The Wall Street Journal notes that the anticipated Obama VP announcement will probably not happen this week or even next…

Barack Obama and Indiana Sen. Evan Bayh appeared at a campaign rally together Wednesday, stoking conjecture that the Hoosier senator may be asked to join the ticket as Obama’s running mate.

But with speculation nearing a fever pitch over who he will pick to round out the Democratic presidential ticket, campaign officials soaked the ground with cold water, at least regarding timing.

Obama won’t be tipping his hand for running mate this week, one campaign official said, and he won’t do it next week either, at least not while he’s vacationing with his family in Hawaii. That vacation ends Aug. 16, giving Obama about a week and a half to make a decision in advance of the Democratic convention.

There has been speculation for some time that this would be the week Obama would make his decision, on the theory that he wouldn’t want to risk being upstaged by the Olympic Games in Beijing. Among the lead proponents of this theory: employees of NBC, which is televising the games.

The soothing words from the campaign that a decision isn’t imminent didn’t placate edgy reporters, some of whom camped out late Tuesday in the lobby of the Elkhart motel where Obama was staying, on the off-chance that Bayh might show up in a black limousine.

Further stoking speculation that Bayh is the one: the film crew that routinely shoots video for Obama campaign ads were spotted at the Elkhart event.

So much for the pre-Olympic announcements.

By Mike DeVine, Legal Editor for The Minority Report and The HinzSight Report
___________________________________________________________________

No less than three times in the past several weeks, Barack Obama has asserted that Republicans “will” make racist appeals to scare voters from voting for him.

No one in the MSM had a problem with this slur against millions of American voters. In fact, no one said Obama had, “played the race card,” until he tied McCain’s campaign to the allegation.

Incredibly, George Stephanopoulos, in this past Sunday’s “Who Played the Race Card” segment on his ABC This Week program, explicitly and casually deemed such attacks against generic Republicans as obviously acceptable, as he criticized such attacks against John McCain in the context of the “Obama as Paris Hilton-like celebrity in Berlin” ad.

The conservative George across the table failed to muster the Will to refute the most venal Known Fact template of the Leftist MSM and Democratic Party: That to be a Republican is to be a racist that will, obviously, make racist attacks against Blacks and will make racist appeals to the obviously millions of racist Republican voters to fear voting for any Democrat.

Liberal columnist E.J. Dionne echos liberal George.

The left has also used the “race card” phrase to control discussions of race to their advantage as they equate any Republican utterance on the issue as morally equivalent to actual racism while deeming Democrats as having the “right” to raise the issue any time due to the GOP’s “history” of playing the race card, and either overlooking or exonerating based on “white guilt” actual racism practiced by the Democrats. And by actual practices, I am not only talking about their blatant race based policies and laws they advocate and defend.

So, what is this racist/fear mongering “history” of the GOP?

I guess the myth starts with Goldwater’s opposition to the Civil Rights Act based on private property grounds vs. LBJ’s not so “Great” Society that kicked the Black man out the house and made Uncle Sam Daddy. The myth continues with Reagan’s safety net for only the truly needy sans “Welfare Queens” and the misleading anecdotal sob stories on broadcast news. Miraculously, no one was homeless from 1993-2000.

And of course, there was Willie Horton, about whom liberals projected their revulsion at the visage of a large Black Man with big lips and a bushy afro onto supposed racist Americans that would reject Dukakis because the rapist/murderer he released wasn’t a nice looking white guy?

Meanwhile, Democrats run ads saying electing Republicans will cause more Black churches to burn and that executing the killers of James Byrd in Texas wasn’t strong enough punishment since Governor Bush opposed so-called “hate crimes” legislation that would have devalued the lives of white children, among other white people. (see adults)

The liberal George needs to be fired or sent to sensitivity training. Will needs to assert this even if the conventional wisdom lie is 40 years old.

The template is part of an overarching strategy in the media that uses race as substitute for liberalism, the overall goal being that liberalism never be discredited and seen as the reason Democrats are rejected.

Obama is sinking in the polls because his elitism was brought to light sooner than past Dem nominees thanks to the din of Obama’s 20-year pew-parked butt in a Hate whitey America Church.

Pat Buchanan accurately describes the political reality today :

In a week, Barack, an object of media homage on his trip abroad, has become an object of mockery in much of Middle America. Though his media allies may howl racism, most Americans tend more and more to dismiss this. That card has been played so often it’s dog-eared.

The dirty little secret that MSM isn’t yet hip to is that most all whites and blacks know and have known for years that the race card allegation attacks on the GOP are phony, but that too many have been pc’d into silence for years.

Rush broke the silence years ago. McCain did days ago.

I said in the fall 07 that since Obama wants the nukes, that this pathology will be aired and exposed. It is happening.

Republicans really need to stop using and stop acquiescing in the use of the phrases “race card” and “Playing the race card.” We should insist that allegations of wrongdoing be specifically described and accurately labeled. And we should insist that it is perfectly good and, indeed, necessary that people that are falsely accused of racism speak out and defend themselves and that false witnesses be put to shame in public, much like was properly done against actual white racists in the 50s and 60s.

What a concept.

_____________________________________________________________________________________

Mike DeVine’s Charlotte Observer columns
Legal Editor for The Minority and HinzSight Reports
“The way to stop discrimination on the basis of race is to stop discriminating on the basis of race.” - The Chief Justice
Race 4 2008
“One man with courage makes a majority.” - Andrew Jackson

Rasmussen Trust on Issues Survey

Who do you trust more on national security?

