Is it ‘Bambi’ Obama, or is there something there with fangs?

This quote for Hot Air does raise a real issue with anyone campaigning against Obama in an amusing analogy; how does one challenge wide-eyed innocence and ‘Hope’ (actually, the appearance of same; preception is rarely reality in politics):

She can’t club Bambi now or else she’ll look desperate, but she couldn’t club Bambi last year when she was ahead or else she would have looked mean and … Hillary-ish. This is why I fear Obama so much more than her in the general: There’s never a good time to club Bambi.

The rest of the piece is interesting as well; it details how the arrogance of the Clintons over the years is returning to bite them in terms of press coverage.  Of course, it was the press that helped them breed that much arrogance in the first place by fawning over them and protecting them from themselves.  It’s a lesson that Barack better recognize for himself; today’s golden child becomes tomorrow’s target practice, as far as the MSM is concerned.  And it can happen quite quickly, when the time comes.

Now for the other side:

Chicago has a well-deserved reputation for political shenanigans, though it’s less noticeable than in the Original Mayor Daley days. And Obama has been in the thick of it for several years.  The question the Democrat hierarchy has to be considering:

A British-Iraqi billionaire lent millions of dollars to Barack Obama’s fundraiser just weeks before an imprudent land deal that has returned to haunt the presidential contender, an investigation by The Times discloses. 

Are stories like this one- the tip of an iceberg, or just an ice cube floating by?  If there are such icebergs in Obama’s life, will the news media be as effective at masking such problems as they were with Bill’s extra-curricular activities? 

This particular story is pretty thin, with most of it being circumstantial; however, it already has more meat to it (with actual financial transactions that appear, at least, odd) than the front-page blast the McCain with far less about the lobbyist (with 4 bylines no less).  There are certainly questions to be asked of Tony Rezko (awaiting trial), who had “no income, negative cash flow, no liquid assets, no unencumbered assets [and] is significantly in arrears on many of his obligations”, yet managed to qualify for a mortgage and get loaned millions. 

Of course, the media will give Obama the same kind of coverage McCain got when Satan’s team skates the Stanley Cup.  But when Hillary gets knocked out and is sitting on the sidelines, who’s to say whether her back-stabbing little minions won’t manage to chum the waters with more substantial meat than this to leave 2012 open?  They would do it as covertly as possible to avoid bloodstained hands showing up in the next cycle; but they’ve done such before.

Politics at this level is a full contact sport that makes rugby look wimpy; if there’s a wolf under Bambi’s’ clothing, we’ll end up seeing Barack’s fangs before this is done.

Obama needs the Remedial Commander-in-Chief Class

Update: The captain (who was a Lieutenent then) exists, there were some selective ammunition shortages in training and his platoon was downsized somewhat before leaving (but was still within Army limits).  And the complaint about a lack of uparmored Humvees was unreasonable; in 2003, very few existed and a Light Infantry unit would be very unlikely to have them anyway.  Most importantly, he refuted having to ’scrounge’ for weapons, the key point of Obama’s statement.   Bottom line: Obama’s story was pretty much A ‘Clintonian’ truth; just enough of a seed to get by without being a full-fledged lie. 

This is just amazing.  When I watched it the first time, I couldn’t believe the word’s falling out of Barack’s mouth.

Where to start:

• Captains lead companies, not platoons
• Platoons are never split up
• According to this guy, the 10th’s deployments in Iraq and Afghanistan were a year apart
• Scrounging for weapons due to some sort of supposed supply shortage is being laughed at by everyone who has been in theater.

Any this guy wants to be Commander-in-Chief?? Didn’t we reject a guy last time with a tendency to make up stories about the military (who at least served in it)?

And it is an indication of the type of people involved in Democrat debates- whether as participant, moderator, or audience- that this went right by them without so much as an eyeblink of challenge. 

Additional Suggestions after another Campus Shooting

Sadly, the politically correct sign:

GUN-FREE ZONE

has again been translated, in the realworld, as:

VICTIM HUNTING PRESERVE

I made some suggestions after the last one, to which Instapundit comment was ‘only 5%?’  Fine, 10%; whatever the business thinks is worthwhile.

