Thought Police strike again.

March 13, 2008 Category: Global

Tags: , , , ,

By: wdporter

So Geraldine Ferraro stepped down from her role in the Clinton campaign because she said this obviously bigoted and racist comment:

“If Obama was a white man, he would not be in this position. And if he was a woman, he would not be in this position. He happens to be very lucky to be who he is. And the country is caught up in the concept,” she said.

Anyone else see this as just a little scary? Read it again…is it POSSIBLE she has a point? There’s an equal chance she’s WAY off. Quite possibly Obama’s popularity isn’t at ALL attached to his skin color…but in what way is having the opinion that race is a powerful force behind his popularity off-limits?

Has the political correctness gotten so intense, Geraldine Ferraro can’t have an opinion about the role of skin color in a Presidential campaign?

The Democratic party is slowly losing its mind.

Girl in Clinton Phone Ad is an Obama Supporter

March 10, 2008 Category: Global

Tags: , , ,

By: wdporter

Turns out Clinton bought stock footage from 10 years ago for the TV ad of a little girl sleeping soundly in bed while Hillary answers the phone and keeps her safe.

Obviously the girl didn’t even know about it until her brother noticed on Jon Stewart’s show last Thursday. She prefers Obama’s “positive view of the future” to Clinton’s “fear-mongering”:

Knowles, a high school senior at Bonney Lake, Wash., turns 18 next month. She has been campaigning for Obama and attended his rally at Seattle’s KeyArena on Feb. 8. Her mother, Pam, told The News Tribune of Tacoma that Casey cried and trembled after shaking the candidate’s hand.

At least she didn’t faint:

Texas Ohio predictions

March 04, 2008 Category: Global

Tags: , ,

By: johnnyb

Just voted for Ron Paul.  Jon Cornyn is running against a Texas secessionist, so I had to vote for him in the primary too.  If it looked like Huckabee had a chance, I’d vote McCain, but as it is I had to raise my fist in protest and vote my heart, now that my man Romney is out of the race.

Hillary is going to win Texas.  Oklahoma and Tennessee went pretty solidly for the Billiary, and I see northern and western Texas democrats voting the same way.  Obama has momentum, and it will be close.

Hillary wins Ohio with a good bit of unnecessary pandering to the Jews, using the unfortunate endorsement of Louis Farrakhan against Obama.  Cleveland and Columbus has it’s fair share of politically moderate Jews and they will break for Hillary.  Ohio State will demonstrate that it is not like Wisconsin and turnout among the college kids will be low and won’t necessarily break for Obama.  This is John Edwards country and some people may just stay at home.

With a win at Rhode Island that makes three wins out of four, and even though Texas will be close that puts 7 out of the 10 most populous states in Hillary’s favor, a stat which she will use to pry superdelegates her way.  This dreadful charade shall continue until the convention as the remaining states will break evenly for The Liar (Kentucky Indiana, Pennsylvania, West Virginia) and Barack (all the rest).  Will the GOP just start calling him Black Hussein Osama in order to aid and abet The Liar?  Tune in next week at any of your major news networks.

Can Obama run the table in February…”Yes We Can”

February 06, 2008 Category: Global

Tags: ,

By: johnnyb

I think a large part of Obama’s success is that he uses “we” where Hiliary uses “I”.  Right now the red states are giving Obama a lead in the state count.  Let’s look ahead to see what happens in February.

Feb. 9 Washington and Nebraska caucus, Louisiana primary

Barack Obama has won every caucus except for Nevada, and on Super Tuesday he won Alaska, Idaho, and Colorado caucuses handily.  Those states demographically should be similar to Washington, except for a slightly higher Asian population in Washington.  Remember, Bill Clinton wanted to break up the microsoft monopoly?  Obama wins latte-sippers and Washington is the capital of latte.

Louisiana…done deal for Obama.  It is a closed primary so most whites are voting in the GOP primary.  New Orleans is still king in the state.

Nebraska…considering Obama won Kansas, Colorado, Missouri, Iowa, North Dakota, and Illinois, and that many of these western states were caucuses, you can’t help but think the momentum will swing his way by Saturday.

Maine will caucus.  It seems that if there are no black people in a state, Obama wins.  This might be a toss up with the Hillary win in Massachussets giving her momentum here…on the other hand there are a lot of independents (i.e. cranky white dudes) who will vote for Obama.  Remember it’s a caucus so this is a toss up.

