Change. Creepy, creepy change.

When I was in 6th grade, I had a teacher who was an African American. I remember singing negro spirituals in that class, and feeling very awkward about it.
You see, there weren't any black kids in our class. So this wasn't about the teacher helping someone to find their identity. It was about what the teacher wanted us to do.

Even though I was in 6th grade, I understood that it was wrong for the teacher to have us sing from her point of view.
Similarly, I look at this video and I'm appalled.



When I watch it, I wonder how many of those kids know what they're singing about. I mean, the one girl is talking about how Obama will help bring freedom to the world. Despite the fact that he opposed the surge. Ahem.
The point being that no kid of that age should be used for politics.

If you read the text on the YouTube page, you find out how this video was created:

Inspired by ideas raised at a grassroots Obama fundraiser, a music teacher, Kathy Sawada, and the children composed and rehearsed the songs in less than two weeks.

Let's parse that sentence, shall we?
At an Obama fundraiser, they tried to figure out ways to spread the message. One of the party faithful was a woman named Kathy, who also happened to teach kids music. She co-authored the songs with the kids.
I hope it was the kids who wrote the lyrics. I'd hate to think that the teacher came up with this:

Now's the moment, lift each voice to sing
Sing with all your heart!
For our children, for our families,
Nations all joined as one.
Sing for joy and sing abundant peace,
Courage, justice, hope!
Sing together, hold each precious hand,
Lifting each other up;
Sing for vision, sing for unity,
Lifting our hearts to Sing!

Ack. My teeth hurt.
Hey, if all of the nations joined as one sounds familiar, you'll probably like the ReMix of the song, which you can find here:

Its appropriately German.

Yeah, I know... tacky. But what do you call the original work? Artistic?
Let's face it.... its not just propaganda... but its creepy propaganda.
It reminded me of cults like this one:

That's from the cult of David Berg. He believed in free sex, free love, and freebies in general. Sound familiar?

Anyway, the good news is that we are about 30 days away from elections. If Obama is elected, all of these kids will be given electric blue "Hope" vests to march around in, and they will turn in anyone who doesn't want to affect change, not to mention those who don't want international unity.
That's how it always works.

It could be a landslide... for McCain!

Pollster Zogby has suggested that this upcoming election could end in a landslide... for McCain!
From the Democrat and Chronicle:

John Zogby, president of Zogby International, told a group of businesspeople today that it’s up to Democratic Sen. Barack Obama to convince voters to go with him. If he’s not successful, the country will likely vote for “a comfortable old shoe”, that being Republican Sen. John McCain.

I was surprised as anyone to read that.
Keep in mind that I predicted this a year ago. But for the past two days, pundits have been telling me that McCain is down in the polls.
Apparently, Zogby doesn't think that the polls tell the whole story.

Priorities: McCain vs. Obama

A financial crisis hits.

I'm presuming that by now, everyone knows the details. But there's one detail that I really want to hit on:
What did each candidate do?

Obama was contacted by a Republican friend of his (Senator Tom Coburn) who suggested that he and McCain issue a joint statement.
Obama - to his credit - called up McCain.

McCain agrees, and says that it would be a good idea. Then McCain goes a little further, and suggests that they suspend the debate so that they can both go to Washington and solve the crisis.

Now I know I need to back up this point, because some people have argued that McCain didn't suggest this to Obama in that initial phone call.
Here is a transcript of Obama's press conference from the 24th of September. A reporter asks Obama if McCain mentioned suspending the debates in that call:

OBAMA: Well, he, you know, he mentioned that he was intending potentially, he was going to fly to Washington and that he thought that perhaps we should suspend the debates. I thought this was something that was, that he was mulling over. Apparently, this was something that, you know, he was more decisive about in his own mind.

Which is true. McCain announced that he was suspending his campaign to take care of the financial crisis.
What was Obama's answer?
Obama's priority is that he wants to debate.

I can't think of anything in recent history that makes the priorities of two candidates clearer.
On one hand, you have McCain. When the other candidate reaches out to him and suggests something that is good for the country, he agrees.

Then you have Obama. When the other candidate suggests something that would be good for the country, Obama suggests that he wants to go to the debates.
What is Obama's priority here?
Himself.
His quest for the presidency.
That's what he thinks is most imporant. That people get to see him and hear him.

My dad told me a long time ago that there is a great difference between what people say and what they do, and that I should note the difference.
The difference has been noted.

Naomi Wolf goes batshit crazy

When I was in college, I was assigned "The Beauty Myth" by a professor. He knew that I took fashion photos, and I presume that he wanted me to get some kind of feminist primer.

I wrote a fairly critical review of the book. I don't remember what I said, but I remember saying that Naomi's arguments were both incoherent and illogical.

Somehow, Naomi has gotten less coherent, while still selling books.

Recently, Naomi wrote a commentary for the Huffington Post. She writes about how Sarah "Evita Palin" [her slander, not mine] would mean the 'coming' of the 'police state'.

I'd love for everyone to think about that for just a second.
Do you logically believe that Sarah Palin sounds like the kind of person who is for a police state?
Keep in mind, the primary criticism of Palin up until this point has been that Sarah fired her police chief because he supported a ban on concealed weapons for ordinary people, and because the police chief wanted bars to close earlier.

That's the woman who is going to push a police state?

From there, Naomi starts to lose her shit. -And I mean, she seriously loses it. She argues that people - she doesn't say who - are after her. I'm going to quote her, unedited.

Almost everyone I work with on projects related to this campaign for liberty has been experiencing computer harassment: emails are stripped, messages disappear. That's not all: people's bank accounts are being tampered with: wire transfers to banks vanish in midair. I personally keep opening bank accounts that are quickly corrupted by fraud. Money vanishes. Coworkers of mine have to keep opening new email accounts as old ones become infected. And most disturbingly to me personally is the mail tampering I have both heard of and experienced firsthand. My tax returns vanished from my mailbox. All my larger envelopes arrive ripped straight open apparently by hand.

Naomi goes on to argue that letters that she's sent to her daughter, at summer camp, have vanished. Apparently, the people who are harassing her really know how to get to a person. By stealing letters meant for summer camp. That's just... well... weird.

To Naomi's credit, I must have the same people after me. When I put money into my bank accounts, money vanishes. I have to keep putting more money in. Its really bizarre.

