Degree of Madness

Presidential candidates' passport files breached

First Obama:

Two State Department employees were fired and a third has been disciplined for improperly accessing Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama's passport file, the State Department announced Thursday night.

Senior Department officials said they learned of the incidents only when a reporter made an inquiry Thursday afternoon. They said an initial investigation indicated the employees - all of whom worked on contract - were motivated by "imprudent curiosity."

Then Hillary and McCain: 

State Department spokesman Sean McCormack said the breaches of McCain and Clinton's passport files were not discovered until Friday, after officials were made aware of the privacy breach regarding Obama's records and a separate search was conducted.

At least it wasn't their FBI files.  Michelle Malkin:

Obvious point: This is bad. But it probably wouldn’t be wise for Hillary “Filegate” Clinton to make too much of a stink about this, don’t you think?

"Well, you know, no comment", sounds about right.

The Obama camp is outraged:

The Obama campaign denounced the accessing as "an outrageous breach of security and privacy, even from an Administration that has shown little regard for either over the last eight years."

Spokesman Bill Burton said "our government’s duty is to protect the private information of the American people, not use it for political purposes. This is a serious matter that merits a complete investigation, and we demand to know who looked at Senator Obama’s passport file, for what purpose, and why it took so long for them to reveal this security breach."  (my emphasis)

It's a little over the top to suggest the Bush administration is behind this.  Good grief.  I'm sure the President could not care less what's in Obama's passport file.  And just how has this information been used for political purposes?  Trying to take the heat off Obama and Rev. Wright, I suppose.  Confederate Yankee:

The Obama campaign, sensing a possible escape route from Barack's current string of self-inflicted wounds, quickly moved into victim-mode.

Will Bunch at Attytood:

...OK, the tin foil hats are out :-) ...ready?

1) The office that handles passports, consular affairs, is indeed run by a woman named Maura Harty, who's a....wait for it -- Clinton administration holdover. Remember, no one has implicated her or any State Department employees -- the two people who were fired were contract workers.

2) The greatest interest in Obama's overseas travel has been expressed by Clinton supporters. One area of interest -- and I really don't understand what exactly they were getting at -- is Obama's European travels, or non-travels.

Let the conspiracy theorizing commence.

Sharon Jasper arrested in New Orleans

Laura at Pursuing Holiness has the story, and some background:

Sharon Jasper, her daughter Kawana, and a fellow traveler were arrested at a protest against the demolition of the St. Bernard Housing Development. Sharon Jasper lived in the St. Bernard project for nearly 60 years until the taxpayer subsidized, crime-ridden slums were closed after Hurricane Katrina. Sharon and Kawana Jasper also exercised their right to free speech at a recent New Orleans City Council meeting, where they advised a fellow citizen to “Shut up, white boy!”

Check out Laura's post and the picture of the housing built to replace one of the projects already demolished.  And be sure to follow her links. 

Previous post.

Obama's speech and cheap shots at Mitt Romney

The New York Times:

There are moments — increasingly rare in risk-abhorrent modern campaigns — when politicians are called upon to bare their fundamental beliefs. In the best of these moments, the speaker does not just salve the current political wound, but also illuminates larger, troubling issues that the nation is wrestling with.

Inaugural addresses by Abraham Lincoln and Franklin D. Roosevelt come to mind, as does John F. Kennedy’s 1960 speech on religion, with its enduring vision of the separation between church and state. Senator Barack Obama, who has not faced such tests of character this year, faced one on Tuesday. It is hard to imagine how he could have handled it better.

Mr. Obama had to address race and religion, the two most toxic subjects in politics. He was as powerful and frank as Mitt Romney was weak and calculating earlier this year in his attempt to persuade the religious right that his Mormonism is Christian enough for them.

Maureen Dowd:

In many ways, Barack Obama’s speech on race was momentous and edifying.

You could tell it was personal, that he had worked hard on it, all weekend and into the wee hours Tuesday. Overriding aides who objected to putting race center stage, he addressed a painful, difficult subject straightforwardly with a subtlety and decency rare in American politics.

Certainly, Senator Obama was exercising sophisticated damage-control on his problem with Jeremiad Wright. But he did not pander as Mitt Romney did with his very challenging speech about Mormonism, or market-test his own convictions, as most politicians do.

