Archive for October 7th, 2008

October 7, 2008

Could I be . . . wrong?

Having declared the election over, I’m now beginning to have doubts. Why? Because the Left seems to be starting its victory lap early, convinced that calling Americans racists is the winning ticket.

Exhibit AGlenn Greenwald:

[O]ne of the ugliest, nastiest, most invective-filled personality attacks a major candidate has ever delivered, blatantly designed to stoke raw racial resentments and depict Obama as a Manchurian candidate funded by secret Arab Terrorist sources — a truly unstable and hate-mongering rant . . .

Exhibit BMike Dukakis:

“That ad with Frank Raines was despicable. . . . I mean, what was that anyway? First, it was bald-faced lies. Right? These guys had met once, and Raines is not his housing adviser. Secondly, he put two black guys up there with this older white woman who’s losing her house or whatever. What do you think that’s all about? It isn’t even subtle.”

Exhibit CFiredoglake:

I can’t wait to see these people completely broken and humiliated. I really can’t.

Self-righteousness and hubris are a bad combination in politics, and it’s possible that Democrats are mounting a desperate last-ditch effort to lose this election.

(Cross-posted at AmSpecBlog.)

October 7, 2008

Clergy call you a racist

First it was Barney Frank, now it’s the National Council of Churches:

At its September board meeting, the National Council of Churches approved a resolution essentially supporting virtually open borders for the U.S, ascribing support for border control to “fear” and racism.
“We acknowledge the ease with which we as human beings are prone to fear people who we consider ‘other,’ yet our faith challenges us to overcome such natural fear of those who are not like us,” the NCC intoned. It recalled America’s struggle to overcome “racial, ethnic, gender and religious discrimination.” And it expressed distress that America may currently succumb to “fear, xenophobia, and racist impulses directed against new immigrants.”

And, as always, remember: If you deny that you’re a racist, that only proves you’re a racist.

October 7, 2008

Michelle Obama’s cousin, the rabbi


As a state senator, Democrat Barack Obama awarded $75,000 in government grants to a Chicago social service organization led by a rabbi who is also his wife’s cousin, records show.
In 1999, Obama arranged for $50,000 for adult literacy and counseling services offered on Chicago’s South Side by a group called Blue Gargoyle. A $25,000 grant for the group’s youth services followed the next year.
The group’s executive director when the grants were awarded was Capers Funnye, a South Side rabbi and Michelle Obama’s first cousin once removed.

Which, if I remember my genealogy, means that one of the rabbi’s siblings married Michelle’s cousin. Rusty’s all excited about the conflict-of-interest angle. Me, I’m just laughing at the anti-Semitic tin-foil hat conspiracists, whose heads will explode at this news: Those neocons have everything covered!

October 7, 2008

Is your church supporting ACORN?

If you’re a Catholic, your tithes and offerings help fund ACORN and other “community organizer” groups. In fact, during Barack Obama’s time as a community organizer in Chicago, his group received two grants totallying $73,000 from Catholic charities.

October 7, 2008

New ad: Obama ‘lied’

Well, he’s a Democrat. What did you expect?

October 7, 2008

Barney Frank calls you a racist

Yes, you there, the one who thinks it’s a bad idea to pressure banks to make risky mortgages in the pursuit of “social justice.”

Let’s bring some evidence to bear on this issue:

All of these journalists and economists who say that Barney Frank, Jamie Gorelick, Franklin Raines, Jim Johnson and the Community Reinvestment Act helped cause the mortgage meltdown, they’re just racists, see? And if you don’t agree, what does that make you?

October 7, 2008

Fraud against ‘An American Carol’?

That’s what Little Miss Atilla says, and the producers are investigating. I have no problem believing that biased ticket clerks would sabotage a conservative film, since biased bookstore clerks do everything they can to sabotage conservative books.

You should go see An American Carol — it’s funny. Here’s my mini-review, and here’s the trailer:

October 7, 2008

How John McCain lost

That’s my latest American Spectator column:

John McCain lost the election Sept. 24 and Barack Obama will be the next president of the United States. Nothing that is likely to happen between now and Nov. 4 can change this outcome.
Since Sept. 24, polls have increasingly pointed toward a Democratic landslide. Obama not only has an outside-the-margin advantage in nearly every national poll, but leads strongly in enough battleground states that if the election were held today, the Electoral College vote would be 353 for the Democrat, 185 for the Republican. Even Karl Rove’s electoral map now shows Obama winning.
Two weeks ago, after polls first began showing a trend toward Obama, I warned against a Republican panic. The candidates had not yet met in their first debate and it was possible that a strong performance by McCain might shift the momentum back toward the GOP candidate.
On Sept. 24, however, the McCain campaign suddenly freaked out. The Arizona senator announced that he was suspending his campaign activity, seeking a postponement of the Sept. 26 debate, and flying off to Washington to push for the Wall Street bailout bill.

Read the rest. It’s been headlined at Hot Air and linked by Mark Harvey, who isn’t exactly a fan.
A lot of the angry reaction can be boiled down to abuse of the first-person plural — “we.” You see this in some of the Hot Air comments, e.g.:

Jesus. We’re supposed to just concede a freakin month before people even vote? No thanks. . . .
When did we become the quitters? When did Republicans lose their nerve?

In other words, “we” (conservatives) are responsible for the success or failure of Republican politicians and their campaigns. This is a sort of identity issue, like the Dallas fan who speaks of the Cowboys as “we” — “We won Sunday!” — as if he were actually wearing a helmet out on the field. Therefore, if a Republican politician loses, “we” are responsible.

This kind of thinking is bass-ackward. It exempts politicians from responsibility for their own actions. Did “we” tell Maverick to support the bailout? Did “we” tell him to blame Chris Cox for the financial crisis? Did “we” tell him to blame the problem on greedy capitalists? No. He runs his own campaign, and if he runs it off a cliff, “we” are not to blame.

The headline on my Sept. 24 blog post, reacting to the news that Maverick was suspending his campaign to push for the bailout was, “Holy crap!” That move made no sense. Despite a slow post-convention fade in his numbers, McCain was still in a statistical dead heat on Sept. 24 — trailing 3 points in Gallup, down by 2 points in Rasmussen.

Just two days before the first debate, and the GOP presidential nominee does a total freakout. It was inexplicable then, and I’ve never heard any plausible explanation of why it was necessary as policy or politics. The fact that it sank his campaign — well, it’s just a fact. And “we” didn’t have anything to do with it. I have no doubt that Maverick will blame conservatives for his defeat (he always does), but there’s no reason we should volunteer as scapegoats.

BTW, I notice that one of the most vicious commenters at Hot Air, slagging me as a “Paulbot” — wrong! — is “funky chicken,” who just happens to be the same guy that sneered at pro-life activist Becky Banks as “trout pout and kind of fugly.” Irony.

UPDATE: Patrick Ruffini: Bringing up the Ayers connection in October looks “desperate.”

UPDATE II: Obama +10 in Virginia.

UPDATE III: RCP averages:

If this is not evidence of an incipient landslide, what is it? And if you’ve got some idea of how Team Maverick can reverse that momentum, how about you tell them about it?

UPDATE IV: Linked by Jules Crittenden, who loves him some celebrity cleavage.