Simpson > OBL

Last summer, I attended a speech by Patrick Fitzgerald. Fitzgerald was the prosecutor in US v. Usama bin Laden, the case which the Junior Senator from Illinois now points up as the model for fighting the War on Terror (not that the Senator would use that term, which he no doubt regards as fearmongering). Fitzgerald made the point that at the time that case was going on, it received virtually no press coverage. Why? Because that was right smack in the middle of the O. J. Simpson trial. The press couldn't care less about the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center.

On a sidenote: much as I like Patrick Fitzgerald (though not as a speaker - the man is damn boring), I don't actually think that US v. Usama bin Laden was that effective at fighting al-Qaeda. After all, bin Laden had already been convicted in absentia long before 9/11 occurred. Nevertheless, Obama feels this approach was good enough. What a disgraceful, September 10 approach.

Opportunity for McCain

The New York Times has just reported that Barack Obama has officially decided to opt out of the public financing system, thereby freeing himself to raise unlimited amounts of donor money. Given the Obama campaigns efforts to portray McCain as a tool of the Washington establishment, this presents Big Mac with an opportunity. Obama promised earlier in the campaign to accept public funding. By reneging now, it is he, and not McCain, who looks like a conventional pol.

Obama's First Term

Preview of Obama's first term.

Watch all 10 minutes of the clip. The similarities are eerie..

New Politics or New Pandering?

So, Barack Obama has just admitted that his anti-NAFTA rhetoric while campaigning for the votes of those bitter-clingers in Ohio and Pennsylvania was "overheated."

Is this an example of the vaunted New Politics? Is blatant pandering less offensive if the candidate admits afterwards that he was, in fact, pandering?

Still, I'm glad that Obama has come around and is not as antitrade as I had once feared. Looks like Goolsbee was right all along.

"La plus ça change" we can believe in

It is fast becoming apparent that all of Obama's talk about changing the way Washington works is pure rhetoric. Whenever he has to actually do something, like make an important appointment, we're getting the same tired old Democratic faces. Heck, he appointed Walter Mondale's campaign manager to his VP search committee.

Today, the Obama campaign announced the formation of a National Security Working Group which includes blasts from the past such as Madeleine Albright, William Perry, and Warren Christopher (pictured).

Why not Jimmy Carter for VP?

Advice Falls On Deaf Ears

Hoshyar Zebari to Obama:

"We have a deadly enemy. When he sees that you commit yourself to a certain timetable, he will use this to increase pressure and attacks, to make it look as though he is forcing you out. We have many actors who would love to take advantage of that opportunity."

I appreciate Mr. Zebari doing his job, but I'm sure that Obama couldn't care less what he has to say. In fact, I'd be surprised if Obama even knows who he is.

It's so sad that, just as the corner is being turned in Iraq, the Democrats want to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory and pack up and go home.

Not a Muslim - We Get It, Already

"Senator Obama has never been a Muslim, was not raised as a Muslim, and is a committed Christian."

Heck, he won't even be photographed with Muslims.

On the other hand, doesn't that sound suspiciously like something that a secret Muslim would do? Hmm.

Political Spouses: A Jury Question

In recent weeks, I've grown tired of the debate over whether the wives of the presidential candidates should be topics of political discussion. My answer is that of course they should. In a democracy, the issue of what is relevant in electing a president should be left to the jury (i.e., the people) and not to the parties (i.e., the candidates) or to the judge (i.e., the elite media).

Furmanmania

Well, no sooner did I speculate on whether the appointment of that knife-juggler, Jason Furman, as Obama's senior economic adviser means that Obama's economic policy is tacking in the direction of the Rubin rather than the Reich wing of the Democratic Party, when we have this clarification from the candidate's mouth:

"I've got Bob Rubin on one hand [as an adviser] and [former Labor Secretary] Bob Reich on the other....I tend to be eclectic."

Now, just a minute. We have for some time known that the Junior Senator from Illinois intends to imitate the Apostle by becoming all things to all men, but isn't that a bit of a dodge? Now, as I read it, Obama's platform is now: increasing spending, slash the deficit, and lower taxes for average Americans all at the same time. If only economic policy were that simple. Real leaders, however, have to make tough choices, and Obama is increasingly looking like your average, old-school politician - willing to say anything to get elected, unwilling to do the hard thinking necessary to governing.

Obama: Vanguard of the Proletariat

This quote from Obama's Wall Street Journal interview, in which the Illinois Senator mourns the deleterious effects of globalization on the American worker, nicely sums up Obama's economic and cultural worldview:

"Globalization and technology and automation all weaken the position of workers," he said, and a strong government hand is needed to assure that wealth is distributed more equitably. He spoke aboard his campaign bus, where a big-screen TV was tuned to the final holes of the U.S. Open golf tournament.

There is a long history on the academic left of criticizing the harshness of capitalism while enjoying its fruits. Obama is in good company.

Mmmm.... Bacon....

I was struck by this quote from Al Gore at his endorsement of Obama the other day:

“If you care about food safety, if you like a “T” on your B.L.T., you know that elections matter."

It strikes me that blaming the Bush administration for a fairly routine and short-lived agricultural problem is a bit unfair. Besides, how will Gore's celebration of the BLT sit with the vegans?

Soft on Terror? Yes, he is.

I am pleased to see that McCain surrogates are finally picking the low-hanging fruit and criticizing Obama for his naivete regarding terrorism:

Former CIA head James Woosley: “This is an extremely dangerous and an extremely naive approach to terrorism.”

McCain aide Randy Scheunemann: “He really does not understand the nature of the enemies we face.”

I have long believed that McCain's odds in this election are better than is widely believed. Democrats are simply not serious on issues of national security, and haven't been for at least 30 years. By emphasizing that we do, in fact, live in a dangerous world, McCain can expose Obama's kumbaya approach to world affairs for what it is.

