31 October 2008

All Hallows Eve

Happy Halloween!

H/T: Nick over at RightMichigan

30 October 2008

The Khaki Elephant Endorses A Friend: Joe Knollenberg

I've written about him before but with the race tight and the stakes high, I'm writing again to ask those of you in Michigan's 9th Congressional District to vote for my friend, Joe Knollenberg. And he's not just my friend, but a friend to everybody who calls Michigan home.

The current congress is running about as smoothly as the old Pontiac Catalina that carried me during my college days. With a coat hanger in the turn signal, a rear bumper held together by Molly Hatchett bumper stickers and doors you had to hurdle like Bo and Luke Duke, my old hoopty was a rolling disaster. But that's not to say that nothing on her worked. There was . . . um . . . well . . . let's see . . . the lights, yes, the lights worked. And WOW, did they shine brightly!

Looking at the current do-nothing congress it is tempting to simply vote for change and throw out every incumbent that we can grab by the haunches. But just because the group is a sordid slough, that doesn't mean there aren't some bright lights shining through the morass. Joe Knollenberg is one of those bright lights (and I'll bet you never thought you'd read that about anyone this side of Sarah Palin on The Khaki Elephant).

Michigan's economy is stumbling under a Governor who has taxed corporations to southern flight, but that hasn't stopped Joe from working through the Federal Government to secure assistance for our struggling state. The Congressman has fought to bring nearly $39 million in grants to Michigan industries. These grants are currently helping to fund research and development for alternative fuel vehicles in the birthplace of the American auto industry. Joe has also formed Big3Defense.com, a grassroots effort to help defend auto industry jobs.

But Michigan industry and it's workforce aren't the only benefactors of Joe's congressional clout. He's also brought millions of dollars for health care research and treatment to places like Detroit's Karmanos Cancer Institute and my Alma Mater, The University of Michigan, for their "cutting edge ways to replace kidney function," (research that recently helped a friend).

And all of this is but a sprinkling of what Joe has done for us. He has also secured over $11 million for Oakland County schools and universities, he brought tax dollars back to us (the largest "donor county" in Michigan) to improve our roads, and while I have not seen him walk on water, Joe did bring home $60 million to clean up that nasty River Rouge.

Joe Knollenberg is my friend. And I hope you've seen that if you live in Michigan's 9th Congressional District he's your friend too. So do what friends do -- give Joe some love. On November 4th, give him your vote.

For more information, visit: http://www.knollenberg.house.gov/

29 October 2008

Media Shocker: The LA Times Is Protecting Obama

The LA Times has a video. Not just any video, but a video of a U.S. Presidential candidate attending a party and providing a special tribute to Rashid Khalidi, an influential anti-Semite who "from 1976 to1982 was reportedly a director of the official Palestinian press agency, WAFA, which was operating in exile from Beirut with the PLO." The LA Times refuses to release this video.

POP QUIZ: Who is the Presidential candidate caught on this media-suppressed video praising a man with terrorist ties?

If you guessed Barack Hussein Obama, go to the head of the class . . . but don't expect your answer to become common knowledge prior to the November 4th election. Oh, And yes, I did use Obama's verboten middle name -- Khaki is in a foul mood.

OK, first of all, can we stop pretending that Barack Obama doesn't have connections with anti-Semitic friends? His church gave a special award to anti-Semite hall-of-famer, Louis Farrakhan. His Pastor had some pretty harsh words for our closest ally in the Middle East. He had help early in his career from out-spoken Israel hater Khalid al-Mansour. And now we learn that Obama was a "friend and frequent dinner companion" of Rashid Khalidi, even taking a significant part in his farewell party.

Second of all, can we stop pretending that Obama doesn't have connections with known terrorists? His ties to unrepentant domestic terrorist, William Ayers, are undeniable. And now we know that he was a lunch-munch buddy with the controversial Rashid Khalidi.

Finally, can we stop pretending that there isn't a media bias? The LA Times has this video, but refuses to release it? They claim that they will not release the video at the source's request . . . but that didn't stop them from releasing the story. Now, the Times claims that they are not suppressing the video and the fact that they printed so many details about the video is proof of that. That's a bit like saying, "I don't need to give you a slice a pizza when I can tell you what it tastes like." Despite The LA Times daft attempt at deftness, we all know the difference between one column of print off the front page and a video released via the media. And if you're really not sure about the difference, just ask the Reverend Wright.

The LA Times knows the reaction many Americans will have to watching Obama's response on video to "a poem recited at the party accusing Israel of terrorism and warning of consequences for US support of Israel." They know that thinking Americans are beginning to question the radical agenda and racist friends of Barack Obama. And they know that the video could turn the election.

Truth no longer matters to the mainstream media. The news they report is not born of journalistic integrity, but of a targeted agenda. Welcome to the new America. Change is already here.

28 October 2008


I was an English major. I struggled against dangling my participles. I read Bakhtin. I even tried to write a new take on Shakespeare (and I still think the "pod spawn of Marlowe" angle is worth further investigation). But just because words were my focus, that doesn't mean that I have no interest in numbers.

The fact is that I love math. In high school it taught me that being a 3 on a scale of 1 to 10 wasn't going to get you many dates. In college it kept me under the legal limit. And in my career it has helped me to understand that I need more money.

Yes, I love math. But I fear Obamath.

Obamath is that curious calculation where the numbers just don't seem to add up. It's the will-o-wisp figure that lures you happily into the bog, then changes just as you are about to wrap your fingers around it and leaves you sinking into monetary muck without a lifeline.

Take Obama's payroll tax plan. When The One's campaign began he promised that only those making over $250,000 would fall victim to his tax hike. But just a little while later that income level mysteriously dropped to those making only $200,000. Yesterday, the taxpayer's who Obama defined as rich suddenly got poorer as his Obamath acolyte (Joe Biden) said that the tax will hit those making $150,000 a year. What number will they use next? In Obamath: 250,000 = 200,000 = 150,000 = X, with X being the yet to be defined frightening tax threshold.

Obama also promises that 95% percent of Americans will get a tax cut under his plan. This is an absolutely amazing percentage that is only possible to achieve using Obamath since more than one third of Americans already pay no taxes at all.

Obviously Obamath plays a critical role in the Obama budget. If it didn't, he'd need to call Lord Voldemort to get this proposal working. Just pause for thought: with Wall Street wobbling and main street in foreclosure, what logical formula could he have used to convince himself (and voting Americans) that he could balance the budget through a $1.4 trillion special interest spending spree? Not even the Democrats in the Senate who support his candidacy are willing to vote for his loony budget.

When it comes to campaign donations, Obamath is a blinder that allows the Democratic candidate to ignore rules, withhold information, and dip into foreign currency with a conscience cleaner than his pastor's pulpit language. After breaking his promise to use public financing, Barack Obama freed himself from the financial restraints that McCain decided to accept by keeping his end of the bargain. And by then turning to Obamath, he freed himself from the campaign restraints of maximum donor contributions and foreign contribution restrictions. Freedom ain't free, and through Obamath it doesn't even need to be moral or legal.

Naturally, given its nature, Obamath shows no loyalty to the furtherance of actual math or science. In fact, Obama's budget calls for slashing funds from the home of "the federal government's greatest investments and achievements in math and science": NASA. Go figure.

I still love math. But I fear Obamath.

The image is from Mightywombat.com. Get an i vs pi t-shirt here

27 October 2008

What Does Barack Obama Think About The Constitution?

Well, he's not too happy that it hasn't been reinterpreted to force the redistribution of wealth.

Seriously, this guy is beginning to make Karl Marx seem like a cheerleader for Reaganomics. And the machinery of his economic program is oiled by the blood of Joe the Plumber.

You owe it to yourself (and the rest of us) to check it out at Nikki's Blog!

Barack Obama Thinks The Constitution Is Flawed.

Trick Not A Treat

Thanks, Tim

26 October 2008

Joe Biden And The Second Amendment

“I guarantee you, Barack Obama ain’t taking my shotguns. . . . I got two. If he tries to fool with my Beretta, he’s got a problem. I like that little over and under, you know? I’m not bad with it.”
--Joe Biden

"I'll tell you what, if that [gun] is his baby, he needs help. I don't know that he is mentally qualified to own that gun."
-- Joe Biden

I've already written about Barack Obama's take on the 2nd Amendment, but what about his sidekick, Joe the Dumber. Is he the swaggering soldier swinging a Beretta in each hand, daring Obama to pry them out of his fingers? (And before you write, yes, I am aware that Biden received five student draft deferments during Vietnam and wasn't actually a soldier.) Or is he the condescending school marm who feels qualified to determine who is or isn't qualified to own a gun?

