by Patrick Hynes @ 6:35 pm. Filed under Politics, 2008
Here’s the transcript from the next thirty-three seconds of that Jamie Rubin-John McCain interview:
Rubin: So should we the United States be dealing with that new reality through normal diplomatic contacts to get the job done for the United States?
McCain: I think the United States should take a step back, see what they do when they form their government, see what their policies are and see what ways we can engage them; and if there aren’t any then their may be a hiatus. But I think that part of the relationship is going to be dictated by how Hamas acts, not how the United States acts.
Full video below.
I invited Washington Post editor Fred Hiatt–who uncritically published Rubin’s dishonest Op-Ed piece this morning–onto my radio show tomorrow morning. His secretary hung up on me. Can’t say I blame him.
by Bull Dog Pundit @ 2:40 pm. Filed under Politics, 2008, Culture, War On Terror, John McCain, Nancy Pelosi, Barack Obama, Law, Foreign Policy, News, Conservatism
I’ve been swamped the last few days but wanted to touch on 2 big items today.
First, and the best, is that President Bush laid down the gauntlet today in a speech to the Knesset, rightfully calling the people (i.e. Barack Obama and the majority of Democrats) who want to negotiate with terrorists like Hamas and Iran exactly what they are - appeasers. Said the President.
”Some seem to believe we should negotiate with terrorists and radicals, as if some ingenious argument will persuade them they have been wrong all along,” the President said to the country’s legislative body, “We have heard this foolish delusion before. As Nazi tanks crossed into Poland in 1939, an American senator declared: ‘Lord, if only I could have talked to Hitler, all of this might have been avoided.’ We have an obligation to call this what it is –- the false comfort of appeasement, which has been repeatedly discredited by history.”
That folks, is what’s known as a direct hit right between the eyes.
Well, no sooner had the President finished speaking than the Obama campaign and the Democrat leadership (including Nancy Pelosi, who famously went on the “Road to Damascus” peace mission) got pissed, saying things like “Bullshit” and that the comments were “beneath the dignity of the office“.
Geez, Dems, a bit sensitive aren’t you. Me thinks you all protest too much. Here’s the problem guys (and gal), you have to scream like babies, because the President is exactly right. Wanting to talk to Iran and Hamas is akin to negotiating with Hitler, and you are a bunch of appeasers.
For all his faults, President Bush is exactly right on this issue, and it’s times like this that remind us why we were so happy he won in 2000 and 2004.
And if John McCain wants to rally conservatives to his side, he’ll echo the same theme all over the country.
The second piece of big news today is that the California Supreme Court has overturned the ban on gay marriage, opening the door to Massachusetts-like gay marriages. I haven’t read the decision yet, but according the reports the Court found that the ban “infringes on their Constitutional right to marry” and equal protection rights.
This folks, is going to cause an uproar that can only help John McCain with conservatives. It puts the issue of judges front and center, and McCain needs to remind social conservatives that as much as they don’t like or trust him (with good reason), that the alternative is Barack Obama picking judicial activists.
Personally, I could care less if gay people want to get married - hell, if they want to be just as miserable as married straight people, then come on in, the water’s fine. However, what makes me angry is when it is judicially mandated. This is judicial activism at its finest. There is no “constitutional right” to marry, but like abortion, the judges just happened to find one in there to get the result they wanted.
Look, these questions should be left up to the people, legislature, and the executive. If people in a state want to elect representatives and a governor who are going to pass and sign into law a bill allowing gay marriage, then so be it. Or, if the people, by referendum, want to allow it, then I’m find with it.
What I am not fine with is an imperial judiciary legislating from the bench on issues that are properly left to the people and their elected representatives. My understanding is that come November, the voters of California will get to vote on an initiative that would in effect, overturn the court’s ruling. But come on, if that happens, we all know the court will strike that vote down as well.
