Pundit wants to be sportswriter...

Touchdown Israel!

Deep in the fourth quarter, the Israelis come back with "the bomb". After three and a half quarters of punishing Gaza runs up the field, it appeared the Israelis defense was, after all, just talk. It was if the Gazan offensive players were mowing through the Israeli fans, targeting the weak and defenseless rather than playing their equals on the Israeli team.

The Gazans followed their playbook to a tee, and repeated ad nauseam: the "rocket barrage" play followed by the confusing "cease fire" and "run to the UN" plays. The Israeli defenses were disoriented, with seemingly no leadership on the field. "At what point do we decide to defend?", an unnamed teammate lamented.

Then, in this fourth quarter, the urgency returned to the home team. Realizing their backup QB, a man with the middle name of Hussein, was going to fail them worse, the need to act was now. And act they did. The touchdown run resulted in numerous injuries in the Gaza defense. The Gazans cleared the field of play...

...and are taunting the Israelis to go for the two point conversion.

Here is hoping the Israelis comply.

There is no clock on the field. It will come down to one team deciding to win.

Pictures from Reuters, whose staff miraculously escaped injury...

Merry Christmas

We're back!

It was a long move from a state that will soon have a 13% income tax to a state that is in the process of lowering their income tax - currently around 6%. Our thanks to the loyal Ushanka.us visitors for their patience!

Karl's Weekend Reading

We'll be busy moving our Commie Obama HQ in the coming days. In the meantime, please visit those great blogs in our Blogroll to the left.

Two WSJ editorials from Friday sum up this less than special week:

Obama's Russia Test - Regarding Russia's announcement this week to deploy missiles between NATO members Poland and Lithuania, and the worries that the "Congressional Democrats have given the impression that U.S. support for Poland or NATO aspirants Ukraine and Georgia is negotiable."

[Obama} could help U.S. interests and himself merely by putting on record that an Obama-led America won't be intimidated by threatening outbursts from Russian leaders and will be a reliable partner to its allies in Europe. Any hint of doubt from the next Administration on this point will send shivers through our NATO allies and encourage more bad behavior by Russia and others. The Kremlin is doing Mr. Obama a favor by testing him so early.

Palin and the GOP - a poorly hidden criticism of Palin, and of those who criticize her. We think the Journal is giving too many voters credit for critical analysis of the candidates - thinking Gov. Palin isn't ready for national politics - rather than choosing the guy who promised free stuff and receding oceans. Or maybe we are not ready to read negative opinions about the one candidate that best communicated our frustrations with government and our vision for the future. The WSJ did get these three paragraphs right:

...Mrs. Palin was clearly thrust into the spotlight before she was prepared for the rigors of a national campaign. The McCain camp also did her no favors, initially keeping her under a quarantine that raised the stakes for any media interview she did do. When it finally handed her over to Charlie Gibson and Katie Couric, Mrs. Palin was set up to fail with ground rules that let CBS dribble out her uncertain answers night after night.

The nasty leaks and gossip about Mrs. Palin that are now emerging from sources inside the McCain campaign have the ring of score-settling. Staff aides who mishandled her, or set her up for the Couric embarrassment, are now saying she refused coaching. Perhaps these were the same advisers who told her to cite Alaska's proximity to Russia as a foreign-policy credential.
---
As for Mrs. Palin's Republican critics, they might consider if they can afford to write off a young leader with such natural political talent. We don't see a large constellation of other GOP stars on the horizon. Mr. McCain was right to understand that his party needs a new generation of leaders who haven't grown comfortable with the perks of Washington. Especially as Democrats once again grow the Beltway, the next GOP leaders will need to make a better case for entrepreneurship and limited government. Mrs. Palin deserves a chance to see if she has the skill and work ethic to become that kind of leader.

Wednesday Afternoon Cigar

President-Elect Obama, you can have my Camacho SLR Maduro when you pry it from my cold dead fingers.

"Historic"

The election of Barack Obama is "historic" as many of our fellow conservative bloggers posted in a shameful hurried rush.

Yes, the most liberal candidate in the history of the United States is now President Elect. That is historic.

Yes, the candidate that proposes a 25% increase in federal spending, paid for in higher taxes for all, was elected. That is historic.

Yes, the candidate with the most ambitious goals to ignore and override fundamental values written into our Constitution has been elected. That is historic.

Yes, the candidate who will cash out the gains of 232 years of liberty, capitalism, individual initiative, investment risk and spilled blood was elected last night. That is historic.

Obama ran a well organized campaign, put in a maximum effort, and beat McCain-Palin with enough margin to negate the Democratic Party's massive fraud efforts. NOT historic. That is just good campaigning.

If you want to call us racist, get in line. We are a product of the US public school system where we endured years of indoctrination that told us skin color, gender, etc. was to be ignored. That all are equal. Ok - that is what we are doing. Our question to those who want this to be about race is: why weren't you paying attention in public school like we were?

So, while some of our fellow bloggers want to write about race and some "historic" precedent, we'll stick to our assessment methodology that has served us well over the years. We will continue to judge by character, associations, respect for and adherence to the Constitution, and results. Obama is 0-4 in these areas today. Let's see how he does as President.

Our 2008 Election Analysis video:

2008 Election Analysis

Our second Election Analysis video

Click here to see our 2006 Election Analysis Video. Do you see a trend within the MSM?

The News of the Day

Update 10PM: Obama wins, and our Commie Obama Hat Store gets a four-year extension. Stay tuned for our 2008 Election Analysis...

