A con man always says everyone else is confused
Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama said on Saturday his plan to end the Iraq war was unchanged and he was puzzled by the sharp reaction to his statement this week that he might "refine" his timetable for withdrawing U.S. combat troops. "For me to say that I'm going to refine my policies I don't think in any way is inconsistent with prior statements and doesn't change my strategic view that this war has to end and that I'm going to end it as president," Obama told reporters on his campaign plane.
Obama, who based his drive to capture the Democratic nomination on his early and ardent opposition to the war, said earlier this week he might alter his plan to bring combat troops home within 16 months of taking office if conditions on the ground changed. The comment drew heavy coverage and sharp criticism from some on the left and the right, with Republicans saying it showed he was vacillating on Iraq.
"I was a little puzzled by the frenzy that I set off with what I thought was a pretty innocuous statement," he said on a flight from Montana to St. Louis. "I am absolutely committed to ending the war. I will call my joint chiefs of staff in and give them a new assignment and that is to end the war." ....
"What's really puzzling is that Barack Obama still doesn't understand that his words matter," said McCain spokesman Tucker Bounds.
Obama said he did not make a mistake with his earlier choice of words in describing his Iraq position -- even though he called a second news conference a few hours after his initial comments to clarify his stance. He laid the blame with reporters....
"If you look at our position, it's been very consistent," he said. "I am unwavering in the belief that this has been a strategic mistake and that this war has to end. It would be a further strategic mistake for us to continue with an open-ended occupation of the sort that John McCain has promised."
Obama said his willingness to consider changing conditions on the ground and the potential ramifications of the pull-out plan was a strength -- and a sharp contrast to Republican President George W. Bush's stay-the-course strategy in Iraq.
"The tactics of how we ensure our troops are safe as we pull out, how we execute the withdrawal -- those are things that are all based on facts and conditions," he said. "I'm not somebody who, like George Bush, is willing to ignore facts on the basis of my preconceived notions. I want to pay attention to what is happening on the ground." ....
It is amazing to see someone so blatantly misleading and arrogant at the same time. Lets put aside using the possessive when referring to the country's Joint Chiefs. That is in fact arrogant and suggest a style of leadership that departs from the norm.
What is really striking is how he is the guy who has been ignoring the facts on the basis of preconceived notions for the past 18 months. He is the one who is not paying attention to what is happening on the ground. He is the one who refuses to acknowledge that he has been dead wrong about the situation in Iraq during this entire period and he is the one who would have led us to a disastrous defeat instead of the victory we are now on the brink of.
I have brought cases against several con men in my practice and Obama is exhibiting classic signs of being one. They are always glib and it is always someone else's fault that they misunderstood what he was saying. In the days of YouTube it is getting harder to pull that off, but I expect him to keep trying.
Rove hits Obama on abortion
Karl Rove used a speech on Friday before a prominent anti-abortion group to attack Senator Barack Obama for his abortion rights positions and praise his opponent Senator John McCain for his family values.
Mr. Rove, the former top adviser to President Bush, told members of National Right to Life that Mr. Obama was threatening "to strike down all the good work that you've done over decades" through his support of the federal Freedom of Choice Act and other pieces of legislation that would advance abortion rights.
"This is a man who stands up and says he is going to bring Republicans and Democrats together to achieve great things for the country," Mr. Rove said. "How can you claim to do that if you are at the same time supporting the divisive practice of using taxpayer dollars to fund abortion? You can't. You cannot square that circle."
And he ticked off a list of positions Mr. Obama has taken on abortion-related bills, pointing out that the Illinois senator and presumptive Democratic presidential nominee, received a zero rating from the N.R.L.C and a 100 percent rating for his Senate votes from the abortion rights group, Naral Pro-Choice America. Naral endorsed Mr. Obama in May.
Mr. Rove also took aim Mr. Obama's recent efforts to court "pro-life and values leaders" and try to "convince them that he's a reasonable person."
"I understand what he's trying to do," Mr. Rove said. "But there is a difference between talk and action. And in this instance, his actions over the years are far more important than any reassuring words that he can offer in a private conversation." ....
