Showing posts with label Joe Biden. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Joe Biden. Show all posts

02 October 2009

Checking In With Tim Pawlenty

All you guys who hate social conservatives (Mike Huckabee), conservatives whose positions have changed/evolved over the years (Mitt Romney) and otherwise smart people who occasionally say dumb things (Sarah Palin--but you still love Average-Joe Biden!), are going to love Tim Pawlenty.
Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty has been quietly assembling the blueprint of a presidential campaign and will announce Thursday the support of a group of high-level political strategists and donors, complemented by a handful of top new media consultants, POLITICO has learned.

Pawlenty, under the radar of D.C.’s political community, has locked up some of the key operatives who engineered then-President George W. Bush’s reelection campaign — a significant feat for a little-known Midwestern politician.

The moves underscore, and will lend credence to, the emerging belief among many establishment Republicans that Pawlenty is becoming the sole viable alternative to former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, a potential Republican primary rival. The Minnesota governor has even gone so far as to contact some of Romney’s former supporters.
Congratulations to Liz Mair, a friend of this blog, who has joined Gov. Pawlenty's PAC.


If you have tips, questions, comments or suggestions, email me at lybberty@gmail.com.

18 May 2009

Sarah Palin vs. Obama (or Biden) [UPDATED]

Take your pick.

I often suggest this contest to people who critique Governor Palin for her verbal gaffes and miscues--as though they were unique to her. The Contest: I'll match 2 Youtube clips of either President Obama or VP Biden saying something stupid for every 1 clip you find of Sarah Palin.

No one ever takes me up on this challenge.

You know why? Because everyone knows in their heart of hearts that she's no more gaffe-prone than either of these guys (or liberal gals, for that matter) and that they hold her to a different standard because she's both a woman and conservative.

Now lets play another of my fav games--compare & contrast.

In his latest column, Victor Davis Hansen has done something very clever. He has replaced Obama with Palin (as President) and had the media react to the many dumb things Obama has done in his first 100 days as though Sarah Palin had done them.

WORSE THAN 'NUCULAR'
ABC’s Katie Couric summed up the general disappointment with the president’s communication skills. “I tried to warn the American people in that interview a few years back what they would get if they voted for her. Let’s face it: She’s a walking embarrassment. I mean just count ’em up: The mayor of Wasilla thinks Austrians speak some lingo called ‘Austrian.’ Then she tries her hand at Spanish and comes up with some concoction, ‘Cinco de Cuatro.’ Next thing she’ll walk into the window of the Oval Office and expect it to open — oops, she’s already done that. No wonder that when her Teleprompter stalls, she shuts her mouth until it catches up. I’m surprised she managed to get sworn in. And did she think that tasteless ‘Special Olympics’ slur was funny? Or making fun of octogenarian Nancy Reagan’s séances? No wonder Wanda Sykes feels at home.”
This juxtaposition of Obama/Palin, while having the media respond as though she were the one who had done whatever very clearly highlights the different standard to which the one is held vs. the other. One is beloved of the media--indeed, is the media's Beloved--while the other is the exact opposite of all their ideal for a woman--conservative, pro-life, with a family, etc., etc.

UPDATE 20 May 2.28pm BST: Jansen G. writes:
The reason there are more youtube clips of Obama or Biden gaffes than Palin is b/c Obama and Biden have been in the limelight far longer than Palin.
OK, fair enough. For the purposes of this challenge, I will limit the scope to the following period: The day she was announced--29 August 2008--to the day of the election--4 November 2008.

Based on my preliminary Youtube search (on the remote chance someone actually decided to take me up on the challenge), I suspect I'll still be able to double every Palin-gaffe with two of either Biden or Obama.


If you have tips, questions, comments or suggestions, email me at lybberty@gmail.com.

03 November 2008

Obama: Generous With Other People's Money

[ed. note: in case you missed this because I ran it in the middle of the day on a Saturday]

Remember how I asserted that conservatives--especially the religious type--were more generous than their liberal progressive counterparts? I pointed out the obvious fact that liberals would rather be generous with government handouts than they would with their own money to the guy on the street.

Yeah, this has been empirically proven.

I'm sure there are exceptions to this data--specifically, the liberal-progressive readers of this blog. I'm sure they're very generous with their money.

But this isn't just true empirically, there's also anecdotal evidence very close to home, as it were, in the person of Joe Biden.

Joe pays practically nothing in charity. Just read Byron York:
In nine out of the ten years for which tax returns were released, the Bidens gave less than $400 to charity; in the tenth year, 2007, when Biden was running for president, they gave $995 out of an adjusted gross income of $319,853.
And these guys, Joe & Barack, have the gall to call Americans who want to pay fewer taxes, "selfish."

