Redstate

Posted at 2:33pm on Jul. 8, 2008 "Help Senator Barack Obama win and help Senator Barack Obama develop good space policy."

"Yes we can -- even in space"

By Jeff Emanuel

Yep, it's for real. A Barack Obama supporter who started the "Space Policy Advisory Group" on the suitably-titled "MyBO" social networking portion of Obama's Web site is asking for YOUR money, to -- in his words -- "Help Senator Barack Obama win and help Senator Barack Obama develop good space policy." (Click image at right to see a screencap)

That's profound stuff there. What exactly constitutes a "good space policy," and how will your donation "help Senator Barack Obama develop" that "good space policy"? That, my friends, is left to the imagination, because the title and subtitle of this post is the entirety of the text on that page. Just give them your money, don't ask, and trust that Obama's Space Policy, like everything else he promises, will be "good."

Heck, for an extra $25, he may throw in some Hope and Change, too. And a raffle ticket to the Denver worship service acceptance rally. And a front-row seat to an intelligence briefing. And....

Anyway, I digress. Just give him your money, and trust.

Brilliant. Let's make this an open thread.

Posted in 2008 | Barack Obama | the Potemkin candidate — Comments (43)/ Email this page » / Read More »

Posted at 11:04pm on Jul. 7, 2008 The Answer: Because they know it's *not real*

By Jeff Emanuel

The Question:

Why is it that the anti-theist Left wing goes nuts shrieking "Church and State" and spouting accusations of "[breaking] with longstanding precedent" by "unveil[ing] a presidential campaign ad infused with deeply religious tones" when they look hard enough, with enough prejudice, at the image below to find a phantom religious symbol in it...

...yet there's nary a peep from those same anti-religion Lefties when Barack Obama does this:

Evangelical Christians, and other religious individuals who occasionally feel drawn in by Barack Obama's rapidly-changing message, should keep that question, and the answer, in mind when considering who they want to support -- and why -- this election season.

The anti-religious Left allows Obama and other Democrats to use the imagery and the language of the Church, to attend and be active in churches for two decades-plus, and to speak to people of faith in what they assume is "their" language without argument or protestation (when a fraction of that level of "religious" activity would earn a Republican the title of "theocrat") because the Left knows Obama, et al are simply doing those things out of a need to appeal to the bitter religion-clingers, not because they actually believe or mean them in any way.

Christians should simply look at the Left's reaction to Barack Obama or any other Democrat politician's religious statements and claims of faith to gauge just how real those claims are. Just refer to the above exhibit for evidence of how serious, and how authentic, Barack Obama's are.

Posted in 2008 | Barack Obama | Church and State | Mike Huckabee | Obamafiles — Comments (57)/ Email this page » / Read More »

Posted at 4:05pm on Jul. 7, 2008 Attempts to defend Obama's shift on Iraq lack logic, seriousness, chronology

By Jeff Emanuel

Attempts to come to terms with, and to defend, Barack Obama's sudden attempt to walk back the centerpiece of his presidential campaign -- unwavering opposition to the effort in Iraq, regardless of facts on the ground or of new information -- have abounded over the last few days, with each falling well short of anything even remotely resembling intellectual honesty or seriousness.

A couple of the latest have come from the New Yorker's George Packer, and from our old friend Andrew Sullivan -- someone whose writing contains intellectual honesty only rarely, and intellectual seriousness never.

Sullivan has this to say about Obama's sudden lurch to the right on Iraq:

"Any potential president who is uninterested in the facts on the ground in calibrating his Iraq policy would be another George W Bush."

All I have to say is, whoever usurped Bush's presidential duties from December 2006 onward, and is therefore actually responsible for effecting a wholesale change in the entire strategy of operations in Iraq as a result of the deteriorating situation on the ground there, while Sully's ideological allies on the left side of the legislative aisle were fighting tooth and nail to prevent any changes from being made, did one heckuva job.

There's no doubt the situation in Iraq progressively worsened over a long enough period of time that the administration has little or no excuse for not recognizing and responding to it with a series of adjustments in how the postwar was being waged. However, for Sully to make that claim after 2006 is simply ridiculous. Fortunately, none of us are surprised to see such ridiculousness emanating from that dank, musty corner of the blogosphere.

The New Yorker's George Packer took a slightly different tack, deciding that acknowledging progress in Iraq as a result of President Bush's willingess to change strategy was an Okay thing to do -- but, in the process of twisting things around as much as possible to defend Obama, he screwed up his timeline royally (while also doing wonderful imitation of Sullivan in terms of abandoning intellectual seriousness). According to the UK First Post:

Read on...

Posted in 2008 | Barack Obama | New Yorker | Obamafiles — Comments (28) / Email this page » / Read More »

Posted at 2:28pm on Jul. 7, 2008 "Because this is your convention, not mine, I'm holding an event that is even more about ME than anything else we've done yet"

You can come, maybe, if you keep giving me money and promise to cheer loud enough, or faint.