• John McCain 52%
• Barack Obama 40%

Who do you trust more on the War in Iraq?

• John McCain 51%
• Barack Obama 39%

Who do you trust more on immigration?

• John McCain 45%
• Barack Obama 36%

Who do you trust more on energy issues?

• John McCain 46%
• Barack Obama 42%

Who do you trust more on the economy?

• John McCain 45%
• Barack Obama 45%

Who do you trust more on taxes?

• John McCain 47%
• Barack Obama 40%

Who do you trust more to balance the federal budget?

• John McCain 43%
• Barack Obama 40%

Who do you trust more to negotiate trade agreements?

• John McCain 45%
• Barack Obama 40%

Who do you trust more on social security?

• John McCain 44%
• Barack Obama 38%

Who do you trust more on abortion?

• John McCain 40%
• Barack Obama 34%

(more…)

No surprises here, just another reminder of Obama’s insincerity…

Barack in November 2004:

“I am a believer in knowing what you are doing when you apply for a job…If I were to seriously consider running on a national ticket, I would essentially have to start now, before having served a day in the Senate. Now, there’s some people who might be comfortable doing that, but I’m not one of those people.”

Of course you aren’t one of those people, Barack, we would never confuse you with them.

The sum of Obama’s guiding principles: Whatever it takes to advance his personal standing.

H/T Jenn

Gov. Ritter does not exactly gush when talking about Obama’s experience:

I’ve been governor for 18 months. It’s been a great experience. But it’s just 18 months…Obama has to think about experience…levels of experience…”

Later a caller to the show pointed out that Obama had been a Senator for a 143 days when he decided to run for President, and made the obvious point:

“Governor, you said 18 months’ experience wasn’t enough experience as governor to be the vice president. Would you want to contrast that with the 143 days experience Obama as senator before he decided he had enough experience to be president.”

The best Ritter could do was:

“All I can tell ya is I am a fan of Barack Obama’s. Met him in 2004 during his campaign for Senate…You meet him and discover there’s something very different about him. That’s all I’ll say.”

So there you have it–eighteen months in an executive position is insufficient to qualify one for the office of Vice-President, but a bit less than five months as a Senator is more than enough to decide that one is qualified for the Presidency.

Hat-tip to RedState diarist Stinger808

I just received this in my inbox:

McCain Team -

Americans across the country are feeling the effects of high gas prices and our need to expand domestic oil production.

John McCain says we need offshore oil drilling and we need it now. Senator Barack Obama has consistently opposed offshore drilling - calling it a “gimmick.” Senator Obama’s solution to high gas prices is telling Americans to make sure their tires are inflated.

Today, I’m asking for your help in putting Senator Obama’s “tire gauge” energy policy to the test. With an immediate donation of $25 or more, we will send you an “Obama E nergy Plan” tire pressure gauge. Will simply inflating your tires reduce the financial burden of high gas prices on your wallet?

It’s clear Senator Obama has no plan to address the energy challenges we face as a nation. He has said no to offshore drilling, no to expanding domestic drilling and no to nuclear energy. He has no plan to reduce our dependence on foreign oil.

John McCain is prepared to lead our country as president to break our dependence on foreign oil with real solutions. John McCain believes we should lift the federal ban on offshore drilling, enabling you to decide where we drill for oil.

But John McCain won’t be able to enact these policies without your help in electing him as our next president.

Please help us put Senator Obama’s energy plan to the test - donate $25 or more for your very own “Obama Energy Plan” tire pressure gauge.

Th anks, as always, for your support.

Sincerely,
Rick Davis
Campaign Manager

P.S. Our next president’s energy policy will need to reduce our dependency on foreign oil. John McCain believes we need offshore drilling now. Senator Obama’s plan is calling on Americans to check their tire pressure. We’re asking for your help in testing out Senator Obama’s energy plan. With your donation of $25 or more right now, we’ll send you a tire gauge to test for yourself, Senator Obama’s “tire gauge” energy policy.

Here’s the audio from this morning’s McCain Campaign conference call regarding Barack Obama’s energy policy with Rep. Eric Cantor and economic advisor Doug Holtz-Eakin:

Well, here we are. As we welcome this new month of August, we must look back in awe of the events that have transpired over the last year. This time a year ago, we were abuzz over a Clinton-Giuliani battle for the White House. Obviously, those plans fell apart. Yet, who would have predicted that the race would narrow to these two sitting Senators, one the first African-American to lead a major ticket and the other a man left for dead only months ago?

For all the notable firsts and historical records that go along with this contest- the first time both major candidates were born outside the continental United States, and the current age disparity between the two major candidates marks the largest in history- there remain plenty of worthwhile links to previous elections. As many have demonstrated in the past, the national mood and political environment of 2008 bears similarities to 1976. In that election year, a center-right Republican in Gerald Ford squared off against a new and relatively inexperienced face in Jimmy Carter. The electorate, as they are today, was weary of the future and sought a new course. Energy prices were skyrocketing, tensions simmered in the Middle East, and the economy struggled to gain any traction.