It's interesting Dowd and the editors at The New York Times took the opportunity to slam Mitt Romney's speech.  Romney's speech was about his religion.  Obama's was, supposedly, about his relationship with his racist mentor and preacher.  From The Times editorial (my emphasis):

Mr. Obama’s eloquent speech should end the debate over his ties to Mr. Wright since there is nothing to suggest that he would carry religion into government. But he did not stop there. He put Mr. Wright, his beliefs and the reaction to them into the larger context of race relations with an honesty seldom heard in public life.

From where I sit, Obama's religion is not at issue.  For must of us, Rev. Wright's sermons, the ones we've heard, bear little resemblance to religion.  The issue is the hate speech Obama's been listening to for two decades.  Maybe Obama adequately addressed that, maybe he didn't.  But taking cheap shots at Mitt Romney's speech is...cheap.

I'm with the beer drinkers...

Cheers:

As some Americans recover from hangovers induced by St. Patrick’s Day, a CNN/Opinion Research Corporation Poll released Tuesday suggests a voter’s drinking preferences may also reveal their political preferences.

Beer drinkers appear more likely to vote for Sen. John McCain in November, while those who enjoy wine say they’re more likely to vote Democratic in the fall. Among registered voters who prefer beer to wine, McCain has a 53 percent-46 percent edge over Sen. Hillary Clinton while McCain winds up in a virtual tie with Sen. Barack Obama among beer drinkers. In the head-to-head match-ups with McCain, Sens. Obama and Clinton each win a majority among registered voters who prefer wine to beer.

Have you hugged your beer today?

Cindy Sheehan: "Senator Obama needs to denounce me"

That seems like a no-brainer.  (via Sweetness & Light)

"We bombed Hiroshima, we bombed Nagasaki, and we nuked far more than the thousands in New York and the Pentagon, and we never batted an eye. We have supported state terrorism against the Palestinians and black South Africans, and now we are indignant because the stuff we have done overseas is now brought right back to our own front yards. America's chickens are coming home to roost."
Reverend Jeremiah Wright; Sept. 16th 2001

[...]

Barack Obama has denounced the above remarks of his mentor and pastor, Rev. Wright saying: "I categorically denounce any statement that disparages our great country or serves to divide us from our allies." Let's parse the Rev's statement.

"We bombed Hiroshima, we bombed Nagasaki, and we nuked far more than the thousands in New York and the Pentagon, and we never batted an eye."

Yes, on December 7th, 1941 (another day that will live in infamy), a US Naval base in Pearl Harbor, Hawaii was attacked by Japan. On that day, 2338 American service personnel were tragically killed, but there was little of what our Pentagon calls "collateral damage," civilians killed. As a matter of fact, during WWII, Japan killed very few American civilians. However, the US military command in the Pacific killed hundreds of thousands of Japanese civilians in aerial bombings and with the use of the new WMD; H-bombs. General Curtis LeMay informed future Secretary of Defense, Robert McNamara (who was under LeMay during WWII), that if the US had lost they would have been tried as "war criminals." The loss of innocent life in Japan was numbered in the hundred of thousands and I don't hear Senator Obama denouncing those acts of cowardice.

We have supported state terrorism against the Palestinians and black South Africans,

I think there is little dispute that Israel (which I assume is what Obama refers to when he says "allies") receives approximately three billion dollars in aid from the U.S. each year and have brutally oppressed and occupied Palestinian lands for decades. In a one week's period this month, Israel killed over 300 Palestinians and was "shocked" when 8 Jewish seminary students were killed in return. I hate and reject all loss of innocent life no matter what is the color, religion or nation of origin. I think Senator Obama may buy into the neocon lie that somehow Israeli or American lives are more precious than Arab lives or black lives. Not only has the US supported state-sanctioned terrorism in such places as Palestine and South Africa, but we are committing some more of our own in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Blah, blah, blah.  "Chickens coming home to roost".  Hate America first.  Maybe Cindy should run for President with the Rev. Wright as her running mate.  She might find out that while most of us acknowledge America's shortcomings we also realize how blessed we are.  And the fact she can speak freely about her hatred of her country speaks volumes, but Ms. Sheehan is incapable of figuring that out all by herself.

But she does ask a good question:

Senator Obama also denounced any remarks that "disparaged our great country." Hmm…does he denounce remarks that his own wife made about being proud to be an American for the first time in her "adult life?"...

Hmm...

Obama will be giving a speech tomorrow on “the larger issue of race in this campaign,”.   

“I am going to be talking about not just Reverend Wright, but the larger issue of race in this campaign,” he said.

Bull Dog Pundit:

The issue here isn’t race, it’s about the views of this nut Reverend Wright who happens to be black, and why Barack Obama didn’t see those views as problematic until he ran for President.

