While the left screams about TEA Party members wanting blacks lynched (a baseless claim) the left is engaging in a high tech lynching of a black conservative. The story that Herman Cain was accused of sexual harassment and that an investigation turned up nothing has not stopped the left wing media (the Democrat wing) from lynching him. The baseless claims line up with the smear job The New York Times did in manufacturing (in 2008) the equally baseless claim that John McCain had an affair.

The left is very fast to jump on the lynch train when it comes to Herman Cain even though the allegations appear baseless. When it comes to their own they ignore the facts to provide protection.

Bill Clinton accused of rape and caught (and verified via DNA) having sex with an intern. He lied about it and the Democrats defended him during the impeachment he suffered for perjury. The left said it was a personal affair, a matter of sex between consenting adults. Nothing to see here so move along.

John Edwards is another example. He denied, denied, denied and then bam, the facts came out and not only did he have an affair while his poor wife was dying of cancer, he fathered a child. He was eventually shunned by his party but not until the evidence was so overwhelming (and sleazy) that there was no way to deny it.

Jesse Jackson, the paragon of virtue, fathered a child with someone that was not his wife. He is still regarded as a spokesperson for the disadvantaged minorities in this country (or those who have been told so often they are disadvantaged that they act like it).

We are all human beings and we all make mistakes. These men suffered their issues in public because of who they are. The untold numbers of people in the same situations are unknown to all except their family and friends because they do not live in the public’s eye.

The problem arises when allegations such as those against McCain and Herman Cain are manufactured and people do not give them the benefit of the doubt because of politics. Clinton and Edwards deny it so it must be false. Cain denies it and he is lying…

Wouldn’t it be better if the NYT did not make up the McCain story?

Wouldn’t it be better if Cain received the same consideration Clinton and Edwards did when the left kept telling us nothing was going on? It has not been shown that Cain did anything wrong. If it turns out that he did then fine, skewer him and send him on his way.

The idea that he needs to be ruined over baseless accusations is one of the things wrong in our political system.

It would have been nice though, if the MSM had spent as much time vetting Obama as it does looking to destroy Republicans.

Certainly there were a few things in Obama’s past that were liabilities. Of course they are not a problem when the MSM is burying legitimate stories.

Then again, the left only lynches blacks who have strayed away from the Democrat plantation.

Cave canem!
Never surrender, never submit.

Of course the title of this post is sarcastic because John McCain, Mr. Straight Talk, is not talking the same straight talk he was back when immigration reform was a hot button issue. When George Bush wanted to grant amnesty to millions of illegal aliens John McCain was on board with the entire process. The uproar from the citizens of this country is the only thing that kept Congress from granting amnesty to millions of law breakers.

Back then McCain did not have a care in the world and he was courting the Hispanic population (how did that work out for you John) he could claim he was a Maverick and that he did not toe the party line. Yes, that was then but now he is singing a different story. Perhaps it is because he has watched as incumbents from both parties were voted out in their primaries. More likely it is because he is in a very tight race for his Senate seat and he might just lose.

It is not hard to see that McCain is in a tight race because his whole stance on illegal immigration has changed. Back when McCain was courting the illegal vote he told an interviewer that he did not think a fence was the way to go but if they (those opposed to illegals) want a fence I’ll build the G-d damned thing. Now he is a big proponent for the fence. His latest ad has him walking along with a law enforcement officer and McCain blames illegals for all the bad things taking place (much of which is true) and then says we need to build the danged fence. The viewer is left with a warm and fuzzy feeling as the officer says you’re one of us.

McCain was not one of us when he was working very hard trying to get amnesty for the lawbreakers. McCain was not one of us when he was shunning the idea of a fence and he was not one of us when he was working with the left and all the La Raza types to reward criminals (all the time ignoring the will of a huge majority of citizens). No, McCain became one of us when he saw a challenger with a good chance of beating him. McCain is trying to be one of us now that Arizona has passed a tough law against illegal immigration, a law that about 70% of the state’s legal population approves of. John McCain can see that if 70% approve of this law then he had better try to appear anti illegal and hope that no one remembers his past position on the issue if he wants to have a chance to be reelected.

It is time for John McCain to go. In fact it is well past time for him to go. I think he would have been a better president than the guy we have now but mostly because he has leadership experience and has actually sacrificed for this country. And McCain would not have been as radical as Obama.

Having said that, there is not much difference between the two of them in most other regards.

I predict that McCain will lose the primary. The people in Arizona are going to look at the commercial and laugh at tough guy McCain and his supposed stance on illegal immigration.

RINOs are in as much trouble as the Democrats.

Source:
ABC

Never surrender, never submit.