Update 11.5 11am: Found at IBD Editorials:

More Marx

Found these at American Thinker:

Obama's Red Star

Doug Ross has a post today showing the picture below of the Obama banner with the red star. He has a good write-up too.

We know it isn't fair to call Obama a Communist until after he takes our property away, so we'll stay mum...

Useful Idiots No Longer?

The Obama campaign dis-invited three reporters from their plane today. Drudge reports the NY Post, Dallas Morning News and the Washington Times - all papers that endorsed McCain - will no longer be allowed to ride with the campaign.

Our reaction to this makes us think of a man on the deck of the sinking Titanic saying to another, "I'm glad I ordered the Lobster tonight." It is coming to an end, but somehow we can still joke about it.

Think about it. The media, even the papers above, have given Obama a full pass this election year on major issues ranging from Ayers, to unanswered questions about gun control, to the effects of redistributive policies. No media outlet, including FOX News, has led, and pushed, with any of the critical issues to bring awareness and transparency. The next four years may be a disaster that dwarf Carter's epic failures thanks to the MSM, yet the humor will be rich: the MSM will join the rest of us when we are told what to think, where and where not to work, and how much of our property belongs to the state.

Lenin was right - Useful Idiots Indeed.

Karl's Weekend Reading

Andrew Walden reviews the Obama-Communist past at the American Thinker, Barack Obama: Red Diaper Baby.

Barack Obama is a "red diaper baby" who has spent his formative years -- literally from the moment of his birth -- interacting with members and sympathizers of the Communist Party, USA.

Paul Kengor, also at the American Thinker, returns to two articles written by Obama's mentor, and known communist, Frank Davis Marshall. Dreams from Frank Marshall Davis:

Obama's recent remarks on wealth redistribution made me think of two Davis columns in particular, both for the Honolulu Record:

The first was Davis's January 26, 1950 piece, "Free Enterprise or Socialism?" Davis hoped that America and its economy were at a turning point, as if a kind of perfect storm was brewing that could at last allow him and his comrades to realize their dreams of a socialist America. They would need to trash the current free-enterprise system and argue for a change to something else. Of course, they could not fully disclose themselves, their beliefs, and their intentions, although any thinking observer could easily read between the lines. The key was to gain the support of the people who didn't know any difference.
---
[article #2] For Davis, the only hope was a huge, emboldened federal government that could save Americans from the capitalists, that could rein in fat-cat corporations, that could slap down Wall Street and its excesses, that could spread the wealth, and that could ensure that the poor could buy a home.

And, the Heritage Foundation published a comparison between Obama's and McCain's tax plans. Here are their summary points and conclusion (with our emphasis), and one of the article's graphs.

1. Jobs respond more to McCain's plan than to Obama's.
2. Overall economic activity more vigorous under McCain's plan.
3. More after-tax spending potential under McCain than under Obama.

Conclusion
The economy improves under each plan as compared to the baseline. The baseline forecast assumes that all of the Bush tax cuts disappear, which raises the cost of capital and marginal tax rates. Both candidates plan to reduce taxes com pared to this scenario.

Senator McCain's plan is substantially better at spurring economic growth than Senator Obama's. This is not surprising, since Senator McCain focuses on economic growth and job creation while Senator Obama focuses on the redistribution of income. As Tax Policy Center Director Len Burman states, "the major themes of the two plans are, in the case of Senator McCain's plan, that the major emphasis is on economic efficiency—cuts marginal tax rates, improves economic incentives…. In the case of Obama's plan, the goal is primarily to improve pro gressivity…to lower tax burdens on low-income people and raise them on higher-income people."[10] Each presidential candidate achieves his stated goal,with Senator McCain generating the most new jobs, growth, and additional income for individuals. Senator Obama's plan drives up the tax rate for individ uals with annual incomes above $250,000 and redistributes money to workers with lower incomes.

The Second Bill of Rights

Sweetness & Light Blog has the list of 'new' rights. Rights proposed by members of the same political party that Barack Obama belongs to. Liberal, Progressive, Communist.

The right to a useful and remunerative job in the industries or shops or farms or mines of the nation;

The right to earn enough to provide adequate food and clothing and recreation;

The right of every farmer to raise and sell his products at a return which will give him and his family a decent living;

The right of every businessman, large and small, to trade in an atmosphere of freedom from unfair competition and domination by monopolies at home or abroad;

The right of every family to a decent home;

The right to adequate medical care and the opportunity to achieve and enjoy good health;

The right to adequate protection from the economic fears of old age, sickness, accident, and unemployment;

The right to a good education.

All of these rights spell security. And after this war is won we must be prepared to move forward, in the implementation of these rights, to new goals of human happiness and well-being.

America’s own rightful place in the world depends in large part upon how fully these and similar rights have been carried into practice for our citizens.

Click to see the full blog post.

U/T: Sweetness & Light

Obama a Marxist?

How dare the biased conservatives in the media compare Obama's compassionate policies with the teachings of Karl Marx! The political discourse has just been lowered another level at the expense of the little people proletarian masses.

BTW, Commie Obama hats are flying off the shelves! Buy today, or wait in line next year...

UPDATE 9PM: Biden steps in it again:

New Survey

The mortgage crisis wins hands down in our last survey which asked what crisis will the Democrats use as an excuse to take power. This survey was posted prior to the $700 billion bailout - before an actual crisis was apparent. Interestingly, the mortgage crisis has not helped Obama, who remains a couple points ahead of McCain despite the crisis and 2x-3x in campaign spending. Will they manufacture a new crisis in the coming days?

Our thanks for those who participated in the survey!

