Bill Richardson was on Fox News this morning discussing Obama’s economic plan. Not much to write home about, but if you had the stomach to sift through (or even sit through) the BS, there were a couple of gems worth noting.

Fox: (after Richardson talks about CEOs and golden parachutes) isn’t it true, though, they were getting the golden parachutes during the Clinton years as well, while you were there?

Richardson: Well, look, there’s no question about it: what we need is stronger oversight and transparency of these institutions, and my point is, Senator McCain was Chairman of the Commerce Committee that was supposed to regulate these entities.

Translation: Um… er… ah… yeah, anyway, back to what I was saying before I was so rudely interrupted with fact…

Richardson: Look, I — I want to let businesses deal with their own market. I think the AIG bailout, in my personal opinion, was the right thing to do, because you’ve got a hundred and 16 thousand employees… but we have an inconsistent policy…

I’m going to pause for a moment to just let that sink in… … …

And, we’re moving forward:

Fox: I know the — there’s the housing enterprise regulatory reform act of 2005, which he (McCain) sponsored, which Democrats killed… and in that reform act, Governor Richardson, he talked about his worry about the way real estate was going, the lack of — McCain — Senator John McCain, that is — and Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac, specifically.

Richardson: Well, but, look: who was in the white house? President Bush. Where was President Bush? Look, you know, it doesn’t make sense just to assign blame. I think what’s important is, where do we go from here. At least Senator Obama has said, “these are the steps that I would take as President.”

Translation: You’re right, and President Bush should have saved the American economy from the disastrous fiscal policy of the Democrats — um, I mean, hey, you know, let’s not get into the finger-pointing. You say it was the Democrats, I say the Democrats should have been stopped — but anyway, VOTE DEMOCRAT.

I think, to paraphrase Ronaldus Maximus, that it’s not that Governor Richardson is ignorant… he’s just not very bright.

Okay, I get that Oprah is a media icon, with a large slice of every venue ‘media’ has to offer. I really do understand that. And, like many of you, I rolled my eyes in disgust when she stated she was declining to allow Sarah Palin on her show before the election, because she didn’t want her show to be a political outlet.

But, this morning I got an email inviting me to sign a petition “telling” Oprah to have Palin on the show. I’m not going to sign this petition. I’m not even going to link this petition. I’m sure many of you have gotten a similar email anyway.

The reality is, Oprah not allowing Palin onto the show (especially after numerous public appearances with Barack Obama) already speaks volumes, in a way that a sit-down chat between the Barracuda and the “Big O” could not.

I’m quite certain many people view Oprah as exceedingly relevant, culturally. I’m equally sure that Oprah fancies herself something of a kingmaker. Neither, actually, is true. Media would be basically what it is today, whether Oprah was a part of it or not. In general, our culture would be largely unchanged. This is not to diminish Oprah’s achievements: she is one hell of a self-promoter, is indeed very popular (popular enough that I fully expect some vehement disagreements with the bulk of this paragraph, even from RS regulars) and has had a brilliant and inspiring career. To be clear, I’m not suggesting that Oprah is culturally irrelevant — simply that she’s not as important to what happens, to whom, and how, as she and her followers might believe.

I see Oprah’s show much as I view a good zombie movie (except that I enjoy a good zombie movie): basically meaningless, mindless (in some cases, brainless) fun. It serves those who enjoy that sort of thing, but nobody with a brain sees it as a serious source of information.

This brings us back to the Palin situation. It’s Oprah’s show. She can have on her show whomever she likes. Palin’s appearance on Oprah’s show, or lack thereof, is simply not going to impact this election.

The petition is as reactionary as it is unintelligent. It forces relevance onto an irrelevant non-event and gives an illusion of importance to something that isn’t. Palin not being on Oprah, I think, will prove far more useful. Or, at least, less useless.

(via oo7angel, h/t Rod Patrick)

People can debate whether or not this falls under the definition of “plagiarism.” But I find it interesting that some of Obama’s “Best” stuff is often other peoples’.

For example:

or:

and

(last three videos from Chrisoh7)

By the way, I note I’m using videos compiled by other people. Ironic, no? I’m also giving them credit for it. Get the difference?

So, what’s my point? Simple. Obama is accused of mouthing Democrat talking points. Of being more of the same. Of not being the “uniter” he claims to be, because he pretty much just toes the Democrat party line. These accusations call into question Obama’s intellect and integrity. These videos don’t help him.

Remember the key to electing a leader: Leaders lead. That’s not what we’re getting with Obama. And what’s really scary is, with Obama, we don’t actually know what we’re getting. These videos raise the question of what Obama, himself, actually believes. If the words aren’t his, what about the ideas they describe?

These words by Obama are, indeed, “just words.” He isn’t a leader — he’s a reader. He’s a mouthpiece for the party platform. He’s a good-looking, charasmatic, articulate guy, basically being fed talking points and bamboozling people into believing in his leadership. On some level, we all know that lofty speeches don’t make a great leader — that some times, great leaders don’t give great speeches. Let’s hope our fellow countrymen remember this before we put this guy in office.

