In their haste to find a racial angle to the increasingly commonplace assertion that Senator Barack Obama is becoming a rather arrogant jackass, the New York Times gives the whole thing away in one fell - and funny - swoop:

But Rick Davis, Mr. McCain’s campaign manager, had a snappy answer. “Barack Obama has played the race card, and he played it from the bottom of the deck,” he said. “It’s divisive, negative, shameful and wrong.’’

The retort was, we must say, not only contemptible, but shrewd. It puts the sin for the racial attack not on those who made it, but on the victim of the attack.

It also — and we wish this were coincidence, but we doubt it — conjurs up another loaded racial image.

The phrase dealing the race card “from the bottom of the deck” entered the national lexicon during the O.J. Simpson saga. Robert Shapiro, one of Mr. Simpson’s lawyers, famously declared of himself, Johnny Cochran and the rest of the Simpson defense team, “Not only did we play the race card, we dealt it from the bottom of the deck.”

(Via Ace)

And here we all thought that Mr. Davis was merely calling Senator Obama a duplicitous, race-baiting suckweasel - which is pretty much the message that anyone whose IQ is higher than the ambient temperature of his or her surroundings would take away from that comment. Note that you don’t have to agree with that message: you can, in fact, object to it wholeheartedly. But for Heaven’s sakes, let’s not pretend that the first thing that popped into anyone’s mind when they heard that statement was “Gee. He just compared the Obama campaign to a notorious double murderer!” 4:28 PM is a rather long time for that sort of instinctual realization.

Unless you’re the New York Times, of course. Apparently, they all do look alike to them.

Moe Lane

PS: Note the lack of names attached to that statement. Can’t say I blame the dirty little racists.

I give up. I figured that six bucks a gallon was a nice, round number with which to beat the Democrats with about the head and shoulders. Which it would be. For rational people.

But freaking ten?

(Via Hot Air)

What are you willing to bet that Senator Salazar hasn’t paid for his own gas in years? - because he certainly seems perfectly happy to make you pay more for yours.

Moe Lane

PS: They want Mitch gone, you know. Hint, hint.

PPS: Ken Salazar would purely hate it if, starting in January his colleague from Colorado was named Bob Schaffer. Hint, hint.

And his legislation…

No, really. HR 6615, which NRO’s Gregory McNeil suggests may have been “in jest” (H/T AosHQ)

…would have Justice Kennedy have of all the responsibility that he (and more importantly, Rep. Gohmert) could possibly want on this issue. And more.

Yes, this is not going to go anywhere, more’s the pity. And Gohmert’s about as likely to lose this seat in November as I am to join the Rolling Stones, so putting up his donate page isn’t much of a reward. Still. I laughed at this, and I figured that you would, too.

Moe Lane

Read More →

It’s always a pleasure to see the Left’s breathless explanations of how amazingly good we are at the most esoteric forms of evil. Not least of which is because that as long as they do this, they’ll never confront the truth: which is pretty much that yeah, they really do suck that badly.

So concludes Allahpundit, based on what we’ve been hearing from a rather pouting Left recently:

Mind you, if I had burned through half a billion dollars on a divisive primary, and only gotten back the results that the Democrats have gotten, I’d probably be pouting too. Besides everything esle, I doubt that anybody actually thought to save their receipts.

Moe Lane

But better late than never.

And like Ed, I like calling this “the not-quite-in-motion picture”

Congress is going to be a bear this go-round. No way to get around it. But, heck, the NRCC at least looks like that it’s going to go down swinging. So… stick and carrot, you know what I mean?

Oh, right: we were so busy rolling our eyes at the generically Democratic accusations of racism that we completely overlooked the specifically Democratic exhibition of killing hubris. Well, that’ll teach us:

Obama says Republicans trying to scare voters

{snip}

“Nobody thinks that Bush and McCain have a real answer to the challenges we face. So what they’re going to try to do is make you scared of me,” Obama said. “You know, he’s not patriotic enough, he’s got a funny name, you know, he doesn’t look like all those other presidents on the dollar bills.”

