"…By engaging Iran [in dialogue], we reclaim the moral high ground — no small feat. If Iran refuses to budge, we have new leverage to expose it as a threat whose bad intentions cannot be explained away" - John Kerry, May 24, 2008

(link)

Behold the mind of John Hanoi Kerry, where the USA needs to "reclaim the moral high ground" from Iran, a terrorist supporting country run by religious extremists (thanks Jimmy), where they do things like execute homosexuals and aspire to, in the words of the Iranian president, "wipe Israel off the map", because Israel is a "stinking rotting corpse". In addition, Kerry deems it "no small feat" for the USA to recapture the moral high ground from Iran. I wonder what caused the USA to sink to such depths in the mind of Messieur Kerry ? It must have been when the evil George W. Bush removed the terrorist supporting mass murdering tyrant Saddam Hussein from power in neighboring Iraq. I wonder if the Kurds agree ? Or the Kuwaitis ? I'm thinking NOT. I doubt if even the Iranians would want Saddam back.

Also, notice how Waffles says talking with Iran will give us "new leverage to expose it as a threat whose bad intentions cannot be explained away". This leads me to wonder if Kerry is the slowest kid in the class, because everybody else already realizes Iran is a threat whose bad intentions are on plain display for all to see. Try to keep up, Mr. Kerry. Better yet, go away.
====
Next up is the Worst Person In The World, Keith Olbermann, who works for one of Barack Obama's public relations arms, MSNBC. Watch this video, where Olby raves on and on and on about Hillary Clinton's unfortunate remark about Bobby Kennedy being assassinated in June 1968. Granted, Hillary's comment elicited some pretty bad political imagery, but nobody in their right mind could think that she was talking about staying in the race because Obama could be gunned down. She was only talking about how nominating contests used to go on longer, in response to being asked for about the 10,000th time why she doesn't quit the race. Olberdork, however, not being in his right mind, raves on about it for over 5 minutes, building to a hysterical forced crescendo, blowing Hillary's comment so far out of proportion that you'd almost think she was involved in an assassination attempt herself. Olberdork is the most biased cowardly hack working in the "news" business today. He doesn't even feign fairness or honesty. He doesn't have anyone on his show who doesn't parrot his same dishonest leftwing bilge. There's no fairness and there's certainly no balance. Olberdork loves to make fun of Fox News for being rightwing, but on Fox, there is debate. Both sides of an issue are presented on shows like The O'Reilly Factor or Hannity and Colmes. Those shows purposely have guests come on to argue the opposing points of view. Olberdork works in his safe little leftwing echo chamber, where never is heard a discouraging word, and then Olby has the nerve to sling mud at FoxNews. What a loser he is. If you really want FauxNews, look no further than Keith Olbermann.

I guess it also never occurred to Olberdork that his windy tirade about political assassination gave the idea more breath and exposure than Hillary ever did, by far, even if she had meant it as Olby pretends, which she didn't. I guess I could be wrong on that point, because there probably aren't enough people watching Olbermann's show for him to give ANY idea much exposure. I can't believe someone actually pays Olbermann to flap his lips. There must be millions of Better Persons In The World.

During this week's superfluous dog and pony show hearings with the oil company executives, where Democrats worked up considerable vote-centric righteous indignation over the fact that the oil companies make profits (better they should lose money ?), representative Maxine Waters (D-CA) let the liberal cat out of the bag. When one of the oil execs blamed Congress for the high price of gasoline, citing the fact that Maxine Waters' Democratic party won't allow any domestic oil exploration (and hasn't for decades), Mz. Waters turned into Hugo Chavez, threatening like a good little commie to nationalize the oil industry. Waters seemed to realize what she was saying in mid-unamerican brain fart, and was momentarily at a loss for words. You really have to watch the exchange, it's priceless. It's not often you get a liberal on record telling the truth about their actual agenda. This is one of those rare times. Waters broke the liberal secrecy vow of 'never tell america what we really believe, or america will realize what radicals we are and never vote for us again'. Thanks to Hot Air for the video.

A few months ago, I heard Barack Obama (D-ILL) at a campaign rally, talking about how difficult it was going to be to take away the profits of the oil companies. When I heard Obama say that, I was thinking 'what gives YOU the right to take away the profits of the oil companies ?' They don't have that right, but Maxine Waters has shown the way. All the libs have to do is rescind capitalism and freedom. Piece of cake.

Hope I'm not being a divisive fearmongerer. Hey, what are those stormtroopers doing breaking down my front door ? I'll have to go see what they wa…

We might as well elect this guy.