This is a good line of attack on Obama on not just abortion but on other issues. Focus on what he is doing not what he is saying. When the two do not add up he should be attacked for trying to mislead people about his true positions and also attacked on credibility. You cannot always take him at this word. Some of his most ardent supporters are finding that out now.
Deification of Obama in Europe
It's bad enough we have our own Obama worshippers here in the United States. But when Europeans catch the Obama bug, Americans who are thinking of voting for him should look long and hard at why the Continent is so much in thrall to the Democrat:
Spend a few days in western Europe talking about American politics and you discover that you are in deepest Obamaland. Not much different from Berkeley, California, or the South Side of Chicago.
As a woman put it to me in Paris: "We want America back.'' "Why does that mean Obama?'' I asked her. Her response: "We think he's the black Kennedy.''
What's driving Obama frenzy in Europe? Is it ideology? The educated, well-informed Europeans I met were not entirely sure what Obama stood for. "Is he a socialist?'' they asked. "I don't think he would accept that label,'' I told them.
They worried a little bit about Obama's views on trade. "Is he a protectionist?'' they wondered. "He calls himself a free trader,'' I said, "just like John McCain, although he has been more critical of trade agreements like NAFTA.''
Europeans are not especially anti-McCain. I asked my British informant what kind of response McCain drew when he visited London. "Nothing,'' he responded. "We see McCain as another old man. Just like our politicians.'' Europeans believe their politics has become old, tired, unexciting. Which is, fairly or unfairly, their image of McCain.
To his European fans, Obama is the symbol of American renewal. They know three things about him. That he is young. That he is African-American. And that he has a Muslim name.
It appears our European cousins are even more superficial than we are. And when Europeans talk about wanting America "back" what they mean is they want America to be subservient to them, to just have us step aside and let them run the world. This is especially true in France who fondly recall JFK getting boxed around by DeGaulle over nukes, NATO, and Africa.
The myth that Bush has gone off on his own and practices "Cowboy diplomacy" is well entrenched now thanks to a leftist European press who never gets around to reporting all of the issues that GWB and our European allies are cooperating over. Afganistan is a NATO operation. Our cooperation over sharing intelligence on terror cells and suspects is outstanding. On Iran, we have pushed Germany, France, and Great Britain to the forefront of negotiations over nukes. On AIDS in Africa, Darfur, the Congo, North Korea, Somalia, nuclear proliferation - all of those issues, the US under Bush has sought to involve our allies and the United Nation. Even climate change has seen the president alter his position so that it mirrors the European efforts.
What the hell are these people's beef? They don't have a legitmate one. But when you are fed a steady diet of big bad America running off half cocked on its own with no regard for international cooperation, you get an ignorant population with no knowledge of the reality of the situation.
Wake up you numbskulls! You have been bamboozled and are too lazy to figure out for yourselves you've been had. Obama will be worse than Carter. And you remember how much you loved and respected the peanut farmer, right?
I swear by the time the press is through with Obama, he will be able to run for God.
Story so far: Obama Birth Certificate faked
But we knew that already, right? Israeli Insider claims to caught the culprit.
"Jay McKinnon, a self-described Department of Homeland Security-trained document specialist, has implicated himself in the production of fake Hawaii birth certificate images similar to the one endorsed as genuine by the Barack Obama campaign, and appearing on the same Daily Kos blog entry where the supposedly authentic document appears."
It's a long post but very compelling so read the rest. Back when Kos posted this thing I you'll remember I noted several discrepancies, the most telling:
"But the interesting thing about this certificate is the description for race on Obama's father, it lists him as "African". In 1961 all Live Birth certificates contained the word "Black", which is a race, not African."
Suitability Flip at the time noted other weirdness about the document. Co-blogger here and in his own right Doug Ross has been on this since it broke as well and has his take.
Here's the deal, Obama, himself, produces a BIRTH CERTIFICATE. An official from the State of Hawaii Department of Vital Statistics goes on the news and announces it is valid. Until then, don't put your Campaign hat away yet Hillary.
UPDATE: To clarify even for the most dense of liberals, Obama could clear things up by producing the real deal. Because he won't, or can't, is the most telling.
