Yesterday I asked this about the candidate I refer to as “Mr. BOOHOO-OUCH” (Barack O-bomba Overseas Hussein “Obambi” Obama - Objectively Unfit Coddler of Haters):

Does anyone doubt that Obama and a Democratic majority would further gut the military, as Clinton did, if they get the chance?

Geez, I had no idea that the proof has been out there, and so obviously (HT to Rush Limbaugh; Sept. 25 Update — Team Obama has disabled embedding, but the link still works).

Transcript (links added by me):

Thanks so much to the Caucus4Priorities for the great work you’ve been doing.

As President, I will end misguided defense policies and stand with Caucus4Priorities in fighting special interests in Washington.

First, I’ll stop spending $9 billion a month in Iraq. I’m the only major candidate who opposed this war from the beginning. As President, I will end it.

Second, I will cut tens of billions of dollars in wasteful spending. I will cut investments in unproven missile defense systems. I will not weaponize space. I will slow our development of future combat systems. And I will institute an independent defense priorities board to ensure that the quadrennial defense review is not used to justify unnecessary spending.

Third, I will set a goal of a world without nuclear weapons. To seek that goal, I will not develop new nuclear weapons. I will seek a global on the production of fissile material, and I will negotiate with Russia to take our ICBMs off of hair-trigger alert, and to achieve deep cuts in our nuclear arsenals.

You know where I stand. I’ve fought for open, ethical, accountable government my entire public life. I don’t switch positions or make promises that can’t be kept. I don’t posture on defense policy, and I don’t take money from federal lobbyists or powerful defense contractors.

As President, my sole priority for defense spending will be protecting the American people. Thanks so much.

He doesn’t exactly come off as Mr. Sunshine in this vid, does he?

Nope, this is the real Barack Obama — a grimly determined Bill “No Regrets” Ayers/Bernadine Dohrn radical who has learned nothing from history.

_________________________________________________

UPDATE: So why does Obama have so much to say about Russia and while uttering not a word about China? Answer: He must be okay with letting them arm further, and allowing them to catch up technologically.

UPDATE 2: From Rush (link will work for about a week) –

What you heard is real, and it is something that is frightening. Look, it’s patently obviously who this guy is. Make no mistake about it. This is a huge pacifist from the far-left fringe who is seeking the Oval Office.

I’ve been meaning to get into the legal and constitutional specifics of the complete-nonsense California “ruling” on same-sex “marriage” and Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger’s sellout response to it.

An e-mailer, frequent commenter, and stay-at-home mom has serendipitously done it for me, and exceptionally well. I have that person’s permission to post the following:

A Tale of Two Opinions…

In 1997, the Supreme Court of Ohio gave an “opinion” that the way we funded schools at the time was unconstitutional (DeRolph v. State, 1991). They “ordered” the Legislative branch to immediately and completely overhaul the process and even gave them a deadline (which was not met).

Now, our state law (Constitution) dictates that educational funding can be changed via our legislature or a constitutional amendment (there have been three proposed). And although liberals tried to use the courts to put their fox in charge of the henhouse on this issue, our Governor and legislature knew better and amazingly enough refused to implement what would arguably be ineffective, imprudent “repairs.”

The fundamental lesson here is that we have what is called “separation of powers.” One branch of government is NOT beholden to or bullied by another. Our Founders and subsequent states designed things that way to avoid creating another King George III situation. If that were NOT the case, and the judicial branch had power over the other two, then Ohio’s entire Legislature would be in contempt and/or jail to this day.

On May 16, 2003, the Supreme Court of Ohio ended all litigation and any further proceedings in DeRolph. We all continue to work together to implement the right kind of education reform and although not perfect, the process and rule of law were upheld…

Ironically, a few months later in November of 2003, the Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts issued a similar “opinion,” that the state’s ban on same-sex marriage was unconstitutional [Goodridge v. Dept. of Health, 2002]. A couple of differences here…the first being that Ohio’s Supreme Court had jurisdiction in DeRolph. Not so in Massachusetts, whose Constitution clearly states that only the executive and legislative branches can deal with/change matters of marriage (which the court openly acknowledged). Second, the Ohio branches followed the rule of law regarding the DeRolph opinion. Not so in Massachusetts. Mitt Romney, in tandem with a rogue, liberal court, unlawfully enforced a [non-binding] opinion without the legislation required by his state’s Constitution. Wow Mitt…meet King George III.

Now for some reason, so-called conservative pundits have given Mitt Romney a complete pass on this egregious dereliction of duty. Perhaps that is why they now refuse to argue the legal premise of what has been going on in California. If they “out” Arnold, no pun intended, then they “out” themselves…

Turns out, the California Supreme Court decided to issue the same “opinion” as Massachusetts, that the state’s voter-driven Prop 22 adopting the traditional definition marriage as law, is unconstitutional. And hey, why not? If a Republican Governor in Massachusetts can help subvert the law, it is only logical that California will want to keep up with the Jones’…or “King Georges” as the case may be. Problem is that since Prop 22 was made law via a voter-initiative, then by law, only the voters can reverse it. And whereas the CA Supreme court is allowed to [jurisdictionally] review the state Constitution all day long, they cannot make law, grant special rights or override the people without a binding statute/legislation…nor can their Governor.

Look, if the citizens of California have changed their minds and now want to be able to marry their hamsters, then have at it, just another reason to annex the state back to Mexico. But even they are going to need another ballot initiative, constitutional amendment and/or binding legislation (ratified by the people) to reverse Prop 22. Acquiescing this legal premise is why judicial activism is on the rise and society on such a sharp decline. Nevertheless, Governor Schwarzenegger, in tandem with a rogue, liberal court, plans on ignoring the legally-binding, overwhelming will of his constituents and follow in Mitt & George’s footsteps. Wow Arnold… meet King George III.

