First try:

Strang: Based on emails we received, another issue of deep importance to our readers is a candidate's stance on abortion. We largely know your platform, but there seems to be some real confusion about your position on third-trimester and partial-birth abortions. Can you clarify your stance for us?

Obama: I absolutely can, so please don't believe the emails. I have repeatedly said that I think it's entirely appropriate for states to restrict or even prohibit late-term abortions as long as there is a strict, well-defined exception for the health of the mother. Now, I don't think that "mental distress" qualifies as the health of the mother. I think it has to be a serious physical issue that arises in pregnancy, where there are real, significant problems to the mother carrying that child to term. Otherwise, as long as there is such a medical exception in place, I think we can prohibit late-term abortions.

Second try:

Reporter: You said that mental distress shouldn't be a reason for late-term abortion?

Obama: "My only point is this -- historically I have been a strong believer in a women's right to choose with her doctor, her pastor and her family. And it is ..I have consistently been saying that you have to have a health exception on many significant restrictions or bans on abortions including late-term abortions.

In the past there has been some fear on the part of people who, not only people who are anti-abortion, but people who may be in the middle, that that means that if a woman just doesn't feel good then that is an exception. That's never been the case.

I don't think that is how it has been interpreted. My only point is that in an area like partial-birth abortion having a mental, having a health exception can be defined rigorously. It can be defined through physical health, It can be defined by serious clinical mental-health diseases. It is not just a matter of feeling blue. I don't think that's how pro-choice folks have interpreted it. I don't think that's how the courts have interpreted it and I think that's important to emphasize and understand.

Verdict: Prior to the release of that first interview, there were many feminists who planned on voting Obama but were torn about it because they feel he hasn't taken enough of a stand on women's issues. These comments seemed to prove their suspicions. The second try was better phrased though the dismissive attitude towards the notion that people might have interpreted the comments the way they were actually said is a bit baffling. Both statements seem to suffer from a lack of specifics while trumpeting moderate keywords.

Footnote: Jill at Feministe has a fantastic post about the problems with Obama's initial comment.

Madtv - Umbrella Music Parody Hillary Clinton Barack Obama

Lyrics:

Obama: [rapping] Uh huh! Uh huh! Yo my girl Hillary, former first lady, will she be president? Who knows, maybe. Yo Barack Obama! I'm a black democrat, no I ain't no punk, Hillary's a hot mama. She's got her eyes on the prize, and I'm talking 'bout my junk. Hillary, where you at?

Hillary: I'm in the front. But what I want is a little bit of mandingo love. Bill had Monica, played him like a harmonica. So can I be blamed if I wanna get some strange?

Yes, I am a firm believer of some hardcore jungle fever. He's my boy, I am his girl, hellz yeah we're both down with the swirl! We may have differed on Iraq, but no one's stiffer in the sack. I can't lie - that's why I wanna be under Barack Obama, bama, bama, ay, ay, ay, under Barack Obama, bama, bama, bama, ay, ay, ay, ay, ay.

The polls have me in the lead, but your polls the only one I need.

Obama: Girl you're making me really hot, I'm gonna put my ballot in your slot.

Hillary: Pour your chocolate rain on me and I'll make you my VP.

Obama: Gonna put my lovin' on ya.

Hillary: I wanna be under Barack Obama, bama, bama, bama, ay, ay, ay, ay, under Barack Obama, bama, bama, bama, ay, ay, ay ay!

In many respects, I liked Bill Clinton; I voted for him twice. But there is a major respect in which Clinton was the wrong choice for President - - his treatment of Islamic terrorism - - and it relates directly to his lack of military experience.

In 1993, Islamic terrorists attacked the twin towers of the World Trade Center in New York. The attack, which came early in Bill Clinton's first term, did only minor damage. The Clinton administration treated the attack as a crime, located the lower-level operatives, arrested and convicted them and sent them to prison. In short, it treated the situation as a non-military matter. The Clinton administration took no effective measures to prevent the second attack, which occurred on September 11, 2001, early in the George W. Bush administration. The second attack destroyed the target.

Investigation of the 9/11 attack demonstrated, first, that the planning and preparation took place without interference from the U. S. authorities who should have been watching this; second, that the planning and preparation took place under the nose of the Clinton administration; and, third, that far better preparation on our part would be necessary to prevent other such attacks.

Realizing that hindsight is 20-20, on reflection, it would have been better if Bill Clinton had served in the military. Approaching the problem of Islamic terrorism from a strictly civilian viewpoint had very negative consequences. The 9/11 attack could have been prevented; should have been prevented.

The next major attack has probably been planned for 2009, early in the administration of the next President. Will we be safer with Barack Obama, who has no military experience and who obviously brings a civilian mindset to the problem . . . or with John McCain, who has military experience? For this rogue Democrat, there's simply no contest - - McCain.

Related posts:

National Insecurity

National Insecurity II: Obama Gets Scarier Every Day

Aujourd'hui, je crois qu'il est temps d'actualiser la liste. On peut maintenant parler de son appui à la peine de mort, son refus de condamner une décision de la cour réitérant le « droit » des États-uniens de se promener armés jusqu'aux dents, sa décision de renforcer le programme du président Bush de donner des fonds publics aux organisations religieuses et de voter en faveur du projet Bush de légitimer le programme d'écoute électronique.

Richard Hétu parle de « recentrage ». Mais pour qu'il y ait un recentrage, il faut qu'il y ait eu une distance à partir du centre dans l'autre direction des nouvelles positions prises. Sauf que ce n'était pas le cas: Obama a toujours eu un programme de centre-droit, et maintenant qu'il est officiellement candidat (maintenant qu'il ne doit plus séduire le petit peuple, mais plutôt les vrais dirigeants, cette élite qui n'est pas soumise au suffrage universel) il s'enfonce davantage vers la droite, alliant à ses positions économiques droitistes les questions de morales conservatrices.

