TexanInfidel's Blog

This was one of the most clever pieces I've read in a while.   From the LA Times - the same people who brought you "Barack the magic negro". 

 

---

 

http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/opinion/la
-oe-stein18-2008jul18,0,6907907.column?track=rss>

 

How to make fun of Obama

 Tips for those who find it too hard to joke about the Democratic candidate.  

Joel Stein
July 18, 2008
I believe comedic change is possible. Since the New Yorker dropped a bum joke on its cover this week, comedians have appeared on every news outlet to whine about how hard it is to make fun of Barack Obama. Really? They have an arsenal of jokes to use against a 71-year-old ex-POW cancer survivor and Obama is too touchy a subject?

I'm here to help. I called some comedian friends to compile a guide to making fun of Obama. The consensus is there's not yet one standout attribute to pound away on (McCain is old! Clinton cheats on his wife! Bush is stupid! Al Gore is a robot! John Kerry makes me feel inexplicably sad inside!), but there are areas to explore. If we just work a little harder, and sacrifice a little bit, we can achieve greatness. We are the immature jerks we have been waiting for.

 

•  

He's a nerd. Yes, he seems cool because he plays basketball and fist-bumps and knows about pop music. But that's because we're comparing him with other politicians, all of whom are older than our grandparents. Compare Obama with other 46-year-olds and he's Urkel. He's the kid at the Model United Nations conference who says, "Guys, guys, c'mon. Let's not make fun of Eastern Europe." And the brutal truth is, even if women faint at your rallies, you'll never feel cool inside when you have Alfred E. Neuman's ears.

He's ridiculously earnest. Obama is the kind of guy who not only talked you into showing up for Hands Across America but afterward insisted that it was awesome. On "Saturday Night Live," Fred Armisen plays up Obama's weird pauses and brow furrows like he's Yogi Bear getting bad news from a doctor. Comedian Marc Maron does a really smart bit about how Obama stares out into the distance while giving a speech. "The first time you see him you're like, 'What's he looking at?' But then you're like, 'I don't know, but it's good and full of hope. And he's the only one who can see it. If we vote for him, maybe he'll take us there.' "

He's black. Apparently, the differences between black people and white people can be funny. Trust, me I've seen this on HBO's "Def Comedy Jam."

When I called "Simpsons" writer Matt Selman for help on Obama jokes, he came up with this: "A lot of people are worried about Obama being assassinated because he's black. The solution to that is a much blacker vice president. I'm thinking Flavor Flav." Admittedly, Selman nervously said, "Don't make me look racist!" about 20 times before and after telling me his joke.

He's manorexic. No one loses weight on the campaign trail, when you're grabbing fast food and eating whatever is offered out of politeness, but this guy is always turning down doughnuts. It's like he signed up for running for president because he thought "president" was some kind of 10K race.

As comedian Aisha Tyler told me, "He has the build of an ex-high school javelin thrower. He's the guy on the track team who only does that one event, and he weighs the same as the javelin."

He's effete. He's well-dressed. He eats arugula -- which he buys at Whole Foods. He mocks those who use guns. He is, as we mentioned, quite thin. He may only be half-black, but he's three-quarters gay.

He called his own grandmother a racist. We all have racist grandmothers, but we don't brag about it to everyone. I like to imagine that his granny wasn't that bad and that Obama was just super-sensitive. Like she would tell him it was bedtime and he'd yell, "Oh, I have to go to bed because I'm black!" Or she'd tell him to clean up his room and he'd start yelling, "Oh, clean my room, huh? My people stopped obeying the white woman 100 years ago, Grammy!" Then they'd both laugh and she'd whip him.

His name is weird. The unfunny people beat us to the Osama/Obama bit, which really could have been mined. But Obama also dropped the "Barry" nickname in college. Do you remember those classmates who suddenly found their culture and had to share it with you like they were on the ninth step of AA? You just wanted to trudge through "Portrait of a Lady," but they felt compelled to sit you down in the dorm hallway and explain how they're no longer Susie, they're Mei Mei now. Then they recounted their whole journey of identity by using a lot of words that made it clear that Mei Mei was going to be a lot less fun than Susie was.

His platitudes need deconstruction. "We are the people we've been waiting for"? Actually, I'm pretty sure we're the people who put all our money in Yahoo and then bought a house to flip and now are hocking everything we have. We're the people China has been waiting for.

According to the new New York governor (replacing the shamed Elliot Spencer), if Obama loses it will be because of racism.  Oh really fool?  Really fool!   Why is it that it is completely acceptable for the left to call anyone who disagrees with them racists?  Can we not dislike Obama due to his double-twist sow cow with a backflip political views?  Can we not dislike Obama due to his lack of experience?  Nope, we may not.