Bolding mine, because when you’re trying to point something out to Obama supporters, subtlety is not always your friend. Although I shouldn’t talk: we all needed an Instapundit reader to write in and point out this particular case of anticipate-the-parson.

Moe Lane

Because, really, the stupidity of the article below is crystallizing at the bottom of the glass.

I note with interest today, John McCain’s new tactic of associating Barack Obama with oversexed and/or promiscuous young white women.

(Via Jake Tapper, who submitted this without comment, except to casually deflate Marshall’s clumsy attempt to link this to the Ford ad*; then again, given that Jake had previously eviscerated the usual Democratic attempts to paint the GOP as racists, perhaps he felt it unnecessary to write the post all over again.)

The video in question is, of course, this one:

…and it apparently is much better than “pretty good,” given the shrieks of outrage that it’s provoked thus far. This one is particularly choice, given that the message is fairly clear: Barack Obama doesn’t want to be with Paris Hilton (what sane man who values his health would?); he is Paris Hilton. I can understand why people don’t want to hear that, but that’s hardly our fault. Seriously: if the Democrats don’t want us to compare their candidates to fairly vacuous celebrities with no history of accomplishments, then they can start nominating better candidates{*}.

But full points for doing your part in bringing the word “uppity” back into the bounds of political discourse, Marshall. Although I think that your Magic Racist-Detector Whistle is broken: I for one can’t hear a damned thing… Oh, you’re sure it’s working?

Fancy that.

Moe Lane

Read More →

Do you think that the Senate Ethics Committee should censure Senator Coburn for delivering babies for free at a private hospital?

Assuming that they don’t drop everything and respond right away, Representative Boyda can be reached at:
(785) 234-8111
(202) 225-6601
Fax: (202) 225-7986
Or via email here

…and Representative Moore can be reached at:
(913) 621-0832
(202) 225-2865
FAX: (202) 225-2807
Or via email here

Note that neither of them will accept emails from people outside their district, probably because they’re both tap-dancing like heck when it comes to the war. So they’d probably be happy to have a subject change, right?

Moe Lane

PS: Oh, trust me: as soon as we know who the GOP candidates are for those two districts, I’ll be asking them, too. I expect I’ll get a quicker answer, though.

But July 30th? Not so much. (Via Hot Air Headlines

Tick.
Tick.
Tick.

I dunno, Allahpundit. I mean, the Celebrity ad was pretty good. Not the best thing EVER, but pretty good:

…but this response was… well, to be honest, it kind of droned. I guess that I was expecting something a little more punchy, a little less press release-like, and a whole lot less whiny.

I know this is going to sound heretical and everything, but the Obama campaign doesn’t actually seem to be all that good at making campaign ads. It’s like George Lucas and Star Wars: all of the really cool stuff these days is fan-generated.

Moe Lane

PS: Credit where credit is due, however: full points to Obama spokesman Bill Burton responding with “What does this mean?” when faced with some (presumably) pro-Obama lyrics by rapper Jay-Z. Of course, he was probably just as happy to change the subject after Ludacris…

{Updated: Both Jeff and myself (and I confirmed with a phone call) have been notified that Rep Blunt had been attending a lunch hosted by Paul Weyrich; that he had had no more than 15 or 30 minutes’ notice; that this is not the first time that this sort of thing has happened; and that he would have voted against adjournment if he had been able to get there. I accept this explanation, and have removed him from the list. - Moe Lane}

Well, if he or she is:

