Dems Trashed American Flags

Democrats are employing a diversionary tactic to defend themselves against the charge that they trashed thousands of American flags used at the grand finale Greek Temple event at Invesco Field. Here's how it works:

To make the accusers look ridiculous, they publish pictures like the one on the left, showing flags bundled up in trash bags. This is a real picture, and I don't doubt they indeed were packaging them for later use.

This is the diversion. Ordinary Americans hear the story and are outraged, but then see the picture and think "oh, that's not so bad."

This first bit of truth over here diverts attention from the truth of the original story over there: Yes, conventioneers really did trash American flags. Did Obama order it? Of course not, another strawman put up by the left to cover their unpatriotic act.

So, regardless of what the experts over DNC house organs like the Huffington Post and MSNBC say, this story is not bogus.

HuffPo featured only the picture on the left and dutifully spouted the DNC line that this was all a big lie:

Another statement from the Democratic National Convention Committee: "Stories circulating about flags at the Democratic National Convention are false. We distributed more than 125,000 American made flags at the Convention - the flags removed from Invesco field were intended for other events and taken without permission. It's disappointing that someone would take American flags without authorization and then falsely describe how they were being used. We have the utmost respect for the American flag, and it's sad to see them being used for a cheap political stunt."

The pictures from Redstate.com, of which I have posted only one, make it pretty clear that Democratic conventioneers did indeed throw American flags in the trash. Please go visit the site, but be prepared to get mad.

The Dems' indignant protestations remind me of a Quote by Ralph Waldo Emerson:

Do not say things. What you are stands over you the while and thunders so that I cannot hear what you say to the contrary.

Links:
http://blogs.denverpost.com/opinion/2008/09/06/republican-recycling/
http://www.redstate.com/diaries/redstate/2008/aug/28/mystery-solved/

Real Hope

This was done by David R. Darrow, http://www.everydaypaintings.com/

Obama Shoots Off His Mouth About Guns

Mr. Obama was out trying to tame the unwashed Bible thumpin' gun clingin' rednecks yesterday. First he said this:

“I believe in the Second Amendment, and if you are a law-abiding gun owner, you have nothing to fear from an Obama administration!”

So far so good, but then the mask slipped:

He also keenly noted that even if he intended to take away guns, he would not have the power to do so as president. “I couldn’t get it done. I don’t have the votes in Congress.”

Hmmm... If he believes in the second amendment, why would he even make such a statement?

You would never hear him say "Even if I wanted to take your free speech away I couldn't do it. I don't have the votes!" We all know that would be an absurd statement; just as absurd as his statement about voting to take our guns away.

Congress Cannot Vote Away Constitutional Rights!

For the record, here's a refresher, courtesy of Cornell University:

Amendment II: A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.

Mr. Obama is a gungrabbing city slicker who has no concept of small-town and rural America. I think he would take our guns away if he had the votes. He said what he really though of us out in San Francisco while schmoozing his fellow effete liberal, wine and cheese, Volvo driving, arugula eating, oh-so-better-than-you-and-me snobs.

That BS don't fly in the heartland.

But Everybody's Doing It!

But Mom! Everybody does it!

Remember using that tactic as a kid when you're parents criticized your participation in the latest craze or fad? Pretty immature, wasn't it?

Well, the press is employing that same tactic to defend their candidate's multiple "present" votes in the Illinois Senate. Check this out from AP:

"We don't have a 'present' button as governor - we are expected to lead..." said Palin, who is in her first term as Alaska's governor.

Palin was referring to Obama's days in the Illinois Senate, when he voted "present" dozens of times among the thousands of votes he cast in his eight years there. The move is common among Illinois lawmakers, but has become a favorite Republican complaint about Obama.

See how they blithely explain it away? It was only dozens of times out of thousands of votes... And anyway, everybody does it! Instead of calling out weasel lawmakers, like it did back in the day, the press covers for them!

This is what's wrong with Washington and all the state capitols around this country: Lawmakers who duck the tough decisions are aided and abetted in their cowardice by the enablers in the press who don't want to get kicked off the cocktail circuit.

Sarah Palin is the mom who stands up and calls these immature brats on it. "I don't care if everybody does it, it's still shirking your responsibility as a public servant. Stand for something and make a decision!"

The Obama sycophant who wrote the article signed off with a subtle dig:

She did not take questions from reporters.

How dare Ms. Palin employ an Obama tactic!

Peggy Noonan Raw, MSNBC Style

I've grown to like Peggy Noonan over the years. She has a soft, feminine veneer that disguises a hard-edged thinking that sometimes sneaks out in her writing.

Her open open mic comments where she seems to declare the the McCain-Palin campaign "over" are all over the internet. And they've given the lefties an excited case of the giddy red-hots: Lying Repugs revealed! One of their own has slipped up!

Here's what was reported:

After a segment with NBC's Chuck Todd ended today, Republican consultant Mike Murphy and Wall Street Journal columnist Peggy Noonan were caught on a live mike ridiculing the choice of Sarah Palin.

"It's over," said Noonan, who then responded to a question of whether Palin is the most qualified Republican woman McCain could have chosen.

"The most qualified? No. I think they went for this — excuse me — political bullshit about narratives," she said. "Every time the Republicans do that, because that's not where they live and it's not what they're good at, they blow it."