---

http://www.nysun.com/new-york/paterson-obama-defeat
-would-be-victory-for-racism/82115/?print=0076236121>

Paterson Implies 'Accidental' Racism

By JACOB GERSHMAN, Staff Reporter of the Sun | July 18, 2008

Governor Paterson, who became New York's first black governor following the resignation of Eliot Spitzer, is lashing out at the press for describing him as an "accidental governor," implying in a speech that the term's frequent usage was motivated by racial bias.

AP Photo/Al Behrman

Governor Paterson speaks at the annual NAACP national convention, today at Cincinnati.

 

In a speech at the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People's annual convention in Cincinnati, Mr. Paterson also suggested that the defeat of Senator Obama by Senator McCain in the presidential contest would be a victory for racism.

Mr. Paterson's stark view of the presidential contest and his criticism of reporters was a sharp departure for a governor who was one of Senator Clinton's most enthusiastic backers until she conceded the Democratic primary in June, and whose relationship with the press has been marked by humor and ease.

The governor, who in Albany has made a point of not criticizing legislators or other officials, took a swing at the presumptive Republican nominee, saying Mr. McCain favors Bush administration policies that have left children hungry and "entire regions struggling for survival."

Thrust into office by a prostitution scandal that brought down Mr. Spitzer, Mr. Paterson, a former state legislator and lieutenant governor who was largely unknown in the state four months ago, has been eager to establish himself as a powerful leader in his own right as he prepares to run for office in 2010.

Yesterday, he let it be known that he no longer wants to be called accidental, saying the term has not been applied to white governors and presidents who took office under emergency circumstances.

"I am known as New York's accidental governor. I would like to point out a couple of facts: The two adjoining states to New York, New Jersey and Connecticut, have had three government changes in the last five years. None of those people were called the accidental governor," he said.

"Nobody called Teddy Roosevelt an accidental president. Nobody called Truman an accidental president. And nobody called LBJ an accidental anything. So why was this non-illustrious title held all of these years for me? I will leave the answer to all of you and the Freudians in the audience because I haven't had the chance to think about it," he said.

Mr. Paterson's claim appears to be contracted by news accounts and books about the figures he mentioned.

For instance, Richard Codey, who filled in as governor of New Jersey for James McGreevey after the latter resigned in a sex scandal, was described as an "accidental governor" by the Philadelphia Inquirer, the New York Observer (in a story headlined "the Return of an Accidental Governor), the Washington Post, the Star-Ledger (in several articles), the Associated Press, and the New York Times.

President Johnson was the subject of a 1967 book by Robert Sherrill called "The Accidental President." A 2001 book about President Bush and the 2000 election race by David Kaplan was titled, "The Accidental President: How 413 Lawyers, 9 Supreme Court Justices, and 5,963,110 Floridians (Give or Take a Few) Landed George W. Bush in the White House."

Mr. Paterson, who was a Clinton super-delegate and often joined her on the campaign trail, said the outcome of the November election would decide whether America moves beyond its legacy of slavery and segregation.

"Can America reject the crucible of race that has dictated and pervaded all of our history to embrace an African-American man who has the right polices for the next decade in this country?" he said.

He continued: "Can America go past the crippling way that we've shot ourselves in the foot over and over, denying opportunity to people who are bright, to people who are qualified, to people who are able because they didn't look like us, or they didn't come from where we came from, or they are from a different gender, or they are from the African continent? Can America push that away and find new leadership? We'll find out in the next few months what America can do."

A spokesman for the Obama campaign framed the election in less racial terms, saying in a statement that voters would make their decision based on "Senator Obama's vision for uniting our country, turning the page on President Bush's failed policies of the past, and bringing change we can believe in to Washington, D.C."

Mr. Paterson, while praising a speech Mr. McCain gave before the civil rights group on Wednesday, echoed the central attack strategy of the Obama campaign, which has sought to link the Republican to the policies of an unpopular president.

The governor said Mr. McCain "wants to support policies of an administration that has seen jobs go overseas and the national savings cut in half, thousands of companies out of business and going out of business, state budgets wildly out of balance, more children going without food and without shelter than any time in the last 10 years, entire regions struggling for survival."

And it is for moments like these - similar to the "c'mon, dumbass" swagger of Rumsfeld.  I apologize in advance as I cannot view videos at my place of employment, so I will ask you to watch the linked video of our President telling reporters why people are capable of making their own decisions and he's not going to nanny them:

http://hotair.com/archives/2008/07/15/reporter-to-b
ush-why-dont-you-formally-inform-our-moron-public-that-
they-should-use-less-gas/

Because I'm feeling argumentative this evening, and am tired of being called a racist for saying that Obama has poor judgment, I decided to post a list of a few of Obama's self-admitted poor judgment calls and regrets.  This should be fun.

