Archive for October 30th, 2008

October 30, 2008

Al Qaeda endorses Obama

Less surprising even than the New York Times endorsement:

An al Qaeda leader has called for President George W. Bush and the Republicans to be “humiliated” . . .
“O God, humiliate Bush and his party, O Lord of the Worlds, degrade and defy him,” Abu Yahya al-Libi said at the end of sermon marking the Muslim feast of Eid al-Fitr, in a video posted on the Internet.

Allahu akhbar, Obama!

UPDATE: Another dangerous extremist, Erica Jong:

“My friends Ken Follett and Susan Cheever are extremely worried. Naomi Wolf calls me every day. Yesterday, Jane Fonda sent me an email to tell me that she cried all night and can’t cure her ailing back for all the stress that has reduces her to a bundle of nerves.” . . .
“If Obama loses it will spark the second American Civil War. Blood will run in the streets, believe me. And it’s not a coincidence that President Bush recalled soldiers from Iraq for Dick Cheney to lead against American citizens in the streets.”

You know, it’s funny what she said about Jane Fonda. I’ve been sleeping like a baby ever since I got back from seeing the thousands who lined up Tuesday to see Sarah Palin in Pennsylvania. I’m more worried about Saturday’s Alabama-LSU game than I am about Tuesday’s election.

October 30, 2008

Amen, Craig Shirley!

I agree with almost everything he says:

I heartily endorse fingerpointing and bloodletting. . . .
I would rather speak today of Governor Palin and the cut and run crowd of the Republican Party. I think it is not a coincidence that many hail from New York City, as it seems they have channeled the “Lost Generation,” moaning, whining, bewailing the fact that Sarah Palin is not…. one of them. . . . A generation ago, the same elitists bewailed “that actor” taking over the Republican Party. None of them thought as highly of Reagan then as they profess to now. Few have ever gotten their hands dirty running a campaign and some like David Brooks are in need of an ideological booster seat. Debate yes over Palin, but for Brooks to call her a “cancer” on the GOP is vile in the extreme, unchivalrous, unmanly and most especially untrue. No one would ever think of calling Brooks a “cancer” but he is not a conservative, has never been a conservative, does not speak for conservatism and is simply being derivative. One suspects his cruel comments are more about settling old high school scores, when young women like Palin were chosento be the homecoming queen while young men like Brooks were always chosen last for a pickup basketball game. . . .

(This is the part I disagree with — Brooks is at least a suspicious lesion on the Republican Party, and Sarah Heath wasn’t the homecoming queen, rather a starting point guard on the basketball team, whereas Brooks had a note from his mother excusing him from P.E. class because of his allergy to gym socks.)

Palin has been ill served by her staff, who have been leaking against her and she is wise, according to recent reports, to chart her own course. If Palin is guilty of anything, it was not understanding the insidious relationship her “handlers” and the Washington elites have with each other. Palin is guilty of not understanding that, for these people, she is simply a vehicle through which they have fun and make profit. She has only found out recently and ruefully that if she calls one of her handlers simultaneous to a call say, from Chris Matthews, the handler will take Matthews call first. Governor Palin, put not your faith in princesses. . . .
Palin should pick up this populist issue and run with it. Palin needs to let the people know their common sense conservatism is always right, and the ideologically casual elites of the modern GOP are always wrong.

Damn straight! We’ll see you at CPAC, Mrs. Palin — and I’m going to talk to a few friends about exactly who will not be on the invitation list at CPAC next year.

October 30, 2008

Joe the Guitarist

Aerosmith guitarist Joe Perry comes out of the closet as a Republican. Wow. First, Ted Nugent, now Joe Perry — could somebody check with Eddie Van Halen? And now I’m wondering if Jimmy Page is secretly a Tory . . .

October 30, 2008

Video: Planned Infanticide

Students For Life explains:

In the footage, the Planned Parenthood nurse describes to the pregnant woman that the abortion would entail delivering her son alive and, after the woman asks if the baby can be born alive, the nurse admits that “it does happen, but it wouldn’t be able to survive on its own so eventually the baby does die.”
This footage is shocking on multiple fronts and is relevant given the current presidential race. In August, an abortion survivor, Gianna Jessen, was featured in an ad asking why, as an Illinois State Senator, Barack Obama voted 4 times against a bill that would have protected babies born alive during an abortion called the Born-Alive Infants Protection Act. The bill was drafted after Chicago nurse Jill Stanek discovered that babies were being born alive during abortions and left to die.
The SFLA video includes an audio clip of Senator Obama speaking out against the bill in 2002 on the Illinois Senate floor attacking the bill as burdening “the original decision of the woman and the physician to induce labor and perform an abortion.”
In the 3rd presidential debate on October 15, 2008, Obama said that he voted against the bill because it would have infringed upon Roe v. Wade and was medically unnecessary, claiming protections were already in place. However, the law he is referring to did not have the specific protections that would have provided medical care to babies born alive during abortions.
As evidenced in the SFLA video, the practice of allowing babies born alive during abortions to die, which is defined as infanticide, is still being practiced today. Senator Obama argues that to let these babies live is “to burden the original decision of the woman.” . . .
Kristan Hawkins, SFLA’s Executive Director remarked, “I was absolutely stunned when the Planned Parenthood nurse revealed that allowing a baby to die after being born alive is a common practice for abortionists. It begs the question of why a presidential candidate will not support human rights protections for babies born alive during an abortion procedure. This is outright infanticide, and a candidate for President defends it!”

