Why is it that Obama can get away with this stuff?  Can you imagine if a Republican was making a habit of flooding radio shows that dare have critics on as guests and use law enforcement officials as part of a campaign to intimidate his critics from running ads?  I am going out a limb and guessing that the word Nazi would be used.

Now if you watch the video above, you will see that there is very little oomph behind the plan.  But it is still troubling that Obama finds the need to use his supporters in law enforcement to publicly threaten legal action against his critics.

It is also the height of hypocrisy for Obama supporters to complain about smears and unfair attacks when they have been busy slinging them at McCain.

Obama wants to have it both ways.  He wants to be seen as the calm, cool, above it all candidate who can bridge the partisan divide and bring real change.  But he also wants to play hardball and run harsh and deceptive attack ads against his opponent.  And if that isn’t enough he pulls stunts like this, and others, where he seeks to silence his critics.

That the liberals keep silent while Obama plays this game is testement to their desperate desire to win and their rank hypocrisy when it comes to their opponents.  You will forgive me if I don’t take them seriously.

Technorati Tags: ads, Audacity of Hypocrisy, free speech

Obama may very well be the slipperiest politician I have ever known.  I have never seen a politician less willing to admit he was wrong or who insisted more often that everything he ever did was right and consistent and that every thing his oppoent every said or did - or was in any way connected to - was fair game for distortion and attack.

Let’s take a quick bullet pointed review just off the top of my head:

• Obama says he won’t run for president.  Then runs anyway.
• Obama says William Ayers is just some guy from his neighborhood.  Turns out they were colleagues, Obama blurbed his book, Ayers hosted a fundraiser, etc.
• Obama said he couldn’t disown Rev. Wright.  Then he disowned him.
• Obama says he will meet with leaders of rogue nations unconditionally.  He then denies it.  Eventually he attempts to massage and spin it until no one knows what he means or where he stands.
• Obama promises to accept public financing.  Then he breaks his promise while insisting that he is doing it because the system is broken not because it will help him win.
• Obama insists the Surge won’t work.  Then he admits that it did work but that he was right to oppose it.  Then he denies that he said it wouldn’t work.  Now he insists that it succeeded but no one thought it would.
• Obama was for the DC gun ban but then was for it.  He now insists he won’t try to take your guns and he couldn’t even if he wanted to - but he doesn’t - because he doesn’t have the votes.
• Obama was against the FISA renewal with telecom immunity but voted for it.

• Obama continually says his opponent is using race against him when there is no evidence of any such thing.  And denies he meant to bring race into the campaign.
• Obama says John McCain wants to stay in Iraq for 100 years when even mainstream journalists view this as out of context and untrue.
• Obama takes what was clearly a joke about being rich after making $5 million dollars and continues to use it to label McCain as out of touch.
• Obama uses an attempt by McCain to have his staff get reporters the details of his wife’s real estate investments as yet another chance to portray McCain as out of touch.
• Obama takes McCain’s statements about he economy out of context to label him as . . . you guessed it, out of touch.
• Obama surrogates regularly question whether McCain is too old or angry or unstable to be president; many even attempting to use his time as a POW against him.
• Obama runs an ad that says McCain is out of touch because he doesn’t use email when a large factor in his limited use of technology is the fact that he has extensive injuries from being a POW; to say nothing of the fact that McCain is clearly familiar with technology and known for using it in innovative ways in his campaign.
• Obama runs a dishonest race baiting Spanish ad portraying McCain as anti-immigrant that is again seen even by mainstream journalists as deceptive and misleading.
• Obama hammers Phil Gramm’s comments about a nation of whinners to this very day as somehow proof that McCain is once again out of touch even though McCain denounced it at the time and Gramm is no longer connected to the campaign.
• Obama questions McCain’s loyalty to America because he believes in free trade.
• Obama has his campaign supporters flood radio stations to complain about critics being given air time and then slanders his critics.
• And after all of this, and more, Obama complains that McCain is running a sleazy campaign!