As John McCain continues to recommend about the Democratic ticket, look beyond the well-written rhetoric and plastic promises to focus on their records.

  • Biden voted to ban virtually all hunting rifle ammunition. (U.S. Senate, S. 397, vote 217; U.S. Senate, S. 1805, vote 28)
  • Biden wrote and introduced one the the first bills to ban semi-automatic firearms. (Biden Bill, S. 1970, '89)
  • Biden voted to ban hundreds of models of common rifles and shotguns. (U.S. Senate, S. 1805, vote 24; U.S. Senate, S. 1607, vote 375)
  • Biden voted in support of liability lawsuits against firearm manufacturers for the misuse of their products by others. (U.S. Senate, S. 397, Vote 219)
  • Biden voted against confirming pro-2nd Amendment justices to the Supreme Court. (Samuel Alito, vote 2; John Roberts Jr., vote 245; Clarence Thomas, vote 220).

Given Biden's fatuous understanding of the Constitution, it could be that he just had all those crazy amendments mixed up in his plug-scarred head and was never really sure what he was actually voting for. But whatever the reason, it is certain that when gun legislation is on the docket, good ol' Joe is sitting in his blind ready to unload on sportsmen.

For more on Joe the Dumber's stance on the 2nd Amendment, see http://www.gunbanobama.com/

24 October 2008

Michigan's Prop 2: Is Embryonic Stem-cell Research Science Or Social Agenda

In November Michigan voters will be casting the yea or nay on Proposal 2, which would amend the state constitution to expand embryonic stem-cell research and open the door for additional funding at the tax payer's expense.

Now listen, I cried like the rest of you when Superman rolled out in his wheelchair to laud embryonic stem-cell research. And I was shaky after Michael J. Fox's plea for additional funding. But strumming the heart strings will only go so far when you notice that the actual scientific advancement of this particular research doesn't match the promise promised by its proponents.

Those in favor of embryonic stem-cell research rightly claim that the cells harvested are "pluripotent," meaning they can form (or be formed) into any of over 200 hundred cell types found in the human body. Adult stem cells, on the other hand, are "multipotent," meaning that they are only partially differentiated and can form a fairly limited number of other tissues. So, the argument goes, why not perform your research in the area with the greatest potential?

The primary problem with this logic, of course, is that a human embryo has to be destroyed to get those pesky stem cells. On top of that, embryonic stem cells have lacked stability and thus resulted in little or no actual success stories, while adult stem-cell treatments have been successfully used in cases like paralysis and blood diseases in children. Finally, there are a growing number of alternatives for finding pluripotent stem cells without upsetting grandma by donating the future apple of her eye to science.

How about umbilical cord stem cells? While there is a lower frequency of stem cells in the cord, there is evidence that both multipotent and pluripotent cells are there. And after baby arrives and daddy snips that nasty piece of slimy flesh, everybody this side of Scientology is going to toss it into the trash bin anyway (the cord, not the baby). No controversy (if it's the cord, not the baby).

But even more interesting are new research results brought to my attention by my ol' friend Dr. Rapp (who is a doctor of philosophy, but has credentials at least equal to Dustin Hoffman on this subject). Apparently, "researchers have found a way to take any kind of human cell, a skin cell for example, and change it into a pluripotent stem cell. The field is rapidly advancing. "

With this being the case, why do so many on the left want to push for embryo smack downs when there are alternatives that have proven more successful, now have the same potential, and are obviously less controversial when it comes to questions about the sanctity of life? Could it be that there is a social agenda behind their science?

Read more about Dr. Rapp's take here: Michigan's Ballot Proposal No. 2

And if you're a Michiganian, Michigander, Yooper or Troll:
Vote NO on Proposal 2.

Obama Thugocracy: Pizza For McCain Signs

Once again the most loathsome political campaign ever waged has raided Arkham Asylum to release yet another unscrupulous supporter.

In case you haven't seen this story: Diane Franzoni, owner of Salvatore’s Pizzeria in Warren, Michigan, decided to offer free pizza to anybody who brought in a McCain/Palin yard sign. Franzoni claims that she only made the offer after McCain pulled out of Michigan in hopes that former McCain supporters would bring in their own signs. Yep, she never intended for people to *gasp* steal McCain signs for free pizza. Franzoni then shuffled her feet and shifted her O button to cover the hole that was left when her heart was removed at the last Obama rally.

Since Michigan McCain supporters are about as likely to turn in their signs for Pizza as exchange their brains for the Obamabot implant, it's obvious what Franzoni intended: to grow the election cycle hobby of the Democratic Party -- sign stealing (ha, I'll bet you thought that I was going to say "tax defending" or "terrorist alibiing"). And it was working: Salvatore's Pizzaria was averaging around 30 McCain signs a day.

Franzoni claims that her restaurant has stopped the practice . . . though given her evident lack of integrity I'm not so sure she's giving us the whole pepperoni (um, OK, that doesn't make any sense but I thought an obligatory pizza reference was needed). If you'd like to contact her to discuss your feelings about her practice, she can be reached at

Salvatore's Pizzaria
30830 Ryan Rd
Warren, MI 48092
Phone: (586) 574-0023

23 October 2008

Portraits Of The Khaki Elephant

I saw this over at Shoprat's site and felt its otherworldly pull on me.

It's from the SP Studio, where visitors can wander in and create their own South Park style characters. Like the Educated Shoprat, I decided to create a timeline of images, primarily for my own amusement (which, come to think of it, tends to be the impetus behind much of my life). Anyway, here is my take on The Khaki Elephant through the ages.

The Khaki Elephant in high school:

The Khaki Elephant in college
The Khaki Elephant today:

Obama's Thugocracy: More Hate From The Left

Obama supporters have moved beyond stealing McCain/Palin yard signs to vandalism and assault (well, that's what they're up to when they have some free time after stealing votes from the mentally challenged).

So what exactly do the Democrats mean by "progressive" -- illegal censorship or liberal thugocracy?

22 October 2008

The Vice President Is Always The President Of The Senate

During the the Veep debate, Joe Biden (who has been in the Senate for a hundred years or so) claimed that the relationship between the Vice President and the Senate is describe in Article I of the Constitution, and since that Article is about the Executive branch of government it proves that the Veep is not really a part of the Legislative branch. Of course, the major problem with Joe's observation is that Article I is actually about the Legislative branch, destroying the premise of his argument. It seems Republicans have "Joe the Plumber" and Democrats have "Joe the Dumber."

Biden went on to claim that the Vice President's role is to preside over the Senate (yes, that same body where ole Joe has been for a hundred years or so) but "only in a time when in fact there's a tie vote. The Constitution is explicit." Yes, Joe, the Constitution is explicit, but perhaps you should give it another read . . . or even a first read. The constitution actually says that the Veep is ALWAYS the President of the Senate, but only votes in the case of a tie.

The question is, What does it mean that the Vice President is the "President of the Senate"? Ah, there is the area of dispute. You see, the Constitution never fully defines it . . . though is does provide a definition of the term "President" (that would be found in Article II, Joe).

But while "scholars" may dispute what the term "President" means in Article I, it is clear that breaking a tie vote is not the only role the Vice President has played in the Senate. The Vice President can address the Senate with the Senate's permission, and the Veep can function to interpret senate rules, and his (or her) interpretation can only be overruled by a majority vote of the senate. For Democrats with a lust for history who may be reading this, head to the local library and check out the active role that Thomas Jefferson took as a Vice President.

So then why is the left incensed about Sarah Palin response when an 3rd grader asked what the Vice President does? Part of Palin's response (the part that sparked the latest wave of Palinphobia from folk like Matt Demon . . . I mean, Damon) was,

“But also, they're [the VP] in charge of the United States Senate, so if they want to they can really get in there with the senators and make a lot of good policy changes that will make life better for Brandon and his family and his classroom."

The fact is, through their titled role as "President of the Senate" and ability to interpret Senate rules, they are "in charge" of the Senate (as much as anybody else can be said to be in charge of that nest of vipers). And through their ability to cast tie breaking votes and address the senate, they can "really get in there with the senators and make a lot of good policy changes."

But left-wing constitutional scholars like, say, Mitch Albom, continue to spend time when they're not writing bogus stories about events that they never actually attended bashing Sarah Palin for her comments?

Why? Why? Why?

I'd suggest two primary reasons:

1) Given their take on the first and 2nd Amendments, we can safely say that liberals are not real big fans of the constitution in the first place.

