Category Archives: Democrats

Manufacturing A Storm In The D Camp

Democrats, Elections 2008, Hillary Clinton, Iraq

Howard Dean has jumped in; Gore was volunteered as mediator, Pelosi piped up, Obama backers stomped their feet in fury, and demanded Hillary quit the competition—who is manufacturing this melodrama; this storm in the D Camp?

Don’t switch off when I say the media. Since when has a good political tussle become a cause for such breast-beating? What kind of a people can be led to denounce a vigorous race for the highest office in the land because it is, well, vigorous?

I’m describing a reality shaped by pussies. I won’t postulate about media motivation—why has the malpracticing media reflexively, rather than intentionally, framed a dynamic debate as a crisis?

It is possible that this mindless monolith’s hunger for Hussein has driven them to manufacture a reality out of thin air? I’m not sure these people are even smart enough to jump a level of abstraction and Meta-analyze their motivation, and, by extension, control their derangement. I think it’s all gut with this gormless lot.

But for heaven sake, settle down; calm down to a blind panic. As it is, elections are dishonest enough a process. Don’t buy into the phony supposition that a crisis is unfolding because two Democrats are battling bitterly over the party’s nomination. (If only Republicans had more than one mummified candidate.)

Admittedly, the Florida and Michigan delegate situation is disturbing. It’s obvious to me that party procedure cannot trump the truth as represented by the voters and their votes. This does not seem as plain to pundits and party officials.

Another thing that has been cobbled up is Hillary’s lying—her depiction as a pathological liar is humbug! Hillary embellishes on a few episodes in her life—she has a bit of an Arabic imagination; like Scheherazade of “A Thousand Arabian Nights”—and suddenly she’s a pathological liar?

This from pundits and politicians—”idio-experts” who’ve demonstrated their allergy to the truth over and over again. Iraq anyone? When it comes to grave issues of policy that affect lives and the future of this republic, Iraq is the cardinal lie. All those hammering home the message that Hillary is a liar for embellishing on a trip she made during another unjust war make me sick.

Come clean about the lies that led to the war in Iraq and that keep it going before fraudulently fashioning a fib into a lie.

Updated: Obama’s Racial Ramrodding

Ann Coulter, Barack Obama, Democrats, Elections 2008, Race, Racism

Obama just can’t stop pounding on grandma. Today he told a radio show host that the woman who raised him with a great deal of love apparently was “a typical white woman.” Trust me, this was not a compliment. I can’t help thinking that Rev. Wright is not the only one to have coached Obama for over 20 years. Militant Mama Obama (as opposed grandma Obama), any one?

In any event, good luck finding the item on the Internet, although even Obama Boy Anderson Cooper covered it, but failed to post it. Send us a link if you get lucky.

Against the backdrop of Barack beating up on grandma yet again, my WND column is apropos. Frequenters of Barely a Blog will be very familiar with the themes:

“Richly revealing was the way Obama tarred his maternal (white) grandma with the taint of racism because she ‘once confessed her fear of black men who passed by her on the street,’ among her other cardinal sins…”

“Obama gets away with conjecture—he saddles white America with black America’s woes. Grandma, however, has still not acquitted herself for expressing a visceral fear borne of the brutal reality of crime in this country…”

Read the complete WND column, “Obama’s Racial Ramrodding.”

Update (March 21): I occasionally check DIGG to see what they’re saying.
Incidentally, appended to last week’s column was a long comment in support of the Palestinian cause. It dealt with the issues (although his facts were problematic). The writer did not attack me for having a different (correct) perspective.
The missive may not have been very intelligent, but it is an example of how anyone who aspires to debate must proceed.
How different is this example from the addled orgy of idiocy directed at Mercer, into which the congenital idiot “Shshshaun” plunged the lost souls on the Jewcy.com chat board. “Shshshsaun” is a creature I had allowed, in my generosity, to post on BAB. (Here is his first offering.) Kudos to Dan, our reader, for trying to tutor that malevolent moron in clear thinking. A waste of time, but Dan did at least get the chat on track again.

This one is a DIGG to “Obama’s Racial Ramrodding”:

Darel99 4 hours ago
Dear Ilana,

“… Ilana’s summary blows Ann Coulter’s off the map. You are an excellent communicator. I must state that if it wasn’t for Corsi, Vox, you and a few others I would have no reason to visit WND. Great job.”