2/13/2007: Obama regrets saying soldiers lives were "wasted" in Iraq: http://www.suntimes.com/news/sweet/254536,CST-NWS-swee
t13.article

2/27/2008: Obama regrets intervening to save Terri Shaivo: "It wasn't something I was comfortable with": http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pa
geId=57488

3/15/2008: Obama admits more extensive relationship and repeated poor judgment in his relationship with slumlord Rezko: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/03/14/obama-admits-
more-extensi_n_91652.html

4/12/2008: Obama regrets his comments about us gun/Bible clinging xenophobes: http://marcambinder.theatlantic.com/archives/2008/04/o
bama_regrets_if_he_offended.php

7/9/2008: Obama admits poor judgment in allowing candid interview with his children on Access Hollywood: http://www.usatoday.com/news/politics/election2008/200
8-07-09-obama-malia_N.htm?csp=34

There are 5 significant regrets.  This illustrates a consistent lack of good judgment.  These are sophomoric errors at best.  Barack Obama should have finished his senate term, run for another, and then he might be ready to be the leader of the free world.

The New Yorker has printed the following cover in an attempt to show how conservatives see the Obamas.   Funny that, taken out of the snooty New York state of mind, this cover appears to be quite racist.  In this issue of Bus&Driver: Obama vs. The New Yorker.

Here is a link to the entire article: http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2008/07/21/080721fa
_fact_lizza?printable=true

I love that HotAir.com is calling all stories pertaining to Obama's abandonment of close friends "This Week's Bus&Driver".  Anyway, Obama invited Bernie Mac to do standup at a fundraiser.  For anyone who has heard Bernie Mac's standup, you know that it is both hilarious and filled with profanity.  It is not for the little ones.  Bernie Mac told this old joke:

“My little nephew came to me and he said, ‘Uncle, what’s the difference between a hypothetical question and a realistic question?’” Mac said. “I said, I don’t know, but I said, ‘Go upstairs and ask your mother if she’d make love to the mailman for $50,000.’”

If any of you don't know the punchline to this joke, let me know. 

Point being, you know Bernie Mac is going to say horrible things.  What if McCain invited Andrew Dice Clay to speak at his fundraiser?  Although I suppose that Andrew Dice Clay isn't as bad as some of the acts today...  I digress.  So if you know Bernie Mac is going to say awful things, why invite him to do standup at a Presidential fundraiser?  Obama's answer to all of these slipups has been to throw them under the bus the next day, which he did. 

In all fairness, I agree with his knee-jerk reaction to distance himself from talk of "hoes" and such, seeing as he was the first presidential candidate to demand Don Imus step down after the Rutgers basketball team fiasco.  These are sophomoric mistakes, folks.  Next thing you know we'll hear about Obama spitting into the wind or pulling the mask off the ol' Lone Ranger.  

 

This editorial hits several nails on the head.

---

http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives2/2008/07/0209
65.php

July 10, 2008 Straight from the Kansas heartland, by way of Rev. Wright's church

 

Barack Obama is on the air in the Washington D.C. media market with a bio-ad that touts his love of America and describes his values as coming "straight from the Kansas heartland." The ad presumably is aimed at Northern Virginia voters. If Obama rolls up big enough margins in Northern Virginia, he could be competitive against McCain statewide. At a minimum, Obama hopes to force McCain to devote resources to what has long been a reliable Republican state in presidential elections.

The ad itself is vintage Obama, which is to say fraudulent. Obama's embrace of Kansas values cannot be reconciled with how he worshipped on Sundays throughout the past 20 years. Obama spent his Sundays listening to Jeremiah Wright. In recent years, he was accompanied by his young daughters. The hate-filled, venomous ranting of Rev. Wright has nothing to do with Kansas, a state not widely associated with black liberation theology. Obama's pattern of religious worship is far better evidence of his values than a campaign ad.

Obama's profession of deep love for America is also at odds with the evidence. When his wife said she had never as an adult been proud of America until now, Obama did not take issue with her viewpoint. Instead, he defended her comment on the ground that what she meant was that "this is the first time that she's been proud of the politics of America." A person who deeply loves America could not see any merit in the view that there is nothing about our politics to be proud of. Nor could he take his spiritual guidance from a man who insists America should be damned, not blessed.

It was Bill Clinton who first used the term "fairy tale" in conjunction with the Obama campaign. The former president has never been closer to the mark. And since the MSM appears to have decided that references to Obama's relationship with Rev. Wright are off-limits, it's possible that Obama may once-upon-a-time himself into the White House.

The Balloonist
 
A woman in a hot air balloon realized she was lost. She lowered
 her altitude and spotted a man in a boat below. She shouted to him,
 
'Excuse me, can you help me? I promised a friend I would meet him an
 hour ago, but I don't know where I am.'
 
The man consulted his portable GPS and replied, 'You are in a
 hot air balloon, approximately 30
 feet above sea level. You are at 31 degrees, 14.97 minutes north 
latitude
 and 00 degrees, 49.09 minutes west longitude.'
 
She rolled her eyes and said, 'You must be a Republican.'
 
'I am,' replied the man. 'How did you know?'
 
'Well,' answered the balloonist, 'everything you told me is
 probably technically correct, but I have no idea what to do with your
 information, and I'm still lost. Frankly, you've not been much help to 
me.'
 
