We saw today that protests over Obama’s commencement address and receipt of an honorary agree from Notre Dame started in earnest leading to 15 arrests including Alan Keyes. 

The protestors were noted as peaceful but “…..were told they could protest all they want in the town of South Bend, Ind., but once they stepped onto Notre Dame property, they would be arrested.”  They did not heed the warning.

This does not help the pro-life cause.  I obviously agree with their stance and their right to protest.  However, they have to be smart and cognizant of how the MSM will twist this story.  On a day when we have encouraging news with a Gallup poll showing a majority of Americans identifying themselves as pro-life for the first time ever, the MSM will undoubtedly try to divert attention from that surprising result by focusing on these arrests.

If these were anti-war protestors during the Bush administration, their arrests would likely be portrayed as something noble and honorable.  People patriotically exercising their First Amendment rights, but being silenced by a tyrannical administration hell bent on silencing all dissent.

However, as conservative protestors during an Obama administration (much less specifically protesting an Obama appearance) they will likely be portrayed as anti-government, ultra-religious fanatics.

Plenty of publicity has already been brought to this situation.  The opposition to Obama’s appearance has made its point loud and clear by collecting over 360,000 signatures.  A number of Catholic dignitaries and other public figures have also voiced their disagreement.  So while the protestors on graduation weekend are fighting the good fight they should not become the news.  Hold your protests and have your prayer vigils and services, but do not give the left an excuse to smear the pro-life movement.

For his part, I hope Obama is respectful enough to stay far away from the topic of abortion in his speech, although that seems unlikely from early indications.  I hope he at least gives the kids a better speech than he did at Arizona State.  Really Barack, I don’t begrudge you any of your success, but I don’t want to be lectured about my materialism from a multi-millionaire whose most precious possession is his Blackberry and whose wife wore a $540 pair of sneakers to an event last week.

Number of jobs promised by the Obama administration :                            4,000,000

Number of jobs remaining to hit goal :                                                      5,919,000

Link to Bureau of Labor Statistics data.

I’m not sure if the above numbers include the 150,000 jobs Obama claimed to have created (or saved) during his 100th day speech, but, then again, he’s not sure either.

Notes:

1. Number of jobs promised by the Obama administration has varied between 3.5 – 4 million.  He promised 4 million early, and then started easing off on that.  I’m sticking with his original promise. (also “The road to 4 million” sounds a little better than “The road to 3.5 million).
2. The above is tracking only new jobs created / lost as tracked by the Department of Labor through its Bureau of Labor statistics.  Obama team has repeatedly said the 4 million represents jobs created or saved.  Since a “saved” job is highly subjective and can’t be calculated by any consistent standard, they are not accounted for above.
3. Obama administration would likely dispute that the current job losses should be held against them, but that is life in the big city when you’re President.  The last economic recession started in March 2001 when George W Bush had been in office for 1.5 months.  Democrats were only too eager to hang that around his neck (ignoring the fact that it is economically impossible to drive the economy into recession in that short a time period).  Also, it is only fair to assume that Obama’s pledge involves a net gain of 4 million jobs as of the point when his administration took charge .  If we lose 4 million jobs at the beginning of his tenure only to gain 4 million jobs later to end up where we started, I hardly think that fulfills his promise.
4. Updates to continue monthly

These will be soft numbers and impossible to prove…..but then, of course, so was Obama’s claim of creating or saving 150,000 jobs (looking forward to seeing that formula of how you compute saved jobs Barry).