So, Obama picked former Fannie Mae CEO Jim Johnson to lead his VP search team (a man who had pledged to raise large amounts of money for him).  As it turned out, Johnson was deeply intwinned in the shady dealings that have threatened Wall Street.  This of course resulted in Obama throwing Johnson under the proverbial bus.

Now you might think this is relevent today.  But Obama heartily denies this reflects in any way on his vaunted judgement or his ability to change Washington.

Likewise, when the Washington Post ran a story claiming that another Fannie Mae CEO was advising Obama no one said a peep.  But when McCain raises the issue this week Obama says it is a lie and a smear and others even cry racism.

Obama is continuly attempting to connect McCain to the failed policies of Washington when his own running mate has been in Washington longer and, like Obama, has deep connections to the very “special interests” Obama loves to rail against.  And he oddly never seems to mention that his party has been in control of Congress for the past two years and in fact blocked attempts to reform Freddie and Fannie.

This pattern plays out over and over again.  Obama’s background, promises, connections, and record are all perfectly consistent and correct and any attempt to say otherwise is sleazy and probably racist.  And yet Obama can twist the words of others in any way he chooses and still have the audacity to claim the mantle of Hope and Change.

I guess it is not surprising given his messiah complex, but being Obama means never having to say your sorry or admit you were wrong.  It means you can play hardball as much as you want and then cry foul when someone points out your faults.  It means records, positions, and words have only the meaning you allow them to have.

And that is about the opposite of judgement and leadership.

Technorati Tags: Audacity of Hypocrisy, Hope and Change

Obama has pulled off the miraculous.  No, he hasn’t stopped the rising sea levels.  He has figured out a way to take an issue that usually ticks the base off, John McCain and the immigration issue, and focus that anger on himself instead.  And just to top it all off, he has further eroded whatever smidgen of credibility he had on so called negative campaign ads.  After all, it is hard to complain your opponent is using sleazy attack ads when you just rolled out the most deceptive one yet.

That’s right, Obama released a Spanish language radio and TV ad that didn’t make it past Jake Tapper’s smell test.  Says Tapper:

There are some real factual problems with this ad, which is titled “Dos Caras,” or two faces.

First of all, tying Sen. McCain – especially on the issue of immigration reform – to Limbaugh is unfair.

Limbaugh opposed McCain on that issue. Vociferously. And in a larger sense, it’s unfair to link McCain to Limbaugh on a host of issues since Limbaugh, as any even occasional listener of his knows, doesn’t particularly care for McCain.

Second, the quotes of Limbaugh’s are out of context.

[. . .]

By linking McCain to Limbaugh’s quotes, twisting Limbaugh’s quotes, and tying McCain to more extremist anti-immigration voices, the Obama campaign has crossed a line into misleading the viewers of its new TV ad.

I guess other than being unfair and untrue the ad is fine.

Can we all acknowledge that Obama’s whinney complaints about McCain’s ads are now absurd?  Obama comes out crying about slimiest this and sleaziest that and how he is going to hit back hard but refuses to lie or make things up.  And no sooner is this new strategy revealed then he does exactly that.  The hypocrisy is absolutely astounding even for a politician.

Erick Erickson I think hits on what this is all about:

Barack Obama, the man who claims to transcend politics and race, has hurled out a massively untrue race baiting ad and it is not even in English. He did it in Spanish to whip Latino immigrant populations into a fury.

Why?

Because Latinos do not trust Barack Obama. He has to make them trust John McCain even less. And he cannot do it with the truth. He’s going to have to lie to Latinos to do this, something that won’t go over very well in the end.

Talk about your old style politics of smear. Too bad the mainstream media is so enraptured with Obama they won’t do their job and report this accurately.

This is all part of the Obama Con.  Shout loudly about smears while you use the media for cover for your own hatchet jobs.