Despite these striking comparisons, the McCain campaign must recognize one major difference: the polls. Gerald Ford trailed his challenger by substantial margins throughout the summer and fall of 1976 and, while Ford fought back, only to lose by two percentage points in the popular vote, his entire campaign was doomed by the general sentiment that he had no chance. Conversely, John McCain lurks within single digits of the anointed President Obama. In fact, the most recent tracking polls from Gallup and Rasmussen place McCain and Obama deadlocked in the mid-40’s. Although he has not led in the RealClearPolitics polling average since April 14, McCain has proved his staying power. Taking into account Obama’s advantages in fundraising, organization, media attention, and party identification, it is truly amazing that he does not hold a comfortable lead. It now looks as though the time has past for Obama to land an early knockout punch.

In light of these developments, I would urge Senator McCain to take three distinct measures to bolster his campaign and capture a piece of the narrative:

• Choose a dynamic and game-changing VP
• Target Congress as Public Enemy #1
• Continue to focus on Obama’s character, for it is a gateway in understanding his shifts on key issues and lack of true governing principles

THE VP

It was not long ago when some believed that McCain’s best bet for VP would be a safe pick that would represent a clearing-out of the old guard to make way for the future. This logic rested upon the notion that McCain would fade as the summer months progressed and the campaign turned towards the conventions. This has simply not happened. For all the disappointment voiced (mostly warranted) by Republican activists over McCain’s sluggish message, this election is still very much up for grabs.

Let’s explore the handful or so of candidates that would be considered “game-changing” for John McCain. When evaluating each prospective running-mate, I have taken into consideration one’s ability to garner new votes, shape the narrative or alter public perceptions, and act as a sufficient attack-dog:

Rudy Giuliani

Strength (Attack-Dog)- Provides McCain an able and ready surrogate to clearly and thoroughly land hits on Obama. Rudy could be the catalyst in McCain’s continuing search for a solid campaign message.

Doubts, but not completely negative (Garnering New Votes)- As in years past, New Jersey is fool’s gold for Republicans. Rudy’s selection may bolster McCain in the state, but it remains unclear if he can actually flip it to the GOP column. In addition, though I am confident that Hizzoner brings in moderates and independents in the Philadelphia suburbs and northeastern Pennsylvania, I am not sure if McCain can counter Obama’s strongholds in Philadelphia and Pittsburgh. As for Florida, I am skeptical that Rudy would add significant numbers of voters that are not already supporting the ideologically similar McCain.

Joe Lieberman

Strength (Narrative/Perception)- Whatever you may think of McCain’s “maverick” reputation or his history of bucking the party line, Lieberman’s selection would signal the campaign’s willingness to chart an unprecedented course for governance. Forget about Lieberman’s social and domestic liberalism; McCain’s motives for choosing his fellow Senator would be to grab public attention and demonstrate that he is truly able to reach across the aisle. Lieberman is a known commodity and remains popular among Independents, therefore, allowing the McCain camp to squash any public notion that Obama is the agent of change and post-partisanship. Moreover, Joe would serve as a valuable attack-dog and plausible Commander-In-Chief.

Doubts and Weaknesses (Will the Right revolt?)- Lieberman’s selection would raise the following questions…

• Does Lieberman’s liberalism on social and domestic issues represent a bridge too far for some conservatives? (Something tells me McCain would hang on to the Deep South despite the convention chaos that may ensue).
• Will Republican activists understand that a Lieberman selection would stand as a unique necessity, one that could keep Obama from power without damaging the party platform in the future? (Stay tuned…)

Sarah Palin

As a disclaimer, I have already voiced my support for a McCain-Palin ticket.

Strength (Narrative/Perception)- In short, I believe that Palin’s biography and charisma would sit well with many middle and working-class voters that remain undecided. Public perceptions of McCain could instantly shift if he selected a youthful female leader who has stood for integrity and accountability during her term as governor. Since many Hillary supporters have not fallen in behind Obama, a Palin selection could push them to give McCain a second look. Furthermore, Palin seems to be the pick that both conservatives and moderates agree upon.

Strength (Attack-Dog/Campaign Issue)- Sarah Palin’s knowledge, eloquence, and hands-on experience with energy issues could prove decisive during the fall campaign. Gas prices and energy security will continue to dominate the campaign trail and McCain would be wise to choose a running-mate that could highlight the Democrats opposition to domestic drilling.

Doubts- Does Palin pass the Commander-In-Chief test? Will her relatively low name recognition hurt McCain’s fundraising?

Colin Powell

Powell could be the ultimate game-changer, but he is also the biggest mystery…

Strength (Narrative/Public Perception)- Quite simply, Colin Powell remains, to this very day, the most respected and admired man in America. I believe that the majority of voters would see Powell’s acceptance to a McCain ticket as a way to rescue his legacy from the embarrassing episode at the U.N. Something tells me that they may just give him the chance.

Doubts (Everything)- Would he even consider joining McCain? Will he endorse Obama? What are his real feelings on social and domestic issues?

Mitt Romney

Here we go again…

Strength (Electorally in specific states)- McCain must be flirting with the idea of stomaching Romney if it means that he adds key votes in Colorado, Michigan, Nevada, and New Hampshire. McCain does want to win, of course. Romney has been vetted, adds potential as a prolific fundraiser and organizer, and could bring along credibility on the economy.

Doubts (A lot)- While bringing in votes in some states, will Romney’s selection repel working class voters in places such as Ohio and Pennsylvania? Will the narrative sour and public perception simply cement once McCain picks another white guy with CEO sensibilities and weatherman-type looks? Who says Romney can actually deliver Michigan?