Thursday Afternoon Cigar

A Camacho SLR Maduro, and likely the last 92 degree day of the year.

Soon We'll Make Our Own Jokes

The bright side of an Obama presidency is that the former Soviet citizens will lose their monopoly of communist humor.

5 minutes of the great one:

Obama, a Hammer, and a Sickle

Cartoon by David Heisch, found at AmericanThinker.

General Powell - Some Thoughts

One. We are disappointed that the General would endorse a candidate that espouses 'Reward first, work second' when Powell himself achieved a level in the Army, and later our government, that can only be attained by effort, judgement and achievement. Three things the Democratic candidate lacks.

Two. We lose sleep when old men do things like this. Will we live a life of values and integrity, establishing consistency and predictability in our decisions and motives, only to throw it all away one day?

Three. We are glad we left the Army at Captain. Looking at Powell and W. Clark for example, it appears to go further up the ranks is to compromise principle. (Looking at Generals Franks, Petraus and the many others, we know Powell and Clark are the exceptions.)

Four. Rush Limbaugh asked: "When was the last time Powell endorsed an inexperienced white candidate?"

Five. Bret Stephens provides his list in his Tuesday WSJ article, Powell Catches the Beltway Breeze. (Picture above is from his article). The conclusion of this wonderful article:

The standard view of Mr. Powell's tenure at State is that he had a diplomat's brain but a soldier's heart, and soldiers ultimately do as ordered. Maybe. Another view is that he is a man with an unfailing sense of the political breeze, like a kite. His endorsement of Mr. Obama sends his reputation aloft again, floating high above a record that stands for nothing.

Karl's Weekend Reading

Three great picks from this week's rags:

Laura Hollis at Townhall uses the "C" word!!

I am tired of all the dancing around the subject with respect to Barack Obama’s political, social, and economic views. He’s not a “liberal,” or a “Democrat,” or a “progressive,” or even a “socialist.” Let’s call it what it is, shall we? It’s time to use the “C” word. His policies are communist, pure and simple.
---
It’s not that Obama is ignorant, or misguided. He knows – as do his Red backers – that the policies he espouses will cause further economic trauma. This is deliberate. Because the worse things get, the more receptive the public will be to Obama’s & Co.’s honey-tongued assurances that the government will step in and “make it all better.” Look at Hurricane Katrina, and the recent financial crisis: how many people were clamoring for the government to “do something”? And that’s nothing compared to what we’re going to face when Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid collapse.

A well-earned Ushanka Tip to Laura!

Adam Lerrick asks, "What happens when the voter in the exact middle of the earnings spectrum receives more in benefits from Washington than he pays in taxes?" From his Wednesday WSJ article, Obama and the Tax Tipping Point:

In 2006, the latest year for which we have Census data, 220 million Americans were eligible to vote and 89 million -- 40% -- paid no income taxes. According to the Tax Policy Center (a joint venture of the Brookings Institution and the Urban Institute), this will jump to 49% when Mr. Obama's cash credits remove 18 million more voters from the tax rolls. What's more, there are an additional 24 million taxpayers (11% of the electorate) who will pay a minimal amount of income taxes -- less than 5% of their income and less than $1,000 annually.

In all, three out of every five voters will pay little or nothing in income taxes under Mr. Obama's plans and gain when taxes rise on the 40% that already pays 95% of income tax revenues.

Kimberly Strassel at the WSJ shares the circus atmosphere in her article, Obama's Magic:

To kick off our show tonight, Mr. Obama will give 95% of American working families a tax cut, even though 40% of Americans today don't pay income taxes! How can our star enact such mathemagic? How can he "cut" zero? Abracadabra! It's called a "refundable tax credit." It involves the federal government taking money from those who do pay taxes, and writing checks to those who don't. Yes, yes, in the real world this is known as "welfare," but please try not to ruin the show.
---
Mr. Obama will now demonstrate how he gives Americans the "choice" of a "voluntary" government health plan, designed in such a way as to crowd out the private market and eliminate all other choice! Don't worry people: You won't have to join, until you do.
---
Moving along to a little ventriloquism. Study his mouth carefully, folks: It looks like he's saying "I'll stop the special interests," when in fact the words coming out are "Welcome to Washington, friends!" Wind and solar companies, ethanol makers, tort lawyers, unions, community organizers -- all are welcome to feed at the public trough and to request special favors. From now on "special interests" will only refer to universally despised, if utterly crucial, economic players. Say, oil companies. Hocus Pocus!

Cartoon Overflow

Our Top Ten Election Cartoons is full, yet we discovered these at Townhall this past week. It is nice to see our friend Karl make a reappearance. Now that Karl is back the only question is: has ACORN registered him to vote?

See our Top Ten Election Cartoons - here!

LCABroadside

We found LCABroadside, the videos and the blog, the other day. A late-comer to the game of election-related media, but some great stuff. We like what he's done with the Obama logo...

Kotecki and Fur Hats

Joe the Proletariat

It was not supposed to be like this. A plumber refusing to participate in the dictatorship of the proletariat? Questioning why the American Dream is only valid up to $250k. We're sure Obama's team is sending someone over right now to explain to Joe the economic plan in detail, as there has clearly been a mis-understanding.

Here are the related videos, and the graphic of the 2008 election. U/T: Our comrades at the People's Cube.

A compilation of clips that includes the "Spread the Wealth" statement:

Link to Joe's interview with ABC

Karl's Weekend Reading

We are posting our Weekend Reading list early, as we'll be offline this Thursday and Friday.