B) Palinphobia (as Newsmax calls it). They are scared to death of the woman who left-leaning feminist, Camille Paglia, described as "an explosion of a brand new style of muscular American feminism."

21 October 2008

The Obama Machine's "Kill Him" Story Is Fabricated

You may have heard the frothing Keith Olbermann berate Sarah Palin for not condemning the person at her rally shouting "Kill him" when Barack Obama's name was mentioned. You may have watched Barack Obama sadly strike the martyr pose during the debate as he charged McCain supporters with chanting "Kill him" at several rallies. You may have even read the avalanche of accusations from our beloved main stream media who imagined raging rural republicans ranting "Kill him" whenever Obama's name is mentioned.

Well, it turns out that nobody shouted "kill him."

The "Kill Him" story, swaddled and nurtured by the media, started with a left-wing journalist named David Singleton of the Scranton Times-Tribune (Joe Biden's hometown rag). Singleton claimed that he heard some guy (a guy, one guy) shout "Kill him" at the Scranton rally and wrote about it the very next day . . . but nobody else there heard this one guy . . . not the other journalists, not the secret service, not even that rainbow haired dude holding the "John 3:16" placard. But the lack of corroboration didn't matter to the media as they descended on the tale like vultures, then took to the air, scattering the story like nasty white droppings on the windshield of America. Before you knew it, reports were going out that would have you believe that every McCain/Palin rally was filled with calls to murder the messiah and free Barabbas.

Even though it turns out that nobody, not even that one guy, shouted "kill him."

As reported at TimesLeader.com:

News organizations including ABC, The Associated Press, The Washington Monthly and MSNBC’s Countdown with Keith Olbermann reported the claim, with most attributing the allegations to the Times-Tribune story.

[Secret Service] Agent Bill Slavoski said he was in the audience, along with an undisclosed number of additional secret service agents and other law enforcement officers and not one heard the comment.

“I was baffled,” he said after reading the report in Wednesday’s Times-Tribune.

He said the agency conducted an investigation Wednesday, after seeing the story, and could not find one person to corroborate the allegation other than Singleton. Slavoski said more than 20 non-security agents were interviewed Wednesday, from news media to ordinary citizens in attendance at the rally for the Republican vice presidential candidate held at the Riverfront Sports Complex. He said Singleton was the only one to say he heard someone yell “kill him.”

“We have yet to find someone to back up the story,” Slavoski said. “We had people all over and we have yet to find anyone who said they heard it.”

Now you may be saying, "Khaki, I got your point. But this story is getting old, isn't it?"

Which may lead me to respond, "Reader, I get your point, this did happen a few days ago. But now the Secret Service has come out with their report that the allegation is unfounded, so where are the retractions from the media? Where is the apology from Barack Obama, who falsely accused McCain supporters of hate mongering on National television."

And where is the media outrage at this heinous act by Obama supporters that was sanctioned on the official Obama website???

H/T: Real World Libertarian

20 October 2008

Joe Biden Seems Worried, What About You?

Yesterday in Seattle (the birth place of Jimi Hendrix) Joe Biden made an interesting point that must have had Barack Obama asking, "Hey, Joe, where you goin' with that gun in your hand?"

"Mark my words. It will not be six months before the world tests Barack Obama like they did John Kennedy. The world is looking."

Whoa, wait one minute, Joe. Are you trying to tell us that if Obama is elected some rogue nation is going to try to test his leadership ability? Biden continued,

"Remember I said it standing here. If you don't remember anything else I said. Watch, we're gonna have an international crisis, a generated crisis, to test the mettle of this guy. And he's gonna have to make some really tough -- I don't know what the decision's gonna be, but I promise you it will occur. As a student of history and having served with seven presidents, I guarantee you it's gonna happen."

Are these supposed to be words of comfort from the Veep nominee? We are living in the most dangerous times the world has ever known with a terrorist foe who wants to destroy everything from Christianity to McDonald's, from Judaism to Einstein Brothers, and the guy Obama said he turns to for foreign policy advice is telling us that the world is going to generate an international crisis to "test" the mettle of Obama. If this is the case, perhaps the best foreign policy advice that Biden can give Obama is, "For the love of God, drop out of the presidential race."

Biden doesn't know what the crisis is going to be -- another attack on U.S. soil, Russian aggression, Iranian nukes, bombing Israel -- but he is sure there is going to be that "test," and soon. And apparently this generated "test" could mean anything from a simple international disaster to the slaughter of innocents . . . yes, that is comforting.

Of course, this is not the first time that Joe Biden has shown concern over what our enemy's may think of an Obama presidency. It was only a year ago that, when speaking of "the One," Biden said,

"If the Democrats think we're going to be able to nominate someone who can win without that person being able to table unimpeachable credentials on national security and foreign policy, I think we're making a tragic mistake…"

Tragic indeed. And during the democratic debates when George Stephanopoulos asked Biden if he still believed that Obama was not ready to lead because "the presidency is not something that lends itself to on-the-job training," Biden replied, "I think that I stand by the statement."

Joe Biden's prediction in Seattle demonstrates that he is still standing by his statement . . . even if he doesn't want to admit it publicly . . . again.

If The Khaki Elephant Posted A Quote Of The Day

It would be this:

"My friends, we live in the greatest nation in the history of the world. I hope you'll join with me as we try to change it."

--Barack Obama

(Thanks, Nancy)

19 October 2008

Et Tu, Colin?

I feel like Brutus has just Norman Bates'd me in the cyber shower. Or (on the less dramatic side) maybe I just feel like the Democrats who had to watch their former Vice Presidential candidate of only a few years back, Joe Lieberman, endorse John McCain at the Republican National Convention.

Prominent Republican Colin Powell has decided to vote for Barack Obama. He said that he will not campaign for the democratic nominee, but he promised to check the Obama box.

Yes, I know that McCain has been endorsed by four former Secretaries of state and over 200 retired generals, but I'm still disappointed by Powell's decision.

I won't question his motives, just note that he has made a mistake. And that I still love the big guy.

Barack Obama Jokes

Things getting a little dull around the water cooler? Been a while since you've taken a trip to your company's HR department? Why not try out one of the Barack Obama jokes collected here (to be used at your discretion).

Q: What do Barack Obama and Osama Bin Laden have in common?
A: They both have friends who have bombed the Pentagon.

Q: Why did Obama cross the road?
A: To help the other side.

Q: Why won't Obama release his real birth certificate?
A: It shows that he wasn't born of a virgin.

Q: Why won’t Obama laugh at himself?
A: Because it would be racist.

Q: Why do cemeteries have fences?
A: To keep out ACORN vote recruiters.

Q: What’s the difference between Ross Perot and Barack Obama?
A: Ross Perot is a crackpot with big ears; Barack Obama is a crackhead with big ears.

Q: Why doesn’t Obama drink Pepsi?
A: He thinks that things go better with coke.

Q: Why did Obama change his name from Barry to Barack?
A: He thought Barry sounded too American.

Q: Why did Obama say that the madrassa where he went to school wasn’t a “radical” one?
A: They didn’t have live ammo training exercises.

Q: Why does Obama want to take the oath of office in a baseball stadium?
A: So he can deliver his sermon on the mound.

John McCain, Hillary Clinton, and Barack Obama Barack all die and go to heaven. God looks down from his throne and asks McCain, "Do you think you deserve to be in heaven?"McCain takes a breath and then replies, "Well, I think so because I was a great leader and tried to follow the words in your great book." God looks down and then says, "You can sit to my left side."

So, McCain takes his seat and then God asks the same question to Hillary, "Do you think you deserve to be in heaven?"Hillary thinks for a second and then replies, "I think so because I have been fighting for the rights of so many people for so long." God again looks down and this time says, "You can sit to my right side."Finally God turns to Barack Obama and asks, "Do you think you deserve to be in heaven?"Obama replies, "You're in my seat."


Q: Why did Joe Biden get a hair transplant?
A: To hide the mark of the beast.

18 October 2008

Joe The Plumber Demonized

Q: What happens when you ask Barack Obama a tough question?

A: The Obama smear machine demonizes you.

