I’m thinking about starting a 24 hour cable channel featuring nothing but off-the-cuff Obama riffs unaided by any electronic performance enhancing devices. I’ll call it “Obama Unplugged”. Here’s the latest entry:

Yesterday (in yet another one of the places I used to call home) Obama stepped from behind his TelePrompTer equipped lectern in Springfield Missouri and announced that he had discovered the cure for America’s dependence on foreign oil. Actually, he’s discovered an alternative fuel that will make your car so fuel efficient its doubtful you’ll ever need to fill your gas tank again.

What’s this new fuel? Why I’m glad you asked. No, it’s not Mr. Fusion.  It’s not a hydrogen fuel cell. It’s not even one of those smart cars that are so small they wouldn’t survive a head on collision with my son’s bicycle.

No, dear reader, Obama has gone above and beyond our mere mortal abilities of propulsion. He’s discovered that using just plain old ordinary air will get America out of her current fuel crunch. No, I’m not making this up. Stop laughing and watch the video.

See? Now dagnabbit, I told you to stop laughing. You know the Obamessiah doesn’t take kindly to being laughed at or about. Now go out and make sure your tires are properly inflated or Obama will again be embarrassed by your not heeding his wise counsel.

Obama knows about as much regarding improving fuel economy as he does about particle physics. Powerline’s John Hinderaker has run the numbers – you know those cold hard things we like to call factual data – and has concluded

…it would take only 11,308 years of proper tire inflation to equal “all the oil that they’re talking about getting off drilling.”

In the process of business decision making, the accountants always want to know what the “break-even” point is – in other words, the point at which the new venture will have made enough money to pay back the original investment. No business in it’s right collective mind would ever enter or advocate a new venture who’s break even point was 11,000 years out.

Of course, maybe by then our great (to the power of 24 or so) grandchildren will be flying around in cars powered by Mr. Fusion.


Earlier today Stephen posted the much-buzzed McCain ad portraying Obama as the World’s Biggest Celebrity. The Obama camp has already fired back.

So which is more effective? (And can we hear from a liberal or two, por favor? We know you’re lurking…)

I’m not exactly sure how I got routed to The Nation’s page today. I’m pretty sure I meant to click on another link at RealClearPolitics, but somehow or other I ended up reading “An Open Letter to Barack Obama“. I’m not sure how many people will actually read this letter. The same page has a blinking ad begging for donations so that The Nation can keep up with the rising cost of postage. Any publication that begs for donations obviously lacks enough subscribers to stay afloat.

But I digress. Where was I? Oh yeah, the Open Letter.

The signatories of this letter make a point of admonishing Illinois’ junior senator to

… listen to the voices of the people who can lift you to the presidency and beyond.

Forgive me if I get a bit presumptuous in my commentary, but last I checked, the office of the President of the United States is the highest office in the land. Other than a second term, there isn’t an office higher than the president to which one can aspire. What “beyond” are these jokers referring to?

The authors make a point to “remind” Obama that retreating from the stands he took in order to wrest the primary election from Hillary is not an option. Read between the lines and you’ll see clearly the slight cracks which are evident in Obama’s voter base. Simply put, if Obama abandons – or even appears to abandon – the hard left positions he took during the primary season this voter bloc could simply stay home and cost him the Big Chair.

And, to top it off, the first signature on the Open Letter belongs to none other than former (sorry excuse for) Salt Lake City Mayor Ross Anderson. No, I won’t call that spineless weenie “Rocky”.

Alaska Senator Ted Stevens, long a powerful and influential figure in the Senate, is facing political extinction after his indictment on charges of making false statements involving his acceptance of inappropriate gifts. The National Review Online has gone so far as to call for his immediate resignation.

Stevens’ dilemma only worsens a potential disaster in the 2008 election in the Senate, where at the moment, the Republicans are in danger of losing a lot of ground. Currently, GOP seats are in serious danger in Alaska, New Mexico, Colorado, Virginia and New Hampshire.

