TOBY PETZOLD

Over at the Eschaton opium den just now, my friend Steve Simels made the mistake of asking me if I thought that

Obama’s more to the left than Bill Clinton? If so, you’re beyond stupid.

Now, it’s true that Obama and the Big Dog are unusually soulless men who have only ever desired power, but it is also true that Bill Clinton had a great wealth of electoral and executive experience that almost certainly burned out of him any real tendencies he might have had towards socialism or full-on racial or gender equality. Obama, by contrast, has virtually no executive experience (outside of being a grievance engineer in a very corrupt city) and, so, is obviously more smitten with pie-in-the-sky Leftist horseshit. That’s why he thinks it personally necessary to go and apologize to the Eurozombies for the bad feelings they’ve been feeling about America. Pobrecitos! Once Obama Skywalker alights upon Washington, all the world will ooh and aah and feel good about us again. Because that’s what we’ve been needing: the approval of people who don’t even have the sense to defend themselves against the Mohammedan Menace.

When Barack Hussein Obama is President, people like Christopher Reeve are going to walk again.

Just caught the last few minutes of Madame Couric fluffing Obama Soter —and it turns out that the reason he’s going to hold a campaign rally in front of Hitler’s favorite monument to Prussian militarism is to get the krauts “to feel good” about America again. And to say we’re sorry to our “old enemies.” So very, very sorry.

Obama is an abomination. Inshallah, this wankfest he’s been on this past week will be the beginning of the end of his hopes. Surely Americans won’t reward this degree of narcissism.

When Al Gore accepted the Nobel Prize, he said that we human beings are the problem.

If that sort of self-loathing Leftist pessimism isn’t the direct descendant of the concepts of original sin and the unredeemed sinner, then it is their retarded nephew. Therefore, what Gore and the Gaiists are practicing is religion. Moreover, it is utterly derivative of Judeo-Christian morality, which must be just awful for these tweed jacketed and besandaled morans to finally recognize: “Wha-? We’re just as trapped by the oppressive orthodoxy of sin and redemption as mere Christianists and Neocons?!”

Just quit tripping and settle down, hippies. Come up with something slightly less insane than to promise a completely carbon-neutral America within ten years. Jesus, Gore! Put down that bong and be serious. 

The hippies get all bent out of shape when you explain to them that George W. Bush isn’t actually spying on them, in particular. They so want to matter, but know they don’t. Therefore, the conspicuous cries foul, as though the pretense to offense were enough to make themselves into ”persons of interest” to McHitlerburton. Instead, these mostly-anonymous slanderers and libelers —raging against some cabal du jour of Jews, Texas oilmen, and Admiral Poindexter— are certain that their most recent blog post on FISA as a bill of right has gained them the attention of the Chimperor’s gestapo. These libtards are pathetic. Nobody cares and nobody is reading their anonymous shit.

Peter Wehner unloads on the Eleven Percenters’ Democratic half with respect to the success of the surge in the War for Iraq. The Democrats, he concludes:

have compounded their initial bad judgment about the surge with reckless obstinacy. As ethno-sectarian violence in Iraq rapidly declined, as al Qaeda absorbed tremendous military blows, and as political accommodation and legislative achievements have emerged, Democrats, rather than welcoming the progress, grew agitated. They embraced with religious zeal the belief that the Iraq war was lost; they therefore viewed the success of the surge as a terribly inconvenient development, one they sought to deny to the point that they looked silly and out of touch. Worse, Democrats acted as if they had a vested interest in an American defeat.

Rarely has a political party been so uniformly wrong, in such an obvious way, on such an important matter. And when Americans cast their vote on November 4, they should carefully consider how Barack Obama and the entire Democratic party fought ferociously and relentlessly to undermine a policy that has worked extraordinarily well and may yet prove to be among the most successful military plans in modern times.

Not only are the Democrats defeatists, but they have nominated an unqualified liar for the ostensible reason that he —and not Hillary— will act on his promise to them to end the war. But now that the war has already been won in large measure because of a commitment to victory and to political stability that Obama repeatedly denied our military could ever accomplish, what is he to say? Who knows? No one cares because it isn’t what he has to say that’s so damned mesmerizing, but how he says it. It’s all so Kennedyesque and wonderful and epochal in its significance.

