Sure you might lose your job, or some pay, in the process but who cares? Those won’t be needed under an Obama administration anyway.
Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean said Monday that he’s looking forward to one party controlling all aspects of government, despite GOP charges that it would be a disastrous Nov. 4 outcome.
“Republicans had a chance to rule. They failed miserably. I think it’s time to give the other party a chance,” Dean said on MSNBC.
Barney Frank has already revealed one of their first targets:
In a revealing meeting with the editorial board of the Southcoast (Mass.) Standard-Times last week, Rep. Barney Frank, D-Mass., called for a 25% cut in military spending, saying: “We don’t need all these fancy new weapons.” Judging from his past comments, Obama seems to agree. He says we should talk to our enemies. Obama, Frank and the Democratic caucus would have us speak softly and carry no stick at all.
The irony here is that this call to disarm is coming from the party of Franklin Roosevelt, who called the United States the “arsenal of democracy.” Obama is a far cry from Harry Truman or the Jack Kennedy who said that only when our arms are sufficient beyond doubt will we be certain beyond doubt they will never be employed.
It’s “fancy new weapons” that now provide a rudimentary amount of protection against ballistic missile attack both here and abroad. What olive branch does Obama suppose will protect against Iraq’s Shahab missiles, once they’re armed with nuclear warheads?
In a video presentation to the far-left group Caucus for Priorities, Obama revealed just where Frank’s 25% cut might come from. “I will cut investments in unproven missile defense systems,” he said. “I will not weaponize space. I will slow our development of future combat systems. I will institute an independent defense priorities board to ensure that the Quadrennial Review is not used to justify unnecessary defense spending.”
So forget about national missile defense or responding to a realistic assessment of our enemies’ intentions and capabilities.
You folks in aerospace and defense should probably be polishing up those resumes now.
Elaine is a Democrat and former editor in chief of Ms. magazine. While she does comment on Palin’s intelligence she shifts gears quickly and goes after hypocritical feminists who’ve been exposed by Palin’s selection:
Many of those—not all—who decried the sexist media treatment of Hillary Clinton have been silent as Palin has been skewered in the old ways that female public figures are skewered, as well as a host of sexualized new ways as well. Some feminists have weighed in; “Even the reportedly clear glasses she wears to play down her beauty queen credential and enhance her gravitas can’t make up for experience,” writes my heroine Suzanne Braun Levine, former editor of Ms. Oppose her on policy? Fine. But how sad for feminist leaders to sink this low, especially when Palin has worn glasses since she was 10 years old.
Last month a prominent feminist blogger, echoing that sensibility, declared that the media was wrongly buying into the false idea that Palin was a feminist. Why? Well, just because she said she was a feminist, because she supported women’s rights and opportunities, equal pay, Title IV—that was just “empty rhetoric,” they said. At least the blogger didn’t go as far as NOW’s Kim Gandy and declare that Palin was not a woman. Bottom line: you are not a feminist until we say you are. And there you have the formula for diminishing what was once a great and important mass social change movement to an exclusionary club that rejects women who sincerely want to join and, God forbid, grow to lead.
More examples of this behavior, some graphic, can be found here.
Sirens are flashing on Drudge and the AP has a one liner. More news as it develops.
knoxnews.com has more:
The ATF says it has broken up a plot to assassinate Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama and shoot or decapitate 102 black people in a Tennessee murder spree.
In court records unsealed Monday, agents said they disrupted plans to rob a gun store and target an unnamed but predominantly African-American high school by two neo-Nazi skinheads.
I wouldn’t surprised if these guys turn out to be a couple of slack-jawed meth-heads (aren’t all skinheads?) with little or no chance of actually pulling this off. These stories are often over-hyped. We’ll see.
The Smoking Gun has more:
In the ATF affidavit, a copy of which you’ll find below, Cowart and Schlesselman “discussed the killing spree to include targeting a predominately African-American school, going state to state while robbing individuals and continuing to kill people.” The pair’s “final act of violence” would be an attempt to kill Obama, the Democratic presidential nominee. In separate interviews with investigators, the men said that they planned to speed their vehicle toward Obama while “shooting at him from the windows.” Apparently befitting the historic assault, Cowart and Schlesselman “stated they would dress in all white tuxedos and wear top hats during the assassination attempt.” The wannabe assassins were named in a three-count federal felony complaint, a copy of which you’ll find here.