But first, a joke:

"President Bush blasted Congress for not allowing oil exploration in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. Democrats said it wouldn’t do any good, because it wouldn’t produce oil for 10 years. You know, the same thing they said 10 years ago." - Jay Leno

That joke is funny until you really think about the ramifications of all these years of inaction on ANWR and other domestic oil and energy production that has been blocked by the Democrats. Thanks for nothing, Dems. Hope you're happy now. What's that you always say about helping the little guy ? We don't need your kind of help.
====

Barack Obama's criteria for selecting Supreme Court Justices displays a serious lack of knowledge of how our system of government works. Obama would turn the judicial branch into a legislative branch who would judge cases according to "social and economic justice", as opposed to the rule of law. The following exchange between Megyn Kelly of Fox News and Rudy Giuliani captures the essence of it:

KELLY: It's funny you should mention that, Mr. Mayor, because Barack Obama in a statement responding to John McCain's point today said and I quote, "Barack Obama has always believed that our court should stand up for social and economic justice, and what's truly elitist is to appoint judges who will protect the powerful and leave ordinary Americans to fend for themselves."

[Giuliani starts laughing]

KELLY: Why the laughter?

GIULIANI: Well, the laughter because that is not what a judge in the American legal system is supposed to do. That is not a really responsible definition of a judge. The judge is supposed to interpret the law. And the law is written by other people. It's written by members of the Congress. It's written by framers of the Constitution. It's written by the people when they amend the Constitution.

And then a judge has to have a certain, I would say, dedication to trying to interpret what other people mean and sometimes cannot put their social views into action. This is a very fair issue. John McCain would appoint judges who are more, I would call, originalists in terms of trying to define the meaning that other people had.

I think Senator Obama has made the case very strongly that John McCain has made that, he will appoint social activist judges, judges who tend to try to solve social problems rather than trying to figure out what does the law mean?

KELLY: Yes. Remember Mr. Mayor, during the confirmation hearings for Chief Justice John Roberts, one of the Democratic senators asked him, "Will you stand up for the little guy?" And he said, "Only if the little guy deserves to win under the law."

GIULIANI: Of course. It's not about - this isn't about little guy, big guy, small guy or a large guy, it's about the law. It's about what's fair, what's just, what is the law say. A judge is the interpreter of the law in the American legal system, not someone who creates it.

KELLY: Let me ask you.

GIULIANI: If you end up — if you end up making a judge of somebody who creates the law, then you've made a judge into a legislator, and you really have totally distorted our separation of powers.

The President Of The United States must swear to uphold the U.S. Constitution. Obama has clearly stated here that he would not do so, and instead would seek to overturn the rule of law by appointing Justices who would judge cases based upon the social and economic status of the participants rather than the application of the law. This would undermine our entire Justice system, and subvert the power of the Legislative branch as well.

I know Obama supporters are more interested in those words 'hope' and 'change' than anything else, but this position of Barack Obama's should disqualify him from being the President. This is government 101, and Obama either doesn't understand it or intentionally wants to destroy it. Either way, it's entirely unacceptable.

YES WE CAN [say 'NO' to this fool]. This story should be ALL OVER the media airwaves, because it affects every american and our entire system of government. This is an issue that people SHOULD care about. We can't afford to let the Left hijack our system of justice in this way. On an importance scale from 1 to 10, this is a 10. We can't let Obama lead this undermining 'change'. Some change is bad, and this change would be very bad indeed.

Anyone who disagrees, please go read a textbook on America's system of government, asap. This is a public service announcement.

The Global Poverty Act (S.2433). That sounds worthwhile. We all want to reduce global poverty. This pleasant sounding bill is sponsored by none other than Senator Barack Obama (D-God), the "new kind of politician", The Man From Hope (no wait, that was Bubba Clinton, the sexual predator president), The Audacity Of Hopester, who transcends all who came before him. He's The Great And Powerful Oz-bama. Swoon at mere mention of his name, ye lowly mortals. Pay no attention to the man in the booth.

The Global Poverty Act would commit the US to paying 0.7 percent of our Gross National Product to the United Nations to meet the UN's 2000 Millenium Development goals. This amounts to a phenomenal 13-year total of $845 billion over and above what the US already spends in foreign aid. The US gives more in aid than any other country on this planet to begin with.