While this list is not exhaustive, I cannot, in good conscious, label Tim Pawlenty, Rob Portman, or Tom Ridge as game-changers. Eric Cantor is intriguing for his appeal among the Jewish, working-class, and suburban voters, yet I am not sold at the moment.

FOCUS ON CONGRESS

Mired in a rut where it seems that he only responds to Obama’s moves, John McCain must focus in on a vulnerable target: Congress. With their approval ratings in single digits and House Republicans staging summer recess protests over domestic drilling, Capitol Hill offers McCain the perfect avenue to channel public angst and frustration.

Go ahead, camp out with your colleagues on the front steps of the Capitol, demanding that Nancy and Harry return from vacation to carry out the will of the people and allow a vote on offshore drilling. More importantly, McCain could point to the possibility of complete Democratic control and warn the electorate that he is the only thing standing in the way of an Obama-Pelosi-Reid three-headed monster. McCain should spend weeks reminding the public that Congress has said no to domestic drilling and nuclear power, while refusing to acknowledge the success of the surge and our achievements in Iraq. Why would they want more of the same from Obama?

CHARACTER REVEALS PRIORITIES

Finally, John McCain should continue to focus on Barack Obama’s questionable character and his unusually elevated view of himself. While some may see this as negative-based campaigning, the truth of the matter is that revealing Obama’s character allows us to see his rationale on key campaign issues. Barack Obama is one of the more inexperienced candidates in presidential history. Though he was elected to the U.S. Senate, he has spent the majority of his first term running for president. Is he truly the candidate of “hope” and “change,” when he has not even dedicated himself to the people of Illinois? From his presidential-like seal to his “the odds of us winning are very good” declaration, Obama has displayed a level of hubris and self-love rarely seen before.

In the end, what is the only guiding principle or ideal that Obama has devoted himself to relentlessly? Being elected. How else can you explain the shameless shifts on public financing, Iraq, the D.C. gun ban, NAFTA, the FISA bill, town-hall meetings, or talks with Iran? The list goes on. I am optimistic that the American people will come to grasp these realities and understand that, despite his flaws, John McCain is the man to be trusted in these difficult times. He knows first-hand that it is sometimes necessary to forfeit your personal ambitions for the greater good of your own country.

By Mike DeVine, Legal Editor for The Minority and HinzSight Reports
__________________________________________________________________________

By the most basic of criteria, John McCain is running a great campaign. He is defying history by either leading polls or being within the margin of error in July when past Dem losers led by from 7-14 points at this stage.

He is responding daily to attacks with speed reminiscent of the Cue ball Carville, Paul “the Forehead” Begala, and Hillary war room for Bill.

Today, he did something I have been praying for a republican to do, and that even Reagan didn’t do:

He not only pushed back on race card allegations, he leveled the race card charge against the Democrat. And Obama backed down.

McCain has been all over Obama’s gaffes on tire pressure, the surge, etc., and has obliterated Obama’s near dead cat Euro tour bounce.

So, it was with some distress that I saw several blogs that attacked McCain so harshly for kind words for Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi and his “nothing off the table” remark re taxes in any future negotiations with Democrats in Congress to reform Social Security.

President Reagan was chummy with Tip O’Neil and signed off on a Social Security rescue package that included tax increases.

McCain buttered up a lady that he may have to deal with next year and simply made a generic statement about some future SSA issue that will become obligatory to deal with as a true crisis, if not before.

Republicans, especially fellow conservatives, McCain is our nominee. I have written many columns about the necessity of holding his feet to the fire given the proof that he can be moved. But these statements were not occasions for same, in my opinion.

I am thrilled with McCain’s campaign performance and as we get closer to Election Day we should be increasingly focused on victory and less on purity.

I will lead the We the People coalition beginning January 21, 2009 to make sure our hired hand does our will.

Let’s beat Obama now.

McCain is doing fine in that regard. Obama himself is doing a better job. Pray that Obama doesn’t get laryngitis.

______________________________________________________________________________

Mike DeVine’s Charlotte Observer columns

Legal Editor for The Minority and HinzSight Reports

“The way to stop discrimination on the basis of race is to stop discriminating on the basis of race.” - The Chief Justice

“One man with courage makes a majority.” - Andrew Jackson

Barack Obama, in an interview earlier today, told the Palm Beach Post:

“My interest is in making sure we’ve got the kind of comprehensive energy policy that can bring down gas prices. If, in order to get that passed, we have to compromise in terms of a careful, well thought-out drilling strategy that was carefully circumscribed to avoid significant environmental damage - I don’t want to be so rigid that we can’t get something done.”

Obama said he would be open to expanding the current drilling boundaries if it meant winning approval for more fuel-efficient cars, developing alternative energy sources and making America more “energy independent.”

“I think it’s important for the American people to understand we’re not going to drill our way out of this problem. It’s also important to recognize if you start drilling now you won’t see a drop of oil for ten years, which means its not going to have a significant impact on short-term prices. Every expert agrees on that.”

“The Republicans and the oil companies have been really beating the drums on drilling. And so we don’t want gridlock. We want to get something done.”

“I will keep the moratorium in place and prevent oil companies from drilling off Florida’s coasts,” Obama said in Florida in June.