And e-mail? Don't get me started. I don't know who they are, but they keep putting a bunch of spam in my e-mail box. Obviously, I've been annoying those who would put us in a police state.
People like that old POW and the woman who fired her police chief because he wanted to restrict people from owning weapons.

Unfortunately, I missed Naomi's appearance tonight at the main library in my city. I realized she was going to be there too late. Which is too bad. Because I'd love to ask her a bunch of things in person. Like...

• Are you nuts? Do you actually believe that there is a secret cabal of Republicans who are harassing you?
• Why are you for Democrats, and against Republicans? Do you actually believe that the Republicans are trying to strip away your rights? Did you know that it was a Democrat who pushed labels on CDs with 'bad' lyrics? That it was a Democrat who pushed the V-chip in your TV? That it is Democrats who are pushing the 'Fairness Doctrine'?
• Are you nuts? No... really... like batshit crazy nuts? Do you believe that building 7 was bought down by the owner of the building on 9/11? Do you think that Katrina was caused by weather experiments? Do you think we faked going to the moon?

Naomi; I'm genuinely sad that I couldn't question you today. It would have been fun. Of course, you would have asked the security to take me away, because you'd worry that I'd put a new chip in your head. But it would still be fun.

A must-read story on a PR company and anti-Palin videos

Its really hard to sum up all of the fantastic reporting that The Jawa Report has done on this story. But I'll try.
Right after Palin was announced as the VP candidate, a video was produced attacking her. Links to that video were presented in various places, including a DailyKos diary, which was later deleted.

The Jawa Report followed the internet nuggets to the door of Winner & Associates; a PR firm that has donated to the Obama campaign and has significant ties to the same.

Again, read the report. I can't sum it up and do it justice. These guys really did their homework and connected the dots.

But if its all correct (and it seems to be), a PR company that has many connections to the Obama camp released a smear video on Palin, then tried to cover its tracks. A lot of tracks were deleted in the process, but the Jawa report kept them all.

Most recently, the Jawa Report published an update, where Ethan Winner (yes, Of Winner and Associates) claims that he made the video on his own, and that he planned on paying all of the expenses out of his own pocket.
If you read the rest of the report, you'll be saying 'bullshit' throughout his denial of impropriety, as I did.
Its important to note that the Jawa Report figured out that 'whoever' was posting those videos online was doing it during regular business hours... which would make it during the time when Ethan was supposedly working for Winner And Associates. Provided that he has regular business hours, of course.

I can't emphasize enough how good this report is. I took journalism classes. I know how much work it takes to follow all of the leads. If there was a Pulitzer for blogging, these guys should get it. Seriously.

What Republicans tried to do, to avoid this financial meltdown

I just wanted to remind everyone what Republicans tried to do in 2003, to avoid this financial meltdown.

According to this New York Times article, that I referenced earlier, the Bush White House proposed further regulation and oversight of Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae.
Democrats almost reflexively went against it... suggesting additional oversight would make it harder for people with poor credit to get loans. (By the way; its just logical not to loan money to people with bad credit. I have horrible credit, and its that way for a reason.)

I did my homework, and I looked up the bills that were proposed at the time.
If you look here you'll find senate bill 1508. Read the first part. Its says:

TITLE I--REFORM OF REGULATION OF FANNIE MAE AND FREDDIE MAC

That was a bill that Senator Hagel tried to get passed. If you look at the co-sponsors, you'll see McCain's name.

Apparently, the bill floundered in committee.

Here is bill HR 2575 which:

Amends the Housing and Community Development Act of 1992 to transfer supervisory and regulatory authority over specified government sponsored enterprises (Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac) to the Director of the Office of Housing Finance Supervision from the Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight of the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) and from the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development.

Requires the Director to ensure that the enterprises operate in a financially safe manner and remain adequately capitalized.

Sounds pretty smart. Doesn't it?

I lost tract of the third bill, but hopefully, you get the point. A bunch of Republicans tried to solve the problem, and they were blocked.

Anyway, I just wanted everyone to remember that as they read the financial news. Particularly when someone suggests that the Republicans don't care, or didn't try to do enough.

Cheney defines Bush Doctrine in 2001

There are about 5 different definitions of Bush Doctrine that I've found so far.
But this one is interesting to me, because it was said by VP Dick Cheney, shortly after September 11. Its from October 23rd of 2001.

Under the Bush doctrine, a regime that harbors or supports terrorists will be regarded as hostile to the United States of America.

The direct attack on our nation has put us on notice that the enemy is resourceful and ruthless. We have to assume there will be more attacks. That is the only safe way for to us proceed.

In this conflict, for the first time in our history, we will probably suffer more casualties here at home than will our forces overseas. But in the face of these dangers, Americans can be assured that we are doing absolutely everything we know how to do.

Its strange to believe that September 11th happened 7 years ago. It feels like 2, maybe 3 years ago. Anyway, I thought that the next time that Charlie Gibson asks someone about the Bush doctrine, he might want to use Cheney's definition.

McCain critical of the NY Times

McCain is finally going after the real enemy in this election... the media.
The New York Times recently caught his ire. Spokesman Steve Schmidt said:

"This is an organization that is completely, totally, 150 percent in the tank for the Democratic candidate, which is their prerogative to be, but let's not be dishonest and call it something other than what it is."

In response, the Obama camp tried to suggest that there was no bias on the part of the New York Times. (The Obamaniacs at the Times must be protected at all costs!)
To try to diffuse criticism of the Times, Obama spokespeople released a list of articles that they felt were critical of Obama.
I've chosen my favorite titles from that list, and post them below. Remember, these are supposed to be articles critical of Obama.

