Right Wing Nut House



Filed under: Decision '08, Lebanon, OBAMANIA!, Politics — Rick Moran @ 11:58 am

This will be the 12th presidential election that I have followed closely in my lifetime. As a 10 year old growing up in suburban Chicago, I got hooked on politics watching the conventions that summer - two of the most dramatic party conclaves of the 20th century. For Republicans, there was the utter bewilderment and anger as the establishment couldn’t understand what was happening when Barry Goldwater’s insurgency overwhelmed the Rockefeller wing of the party and began the long slide of GOP liberals and moderates into oblivion.

For you younger folk, yes indeed there was such an animal as a “liberal” Republican. And to their eternal credit, they sided with LBJ and the Democrats in passing the two most important pieces of legislation of the era - the Voting Rights Act and the Civil Rights Act. They also were solid internationalists, beating back the challenge of the remnants of the isolationist Taft faction who would have turned the United States inward at a time of maximum risk to what freedom existed around the world at the time.

Goldwater was right otherwise, of course. The GOP liberals sided with Johnson in his overreach in creating a welfare state that has now handed their ancestors tens of trillions of dollars in unfunded liabilities coming due in a few decades. The cry today of “We didn’t know” echoes hollowly. Of course we “knew.” Goldwater told us. Even liberal lion Daniel Patrick Moynihan warned that the way the welfare state was set up, it would create a dependency among African Americans and destroy the black family.

As clearly as many conservatives saw the way that the welfare state was designed would lead to eventual catastrophe, I will base the following on my life experience and more than 40 years observation of politics and government; a Barack Obama presidency will result in a radical diminution of American wealth, American power and prestige, and inevitably, a loss of liberty.

Barack Obama is not qualified to be president of the United States. He has little interest in the nuts and bolts of how government works (yes, one can say the same of George Bush and look at us now). Unlike a Clinton or Bush #41 who enjoyed fiddling with the levers of government, enjoining the bureaucracy and Congress to bend to their wills, Obama literally doesn’t have a clue. He will be eaten alive by the striped pants set in the State Department. He will be gobbled up whole by the poverty lobby. And since he has little or no ideology or principles, he will sway with the political winds tacking hard left and then hard right until he angers everybody.

Oh, he will have a “plan” when he comes into office. The first 100 days will be a liberal paradise thanks to an increased and more leftist Democratic majority in the Congress. We will bail out homeowners, his buddies in the unions, finish the job of nationalizing most of our financial industry if not in name then certainly in the practice of it. He will set ambitious targets for carbon reduction. He will nationalize the health insurance industry. He will begin to raise taxes on the rich (a process that any first year government student could inform him will result in eventual tax hikes for all). He will begin to “re-regulate” - a process that will take many years but will eventually lead to where we were at the end of the 1970’s; strangulation and reduced competition in industries affected.

These are all things he has promised to do - and they will get done. But then what? After absorbing the idiotic, slavish, and nauseating comparisons to the greatest presidents in history, just what will this neophyte do?

Well, maybe he’ll start consolidating his power by moving to cut off opposition to what he plans to do:

he Obama campaign has decided to heave out three newspapers from its plane for the final days of its blitz across battleground states — and all three endorsed Sen. John McCain for president!

The NY POST, WASHINGTON TIMES and DALLAS MORNING NEWS have all been told to move out by Sunday to make room for network bigwigs — and possibly for the inclusion of reporters from two black magazines, ESSENCE and JET, the DRUDGE REPORT has learned.

Despite pleas from top editors of the three newspapers that have covered the campaign for months at extraordinary cost, the Obama campaign says their reporters — and possibly others — will have to vacate their coveted seats so more power players can document the final days of Sen. Barack Obama’s historic campaign to become the first black American president.


Some told the DRUDGE REPORT that the reporters are being ousted to bring on documentary film-makers to record the final days; others expect to see on board more sympathetic members of the media, including the NY TIMES’ Maureen Dowd, who once complained that she was barred from McCain’s Straight Talk Express airplane.

After a week of quiet but desperate behind-the-scenes negotiations, the reporters of the three papers heard last night that they were definitely off for the final swing. They are already planning how to cover the final days by flying commercial or driving from event to event.

Do you also feel the hairs on the back of your head pricking up in reaction to this move? A portend of what’s to come in Obama’s America?

Of course, we’re being silly our liberal betters tell us. No doubt the New York Times and Washington Post will have examples in their columns tomorrow of previous candidates who booted newspapers off their plane. It will be sold as just something that everyone does and there’s nothing to get alarmed about America. Just go back to sleep and don’t forget to wake up long enough to go to the polls on Tuesday and elect our Messiah.

Except this isn’t the Podunk Tribune we’re talking about here. These are three respected newspapers who happen to have critical coverage of a candidate who now deems it necessary to toss them off his campaign plane. No connection?

A sizable number of residents in Virginia buy and subscribe to the Washington Times. Obama is limiting a point of view that residents in perhaps the most vital swing state in America will be getting. Are we to believe that this is an accident? Are we to seriously consider that Obama isn’t trying to affect how reporters cover his campaign?