Joe the plumber stood in the crowd and when Obama came to him asked a straight question about whether Obama's tax plan would keep him from buying the business where he is employed that currently brings in over $250,000 a year. Obama answered . . . oh, did he ever answer. And the left does not want you to think about that answer. Oh, the smear machine must stop you from thinking about the answer, so they attack the man who asked the question. If you have a strong stomach, head over to The New York Times, The Huffington Post, MSNBC or any other liberal Goebbelian propagandist and you'll find a hit piece on Joe. You'll see things like:
  • Why, his name isn't even Joe . . . that's his middle name (and we all know what Barack Hussein Obama's people think about middle names)
  • He's a single father (but self reliant . . . no wonder they hate him)
  • He owes taxes (even professional tax evader Keith Olbermann attacked him for this)
  • He's not a licensed plumber (this happens to be "say it ain't so" Joe Biden's demonization of choice)
  • He's a conservative (which explains why he asked Obama a question the main stream media would not)
  • McCain should have vetted him (this may be the most idiotic point of all. Now McCain needs to "vet" random people in rope lines before they have the audacity to ask Obama a tough question)
  • $250,000 would make him rich (um, we're talking about the income of a small business that employs people)

And all of these attacks from the Obama machine are intended to distract you from their chosen one's answer. Because unscripted, unprepared and uninhibited, Obama answered with his unadulterated belief. His tax plan is not about helping the economy. His tax plan is not about encouraging small businesses. In his own words, Obama's tax plan is about spreading the wealth . . .

or as Barack Obama said to Joe, "I think when you spread the wealth around, it’s good for everybody."

Where have we heard this philosophy before?

Spread The Zo (and Macho Sauce Productions)

If you treat the web like a geisha then you've probably seen Zo do his thing. But based on potential Alfonzo-proliferation I withheld from posting his stuff on The Khaki Elephant . . . until now.

It struck me this morning that everybody should be Zo'd.
Zo, here you go.

And wouldn't you love to see him mainstreaming!

15 October 2008

Debate #3: Man, My Head Hurts

Since Stephen Green, the Vodkapundit, is a bit under the weather tonight and unable to drunkblog the debate, I thought that I might try my hand at it. I mean, politics and drinking while writing . . . who wouldn't want to be the Vodkapundit for a night?

It started with wine at dinner (stuffed salmon and a spinach salad) and then continued . . .

When to say when: a lesson that I sorely need to learn.

The keyboard is soooooooo far away. And . . .it's moving. In this light it kinda looks like a beetle. "Hello, Mr Z. So nice to see you so close to Mr. X." Ow, who left that Lego there? Kids . . . does partial birth abortion cover two-year-olds? www.pinkelephants/ -- no, http://www.khakielephant.com/ . . . screw this.

Now I'm tired. I'm sobering up. And my first (and probably only) attempt at debate drunkblogging has only proven that during a debate "drunk" is more appealing to me than "blogging." So, I'll leave it to the professionals. Get well soon, Mr. Green.

But before I go to bed to sleep it off, I'll at least take a few minutes to provide a buzzed reaction to the debate. And I'll do so without mentioning how many times I found myself shouting slurred rebuttals to both candidates (or how many times I wondered aloud if Bob Schieffer's faces was actually melting).

I was happy with McCain's start. He came out of the gate swinging and even dropped the line of the night, "I am not President Bush. If you wanted to run against President Bush, you should have run four years ago." But Mac just doesn't seem to be a finisher. By night's end it seemed primarily a repeat of previous debates, with the possible exception of Joe the plumber becoming more popular than the Beatles.

I think McCain did well and if an undecided voter was paying attention he/she would have spotted the conflicts and logic-defying platitudes of Obama's policy plans, particularly when framed by his legislative record. But we all know the attention span of undecided voters (who, if they haven't decided for McCain/Palin by this point clearly haven't been paying attention). I frankly don't believe that this debate helped the GOP candidate very much -- though I hope the alcohol has clouded my senses and I'm wrong.

As with previous debates, there are so many things that I wish John McCain would have said. Sure, I do appreciate him using a variation of my initial response to Obama's "we need to use a scalpel to cut spending." (Keep reading, John!). I just wanted him to drop something like:

  • "Let's get this straight. On every topic tonight you've heard Senator Obama mention that fixing that issue will require more spending but then he still claims that he is going to give a tax cut to 95% of Americans. Sounds like we're going to need Joe the plumber to get that load of crap through the pipes."
  • "Nobody at any rally has said that you're a terrorist because your middle name is Hussein or because, like al Qaeda, you wanted us to surrender in Iraq. But even Joe the plumber is wondering why you were launching your political career in the living room of an unrepentant terrorist. You weren't 8 years old when you did that, Senator."
  • "Senator, you said that you want to help the auto industry in Detroit. Well, those 'big corporations' that you want to tax include Ford, GM and Chrysler, who have already laid off thousands of employees. Joe the plumber, I hope your business does well and you can start hiring because if Senator Obama's tax plan is put into place there'll be a lot of unemployed auto workers looking for work."
  • "Pinocchio's nose grew when he lied. Senator Obama, is that what happens to your ears. Joe the plumber, did they look this gi-nourmous in the rope line?"
  • "Senator Obama, your position on abortion is extreme. Your record is not pro-choice, it is pro-abortion. You told Planned Parenthood that the first thing you'd do as president is sign the Freedom of Choice Act that would allow for unrestricted abortions. At this point, I'm just surprised that you haven't introduced legislation that would allow Joe the plumber to just snake the little rascals out of a uterus."

Sorry, but that's enough for now . . . and please forgive any lapses in context, grammar or spelling tonight. Water, aspirin and I'm going to bed. Good night, ya'll. And a special good night to Joe the plumber.

13 October 2008

Barack Obama And The 2nd Amendment

It's too bad "fact check" organizations aren't publicly traded during the election season as they seem to be the only businesses that keep on swinging through the market slide. Of course, if they were investment puddles, perhaps people would actually check the facts about these fact check groups.

I really started to question these "unbiased" public servants *wink* when I noticed a growing similarity between their take on most issues and the rhetoric of the Obama. Based on their analysis of honesty, it seemed that I had misjudged the product of Chicago chicanery and that he is actually more honest than a man who gave up freedom for torture because of his integrity. Could this be possible? Admittedly, it is difficult to judge on subjects where I am Valentine Michael Smith trying to understand "the one who groks." But what if it's an issue that is relatively simple to verify. Take, for example, Barack Obama's stance on the 2nd Amendment.

The NRA has released several ads condemning Obama, claiming that he would be the most anti-gun president in American history. They claim that Obama has a ten point plan to 'Change' the Second Amendment, which includes banning the use of firearms for home defense.

For his part, Obama has started to portray himself as John Wayne lite, riding upright with the reins of his white stallion clenched in his teeth as he tramples through freedoms wielding a class envy tax shooter in each hand. And to prove his hardline, bitter gun-clinging beliefs, he has taken the favored approach of liberal machismo and employed lawyers to write snitty letters to media outlets that play NRA ads besmirching his image.

So who is right? Does Obama have a long record of anti-second Amendment votes and comments or is he Charlton Heston without gravitas? Let's get back to those fact checkers in paragraphs 1 and 2.

First there is FactCheck.org, which claims that the NRA "distorts" Barack Obama's anti-gun positions. FactCheck.org, of course, is a product of the Annenberg . . . wait a minute. Isn't the Annenberg Foundation at the center of the Ayers/Obama controversy? It's coming back to me now . . . those records from the Chicago Annenberg Challenge, an organization that Obama chaired and that Ayers co-founded, that are supposed to be made available to the public. But wait, just because there is an Obama connection, does that mean that this organization takes a liberal stance when fact checking? Especially when it comes to guns? Well . . .

Just last year, FactCheck's primary funding source, the Annenberg Foundation, gave $50,000 to the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence for "efforts to reduce gun violence by educating the public and by enacting and enforcing regulations governing the gun industry." Annenberg made a similar grant for $100,000 in 2005.
So it seems the funders of FactCheck.org have targeted the NRA through a desire to regulate lawful gun ownership.

So what about another prominent "fact checking" org: PolitiFact.com?

Not only did PolitiFact claim that the NRA ads were misleading, they flat out nah-nah-boo-boo'd the National Rifle Association with the dreaded rating of "Pants on Fire" (which either means they are really-really lying or Bill Clinton is making the intern rounds again). This must be serious stuff. And PolitiFact isn't funded by an anti-gun foundation, no, they're run by a newspaper: The St. Petersberg Times. Yep, a main stream media type . . . and a lippy liberal one at that. In fact, the St. Petersberg Times, endorsed Obama, has been caught fabricating stories of racism on behalf of Obama, and they even top Bill O'Reilly's defamation list. Now, I'm not saying that O'Reilly is the most sane fellow stepping the globe, but whether you like him or not it should at least raise eyebrows that a "fact check" organization tops a prominent pundit's hall of shame.