Abercrombie, Ackerman, Allen, Andrews, Baca, Baird, Baldwin, Barrow, Bean, Becerra, Berkley, Berman, Berry, Bishop (GA), Bishop (NY), Blumenauer, Blunt, Boren, Boucher, Boyd (FL), Boyda (KS), Brady (PA), Brown (Corrine), Brown-Waite (Ginny), Butterfield, Capps, Capuano, Cardoza, Carnahan, Carson, Castor, Cazayoux, Chandler, Clarke, Clay, Cleaver, Clyburn, Cohen, Conyers, Cooper, Costa, Costello, Courtney, Cramer, Crowley, Cubin, Cuellar, Cummings, Davis (AL), Davis (CA), Davis (IL), Davis (Lincoln), DeFazio, DeGette, Delahunt, DeLauro, Dicks, Dingell, Doggett, Doyle, Edwards (MD), Edwards (TX), Ellison, Emanuel, Engel, Eshoo, Etheridge, Farr, Fattah, Filner, Foster, Frank (MA), Giffords, Gonzalez, Gordon, Green (Al). Green (Gene), Grijalva, Gutierrez, Hall (NY), Hare, Harman, Hastings (FL), Higgins, Hill, Hinchey, Hinojosa, Hirono, Hodes, Holden, Holt, Honda, Hooley, Hoyer, Hulshof, Inslee, Israel, Jackson (IL), Jackson-Lee (TX), Jefferson, Johnson (GA), Johnson (E. B.), Jones (OH), Kagen, Kanjorski, Kaptur, Kennedy, Kildee, Kilpatrick, Kind, Klein (FL), Kucinich, Langevin, Larsen (WA), Larson (CT), Lee, Levin, Lewis (GA), Lipinski, Lofgren (Zoe), Lowey, Lynch, Mahoney (FL), Maloney (NY), Markey, Matheson, Matsui, McCarthy (NY), McCollum (MN), McDermott, McGovern, McIntyre, McNerney, McNulty, Meek (FL), Meeks (NY), Melancon, Michaud, Miller (NC), Miller (George), Mollohan, Moore (KS), Moore (WI), Moran (VA), Murphy (CT), Murtha, Nadler, Napolitano, Neal (MA), Oberstar, Obey, Olver, Ortiz, Pallone, Pascrell, Pastor, Payne, Pelosi, Perlmutter, Peterson (MN), Pomeroy, Price (NC), Rahall, Rangel, Reyes, Richardson, Rodriguez, Ross, Rothman, Roybal-Allard, Ruppersberger, Rush, Ryan (OH), Salazar, Sánchez (Linda T.), Sanchez (Loretta), Sarbanes, Schakowsky,Schiff, Schwartz, Scott (GA), Scott (VA), Serrano, Shea-Porter, Sherman, Shuler, Sires, Skelton, Slaughter, Smith (WA), Snyder, Solis, Space, Speier, Spratt, Stark, Stupak, Sutton, Tanner, Tauscher, Taylor, Thompson (CA), Thompson (MS), Tierney, Towns, Tsongas, Udall (CO), Van Hollen, Velázquez, Visclosky, Walz (MN), Wasserman Schultz, Waters, Watson, Watt, Waxman, Weiner, Welch (VT), Wexler, Wilson (OH), Woolsey, Wu, Yarmuth

…then he or she doesn’t give a tinker’s dam about whether you end up paying six bucks a gallon for gas. And remember: this movement to adjourn passed by one vote: which means that they all share in the responsibility Any one of them could have voted yea to not adjourn, but they didn’t.

Consider that the next time you ask yourself, How much does one vote matter, anyway?

I’m sure that said reaction will be quite significant.

So, starting with Rasmussen, we have a six-point bounce… erm. Back down to two and margin-of-error, huh?

:crumpling up paper and tossing it in wastebasket:

Well, there’s always Gallup and its 9 8 6 4 point lead. Or, as Gallup put it on 7/23,”modest“…

:crumple:

Read More →

It’s just that now it’s becoming mainstream, thanks to the sudden realization that, hey, it’s grawlix like this that’s putting our gas prices up past $4 a gallon. Real shame that the Democrats in Congress haven’t worked this out for themselves yet, huh? As for not making fun of the ones who are “bossy, self-righteous, and hypocritical”… well, issue them armbands or a medal or something, so that we can excuse them from the group mockery. Maybe a special hat.

There’s only five or so in the country that would qualify, anyway.

The question is, does he have the guts to even respond? to the San Francisco Chronicle?