• In Law School, Obama Found Political Voice [New York Times, 1/28/07]
• Charisma and a Search for Self In Obama's Hawaii Childhood [New York Times, 3/17/07]
• After 2000 Loss, Obama Built Donor Network From Roots Up [New York Times, 4/3/07]
• A Candidate, His Minister and the Search for Faith [New York Times, 4/30/07]
• An Obama Patron and Friend Until an Indictment in Illinois [New York Times, 6/14/07]
• In Illinois, Obama Proved Pragmatic and Shrewd. [New York Times, 7/30/07]
• Loyal Network Backs Obama After His Help. [New York Times, 10/1/07]
• Obama in Senate: Star Power, Minor Role [New York Times, 3/9/08]
• Obama Secret Service Agent Tied To Sex Joke [New York Times, 5/15/08]
• The Story of Obama, Written by Obama [New York Times, 5/18/08]
• Many Blacks Find Joy in Unexpected Breakthrough [New York Times, 6/5/08]
• Where Whites Draw The Line [New York Times, 6/8/08]
• Obama’s Organizing Years, Guiding Others and Finding Himself [New York Times, 7/7/08]
• As a Professor, Obama Enthralled Students and Puzzled Faculty [New York Times, 7/30/08]

That last one really hurts.
Ouch! How can his students be enthralled with him? That's clearly biased against him. -And the story of Obama, written by Obama? Now that's some hard-hitting journalism.
I thought I'd share that list of what the spokepeople of the Obama camp feel are articles that are critical of them.

In other criticism, Obama can't actually walk on water.

Having multiple cars? Wrong. A huge plane? Oh, that's okay.

Obama recently criticized McCain for his dozen cars. I guess that's excessive.

Apparently, he did so before boarding his campaign airplane.
You know the one. The one that has his name on his seat, with the word "President" on it?

Obama supporters try to suppress WGN. Again.

From this article on the Swamp:

Chicago radio station WGN-AM is again coming under attack from the presidential campaign of Sen. Barack Obama for offering airtime to a controversial author.

It is the second time in recent weeks the station has been the target of an "Obama Action Wire" alert to supporters of the Illinois Democrat.

At some point in time, Obama supporters are just going to have to actually start banning books critical of Obama.

UPDATE:

Here is a podcast of that show. I'm including it to piss people off who were trying to suppress the show.

What is Rangel's problem?

He didn't really call Palin disabled.
Did he?
From this CBS News story:

CBS 2 HD: "You got to be kind to the disabled?"

Rangel: "Yes."

CBS 2 HD: "She's disabled?"

Rangel: "There's no question about it politically. It's a nightmare to think that a person's foreign policy is based on their ability to look at Russia from where they live."

Stay classy, Rangel.

Absentee ballots

A bunch of people are complaining about absentee ballots.
I'm wary of them, but not against them. For this reason, I wanted to make sure that I bookmarked a good article that suggests that up to 1/3rd of the ballots this year might be cast via absentee ballot.

I note, with no happiness, that both parties are sending out a bunch of ballots. They are hoping that their people will fill them out and send them back. I'm not against people voting. But my feeling is that this is being done to make voter fraud easier.

John McCain wants to suppress POW info?

Of the nuttiest stories ever told during this campaign, the one that I hate the most is the idea that McCain has been trying to suppress knowledge about POWs that are still being held in captivity.

The guy behind this story is Sydney H. Schanberg, a Pulitzer winner who is an idiot. He previously wrote for the NY Times in 1975, and defended the rights of the Khemer Rouge in Cambodia:

In the news columns of The New York Times, the celebrated Sydney Schanberg wrote of Cambodians that ``it is difficult to imagine how their lives could be anything but better with the Americans gone.'' He dismissed predictions of mass executions in the wake of a Khmer Rouge victory: ``It would be tendentious to forecast such abnormal behavior as national policy under a Communist government once the war is over.'' On April 13, 1975, Schanberg's dispatch from Phnom Penh was headlined, ``Indochina without Americans: for most, a better life.''

This was stupid then, and Sydney is stupid now.
To suggest that McCain wants to hide any information about POWs from public consumption is not only reckless, but its not supported by facts. You don't have to believe me. Just go to the article, and look for meat. It doesn't exist.

It angers me to see someone who voluntarily stayed behind to support the morale of his POW cohorts being this badly maligned. Presumably, this is for political malice. If not, its journalistic malpractice.

He's not arrogant. He's prematurely president.

I was reading this article, by the AP, on Barack's Chicago headquarters, when I noticed the 8 foot tall portrait of Obama in the background. It was so big, so overwhelming, that I felt a need to blog about it.

But I haven't quite covered all of my feelings about it, so let's recap.

From the begginning, the big criticism about Obama is that he's arrogant. So let me start by saying that I understand that candidates will often have posters with their image around their headquarters.

That doesn't bother me, or freak me out. They are selling a product, and it doesn't hurt to have photos of your product all around you. But Obama has a long history of doing things that kinda look arrogant. For instance, I blogged about this chair of his, on Obama Force One, from a CBS report: ...With the word "President" written on it, near his name. In June, blogs like Holy Coast commented on Barack's new podium, with his own presidential seal. Holy Coast even presented its own comparison, so that people could see the similiarity. I should point out that the presidential seal did not appear on Barack paraphenalia there first, but at places that actually sold Barack merchandise. You can get Barack t-shirts and keychains back in May (pre-podium) from places like Zazzle.com Then there was the greco-roman temple - built in a football stadium - strictly for Obama's speech. Keep in mind, no one else was to use this temple. Just Obama. as you see in this photo from the LA Times: Again, I should point out that any one of these single things, taken by themselves, are weird.

But not troubling.

Building a mini-temple for your candidate? Okay... a little freaky. But not a problem. The chair with the word "President" on it? Yeah... that kinda gives me that icky feeling.
The podium? Freaky. Its that whole thing of trying to make us think that he's president already, and we just haven't noticed it yet.

But this image of Barack in his headquarters is just over-the-top creepy.
Apparently, there is an artist who creates these types of images out of newspaper clippings. He made one of Barack.

Now I get it. Someone gives you a really huge image of yourself, and you can't just say 'no.' You have to do something with it.
But what did Barack do? He hung it up in his headquarters. His office. Where his people work.

Combined with other images of Barack in the headquarters...

...and you get the feel of the old soviet republic.

Here is a company that sells communist propaganda posters. If you look at this picture...

...its part of a triptik that reads:
"The deeper the change that we want to execute is, the more interest we need to raise for it."
Change.
Anyway, you'll note the similiarities between the soviet style of propaganda, and the posters that the left has chosen to sell "Progress"

I took graphic arts. I understand when someone is imitating a style.
But I also understand when someone imitates a style, that sometimes they also like the underlying message.


Its part of that whole communist chic. I get it. Which is why it feels threatening to me. Particularly from a guy who seems to really like himself.

