Big Dogs Weblog

Hillary Clinton’s name will be placed in nomination at the DNC and she will receive votes. This is a pretty gutsy move by Barack Obama since he does not have the number of delegates needed for an outright win and Super Delegates can vote for whomever they want. One Democrat indicates that as many as half the members of the House may vote for Hillary:

Rep. Loretta Sanchez says she’s happy for the chance to vote for Hillary Rodham Clinton at the Democratic National Convention — and she predicts that as many as half of the Democrats in the House could join her. Politico

Barry has been having a rough month, one that has Hillary and Bill silently laughing. The Democrats are worried that they might have made the wrong choice in candidates and the nagging issue of Hillary supporters has them nervous. Has Obama sent out the hit squad to ensure that Clinton supporters are not able to vote at the convention?

Democratic Sen. Dianne Feinstein of California has broken her ankle and will skip next week’s Democratic National Convention.

Feinstein, who was one of Hillary Rodham Clinton’s top supporters, was to have chaired California’s delegation to the convention in Denver. Breitbart

U.S. Rep. Stephanie Tubbs Jones of Cleveland has suffered an aneurysm and is in a hospital.
~snip~
She was one of Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton’s biggest boosters during the primaries and is a superdelegate at next week’s Democratic National Convention in Denver. Breitbart

Maybe the Obama hit squad is out ensuring that Hillary supporters are unable to attend the convention. These “accidents” sure appear to be Chicago style politics. Barry has bumped off his competition before so it is not out of the question that he would do it again.

Maybe this is what he meant when he stated that McCain does not know what he is up against…

Tags: delegates, dnc, feinstein, hit squad, Obama, tubbs-jones

Barry Obama is fresh off his Hawaiian vacation and is not too happy because he got his head handed to him at Saddleback and now is five points behind John McCain in the national polls. In order to regain momentum after being punished at the religious forum Obama has decided to extend his tough talk past his post forum tantrum. He told a group in North Carolina:

“Our job in this election is not just ‘win,’ although I’m a big believer in winning,” Obama said during the rally. “I don’t intend to lose this election. John McCain doesn’t know what he’s up against.”

“He can talk all he wants about Britney (Spears) and Paris (Hilton), but I don’t have time for that mess,” Obama said. My Way News

Barry is trying to talk tough and wants people to believe he is a big believer in winning but that is simply not the case. Barack Hussein Obama is a big believer in personally winning because he is a politician and a self centered one at that. He is opposed to America winning and has described policies he will implement as president that would assure us of a loss in Iraq. He has already gone against the most successful tactic in the war and stated that they would not work. He wanted us to come home in shame so he opposed any new tactics and has refused to admit they were successful. Obama has even said he would not employ them even knowing what he does today. In other words, he would take the path of defeat.

Leave it to Barry to bring out the tough guy, punk in the hood, drug using, Chicago gangsta talk in this election. He mentioned that McCain does not know what he is up against. Barry, you are from Chicago. We all know what McCain is up against. He will face more votes from that place than there are registered voters. He will face voters who have been dead for years. He will face an electorate that will be bullied and intimidated by the Mayor and his thugs who will do anything in order to ensure your victory. This is what Richard Nixon faced in 1960 and it is what John McCain will face in 2008. Nothing has changed in the crime ridden Chicago political landscape in 48 years. Is he statement about McCain not knowing a veiled swipe at his age?

John McCain spent years being beaten and tortured by very bad people. He was abused and suffered physical and emotional wounds that took a long time to heal. What makes Barry think that John McCain will be threatened by a two bit hack from Chicago who has not quite gotten the hood out of his blood?

The reality is, Barry does not know what hit him. He has no time for Paris and Britney but he has time to play on the beach. The ads have hurt him and they have done so because they are accurate. Obama has celebrity status and he is viewed as a rock star. These are words that are used by his supporters and McCain seized upon them. Couple this with the messianic, cult like worship that his party, from the leadership down, showers us with on a daily basis and the McCain folks have a lot of ammunition courtesy of the other side.