If this sounds like a global tax to you, well, it does to me too, payable to one of the most corrupt organizations on earth, the United Nations (who, btw, recently had it's Human Rights Council start on a mission to find countries who are "abusing freedom of speech". I hope you heard that. The UN is looking for countries who are too free, and calling that a problem. That's what happens when the Human Rights Council is dominated by the Arab League. They start prosecuting freedom rather than human rights violators. Also, guess who the biggest human rights violator on earth is, according to the mega-corrupt UN ??? If you said "Israel", you win first prize). The UN is a complete joke, is increasingly anti-american, is anti-Israel, is becoming anti-human rights, and is anti-sanity…and Barack Obama and others want to give it a big old chunk of our money, since we have so much extra that we don't need. All you foks out there have tons of extra money laying around, don't you ? Of course you do. That's why we don't have any problems here in America. We are rich. Yahoo ! It's a non-stop party here in the USA. The streets are paved with gold.

If you ask me, we should be considering withdrawing from the UN, not surrendering our sovereignty to it through a global tax. I think the chances of the UN eradicating global poverty with our global tax dollars are slightly less than my chances of finding an armed nuclear device in my backyard this morning.

It just occurred to me that I might be, to quote Obama, "distracting us from the issues that americans truly care about" by bringing this stuff about Barack's global tax up. If so, I truly and deeply apologize, and if Obama does become president, I will report to a re-education camp immediately. Until that time, I will operate on the assumption that this is still a somewhat free country guided by a Constitution, where the notion of paying a global tax to an unfriendly group of corrupt nations not only wouldn't be considered a good idea, but would be considered treasonous. I guess that makes me old-school, out of touch with Barry O's "new kind of politics". I hope they have real orange juice at the re-education camp. It's so much better than that sugary orange drink or that Tang stuff, and I've never even tried Sunny D. Like I said, I'm old school. But I digress…

Wait a second…Could it be that the Global Poverty Act is intended to BRING poverty to the entire globe ? Now, THAT makes sense. I should have thought of that earlier. We redistribute the wealth away from the rich people (like you and I. "Rich" will be defined as "anyone with a roof over their head"), and we give it to the UN, who will then do something with it, resulting in Global Poverty. Got it. I wonder why Obama didn't explain it like that to begin with ?

The text of the Global Poverty Act purposely avoids ANY mention of the cost of the bill, instead making it sound more like a generic and compassionate commitment to reduce poverty, as follows:

"…[The legislation] requires the President to develop and implement a comprehensive strategy to further the United States foreign policy objective of promoting the reduction of global poverty, the elimination of extreme global poverty, and the achievement of the Millennium Development Goal of reducing by one-half the proportion of people worldwide, between 1990 and 2015, who live on less than $1 per day."

It's only when you get to the UN's Millenium Development Goals that you discover the 0.7% tax on US GNP. Nice trick, Mr. Obama. That trick got the House to pass the bill without discussion via a voice vote back in february 2008. It is set to come up for a Senate vote soon, and it seems nobody is raising much of an objection. It seems nobody is even mentioning it. So far, this is pure stealth legislation. I have yet to hear the issue raised in any newscast or in any debate. Tim Russert just spent an entire hour with Barack Obama on Meet The Press and didn't raise the issue. Making the US subservient to the United Nations seems like a major issue to me. I hope it is to others as well.

And incidentally (or not), the Global Poverty Act would also commit the USA to the Kyoto Protocol, which is part of the Millenium Development Goals. Funny how that works.

You can send a blast fax to president Bush and Republican congressional leaders to ask that they stop the Global Poverty Act here.

I haven't had much time available for posting this week, and only limited access to a computer, so thanks for bearing with me. Things should return to normal soon, assuming any of you think I'm normal in the first place.
====
The following mythical conversation between Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) and president George W. Bush demonstrates the politics of oil:

Pelosi: Mr. President, you simply must do something about these high gas prices.
Bush: We could drill for oil in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR).
Pelosi: Forget it.
Bush: How about expanded offshore oil drilling ?
Pelosi: No.
Bush: Build new refineries ?
Pelosi: Definitely not.
Bush: Clean coal technology ?
Pelosi: Not going to happen.
Bush: Nuclear power, then.
Pelosi: You must be joking.
Bush: Um, we could lift the federal gas tax.
Pelosi: No way.