I would say to the Washington Post and New York Times there will come a day when you too will feel this rope around your neck and your freedom is affected because you are not behind The One 100%. Your cries of “We didn’t know” at that point will be ignored by a public who will wonder where were you when it started?

There’s always energy policy. As long as our economy is sluggish (thus dragging down the economies of most of the planet), oil prices could remain fairly steady, at or near where they are now.

Except they won’t. The Israel-Iran showdown is coming - probably sooner than anyone realizes. Simply put, the Israelis cannot afford to take Iran’s word - or the word of the IAEA - that Iran is not in the process of building a bomb. With their survival at stake, Israel will act pre-emptively and seek to take out or slow down the Iranian program. The resulting spike in oil prices will be a catalyst for Obama to push through a massive energy bill, the end result being anyone’s guess.

The foreign policy ramifications could be Obama’s first real “test” - Biden’s nightmare. Will Obama lead the charge in the UN to censure Israel? Would he cut off military aid? Don’t put it past him. Given his advisors and their views on our relationship with the Jewish state, anything is possible.

“We didn’t know” that he would sacrifice the safety and security of an ally will be the cry.

Meanwhile, less energy means less economic growth - or worse. Obama’s energy schemes alone could hamper the American economy for a generation.

“How could we have guessed?” will be the refrain.

Education reform will no doubt occupy an Obama Administration’s time. What kind of mischief could it cause if this beginner gave the education bureaucrats (no doubt staffed with Ayers-trained acolytes) their heads?

I am not necessarily worried about Obama’s cabinet appointments. It is the 3,000 or so other presidential appointments within his power that scares the beejeebes out of me. Coming as they will from academia and liberal think tanks, here is where the real radicalism of an Obama Administration would manifest itself. The cabinet secretaries are figureheads, chosen as much for how they come off on the Sunday news programs as how knowledgeable and competent they are.

The real power in these departments devolve to the under secretaries and assistant secretaries who are charged with implementing any decisions made by the president. “The devil is in the details” is a literalness I care not to discover when it comes to “school reform” or Obama’s health insurance plan. Unless someone is watching these underlings, the chances are good that they will interpret their mandate to act through their own ideological prism rather than any good intentions of Obama or their cabinet secretary bosses.

“Nobody told us” will be the excuse.

We saw some of this in the Bush Administration with science policy and other areas where lobbyists who had worked for one industry were then named to oversee that same industry in a federal department. This may be good for business but it is bad government. And Obama will probably not want to go to war with a lot of these folks since they will have been put in those positions by his far left base.

Finally, what will the world say when we sell out Lebanon in order to get Syria to play ball with the Israelis on a peace deal? There is only one thing we have that Syria wants - and wants more than anything; our continuing support for a free and independent Lebanon. They don’t want our money or our “good will.” They don’t want any trade agreements or trade goods. They want us to adopt a “hands off” policy on Lebanon so that when Syria moves back in (or their terrorist proxies in Hezballah engineer a takeover of some kind), we do nothing.

Obama wants to talk with Assad. Fine. His no preconditions pledge will come back to bite him in the ass - and not only in Syria. What possible advantage is there to the United States to have the American president meet President Ahmadinejad? “Good will?” Or the world will fall in love with us again?

Whatever small step made in service to internationalism a presidential meet with the Iranians would bring would be dwarfed by the mammoth propaganda coup that would accrue to the Iranians, granting them a legitimacy and stature far beyond anything they have had previously. A similar situation would present itself in Venezuela with a grip and grin with Chavez.

“Well whaddya know, who would have thunk it?” the voters will say.

But we know all this. The world knows it too which is why France’s President Sarkozy is so peeved at Obama. It isn’t meeting with an enemy that is at issue. It is the simple formulation that presupposes a huge advantage being given an enemy for absolutely nothing in return.

But at least we’ll all feel good about ourselves for being so “civilized.”

Obama will not sell us out to the UN. But I have little doubt that we will subsume our national interests in order to curry favor with the lickspittles there. This will result in an erosion of our position in the world and a loss of prestige - and worse. Nation’s that fear us now will not fear us under Obama. They won’t like us any more. They won’t be any more cooperative in keeping the peace. The difference will be that they will be able to cause trouble wherever they wish with no worries that the US would try and stop them - except at the UN. And we know how effective the UN is at dealing with the thugs, the miscreants, and the lunatics of the world.

So sometime in the near future - perhaps within a couple of years or more likely before Obama leaves office - people will wake up one morning and say to themselves, “How did this happen? How could we have known?”

It won’t be an acceptable question to ask then because everything that happens in the next few years will have been predicted by someone based on all the crap that the press either refused to cover or glossed over, denigrated, or called a “distraction” today.


  1. I’d raise my eyebrows more about the plane dumping today if McCain’s campaign hadn’t already done that with Dowd and Klein. Both are fairly foolish moves.

    There’s a reason I’ve never joined a political party. I am not interested in the assumption of power qua power, and distrust its pursuit implicitly. But neither do I believe in the worst of all possible worlds in all cases, at all times, inasmuch as I don’t believe in neverending utopias. With that in mind, roll on Tuesday.

    There is no comparison what so ever - none.