Encore une fois, les véritables perdants de ce virage à droite seront les États-uniens qui ont cru qu'Obama représentait le changement. Ils font la cruelle expérience que la démocratie n'existe plus vraiment aux États-Unis et que les élites ne laisseront jamais aucun candidat de gauche se rendre jusqu'au bout.

Aux États-Unis, vous avez le choix: droite, centre-droit, extrême-droite. Vous avez le choix, mais c'est le choix qu'on vous impose et gare à vous si vous croyez imposer le changement par votre vote.

Looking at our wartime Presidents

War of 1812 James Madison had no military experience (WON)

Civil war Abraham Lincoln Limited military service (During the Black Hawk War, Abraham Lincoln of New Salem, Illinois served three enlistments. Each enrollment lasted for approximately 30 days.)
(HIS SIDE WON)

World War One Woodrow Wilson had no military experience (WON)

World War Two FDR had no military experience (WON)

Korea Truman and Eisenhauer both had military experience (DRAW)

Vietnam JFK and Nixon had military experience (LOST)

DESERT STORM Bush the Elder had military experience (WON )

Kosovo Bill Clinton had no military experience (WON)

IRAQ/AFGANISTAN/IRAN GW Bush Military experience ? Outcome ? (I will leave that to you)

IN MY VIEW ONLY EISENHAUER HAD THE KIND OF MILITARY EXPERIENCE THAT IS RELEVANT TO BEING COMMANDER-IN-CHIEF. NIXON AS A NAVY LIEUTENANT COMMANDER MIGHT HAVE SOME RELAVANT INSIGHT . TRUMAN AS AN ARTILLARY CAPTAIN IN WORLD WAR ONE MIGHT HAVE SOME CLAIM.

EVEN IF,INDEED, McCAIN WERE A BONA FIDE WAR HERO (WHICH I QUESTION), I SUBMIT THAT THIS WOULD NOT FAVOR HIM BEING A GOOD PRESIDENT.

In other news: Some one at the Government screwed up! (I know, I know, there's a joke in there somewhere!) Normally, they are TAKING MY MONEY LIKE GANGBUSTERS. So, this is a nice change. I cannot wait for this check to come. I am going to rub it all over my body, and then go spend it at Ikea, a Swedish furniture store.

I was originally going to donate it Barack, but now he's not taking contributions from the American Public. And I decided that I need to be in PR, because DAMN I would be good at it. I mean, I already spin numbers, and I could spin that so very well. I should write an open letter to Barack. I mean, I am from Illinois, so I could carry this state for him, we are very fond of voting for our homegrown heroes.

Wait? What? Oh right, Barack will win Illinois anyhow. For one thing, we are a STRONG blue state, as well as Barack's home town (And, a quick recap: Barack is a citizen of the US, he is not a radical supporter of Islam and a sleeper cell, and is from Illinois)

Either way, this turned into QUITE the political post!

Ok folks, time for church!

YOU BETTER NOT MR McCAIN! BACK AWAY SLOWLY!

Now I know why the Democratic Party has a jackass for its Logo.  If the shoe fits………

Earlier I was reading a post on Obama how he is saying that mental distress is not a reason for a late term abortion.  Oh Please, this is coming from the man who twice refused to vote for the infant protection pact.  He has stated on record that he is FOR late term abortions and now he flip flops again. 

Last year, after the Supreme Court upheld a federal ban on late-term abortions, Obama said he "strongly disagreed" with the ruling because it "dramatically departs from previous precedents safeguarding the health of pregnant women."

http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5giojIhr1t6DX6K27JDnIVDciQDTgD91MLKF00

www.Patterico.com states the following:

“These reporters are so damn politically correct that they would rather say something factually false, rather than repeat a phrase they have been told is ideologically loaded.

I’ll tell you what the AP won’t: the Supreme Court did not uphold “a federal ban on late-term abortions” last year. It upheld a federal ban on partial-birth abortions.

Of course, the AP doesn’t want to use the term “partial-birth abortion” because it is a misleading, contentious, and highly charged phrase that doesn’t accurately reflect what happens, which is an abortion after a partial birth.

So they’ll just tell you that there was a federal ban on late-term abortions — making it sound as though there is no longer any such thing as a late-term abortion, because, you know, there is a federal ban on them.

So Obama wasn’t against a ban on all late-term abortions. He was against a ban on partial-birth abortion, in which a doctor delivers a part of the baby, sticks a pair of scissors in the back of the baby’s head, and sucks out the baby’s brain matter using a suction catheter.

That would be the procedure that Obama wants to remain available.

Just so we’re clear.”

http://patterico.com/2008/07/04/ap-chooses-pc-over-facts-in-describing-obamas-views-on-partial-birth-abortion/

Is anyone else out here sick of the flip flopping?  Obama has referred to babies as a ‘punishment’ by saying he would not want his daughters punished with a baby.  This is disgusting.  He refuses to let a baby born alive have any medical treatment by being the only Senator who voted AGAINST the Infant Protection Act and now he acts like he gives a damn what goes on in abortions?  Can we say sucking up to Evangelical voters? Sickening. 

Everything BO accused Hillary Clinton of doing he has done.  Obama’s back room dealt NAFTA and now is for it when he distributed pamphlets accusing Hillary of this when all along HE was the one who was for NAFTA.  He is the one who was Lying and cheating the American Public with his lies while accusing Hillary of doing this? Hindsight is always better than foresight.

He Promised to bring the troops home for Iraq and now, forget it he lies about this one too. He now states he will NOT be married to a time line. Then he lies about FISA and then lies about his lie he told in the first place.  Lies, flip flopping and more lies and that is THE HOPE AND CHANGE Obama promises? 

Be smart, vote John McCain.  Do not stay home, do not vote Independent as those are wasted votes and help Obama.  The Democratic Party WANTS us not to vote or to throw away the votes away on Independents as they know this will help Obama win.  We need to get the word out to all we can, go to vote McCain and let’s get Hillary back in 2012. We cannot handle another four years of a lying President who cares only for himself.  We just did eight years of this with Bush.