By Jeff Emanuel

Well, it's official: Barack Obama will be accepting the Democratic nomination for President at Invesco Field at Mile High, the 75,000-seat open-air home of the Denver Broncos, rather than at the convention hall as originally planned.

Campaign manager David Plouffe said the following in an email:

At the Democratic National Convention next month, we're going to kick off the general election with an event that opens up the political process the same way we've opened it up throughout this campaign.

Barack has made it clear that this is your convention, not his.

On Thursday, August 28th, he's scheduled to formally accept the Democratic nomination in a speech at the convention hall in front of the assembled delegates.

Instead, Barack will leave the convention hall and join more than 75,000 people for a huge, free, open-air event where he will deliver his acceptance speech to the American people.

It's going to be an amazing event, and Barack would like you to join him. Free tickets will become available as the date approaches, but we've reserved a special place for a few of the people who brought us this far and who continue to drive this campaign.

If you make a donation of $5 or more between now and midnight on July 31st, you could be one of 10 supporters chosen to fly to Denver and spend two days and nights at the convention, meet Barack backstage, and watch his acceptance speech in person. Each of the ten supporters who are selected will be able to bring one guest to join them.

This is simply the next logical step in a campaign that has been all about one man and his quest for adulation and power.

Opening up the political process? Only by pun are they doing that; the rest is simply another manufactured event for a manufactured candidate. The way they're "opening up the process" here is as they've done it to this point -- by bringing more people in to sit and listen to Obama talk (and have the opportunity to faint, I suppose).

"This is your convention, not his"? Only if you're a willing member of the Obama cult of personality. If you're not -- say, for example, you're a Clinton delegate, as almost half the assigned delegates are -- then an event like this has to feel like an attempt to drown you out, if not to exclude you altogether.

Posted in 2008 | Barack Obama | Democratic Convention | Denver | Obamafiles — Comments (87)/ Email this page » / Read More »

Posted at 1:00am on Jul. 6, 2008 On the Absurdity of Being Shocked to see a Weather Vane Shift with the Wind

By Jeff Emanuel

The transition from primary to general election campaign mode has seen Barack Obama (D-IL) perform whiplash-inducing 180°s on Iraq, on abortion, on the DC gun ban, on FISA and telecom immunity, on welfare reform, on the death penalty for child rapists, on debating John McCain "anywhere, any time," on the financing of his campaign, and on too many others to recount here (not to mention on Jim Johnson, on Jeremiah Wright, on Wes Clark, on Austan Goolsbee, on Samantha Power, on Tony Rezko, and on Scarlett Johansson, as well as on too many other people to recount).

Those flips which have put him to the right of that famous Triangulating Moderate, Bill Clinton, recently caught the attention -- and the ire -- of the ever-vigilant New York Times editorial board.

On July 4 the NYT featured an editorial titled "New and Not Improved" that, in part, said the following about what the editors called Obama's "perplexing shifts in position":

Senator Barack Obama stirred his legions of supporters, and raised our hopes, promising to change the old order of things. He spoke with passion about breaking out of the partisan mold of bickering and catering to special pleaders, promised to end President Bush’s abuses of power and subverting of the Constitution and disowned the big-money power brokers who have corrupted Washington politics.

Now there seems to be a new Barack Obama on the hustings. First, he broke his promise to try to keep both major parties within public-financing limits for the general election. His team explained that, saying he had a grass-roots-based model and that while he was forgoing public money, he also was eschewing gold-plated fund-raisers. These days he’s on a high-roller hunt.

Read on.

Posted in 2008 | Barack Obama | Obamafiles — Comments (5)/ Email this page » / Read More »

Posted at 9:58am on Jul. 5, 2008 Tim Mahoney (D-FL) spends Independence Day in Canada after honoring Soviet vets in taxpayer-funded mailer

By Jeff Emanuel

Democrat Congressman Tim Mahoney (FL-16), fresh off the embarrassment of getting caught being so out of touch with America's military that he sent out a taxpayer-funded mailpiece "in honor of those who defend our freedom" featuring a photo of a Soviet veteran, decided to get out of the spotlight for a few days during the Independence Day recess.

Unfortunately for Mahoney, while a Congressman may be able to leave the country for a few days, the spotlight is rarely far behind -- especially when the time you choose to leave the country and chill at your second house in Canada coincides with America's Independence Day, and your constituents -- and your opponent -- are dedicating time and energy to celebrating that most special of holidays.

Further, Tim Mahoney's Web site contained no acknowledgment of the 4th of July in any way.

Perhaps Mahoney is far more in line ideologically, and patriotically, with The Progressive magazine's Matthew Rothschild, who wrote:

Why I’m Not Patriotic

By Matthew Rothschild, July 2, 2008
(In memory of George Carlin.)