The man smiled and responded, 'You must be a Democrat.'
 
'I am,' replied the balloonist. 'How did you know?'
 
'Well,' said the man, 'You don't know where you are or where you
 are going. You've risen to where you are, due to a large quantity of
 hot air. You made a promise that you have no idea how to keep, and you
 expect me to solve your problem. You're in exactly the same position you
 were in before we met, but, somehow, now it's my fault.'

This post has been edited by an administrator

According to Rasmussen reports, only 9% of registered voters think congress is doing their jobs. 74% believe they are only interested in furthering their own political careers.

For quite an interesting read:

 

---

 

http://rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics
/mood_of_america/congressional_performance/congressiona
l_performance

Congressional Performance Congressional Approval Falls to Single Digits for First Time Ever Tuesday, July 08, 2008 -->

The percentage of voters who give Congress good or excellent ratings has fallen to single digits for the first time in Rasmussen Reports tracking history. This month, just 9% say Congress is doing a good or excellent job. Most voters (52%) say Congress is doing a poor job, which ties the record high in that dubious category.

Last month, 11% of voters gave the legislature good or excellent ratings. Congress has not received higher than a 15% approval rating since the beginning of 2008.

The percentage of Democrats who give Congress positive ratings fell from 17% last month to 13% this month. The number of Democrats who give Congress a poor rating remained unchanged. Among Republicans, 8% give Congress good or excellent ratings, up just a point from last month. Sixty-five percent (65%) of GOP voters say Congress is doing a poor job, down a single point from last month.

Voters not affiliated with either party are the most critical of Congressional performance. Just 3% of those voters give Congress positive ratings, down from 6% last month. Sixty-three percent (63%) believe Congress is doing a poor job, up from 57% last month.

Just 12% of voters think Congress has passed any legislation to improve life in this country over the past six months. That number has ranged from 11% to 13% throughout 2008. The majority of voters (62%) say Congress has not passed any legislation to improve life in America.

Voters hold little positive sentiment about the future. Just 41% find it at least somewhat likely that Congress will address important problems facing our nation in the near future, while 55% find this unlikely.

Despite these negative attitudes towards Congress, Democrats continue to enjoy a double digit lead on the Generic Congressional Ballot.

Most voters (72%) think most members of Congress are more interested in furthering their own political careers. Just 14% believe members are genuinely interested in helping people.

A separate Rasmussen survey found that half of all voters believe America’s best days are in the past. However, another survey found that 64% of voters also believe that the world would be a better place if more countries were similar to the United States.

Catherine - a little girl in our neighborhood - told me that she wanted to be President one day.

Both of her parents, liberal Democrats, were standing there with us - and I asked Catherine - "If you were President what would be the first thing you would do?"

Catherine replied - I would give houses to all the homeless people."

"Wow - what a worthy goal you have there Catherine." I told her (while both parents beamed), "But, you don't have to wait until you're President to do that. You can come over to my house and clean up all the dog poop in the back yard and I will pay you $5 dollars . Then we can go over to the grocery store where the homeless guy hangs out, and you can give him the $5 dollars to save toward a new house."

Catherine (who was about 8) thought that over for a second, and then replied, "why doesn't the homeless guy come over and clean up the dog poop himself, and you can pay him the $5 dollars?"

Welcome to the Republican Party Catherine..... *

Coming soon to a US court near you:

GB's highest justice has endorsed allowing Brits to use Sharia law to settle marital or financial disputes.  He says they can't use the punishments like cutting off hands.  *whew*  Some argue that living under two sets of laws would divide and alienate Brittish people.  Ya think!?

---

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/2242340/Muslim
s-in-Britain-should-be-able-to-live-under-Sharia-law%2C
-says-top-judge.html Muslims in Britain should be able to live under Sharia law, says top judge By Christopher Hope and James Kirkup Last Updated: 9:57PM BST 03/07/2008 Muslims in Britain should be able to live according to Sharia law, the country's most senior judge has said. Suggestions that Sharia law can be used to help govern issues like family disputes and the sale of financial products have drawn criticism

Lord Phillips of Worth Matravers, the Lord Chief Justice, strongly backed Rowan Williams, the Archbishop of Canterbury, over his suggestion earlier this year that aspects of Sharia law should be adopted in Britain.

The archbishop's remarks sparked a national debate and led to calls for his resignation.

Risking inflaming that controversy again, Lord Phillips has said that Muslims in Britain should be able to use Sharia to decide financial and marital disputes.

Lord Chief Justice, Lord Phillips

The judge did add that only the criminal courts should have the power to decide when a crime has been committed and when to impose punishment.

But his suggestion that different religious groups should run their affairs according to different rules sparked warnings that community cohesion could be undermined.

In a speech at the East London Muslim Centre in east London, Lord Phillips said it was "not very radical" for Dr Williams to argue that Sharia law can be used to help govern issues like family disputes and the sale of financial products.