As reader Branden B. points out, this latest "progressive critique of the capitalist system" is, well, pure socialism.
It's worse than I thought. He isn't a liberal with socialist tendencies. He is the "socialism" Wikipedia entry himself.
Give your money to Barack & Joe and they will spread it around "fairly" and "equally," as they see fit.

Another reader, reminds me of some great literature. Their comments in full:
Jake, interestingly enough after sending you that article I went into the library and picked up my old copy of Ayn Rand's "The Virtue of Selfishness" and this is the first thing I read which I highlighted 5 years ago:

"Socialism is not a movement of the people. It is a movement of the intellectuals, originated, led and controlled by the intellectuals, carried by them out of their stuffy ivory towers into those bloody fields of practice where they unite with their allies and executors: the thugs."

Who would you categorize as the two separate and distinct demographic groups that are voting (read fanatical) for Obama?

Let me continue with Ms. Rand and you will see an errily similar motive and comparison with one of our presidential candidates......

"What, then, is the motive of such intellectuals? Power-lust. Power-lust--as a manifestation of helplessness, of self-loathing and of the desire for the unearned. The desire for the unearned has two aspects: the unearned in matter and the unearned in spirit. These two aspects are necessarily inter-related, but a man's desire may be focused predominantly on one or the other. The desire for the unearned in spirit is the more destructive for the two and the more corrupt. It is a desire for unearned greatness; it is expressed (but not defined) by the foggy murk of the term "prestige."

Compare and contrast the earned greatness of a man like John McCain v the unearned prestige of Obama.
(emphasis in original)

Can we make it more plain than that?

Obama bribes the poor with the rich's money, using the "intellectuals" in the ivory tower for legitimacy (believe me, I see it every day) and the thugs in the street to try to get himself elected.


If you have tips, questions, comments or suggestions, email me at lybberty@gmail.com.

01 November 2008

Obama: Generous With Other People's Money

Remember how I asserted that conservatives--especially the religious type--were more generous than their liberal progressive counterparts? I pointed out the obvious fact that liberals would rather be generous with government handouts than they would with their own money to the guy on the street.

Yeah, this has been empirically proven.

I'm sure there are exceptions to this data--specifically, the liberal-progressive readers of this blog. I'm sure they're very generous with their money.

But this isn't just true empirically, there's also anecdotal evidence very close to home, as it were, in the person of Joe Biden.

Joe pays practically nothing in charity. Just read Byron York:
In nine out of the ten years for which tax returns were released, the Bidens gave less than $400 to charity; in the tenth year, 2007, when Biden was running for president, they gave $995 out of an adjusted gross income of $319,853.
And these guys, Joe & Barack, have the gall to call Americans who want to pay fewer taxes, "selfish."

As reader Branden B. points out, this latest "progressive critique of the capitalist system" is, well, pure socialism.
It's worse than I thought. He isn't a liberal with socialist tendencies. He is the "socialism" Wikipedia entry himself.
Give your money to Barack & Joe and they will spread it around "fairly" and "equally," as they see fit.

Another reader, reminds me of some great literature. Their comments in full:
Jake, interestingly enough after sending you that article I went into the library and picked up my old copy of Ayn Rand's "The Virtue of Selfishness" and this is the first thing I read which I highlighted 5 years ago:

"Socialism is not a movement of the people. It is a movement of the intellectuals, originated, led and controlled by the intellectuals, carried by them out of their stuffy ivory towers into those bloody fields of practice where they unite with their allies and executors: the thugs."

Who would you categorize as the two separate and distinct demographic groups that are voting (read fanatical) for Obama?

Let me continue with Ms. Rand and you will see an errily similar motive and comparison with one of our presidential candidates......

"What, then, is the motive of such intellectuals? Power-lust. Power-lust--as a manifestation of helplessness, of self-loathing and of the desire for the unearned. The desire for the unearned has two aspects: the unearned in matter and the unearned in spirit. These two aspects are necessarily inter-related, but a man's desire may be focused predominantly on one or the other. The desire for the unearned in spirit is the more destructive for the two and the more corrupt. It is a desire for unearned greatness; it is expressed (but not defined) by the foggy murk of the term "prestige."

Compare and contrast the earned greatness of a man like John McCain v the unearned prestige of Obama.
(emphasis in original)

Can we make it more plain than that?

Obama bribes the poor with the rich's money, using the "intellectuals" in the ivory tower for legitimacy (believe me, I see it every day) and the thugs in the street to try to get himself elected.


If you have tips, questions, comments or suggestions, email me at lybberty@gmail.com.

29 October 2008

"I'm Feeling Lucky"

Bret Stephens latest column asks the crucial question, "Will Obama Gut Defense?" This is a very serious and important question.