What specifically is John McCain up against? Barack Obama is a Senator who is in his first term. He has spent more time campaigning than he has in the office to which he was elected. He has no legislative accomplishments as a US Senator and very few, if any, as an Illinois politician. His major claim to leadership is the fact he was a community organizer. That effort was marginal at best and provided no results for the community but a lot of money for his friends. Obama has no military experience, no leadership experience (I don’t think his claims count) and he has an unremarkable record. Obama has less experience for this job than Clarence Thomas had for the Supreme Court when he was selected. Obama said Thomas did not have the experience he needed when he was selected. What does that tell us about Barry? John McCain graduated from the Naval Academy two years before Obama was born and has more time serving this country than Barack Obama has on this planet.

The truth of the matter is that Barry thought he was on a cake walk. He has bought into his own hype. He believes he is “The One” and that the time is his. Hillary started out thinking that and look where she is.

Obama is talking tough because he thinks that John McCain has questioned his patriotism. McCain’s people point out they are questioning Obama’s experience. In reality, it is Obama who questioned McCain’s patriotism with his “Buy American, Vote Barack Obama” campaign. That campaign makes it clear that Obama is the true American Patriot but does not use the words to say it. I pointed out that Obama said he would never question someone else’s patriotism but that he did so in that new campaign. Obama only cries that his patriotism is being attacked so he has a reason to go on the warpath. He is making excuses so he can blame his lackluster performance on the attack ads. He believes that it must be the ads because everyone accepts the messiah.

Barry, be careful about the tough talk. People might expect you to back it up. You might think that the crafty veteran has no idea of what he is up against but I think he has been through much tougher times than anything you could possibly throw at him. I also know that if you start talking tough you might end up getting slapped around a bit by an old guy who has dealt with people tougher than you could ever hope to be.

As for your character. You have lied about too many things to count and you believe in killing infants. That says enough about your character right there.

You, young man, have no idea what you are up against…

Tags: chicago, gangsta, McCain, Obama, politics, tough talk

Barack Obama once famously announced he would debate John McCain anytime, anywhere. We found out that was untrue 75 days ago when John McCain invited The One to participate in 10 town Hall type debates. Obama agreed to one on the Fourth of july when no one would be interested and has avoided any other mention of the subject. The recent presidential forum at Saddleback church in California hosted by rick Warren demonstrated why Obama is avoiding any more debates than he absolutely has to attend. He is not well informed, he is not well prepared and he got his head handed to him on a platter.

Obama took some risk in this type of venue because this is not the typical liberal base. Liberals believe in immoral things that fundamental Christians oppose and given Obama’s position on murdering children in the womb and after they are born it is safe to say he was entering a place where he was out of his comfort zone. Of course, any place where Obama is without prepared text and a teleprompter is out of his comfort zone.

The sainted one went first and he stumbled over questions by searching for the right answer. He could not avoid stating his positions that are well known but he searched for nuanced ways to make them a softer sell. His appearance was off balance, awkward and disastrous.

John McCain, on the other hand, gave immediate answers and was well prepared. He answered from the heart based upon decades of experience and his replies were genuine. He did not have to fumble around looking for the “right” answer because he gave sincere answers. He made Obama look like the amateur that he is.

It is obvious that the Obama camp knew right away that their messiah had done poorly. The campaign accused John McCain of not being sequestered and therefore being able to hear the questions beforehand. This is not true as McCain was in a motorcade in route to the event and then in a green room that had no feed of the broadcast. The Obama camp had to claim McCain cheated because they exclaimed that he was so well prepared. He was so at ease. He must have heard the questions because no one can answer that smoothly and confidently. Only he did.

After the Obama camp made the accusations of cheating, Andrea Mitchell of NBC carried the water for them. She said that McCain was crisp, immediate, and forceful and that Obama did not do as well as his camp had wanted and then she said; “…what they’re putting out privately is that McCain may not have been in the cone of silence and may have had some ability to overhear what the questions were to Obama.”

Leave it to Andrea to fan the flames of rumor and unsubstantiated claims in order to assist The One. A real journalist would have investigated the claims in order to ascertain the truth and then reported it. Mitchell took the short cut in order to help Obama spread doubt about McCain. As a commenter on Wizbang pointed out, this is the way to help Obama in the real debates. They will give him the questions in advance so he can rehearse answers and then if McCain accuses him of cheating they will yell sour grapes and that he was the one who cheated. It is a ploy that involves the media wing of the Democratic party.