So when we check the facts it appears that the fact checkers have their own agenda to serve. And if we can't trust them, who can we trust? Well, The Khaki Elephant for one. But if you must, go and check out the facts for yourself. Word of warning to Obama supporters who want to bitterly cling to their guns . . . the NRA's case is very well documented.

Here is a sampling of the NRA on Barack Obama:
  • Obama voted to allow the prosecution of people who use a firearm in defense of their homes (Illinois Senate, S.B. 2165, vote 20)
  • Obama endorsed a ban on all handguns (Independent Voters of Illinois/Independent Precinct Questionnaire, 9/9/96, Politico, 3/31/08)
  • Obama supported increasing taxes on firearms and ammunition by 500% (Chicago Defender, 12/13/99)
  • Obama voted in support of liability lawsuits against firearm manufacturers for the misuse of their products by others (U.S. Senate, S. 397, Vote 219)
  • Obama voted to limit gun purchases to one a month (Illinois Senate, H.B. 2579, Vote 34)
  • Obama voted to ban almost all rifle ammunition commonly used for hunting and sport shooting (U.S. Senate vote, S. 397, Vote 217)
  • Obama has opposed right to carry laws (Pittsburgh Tribune-Review, 4/2/08; Chicago Tribune, 9/15/04)
  • Obama has repeatedly claimed that local jurisdictions have the capability to institute their own gun laws (Baltimore Sun.com, 2/15/08) -- which conflicts with the recent Supreme Court Decision District Of Columbia vs. Heller

So while Fact Check organizations cry liar-liar, the evidence is clear. Barack Obama hopes to bring his brand of Change to the 2nd Amendment

12 October 2008

The Rampant Rage Of Liberalism

We all see stories these days about "anger filled" McCain rallies and "vicious" words from Sarah Palin. The media is doing its best to portray Republicans as one step away from violent green metamorphosis. Don't make us angry; you wouldn't like us when we're angry.

Meanwhile, the left is shown to be peaceful demonstrators just trying to love and have their country Euro-loved, while Obama himself struggles to wage a clean campaign amid broiling anger and racism.

But take a moment. Look deeply. Where is the true mother of intolerance, rage and hatred in this country? See her? There she is, to the left. And on her forehead there is a mark: LIBERALISM.

For activist liberals, politics is not about a differing of opinions. They are right and their opponents are not just wrong, they are wicked! Thus anything they do to win is justified. They loathe Bush. Cheny is Evil. Rumsfeld is a horn-rimmed demon. Rice is butt ugly. McCain is insane and Palin . . . Palin is a functioning waterhead bent on destroying science and sanity. They seethe just thinking about it and it steams through their rhetoric and actions.

Michelle Malkin exposes the rage of the Obama machine in her well-documented post, Crush the Obamedia narrative: Look who’s “gripped by insane rage”

Scary stuff.

UPDATE: Check out this post from M.A. over at Dollar Two Ninety-Eight. The media may try to talk about the "meanness" of Republicans, but you'd never see this type of vile hatred accepted among mainstream Republicans.

Fire Rich Rod!

I don't care if they don't have the right players for his system. I don't care if there are injuries. I don't care if the kicker missed a chip shot.

Michigan should never lose to Toledo, much less in The Big House.

Let me be the first to say it:


11 October 2008

The Politics Of Troopergate

Yes, there was a panel in Alaska investigating Sarah Palin's role in Troopergate: the alleged attempt to persuade Walt Monegan (Commissioner of Public Safety) to fire Palin's ex brother-in-law, Mike Wooten, a state trooper who tasered an 11-year-old, was accused by witnesses of drinking and driving while on duty, illegally killed a moose and threatened to murder the governor's father -- you might be wondering how this guy ever kept his job (though I doubt you're wondering why he's been divorced four times).

Yes, the investigation released a report on October 10th claiming that Monegan's firing was lawful, but Palin's people applied unethical pressure on Monegan to fire Wooten.

Yes, the investigation was directed by panel members who have motives reflecting Sylvester's request to babysit Tweety Bird.

And yes, that's the same Democratic Sen. Hollis French in the picture who oversaw the investigation and promised the report could provide an "October surprise" for the McCain campaign.

But I'm sure this report can be trusted.

H/T: American Princess

5 Friends: Don't Vote Obama

Speaking of Hollywood . . .

Movie Review: An American Carol

It's not as funny as Airplane (the one without William Shatner). It's not as clever as The Naked Gun (the one with O.J.). But it still has Leslie Nielson and plenty of laughs . . . especially if you find humor in the parody of Hollywood and the radical left.

David Zucker's latest film, An American Carol, is a dramatic departure from what we're used to seeing from Hollywood these days. This film is unabashedly pro-American, unreservedly anti-terrorism, and unconventionally (by current film standards) supportive of the U.S. military -- even going so far as to portray them as heroes.

The film is set in the framework of Charles Dickens' A Christmas Carol, but in this version Scrooge is replaced by a voluminous, radical left-wing "documentary" maker named Michael Malone (who may just be a parody of voluminous, radical left-wing "documentary" maker, Michael Moore). And while the lead hater in Dickens' tale humbugged Christmas, Zucker's lead wants to abolish the 4th of July.

Like the original, Zucker's character is visited by four spirits. The first, replacing Bob Marley . . . no wait, that was Jacob Marley . . . is John F. Kennedy, who attempts to correct Michael Malone's perception of his presidency (though the Kennedy spectre makes no reference to the fact that he was a supporter of supply-side economics like Ronald Reagan and would call Obama's fiscal plan "economic suicide"). Kennedy then warns that there will be a visit from three spirits, who turn out to be General George Patton, President George Washington and The Angel of Death (country music star, Trace Atkins). He failed to warn Malone about the other visitors he would encounter like the undead ACLU lawyers, brain-dead protesters and conscience-dead terrorists. Oh, and the movie also has career-dead Gary Coleman!

Like the original Carol, the visits have a life-changing effect on Malone. But I'll save that for the cinema.

Do I recommend the film? Yes. It's not going to win an Oscar, but it has some funny moments and some thought provoking concepts (especially concerning the first Republican president and slavery). If nothing else, your visit to the cinema will tell Hollywood that Americans really do like films that admire America.

Go out. Take a date. Give David Zucker some support. And if you're a left-wing radical: go out. Take a date. Know your enemy.

10 October 2008

Overheard At The Dentist

"I want to wait and schedule the root canal for the middle of November. Obama is going to win the election so I'll have insurance then."

Everybody hopes for high voter turnout . . . but maybe some folk just aren't qualified to vote.

09 October 2008

Make Michigan Red

Really, I'm tired of living in a "Blue State," feeling the job loss, tax burden and defeatist atmosphere that only a left led state can provide. We need to make Michigan Red again.

With McCain pulling some of his resources out of Michigan, the rest of us have to step up a keep the mitten a battleground state.

And you can help do that here: Our Country Deserves Better


More On Katie Couric, Joe Biden And Absolute Idiocy

A little while ago I wrote about Katie Couric's calculated interview with Joe Biden. It simply amazed me that the media was in a frenzy over Palin's answers during the Couric interview but never whispered a sound about the absolute insanity broiling in Biden's responses when he took his turn . . . not to mention Couric's southpaw softies to the Senator. Well, I'm happy to see that a number of folk took notice, including Anne Coulter.

Now I know a number of you break out into haloed hives at the mention of Coulter's name . . . but I also know, based on experience, that if this is your immediate reaction that you are probably more familiar with things written about Anne Coulter than things written by Anne Coulter. And though I don't agree with her on every issue, the article below is worth everybody's read because she nailed Biden . . . but not in that way (that would be icky).

So here is the definitive take on VP Joe Biden. I've copied the whole thing here, which I hope doesn't upset Anne. But just in case, go buy her latest book.

by Ann CoulterOctober 8, 2008

If Sarah Palin had made just one of the wildly inaccurate statements smugly uttered by Sen. Joe Biden in last week's vice presidential debate, there would have been 3-inch headlines in newspapers across America. (I can almost hear Katie Couric asking me, "Which newspapers?")

These weren't insignificant errors, such as when Biden said, "Look, all you have to do is go down Union Street with me in Wilmington or go to Katie's restaurant or walk into Home Depot with me where I spend a lot of time, and you ask anybody in there whether or not the economic and foreign policy of this administration has made them better off in the last eight years."

It turns out that Katie's restaurant, where Biden gets his feel for the average American, closed 20 years ago. The only evidence that he spends any time in Home Depot is that it appears that a pipe wrench fell on his head one too many times.

