Feeling the heat from the left closing in, and sweat accumulating under his collar, Obama reassures his constituency in St. Louis on Saturday Jul 5th that he still plans on his surrender and withdrawal of troops as he announced to the enemy earlier this year… Al-Qaeda you don’t have to change your victory celebration timetable as long as he makes it to the White House. His eye is winking at his core following. The entire city of San Francisco was heard to breath a collective sigh of relief - wink wink.
ST. LOUIS (Reuters) - Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama said on Saturday his plan to end the Iraq war was unchanged and he was puzzled by the sharp reaction to his statement this week that he might “refine” his timetable for withdrawing U.S. combat troops.
“For me to say that I’m going to refine my policies I don’t think in any way is inconsistent with prior statements and doesn’t change my strategic view that this war has to end and that I’m going to end it as president,” Obama told reporters on his campaign plane. — Reuters
So here is a guy who has exploited the radical left since his college days in his bid for the highest office. What’s the first thing he does after his nomination is locked up? Pander to the right and middle of the road voter in rural America. Does anyone see anything different about this guy then any of his predecessors? To make matters worse he acts dumbfounded as to why the left is furious over his recent remarks.
Hey Obama… We have a news bulletin for you. You are now beholding to the radical left and Moveon.Org unlike your rival Hillary Clinton. Now you need to reassure the left that you have not flipped, but you must at the same time flip for those in the middle. This is what happens when a campaign is only built on rhetoric and double speak. Where is the change your are bringing to the political process Oh Ye Messiah Obama? Do you really expect mainstream America not to see through your ‘I will say anything to get elected’ charade while you pander to the middle of the road voters with both eyes on the polls? How far to the right, and hypocritical are you willing to become to capture that middle vote? Have you no shame?
And here is the clincher… radical leftists - read it and weep. You have been bamboozled:
Obama said his willingness to consider changing conditions on the ground and the potential ramifications of the pull-out plan was a strength — and a sharp contrast to Republican President George W. Bush’s stay-the-course strategy in Iraq.
“The tactics of how we ensure our troops are safe as we pull out, how we execute the withdrawal — those are things that are all based on facts and conditions,” he said.
“I’m not somebody who, like George Bush, is willing to ignore facts on the basis of my preconceived notions. I want to pay attention to what is happening on the ground.”
Under heavy pressure from McCain, who criticized his failure to visit Iraq since 2006, Obama plans to travel to Iraq and Afghanistan. The dates have not been announced for security reasons but the trip is expected within the next month. — Reuters
[
0 rating,
2 votes]
Loading ...
Well surprise, surprise, and if this don’t beat all! This news story sure sounds a lot like a set up for a future statement from Obama that might go something like “..after reconsidering the information on the ground from our commanders…” brace yourself “… we must ensure that the fragile peace is preserved, and I have determined after careful consideration that premature withdrawal of American troops would in fact be counter productive.” You can take that to the bank as Obama begins his flip toward the middle ground and the moderate voters he has been courting of late (including evangelicals).
It wasn’t that long ago that Obama, and the henchmen of Moveon.Org, and other far left anti-war factions were out to crucify General Petraus and his assessment of the “surge” working. Interesting how CHANGE AGENT OBAMA is about to CHANGE his position on troop withdrawal since he has locked up the nomination. One has to wonder if Hillary has enough energy and guts to rally the left and perhaps pull a last minute upset at the convention if this story is going where we think its going. An upset driven by a strong voice from the left might make for some interesting photo-ops in Denver!
Senator Barack Obama said Thursday that he might “refine” his plans for a phased withdrawal from Iraq after meeting with military commanders there later this summer. But later, he hastily held a second news conference: to emphasize his commitment to withdrawing all combat troops from Iraq within 16 months of taking office.
His two statements, made just hours apart in Fargo, N.D., reflected how the changing dynamics on the ground in Iraq have posed a challenge to Mr. Obama, as he tried to retain flexibility as violence declines there without abandoning one of the central promises of his campaign: that if elected he would end the war there.
His remarks came as Republicans — including his all-but-certain Republican rival, Senator John McCain — have been arguing that Mr. Obama would likely change his position on the phased withdrawal. They argue that with violence dropping there, bringing the troops home would risk erasing the fragile gains that have been made.
Mr. Obama said at his first news conference that he planned a “thorough assessment” of his Iraq policy when he visits the country later this summer. “I’ve always said that the pace of withdrawal would be dictated by the safety and security of our troops and the need to maintain stability,” he said. “That assessment has not changed. And when I go to Iraq and have a chance to talk to some of the commanders on the ground, I’m sure I’ll have more information and will continue to refine my policies.”
