama, No Deal, No Friggin Way.
UPDATE: I woke up this morning and turned on CNN and guess what was on… a special about Union activists campaigning door to door in PA and OH, and their struggle to deal with racism against Obama…. Nice, right?
So I listen for a while and then it peeks it’s head out in one of the comments… a canvasser talks about how he has run into the problem “a few times.” Well, as a canvasser you can visit hundreds of homes a week… and in a predominantly white, blue collar, working class, heavy union neighborhood, they run into the problem a “few times?”
And this justifies a CNN special report why? Oh yeah, it’s spin and bullshit. That’s why.
And then there was the statement from Obama… I am doing this from memory, but this is what he said almost word for word…
I don’t think race is a problem in the race. Look, I am ahead in the polls… that means that the American people are basically good. They are judging me on my policies and on what I want to do, not my skin color.
Ok, on first pass, not a bad statement, right?
But we have to look at the more subtle meaning of what he said…
“Look, I am ahead in the polls… that means that the American people are basically good.”
He subtly hints that if he were behind in the polls or that if people were to vote against him, then they would not be good and they would be racist.
Those are code words. Real code words.
Palin’s comment about terrorists… not code words.
When Hillary Clinton told a tall tale about “landing under sniper fire” in Bosnia, she was accused of “inflating her war experience” by rival Democrat Barack Obama’s campaign.
But the campaign has been silent about Obama’s running mate, Joe Biden, telling his own questionable story about being “shot at” in Iraq.
“Let’s start telling the truth,” Biden said during a presidential primary debate sponsored by YouTube last year. “Number one, you take all the troops out – you better have helicopters ready to take those 3,000 civilians inside the Green Zone, where I have been seven times and shot at. You better make sure you have protection for them, or let them die.”
But when questioned about the episode afterward by the Hill newspaper, Biden backpedaled from his claim of being “shot at” and instead allowed: “I was near where a shot landed.”
The senior senator from Delaware went on to say that some sort of projectile “landed” outside a building in the Green Zone where he and another senator had spent the night during a visit in December 2005. The lawmakers were shaving in the morning when they felt the building shake, Biden said.
“No one got up and ran from the room-it wasn’t that kind of thing,” he told the Hill. “It’s not like I had someone holding a gun to my head.”
Meanwhile, the gaffe-prone Biden has again raised eyebrows with another story about his exploits in war zones – this time in Afghanistan. Biden said he will grill Republican rival Sarah Palin in Thursday’s vice presidential debate about “the superhighway of terror between Pakistan and Afghanistan where my helicopter was forced down.”
“If you want to know where Al Qaeda lives, you want to know where Bin Laden is, come back to Afghanistan with me,” Biden bragged to the National Guard Association. “Come back to the area where my helicopter was forced down, with a three-star general and three senators at 10,500 feet in the middle of those mountains. I can tell you where they are.”
But it turns out that inclement weather, not terrorists, prompted the chopper to land in an open field during Biden’s visit to Afghanistan in February. Fighter jets kept watch overhead while a convoy of security vehicles was dispatched to retrieve Biden and fellow Senators Chuck Hagel and John Kerry.
“We were going to send Biden out to fight the Taliban with snowballs, but we didn’t have to,” joked Kerry, a Democrat, to the AP. “Other than getting a little cold, it was fine.”
Hillary was nailed to the friggin wall for weeks and her story was more truthful than presented in the media, but not a peep when Biden does it… Twice.
It just proves that the media has chosen Obama and is perfectly willing to do what it can to make sure he gets elected.
From Hillary’s Op-Ed in the WSJ
There is a broad consensus that Congress must act to stave off deeper turmoil on Wall Street. Irrespective of the final agreement yet to be reached, there are several principles that must be part of a broader reform effort that begins this week and continues in the coming months.
This is not just a financial crisis; it’s an economic crisis. Therefore, the solutions we pursue cannot simply stabilize the markets. We must also deal with the interconnected economic challenges that set the stage for this crisis — and reverse the failed policies that allowed a potential crisis to become a real one….
There is much more at the link.
It just proves what leader Hillary Clinton is, how well she knows her stuff… and that she should have been the Democratic nominee.
Congressman Hastings is a Florida Democratic Congressman that was once a Federal Judge… until he was impeached and convicted for bribery and perjury that is.