Barack Obama...The company he keeps

From the Chicago Sun Times, More Rezko Dough Found:

For the first time, Sen. Barack Obama put a figure Friday to the amount of campaign contributions that indicted political fund-raiser Tony Rezko raised for the senator's campaigns, and the number -- about $250,000 -- was far more than he previously acknowledged.

"We believe we have identified all money that is traceable. ... It's hard for me to know precisely. I don't have the capacity to go back and figure out who did he raise money from. There might be additional dollars,'' Obama told the Chicago Sun-Times in an 80-minute interview that focused on his 17-year relationship with Rezko, who has become a lingering issue as Obama seeks the Democratic nomination for president.

[...]

Obama's estimate exceeded his campaign staff's previous estimates of Rezko's fund-raising during Obama's 12 years in politics. In November 2006, Obama's staff estimated Rezko raised $50,000 to $60,000 over the senator's career. In the last year, Obama's campaign fund has given charities more than $157,600 in donations it linked to Rezko, his family, friends and business associates.

Quite a gap between $250,000 and $60,000.  Obama says of his friendship with Rezko:

"It's further evidence that I'm not perfect.''

Nobody's perfect.  Those of us not in politics and not running for President of the United States are not subject to the scrutiny given to those who are.  It goes with the territory.  Obama's choice of friends and mentors, added to his mighty slim resume, certainly calls into question his fitness for the job he is seeking.  It is unfortunate Obama's background wasn't scrutinized more thoroughly before he became the front-runner for the Democratic nomination.  Of course Hillary Clinton's background is well known and she's right behind him so I wonder if it would have made a difference.  Is this the best we can do?

Dan Riehl:

What is the one word most associated with Obama up until now, after all - the one so associated with the man as to have become a running joke? Change! That word has served as the entire rationale for the man's run for the presidency, has it not?

So, what did this great agent of change do when confronted with the usual slime of Chicago politics? Did he stand up boldly and work for change? Or did he simply go along, playing the system for his own benefit like so many uninspiring and ultimately disappointing politicians before him? The answer should be obvious to any objective observer now.

It may be a little too late for Democratic voters to objectively observe, assuming they would anyway.  As for Obama himself, it's hard, if not impossible, to put the toothpaste back into the tube.  What's done is done?  Obama's hoping it can be undone:

Obama said that he "hoped" the interview "would quell the lingering controversy over his relationship with Rezko" and said that "voters concerned about his judgment should view it as 'a mistake in not seeing the potential conflicts of interest'," Jackson wrote. "Obama also said for the first time that his private real estate transactions with Rezko involved repeated lapses of judgment. The mistake, Obama said, was not simply that Rezko was under grand jury investigation at the time of their 2005 and 2006 dealings. 'The mistake was he had been a contributor and somebody involved in politics,' he said.

I'm not convinced.  There is more to this story.

Alabama...Immigration reform rally March 26

The following is from an email I received from my friend Don:

Recently there was a rally at the State House organized by talk show hosts Matt Murphy in Birmingham and Dale Jackson in Huntsville in support of Senator Scott Beason's bill dealing with illegal immigrants (SB426) with around 80 to 100 people showing up, depending on who made the estimates.

 

Later in the day several members of the committee hearing SB426 failed to show up so no vote on the bill could be taken because there was not a quorum present. That was likely by design and through the collusion of some committee members.

 

The bill is due to be back in committee in about 2 weeks from now on Wednesday, March 26. Murphy and Jackson are  organizing another rally that day, BUT ONLY IF many more citizens commit to being there because a similar sized crowd or a smaller one will indicate to the legislators that Alabamians aren't really very concerned about whether they pass legislation to deal with illegal immigrants or not, and the bill would probably fail to be approved at the committee level.

 

Matt, on his afternoon program, and Dale, on his morning show are trying to gauge public sentiment among listeners to see how many people will commit to being there if the rally takes place. Matt says that he will soon have a place on his Matt Murphy Show website for people to sign up, committing to be there and he has said that a minimum of 300 people would be required to put on the rally. Dale, on his "Show Notes" page @ http://www.wvnn.com/dale.shtml#ShowNotes has link for people to sign up and he says at least 100 are needed.

 

Both programs are streamed live over the internet: Matt on the WAPI website from 4 to 7pm M-F @ http://www.wapi1070.com/; Dale on the WVNN website from 6 to 9am M-F @ http://www.wvnn.com/.