Appelbaum commented that this was a “[g]rim proving ground for Obama’s housing policy.” Sen. Obama “endorsed subsidies for private entrepreneurs to build low-income units. But, while he garnered support from developers, many projects in his former district have fallen into disrepair.”

Sen. Obama's political patron and personal real estate fairy, convicted political fixer Antoin "Tony" Rezko, is not the only one in his past to have connections to Chicago's slum housing.

Chicago Tribune reporters Jason Grotto and Laurie Cohen added July 5, 2008, that close campaign adviser Valerie Jarrett "stands at the center of Chicago's controversial efforts to redevelop public housing."

Jarrett has pushed to integrate new developments by limiting the number of residents, mostly poor and black, who can live in the new communities. From the beginning, that stance clashed with efforts by residents and housing advocates to ensure the number of units set aside for the poor was as large as possible.

Got that? Can't have too many poor black people living in new developments. Bad for the 'hood.

Since 1995, Jarrett has been a high ranking executive at Habitat Co., a real estate firm tasked by a federal judge to ensure the CHA ends segregation in public housing.

The company decides how many public, affordable and market-rate units will be built at each site, approves the budgets and helps negotiate the contracts. In some cases, Jarrett, who became chief executive officer of Habitat last year, has personally signed off on the location of public housing units inside the new developments.

Habitat argues that to integrate public housing it must attract middle-class families, who will not buy into a development that includes too many poor people.

The ChiTrib reporters describe Jarrett as "a former top official in Mayor Richard Daley's administration." Surprise! They failed to mention a few details about Jarrett's long and close relationship with both Sen. Obama and his wife, Michelle Robinson Obama.

On January 29, 2008, RBO/RW wrote:

An April 22, 2007, Chicago Tribune biographical profile relates that in summer 1991 a “young Sidley Austin attorney named Michelle Robinson” interviewed with Valerie Jarrett, who was then Mayor Richard Daley’s deputy chief of staff. Reporters Christi Parsons, Bruce Japsen and Bob Secter reported that, before accepting the subsequent job offer, Michelle Robinson said that first “her fiance”, Barack Obama, “the independent-minded community activist [who] had privately expressed his political ambitions”, wanted to meet with Jarrett.

What followed was a Chicago dinner meetup by Jarrett, Robinson and Obama:

This job would put his wife-to-be squarely in the offices of the man whose father had perfected the Democratic machine.

“My fiance wants to know who is going to be looking out for me and making sure that I thrive,” Jarrett recalled Robinson telling her. …

At the end of the evening, Jarrett turned to Barack and asked, “Well, did I pass the test?” Obama smiled, put his head down, closed his eyes and said, “Yeah, you passed the test.

That was the start of a long relationship that has paid off politically for Barack Obama, connecting him to Daley’s inner circle.

From summer 1991 until sometime in 1993, Michelle Obama was well-positioned at Chicago’s City Hall.

Michelle Obama’s “close and lasting friendships with Jarrett and many other top Daley aides, including former Corporation Counsel Susan Sher and David Mosena, who was the mayor’s chief of staff when Michelle Obama first joined his administration”, have endured, with their careers “frequently overlapped, and together they make up a network that reaches into virtually every aspect of Chicago politics.

“After leaving City Hall, Jarrett went on to lead the Chicago Transit Authority. She recruited Michelle Obama to the transit agency’s citizen advisory committee. Mosena, who now is president of the Museum of Science and Industry, served with Obama on the Commission on Chicago Landmarks. …

City Hall records show Michelle Obama, then still named Robinson, began work as a $60,000-a-year mayoral assistant in September of 1991. She didn’t stay long in the mayor’s office. Within weeks, Daley promoted Jarrett to run the new Department of Planning and Development. Obama followed.

She had no background in economic development, but Obama served as a troubleshooter for Jarrett.

After only 18 months at the city, she left to launch the Chicago chapter of Public Allies, a group that sought to build future community leaders by arranging apprenticeships for young adults with non-profit organizations. Barack Obama was on the founding board of Public Allies, and it was he who recommended his new wife for the job as the Chicago chapter’s first executive director, recalled Paul Schmitz, the current president of the group, which is now headquartered in Milwaukee and has chapters in many cities.

Bottom line? By early 1993, Michelle Obama had a good working knowledge of Chicago’s infrastructure and topography, having worked as a mayoral assistant, with the Chicago Transit Authority, and in the Department of Planning and Development. Three years later, in 1996, when she left Public Allies for a position at the University of Chicago, her husband, Barack Obama, was serving or soon to serve with the Illinois State Senate. By this time, the Obamas each had, at minimum, four and half years of street-level experience in Chicago.

Among other things, Valerie B. Jarrett has served as treasurer of Barack Obama’s leadership political action committee (PAC), the Hopefund.

Oh, and let's not forget, Jarrett is the vice chair of Chicago’s 2016 Summer Olympics bid committee.

There's just so much more that could be added here. The number of unsavory and questionable associations both Obamas hold within the Chicago community appear to be legion.

Also see related RBO article Rezko's slum housing, Obama's district, June 27, 2008 (updated version).

I'm definitely gonna try pick up as many copies as I can.. Ebony's August issue is a composition of 8 covers celebrating the '25 Coolest Brothers Of All Time'. Along with Barack Obama is Muhammad Ali, Denzel Washington, Billie Dee Williams, Marvin Gaye, Jay-Z and Samuel L. Jackson.

Barack could wear a rubbish bag and still look great. I'm biased but I'd say it's the half White/half East African genes that does it ;) lol.