Palin would surely have been forced to withdraw from the ticket had she said something like that, but most of Biden's errors were not trifling mistakes like these. They were lengthy Lyndon LaRouche-like disquisitions that were pure fantasy from beginning to end.

For example, Biden said about Hezbollah: "When we kicked -- along with France -- we kicked Hezbollah out of Lebanon." Hezbollah was never kicked out of Lebanon.

He continued: "I said and Barack said, 'Move NATO forces in there. Fill the vacuum, because if you don't, Hezbollah will control it.'" This is madness -- Lebanon is not a NATO country, nor had any NATO country been attacked by Lebanon.

Somebody please tell me that Biden wasn't picked for the Democrat ticket based on his knowledge of foreign policy.

Biden also stoutly denied that Obama ever said he would sit down with Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Liberals find it hilarious that McCain can't use a computer keyboard on account of his war injuries, but Biden is apparently unaware of the Internet, because there are clips all over the Internet of Obama saying exactly that during the CNN/YouTube debate last year.

Biden might have remembered that debate since: (1) He was there, and (2) he later attacked Obama's answer, telling the National Press Club in August 2007: "Would I make a blanket commitment to meet unconditionally with the leaders of each of those countries within the first year I was elected president? Absolutely, positively, no."

And that's still not all! Obama's own Web site says: "Obama supports tough, direct presidential diplomacy with Iran without preconditions."

Somebody please tell me that Biden wasn't picked for the Democrat ticket based on his ability to remember well-known facts.

Biden also gave a long speech at the debate on vice president Dick Cheney's "dangerous" belief that "he's part of the legislative branch." The great constitutional scholar Biden cited Article I of the Constitution as proof that Cheney "works in the executive branch" and has "no authority relative to the Congress." Biden huffily added: "He should understand that. Everyone should understand that."

Palin would have had to deny that Alaska is a state in the union in order to say something comparably stupid.

Article II, not I, describes the executive branch. Someone tell Biden, who is supposed to be a lawyer. Apart from getting the Articles of the Constitution mixed up, what on earth does Biden mean when he says that the vice president "has no authority relative to Congress," apart from breaking ties?

The Constitution makes him president of the senate every day of the week. I realize that Biden may not be able to count to two, but Article I says the vice president is president of one of the two houses of Congress -- the one Biden is in, for crying out loud -- which is what you might call "authority relative to Congress."

Somebody please tell me that Biden wasn't picked for the Democrat ticket based on his knowledge of the Constitution.

In one especially hallucinatory answer, Biden authoritatively stated: "With Afghanistan, facts matter, Gwen. ... We spend more money in three weeks on combat in Iraq than we spent on the entirety of the last seven years that we have been in Afghanistan building that country."

According to the Congressional Research Service, since 9/11, we've spent $172 billion in Afghanistan and $653 billion in Iraq. The most money spent in Iraq came in 2008, when we have been spending less than $3 billion a week. So by Biden's calculations, we've spent only about $9 billion "on the entirety of the last seven years that we have been in Afghanistan building that country." There isn't even a "9" in $172 billion.

Somebody please tell me that Biden wasn't picked for the Democrat ticket based on his knowledge of math.

In the same answer, Biden went on to claim that "John McCain voted against a comprehensive nuclear test ban treaty that every Republican has supported."

The last nuclear test ban treaty the Senate voted on was the one Clinton signed in the '90s. As The New York Times editorialized on the Senate vote a few years later: "Last week, Senate Republicans thundered 'no' to the nuclear test ban treaty, handing the White House its biggest defeat since health care in 1994." Forty-nine Republicans voted against the treaty; only four liberal Republicans voted for it. That's the treaty Biden says "every Republican has supported."

Somebody please tell me that Biden wasn't picked for the Democrat ticket based on his ability to function as vice president.


Happy Leif Erikson Day

Like my Dad used to say, "Don't tell me you're afraid. Your ancestors crossed the ocean in a row boat; what do you have to be afraid of?"

08 October 2008

Sara Palin Blesses The Heckler

Yes, the opposition has been trying to disrupt her rallies by whistling, cat calls, obscenities and chants. But once again Sarah Palin demonstrates that she is the best and brightest person on either ticket.

07 October 2008

Debate #2: Not A Game Changer

I've always liked the town hall format when it comes to debates. For one thing, it somehow seems less formal watching the candidates strut around the stage palming their microphones like Don Ho at a national sales luau. But even more interesting are the questions posed by the audience. They are Americana and you just never know what they're going to ask. Will Chris whine about his lot in life and ask what the country will do to help him? Does Stephanie want to know if the candidates plan to bring down the cost of her chocolate addiction? And are either of these guys going to take away Alex's guns? You can always expect a couple of bizarre question that force the candidates to step outside practiced response and into the world of instinct and character . . . unless the questions are selected by Tom Brokaw.

There were reportedly millions of questions that were sent in for this debate. However, Brokaw decided to select questions that reflected the ground these candidates have been covering every single day for months: the economy, health care, Iraq, ZZZZzzzzzzzzzz.

I'm back.

The result: America had another opportunity to watch their stump speeches. Nothing new (except McCain's left turn concerning mortgage buy outs). Nothing groundbreaking.

To be honest, both candidates were pretty good; neither was great. And since Obama is currently leading in most polls, that fact plays in his favor. If he wants to win this thing, John McCain will need to spend the next few weeks hammering away at Obama's minuscule record and credibility while at the same time ensuring that his supporters do not listen to the media projections and head to the polls in November.

The only question that I found remotely interesting was the last. And on this one we owe a debt of gratitude to Al Gore for creating the internet, thus allowing Peggy of Amherst to deliver the best question of the debate. And if you didn't see the debate, trust me, that was a long time to wait for a single interesting question. (In fact, if I weren't writing this blog I probably would have switched the channel over to Nickelodeon where Dora and Boots were in quite a donnybrook with Swiper the fox).

So I'll close this post the same way the debate closed -- with Peggy's question and the full response of each candidate.

PEGGY: "What don't you know and how will you learn it?"

OBAMA: My wife, Michelle, is there and she could give you a much longer list than I do. And most of the time, I learn it by asking her.

But, look, the nature of the challenges that we're going to face are immense and one of the things that we know about the presidency is that it's never the challenges that
you expect. It's the challenges that you don't that end up consuming most of your time.

But here's what I do know. I know that I wouldn't be standing here if it weren't for the fact that this country gave me opportunity. I came from very modest means. I had a single mom and my grandparents raised me and it was because of the help of scholarships and my grandmother scrimping on things that she might have wanted to purchase and my mom, at one point, getting food stamps in order for us to put food on the table.

Despite all that, I was able to go to the best schools on earth and I was able to succeed in a way that I could not have succeeded anywhere else in this country. The same is true for Michelle and I'm sure the same is true for a lot of you. And the question in this election is: are we going to pass on that same American dream to the next generation? Over the last eight years, we've seen that dream diminish.

Wages and incomes have gone down. People have lost their health care or are going bankrupt because they get sick. We've got young people who have got the grades and the will and the drive to go to college, but they just don't have the money. And we can't expect that if we do the same things that we've been doing over the last eight years, that somehow we are going to have a different outcome.

We need fundamental change. That's what's at stake in this election. That's the reason I decided to run for president, and I'm hopeful that all of you are prepared to continue this extraordinary journey that we call America.

But we're going to have to have the courage and the sacrifice, the nerve to move in a new direction. Thank you.

BROKAW: Sen. McCain, you get the last word. Sen. Obama had the opening. You're last up.

MCCAIN: Well, thank you, Tom. And I think what I don't know is what all of us don't know, and that's what's going to happen both here at home and abroad.

The challenges that we face are unprecedented. Americans are hurting tonight in a way they have not in our generation.

There are challenges around the world that are new and different and there will be different -- we will be talking about countries sometime in the future that we hardly know where they are on the map, some Americans.

So what I don't know is what the unexpected will be. But I have spent my whole life serving this country. I grew up in a family where my father was gone most of the time because he was at sea and doing our country's business. My mother basically raised our family.

I know what it's like in dark times. I know what it's like to have to fight to keep one's hope going through difficult times. I know what it's like to rely on others for support and courage and love in tough times. I know what it's like to have your comrades reach out to you and your neighbors and your fellow citizens and pick you up and put you back in the fight. That's what America's all about.

I believe in this country. I believe in its future. I believe in its greatness. It's been my great honor to serve it for many, many years.

And I'm asking the American people to give me another opportunity and I'll rest on my record, but I'll also tell you, when times are tough, we need a steady hand at the tiller and the great honor of my life was to always put my country first.

