three's company

The Bad Company Of Barack Obama
National Review Online: The Senator's "Change" Would Radically Alter This Country
This column was written by Andrew McCarthy

Why is Barack Obama so comfortable around people who so despise America and its allies? Maybe it’s because they’re so comfortable around him.

He presents as the transcendent agent of “change.” Sounds platitudinous, but it’s really quite strategically vaporous. Sen. Obama is loath to get into the details of how we should change, and, as the media’s Chosen One, he hasn’t had to.

But he’s not, as some hopefully dismiss him, a charismatic lightweight with a gift for sparkling the same old vapid cant. Judging from the company he chooses to keep, Obama’s change would radically alter this country. He eschews detail because most Americans don’t believe we’re a racist, heartless, imperialist cesspool of exploitation. The details would be disqualifying.
Continued here.


Can We Fill the Holes in Barack’s Story?
By Larry Johnson from noquarter.com
(Larry C. Johnson is CEO and co-founder of BERG Associates, LLC, an international business-consulting firm with expertise combating terrorism and investigating money laundering. Mr. Johnson works with US military commands in scripting terrorism exercises, briefs on terrorist trends, and conducts undercover investigations on counterfeiting, smuggling and money laundering. Mr. Johnson, who worked previously with the Central Intelligence Agency and U.S. State Department’s Office of Counter Terrorism, is a recognized expert in the fields of terrorism, aviation security, crisis and risk management.)

It just does not make sense. Why does Barack move to Chicago after law school? He has hidden this part of his past and frankly, if you are hiding something there is usually a reason and the reason ain’t good. You have a reason to move to a particular city or state. Let me illustrate what I mean. I was raised in Independence, Missouri. I left home to attend the University of Missouri. After getting my Master’s degree I returned to Independence briefly then wound up in Honduras working on a community development project. I came back from Honduras and decided to pursue a Ph.D. I was accepted at American University in Washington, D.C. I moved to Washington and have been in the Washington metro area, off and on, since 1979.

So I return to the question. Why does Barack wind up in Chicago? Here’s a guy who is at the top of the heap at Harvard’s Law School as the head of the Law Review, who could reasonably be expected to earn huge dollars in New York, Philadelphia, Los Angeles, or Boston and he spurns all of these to go to work in Chicago? Why?

There is no family tie that we know of. How about a college roommate? His two books do not explain this. Why my interest? I find it odd that this guy goes to Chicago and becomes part of a circle of folks who are known for politics best described as radical left. Any thoughts?


The Obama Campaign: Consent of, or Contempt for, the People
Expert guest post by Joseph C. Wilson
originally published on Huffington Post

Senator Obama's ill-conceived remarks likening small town Americans to embittered guns-and-God bigots have triggered a justifiable furor. Not only are the remarks insulting, but also factually incorrect.

As it happens, at the same event in San Francisco, Senator Obama made other remarks, equally startling, insulting our Foreign Service, Intelligence Officers, members of Congress who provide oversight, and friendly governments. Like his comments about small town Americans, Obama demonstrated a cavalier disregard for Americans who every day get up determined to make this a better country, whether running the general store in a small town, or representing our national security interests in a foreign country.

This is what Obama said:
Experience in Washington in not knowledge of the world. This I know. When Senator Clinton brags, 'I've met leaders from 80 countries,' I know what those trips are like. I've been on them. You go from the airport to the embassy. There's a group of children who do a native dance. You meet with the C.I.A. station chief and the embassy and they give you a briefing. You go take a tour of a plant that with the assistance of USAID has started something. And then you go.

Obama's arrogance and contempt for career professionals in the national security community is palpable. His contempt reminds me of something Bill Kristol, the editor of the right wing war mongering Weekly Standard, said in a debate with me shortly after the launching of the Iraq War in 2003. We were in Midland, Texas, Laura Bush's home town, and Kristol was asked if he had ever spent time in the Middle East region, to which he responded "I've always believed on the ground experience is highly overrated." That callous disregard for professional expertise and experience is, of course, one of the reasons we so badly miscalculated the consequences of our actions in Iraq. That arrogance is no less offensive coming from Senator Obama. And it is no less wrongheaded.