While we are still awaiting commentary from our ostensible, conservative leaders, I have an opinion of my own regarding their culpability in all of this and you know who you are…I’m tired of being lied to by faux conservatives caught up in their own bureaucracies soliciting “fight the good fight” donations under the guise of advancing conservatism, which they only do when it fits their narrative. The more we understand and spread the word about the fundamental rule of law regarding these matters, the more we will reject those who have ignored it by publicly continuing to debate on the false premise that “Same-Sex Marriage” has or can be made legal via the judiciary.

It’s hard to pick which is worse:

• Mitt Romney’s acquiescence to the open defiance of specific language in his state’s constitution by the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, which had no legal right to even accept the Goodridge case, let alone to render an opinion — “All causes of marriage…shall be heard and determined by the governor and council, until the legislature shall, by law, make other provision.” (PART THE SECOND, Ch. III, Article V.)
• Arnold Schwarzenegger’s near-eagerness to defy the expressed will of California’s people as described in the column.

Mitt Romney proved by what he did that he was, and remains, objectively unfit to hold public office. Schwarzenegger is about to do the same.

It’s here.

Their home-page tease is pretty good too — “America’s presidential hopefuls are pushing government-heavy approaches to climate change — just as the rest of the world is rebelling against them.”

I will post the column here at BizzyBlog Sunday morning (link won’t work until then) under the title “Governments Find It’s Not Easy Being ‘Green’ While Trying to Fleece Citizens” after the blackout expires.

Follow-up thought: It’s interesting how the “we ought to follow world opinion” crowd, and their media water-carriers in the US, are stone silent on “the world’s” rejection of draconian taxes and living-standard reductions to fight “global warming.” Maybe it’s because the “rest of the world” has figured out that it’s all a bunch of globaloney.

______________________________________________

UPDATE: Today’s edition of the CCNet daily e-mail I referred to in the PJM column has these three stories leading it, each from the UK (links added by me) –

(1) GREEN TAXES ON THE ROPES AS PUBLIC BACKLASH GROWS — Local Transport Today, 30 May 2008

The Government was struggling to maintain its green taxation agenda on transport this week amid truckers’ fuel protests, a media onslaught and a revolt by its own backbenchers. Ministers, already alarmed at Labour’s plummeting poll ratings and stung by this month’s byelection defeat in Crewe and Nantwich, this week insisted that they were in listening mode to the protestors, which suggests they may be prepared to abandon policies that are central to their attempts to reduce transport’s carbon dioxide emissions.

(2) BROWN HIT BY WORST PARTY RATING EVER — Jeremy Lovell, Reuters, 30 May 2008

British Prime Minister Gordon Brown’s ruling Labour Party has registered its worst opinion poll showing since surveys began in 1943, the Daily Telegraph newspaper reported on Friday. It said the YouGov poll showed Labour on 23 percent against 47 percent for the opposition Conservatives, underlining voter concerns about a slowing economy, rising fuel and food prices and a botched tax reform that have battered Brown’s popularity.

(3) GAS BILLS SET TO CRASH THROUGH THE £1,000 BARRIER — Gerri Peev, The Scotsman, 29 May 2008

Householders have been warned to brace themselves for “catastrophic” rises that could take their gas bills to £1,000 a year, after prices nudged to a record high yesterday. The average bill is set to soar by nearly £400 as energy companies prepare to pass on the costs of wholesale gas prices, which have surged. This would take the average gas bill from £665 to £1,091, the first time it has been more than £1,000. This is double what it was in January last year and treble the average bill just six years ago.

How is this not news in the US? If this were happening to Tony Blair over opposition to British military involvement in the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, we’d be reading about it daily.

UPDATE 2: In light of the previous update, isn’t it “amazing” that the New York Times’s coverage of Labor’s Crewe and Nantwich losses last week says absolutely nothing about unpopular “green” taxes on older vehicles or the truckers’ protest? In fact, you’ll see a bit of blame-shifting to the US (not kidding) for Gordon Brown’s troubles.

From Lake Oswego, Oregon:

Thursday, May 22, 2008

Pam Fischer usually wags a finger and says “hush” when her little dachshund, Annie, starts barking. But now, she’s glad her 9-1/2-pound friend has such a big mouth.

Around 1 a.m. Tuesday, police responded to a complaint about a barking dog waking residents in the Lake Grove neighborhood. Sgt. John Brent expected to find a giant, frothing canine. Instead, he was confronted by a very small, very agitated dachshund that was so aggressive it blocked Brent’s patrol car.

At first Brent, who heads Lake Oswego’s police canine unit, tried to catch Annie — formally named Annabelle — but that only made things worse. Not only did the dog keep barking with unwavering ferocity, she wouldn’t let Brent pass and stopped him when he tried to leave in the other direction.

That’s when the officer heard a faint cry for help.

Following the sound, he discovered Fischer lying behind a bush. She’d been lying there, unable to get up, for nearly an hour.

The 60-year-old woman says she had returned from the airport earlier that evening, after visiting her parents in Hawaii. The 51/2-hour flight was an ordeal, so she took a shower. Afterward, she felt so refreshed that she took Annie for a walk.

But Fischer, who suffers from degenerative joint disease and walks with a cane, tripped when she tried to step up a high curb. Falling, she grabbed a flimsy street sign and hit her head. Down she went, and she couldn’t get up by herself.

“I knew I would be OK, if I could get a little help,” Fischer said. “But Annie went crazy. She was licking my face and barking. She knew I didn’t belong on the ground. …..

Go here for the rest of the story.