I’m sure Doug Kmiec can explain why Catholics and other pro-lifers should vote for Obama anyway. Ed Morrisey has more at Hot Air.

The irony here is that Democrats insist on “comprehensive” (i.e, explicit) sex education in public schools, but they lie through their teeth about abortion and hide the facts behind a wall of propaganda and euphemisms.

October 30, 2008

Comment of the Day

Over at Hit & Run:

The “lessons” our Republican friends glean from this election will be wrong, and after a spasm of recriminations and self-doubt, they will embark pell-mell down the same road they have been on for the past decade; I say this with complete confidence.

The aphoristic commenter has a profoundly ironic sense of humor, and a deep knowledge of history.

October 30, 2008

HuffPo writer kills former lesbian lover

Hope was not enough, and she refused to take her anti-depressants, and so . . .

Carol Anne Burger killed her former lover by stabbing her 222 times with a Phillips-head screwdriver and then took pains to hide her crime, police said Wednesday.
Jessica Kalish, who shared a house with Burger despite breaking up with her more than a year ago, was found last Thursday stuffed in the backseat of her gun-metal BMW sedan . . .
As investigators studied the case, several telltale signs, including the ferocity and personal nature of the attack, pointed to Burger, they said.
But before they could question her, Burger walked out into her back yard, pressed a gun up under her chin and pulled the trigger, police said. Detectives found her body there last Thursday but couldn’t locate a suicide note.

The murder-suicide evidently occurred shortly after Burger wrote about the Obama-inspired glee in “the gay Mecca of Fort Lauderdale.” Somehow, the Left will find a way to blame Bush. Or Halliburton. Or maybe it was an assassination by the evil misogynist homophobic theocrats, with assistance by the CIA and the Mossad.

UPDATE: Just sent John Hawkins an e-mail:

DAMMIT, HAWKINS, YOU RETARD!
Don’t you see that the HuffPo writer’s so-called “murder-suicide” was actually . . . THE REICHSTAG FIRE? You can’t melt steel with jet fuel, y’know!

He obviously believes the Big Lie by the fascist police . . .

October 30, 2008

Sully calls Palin ‘delusional … fanatic’

“Sarah Palin, an unhinged, know-nothing, delusional religious fanatic . . .”

And if anybody was ever an expert on delusional fanaticism, it’s Andrew Sullivan.

October 30, 2008

Do you believe in miracles?

Pennsylvania NBC poll:

Obama 47%
McCain 43%
Margin of error: 4%

This is either a statistical anomaly or the greatest political miracle of my lifetime. But I’m still thinking about those thousands who stood in line in the cold wind to see Sarah Palin on Tuesday, so it’s impossible for me to be objective.

UPDATE: As noted here previously, some people are trying to make Palin the scapegoat for an expected GOP defeat Nov. 4. Some of those people are backstabbing assholes professional Republicans working for the McCain campaign:

John McCain’s campaign is looking for a scapegoat. It is looking for someone to blame if McCain loses on Tuesday.
And it has decided on Sarah Palin.
In recent days, a McCain “adviser” told Dana Bash of CNN: “She is a diva. She takes no advice from anyone.”
Imagine not taking advice from the geniuses at the McCain campaign. What could Palin be thinking?
Also, a “top McCain adviser” told Mike Allen of Politico that Palin is “a whack job.”
Maybe she is. But who chose to put this “whack job” on the ticket? Wasn’t it John McCain? And wasn’t it his first presidential-level decision?

The thing to remember about professional political operatives is that when someone is peddling loyalty as a commodity, caveat emptor.

October 30, 2008

And to hell with George Will, too

George Freaking Will blames Palin:

From the invasion of Iraq to the selection of Sarah Palin, carelessness has characterized recent episodes of faux conservatism. Tuesday’s probable repudiation of the Republican Party will punish characteristics displayed in the campaign’s closing days.
Some polls show that Palin has become an even heavier weight in John McCain’s saddle than his association with George W. Bush. Did McCain, who seems to think that Palin’s never having attended a “Georgetown cocktail party” is sufficient qualification for the vice presidency, lift an eyebrow when she said that vice presidents “are in charge of the United States Senate”?

How fascinating that Will, just like Frank Fukuyama, now lumps Sarah Palin together with the invasion of Iraq, considering that Will, just like Fukuyama, was among those who called for a “preemptive” attack on Iraq back in the day:

Some critics seem to say that in order for the president to “make the case” for proving that the danger is present, its presence must be evidenced by a “smoking gun.” But that means America cannot act against Iraq until acting is much more dangerous, when Iraq has nuclear weapons. . . .
As Condoleezza Rice has said, let us hope the smoking gun is not a mushroom cloud.

It seems Will is blaming Palin for his own “carelessness.” He’s forging the first draft of history: Having rewritten the past to exempt himself from blame, now he is falsifying the present to hang the blame on Palin. Well, George, if you were so wrong in 2002, why should we believe you’re right now?

UPDATE: Linked by some lefty Brit blogger, and also by PrestoPundit, who points out that this would be a nice time to re-read Hayek’s thoughts on “Why the Worst Get On Top.”

October 30, 2008

Celebrity Update

Haven’t done one of these in a couple of weeks, so here is all the sleazy tabloid trash: