Sunday, August 31, 2008
Wednesday, August 27, 2008
I would like to note something in this video.
There has been a recent increased use of body language experts in stories in the public domain. O'Reilly uses a body language expert (Click "Body Language" in the menu in the center left part of his page). CBS just ran a story on the body language of Hillary's speech in Denver.
So, rewatch the video above and pay attention at 1:45. Watch Obama's rate of blinking his eyes.
I'm no expert, but I wouldn't be surprised if a body language expert says that this indicates discomfort, if not disingenuity.
h/t Allahpundit over at Hot Air.
Two. Obama on Russia's involvement in Georgia:
“...We’ve got to send a clear message to Russia and unify our allies,” Obama told a crowd of supporters in Virginia. “They can’t charge into other countries. Of course it helps if we are leading by example on that point....” [my emphasis]Two. Michael J. Totten on Russia's involvement in Georgia:
“...We've been trying to tell the world about this for months. If you go back and look at the archives you'll see plenty of calls from the Georgian government saying they're really worried. Even some Russian commentators agree that this is exactly what happened. Don't forget, they sent in a lot of irregulars, Chechens, Cossacks, Ossetians, Ingush – basically thugs. Not normal Chechens or Ingush – thugs. Thugs out for a holiday. Many Western camera crews were robbed at gunpoint ten meters from Russian tanks while Russian commanders just stood there smoking their cigarettes while the irregulars...that happened to a Turkish TV crew. They're lucky to still be alive. Some of the Georgians were picked up by the irregulars. If they happened to be female, they got raped. If they happened to be male, they got shot immediately, sometimes tortured. Injured people we have in hospitals who managed to get out have had arms chopped off, eyes gouged out, and their tongues ripped out.”The math adds up to this: Obama is blazingly ignorant in the field of foreign affairs. The story Totten tells is probably too complicated to explain to Joe Sixpack, but the truth shines through: Russia's Putin is a brute.
Plus it's the oldest law of warfare: have your guns in populated areas, and when the enemy responds, show the world your dead women and children....”
h/t to Vodkapundit for the Totten article.
Monday, August 25, 2008
Saturday, August 23, 2008
So I haven’t been here all that much recently. So, sue me. Cancel your subscriptions, and I’ll gladly refund whatever you’re due.
Seriously, I have recently been alternately busy and lazy. We’ve got a wedding coming up. I don't have much directly to do with that, but it is another thing going on in the house that keeps others busy. I’m spending a bunch of my online time learning to invest and on That-Forum-Which-Shall-Not-Be-Named, frequently discussing the same sorts of things I’d be putting up here.
However, on my re-entry here, and I may live to regret these words, I thought I’d put up my Pre-Election Post-Mortem.
This morning Obama announced his Vice Presidential pick as Joe Biden.
Yes, that’s right. Joe. Biden.
And, in my mind, this pick pretty much nails down my view that Obama is going down in flames. Here’s why…
Obama has had to deal with the distractions of the Edwards scandal and the Olympics. That said, he flubbed his announcement by delaying until Saturday and by not testing his text-messaging before his announcement. He needs every little bit of bounce he can get, and at nearly every opportunity, he's whiffing at the ball.
There is plenty to wonder about Obama’s pick of Biden. I’m sure the McCain camp has been working through all the possibilities for months now. But off the top of my head, here are the questions I have…
- Joe “I think that I stand by the statement [that Obama is not ready]” Biden.
- Joe “Plagiarism” Biden
- Joe “ [A]rticulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy” Biden
- Joe “Been in the Senate since 1973” Biden
Bonus Snark: Q. Where was Obama in 1973? A. In seventh grade.
- Joe “Delaware’s 3 Electoral Votes” Biden
- Joe “Never more than 3% of the vote” Biden
- Joe “Yea on the Iraq War Authorization” Biden
- Joe “Negative Net Worth” Biden
- Joe “The Senator from MBNA” Biden
OK. That’s enough…I think you get the idea. While Obama may view that Biden offers his ticket everything that he does not—foreign policy experience being primary—he also comes with a fair amount of baggage. Obama’s Biden pick allows McCain to bring along someone like Pawlenty or Palin as the younger, less loose-cannon-ish, and baggage-free alternative (although Palin does have her problems too).
