Writes the Times:

Mr. McCain predictably criticized liberal judges, vowed strict adherence to the Founders’ views and promised to appoint more judges in the mold of Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Samuel Alito. That is just what the country does not need.blockquote>

Oh my how I do love to read of tantrums on the left! James Wolcott tells you of the Kossacks dividing over Hillary and Barack, while Matt just realized that he has been marginalized by the very people he helped to put in power.

And then there are the number of people who take issue with a basic request for competence at the Obama campaign with regards to communications. People apparently don’t want Obama sending out talking points or talking to bloggers, preferring that bloggers stay independent. Well excuse me, why do you think Obama surrogates suck on TV? They aren’t getting fucking talking points, you idiots. How do you think this works?

While we’re on Obama, consider the ridiculous defenses of Obama going on Fox News and lying about his intent to ‘take them on’, to which I could refer you to Chris’s post once again. The straw men arguments were just disgusting and out in force.

Watch this

That is the question asked by the NY Daily News. I think Jeff summed it up best:

Barack Obama’s Manhattan campaign office, located in the newsroom of The New York Times, is spinning Rev. Jeremiah Wright’s incendiary comments at the National Press Club away from the Illinois senator. The headline says it all: Not Speaking for Obama, Pastor Speaks for Himself, at Length.

He also wrote a book, “The Great Media War: A Battlefield Report”, so if you have the time, it’s a good read! But back to this ‘trick’…

Brent Baker points out: Only ABC Focuses on Wright’s Inanity, All Showcase Shot at Cheney

Seven years later, where are we?

As angry truckers encircled the Capitol in a horn-blaring caravan and consumers across the country agonized over $60 fill-ups, the issue of high fuel prices flared on the campaign trail on Monday, sharply dividing the two Democratic candidates.
Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton lined up with Senator John McCain, the presumptive Republican nominee for president, in endorsing a plan to suspend the federal excise tax on gasoline, 18.4 cents a gallon, for the summer travel season. But Senator Barack Obama, Mrs. Clinton’s Democratic rival, spoke out firmly against the proposal, saying it would save consumers little and do nothing to curtail oil consumption and imports.
While Mr. Obama’s view is shared by environmentalists and many independent energy analysts, his position allowed Mrs. Clinton to draw a contrast with her opponent in appealing to the hard-hit middle-class families and older Americans who have proven to be the bedrock of her support. She has accused Mr. Obama of being out of touch with ordinary Americans who are struggling to meet their mortgages and gas up their cars and trucks.
Mrs. Clinton said at a rally on Monday morning in Graham, N.C., that she would introduce legislation to impose a windfall-profits tax on oil companies and use the revenue to suspend the gasoline tax temporarily.

McCain Frequently Used Wife’s Jet for Little Cost screams the headline! 33 paragraphs long yet the answer is in the 5th paragraph or 8th sentence of the article:

The senator was able to fly so inexpensively because the law specifically exempts aircraft owned by a candidate or his family or by a privately held company they control. The Federal Election Commission adopted rules in December to close the loophole — rules that would have required substantial payments by candidates using family-owned planes — but the agency soon lost the requisite number of commissioners needed to complete the rule making.

I’m not sure why there was any need to go further than that. McCain is within the rules and the rules would have been changed had there been enough rule changers to change the rule.

More blog reacts at memeorandum

Content warning

“>

I know that some of you will appreciate this!

I ask you this because the LAT’s does have a problem with it:

Sen. John McCain has long said he is in robust health and is strong enough to hike the Grand Canyon, but he also is receiving what his staff Monday termed a “disability pension” from the Navy.
When McCain released his tax return for 2007 on Friday, he separately disclosed that he received a pension of $58,358 that was not listed as income on his return.
On Monday, McCain’s staff identified the retirement benefit as a “disability pension” and said that McCain “was retired as disabled because of his limited body movements due to injuries as a POW.”
McCain campaign strategist Mark Salter said Monday night that McCain was technically disabled. “Tortured for his country — that is how he acquired his disability,” Salter said.
Certain types of military and veterans pensions are either partially or completely tax-exempt, depending on the seriousness of the disability. In McCain’s case, the exemption is 100%.

I mean really?!?! Just look at this line:

Murdoch’s reconceived Journal represents nothing short of a formal declaration of war on that most venerable of journalistic institutions, The New York Times.

The New York Times declared war on the readers, and Pinch has been a disaster

Matthew puts one rumor to rest:

The mag’s piece in turn sparked a newspaper industry news boomlet as other publications rushed to find out whether Newsweek’s claim that liberal Democrat Republican New York mayor Michael Bloomberg might give the New York Times Company a cash infusion to “protect the brand.”

Not so, says Bloomberg, who denied the claim that he was trying to get into the newspaper biz or purchase a share in Times Co.

Let’s take a walk down memory lane:

The New York Times Rings In The New Year With A Touching Tribute To Saddam

According to the New York Times, yes you can:

If there’s butter and white wine in your refrigerator and Fig Newtons in the cookie jar, you’re likely to vote for Hillary Clinton. Prefer olive oil, Bear Naked granola and a latte to go? You probably like Barack Obama, too. And if you’re leaning toward John McCain, it’s all about kicking back with a bourbon and a stuffed crust pizza while you watch the Democrats fight it out next week in Pennsylvania.