Somehow he convinced a whole lot of dumb people to send him, a friggin criminal, to Congress…
Anyway, Hastings made a statement to a group of Jews Democrats in the middle of what I pray was a full blown paranoid schizophrenic attack, because if it wasn’t… I don’t even know what…
“If Sarah Palin isn’t enough of a reason for you to get over whatever your problem is with Barack Obama, then you damn well had better pay attention,” Rep. Alcee Hastings of Florida said at a panel about the shared agenda of Jewish and African-American Democrats Wednesday. Hastings, who is African-American, was explaining what he intended to tell his Jewish constituents about the presidential race. “Anybody toting guns and stripping moose don’t care too much about what they do with Jews and blacks. So, you just think this through,”
Holy Shit?!?! Really?!?! Did he seriously just insinuate that Palin was some kind of Moose hunting Hitler?
Please excuse my language. Expletives rarely make their way into my writing, but I felt it was appropriate given the circumstances…
I mean, what the hell is wrong with these people? I am dead serious… what is wrong with these people’s minds?
Is there some black mold in the ventillation shafts in the Capitol Building causing mass hallucination and paranoid delusions? Is someone diluting LSD into the Iced Tea in the Congressional lunchroom? Is someone slipping the wrong kind of mushrooms on to their pizza?
What the hell kind of a person even thinks up something like that?!?!?!?!
I am so ashamed of the Democrats…
You people not only lost my respect, but you have lost my vote… and you are working real hard on making it permanent.
Oh, wait… Hastings topped his craziness off with this little piece of advice for us… a nice little unity message;
“For those of you like me that supported Sen. Hillary Clinton, she lost! Get over it!”
Yeah… I think that pretty much did it.
Coming on the heels of several surprising endorsements from major Hillary Clinton supporters, the McCain-Palin camp happily announced two new endorsements today.
The first is Miguel D. Lausell, a former Senior Advisor to Hillary Clinton on international trade, telecommunications and Latino issues. In a press release he said that “John McCain has a long record of reforming government and working across the aisle to achieve bipartisan results. His courageous leadership is exactly what we need in the White House, and I am convinced that John McCain is the right leader at the right time for our nation.”
According to the press release, Lausell has served as President and CEO of the Puerto Rico Telephone Company; Executive Director of the Puerto Rico Telephone Authority; a member of the Governor of Puerto Rico’s Economic Strategic Council; President of the Export Policy Commission of Puerto Rico; and Undersecretary of the Department of the Treasury of Puerto Rico. He served on the National Finance Board of the Gore 2000 Committee and was a member of the Democratic National Committee’s Leadership 2000 Board.
The second endorsement comes from Luchy Secaira, who was an “At Large” delegate for Hillary Clinton this primary season. Secaira said, “Although I supported Hillary during the primaries, I now support John McCain and Governor Palin because I am putting my country first,” said Secaira, former Hillary Clinton Florida Delegate-at-Large. “They have the experience and judgment to lead America through these difficult times, and I trust them to work with Democrats to do the right thing for our country.”
According to the press release, Secaira, who is of Dominican descent, traveled to eight states to coordinate grassroots efforts for Senator Clinton, has a doctorate of neuropsychology and was trained at New York University.
I am sure there will be many more to come.
Sarah Palin, for very obvious reasons, has made a lot of enemies in Alaska… enemies in both parties. She has taken on corruption bigtime and “left a trail of bodies all over Alaska” in her crusade against wasteful spending.
It now looks like the “Troopergate” thing is turning into a modern day “Whitewater” in which a prosecutor starts out looking for one thing, doesn’t find anything, then digs and digs and digs, turning over ever rock possible, and all the while starts flinging mud to do as much damage as possible… because it’s not really about a crime, it’s about politics.
It is now well established that Monegan, the state police chief, was fired because of insubordination and fights over budget disagreements. More specifically, Palin claims that the last straw was an “unauthorized” trip Monegan planned to take to DC in order to lobby Congress for funding after Palin refused to provide the funding from the state coffers.
So, here are the newest twists…
First, according to ABC, it turns out that Palin’s office did approve the trip, which meant that Monegan could use state funds to pay for his travel expenses.