    Dowd and Klein are columnists. McCain didn’t kick Time Mag or the NY Times off his plane.

    Obama did. Huge, huge difference.


    Comment by Ned R. — 10/31/2008 @ 12:21 pm

  2. “-people will wake up one morning and say to themselves, “How did this happen? How could we have known?””

    Yeah. Just like I woke up this morning and said the very same thing. Too bad you and your dire warnings weren’t around when your guy Bush got elected.

    Comment by Chuck Tucson — 10/31/2008 @ 12:22 pm

  3. I could not agree with you more. The hypnotic hold that “the One” has over half of our country just shows the ignorance of those people. I have never seen a person nominated to such a high office with so little qualification. I would disagree with your opinion that he will not sell us out to the UN. He will usher us toward a one world government, and the super power we know as the United States of America will be religated to history books. I pray that I am wrong. I believe MCCain can win this election. I don’t believe the polls. Thanks for your insight!

    Comment by scott — 10/31/2008 @ 12:38 pm

  4. For every prediction that gets it right, there are far more that are not even close.

    You are saying that after running a very long and close primary that no one thought he had much chance of winning, followed by a very succcesful presidential campaign… that he doesn’t know what it takes to make thing work?

    You fear that he might let the education heads try something different? Have you seen the cesspool many of our school systems are? Or is it just that you are against children being taught more then just the 4Rs, and maybe even be allowed to have independent thoughts and encouraged to ask questions?

    You belive that any movement away from our current energy set-up could go badly, while many of us see this as a chance for small local start ups to be inovative, and changes to all of our technology to happen at a pace not seen since the first decade of the 20th century. High school kids built a car that does 0-60mph in 4 seconds while getting 60mpg. Dozens of people converting old gas powered cars in their garages to run on electric, Neil Young’s 2.5ton, 19.5 foot long 1959 Lincoln gets the equivalent of 75mpg. Companies installing wind and solar power generators on their factories, and saving millions of dollars. But it’s not oil and coal, so you are against this inovation.

    At what point has Obama said anything about not supporting Isreal?

    But this is America, land of the free (and home of a lot of people who are afraid of Obama), were each and everyone of us is allowed to voice his or her opinion. So please continue to voice your’s.

    I’d hate to live in a place where those who disagree with me were not allowed to speak.

    Comment by Pan_theFrog — 10/31/2008 @ 1:12 pm

  5. I really hope this piece does not become some form of prophecy. But, I fear that it is a harbinger of things to come. I have zero hope for an obama presidency (Ironic isn’t it?) A liberal gov’t lacking any judicial or legislative checks and balances is the death knell for the fundamental way America runs. We cannot become something contrary to our basic tenets, if we do, then what have we become? Certainly not America anymore. I’m not sure what worries me more for Tuesday, a McCain win or an obama win. One means a slow slide toward socialism, the other means possible riots or deadlocked gov’t.

    Comment by Finrod — 10/31/2008 @ 1:34 pm

  6. Dowd and Klein are apples and oranges, they are columnists who personally attacked McCain.

    Obama is throwing off beat reporters from papers whose editorial boards disagree.

    Comment by Hawkins — 10/31/2008 @ 1:35 pm

  7. You are so right!!!…it is all out there to see…in plain sight even if the Obamedia hasn’t deemed it important enough to cover. Get out and vote!! for McCain/Palin.

    Comment by Annette — 10/31/2008 @ 1:45 pm

  8. I don’t recall the Republican blogosphere wetting itself when Joe Klein and Maureen Dowd were kicked off the McCain plane.

    Then again, those members of the press are threatening Sarah Palin’s First Amendment Rights–she says so.

    Two columnists telling deliberate lies is the same as kicking three beat reporters off a plane?

    Jesus Christ what an idiot.


    Comment by Geek, Esq. — 10/31/2008 @ 1:46 pm

  9. Yawn. This is nothing but a list of worst-case expectations. Happy Halloween, an unqualified, clueless liberal is being elected President.

    Since a pessimist can only be pleasantly surprised, you have just ensured yourself four pleasant years.

    Comment by Postagoras — 10/31/2008 @ 1:51 pm

  10. Well, I’m sorry to see that you’re leaning towards a bit of the hysteria that was targeted at you after your “My President” posting. There’s just too much to go into for a comment but I do have to address you initial point:

    “A sizable number of residents in Virginia buy and subscribe to the Washington Times. Obama is limiting a point of view that residents in perhaps the most vital swing state in America will be getting. Are we to believe that this is an accident? Are we to seriously consider that Obama isn’t trying to affect how reporters cover his campaign?”

    If he’s trying to further alienate them so they report negatively, then maybe. I can’t see how this is in HIS interest. He may indeed be trying to make room for other, more sympathetic or future oriented reporters - a la Essence or Jet, but it certainly doesn’t eliminate or in any way prohibit reporting by the listed newspapers. Yes, it’s more difficult but not nearly impossible for them to cover the last days of the election. The only effect this move is likely to have is to piss off these reporters so that they have a more jaundiced eye when reporting on Obama.