But what’s really going to be interesting is to see what Barack Obama says when asked if he agrees with the decision. If he says “Yes”, then don’t even bother trying to get back those “bitter” voters back in November that went for Hillary in the primary, because you will have lost them forever.
by Bull Dog Pundit @ 8:19 am. Filed under News
Other than donating money and/or supplies, and praying, unfortunately there’s not much more most of us can do for the victims of recent natural disasters. It’s been a horrible last few weeks for people all over the globe. Between the cyclone in Burma, the horrendous earthquake in China, and tornados and storms in our own country, you almost become numb to it.
Let’s try not to do that and give what you can to help all these people, as well as keeping them and their families in your thoughts and prayers.
by Bull Dog Pundit @ 8:14 am. Filed under Politics, 2008, Culture, Barack Obama, News
Here it comes folks. The MSM, and some Obama supporters, are starting to talk about how tough it’s going to be for him to win the Presidency because of all the racists out there, especially among the “bitter” demographic where Hillary happens to be trouncing him.
Today the Washington Post gives a good bit of space to a story about the racism and racist comments that have met some Obama volunteers and staffers, and how such attitudes are giving them “pause” about their chances in November.
Here’s the worst: In Muncie, a factory town in the east-central part of Indiana, Ross and her cohorts were soliciting support for Obama at malls, on street corners and in a Wal-Mart parking lot, and they ran into “a horrible response,” as Ross put it, a level of anti-black sentiment that none of them had anticipated.
“The first person I encountered was like, ‘I’ll never vote for a black person,’ ” recalled Ross, who is white and just turned 20. “People just weren’t receptive.”
For all the hope and excitement Obama’s candidacy is generating, some of his field workers, phone-bank volunteers and campaign surrogates are encountering a raw racism and hostility that have gone largely unnoticed — and unreported — this election season. Doors have been slammed in their faces. They’ve been called racially derogatory names (including the white volunteers). And they’ve endured malicious rants and ugly stereotyping from people who can’t fathom that the senator from Illinois could become the first African American president.
The contrast between the large, adoring crowds Obama draws at public events and the gritty street-level work to win votes is stark. The candidate is largely insulated from the mean-spiritedness that some of his foot soldiers deal with away from the media spotlight.
Victoria Switzer, a retired social studies teacher, was on phone-bank duty one night during the Pennsylvania primary campaign. One night was all she could take: “It wasn’t pretty.” She made 60 calls to prospective voters in Susquehanna County, her home county, which is 98 percent white. The responses were dispiriting. One caller, Switzer remembers, said he couldn’t possibly vote for Obama and concluded: “Hang that darky from a tree!”
Documentary filmmaker Rory Kennedy, the daughter of the late Robert F. Kennedy, said she, too, came across “a lot of racism” when campaigning for Obama in Pennsylvania. One Pittsburgh union organizer told her he would not vote for Obama because he is black, and a white voter, she said, offered this frank reason for not backing Obama: “White people look out for white people, and black people look out for black people.”
On Election Day in Kokomo, a group of black high school students were holding up Obama signs along U.S. 31, a major thoroughfare. As drivers cruised by, a number of them rolled down their windows and yelled out a common racial slur for African Americans, according to Obama campaign staffers.
Frederick Murrell, a black Kokomo High School senior, was not there but heard what happened. He was more disappointed than surprised. During his own canvassing for Obama, Murrell said, he had “a lot of doors slammed” in his face. But taunting teenagers on a busy commercial strip in broad daylight? “I was very shocked at first,” Murrell said. “Then again, I wasn’t, because we have a lot of racism here.”
The bigotry has gone beyond words. In Vincennes, the Obama campaign office was vandalized at 2 a.m. on the eve of the primary, according to police. A large plate-glass window was smashed, an American flag stolen. Other windows were spray-painted with references to Obama’s controversial former pastor, the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, and other political messages: “Hamas votes BHO” and “We don’t cling to guns or religion. Goddamn Wright.”
Now look, racism exists in this country, and to deny that would be foolish. And I’m sure that there have been some hateful and ignorant racists who say and do the sort of horrible things that are mentioned in this article.