-Or at least is really okay with having a very big image of himself around.

I said this to someone earlier: Obama doesn't just worry me because he's arrogant. I'm mainly worried about Obama supporters, who would seem to support him in whatever he does.
A man by himself is not dangerous. But a man who millions would willingly follow without question is someone that I don't want as my leader.

Again, and I can't stress this enough... I always used to wonder why it was that people would support Stalin, Lenin, Hitler, etc... without question. I doubted that it could ever happen in my country.

When someone hangs an image that big in his campaign headquarters, that little voice/instinct that warns me (and others) of impending danger starts to get really loud.

Why I'm voting for McCain

Because Woody Allen has endorsed Barack Obama.

When a guy who married his foster child tells me what the right moral decision is, I try to veer in the opposite direction.

Be Patriotic! Pay more taxes!

Biden, according to the AP:

Noting that wealthier Americans would indeed pay more, Biden said: "It's time to be patriotic ... time to jump in, time to be part of the deal, time to help get America out of the rut."

I think that the Democrats have found their direction, finally. They are the party of patriotism, through higher taxes. Don't wear a flag pin. That's jingoism. But paying more taxes? Well... that's just American.

Your Assignment: Tell me why you hate Sarah Palin

When I was in high school, I had teachers like this:

Metro State College is investigating a professor who asked students to write an essay critical of Republican vice presidential candidate Gov. Sarah Palin. One student said the instructor singled out Republican students in the class and allowed others to ridicule them.

Its sad, but this really did contribute to me becoming a Republican. Don't get me wrong. I became a Republican at something like the age of 12... while watching the Stalinist tactics of the Democrats in Chicago, my home town.
But when you're in class, and the teacher is basically telling you that anyone who is a Republican is wealthy or an idiot, it takes away a lot of their credibility.

Anyway, Denver's Metro College has an adjunct English professor named Andrew Hallam who assigned an anti-Palin essay as their composition.
A brave young lady named Jana, who is a student at that college, spoke up. Good for her.
If Hallam thinks that his assignments are fine, this is a good time for him to find out that not everyone agrees with him.

Obama doesn't want to show his economic plan... yet

According to Reuters, Obama is going to 'hold off' on showing his economic plan.

"Given the gravity of this situation, and based on conversations I have had with both Secretary Paulson and Chairman Bernanke, I have asked my economic team to refrain from presenting a more detailed blue-print of how an immediate plan might be structured until the Treasury and the Federal Reserve have had an opportunity to present their proposal."
Yeah. That's why.

Its not because he doesn't have an economic plan. He's going to show his plan any second now. Really.

Right To Privacy folks prove their real intent

I think its fascinating that the people who always talk about someone's right to privacy are now reprinting and detailing e-mails that were hacked into, of Sarah Palin.

The hypocrisy is all over the net.

I just read a wired blog that detailed the topics of her e-mails.
Really? This is what we've come to?
That as long as someone stole information, everyone will share it?

Remember when the Dems wanted to protect Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae?

Most people don't remember.
Mainly because the Dems were trying to protect both from any type of oversight or regulation.

At one point, the Bush administration wanted to form a new organization to oversee both companies.
The Democrats blocked them. From the New York Times:

Significant details must still be worked out before Congress can approve a bill. Among the groups denouncing the proposal today were the National Association of Home Builders and Congressional Democrats who fear that tighter regulation of the companies could sharply reduce their commitment to financing low-income and affordable housing.

''These two entities -- Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac -- are not facing any kind of financial crisis,'' said Representative Barney Frank of Massachusetts, the ranking Democrat on the Financial Services Committee. ''The more people exaggerate these problems, the more pressure there is on these companies, the less we will see in terms of affordable housing.''

Representative Melvin L. Watt, Democrat of North Carolina, agreed.

''I don't see much other than a shell game going on here, moving something from one agency to another and in the process weakening the bargaining power of poorer families and their ability to get affordable housing,'' Mr. Watt said.

Yep, they were absolutely frigg'in right.
Like Barney Frank said, they are not facing any type of financial crisis. No sir. Not Fannie or Freddie. Of course, you can't blame him for not knowing. He was just in charge of the financial services committee.

An Obama Facist Show

As long as we're talking about how facists take over, let's do a study in facist Fashion.

This flickr website is a primer.

In honor of fashion week, having just returned from the Democratic Convention, and the fact that Palin and McCain belittled community organizing in their speeches, I decided to have an Obama themed fashion show: AuH2Obama! On Thursday, Sept. 11 at Cafe 81, pretty ladies modeled Obama dresses, I handed out free Obama buttons and stickers, sold AuH2Obama tops for only $20 and donated 50% of the profits to the campaign. What did you say about community organizing, Sarah Palin?

I can't speak for Sarah, but it spooks me whenever someone creates a complete line of fashion around a politician. (See: Che, See: Stalin, See: Hitler.)

Of course, this is all about good fashion. Right? So let's take a look. Tell me if you think that any of those articles of fashion make you wonder.

Obama's Teleprompter

Obama is going back on the road with a teleprompter.
'A what?' you say.
I know... you didn't realize he needs one. You thought he always said everything off of the cuff. But like most politicians, he uses one. He's just better at hiding them.

Why the press announced this now, I'm not quite sure.

'The Atlantic' apoligizes for McCain Photos

I have to hand it to 'The Atlantic'. Clearly, they are no fans of McCain. But they are all over this issue on the basis of journalistic integrity.

In a previous post, I wrote about how Jill Greenberg is a cunt. I wrote that because Jill took photos of McCain with an intent to make him look evil, and then bragged about it, altered those images, and put them online.

The reporter who wrote the story on McCain was appalled. So were other reporters from the magazine. They understood, correctly, that it made them look bad.
The reporter apoligized and expressed his outrage publicly. So did another reporter from the magazine. More recently, the magazine offered its apology to McCain, and suggested that they might sue the photographer over her duplicity.

I hope they do, and I hope they win big.
For those of you who don't know, Jill became famous for getting photos of crying toddlers. How did she get those photos? By giving them cool toys and candy, and then taking them away. That's right. Jill literally took candy from a baby.

It always amazes me when people accuse Republicans of being evil, and then you find out that those people literally take candy from a baby to get a good photo. Nice going, Jill. Your soul is completely intact.