The campaign is turning harsh, with the standard Republican accusation that the Democratic Party's nominee is a "Socialist" or "Communist". This drives the political discourse into the mud, especially when the accuser is wearing one of our incredible and furry Commie Obama hats! Get yours today for only $29.99 at CommieObama.com!

Silly conservative, it is not fair to call Obama a communist until AFTER he takes your property away. Remember, it has to be fair.

We saw two excellent articles this past week that expand on this topic:

Author Paul Kengor writes in the American Thinker, Why Obama's Communist Connections Are Not Headlines. He argues our education system has let down its students when it comes to the history of communism. Further, he addresses faculties' revulsion to anti-communist speech:

These professors glare at me as if the ghost of Joe McCarthy has flown into the room and leapt inside of my body. In fact, that's the essence of their criticism: It is not so much that these professors approve of communism as much as they disapprove of -- actually, utterly despise -- anti-communism. They are anti-anti-communist more so than pro-communist. Conservatives need to understand this, so as to avoid broad-brushing and losing credibility. Sure, a lot of professors are Marxists, and many more share the utopian goals of Marxism, but the vast majority are simply leftists.

They aren't communists. They are anti-anti-communists. Or as we say, they are "communist inspired". More Kengor:

What's more, aside from failing to instruct their students in the crass facts about communism's unprecedented destruction -- its purges, mass famines, show trials, killing fields, concentration camps -- these educators are negligent in failing to teach the essential, non-emotional, but crucial Econ 101 basics that contrast capitalism and communism and, thus, that get at the heart of how and why command economies simply do not work. Each semester in my Comparative Politics course at Grove City College, it takes no more than 50 minutes to matter-of-factly lay out the rudimentary differences. Whereas capitalist systems are based on the market forces of supply and demand, which dictate prices and production levels and targets, communist systems are based on central planning, by which a government bureau attempts to manage such things. Capitalism is based on private ownership; communism on public ownership. Capitalism thrives on small government and taxes; communism on large government and taxes, typically progressive income-tax rates and estate taxes -- both advocated explicitly by Marx -- and much more.

This stuff isn't rocket science. It is easy to teach, if the professor desires. The problem is that it isn't being taught. Consequently, Americans today do not know why communism is such a devastating ideology, at both the level of plain economic theory and in actual historical practice. It is a remarkably hateful system, based on literal hatred and targeted annihilation of entire classes and groups of people. (Nazism sought genocide based on ethnicity; communism sought genocide based on class.)

Good stuff. We read his book on Reagan - The Crusader
And we look forward to reading his book, The Judge
, about Reagan advisor William Clark.

James Lewis, also writing in the American Thinker, On Bill Ayers and Small 'c' Communists. He explains the difference between six million (holocaust deaths) and one hundred million (communism), and why those numbers matter. He begins this discussion:

I know goofy liberals who moan about all the good intentions demonstrated by Karl Marx, Lenin, and Trotsky. They're all Obama voters, for some reason. They are the same kinds of people who think Jesus was a communist, and that George W. Bush is Hitler. They are often the kind of people who try desperately to be completely nice in their lives, especially to designated victims. But often they harbor a belly full of rage -- against conservatives, or big corporations, or fundamentalist Christians, or anybody who challenges their belief in their own saintliness.

If you're interested - a related AFP article about the Communist Party USA's anticipation for the coming election.

"We can afford to be less on the defensive for the first time since Ronald Reagan, and we can say our word in rebuilding America on a new basis, rebuilding a better world, instead of one based on the greed of the few."

Go, Commie, Go!

We'll be back online no later than Sunday. Have a nice weekend.

The Socialist Tsunami

An IBD editorial says it all.

The Crash: "Why has the market dropped so much?" everyone asks. What is it about the specter of our first socialist president and the end of capitalism as we know it that they don't understand?

What is that agenda? It starts with a tax system right out of Marx: A massive redistribution of income — from each according to his ability, to each according to his need — all in the name of "neighborliness," "patriotism," "fairness" and "justice."

Read it. Twice.

Karl's Weekend Reading

The other Karl, Karl Rove, comments about the second debate and the remaining challenges for Obama. Thursday's WSJ, Voters Haven't Decided Yet.

Mr. Obama's test is that voters haven't shaken deep concerns about his lack of qualifications. Having accomplished virtually nothing in his three years in the Senate except to win the Democratic nomination, Mr. Obama must show he is up to the job. Voters like him, conditions favor him, yet he has not closed the sale. He may be approaching the finish line with that mixture of lassitude and insouciance he displayed in the spring against Mrs. Clinton.

Dorothy Rabinowitz points out the obvious in her WSJ opinion piece, News Flash: The Media Back Obama.

The single constant in the eternal election remains the media, whose activist role no one will seriously dispute. To point out the prevailing (with honorable exceptions) double standard of reporting so favorable to Mr. Obama by now feels superfluous -- much like talking about the weather. The same holds true for all those reports pointing to Mr. Obama's heroic status outside the United States -- not to mention the cascade of press analyses warning that if he fails to win election, the cause will surely be racism.

Speaking of a biased press, WSJ's James Taranto has buried his fangs into their latest misleading game - the all pure "Fact Check" reporting. In his Thursday Best of the Web, James presents a fact, and how two leading news agencies can draw different conclusions to benefit their bias. He sums it up well:

It is fine, indeed quite useful, for reporters to present relevant facts that voters can use in evaluating candidates' campaign claims. In this "fact check" form, however, journalists play prosecutor, judge and jury, deciding what evidence to present, what evidence to admit, and what it all means (CNN actually calls the conclusion a "verdict"). Why not just report and let the reader decide?