    As for the rest. . . wow, almost a complete flip from your posting the other day. Not sure even where to begin. If I believe what you wrote then the people who excoriated your “My President” post must be correct.

    Are you saying that criticism of Obama is the same as delegitimizing him? Are you nuts?

    Holy shit. I really worry about the intelligence of people when I read a piece of crap like this.


    Comment by emgersh — 10/31/2008 @ 2:07 pm

  11. “-people will wake up one morning and say to themselves, “How did this happen? How could we have known?””

    The answer by the Obamanians will be it is Bush’s fault! This will be the cry every time something goes wrong. This I suspect will lead to even more government intervention and control. The result will be a avalanche (or a tsunami) of new restrictive regulations locking us into government control.

    Just wait, you will see. It’s all Bush’s fault!!

    Wramblin’ Wreck

    Comment by Wramblin' Wreck — 10/31/2008 @ 2:59 pm

  12. attaboy!! or better said “dirka dirka jihad!!!”(Team America) we will get what we deserve, the stars have aligned…

    Comment by jambrowski — 10/31/2008 @ 3:11 pm

  13. From what I gather from snippets from other blogs throughout this election, the Obama campaign waves carrots in front of reporters to encourage positive reporting on their campaign. Those that write friendly pieces get the access and the interviews. Those that do not… well, we all know what they did to Barbara West in Orlando. And now these newspapers are booted off the plane. It pays $$ to support the One, doesn’t it?

    But you know, the press being motivated or tempted by $$ is not news to me. What really creeps me out about this is that I perceive actions like this to be an attempt to discourage fair and objective criticism in any form. And what does that say about a man who wants to be President? Will he listen to opposing sides before he makes a judgement? Or will he turn the Presidency into a left-wing classroom, where any opposing ideas are ridiculed?

    Considering he has not reacted well to criticism and opposing viewpoints so far, I am still making up my mind on whether or not he will swing whatever way the political winds blow… He might, but I just can’t make it out yet. I suspect his left wing ideas from his college days and after will override any political winds. But, I could be wrong.

    But I do agree with you Rick that after Obama will be elected there will be somewhat of a mass hysteria as people finally realize his flaws. the honeymoon will be over then!

    Comment by Shelby — 10/31/2008 @ 3:45 pm

  14. I’m sorry, Drudge isn’t making a very good case here; certainly not enough of one for you to base an example of your argument on, Rick.

    From the Dallas Morning News (one of the three, McCain supporting newspapers):

    “[W]e don’t have evidence that the newspaper’s endorsement of Sen. McCain had any bearing on the campaign’s decision to boot us from the plane. … We think the Obama campaign’s decision is to some degree more a function of limited seats, and while we’re a large regional newspaper, we’re not national and we’re not in a swing state. We’ve been on the road with them at key moments, but we’ve not been along for the entire ride, like, say, The New York Times and The Associated Press.

    For what it’s worth, we’ve had the same trouble with the McCain campaign.”

    Ahh Drudge. Investigative journalism at its best, huh?

    Comment by Kyle — 10/31/2008 @ 5:48 pm

  15. Further:

    VA? really? Your the one who turned me on to fivethirtyeight.com, Rick. Obama up by 8, you say? Kicking a newspaper off your plane 5 days before the election because they aren’t national and they distribute to areas you have in the bag, statistically no matter WHAT happens? I’m sure the Washington Times had a really strong case if their support and continued close coverage of Obama’s campaign was gonna sway VA 1.5 point a day, all the way up the the election. McCain could still have it if it weren’t for Obama’s media treachery!

    Wait, that doesn’t make any sense.

    I’m not your liberal better. there is no “no doubt” involved. Dallas Morning News, McCain supporter extraordinaire, DID print that it was just seats. Are they covering for Obama? Are our rights to free speech be squashed by a Dallas Morning News for Obama conspiracy?

    What the solution here? never kick any supporter of the opposition off your plane, ever?

    Comment by Kyle — 10/31/2008 @ 6:14 pm

  16. Pushing his pals off the bus was a constant. Kicking reporters off the plane during the finale should have been expected since Obama has treated the press like his sidekicks all along.


    Comment by Dave Turson — 10/31/2008 @ 7:08 pm

  17. Purge them! Purge the elites! Hilarious, sounds like something from a Red Guard rally during the cultural revolution. Go ahead and kick out the RINOs and have your “ideologically pure” party, who wants dissention and the give and take of ideas anyway. What you want is a liberal bashing cult where you can drink the kool aid, open the Holy Book of Unassailable Truths, and froth at the mouth every time you read the word “liberal”. It’s going to be a loooong time in the wilderness.

    Comment by grognard — 10/31/2008 @ 7:17 pm

  18. Former Reagan chief of staff Ken Duberstein must have missed the warning. As has Rep. Jim Leach (R) IA, Sen. Lincoln Chaffee(R) RI, Gov. William Weld (R) MA, Gov. Arne Carlson (R) MN, Congressman Wayne Gilcrest (R) MD, Sen. Charles Matthias (R) MD, Sen. Larry Pressler (R) SD, Sen. Lowell Wicker (R) CT, Gov. William Millikin (R) MI, Secretary of State Colin Powell,Ken Adleman Ford Administration Official, Douglas Kmiec, Head of the Office of Legal Counsel under Reagan & Bush 41 Larry Hunter, Former President Reagan Policy Advisor and many other Republicans and Reagan & GHW Bush officials, all endorsing Sen. Obama.