I’ll start the bidding:

Cost of New York flyover/photo-op by Air Force One :   $328,835

Cost of lost productivity, disrupted business, emergency response, etc. caused by general panic due to New York flyover :  $50,000,000 (doesn’t include anticipated cost of investigation into why this happened since Obama is so furious about the incident)

The Biden effect.  Hit to transportation industry, hotels, tourism, etc. due to his comments telling us all to hunker down in bunkers due to the swine flu outbreak :  $25,000,000 and counting

In summary:

Flyover:                  $328,835

Flyover aftermath: $50,000,000

Biden:                    $25,000,000

Total tally:             $75,328,835

Jobs gained / (lost) in February 2009 per the US Dept of Labor :    (651,000)

Jobs gained / (lost) in March 2009 per the US Dept of Labor :        (663,000)

Number of jobs promised by the Obama administration :               4,000,000

Number of jobs remaining to hit goal :                                          5,314,000

 Perhaps, there are not enough of those “shovel-ready” jobs that the stimulus was supposed to produce.

Notes:

1. Number of jobs promised by the Obama administration has varied between 3.5 – 4 million.  He promised 4 million early, and then started easing off on that.  I’m sticking with his original promise. (also “The road to 4 million” sounds a little better than “The road to 3.5 million).
2. The above is tracking only new jobs created / lost.  Obama team has repeatedly said the 4 million represents jobs created or saved.  Since a “saved” job is highly subjective and can’t be calculated by any consistent standard, they are not accounted for above.
3. Obama administration would likely dispute that the Feb and March 2009 job losses should be held against them, but that is life in the big city when you’re President.  The last economic recession started in March 2001 when George W Bush had been in office for 1.5 months.  Democrats were only too eager to hang that around his neck (ignoring the fact that it is economically impossible to drive the economy into recession in that short a time period).  Also, it is only fair to assume that Obama’s pledge involves a net gain of 4 million jobs as of the point when his administration took charge .  If we lose 4 million jobs at the beginning of his tenure only to gain 4 million jobs later to end up where we started, I hardly think that fulfills his promise.
4. Updates to continue monthly

Jobs gained / (lost) in February 2009 per the US Dept of Labor :    (651,000)

Number of jobs promised by the Obama administration :             4,000,000

Number of jobs remaining to hit goal :                                             4,651,000

Notes:

1. Number of jobs promised by the Obama administration has varied between 3.5 – 4 million.  He promised 4 million early, and then started easing off on that.  I’m sticking with his original promise. (also “The road to 4 million” sounds a little better than “The road to 3.5 million).
2. The above is tracking only new jobs created / lost.  Obama team has repeatedly said the 4 million represents jobs created or saved.  Since a “saved” job is highly subjective and can’t be calculated by any consistent standard, they are not accounted for above.
3. Obama administration would likely dispute that the 651,000 jobs lost in Feb 2009 should be held against them, but that is life in the big city when you’re President.  The last economic recession started in March 2001 when George W Bush had been in office for 1.5 months.  Democrats were only too eager to hang that around his neck (ignoring the fact that it is economically impossible to drive the economy into recession in that short a time period).  Also, it is only fair to assume that Obama’s pledge involves a net gain of 4 million jobs as of the point when his administration took charge .  If we lose 4 million jobs at the beginning of his tenure only to gain 4 million jobs later to end up where we started, I hardly think that fulfills his promise.
4. Updates to continue monthly

NOTE : Obviously the below is fictitious (but I tend to think this is about how it would go).

jazzycmk : Mt. Attorney General, I want to thank you so much for taking some time out of your busy schedule to speak with us today.

Eric Holder : Thank you, jazzy.  What publication do you represent again?

jcmk : It doesn’t matter.  But let’s get to the point.  You caused quite a stir this week referring to the US as a “nation of cowards”, at least when it comes to matters of race.

EH : I suppose, but I stand by my comments.

jcmk : OK.  Well, personally I don’t like being called a coward, so let’s talk about some race-related issues.

EH : Great.  You see, this is what we need.

jcmk : Absolutely.  So, it doesn’t seem your race has held you back, nor has it for President Obama.  For that matter, President Bush had one of the most diverse cabinets in history.  When we’re children, our parents tell us that we can grow up to be whatever we want, even the President.  Now that we’ve got an African-American President, is it time to start at least talking about the proverbial “playing field” having been leveled and rolling back Affirmative Action programs?