Pelosi (later in a press conference): This administration refuses to do anything about the high price of gasoline, which is hurting hard-working american families.
====
I have to give props to Hillary Clinton for having the nerve to go toe to toe with Bill O'Reilly on Fox News. I don't always agree with Hillary, but she made her case forcefully with O'Reilly. Hillary is the superior Democratic candidate by far over Barack 'The Timidity Of Hope' Obama. Here's a link to some of what Hillary said on the show. If you have a chance to watch the video, it's worth it. Hillary has some brass.
====
Unfounded conspiracy theory of the week:

The D.C. Madam committed suicide ? Really ? She knew of people in high places, and I mean 'knew' in the biblical sense. Hmmm……….
====
Random muse:

Since the Democratic primary process makes about as much sense as screen doors on a submarine, I wonder why it hasn't occurred to the far lefties to completely subvert the will of the people and make Dennis Kucinich the Democratic presidential nominee ? I know how much I'm looking forward to that Department Of Peace.
====
I know I said I was sick of Jeremiah Wright last time, and I am, but this was too funny to pass up, plus it will irritate Obama supporters (and all liberals, who react to Ann Coulter like Superman reacts to kryptonite). Read Coulter's comic take on the Jeremiah Wright story. (link) Here's a snippet:

In his speech to the National Press Club on Monday, for example, Wright described America as a country of "segregation, Jim Crow, lynching and the separate-but-equal fantasy." Then he ran outside to feed more quarters into the meter where his time machine was parked.

Wright described this as a country that supported the "racist regime of South Africa" and "the Contras, who were killing the peasants and the Miskito Indians in those two countries" — as opposed to the Sandinistas, who were equal-opportunity murderers with a more diverse group of victims.

He said this is a country that "cuts food stamps and spends billions fighting in an unjust war in Iraq," neglecting to add that before you can cut the food stamp program, you must have a country that has a food stamp program.

He said we are a country that sent "over 4,000 American boys and girls of every race to die over a lie." And Wright said it is a country "where I can worship God on Sunday morning wearing a black clergy robe and kill others on Sunday evening wearing a white Klan robe." (Unless, like me, you do all your Klan-related murdering on "casual Fridays.")

When I first heard the unrepentant 60-70's Weather Underground terrorists William Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn (Ayer's wife) were friends with Barack Obama, it wasn't the Obama connection that bothered me as much as the fact that William Ayers is now a Distinguished Professor Of Education at the University Of Illinois, Chicago, and Dohrn is one the American Bar Association’s governing elite, as well as the director of Northwestern University’s Children and Family Justice Center. Exactly how do you go from being a Marxist nihilist revolutionary bomber of the Pentagon, Capitol, and other government sites, attempt to murder american soldiers, aid and abet robbery and the murder of state troopers, praise the Manson family murderers, advocate for children to kill their parents, have a stated goal to destroy America…and then end up in charge of shaping the minds of our younger generation ??? Please tell me this is all some kind of joke. Please. I mean, what's next ? Too bad we killed Timothy McVeigh, or we could have made him the junior Senator from Oklahoma. Hell, let's free Charles Manson and have him do guest stints on the Dr. Phil show offering psychological advice. Welcome to your nightmare, 'Amerikkka' (that is how Ayers, Dohrn, and another Obama buddy, Rev. Jeremiah Wright, refer to our country. It's tres chic Leftspeak in Hyde Park, where Wright, Obama, Ayers, and Dohrn all live).

On September 11, 2001, the same day Islamic terrorists were crashing airliners into buildings and killing thousands of innocent U.S. citizens ('chickens coming home to roost' in Leftspeak), the New York Times ran an article about Ayers and Dohrn called "No Regrets For A Love Of Explosives." As David Horowitz reports for Frontpagemag, days after 9/11:

…I opened its pages [the New York Times] to be confronted by a color photo showing a middle-aged couple holding hands and affecting a defiant look at the camera…The couple pictured were Bill Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn, former leaders of the 1960s’ Weather Underground, America’s first terrorist cult. One of their bombing targets, as it happened, was the Pentagon.

"I don’t regret setting bombs," Ayers was quoted in the opening line of the Times profile; "I feel we didn’t do enough." In 1969, Ayers and his wife convened a "War Council" in Flint Michigan, whose purpose was to launch a military front inside the United States with the purpose of helping Third World revolutionaries conquer and destroy it. Taking charge of the podium, dressed in a high-heeled boots and a leather mini-skirt – her signature uniform – Dorhn incited the assembled radicals to join the war against "Amerikkka" and create chaos and destruction in the "belly of the beast." Her voice rising to a fevered pitch, Dohrn raised three fingers in a "fork salute" to mass murderer Charles Manson whom she proposed as a symbol to her troops. Referring to the helpless victims of the Manson Family as the "Tate Eight" (the most famous was actress Sharon Tate) Dohrn shouted:

Dig It. First they killed those pigs, then they ate dinner in the same room with them, they even shoved a fork into a victim’s stomach! Wild!