The McCain/Palin camp responded with…
…a statement from Randy Ruaro, another aide to Palin…. According to Ruaro, Monegan asked for — and received — approval for the travel without telling Palin’s staff his reason for going. “As a matter of routine, the travel was approved by Mike Nizich … weeks before the actual purpose was made clear by former Commissioner Monegan,” Ruaro wrote.
And now for the second twist…. According CBS,
Monegan told ABC that the travel authorization was explicitly to pursue funding for the anti-sexual-violence program, though the document does not state that as a reason for the trip.
McCain-Palin responded with this in that same article;
McCain spokesman Taylor Griffin said Friday that the travel authorization was for a routine trip, and that state commissioners regularly travel to meet members of Alaska’s congressional delegation.
“He was not authorized to lobby Congress,” Griffin said.
Ok, so we have to keep one thing in mind… we are talking about an issue that involves Presidential politics, so we remember that these people are playing on the most hardcore playing field ever.
Presidential elections and the success of the candidates mean power and money for tens of thousands of people across the country. This is not a game, but deadly serious and we have to look at these things with a ver different kind of eye, because in this arena, very little can actually be taken at face value.
So, we have to take a step back from our initial reaction, which is probably something like “OMG, She’s against an anti-sexual violence program?!?!” and think about the dynamics logically… thru another prism.
We have to do what the media refuses to do… peel back the tabloid drama, filter out the partisanship and the spin and look at the who, what, and why.
So let’s start with some questions…
1. What are the reasons that Palin was chosen as McCain’s Vice Presidential Nominee?
Palin was chosen because she is a maverick like McCain, has a record of anti-pork and corruption, is fantastically well versed in Energy policy, instantaneously solidified the conservative base, and also because she is a woman.
2. What is the biggest threat that Palin, as McCain’s VP nominee, poses to the Democratic Party and to Barack Obama?
Of all the attributes Palin has, the biggest direct threat to Obama and the Democratic Party is her gender.
Now, please DO NOT mistake what I am saying. I am in no way saying that McCain picked her beause of her gender.
The similarity in status as a maverick, the intense energy resume and the solidification of the party base were the primary reasons. The religious conservatives love Palin… period. The domestic energy issue rounds out McCain’s international and foreign policy resume, solidifying the fiscal conservative as well as the national security base in the Republican Party. These people weren’t going to vote for Obama, but they may not have ALL voted for McCain but for Palin.
No, the direct threat to Obama is her gender because she has the potential to take votes away from Obama and give them to McCain in large numbers given the VERY unhappy female Democratic base due to the contentious primary season and the passing over of Clinton as VP candidate.
This is worse than people not vote for Obama and going third candidates, which many disatisfied female Democrats had planned on doing until Palin arrived on the scene. The reason is that a Democrat that votes for a third candidate is a -1 net loss for Obama, while a Democrat that votes for McCain is a -2 net loss for Obama because it is one less vote for Obama and one more vote for McCain. This means that for every person that votes for a third party, Obama only needs to replace them with one more voter, but for everyone that votes for McCain, Obama must now replace them with 2 voters… a much bigger problem. Twice as big, really.
3. What are the traditonal “women’s issues?”
The “traditional” women’s issues are children, choice, abuse and education. When politicians focus on women… these are the things they focus on. Well, and healthcare too, but no one seems to be talking about healthcare too much at the moment.
4. How do you stop women from flocking to Palin?
The Democratic Party and the Obama has been in a scramble to figure this out, and have thrown the proverbial kitchen sink at her in the process.
The left has screamed about how she wants to overturn Roe v Wade and teach creationism in schools but these attacks have not worked, so they continue to scream about these things and have moved on to several other attacks in tandum.
They have slanderously lied about her cutting funding for everything from special needs kids to pregnant teenage moms, both of which hit Sarah suspiciously close to home because she has a pregnant teenage daughter and a son with Downs syndrome. These accusations turned out to be not only untrue, but it turns out that she increased funding to these programs by as much as 300%.
Then came the horrendous personal attacks which devolved into everything from calling her white trash pornstar look-a-like, to articles talking about masturbatory fantasy involving a Palin, a threesome and the Constitution. One journalist even sunk so low as to as the question about whether Palin played the “retard card.”
And none of it has worked. Actually, the attacks have seemed to backfire.
5. How does this latest “Troopergate” twist fit into the puzzle?
Ok, so keeping in mind all of the above, we now look at troopergate.