If what we eat says a lot about who we are, it also says something about how we might vote.

Although precincts and polls are being parsed, the political advisers to the presidential candidates are also looking closely at consumer behavior, including how people eat, as a way to scavenge for votes. The practice is called microtargeting, as much political discipline as buzzword. The idea is that in the brand-driven United States, what we buy and how we spend our free time is a good predictor of our politics.

“It is now clear that the trial-lawyer Democrats’ idea of campaigning for President is to hire lawyers and file frivolous lawsuits. It’s unfortunate the DNC is now trying to drag the federal courts into their circus as well,” he said in a statement. “As for the lawsuit itself, it is clearly without merit and filed only for public relations purposes. The FEC’s own regulations provide that the Commission must be given 120 days to review any complaint before they may be sued in court. It has only been 49 days since the DNC’s initial meritless complaint to the Commission was filed, and thus we expect this lawsuit to be thrown out at the first opportunity.”

Read the whole thing and keep in mind that the FEC is still not able to handle any election issues. The Dems just love to bring lawyers into fights they can’t win!

David Freddoso shares these 2 quotes:

Democrats on the Economy in 1996:

“Our economy is the healthiest it has been in three decades.” (President Bill Clinton, State of the Union Address, January 23, 1996)

Democrats on the Economy in 2008:

“The bottom line is that this administration is the owner of the worst jobs record since Herbert Hoover.” (Senator Charles Schumer, Press Release, March 7, 2008)

Please refer to David’s comparision so you can see how laughable the democrats are

Useful idiot?
Which is worse, his words or the comments to them?

This is the conflict Senator. We are at war with radical Islamic forces. Your party has proven itself to be rooting for defeat. There will be no next conflict if we walk away from this!

Some highlights of the monstrous radical ISLAMIC THREATS around the world in January 2008. That is just one month!

List of Thwarted Terror Attacks Since Sept. 11

The following is a list of known terror plots thwarted by the U.S. government since Sept. 11, 2001.

• December 2001, Richard Reid: British citizen attempted to ignite shoe bomb on flight from Paris to Miami.

• May 2002, Jose Padilla: American citizen accused of seeking “dirty bomb,” convicted of conspiracy.

• September 2002, Lackawanna Six: American citizens of Yemeni origin convicted of supporting Al Qaeda. Five of six were from Lackawanna, N.Y.

• May 2003, Iyman Faris: American citizen charged with trying to topple the Brooklyn Bridge.

Here is a link to his opening statement. After hearing the testimony of General Petraeus and Ambassador Crocker, Levin proceeded to use the past ploys of the Democrats. In his Statement, the General said that “we undertake a 45-day period of consolidation and evaluation”, to which Levin tried, but failed to make it sound as if we are never leaving and we aren’t pressuring the Iraqis.

Crocker statements to note:

Ted Kennedy tries to blame Cheney:

The WSJ has this must read article, I will give you just a taste:

As General David Petraeus briefs Congress this week on Iraq, it’s clear his surge has achieved remarkable results. The most crucial is that the U.S. can no longer be defeated militarily in Iraq, which could not be said a year ago. The question now is whether Washington will squander these gains by withdrawing so quickly that we could still lose politically.

A political loss has always been a strong possibility given the fact that the majority of the Democrats in Congress have done everything in their power to lose this war militarily.

As we await General Petraeus’ testimony, take a look at this: Sadr calls off the Million Man March

Go ahead and caption this for me! Thanks Robert!

Elizabeth Edwards is in a tizzy because she will be left out of McCain’s healthcare plan, or so she says:

I do understand exactly how devastating it will be to people who have the health conditions with which the Senator and I are confronted (melanoma for him, breast cancer for me) but do not have the financial resources we have. In very unconfusing language: they are left outside the clinic doors.

No they aren’t, but don’t let anything like a fact get in your way Elizabeth.

Even your husband, a one term senator, who after being elected in 1998, unofficially began his presidential campaign in 2000 but officially running in 2003, and made a mint in tort law, may just be able to explain to you, a lawyer as well, HIPAA.

Must read:

Democrats criticized McCain’s speech for lacking specifics, displaying their fondness for laundry lists of government “solutions” to complex problems. The Democrats’ various proposals indicate that they have misdiagnosed the causes of the current crisis, attributing too much blame to “predatory lending” while absolving irresponsible borrowers who took out loans they could not afford. Conservatives needed to hear the Republican nominee present a broad and accurate overview of the crisis; the specifics can wait.

Rising home prices led lenders to lower their standards, McCain said. “Some Americans bought homes they couldn’t afford,” he added, “betting that rising prices would make it easier to refinance later at more affordable rates.”

Wall Street helped inflate the housing bubble, McCain argued, by betting big on mortgage-backed securities. When housing prices started to decline and foreclosures started to rise, a widely dispersed network of investors found themselves owning a lot of questionable mortgage debt, which sent investors into a panic.