Embarrassed today by this memory, but unable to expunge it from the record and unwilling to repudiate her terrorist deeds, Dorhn resorts to the lie direct. "It was a joke," she told the sympathetic Times reporter, Dinitia Smith; she was actually protesting America’s crimes. "We were mocking violence in America. Even in my most inflamed moment I never supported a racist mass murderer." In 1980, I taped interviews with thirty members of the Weather Underground who were present at the Flint War Council, including most of its leadership. Not one of them thought Dohrn was anything but deadly serious. Outrageous nihilism was the Weatherman political style. As soon as her tribute to Manson was completed, Dohrn was followed to the Flint platform by another Weather leader who ranted, "We’re against everything that’s ‘good and decent’ in honky America. We will loot and burn and destroy. We are the incubation of your mothers’ nightmares."

Sweet, isn't it ? Near the end of the frontpagemag article, Horowitz talks a little about the 10 hours of interviews he did with Ayers:

I interviewed Ayers ten years ago, in a kindergarten classroom in uptown Manhattan where he was employed to shape the minds of inner city children [Gag]. Dressed in bib overalls with golden curls rolling below his ears, Ayers reviewed his activities as a terrorist for my tape recorder. When he was done, he broke into a broad, Jack Horner grin and summed up his experience: "Guilty as hell. Free as a bird. America is a great country."

As you can see, Ayers is a puke stain. Ditto for Dohrn. These two spoiled rich white leftist dipsticks never had to pay much for their crimes (Ayers got off on a technicality and Dohrn served only 7 months for contempt), and today, they are still spoiled rich white leftist dipsticks, only now they are referred to as 'activists' in polite liberal society.

When Barack Obama ran for the Illinois Senate in 1995, he held a fundraiser at the home of Ayers and Dohrn. It was Obama's coming out party, his introduction into rich white leftist dipstick Chicago society circles. Obama fit right in, being a former Saul Alinsky-inspired community organizer and civil rights lawyer. Obama and Ayers became friendly, later serving on the Woods Fund together.

Obviously, Barack Obama isn't accountable for the terrorist crimes of Ayers and Dohrn. I'd be interested to know the extent of the relationship however, because Ayers politics haven't changed, and somehow he has acquired influence in liberal educational circles (that's a story for another day). Here's Sol Stern of City Journal:

He [Ayers] still boasts about working full-time to bring down American capitalism and imperialism. This time, however, he does it from his tenured perch as Distinguished Professor of Education at the University of Illinois, Chicago. Instead of planting bombs in public buildings, Ayers now works to indoctrinate America’s future teachers in the revolutionary cause, urging them to pass on the lessons to their public school students.

Indeed, the education department at the University of Illinois is a hotbed for the radical education professoriate. As Ayers puts it in one of his course descriptions, prospective K–12 teachers need to “be aware of the social and moral universe we inhabit and . . . be a teacher capable of hope and struggle, outrage and action, a teacher teaching for social justice and liberation.” Ayers’s texts on the imperative of social-justice teaching are among the most popular works in the syllabi of the nation’s ed schools and teacher-training institutes. One of Ayers’s major themes is that the American public school system is nothing but a reflection of capitalist hegemony. Thus, the mission of all progressive teachers is to take back the classrooms and turn them into laboratories of revolutionary change.

I'd like to know Obama's opinion of Ayers teaching methods. Ayers is a radical, and he seems to have found a comfortable home in the university environment. That doesn't speak well of our universities. The above Ayers quote about social justice sounds like it could have been taken from an Obama speech. I'd like to hear this brought up in a debate (assuming the Timidity Of Hope agrees to any more debates after his last debacle). It's time America gets to know exactly what Barack Obama stands for. I don't think we should wait until he's already in the Oval Office to find out.

This is a short one, just a few quotes to show you how the other half thinks (or more accurately, DOESN'T think). Here are the winners for the week.