Well, it seems someone (could it be an MSNBC employee?) selectively edited the tape before blasting it to the world. Why do arguments from the left so often involve some deceit or distortion, like the John McCain joke about what he considers rich?

Anyway, Peggy issued a clarification today. She is still critical of the Republican ticket, but she credibly maintains that her "it's over" comment was snipped and taken out of context. I believe her. She's a conservative, but she's no knee-jerk party cheerleader. She says what she thinks, upsetting the party faithful in the process. If she really thought it was "over" she would have said so in one of her columns. Her criticism of President Bush recently is a good example.

You can read her full response Here. Here's an excerpt:

In our off-air conversation, I got on the subject of the leaders of the Republican party assuming, now, that whatever the base of the Republican party thinks is what America thinks. But, I argued, that's over, those assumptions are yesterday, the party can no longer assume that its base is utterly in line with the thinking of the American people. And when I said, "It's over!" -- and I said it more than once -- that is what I was referring to.

In the truncated version of the conversation, on the Web, it appears I am saying the McCain campaign is over. I did not say it, and do not think it. That is, McCain may well win. I do not think the campaign is over, I do not think this is settled, and did not suggest, back to the Todd-Murphy conversation, that "It's over."

Now, on to the next press-manufactured scandal...

...But She's the Wrong Kind of Feminist!

Sarah Palin should be a feminist's dream. She's a powerful woman who made it on her own and she has it all: A self-made career and a beautiful family. Her macho, union worker, snowmobile racing husband, Alaska's "first dude," is happy to play Mr. Mom while she runs the state.

I know, it's all about her anti-abortion, pro-guns and God stances... Can't feminists at least give her props for her achievements before slamming her policies? Gloria Steinem was just quoted as saying "All Sarah Palin shares with Hillary is a chromosome." All I can say is, thank God for that!

I could go on, but I'd rather direct you to an excellent commentary written by Andrea Peyser. She skillfully shows how the left has lapsed into 1950's style paternalistic sexism. Here's the money quote:

But women on the left, who fought long and hard for the ability to raise children simultaneously with election cash, are in spasms. (Some have simply kept silent. Nancy Pelosi, Hillary Clinton - where are you?)

Meanwhile, WomenCount, A Pro-Hillary Feminist group, actually defended Palin against what it calls "misogynistic attacks," while maintaining they did not agree with her politics. Finally , one feminist organization that is intellectually honest and true to its stated cause. Why haven't we heard more from them? Because it doesn't fit the narrative.

Why the hypocrisy? Because it's not about the poor, or feminism or racism or whatever-ism, it's about Liberalism.

For a summary of media attacks against Palin, go read this politico article. It sums things up nicely, but be prepared to get mad. My favorite is the one criticizing her hairdo.

Obama-Lincoln, Obama-Kennedy: No Comparison

Since McCain nominated Sarah Palin, Senator Obama's experience has again become an issue. I guess the European jaunt didn't quite burnish his credentials.

There are two arguments over his experience: One comparing his to Palin's, and the other absurdly argues that he is as qualified as Lincoln or Kennedy when they ran for office.

I'll deal with the first and ignore the second. I think a business owner and governor has more executive leadership experience than a community organizer turned politician who eats donations and craps BS. My purpose here is to cut down the nonsensical comparisons with JFK and Lincoln.

Let's take Abraham Lincoln first. A skilled debater could almost make this a convincing case, for Lincoln's Civil War leadership is what revealed the greatness of this man who was underestimated by some when he was elected.

Lincoln was a true self-made man, becoming a lawyer by dint of his own hard work and self-study. He was a store keeper and a Captain in the Illinois Militia during the Blackhawk wars. His military experience only lasted a few months, but that's still more than Obama's. He didn't teach law, but he did practice it for years, earning the admiration of his peers. He was an Illinois legislator for eight years and earned national fame during the Lincoln Douglas debates that took place during his unsuccessful run for Senator. His fame was well earned: He dazzled audiences with his clever debating skills that were well-grounded in Christian Religion and classical thought as he debated the great issues facing our country. In other words, he actually said substantive things when he spoke.

The John F. Kennedy argument is even more ridiculous. JFK was a Naval Officer in the Pacific during WW II, earning a purple heart as well as decorations for heroism. Despite grave injuries, he made sure his crew got to safety after their boat, PT 109, was cut in half by a Japanese destroyer. He was a US Congressman from 1947-1953, and a US Senator from 1953-1960. He also won a Pulitzer prize for his book, profiles in courage, which by the way was not about himself. John Kennedy was already a great man of significant accomplishments when he entered the White House in 1961.

Mr. Obama cuts a stylish figure like JFK and he's from Illinois like Abe Lincoln, but the comparisons become strained much past that. Good people can make the argument that Mr. Obama is qualified to be president. They just need to refrain from twisting history and belittling the reputations of true American heroes in the process.

http://bioguide.congress.gov/scripts/biodisplay.pl?index=l000313
http://www.whitehouse.gov/history/presidents/al16.html
http://www.whitehouse.gov/history/presidents/jk35.html
http://www.biography.com/deathiversary/jfk/jfk.jsp