In a June 10 interview with CNBC’s John Harwood, Obama admitted he believes high gas prices are helpful, but that he “would have preferred a gradual adjustment” to “help people to make the adjustment” and “adapt to these new circumstances.”

The plan also includes energy initiatives Obama has endorsed. “It would repeal tax breaks for oil companies so that we can invest billions in fuel-efficient cars, help our automakers re-tool, and make a genuine commitment to renewable sources of energy like wind power, solar power, and the next generation of clean, affordable biofuels,” Obama noted.

“Like all compromises, it also includes steps that I haven’t always supported,” Obama conceded. “I remain skeptical that new offshore drilling will bring down gas prices in the short-term or significantly reduce our oil dependence in the long-term, though I do welcome the establishment of a process that will allow us to make future drilling decisions based on science and fact.”

When asked by the AP about Obama’s major shift, John McCain said, “We need oil drilling and we need it now offshore. He has consistently opposed it. He has opposed nuclear power. He has opposed reprocessing. He has opposed storage.”

In an interview with the St. Petersburg Times and Bay News 9’s Political Connections on Friday morning, Obama commended the self-styled “Gang of 10″ — five Democrats, five Republicans — for their cooperation and broad plan.

Obama didn’t specifically endorse the bill, but his willingness to consider more oil drilling represents a significant change in position. And it dramatically alters prospects for the bill.

“My attitude is that we can find some sort of compromise. If it is part of an overarching package then I am not going to be rigid in preventing an energy package that goes forward that is really thoughtful and is going to really solve the problem.”

Sen. Kent Conrad of South Dakota, the leading Democratic negotiator, said he was “delighted to hear Sen. Obama’s supportive comments.”

Under the proposal, drilling for oil and natural gas would be permitted as close as 50 miles from Florida’s west coast, which is currently protected by a 2006 ban on drilling within about 230 miles of Tampa Bay and 125 miles from the Panhandle.

Florida’s east coast would be exempt. Drilling also would be allowed 50 miles off the coasts of Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina and Georgia if their legislatures opt to allow it.

Watch the video:

What strikes me particularly about this answer is Obama’s almost staggering inability to think on his feet.  He stutters and umms and ahs, and spends  half the time asking the relatively tame crowd to calm down (I suspect, in an attempt to give himself more time to think), and still tosses off an abysmal answer.  He doesn’t address the insinuation that the questioner makes that the US Government has deliberately attacked “Africans”, indeed he seems to lend credence to the idea at points, and ignores it entirely the rest of the time.  In the end, he falls back on some of his trite oratory “we need to bring Americans together, black and white and latino and gay and straight..etc”. 

This is remarkable and is something we’ve seen repeatedly from Obama in these sorts of settings.  He has no political instincts, on the micro-level.  He’s good at set-pieces and themes, building mass movements, things that take time and organization and which can be pre-planned, but he’s terrible at the day to day.  Bill Clinton would have taken that moment to forever end the “I’m a radical racist” idea that was spawned with Jeremiah Wright.  He would have said something like “I love this country, I love this government, and I do not believe anyone in a serious position of power has purposely attacked African Americans.  And I resent your attitude.  It’s divisive, it’s mean spirited, and it’s hostile to our American tradition”.  How would offended blacks respond?  By voting for John McCain?  I can tell by your laughter that you catch my meaning. 

This is such an obvious answer, and so clearly politically beneficial, that it’s a wonder that Obama missed it.   It’s a wonder that Obama seems to be continually missing such moments.  I had formulated that essential answer halfway into the kid’s second sentence.  And there’s a real opportunity here for the GOP.  Campaigns are often staged set-pieces, but most of the action takes place on smaller stages, which candidates turn into large stages by exploiting temporary conditions.  Bill Clinton got so much attention in the primary partly because he was an ex-President, but mostly because he knew how to use a moment and create drama.  This ability comes in handy after the conventions pass, and Obama lacks it utterly.

Exit Question:  What’s with these dopey Obama supporters breaking into applause at strange and unusual moments?

4.25:  Obama says “no-now I may no-not have spoken out the way you would ha-have wanted me to spe-speak out”. 

4.26:  Crowd breaks into applause.

Oh, the joys of participatory democracy. 

Simply brilliant…

h/t Bethtopaz and Jeff

Bill Press is, as usual, the smartest guy in the room:

Of all the famous celebrities they could have compared Obama to, why not Tom Cruise? Or Arnold Schwarzenegger, or Donald Trump, or Oprah Winfrey? Why Britney Spears and Paris Hilton? Why two white blond bimbos?

Only one reason. It’s a somewhat tamer version of the white bimbo ad used so successfully against Harold Ford in Tennessee. In juxtaposing Barack Obama with Britney Spears and Paris Hilton, the McCain campaign is simply trying to plant the old racist seed of black man hitting on young white woman. Not directly, but subliminally and disgracefully.

Why Britney Spears and not those four? Um, let’s see, because the point of the advertisement is that Barack Obama’s candidacy is vacuous — and, given that Arnold Schwarzenegger is the governor of a state, Oprah Winfrey is one of the most respected women in the country, and Donald Trump is a highly successful businessman, it wouldn’t make sense to use them as analogies? Even Tom Cruise, beneath his batty Scientologist beliefs, is a respected actor.

Bill Press is clearly a racist for comparing Oprah Winfrey to Paris Hilton.

The New York Times editorial board has gotta be kidding me:

[T]here was something surreal, and offensive, about today’s soundbite from the campaign of Senator John McCain.