Mr. Obama has long spoken of consulting with commanders in the field as part of his plan for a phased withdrawal from Iraq, but his shift in emphasis in the way he spoke about the situation on Thursday — after weeks in which Republicans and even an outside Iraq policy adviser to the Obama campaign argued against a withdrawal along the lines he had proposed — fueled speculation that he might not be wedded to his timetable. — NYT
And then there is this…
We’re beginning to understand why Barack Obama keeps protesting so vigorously against the prospect of “George Bush’s third term.” Maybe he’s worried that someone will notice that he’s the candidate who’s running for it.
Most Presidential candidates adapt their message after they win their party nomination, but Mr. Obama isn’t merely “running to the center.” He’s fleeing from many of his primary positions so markedly and so rapidly that he’s embracing a sizable chunk of President Bush’s policy. Who would have thought that a Democrat would rehabilitate the much-maligned Bush agenda?
Take the surveillance of foreign terrorists. Last October, while running with the Democratic pack, the Illinois Senator vowed to “support a filibuster of any bill that includes retroactive immunity for telecommunications companies” that assisted in such eavesdropping after 9/11. As recently as February, still running as the liberal favorite against Hillary Clinton, he was one of 29 Democrats who voted against allowing a bipartisan Senate Intelligence Committee reform of surveillance rules even to come to the floor.
Two weeks ago, however, the House passed a bill that is essentially the same as that Senate version, and Mr. Obama now says he supports it. Apparently legal immunity for the telcos is vital for U.S. national security, just as Mr. Bush has claimed. Apparently, too, the legislation isn’t an attempt by Dick Cheney to gut the Constitution. Perhaps it is dawning on Mr. Obama that, if he does become President, he’ll be responsible for preventing any new terrorist attack. So now he’s happy to throw the New York Times under the bus. — WSJ
[
2 rating,
2 votes]
Loading ...
In a 5-4 Supreme Court decision the highest court in the U.S. ruled a Washington D.C. outright handgun ban unconstitutional. Although the court did not find that state licensing was an issue, this ruling upheld the right of a U.S. Citizen to Keep and Bear Arms afforded to them under the 2nd Amendment as an individual right, not simply just the right of a State to support a militia or guard as many radical anti-2nd Amendment activists have claimed for years.
(WASHINGTON) - The Supreme Court ruled Thursday that Americans have a right to own guns for self-defense in their homes, the justices’ first major pronouncement on gun rights in U.S. history.
The court’s 5-4 ruling struck down the District of Columbia’s 32-year-old ban on handguns as incompatible with gun rights under the Second Amendment. The decision went further than even the Bush administration wanted, but probably leaves most firearms restrictions intact.
The court had not conclusively interpreted the Second Amendment since its ratification in 1791. The amendment reads: “A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.”
The basic issue for the justices was whether the amendment protects an individual’s right to own guns no matter what, or whether that right is somehow tied to service in a state militia.
Writing for the majority, Justice Antonin Scalia said that an individual right to bear arms is supported by “the historical narrative” both before and after the Second Amendment was adopted.
The Constitution does not permit “the absolute prohibition of handguns held and used for self-defense in the home,” Scalia said. The court also struck down Washington’s requirement that firearms be equipped with trigger locks or kept disassembled, but left intact the licensing of guns.
Scalia noted that the handgun is Americans’ preferred weapon of self-defense in part because “it can be pointed at a burglar with one hand while the other hand dials the police.”
One commenter on Digg mentioned, “Let’s pray they overturn Roe v. Wade and outlaw gay marriage as well.” — that’s a long shot (no pun intended). However, you gotta love Justice Scalia — “the handgun is Americans’ preferred weapon of self-defense in part because it can be pointed at a burglar with one hand while the other hand dials the police.” — Absolutely priceless !!
[
1 rating,
1 votes]
Loading ...
The U.S. Open Golf coverage was interrupted with a startling report that Tim Russert collapsed in his new office earlier today. Tim Russert was perhaps one of the most beloved and charismatic political news correspondents. I am sure many of our readers have spent more of their Sunday mornings riveted to his pointed no holes barred interviews on Meet the Press.
They always say the good die young… such is the case today as we all mourn the loss of an outstanding journalist and American.
NBC interrupted its regular programming to announce Russert’s death, and in the ensuing moments, familiar faces such as Tom Brokaw, Andrea Mitchell and Brian Williams took turns mourning his loss.