Winner of the Can't See The Forest For The Trees Award:

“Joblessness is growing. Millions of homes are sliding into foreclosure. The financial system continues to choke on the toxic leftovers of the mortgage crisis. The downward spiral of the economy is challenging a notion that has underpinned American economic policy for a quarter-century—the idea that prosperity springs from markets left free of government interference. The modern-day godfather of that credo was Milton Friedman…” —New York Times economics reporter Peter Goodman, forgetting that free markets are what created U.S. wealth to begin with.
—
Winner of the No Sh*t Sherlock Cup:

“The problem is not that I met with Hamas in Syria, the problem is that Israel and the United States refuse to meet these people… So I told [Hamas] don’t wait for reciprocation, just do it unilaterally. This will bring a lot of credit to you around the world for doing a humane thing. They turned me down.” —Jimmy Carter, apparently unaware that the mission of Hamas is to destroy the state of Israel.
—
Winner of the Pinko Pinhead Plaque:

“[J]ust when we were close to a national news media providing a general consensus on what the truth is, along comes the Internets [sic] that allows its users a choice on the kind of news it watches and the YouTube. My God, we’ve got to stop them.” —actor Tim Robbins. Don't quit your day job, comrade Tim.
—
Winner of the Feel The Left Wing Lunatic Love Trophy:

"The Clinton campaign describes Hillary’s voters as older, white, and undereducated. Or as we called them in my neighborhood: white trash." — liberal radio host Randi Rhodes, talking about her fellow Democrats following the Pennsylvania primary. Maybe Barack Obama can speak to Mz. Rhodes about her bitterness, which is causing her antipathy towards those who aren't like her (the sane).
—
Winner of the Just Lose, Baby Button:

"The Pennsylvania campaign, which produced yet another inconclusive result on Tuesday, was even meaner, more vacuous, more desperate, and more filled with pandering than the mean, vacuous, desperate, pander-filled contests that preceded it. Voters are getting tired of it; it is demeaning the political process; and it does not work. It is past time for Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton to acknowledge that the negativity, for which she is mostly responsible, does nothing but harm to her, her opponent, her party and the 2008 election." — New York Times editor, irritated that Hillary Clinton is still trying to become president instead of rolling over and dying to clear the way for Saint Barack of Obama's Hope And Change Traveling Vaudeville Show.
—
And finally, I'd like to nominate Keith Olbermann for Dazed And Confused Man Of The Year, for absolutely every word he's spoken on that hack MessNBC pile of propaganda he calls a television show.

Thank you. That's all, folks.

Here's something you might not have heard about, seeing as how our left-biased media (90% of newspapers, 80% of television stations) didn't bother to report on it. It concerns the other war, in Afghanistan. As every american media consumer knows, and as every Democrat happily reports, Bush abandoned Afghanistan to go into Iraq. Thus, the Taliban is returning to power and Afghanistan is going to hell due to Dubya's wrong-headed policy. That's pretty much the way they characterize it, right ? Right.

There's a problem with that characterization, and the problem is, it isn't true. NATO released a progress report on Afghanistan earlier this month. Here is an excerpt from the executive summary of that report:

August 2008 marks the fifth anniversary of NATO’s presence in Afghanistan. Set against the devastating effect of decades of conflict, these five years have witnessed substantial progress in all spheres of Afghan life – from a reasonably stable security situation in most of the country to a massive increase in the number of health clinics and children in schools. Since 2003, NATO-ISAF has gradually extended its reach and is now responsible for security across the whole country. The number of our troops has grown steadily from the initial 5,000 in Kabul to the current 47,000 ISAF personnel in theatre. Today, large parts of the country are relatively stable with no or very few security incidents per month even if the security situation in southern Afghanistan and parts of the East remains challenging for international and Afghan security forces. There is room for cautious optimism. In 2007, the direct engagement of Afghan National Army (ANA) and ISAF routinely defeated militants. Although the overall number of security incidents across Afghanistan has increased, this corresponds to the expansion of Afghan National Security Forces (ANSF) and NATO-ISAF operations to areas formerly considered to be extremist strongholds. In 2007, 70% of security incidents were confined to 10% of Afghanistan’s 398 Districts. These districts contain less than 6% of the Afghan population. This progress would not be possible without the increasing effectiveness of our Afghan partners. The ANA is becoming a professional, well-trained and equipped force that will be able to fully provide for its country’s security. In 2002, there was no ANA to speak of. Today, the ANA stands at around 50,000; every two weeks, the Kabul Military Training Centre graduates 1,100 more soldiers. The ANA is increasingly taking the lead in security operations and played a key role in liberating Musa Qala from Taleban extremists in December 2007. Ninety per cent of the Afghan public sees the ANA as an honest and fair institution. The evolution of the ANA and particularly the ANP are essential pillars in building an Afghanistan that is at peace with itself and its neighbours.

