Jeff over at Red State points us to an incredible case of chutzpah from Joe Biden.  Watch Biden claim that the very strategy that Obama voted against and denied would work was in fact his idea:

Here is relevant snippet:

The fact of the matter is, the only thing succeeding in Iraq right now is the plan that Barack and I talked about that Petraeus is implementing — giving local control in the very areas with a limited central government.

Wow.  So now Team Obama is actually claiming to have designed the surge!  From opposing it to denying it would work to saying of course it worked to coming up with the idea in the first place.  Quite a transformation.

Jeff calls this for what it is:

. . . I suppose we are now expected to believe that when Biden said, “The president and others who support the surge have it exactly backwards,” in December 2006, he secretly meant, “Go through with the surge, Gen. Petraeus — I believe in you!”

Or, when Biden was pushing for Iraq to be divided into into three ethnically-homogeneous, unsustainable “states,” then abandoned, he was actually working behind the scenes with the freshman Senator from Illinois and General Petraeus to craft a plan to make Iraq more unified and sustainable.

We are likewise expected to believe that, when Barack Obama sponsored legislation that would have withdrawn U.S. troops from that country beginning last year — at the most sensitive point to date in the entire conflict — with a full retreat having been completed by this past March, thereby rendering every single achievement made possible by the ‘Surge,’ from the rising up of Concerned Local Citizens, to the driving out of al Qaeda in Iraq, to the quelling of sectarian violence, to the growing political reconciliation that made possible legislation passed this week setting the stage for provincial elections in that country, entirely null and void, he was actually laying the ground work for success there. Good thing General Petraeus was somehow in on the secret there, and understood that all of Obama’s posturing was actually cover for Petraeus to do what he has done to date in Iraq.

Or not. What this actually was, was simply this: perhaps the most brazen engagement in revisionist history — if not the most brazen outright lie — ever to leave the lips of a man who is known for his embellishments.

Barack Obama and Joe Biden clearly have no shame.  They will spare no effort to hide the fact that they were simply wrong on the critical strategy that has rescued our efforts in Iraq and made the remarkable progress not just a possibility but a reality.

It is also worth noting that this is supposed to be Biden’s area of expertise; this is the very reason he was chosen as VP.  And yet he has done nothing but make fundamental errors and, in fact, make things up practically from the day he was chosen.

This is Obama’s judgement in action.

Technorati Tags: Audacious Arrogance, Iraq, Joe Biden, Veeps, video

Do you recall how the media constantly hammered President Bush during his re-election campaign?  Why couldn’t he admit what he go wrong?  Why could he admit his mistakes?  Why can’t he answer a question on these issues directly?  On and on it went.  In their eyes Bush was an arrogant, shallow, and unthoughtful person.

Yet, here we are in a campaign where Barack Obama regularly refuses to admit mistakes even as he abruptly changes positions on issues to lengthy to list here.  Most famously he simply refuses to admit he was wrong on the surge and now claims it succeeded beyond anyone’s wildest imagination despite having predicted it would fail.

And now Jennifer Rubin points out this arrogant and deflective answer when asked why there have been no futher attacks on American soil after 9/11:

Well … I think that the initial invasion into Afghanistan disrupted al Qaeda. And that was the right thing to do. I mean, we had to knock out those safe havens. And that, I think, weakened them. We did some work in strengthening our homeland security apparatus here. Obviously, the average person knows that when they go to the airport, because they are goin’ through taking off their shoes … all that. The problem is when we got distracted by Iraq. We gave al Qaeda time to reconstitute itself. And we now know, based on all the intelligence available to us that they, in fact, have set up safe havens back in Afghanistan, the hills between Afghanistan and Pakistan. They are now carrying out very aggressive actions against U.S. troops in Afghanistan and they are training to attack the United States once again. So now, my hope obviously is that we continue to prevent them from being able to move at all out of those safe havens. But our intelligence indicates … that the danger, the likelihood, of a potential attack is significantly higher now. And that has been an enormous mistake that I intend to correct when I’m president of the United States.

As Jennifer notes:

What a perfectly horrid response. He told us how we’ve messed up (in his eyes) yet the question was why has it worked. Does he not know or is he such an embittered partisan that he can’t admit the one aspect of the Bush legacy–no further attacks on America soil–which is beyond dispute.

The answer I think is yes.  To Obama this is politics, period.  He reacted the same way on the surge.  He couldn’t admit he was wrong because he had to change the political dynamic, etc.

When is the media going to ask Obama why he can’t admit he is wrong?  When are they going to see that despite all his skills he can be incredibly graceless (You’re likable enough, Hillary)?

I am not holding my breath.

Technorati Tags: Audacious Arrogance

Remember how everyone lambasted President Bush for not being able to admit he was wrong?  Well, Bill O’Reilly attempts to get Obama to admit he was wrong about the surge but Obama refuses to do so:

O’REILLY: But if it were up to you, there wouldn’t have been a surge.

OBAMA: Look…

O’REILLY: No, no, no, no.

OBAMA: No, no, no…

O’REILLY: If it were up to you, there wouldn’t have been a surge.

OBAMA: No, no, no.

O’REILLY: You and Joe Biden, no surge.

OBAMA: Hold on a second, Bill. If you look at the debate that was taking place, we had gone through five years of mismanagement of this war that I thought was disastrous. And the president wanted to double down and continue on an open-ended policy that did not create the kinds of pressure on the Iraqis to take responsibility and reconcile.

O’REILLY: But it worked. It worked. Come on.

OBAMA: Bill, what I’ve said is - I’ve already said it succeed beyond our wildest dreams.