A big question in this election is whether the voters can see through this scheme.

Technorati Tags: Audacity of Hypocrisy, immigration, Rush Limbaugh

Francis Beckwith catches Obama seeking to have it both ways yet again:

Today, Senator Obama said: “Senator McCain offered up the oldest Washington stunt in the book: you pass the buck to a commission to study the problem. But here’s the thing: this isn’t 9-11. We know how we got into this mess. What we need now is leadership that gets us out.”

Apparently, then, we can dismiss Senator Obama’s call for commissions on Social Security (11/2007), torture (9/2007), war crimes (8/2008), and financial oversight for Wall Street (4/2008) as four separate instances of the senator pulling “the oldest Washington stunt in the book.” Perhaps the person who ghost writes his teleprompter can first do a Google search on the senator’s behalf to see whether he had opined on prior occasions on the matter of commissions. It took me about 40 minutes to track all these down.

Either Obama thinks we are stupid or his staff isn’t very good with The Google.

Neither one is very flattering.

Technorati Tags: Audacity of Hypocrisy, Google, Social Security

So Obama releases an ad attacking McCain by quoting a bunch of liberal columnists and tut-tutting media types claiming that McCain is running a sleazy campaign.  Put aside the riddiculous nature of qouting your supporters as proof that your opponent has gone too far, and the poor strategy behind such an ad, and think about the brazen hypocrisy of Obama lectureing McCain about honor.

As I have tried to document here, practically every Obama ad (except for the soft candidate profiles) mischaracterize and distort McCain’s record and words.

Throwing out just a few examples, Obama has:

• claimed that President Bush did nothing while New Orleans drowned.
• taken an obvious McCain joke and made it into a campaign talking point (ie: McCain thinks you aren’t wealthy until you make $5 million).
• claimed McCain is out of touch because he doesn’t use email when in fact his computer use has been hampered by injuries sustained while a prisoner of war; which is besides the fact that he has a long record of engagement in technology policy and has used technology in innovative ways as a candidate.
• allowed his surrogates to regularly attack McCain as dangerously old and seemingly near death.
• This is to say nothing of the shameful and over-the-top attacks against Governor Palin.

Oh, and how is this for classy attacks:

“Just ask the machinists in Pennsylvania who build Harley-Davidsons,” Obama said of McCain’s record. “Because John McCain didn’t just oppose the requirement that the government buy American-made motorcycles, he called Buy American provisions ‘disgraceful.’ Just ask the workers across this country who have seen their jobs outsourced.  The very companies that shipped their jobs overseas have been rewarded with billions of dollars in tax breaks that John McCain supports and plans to continue.

“So, when American workers hear John McCain talking about putting ‘Country First,’” Obama said, “it’s fair to ask –- which country?”

I though liberals were against questioning people’s patriotism.

So after all of these attacks and smears Obama is the one with a commerical complaining that McCain has lost his honor?  A candidate whose entire campaign was once thought to be built on changing politics has become a caricature of hardball politics, all while constantly whinning about attacks, and he thinks his opponent is to blame?

I think someone is out of touch but it isn’t John McCain . . .

Technorati Tags: ads, Audacity of Hypocrisy

Getty Images via Daylife

More on Obama’s new tough strategy:

The Democrat, 47, vowed to wield the “truth” against his Republican adversary and seize the policy high ground, but McCain denied resorting to outright untruths in his escalating attacks on Obama.

Questioned by a man frustrated with Obama’s response to a Republican “smear campaign,” the Illinois senator said in Dover, New Hampshire that Democrats were right to be nervous because “they’ve seen this movie before.”

But US voters would not be diverted from anxieties over the economy, healthcare, education and war, Obama said.

“I can guarantee that we are going to be hitting back hard … but we’re hitting back on the issues that matter to families. I’m not going to start making up lies about John McCain,” he said.