    Or perhaps they were “warned” and found the warning without merit.

    Comment by still liberal — 10/31/2008 @ 7:20 pm

  19. To Wramblin’ Wreck:

    Congratulations, you know how to listen to Rush Limbaugh and parrot what he already has said fifty times. Good little dittohead. At least he’s entertaining more often than not.

    Comment by TeamsterCO — 10/31/2008 @ 10:06 pm

  20. I only WISH the US would stop supporting Israel– the reason WHY there are “Arab terrorists” in the first place. No Israel = No Arab Terrorism! If Obama does this one thing he will be the GREATEST PRESIDENT of all time, because he will be allowing the destruction of the nation that has CREATED more terror (and terrorists) than any other nation on earth. We should not allow a 51st year for the modern Israel. The UN created it– it should ‘uncreate’ it– or allow it to be defeated!

    Comment by Shawn — 10/31/2008 @ 10:18 pm

  21. I’ve heard it countless times. Yeah, they will scream “It’s George Bush’s fault.” In reality, if Obama can’t get it right if elected, it’ll be him fulfilling a 3rd term for Bush.

    And I’m so irked that Obama’s citizenship issue is still not resolved. I’ve read comment after comment that the judge who threw out Berg’s lawsuit could have really spent more time on the US Constitution and not dismiss it so quickly. Did he act like a judge or just like a small time uninformed attorney? Just who is the person in power to get Hawaii and Obama to release the truth and the d@arn birth certificate? I want to know.

    Comment by Gula — 10/31/2008 @ 10:47 pm

  22. All of you people need to get a life and a clue. It all boils down to one thing: Barack is black. Oh no! We’re going to have Fried Catfish Fridays in the school system now! Oh no! The President will have gold teeth and a huge ‘bling bling’ chain on when he gives the State of the Union Address. Oh no! When he pulls up to give appearances, we’re only going to hear loud bass from the rap he’s playing in his car with spinning wheels! It’s time for all of you to face your inner racism that was bestowed upon you by your ancestors. Yes, I said it. I pulled the race card, and I’ll pull it again and again and again until it’s NOT about race.

    And you know what? Even if Barack didn’t have a clue, I would STILL vote for him because I’m sick of seeing white people running this damned country when it was built with the blood, sweat, and tears of Africans who were stolen from the comforts of their homeland. YES! I SAID IT! I WOULD VOTE FOR OBAMA EVEN IF HE DROPPED OUT IN THE 5TH GRADE! Do I sound like a product of oppression? I do because I am. White people will never understand what Black people have gone through and are still going through today. So, guess what? All of you Disdain/Failin’ supporters can kiss the crack of my ass because you just can’t stand the fact that a BLACK MAN is about to be running things.

    Comment by theoneyoulovetohate — 10/31/2008 @ 10:59 pm

  23. Really scared huh? The Crazy Cons should be running scared after what they did to this country! Are they afraid they won’t be allowed to destroy it completely? All Obama needs to do is reverse all Dubyas’ eight years and flush it down the Potomac!

    Comment by Riverat — 10/31/2008 @ 11:20 pm

  24. Chuck Tucson = genius.

    Chuck Tucson Said:
    12:22 pm

    “-people will wake up one morning and say to themselves, “How did this happen? How could we have known?””

    Yeah. Just like I woke up this morning and said the very same thing. Too bad you and your dire warnings weren’t around when your guy Bush got elected.

    Comment by Chuck Tucson Fan — 10/31/2008 @ 11:36 pm

  25. Quisling:
    “Someone who collaborates with an enemy occupying force”

    #18 still liberal, thanks for your quisling list.

    Comment by General de Gaulle — 10/31/2008 @ 11:40 pm

  26. This is for all the ” Followers ” of Obama.

    These words were said many years ago by Thomas Jefferson >> ” A government big enough to give you all you want… will be strong enough to take everything you have. ”

    So once he has taken all he can from the rich…he will then start taking all he can from those lower down on the income pole. The old saying goes…sh*t runs down hill. America doesn’t need to just WAKE UP…we need to GET OUT of BED !!!…before it’s too late.

    Comment by Al C. — 11/1/2008 @ 12:35 am

  27. I for one am not looking at Obama as “The Man”, but after Bush the liar, war profiteer, and oil profiteer, I am happy to vote for anyone but the Republicans. What ever happened to the days of rich Republicans benefiting their poor and middle class brethern…now they just try to cage bribes and pay off government stooges. It’s time to bring government back to the people or Republican heads will roll from the guillotine like they did in France’s revolution.

    Comment by Matthew — 11/1/2008 @ 12:48 am

  28. George W. Bush, in his arrogance and ineptitude, has done more to elect Barack Obama than anyone else. Republicans were elected, and they blew it, badly.

    I proudly voted for Barack, and the smear attempts didn’t influence me at all. Why is Obama’s association with Ayers important, But McCain’s four bouts with an aggressive and deadly form of cancer swept under the table?