Thank you, Tom.

Sit Down For This One: Even CNN Says That Obama Is Lying About Ayers

According to Barack Obama, he barely knows the unrepentant domestic terrorist William Ayers. And the little party at the Ayers home that launched Obama’s political career? Well, that was just an itty bitty fundraiser put together by Alice Palmer that by coincidence happened to at the Ayers estate. Ayers was just a "guy who lived in Obama's neighborhood."

Well, it turns out that even CNN can no longer cover for B. H. Obama. After turning to official records and witnesses, the network uncovered that the Obama/Ayers connection is much closer than even conservatives implied. Sure Obama was only 7 when Ayers was sending his "troops" to bomb the Pentagon. But it was the adult Obama who connected with Ayers on a radical agenda. Yes, he partnered with William Ayers, the man who did not repent of his attacks against America, but said that he wishes he'd done more.

Is my friend, Dr. Rapp, right? Is Barack Obama the new bomb that William Ayers is sending against America ?

Thanks to blogs like Hot Air, the truth is wafting through the country. Can you feel it? Is anybody listening?

06 October 2008

NOW: It's Time For Sarah Palin

Yes, it is true that Hell, Michigan generally freezes over a couple of times a year. I've been there. I know. Yes, it is true that British aviator, John Moore-Brabazon, made the first live air cargo flight with a pig in a basket tied to a wing-strut of his airplane. And while there is no truth to the preposterous rumor that monkeys have, indeed, flown out of my ass, something even more startling has occured. A prominent member of NOW (the National Organization of Women) has spoken on behalf of Sarah Palin, going so far as to introduce her at a campaign rally in Carson, CA.

Sally Mendel, President of NOW in Los Angeles, introduced Sarah Palin saying that she had worked as a women's activist for three decades to see this day. "I'm here today, proud to support Sarah Palin. A woman who will fight for women's rights. A woman who will fight for the middle class. A woman who will, Lord knows, shake things up."

Mendel went on to explain that as a lifelong Democrat she doesn't agree with everything that Sarah Palin believes, but she knows that Palin "is a reformer who will break up the old boy's network." She then proclaimed, "America, this is what a feminist looks like, Governor Sarah Palin."

That's right. A ranking member of NOW, the organization that believes all women should be born with a vacuum in their uterus just in case, has thrown her support to a pro-life Republican.

Strange days we're living in. Strange days.

Sarah Palin Biography

Just can't get enough of Sarah Palin? Or perhaps you're one of those still scratching your head over how this elk dropping, oil drilling, naughty librarian looking, chair of the PTA could possibly rise to power so quickly on the national stage.

Well, don't bother heading to the book store or local library for biographic information. If you want a quick Sarah Palin primer just head over to the Baseball Crank . . . of course.
And click here to read a clear (and concise) bio of the Alaskan governor.

05 October 2008

John McCain Ad . . . Featuring: Bill Clinton

It seems Bill Clinton isn't quite on board the Obama train. Little wonder, despite his flaws Clinton was fairly conservative when it came to fiscal policies so he must be cringing at the economic Maoism the new leader of the democratic party wants to install.

Perhaps that's what led Clinton to drop the bomb on Democrats concerning the Fannie & Freddie debacle, finding his way as the featured speaker on this John McCain ad:

Or perhaps Clinton was upset with the fact that Obama scooped up the corrupt CEO of Fannie Mae, Jim Johnson, to lead the way in selecting his vice presidential candidate.

Or just possibly the former president who felt "it's the economy stupid" is more than a little concerned that Obama selected another Fannie Mae criminal to provide economic advice.

Whatever the reason, Bubba doesn't appear to be happy with the economic plans of the Obama Nation.

Biden Talks The Talk, Palin Walks The Walk

When it comes to charitable giving, Joe Biden talks the talk, but Sarah Palin walks the walk.

According to contributions adjusted by gross income, the Palins are around 12x more charitable than the Bidens.

Of course, when adjusted by the amount of money he wants you to give to others through higher taxes in a redistribution of wealth, well, that's where Joe Biden shines. He doesn't want to give his money away, but for you to do so is "patriotic."

God Bless America, Joe

H/T: American Digest

03 October 2008

Joe Biden Is A Liar

Joe Biden is a liar.

Not in the every-politician-is-a-liar sense, but in the worms-from-the-bowels-of-hell sense. Oh, one could try to soft peddle the fact by claiming he's just a fibber. Or one could wink like you do about that crazy uncle with the lazy eye who is "prone to exaggerate." But one would be ignoring the clear fact: when somebody intentionally and repeatedly distorts facts, even to the point of stating the polar opposite of said facts, that person has lied. It doesn't matter if that person speaks with authority and confidence, he is still a liar. And Joe Biden, dear and undear readers, is a liar.

This shouldn't surprise anyone. I mean, this is a guy with the audacity to lie about the greatest tragedy of his life, the death of his first wife and daughter, for political gain, so he isn't exactly a powdered wig away from being George Washington. But in the 2008 Vice Presidential Debate he demonstrated an uncanny ability to lie by Pinocchioing virtually every topic. Here is a saddening sampling courtesy of Steve Thomas through alt.news-media:

1. TAX VOTE: Biden said McCain voted “the exact same way” as Obama to increase taxes on Americans earning just $42,000, but McCain DID NOT VOTE THAT WAY.

2. AHMEDINIJAD MEETING: Joe Biden lied when he said that Barack Obama never said that he would sit down unconditionally with Mahmoud Ahmedinijad of Iran. Barack Obama did specifically say that, and Joe Biden attacked him for it.

3. OFFSHORE OIL DRILLING: Biden said, “Drill we must.” But Biden has opposed offshore drilling and even compared offshore drilling to “raping the Outer Continental Shelf.”

4. TROOP FUNDING: Joe Biden lied when he indicated that John McCain and Barack Obama voted the same way against funding the troops in the field. John McCain only opposed a bill that included a timeline that the President of the United States had already said he would veto regardless of its passage.

5. OPPOSING CLEAN COAL: Biden says he’s always been for clean coal, but he just told a voter that he is against clean coal and any new coal plants in America and has a record of voting against clean coal and coal in the U.S. Senate.

6. ALERNATIVE ENERGY VOTES: According to FactCheck.org, Biden is exaggerating and overstating John McCain’s record voting for alternative energy when he says he voted against it 23 times.

7. HEALTH INSURANCE: Biden falsely said McCain will raise taxes on people's health insurance coverage -- they get a tax credit to offset any tax hike. Independent fact checkers have confirmed this attack is false

8. OIL TAXES: Biden falsely said Palin supported a windfall profits tax in Alaska -- she reformed the state tax and revenue system, it's not a windfall profits tax.

9. AFGHANISTAN / GEN. MCKIERNAN COMMENTS: Biden said that top military commander in Iraq said the principles of the surge could not be applied to Afghanistan, but the commander of NATO's International Security Assistance Force Gen. David D. McKiernan said that there were principles of the surge strategy, including working with tribes, that could be applied in Afghanistan.

10. REGULATION: Biden falsely said McCain weakened regulation -- he actually called for more regulation on Fannie and Freddie.

11. IRAQ: Joe Biden lied when he said that John McCain was “dead wrong on Iraq” because Joe Biden shared the same vote to authorize the war [which was a "war resolution" -- another Biden lie] and differed on the surge strategy where John McCain has been proven right.

12. TAX INCREASES: Biden said Americans earning less than $250,000 wouldn’t see higher taxes, but the Obama-Biden tax plan would raise taxes on individuals making $200,000 or more.

13. BAILOUT: Biden said the economic rescue legislation matches the four principles that Obama laid out, but in reality it doesn’t meet two of the four principles that Obama outlined on Sept. 19, which were that it include an emergency economic stimulus package, and that it be “part of a globally coordinated effort with our partners in the G-20.”

14. REAGAN TAX RATES: Biden is wrong in saying that under Obama, Americans won't pay any more in taxes then they did under Reagan.

And then there were some of the shaky lies that are, at best, debatable. For example, Biden pretended to be a constitutional expert when he attacked Dick Cheny during the debate saying, "The idea he doesn't realize that Article I of the Constitution defines the role of the vice president of the United States, that's the Executive Branch." However, if you actually read the Constitution you will find that the vice president is indeed mentioned in Article I, but that Article is actually about the Legislative Branch (as Cheny claimed) and identifies that Vice President as part of the legislative branch by acting as "the President of the Senate." So either Biden lied, expecting that the American people would never actually hear about it, or he's currently reading at about a third grade level.