EH : Er……. I don’t want to comment on that, except to dispute what you said about the Bush administration, because we all know they didn’t do anything right.

jcmk : Of course.  Let’s try something else.  Years ago in a case involving the University of Michigan law school, the Supreme Court left the door open for subjective use of race in admission standards.  This seems patently unfair and discriminatory to me.  Any comment?

EH : You know, this is not what I had in mind when I said people need to talk about race.

jcmk : I see.  Don’t like that one either.  OK.  What did you think about the way the media lynched the white members of the Duke lacrosse team, especially when their accuser’s story was ultimately debunked?  Do you think she should have been prosecuted?

EH : No comment

jcmk : OK, OK.  How about this?  White, straight males are the cause of all problems, and not only should they gladly get in the back of the line but they should also be forced to pay for all sorts of entitlements and compensatory programs (reparations, etc.).

EH : Now you’re talking!  This is what I mean.  If everyone could have an attitude like that, not only would we no longer be a nation of cowards, we would be a shining example for the rest of the world to see.

jcmk : I’m sure.  OK.  Looks like we’re out of time.  Thanks so much again Mr. Holder.

END INTERVIEW

And exactly who would be the coward in this case?

I have been trying hard to give the President the benefit of the doubt.  Obviously, he was not my guy, but I don’t want the country to suffer in order for Republicans or conservatives to score political points.  At the same time, inevitably, I was likely going to be wary of him.

During the Presidential debates, the topic of spending cuts and budget priorities came up several times.

McCain, to his credit, offered a fairly specific answer.  He said,  “How about a spending freeze on everything but defense, veteran affairs and entitlement programs.”  We’ll never know whether he would have actually held to that, but at least he put that stake in the ground.

When put to it, Obama was predictably evasive.  He said, “I want to go line by line through every item in the federal budget and eliminate programs that don’t work and make sure that those that do work, work better and cheaper.”  No word yet from the White House on how his “line by line” review is coming.  My guess is that they’ve scrapped such plans as it would surely be anti-stimulus.

The response that was most telling to me, particularly now in hindsight, from Obama was his reaction to McCain’s proposed spending freeze.  He said, “The problem with a spending freeze is you’re using a hatchet where you need a scalpel.”

(In the interest of full disclosure, the above quotes are taken across the first two debates).

Let that comment sink in for just a second.  Scalpel, not a hatchet.

This coming from the man that has just pushed the mother of all bludgeons on all of us. This stimulus is not a surgical strike on the economy. It is an example of government at its worst. At best, it is a crude, blunt object that may have a limited positive impact. At its heart, however, this is Washington being Washington.

If they had wanted a surgical strike. They could have passed tax relief quickly. Cut the payroll taxes. That was low hanging fruit. It would have gotten additional money into paychecks within weeks, and that is money people would have continued to see paycheck after paycheck.

With that relief in hand, they could have then started talking about targeted spending programs, and those programs that might have benefit vs those that were pure pork would have received a much more public treatment.  But no, Washington has to do everything “comprehensively”. They stuffed this thing and now the government has grown. And once the government grows, it never contracts.  Why do major initiatives all have to be comprehensive? Change (and I’m sick of that word, by the way), rarely comes all at once.

Immigration reform? All attempts have been comprehensive. Here’s an idea, deal with the border first. Slow the flood of illegal immigrants to a trickle. Then you can deal with those that are already here.

Health care reform? Again, you don’t have to overhaul everything at once. Most can agree for those that have access to medical care, the services provided in the US are the best in the world. That has to be the starting point. We don’t want to tinker with that quality of care, we want to find way to make it more widely available and less expensive. Granted, the opinions on just how to do that are all over the map. Personally, I would first focus on medical liability reform, which I believe is a large part of the reason for runaway medical expenses. It’s not just the lawsuits and awards against doctors. The threat of such lawsuits has driven malpractice insurance through the roof. That has forced a lot of doctors in small towns to close up shop. Furthermore, the threat of medical liability causes doctors to often order batteries of tests that are irrelevant to a patient’s condition, but in case the worst happens, these physicians are not going to leave themselves open to a trial lawyer saying, “If only this doctor had ordered this test, he / she would still be with us today.” That picture is rarely painted for people as part of the medical debate. Usually, any talk of liability reform degenerates into a battle between rich doctors / insurance companies vs evil trial lawyers (and neither combatant is viewed highly in the public’s eye).