Then there’s next Tuesday, with Virginia, Maryland, and DC.  Maryland and DC are in the bag for Obama.   Virginia has a 19%  black demographic, and my sources on the ground in Northern Virginia have told me that the latte-sipping elites tend to lean Obama.

Then there is Wisconsin, which may be for Obama what New Jersey was for Hillary.  Obama won Minnesota and Iowa, but those were caucuses.  It could be close, but it is conceivable that Obama wins Wisconsin as well, especially once the funds get spent and momentum can be generated from Washington and Maine.  That leaves Hawaii, which could very well break Clinton but with another caucus it could be close.

We could see Clinton win one (Hawaii) or maybe two (Maine) small states for the rest of the month.

Barack Obama is really hitting Hillary Clinton in the mouth.

Why Republicans like Obama

February 05, 2008 Category: Global

Tags: ,

By: johnnyb

I figure if the New York Times can endorse for both primaries, so can Logipundit.

#1 Obama is his own man. He earned his spot the hard way. He was in the state Senate of Illinois for 6 years before becoming Senator. Although he only has two years of experience before running for president, how much experience do you need to be a Senator? How many years of experience as a Senator do you need to qualify for running for president. Neither Hillary nor Obama crafted “fantastic” legislation like McCain-Feingold, or McCain-Kennedy, yet that probably works in their favor. If this nation is really going to vote for a Senator for president, then a Senator who has spent the least amount of time in Washington is probably best. Republicans don’t need to wonder what Michelle Obama’s agenda is because Barack has been forthcoming about his liberalism (unlike Bill was) and doesn’t need Michelle or Oprah to wag their fingers at reporters to climb ahead of the polls, like Hillary needs Bill.

#2. Republicans want a clean fight. Barack presents straight up, unapologetic liberalism. No third way nonsense. Also, it seems like we won’t have to worry about interns and Michelle Obama being a lesbian, they seem like a normal family. See, that’s a fine contrast from Lady Macbeth and her stupid cackle. Can you imagine four years of that hideous cackle? Hillary can mention Rezko all she wants but she is living in a house of thin glass walls and may want to be wary of calling the kettle…uh, black.

#3. Barack Obama has been opening up cuts in the Billary machine for all the country to see, which provides so much fodder for the GOP should she win the nomination. The crying, Bill pouting and throwing temper tantrums, that hideous fake cackle, fake rhetoric, and absolute shallowness that the Clintons exude simply would not have come to pass had this been a Billary coronation. Then when the GOP would try to expose some of these flaws it would be a right wing conspiracy.

Anyhow, the polls look close and I’m inclined to think Obama will do better in Tennessee, Alabama, and even Arkansas, Missouri, and New Jersey than the polls say. Thus far every state Obama has visited, he’s been close or won in a landslide, including New Hampshire and Nevada. Hillary was not close at all in Iowa (1.1% black) or South Carolina. In an election where proportional delegates are allotted from most states, this favors Obama. If he can stay close in rural states and California and win in the south and mid-atlantic states by wide margins, he could well take this nomination.

Also, can anyone imagine putting a Hillary speech to music, and people listening to it? No, right?

Barack Panders to "The Race"

August 04, 2007 Category: Uncategorized

Tags: , , ,

By: wdporter

Not sure why this bugs me so much, because it should be expected by now, but apparently I’m not a quick study. I do, however, find myself more and more perturbed with our “new kind of politics” Presidential contender.

Obama tells La Raza in a speech the other day:

“Find out how many senators appeared before an immigration rally last year. Who was talking the talk, and who walked the walk - because I walked,” Mr. Obama said at the National Council of La Raza’s annual convention in Miami Beach. “I didn’t run away from the issue, and I didn’t just talk about it in front of Latino audiences.”

The Illinois Democrat said the recent Senate immigration debate “was both ugly and racist in a way we haven’t see since the struggle for civil rights.”

I’m sorry, but BULLS***, BULLS***, BULLS***.

The REAL debate had absolutely nothing to do with racism. I’m sure there were racists saying racist things, but that wasn’t part of the debate, and Obama knows that. The debate was over a lot of things: national sovereignty, border security, language and culture, economics, but most of all it was about the American Public’s decided lack of trust in Mr. Obama’s august political body to do what they say they are going to do. They believed the Government 20 years ago when Reagan pushed for an amnesty plan, and luckily their memory was long enough not to fall for it again. By saying that all the detractors on the immigration bill are racists is 100% “running away from the issue.”