The presumptive Republican nominee has embarked on a bare-knuckled barrage of negative advertising aimed at belittling Mr. Obama. The most recent ad compares the presumptive Democratic nominee for president to Britney Spears and Paris Hilton — suggesting to voters that he’s nothing more than a bubble-headed, publicity-seeking celebrity.

The ad gave us an uneasy feeling that the McCain campaign was starting up…[a] racially tinged attack on Mr. Obama…

I have no words.

Comparing Barry to Dick Cheney? Ouch!

Barack Obama has long been his party’s presumptive nominee. Now he’s becoming its presumptuous nominee.

Fresh from his presidential-style world tour, during which foreign leaders and American generals lined up to show him affection, Obama settled down to some presidential-style business in Washington yesterday. He ordered up a teleconference with the (current president’s) Treasury secretary, granted an audience to the Pakistani prime minister and had his staff arrange for the chairman of the Federal Reserve to give him a briefing. Then, he went up to Capitol Hill to be adored by House Democrats in a presidential-style pep rally.

Along the way, he traveled in a bubble more insulating than the actual president’s. Traffic was shut down for him as he zoomed about town in a long, presidential-style motorcade, while the public and most of the press were kept in the dark about his activities, which included a fundraiser at the Mayflower where donors paid $10,000 or more to have photos taken with him. His schedule for the day, announced Monday night, would have made Dick Cheney envious:

11:00 a.m.: En route TBA.

12:05 p.m.: En route TBA.

1:45 p.m.: En route TBA.

2:55 p.m.: En route TBA.

5:20 p.m.: En route TBA.

The 5:20 TBA turned out to be his adoration session with lawmakers in the Cannon Caucus Room, where even committee chairmen arrived early, as if for the State of the Union. Capitol Police cleared the halls — just as they do for the actual president. The Secret Service hustled him in through a side door — just as they do for the actual president.

Inside, according to a witness, he told the House members, “This is the moment . . . that the world is waiting for,” adding: “I have become a symbol of the possibility of America returning to our best traditions.”

As he marches toward Inauguration Day (Election Day is but a milestone on that path), Obama’s biggest challenger may not be Republican John McCain but rather his own hubris.

Some say the supremely confident Obama — nearly 100 days from the election, he pronounces that “the odds of us winning are very good” — has become a president-in-waiting. But in truth, he doesn’t need to wait: He has already amassed the trappings of the office, without those pesky decisions.

Read the rest here.

What is the matter with this guy?

“Nobody thinks that Bush and McCain have a real answer to the challenges we face. So what they’re going to try to do is make you scared of me,” Obama said. “You know, he’s not patriotic enough, he’s got a funny name, you know, he doesn’t look like all those other presidents on the dollar bills.”

He clearly wants to be attacked for his race, and he’s sick of waiting for it to happen, dammit. It’s a lot easier than responding to charges of inexperience, flip-flopping (accusations of which are coming from both the left and right), and naivety. He’s so wrapped up in his own caricatures of the Republican Party that he can’t bring himself to truly believe that he wouldn’t be attacked for his race — I mean, given that the Republican Party is stacked from top to bottom with racists and all. (To paraphrase Ann Coulter, here’s a little ‘inside scoop’ about white people: we’re not thinking about your race, buddy. We’ve got better things to do than to think about your skin color all day long.)

An Obama spokesman denied that the comment was related to race. But as someone in the Politico comment section noted: what was he referring to, then? Powdered wigs?

And so it continues. Yesterday, according to the Washington Post,

In his closed door meeting with House Democrats this evening, presumptive Democratic nominee Barack Obama delivered a real zinger. According to a witness, he was waxing lyrical about last week’s trip to Europe, when he concluded, “this is the moment, as Nancy [Pelosi] noted, that the world is waiting for.”

The 200,000 souls who thronged to his speech in Berlin came not just for him, he told the enthralled audience of congressional representatives.

“I have become a symbol of the possibility of America returning to our best traditions,” he said.

Jonathan Martin notes in the comments to another post: “My God, he is losing it. How can such a man govern? How could he possibly deal with the other branches of government if he were elected?”

I’m glad you asked that Jonathan.

A couple months ago, LightBringer told a joke.  It was admittedly a little joke, but often little jokes can shed tremendous light on how a candidate views things. Presented with a walking stick as a gift, Obama’s response, of all things, was “if members of Congress don’t pass my health care bill, I’m ready, I’ll whup ‘em.”

You could almost hear the collective “oh really?” coming out of Jack Murtha’s, Robert Byrd’s and John Dingells’ mouths. You see, these men are pretty important men, and they’ve been in Congress for a long, long time.  Dingell and Byrd have been in Congress since before Obama was born.  I reckon that they will be even less impressed with the new kid telling them what kind of bills to pass as the relatively junior Van Hollen and Schumer were with him announcing that the party would abandon lobbying money (remember that little adventure?).

There are a million other data points, but after a brief honeymoon, this is what I expect The Artist Formerly Known As Obama’s Presidency to devolve into: A very liberal President who is self-assured of his ability to change the way things work in Washington, feuding with a very entrenched Washington bureaucracy that wants nothing to do with it. This is the real fruit of Obama’s lack of executive and/or Washington experience — a dearth of understanding as to how to really get things done.