"I'm probably the only candidate who, having won the nomination, can actually redraw the political map," Obama replied to a question about his strategy from a Concord, N.H., woman at a house party last August. Pacing around the old Victorian home, the wooden floor creaking, Obama went on: "I'll give you one specific example: Mississippi is 40% African American, but it votes 25% African American. If we just got the African Americans in Mississippi to vote their percentage, Mississippi is suddenly a Democratic state. And Georgia may be a Democratic state. Even South Carolina starts being in play. And I guarantee you African-American turnout, if I'm the nominee, goes up 30% around the country, minimum."

Obama's entire claim to redrawing the political map is based on his perceived ability to win in Southern states precisely because of African American voters. After all, this is why Hillary's claim that she alone was capable of winning large swing states that Democrats must win, such as Ohio and Pennsylvania, went unnoticed and unheeded by Dean, Pelosi and others. However, this is a severe and dangerous gamble. 

As we pointed out a few weeks back, the Obama campaign seems to know that Ohio and Florida are going to be a stretch, so they are looking for alternate paths to 270, which means they are relying heavily on the Southern states, especially Virginia and Georgia. They also discuss the Rocky Mountain states of Nevada, New Mexico and Colorado, but frankly, even if he wins those three, and Michigan, Pennsylvania and New Hampshire (all three of which will be highly competitive), if he loses Ohio and Florida, he will lose the election 267-271 (this count includes all the states Kerry won). In short, if Obama loses Ohio and Florida, the three Rocky Mountain states and Georgia and Virginia become must win states. 

As Senator Obama will still lose the general election with the three Rocky Mountain states if he fails to swing Georgia and Virginia, these two states are of particular interest. The Obama campaign pulled no punches in revealing their tactic to win to the AP back in June: race. 

Obama's campaign has spent heavily on time and money in Virginia, where a Democratic presidential candidate hasn't won since 1964. In recent elections, however, high-profile Republicans have lost there. And in a sign of how serious Obama is taking the state, Plouffe dispatched to Virginia many aides who helped Obama stage his upset win in the Iowa caucuses Jan. 3.

The key, Plouffe told supporters, will be to register new black voters and new young voters in Virginia.

Likewise, Georgia has many unregistered black voters who could turn out in record numbers to support the first major-party nominee who is black, he argued. Plouffe said the campaign also will keep an eye on Mississippi and Louisiana as the race moves into the fall to see if new black voters could put them within reach.

First and foremost, as an African American voter, I feel used and offended by this purely racial strategy. As I have stated before, Senator Obama has done nothing for the African American community and has avoided and ignored our communities during his presidential campaign, but believes in racial polarization and indeed, prejudice within the black community, so much so that he is willing to hang his presidential hopes on it. Second, the Obama campaign needs to do a bit more research before they spend anymore money in Virginia, Georgia, or any other Southern state for that matter. 

First, Thomas Schaller of the New York Times reveals the myths upon which Obama has built his dreams:

The first myth is that African-American turnout in the South is low. Black voters are actually well represented in the Southern electorate: In the 11 states of the former Confederacy, African-Americans were 17.9 percent of the age-eligible population and 17.9 percent of actual voters in 2004, analysis of Census Bureau data shows.

And when socioeconomic status is held constant, black voters go to the polls at higher rates than white voters in the South. In other words, a 40-year-old African-American plumber making $60,000 a year is, on average, more likely to vote than a white man of similar background.

So African American voters already vote in numbers congruent to their percentage of the population. Thus, increasing the turnout "30% around the country, minimum" is not just arrogant, but largely improbable. 

The second myth is that Democratic presidential candidates fare better in Southern states that have large numbers of African-Americans. In fact, the reverse is true, because the more blacks there are in a Southern state, the more likely the white voters are to vote Republican.

Mississippi, the state with the nation’s highest percentage of African-Americans in its population, illustrates how difficult Mr. Obama’s task will be in the South. Four years ago, President Bush beat John Kerry there by 20 points. For the sake of argument, let’s assume that Mr. Obama could increase black turnout in Mississippi to 39 percent of the statewide electorate, up from 34 percent in 2004, according to exit polls. And let’s assume that Mr. Obama will win 95 percent of those voters, up from the 90 percent who voted for Mr. Kerry four years ago.

If that happened, the black vote would yield Mr. Obama 37 percent of Mississippi’s statewide votes. To get the last 13 percent he needs for a majority, Mr. Obama would need to persuade a mere 21 percent of white voters in Mississippi to support him. Sounds easy, right?

But only 14 percent of white voters in the state supported Mr. Kerry. Mr. Obama would need to increase that number by 7 percentage points — a 50 percent increase. Mr. Obama struggled to attract white Democrats in states like Ohio and South Dakota. It strains credulity to believe that he will attract three white voters in Mississippi for every two that Mr. Kerry did.

Keep in mind that this analysis (and the speculation that Mr. Obama will generate unprecedented black turnout in the South) does not consider the possibility that white voter turnout will rise, too. Passage of the 1965 Voting Rights Act led to an upsurge in black voting in the South, but it also caused many white Southerners to register and vote as well — for the Republicans.

If you live by the racial sword, you will die by it as well. While it is unlikely that Senator Obama would garner more of the white vote than Kerry did (which he needs to in order to win the state), if white turnout also increased, he would still probably lose the state. 

But let's look even closer at the specific states. Schaller's take on Georgia is not particularly optimistic: 

What about Georgia, North Carolina and Virginia, the three states that are routinely cited as new possibilities for the Democratic column this fall?

Mr. Obama can write off Georgia and North Carolina for the same reasons that Mississippi is beyond his reach — although the math in those two states is slightly less daunting. 

Newton-Small is a little more optimistic about Georgia:

Though he may have a legitimate shot in Georgia, he currently trails McCain by a margin of 12.3 percentage points, according to an average of Georgia polls by the non-partisan website RealClearPolitics.com.

~snip~

 

There is no question that Obama can turn out Southern blacks: African-American voter participation in the 2008 Georgia primary, which Obama won by 36 percentage points over Clinton, increased 85% over the 2004 primary, for example. And there's lots of room to grow from the last general election; in 2004 just 54.3% of the 1,090,000 registered blacks in Georgia voted.