Williams called him “aggressively unfancy.”
President Bush said he was “deeply saddened” by Russert’s death.
“Tim was a tough and hardworking newsman. He was always well-informed and thorough in his interviews. And he was as gregarious off the set as he was prepared on it,” Mr. Bush said in a statement.
Russert, of Buffalo, N.Y., took the helm of the Sunday news show in December 1991 and turned it into the nation’s most widely watched program of its type. His signature trait there was an unrelenting style of questioning that made some politicians reluctant to appear, yet confident that they could claim extra credibility if they survived his grilling intact.
He was also a senior vice president at NBC, and this year, Time Magazine named him one of the 100 most influential people in the world.
Russert had Buffalo’s blue collar roots, a Jesuit education, a law degree and a Democratic pedigree that came from his turn as an aide to the late Sen. Daniel Patrick Moynihan of New York. – AP News Wire
[
1 rating,
1 votes]
Loading ...
Tuesday - May 20th, 2008
8:29 pm
News
The prognosis for Ted Kennedy is not the best given the type of tumor that has invaded his brain tissue. Regardless of any distaste for his politics, we urge our readers to take the high road and keep him in their prayers. It’s the moral and the “right” thing to do…
(WASHINGTON - Reuters) - A diagnosis of malignant glioma is grave news for Massachusetts Sen. Edward Kennedy, brain experts said on Tuesday.
A malignant glioma kills half its victims within a year and patients rarely survive more than three years. Even surgery cannot cure such a tumor, which sends fingers of cancerous cells into nooks and crannies of the brain, doctors agreed.
However, Kennedy, 76, has a chance of extending his life with chemotherapy — the preferred drug is a pill with few side-effects — and radiation.
“A diagnosis of a malignant brain tumor can be one of the most terrifying diagnoses that patients or their loved ones can hear,” said Dr. Keith Black, chairman of the department of neurosurgery at Cedars-Sinai Medical Center in Los Angeles.
Kennedy suffered a seizure on Saturday and has been undergoing tests in the hospital ever since. A biopsy — a little sample of brain tissue — confirmed a malignant glioma. More…
[
1 rating,
1 votes]
Loading ...
(KENTUCKY) — Hillary Clinton is down to bare knuckles telling a Maysville KY crowd today that it is “nowhere near over.”
“I’m going to make [my case] until we have a nominee,” she told the crowd at a local high school, “but we’re not going to have one today and we’re not going to have one tomorrow and we’re not going to have one the next day.
“This is nowhere near over, none of us is going to have the number of delegates we’re going to need to get to the nomination,” she proclaimed.
Clinton feels neither candidate will have the necessary 2,210 delegates by the last primary on June 3, the number she says is needed because she argues Michigan’s and Florida’s delegates must in fact be counted. That seems to be her near term battlefront and it appears she is serious about taking that battle to the convention.
The Obama campaign has said that after Oregon and Kentucky’s primaries on Tuesday, they will have the majority of the pledged delegates.
But Clinton told supporters that she has the lead in the popular vote.
“Right now, more people have voted for me than have voted for my opponent,” she said. “More people have voted for me than for anybody ever running for president before,” she added, referring to previous Democratic primaries.
Sen Clinton is convinced that the geopolitical map in the end will be more important to the super delegates than the regular delegate count. Playing on a fear that although Obama may seem popular, he does not have enough of the “center” to win in November.
“The states I’ve won total 300 electoral votes,” she said, explaining that 270 electoral votes are needed to win in November and that many of the states Obama has won will go for John McCain then .
“I still have a cushion if you look at all the states that I have won and take out those that may not be in our column come the fall. My opponent has 217 electoral votes from places like Alaska and Idaho and Utah and Kansas and Nebraska and many of his votes and his delegates come from caucus states, which have a relatively low turnout,” Clinton said.
While Obama has all but written off Kentucky, Hillary makes this observation to the superdelegates…
“You know, Kentucky has a history of picking presidents,” she said. “People don’t get elected president without winning Kentucky.”
You have to give her credit for being a fighter. The Clintons know that to get another shot at the White House, they need to dominate the party internally from this point forward and split it into two camps over the next four years if Hillary is not successful. Eitherway, Obama will have his hands full politically behind the scenes, regardless of the unifying rhetoric Sen Clinton may espouse if indeed she is not nominated. ed. – ZZNS
[
3 rating,
3 votes]
Loading ...
Talk about the need for anger management therapy in the Big Apple and Bean Town! New York Yankee and Boston Red Sox fans… we have one thing to say. Get a grip !!