Enjoy telling our troops in Iraq that they have accomplished nothing. Make a mockery of the very idea of leadership by turning this little junket of yours into a Big Media suckfest. Go and give us a speech on peace before a Prussian war memorial, Barry. Who says you have no sense of humor?

Everybody’s going to be talking about this New Yorker article all week —after they talk about the cover— so be sure to check it out:

Obama seems to have been meticulous about constructing a political identity for himself. He visited churches on the South Side, considered the politics and reputations of each one, and received advice from older pastors. Before deciding on Trinity United Church of Christ, he asked the Reverend Wright about critics who complained that the church was too “upwardly mobile,” a place for buppies.

“Buppies”? Ha, ha. Never mind the “word of God” —Obama was only in it for the political advantage. Needed to know how the congregation was perceived politically. There’s hardly any denying that. He’s such a goddamned fake, the notion that he’s a Manchurian candidate is almost impossible to ignore. Barack Hussein Obama is a calculated liar and a hypocrite. His nomination is the final proof of the Democratic Party’s contempt for their own country.

Regarding Barry Hussein Obama’s latest lie —this time about Iraq— ABC News’ Rick Klein writes:

There’s been lots of speculation this week about whether Sen. Barack Obama has an Iraq problem. He does now.

His comments Thursday, saying that he will “continue to refine” his plan to withdraw combat troops from Iraq inside of 16 months, seems likely to leave the campaign on the defensive on this issue for days or weeks.

And it increases the likelihood that his trip to Iraq later this month will not turn out like Obama wants it to.

Well, Barry doesn’t even want to go to Iraq, but McCain has apparently shamed him into it. This horseshit about “refining” his position on the withdrawal of our troops makes Obama just another lying hack politician. Klein concludes:

Obama’s migration to the political center has been well-documented, and is already a frame McCain is building around his candidacy. But Iraq — this is qualitatively different, an issue that lives on a higher plane, since opposing the war was the rationale for his candidacy in the first place.

Being opposed to the war may have been a major selling point, but let’s not lie about Obama’s candidacy. He is where he is because of his race. Period. The Leftists have taken over the Democratic Party and have installed an absolute fucking clown on their Presidential ticket for the sake of identity politics.

Obama’s nomination is the final proof of the Democratic Party’s contempt for their own country.

Yesterday, Obama’s surrogate, Wesley Clark, told Bob Schieffer on Face the Nation that McCain’s service in the Viet Nam War was nothing too relevant to his leadership. Here’s part of their exchange (emphases mine):

SCHIEFFER: Well you, you went so far as to say that you thought John McCain was, quote, and these are your words, “untested and untried,” And I must say I, I had to read that twice, because you’re talking about somebody who was a prisoner of war. He was a squadron commander of the largest squadron in the Navy. He’s been on the Senate Armed Services Committee for lo these many years. How can you say that John McCain is un- untested and untried? General?

CLARK: Because in the matters of national security policy making, it’s a matter of understanding risk. It’s a matter of gauging your opponents, and it’s a matter of being held accountable. John McCain’s never done any of that in his official positions. I certainly honor his service as a prisoner of war. He was a hero to me and to hundreds of thousands and millions of others in Armed Forces as a prisoner of war. He has been a voice on the Senate Armed Services Committee, and he has traveled all over the world. But he hasn’t held executive responsibility. That large squadron in Air- in the Navy that he commanded, it wasn’t a wartime squadron. He hasn’t been there and ordered the bombs to fall. He hasn’t seen what it’s like when diplomats come in and say, ‘I don’t know whether we’re going to be able to get this point through or not. Do you want to take the risk? What about your reputation? How do we handle it-’

What is he even talking about? What an absolute fucking idiot. What part of Obama’s experience in foreign policy and wartime diplomacy does this dolt hold above McCain’s decades of real experience? Where is the evidence of Obama’s superior judgement? Clark’s “argument” is an embarrassment to stupidity itself. 

Not to be outdone, another of Obama’s surrogates, former NSC member Rand Beers, told a public audience today that McCain’s experience as a POW works against him:

While Barack Obama was urging supporters not to devalue the military service of rival John McCain, an informal Obama adviser argued Monday that the former POW’s isolation during the Vietnam War has hobbled the Arizona senator’s capacity as a war-time leader.