 

Toll free phone numbers for their shows are 1-866-927-1070 for Matt and 1-866-494-9866 for Dale.

 

If you're concerned about illegal immigrants in Alabama  contact everyone you can and ask them to commit to being at this proposed rally. If you're not concerned, but you know someone who is, tell them about this opportunity to show our legislators that we want this problem dealt with NOW.

Matt now has the sign up page on his website.  We must show our support if we expect our legislators to act.  Please do what you can to make it to this rally.  Let Matt and Dale know you will attend so this very important rally can go forward:

Sign up only if you can and WILL be attending a rally March 26th on the steps of the state house in Montgomery, Alabama. If enough participate, we'll caravan back to the capital! More info on www.murphyshow.com! Click "I'll be there" and sign up!

Matt and Dale cannot do this alone, nor should they have to.  This legislation affects every citizen in the state of Alabama, including LEGAL immigrants. 

Here is a link to the pdf for SB426.

David Horowitz remembers Sarah

Sarah Horowitz, January 4, 1964-March 5, 2008

Her father, David Horowitz says goodbye.

God Speed, Sarah.  RIP.

Help him retire John Kerry

Jim Ogonowski:

Great video!  Via: David Freddoso 

Obama repudiates Rev. Wright

Too little, too late.  Here is an excerpt from his statement via Hot Air:

Let me say at the outset that I vehemently disagree and strongly condemn the statements that have been the subject of this controversy. I categorically denounce any statement that disparages our great country or serves to divide us from our allies. I also believe that words that degrade individuals have no place in our public dialogue, whether it’s on the campaign stump or in the pulpit. In sum, I reject outright the statements by Rev. Wright that are at issue…

Rev. Wright preached the gospel of Jesus, a gospel on which I base my life. In other words, he has never been my political advisor; he’s been my pastor. And the sermons I heard him preach always related to our obligation to love God and one another, to work on behalf of the poor, and to seek justice at every turn.

The statements that Rev. Wright made that are the cause of this controversy were not statements I personally heard him preach while I sat in the pews of Trinity or heard him utter in private conversation. When these statements first came to my attention, it was at the beginning of my presidential campaign. I made it clear at the time that I strongly condemned his comments. But because Rev. Wright was on the verge of retirement, and because of my strong links to the Trinity faith community, where I married my wife and where my daughters were baptized, I did not think it appropriate to leave the church.

He can condemn all he wants, the fact of the matter is he has attended Wright's church for twenty years.  I seriously doubt Wright's message has all of a sudden changed.  No one would expect Obama to agree with every word said by his pastor or anyone else for that matter, but we're not talking about a casual relationship.  And we're not talking about a statement or two made by Rev. Wright. 

The Obama campaign's reaction to comments made by Geraldine Ferraro:

“When you wink and nod at offensive statements, you’re really sending a message to supporters that anything goes. We call upon the Clinton campaign to take swifter action,” said David Axelrod, the chief strategist for Mr. Obama. “She ought to be removed from those positions. There’s no other way to send a serious signal that you want to police the tone of this campaign.”

[...]

Susan Rice, a senior adviser to Mr. Obama, called Ms. Ferraro’s remarks “outrageous and offensive.”

Why do you notice the splinter in your brother’s eye, but do not perceive the wooden beam in your own eye?  Comes to mind.

Captain Ed points out  Obama contradicts himself when he claims Wright has never been his political adviser:

Obama says that rather than advising him on strategy, Wright helps keep his priorities straight and his moral compass calibrated. …

Though Wright and Obama do not often talk one-on-one often, the senator does check with his pastor before making any bold political moves.

Last fall, Obama approached Wright to broach the possibility of running for president. Wright cautioned Obama not to let politics change him, but he also encouraged Obama, win or lose.

Captain Ed asks, "Those two statements clearly conflict, so the question becomes this: is he lying now, or was he lying then?"  He's lying now.  How do I know?  I guess it's the timing.

Barack Obama has a pretty thin resume in politics.  It is appropriate (and critical) to investigate his past and look under every rock before electing him President of the United States.  Voters must look past the "rock star" Obama and dig deep in order to judge whether or not he is fit to be President of the United States.

 

***Update 7:04 PM CT***
Investor's Business Daily:

Obama's campaign also issued a lukewarm denunciation of Wright's leaked sermons, saying only that "there are things he says with which Sen. Obama deeply disagrees." Like what? We don't know. Has he ever walked out of a sermon in disgust? We don't know. But we need to know, and voters deserve to know. Now.