Politics & policy

 

It's time to fire, Commander

We've detailed our problems with John McCain but his distinguished military service isn't among them. Five-plus years as a POW in the Hanoi Hilton is an unfathomable hell to most civilians, but the anguish and torture he suffered while serving his country is enough to earn anyone's respect.

 

Except the Democrats, of course, who don't respect anything because they stand for nothing. More on that in a moment.

 

As a Navy pilot from a distinguished military family, Senator McCain knows the United States rules of engagement: We never fire unless fired upon, then we shoot to kill. But the presumptive Republican nominee's temper also is a matter of record, which leads us to ask: When is Mount McCain going to blow?

 

If not after the deplorable comments by Wesley Clark -- the florid ex-general and Obamatron dubbed "Ashley Wilkes" by Rush Limbaugh -- one must wonder. Blabbing on one of the insipid Sunday shows, Clark said McCain's military service didn't necessarily make him fit to be Commander-in-Chief; that getting shot down didn't demonstrate much national security savvy; that McCain's forced participation in a North Vietnamese propaganda film should call his integrity into question; blah, blah, blah.

 

We could say much about Clark's character (or lack thereof), since he's been a Clinton shill for years and the architect of a carpet-bombing campaign from 20,000 feet that caused uncounted civilians casualties in the Bosnian war. But for any soldier of any rank to ever question the integrity of a fellow GI who spent a half-decade in an NVA prison camp is simply beneath contempt.

 

Yet if McCain isn't going to come out swinging, why should we?

 

McCain loves his maverick/bipartisan mantle but doesn't understand how he's been used by his Democrat "colleagues." The libs and their lapdogs in the drive-by media give him ink and airtime only because he tweaks his own party's nose, and they'll shove him in the trench whenever it's convenient -- which will be early and often during his run against The Chosen One.

 

We've been waiting for the ex-pilot and patriot to realize he's been taking a knife to a gunfight and respond accordingly. It's time to shoot to kill, Senator. Your country needs you. Again.

 

 

The McGovern Democrats and another HIHF*

*Heard it Here First

 

As Hillary and Obama continue trolling for votes, it's time to revisit one HIHF and gleefully issue a few more.

 

It was November of 2006, whilst watching the off-year elections with good friend (and conservative protege) Donovan Stockton, when I asserted that Hillary Clinton would NOT be the nominee of her party for president. That this bucked the so-called conventional wisdom should be no surprise, since that's what we do here.

 

Anyway, I said she wouldn't get the nod for 3 main reasons:

 

1. She's eminently unlikable

2. She has no core political philosophy

3. She's eminently unlikable

 

We've already detailed nos. 1 & 3, but let's discuss no. 2. Back when Hillary was in coronation mode, her strategy was to track right of center on national security and fiscal issues to attract moderate support while winking to the red-meat crowd on the fringe left. Obama's surprising popularity then forced her to veer hard left much sooner than anticipated, and now she and Obama are locked in a steel cage match to see who can out-liberal the other.

 

Truth is, they do this for the same reason I made the 2006 prediction -- because that's where all their money lives. The Democrats have been in this vicious cycle for years, unable to find the precarious balance between satisfying their kook left fundraising base and cultivating the moderate/conservative image needed to win national elections. It's why they're always pretending to be something else, because the truth is too repulsive for most American voters and a big loser for them.

 

But with Hillary staying in the race until this summer's bitter (and potentially destructive) end, it's become and all-out sprint to see who can make Karl Marx look like a John Birch Society pledge.

 

As such -- here's the next HIHF -- the Dems are headed for a landslide defeat of McGovernesque proportions in November. Every day Hillary stays in (Thank you El Rushbo and Operation Chaos) brings another absurd socialist initiative from either side that even the mainstream press can no longer conceal. As such, their national support is sinking like the Bismarck in the deep North Atlantic.

 

And don't believe all this hooey about disaffected Republicans falling in love with Obama or considering Hillary, either. The bitterness of the Dems' bare-knuckles campaign will lead at least 25 percent of the loser's supporters to vote for John McCain in the fall.

 

Ironically, McCain could be a huge winner even without sewing up the conservative base most thought he'd need to survive. If so, the Drive-by media -- dejected over yet another Democrat presidential loss -- will insist that "only a moderate Republican could attract this kind of broad-based support," blah blah blah (HIHF No. 3). Don't buy that either.

 

Fact is, a huge McCain win will not be a triumph of moderate politics but a decisive rejection of the unvarnished, hate-filled anti-American liberalism now on fully wretched display by the Democrats. Call it an inverse triumph of conservative politics or call it fate. Just remember that you Heard it Here First.