But black votes alone cannot win him Southern swing states like Georgia, according to David Bositis, senior political analyst at the non-partisan Joint Center, which tracks black voter trends. "In states that could potentially flip it isn't just about increasing black turnout. They have to be states where Obama can win a fairly significant portion of whites," Bositis said. In the Georgia primary Obama edged out Clinton among young white voters, but lost white voters over the age of 45 by more than 20 percentage points, according to CNN exit polls. 

 

As for Schaller, he believes Virginia is his best hope:

Virginia, however, is the one Southern state that Mr. Obama has a reasonable chance of winning. And it’s precisely because the home of Robert E. Lee, as NBC News’s political director, Chuck Todd, has suggested, is seceding from the Confederacy.

The demographic makeup of the electorate in Virginia is unlike that of any other state in the South. The black population in Virginia is, as a percentage, among the lowest in the region. And during the last two decades, the state has also experienced a huge influx of upscale non-Southerners, who have taken over the Washington suburbs of northern Virginia. (Florida is a perennial target for similar reasons. With a relatively small black population, a big Hispanic voting bloc and a large contingent of relocated retirees from the North, it is the least Southern of the Southern states.)

While these states are slim possibilities, it's important to note that to turn them blue, Obama will have to churn out the green (perhaps this is the reason he chose to forego public financing?). But while Obama is throwing millions of dollars at states that have not gone to Democrats since 1964 (Virginia), and 1992 (Georgia and Bill), he'll be opening the door even wider for Republicans in actual swing states. 

Mike DuHaime, political director of the Republican National Committee, doesn't argue with Obama's fund-raising advantage. But he disputes the notion that Obama can afford to keep throwing money at long shots once the campaign really heats up in the fall, and he contends that Obama's defense of vulnerable states like New Jersey, Pennsylvania and Ohio will be much more expensive. "It would take a major swing to swing these [Southern] states," says DuHaime. "I don't fault them for trying to expand the map, but we have better opportunities in other states that are just as big, if not bigger — Pennsylvania, Ohio, for example."

Obama thinks he can win simply by essence of being black. Not only is this insulting, prejudicial, and frankly predictable at this point, but it's flawed, and will fortunately cost him the election.

Erst stimmte Obama für Bushs umstrittenes Abhörgesetz, das er lange deutlich abgelehnt hatte. Dann befürwortete er - völlig unerwartet - die Entscheidung des Obersten Gerichts, die private Bewaffnung jeden Amerikaners weiterhin zu gestatten. Fassungslos macht seine Forderung nach der Todesstrafe für Kinderschänder, die von eben diesem Gericht kürzlich abgelehnt wurde. Und die Distanzierung von seiner bisherigen Unterstützung von Abtreibungen ließ ebenfalls aufhorchen.

Nun erntete Obama Proteststürme für seinen gedanklichen Rückzug vom schnellen Ende des Irak-Krieges, dessen Propagierung entscheidend zum Wahlkampf-Erfolg über Hillary Clinton beigetragen hatte. Gab er bislang eine klare 16 Monats-Frist nach Amtsantritt für die Rückholung sämtlicher US-Truppen aus dem Irak vor, so relativierte er in Interview-Äußerungen plötzlich diese Zielsetzung, ruderte aber aufgrund der heftigen Kritik sogleich wieder retour.

Wofür steht Obama nun tatsächlich ? Ist er eher der linke Demokrat, als der er sich in den vergangenen Monaten der Welt präsentierte, um sich von McCain und natürlich auch von Clinton politisch deutlich abzugrenzen ? Oder steht er eher für die konservative Mitte, die er mit seinen neuerlichen Aussagen leichter gewinnen kann ? Was ist Überzeugung, was ist der Taktik geschuldet ? Wer ist der echte Obama ? Seine Wähler und wir hoffnungsvollen Beobachter aus Europa müssen uns wohl auf weitere Überraschungen gefasst machen.

Obama appears in a super cool cover for Ebony Magazine August 2008 Issue. This guy has had to have set a record for number of times appearing on the covers of magazines in a years span.

YOU BETTA WORK.

From coast to coast, Somali, Ethiopian, Nigerian and Kenyan Americans are knocking on the doors of their fellow African immigrants, registering new citizens to vote, raising money and preaching Obama's mantra of hope and change. They hope that his prominence will change their status as one of the nation's least-recognized immigrant groups, and that he will one day provide aid to help ease the turmoil and poverty in countries such as Ethiopia, Somalia and Sudan.

At a Caribou Coffee shop on East West Highway in Silver Spring, where Somalis and Ethiopians often gather, Ahmed Eyow, a Somali, said supporting Obama is a no-brainer.

"Obama is one generation away from Africa," said Eyow, who immigrated to the United States nearly 30 years ago. "I have nothing against my brothers and sisters, black people who were born here, but his father is like me. His father was an immigrant. I can relate to him the way I can relate to my own children. He's almost like my son."

I think that it is great to see a story of how a person can rise from any background to prominence, and it would send a great message to the rest of the world. However over the past few months Obama has come off to me as very packaged. Yes, I know that all politicians "package" themselves, but Obama seems to be a very special and calculated case. I am beginning to wonder if there is anything authentic about this guy.

Obama has spent local political career trying to attach himself to black Americans (those that are decedents of slaves). Not being a decedent of slaves himself, Obama shored up his "cred" by joining Dr. Jeremiah Wright's church on the South Side of Chicago (another calculated choice). He made himself into an "African-American" rather than the son of an African immigrant.

Now that he is running for higher office that became a liability and he took a different direction. He is now a "post racial" candidate. There is nothing wrong with that and I prefer "post racial" politics to the race hustling politics of the Jesse Jacksons and Al Sharptons, but this is where Obama hitched his political wagon when he initially ran for office on the South Side of Chicago.

