Just look at this ruthless, heartless, critique of our dear President:
With the exception of core Obama Administration loyalists, most politically engaged elites have reached the same conclusions: the White House is in over its head, isolated, insular, arrogant and clueless about how to get along with or persuade members of Congress, the media, the business community or working-class voters. This view is held by Fox News pundits, executives and anchors at the major old-media outlets, reporters who cover the White House, Democratic and Republican congressional leaders and governors, many Democratic business people and lawyers who raised big money for Obama in 2008, and even some members of the Administration just beyond the inner circle.
Who is the ignorant, conservative, RAAAAAcist Tea-Partying pundit who wrote this trash?
Well, it’s … uh … uh … Mark Halperin at Time Magazine (“Why Obama Is Losing the Political War”; HT To Noel Sheppard at NewsBusters, where the headline is “Time Magazine Shocker: Obama In Way Over His Head”).
I told ya, 2-1/2 years ago. The third- and fourth-last letters of yours truly’s acronym (Mr. “BOOHOO-OUCH”) stood for, and still stand for, “Objectively Unfit.” He remains so. Halperin is merely confirming the obvious.
The children’s role was to provoke Be’eri (an Israeli archaeologist) into killing or injuring them by attacking him with rocks (and having him retaliate). The photographers’ role was to photograph the children getting killed or hurt.
Read the whole thing.
Representatives Steve Driehaus of Ohio, Suzanne Kosmas of Florida and Kathy Dahlkemper of Pennsylvania were among the Democrats who learned that they would no longer receive the same infusion of television advertising that party leaders had promised. Party strategists conceded that these races and several others were slipping out of reach…
Cue up the band to play “Good-bye, Stevie” at about 11 p.m. on November 2.
I’d like to see an encore in the OH-31 State Rep race. It’s a tough district for anyone with an “R” by his name to win, but if it’s possible in any year, this would be the one. Mike Robison is a far superior candidate on the issues –especially compared to the incumbent, Steve Driehaus’s sister Denise.
Denise will say that she’s pro-life, and she’ll wave around her answers to this pro-life questionnaire as “proof.”
But as I explained two years ago in the case of her brother (“Steve Driehaus is NOT Prolife”), a politician cannot legitimately claim to be pro-life if he or she voted for and actively supported Barack Obama in 2008 as long as they were aware of his positions and record on life-related matters. On the assumption that Ms. Driehaus’s Wiki entry is correct about her being a Roman Catholic, and that she was aware of Obama’s stridently anti-life positions, Church doctrine, as expressed in layman’s terms here, could not be more clear:
4. If I have strong feelings or opinions in favor of a particular candidate, even if he is pro-abortion, why may I not vote for him?
… neither your feelings nor your opinions are identical with your conscience. Neither your feelings nor your opinions can take the place of your conscience. Your feelings and opinions should be governed by your conscience. If the candidate about whom you have strong feelings or opinions is pro-abortion, then your feelings and opinions need to be corrected by your correctly informed conscience, which would tell you that it is wrong for you to allow your feelings and opinions to give lesser weight to the fact that the candidate supports a moral evil.
14. Is it a mortal sin to vote for a pro-abortion candidate? (the answer which follows clearly also applies to active public support — Ed.)
Except in the case in which a voter is faced with all pro-abortion candidates (in which case … he or she strives to determine which of them would cause the let damage in this regard), a candidate that is pro-abortion disqualifies himself from receiving a Catholic’s vote. This is because being pro-abortion cannot simply be placed alongside the candidate’s other positions on Medicare and unemployment, for example; and this is because abortion is intrinsically evil and cannot be morally justified for any reason or set of circumstances. To vote for such a candidate even with the knowledge that the candidate is pro-abortion is to become an accomplice in the moral evil of abortion. If the voter also knows this, then the voter sins mortally.
Update: From Rothenberg Political Report (HT to a COAST e-mail) —
Media sources in the Cincinnati media market confirmed to the Rothenberg Political Report this morning that the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee has cancelled its media buys after this week.
… The DCCC has cancelled all of its reserved time at WKRC, the CBS affiliate in the market, for the weeks of October 19 and October 26. The Committee pulled over $200,000 worth of reserved time. The Committee also cancelled its time (over $75,000 worth of time) for those two weeks at WLWT, the NBC affiliate.
… Other Democrats could face the same fate in the next 24 hours, since the deadline for cancelling reserved time is fast approaching.
Pamela Geller at BigGovernment.com — “Foreign Contributions: Investigating Obama.”
As I noted in November 2008 (Pajamas Media; BizzyBlog), based largely on work Geller originally did, “The campaign of Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama has been and may still be accepting credit-card and prepaid-card contributions from overseas. … it is likely that the total dollar amounts involved run in millions, if not tens of millions, of dollars.”
Remember this the next time a leftist spouts crap about opening up the voting process and making it easier:
More Disgrace: … DOJ’s complete failure to ensure that military voters get their 2010 ballots on time.
There’s only one reason for this: Military members tend to vote Republican. DOJ is deliberately standing by why many states are failing to carry out their lawful duties, or is granting bogus requirement waivers based on non-excuses, or both. That Eric Holder’s Department of Justice is a rogue agency is no longer a debatable matter.