But as we pointed out earlier, Obama hit McCain in a new ad accusing him of being out of touch because he doesn’t use computers or technology.

Except that he does use those things but has been hampered because of physical handicaps that are the result of being tortured as a POW.

It also turns out that McCain is no stranger to technology policy or using the web in innovative ways.

So:

• It appears to me that Obama is in fact making up lies about McCain.  Just as he did with the $5 million = wealthy and doesn’t know how many houses he own attacks.
• How can anyone view this ad as about the big issues?  McCain is out of touch?  That is the issue that matters to families?  Uh, no.

Obama has a gigantic case of projection here:

“They will spend any amount of money and use any tactic out there in order to avoid talking about how we are going to move America into the future,” he said of his Republican opponents.

Obama is constantly warning of GOP dirty tricks even as he rolls out ad after ad built on distortions and deceptions.  This is in fact the basic strategy of Obama.  They will spend any amount of money and use any tactic to try and connect McCain with Bush and portray McCain as a dangerous old man.

This may be smart politics - I doubt it - and it is certainly what the angry base wants, but it is anything but serious ads about the issues and where he wants to take the country.

But this is the trap that Obama has set for himself.  He evidently doesn’t have enough faith in the American people to truly run a positive campaign of Hope and Change.  He can’t just run on his policy platform because he is to the left of a large chunk of the country.

He has to attack McCain and his supporters insist he prove he is “tough enough.”  So he throws up deceptive negative attacks and yet cries foul when the other side plays hardball too.  He keeps on promising he will fight back and fails to notice that this very stance undermines his image and message.

Obama has two choices.  He can drop the premise that he is anything other than just another liberal politician or he can take the risk of trying to ignore the constant calls for toughness and try and return to his calm, cool, and unifying image.  But trying to do both, as he has lately, just makes him look foolish.

His choice will play a big part in deciding the election.

Technorati Tags: ads, Audacity of Hypocrisy, Hope and Change

Obama offers this arrogant little tidbit on “Swinegate” as they are calling it:

“What their campaign has done this morning is the same game that has made people sick and tired of politics in this country. They seize on an innocent remark, try to take it out of context, throw out an outrageous ad because they know it’s catnip for the news media,”

Obama’s indignation would be a lot more believable if he didn’t constantly play the same game.

Let’s use an example.  McCain made a joke at the Saddleback forum and Obama has portrayed it as a factual statement in ads and in stump speeches ever since.

Let’s look at the transcript and the question:

Warren: Ok, on taxes, define “rich.” Everybody talks about taxing the rich, but not the poor, the middle class. At what point - give me a number, give me a specific number - where do you move from middle class to rich?

Is it $100,000, is it $50,000, is it $200,000? How does anybody know if we don’t know what the standards are? MCCAIN: Some of the richest people I’ve ever known in my life are the most unhappy. I think that rich should be defined by a home, a good job, an education and the ability to hand to our children a more prosperous and safer world than the one that we inherited.

I don’t want to take any money from the rich — I want everybody to get rich.

(LAUGHTER)

McCain: I don’t believe in class warfare or re-distribution of the wealth. But I can tell you, for example, there are small businessmen and women who are working 16 hours a day, seven days a week that some people would classify as - quote - “rich,” my friends, and want to raise their taxes and want to raise their payroll taxes.

Let’s have - keep taxes low. Let’s give every family in America a $7,000 tax credit for every child they have. Let’s give them a $5,000 refundable tax credit to go out and get the health insurance of their choice. Let’s not have the government take over the health care system in America.

(APPLAUSE)

So, I think if you are just talking about income, how about $5 million?

(LAUGHTER)

But seriously, I don’t think you can - I don’t think seriously that - the point is that I’m trying to make here, seriously — and I’m sure that comment will be distorted — but the point is that we want to keep people’s taxes low and increase revenues.

And, my friend, it was not taxes that mattered in America in the last several years. It was spending. Spending got completely out of control. We spent money in way that mortgaged our kids’ futures.