This is a great ad, in the sense that it makes Obama look like a bad guy, fires up the female demographic and makes Republicans laugh. Here’s my problem with it: it’s a deliberate misrepresentation of what actually happened:

Now, Obama can be taken to task for misrepresenting McCain’s views. He can be taken to task for, through his actions and voting record, defining “Change” as “getting the country closer to socialism.” He can be taken to task for defining, through his voting record, “Change” as “going down the party line” — indeed, this is something that ought to be hit harder. He accuses McCain of voting down the party line, but only one candidate has a record of crossing the aisle, and it ain’t Obama. Obama seems to forget that many Conservatives were uncomfortable with McCain for just that reason.

There are a lot of reasons Obama is bad for America. There is a lot of stuff Obama can rightly be called into question on. But the “lipstick on a pig” issue is a loser for Republicans.

It can be argued that Obama was really talking about Palin with his comment — that it was a subtle jibe at her, based on her own “Lipstick” joke during the RNC Convention. But let’s be real: Obama just isn’t that subtle. The RNC ad will cause people to look closer at what Obama really said, and it will look like the RNC is simply trying to smear him.

We’re winning, and this ad reeks of desperation. We’re digging too deep into an off-the-cuff comment (clearly, Obama was off-teleprompter, as you can tell by his overall performance) to find things to go after Obama on. But as I pointed out above, there was plenty, in the meat of the speech, that we can go after legitimately.

Republicans are better than this.

I had a really bad day yesterday. I’m not going to waste anybody’s (or my) time in describing it, but suffice to say, I came home in not the best of moods.

Tuning in to the Republican National Convention, I started on MSNBC, which my wife had begun recording for me until I got home. The team of Olbermann and Matthews (among the least professional news broadcasters in the industry — no mean feat, considering the competition), however, did little to brighten my day. I tuned to CSPAN instead, which I highly recommend to anyone wanting to watch the rest of the Convention without being annoyed by MSM stupidity.

What a breath of fresh air! Every video stirred my national pride, and reminded me why I’m proud to be an American. In stark contract to those of the DNC Convention, the Republican “every-day citizen” speakers discussed not their hardships, and how they expected the government to assist them, but their trials and triumphs — and how the American Dream worked for them.

I was moved to tears with the story of Navy SEAL Michael Monsoor — a story with which I was familiar, but did not fail to impress upon me, and, I believe others, the heroism, integrity and honor of our soldiers. Another stark contrast to a party making headlines by accusing troops (falsely) of terrorizing women and children in the dead of night, and slaughtering innocent civilians.

George W. Bush
When it was President George W. Bush’s turn to speak, his first words weren’t filled with the political trappings expected in a rally speech, but with concern. His first business was that of leadership: passing information to the people of the Gulf Coast, dealing with the business of State by doing, in all things, what he could to ensure the safety of his Fellow Americans.

When he did turn to the reason for his appearance, President Bush reminded me, not why I was voting for McCain, but why I had voted for Bush. He was confident in his positions, no matter what the polls might say. He gave credit where it was due. He remained the man of integrity and resolve that I voted for twice — reminding us in all things why we live in the greatest country on earth.

Fred Thompson
More than anything, being an unrepentant FredHead, I was looking forward to Senator Thompson’s speech. I was not disappointed, but was surprised. I had conflicting thoughts during the speech: First, the Senator gave me a new appreciation for our Republican nominee for President. Second, he had me wondering, just where the hell was this Senator Thompson during the Primaries?

However, I had little time for regrets. Thompson, being the kind of man he is, never dwelt on his own position, on his own bid for the nomination, or on making the time about himself. In keeping with the night’s theme of “Country First,” Senator Thompson eloquently described a man who is uniquely placed to lead our nation in these times.

John McCain
Senator McCain’s choice of Sarah Palin as running mate had moved me from merely voting against Obama to actually voting for the Republican ticket. But Thompson’s recounting of McCain’s life — a life of honor, integrity, faith and certainty in the face of more adversity than any single man should have to bear — moved me to being able to proudly cast my vote for Senator John McCain.

It’s true, I don’t agree with some recent decisions by the senator. Indeed, there are things with which I strongly disagree. But more than anything, what we need in our leaders is strength, integrity, honesty, faith and resolve. And these attributes make up the very core of who John McCain is. He is an American first, and one who will, with every fiber of his being, fight for Americans. This may result in some less-than-perfect (even bad) decisions — God knows it already has, as it has with President GW Bush. But I will never doubt his motives, his patriotism or his love for his countrymen — just as I have never doubted it in George W. Bush. McCain is a leader who will do what he believes is best, and if he’s not sure what’s best, he will strive to discover it. This was evidenced in his recent reversal on off-shore drilling, and it is evidenced in the way he has lived his entire life.

In Sum
Last night’s convention rally was basically what it was intended to be: inspiring, moving and motivational. Every part of what I saw was encouraging. But more than that, for me personally, it reiterated everything great about our nation, and gave me the gift of being able to proudly pull the lever for John S. McCain, come election day.