 

 

Better watch your back, Barry

Time to go to the matresses, folks. It's bad enough that Barack Obama sat in a pew for 20 years while pastor Jeremiah "Bullfrog" Wright spewed militant, racist, anti-American hate from the pulpit. It's even worse that Obama's response to Wright's vitriol was a disingenuous "national conversation on race," which was like an arsonist giving a primer on fire safety.

 

But Wright just crossed a bridge too far while slurring Italians as "garlic noses" who ran an "apartheid society" while crucifying Christ "Roman style." While this proves he's an equal opportunity creep, it should be interesting to see how long the heavy Rev continues to breath air.

 

Wright and his kook-fringe flock may have forgotten, but last time I checked there was still a Mafia presence in Chicago. Obama loves to regale his cult following with tall tales of his rough 'n' tumble upbringing in Chitown politics, but he seems to forget that La Cosa Nostra predated black liberation theology as a potent force in the ol' Windy City.

 

Just because Al Capone is no longer shacked up in the Lexington Hotel doesn't mean his descendants can't read a newspaper.

 

Peeing all over "white people" is one thing, but disparaging Italians who have suffered a century of discrimination in relative silence is seriously stuck on stupid. Wright and his political puppet may want to have someone else start their cars for the foreseeable future.

 

Until then, we'll consider both to be dead to us. As Michael Corleone said after being betrayed by his brother in The Godfather: "Fredo, you're nothing to me now. You're not a brother; you're not a friend. Nothing."

 

Obamanon®

There are many ways to dissect the Barack Obama phenomenon, but the most interesting angle is what it reveals about the Clintons.

 

Since the fraudulent 90s, this observer has insisted that support for the Clintons was a media-induced mirage -- 10 miles wide but never more than a half-inch deep. The American left created the myth of the Clintons' popularity for two simple reasons:

 

1. As the most morally challenged politicians in our lifetime, they make liberals comfortable with their own considerable faults.
2. As "co-presidents," they managed to beat a Republican twice to win the White House -- though never with even 50 percent of the popular vote.

 

That's right, folks. The same Democrats who still wail over George W. Bush's "stolen" 2000 victory over Algore conveniently forget that Bill Clinton still has yet to get as many votes as did W. in 2000 or 2004. Francisco Franco is still dead, too.

 

The libs loved Billary as long as it meant control of the Oval Orifice, but were always uncomfortable with their scandals, cronies and vice grip over the pursestrings over at DNC central. (Has Howard Dean's face surfaced on a milk carton yet?) As classic front-runners, they wanted to flee the Clintons but couldn't do so until a perceived winner came along.

 

Enter Obama, completely devoid of substance but charming enough to intrigue the party faithful. As a political metrosexual, he's gained ground among all major demographic constituencies. As an allegedly black candidate, he makes liberals -- obsessed with identity politics -- feel good about supporting him.

 

And since he'd compare favorably with a 71-year-old Republican (John McCain) in the fall, he has a legitimate shot at winning the general election -- more so than Hillary, and by a substantial margin if the polls are accurate.

 

So while we know Obama speaks in emotionally compelling bromides, and can engage an audience with his "hope, change, [lather, rinse, repeat]" mantra, his support primarily comes from those escaping the 15-year reign of the Clinton crime family. And lest we forget the true Clinton legacy (non-blue dress division), let us restate:

 

When Bill Clinton was elected in 1992, the Democrats controlled the White House, Senate and House of Representatives. When he left office in 2000, Republicans controlled the White House, Senate and House of Representatives (until 2006) and have maintained the presidency ever since.

 

Meanwhile, the Democrats are bracing for a 1968 Chicago-style showdown at their summer convention, where the Clintons will stop at nothing -- including destroying the party -- to keep themselves in power. The delegates know it's coming and hope a savior can stop it.

 

And that, my friends, is what the Obamanon is all about.

 

 

Bad news for Barack 

I know what you're thinking: "But Consigliere -- Obama just crushed Hillary in the South Carolina primary. How can this possibly be bad news for him?"

 

That's why we're here, folks. Winning is good but the way the Clintons forced him into it surely is not. Let us explain ... and please don't try this at home.

 

You should know (because we told you) the Clintons are self-absorbed, conniving, amoral psychopaths. At best. But you may not know they're also devoted followers of Saul Alinsky, a 60s New Left radical who preached a toxic gospel of nonviolent revolution based on Leninist theories of divide and conquer.

 

Alinsky's twist on Lenin also involved isolating your enemy by polarizing his support through distortion, lies and ridicule, thereby neutralizing his/her advantage. Which brings us to Obama.

 

His popularity is based not on policy (he's another typical liberal) but on fuzzy odes to unity, harmony, bipartisanship, healing and other New Age nostrums. Obama is essentially the male Oprah -- which is why she loves him, by the way -- who appeals to those who think our nation's problems (and enemies) will disappear if we all just learn to get along.