Here’s one; it’s time to add handgun training as a PE course on college campuses.  They certainly offer a lot of stuff far less practical and making the handgun training a full course would certainly be an improvement over the paltry 10 hours my Concealed Handgun License required.  They could make it tougher and those that ace the course (and pass extensive background checks) have conceal carry privileges on campus.  Professors, too, could similarly qualify.  Violations of handgun security on campus or public intoxication would immediately revoke those privileges.

Here’s another suggestion: add a military police component to the ROTC programs; those who pass that- along with the handgun class- are allowed to add a sidearm to their campus uniform.   Some of those Ivy league schools might want to reconsider restarting their ROTC programs.

And, like the previous suggestion, prominent signage is important:

“This campus has a program that supports the 2nd Amendment and maintains an active program in concealed handgun training for appropriate members of student and faculty.  Concealed carry permitted on campus but ONLY with appropriate campus-specific certification and identification.” 

Simple suggestions that are not overly radical that would put a level of protection on campus that are better trained than the normal CHL holders.  it is worth considering, given recent events.

In Support of Freedom of the Press

As an advocate of democracy within the global community, I am in full agreement with Ed on this one. So, in solidarity with the Danish press and their right to print such things, I present:

Insulting? Yes, and not something I’d normally do. But it is a right to do so, if one chooses. Considering the insults to Christianity (like a crucifix in a jar of urine) that have actually been presented as art, this one is certainly no worse.

And, unlike many of the Danes, I am also a firm believer in- and practitioner of- the U.S. Constitution’s 2nd Amendment.

Must I vote for the Queen Witch of the Universe???

Update: OK; I did it. I went to the poll and cast my vote for the Hildebeast; I now have my caucus card in my wallet for March 4th. A squadron of pigs flew in formation overhead, as Satan’s ice hockey team lined to vote behind me. My stomach hasn’t felt like this since I accompanied my coroner Dad to a suicide scene after a steak dinner where the guy used both barrels of a shotgun on his head.

Ugh! But if I follow my previous logic on the primaries, I just may have to. For the sake of the GOP’s chances in November, a brokered convention in Denver is helpful. And Hillary’s campaign is imploding too fast to make that a sure thing if she doesn’t win Texas (and probably Ohio). McCain pulled out Virginia tonight (good thing it was all or none format for him), so his lead is pretty much insurmountable. Hopefully, he’s gotten the message and will pick a solidly conservative VP (neither Huckabee nor Romney will do). He probably needs a ‘double pander’ here; a conservative who is female and/or a minority, simply to take some of the edge off of the ‘historic vote’ nature of November.

Here’s hoping John Edward’s handful of delegates are important enough to get him the VP slot. If not, the winner will likely fill the slot with another pander candidate and will be really tough to beat. It also would leave John to sell his delegates for a far more dangerous position- Attorney General or even the Supreme Court. Doesn’t that thought send shivers down your spine? That horrific vision alone will drive me to vote for McCain in November.

Update: Oh what fun! If I follow this logic, with the Dems Split primary/caucus situation, the Dems get to vote twice legally! (Legality issues haven’t kept them from doing it before.) This means I should go to the caucus for Hillary as well: I, who consider Ghengis Kahn a moderate on foreign policy and Scrooge a moderate on government spending, sitting in with the Impeachers and socialists. I could tell them that I ran the Denton County party for a a year or so back a couple decades ago (I just won’t tell the which party . If pressed, I could them them I’m a member of Zell Miller/Ralph Hall branch of the party; it would be right, but that branch could have their meetings in phone booth these days.

The Developing Nightmare of the Democratic Primary

Last night, Barak Obama swept all Democrat contests and the Democrat’s biggest nightmare is developing in the breakdown of the delegate counts. As of this moment, Barack leads Hillary 908 to 877 in the ‘pledged’ delegates, but is behind overall in the delegate count 1039 to 1100, all based on the unelected super-delegates.