John McCain is in a real dogfight for his Senate seat as Republican J.D. Hayworth is mounting a respectable campaign and is beating up on McCain for his RINO history. McCain feels the heat and he is resorting to the same arguments Democrats used once the war on terror became unpopular. Astute readers will remember that Democrats ran around claiming they were misled on the war (and by the man they claim is dumb).

Yes, now that McCain is being beaten up for his support of a program that many Americans did not agree with he is claiming that he was misled.

McCain has been around the block more times than the ice cream man so he is aware of what goes on in this country and this is true with TARP. He was well aware that a lot of people opposed the TARP and he has an understanding of the financial system. If he was this easily “misled” and did not understand what was going on then why was he running for the presidency?

I voted for John McCain because he has a track record of service to this country, served honorably in Vietnam, endured unimaginable torture at the hands of our enemy, and was a better choice than Obama. But he is no conservative and he has as much responsibility for the situation we are in as others in Congress.

He is now facing a person who has a chance to beat him and McCain is resorting to the old “I was misled” excuse.

He is not taking responsibility for his actions.

He needs to go this year as do a lot of people in both parties. It is time to clean out the closet and get rid of those who have lost touch with the voters and with reality.

Source:
AZCentral

What a difference a campaign makes. Back when Obama was a candidate he opposed the idea of a spending freeze. In the presidential debates John McCain said he would consider a spending freeze for the government except for veteran’s programs, national security and certain other vital programs. Obama said that the problem with this was that it was taking a hatchet to the budget when a scalpel was needed. Obama said that the freeze would halt vital programs that would hurt people.

Obama is expected to call for a spending freeze during tomorrow night’s State of the Union Address:

The freeze would take effect in October and limit the overall budget for agencies other than the military, veterans affairs, homeland security and certain international programs to $447 billion a year for the remainder of Obama’s first term, senior administration officials said Monday, imposing sharp limits on his ability to begin initiatives in education, the environment and other areas of domestic policy. Washington Post

When John McCain proposed this idea Obama poo pooed it but now that he finds it necessary to tact to the right he is in favor of it. The right is not happy because Obama raised the budgets of most agencies by as much as 50% so the freeze will be at a higher level and the left is upset because it does not want any freeze on its ability to spend, spend, spend.

By requesting this freeze Obama is admitting that the country cannot afford his agenda. He tried pushing it and the public became outraged at the excessive spending particularly in these hard economic times. Obama has ceded the fact that we cannot afford what he wants and has given the right ammunition. Any Democrats who oppose the freeze will be labeled as out of touch while the right points out that even Obama wants the freeze. If things in the economy get better during Obama’s time in office and he tries to push his agenda the public will quickly be reminded that he admitted we could not afford what he wants.

Considering that Obama has tripled the deficit which will hit 1.4 TRILLION dollars again this year, the freeze amounts to very little but it is nothing different than what McCain called for and Obama discounted out of hand. Obama is a rookie and this pandering to the middle class will not work. People have seen the man behind the curtain and they do not like what they have seen.

Nancy Pelosi tried to pin the deficit increase on Bush but Gateway Pundit sets the record straight:

For the record, during the Bush years, despite the 2000 Recession, the attacks on 9-11, the stock market scandals, Hurricane Katrina, and wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, the Bush Administration was able to reduce the budget deficit from 412 billion dollars in 2004 to 162 billion dollars in 2007, a sixty percent drop. In 2004 the federal budget deficit was 412 billion dollars. In 2005 it dropped to 318 billion dollars. In 2006 the deficit dipped to 248 billion dollars. And, in 2007 it fell below 200 billion to 162 billion dollars. During the Bush years the average unemployment rate was 5.2 percent, the economy saw the strongest productivity growth in four decades and there was robust GDP growth. These were amazing accomplishments considering the unexpected challenges. You certainly didn’t read much about this in the press.

But, things changed in 2007. Democrats took over Congress, gas prices started to rise, and at the end of the year and into 2008 several financial institutions started to crumble as the housing bubble began to burst. Of course, it should be noted that President Bush publicly called for the reform of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac 17 times in 2008 alone before Congress acted. Democrats, on the other hand, blocked reform numerous times. It was later reported after the 2008 election that Bush had nothing to do with the financial crisis. Hoover Institution visiting fellow Scott S. Powell wrote in Barron’s in February of 2009 that the present crisis began in the 1970s, during the Carter administration, with passage of the Community Reinvestment Act to stem bank redlining and liberalize lending in order to extend home ownership in lower-income communities. This risk was acknowledged in the Bush administration’s first fiscal-year budget, released in April 2001. Sadly these warnings were ignored by Congress.