Senator Obama, you’re invited

Sen. John McCain came up with a terrific idea Monday when he was handed an invitation to meet with our editorial board as part of our endorsement process.

“Why don’t you invite Senator (Barack) Obama to join me?” McCain suggested.

{snip}

Senator Obama: Consider this an official invitation for a debate with McCain before The Chronicle’s editorial board.

{snip}

What do you say, Senator Obama?

Probably? As little as he can possibly manage; and, judging from the way he and his get peeved when they don’t get everything precisely the way that they like it, what he will say will almost certainly be… ah, unsatisfactory to the San Francisco Chronicle. I expect that the word “distraction” will be prominently displayed in any rejection - should Obama even bother to give one, and by “bother” I mean “dare.”

Business as usual, in other words.

Moe Lane

Read More →

Now, we know that there are now, and always have been, a good deal of nasty stories that go through the Internet. In many ways, that’s what the Internet is for, more’s the pity: and usually, the best that you can do about them is to ignore them with dignity and restraint - just like John Edwards did, at least after he emerged from the bathroom. So we have been counseled to stand tall, look people right in the eye, and sneer at this latest suggestion that we have acted in a improper fashion.

We cannot do this. Our reputation is too dear to us, and we have spent far too long fighting for it to tolerate such an underhanded attempt to demean it in such a contemptible, cowardly fashion. There are limits to how much we can be expected to stand by and meekly accept, and the recent scandalous, scurrilous libels go far over the line. So, let me state this, firmly, and for the record:

Read More →

He wants an auto-da-fe of the Blue Dog Democrats, and I for one would be happy to help. Hunt them through the halls of Congress, Glenn. Hunt them with torches and whips. Use dogs on them - or maybe cheetahs; it looks cooler, and they did that in medieval times. That’s the sort of vibe that you’re going with, right? The guttering torch, and the red-hot poker, and the thumbscrews, and the mixed smells of iron, incense, and blood: the screams from the bowels of the Capitol as your minions probe for insufficiently progressive thought; and then, the terrible purity of the pyre where your broken foes are cast into the LIVING FLAMES OF YOUR RIGHTEOUS ANGER under the pitiless gray skies…

(shaking head)

Yeah. That’ll show us.

Moe Lane

PS: You’re going to go after Ed Kilgore first, right? What? Oh; lucky guess.

You do?

Well, go remind people, then. Be sure to also ask if they miss that $2.20/gallon that we were enjoying at the end of 2006, back when the GOP was still running Congress. And when you’re done with that, ask ‘em what they think that the price of gas is likely to be after two more years of Democrats running Congress.

Moe Lane

PS:

NRSC.
NRCC.

Pay to play, ladies and gentlemen. Pay to play.

OK, that’s the part that’s supposed to point outwards. Generally, the idea is to stick the sharp bit in your opponents.

Op-pon-ents. O… P… P… What? No, your opponents. Not Mitch McConnell’s:

Reid plan splits Dems
By Alexander Bolton

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) has split the Democratic front opposed to drilling with a plan that would open new areas for exploration.

Reid’s proposal was meant to insulate Senate Democratic candidates from public anger over gas prices. Instead, it has created a divide with liberal colleagues and drawn fire from senior House Democrats.

A group of influential Senate and House Democrats has sided with environmental groups against Reid to call exploration in new areas unnecessary.

(H/T Instapundit)

Read More →

Nothing too profound: only, if Obama’s European trip was mostly supposed to be about the Germany speech, and if said speech was supposed to be evocative of both JFK’s and Ronald Reagan’s… why is it that none of the text of that speech has captured the public imagination? Stop your average American on the street, and they’ll know the most famous phrases from either Kennedy or Reagan’s speech. In fact, they’re so well-known that I don’t even have to bother typing them out. Obama’s… not so much. Also: instead of exclusively talking up said speech, the Obama campaign has instead spent a nontrivial amount of time over the last few days involved in the controversy of whether their candidate was or was not being a grawlix in any one of three separate occasions, not to mention countries.

That Karl Rove’s something else, isn’t he?

Moe Lane