Because I don't have enough posts with the word "Palin" in them

Here's the most shocking thing I've read in a long time. Ready for this?
Sun-Times columnist Mary Mitchell doesn't like Sarah Palin.
Wow.
That surprised me.
Mary argues that a woman who became a mayor of a small town, who went on to become the most popular governor in the US, is a 'laughingstock to feminists.' I guess that if you really want to be a feminist, you have to be hated?

Frankly, Sarah Palin scares me.

Republicans always scare Democrats. Democrats are fearful of anyone who doesn't think like them, and of anyone who shows the regular use of a backbone.
But what's weird about Mary's column is that she is arguing that you can't be a governor of a big state if you have a family.

Even with a supportive husband, I doubt seriously that Palin has time to be a hockey mom unless she is making a personal appearance on a campaign trail.

What? Really? Is Mary making the argument against feminism?

After all, there's no such thing as a superwoman, and children of driven moms make their own sacrifices.

Now I know that I'm in a parallel universe. The left is telling me that its wrong for a woman to be both a mother and hold down a professional job.
What drove them in this direction? A strong Republican woman named Palin.

I now like Palin more then ever.

A photo that made me go "What???"

UPDATE:
Here is the wall, the one in the background of that photo (found on Flickr), that I was talking about.

Now please read the section below, and click on the link for the photo on Yahoo News.

If anyone is reading this, please tell me what your first reaction was when you saw this photo. (I won't copy it to my website because I don't want to violate the copyright)

Its from the headquarters of the Obama campaign.

The Newsweek article on Wasilla

Newsweek recently ran an article on Wasilla to get the rest of us up to speed. Just in case, well, you didn't know what a hick town it was:

You certainly can have a great time swigging beer in two bars that are allowed to stay open until 5 a.m. It was Mayor Palin who rejected attempts to make them close earlier. (If Palin had completely had her way, in fact, you could have sidled up to the bar with a gun.) At the Mug-Shot Saloon, you can memorize the expletives on the collection of bumper stickers next to the well of bottles. But once you leave, you might want to watch your back: in a state that is consistently in the top 10 of the nation's most violent per capita, Wasilla has among the highest per capita violent- and property-crime rates in Alaska.

The crime rate in Wasilla is pretty high. How high is it? Why, it's very similar to the city that Senator Obama comes from (and represents)... Chicago!

Here is the crime rate for Wasilla, and here is the crime rate for Chicago.

• 2005 rate of violent crime in Wasilla (extrapolated, of course) 1,199.7
• 2005 rate of violent crime in Chicago 1,195.7

Those numbers are, statistically speaking, the same.

Anyway, back to the article:

In 1999, when Wal-Mart was the place to shop in Wasilla, a couple who worked there decided to get married in the aisles of the store. Shoppers convened, and tour-bus passengers stopped and gawked. Palin, who was then mayor of the 5,000 or so residents of the town, officiated. Later, she told a reporter that she had to hold back tears. "It was so sweet," she said. "It was so Wasilla."

So I read stuff like that, and I conclude that the author
1) Doesn't like Palin
and
2) Really looks down on the residents of Wasilla

I got curious. As someone with a background in journalism, I smelled a whiff of bias. But I am a journalist, and I wasn't going to accuse Amanda Coyne of bias without reason.
At the end of the article, Newsweek tells us who Amanda is:

Coyne is a freelance journalist based in Anchorage. She’s the cofounder of alaskadispatch.com, an online magazine where commentators have been both supportive and critical of Palin.

Naturally, that made me even more curious. So I dropped by Alaskadispatch.com, where you can find the following headline:

"What Palin sees in Wasilla "

Over a photo of a 'gun loan' store.

Go to Alaska Dispatch and read the headlines yourself.
Of course, that just made me even more curious as to who Coyne is. I clicked on the "About" section of the website, and found this:

Amanda Coyne teaches writing at Alaska Pacific University, free-lances for magazines, and blogs for HuffingtonPost.com. She was a writer and editor at the Anchorage Press from 2001 to 2005. Her work has appeared in Harper’s, The Guardian, The New York Times Magazine, Bust, Alaska Magazine and other publications.

Huh. That's kind of curious.
She blogs for Huffington Post (not exactly a centrist pub) the Guardian (who opening loves Obama) the New York Times (who has already elected Obama president) and Bust. How'd she end up working for Newsweek?

Below that, came the answer that I was looking for.

Tony Hopfinger is a free-lance writer and correspondent for Bloomberg News and Newsweek. Between 1996 and 2005, he was a reporter and editor at newspapers in Idaho, California and Alaska, including the Anchorage Daily News and Anchorage Press. His work has appeared in Walrus Magazine, The Christian Science Monitor, Magazine, The Seattle Times and other publications

So Tony, her compatriot, is also a free lancer for Newsweek.

With that in mind, I wondered what Amanda normally writes about. Here are some of her articles from the Huffington Post:

• Alaska Chants for Oh, Oh, Oh, Obama,
• Life Is A Picnic For Democrats In Alaska,
• Another Alaska Republican Covered In Scandal

Starting to get a general picture of who wrote the article on Wasilla for Newsweek?
Here are some of the articles she wrote for the Alaska Dispatch:

• Sex allegations against Allen may come up in Stevens's trial (written with Tony)
• Alaska's Growing Pains (an article written for the Guardian)
• Taking the perp walk at Anchorage Baptist Temple (I can't describe this article. You have to read it yourself.)

To Amanda's credit, she did write this profile of Palin in 2006. She reprinted it on her website in August of 2008. What did she think of Palin at the time?

Palin has so far prevailed against all odds, and against her own party's mainstream, which not only is against her but at times lately has seemed to be trying to dismantle her campaign. Alaska's Republican Party has had its share of meltdowns, but no politician has stepped from its ashes like Palin, a small-town, angel-faced mother of four, an avid hunter and a fisher with a killer smile who wears designer glasses and heels, and hair like modern sculpture, who's taking it to the boys ever so softly. Whatever happens on Tuesday, her popularity has shown that good-old-boy politics, even in Alaska , in the GOP, may be yesterday's news.

Note the tone of Amanda's coverage on Sarah's "killer smile", heels, and hair.
(There are a lot of things that journalists don't like about Sarah. But part of it, for some reason, is the fact that she's stylish and pretty. I don't get that.)