Obama said he would rather be a real good one term president than a mediocre two term one. Of course people who have real good first ones usually get a second one. Obama will be lucky to be as high as mediocre when his first (and only) term ends.

Barack Obama took an axe
And gave the budget 40 whacks
When the libs saw what he’d done
His term in office was just one.

Others:
Pajamas Media
Real Clear Politics (video of Obama opposing spending freeze on four different occasions)

John McCain is running for reelection in Arizona and his campaign ads are already out. I have seen the transcripts of several of them and I am having a hard time figuring out who the McCain the ads talk about is. John McCain, the Senator from Arizona, has ads telling the people of the great state of Arizona that he bumps heads everyday with Barack Obama and that if he gets a bruise or two along the way, that is fine.

“I stand in his way every day,” McCain says. “If I get a bruise or two knocking some sense into heads in Washington, so be it.”

John McCain refused to bump heads with Obama in any meaningful way in the past election. Obama won that battle and, with majorities in both chambers, he is winning most other battles as well regardless of the bruises McCain gets. Another ad discusses McCain’s time as a POW and then goes on to say:

“But perhaps no battle in our lifetime is more vital than the one John McCain fights now… a battle to save America, save our jobs…

The ad discusses McCain and slashing spending as well as bloated government programs. For the most part McCain has been true to this with regard to his own actions. I have heard that he does not put earmarks in bills (though I also heard he has put small ones in). When he was running for president he said that he would veto bills with earmarks and name names of those who inserted them.

But he votes for them. When the Republicans were in power they controlled the legislation and they loaded bills with earmarks just like the Democrats did then and both parties do now. Pork projects are not party specific. If McCain is serious about no earmarks then he should not vote for any legislation that contains earmarks no matter who inserted them.

This bluster comes when his party is not in power and when he is running for reelection and, oh by the way, has a primary challenger. John, you cannot have it both ways. You were not this blusterous when your party was in control and spending like there was no tomorrow. You were not this blusterous when you supported the Bush TARP. You might claim to bump heads with Obama but you both voted for the TARP and that was the wrong thing to do.

The folks in Arizona might believe that you are going to save America and that is for them to decide on election day but the country decided that you were not that person in 2008. While you might have been better than Obama many folks believe there is not much difference between the two of you.

Claiming to be a conservative and then working with Ted Kennedy on things like amnesty for illegals does not send a very good message. Your primary opponent is very much against immigration reform and that puts him higher on the scale than you. In the overall scheme of things you are with Obama on this issue as both of you supported the last attempt at amnesty.

John, I have no doubt you are an honorable man and I admire your service to this country. You went through things many of us could not endure but you have allowed your years in the Senate to change you into a go along to get along guy until it is inconvenient.

You were not the choice of most Republicans in the last election. You were the choice of the media and you were pushed on us. If it had not been for Sarah Palin being your running mate I believe that Obama would have nearly run the table on you. People voted for her, not for you because she holds conservative values and she walks the walk.

And keep in mind John, you were a darling of the left as well. They liked the way you worked with their politicians, the papers loved you, and you were seen as a guy who they could work with which is why they pushed you. They felt that you were the lesser of all evils if their guy lost. But look at how they threw you to the wolves during the last election. I would have thought you might have learned from this but you have this history of talking tough (that “straight talk”) about things and then compromising when it is convenient.

So I ask; Who is this John McCain that has ads in Arizona? It is not the guy who ran for the presidency a year ago.

Not even close.

And it is not the guy Arizona will get if he wins reelection.

Source:
The Swamp

When Obama was running for the office he now holds he put out a commercial that blasted John McCain over his positions on health care reform. McCain discussed taxing employer provided benefits and cutting Medicare and Obama went after him on that. Obama said; “Taxing Healthcare and Cutting Medicare Is Worst Way to Reform System.”

The worst way to reform the system.

The bills that will be reconciled in the House and Senate will tax health care plans and cut Medicare. The two things Obama said were the worst way to do things his Congress is now doing as is Obama because he made it clear he will sign whatever the Congress comes up with.

Breitbart has the video of the commercial. Be sure to watch it and see how, back then, Obama was against what he is now pushing for. You can be absolutely certain Obama was on board with the commercial because at the end he says; “I’m Barack Obama and I approve this message.”

In their haste to get something, anything, passed the Democrats have shown that either they agreed with McCain or they are willing to abandon their position just to get something through. I think it is the later rather than the former.

Obama’s numbers are rapidly falling and people are against this plan. He does not care. He wants to be able to say that he got health care passed. It matters not to him that he will be signing a bill into law that contains things that “are the worst way to reform the system.”

