Saturday, August 30, 2008

Mickey Moore Cheering on God

That Malignant Michigan Moron Michael Moore is pontificating again.
To liberal documentary filmmaker Michael Moore, the bounds are seemingly endless. Moore has made a recent career out of attacking President George W. Bush, bashing conservatives and criticizing business. His latest outrage occurred on MSNBC’s August 29 “Countdown with Keith Olbermann” and when he commented about the coincidental timing of an unfortunate disaster – the potential for Hurricane Gustav to make landfall at the beginning of the Republican National Convention in St. Paul, Minn.

“I was just thinking, this Gustav is proof that there is a God in heaven,” Moore said, laughing. “To have it planned at the same time – that it would actually be on its way to New Orleans for day one of the Republican Convention, up in the Twin Cities – at the top of the Mississippi River.”
Of course this was all on Keith Olbermann's show. No doubt he's hoping that they can blame all the deaths on Bush and now McCain.

You know, the nice thing about the prospect of the "Fairness" doctrine returning, it that shows like this will get hammered just as often as any conservative talk show. Olbermann isn't a reporter, he's just another editorialist who thinks he can hide behind that journalism badge and expect people to think he's actually honest.

Friday, August 29, 2008

Per Algore: Barry = Lincoln

This is quite humorous. And not unexpected for the usual nebulous attachment of progressives with history.
Gore also compared Obama to Abraham Lincoln, saying that "before he entered the White House, Abraham Lincoln’s experience in elective office consisted of eight years in his state legislature in Springfield, Ill., and one term in Congress –- during which he showed the courage and wisdom to oppose the invasion of another country, that was popular when it started, but later condemned by history.
Now, why did Lincoln oppose the Mexican-American War? Oh, that's right, I'll tell you what Algore was referring to since he seems to have left that little detail out. The answer is that the opposition was because they felt that the inclusion of Texas and the other territories would be a means for the Slavery supporting states to increase their populations and thus voting roles in support of slavery. (Go to Wiki if you doubt me.) That was a admirable stand. The end result wasn't what they feared though, was it.

I also don't agree with the contention that the Mexican-American war was condemned by history. There are good points on both sides of the argument, but the end result was the US got a very large amount of property and a better defined border in an area that was claimed by Mexico, but never actually under their control. In the context of the times, that was pretty much how it worked. Disagree? You might actually want to look at how colonization during that period worked.

Also, Lincoln's opposition actually mattered, since he was in congress and voted against it. Barry was just making noise where it had no effect.

Thursday, August 28, 2008

Reasoned Discourse at DemCon

This actually starts of quite humorously with Stephen Green from Vodkapundit.

But the Reasoned Discourse kicks in with Alex Jones (radio host (?)) bellowing at Michele Malkin. Don't bother watching the whole thing. You'll quickly lose interest, if not just want to punch Alex Jones in the face.

Party of Whiners

I must admit, I've listened to some of the tripe that the speakers DemCon and I usually get quickly fed up with the whining. They do preach hope, but they all seem to seem to think that they are the down-trodden masses. I went to read VDH this AM and found he puts this in better perspective than I have.(Probably because I get nauseated by the whole thing and would rather not dwell on my loathing of the type.)
Let us hope that the Republicans avoid the teary-eyed, drippy stories that almost all these Democratic speakers insist on inflicting on us: in this Oprah world, one would think that there is mass starvation, depression, and general mayhem. In every introduction, we hear that the speaker to come was poor, deprived, and a multifaceted victim. Not since reading the Attic Orators has one heard how horrible life has been to such heroic figures, who nonetheless somehow ended up in such a cruel country with big salaries, enormous homes, and influential jobs.
I doubt the Repugs will avoid it, but then, they probably will not have nearly the level of victimhood on display that the Dems have.

Read the rest of Hanson's observations. I pretty much view his views as center/center-right. And please note, that is based on how elections have shown the political bases in the past few presedential elections. Just my opinion.

Well, the DemCon commercial will be over shortly. I plan to NOT see the Obama speech. I don't think I could stand that level of nausea.

Tuesday, August 26, 2008

Democrat's National Convention

I suppose this really says all you really need to know about those protesting at the Dems convention.

I suppose if they were civilized or even moderately intelligent they would have just ignored Fox News Reporter, but instead they show just how moronic they really are.

I don't know what Griff Jenkins was doing, but he obviously ended up on the wrong end of the protest. Personally, I'd think he'd hire the biggest and meanest looking camera men that he could find to go into such scenarios.

You can also note how little the police did. Makes you wonder how far they would have let that go before they actually stepped in.