Lord Phillips said: "It is possible in this country for those who are entering into a contractual agreement to agree that the agreement shall be governed by law other than English law."

Therefore, he said, he could see no reason why Sharia law should not be used to settle disputes in this country.

He said: "There is no reason why principles of Sharia law, or any other religious code, should not be the basis for mediation or other forms of alternative dispute resolution."

He added: "It must be recognized however that any sanctions for a failure to comply with the agreed terms of the mediation would be drawn from the laws of England and Wales."

Sharia law suffered from "widespread misunderstanding" in Britain, Lord Phillips said.

"Part of the misconception about Sharia law is the belief that Sharia is only about mandating sanctions such as flogging, stoning, the cutting off of hands or death for those fail to comply with the law," he said.

"In some countries the courts interpret Sharia law as calling for severe physical punishment. There can be no question of such courts sitting in this country, or such sanctions being applied here."

The judge said Dr Williams had been misunderstood when it was reported in February that he said British Muslims could be governed by Sharia law.

Lord Phillips said that the archbishop was saying only that "it was possible for individuals voluntarily to conduct their lives in accordance with Sharia principles without this being in conflict with the rights guaranteed by our law".

There is already scope in English law for some communities to use their own religious codes to resolve disputes. Orthodox Jews can use the Beth Din rabbinical courts to decide on matters including divorce.

However some critics say that women marrying under Sharia law do not have the same rights as in English law, and could lead to them being treated as second class citizens as far as divorce settlements, custody of children and inheritance go.

Muslim and Christian politicians expressed fears that at a time of heightened tensions, encouraging Muslims to live by their own distinct rules could make it harder for different communities to integrate.

Khalid Mahmood, Labour MP for Birmingham Perry Bar and a practising Muslim, said that allowing Sharia law in parts of the UK would be divisive.

He said: "This would create a two-tier society. It is highly retrograde. It will segregate and alienate the Muslim community from the rest of British society.

"The majority of British Muslims want to live only under British law and they would reject anything that means they are treated differently.

"What Lord Phillips and the archbishop are discussing is something that is completely outside their area of understanding."

Philip Davies, the Conservative MP for Shipley, said Lord Phillips' suggestion was "totally unacceptable."

He said: "It is very unhelpful for community cohesion. This is the sort of thing that builds up tensions in areas like mine, in places like Bradford. Sharia law has got no place in any shape or form in British law."

Andrew Selous, a Tory MP and chairman of the all-party Christians in Parliament group, said calls like those made by Lord Phillips and the archbishop were "worrying."

He said: "As far as people of all faiths are concerned, it is important that we are all equal under one United Kingdom law. It will lead to more community tensions rather than less."

Lord Ahmed, a Labour peer and practicing Muslim, said there was a "big debate" among British Muslims about whether and how Sharia should apply in the UK.

He said: "There is a risk that this would make it harder for communities to integrate -- we all need to do more to integrate, and mainstream society has to do more as well."

"We should have one law for everyone in the UK, but there may be very rare occasions when exceptions have to be made, like for marriage, divorce and food."

A Muslim lawyer said that raising the prospect of allowing people to live under Sharia law in Britain would "alarm" people.

Mahmud Al Rashid, spokesman from the Association of Muslim Lawyers, said: "There is massive misunderstanding about what Sharia is. It is not a single law."

A spokesman for Dr Williams said: "We welcome the speech given by the Lord Chief Justice as a positive and constructive contribution to this important and ongoing debate."

Cardinal Cormac Murphy O'Connor, the Archbishop of Westminster and leader of Britain's Catholics, said that people should live under the laws of the UK.

His spokesman said: "As the Cardinal has consistently said and indeed said earlier this year, was that Britons should abide by and be subject to the law of the land."

Downing Street said the Government's position on the issue of Sharia law had been made clear at the time of the controversy over the Archbishop's speech.

"We think that British law should be based on British values and determined by the British Parliament," the Prime Minister's spokesman said.

Baroness Warsi, the Conservative shadow minister for community cohesion, backed the judge.

She said: “The Lord Chief Justice's speech is a very clear and unifying speech for our communities in Britain.

”I specifically endorse the points made by Lord Phillips that with equality of rights come responsibilities. It is absolutely essential that everyone in this country is treated equally by the law but it is important that everyone is equally subject to it, and that the same laws apply equally to everyone.”

And flops.  His initial position was that he thought it should be up to the states.  That is, until states wanted to outlaw it.  Then it should be up to the federal government.   Well done, Ed Morrissey.  Well done.

---

http://hotair.com/archives/2008/07/01/obama-flips-a
gain-gay-marriage/

Obama flips again: gay marriage posted at 8:51 am on July 1, 2008 by Ed Morrissey
Send to a Friend | printer-friendly

Barack Obama has reversed himself yet again, but this time he has done a double backflip with a half-twist to the Left.  After previously saying he opposed gay marriage and that he respected the rights of states to set conditions for marriage, Obama has now said that he opposes California’s initiative to ban gay marriage — and that he would use federal law to end such efforts:

Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama, who previously said the issue of gay marriage should be left up to each state, has announced his opposition to a California ballot measure that would ban same-sex marriages.