Remember not to question their patriotism when you read American Thinker's piece, Shocking Revelations about Biden in Soviet-Era Documents. Quoting from Hot Air:

According to internal Soviet Union documents from the SALT-2 negotiations in 1979, Joe Biden effectively told Soviet negotiators not to worry about American rhetoric about human-rights concerns. In fact, Biden also told the Soviets that the Senate didn't really care about European security, but only in giving the appearance of caring about it.

WSJ's Mary Anastasia O'Grady suggests tripling the US support to Columbia in response to Chavez's latest posturing, and asks Democrats to answer "whose side they are on", in her Monday article, Democrats Shouldn't Coddle Chavez.

The strongest immediate signal the U.S. could send Mr. Chávez and Latin American democracies is unequivocal support for Colombia. President Bush has tried to do that but the effort is being undermined by Congressional Democrats.
---
The FARC also expressed faith in Mrs. Pelosi as someone who "helps" in its effort to undermine Colombian President Alvaro Uribe. Mr. McGovern said in a letter to this newspaper that the FARC was engaging in fantasy. But maybe instead the rebels put their faith in Mrs. Pelosi because they perceive a common friend...

Obama & The New Party

We would say "We told you so", but as an avid Ushanka.us reader you were already 'in the know'. Click anywhere - this site's whole purpose for existing is to connect the Democrat dots with the Commie dots. It's just a coincidence that the current Democratic nominee for president is

ONE 

BIG 

DOT!

Our fellow bloggers have run wild with this latest story about Obama's connection with the marxist New Party (NP) and the Democratic Socialists for America (DSA). We have read everything we could find, and are providing you an executive summary on the topic along with links to the blog posts with original content and expert analysis.

Background:

The DSA established the NP to move their socialist principles forward through elected officials.

Membership in the NP was the method for Democrats to convey their leftward intentions, to differentiate from the moderate Democrats.

A tactic of the NP, and other groups, was called "Fusion", which allowed a Democrat to join the New Party and combine the votes from both parties in a primary. This allowed a NP candidate to defeat their moderate opponents who ran only on the Democratic ticket. It appears Obama benefitted from Fusion in his 1996 win. The Supreme Court ruled Fusion unconstitutional in 1998, and the NP dissolved shortly thereafter.

The DSA exists today.

Obama's Links to DSA and NP:

The news that put this topic back on the blogosphere front page: Obama signed a contract with the New Party promising "a visible and active relationship with the NP". The controversy - back in June the Obama campaign, along with the DSA and NP, denied NP or DSA membership. Ever. Blogger Politically Drunk on Power found a deleted, yet archived, NP webpage from October 1996 announcing member Obama's recent primary victory - link.

The same blogger also found recognition in the "Progressive Populist" magazine from November 1996 that states Obama was a NP member - link.

Thomas Lifson at the American Thinker digs deeper and finds evidence of Obama's NP membership from 1995 in the DSA's publication, New Ground 42 - link.

The DSA has endorsed Obama

...DSA believes that the possible election of Senator Obama to the presidency in November represents a potential opening for social and labor movements to generate the critical political momentum necessary to implement a progressive political agenda.

Conclusion:

Obama is a closet commie, and our fellow bloggers are starting to take notice.


Ushanka Tips to the bloggers with original content and analysis:
American Thinker
Doug Ross
Sweetness & Light
Politically Drunk On Power
Yid with a Lid

Thursday Afternoon Cigar

We smoked a CAO Brazilia while we read-up on the latest Obama-New Party news. We'll add a post on the subject later tonight.

A Glimpse Into the Future

A prescient look at Karl in the near future:

Our preemptive apology to our Dear Leader Obama, assuming he wins.

Sunday Afternoon Cigar

We burned another Camacho SLR Maduro after watching the new movie American Carol. We highly recommend both the cigar and the movie!

Karl's Weekend Reading

The $750 billion bailout was the main event of the week, with the Pelosi-whatshisname debate a strong second. There was plenty of great commentary on both, but only one worth passing on. We're supplementing this short list with three bailout-related videos.

Mary Anastasia o"Grady at the WSJ writes in Monday's paper, What We Can Learn From Chile's Financial Crisis. She writes before Friday's bailout bill that an alternative similar to Chile's would be better for America, namely government loans to the banks rather than government taking responsibility for managing the assets.

It took several years for Chile to recover from its banking crisis and the U.S. will also need time to work off its credit mania. Federal assistance may be required. But that doesn't mean that we need to hand a blank check to the government that will allow it to expand its powers yet again.

So true. We first mentioned this solution in a list of suggestions by Newt Gingrich, September 24th.

Bill O'Reilly goes off on the culprit of the financial disaster, Barney Frank. This is mild compared to the appropriate response:

We nominate the National Republican Congressional Committee for the best political commercial - ever.

And Saturday Night Live comes pretty close to the facts in last night's skit. U/T Babalu.

NBC pulls the controversial clip. See it here. U/T: SondraK

UPDATE - 15 minutes later: Found a video of proud Ushanka owner Ann Coulter suggesting war-crimes tribunals! U/T: Sweetness & Light.

Mac vs. PC: I'm a PC

Would you agree there are too many PCs in the world, and not enough MAC's?

Our thanks to the following PCs: Al Gore, Keith Olberman, Nancy Pelosi, Lenin, Dukakis, Rachel Maddow, Joe Biden, Trotsky, John F. Kerry, Lloyd Bentson, Harry Reid, Stalin, Howard Dean, Jimmy Carter, Hillary Clinton, Campbell Brown, Walter Mondale, Khrushchev, and, uh, Barack Hussein Obama.