By the way a well known Conservative PAC is considering challenging the candidacy of Obama until his citizenship can be proven. I am being told that the consideration will be in the form of a lawsuit to contest his eligibility. I've also been asked not to post their name until they make the announcement if and when they decide to move forward. Obama, ball is in your court!
Obama on July 4th
As he finished a weeklong tour of states that have voted Republican in recent presidential races, Senator Barack Obama said on Friday that the nation had "hit a crossroads and we've got to make a fast turn," urging voters at an Independence Day celebration to support his candidacy if they wanted to end the war in Iraq.
One day after Mr. Obama said he would consider refining his plan to remove troops from Iraq within 16 months, he offered no timetable for withdrawal as he criticized the Bush administration's Iraq policy, which he said "has not made us more safe and has fanned anti-American sentiment all around the world."
"It's a war we need to bring to an end," he added, speaking over applause from a crowd of about 1,000 at a picnic outside the World Museum of Mining.
My friends, as McCain likes to say, the turn that Obama wants to make at this cross roads is a hard left one in the face of on coming traffic. He continues to make the false assertion that he can win the war with a retreat. There is not record in history of retreating to victory. We are fighting a nihilistic enemy who will not stop fighting us just because we retreat from one theater where we have been winning. It is just not an intelligent response to the situation in Iraq and the war in general.
He also repeats the false assertion that the war has not made us safer and that it has made us unpopular. You don't go to war to be popular, but the war in Iraq has been a strategic defeat for our enemies because it has made them less popular than at anytime in history. It has weakened our enemies in al Qaeda and Iran. What Obama proposes is a gift to both that they have not earned.
BTW, check out the wary look of the soldier Obama is shaking hands with in this photo. He has reason to be wary of Obama's military policies and strategy.
Democrat convention fiasco
Some of the Democratic missteps started almost immediately after planning for the event began. The Democratic National Campaign Committee turned down a chance to get cheap office space and decided to rent top-quality offices in downtown Denver at $100,000 a month, only to need less than half the space, which it then filled with rental furniture at $50,000 a month. And in a costly misstep, the Denver host committee, early on, told corporate donors that their contributions were not tax-deductible, rather than to encourage donations by saying that the tax-exempt application was pending and expected to be approved.
Overly ambitious environmental goals - to turn the event into a "green" convention - have backfired as only three states have agreed to participate in the program. Negotiations over where to locate demonstrators remain unsettled with members of the national news media concerned over proposals to locate the demonstrators - with their loud gatherings - next to the media tent.
And then there is the food: A 28-page contract requested that caterers provide food in "at least three of the following five colors: red, green, yellow, blue/purple and white." Garnishes could not be counted toward the colors. No fried foods would be allowed. Organic and locally grown foods were mandated, and each plate had to be 50 percent fruits and vegetables. As a result, caterers are shying away.
For the Democratic Party, the danger is that a poorly run convention, or one that misses the mark financially, will reflect badly on the party, and raise questions about Democratic management skills. And more worrisome for the Obama campaign is that it will be left with the bill for cost overruns or fund-raising shortfalls, and that the candidate will have to compete in raising money against a convention effort desperate for cash.
Natalie Wyeth, a spokeswoman for the Democratic National Convention Committee in Denver, said the convention "is on track and we are confident that we are where we are supposed to be at this point in the game." She added, "We are exactly where we intended to be at." ...
Oh really? If they intended to be this screwed up that is good news for the Republicans. They are still running $11 million short on their budget and are talking about shortening the convention by a day. Perhaps they should limit it to one day and save some real money, Then they can have MacDonalds cater the operation to save on their food budget.
If the Obama camp is worried about how this is going to make them look, they clearly ahve reason for concern. What he probably needs to do is take some of the money he has already reased to bailout the convention so it does not make him and the party look foolish.
(For more postings from me, see DISSECTING LEFTISM, TONGUE-TIED, EDUCATION WATCH INTERNATIONAL, GREENIE WATCH, POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH, FOOD & HEALTH SKEPTIC, GUN WATCH, SOCIALIZED MEDICINE, AUSTRALIAN POLITICS, IMMIGRATION WATCH INTERNATIONAL and EYE ON BRITAIN. My Home Pages are here or here or here. Email me (John Ray) here.)