In a letter to the Alice B. Toklas LGBT Democratic Club read Sunday at the group’s annual Pride Breakfast in San Francisco, the Illinois senator said he supports extending “fully equal rights and benefits to same-sex couples under both state and federal law.”

“And that is why I oppose the divisive and discriminatory efforts to amend the California Constitution, and similar efforts to amend the U.S. Constitution or those of other states,” Obama wrote.

Obama had previously said he opposes same-sex marriage but that each state should make its own decision.

His letter to the Alice B. Toklas GLBT Democratic Club will effectively toss traditional marriage under the same bus as his opposition to FISA reform and his pledge for public financing.  However, his allies on the Left will enjoy the reversal on this position much more than they did with his other flip-flops, even if they have to wonder how long this new position will last.

Once again, voters have to ask themselves what Obama is thinking.  I’m no big fan of the gay-marriage ban, but we’re getting past the point of the issues themselves and what all of these reversals mean about the candidate.  There are only three possibilities for why Barack Obama has had to change his mind on almost every policy he has mentioned in this campaign:

1. He’s a liar who says what each audience wants to hear.
2. The election debate has changed his perspective on every issue.
3. He has no clue on any of the issues.

Only the second reflects any positive quality, that of open-mindedness, but it also carries with it the underlying unreadiness of a man who has only three years of national political experience for the Presidency.  Assuming the best of intentions, Obama has no firm stands on any principle or policy.  That doesn’t even recommend Obama as a Senator, let alone a President.  If option 2 is the case, he needs to set out this election while he makes up his mind.

The most disturbing aspect of this new reversal is Obama’s sudden abandonment of federalism.   What happened to letting California decide on the public recognition of marriage?  This twist reveals a little more of what we can expect from a President Obama — a further aggrandizing of power in Washington DC and a reduction of the scope of authority for state and local communities.

Rumor has Team Obama bolstering its outreach to evangelicals.  How long before this reversal gets reversed?

Politico.com has compiled a list of 3 possible female running mates for McCain.  Please be advised that as a woman, and a Texan, I am only just 'okay' with Kay Bailey Hutchison being veep.  I would much prefer Alaskan gov. Sarah Palin due to her fiscally and socially conservative governing style, the fact that she carried to term her 5th child (knowing it had Downs but refusing abortion), and that she hunts and fishes.  What she lacks in foreign policy experience could be supplemented by McCain's experience and her own common sense. 

Could this draw the beaten and bloodied feminist/old-lady-with-belt-over-shirt HRC supporters to the Republican candidate that (aside from numerous close personal friends dying from suspicious causes) very much resembles the policies of Hillary?

Seriously, read the quib about Sarah Palin. 

---

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0608/11258.htm
l

Three women who could join GOP ticket By DAVID PAUL KUHN | 6/22/08 5:18 PM EST  
From left to right, Texas Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison, former HP CEO Carly Fiorina, and Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin. Photo: Composite image by Politico.com

While the vice presidential slot may be John McCain’s best means of wooing those Hillary Rodham Clinton supporters who remain loath to embrace Barack Obama, the Republican party is a thin source of politically viable women, leaving McCain with few top-tier options.

The most-mentioned potential running mates — former Republican candidate and Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal and Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty — are all men. Yet no clear front-runner has emerged, and there are at least three women McCain might select to fill out the ticket. All three would mark a symbolic turn away from Vice President Dick Cheney, the ultimate D.C. old-boys-club insider.

One obvious choice is Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice. She’s as near to Cheney on policy as she is far from him symbolically. Rice, however, has consistently denied interest. While such denials are par for the course for prospective veeps, if Rice is indeed out of the mix, that would leave McCain with three other likely female running mates to consider:

Sarah Palin

Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin may be nationally unknown, but in her state she is nothing short of a political phenomenon.

Palin, 44, would add youth to the GOP ticket. As governor she has shown a willingness to veto some of the state’s large capital projects, no small plus for fiscal conservatives. But it’s her personal biography, which excites social conservatives, and reformist background that might most appeal to McCain.

She’s stridently anti-abortion, and recently brought to term her fifth child — who she knew would have Down syndrome. A hunter, fisher and family woman with a rapid professional rise, Palin is a natural for Republican framing.

In 1982, Palin led her underdog high school basketball team to the state championship, earning the nickname “Sarah Barracuda.” Two years later she won the beauty pageant in her hometown of Wasilla, Alaska — and was also named “Miss Congeniality.” By her early thirties, she was the mayor of Wasilla.

In 2003, as ethics commissioner on the state's Oil and Gas Conservation Commission, she risked her rising political star by resigning her position in protest of ethical misconduct within the state’s Republican leadership as well as then-Gov. Frank Murkowski’s acceptance of that impropriety. Though this briefly made her an outcast within the party, within a year several state Republican heavyweights were reprimanded for the conduct she’d decried.