“Sadly, Sen. McCain was not available during those times, and I say that with all due respect to him,” said informal Obama adviser Rand Beers. “I think that the notion that the members of the Senate who were in the ground forces or who were ashore in Vietnam have a very different view of Vietnam and the cost that you described than John McCain does because he was in isolation essentially for many of those years and did not experience the turmoil here or the challenges that were involved for those of us who served in Vietnam during the Vietnam war.”

“So I think,” he continued, “to some extent his national security experience in that regard is sadly limited and I think it is reflected in some of the ways that he thinks about how U.S. forces might be committed to conflicts around the world.”

McCain spent five years in captivity as a POW in North Vietnam.

It’s hard to imagine a reason why Obama would send these idiots out into the world on his behalf to question the relevance of John McCain’s service in the Viet Nam War. Is Obama somehow trying out a line of attack to suggest that McCain is somehow unfit or unsound because of his years of isolation as a prisoner of war? If so, it’s an amazingly dirty angle to take for someone who has a lot to prove to the veterans of Middle America.

Let’s wait for the backlash and the inevitable disavowals. 

UPDATE: Oops! I didn’t realize that Obama has already disavowed Clark’s idiocy. Andrea Mitchell says:

Here’s a statement from Obama spokesman Bill Burton on Wes Clark’s controversial comments about McCain’s military service. “As he’s said many times before, Senator Obama honors and respects Senator McCain’s service, and of course he rejects yesterday’s statement by General Clark.”

It will not be enough to be factually correct about Barack Obama’s incompetence to defeat him this November; it may be only just enough to damage him irreparably —day by day and by all means necessary. Smug conservative writers and strategists need to forget about the latest flip-flop and concentrate on those areas of Obamessiah’s character and judgement that are most amenable to question and doubt.

Obama reminds me a little bit of Ross Perot. Both of his campaigns were mediaphobic (except for the CNN infomercials) and stage-managed until they started to break down in a major way because of his over-weening sense of self. The nut came out and stayed. With Obama, I don’t think there is a nut; there’s only a lack of conscience and an outsized ego. And with an ego like his, the key to bringing him down is to get him to over-correct in its defense since he has no actual humility. But we’ve only got four months to go. There’s a lot to be done to ensure that the absurdity of Obama’s candidacy never succeeds on Election Day.

A lot of people I read have been linking to Joseph A. Palermo’s ham-handedness at today’s Huffington Post because it is so monumentally stupid:

Jon Stewart and The Daily Show should be mindful whenever Obama is the target of their satire that they don’t end up regurgitating Republican talking points. The Daily Show is far more influential than it was four years ago when Bush still had millions of people duped. The producers should be careful when poking fun at Obama not to provide fuel for the right-wing slime machine. Poke fun at Obama all you want, but do it in a way that also reveals the Republicans’ mendacity and hypocrisy.

Palermo’s fear of what his party has done is so fragrant that he needs someone to follow him around to clear the stink lines emanating from his head. Threatening Jon Stewart with the disapproval of the Obamatons? Giving Stewart directions on how to criticize Obama?  What a childish head-zealot. There are three things I will never understand: veganism, scat, and liberals who don’t notice liberal bias in Big Media. I mean, Jee-zus.

Oh, and I don’t want to let a single calendar month between now and November go by without my explicit request that the Democratic Party apologize to me for permitting this nonsense. What have you done to my former party? The one that Bill and Hillary Clinton invited me into before the Big Dog’s lies became too much and I went into protest voter mode until 11 September 2001. You Eleven Percenters are crap to me and I have zero respect for the Democratic Party for this effrontery. Is Obama in any way remarkable on the merits? Look at someone like Ted Kennedy. That’s a guy you can really get a hate-on for. I once had a boss who would routinely excuse himself with newspaper in one hand and his spit-cup in the other to go “take a Ted Kennedy.” Love him or hate him, the man inspires genuine reaction and occupies a large place in our lifetimes. In mine, I’ve never known an America without Ted Kennedy —and I’m pushing forty! What claim on History and Americanism can Obama make? Very little. He showed up without warrant and the idiots went to drooling. I don’t like him. I don’t trust him. And it’s hard to respect people who think he is qualified to be the most powerful man in the world in this season of his life. Maybe another season. Fine. But Obama will have to lose much if ever hopes to win again.