A New York Yankees fan has been charged with second-degree murder after allegedly ramming her car into a group of people outside a New Hampshire bar, killing a Boston Red Sox fan.
Ivonne Hernandez
This booking photo released by the Nashua, N.H., Police Dept., shows Ivonne Hernandez on Friday after her arrest. Witnesses say a Red Sox-Yankees argument in a bar Friday led to taunting in a parking lot and then, according to prosecutors, to murder.
Ivonne Hernandez, 43, was arraigned this morning in Hillsborough District Court on reckless second-degree murder and drunken driving charges. She did not enter a plea and will be held without bail.
The murder charge followed the weekend death of 29-year-old Matthew Beaudoin, who was one of two people struck early Friday morning by Hernandez in a Nashua, N.H., parking lot after an altercation that reportedly involved fans of the rival big league teams.
Hernandez, of Nashua, had initially been charged with two counts of felony reckless conduct, but one of the charges was increased after Beaudoin’s death.
“One of the pedestrians sustained minor injuries,” according to the Friday release from the state Attorney General’s Office. “The second pedestrian sustained life-threatening injuries. — ABC News
Sure hope the Red Sox fans don’t take this too personal. I can just see the reaction next time the Bronx Bombers set foot in Fenway Park or the Red Sox fans visit Yankee Stadium. If you are a fan of one of these teams you might want to make sure you go to the next game with a kevlar vest under you favorite player’s jersey!
[Rate This Post]
Loading ...
Do you get a a sense that if the Iowa Caucus was run again on Tuesday along with North Carolina and Indiana that the result might be quite a bit different? Americans do have a passion for drama and support for the underdog. How much of that passion was at play in the early primaries? Back at the beginning of the primaries, there was no doubt that Barack Obama was the clear underdog and Hillary Clinton was supposed to be the hands down sure thing. If you are honest with yourself there was also an unspoken tension regarding race as a potential differentiator. Thus the MSM did virtually no investigation of Barack’s personal associations for fear of being branded as playing a race card if they were the first to break a negative or controversial story or fact.
Ironically — it was Barack’s own pastor of 20 years that has now opened the lid on the race card pandora’s box. Not the Republicans, not Hillary Clinton or John McCain, but his long time association with a radical black minister who by the way does not represent the value system of mainsteam black Americans. Obama even acknowledges openly that the issue of his judgement for being so closely associated with this pastor IS in fact a fair issue in the campaign.
Sorry Barack, but throwing Rev. Wright under the bus now is a bit late. No matter what transpires within the Democratic National Committee’s smoke filled rooms, no matter what else Howard Dean has to say on Fox News, you have damaged yourself by your own poor judgment and nativity about the impact your past associations will have on your political aspirations. Are we to believe that after 20 years of association with this racist minister, that you have just now received the great awakening and revelation that his value system is not in alignment with your own? If this is really true and you are being honest with us this just reinforces the concern that many Democrats are having that your lack of judgment and experience is a serious Achilles heel in a national election.
Obama’s “Great Race Speech” although lofty and elequent did nothing to answer the fundemantal question as to WHY he remained a member of a congregation that so clearly and joyously reveled in the views of this radical pastor. Barack, the Prophet of Change, has now elected to do what every other belt way politician does, throw him under that same bus seen still dragging his white grandmother from his so called historic race speech.
As a result of all of the doubts that have been raised in the minds of many voters concerning Obama’s true value system and potential integrity issues, Hillary now finds herself with the beloved and sometimes blessed underdog status and with a tailwind. The good voters of North Carolina and Indiana, have the rare chance to shape history by keeping both the drama of the race AND the intellectual debate between Obama and Clinton alive.
American Thinker: Obama’s Trap
Barack Obama set the trap. Then he stepped in it. Or, as Reverend Wright might put it, Barack’s chickens are coming home to roost.
Thus is the effect of the Great Race Speech.
Six weeks ago, Obama’s status as the Messiah was dramatically enhanced for having turned the negative of Reverend Wright into a “much needed” exploration of race in America. So eager was the liberal establishment for confirmation that race is the biggest problem in this country (and that Barack is the solution) that they didn’t see the obvious; they were being deceived by a cynical sleight of hand.
As virtually every intelligent (and honest) pundit noted, along with millions of average Americans, the Wright controversy wasn’t about race. It was about patriotism. Any person seeing those clips said to themselves, “I would never have been part of this man’s church. I’d have gotten up and left.”