Her reputation with the party thus redeemed, Palin defeated Murkowski in the 2006 Republican primary on the way to being elected governor.

As governor, she’s continued challenging the state’s powers that be, even winning tax increases on oil companies’ profits. Her approval rating has soared as high as 90 percent, making her one of America’s most popular governors.

“Palin is becoming a star in the conservative movement, a fiscal conservative in a state that is looking like a boondoggle for pork barrel spending,” said Kellyanne Conway, a Republican pollster who specializes in women’s politics.

“She’s young, vibrant, fresh and now, and a new mother of five. She should be in the top tier,” Conway continued. “If the Republican Party wants to wrestle itself free from the perception that it is royalist and not open to putting new talent on the bench, this would be the real opportunity.”

But several top Republican Party leaders, who asked that their names be withheld so they could speak frankly about vice presidential options, said that Palin remains out of the top tier for now. “Too unknown and inexperienced,” said one GOP insider. Others pointed out that she is not only based far from the continental 48 — and in a state with just three electoral votes that should already be in the bag for the GOP — but also has no foreign policy credentials or experience.

 Page 2

Carly Fiorina

Carly Fiorina has an up-by-her-own-bootstraps success story, having worked her way from a start as a young secretary straight through the glass ceiling to become Hewlett-Packard’s chief executive from 1999 to 2005. She presently serves as the chair of the organization tasked by the Republican National Committee with preparing the party’s crucial get-out-the-vote operation. It’s no symbolic post, but a crucial position for a party facing an uphill presidential contest.

Along with eBay.com CEO Meg Whitman — who has also been brought up occasionally as a long-shot GOP vice presidential prospect — Fiorina is one of the most prominent female executives of the last decade.

Fiorina is also already close to McCain. The two of them recently sat down at his Arlington headquarters with frustrated Clinton supporters and urged them to shift their political allegiance to him. On the campaign trail and on shows like CBS News “Face the Nation,” she’s served as a ubiquitous advocate of the candidate. Privately, she has also become one of McCain’s most trusted economic advisers.

Grover Norquist, a fiscal conservative leader and longtime party organizer, touts Fiorina’s economic and executive bonafides but labeled her a “dark horse” vice presidential prospect. One Republican state party chairman said, “everybody would be very pleasantly surprised with her” before adding that “the danger is that she hasn’t been vetted” — a concern echoed by several GOP insiders.

These insiders also expressed concern that adding her to the ticket would do little to galvanize social conservatives, some of whom still view McCain with suspicion and antipathy. They also brought up her lack of foreign policy experience, and expressed concern that her reputation as “the most powerful woman in business” — as she was once called by Forbes magazine — could prove a dubious distinction at a time when economic anxiety is reaching levels unseen since the late 1970s.

While McCain has criticized excessive executive salaries, Obama spokesman Bill Burton has already issued a statement pointing out that she “presided over thousands of layoffs at Hewlett-Packard while receiving a $21 million severance package” when she was fired by the company’s board of directors in 2005.

Kay Bailey Hutchison

Last week Kay Bailey Hutchison of Texas, the longest-tenured female Republican senator, joined McCain for a fundraising sprint in the Lone Star state. Hutchison, who until recently headed the Senate Republican Conference, now serves as chairwoman of the Republican Policy Committee, two top Beltway party posts.

Hutchison had already engaged on McCain’s behalf, defending his embrace of the controversial conservative Pastor John Hagee earlier this year and making the rounds as a surrogate on the Sunday political shows (including an appearance Sunday on ABC’s “This Week”), though, like McCain, it’s a medium that does not suit her. And also like McCain, she is not a gifted campaigner.

In Texas, where she has been comfortably reelected, one Republican strategist notes that she’s “proven she can get scores of Hispanics in a huge state surrogate.”

“She’s underused as a surrogate to the party,” the strategist added.

But despite her popularity in the state and in the party and her years of experience, insiders are skeptical she’ll be selected. Like Alaska, Texas is already a solidly Republican state in presidential races. And adding Hutchison — who supports embryonic stem cell research and is relatively moderate on abortion (she is against outlawing the procedure, though she also opposes federal funding for it) — to the ticket would also alienate some social conservatives.

And then there’s the energy problem. Hutchison has long been a defender of Big Oil, which may make political sense locally but could prove a liability in a national race at a time when oil companies are enjoying record profits even as Americans pay record amounts at the pump.

Insofar as Hutchison, Palin or Fiorina are seriously considered, the question McCain's team may first have to answer is how much of a premium to place on gender.

Then there is the media factor. McCain himself aches for the favorable attention of a press corps he feels prefers his rival. The vice presidential pick is one of the few remaining set pieces that will ensure him the spotlight, and could build excitement about his candidacy. And as even Republicans are noting, they could use a bit of excitement.