UPDATE: Looks like he may have been trying talk to Ward ChickenShit Churchill. No footage of the actual interaction with that piece of crap, but the footage there pretty much sums up why I can't stand the far left.

Monday, August 25, 2008

Obama's Racial Issues

Saw these links at the Vodkapundit.

No doubt Slate is proud of moron Jacob Weisberg's piece. Not that there is any reason for Barry to lose, like his complete lack of experience, complete communist stance on money redistribution or any of that pantheon of other reasons that conservatives cringe about. Nope, it's just about race.
If it makes you feel better, you can rationalize Obama's missing 10-point lead on the basis of Clintonite sulkiness, his slowness in responding to attacks, or the concern that Obama may be too handsome, brilliant, and cool to be elected. But let's be honest: If you break the numbers down, the reason Obama isn't ahead right now is that he trails badly among one group, older white voters. He does so for a simple reason: the color of his skin.

Much evidence points to racial prejudice as a factor that could be large enough to cost Obama the election. That warning is written all over last month's CBS/New York Times poll, which is worth examining in detail if you want a quick grasp of white America's curious sense of racial grievance. In the poll, 26 percent of whites say they have been victims of discrimination. Twenty-seven percent say too much has been made of the problems facing black people. Twenty-four percent say the country isn't ready to elect a black president. Five percent of white voters acknowledge that they, personally, would not vote for a black candidate.

Not sure why the victim thing is relevant, but I'm sure if blacks were asked about who victimized them you'd get at least a similar reaction with whites as an antagonist. But any how, there is little doubt that race is a factor. You'd have to be blind or stupid to ignore it. Of course, Weisberg seems to completely forget the reversal of his topic, how many blacks will vote for Obama just because he's black and against McCain because he's white. Funny how that dichotomy seems to always be left out of the equation.

The best part is the "think of the children" canard.
Many have discoursed on what an Obama victory could mean for America. We would finally be able to see our legacy of slavery, segregation, and racism in the rearview mirror. Our kids would grow up thinking of prejudice as a nonfactor in their lives. The rest of the world would embrace a less fearful and more open post-post-9/11 America. But does it not follow that an Obama defeat would signify the opposite? If Obama loses, our children will grow up thinking of equal opportunity as a myth. His defeat would say that when handed a perfect opportunity to put the worst part of our history behind us, we chose not to. In this event, the world's judgment will be severe and inescapable: The United States had its day but, in the end, couldn't put its own self-interest ahead of its crazy irrationality over race.
What a pile of horse-shit. I love the fact that Obama will somehow cleanse the historical legacy of slavery, segregation and racism. How is that exactly? Those are things that definitely occurred, just having Barry as President won't make that go away, nothing will. And if your children are growing up thinking equal opportunity is a myth, then maybe you have no one to blame but yourself. A presidential election isn't about salving some pretended wounds, its about choosing the person right to direct our country for the next four years. That person is chosen by the majority, not by some made up contention that someone's children need some little push to have good self esteem.

The other link in that post is worth reading as well. George Will throwing darts at Barry "renewable resources" Obama.
Obama is (this is part of liberalism's catechism) leery of nuclear power. He also says -- and might say so even if Nevada were not a swing state -- that he distrusts the safety of Nevada's Yucca Mountain for storage of radioactive waste. Evidently he prefers today's situation -- nuclear waste stored at 126 inherently insecure above-ground sites in 39 states, within 75 miles of where more than 161 million Americans live.

But back to requiring this or that quota of energy from renewable sources. What will that involve? For conservatives, seeing is believing; for liberals, believing is seeing. Obama seems to believe that if a particular outcome is desirable, one can see how to require it. But how does that work? Details to follow, sometime after noon Jan. 20, 2009.

That bit cracked me up. I'd say it is funny, right up until I think about it and realize its true. Then, I get worried. Read the quotes from Will's piece. They have a creepy dictatorial tone.
Obama recently said that he would "require that 10 percent of our energy comes from renewable sources by the end of my first term -- more than double what we have now." Note the verb "require" and the adjective "renewable."
Require? He's not going to be king, so how is he going to require that we have this? Maybe he could legislate it with the assistance of a democrat controlled congress, but that still isn't his requiring.
Obama has also promised that "we will get 1 million 150-mile-per-gallon plug-in hybrids on our roads within six years." What a tranquilizing verb "get" is. This senator, who has never run so much as a Dairy Queen, is going to get a huge, complex industry to produce, and is going to get a million consumers to buy, these cars. How? Almost certainly by federal financial incentives for both -- billions of dollars of tax subsidies for automakers and billions more to bribe customers to buy cars they otherwise would spurn.
Again, this is another dictatorial statement, though you could take it more lightly if you remove any association with other statements.