Another indication that Obama felt he did poorly was that he attacked McCain the very next day. Obama went on the attack because he knew he had been beaten like a rented mule. He had to go on attack to take the wind out of McCain’s sails. The problem is, when Obama attacked McCain, what he said made no sense:

“McCain says ‘Here’s my plan, I’m going to drill here, drill now which is something he only came up with two months ago when he started looking at polling,” Obama said of McCain’s energy policy. My Way News

Isn’t this a bit stupid? McCain might very well have changed his mind based upon polls despite his claims that $4.00 a gallon gas convinced him. However, Obama changed his mind two weeks ago and he did so based solely on polls. Obama was opposed to drilling (and still is) and he criticized McCain for changing his mind. Then, when polls showed that more than two thirds of Americans wanted us to drill, Obama says he is open to it. If Obama is critical of McCain in this fashion, is he not critical of himself as well? McCain was first to realize this issue and address it. Obama followed much later. As with Saddleback, Obama demonstrated he is a follower, not a leader. The only leading Obama did at the event was going first.

It is obvious why Obama will not debate McCain in Town Hall type events and why he will participate only in as many debates as he absolutely has to. McCain has much more experience and looks more presidential than Obama does. Obama will give a great speech in Denver because he will be reading prepared remarks from a teleprompter. Force him to answer based upon experience and knowledge and he flounders like a fish out of water.

One can only parrot Yes We Can [Thanks AOW] and scream Hope and Change for so long before the truth is exposed. Obama would have done better to start late so people did not have as much time to see his weaknesses. He will be played out by the time the election comes.

Given that Investor’s Business Daily said Saddleback was “No Contest” Obama and his people must be fretting the post convention debates. I can smell the fear and their reaction to Saddleback only demonstrates just how afraid they are.

It won’t be long before they realize the Emperor has no clothes. I bet even Hillary and Bill Clinton are smiling today…

Tags: accusations, cheating, debates, fear, McCain, Obama, saddleback

Maryland State Senator Ulysses Currie of the 25^th district (who is under federal investigation for illegal activities) wrote a piece about gun control. Currie is upset that the Supreme Court reaffirmed what our founders stated by ruling that the Second Amendment is an individual right. Currie takes exception to this and indicates that no other court has ruled this way. Actually, no other court has looked at this issue. The 1939 Miller case is held by gun control advocates as a bellwether for a militia interpretation but the ruling had nothing to do with the issue at hand. It dealt with interstate commerce and a weapon, not who had the right to carry it.

Currie is very upset that the SCOTUS overturned the DC gun ban and, like Chicken Little, cries “the sky is falling.” He asserts that we will have more murders in DC and he further goes to point out that states with more lenient gun control laws have higher death by gun rates. His statistics come from The Violence Policy Center which is an anti gun organization. The raw numbers are misleading and there are many other factors that play into this. What is very interesting is that Currie fails to mention the DC gun death rate which is one of the HIGHEST in the country. How can that be if strict gun laws keep us safe?

It is important to remember that one can make any claim using numbers. It is also important to note that gun death rates encompass a lot of reasons for death like suicide, justifiable shootings (as in the police or self defense), accidental shootings and criminal acts (murder or crimes resulting in murder). Another thing to consider is the number of crimes that were committed by law abiding citizens with carry permits. This makes a big difference because if the crimes are committed by people who should not have guns then the laws forbidding their possession are not working. Currie should whittle down the numbers and point out how many crimes are committed by people who are permitted to carry.

This is important because people like Currie lamented about how Florida would see a marked increase in gun deaths after the state relaxed its gun laws and allowed more people to carry. This has never come to fruition. In Florida hundreds of thousands of permits to carry have been issued and fewer than 20 people with a permit have been involved in crimes (not necessarily involving gun use). Up through 1998 no permit holder has ever shot a police officer but several permit holders have assisted police.