*sigh* my hero...  Fred Thompson (in a HotAir.com exclusive) has responded to Obama's positions on the recent court ruling granting rights once exclusively given to American citizens (not enemy combatants).  Please be advised that you are about to read the words of a genius - one who would have been president if the media didn't feel the need to summarize candidates using 5 second soundbites:

---

http://hotair.com/archives/2008/06/22/hot-air-exclu
sive-fred-thompson-on-obamas-boumediene-folly/

Hot Air Exclusive: Fred Thompson on Obama’s Boumediene Folly Update: More at PJM posted at 6:42 pm on June 22, 2008 by Ed Morrissey
Send to a Friend | printer-friendly

Earlier this week, Senator Fred Thompson held a press conference on the Supreme Court’s Boumediene decision and the reaction to it from Barack Obama.  Afterwards, the Obama campaign dug up a quote from Senator Thompson in which he said that Osama bin Laden should get “due process” as a defense for Obama’s support of Boumediene — which shows that Obama doesn’t understand the decision or due process.  Senator Thompson responds publicly and exclusively at Hot Air:

Our Democratic friends are once again scrambling to defend Senator Obama’s latest national security gaffe.

Obama supports the recent Supreme Court majority opinion in the Boumediene decision, which extended for the first time habeas corpus rights to foreign enemy combatants held abroad. The Senator went even further than the Court and said that accused terrorists should be tried in American courts as was Omar Abdel Rahman, “the blind sheik”, who masterminded the first World Trade Center bombing.

Last week, in a call with reporters and bloggers, I pointed out Obama’s folly. The Rahman case demonstrates some of the main reasons why we should not treat enemy combatants as ordinary criminal defendants. Such proceedings potentially compromise results, sources and methods of intelligence gathering. In the course of prosecuting Rahman, the government was compelled to turn over a list of un-indicted co-conspirators to the defendant. That list included the name of Osama bin Laden. We later learned that within ten days a copy of that list reached bin Laden in Khartoum, letting him know that his connection to that case had been discovered.

My comments apparently caused the DNC to send out an A.P.B. for anything that might help their candidate out of this problem. Their “Googling” efforts revealed the fact that last year I pointed out that bin Laden would have to be given due process when he is apprehended.

Given that our Democrat friends apparently don’t understand what “due process” means for enemy combatants, they probably thought they had found a silver bullet for their candidate. For them, my statement supports Obama’s argument for terrorist trials in United States courts.

Of course, it doesn’t. Under several centuries of British and U.S. law, enemy combatants, especially those who are foreign combatants, do not have the same rights as American citizens. This does not mean that they cannot be given certain rights. In 2005, under the Detainee Treatment Act, Congress provided enemy combatants arrested and held abroad with certain procedural rights, such as the right to detention hearings where they may call and cross examine witnesses, etc. It was the due process to which all such prisoners were entitled at the time of my statement last year.

This is a far cry from a trial in a United States court, which Senator Obama would grant them.

The military tribunal process which the Supreme Court threw out last week provided more “due process” to enemy unlawful combatants than any which preceded it — and certainly more than Obama’s oft-cited Nuremberg trials, which provided neither habeas corpus nor any appeals whatsoever.  Barack Obama may want to study Nuremberg before using it as an example, because all it proves is how wrong he is.

Update: Fred expands on the due process available to detainees at Gitmo before Boumediene in a new column at Pajamas Media:

• The right to hear the bases of the charges against them including a summary of any classified evidence
• The ability to challenge the bases of their detention before military tribunals modeled after Geneva Convention procedures. As Robert’s pointed out, some 38 detainees have been released as result of this process.
• The right, before the tribunal, to testify, introduce evidence, including exculpatory evidence, call witnesses, cross examine the government witnesses and secure release if and when appropriate.
• The right to the aid of a personal representative in arranging and presenting their cases before the tribunal.
• The right to have the government search for and disclose to the detainee any evidence reasonably available to it tending to show that the detainee is not an enemy combatant.
• The right to appeal an adverse decision from the tribunal to the Federal DC Circuit Court along with the right to employ counsel and secure release if entitled to it.
• The right to petition the DC Circuit to remand a detainee’s case for new tribunal consideration if the petitioner comes up with newly discovered evidence
• The right to require the Department of Defense (DOD) to conduct a yearly review of the status of each prisoner including the right to have the Secretary of Defense review any new evidence that may become available relating to the enemy combatant status of a detainee.
• As a part of that yearly review, the opportunity for the detainee to explain why he is no longer a threat to the United States, which could lead to his release.
• The DC Circuit can order release of the prisoner, and the head of the DOD Administrative Review Boards can, at the recommendation of those panels, order release upon an appropriate showing.

It’s worth pointing out that 38 detainees won their freedom through the use of this due process.  Be sure to read the entire column for more insight.

Here's the new moveon.org ad...  Is it just me or do all these moveon.orgers look like drug addicts?