I’m not suggesting fully insulating doctors, but I am suggesting imposing liability limits. Doctors are not infallible. They may make a mis-diagnosis while having a split second to assess a life and death situation. It is unfair to hold them to such a severe standard. If I make a mistake at work, it’s rarely something that can’t be undone by fixing an Excel formula the next day (and also, in many cases, there is no mis-diagnosis on the part of the physician. The patient’s condition or other complications come into play and may result in a bad outcome) . Also, there’s a world of difference between a mis-diagnosis, and gross / criminal negligence. If a surgeon is drunk or under the influence, you should take him / her for all she’s worth, make sure he / she never practices again, and prosecute him / her to the full extent of the law.

Apologies for the medical rant. Medical reform is my own “pet project”. Unfortunately, I’m not in Congress.

But back to the stimulus. Obama has defended the stimulus saying that he can’t take critics of the spending seriously when he inherited a huge deficit. That may be true, but that doesn’t mean you have to make plans to almost double it within your first weeks in office. He also said we don’t have time to make this bill perfect. Few people expect perfect, Mr. President. What we do expect is caution and restraint, and we’re seeing little of that from you thus far.

Scalpel indeed.

On Michael Steele’s election as RNC Chairman :  I like it.  Steele brings a lot of enthusiasm and energy to the position, which is something the GOP sorely needs.  He is also a nationally recognized figure thanks to his appearances on Fox and elsewhere.  He’ll know how to deal with and combat the media.  I had no beef with Duncan.  I think he just presided over a period that was unfavorable to Republicans.  However, the GOP needed a fresh start and a new voice at the top.  With a leadership void among Republicans right now, Steele becomes vitally important right away.  He’ll set the tone.  I’m already seeing snarky pieces out there saying he only got this because he’s African American in order to counter Obama.  I wonder if these same columnists and bloggers were praising Bush when he named the first African American Secretary of State, the first Hispanic Attorney General, and the first female African American Secretary of State?  Bush had the most diverse cabinet in history and I didn’t hear many accolades.  Good luck to you Mr. Steele.

On the stimulus package :  The more I read, the less I like.  Too much pork disguised as “government stimulus”.  My guess is that the Democratic majorities will overreach with their newfound power, and that will eventually lead to a Republican resurgence.  I just didn’t think it would come this early.  They are stuffing that thing with all sorts of social programs that have no ability to create jobs or improve the economy.  Studies on global warming and STDs?   Smoking prevention programs?  $6.2 billion for something called “home weatherization”?  You can argue about whether these are worthwhile programs, but I can’t see how they’re going to add any new jobs or stimulate the economy.  Fortunately the public is getting wise.  Support for the package is falling sharply.  Rove had it right the other day on O’Reilly.  Fastest way to stimulate economy is to cut payroll taxes.  People will see it in their paychecks within weeks and will see that with each and every paycheck thereafter, unlike a one-time rebate that they will likely save for a rainy day or use to pay down debt on purchases they already made.

On Al Gore testifying before Congress on global warming : The irony was too thick to ignore.  Gore testifying on global warming on a day when much of DC (and many parts of the country) were shut down due to cold and ice storms.  Al – there’s a reason they gave you the Nobel Prize for Peace and not Science.  Your science is lousy.

On Tim Geithner being named Treasury Secretary : so let’s see, in Geithner’s own words his tax mistakes were “careless, avoidable, and sloppy”.  And now you’re in one of the most economically influential positions in the government, with the IRS reporting to you to boot.  You’ve got to be kidding me.  If the guy was up for head of the EPA or the Dept of Education, I might cut him some slack, but the Treasury Secretary should know how to do his taxes (and that’s giving him the benefit of the doubt that he wasn’t purposely evading them).