It's not all peaches and cream in Afghanistan, but there is substantial positive news, and Afghanistan is light years better than it was before. I wonder why Democrats and the media can't bring themselves to acknowledge that ? It wouldn't have anything to do with POLITICS, would it ?

The art of deception is alive and well. You see, the prospects for the Democrats in the fall elections are in inverse proportion to how things are going in america. If Afghanistan is going badly, that's good for Democrats. If Iraq is going badly, that's good for Democrats. If the economy is going badly, that's good for Democrats. Anything going right in america seems to be bad for Democrats. Is it any wonder then that the Democrats have painted such a negative picture of the United States ? The Dems say we're losing both wars, are sure global warming is about to destroy the planet, are predicting a second Great Depression, act as if most americans are living in tents, and pretend that border control is some kind of racist plot. They try to convince us that the rich are out to enslave the poor, that capitalism is a disease, and that free trade is our enemy. The solution, of course, is to elect Democrats to save us from this horrible fate. The solution, incredibly, is for Dems to increase taxes by a few trillion so they can make sure the country is destroyed fix all the problems. All this brings to my mind those old words that should never fail to have us shaking in our boots - "I'm from the government, and I'm here to help." No thank you, government. You've done enough already.

Listen up, midwestern states. Barry O has got your number. Here's your problem, as stated by the Great Orator in San Francisco the other day:

"You go into these small towns in Pennsylvania and, like a lot of small towns in the Midwest, the jobs have been gone now for 25 years and nothing’s replaced them…And they fell through the Clinton Administration, and the Bush Administration, and each successive administration has said that somehow these communities are gonna regenerate and they have not.
And it’s not surprising then they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren’t like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations."

There you have it, rednecks. Straight from the elitist mountaintop. Y'all are a bunch of gun-lovin', racist, superstitious, evangelical, bitter hicks. You lost your jobs 25 years ago and just didn't know what to do after that, so you loaded up on guns, god, and chewin' tobacco, and started hating anyone who doesn't look or talk just like you. You are ignorant, small town midwestern flyover state rubes, given to all sorts of crazy notions, helpless without the guidance of your government masters like Barry. Y'all are kind of like those apes in the beginning of the movie 2001: A Space Odyssey. It's nothing short of amazing that you are even toilet-trained, especially when you consider there isn't an $18 billion government potty initiative (must be a failure of leadership).

As one of those aforementioned midwestern hicks, I have a response to the Harvard educated Mr. Obama: Take your condescending stereotype and stick it up your arrogant tailpipe, you pompous piece of prattling pig puke.

Barry Bonehead offered a followup comment on the topic friday night in Indiana:

"They don’t vote on economic issues because they don’t expect anybody’s gonna help them. So people end up, you know, voting on issues like guns … issues like gay marriage … take refuge in their faith and their community and families, things they can count on … so here’s what’s rich. Senator Clinton says, “Well, I don’t think people are bitter in Pennsylvania …” John McCain says, “Oh, how can he say that? How can he say people are bitter?”

Now, being a 2001 apeman, I don't know nuthin' 'bout no E-caw-nuh-mee, but I sure do recognize spin when I hear it (He really DOES think we're that stupid, doesn't he ?) He tried to say Hillary and McCain objected to him calling people "bitter", when that wasn't what they objected to at all. What they both objected to Barry, was your bigoted view of midwestern americans, you schmuck (and McCain actually meant it). They objected to the fact that you don't even give midwesterners enough credit to form their own opinions about issues like the Second Amendment, religion, illegal immigration, or free trade. Instead, midwesterners are "bitter" and "frustrated," especially when they disagree with YOU, right Barry ? If people disagree with Obama's liberal attitudes, why then, they must be racist, they must be zenophobic, they must be psychologically unbalanced ! It's the same bankrupt liberal argument I've been hearing for years. I'm sick to death of politicians like you, Barry. You talk about unity, but all you do is divide people into stereotyped groups, ptting one against the other. And, of course, every one of those aggrieved groups needs help from the government. They need help from Barry. After all, how can a bunch of apes fend for themselves ? We need zookeepers.

FYI - Those jobs that Barry talked about leaving 25 years ago were factory jobs. Barry isn't going to bring any of them back. Not one. It's pols like Barry that caused them all to leave in the first place. Barry thinks you're too stupid to realize that too.

Take a hike, Obama. Too bad. I really would like there to be a black president. That would a be great step for our country. It's just that Barry's not the one. He IS the manchurian candidate (you nailed it, larry d). What's Colin Powell doing these days ? I'd take him over anyone left in the presidential race.