Now that he has won the nomination, he is emphasizing his white roots. Again, there is nothing wrong with a person embracing all sides of their heritage. My problem here is that this is cold political calculation and does not seem to be real. A decade ago, he was rejecting all of this, now he is embracing it now that he is running for higher office without explaining that he had a change of heart or any of that. All of a sudden, he is a "post racial" guy that transcends race. So my problem is who is the real Obama? The one that joined Dr. Wright's very openly and proudly pro-black church or the post racial guy? What form will he take if he takes office?

Now he seems to be backing away from his pledge to withdraw from the disaster that is Iraq, broke his promise on public campaign funding and already has a series of "flip flops". This is not including the sweetheart deal he received on his mortgage on top of getting his $2 million mansion for $300,000 under the asking price in 2005, which was 2-3 years before the current fall of housing prices. The more I hear this guy, the more the voice in my head tells me: "This guy is completely full of crap".

One thing I can say about McCain (and no, I am not supporting McCain) is that he seems to be straight forward and authentic. You know exactly what you get with him. In comparing Obama and McCain, I can't help but think of what Malcolm X used to say about "the fox and the wolf". The wolf snarls and the fox smiles, while both will eat you.

On the other hand, Bush has been such a disaster (and McCain promising more of the same) that the fact Obama is not Republican is probably good enough in spite of the fact he has no authenticity.

"D - Day" Demonstration : 8th July- Vaclavske Namesti - Wenceslas Square
July has arrived in Prague, and as well within just a few days, the U.S. Secretary Of State, Condoleeza Rice is expected to attend discussions with the intentions of signing the treaties involved in the installation of a U.S. Missile Defense Radar Base in the Czech Republic.

The length and exact term of "Condi's" visit has been reported to be on the morning of July the 8th and stay between the 10th.

If our government here in the Czech Republic thinks that it's citizens will remain passive, quiet and indifferent "neteční" during it's ignorant and defiant pursuit of a rapid signing of the Missile Defense & Radar Agreement, truly they have made an unprecedented mistake.

"Pokud si naše vláda myslí, že občané zůstanou neteční k její úporné snaze o urychlené podepsání smlouvy o radaru, tak se plete."

"D - DAY" Demonstration

"D-Day" = The Day Of Condoleeza Rice's Arrival In Prague.
Individuals who are against the placement of the U.S. Radar Base on Czech Soil, Voice It ! - Say It ! - THE RADAR WILL NOT BE HERE !!

The people have remained against the agreement for two years without change, and the government has also not changed in it's stance of ignorance of the people, citizens and the majority "Czech Vote". We can voice our final words once more to Parliament via elected and responsible spokespeople for the "No To Bases" Iniciative, "Ne Zakladnam".

We will demonstrate in protest of "Condi" and the Radar, On Tuesday, 8th of July, in Wenceslas Square, from 18:00 (6pm).

For all Senator Barack Obama’s success at raising money and generating excitement among voters, he faces a daunting challenge as he prepares to claim the nomination in August: a Democratic convention effort marred by costly setbacks and embarrassing delays.

But that's only the beginning. Did you know, for instance, that there are some crazy food rules that are interfering with catering contracts? And that a lot of Denver caters are saying no deal because of them? It's true:

And then there is the food: A 28-page contract requested by Denver organizers that caterers provide food in “at least three of the following five colors: red, green, yellow, blue/purple and white.” Garnishes could not be counted toward the colors. No fried foods would be allowed. Organic and locally grown foods were mandated, and each plate had to be 50 percent fruits and vegetables. As a result, caterers are shying away.

Did you get that? Jesse Jackson's rainbow coalition, right there on your plate. Oh, but it gets better:

Nick Agro, head of Whirled Peas Catering, questioned whether the requirement for local organic food could meet cost constraints. “These were fantastic ideas, but I question who is willing to pay for these extra costs,” Mr. Agro said. “My experience is that it is all coming together slowly.”

Who are these people? And what have they done with my party? Rainbow food is paramount? I don't think so. This is totally analogous with how utterly out of touch these people are. Elitist freaks. It's fantastic, IF you can AFFORD it, to eat locally grown and organic foods; I do it with my family sometimes if we have a extra in the budget (very rare these days), but these guys have known for months that money was tight. And they should have um, you know, RESEARCHED the availability of such foods in the Denver area before putting that in the 28 page contract. Yeah, I know, Celine freaking Dionne has a shorter service ryder than the DNC.

But food's not the only problem:

Some of the Democratic missteps started soon after planning for the event began. The Democratic National Convention Committee decided not to take cheap office space and instead rented top-quality offices in downtown Denver at $100,000 a month, only to need less than half the space, which it then filled with rental furniture at $50,000 a month. And in a costly misstep, the Denver host committee, early on, told corporate donors that their contributions were not tax-deductible, rather than to encourage donations by saying that the tax-exempt application was pending and expected to be approved.

About which the Obama campaign is starting to wonder:

Part of the problem, say those close to the plans, is a clash between the Obama campaign, which is tight-fisted about its money, and the Democratic convention committee, which failed to estimate properly the costs of the convention. As the Obama campaign begins to take over in Denver they are beginning to question why the party’s estimates for construction, entertainment and other components are so at odds with what actual costs are turning out to be.

“We are now going into the final construction phase, and it is turning out to be much higher,” said a person with knowledge of the budget, but who is not tied to either the Obama campaign or the party. “So the Obama camp is not pleased and is raising questions about where all the money had been going. And they look at the posh office space for the Democratic Party staff here, which is really plush, and they say, ‘They spent the money on that?’ ”

Oh, tight-fisted, 100 million-dollar-man Barry just can't understand why they need to spend so much money on offices they only half fill. To which I say, pot, meet kettle.