Obama still has a P.U.M.A. problem that he will have to work through next week. I don’t think that Hillary herself is stupid or arrogant enough (but who knows) to seriously mount a Convention challenge to Obama, but this lack of unity, at this point especially, is a problem for Obama. That said, the very idea that Hillary has had to form her own “whip teams” speaks to Obama’s weakness at his own convention (not to mention bringing up some disturbing images).
The Democrat Party Future
This is an I-told-you-so moment for the Republicans and conservatives in general.
The D’s should have got on board with removing Bill Clinton from office. They’d have lost the election by a larger margin in 2000 than they did, but by not doing so, they immediately allowed Hillary to be elected to the Senate as nothing more than America’s Most Scorned Woman. Then, as a Senator, she became the party’s “inevitable” primary candidate in 2008. Her “inevitability” was, of course, not a foregone conclusion, but this allowed Obama to sneak under the radar with little examination of just how unqualified a candidate he is. The D’s are about to pay for this.
Had the D's gone along with removing Clinton, I believed they'd be healed as a party by now and have grown a good crop of candidates. As it is, the D's have been beholden to the Clinton machine, and now the party is floundering because of it.
Mark my words: The D’s are going down hard this year. Both as a party and with regard to McCain, the R’s are still far, far from perfect, and they may not recapture either House, but I won’t be surprised if they do increase their seats. The Kos Kidz, the DUers, and the other libtards will take this hard, and frankly this concerns me a bit.
Saturday, August 09, 2008
He ran an intellectually empty campaign...running away from positions he had sincerely taken in the past, and adopting a populist message that he had no history with.
However, I began to have some sympathy for John and Elizabeth Edwards when her cancer recurred.
No more. Sympathy for her--Yes.
He is a snake.
I don't have any idea how many married American men and women are unfaithful in their marriages. I do know that infidelity is wrong. It is wrong when you're trapped in a nightmare marriage. It is wrong when you're drunk. It is wrong when you're both drunk and in a nighmare marriage and happen to stumble on Ms. Right.
A marriage means committment...to one person. If the marriage has failed and you're done with that commitment--fine. Get out of the marriage. Then move on to another relationship.
But infidelity is wrong. There are no circumstances when it is right. And I know that you know that infidelity is wrong. How so, you ask? It's really very simple...
Because the unfaithful keep their infidelity a secret.
And, in the case of John Edwards, it is wrong when you're running for your party's nomination for President. And it is especially wrong when your wife has a terminal illness.
The guy is a snake.
Ace has gone a bit overboard on every little detail of this (as well as subsequent posts), but he does make a number of good points.
- That Hunter is in love with Edwards and thinks that post-Elizabeth that they'll get married tells me that she's a snake too.
- That Edwards-aide, Andrew Young, is fessing up to paternity tells me that either Hunter can or was passed around the campaign. Not very flattering to any of the parties.
- That Edwards has fat-cats who may be paying off Hunter tells me that this is not just about infidelity and love-out-of-marriage, but also of money. Snakes. (Did I mention that yet?)
But Paul at Powerline makes a good point too...this is none of our business, and especially so considering Elizabeth's illness.
But the larger story here is one of the media. The MSM are so deeply in the tank for whichever candidate the Democrats will nominate that they could not explore Edwards' infidelity when handed the information. It was the National Enquirer which broke this story. It is clear to me that the N.E. is riding this story for all it's worth...they're a for-profit company, after all. They probably paid Hunter for her story and/or the blurred photo of Edwards and the child. Who cares? (I don't.)
But the MSM completely failed the public. Had this been a Republican former Senator and VP candidate, they would have been all over this story months ago. They (deservedly) dug into Larry Craig's restroom misbehavior. They used the Foley scandal over inappropriate emails (but no physical actions), among other Republican failings, into a change of leadership in 2006.
The MSM was maintaining their silence here to keep a scandal centered on a Democrat formerly running for the nomination from hurting all Democrats.