I also don't see how Barry thinks this is going to work. Here in the Northeast these battery cars work, but they don't ever get mileage like that. And a plug-in car just moves the tail pipe somewhere else. Will goes on to discuss that. Personally, I won't drive one of these things. I don't like how they drive and I've seen them in the snow and I just don't want to end up that stuck that often.

Oh, and just a last stolen link to add from Vodkapundit. Here is Green Ego and Ham from Watchman's Words.

Heh. Got to love them when they do it well.

Russian Hypocrites

You have to love listening to the Russians. All you have to do is think Chechnya and you can recognize a hypocrite.
Georgia and Russia fought a brief war earlier this month over South Ossetia after Tbilisi sent in troops to try to retake the province by force, provoking a massive counter-attack by land, sea and air from Moscow.

"Today it is clear that after Georgia's aggression against South Ossetia (that) Georgian-South-Ossetian and Georgian-Abkhazian relations cannot be returned to their former state," upper house speaker Sergei Mironov said during the debate.

"The peoples of South Ossetia and Abkhazia have the right to get independence."

Well, I suppose there is little that Georgia can do about this, but the Russians should recognize that the rest of the world doesn't need to agree with their actions.

By this strategy I'm thinking that the US should be looking at a former Russian ally to crush and free just to the south of our border.

Tuesday, August 05, 2008

The Problem with Batman...

Now the simpering ladies of the press find Batman's voice to rough for them.
"His Batman rasps his lines in a voice that's deeper and hammier than ever," said NPR's David Edelstein.

The New Yorker's David Denby praised the urgency of Bale's Batman, but lamented that he "delivers his lines in a hoarse voice with an unvarying inflection."
What do they want? I suppose he could have a high whiny lisping voice, but do you think that would work with the dark persona and the fear that he uses as his tool?

Or I suppose they'd prefer Adam West's voice and measured tone. That will strike fear in a 3 year old, but do they actually think a criminal would be intimidated?

Maybe these dolts should actually understand what the story is about rather than fret that his voice is raspy and deep.

You're Either With Me or a Racist

Glad to see I'm not the only one tired of being called a racist because I happen to find BarryO an arrogant ultra Liberal elite.
And Maureen Dowd better watch out when she talks about Obama being proud. Apparently, that is code language and it takes David Gergen to translate that for us. Today on ABC's show This Week, Gergen told us that everyone with a southern heritage knows that when the McCain campaign juxtaposes Obama with Moses and calls him "The One" (something both Maureen Dowd and I have also done) that every southerner knows that that is just code for calling him "uppity." Really!? Does that mean that no one can ever point out that Obama seems quite arrogant and full of himself without Gergen saying that we're playing to subliminal racism? Baloney! Remember the trouble that Biden got in for saying that Obama was articulate? Apparently, that was also racist. What is it when a white guy like John Kerry was ridiculed for being arrogant? And just as there is no defense against this sort of attack where every word is a hidden attack of racism, there is no arguing against Gergen's logic here. He knows this because he's from the South so that gives him an extra spidey-sense to detect this sort of thing. If you disagree, it's either because you're not from the South and don't know whereof you speak or you're from the South and probably just sublimating your inner racist.

This is quite a gig that these people have. Basically, they've drawn the rules so that whatever you say about Obama, you can be called out for catering to racism. I know that the Democrats would like to make Obama immune from all criticism, but this is an election, dang it! Candidates criticize each other in elections and Republicans refuse to unilaterally disarm just because Obama had an African father.
Now it's some mysterious code that conservatives use to racially denigrate BarryO by calling him arrogant, but when BarryO uses an obvious racial statement about not looking like president's on dollar bills, he's saying what exactly?
Sen. Barack Obama's chief strategist conceded that the Democratic presidential candidate was referring to his race when he said Republicans were trying to scare voters by suggesting Obama "doesn't look like all those other presidents on the dollar bills."
He's not just playing the scare tactic but the guilt tactic. Not a difficult game considering that large numbers of liberal whites still find some internal guilt over slavery. But that's not playing a racial card is it? No can't be. And every time he throws one of those grenades into the crowd, McCain has to dive for cover.

Nice to see that BarryO is still not playing the negative campaign style he swore not to get into.

Friday, August 01, 2008

Never Talk to the Police

Seen at Schneier's.

I'm not finished listening to this, but I'm convinced.