Just as long as he gets to sign something…

Looks like he lost Republicans foolish enough to vote for him, has lost Independents who voted for him and now is losing Democrats who were all full of Hope and Change.

Obama even lost his buddy Hugo.

This hack is a one term wonder.

And folks, the Senate bill has language that would prevent it from ever being repealed (though I imagine a future Congress could pass a bill that allows unrepealable laws to be repealed). The problem is, once we get it, it will not go away. There are too many lemmings who suckle at the teat of government to ever let go.

On a lighter note, this piece by Dave Barry (Miami Herald) is absolutely hilarious.

During the campaign Barack Obama told us how his limited experience made him a better choice as Commander in Chief than John McCain, a decorated veteran. Of course there were many variables in the election and John McCain was not the ideal candidate. He was the wishy-washy middle of the road Republican that Colin Powell says we need. Of course, Powell endorsed and voted for Obama. I can only conclude that race was the deciding factor.

Now that the Community Organizer in Chief has been in office for a while the world is able to see how weak kneed he is. The Muslim world is thumbing their collective noses at him and North Korea is launching missiles and testing nuclear devices. Obama said that his strategy was to just talk with these people because that would bring us all together. He is an organizer of the world community.

The only problem is that no one is listening. North Korea is now preparing to launch a missile at Hawaii. The missile is reportedly unable to reach Hawaii but just aiming it at us and firing it is an act of war. North Korea also has a cargo ship moving around and experts believe it has weapons and other materials banned under UN resolution.

The Navy Destroyer USS John McCain is preparing to intercept that vessel in what North Korea will certainly see as an aggressive act. It is unclear what the ship will do once it intercepts but Lil Kim will not be happy no matter what it does. Fortunately, the McCain is manned by people from the finest Navy in the world.

Will this escalate into war? Will it provoke Lil Kim and will we need to retaliate (if Obama even has the testicular fortitude to do so)?

These things remain to be seen but I find it ironic that the McCain is working on unscrewing the mess Obama has made of things.

Source:
Fox

I have had a go around with several people who claim that Resident Obama is actually increasing Defense spending. It is true that Obama has increased the budget 4% but he took the war funding, which was not part of the Defense budget (it was funded from other sources) and placed it under Defense but the money did not go with it. This means that The DOD will have a budget cut.

As has been reported, the 4% increase in defense spending proposed by Secretary Gates is actually 4% less than what the Joint Chiefs of Staff wanted; and, if taken alongside the fact that this budget attempts to fold in spending previously funded by supplemental war budgets, the supposed 4% increase is actually a $8 billion cut in defense spending. The Army is worst hit by folding supplemental spending into the base budget, as it was receiving the most ad-hoc funding for Iraq and Afghanistan. Ace of Spades

Ace goes on to explain this for those who care to look at it. It is easy to understand but in DC math this is considered a budget increase. It definitely is NOT.

While all the grenades are being lobbed around by the bumbler in chief, he continues to throw so many things at the public that it cannot keep up. On top of the economy, the omnibus, the trillions in spending, the 90% taxes to punish people whose contracts were honored, Iranian rockets, North Korean missilesm bows to kings, ACORN and the census, shooting pollution into the sky to cool the planet and all the other distractions, Obama is now ready to make millions of ILLEGALS into citizens.

Drudge is reporting that the New York Times will have a page 1 story tomorrow on Obama’s plan:

IMMIGRATION BILL THIS YEAR: Obama to begin looking for illegal immigrants to become legal, NY TIMES planning to lead in Page Ones on Thursday, newsroom sources tell DRUDGE… Developing…

It is time to gear up for a big fight. We cannot allow millions of lawbreakers to become citizens. They broke the law and we need to get rid of them when we find them. We cannot afford to have these blood sucking leeches be rewarded for breaking the law. You get more of what you reward and if we reward these people with citizenship then we will get more and more ILLEGALS coming here expecting the same deal. The amnesty that was provided two times before was billed as necessary to take care of the problem and it would never have to happen again. Now we are looking at millions more becoming citizens, being rewarded for breaking the law.

I read somewhere that immigrant groups (the ones that work hard to help illegals) had John McCain at some meeting looking for his help on this issue. I remember that they all left without a warm and fuzzy feeling because McCain indicated they were on their own. I believe he told them that they made their choice by picking Obama and they needed to go to him for what they wanted.

If I am not mistaken, McCain was basically telling them that he put his neck out for them during the last amnesty debate and bucked his own party which ended up costing him political capital. His message was, I was there for you and in the election you overwhelmingly supported Obama so go ask him for help, don’t come to me.

