In case you have been in a coma or living under a rock and failed to notice, Barack Obama has wrapped up his World Tour 2008 and returned to the U.S. What started as a “whisper in Springfield” in an attempt to draw comparisons to Abraham Lincoln has grown into a speech in Berlin in an attempt to draw comparisons to Reagan. The always complicit left-wing media was more than happy to oblige. Standing in front of the victory arch, which was erected by the Germans to celebrate conquest in war, the anti-war candidate delivered one heck of a speech. Now perhaps you missed the speech for the very same reason that I did. You see, having recently been scolded by Barack for not learning a foreign language, and having learned how embarrassed he is of Americans who travel abroad and can’t speak the languages of the locals, I assumed he would deliver the speech in German. Silly me. He didn’t. It was in English. But since I didn’t see it live, I decided to grab the transcript and give it a read and point out the highlights. Here are some quotes I wanted to point out.
As we all know by now, Barack Obama has announced that, even knowing what he knows now, he would still oppose the troop surge. Right wing bloggers and columnists have jumped all over this. Why? Because obviously, the surge has worked. So simple minds wish to hit on this point as if they finally found “Waldo” of “Where’s Waldo” fame. I like to go a little deeper, so I found the transcript of the Couric interview of Obama. There is some really interesting stuff in here.
I have a cousin who believes that, were it not for the interference run by Rush Limbaugh and Operation Chaos, Obama would have beaten Hillary handily. I decided to review the states of Indiana and Texas, two states where election results were close, to see what potential influence this campaign had.
In the state of Indiana, 1,274,993 people voted in the Democrat primary. Of these, 10% were Republicans. That makes 127,499 republican voters. They favored Hillary by 8%. That accounts for a surplus of 10,200 votes for Hillary from these registered republicans. Hillary won the primary by 14,195 votes. If we remove the surplus, she still wins by roughly 4,000 votes. That, combined with the fact that she only had an 8% lead amongst republican voters, tells me the plan didn’t work.
In Texas, there were 2,864,454 votes cast in the primary. Hillary won by 101,029 votes. The republican crossover voters made up 10.8% of the vote, or 309,361 votes. 33% of those votes went to Hillary, for a total of 102,089. 25.1% went for Obama for a total of 77,649 votes. That leaves Hillary with a total surplus of 24,440 votes from crossover republicans. Hillary won by 101,029 votes. Without the crossover, she still wins by 76,589.
My final analysis is that the Limbaugh Effect could certainly be felt, but not strongly enough to influence the results. In the end, Hillary won with the Democrats, not just with the help of the Republicans. This notion that somehow Obama would have sailed to a victory were it not for the interference of Rush Limbaugh is a faulty one.
So what did cause Obama’s collapse at the end? I believe it is the same thing that will cause him to lose the general election. A new poll shows that 38% of Obama supporters are “excited” about the election, whereas only 9% of McCain supporters feel the same way. Why is this? In part because of McCain’s liberal tendencies. But I believe that Obama’s extreme liberalism is more to blame. Obama’s appeal to left wing extremists like the environmental movement, socialists, and anti-capitalist special interests groups is the key to his success in this poll. With a major candidate expressing socialist ideology as freely as Barack does, this gives these “Hate America First” groups reason to be excited as for the first time a full fledged socialist has won the nomination of a major party (barring a miracle for Hillary). They even have the added bonus of a potential First Lady who has publicly admitted to going her whole adult life without being proud to be an American until this year! While this will excite the leftist base, it turns off many of the average Democrats and Independents. Hence, despite a struggling economy and an unpopular war pinned to John McCain’s part, Barack only has a 7 point lead in the polls even with this “excitement gap”.
You can count me in the ranks of those who will never be excited to pull a lever for McCain, but will do it simply to stop this country from suffering at the hand of the Socialsit extremist that is Barack Obama.
I have a cousin who believes that, were it not for the interference run by Rush Limbaugh and Operation Chaos, Obama would have beaten Hillary handily. I decided to review the states of Indiana and Texas, two states where election results were close, to see what potential influence this campaign had.
I suppose that would depend on whom you ask. But Senator Claire McCaskill, a Democrat from Mo seemed to inadvertently say so. She is an Obama supporter, but U.S.A. Today has her quoted as saying that the 16 month timetable was a “goal” and that “it would be irresponsible to set in stone a date”. But what has Obama said on the matter? On June 6th of this year, he said the following.
“I have to look at this issue from a broader strategic perspective. And in terms of long-term strategy, I am absolutely convinced that the best thing we can do is to set a clear timetable, tell the Iraqis we are going to start pulling out and do it in a careful fashion.
A clear timetable. And what is that timetable? His own website answers that question.
I have some friends and family who supported President Trump from early on in the process. From time to time they will ask me when I will admit that I was wrong about him. "If Trump does x... If Trump gets y... If Trump supports a policy that results in z... will you admit that you were wrong?" My answer is always "no", because I wasn't wrong. To be clear, I could be wrong in practical application, but that isn't what an election is about. Elections are about theory and speculation and, generally speaking about judging records. Trump had no record to speak of, and his history of stances on issues was all over the map. I opposed his candidacy for several major reasons, all of which are proven valid in this single issue we now refer to as the "travel ban". Here were my reasons.
If you're not familiar with Justice with Judge Jeanine, it is a show on the FOX News Network starring Jeanine Pirro. She is known for her over-the-top rants where she serves up gobs of fresh red meat for her largely hard right wing audience. While it's not unusual for her to be a little fast and loose with the facts, she has been known to occasionally return from the break with a correction from her producers. Last night, however, there was no such correction to an outright lie she told on the show, and the matter being discussed should have (at the very least) contained a disclaimer from the host. I would cut her some slack, but as a former prosecutor and judge, she should be well aware of what proper protocol should have been here.
It's not cute anymore, Republicans. The President of the United States is completely detached from reality, and you can't fix that. You can't cover it up, you can't explain it away, and let me make this as clear as I possibly can for you. You cannot possibly undo the damage you are doing to the party brand by trying to pretend this man is anything other than completely unhinged. I'm watching Sean Hannity borrow guests from the Alex Jones show in an attempt to bolster Trump's conspiratorial claims. I'm seeing relatively mainstream conservatives make themselves look like the crazed fringes of the paranoid right wing. Don't believe me? Look at this.