 

It's nonsense, but popular enough to have made him a formidable presidential candidate who skunked Hillary in Iowa and ran a very close second in New Hampshire -- both lily-white liberal states that should have been runaway wins for Mrs. Clinton. Her status as the Inevitable Coronated Democratic Nominee jeopardized, the thugs at Clinton Inc. promptly ordered another hit.

 

Knowing Obama was the "unity" candidate who ran well in white states, they set out to make him the "black" candidate who can't win a general election -- especially in the south. So Hillary and husband [hitman] Bill started using racial codewords, saying Obama's candidacy was a "fairy tale," that he "hasn't done the necessary spadework" to be president, or that Martin Luther King Jr.'s civil rights dream would've gone nowhere without a (white) president (LBJ) to make it law.

 

In other words, the Clintons started a race war to get blacks to rally behind Obama, thereby painting him not as a candidate with wide appeal -- which he was -- but as a niche favorite only of the black community with no chance to win in November -- which he's going to become if he doesn't wake up to the street fight he's in.

 

The early returns aren't promising. Obama still thinks his big win repudiates racial politics when in fact it was a direct result of them. The Clintons are smirking their way to Super Tuesday, where their whispering campaign will resonate in states largely composed of white voters who aren't uncomfortable with segregationist views. Hitman Bill already has compared Obama to Jesse Jackson, Clintonspeak for "black loser."

 

The mainstream press will continue its slavish devotion to Clinton Inc., either oblivious to or brainwashed by this appalling agitprop. Any Republican who dared try this would be swinging from the Capitol flagpole.

 

Disgusting as it is, ol' Alinsky knew what he was doing. Obama can either continue to pretend he's not under attack and become further isolated, or start responding and be accused of identity politics by the Clintons -- masters of tarring opponents with their own dirty deeds.

 

As such, Illinois' favorite son better start practicing Chicago-style politics as detailed by Sean Connery in The Untouchables: "He pulls a knife, you pull a gun. He sends one of yours to the hospital, you send one of his to the morgue. That's the Chicago way."

 

Until then, it'll be good news/bad news for Barack. And now you know why.

 

 

Billary rides again

There isn't enough BS repellant to resist the rhetorical compost routinely spread by Bill Clinton, but we can't let his phony ode to Hillary pass without a squirt or two from the ol' aerosol can. Please remember to don your oxygen mask before attempting to save other passengers.

 

The nonsense our ex-Prevaricator in Chief dispensed while stumping for his wife in Iowa is instructive only for one important point -- that nothing the Clintons say or do is spontaneous, heartfelt or remotely sincere. Every move, every word, every theme is carefully focus-grouped to bathe their sycophants in what I call emotionally compelling nonsense -- designed to produce an visceral reaction while disarming the listener's ability to critically analyze what they're saying.

 

In this case, he knows Hillary's negative poll numbers still hover at 50 percent, the kiss of death for anyone hoping to occupy the White House. And this is before her consistent rhetorical fumbling during the last two Democrat "debates," highlighted by endorsing N.Y. Gov. Eliot Spitzer's scheme to issue drivers licenses to illegal immigrants. They don't call it Motor-Voter for nothing, my friends.

 

So when he says she's the love of his life, that he marvels at her intellect, that she's had a profound effect on the lives of millions, it's nothing but a desparate ploy to humanize a woman who has all the curb appeal of a '58 Edsel.

 

There's no place in Clinton Inc. for anything approaching genuine affection, folks. They love each other like Clemenza loved piano wire in The Godfather -- as a tool to accomplish a set of tasks before eliminating the opposition. Lest we forget that most Clinton "friends" spent time in jail, are under indictment or still dead.

 

Isn't it a bit fishy that he suddenly gushes over her after 32 years of marriage? Where was all this maudlin sentiment during his decades of raw ambition, fatback scandals and bimbo eruptions? A careful reading of the text shows he purposely hit (and spun) every negative touch point that's been flushing down her campaign faster than one of Algore's enviro-friendly toilets.

 

And she's still yet to face a genuinely tough question from her Gunga Dins in the mainstream press, despite all the mau-mauing about the media pulling a Russert.

 

The dirty little secret is that Hillary Clinton is viewed sympathetically only when she purposely acts like a victim -- of Bill's many trysts, of supposedly unfair press coverage, or of the "old boys club" against which she's allegedly campaigning. This couldn't be more condescending, sexist and demeaming to women, particularly from one who professes to carry the feminist torch.

 

Such tactics got some traction while she had the cushion of being First Lady or a carpetbagging senator in one of the country's most liberal states, but the intense glare of a presidential campaign melts a wax mask like Vincent Price in the House of Usher.

 

As for Bill, his latest dirge reminds us why he's the only elected U.S. president ever to be impeached ... a dubious honor he never seems tired of earning.

 

 

 

 Create your own free wiki!Support CommunityPublic, not yet premium Privacy Policy RSS