It’s July 4th again, a day of near-compulsory flag-waving and nation-worshipping. Count me out.

Spare me the puerile parades.

Don’t play that martial music, white boy.

And don’t befoul nature’s sky with your F-16s.

You see, I don’t believe in patriotism.

It’s not that I’m anti-American, but I am anti-patriotic.

Love of country isn’t natural. It’s not something you’re born with. It’s an inculcated kind of love, something that is foisted upon you in the home, in the school, on TV, at church, during the football game.

Yet most people accept it without inspection.

In fairness to Mr. Mahoney, he may not agree with this; however, he was in Canada on July 4 and therefore unavailable for comment. Perhaps Mahoney simply doesn't believe in patriotism -- or his vision of "the New Patriotism" is so far out of touch with mainstream America's, and with the citizens of FL-16, that he thinks escaping the commemoration of what is the most important patriotic holiday of the year is something his constituents will neither mind nor notice.

Posted in 2008 | FL-16 | Tim Mahoney — Comments (43)/ Email this page » / Read More »

Posted at 8:01pm on Jul. 3, 2008 Watch out for all those bitter folks in the crowd, Barry -- they tend to cling to things [Open Thread]

By Jeff Emanuel

Courtesy of Roll Call($) comes this wonderful report:

Obama May Campaign at NASCAR Races

Sen. Barack Obama (Ill.) in the coming weeks may become the first Democratic presidential nominee to attend a NASCAR stock car race in 16 years, his campaign confirmed today.

“We would love to make it to a NASCAR race if the schedule permits,” Obama spokeswoman Jen Psaki told Roll Call Thursday afternoon. “In the meantime, we plan to continue campaigning in communities across the country including small towns and rural communities where people are dissatisfied with the leadership of the last eight years and looking for a new direction for the country.”

The sight of Barack Obama attempting to mingle with a demographic he so publicly despises and looks down on should be an interesting one indeed. Further, the entertainment value provided by liberal elites who try to do "normal people" things is practically endless, as the two scenes below from the 2004 campaign remind us.

By the way, anybody remember the wonderfully eloquent attempt to blend in just before the hunting trip chronicled above by asking, "Can I get me uh huntin' license here?"

Delicious. I can't wait to see what Obama tries to do to blend in with these bitter hayseeds who are always clinging to guns and religion.

Posted in 2008 | Barack Obama | Liberal elites trying to blend in with the unwashed masses | NASCAR | Obamafiles — Comments (78)/ Email this page » / Read More »

Posted at 8:13pm on Jul. 1, 2008 Healthy eating "the new patriotism," says Denver mayor

By Jeff Emanuel

Remember the good old days when Patriotism was Patriotism, and there was no need for a "new" definition?

Yeah. Me too.

This Cox Newspapers article is presented without further comment:

Democratic convention to be no-fry zone

By Scott Shepard
Cox News Service
Article Last Updated: 06/26/2008 08:45:08 PM MDT

DENVER — Warning to Southern delegates to the 2008 Democratic National Convention in Denver this August: it will be a no-fry zone.

As part of the effort to make the August 25-28 convention the greenest ever, the Democrats' guidelines for food catering include one that strikes at the heart of Southern cuisine: no fried food.

No fried chicken. No fried catfish. No fried green tomatoes. No fried okra. No fried anything.

In promoting healthy eating habits, the Democratic guidelines say every meal should be nutritious and include "at least three of the following colors: red, green, yellow, purple/blue and white."

"It's the new patriotism," says Denver Mayor John Hickenlooper, the driving force behind the greening of the Democratic convention.

However, if presumptive Republican presidential nominee John McCain starts gaining in the polls on Barack Obama, who will accept the Democratic nomination in Denver, the Democrats may find they've got bigger fish to fr? - uh, make that - bake.

Posted at 1:43pm on Jul. 1, 2008 Paul Kanjorski: Terrorism, National Security, Foreign Policy not "Substantive Issues"

By Jeff Emanuel

“Thank goodness this is a presidential election year. We really need new leadership. People will be voting on substantive issues in this election – the economy, health care, education.”

-Congressman Paul Kanjorski (D-PA-11)
April 28, 2008
Wilkes-Barre, PA

Source. Clearly the 2004 election, which saw so many voters cast their ballots for the candidate they thought best suited to keep the country secure, prosecute the Global War on Terror, and conduct foreign policy, wasn't based on anything "substantive," but rather was a temper tantrum thrown by a population that was led by the nose into superficial electoral decision-making.

Thank goodness Paul Kanjorski is around to remind us what the substantive issues are -- "the economy, health care, education" (not coincidentally, also issues on which Barack Obama's HopeChangeNoRegardForReality platform would cause more problems for America) -- and to make sure we don't slip into that 2004 mindset in which we actually care about keeping our country safe, not losing wars, etc.