On Caroline Kennedy dropping her name for consideration for NY Senate seat :  You know, I don’t care about Caroline Kennedy.  I think it’s good that she wasn’t named senator.  It smacked of too many things wrong in politics.  A political princess descends from her throne and declares that she would like this powerful position just given to her.  There was about a day of coverage speculating on why she dropped out.  Reasons were all over the place (tax issues, nanny problems, possibly an extramarital affair, etc).  After that it was all but dropped.  That’s probably how it should be, particularly if she’s going to return to her rather private life.  However, I do know this, if that was Sarah Palin, media would not have ignored the story.  That just reminds me of what a raw deal Sarah got from the media in the general election.  Imagine if the Democrats had put up a mother of five, with one of them being a Down’s syndrome child.  She would have been Mary to Obama’s Messiah.

On Obama’s order to close Gitmo within a year :  Don’t know what to do with the terrorists?  This job is not quite as easy as you made it sound on the campaign trail is it Barack?

On the Obama coronation inauguration coverage :  I can appreciate it was an historic event, but by that Tuesday I was in such sugar shock that I couldn’t watch any of the event itself.  Yeeeesh.

Regarding the nasty stories being spread by McCain staffers, I think McCain could end this almost immediately.

Unlike others, I don’t think he should publicly address it. That just lends credence to the story. I think he should just do a private conference call with all the campaign insiders and offer them a one-time get out of jail free card.

Something along the lines of : “This stops now. You’re making me look bad. You’re making my choice of VP look bad. You are already damaging our prospects in the next election. I’m warning you, if I hear one more story I will find who spread it and you won’t be able to get a job on the campaign staff of a candidate running for City Council in Wasilla.”

In other news, Sarah is getting deluged with requests for interviews (Barbara Walters, Larry King, Oprah, etc). I think she should tell them all to go play in traffic.

So the election has come and gone. I was, of course, hoping for a McCain-Palin win, but I was braced for an Obama victory. Yet, it’s funny, no matter how much you steel yourself against something, it still comes as something of a shock when it actually happens. It’s like a dear sick relative that has been living on borrowed time, and you know what’s happening, but you still can’t help but grieve when the inevitable comes.

However, the 2010 mid-terms begin today. The 2012 Presidential race begins today. One of the retrospective mistakes the GOP made after the 2004 victory was that they took a deep breath and relaxed a bit. The Dems, however, dug in their heels and were determined not to allow any legislative victories to GWB. It began with their fight against Social Security reform. When that went down in flames, Bush’s approval rating began its descent and he never recovered.

Looking at this 2008 election there are certainly lessons to be learned, and that can start with debunking certain falsehoods.

1. Obama won in a landslide

You are going to see that passed around liberally (pun intended). I don’t know if there is a formal definition for a landslide, but this is not one. He won the national vote by less than 6%. Yes, he won all of the close states, but those were all states with close votes in 2004, and the statewide polling followed the shift in national polling.

1. Obama ran the most brilliant campaign ever

Please. I will give credit where credit is due. Obama ran a very smart campaign. They were well-organized. They were excellent fund raisers. Obama himself stayed on his simple message (Bush = McCain, McCain = Bush). He made very few mistakes. He was an effective debater in the sense that he was always good at making his answers conform to his short list of talking points. However, to say he ran the most brilliant campaign ever is a stretch. He entered the general election season with a modest lead. He exits the general election season with a modest win (nationally). He basically ran out the clock and took few risks. He also had the built in advantage of having a very unpopular incumbent President from the opposing party. He also had a media that was (charitably speaking), ahem, a bit favorable to him. Add into that equation a great deal of fortuitous timing. If Lehman Brothers and the other financial institution don’t melt down in mid-September, this thing goes down to the wire, neck-and-neck. The external events could not have played out any better for him. Once that happened, undecided voters didn’t care any longer about his lack of experience, his associations, his far-left liberal views, etc. They just decided to boot out the party currently holding the Presidency just to see if the other guy could do any better.