Throw in the fact that he’ll have a house caucus with about 70 members in districts carried by George W. Bush, and (not coincidentally) 33 members with lifetime ACU scores above 30*, and 54 above 20, and we’re looking at a good 2010. Either Obama will get what he wants done, in which case those 54 members will be running for re-election with decidedly more liberal voting records in districts that are still pretty conservative, or he won’t. In which case, well, pass the popcorn.

Anyway, that’s how he plans on dealing with the other branches of government and why, even completely setting policy aside, I suspect that this will be a disastrous Presidency.

*This is actually pretty significant, given the skew of ACU scores. By contrast, only 37 Republicans have lifetime ACUs below 80, and only 17 fall below 70.

Here’s Alex’s big bucket of cold water to throw on Race42008 for today…

Memo to everyone eating up this red herring: Barack Obama is not going to select Tim Kaine as his running mate!

1. Kaine Doesn’t Guarantee Virginia

Tim Kaine is no Mark Warner. His approval rating, as of two months ago, was 53% among whites (that’s all that matters; virtually all blacks are already with Obama) — not terrible, by any means, but no game-changer. If Obama were to take an unprecedented course and select a vice-presidential candidate solely to deliver a state, he wouldn’t risk that on someone who only has a +10% approval rating among whites. Evan Bayh would be a much smarter selection on that count — Indiana is also right within the Democrats’ reach this season, and his approval rating is much higher: the most recent poll I could find shows him with a nearly 80% approval rating. Nothing earth-shattering has happened since December 2006 that should have changed that perception.

2. Kaine Doubles Down On Obama’s Weaknesses

This is a guy with less experience in a “serious” (senator/governor) office than Barack Obama. People are already highly weary of Barack Obama’s experience level, and adding a guy with even less experience — and just as much to show for it — isn’t going to do anything for him.

3. This Is Not a Clinton/Gore Election

People have been touting Tim Kaine as a “Gore to Obama’s Clinton”, as if the election of 1992, in which the “end of history” was said to be approaching and a “peace dividend” could be reaped, is even remotely comparable to today’s situation. We’re in a war against Islamic jihad, and whether the economy is the top issue or not, it’s still there and people still realize it — and if they don’t, the McCain camp will be sure to make them if Tim Kaine is the pick!

4. What Does Kaine Do That Clark or Jones Doesn’t?

Fine. So Tim Kaine is an “outside-the-beltway” politician that hasn’t had the hope knocked out of him by the menacing, evil lobbyists yet. Whatever. But of all the people that fit this profile, why Tim Kaine, given that he doesn’t even guarantee Virginia? What does he do that Wesley Clark or James Jones doesn’t? Virginia’s voters — heavily veteran, as Kavon delights in pointing out — would surely go for a retired general as much as they would their governor. And a general is more likely to swing the right type of voter into Obama’s camp.

Obama is already trusted on the domestic front, but if he’s going to pick someone for that reason (I have no idea why he would, but let’s just assume he’d want to), then why not just select Bayh, who has more experience, a higher approval rating, and is better-liked by the Clinton wing of the party?

*

…But if I’m wrong (I’m not), Kaine would be announced after McCain’s selection. If Kaine is Obama’s current top pick (he’s not), he wouldn’t want to risk McCain choosing someone like Colin Powell or Rudy Giuliani, making an Obama/Kaine ticket look utterly laughable.

*

So, to recapitulate: it’s not Kaine. Can someone please make the case for Kaine for me, here? Because I am deathly confused.

Well, I am so glad to see that MoveOn.org is spending their money wisely:

While obviously lighthearted, the ad goes a long way in explaining why so many of my generation adore Barack Obama: Hope. Change. And some more Change.

Sadly, many of those same people cannot name one legsilative accomplishment or noteworthy action undertaken by their Savior.

Though I agree that many of President Bush’s policies have been disappointing, I know that handing power to the inexperienced and self-loving Obama would be a grave mistake.

Congratulations MoveOn.org on this $150,000 expenditure.

And I mean ever. Simply brilliant. (H/T The Hedgehog Report)

According to the Washington Post this morning, Virginia Governor Tim Kaine is in “serious talks” with Obama with regards to being his ticket-completer. They also quote (unnamed and uncited) inside sources at the campaign who cite this as being Obama’s shortlist for Veep consideration, all of whom are being vetted by the Obama campaign:

• Gov. Tim Kaine (VA)
• Gov. Kathy Sebelius (KS)
• Sen. Evan Bayh (IN)
• Sen. Joe Biden (DE)

As of right now, the Intrade guessing looks like this:

1. Bayh - 34.9
2. Kaine - 30.0
3. Sebelius - 13.1
4. Biden - 10.1

Those four are the top four on the market.

Honestly, if this shortlist is accurate, I think we really dodged a huge bullet by avoiding Webb or Nunn on the bottom of the ticket. Bayh would be by far the toughest of the four in my estimation. Biden and Sebelius would be the easier two to beat, but Kaine wouldn’t be bad. He’s a one term Governor with zero foreign policy experience and no real significant political achievements. Sounds kind of like the top of the ticket, eh?

And then there’s always this:



Obama/Eyebrow ‘08!

Hilarious!

Be sure to head on over and click the links to all of Sen. Obama’s “friends” to see their detailed profiles.

