John McCain

:D

 Hold the presses.

It ain't true.

Apparently, a 20-year-old college student, Ashley Todd, invented the whole thing.

"Todd initially told investigators she was attempting to use a bank branch ATM when the man approached her from behind, put a knife with a 4- to 5-inch blade to her throat and demanded money. She told police she handed the assailant $60 and walked away."

That usual suspect... a black man. Surprised? Nah... Todd then alleged that "he then sat on her chest, pinned her hands down with his knees and scratched a backward letter "B" into her face with a dull knife."

"They just started talking to her and she just opened up and said she wanted to tell the truth..." Bryant said.

 So the attack never happened.

(Stop for a moment and exercise your powers of observation in the picture. What's become of college lately?)

Anyway, ignore all of that for a moment.

For the sake of argument, let's say this attack really did happen and everything that Todd alleges is true. In fact, let's also pretend that the Pittsburgh police caught the suspect and he confessed to the attack and the attack was politically motivated.

What should the response of liberals and democrats be?

Should we say suspend  judgment and say, well we don't know what Todd could have said to incite such violence? Should we blame Todd for inviting the attack? I mean we could not see what Todd had said, so perhaps she had said something in which begged this man to attack her. In fact, she deserved it.

No.

The proper response would be to condemn this person and an attack like this.

Liberals have no need to play Team "D" at the expense of common sense and respect to people rights.

However, some do (Amy Hemmer ... Amy Hemmer) because they must play Team "R" at all costs.

Lesson today: Do not defend the indefensible.

When you do, you've only exposed yourself as the hypocrite that you thought you gotcha'ed.

Very few – if any, deathbed conversion stories pan out to be reliable.

For example, Charles Darwin. It was said that he renounced evolution and embraced Christianity on his deathbed. A fabricated story. Darwin died an atheist and still convinced of the science he so painstaking tested over the course of some 20 years.

Despite the unreliability of these deathbed conversion stories, they continue to hold a power over us and play upon our imaginations for whatever reason.

There is no need for imagination where the reliability of present day political conversions and endorsements are concerned though. Much has been made of the oft Hilary Clinton supporter so miffed by Senator Obama's candidacy, who are now voting for Senator McCain. Yet, little has been said of republicans, or conservatives, who have endorsed Senator Obama instead of the de facto Republican Party leader and candidate, Senator John McCain. And I am not talking about those conservatives, like George Will, Kathleen Parker or Ken Adelman, who blasted McCain for his inane pick of Sarah Palin - which is quickly becoming McCain's own Harriet Myers moment.

Until now.

Here are just a few of the more prominent republicans and conservatives who have broken with their fellow partisans. Their collective endorsements directly rebut the criticisms by republicans and other conservatives against Obama that he is not able or ready to lead.

Colin Powell. In probably the most high profile of all endorsements, Republican and former Bush administration cabinet member  rebuffed McCain for his smears against Obama and stated "I come to the conclusion that because of his ability to inspire, because of the inclusive nature of his campaign, because he is reaching out all across America, because of who he is and his rhetorical abilities -- and you have to take that into account -- as well as his substance -- he has both style and substance..."

Christoper Buckley. When the son of the late National Review founder, William F Buckley, endorsed Obama for president he forced to resign his small column due to the hate mail he recieved. On Obama, Buckley stated that "Obama has in him—I think, despite his sometimes airy-fairy “We are the people we have been waiting for” silly rhetoric—the potential to be a good, perhaps even great leader. He is, it seems clear enough, what the historical moment seems to be calling for."

Scott McClellan. Off the heals from the recent publishing of his book criticizing Bush over the policy to war with Iraq, the former Bush press sectary stated "From the very beginning I've said I'm going to support the candidate who has the best chance of changing the way Washington works and getting things done. I will be voting for Barack Obama."

Republicans for Obama. A grassroots organization of republicans who  have campaigned and voted republicans for "all their lives." They endorse Obama because "Senator Obama has rejected the politics of division and the win-at-all-costs attitude that has hurt our ability to move forward as a nation. While we as Republicans will not always see eye to eye with a President Obama, we know that his politics of competency and unity will lead to a stronger America."

Are these types endorsements convincing to voters? 

Curiously, Obama did receive a boost in the polls after Powell's endorsement. The Washington Post-ABC News tracking poll showed a 11 point sway in Obama's favor, with 2 in 10 independents who are now more likely to vote for Obama in the wake of Powell's endorsement.

Will this ultimately sway the undecided come November 4th?

I do not know.

The reasons for why people vote the way they vote are complex and not easily understood and I do not wish to pay the issue lip service in this small space. However, it is interesting to note the reasons why when a member of either political persuasion endorses a rival candidate and what convinced them. I've voted for a "rivals"  in the past and it has always been a curious experience for me.

Why? It's a matter of priorities. If a republican would deliver gay marriage rights, protect a woman's reproductive rights, stand firm on the separation Church and State, repudiate racism (which many do obviously), and rebuff faith-based funding, I would vote for that republican despite my disagreements on the role and size of government or other areas of policy. (These are not my main priorities in this election, however.) The why's transcends the how's in this case.