Connection to the civil rights issue is completely fabricated. African Americans in the Jim Crow era were citizens, and had been in the country for generations. Comparing their plight to the plight of millions of people sneaking over the border is insulting to the social injustice resulting in the Civil Rights movement. No one denies the humanity of the issue, or the fact that those coming over the border are for the most part hard-working decent people, or the obvious fact that they should be treated decently. But pretending that securing the border is “racist” is just childish.

Any semblance of hope that this guy is anything more than an empty suit who writes well, is long gone.

Commentary: The Post Chronicle

Obama more naive than Hillary supposed.

August 01, 2007 Category: Uncategorized

Tags: , , ,

By: wdporter

Hillary accuses Obama of being “naive” for saying he would sit down at the highest level with Iran and Syria, etc., so he decides now to become hawkish, while simultaneously excoriating President Bush on his reckless war in Iraq.

Allright, so Obama’s solution to a reckless foreign policy and the war in Iraq without support from the “International Community,” is to posit a unilateral invasion of Pakistan, a country on a precarious and narrow edge of alliance with us on fighting terrorism? Why? Because that’s where Osama Bin Laden is supposed to be, and everyone knows that as soon as you catch or kill OBL, then we’ve won, and all the terrorists will take their IEDs and go home–as long as we cross our hearts and promise not to fight them anymore. Any OTHER terrorists we kill or capture, three more step up in their place, but not Osama; his group of terrorists are just like those ugly guys in the Fifth Element where if you just take the leader out, the rest of them won’t fight anymore. Just send in Obama the negotiator to take him out.

So if Obama is elected, how does he explain these remarks to Musharraf, when it comes crunch time on the Aghan border, there?

“Hey, Mr President, you know…I was just pandering to those right-wing nut jobs for votes. What’s a fella to do? Need that Middle America vote. You know how it is. I certainly can’t let that Clinton lady call me ‘naive,’ can I?”

And his solution to an irresponsible approach to the war on terror is to:

1) Sit down at the highest level with the extremist nutjobs we’re fighting.
2) Downgrade our “moderate” allies’ wishes and border sovereignty as not very important.
3) Double overall foreign aid to $50 billion.
4) Make foreign aid to Pakistan conditional on a Musharraf success at a Taliban crackdown.

I’m all for number four, number three is just sophistry, but does anyone but me find one and two a little bit odd? How about:

1) Refusing to negotiate with terrorist-supporting regimes.
2) Find more ways to uphold, support, develop and downright coddle those regimes that HAVEN’T sworn our destruction as their top priority (still a majority of the world, thankfully) forcing them to further alienate those regimes that HAVE sworn our destruction as their top priority.
3) Make ALL foreign aid to terrorist heavy nations conditional on their Governments’ crackdown on terrorist training camps…and (not to blatantly preempt a Scottie retort) that would include Israel AND the Palestinian Authority, AND Egypt, AND Jordan, etc.

On that note, does anyone know how to find 2006 U.S. Foreign Aid numbers. The latest I found is 2005:

Top 16 recipients of U.S. foreign aid for 2005:
1. Israel 2.58 Billion
2. Egypt 1.84 Billion
3. Afganistan 0.98 Billion
4. Pakistan 0.70 Billion
5. Colombia 0.57 Billion
6. Sudan 0.50 Billion
7. Jordan 0.48 Billion
8. Uganda 0.25 Billion
9. Kenya 0.24 Billion
10. Ethiopia 0.19 Billion
11. South Africa 0.19 Billion
12. Peru 0.19 Billion
13. Indonesia 0.18 Billion
14. Bolivia 0.18 Billion
15. Nigeria 0.18 Billion
16. Zambia 0.18 Billion

washingtonpost.com

Democratic debates

June 04, 2007 Category: Uncategorized

Tags: , , , ,

By: johnnyb

Hillary Clinton
This is Bush’s war (who keeps authorizing funding, then?)

It’s Bush’s war. Yada yada yada. Nobody rebuts with the obvious zinger about Bill shooting long range missiles at Hussein back in ‘98. (And why was that?) She blames the Iraqis for not setting up a civil society in the absence of a strong man. But getting Saddam out of power is good. She wants to have it both ways by saying that deposing a dictator is good, but this is Bush’s war. Life doesn’t work that way.