But where we're concerned are the demonstrations:

While Mr. Brown said he expects the city will “cowboy up” and have a successful convention, the lack of resolution about important issues like the demonstrators and food are “the donkey in the room.”

“We are having people say that they will be leaving town,” said Mr. Brown, who fears that the city could be in a no-win situation with the demonstrators — if there is insufficient police presence, the city could be overrun by them; if the police are overly aggressive, they will be criticized as overreacting.

Apparently they want to put us next to the media tent, but the media doesn't want us to give them cooties, plus, we're just so fucking loud with our demands for freedom and justice. I hope we do get put there, but I doubt it. It's too much of a gift, and even Democrats with the tiny intellects of Donna & Dean will realize what foolishness that is.

Digg the Declaration!

As the United States, and the world for that matter, watches the Obama revolution happen with eager eyes, the Fashion world watches [Michelle Obama] even closer. Her fabulous physic and impeccable fashion sense lure us in, and most of us beam in envy, over that beautiful accessory she's got on her shoulder, Barack Obama.

Fashion officially endorsed Barack & Michelle last month, with Anna Wintour and Calvin Klein holding a fund raiser in the the power couple's honor. Its proven to be a fatal mistake for politicians to ingore style, and its a shame many never consider the impact Fashion has on Politics, --and vice versa. I mean, just imagine how many times over the last couple of Presidential campaigns you heard image references; Hilary's distasteful pantsuits, Obama's Flag pin Accessory indicating "allegiance", John Kerry's Fake tan, turning him into a "flip flopper"? ( ya.. we all know what that was truly about). The list goes on and on, and what it all boils down to is that image and politics, fashion and politics-- go hand in hand. That most likely is something Hillary Clinton wishes she payed a bit more attention too during her run, because of course, after rejecting the Queen of American Vogue- Anna Wintour's, suggestion to appear in Vogue's Febuary Issue and grace its cover, [QUOTE]"for fear of looking too feminine", Hilary in essence ended her presidential hopes and dreams right then and there. Lets consider it safe to say that Hillary didn't get the memo that with the swing of Wintour's diamond encrusted Cartier pen-- lives begin, and Presidential Campaigns end. [It probabily would have been kicking a dead horse-- a lost cause if you will, to try and fabulotize Hilary anyway.]

We consider Michelle Obama of utmost intelligence to take Fashion & Style seriously, as it relates to her--and her husband's public image. It has of course been since Jacqueline Kennedy that Fashion's had a substantial political muse in town, and its fabulous and fitting to report that she is the first African-American contestant to the First Lady throne, too.

With the Fall/Winter 2008-09 Haute Couture shows wrapping up earlier this week, I invited my mind to wonder, which pieces I would befit Michelle Obama in, had I the chance.

PROFESSIONALLY CHIC: On a day out campaigning for her husband, Michelle Obama would look simply unstoppable in this double breasted trench by Jean Paul Gaultier Haute Couture.

AMERICAN LEISURE: Michelle's height makes this deep V dress by Alexis Mabille Haute Couture a perfect choice for all those daily mommy duties. Worn interchangeably with different color under blouses this would a fabulous staple wardrobe piece.

LEGS OUT: Although a bit high above the knee for a first lady, this piece with jacket separate by CHANEL Haute Couture covers a great deal of upper form, making it a perfect choice for Mrs. Obama who loves those blessed legs of hers.

FIRST LADY CHIC: This Satin Anne Valerie Hash Haute Couture dress, would fit Michelle like a glove, and would match Baracks smile.

BELLE OF THE BALL: Theres no better time to pull out all the bells & whistles than at Barack's Inauguration Ball, that Oprah's rumored to be excitedly awaiting with the "perfect dress already picked out" and waiting in one of her closets next to Gale. Therefore, Michelle should be clad in this statuesque, form fitting Elie Saab Haute Coutute Gown.

]]> http://stevenverschoot.wordpress.com/?p=62 Sun, 06 Jul 2008 09:15:31 +0000 stevenverschoot http://stevenverschoot.wordpress.com/?p=62 Obama zal naar Europa en het Midden-Oosten reizen, zo heb ik daarnet gelezen in De Tijd. Hij zal onder naar meer Duitsland, Frankrijk, GB, Jordanië en Israël trekken, om er zijn internationale ervaring op te doen, en te spreken met de leiders van bevriende landen over bijvoorbeeld terrorisme, nucleaire proliferatie, klimaatsverandering, Irak, Afghanistan en Iran.

Nu is mijn vraag: in hoeverre is dit zijn beslissing? Is dit een publiciteitsstunt? Of is dit om te antwoorden op de kritiek van McCain dat hij niet genoeg ervaring zou hebben. In elk geval, begin ik steeds meer te twijfelen aan de 'echtheid' van Obama als politicus. Steeds meer begin ik het gevoel te hebben dat hij niet zijn eigen politiek wil voeren, maar de politiek van zijn adviseurs, van zijn partij, dezelfde manier van politiek zoals ook George Bush jr. heeft gedaan. Onder geen enkele president waren de vice-president en de minister van buitenlandse zaken zo machtig als onder de jongste president uit het Bush-geslacht, met desastreuse gevolgen. En ik begin meer en meer de indruk te hebben dat ook Obama een marionet zal zijn van de mensen die hem omringen.