Like so many other things with Obama, candid Barack says things that are very different what you hear from candidate Barack.
When it comes to defense, there are two Barack Obamas in this race. There is the candidate who insists, as he did last year in an article in Foreign Affairs, that "a strong military is, more than anything, necessary to sustain peace"; pledges to increase the size of our ground forces by 65,000 soldiers and 27,000 Marines while providing them with "first-rate equipment, armor, incentives and training"; and seems to be as gung-ho for a surge in Afghanistan as he was opposed to the one in Iraq.

And then there is the candidate who early this year recorded an ad for Caucus for Priorities, a far-left outfit that wants to cut 15% of the Pentagon's budget in favor of "education, healthcare, job training, alternative energy development, world hunger [and] deficit reduction."

"Thanks so much for the Caucus for Priorities for the great work you've been doing," says Mr. Obama in the ad, before promising to "cut tens of billions of dollars in wasteful spending . . . slow our development of future combat systems . . . not develop new nuclear weapons."

Joe Biden also cut an ad for the group that was even more emphatic: "I'll tell you what we cannot afford . . . a trillion-dollar commitment to 'Star Wars,' new nuclear weapons, a thousand-ship Navy, the F-22 Raptor."

Stephens puts it best, calling a vote for Obama the political equivalent of clicking on Google's "I'm Feeling Lucky" search option.

Like Gump's box of chocolates, you never know what craptastic coconut & rum-filled chocolate you're going to get.


If you have tips, questions, comments or suggestions, email me at lybberty@gmail.com.

04 October 2008

Iowahawk On Gwen Ifill

Earlier this week, conservative funnyman, Iowahawk, turned his sights on Gwen Ifill, moderator of the Vice Presidential Debate. The results were, predictably, hilarious. A sample:
Ifill Ethics Commission Clears Ifill

By Gwen Ifill
PBS Chief Political Correspondent
and Gwen Ifill
President, Ifill Center for Media Ethics
and Gwen Ifill
Editor, BarackBeat Fanzine


WASHINGTON - As expected, a blue ribbon panel from the Ifill Center for Media Ethics cleared award-winning political journalist Gwen Ifill of all charges today, ending a lengthy 20 minute investigation into "ethics" charges that most observers believe were motivated by politics and racism. Ifill, like dynamic groundbreaking President-in-Waiting Barack Obama, is Black. The complete exoneration clears the way for Ifill to moderate the Vice Presidential debate tonight between respected Senate veteran Joe Biden and former beauty pageant loser Sarah Palin.

"I would like to thank Ms.Ifill for her complete cooperation into this unnecessary politically-motivated witch hunt," said Commission Chairperson Gwen Ifill. "On behalf of the entire panel, I would like to offer my sincere apologies for dragging her in and wasting her valuable time on the basis of such obviously flimsy and bogus allegations."

Displaying her famous grace, Ifill said she harbored no ill will toward the inquiry.

Like so many other situations, all liberals/Obamaniacs have to do to understand is think about what their response would be if the shoe were on the other foot. What if, for example, Brit Hume were the moderator and he were writing a book about John McCain to be released on inauguration day? How would you feel about that?

That's what I thought.


If you have tips, questions, comments or suggestions, email me at lybberty@gmail.com.

03 October 2008

Joe Biden, BS Artist

Jonah Goldberg on Joe Biden:
What struck me the most about the debate – and it probably helped having quintessential Obamaphiles in the room – was how Biden’s “gravitas” is derived almost entirely from the fact that he can lie with absolute passion and conviction. He just plain made stuff up tonight. I read a long list tonight in my debate with Beinart here at Wash U, we can visit the details tomorrow.

Just a few: Flatly asserting that Obama never said he’d meet with Achmenijad; that absolute nonsense about spending more in a month in Iraq than we’ve spent in Afghanistan (“let me say it again,” he said as if he was hammering home a real fact); the bit about McCain voting with Obama on raising taxes; his vote in favor of the war etc.

It’s amazing how the impulse to see Biden as the more qualified and serious guy stems almost entirely from his ability to be a convincing b.s. artist. I’m not saying Palin was always honest or unrehearsed, but when she offers up a catchphrase or a talking point, you can tell. When Biden spews up a warm fog of deceitful gassbaggery the response seems to be “what a great grasp of the issues he has!”

His ability, nay his eagerness, to fake not only the “facts” but his sincerity is so shameless many pundits seem either mesmerized by it or scared to call him on it. I’d call his fakery passive aggressive except it’s actually just aggressive aggressive. Beyond being a tool of trial lawyers, I never saw much similarity between Biden and John Edwards, but tonight I was really struck by how alike the two are. Edwards fakes being an everyman, and Biden does too. But his real fraud is intellectual seriousness. He talks like an intellectually mature person, but that’s all it is – talk
(emphasis added)


If you have tips, questions, comments or suggestions, email me at lybberty@gmail.com.