Health care–I’m so glad everyone agrees with me. Let’s let the gov’t lower costs by twisting the arms of the insurance companies and pharmaceutical companies, etc. etc. (Will not be honest about raising taxes to cover the costs) Will let the Bush tax cuts lapse.

On Iran–”I’m not going to talk hypotheticals” (Well, why debate a year and a half before the election, then?) She says we should have been talking to Iran for years now. Sending Condi Rice around the world giving speeches is not diplomacy, even though she’s the head diplomat of our country. Hillary’s line about Dick Cheney gets a lot of applause. A cheap shot that Bill probably came up with. In a way her secret weapon.

On Darfur–essentially, let’s pull out of Iraq and into Darfur.

Gays in the military– Gays and lesbians should serve in the military at all levels. Perhaps including commander in chief? Ok, a cheap shot on my part.

National security–Back to pre-9/11 national security policy. Reminds me of Bob Dole’s “bridge to the past” speech.

Hillary cackles like a hyena. Phony baloney, the phoniest of the 18 candidates. I talked with Yun-ju about it, asking if there’s hope that Americans can see through this phony. Yun-ju’s response, essentially, was to ask how many phony people there are in America. This does not bode well for our future.

Barack Obama

I get Obamamania. He sounds presidential.

On Immigration–Obama agrees with George W Bush and Ted Kennedy 100%, sounds like.

On Health Care–”John and I agree” (theme of the night) Insurance and pharmaceutical companies keep “hoarding profits”

On the Army–Increase the # of troops, more VA hospitals. Touts the VA? Need to treat PTSD.

On Osama bin Laden– Would take him out Jack Bauer style. Nice to hear a Democrat say it.

Osama and Edwards were totally vying for the non-Hillary (i.e. the Johnny B) demographic. Very friendly with each other.

John Edwards

On health care–”You can’t change the health care system for nothing.” (Glad he’s honest)

On Iran–Notes that there is strong pro-American sentiment amongst the Iranian people. He’s right, and he’s right to note this. The Iranian gov’t is not so popular.

On Gas Prices–Vertical integration of oil and gas is bad. Make it harder to refine oil and gas (this lowers prices?) End subsidization of oil and gas industry.

On Education–College for Everyone (yikes!)

Edwards makes a good case that the US needs to establish moral authority in the world by closing down Guantanamo and secret prisons, etc. He’s the most polished on this message and has the most appealing rhetoric

Bill Richardson
Don’t know if y’all know this, but he’s governor of New Mexico. “As governor of New Mexico…”

On immigration–No dividing families with immigration policy. That means no touching back of the home country for Z visa holders. (So illegal immigrants aren’t burdened with the same chores that legal immigrants commonly need to do. But this isn’t amnesty?) Guest workers should have labor protection. Perfect liberal answer.

On Health Care–As Governor of New Mexico, I socialized medicine etc. etc.

On the VA–Soldiers get a hero’s health card that allows them to go to any hospital for service. Follow the soldier, not the VA hospitals. Again, good answer.

On Bill Clinton–”He should be the U.N. Sec’y General” “Israel is a great ally, and needs buttressing”. Well, he just lost Scotty’s vote!

On Sudan–Smartest answer. China buys most of it’s oil from the Sudan. If you threaten not to go to the Beijing Olympics, China can make things quiet in Sudan. A good demonstration of how diplomacy can be used as an effective tool for change, without firing a shot. Perfect Democrat answer.

On Education–Mandatory pre-school. Ugh!

Chris Dodd
He knows stuff, but no one is listening.

On gas–His solution to lower gasoline prices is to impose a carbon tax and require all cars to run at 50 mpg by law. When the price of oil is lowered he would require mandatory rebates for the consumer.

On the Army–Gives a big shout out to the military. Safety and security is the #1 priority of the president (Is this the Democratic debate? I thought it was ending global warming!)

On Richardson’s China answer–No, no, no, China is cool! We can’t pull out of the Olympics! (Richardson merely said let’s threaten to pull out).

On Patriot Act–let’s restore constitutional rights to citizens (Big Applause).

Joe Biden

Everything he says is to defend the Clinton record, and by extension Hillary, at all costs. He’s simply here to lend Hillary some white male credibility when he endorses her in six months. Kerry 2.0

On Immigration–We can’t round up everyone in buses and send them home. Near the Ted Kennedy end of the spectrum on this issue.