1. Sarah Palin was a drag on the ticket

Sarah is probably the biggest reason McCain did as well as he did. Without Sarah, the GOP convention is an absolute bust and McCain gets no bounce. Without Palin, there was no consolidation of the conservative base. Without Palin, there would have been few attacks on Obama because McCain seemed reluctant to do so. Palin being portrayed as a drag on the ticket is the next phase of the MSM to diminish her. They seem to be done with “stupid, ignorant bumpkin” phase. In the last month of the campaign, she was the most accessible of the 4 candidates, doing constant interviews. She gave the MSM nothing to ridicule (certainly no whoppers like Biden had which were largely ignored by the MSM). So now they are going to try to say that the GOP itself has rejected her and that she has caused division within the ranks, etc. Yet wherever she went, huge crowds attended.

I will say this, there have been some rumors (Laura Ingram and others) saying that Sarah is going to be made out to be the fall guy (or gal as the case may be) by the GOP in the aftermath of the election. We’ve already heard stories about Romney supporters disparaging her. I don’t know the validity of all that. But the GOP would be making a grave mistake if they throw Sarah under the bus. They would risk losing the support of many, myself included. This lady went from being little known to becoming one of the most recognized people on the planet almost overnight. She went from being the most highly approved governor in the US to being served to the wolves. She was the victim of the most vicious and coordinated set of attacks (many of them highly personal) that I’ve ever witnessed. Yet she weathered the blows and always came back fighting in her own spunky way. After a tough loss, there is always going to be some finger-pointing but it shouldn’t be directed at Sarah. Last thing GOP needs right now is a fracturing of the base, and heaping blame on Sarah would do that.

Keep the faith.

This article is from the Columbus Dispatch and is also posted on The Drudge Report.

State employee says checks on the newly famous are new to her

This one keeps getting deeper and deeper. At least the Inspector General in Ohio is now investigating.

Here’s the page to send OH governor Ted Stickland a note letting him know what you think of this situation. He’s been very dismissive to this point.

Contact Ted Strickland

I’m hoping for the best. I’ve voted early, and I went to a great McCain rally in Nationwide Arena in Columbus on Friday night. McCain was fired up.

However, facts are facts and polls are polls, and John & Sarah face a steep uphill climb on Tuesday. But I’m keeping the faith. Stranger things have happened.

Assuming that the polls are correct and Obama does win the election (shudder), what can we expect for four years?

I’ve got it boiled down to two simple steps:

1. First two years – complain about the mess you inherited from George W. Bush.

2. Next two years – start running for re-election with your mantra being that we can’t afford to return to the same failed policies of George W. Bush.

I mean, it’s been working for him up until now, why “change”?

While Bill O’Reilly’s pomposity grates on me at times, he is one of the fairest media personalities out there. He may drive liberals up the wall, but he has never been a Republican apologist. He has gone hard after the Bush administration on many issues, notably illegal immigration. While he certainly leans conservative, I think he calls it like he sees it, and I respect him immensely for that.

Last night on Letterman he gave a great defense of Sarah Palin, while at the same time not specifically endorsing the McCain / Palin ticket. It was a point of simple fairness (considering their endorsement of the Obama tax plan, I would think liberals could appreciate this).

Before O’Reilly even came out, Letterman had already been teeing off on Palin. His “top 10″ list related to excuses she is using for her wardrobe. He then suggested to Sarah that she could shop at Target. Yeah Dave, I’m sure that’s where you get those double-breasted suits you wear.

This has been a recurring theme for Letterman. Weeks earlier, he had Dr. Phil on and was criticizing Sarah as a mother because she apparently hadn’t taken “5 minutes” to discuss birth control with her now-pregnant teenage daughter. Yeah Dave, I’m sure you know everything about parenting. Even Dr. Phil chided him saying, “When your kid is a teenager, Dave, you may be shocked to find out that they don’t always listen to you.”