It is abundantly clear that McCain was making a joke about Rick Warren’s earning from his blockbuster book.  McCain smiled and the audience laughed.  And McCain felt compelled to note that it was a joke and that it would be distorted.

Sure enough the Obama campaign has used in in commercials, stump speeches, and media interviews ever since to paint McCain as out of touch.  The same is true of the imbroglio over how many houses he owns.  McCain assumed it was a question about his wife’s assets rather than a question about where he lives.  Ditto numerous statements taken out of context and out of date to twist the words.

But did the media provide any context for these so called gaffes?  Did they jump to the defense of McCain?  No.  The media is focused like a laser on trying to get Sarah Palin to stop touting her record on the Bridge to Nowhere and defending Obama from any possible criticism on his lipstick on a pig remark.  And all the while Obama continues to use deceptive tactics against McCain on a host of issues.

I have been involved in politics enough to know that all politicians use slippery words and gotcha type arguments in commercials and stump speeches.  And this election is no different.

But to quote Obama from earlier today: “Spare me the phony outrage. Spare me the phony talk about change.”

Obama needs to take his own advice.

Technorati Tags: Audacity of Hypocrisy

STATEMENT OF SENATOR BARACK OBAMA
SENATE SUBCOMMITTEE ON FEDERAL FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT, GOVERNMENT INFORMATION, AND INTERNATIONAL SECURITY
JULY 18, 2006

I’m still relatively new to Washington. But even during my short time in the Senate, I’ve been surprised and shocked by the examples of government waste, fraud, and abuse that we’ve seen, particularly at a time when this country’s most vulnerable citizens need to see government at its best. In the aftermath of Katrina, we have not seen government at its best, and all Americans - but in particular, the people of the Gulf Coast - deserve better.

It’s been embarrassing to hear about the government paying 15 times more than the market price for plastic tarps to cover damaged roofs in New Orleans, or paying 5 times too much for debris removal, or contracting with vendors for ice or transportation services who don’t even have the relevant experience or equipment.

How can we expect the American people to have confidence in us when all they hear about is overcharging and overpayments, pork-barrel projects like the Bridge to Nowhere, and money being wasted on frivolous expenses? How can we expect them to have confidence when the Administration and Congress seem unwilling or unable really to hold people accountable?

Tough words, right?  Here is Obama using his rhetoric to champion fiscal responsibility and getting tough on wasteful spending.  This is the change we have been hearing so much about.

Only one small problem.  How did Obama vote when given the chance to back up his words?

Nay.  Biden?  Nay.

Just words.

Technorati Tags: Audacity of Hypocrisy, earmarks, Just Words

***Welcome Cornerites!  Please take a look around.  I hope you will consider checking back regularly***

How else can you explain his ham handed responses lately.  A few days ago the plan was to ignore Palin, but now Obama seems intent on going after her in less than helpful ways.  Take this one:

Well, how about Gov. Palin? She’s you know, an up and comer from Alaska. She - they’re starting to run an ad now saying she opposed the bridge to nowhere. Well now, let’s get the facts clear here. When she was mayor, she hired a Washington lobbyist to get earmarks  - pork barrel spending - all the things that John McCain says is bad, she lobbied to get! And got a whole lot of it. When it came to the bridge to nowhere, she was for it until everybody started raising a fuss about it and she started running for governor and then suddenly she was against it!

You remember that? For it before you were against it? I mean you can’t just make stuff up. You can’t just recreate yourself. You can’t just reinvent yourself. The American people aren’t stupid.

Let us count the ways this is not smart politics:

• Why is Obama going after Palin?  He only increases her stature, wastes time that could be spent attacking McCain, and brings up issues that don’t help him.
• Once again, it is generally thought to be good when you change your mind because of changed circumstances or in the face of clear public support.  As she began to see the connection between earmarks and the corruption in her state Palin realized she was wrong, changed her mind, and proved her sincerity by taking action once elected to statewide office.  Obama?  Not so much.
• Is Obama taking a pot shot at John Kerry with that “For it before you were against it?” bit?  Ouch.  I though Democrats wanted to nuance and all that?