Children O' Mao

We're not the only ones that see through this charade. We heard Mark Levin play the audio of these kids singing their Obama song, and his first thought was of Mao. Nice to see someone added the proper perspective in this video remix:

The New Standard

We regret we have to use the word "New" in this post title. In a perfect world, this would be the "Usual Standard" and probably wouldn't warrant a blog post. But in a perfect world, we wouldn't be asking the taxpayers for a bailout.

U/T: Rep. Thaddeus McCotter, R-MI for speaking for the people.

U/T: SondraK for video

Hugo-Glover Pictures Presents

There are some in Hollywood that are uncomfortable with how the town has become a bastion of right wing neo-cons. Danny Glover is one such celebrity.

His solution is to go to the source, as former SAG President Ronald Reagan would put it. Danny Glover has penned a financing agreement with Hugo Chavez for two movies - $20 million. Both movies will be about Latin American revolutionaries.

We were hoping Glover could work on a couple sequels:

U/T to Sweetness & Light for the story and picture.

The Bias in the MSM

We've saved several links from the past days that all seem to fit in this post about the liberal bias in the MSM. Normally we pass on posting content like this, as we prove the MSM bias beyond any shadow of the doubt each and every day on our home page. But today we're motivated by the MSM's unprofessional coverage of Gov. Palin leading up to the debate. It is a clear attempt to discredit her, and to fill the liberal minds of mush among the Democrat pawns out there with mindless talking points.

From Instapundit, Sept. 29:

A READER AT A MAJOR NEWSROOM EMAILS: "Off the record, every suspicion you have about MSM being in the tank for O is true. We have a team of 4 people going thru dumpsters in Alaska and 4 in arizona. Not a single one looking into Acorn, Ayers or Freddiemae. Editor refuses to publish anything that would jeopardize election for O, and betting you dollars to donuts same is true at NYT, others. People cheer when CNN or NBC run another Palin-mocking but raising any reasonable inquiry into obama is derided or flat out ignored. The fix is in, and its working." I asked permission to reprint without attribution and it was granted.

From HotAir, Oct. 1, a video showing the MSM's contempt for Gov. Palin:

The story came out this week that Gwen Ifill, the moderator of tonight's VP debate, has a book coming out in November called The Breakthrough: Politics and Race in the Age of Obama. Bill Dyer at Hugh Hewitt's blog responds to her deception, and PBS's bias by ignoring the conflict of interest, with this suggestion:

...if for no other reason than the potential appearance of a conflict of interest, Gwen Ifill should publicly disclose her book's impending release and title to the entire nation at the very beginning of tomorrow night's debate. To do anything less would be unethical.

And today, Mike Allen at Politico writing on this story, writes this nonsense:

Ifill is moderator and managing editor of "Washington Week" and senior correspondent of "The NewsHour with Jim Lehrer." She is viewed as one of Washington's fairest journalists.

Not anymore, Mike.

Jim Treacher offers some suggested questions for the debate.

The Obama Debate, Uh, Drinking Game

UPDATE 10/2: YouTuber barackhObamadotcom posted this similar video on Sept. 26:

Monday Afternoon Cigar

For the record, a Camacho SLR Maduro doesn't taste as good as usual after you're retirement savings drops over 10% in one day. It appears the Speaker of the House, that San Francisco Democrat progressive Commie, chose to play politics with the bailout socialist, industry-nationalization plan.

The Bracelet - A Story of Inspiration

Obama forgot the name on his KIA bracelet during the debate. For the record, the 20 year old soldier that died and whose name is on Obama's prop bracelet is Sgt. Ryan David Jopek.

We have a story about bracelets - an experience that stays with us as we wear a KIA bracelet. Our bracelet, with Cpl William M. Amundson Jr's name, will stay on our wrist until the war is over. It has come off once in two years, for an MRI.

Our story:

Like Amundson, Karl was a corporal in the Army once. (The comparison ends there. Amundson was a Ranger, and deployed to war for his country.)

We were assigned to an MP unit tasked with prisoner of war processing. In one training exercise, we were tasked to process some soldiers from another unit. We had to split the 'prisoners' in different holding areas, surrounded with concertina wire, depending on their status - POW, civilian detainee, etc.

When we bring the 'prisoners' into the processing center, we take and inventory their possessions. Wallets, watches, and other personal items. In other words, we had such a tight operation, troops trusted us with their money! This was my job that day, along with fingerprinting.

There I am at my station and this guy shows up wearing a POW bracelet. I turn to my sergeant, and he says to add it to the inventory, to have the guy take it off. The soldier says "No, this bracelet stays on". A little chat with the sergeant and lieutenant, and we decide not to push it.

This guy gets a designation that puts him alone in a holding area.

My 12+ hour shift ends and I join my team in the bivouac area, within site of the holding areas. And there is that guy walking, very slowly, in a circle in his holding area. Weird. Maybe he's getting into the spirit. All other prisoners are sleeping or joking around. Volunteering as a prisoner of war in a training exercise sure beats other options!

The next day, we're getting ready for our next shift, and there is the guy, still walking a circle! He wore a path about 2-3 inches deep in the ground. Same slow pace - in the zone!

That was in the late 80's, when many soldiers wore the POW bracelet. We considered wearing one ourselves, but decided, from this experience above, that we had not yet earned the right to such an honor.

The bracelet is not a prop. It is not a political statement. It is not a means to an end. It is a private tribute to America's best.

Stay tuned. We have another bracelet story.