Anyway, it answered my question of how Newsweek suddenly decided to do a story on Wasilla using a journalist from outside of their realm. They ended up using a writer who honestly doesn't seem to like Wasilla, nor Palin.
Go figure.

Jill Greenberg is a Cunt

That may be the second time I've ever called a woman a cunt.

But Jill Greenberg - the photographer who shoots covers for Time, Wired, the Atlantic, and other trendy mags - is a true cunt.

I get to say this because I'm also a photographer.
But unlike Jill Greenberg, I don't betray the people who trust me to take their photo.
I don't lie to people and pretend like I want to make them look good, only to play a juvenile trick on them.

John McCain made the mistake of posing for Jill Greenberg. He trusted her, which is what you're supposed to do when a major magazine hires a professional photographer. Jill-the-cunt lit McCain from below for some 'special' shots.
Its a standard trick. You learn it in photo 101. Light someone from underneath, and it gives them a very unflattering look. It makes them look evil. The New York Post tells the story:

Asking McCain to "please come over here" for a final shot, Greenberg pretended to be using a standard modeling light.

The resulting photos depict McCain as devilish, with bulging brows and washed-out skin.

"He had no idea he was being lit from below," Greenberg said, adding that none of his entourage picked up on the light switch either. "I guess they're not very sophisticated," she said.

Bullshit, Jill.

I'm willing to bet that you told them that the light below was a 'fill light'.

Any photographer can set up a bunch of lights, and just have the one light pop during the shoot. There is no level of sophistication involved here. Unless someone is trained in photography, they won't notice that most of the light during that 1/250th of a second, when the flash pops, is coming from the light below them.

I would. But then I shoot headshots.

Unlike you, I treat all of my subjects with respect.

John McCain made the same mistake that Mylie Cyrus did, when she trusted Annie Lebowitz to take photos of her. Neither you nor Annie should be trusted to ever take someone's photo again. Annie because she somehow forgot that the girl she was taking provocative photos of, was a 16 year old girl. You, because you let your politics override your responsibility to treat every subject with respect.

Just in case you think that my politics are involved here, they are not.

This is what the New York Post said about Jill Greenberg's blog:

Her Web site now features a series of Photoshopped pics of McCain in some highly unflattering poses - including one that has a monkey squirting dung onto the Republican candidate's head.

Another one reads "I am a bloodthirsty warmongerer," with McCain retouched to have needle-sharp shark teeth and a vicious grin, while licking blood-smeared lips.

Greenberg was unapologetic about the assignment.

Great.

I think she should stick with that head-up-her-ass attitude. I think that any mag that hires her should be treated the same way as any mag who hires a pedophile.

Jill... you are a cunt.

You bespoil my profession. You are no better then the greasy fashion photographers who tell pre-pubescent women that they need to lose weight because they weigh 110 lbs, or the creepy guys who tell women that they only want to shoot their silouhette.

If it were up to me, every magazine would get a copy of the New York Post article with the headline "Jill Greenberg is a Cunt" pasted over it. With an unflattering photo of you with a beard. And devil horns. Because that's soooooo you. That's your style. Your 'sophistication'. Your grade level. Your idea of Art.

I hope that everyone sees your images so that they know how much of a cunt you are.

So much on Palin, that we need a summary

Luckily, ABC news gave a summary of what a lot of members of the press are saying about her. If you don't have a chance to read the hundreds of articles currently being written (I know. Pot. Kettle. Black. I'm guilty.) this is a fun article on how she's being received by the press.
The Note has the best quip about the Obama campaign responding to Palin:

The upside of insularity: There's no panic in Obamaland. The downside of insularity: There's no panic in Obamaland.

I think its time for them to panic.
The only likely voter poll that has Obama up (by one point) is Rassmussen.
The rest have the race tied, or McCain in the lead.

The Vogue cover story on Palin

In case you want to read it:

When term limits forced Palin out of the mayorship in 2002, she was appointed chairman of the Oil & Gas Conservation Commission by the Republican powers that be. The position seemed like a dream. With four children to raise and a husband whose blue-collar job pays an hourly wage, the six-figure salary was more than welcome, but it didn't take her long to become disillusioned by the unethical behavior she witnessed firsthand. "What I saw was so obviously wrong. I was so disappointed and shocked," she says. "Oil and gas revenue account for more than 80 percent of the state's budget, but Alaskans were never going to trust us if that was how we conducted business." When her complaints were ignored, Palin saw no choice but to resign in protest. The once golden girl was suddenly out of a job.

Its a good Palin primer, and might help people understand what McCain saw.

Factcheck clearing house on Palin

Newsweek has a good factcheck article on her.
Its a good place to start to address the rumors.

The little ACORN that could

I'd read before that Obama was connected to ACORN. But for whatever reason, I blew it off.

For those of you who don't know who ACORN is... they are an activist group that shows up at pretty much every rally. When they show up at anti-war rallies, they claim that the US is involved in "racist" wars.
But their random claims of racism are not the main reason why I find them to be threatening. I hate anyone... and I mean anyone, who resorts to violence to silence their critics.
ACORN uses brownshirt type tactics to silence their critics.

So let me start by telling you what their stated goal is: ACORN is a group that tries to get out the vote of low-income housing people.
(Here's a surprising fact: people who don't have jobs aren't always motivated to vote. Huh.)

Sometimes, when they do this, they tend to break the law. Just a little. As stated in this news report:

Investigators said questionable registration forms for new voters were collected by the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now, a group that works to improve minority and low-income communities.The four indicted -- Kwaim A. Stenson, Dale D. Franklin, Stephanie L. Davis and Brian Gardner -- were employed by ACORN as registration recruiters. They were each charged with two counts.

Basically those guys were turning in false registrations of voters. Its a fancy way of saying that they were inventing voters who didn't exist.

Now here's something interesting that the same report noted:

ACORN and Project Vote recruit and assign workers to low-income and minority neighborhoods to register people to vote.

If you don't recognize the name "Project Vote", that's the group that Obama was working for... a long time ago, in a land called Chicago. Its not as radical as ACORN, but they can sometimes get pretty out there. Both groups insist that there are people trying to suppress their vote. (See my comment, above, in parenthesis.)