Here’s one rather interesting point the NRO made about Stevens:

One of Alaska Sen. Ted Stevens’s most memorable moments of the last few years came during the Senate fight over the infamous “Bridge to Nowhere.” In 2005, when Sen. Tom Coburn introduced a measure that would have redirected the money Stevens had earmarked for the bridge to hurricane-ravaged New Orleans, Stevens gave an apoplectic speech on the Senate floor in which he threatened to resign if the Senate passed the measure. It was the nation’s loss that the Senate voted the measure down, simultaneously missing two opportunities.

Classy Ted. Real classy. Why don’t you take some poor kid’s lollipop while you’re at it?

Effective? You be the judge. I guess any remaining questions about whether McCain is willing to attack Obama can be settled.


There’s oodles of news this week about polls, VP’s and McCain’s lesions. But here’s an interesting nugget you might have missed. From Newsmax:

Obama Pulls Fewer Evangelicals Than Kerry

Despite assertions in the press that evangelical Christians are backing Democrat Barack Obama in the presidential race, a new survey reveals that he is getting less support than John Kerry did four years ago.

A typical headline, which ran last week in U.S. News & World Report, announced: “Obama Campaign Is Making Progress With Evangelical Voters.”

But the poll by the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press found that 25 percent of white evangelicals favor Obama over John McCain, while 26 percent favored John Kerry over President Bush in 2004.

In 2000, Al Gore enjoyed even more support — 28 percent.

“Not that this translates into evangelical enthusiasm for McCain, but the survey is worth noting for no other reason than it challenges the prevailing media assumption about how Obama’s overt religiosity is helping his campaign,” National Review’s Mark Hemingway observes.

And the Pew Center notes: “Obama has made no significant gains among this important constituency.”

The survey also found that 39 percent of white mainline Protestants support Obama, significantly less than the 46 percent who backed Gore in 2000.

And among white, non-Hispanic Catholics, 40 percent favor Obama, compared to 47 percent who supported Kerry and 45 percent who backed Gore.

Four in 10 respondents who said they attend religious services at least once a week are backing Obama, fewer than the 42 percent who favored Kerry.

According to Hemingway, press accounts of Obama’s support among evangelicals are “a classic example of the media trying to force a campaign narrative, regardless of whether it is true.”


Wouldn’t a dance-off for the White House be a sight to see?

Just picture Barack break dancing or McCain doing the macarena.

Well, here’s your chance to help the candidates cut a rug.

This comes folks that gave us the doozy that is “Obama Girl”

Let me know what your high score is!



Talk about getting your Larrys crossed!

HT-Jim Geraghty




Hat tip to Scott V. for sending along these competing Batman reviews. They remind us just how strong the partisan lens can be. Read both reviews and return to tell us which one you liked better.

The Dark Knight: The End of the 911 Meta-narrative

The Dark Knight: What Bush and Batman Have in Common


So Barack Obama has now made his first ever trip to Berlin. I can’t wait to see the T-shirt sales from the 2008 Obamamania tour. He’s drawn huge crowds at every venue, whether it be the hotel gym at the Berlin Ritz Carlton or downtown at the Siegessäule.

The MSM – currently following Obama around like a bunch of love-sick band groupies – immediately compared Obama’s speech to those made by Jack Kennedy and Ronald Reagan. In the unitary mind of the MSM, Obama has already won the White House – its only a matter of time before he and Michelle start making really important decisions, namely what color curtains to put in the Oval Office.

There’s one glaring difference between the speeches made by Kennedy and Reagan and that made by Obama today. Both Kennedy and Reagan earned the right to stand in Berlin. Barack Obama has not earned any such right.

Kennedy and Reagan stood in Berlin during different decades but with the same enemy. They both looked across the Iron Curtain and poked America’s finger in the eye of the Soviet Union. Kennedy stood in solidarity with the citizens of West Berlin – even to the point of getting away with calling himself a jelly donut in the process. Reagan dared Gorbachev to “tear down this wall” despite the best effort of linguini-spined State Department staffers who feared he was being too bold.

Read more


Under a recent post regarding Novak being used and abused by the McCain camp, PD editor Jason Wright suggested I adopt some increased personal security measures out of fear that I might incur the wrath of “Prince of Darkness” columnist Robert Novak.

Read the exchange here.

It appears that may have been a wise suggestion.

Read more