So O’Reilly comes out, he and Letterman do some non-sensical chit chat, but eventually Dave has to return to Palin-bashing. So he immediately brings up the Couric interview saying that most people just watched that and said “Wow”. O’Reilly said that he actually admired Palin, and Letterman incredulously asked “Explain that” (as if it is ludicrous to even suggest such a thing).

O’Reilly explains how she is a self-made woman. She had no “rich uncle” who helped her break into politics. She’s reformed Alaska and gone after corrupt officials (even those in her own party). And she’s given back some of the oil company profits to Alaska’s citizens. He then says that the media has unjustly been relentlessly beating on her.

Letterman then tries to defend the media. He actually tries suggesting that Palin has gotten it no worse than the others in the race (what race has he been watching?). And then he implies that O’Reilly would not be so generous in an assessment of Joe Biden.

O’Reilly said he’s been fair to Biden, but asks Letterman why he admires Joe Biden. Letterman refers to the great personal burden that Biden had to bear when his wife died and he had to raise his two sons. That is admirable and it’s a fair enough point (although I wonder if Letterman feels the same way about the 5 years McCain spent in a POW camp).

Personally, I would have loved to have been in O’Reilly’s place. When Letterman started up about the Palin / Couric interview I would have asked, “Have you ever had a bad monologue Dave? A night when all the jokes fell flat and there were nothing but crickets?. She was new to the national spotlight, and she had a bad day and that is all.”

At any rate, kudos to Bill. Thanks for telling it like it is.

I would love to ask this question.

“Senator Obama, your election would be an historic landmark in racial progress. I can’t imagine a clearer signal that the proverbial playing field has been leveled than an African American being elected as President of the United States. With that in mind, do you have plans to roll back affirmative action programs?”

As much as I would like to ask it, it’s a far too easy question to evade. He would just say, “Certainly we’ve made progress, but there’s so much more to make.”

sigh

On Fox’s front page: Obama campaign freezes out Floida TV station

Outside of O’Reilly, this is the first hard-hitting interview I’ve seen by a reporter of the Obama / Biden campaign. And Joe did not like it. Apparently this TV reporter did not get the memo from the Obama campaign about how interviews are supposed to work.

The Obama campaign’s response? It is freezing out this Florida TV station. No more interviews.

This on the heels of Joe the Plumber’s personal life being invaded and scoured by the media because he had the audacity to ask Obama a fair question during a campaign visit to Joe’s neighborhood.

Can’t wait to see what the Fairness Doctrine will bring. Our days on redstate.com could be numbered.

I’ve got to hand it to you MSM, you outdid yourself this week.

First we have Joe Biden warning of an international incident within 6 months of an Obama Presidency to test his mettle. Oh, and by the way, the country probably won’t like Obama’s response. Where was the shocked coverage of that one?

Later in the week, we have Drew Griffin of CNN interviewing Sarah Palin and grossly misquouting a story by Byron York of the National Review saying that York wrote “I can’t tell if Sarah Palin is incompetent, stupid, unqualified, corrupt or all of the above.” Actually, York was commenting on the media coverage of Palin and Griffin left out the key words which opened that quote. Full quote was “Watching press coverage of the Repblican candidate for vice president, it’s sometimes hard to decide whether Sarah Palin is incompetent, stupid, unqualified, corrupt or all of the above.”

The most amusing part of Griffin’s interview with Palin was when Palin asked Griffin who wrote that article, and he didn’t know. Apparently in his haste to find conservative commentary criticizing the Governor, he didn’t even take the time to note who wrote the article, much less actually read it. Or perhaps, his misquote was quite intentional.

This unfair ambush of Palin received little to no coverage. CNN itself has apologized to York, but has not apologized to Palin or the McCain campaign. The best it could offer was clipping that part of the interview from future viewings because they could reluctantly see how people might “misconstrue” that sequence.