At one point in the debate "say it ain't so" Joe said, "Drill we must, but it will take 10 years for one drop of oil to come out of any of the wells that are going to begun to be drilled." But that is simply not true. The current Alaskan Pipeline took 2 years, 2 months and 4 days from ground breaking to completion and covers 800 miles over vast mountain ranges. An ANWR pipeline would only cover 75 miles. So unless they plan on sending the current congress to Alaska to do the work, it will not take 10 years to draw oil from this energy rich, desolate piece of unused real estate.

Biden also echoed Obama's claim that the junior senator from Illinois warned about the subprime mortgage crisis two years ago. This may or may not be a lie. We're all still anxiously waiting for the Obama camp to provide proof of that warning.

Now I'm not the biggest Karl Rove fan, but I have to give him a hockey-mom like shout out on this one. If the media actually does its job and exposes Biden's avalanche of lies throughout the debate, it could have a major impact on the election. But, alas, I'm sure they are far to busy wondering what magazines Sarah Palin does or does not read.

Katie Couric's Calculated Biden Interview

Much has been made of Katie Couric's interview of Sarah Palin, where the governor appeared to be a different person from the one we have seen in YouTube gubernatorial interviews, previous debates and VP engagements. What happened? Was it creative editing, lack of preparation, poor direction from the McCain camp, Stage fright, Alaskan bumpkiness, a girly thing? There are plenty-o-questions on this one.

But where are the questions about Couric's interview with Joe Biden? Where is the media outrage for his outright lies? Where are the watchdogs of journalistic integrity examining Katie's calculated, cackling partisanship ?

If you read no other article about Katie Couric this year, you must read: Katie Couric invites viewers to admire the impressive constitutional expertise of Joe Biden by Ann Althouse.

This is an important read. Do not confuse self-assurance with intelligence, honesty or integrity.

H/T: Annie

02 October 2008

Yep, Sarah Palin Won The Veep Debate

I admit that I may not be the best choice to judge who won the debate. Those of you who are Khaki Elephant regulars know that I was calling for John McCain to add Sarah Palin to the ticket before Tina Fey knew that Alaskans had Midwestern accents. Saying I am biased on the topic of Palin is like observing that Chris Matthews gets the giggles for Obama. So I suppose the question in my mind is not whether I thought Palin won the debate, I'm in no position to objectively analyze that (though she won it handily), but whether or not I think her performance will provide a bump in the polls.

The answer is yes. She was solid on substance and spectacular on style. I can't help but feel that most Americans not already opining Obama felt for the first time in a debate of this magnitude that they weren't watching a politician; which, of course, makes her the most effective of politicians.

First, substance. Most pundits knew Palin would do well on the issue areas she managed as a regulator, mayor and Alaskan governor -- taxes and energy. And while liberal pundits will claim that Palin was "short on details" even a cursory review of the debate transcript reveals that not to be the case.

When it came to corporate taxes, Biden tried to tether McCain's employer based stimulus plan solely to the hitch post of dastardly oil companies by repeatedly complaining that McCain's plan is picket-worthy unfair because it gives tax breaks "for the MobileExxons of the world." Meanwhile, Palin went to the heart addressing the Oil Company CEOs directly with,
"And that's why Tillerson at Exxon and Mulva at ConocoPhillips, bless their hearts, they're doing what they need to do, as corporate CEOs, but they're not my biggest fans, because what I had to do up there in Alaska was to break up a monopoly."
Biden was more effective when talking about middle class tax cuts and the need for universal health care. But even there Palin was strong with specifics, pointing out that Obama's tax plan would impact millions of small businesses that fall into the $250,000+ bracket. And when it came to health care, she did OK with defense of the $5,000 tax credit and the plan to erase state lines for competitive pricing, but she struck pure Klondike gold with pointing out that Obama's health care plan . . .

"is to have universal government run program and unless you're pleased with the way the federal government has been running anything lately, I don't think that it's going to be real pleasing for Americans to consider health care being taken over by the feds."

Predictably, the Alaskan Governor really hit her stride when talking about energy. She pointed out that she oversaw the construction of "a nearly $40 billion natural gas pipeline which is North America's largest and most you expensive infrastructure project ever to flow those sources of energy into hungry markets." She then talked knowledgeably about the amount of available oil and natural gas, explained the environmental footprint of extraction, chided Biden's comments about "raping the outer continental shelf," rebutted Biden's call for "clean coal" by reminding him that he had previously said there was no such thing, and even took the time to correct the Senator's misquote of the rally chant "Drill, baby, drill."

But the true challenge for Sarah Palin was foreign policy. She could not hope to match Biden in knowledge of the topic; she just had to move the focus from knowledge to ideology. After all, everybody knows she wasn't added to the McCain ticket because of her friendship with Angela Merkel. She was selected for her executive experience, reputation for reform, conservative ideology and female genitalia.

Admittedly, Joe Biden gave a strong showing on foreign policy, much stronger, in fact, than the primary on the Democratic ticket did last week. But Palin went toe-to-toe with him and scored several sound points using conservative ideology. She spoke about winning the war in Iraq. She referenced the heroic leadership of General Petraus who the left attempted to demonize not so long ago. Palin praised Israel, promising to protect them from another holocaust and work toward a two-state solution in the region that includes building an embassy in Jerusalem. And when it came to the endless Obama/Biden references to Bush, she provided the best take I have heard from any member of the McCain team, including the man himself.

when we talk about the Bush administration, there's a time when Americans are going to say, "Enough is enough with your ticket," on constantly looking backwards, and pointing fingers, and doing the blame game.

There have been huge blunders in the war. There have been huge blunders throughout this administration, as there are with every administration. But for a ticket that wants to talk about change and looking into the future, there's just too much finger-pointing backwards to ever make us believe that that's where you're going.

Then came back later with:
Say it ain't so, Joe, there you go again pointing backwards again. You preferenced your whole comment with the Bush administration. Now doggone it, let's look ahead and tell Americans what we have to plan to do for them in the future.
You see, strong as she was on substance, it was style where she scored the win and will create a bounce for Republicans. And based on the fact that Biden was hucking Barack Obama instead of Hillary Clinton, we can safely assume that style trumps substance this election cycle.

Biden was pure Washington. He talked about his record, spoke the language of the hill, and attacked by parsing votes and bandying beefy buzzwords. Even references to his own biography seemed staged . . . with the exception of those few moments when he discussed being a single father.

Palin, on the other hand, was intelligent but approachable. She was Abe Lincoln in heels. She even pulled herself outside of current political morass by turning to Biden and saying.
Oh, yeah, it's so obvious I'm a Washington outsider. And someone just not used to the way you guys operate. Because here you voted for the war and now you oppose the war. You're one who says, as so many politicians do, I was for it before I was against it or vice- versa. Americans are craving that straight talk and just want to know, hey, if you voted for it, tell us why you voted for it when it was a war resolution.
I believe she struck a cord with most Americans. She said things the way we want them to be said. And she said things that most politicians frankly wouldn't even have the courage to say. Including my favorite moment of the debate:

Darn right it was the predator lenders, who tried to talk Americans into thinking that it was smart to buy a $300,000 house if we could only afford a $100,000 house. There was deception there, and there was greed and there is corruption on Wall Street. And we need to stop that.Again, John McCain and I, that commitment that we have made, and we're going to follow through on that, getting rid of that corruption.

One thing that Americans do at this time, also, though, is let's commit ourselves just every day American people, Joe Six Pack, hockey moms across the nation, I think we need to band together and say never again. Never will we be exploited and taken advantage of again by those who are managing our money and loaning us these dollars. We need to make sure that we demand from the federal government strict oversight of those entities in charge of our investments and our savings and we need also to not get ourselves in debt. Let's do what our parents told us before we probably even got that first credit card. Don't live outside of our means. We need to make sure that as individuals we're taking personal responsibility through all of

It's not the American peoples fault that the economy is hurting like it is, but we have an opportunity to learn a heck of a lot of good lessons through this and say never again will we be taken advantage of.

UPDATE: Post debate fact-checkers are beginning to examine the claims of both candidates from the debate and Joe Biden has already been found in an extraordinary number of lies: 14 at first swag. Check them out at The Michigan Republican Party Blog.

UPDATE #2: Just when I thought that I was a fair and balanced moderate, I found part of my VP debate analysis on the liberal blog All Facts and Opinions with the following introduction: "Obviously, this is from a hard-spinning right-wing blog. Must admit — it’s fun to watch a Republican spin so hard in support of a woman. Ah, the times…" Time for me to get a Michael Moore infusion.