Back to ACORN:

• They've been accused / indicted in Florida for similiar vote fraud.
• Its a group that is anti-capitalist, and promotes 'welfare rights'.
• Quite naturally, ACORN supports Obama in the election.

So what does Obama have to do with ACORN?
National Review has a great overview that summerizes the connection.

At least a few news reports have briefly mentioned Obama’s role in training Acorn’s leaders, but none that I know of have said what Foulkes reports next: that Obama’s long service with Acorn led many members to serve as the volunteer shock troops of Obama’s early political campaigns — his initial 1996 State Senate campaign, and his failed bid for Congress in 2000 (Foulkes confuses the dates of these two campaigns.) With Obama having personally helped train a new cadre of Chicago Acorn leaders, by the time of Obama’s 2004 U.S. Senate campaign, Obama and Acorn were “old friends,” says Foulkes.

If you're from Chicago, you know what this means. That's how Obama ends up going through the ranks of popularity. He starts out with the more radical organizations, and then works his way into the state senate, and eventually the US senate.

You can also read a great article by Michelle Malkin that explains ACORN better then I can.

You can also read the SunTimes article which brings up his ACORN connection.

In 1995, former Republican Gov. Jim Edgar refused to implement the federal "Motor Voter" law, which Republicans argued could invite fraud and which some Republicans feared could swell the ranks of Democratic voters.

The law mandated people be allowed to register to vote in government offices such as driver's license renewal centers.

Obama sued on behalf of ACORN, the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now. The League of Women Voters and other public-interest groups joined in.

For those of you who aren't from Chicago, Motor Voter was a drive to get more democratic votes. The professionally unemployed may not want to leave the house... but they have to in order to get their driver's license.

He also fought against 'red-lining'.

Obama represented Calvin Roberson in a 1994 lawsuit against Citibank, charging the bank systematically denied mortgages to African-American applicants and others from minority neighborhoods.

That's when banks denied home loans based on where people lived.

Let me reword that, for those of you who don't understand economics: banks were denying people home loans based on the 'radical' idea that some areas were too high of a risk to expect people to repay a loan.

-And just in case you still don't understand that concept: Look at the lending crisis in America right now. It was caused because banks were encouraged to give loans to people who might not be able to afford to pay them off.

But I'm getting waaaaay off track.
Back to ACORN. Obviously, this group has been connected with voter fraud more often then, say, Mayor Daley. So as Atlas Shrugs points out... why are they still allowed to do voter registration drives?

More importantly, why hasn't the national media followed the connections of Obama to this organization, and tried to find out more?
Don't get me wrong. I'm not seeing a conspiracy. I'm noticing the disinterest in finding out anything that might make him look.... messy.

How to get people to come to your speeches

Hire governor Palin.

According to this article on ABC news, McCain is suddenly having no problem getting people to come to his rallies.
Heck.. even the press is covering them now.
:)

Saturday in Colorado Springs, about 10,000 people waved American flags at McCain's rally in an airport hangar there, and Friday in the town of Cedarburg, Wis., there were more people crowding the main street and the surrounding blocks than the population of the tiny town.

Palin is now the biggest threat to the Democratic establishment.
If you don't think this is worrying them, read this article in the Wall Street Journal. Every lawyer, lobbyist, and slimeball operative that the Democrats have is currently trying to find some dirt in her closet.

Which poll has Obama ahead?

Why... NBC news does.
The rest have the race at tied, or McCain ahead.
Go figure.

"Lipstick On A Pig"

Obama's getting all coy, and pretending like he didn't mean to make any comparison between Palin, and... pigs.
So let's start with Palin's comments about Hockey moms, just a week earlier.
Watch the video.

Now let's look at Obama's comments.
Watch where he pauses... right after the word 'pig'.

If he simply made a mistake, and forgot the lipstick comment the week before.... he's stupid.
If he did this on purpose... then he's desperate and calling his opponents pigs.

More balance at MSNBC. "Up next: Why is Obama so darned cute?"

To make their network seem more fair and balanced, MSNBC took Keith Olbermann off of their anchor desk. And then they hired an uber-liberal to follow Countdown.

I can't even make this kind of stuff up.
This is a video of the first part of her show:


It's weird. They hired on Rachel Meadow, who is something like Obama's bestest friend ever. Watch the video, and tell me what you think.
Particularly about how both of these supposed journalists don't think that Obama wants to "attack" his opponents... and how Palin is Liza Manelli.

Obama is sending out surrogates to attack Palin

According to the International Herald Tribune, advisors to Obama are going to have surrogates argue the case against Palin. Apparently, they're worried about Obama attacking her personally. So the Obama camp is getting democratic females to attack her personally.

Way to go, Dems. That's "classy".

Howard Finemen warns Democrats: Beware of the Barracuda

No, we're not talking about the members of Heart.
We're talking about the most evil women on the planet. Someone more evil then Bush!
[cue evil music]

Sarah Palin!

Howard Fineman, of Newsweek, warns Democrat of the peril of going against Palin.
He starts out with a fairly balanced article, but then gives Democrats this advice:

The first—and for Democrats, the most obvious—way to do so is on abortion. Palin doesn't believe in abortion even in cases of rape or incest. Pro-choice advocates concede her sincerity (she gave birth to a baby she knew was a Down-syndrome child), but are planning an extensive independent ad campaign aimed at women in swing states.

I know what you're thinking: Howard Fineman would do the same thing for Republicans. He's just a couple of articles away from telling Republicans how to beat Obama. It'll happen.

I was wondering what the media was going to do once Bush was out of office. They needed a Republican that was more evil then the most evil of all Republicans.
I guess they found their (wo)man.

US Magazine Follows Other Sheep

Earlier, I commented on the latest Time magazine cover that asked if Evangelicals were really supporting Palin.

Now we have US magazine, with the headline:

Babies, Lies, and Scandal

Note the title of the link; "sarah-palin-very-difficult-to-work-with"
At least the people at US magazine are all in agreement.
Baaaaah. Baaaaaaaah.

Anyway, I expect this to just be the first wave of magazine covers asking us, the dumb electorate, what we were thinking when we approved of her so much! We obviously don't understand how dangerous she is.