02 October 2008

Programming Note: Liveblogging The VP Debate

Back by popular demand (and because I enjoy it), I'll be live-blogging tonight's Vice Presidential debate between Governor Sarah Palin and Senator Joe Biden. Tune in for snark-free commentary and analysis of the debate as it happens!

The debate kicks off at 7pm. I'll start by giving a little pre-debate analysis of the TV coverage at 630pm MDT and carry on with typical analysis of the debate itself at 7pm. Be sure to send your emails with observations and commentary to the email listed below and I'll do my best to plug them into the live-blog.

Thanks, and in the tradition of David Axelrod's famous grassroots (read: astroturfing), tell 10 of your friends.


If you have tips, questions, comments or suggestions, email me at lybberty@gmail.com.

18 September 2008

Lynn Forester De Rothschild: Backing McCain

When it comes to appealing to Hillary Clinton voters, I tend to subscribe to the following train of thought: The easiest ones to peel off are socially conservative Latinos and blue collar Reagan Democrats. These are the ones who viewed (and continue to do so) Barack Obama skeptically. Whether you think Hillary's woman-of-the-people was a put on or genuine, the shtick worked with these voters.

That isn't to say that appealing to Hillary's feminist supporters is without merit. No doubt genuine feminists--those who want to see a woman succeed regardless of her political ideology--will support Senator McCain and Governor Palin.

Lynn Forester De Rothschild is one of those--the fabled Hillary supporter who is now backing McCain.

(h/t Gatewaypundit)


If you have tips, questions, comments or suggestions, email me at lybberty@gmail.com.

29 August 2008

Sarah Palin Is Awesome

I woke up this morning to a phone call from my father informing me that John McCain was set to name Governor Sarah Palin as his running mate. That got my attention.

Over the last few months, I had heard Palin's name mentioned frequently, though not loudly, as a potential VP. I personally preferred Romney and thought he could have helped in New Hampshire, Michigan, Colorado, and Nevada, but I understood the risk of giving social/religious conservatives another reason to stay home on election day.

So yeah, I understood the positives and negatives of Romney for VP. I was persuaded that the campaign was too smart to select Lieberman, would never tap Charlie Crist or Tom Ridge, and though I might like it, Colin Powell was unlikely to get the nod. The people I read and whose opinions I trust all suggested Tim Pawlenty. He's a successful governor and a social and fiscal conservative and importantly, hails from a battleground state--Minnesota, a state McCain has an outside chance of winning. But I don't want to overstate the state-specific electoral boost of VP candidates. It didn't work out so well for Edwards or Gore.

But back to Sarah Palin. This woman is awesome. You've read it all elsewhere, but it bears repeating here. She was a mayor. Compare mayor to the nebulous community organizer. Does anyone even know what a community organizer does? More specifically, as CO, does anyone know what Obama did?

But folks, that's not all. She chaired a reformist, investigative committee which put her in a position to take on the corrupt elements in her own party. This wasn't a partisan thing. She saw corruption and she rooted it out.

And then, she became governor. As governor, she has run an incredibly tight financial ship that does not kowtow to special interest and broke up the corrupt Republican political machine.

Governor Sarah Palin, Republicans' #2, has more executive experience and is far more prepared to be President than Democrats' #1, Barack Obama. So Biden has more foreign policy experience than Sarah Palin? So what? Biden is not the Democrat's Presidential nominee, Obama is. And he has no executive experience and little to no foreign policy experience. Sarah Palin would be a better POTUS than either Biden or Obama.

This raises what is, I think, a ridiculously stupid line of argument: that Sarah Palin is inexperienced.

Pot, meet kettle.

This is an argument that makes itself. Conservative pundits don't even have to argue this one. Joe American is going to hear the reactionary Obama surrogates make this argument and say to themselves, "community organizer is criticizing mayor & Governor Palin?" Seriously? Seriously?!

And this woman walks the walk. Pro-life, she gave birth to a child with Downs syndrome.

As a woman, she will peel off the women who wanted to vote for a woman and are not ideological. This eats away at Democrats' traditional advantage among women.

When Obama picked Biden and McCain picked Palin, the outside-the-beltway narrative was ceded to Republicans. The Democrats, with Biden on the ticket, are the ultimate insiders. At a time when the public is dissatisfied with Washington, this was a mistake and huge advantage to McCain/Palin.

Importantly, Governor Palin fires up the base. This was the one concern shared by all conservative pundits--that social conservatives would stay home. No longer. My survey of the conservative interweb shows a base that, maybe for the first time this election, is ready to work hard to get McCain/Palin elected.

Not to be overlooked, adding Governor Palin to the ticket neutralizes, to some degree, the Democrats' narrative that they are "making history."

So are the Republicans.


If you have tips, questions, comments or suggestions, email me at lybberty@gmail.com.

StatCounter