Allegiance to party does not obviate progressive necessity and human rights.

Likewise, the above republicans and conservatives have prioritized their concerns and have endorsed Obama accordingly.

It should be obvious to all Americans that we live in a democracy and not a theocracy, despite the inevitable conflicts between church and state.

Democracies and theocracies are mutually exclusive forms of governance. You can not have a government for and by the people, and a government which exists to carry out God's laws.

For instance, take blaspheme. In Mark 3:29 we are informed that "...whoever blasphemes against the Holy Spirit can never be forgiven, but is guilty of eternal sin." One such famous case of blaspheme is the Trial of C.B. Reynolds from the late 19th century.

Wait, one second... Screw you! Holy Spirit!

Anyway, where our democracy is explicit about free speech - despite some wrongful exceptions to the contrary, nowhere does the United States Constitution (a legal document) state that speech is not "free" except with a few conditions. 

Like blaspheme for instance.

Sarah Palin was interviewed by Bob Dobson of Focus on the Family (ie. hate the gay) yesterday.

"... it also strengthens my faith because I know at the end of the day putting this in God's hands, the right thing for America will be done, at the end of the day on Nov. 4."

And what if Obama wins? Will that be God's will too?

Probably not. It's only God's will when something you want happens, happens. If it does not happen, well then - it's your fault.

"It is that intercession that is so needed," she said. "And so greatly appreciated. And I can feel it too, Dr. Dobson. I can feel the power of prayer, and that strength that is provided through our prayer warriors across this nation. And I so appreciate it."

Palin thinks that God will intervene and turn McCain's and Palin's fortune around come election day. Palin ascribes to Third Wave Theology, a doctrine which asserts that the Holy Spirit is an active and approachable entity in  people's lives.

Basically, God will appoint the Republican ticket to the office of President by intervening in the vote.

If it is His will for the Palin/McCain to win all along, why the need to pray for it? God is omniscient after all, and should know a priori what your hopes and desires are. God is also omnipotent. How would the groveling by a Christian change His mind if Obama was not God's pick for President?

No. Don't bother to harmonize the contradictions. For each one you do, you invoke hundred more.

Confirming this, Dobson stated that he and his wife would pray for "God's intervention."

Funny that is.

While Republicans will endlessly cry about ACORN and alleged voting fraud by the organization, they have no problem with usurping your vote by appealing to God to rob you of yours.

Posts ago, I defended McCain and his supporters that while their rhetoric against Obama was indeed hateful and incendiary, there was no reason to fear because there had been no evidence of any violence perpetrated against any Obama supporters.

I was wrong.

WISN reports:

Nancy Takehara, 58, was canvassing a neighborhood Saturday when the attack happened.

In an exclusive WISN interview, Takehara said that she drove from Chicago to help with Sen. Barack Obama’s canvassing effort.

She said that she and a friend were attacked by a disgruntled homeowner.

The man allegedly grabbed her by the back of the neck and started pulling her hair.

"The next thing I know he's telling us we're not his people, we're probably with ACORN, and he started screaming and raving. He grabbed me by the back of the neck. I thought he was going to rip my hair out of my head. He was pounding on my head and screaming. The man terrified me," Takehara said.

Obama called her to make sure that she was OK, Takehara said.

"This negative stuff has to stop, [we’re] not about attacking each other," Takehara said.

" I thought he was going to rip my hair out of my head. He was pounding on my head and screaming. The man terrified me."

VIDEO

Violence like this does not appear from nowhere. This attack is just the culmination in a series of attacks against liberals and voting rights.

In the last presidential debate, McCain alleges and  amplifies this personal attack against Obama:

"We need to know the full extent of Senator Obama's relationship with ACORN, who is now on the verge of maybe perpetrating one of the greatest frauds in voter history in this country, maybe destroying the fabric of democracy."

I'm calling it now.

McCain may win the election, but has lost the Presidency. His meek record of bipartisanship is forever damaged and he will not be able to lead as President.

(Source)

 

Hey! Did you hear the story of a 33 year old mom who stole her daughter's drivers license in the false hope for a second-chance at high-school? She was caught.

This tactic is right from the McCain playbook. You know, the same candidate who votes with Bush and his policies 90% of the time. And like Bush - McCain doesn't care if it takes a 100 years for "victory" in Iraq. (At the average rate of 750 American causalities a year, we are looking at 75,000 American deaths. That's the size of an average Midwestern city.)

At his RNC acceptance speech last week, McCain dubbed himself the reform candidate. This is code: reform meaning change. McCain knows that the majority of Americans are dissatisfied and upset with the past 8 years of the Bush Administration. One only needs to review the polling to see that Bush is a Nixon bottom feeder.

Sorry, if you vote McCain, you vote the whole of the Republican establishment. Effectively, there will be no change in domestic or foreign policy, because McCain will not reform. McCain will step blissfully in Bush's wingtips. Happy with Bush '04? You won't be happy with Bush '08 by McCain proxy.

Like our mom above, McCain must steal the identity of the Obama campaign.

To expect change from a Republican is like dressing up a 33-year old mom as a high-school cheerleader, or a cheerleader up as president.