Update 2: The Ethnic Particularism Of Barack Obama

Barack Obama, Democrats, Elections 2008, Race, Racism

“The solutions offered by conservative commentators to Barack Obama’s existential crisis have been conspicuous in their shallowness. Unlike Rev. Jeremiah Wright, Victor Davis Hanson is no fake scholar; Hanson has intellectual heft. Yet he proposed that ‘all Obama would have to do is apologize, quit the church, and begin talking about the issues.’

How about admitting himself to rehab, or, even better, expiating on Oprah? (I read on the Los Angeles Times’ blog that Oprah, wise woman that she is, had long ago quit Trinity United Church of Christ for reasons that evaded Obama, her protégé.)

No, I give Obama credit. His reaction to the nation-wide reaction to Rev. Wright’s fulminating—everywhere on full display—was anything but shallow. It was, however, profoundly disturbing.”

Read the complete column, “The Ethnic Particularism Of Barack Obama,” on Jewcy.com. Join the debate on Jewcy; post your comments here, or, even better, do both.

Update 1: What fun; I’ve been fending off a few attacks on the Jewcy Comments forum, here. Jump in.

Update 2: Well, I learned my lesson and that is never to mix it up with the masses. This was the first time I went ahead and partook in an open forum exchange. Before long, the malignant “Shshshshaun,” with whom I’ve been very generous on this forum over the years, chimed in, began attributing quotations to me that are not mine, assigning views to me that aren’t mine, and lumping me with company I do not keep.
This is the Zeitgeist folks. People cannot tell assertion from argument; fact from fiction. As to manners and ethics; they do not exist. One cannot retain dignity in debate around fulminating hordes.
The funny thing is this non-entity; this repulsive little unmanly maggot—here is one of his first letters to our forum, which one headless chicken on the Jewcy forum has crowned a fine argument—thinks he can, with his limited cerebral agility and reach, damage me intellectually. Who raises these inflated gas bags—and there are many like maggot man roaming the Internet—to believe they are what they’re not?

Lesson learned: stay far from the madding crowds. And stop allowing scum onto Barely a Blog.

Spitzer Also Edited The Harvard Law Review

Business, Constitution, Democrats, Ethics, Justice, Law, Natural Law

(The title of the post is a tad unfair to Obama, I know. But editing The Harvard Law Review is clearly no litmus test for purity of intellect or ethics.)

One thing is for sure, Spitzer did not forge his political and fiscal fortunes by means of voluntary exchanges on the free market. The Spitzer piranha didn’t give law teeth; but used bad law to bite business to the bone.

Daniel Gross of Slate had this to say back in 2004:

Spitzer made maximum hay out of the “New York State’s Martin Act. The 1921 legislation, as Nicholas Thompson noted in this Legal Affairs piece, gives extraordinary powers and discretion to an attorney general fighting financial fraud. He can ‘subpoena any document he wants from anyone doing business in the state,’ make investigations secret or public at his whim, and ‘choose between filing civil or criminal charges whenever he wants.’ Extraordinarily, Thompson notes, ‘people called in for questioning during Martin Act investigations do not have a right to counsel or a right against self-incrimination. Combined, the act’s powers exceed those given any regulator in any other state.’”

Spitzer embodied abuse of power. As a government goon, he was an extortionist extraordinaire. “He didn’t simply indict. He issued press releases. When Spitzer published a press release detailing a shocking betrayal of trust by” this or the other “of Wall Street’s most trusted names,” the company would lose billions in market value in a matter of days and would quickly settle with the thug.

I know I’ve defended the naturally licit actions of scum such as Scooter Libby against naturally illicit prosecutions. And yes, I support the decriminalization of prostitution (but not its moral elevation). Yes again: I believe Spitzer’s funds are his to move about, and that his transactions were perfectly licit. So call me inconsistent on this count, but this character is so evil, contemptible, and uncontrollable (and nauseatingly hypocritical), I consider it a mitzvah that he has been removed from office and taken DOWN, if by unjust means.

I want to see Spitzer’s name live on in infamy; he ought to ultimately die disgraced, and if we lived under a just legal system, be prosecuted—but for his crimes against innocent members of the business community. Unfortunately—and I guess I’m nothing if not consistent—I’m with Alan Dershowitz on the following count: Spitzer ought not to be prosecuted for his moral failings. Although I’m filled with schadenfreude at the spectacle of Spitzer, there is no case to be made for his prosecution in libertarian law.

More later on Spitzer’s ho—or rather on the manner in which media have infantilized the girl and turned her into a victim.