    Comment by John Davis, RN — 11/1/2008 @ 1:12 am

  29. By the way, does anybody remember during the early Reagan years that once of his budget cutters said that catsup could count as a vegetable in school lunches, since it was made from tomatoes?

    There was class warfare back then, with the rich attacking the poor. In that decade of greed that was the 1980’s, the saying was: “He who dies with the most toys wins.”

    Comment by John Davis, RN — 11/1/2008 @ 1:18 am

  30. What you’ve deviously failed to tell your readers is that the Rupert Murdoch-owned N.Y. Post is an utterly discreditable scandal sheet, while the Washington Times is not a newspaper at all in the traditional sense, but a right-wing propaganda rag wholly owned by the Unification Church’s Rev. Sun Myung Moon — a longtime mouthpiece for the extreme right-wing. What is surprising is not that these papers’ representatives were kicked off Obama’s plane, but that they were ever permitted to get on it and sit in the company of real journalists.

    Comment by Stephen Roach — 11/1/2008 @ 1:20 am

  31. “Do you also feel the hairs on the back of your head pricking up in reaction to this move?”

    Did your hairs prick when you heard how the DOJ made employees pass a party loyalty test?

    How about when Bush pardoned Libby?

    Yet a campaign’s seating arrangement sends you over the edge.


    Comment by Icy — 11/1/2008 @ 2:05 am

  32. I know that it is not the main issue in your post, but if Senator Goldwater had been elected in 1964, he would not have signed the 1965 Civil Rights Act (assuming it had been passed by the 1965 Congress at all, without being pushed by LBJ), as he declared in his 1964 campaign that such federal statutes were unconstitutional since they interfered with states rights. Undoubtably, the history of the Civil Rights Movement would have been very different if Senator Goldwater had been elected President.

    Comment by calbot — 11/1/2008 @ 2:09 am

  33. So Obama has to keep an certain distribution of liberal and conservative members of the press aboard his plane? And if he doesn’t, he’s a enemy of democracy? What is this, the Fairness Doctrine? Seriously, it’s his own damn campaign! These people are traveling with him at his pleasure, and if he decides that it is no longer his pleasure to have the Washington Times travel with him (and to be replaces with JET), then so what? As long as taxpayer dollars are not begin used to fly the plane around, then the Obama campaign is in the right to do whatever they want. (How the press judges them for it is of course a legitimate topic.)

    Comment by Surabaya Stew — 11/1/2008 @ 4:13 am

  34. How interesting all this right wing blather about “liberal” and “socialist” big spending and Obama’s supposed “lack of experience”. What a crock. It never matters when it is a Conservative who has no experience - what experience has McCain had? A few more years in the Senate sucking up to big business and the landed gentry trying to keep their taxes down? Being a POW has nothing to do with being able to be commander and chief. Bombing and killing people from 20,000 feet is hardly real military combat experience (and he got into the academy with someone else’s influence - which is a hallmark of his playboy life). Obama was one of the brightest law students of his class and passed up offers of a glitzy big money Republican-type law firms to work in a small civil rights office and worked with real people to help the poor. What has McSame ever done for anyone? Volunteer work? He can’t win on his pathetic credentials so he is (which is so typical Repub) trying to win on character assassination using his twit side-kick Sarah Dubya-with-lipstick, a religious rightwing nut, to memorize & repeat slurs to frighten people. This is how Repubs always win - fear (homosexuals, liberals, socialists, pro-choice, your money is going to be spent on somebody other than big oil - oooo scarey! - ad nauseum). And as for “big spending liberals”, what a tired joke that is. At least they have tried to do something for the people and the country. If something isn’t perfect it can be changed. But THE BIGGEST SPENDING PRESIDENTS IN US HISTORY ARE REAGAN AND BUSH II, bar none! And in the past 60 years the most corrupt presidents and administrations have all been GOP (Greedy Old Puritans) - Nixon, Reagan, who had the most corrupt administration in history - even compared to Tricky Dick, that is until Geo. W. Bush, the Village Idiot.

    And not only does McSame not have anything special to qualify him for the presidency, any more than Obama, he’s shown very bad judgement by choosing a silly rightwing radical who doesn’t even read newspapers and hasn’t a clue what is going on in the world. Palin is an ardent member of the New Apostolic Reformation Movement which claims to have gotten her elected in Alaska, wants to take over the government so they can start war with Russia, destroy the world so their Rambo-style Christ can return and really kick some ass. They also claim to have killed Mother Theresa by their prayers because
    she was evil, they want to destroy the Catholic and Mormon churches (maybe not such a bad idea if they take all the rest with them) and they are already praying for McCain’s death
    shortly after his election so Palin/they can take over. With McCain so old and with a history of cancer already the chance of this looney and her friends gaining the presidency is quite
    a good one. Is it worth the chance? No. Oh, and one more thing, Obama is a constitutional law professor too. No small thing. He knows more about the constitution than McCain will ever know (if he even cares since he and his side-kick are bent on keeping gay and lesbian citizens from gaining equal civil and human rights in what is supposed to be a secular society).