O’REILLY: Why can’t you say, “I was right in the beginning, and I was wrong about the surge”?

OBAMA: Because there’s an underlying problem where what have we done. We have reduced the violence.

O’REILLY: Yes.

OBAMA: But the Iraqis still haven’t taken responsibility, and we still don’t have the kind of political reconciliation. We are still spending, Bill, $10 to $12 billion a month.

Obama can’t admit that the surge was a successful and neccesary part of getting to a political solution.  And he can’t seem to understand that regardless of whether the invasion was right or wrong the surge was critical in avoiding a defeat.

He simply can’t admit he was wrong.

Technorati Tags: Audacious Arrogance

That’s right, tragedy:

- a dramatic composition, often in verse, dealing with a serious or somber theme, typically that of a great person destined through a flaw of character or conflict with some overpowering force, as fate or society, to downfall or destruction.

I think Obama supporters might begin preparing for the natural outplaying of the Greek cycle.

Obama has the hubris well in hand:

Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama’s big speech on Thursday night will be delivered from an elaborate columned stage resembling a miniature Greek temple.

The stage, similar to structures used for rock concerts, has been set up at the 50-yard-line, the midpoint of Invesco Field, the stadium where the Denver Broncos’ National Football League team plays.

Some 80,000 supporters will see Obama appear from between plywood columns painted off-white, reminiscent of Washington’s Capitol building or even the White House, to accept the party’s nomination for president.

He will stride out to a raised platform to a podium that can be raised from beneath the floor.

The catharsis part could get a little ugly . . .

Technorati Tags: Audacious Arrogance, Greek Myth

As you are probably aware if you have been following the news, Senators Obama and McCain attended a Civil Forum this weekend at Saddleback Church.  Obama and McCain were asked identical questions by Rick Warren, author of The Purpose Driven Life.  Their answers were revealing and not in a positive way for Obama.

Take his answer on judges.  The Wall Street Journal does a great job taking this one down:

Mr. Obama took a lower road, replying first that “that’s a good one,” and then adding that “I would not have nominated Clarence Thomas. I don’t think that he, I don’t think that he was a strong enough jurist or legal thinker at the time for that elevation. Setting aside the fact that I profoundly disagree with his interpretation of a lot of the Constitution.” The Democrat added that he also wouldn’t have appointed Antonin Scalia, and perhaps not John Roberts, though he assured the audience that at least they were smart enough for the job.

So let’s see. By the time he was nominated, Clarence Thomas had worked in the Missouri Attorney General’s office, served as an Assistant Secretary of Education, run the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission and sat for a year on the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals, the nation’s second most prominent court. Since his “elevation” to the High Court in 1991, he has also shown himself to be a principled and scholarly jurist.

Meanwhile, as he bids to be America’s Commander in Chief, Mr. Obama isn’t yet four years out of the Illinois state Senate, has never held a hearing of note of his U.S. Senate subcommittee, and had an unremarkable record as both a “community organizer” and law school lecturer. Justice Thomas’s judicial credentials compare favorably to Mr. Obama’s Presidential résumé by any measure. And when it comes to rising from difficult circumstances, Justice Thomas’s rural Georgian upbringing makes Mr. Obama’s story look like easy street.

Obama seems to lack the self-awareness to note that Thomas was more qualified for his position than Obama is for the presidency.  The arrogance is eclipsed only by the ignorance.

But as the Journal notes, this isn’t just about judicial philosophy, or Obama’s complete sense of irony in calling Thomas inexperienced, it is about the attitude it reveals:

Even more troubling is what the Illinois Democrat’s answer betrays about his political habits of mind. Asked a question he didn’t expect at a rare unscripted event, the rookie candidate didn’t merely say he disagreed with Justice Thomas. Instead, he instinctively reverted to the leftwing cliché that the Court’s black conservative isn’t up to the job while his white conservative colleagues are.

So much for civility in politics and bringing people together. And no wonder Mr. Obama’s advisers have refused invitations for more such open forums, preferring to keep him in front of a teleprompter, where he won’t let slip what he really believes.

Despite his rhetoric Obama is just another leftwing partisian.  And all the charm in the world can’t disguise this fact.  In unscripted moments Obama post-partisan con falls apart.  The only question is whether the media will report it and whether voters will notice.

Technorati Tags: Audacious Arrogance, judges

No, really it’s not. 

Nope.

Well maybe a little.

Technorati Tags: Audacious Arrogance, their own personal Jesus

Gee, I wonder why people keep insinuating that Obama is prone to arrogance and elitism?  Hmm, no idea

Barack Obama’s new campaign plane is nothing short of grand. Well, for the candidate that is.

Obama’s section of the plane rivals that of any first class. Recently the front cabin of the Boeing 757 was retrofitted to install four individual chairs that resemble La-Z-Boys. They are free-standing and made of plush leather with pockets on the sides. There is also a booth which seats four for a meeting or a meal.

His chair has his name and campaign logo embroidered on the back top — “Obama ‘08” on one line and “President” underneath. To one side is a small table stacked with newspapers ready for the candidate’s arrival. The table of the booth is always covered in snacks and cheese and is where Obama spends most of his time during flights meeting with staff and sitting for the occasional interview.

“Typically the candidate’s cabin is like business class — roomier and less chaotic than the staff and press areas, but still short of the accoutrements of a pro team’s charter,” says Politico’s Mike Allen, a frequent campaign flier.

After looking at a few photos of Obama’s cabin, Allen quipped, “Air Force One may seem a tad claustrophobic.”

Technorati Tags: Audacious Arrogance