If Currie wants to skew statistics let me help him out. Blacks comprise a small portion of the population and yet they account for a disproportionate number of gun deaths. Cities with the largest number of blacks in the population (like DC, LA, and New Orleans) have higher murder rates than cities with more whites. In 2007 California ranked fourth behind Pennsylvania, Louisiana and Indiana in the number of black homicides. The black homicide rate pushes the rate for each state high because the rate is about four times higher than their percentage of the population. Is it fair to say that removing blacks from the states would lower gun death rates? While we are on the subject, Hispanics account for a disproportionately high number of gun deaths as well. The statistics certainly lay out a case for lowering the death rate by removing the minorities. This approach is as legitimate as using crime statistics for illegal acts as a methodology to ban LEGAL gun ownership. Perhaps we should ban people who live in Maryland’s 25^th District from running for office there because 100% of the current Senators from there are under federal investigation. Banning everyone for the acts of criminals is nonsensical. Before anyone tells me that Currie has not had his day in court so he should be presumed innocent, keep in mind that he is assuming that all gun owners commit criminal acts and should not be allowed to own them.

What Currie fails to realize is that the crimes are being committed by people who have no regard for the law. DC, Chicago and many other major cities with extremely tough gun control laws have high gun murder rates. Once again, if the gun laws work why are these places suffering gun deaths? If gun control lowers gun deaths than these places should be the safest places on earth. Unfortunately, some of them have a higher death rate than Iraq and it is in the middle of a war.

People who obey the law do not get permits to carry weapons and then go around shooting people. The facts have proven time and again that law abiding citizens do not commit murders and that law breakers do not care about gun laws because they don’t follow the rules anyway.

Currie has his panties in a wad because the Supreme Court acknowledged that gun ownership is an individual right. This is nothing new. As I have pointed out before, the founders stated that the PEOPLE will be allowed to have guns. It is an undeniable truth. Regardless of the fact that it defies logic to think that the words “The People” mean all citizens everywhere it is used except the Second Amendment, the issue is moot because of the founder’s own words. Walter E Williams has a comprehensive listing of the founder’s quotes on the subject. I defy Currie or anyone else to read them and then demonstrate how they mean anything BUT an individual right. For example:

“That the said Constitution shall never be construed to authorize Congress to infringe the just liberty of the press or the rights of conscience; or to prevent the people of the United States who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms … ”
– Samuel Adams, Debates and Proceedings in the Convention of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, at 86-87 (Pierce & Hale, eds., Boston, 1850)

The people of the United States who are peaceable citizens. How can anyone misconstrue this to be anything other than an individual right?

Ulysses Currie is absolutely wrong on this issue. The places that allow citizens to own and carry weapons are the safest in the country. There are some gun control states that have low gun death rates. It would be interesting to see what the demographics of the population are because I would wager they are mostly law abiding people.

Once again, Mr. Currie, law abiding citizens do not go around killing people. Criminals account for the overwhelming majority of the gun deaths and all the laws in the world will not change their behavior.

We call them criminals for a reason.

Tags: DC, gun control, individual right, Maryland, Second Amendment, supreme court, ulysses currie

“For God so loved the world, that he gave his second begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish (unless aborted), but have everlasting Hope and Change. Pelosi 3:16

It is interesting that the Obama folks all go bonkers when John McCain airs ads calling him “The One” and equating him to characters of Biblical proportion. The reason it is interesting is because the Democratic party does everything it can to make Obama look like he was sent here by God to fix the Earth. To listen to the Democrats (both the elected and the moonbats who support them) one would think that Obama was the second coming of Jesus Christ. Nancy Pelosi did nothing to change the perception of Obama as the one when she stated that God sent him to us:

He was warmly received by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, who called him “a leader that God has blessed us with at this time.” [emphasis mine]Politico

Wow, a Democrat invoking the name of God in politics. Try that in a public school and see what happens. How disturbing is it that the Speaker of the House actually said that God has blessed us with Obama? The Democrats who think Obama is the messiah should be happy that they were not in power when Barry was born. If Roe v Wade had happened two decades earlier Obambi might have ended up as a blob of cells on a platter. If a guy like him had been in office he could have been killed even after he was born.

But I digress. I am having a hard time understanding the Democrat’s ire at McCain’s portrayal of Obama when the Democrats look at him in the same light in which he was portrayed in the McCain ad.

This past week Americans were fixated on Michael Phelps and his history making feat of winning eight gold medals in the Olympics. As impressive as that was, in order to be at Obama level Phelps would have also needed to receive frankincense and myrrh.

If Obama is a gift from God then we must have really ticked him off. Bring us locusts, grasshoppers and black sores anytime. Those plagues would have to be better than the plague of Socialism Barry will inflict upon us.

Tags: chosen one, God's gift, messiah, Obama, Pelosi, sainted one