Props to the ATF for getting these fashion-challenged morons off the street but it doesn’t appear that Obama was ever seriously threatened by these two. They would have been dead long before their fantasy finale played out.
This is a fantastic find but don’t call it an October surprise. It may be October but the fact that Barack Obama is a radical socialist cloaked in meaningless “hope” and “change” marketing babble is not a surprise at all.
That said, Obama’s dangerous interpretation of our constitution and his socialist agenda should be the only topics discussed by the McCain camp in the closing days of their campaign.
The McCain-Palin camp responds:
“The American people continue to learn more about Barack Obama. Now we know that the slogans ‘change you can believe in’ and ‘change we need’ are code words for Barack Obama’s ultimate goal: ‘redistributive change.’ In a previously uncovered interview from September 6, 2001, Barack Obama expressed his regret that the Supreme Court hadn’t been more ‘radical’ and described as a ‘tragedy’ the Court’s refusal to take up ‘the issues of redistribution of wealth.’ No wonder he wants to appoint judges that legislate from the bench – as insurance in case a unified Democratic government under his control fails to meet his basic goal: taking money away from people who work for it and giving it to people who Barack Obama believes deserve it. Europeans call it socialism, Americans call it welfare, and Barack Obama calls it change,” McCain senior policy adviser Douglas Holtz-Eakin said in a statement.
HillBuzz – We are Democrats here are HillBuzz telling you the Democrat in this race scares us — because we know what socialism is from spending time in Europe in the 80s, and we know it does not work and is not what America needs.
Atlas Shrugs – So he doesn’t think it can be done through the courts but he thinks it can be done legislatively. That is why a Liberal Supermajority is crucial.
Wizbang! – It is surreal that this country is close to potentially electing a president who intends to govern with such clear disregard to the same Constitution he will be sworn to defend and protect. But imposed Socialism won’t be un-Constitutional. It will instead be a heralded “transformation” in the name of “political and economic justice.”
Right Pundits – He does not discuss the rights or wrongs of taking for each according to their ability and giving to each according to their need. Instead, he talks about the best ways to go about changing the system in a way that would best facilitate those changes. He concludes that it is best changed through administrative mandate because attempts to change it through legislation is too cumbersome. He also points out that the Constitution is a negative document, telling us what the States and the Federal governments CAN’T do. Instead, he says, it should address the what the States and Federal governments SHOULD do. In other words, he sees our money as belonging to the government. He wants to take our money and he will decide how to spend it. The democrats in Congress and the Senate are already deciding how they will spend it.
NewsBusters.org – Once again we have another story that has been picked up in a big way by the Blogosphere but is currently being ignored by the mainstream media. And this time the story is huge.
Protein Wisdom – In Obama’s America, we’ll finally be able to break free of the “constraints that were placed by the founding fathers in the Constitution” — and in so doing, achieve “social justice” through “redistributive change.” Well, then. Fine . But this is not the America I knew…
Michelle Malkin – Joe The Plumber, you barely scratched the surface.
Mark Epstein – Sometimes you just HAVE so smile. After weeks of Obama campaign denials, after Joe Biden got uppity with a Florida television station over the legitimate question concerning Obama’s marxist beliefs, after weeks of promotion and protection by the mainstream media, after millions of illegal dollars made their way into the Obama campaign coffers, and after Hollywood’s disgusting love affair with Obama, the truth comes out: Obama is a socialist, and YOU can hear him say so in his own words! Ah, but it gets even better–Obama wants to rid the country of its constitutional framework!
Pierre Legrand’s Pink Flamingo Bar – Course if we had an honest press corp stuff like this wouldn’t depend on people like me to find. But since we do not have an honest press corp thank you Free Republic! Naturally this is a bombshell. This is the scariest candidate to be this damn close to becoming the President.
Webloggin – And please note, Obama uses and reuses the word “redistribute.” No hiding here behind colorful, user-friendly expressions such as “spread the wealth.” What Obama clearly envisions is a government program that takes away your money (and your incentive to work hard and make it the American way), so that the money can go to those Obama deems worthy.
Chuck Thinks Right – The only question now is, can the media keep things like this hidden for 8 more days.