Troopergate’s only implication for Palin was that she was possibly not as squeaky clean on the anti-corruption/clean government issue as she claimed, not an issue that addresses the crisis Obama is facing with the women’s vote… until now.
6. Why should you be skeptical?
You should be skeptical of all the “Troopergate” information for several reasons, but mostly… it’s a political hit job.
We must keep in mind that Monegan was not really fired. He was offered a transfer to a non-cabinet position in another department because of the difficulty in working with him, but decided not to take the transfer and instead opted to leave government employ.
It is also obvious that this man has severe personal issues with Palin. Perhaps he resents a woman being in power and telling him no. He certainly seemed to have a problem with his now ex-wife, who had to have a restraining order issued because he broke into her house, beat her and threatened to kill her. I am not talking about the trooper here, who was an abusive husband as well, I am talking about the Chief himself.
It is also important to note that the apparent basis upon which we find out that the trip was about lobbying for an anti-sexual violence program is the word of Mr. Monegan himself. The reason for the trip is not enumerated on the written authorization for travel, and Palin’s assistant noted that he did not make it clear what the trip was for when it was approved.
We must also take into account the topic that they are giving for travel… could ANYTHING possibly be more damaging to her appeal to women than her being against a program to fight sexual violence?
Much like the cutting funding to pregnant teens and to special needs kids, this just seems too damn perfect in a very specific way…
And we are supposed to just accept the word of a wife beating top cop that has an obvious grudge against Palin and has teamed up with a Democrat for a “prosecutor” that this very special and specific reason was the purpose of the trip that he got fired for? Really?
If this was really the reason for the trip, it is also interesting to note that, while I did notice the price tag for the program mentioned (in excess of $50 million dollars if I remember correctly), the details of the program are non-existant. What exactly was this program? What was it spending money on? What provisions already existed? Were existing provisions already sufficient? Was this really a pork project?
7. What the hell does this have to do with Palin firing Monegan for not firing her ex-brother in law?
The answer? NOTHING.
This is all political theater meant to get an emotional reaction out of you so that you vote out of anger and fear instead of with your heart and your head.
As my new friend Caro says… “Old Liberals have a moral center, it seems the new Progessives do not.”
In yet another comment about PUMA that will probably never make it to print…
On Friday Alan Colmes was repeating the Democrat’s talking point about how picking Sarah Palin as VP was cynical, an insult to women and would not peel away Hillary Clinton’s supporters from the Democratic Party…
At this point, Geraldine Ferraro interjected with this little beauty:
I think the PUMA people, the people who were the original ones who said you know we’re there, our party has let Hillary down, they really resent the way that Hillary was treated by the press and by the Obama campaign. Those are the people who will never come back. And, by the party in particular, who say will ‘I don’t care about anything the thing I care about how are women treated on this level and you didn’t treat women right’ those people will, and I have heard from a lot of them, those people will vote for McCain, if they can’t vote for McCain, they’ll write-in Hillary’s name, if they can’t write in Hillary’s name, what they’ll do is they’ll just stay off the line.
You are exactly right, Geraldine. We are not coming back.
Donald Trump is the 4th prominent backer of Hillary Clinton to abandon the Democratic Party and endorse McCain.
Donald Trump announced tonight on the Larry King show that he is now endorsing McCain/Palin for President…
The list is getting a bit long don’t you think?
Scared yet Barky?
UPDATE… Article on Politico
Via Tennessee Guerilla Woman (make sure to follow the link to get the whole story!)
It seems like an epidemic . . . women leaving the Democratic Party. Alma Sanford is the chair of the Tennessee Democratic Women’s Political Action Committee. The longtime party activist has committed untold hours to the project of opening politics up to women in this good old cretin boy state. Alma represented the state at the DNC as a pledged Clinton delegate. She was recently honored by the National Federation of Democratic Women as humanitarian of the year. Alma Sanford has been a committed party activist for more than 30 years. Especially, she is a leader of Democratic women.
Alma pretty well sums it up: “[I]t’s not my party anymore. They have put poison in the well, and have run the older women out of the party.”
Citing actions by Tennessee Democratic Party Chairman Gray Sasser, as well as spokesman Wade Munday, and the general mistreatment of Democratic such as Hillary Clinton and Rosalind Kurita, Sanford said she no longer considers herself a Democrat.
“I will vote for John McCain,” Sanford stated unequivocally.