If that is true then maybe McCain finally got the message. We need to be tough on this. Pay close attention because this is all about politics. Democrats want to increase the number of votes they receive and they can do that by rewarding ILLEGALS with citizenship. Any member who votes for this needs to be voted out of office in 2010. They need to know that is what their vote will cost them.

We will see how this pans out when the NYT publishes the article.

Related:
Flopping Aces

Back during the campaign John McCain talked about taxing health care benefits provided by employers. I am not in favor of taxing benefits such as health care that employers provide and think it is counter productive. Taxing it would make employers less inclined to provide it. The left was not impressed with it either and Obama scoffed at the idea and called it a large increase on the middle class. Obama failed to mention that McCain intended to offset the tax with a tax credit for their health care.

The International Herald Tribune is reporting this regarding Obama’s position at the time:

In television advertisements last fall, Mr. Obama criticized his Republican rival for the presidency, Senator John McCain of Arizona, for proposing to tax all employer-provided health benefits. The benefits have long been tax-free, regardless of how generous they are or how much an employee earns. The advertisements did not point out that Mr. McCain, in exchange, wanted to give all families a tax credit to subsidize the purchase of coverage.

The article goes on to state that Obama might regret his position if he were to win and now it appears that their concern had merit. Barack Obama is open to taxing the health care benefits that employers provide as a way to obtain money to pay for those who do not have health care. Once again, this rookie is working to require those of us who pay our bills to pay the bills of others. We have to pay for their houses so why not their health care?

Obama, at the time of the campaign, called McCain’s proposal the the largest tax increase on the middle class in history but now it looks as if he is open to imposing the largest tax increase on the middle class in history. Once again we see that Obama is not doing what he promised. He is now aligning himself with the policy of a rival, a policy he clearly denounced.

Will the media pick this up and run with it? Will they denounce this and scream about how unfair it is? Will they attack Obama like they went after McCain?

Of course not and his toadies, some of whom comment here, will excuse this and say it is for the good of the nation. They will not look at it as a flip-flop, or worse a lie, but will instead discuss how much this guy cares for people.

I think Obama had these kinds of plans in mind when he was debating McCain. Obama wants to have all health care provided by the government and the way to do that is to destroy the private sector and force employers to abandon health care benefits for employees. If he intended to do this all along then he was lying back then.

One thing is certain, he described it as the largest tax increase on the middle class which means he is not being truthful when he says he will cut taxes for 95% of the people.

This is just another example of spreading the wealth. It is also another example of Obama not being able to do what he said or to stand up for what he said were his beliefs. He is a typical politician and this is not change we can believe in.

They are painting Republicans as the party of NO but it looks like Obama is the leader with NO (scruples, truth, or convictions).

I hope those of you who voted for this guy are learning something though I seriously doubt that you can teach them much. The Kool Aid is very strong.

Also:
NYT

It is no secret that I supported John McCain in the last election. McCain was not my first choice nor was he my second or third but the media worked hard to get him the nomination and so we were stuck with him. I backed John McCain because he has some positions with which I agree and Obama has virtually none. However, McCain is not a conservative and I was not happy with him as the choice. The pundits have declared that conservatism is dead and that the last election was a repudiation of conservatism but since no conservative ran, the claims of its early demise are greatly exaggerated.

Make no mistake. I think McCain is a war hero and he endured challenges that most of us could never imagine or tolerate but his time as a POW, while character building and a tribute to him, is not the same issue as his political ideology.

John McCain was a media darling and they wanted him as the Republican choice because he would be tolerable to them if a Democrat did not win. Obama was their messiah and they wanted him but McCain was a good second choice. The media rapidly turned on McCain and that was something he did not like.

Now that the election is in the history books McCain is looking to regain his status in the media and his image as a maverick. John McCain is a “maverick” because he often sides with the left. There is a lot of legislation that has McCain-[Democrat name] in the title. One of them dealing with campaign finance reform bit him in the rear during the election.

McCain chided his colleagues over the desire of some to delay the confirmation of Hillary Clinton to be Secretary of State. He told people that the election is over and the citizens have spoken. He said that we want them to work together.

Here is a newsflash for John, we have wanted the members to work together regardless of who won or how it turned out and not just for this election. These people get paid a lot of money and we expect they will work together to come to some kind of consensus as to what is best for the country. Instead, we get childish games based upon who is running for reelection and how positions will be perceived among the electorate. These people jockey for power and insist on putting in place measures they want as opposed to what the country wants.

The Democrats wanted 60 Senators so the could have a filibuster proof majority.

With Democrat-lite McCain, they just might have it.

At least the media will, once again, be happy with him.

Source:
Washington Post