Add to this the additional nightmare that, if Barack pulls ahead despite the margin given Hillary by the Democrat ‘machine’ politicians (as opposed to voter and caucus-goers), Hillary’s gang could (and will) advocate the seating of delegates from Michigan and Florida. After all, they’ve been ‘disenfranchised’ (by agreement of all candidates and the Democrat party machinery, to put an end of the chaotic primary leapfrogging). Even seating half would have a profound impact, especially since Hillary was essentially the only one who ‘neglected’ to have her name pulled from the ballot in Michigan and violated the ‘no-campaign’ pledge in Florida.

Now mix in the race vs. gender schism the Clintons have deliberately aggravated and the recent history of the Democrats continually decrying ’stolen elections’ (even though almost all people actually convicted of election fraud over the last decade are Democrats) and ‘minority disenfranchisement’. Throw into that Howard Dean’s statements about the Democrat Party ‘intervening’, setting down with the candidates and ‘making an arrangement’ (which sounds awfully ‘undemocratic’).

It really comes down to this; if Obama ends up winning the primary and caucus delegate totals and it looks like the super-delegates are going to overturn that, the Democrats can expect major demonstrations in Denver. Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton and every other race-baiter would be in full voice and the very real danger of ugliness that could suprass the 1968 fiasco. If ‘an arrangement’ is made to have enough super-delegates switch away from Hillary to ‘honor the vote’, expect a fair amount of noise from feminists (encouraged privately by Hillary and her machine).

Naturally, the solution to this would be a combined ticket, the ‘arrangement’ the Party wonks surely would seek. But that is going to be very difficult to pull off, both for political and personality reasons; Bill Clinton being a big part of the problem. A Barack/Hillary ticket would require Hillary to swallow a nearly unswallowable ego and Barack knows he would be hard pressed to deal with both her and Bill. It would involve Hillary making personal sacrifice for the sake of Party unity, something the Clintons have never done.

A Hillary/Barack ticket is not overly digestible either: Hillary is already having problems dealing with Bill and a ‘rock-star’ VP partner would make her look even weaker. And Barak knows he would be a seriously weakened VP, with Bill Clinton hanging around. He would be essentially giving up becoming President, possibly forever; he would be tied to another ‘Clinton legacy’ the next time the ‘change’ mantra comes around. Passing on the VP slot gives him a real shot of the independence he needs either 4 or 8 years from now, while adding to his currently limited experience at the national level. Idealistic he may be, but not so much not to realize such a slot would severely limit his future. I frankly don’t think he can give that up- and his idealistically liberal principles- for the ’sake of the Party’.

Of course, one has to add into the consideration that Barak and Hillary don’t like each other at this point. One really needs to comfortable with their running mate and neither would be.

So, if the popular vote ends up being overturned and the Party top dogs can’t broker a combined ticket, there is really nastiness ahead at the convention in Denver. Something that could be reflected in November; the election that has been handed on a silver platter to them could be lost.

And I’ll laugh my ass off if that happens.

OK: I’ll be voting for Obama

Those who know my political philosophy (I consider Ghengis Kahn a moderate) are looking at the title and saying: WTF??

It’s simple: The GOP race is done, picking the most liberal member that is anywhere close to electable in McCain; I can’t affect that. The Dem race is closer and that’s where the action is.

Why Obama? Simple: If he wins the popular vote, the GOP, long-term, cannot lose. He still has to get through the convention, and the super-delegates. If Hillary is forced to bludgeon the super-delegates into her camp- via political bribery and blackmail- to overturn the popular vote, it will damage her credibility immensely. Even if it’s close, it will make her more vulnerable to November defeat. Bottom line, I expect her machine to carry it through, but be forced to show itself for all the nastiness it in doing so.

If the long-shot Barak actually carries the day and wins the nomination, not for one minute do I think McCain could beat him.  But, bad as that would be (and it would be really bad for the Iraqis), it’s not catastrophic in the long run.  First, it kills off a toxic political machine that needs to die for the good of America. It will hopefully allow at least one party to start to rebuild on a less corrupt and cynical base.  And the GOP will have to rebuild; hopefully, around people who are conservatives, without the ‘neo-’. 

The major downer will be Iraqis serving as dog meat if Obama pulls it off; and no one in the world will ever side with us again in an international conflict.  We’re too consistent in letting our friends get killed off.  When the next 9/11 rolls around (and I’d expect the next one could be nuclear), global sympathy will be short and political support non-existent. 