Vind je ook niet dat de superdelegates wel heel plots de zijde van Barack hebben gekozen? Vind je ook niet dat Hillary zich wel heel plots achter Obama schaart na zijn overwinning, en hij haar er wel heel makkelijk bijneemt? Het is duidelijk dat persoonlijke meningen hier plaats moeten maken voor een hoger doel: het Witte Huis.  Het is belangrijk voor de vermoedelijke winnaar van de voorverkiezingen zoveel mogelijk van de partij achter zich te hebben, en dus moeten de delegates zich achter hem scharen. Het is ook belangrijk dat zo weinig mogelijk stemmers van Hillary niet op hem stemmen, maar op de onafhankelijke kandidaten, of die van kleinere partijen. Of nog erger: op zijn rivaal McCain, want ook deze kandidaat mikt overduidelijk op de stemmen afkomstig van Hillary's kiezers, zoals duidelijk blijkt uit deze foto, afkomstig van zijn website. Ook de politiek die Obama voert is extreem uitgedokterd, en ik heb steeds meer het gevoel dat Obama zélf niet in zijn change gelooft, als ik zijn speeches bekijk. Meer en meer heb ik het gevoel dat de vlotste spreker, en diegene die het makkelijkst te beïnvloeden zou zijn is uitgekozen door de superdelegates. Meer en meer heb ik het gevoel dat - in tegenstelling tot Hillary met haar ijzersterk karakter - Obama niet zijn eigen politiek zal voeren, maar die van de machtigen uit de democratische partij, en dat dat - samen met het zich achter de vermoedelijke winnaar scharen - een van de belangrijkste redenen was dat ze hun kar hebben gekeerd.

This one just hurts my heart so badly I can't even tell you.  It appears that Las Vegas is in the throes of an economic free fall right now.  Industries across the board -- from gambling to food to sex -- are going under.  In short, Las Vegas is dying.

It's not hard to understand why, it's just not something we ever think about.  Everyone always just takes for granted that Las Vegas will be there when we need her. 

But when America's economy goes south, a city that relies on tourism and liberal spending gets hurt the most.  And because the economic security of millions of families is being broken right now by rising gas prices, health care costs, food prices and a trecherous mortgage market -- fewer and fewer Americans are taking that Fabulous Las Vegas Vacation.  

And look what's happening.

Casino revenues are down another 3 percent this month.  Bankruptcies have quadrupled.  Rising food costs have caused many of the buffets to scale back their business.  Market shares in casino operators are plumetting.  Las Vegas Sands, just to give one example, which controls the Venetian and Palazzo resorts, has fallen below $50 a share; last September it was trading at three times that amount.  That's real money being lost.

But other things are happening as well -- things that are tied to the city's economy but in peculiar ways. 

Nevada has the highest foreclosure rate in the nation, and as homes in Las Vegas have been shuttered, mosquitoes have taken to breeding in abandoned swimming pools.  Some of these mosquitoes were found to carry the West Nile Virus, which prompted a city wide health scare this year.  

It's like a perfect storm of evil is engulfing the one of the greatest cities in the nation. 

And everyone is taking a hit.  Not just the business owners, developers, and restaurateurs -- people in the famed Las Vegas sex industry are taking a serious pounding, if you'll forgive the expression. 

As more and more of America's boyfriends & husbands find it harder to afford those famous Vegas lap dances and trips to the "massage" parlors, strippers and sex workers are seeing their take home pay slashed significantly.

In 2008 alone, the Minx, the Mensa club and the Crazy Horse -- three famous strip clubs -- were forced to close their doors.  It's expected that in the next 12 months, another two or three "major venues" will be lost to us.*

But I'm going to bring this back to politics because politics is at the heart of the problem here.  The economic downturn that Las Vegas is seeing is ultimately tied to the economic downturn we're facing as a nation.

Therefore, because John McCain will continue George Bush's disastrous economic policies, it stands to reason that my beloved Las Vegas would continue to suffer under a McCain Administration. 

Consequently: preserving Las Vegas has now become, in my opinion, the single most important reason to vote against John McCain this November.**  Forget his backward policies on Iraq, health care, abortion, or taxes -- but Vegas Baby -- and the "negative relationship" that exists here which says: if John McCain wins, the House loses.  Permanently.

Related: MORE SEX = LESS HIV?…DON’T BLAME HOOKERS!!

(The Independent)

* On the flip side of all of this, if you happen to be someone with a good deal of discretionary income right now, I'd suggest that you book the first available flight to Las Vegas.  With so much action being lost in that town, those girls will be so appreciative of your business right now that they'll work twice as hard to lighten your wallet.  I'll leave it to you to ponder the many possibilities with that.

** I am, of course, just having a little fun here with the McCain bit, obviously there are "more important" reasons to vote against McCain.  But I do care about Las Vegas a lot, and the situation it faces is no laughing matter.  So if possible, budget for a trip out there to help feed that tourism-based economy.  Just remember to tip your dealers, because if you don't and you're sitting at my table, you will be bitch slapped.

"My only point is this -- historically I have been a strong believer in a women's right to choose with her doctor, her pastor and her family. [ ...and if she has no family or pastor, it IS okay if she chooses on her own, right? What if she chooses NOT to include them in her decison-making process? What then?]  And it is ..I have consistently been saying that you have to have a health exception on many significant restrictions or bans on abortions including late-term abortions.  [But you still think it's okay for politicians to tell women what they can do with their bodies.]

In the past there has been some fear on the part of people who, not only people who are anti-abortion, but people who may be in the middle, that that means that if a woman just doesn't feel good then that is an exception. That's never been the case.

I don't think that is how it has been interpreted. My only point is that in an area like partial-birth abortion [Using those right-wing frames again] having a mental, having a health exception can be defined rigorously. [Shouldn't this job of defining be left to oh, say, DOCTORS, rather than a bunch of Washington politicians?] It can be defined through physical health, It can be defined by serious clinical mental-health diseases. It is not just a matter of feeling blue.  [ARRRGH!!! No one has said it is. Do you think a woman goes through the majority of her pregnancy and then one day, just 'cause she's feeling a little "down" decides to abort? Dammit - you are echoing the right-wing meme that there are a bunch of women out there having late-term abortions just because they don't feel like being pregnant any more, or they want to fit into their "skinny' jeans again. ARRRGH!!!! ] I don't think that's how pro-choice folks have interpreted it. I don't think that's how the courts have interpreted it and I think that's important to emphasize and understand.

Senator Obama, you are either for a woman's right to choose or you are not. It's perfectly clear to me you are not.