Go to Ranger Joes, our favorite store outside Fort Benning, to order a bracelet.

Bill Dyer, at Hugh Hewitt, has more on the Obama bracelet if you aren't disgusted enough.

UPDATE 9.28: Newsbusters reports the family asked Obama not to wear the bracelet.

Post-Debate Thoughts

A collection of thoughts from the world's best bloggers:

Robert, at BabaluBlog:

Charles Krauthammer said last night on FOX that the outcome of the debate reminded him of a newspaper article following a Harvard/Yale football game which proclaimed that "Harvard Beat Yale 29-29".

Unfortunately, I agree with Krauthammer. McCain needed to clearly indicate to the American public that Obama's economic plan is as dangerous as his foreign policy views. He didn't...

HotAir's Allahpundit comments on the Obama contradiction: in the debate he says troops can't die in vain if following their Commander in Chief's orders, and his 2002 statement, "[we should not] allow those who would march off and pay the ultimate sacrifice, who would prove the full measure of devotion with their blood, to make such an awful sacrifice in vain."

The One occasionally confuses the two, telling a crowd in Iowa early last year that we “have seen over 3,000 lives of the bravest young Americans wasted” before backing off afterwards and scolding himself for using constituent-inappropriate rhetoric. The joke here, of course, as it was when Diane Sawyer made Pelosi squirm on this same subject, is that the whole point of the left’s moral (as opposed to political) opposition to the war is that they think soldiers are dying needlessly.

Hugh Hewitt sums it up nicely:

As expected, McCain shines and Obama is on the defensive throughout. The good news for Obama is that more than 30 minutes were not on the specifics of foreign policy. But Obama stumbled badly on Iraq, Pakistan and Afghanistan. McCain simply knows this stuff, and Obama again and again betrays that he does not.

"I honestly don't believe that Senator Obama has the understanding or the experience," and hitting Obama on his stubbornness was a very strong close for McCain. "I don't need any on the job training."

The McCain campaign came out quick with another great ad:

If McCain is right on the issues, why not cancel the remaining debates?

Saturday Night Cigar

A relaxing night with a Camacho SLR Maduro, browsing through our Blogroll blogs for post-debate nuggets and relaxing after posting our latest video - link.

Our first blog stop is always American Thinker. Here is their latest cartoon:

Karl's Weekend Reading

Stanley Kurtz exposes the long questioned relationship between Obama and Pentagon-Bombing William Ayers in Tuesday's WSJ, Obama and Ayers Pushed Radicalism on Schools. In short, these guys are ideological twins. See Chicago Annenberg Challenge (CAC).

One unsettled question is how Mr. Obama, a former community organizer fresh out of law school, could vault to the top of a new foundation? In response to my questions, the Obama campaign issued a statement saying that Mr. Ayers had nothing to do with Obama's "recruitment" to the board. The statement says Deborah Leff and Patricia Albjerg Graham (presidents of other foundations) recruited him. Yet the archives show that, along with Ms. Leff and Ms. Graham, Mr. Ayers was one of a working group of five who assembled the initial board in 1994. Mr. Ayers founded CAC and was its guiding spirit. No one would have been appointed the CAC chairman without his approval.

The CAC's agenda flowed from Mr. Ayers's educational philosophy, which called for infusing students and their parents with a radical political commitment, and which downplayed achievement tests in favor of activism.

The WSJ's Mary Anastasia O'Grady reports in Monday's paper - Castro looks for a US Lifeline.

Fidel Castro and his brother Raúl, who took over as head of state in February, for years have been calling for an end to the U.S. embargo, which they say is starving Cuba. But Cuba can already buy from U.S. producers all the food and medicine it can pay cash for. What the totalitarian tag-team really wants is an end to the ban on private-sector credit to the Cuban government.

Their demand has gone nowhere in Washington, both because of moral objections to doing business with tyrants, and because the Castro brothers are world-class deadbeats. They have defaulted on billions of dollars in debt to the rest of the world, and want credit from the "empire" (i.e., the U.S.) only because their options for borrowing elsewhere have narrowed significantly.

Pre-Debate Thoughts

Stalin never had to work under this much stress! Except maybe when the Germans were outside Stalingrad.

Obama planned on three days in sunny Florida to learn prep for a debate on foreign policy. Instead, McCain suggested they go together to Washington to join their fellow senators in addressing what some have called the biggest financial crisis since the Great Depression.

Why not? It's what they're both paid to do.

Obama declined, and offered to be on call if needed. From Florida.

Then the President goes and invites them both. Obama has to put his foreign policy work aside, and has to learn prep for the meeting in the White House.

We think he must have been overwhelmed in that meeting, much like we would be if we were standing over an open heart surgery and the doctor tells us to take over so he can go to Florida for three days...

There were people there who were ready to work. Serious people. And they shouted at each other too! Add to that, no campaign staff to kiss his a*s and hang on his every, uh, word. It would have been interesting to ask him at that moment if he would rather be visiting our wounded troops.

We will be watching the debate tonight to gauge Obama's confidence and energy levels. Since it is Friday night, we may invent a new drinking game: One shot for every "uh".

Obama & Communism?

Senator McCain, it is not fair to link Senator Obama with communist dictators!

You're lowering the level of political discourse!

To be fair, please wait until AFTER Obama takes our property away before linking him to communism.

UT: BabaluBlog

The Bailout

Found this today at Townhall

Oh, Now They Notice

Tony Blankley at the Washington Times writes in an op-ed today, Media Covering for Obama. He won't be invited to any parties anytime soon.