There is nothing left to vote for, there is just things left to vote against; and- even there- the choices are close as to who will be worst for this country and the world.

In  November, though, I will be voting for the GOP; I’m not completely crazy.  However, the one exception would be if McCain actually picks Huckabee as running mate; that would be the last straw.  In that case, I’ll find something else to do on Election Day.

The Nobel Peace Prize Continues It’s Distinguished Run…

Of recognizing people who get it dead wrong. The 2007 Prize for Global Warming is turning out to be no exception

Despite the sleight of hand as now referring to the ‘Glabal Warming’ problem as ‘Climate Change’, it is still all based on the assumption the Earth is warming due to our excessive production of Carbon Dioxide. Therefore, only warming events correlate; every attempt to associate non-warming events is nothing more than politically-correct mumbo jumbo.

Well, maybe they should ask the people of China their thoughts on Global Warming; they’re in the middle of their worst winter in 50 years.

How about the the people in Jerusalem or Baghdad as they play in the accumulated snow for the first time in recent memory? Maybe the people in America’s Midwest would have some thought on how hot the planet is becoming. Maybe they’d be willing to switch off their use of energy for awhile to cool the planet down some (like 0.0000001 degrees).

There is no question that- all other factors being equal- that a buildup of carbon dioxide in an atmosphere will cause a planet to trap more heat than would occur without it. Problem is, all things are not being equal.

1) Solar radiation: As the primary factor responsible for warming the planet, it needs to be reviewed for impact. In the short-term, there are solar events going on that correlate to the current weather, and portends a longer period of cooling.

2) Biological effect: Earth is not a ‘normal’ planet; never forget, while many of our pollutant are inherently poisonous, carbon dioxide is essentially plant food. As a biosphere, Earth will attempt to compensate. Especially if human beings continue to give in to their evil nature and plant trees. Forests cover approximately one-third of the earth’s land area, and account for two-thirds of global photosynthesis; they also tend to respond rapidly to increased carbon dioxide.

Long before the current ‘green movement’, human beings developed a tendency to plant more trees wherever they go; fruit trees, shade trees, ornamental trees. We stubbornly plant them in places they’ve never been before wherever we set foot. Fly over my home turf in North Texas- an area that was once prairie- and the thing that most clearly marks the populated areas are the trees.

Of course, we produce more carbon dioxide then we compensate for with tree planting, but Mother Nature is compensating. natural forests are increasing in biomass and water-born plants are fixing greater amounts of carbon dixide.

(And please don’t bring up injecting carbon dioxide directly into the ocean to spead the process; everything is toxic at high concentrations and killing off a patch of ocean with the resulting carbonic acid is dumb. Nautal equilibrium over the entire oceans exposed surface is more effective and less damaging. Of course, it doesn’t provide employment for eco-engineers who feel we must do something!)

While we are unquestioning fouling the earth in many other ways (including everything else produced from burning fossil fuels), chasing the supposed demon of carbon dioxide as a causation for global warming only distracts from ways we can really improve things.

Update: Sadly, the curse of the Peace Prize strikes again. In this case, the fellow seems to have been a proper recipient; hopefully, he’ll pull through and all the attackers will caught.

Update: Gateway Pundit, always a good read, is keeping a running tally of Mother Nature laughing at Al Gore this winter.   And my relatives in Minnesota would like to punch Al Gore’s lights out right about now.

Update II: Beside supporting the theory of the Nobel Peace Prize curse, this is actually something to be concerned about.

No wonder there is so much talk recently about global cooling. I certainly hope that’s wrong, because a Dalton type solar minimum would be very bad for our world economy and agriculture. NASA GISS published a release back in 2003 that agrees with the commonly accepted idea that long period trends in solar activity do affect our climate by changing the Total Solar Irradiance (TSI).I’d advocate more and bigger SUVs and coal-fired plants, but I doubt it would have enough impact to counter this.

Update III: Good Lord!  Snow… in San Diego??  And Arctic ice is back and thick (making these National Wildlife people look pretty silly), with record lows across the U.S.  

Please, Nobel Committee; take Goracle’s prize back and save us all!