Let’s talk about that last bit: “You can’t just reinvent yourself. The American people aren’t stupid.”  If that is true then Obama is in trouble.  Let me point out just a few people who have found Obama to be a case study in reinventing himself:

The New York Post pointed out in June, after he changed his mind on public financing, that Obama had a history of this sort of thing:

This isn’t the first time Obama has, um, “changed” political lanes:

* He ripped Hillary Clinton for months for voting to list Iran’s Revolutionary Guard as a terrorist organization. Days after Clinton conceded, Obama flipped and said he supported the definition.

* Obama repeatedly vowed to meet with various heads of terror states - most notably Ahmadinejad of Iran - “without preconditions.” Then, with the nomination in sight, he zigzagged: “There’s no reason why we would necessarily meet with Ahmadinejad. He’s not the most powerful person in Iran.”

* In October, he supported NAFTA expansion. In March, campaigning in the Ohio primary, he called for a “reopening” of the trade pact’s terms. This week, he called his own primary rhetoric “overheated” and said NAFTA has had a positive effect on the US economy.

* Yesterday, after signaling opposition to nuclear power, he told Democratic governors he’s open to expanding it.

In July, Jeff Emanuel tried to count all the changes:

The transition from primary to general election campaign mode has seen Barack Obama (D-IL) perform whiplash-inducing 180°s on Iraq, on abortion, on the DC gun ban, on FISA and telecom immunity, on welfare reform, on the death penalty for child rapists, on debating John McCain “anywhere, any time,” on the financing of his campaign, and on too many other issues to recount here (not to mention on Jim Johnson, on Jeremiah Wright, on Wes Clark, on Austan Goolsbee, on Samantha Power, on Tony Rezko, and on Scarlett Johansson, as well as on too many other people to recount).

Heck, Jim Geraghty, who noted this weekend that Obama has changed his mind on the Bush tax cuts, has a catchy phrase for just this sort of thing:

All statements by Barack Obama come with an expiration date. All of them.

For earlier chapters in this endless series, look here, here, here, here, here, here and here.

Sure, the biggest reinvention started just after the primary, but it is being completed even as we watch.  And that is the change from Obama the different politician, as post-partisan, post-racial, etc. into Obama the traditional politician.  The New York Times was disappointed when it started:

We are not shocked when a candidate moves to the center for the general election. But Mr. Obama’s shifts are striking because he was the candidate who proposed to change the face of politics, the man of passionate convictions who did not play old political games.

Much of the early excitment surrounding Obama’s campaign was built on this, in my opinion naive, belief in Obama’s ability to get beyond partisan bickering and offer something different.  How far away that seems now.

This is, I hope, the Obama Con being peeled away and shown for what it is.  When Obama was in Illinois he was a rather predictable liberal with an fresh face, a charming personality, and exciting rhetoric.  But when he got to the US Senate his staff began to work on a plan - yes, they literally had one - to keep his favorables high by avoiding controversy and playing the moderate and unifying politician.  In the Democratic primary it was easier to balance his liberalism with his Hope and Change rhetoric, but this was bound to be an issue come the general election.  Hence, his lurching centrist rhetoric and changed positions.

But by the time of the convetion the question, according to the chattering classes, wasn’t whether Obama was liberal enough but whether he would “fight back” so out comes a hard edged partisan acceptance speech.  Then when McCain-Palin attempt to steal his change mantra out from him Obama whines and complains.  But he is stuck between playing the crusading liberal that many Dems want and the Hope and Change unifier that appeals to the non-alligned and non-political.