    The US has already been under the rule of Conservative neo-feudal unregulated, free market capitalism for too many years and it has been a huge failure. Wealth is concentrated in a few hands, like a third world country. 1% of the population owns 60% of the wealth, poverty is growing (1 in 8 USAmericans now live in poverty), 47million working poor have no access to health care, infant mortality is the highest in the developed world, Reporters Without Borders ranks the US 52nd in the world in press freedom, the infrastructure is crumbling etc. The US is in serious decline, but the military-industrial complex and war profiteers are doing great. McCain will continue the same failed policies of concentrating wealth in the hands of a few (he’s already said he is against stopping taxpayers funded corporate welfare to the fat-cat Big Oil companies. He thinks the health care system works just fine as a profit making business. He cares nothing for the ordinary people, only the rich and powerful. Sadly, the lower the educational level of voters the more likely they are to vote GOP. They’re too ignorant to question the hype the GOP always puts out.

    And as far as the phoney “values” the GOP always talks about - let them define them. Unfortunately, too many people think they are talking about Christian values, but anyone really looking at their record knows they are the opposite of what Jesus taught. In fact, McCain/Palin charge Obama with being a socialist because he wants to put the values of Jesus into practice - feed the hungry, clothe the poor, love your neighbor (even if he’s gay), love your enemies (at least talk to them before you blow them up to benefit Exxon), judge not, let he who is without sin cast the first stone etc. These are Christian values and all the GOP “values” really come down to are: keep the rich happy, let the corrupt corporations do anything they want to, regulate people’s sex lives, prevent homosexuals from having full civil rights (but take their full taxes though), bully and blackmail the whole world and kill anyone who doesn’t fall into line and let US corporations rape and pillage their resources. No wonder they never want to actually define their “values”. They make Socialism akin to Satanism and sadly the average USAmerican has fallen for it, when, in actuality Socialism is the political movement most akin to true Christian ideals - to create a more just and equitable society, raise up the poor, make education available to all, healthcare to everyone (it is national defense in its purest form), promote democracy - The Rights of Man. It is a noble movement, but opposes the greed of unregulated free market capitalism (and they are now proven right) and sides again with Jesus who very clearly condemned the rich and defended the poor. Just the opposite of Conservative politics. No wonder they are against Socialism. The most advanced countries in the world are based on Christian/Socialist principles - Sweden, Norway, Denmark (the happiest people on earth), Luxemburg (the highest standard of living on earth), Spain, etc. for just about all EU countries. They call it a social contract and it is more important than the USAmerican corporate business, free market capitalist contract - people first as opposed to US business and robber barons first. Having lived on both sides of the Atlantic I’ll take Socialism any day for a more just society, lower crime, better arts, more livable cities, healthcare for all, lower salaries for CEOs, better mass transit, better care for the elderly and disabled, better animal protection rights, and less fear and worry - none of which is available except to the richest in USAmerica. No I’m an Ex-USAmerican and a proud and happy European now. Thank God!!!

    And for those who want to equate Socialism with Stalin etc. that argument stands up as well as equating true Christianity with the Spanish Inquisition, Jerry Falwell, Pat Robertson, snake handlers, New Apostolic Reformation (hate) Movement, Southern Baptists and all the others who march under the banner of a perverted “Christianity”.

    Grow up!

    Comment by Jesse di Santis — 11/1/2008 @ 4:59 am

  35. Some many misjudgments, so little time! First, the big easy one, little experience for Obama–and are we proud of all the experience GWB brought? Governor of a ‘weak governor’ state controlled by his party and father, failed everything before that.

    Rick’s own comment that BO has no policy commitments or experience to compare with Johnson or Clinton, nor a taste for bureaucracy. First, I’m not sure the latter is a good thing anyway, and on the former I think the evidence from a long campaign is precisely the opposite. He has a taste and a talent for policy that may exceed the above mentioned as it is wrapped with a calm view of himself and the world. He does not fall into policy histrionics as Clinton did from time to time, nor propose to launch untested policy initiatives on good intentions alone as Johnson did.

    I have some hope that the website that seems the good and deep history of the Republican party will recognize that we have turned a corner from the ugliness Gingrich and Rove brought us in their politics of division. GWB has left the political ground littered with small-interest groups focused only on their favorite sign, caring little or nothing for the commonweal, political well-being, or the success of the country.

    Comment by bboot — 11/1/2008 @ 5:20 am

  36. Sounds much like the last 8 years. Where were you and your friends during this time? As to Obama, the dramatic of your report is pure window dressing. As good old Palin would say “betcha that it won’t be half that bad!”. Wink!

    Comment by Wham1000 — 11/1/2008 @ 8:14 am

  37. Jessi Di Santis,
    You need to take your medications more regularly.

    Here’s wishing you good mental health.

    Comment by Nagarajan Sivakumar — 11/1/2008 @ 8:30 am

  38. General de Gaulle Said:
    “#18 still liberal, thanks for your quisling list.”

    Minds operate at maximum effeciency when they are open. Those unable to accept constructive criticism remain stuck when events change the world around them. Perhaps your “quislings” may be a better source of information currently for conservatives that Rush and all the little Rushettes of talk radio who are operating from the theory that if you are stuck in the mud, hit the gas and dig deeper! Wake up, think for yourself! The mantra of Republican failure as the result of not being conservative enough won’t sell to anyone but the far right ideologues. Your time in the wilderness only grows longer as long as you stick to this myth.