Gays–All major allies allow gays to serve. In the foxhole soldiers don’t ask other soldiers if they are gay (It’s against the policy remember?)

Defusing (subsidizing?) Iran and North Korea are on top of his agenda.

Dennis Kucinich

“We’re (Democrats) in charge of this country. (He has a point in that you can’t keep blaming Bush now)

Wants to cut funding to defense. Like, now.

On Osama bin Laden–Would not take him out Jack Bauer style. “We cannot use assassination as a tool of foreign policy, because it might come back to haunt us.” Osama should turn himself in and be held responsible before an international court. Shame on you Osama!

On the deficit–Stop the war and we reduce the deficit. No more NAFTA and WTO (Big applause) Wants FDR type make-work programs….sheesh.

Mike Gravel
For the most part nuts.

The only candidate who wants immigrants to learn English. Likes to use the word “Totally”. Wants line-item veto, which made the rest of the (mostly Senatorial) candidates squirm. Points out the obvious with the carbon tax…that it would, uh, raise the price of gas.

The more I watched, the more I thought Ron Paul just might be the right choice for America.

If you don’t care about things like name recognition, and funding, Richardson was the most sensible and “smartest” of the group. The closest thing the democrats have to a Newt Gingrich, someone who has thought about every issue from many angles. The only governor. If you look at resumes, he is the most qualified candidate. Didn’t get the quick easy applause lines, though.

Obama and Edwards sounded a lot alike and both sounded better than Hillary. The only thing I remember from Hillary is a shrill cackle, “I’m not going to discuss hypotheticals” and an overwhelming sense of entitlement from her, because she let her powerful husband walk all over her and now the American people have to pay for it. Some feminist.

Update: All the professional pundits totally disagree with me on Richardson, and think Biden won? Go figure. I missed the first 10 minutes. Well, here at Logipundit, you get a different perspective, is all I have to say. Richardson botched his immigration answer by trying to explain specifics. No one on the panel could have gone into detail on immigration policy without getting into trouble with one group or the other. Biden sounded a LOT like John Kerry.

Obama unveils bid for White House

February 10, 2007 Category: Uncategorized

Tags: ,

By: wdporter

Well, aren’t we all shocked? What I love most about Obama is that he will take any opportunity to invoke the spirit of Abraham Lincoln (granted , I know, any politician from the state of Illinois is required to constantly allude to Lincoln–I think it’s in the State Constitution).

Here’s the NY Times Article on the topic.

The battle is on allright. Even though I still haven’t made up my mind about Obama (really like his attitude but his political stances and voting history are way left of mine), I do sincerely wish he gets the nomination. It just makes me giddy to picture Hillary up in New Hampshire fuming at having her thunder stolen.

And I don’t mind Obama’s lambasting of “corporate interests” and lobbyists and even high poverty rates. What I failed to understand was his promise to end American military involvement in Iraq by March 2008. This is a bill he introduced and it’s just simply liberal poppycock. This is his attempt to put himself firmly to the left of Hillary, who’s been positioning herself as a moderate because she just thought she had the nomination locked.

As long as Obama is as eloquent as he has been and actually stays away from details, he’ll even have a shot in the primary. The days of Democrats running hard left to get the nomination and then running to the center for the general election are behind us now.

Thank God I live in a state that allows you to vote in both primaries. Because through all of this positioning, I just can’t shake this feeling….between the populist “two-Americas” rhetoric of Mr. Edwards, the rantings and careful calculation of Mrs. Clinton, and the beautiful prose and dodgy generalities of Mr. Obama…

There is a serious chance that this is going to get ugly–really ugly.

Obama unveils bid for White House–The Observer

Obama and Abe

June 28, 2005 Category: Uncategorized

Tags: ,

By: wdporter

My last major series of posts were about Abe Lincoln, (yeah that was a while back) so I thought this article about Obama’s opinion about Abe was interesting. I hate to find myself agreeing with Senator Obama, (does anyone doubt he’s our next VP Democrat nominee for President?) but a close study of Lincoln does not find him to be a true champion of Civil Rights until it was militarily and politically expedient (after 2 or 3 years of throwing around useless Generals.) Anyway I’m looking forward to reading ‘Uncovering the Real Abe Lincoln’. I’m all for facts getting in the way of myths and legends.

Posted at 10:15 pm by Logipundit