I just came back from the grocery store. Newsweek, btw, had both McCain and Palin on the cover. Naturally, I bent down to see what headline they used for the cover.
Would you be surprised to find out that they didn't use one?
I guess its the golden rule: When you can't think of anything nice to say....

Huffington Post sets up comment pages for each Palin family member

Photos of the Palin family members are printed on the Huffington Post, as reported by Moonbattery.

Naturally, the Moonbats can't keep their dumbass comments to themselves on the family members.
Do you suppose that any of the family members would be immune to comments from the left? Your answer would be 'no'. They even pick on Piper. Here's a quote from the comments, on Piper licking her hand and smoothing down her baby brother's hair:

That was nasty. What kind of backwoods, hillbilly crap was that?

Does Olbermann like Conspiracy theorists?

If you don't know who Alan Jones is... all you need to know is that he believes that 9/11 was a conspiracy.
Cool? You got the picture?
If not, you can go to his web page, and you'll get an idea of how out there he is.

For that matter, as you can see in this YouTube on this page, he actually ranted/attacked Michelle Malkin after she dared try to ask him some questions.

So I this with a grain of salt. But his web page insists that Olbermann is giving his group the thumbs-up.
I don't think that Olbermann is that out there.
I think.
Oh, and Olbermann was just fired from anchoring election night coverage. Sure took you guys a while to notice that he was hurting your ratings.
I should note that the main reason that I didn't set my DVR to NBC was because I didn't want to watch the convention while listening to Olbermann rant about how Republicans have ruined the world.
Thanks MSNBC. Took you long enough.

Where did Code Pink get their Republican Badge?

Code Pink crashed the Republican convention a couple of times. They claim that it was easy.
Here's a YouTube video interview with Medea Benjamin, who insists that she was given the press pass by a friendly Republican. Note that Medea also insists that they are equal opportunity disrupters.

She was inside of the convention hall with Jodie Evans. Jodie is a huge Obama supporter. According to Gateway pundit, Jodie Evans was wearing the badge of Annie Eckrich. Of course, Annie has no idea how Evans got hold of her badge.

Considering how dishonest the arguments are of Code Pink, I wouldn't be surprised if they were lying about this too. There is a strong suggestion that they had gotten hold of MSNBC press passes. Which I wouldn't believe, except that MSNBC hates Republicans so much, that it sounds plausible.
If you find out the conclusion of this mystery, please feel free to comment or e-mail me.

A Palin Rumor Clearing House

This is a brilliant idea, and one that I thought of a while back for George Bush.
This blogger has decided to start a rumor clearing house for Sarah Palin. Any rumor that you might have heard about her is either dismissed or confirmed here.

How many rumors can there be? She's only been in the running for something like two weeks.

But there's already Sixty, count 'em, Sixty rumors about Palin on the web (and worse yet) in major news stories.

The most disturbing ones to me? The people who take a serious amount of time out of their day to photoshop images. Sarah in a bikini. Sarah nude. Sarah (no kidding) as a teen.
As a photographer, the poor photoshopping skills annoy me.
As a Republican, the dishonesty of it all just makes me mad. And ready to vote.

The NY Times is trying to figure out Palin

It seems that the New York Times is all over the place trying to explain why Palin is so popular.

First, Frank Rich defines irony by attacking Palin, and talking about how smug and nasty she was when she made fun of Obama. (Frank goes on to attack Palin for defending her pregnant daughter's privacy while being pro-life. Go figure.)

The week before, the Times was telling us that Palin was sloppily vetted. Which was the original narrative that all of the press was going with, since they didn't know who Palin was. (If the press doesn't know who someone is, then how can anyone know???)

But then there is this article. What sets this one apart is that the Times (who at one point tried to characterize Palin's appointment as a desparate move) is not suggesting that it was a masterstroke of planning on an advisor's part.

In the three months since that night in June, the McCain organization has become a campaign transformed: an elbows-out, risk-taking, disciplined machine that was on display here last week at the Republican convention that nominated Mr. McCain. And the catalyst for the change has largely been Mr. Schmidt, 37, a veteran of the winning 2002 Congressional and 2004 presidential campaigns, where he worked closely with Karl Rove, then Mr. Bush’s senior strategist.

A few days from now, when the polls settle in (they are all up in a huge way for McCain) the NY Times will have to write a new story explaining how someone else... not McCain, Palin, or even Schmidt, is to be given credit for picking Palin.
Maybe they'll credit Obama for it.
That would kind of fit.

Obama is not a muslim. He just claims he is.

Yes, I understand it was a slip of the tongue, as this article in the Washington Post makes clear.
No, I don't think that Obama is a muslim.
He said "my Muslim faith" as a mistake, while talking about his Christianity. I'm cool with that. (You can watch the full You Tube video here.)

However, if George Bush made this slip, it would be 'proof positive' that he's retarded. Right?
Yet, when Obama does such gaffes, he's just...
....He's what?
Honestly, I want to know what the difference is. Why does Obama keep getting passes for these gaffes?
Is it because of.... what?

In response to a comment on the previous post

On my previous blog, someone left a comment implying that Sarah Palin needs all of the press 'she can muster.'

When you have a higher approval rating then the presidential candidates from either party, I don't know why. But let's see if she's receiving any press today.

Over at CNN?

Palin's swift rise is the talk of her Alaskan town

As I went around the news websites, I found a few overwhelming themes.

First, this kind from Time magazine:

Are Evangelicals Really Sold on Palin?

I expect to find a lot more of these types of articles... either questioning whether Palin's popularity is real, or blaming the people who like her for being so stupid.

Here's an MSNBC video asking if the country is ready for a First Dude (meaning, Palin's nickname for her husband.)
I expect to read a lot of those articles too. Are you ready for this? Honestly? Is this what you wanted? Really?

On the ABC webpage, I found the Sarah Palin Spotlight section.
Gee. Guess they aren't interested either.
Palin better get on a bunch of those Sunday shows, like my commenter suggested.
:)

Look... this is pretty simple. When you bust in with a higher approval rating then the two actual presidential candidates, the media is going to take notice. They still won't like you because you're a Republican, but they'll grit their teeth and ask you why you like Sarah.

McCain, on the other hand, will never get covered.
Even though his approval rating equals Obama, and the Republican convention beat out the Democratic convention for people actually watching it.
The media will continue to tell us that no one is interested.