It all depends on who you ask apparently. According to President Bush, 800 Billion isn’t too much. Congress sent a flawed bill to the floor, where it wrangled into and out of committees for over a year, and we finally have the wonderfully vomitous piece of legislation. Certain senators failed to support (And a big Thank you goes out to Hatch, Cornyn, Thune, Grassley, Inhofe, and others), and yet Bush has succumbed to this pressure. Why am I being forced to pay for someone else’s stupid mistakes? The actual tally for the “bail out” is more like 40 billion, but the ceiling on the US debt has been raised by almost a trillion. In fact, when you look at this 800bn plus the 300bn now being backed by the FHA, we are looking at 1.1 Trillion in new debt potential. 

World markets are poised for a major relief rally today after the US Congress met in a rare weekend session to pass the most far-reaching rescue package for America’s financial system since Franklin Roosevelt’s New Deal.

US Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson has helped engineer the rescue of Freddie and Fannie
The emergency bail-out gives the US Treasury sweeping authority to inject capital into the giant mortgage lenders Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, which together own or guarantee half the country’s $12 trillion stock of home loans.

The ceiling on the US national debt has been lifted by a further $800bn, giving the Treasury almost unlimited resources to prop up the two lenders.

In parallel, the Federal Housing Authority (FHA) is to guarantee up to $300bn of fresh mortgages for struggling homeowners trapped with soaring loan costs, often the result of “honeytrap” contracts.

The scheme aims to avoid an avalanche of fresh defaults as the housing market continues to deteriorate. Over 740,000 homes fell into foreclosure in the second quarter.

Well, this major relief rally is yet to be seen. Maybe wall street does not share congresses’ feelings that we need to expand our government more in one swoop than since the New Deal was proposed?

Of the 40 Billion, approximate 400,000 people will get assistance. They will get the equivalent of $100,000 in government help.  Why are the citizens not furious over this? (Maybe they don’t listen, or they don’t do the math?) I may qualify for “assistance” because I have a “high risk” loan. I got my loan on my own accord. No one made me get it - I chose that route. My house notes are lower for a few years - big whoop.  I do NOT want my tax money going to these nincompoops that didn’t count the cost. We have become a nation of petulant children, looking to mommy because she “can fix anything”. The US Government needs to stop playing momma to these delinquents, and stop protecting them from “daddy”. Punishment might be due; I say make them face the  music. If they don’t, we will see this all over again within this generation.

 And to make post relevant to R4′08, both Obama and McCain didn’t vote last night.

Back on July the 7th, an immigrant penned a letter to the editor at the Richmond-Times Dispatch that I thought was compelling enough to deserve a space here on the front page of the Race42008. Not often do I post on topics that do not relate directly to my focus here at Race42008, which is to provide an evangelical voice of reason to the community, but this one deserved it.

From Richmond Times-Dispatch, Monday, July 7, 2008

Dear Editor, Times-Dispatch:

Each year I get to celebrate Independence Day twice. On June 30, I celebrate my independence day, and on July 4, I celebrate America’s. This year is special, because it marks the 40th anniversary of my independence.

On June 30, 1968, I escaped Communist Cuba, and a few months later, I was in the United States to stay. That I happened to arrive in Richmond on Thanksgiving Day is just part of the story, but I digress.

I’ve thought a lot about the anniversary this year. The election-year rhetoric has made me think a lot about Cuba and what transpired there. In the late 1950s, most Cubans thought Cuba needed a change, and they were right. So when a young leader came along, every Cuban was at least receptive.

When the young leader spoke eloquently and passionately and denounced the old system, the press fell in love with him. They never questioned who his friends were or what he really believed in. When he said he would help the farmers and the poor and bring free medical care and education to all, everyone followed. When he said he would bring justice and equality to all, everyone said, ‘Praise the Lord.’

And when the young leader said, ‘I will be for change and I’ll bring you change,’ everyone yelled, ‘Viva Fidel!’

But nobody asked about the change, so by the time the executioner’s guns went silent, the people’s guns had been taken away. By the time everyone was equal, they were equally poor, hungry, and oppressed. By the time everyone received their free education, it was worth nothing. By the time the press noticed, it was too late, because they were now working for him. By the time the change was finally implemented, Cuba had been knocked down a couple of notches to Third-World status. By the time the change was over, more than a million people had taken to boats, rafts, and inner tubes. You can call those who made it ashore anywhere else in the world the most fortunate Cubans.

And now I’m back to the beginning of my story. Luckily, we would never fall in America for a young leader who promised change without asking, what change? How will you carry it out? What will it cost America? Would we?
Manuel Alvarez, Jr.

Now, I seriously doubt that we would have our 2nd amendment rights removed, and that their would be killing in the streets al’la Che Guevara, but…

Per McClatchy:

Obama Friday called for beefing up the 71,000-strong U.S. and NATO contingents by at least two U.S. brigades, or roughly 7,500 troops, and pressing NATO allies to send more soldiers, as well.

McCain, who’d opposed more forces, responded by saying that he’d send the three brigades U.S. commanders are requesting. Bush agreed that more forces should go, but it’s unclear if he’ll send them before his term ends in January.

More foreign troops, however, would do little than turn more war-weary Afghans against U.S.-backed President Hamid Karzai if they aren’t part of a broader and more effective counter-insurgency strategy, some experts and U.S. officials warned.

What’s the solution, according to military commanders and Afghanistan experts?

“There is not one strategy with one person in charge,” complained a U.S. defense official who requested anonymity because he wasn’t authorized to speak pu