However, to make a larger point about a few isolated incidents is patently ridiculous. Should these sort of incidents be hidden from view and not discussed? Of course not. But to draw the conclusion about the electorate as a whole from what a few jackasses do or say is foolish.
But the Obama campaign gets to be in the catbird seat on stories like this. They say how wonderful the overwhelming majority of people have been to their message, but also get the sympathy from the MSM over how it’s going to be to overcome all the idiot racists out there. And let’s be honest, there are some people out there who will support Obama just to show that they’re not racists, even if they don’t agree with, or don’t know, his positions on substantive issues. They too are idiots for doing so , albeit harmless ones when compared with the people who yell racist things.
I can’t help but wonder why a huge story would be written on what is almost overwhelmingly anecdotal evidence. It’s always “a guy on the phone”, a car that passed by, or “someone I met somewhere” who happened to say these things. You can’t tell me that there are some instances, and I’m not saying anything about this article, but in general, where people will make up anecdotal evidence (or in some cases simply fake it (i.e. Morton Downey Jr. getting beat up by skinheads, or a college professor hanging a noose from her own doorknob and claiming someone else did it) just to garner sympathy and further their own point of view.
So remember folks. If you don’t vote for Barack Obama, it very well may be that you’re a racist.
by Bull Dog Pundit @ 4:35 pm. Filed under Politics, 2008, Barack Obama, Foreign Policy, News
Someone needs to get me a transcript of Barack Obama’s appearance in West Virginia today. According to this AP report Barack Obama gave a speech today in West Virginia in which he called for, among other things, a “strong and humane” military.
Nowhere in the article is Obama quoted using the word “humane” when describing what kind of military he wants, so it could be that the reporter used that characterization from what he said in his speech.
Um, Senator, in case you didn’t know it, the military’s job is to win wars, or in Rush Limbaugh’s words “kill people and break things”.
Now, had he said he wants his foreign policy to be “humane”, that’s another story (Although it sound way too much like Jimmy Carter for my tastes). But to have as a goal for the military to be “humane” shows that this man has no concept of the role of the military. Can you use the military to deliver humanitarian assistance like we did after the tsunami? Sure you can, but that’s different than wanting a “humane” military.
The military needs to be strong. End of story. And is Obama somehow implying that the military is not already “humane”? After all, if he does think they are already humane, why does he even feel the need to mention it (if in fact he did use that word)?
I don’t know about you but if indeed he did say this, it would greatly concern me. When I hear leftists talk about a “humane” military, I somehow get the feeling he would like our fighting forces to be just like the UN blue helmets - lauded in the salons of Manhattan and Cambridge and the “world community”, but utterly ineffective and only used as an empty threat.
If anybody can find something confirming or denying that Obama said he wanted a strong and “humane” military please link to it in the Comments section.
by Bull Dog Pundit @ 11:44 am. Filed under Politics, Economy, Pensions/Social Security, News
Well, I guess the good news is that the MSM is finally beginning to take notice that there is a looming fiscal disaster on the horizon - the billions of dollars in unfunded liabilities of state and federal governments for pensions and health care benefits promised to state workers. Of course, we’ve been writing about this crisis for years.
But what really struck me was the headline of this Washington Post story. The headline read “Growing Deficits Threaten Pensions - Accounting Tactics Conceal A Crisis For Government Workers.
Can someone please tell me how the pensions of government workers are threatened, and why it is a “crisis” for them? After all, they are going to get what was promised to them by the cowardly politicians who gave away the store out of fear of the unions, but didn’t have the guts to fund their obligations. As the article states:
Such “accounting nonsense” has been “pushing the envelope — or worse — in its attempt to report the highest number possible” for their investment returns, wrote billionaire investor Warren E. Buffett in a recent letter analyzing pensions for shareholders of his company. Taxpayers ultimately will pay the price when these forecasts prove wrong.
So who gets left holding the bag for these debts? Not the retirees, but rather we, the suckers, er, taxpayers. First of all it is pretty much settled law that no changes can be made that would change the amount of pensions promised to public employees (although there is a chance that promised health care benefits could be trimmed or eliminated by subsequent laws). But second of all, what politician is going to have the guts to go against the public employee unions?