Those are two whoppers. Yet what story did the MSM push this week? Sarah Palin’s wardrobe expense. Wow. Yet I’ve seen little criticism of the $2 million party that Obama is planning in Chicago on election night, which could be seen as both excessive and presumptuous (now in fairness, like the McCain campaign, he’s spending it out of his contributions, and if that’s how he wants to spend it, so be it).

Let’s take the Biden story. Imagine if Sarah Palin had said something like the following, “You’re darn right we all should be concerned about John McCain’s age. He might not last six months in office, so I’ve got to get ready to be President if that happens.”

First the press would have gotten down on its collective knees and given thanks for such manna from the heavens, and then they would have gone to town. Page 1, above the fold, across the country. McCain and Palin would have been responding to that between now and election day (and probably after). But, in Biden’s case, that’s just Joe being Joe.

Speaking of gifts, unfortunately, the press has gotten a couple more juicy steaks thrown in its lap. First we have this idiot 20-year old McCain volunteer claim she was beat up by an Obama supporter who carved a “B” in her face. That was a hoax, and I hope the police prosecute her to the fullest extent for wasting their time. The College Republicans have expelled her. If this had been an Obama supporter claiming as assault by McCain supporters that would be the end of the story. However, right now the MSM is desparately searching for a way to prove that this girl was not just a nut case acting on her own, but was instead acting on the behest of others within the campaign. If nothing else, this story plays into the false narrative that the MSM has been creating about “rage” at McCain rallies (like the debunked “kill him” claim). Funny, has the MSM been looking into this kid, David Kernell, that hacked Sarah Palin’s personal e-mail account? Isn’t he the son of a Democratic state representative? Personally, I think this kid just pulled a prank, but if that kid had hacked Obama’s e-mail and was the son of a Republican state representative, I doubt the story would have faded as quickly as it did.

Next we get John McCain’s brother, Joe, putting in a 911 call to complain about traffic and then hurling an expletive at the 911 operator. Thanks Joe. Your brother needed that. I’m sure MSM will have a good time talking about how apparently John’s legendary temper (which curiously has not been on display at any time in the campaign) runs in the family.

Kudos MSM. Well done.

So Biden says that within six months there will be an international crisis to test Barack Obama’s “mettle”. This is, of course, just the latest example of “foot-in-mouth” disease that continues to plague Joe the Senator.

I think he forgot that the Democratic primaries were over and that he was no longer running against Senator Obama, but rather with him. Why else would you take such pains to point out your running mate’s inexperience? Are you trying to plant that idea in voters’ minds?

I could hear Obama’s campaign managers saying “Doh!” from halfway across the country.

Now the event has been downplayed in the media, and today Obama was doing damage control by saying that Biden’s comments were meant to mean that regardless of the outcome in the election that the next President would be tested (although Biden specifically said Obama by name).

However, for all the hand-wringing that has been done about Palin being a heartbeat away from the Presidency if 72-year old John McCain should expire while in office, I think we need to take a hard look at the frightening prospects of a Biden Presidency. After all, Obama’s mother died in her early 50s, and Obama used to smoke.

Yikes.

So I just read an account of Joe Biden making another one of his classic gaffes.

To paraphrase, Biden said the following:

Biden : “Barack Obama knows what is important in this election, and its a 3-letter word — jobs. J – O – B – S.”

Now is this important with all the other issues swirling in this election? Of course not.

However, when Biden says this, it’s just “Joe being Joe” and it is roundly ignored and lightly reported.

If Palin says this, SNL is mocking it last night (in front of Palin herself to boot), adding to the Democratic mythos that she is an ignorant country bumpkin.

If McCain says this, we would be seeing condescending reports saying he had a “senior moment”, and this is more proof that he’s becoming more and more erratic. (why don’t they just call him a senile old man and be done with it?)

When Dan Qualye made a mistake while visiting a school spelling bee years ago in correcting a young boy to spell potato as “potatoe” he was mercilessly blasted for being an idiot and it still follows him around today.

Wonder why that is?