Pay No Attention to that Partisan Record Behind the Curtain

On reading this fascinating interview of Obama, I can't help but wonder whether the public will actually believe his claim to be a "post-partisan" figure. As Obama acknowledges, John McCain has a long record of opposing Republican leadership on several high profile issues. By contrast, the best bipartisan achievement Obama can point to is his support for generally uncontroversial ethics reform legislation. Pretty weak stuff. Reminds me of Obama's claim awhile back on Fox News that his commitment to bipartisanship led him to speak out in favor of the John Roberts nomination, even though he towed the hard-left line and voted against the Chief Justice.

Preview of the Obama Supreme Court?

Check out this picture of Judge James Burge of the Lorain County Court of Common Pleas in Ohio. Judge Burge recently struck down the state's death penalty as unconstitutional. Is this the sort of caring and empathetic Justice we can expect a President Obama to appoint? Yes, we can. Viva la revolucion.

Perot Back in the Saddle

A tip of my hat to H. Ross Perot for once again undertaking to educate the electorate via the use of simple charts and graphs.

The chart I've reproduced here, for example, is the best visual representation I've ever seen of the budget deficit. Eliminating the deficit means either expanding the box on the right (Obama's approach) or decreasing the box on the left (McCain's approach).

Anyhow, that's just one of dozens of useful and informative charts available here. I'll doubtless be making future use of them when I comment on fiscal matters..

Breaking News from Obama's Family: He is a Muslim After All

Malik Obama, Barack Obama's half-brother, today confirmed that Senator Obama was raised Muslim.

Not that this is really news. We've already had reports of Obama being raised Muslim (Islam is patrilineal, meaning that since his father was Muslim, Obama was born Muslim), he was registered as Muslim for grade school, where he received Muslim instruction (including learning how to recite the Koran in Arabic), and regularly accompanied his step-father, Lolo Soetoro, to mosque.

Now, my response to Obama being raised a Muslim is basically "So what?" There's no religious test for the presidency - I'd be fine if he were still a Muslim.

But it does bother me that his campaign insists on lying about his background, claiming that "Senator Obama has never been a Muslim, was not raised as a Muslim, and is a committed Christian."

Now, why does the campaign insist on lying about this? No doubt because of their low opinion of the American people. To their mind, if the bitter-clingers out there knew that Obama were raised Muslim, the Bible-thumping, gun-toting rednecks who make up the country would be so outraged that Obama's chances of being president would be sunk. Note: I don't actually think this is the case, but Obama's campaign team is a group of elitists who look down their noses at average Americans.

Oh well, I'm sure that in the next day or two, Obama will disown Malik Obama, just like Jeremiah Wright, Jim Johnson, etc., etc. "This is not the half-brother I knew."

Biden for VP!

According to Karl Rove, Delaware's Joe Biden is currently the leading contender to be Obama's vice presidential nominee. As a McCain supporter, I am thrilled by this development. I might go so far as to say that the prospect of running against Biden gives me a tingling sensation up my leg...

But I digress. Biden is a gaffe-prone blow-hard, and the idea that he would bring gravitas to the ticket is laughable.

What Furmanmania Will Tell Us

Certain labor union officials and liberal activists have been furious since Tuesday when Obama named Jason Furman as his economic adviser.

It will be fascinating to see how this all plays out. For my part, I'm totally happy to see Obama siding with the Rubin rather than the Reich wing of the Democratic party, on the grounds that, if you're going to have a sub-optimal economic policy in office, better to relive the 1990s than the 1970s. So, while I certainly have a lot of disagreements with Furman, the fact that he, for example, supports lowering corporate taxes (though not nearly to the degree favored by McCain), is a positive sign that an Obama presidency would not spell total economic disaster for the country.

I think that the major question about Obama at this point is: is he sincere in siding with Furman and Rubin? He may be just positioning himself as a centrist for the campaign, while preparing to tack to the left once in office (a manoeuvre deftly executed by GWB in the opposite direction in 2000-2001). Or he may really be an economic centrist after all. From a campaign perspective, the biggest challenge facing Obama is how he tries to campaign as a centrist without alienating the left-wing base who voted for him in the primaries mainly because they thought that Hillary Clinton was too right-wing.

What I think is really significant about Obama's selection of Furman is that it signifies that Obama will not be the "Reagan of the Left" which some had hoped/feared. The Reagan of the Left - if and when this mythical creature ever appears - would need to realign the country along liberal lines by making liberal arguments, the way that Reagan realigned the country along conservative lines by making conservative arguments in 1976 and 1980. At this point, it's looking like Obama might be a Bill Clinton figure (campaigns as a centrist, governs as a centrist) or a George Bush figure (campaigns as a moderate, governs as a partisan), but it seems highly unlikely he'll accomplish anything like what Reagan accomplished.

Shootout

Apparently, Obama's threat to "bring a gun" to the presidential campaign has caused McCain to rethink his town hall idea.

Seriously, though, I think that Obama's macho posturing looks particularly hollow in light of the junior senator's refusal to engage McCain in a series of unscripted, unarmed encounters.

Whose Deceit?

While politics is certainly a contact sport, I find Obama's attacks against McCain to be particularly irksome given the Illinois senator's promise to transcend petty political maneuvering . Today's attack against McCain by Representative Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-FL) is emblematic. In accusing McCain of being "deceitful," Wasserman Schultz claims that the Arizona senator's voting record is, in fact, "extreme right." Really, Ms. Schultz? Last time I checked, McCain had angered conservatives through his public support of campaign finance reform, amnesty for illegal immigrants, and a cap and trade system for CO2. Next time an Obama surrogate uses the term "deceit," they should first take a hard look at their own "post-partisan" savior.