The next one to do it will be the first. But to say it’s the pensioners who have the problem is laughable.
by Bull Dog Pundit @ 8:42 am. Filed under Politics, John McCain, Economy, Environment, News, Conservatism
Starting today and apparently continuing throughout the week, John McCain is going to start highlighting his plans to combat global warming. In doing so he is surely likely to highlight the divisions he has with the conservative base. According to reports:
“For all of the last century, the profit motive basically led in one direction - toward machines, methods and industries that used oil and gas,” said McCain. “Enormous good came from that industrial growth, and we are all the beneficiaries of the national prosperity it built. But there were costs we weren’t counting, and often hardly noticed. And these terrible costs have added up now, in the atmosphere, in the oceans and all across the natural world.”
The Arizona senator promised to challenge China and India, two economic rivals who are fueling their challenge to U.S. market supremacy with heavily polluting fuels such as coal, gas and oil.
“For all of its historical disregard of environmental standards, it cannot have escaped the attention of the Chinese regime that China’s skies are dangerously polluted, its beautiful rivers are dying, its grasslands vanishing, its coastlines receding and its own glaciers melting,” said McCain.
He also took a swipe at President Bush, who balked at the beginning of its term at signing the Kyoto global warming protocols. McCain said he would return to the negotiating table.
“I will not shirk the mantle of leadership that the United States bears. I will not permit eight long years to pass without serious action on serious challenges. I will not accept the same dead-end of failed diplomacy that claimed Kyoto. The United States will lead and will lead with a different approach - an approach that speaks to the interests and obligations of every nation,” he said.
Basically McCain is buying into the belief that global warming is man-made, and that government regulation (even though he claims it’s going to be through “market principles”) is the way to combat it. You think the economy is bad now? Wait till you see the costs after all this regulation in the name of a “green” planet.
What’s going to send conservatives (rightly) into a tizzy is his statement to “return to the negotiating table” regarding Kyoto. This of course, would be the same Kyoto that the Senate voted 95-0 not to ratify (I’m not sure if McCain was one of the 95). Simply put Kyoto would destroy our economy and is nothing more than an attempt by the rest of the world to bring the United States to heel. What’s worse, it will do nothing to stop the (perceived) problem.
As wrong as he think he is on the substance, it probably isn’t a horrible political move, especially when it comes to attracting some independent and RINO voters. Whether we like it or not the man-made global warming crowd, along with their buddies in the MSM, have gotten most Americans convinced that our planet is “in peril” and that it is a given that it is our fault, and if we do nothing, our children will be living in a horrible world.
There are many RINO’s (especially in places like Montgomery County, PA) to whom global warming are huge issues, and if McCain said or did nothing to parrot their beliefs, they would vote for Obama, even though many may have reservations about him.
So I can’t slam McCain too much for doing this, although I wish it was a political move, but I actually think he believes this stuff about man-made global warming, which greatly concerns me. And like it or not, it will be an example to independents and RINO’s that McCain is not walking in lock-step with us “crazies”.
What’s comical however, is the belief that McCain singing from the same hymnal as the Democrats on this issue is somehow going to win him some younger voters.
You’ve got to be kidding me. Younger voters are so enthralled with Obama and his empty but effective bromides about “change” and “hope” that John McCain could almost offer them free beer and pizza and it wouldn’t matter. Is global warming a big deal with this demographic? Absolutely. But it’s not the only reason for Obama’s appeal with them, which transcends one issue - or any issues for that matter. It’s purely a connection based on emotion, and when emotion gets involved nothing really matters.