That's all I have to say about this. Now we can all sit back and listen to Obama and friends spin this over the next few days to tell us what he REALLY meant, just like they tried to tell us Obama sat in Jeremiah Wright's black liberation theology church for 20 years and never heard Wright make any racist comments (they really, really think we're that stupid, don't they ?) It will be comical and entertaining, I'm sure.

When a lifelong liberal thinks the Democratic party has moved too far to the left, maybe it's time for the Dems to do some self-reevaluation. Senator Joe Lieberman (I-Conn), former Democratic vice presidential nominee only 8 short years ago, described the Dems hard left turn during an interview with George Stephanopolous. See the video here.

Lieberman describes the Dems as isolationist, protectionist, and anti-free trade. He left out that they are also anti-capitalist, liberty killing, statist appeasers mired in a blinding fog of misguided moral equivalence.

Lieberman says the man who most closely resembles Lieberman's role model, JFK, is John S. McCain. Liebs will get no argument from me there, since I think the current group of socialist hyper-partisans who lead the Democrats have little in common with Jack Kennedy. Kennedy was a military man (warmonger !), a tax cutter who understood free markets (capitalist pig !), and stood up to communism (imperialist !). Moveon.org, DailyKos, and Code Pink would NOT approve. Neither would Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, or any of the other leftist class warriors populating the congressional halls these days. I presume JFK would not be welcome in Berkeley, California either.

Joe Lieberman was excommunicated from the progressive church for one mortal sin. He wouldn't support the party's cut and run strategy in Iraq. That amounted to a tacit endorsement of a George W. Bush policy (so I guess that's really two mortal sins in one. I believe Dems are currently forbidden by liberal sharia law to agree with Bush on anything, ever). Lieberman, unlike Pelosi and pals, realizes that foreign policy is slightly more complicated than strict adherence to the 1960's slogan "war hurts children and other living things."

So does John McCain. Here's an excerpt from McCain's recent foreign policy speech:

"In Vietnam, where I formed the closest friendships of my life, some of those friends never came home to the country they loved so well. I detest war. It might not be the worst thing to befall human beings, but it is wretched beyond all description. When nations seek to resolve their differences by force of arms, a million tragedies ensue. The lives of a nation's finest patriots are sacrificed. Innocent people suffer and die. Commerce is disrupted; economies are damaged; strategic interests shielded by years of patient statecraft are endangered as the exigencies of war and diplomacy conflict. Not the valor with which it is fought nor the nobility of the cause it serves, can glorify war. Whatever gains are secured, it is loss the veteran remembers most keenly. Only a fool or a fraud sentimentalizes the merciless reality of war…But I am, from hard experience and the judgment it informs, a realistic idealist. I know we must work very hard and very creatively to build new foundations for a stable and enduring peace. We cannot wish the world to be a better place than it is. We have enemies for whom no attack is too cruel, and no innocent life safe, and who would, if they could, strike us with the world's most terrible weapons. There are states that support them, and which might help them acquire those weapons because they share with terrorists the same animating hatred for the West, and will not be placated by fresh appeals to the better angels of their nature. This is the central threat of our time, and we must understand the implications of our decisions on all manner of regional and global challenges could have for our success in defeating it".

There isn't anyone running on the Democrat side who can even sniff McCain from the standpoint of experience, and it's experience that informs judgement. Obama's racist pastor, Rev. Jeremiah Wrong, says "Hillary has never been called a (bleep)", but he leaves out that Obama has never spent any time in the Hanoi Hilton either, which is a whole helluva lot worse than being called a name (assuming Obama has even ever been called that name).

Barack Obama calls McCain's talk "the politics of the past", and boils McCain's lifetime of experiences and judgement down to calling McCain "a Bush 3rd termer". That is denigrating and disrespectful of a man who has given as much for his country as John McCain has.

If McCain is a "realistic idealist", Obama is merely an "idealist". Reality is excluded from the equation. Obama acts as if the power of his rhetoric alone can sway the world. Obama seems to believe, unlike McCain, that he CAN "wish the world to be a better place than it is". That has little to do with the politics of the past or the future, or the politics of hope and change, but it does have a lot to do with the politics of naivete. As the old saying goes, 'wishing won't make it so'.

If we must consider McCain to be a quasi-Democrat, okay, so be it. But if we must elect one of those three remaining Democrats to be the president of the United States, and we do, I'll take the one who most closely resembles JFK, not the ones who most closely resemble Hugo Chavez.