So ironically, Obama’s problems comes down to his own reinvention.  In fact, you could argue that Obama has been reinventing himself his whole life as he sought to find an identity that fit and in changing his rhetoric as he moved up the political ladder.

One thing is crystal clear.  Obama shouldn’t be lecturing anyone about reinvention.  And if Americans are as smart as Obama says they are they will see right through his insulting language and false accusations.

But, I really think Obama is jealous that Palin has stolen his thunder.  She has taken the media limelight and I think that really gets under his skin.  And that is why he has chosen to go after her.  It sure doesn’t make any political sense.

Technorati Tags: Audacity of Hypocrisy, Sarah Palin

Obama has clearly decided to run a campaign against President Bush.  And he has also lost any sense of shame.  He is constantly accusing his opponents of things that apply equally, or even more so, to himself.  Take today:

“Don’t be fooled,” a particularly punchy Obama told a crowd this morning at a town hall meeting in Terre Haute, Ind. “These are the folks who have been in charge. John McCain’s party, with the help of John McCain, has been in charge.”

Criticizing new VP candidate Sarah Palin, Obama said she poses as an anti-big-spending maverick despite having pulled in pork-barrel projects into her home state. Calling Palin “a skillful politician,” Obama charged the Alaska governor with taking earmarks “when it is convenient” but decrying them now that she is headlining McCain’s agenda.

“Words mean something!” Obama said of Palin’s reputation as an anti-earmark champion. “You can’t just make stuff up.”

Words do matter.  The problem is that Obama is all words and no action.  For example, Palin did change her mind about the famous Bridge to Nowhere, but she changed her mind in the right direction.  And when she was mayor she did her best to bring bring federal money to her city, but when given the chance to prove herself, and to back up her words, as govenor she did that by cutting spending and waste.  None of this entails making stuff up.

Also note the response of the McCain campaign:

“Barack Obama has requested the equivalent of $1 million in new pork-barrel spending for every working day he’s been in the U.S. Senate, while John McCain has never once asked for an earmark, and Gov. Palin has vetoed hundreds of millions in government spending including killing the infamous ‘Bridge to Nowhere’,” Bounds wrote in an email response. “Just like so many other issues Barack Obama is all talk, has no record to back it up and isn’t ready to make change.”

See how that works?  Obama mocks Palin for changing her mind about earmarks when he hasn’t changed his mind at all.  Insted he funnels millions of dollars to his wife’s employer without blinking an eye.  And Obama has a long history of funneling money to his campaign contributors and friends (often with disastrous results).  So who is better Palin for changing her mind and doing something about it or Obama who never changed his mind and sees nothing wrong with it?  Who is going to bring change to Washington someone who has proven that she can change the status quo or someone who has never changed or challenged anything his entire career.

The fact that his opponents VP pick has a better record on change has to really gall Obama, but it is a fact.  And as noted above the top of the GOP ticket has not taken any earmarks.  Do we want to even get into Joe Biden?

Then Obama goes off on partisanship:

“Maybe what they’re saying is, ‘Watch out George Bush,’” Obama speculated sarcastically, “except for economic policies, and tax policies, and energy policies, and health care policies, and education policies, and Karl Rove style politics. Except for all that, we’re really going to bring change to Washington! We’re really going to shake things up!”

Mocking Republicans’ appeal to end partisan rancor, Obama posed the tongue-in-cheek question to McCain’s party: “Did you pay attention to the last two days of your convention? I mean, what, were you not, were you not watching? Did they not get the memo?”

Funny, I seem to recall someone else’s highly partisan acceptance speech.  Oh, yeah that was Obama’s and it was more partisan than Palin’s or McCain’s.  Secondly, what in the world is with Obama and Karl Rove?  He mentions him constantly now.  And Rove is connected to McCain how?  This is just silly.  Rove has nothing to do with this election except in the fevered minds of the left.

More below.

[Read more →]

Technorati Tags: Audacity of Hypocrisy, earmarks, Joe Biden, money