The mainstream media have gone over the line and are now straight out propagandists for the Obama campaign.
---
They have consciously ignored whole years in his life, and showed a lack of curiosity about such gaps that bespeaks a lack of journalistic instinct.
---
The public image of Mr. Obama as an idealistic, post-race, post-partisan, well-spoken and honest young man with the wisdom and courage befitting a great national leader is a confection spun by a willing conspiracy of Mr. Obama, his publicist David Axelrod and most of the senior editors, producers and reporters of the national media.

One down, thousands to go.

Bailout Thoughts (UPDATED x2)

While we have many anti-communist impulses on this week's $700 billion bailout chatter, we've purposely hesitated to comment with the hope facts would emerge with which we could trust and form and convey sensible opinions.

We agree - if the market is in a free-fall and this is the only option, then do it with a firm plan to re-sell the assets as soon as their value returns. But is it the only option?

We agree - with fellow conservatives that this is a form of communism - government owning industry. It isn't that far from Russia's takeover of Yukos. One is a "rescue", the other overt theft, but both are government takeovers.

But we're puzzed by the following:
1) The more it is discussed, the more Secretary Paulson is isolated as one of the few pushing for immediate bailout. Why? Because it mostly helps his former co-workers on Wall Street?

2) The two biggest groups screaming for more time are the conservative members of congress, and the Communist Party USA! How did that happen?!

So, we're staying on the fence with the plan to chime in later as we know more.

In the meantime, a great article in today's WSJ about William O. Perkins III, a trader that made $1.25 million last week on Goldman Sacks. He plans to spend this profit on a campaign exposing the bailout crowd as "communists". That got our attention! And he's an Obama supporter. Where's the Advil?

He has spent some of his profit on the cartoon above, and will spend the rest on nationwide ads.

"I see it as trickle-down communism," Mr. Perkins said. "We have a communist action where everybody is paying for the benefit of the few and hoping the benefits will trickle down to everyone else.
---
What Mr. Perkins got back was a cartoon showing Messrs. Bush, Paulson and Bernanke planting a flag in the graveyard of capitalism, Iwo Jima-style, with a hammer and sickle where the field of stars would normally go. Mr. Perkins said he plans to run a series of antibailout ads nationwide until he has spent all of his Goldman gains. "I've gotta give that money back," he said."

Comments are on. Tell us what we're missing!

UPDATE 7PM: Newt Gingrich spoke on Hannity & Colmes on the bailout subject. We liked what we heard. Here are the highlights:

1) He calls it "an appalling bad plan", and says it will be "an engine of corruption". Says it will be a "nightmare to implement". Calls it "socialism at its worst".
2) He says the bailout will buy assets at above the market value, not less than the market value.
3) Suggestions: Use rolling 3-year average mark-to-market, zero capital gains, adopt a US-centric energy plan, and loan money at treasury+2% to let entities fix their bad-debt problems themselves - a "workout" rather than a "bailout".

UPDATE 9.25 11AM:

More links and quotes on the subject:

Rush hits the analogy perfect in his Wednesday show:

Barack Obama is nothing different than a high-risk loan. He has no history of accomplishment. He has nothing besides a nice smile and a firm handshake as evidence that he can deliver what he promises. The White House should not be available to high-risk people, such as a 144-day junior senator who has a myriad of highly-questionable, high-risk associates. And when he fails? We will be asked to bail out the United States for the damage that he caused. I'd like a little more collateral on a presidential candidate than just having Bill Ayers, Jeremiah Wright and Tony Resko as co-signers on his application.

Larry Elder adds perspective on the significance of bank failures on our economy in his Townhall column today, Is Capitalism on the Ropes?

According to the FDIC, in the almost two-year period of 2007 and 2008, 15 banks failed. Similarly, during Clinton's last two years in office, 1999 and 2000, 15 banks also failed. In the recession-free years of 1988 and 1989, there were 1,004 bank failures. And since the Great Depression, the average number of yearly bank failures has been 94.

The WSJ editorial, The Candidates Vote 'Present', says "the behavior of both candidates has an air of running for political cover":

...count us as mystified by Senator John McCain's decision yesterday to suspend his campaign and call for a postponement in Friday's first Presidential debate so that he and Barack Obama can work out a consensus bill to stabilize the financial system. This is supposed to be evidence of leadership?

Mr. McCain's decision follows an equally odd suggestion from Mr. Obama yesterday morning that the two candidates issue a joint statement of principles and conditions for the financial rescue package. As a purely political matter, we understand why Mr. Obama would just as soon say "present" on a tricky Senate vote. He probably figures the current economic mess plays into his argument for "change," so why not minimize any differences with Mr. McCain on the Paulson plan as he heads to Election Day?

We also understand Mr. McCain's desire to further dress his campaign in "Country First" gilding, as if patriotism and consensus are one and the same, or that getting something done is more important than getting it right.
---
As candidates, however, they are not serving the public by hiding behind a fog of faux bipartisanship that obscures their core economic principles and their approach to governance in times of crisis. Far from being an issue that is above electoral politics, the financial panic is too serious not to have a serious discussion about.

And another from Hugh Hewitt, Hugh himself this time:

Obama’s halting response to yesterday’s dramatic announcement`by John McCain followed by his about-face and agreement to attend the meeting convened by President Bush even as he insists that tomorrow’s debate go forward reveals much more than standard operating bumbling by Obama when the script he's been reading from unexpectedly changes.

Obama appears to genuinely not grasp the stakes here. He is not acting like a leader who understands the risks the country faces. And this is not surprising giving his experience gap when it comes to money, work, and savings much less finance.