So I hope John McCain has some fireproof suits because it’s going to be one of those weeks where conservatives are reminded why they don’t exactly trust or like him. And those of them who have blogs are going to be very vocal about it. As they should.
by Bull Dog Pundit @ 1:07 pm. Filed under Blogs
Have a good one everyone. I’m heading to the Jersey Shore for a weekend of debauchery (a/k/a my brother’s bachelor party). Hopefully I’ll be sober enough to write on Monday. And Happy Mother’s Day to all the moms out there.
by Bull Dog Pundit @ 12:55 pm. Filed under Politics, Congress, News
I don’t thing anybody out there would want to trade places with New York Republican Congressman Vito Fossella right about now. Not only was he popped for DUI recently, but it turns out the woman who came to bail out this married father of 3 after the arrest is the mother of his 3-year old “love child”.
Here’s the thing - when the cops asked him where he was going, he said “to pick up his daughter”. I wonder if that’s what blew the lid off this whole story.
Of course none of this was known previously, and Fossella had to admit the affair and the love child today. And it doesn’t appear his wife is going to go the Mrs. McGreevey or Spitzer route and stand by her man.
You can’t blame her. It would seem that she didn’t know about this (although that’s not been confirmed), and damn, you have to feel really sorry for her and the kids if she didn’t.
I’ll bet Congressman Fossella was in the same shoes as this guy right about now.
by Bull Dog Pundit @ 12:31 pm. Filed under Politics, 2008, Culture, Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, News
Congratulations Rush. “Operation Chaos” has worked far better that even you could have imagined. Contrary to MSM belief “Operation Chaos” was not about choosing the Democrat party nominee, but rather about keeping the race going and bloodying up the eventual nominee.
And after today’s remarks by Hillary Clinton (which you can listen to here), the intra-party bitterness is going to get worse. In an interview with USA Today Hillary said:
“I have a much broader base to build a winning coalition on,” she said in the interview, citing an article by The Associated Press.
It “found how Senator Obama’s support among working, hard-working Americans, white Americans, is weakening again, and how whites in both states who had not completed college were supporting me.”
“There’s a pattern emerging here,” she said.
Now, some Obama supporters and others on the left are angry because it appears Hillary is trying to drive an “us against them” wedge within the party. You can see Donna Brazile getting angry about it here, after Paul Begala said you can’t build a winning coalition with “eggheads and African Americans”. Now Begala is a weasely, contemptible little slime, but he’s no dummy. And he’s right.
You know what? Hillary is right as well. Exit polls consistently show that Obama loses badly among white working class voters (i.e. the “bitter” people), also known as “Reagan Democrats”, who are so crucial in the battleground states such as Pennsylvania, Michigan, Ohio, West Virginia.
The Democrats are in quite a bind here. If Hillary gets the nomination just how angry will the African-Americans and the young voters be? Spitting mad. They won’t vote for McCain, but they won’t vote for her either. And if turnout is down among African Americans, and they don’t vote over 90% for Hillary, then she won’t pick up enough of the white working class vote to make up the difference.
I can just speak for Pennsylvania when I say no Democrat can win here without the white working class vote. And Obama’s not going to get it in places like the Northeast (Allentown, Wilkes-Barre, Scranton, Bethlehem) or the southwest (Uniontown, Westmoreland County, etc.). It’s not because he’s black - it’s because he’s an out of touch elitist and a proud liberal.
Now look, I’m not saying Hillary is “in touch” or isn’t a “liberal”, but she is far more pragmatic that Obama. And like it or not Rev. Wright’s hate-America radicalism, Bill Ayres, and not wearing the flag-pin matter to many of these folks.
So what’s an undecided “superdelegate” (whose job it is to look out for the party and win the White House) to do? Go with the candidate they think has a better chance to win a national election, which would alienate the very base they rely on for support, and would hurt the party for decades to come, or give it to the guy whose won the most votes, but isn’t best positioned to win in November?
That’s a tough call, but I delight in the fact that they may have to make it.
But really the Dems have no one to blame but themselves for this split. For decades they’ve engaged in identity politics, and now it’s coming home to roost.
In a way it’s ironic that the party who embraced, promoted and shoved political correctness down our throat is going to be prevented from having an honest discussion about race when it comes to whether or not one of their candidates can get enough votes from one racial group or the other.
This will be fun to watch. Pass the popcorn please.
Awarded the biggest buffoon of the week.