It is Barack Obama’s comfort in remaining in an environment that regular folk would have abandoned in an instant that leads to the most intriguing part of the Wright debacle. That choice is the most powerful insight we’ve been given into what kind of man Barack is, and what sort of decision-maker he would be if we decide to give him his first management position…
[
1 rating,
1 votes]
Loading ...
Maybe it was hearing his middle name repeated over and over again on national TV that was the straw that broke this candidate’s back. Maybe it was the latest poll showing Hillary having a much better chance of winning against John McCain in November. Whatever it was, today Obama finally threw his pastor of 20 years under the bus. What’s even more incredible is he would have us all believe that he had no idea that Rev. Wright was so hateful, bigoted and racist until this past weekend. Pretty hard pill for all those bitter poor white backwoods, gun toting bible thumpers in rural America to swallow don’t you think?
(WINSTON-SALEM, North Carolina - Reuters) - Democratic Sen. Barack Obama strongly denounced his former pastor on Tuesday, saying he was outraged by assertions made by Rev. Jeremiah Wright about the U.S. government and race that have disrupted Obama’s presidential campaign.
The controversy over Wright has been a major stumbling block for the Illinois senator, who is leading New York Sen. Hillary Clinton in the state-by-state contest for the party’s nomination for the November election.
Obama was forced to address the issue after an appearance by Wright on Monday at the National Press Club in Washington, where he repeated earlier suggestions that the United States deserved some blame for the September 11 attacks and that the government had had a hand in spreading AIDS to blacks.
“I am outraged by the comments that were made and saddened over the spectacle that we saw,” Obama told reporters as he campaigned for the North Carolina vote against Clinton next Tuesday.
“The person that I saw yesterday was not the person that I met 20 years ago. His comments were not only divisive and destructive but I believe that they end up giving comfort to those who prey on hate,” Obama said.
Wright’s comments have undercut the campaign of Obama, the son of a white mother and a black father who has based his campaign on a promise to unite the country after years of sharp political and racial divisions.
Howard Dean’s head must be about to explode! Just as it looked like he might have had a shot of shutting down the campaign forcing the hand of Super-Delegates and disenfranchising the remaining primary states, the good Reverend gives Hillary Clinton more life! The time for Obama to have distanced himself from the Rev. Wright radical black ideology was 20 years ago not 48 hours ago. It goes to right to the issue of his judgment as well as his political immaturity.
Regardless of what Obama says now, it will be very hard for him to disassociate himself from someone with such a radical and anti-American point of view as Rev. Wright who reinforced that ideology on National TV for all to see. In fact, Rev. Wright ironically is showing more integrity and consistency in his beliefs by at least NOT changing his perspectives on America, or backpedaling on ANY of the comments made in his sermons of the past 20 years. It’s Obama that is looking like the typical beltway flip flop politician by attempting to spin his way out of this association!! What was that about CHANGE Barack???
[Rate This Post]
Loading ...
The Obama campaign spinning has only just begun after his remarks labeling small town rural America as being misguided in their “clinging” to religion and guns!! Where there is smoke there is fire, and perhaps the elitist label will stick more firmly to Obama than he cares to acknowledge. In fact he doesn’t really see what the big deal is about what he said . His words, “everyone knows [its] true”, in the article below from a later speech in Indiana seems to point that out.
Although wishes he said it differently he seems to stand by his position that rural small town America is somehow misguided because they don’t line up exactly with his point of view on religion, guns, and immigration! Can he really be that naive - or is he just politically sedated without a well written set of talking points in front of him from his campaign managers?
After the remarks were reported by the liberal blog Huffington Post on Friday, Obama initially defended them, and on Saturday he continued to say the tenor of them was correct, even if the phrasing was off. He argued that Clinton and Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), whose campaign also criticized the remarks, were turning something “everybody knows is true” into political fodder.
“Lately, there has been a little, typical sort of political flare-up because I said something that everybody knows is true, which is that there are a whole bunch of folks in small towns in Pennsylvania, in
towns right here in Indiana, in my home town in Illinois who are bitter,” Obama said in Muncie. “They are angry. They feel like they have been left behind. They feel like nobody is paying attention to what they’re going through.”
“So I said, ‘Well, you know, when you’re bitter you turn to what you can count on,’ ” he continued. “So people they vote about guns, or they take comfort from their faith and their family and their community. And they get mad about illegal immigrants who are coming over to this country or they get frustrated about, you know, how things are changing. That’s a natural response.” — [hat-tip Washington Post of all places]
[Rate This Post]
Loading ...