    Comment by still liberal — 11/1/2008 @ 10:53 am

  39. Rick,
    Here’s one more thing i would like to add in response to your post - you gave credit to the GOP for voting for the Civil Rights Act and Voting Rights Act etc. Goldwater voted against the Civil Rights Act ON PRINCIPLE - after all this was a person who worked for the ACLU, not to mention his support for the NAACP’s initiatives.

    His principled stand was that states were best left to deal with this situation no matter the morality behind the issues. Of course, people may question him for taking such a stand given the incredibly painful and tortuous history of the African American community and how “states rights” was used as the main tactic by white slave owners to deny them freedom or equal treatment later on.

    But he was not a racist and a radical as he was wildly distorted out to be. He explains his position in the “Conscience of a Conservative” very honestly. He believed that people would eventually come around to seeing that equal civil rights for blacks was truly representative of American ideas of human liberty.

    One can question Goldwater as to how long black people were going to “wait” till southern whites came along. And more importantly why should they wait ??

    But let us put Goldwater’s stance on this issue in perspective - he was truly one of those people who stood up for something he believed in - he was no crowd pleaser.

    And of course we know that he lost in a landslide in that election.

    See comments from Mr.Still liberal

    “Wake up, think for yourself! The mantra of Republican failure as the result of not being conservative enough won’t sell to anyone but the far right ideologues. Your time in the wilderness only grows longer as long as you stick to this myth.”

    I am stuck by how much distorted people’s view of conservatism is, STILL. This was how bad it was 44 years back.

    Still Liberal does not understand that when people say that the GOP is conservative enough, we are talking about fiscal responsibility, limiting the excesses of Government promoting the rule of law, and of course allowing people the freedom to enjoy the fruits of their labor rather than coercively moralizing about redistributive justice.

    As far as Still Liberal is concerned, “more conservative” means more racism, more tax cuts for the wealthy and more hunger for international disputes.

    And you know what - i bet there are a lot of people like STill Liberal who think that way - i dont agree with them of course. But this is the ugly reality conservatives are facing today.

    Comment by Nagarajan Sivakumar — 11/1/2008 @ 12:11 pm

  40. At 1:12 am John Davis, RN Said: Why is Obama’s association with Ayers important, But McCain’s four bouts with an aggressive and deadly form of cancer swept under the table?

    So many questions, but not enough time to answer all the riffraff here. Right Wing Nut House indeed. I’ll shoot at one lunatic and move along. McCain is in good health.


    Comment by Dave Turson — 11/1/2008 @ 1:18 pm

  41. Nagarajan Sivakumar said:

    “As far as Still Liberal is concerned, “more conservative” means more racism, more tax cuts for the wealthy and more hunger for international disputes.”

    Well thanks for thinking for me, Mr. Sivakumar. My request was for you all to think for yourself, not think for me. But thanks anyway. I do not equate conservatism with racism. Living in Kansas means being surrounded by conservatives. My conservative friends and family members are not racist nor is there anything inherently racist about conservative philosophy. Have some conservatives been racist? Yes and so have some liberals. This is better attributed to these people being assholes in general instead of putting it on any political philosophy.

    Do I think big business benefits from conservatives in power? Why yes I do. The tax code is not 2 feet thick for any other reason than to provide tax breaks and incentives for the well-to-do, a redistribution of the wealth upward to the faction with more money individually, but no where near as much as the middle class collectively. (We pay a lot more taxes collectively than the rich because we outnumber than many, many times over.) Will this continue with conservatives in power? You betcha!

    Lastly, Mr. Nagarajan Sivakumar, the ugly reality that conservatism faces come from decades of conservative philosophy holding sway in America. If you had read my words for content instead of a launching pad for a screed, you may have noticed that I did not say working to be more idelogically conservative was wrong. I said it will lead conservatism to a longer period of being out of power. You can never convince people in general that the reason their shit sandwich didn’t taste good was because there was too much mayo and not enough pure shit.

    Comment by still liberal — 11/1/2008 @ 2:19 pm

  42. What a lovely picture you paint! What’s that sound I hear? The wheezing death-rattle of anti-intellectual “conservatism”? How mah-valous!


    P.S. No disrespect intended, but you don’t know squeeze about Israel. I lived there for years, speak the lingo, and belive me, they’ll do just fine with President Obama. It’s Grampy McCain who’s the real menace.

    Comment by Aiala — 11/1/2008 @ 10:43 pm

  43. RM wrote: a Barack Obama presidency will result in a radical diminution of American wealth, American power and prestige, and inevitably, a loss of liberty

    Too late. GWB (and the financial crises) already achieved all of that and more (or should i say, less). how could our power and prestige get any lower? maybe by attacking Iran. Thankfully I doubt BHO will do that.

    Comment by HyperIon — 11/3/2008 @ 3:27 pm

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.

Powered by WordPress