Foreign Service Officers, Intelligence operatives, and USAID development experts carry out the mandate of our government to represent the interests of the United States, to understand the dynamics in a foreign society so as to better advise our own government on policies to be pursued, and work to improve relations between the United States and the country in question. The world is a dangerous and precarious place, and there are serious issues that constantly need to be engaged with foreign governments. It requires hard work and diligence. We ignore or denigrate that work at our peril.

Senator Obama should know better. After all, in his professional capacity as Chairman of the Senate subcommittee responsible for Europe and NATO, he was in charge of ensuring Congressional oversight of the administration's efforts to generate greater NATO support for operations in Afghanistan. The fact that, by his own admission, he was too busy running for president to convene a single meeting of that subcommittee, should not absolve him of responsibility for acquiring at least some understanding of and respect for the work of career professionals who dedicate their lives to the service of their country.

I was one of those public servants for twenty-three years. My colleagues and I, whether in the Foreign Service, the Military or the Central Intelligence Agency, were and are motivated by a commitment to serve the values that have made this country free and secure, values that are enshrined in our founding documents, the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. In exercising our responsibilities, we were careful to ensure that members of Congress were kept abreast and made partners in our efforts to keep America safe. When they visited our posts, we went out of our way to provide substantive briefings, meetings with senior host government officials, trips to USAID projects so elected representatives could see for themselves what the United States was doing to assist citizens of the recipient country improve their lot in life. And yes, there were cultural events, to broaden the perspectives of the visitors and to show respect for the indigenous culture they were being introduced to. Our goal in this was to ensure that those who represent the American people in Congress better understood what we were doing because more knowledge leads to better decisions. Judgment is not intuitive, as Senator Obama asserts; from my hard-won experience as a Foreign Service Officer, that judgment is learned.

Obama has made plain that he is not bothered in the slightest about belittling the work of Foreign Service and CIA Officers serving overseas, often in dangerous circumstances, any more than he is about denigrating Americans from small towns or blaming democrats in Congress, and especially Hillary Clinton, for George W. Bush's war in Iraq. It was not ironic that he made both comments at the same fundraiser in San Francisco. The contempt is consistent.

Trashing Congress, small town Americans, and career national security professionals, while befriending Jeremiah Wright and Weather Underground terrorist Bill Ayers may be a winning electoral strategy. Who knows? Time will tell. But I suspect that many small town Americans are as offended as my professional colleagues and I by this display of contempt from one who seeks our consent to govern.


Ok, now me:
So, is Obama not only giving Hillary the *one finger salute*, but isn't he really giving us ALL the same gesture?

To be honest, I wasn't sure if he was intentionally flipping the bird, but a lot of people in the media think he was, and regardless of my opinion, it is clear that everone in Obama's audience sure thought he was. There is a list here of some of the sites covering the *bird*.

You know, in thinking about the post from Joe Wilson, it made me think about the comments Obama has made about Washington:

“Our leaders in Washington seem incapable of working together in a practical, common-sense way,” Obama said in a video posted on his Web site. “Politics has become so bitter and partisan, so gummed up by money and influence, that we can't tackle the big problems that demand solutions. And that's what we have to change first.”

"The stakes are too high ... to play the same old Washington games with the same old Washington players."

"What Washington needs is adult supervision."

"We can't change the way Washington works unless we first change how Congress works. "

"Most people who serve in Washington have been trained either as lawyers or as political operatives – professions that tend to place a premium on winning arguments rather than solving problems."

It is interesting to me, that people like Kennedy, Kerry and Dodd, lifelong politicians, don't take some offense to a new kid showing up, and telling them that they suck. I guess they know they suck...? Hmm, well, if they do suck, I guess we don't care about their endorsements? *shrug* Just an observation.

Oh, one other thing. You know how I have blogged about Obama supporters and pro-obama web sites threatening Hillary supporters, ridiculing Hillary supporters, the intimidation and death threats on superdelegates, and Tavis Smiley, his mother, and family, their boycotting of Disney, abc and Mickey Mouse, and just all around rude and vile behavior? Well, now someone has made a video called In Memorium - George Stephanopolous. Just because George dared to ask Obama some questions?

This has definitely become a new type of politics. New politics indeed.