Rezko Letter To Court Clears Obama - P.U.M.A Up To It's Old Lies

I happened upon a blog post by some member of "Party Unity My Ass" (P.U.M.A), the small group of sickos who couldn't get over Senator Barack Obama beating Senator Hillary Clinton in the Democratic Primary.  For some of these folks it's like someone forgot to tell the Vietnam P.O.W. that the war was over.  


Now, this P.U.M.A guy is way out on left field trying, hoping, begging to make a connection between Obama and Real Estate Developer Tony Rezko that's not there.  In fact, he goes so far as to make a link asserting a connection because of a letter that it's apparent the author thinks people aren't going to read!  


I read the letter itself and the it's obvious that the P.U.M.A writer was fashioning a lie... 

It reads "Your honor the prosecutors have been overzealous in pursuing a crime that never happened.  They are pressuring me to tell them the "wrong" things that I supposedly know about Governor Blagojevich and Senator Obama.  I will never fabricate lies about anyone else for selfish purposes..."

For prosecutors to take on such an activity in itself is criminal and if it's not -- I think it may be -- it should be.  That's using an investigation with the taxpayers money to take on a political agenda, in effect having taxpayers pay for a set of lies established to achieve a political objective.  In this case, blaming Senator Obama for something that did not happen.  


Watch these PUMA nutcases -- that's what I think they are.  That's why I put this out, to head off P.U.M.A action.  

Wall Street Journal Doesn't Get Redistributing Wealth Which Is The Problem

The Wall Street Journal's opinion section is at times not the best place for intelligent pondering.  I know that's a terrible remark, but I write that for a reason: the lack of circular, systemic thinking.   The WSJ writes that having a non-refundable tax credit, which is something that can't be taken back -- it's a grant of sorts (I prefer an outright subsidy check) -- is bad thing.

Here's what the rest of us are thinking.

We just have AIG Insurance $120 billion (not million) to save it's corporate hide and several of its execs go out on a retreat at a luxury resort valued at over $400,000!   What's that?  It came from our government!

That opinion "work" is a piece of work, and shows why the rest of America is so angry with Wall Street.  The WSJ is not helping the political needs of the Street and should just back off on the rhetoric, at least untill we're way out of this mess.

Rachel Maddow Makes David Frum Look..Not Smart

You've got to see this, because it's a great example of basically running intellectual rings around a person.  In this case, MSNBC's Rachel Maddow had former GOP Speechwriter David Frum on her show today.


 David Frum came on with the idea of bashing Maddow on her way of reporting the news on politics and Maddow essentially forced him into a trap:  he says she's being nasty, but he's basically being nasty in saying she's nasty, but if he agrees with her, it obliterates his argument. 


Brilliant.  


The problem, again, is that the person who's idologically biased runs the risk of falling into such traps again and again -- Frum could have gotten out of this by just agreeing with her and not insulting, ie: "If you took it seriously" or "If it were important" , otherwise Frum came off looking just like the party he claims he's at odds with.


Frum could have then said "I think you're totally right Rachel."  then proceeded to focus on whatever Democratic example that was not the host but equally as bad as calling someone a terrorist he could find.  For example, he could point to my blog for examples of how Dems accuse McCain of being racist and sexist, but he didn't do that. Indeed, he'd have a hard time looking for it at Obama rallies.  Not the same kind of folks.  


Instead, consumed by a weird combination of conservativism, ego, and anger, he started throwing haymakers, and missed.  


Geez.  


Nice work Rachel!  

Drudge Report Getting More Partisan And Racist As Election Nears

I've been a big fan of the Drudge Report, the website which is just a collection of links to different stories, but this blog post is one Matt Drudge, the founder and editor, will not be linking to. Why?

Because I'm accusing Matt of being a big, fat, race-batting website Republican who can't stand the fact that his candidate John McCain's going to lose to an African American man, Barack Obama. He -- Drudge -- is so upset about this that he found a photo of Obama giving a cheek-based kiss to a Blonde woman and posted that photo rather than the standard handshake.

When I saw that, I wrote this to Matt:

So showing Obama kissing a Blonde Is...What? A good way to show how racist you are; you would not have shown it if he kissed, say, Ellen De Generis, or Oprah Winfrey?

What's up with that? I liked your publication until I saw that, now I
think less of you. I'm Black, my girlfriend is Irish. Perhaps you
should date Black women and discover who people are as individuals?

Geez, Matt. Geez.

And I stand by that. Matt's site today was a trip into the world of the pathetic, not unlike the scene at some of the McCain / Palin rallies.

Obama v. McCain - Energy Comparison - Text Here

If you've always wondered how the energy plans of Barack Obama and John McCain compare, you've come to the right place. The Obama for America Campaign has produced this comparison of the two plans. Yes, it's from the Obama campaign, but it's a good comparison still:

Obama vs. McCain 
on 
Energy
 - Upload a Document to Scribd

OBAMA-BIDEN ECONOMIC PLAN FOR THE MIDDLE CLASS - READ IT HERE!

Today, Democratic Presidential Nominee Senator Barack Obama and his running mate Senator Joe Biden issued their "Economic Plan For The Middle Class".

Senator Obama talks about the plan here:



Rather than explain it, you can read the actual plan and it's words here:

Barack Obama and Joe Biden's Rescue Plan for the Middle Class - Upload a Document to Scribd

Paul Krugman wins Nobel prize

Paul Krugman, economist and NY Times columnist, has won a Nobel prize. From Bloomberg:

President George W. Bush, whose approval ratings are at historic lows as the U.S. veers toward a recession or worse, got yet another thumb in the eye when one of his most vociferous critics was awarded the Nobel Prize in economics.

While Princeton University Professor Paul Krugman was honored ``for his analysis of trade patterns of and locations of economic activity,'' he's more widely known for twice-weekly columns in the New York Times and appearances on television, in which he regularly attacks the president on the war in Iraq, his tax cuts and other issues.

Krugman, 55, doesn't mince words. He has accused Bush of leading the country into ``strategic disaster and moral squalor,'' and his columns and Times blog entries carry headlines with such blunt entreaties as ``Please Go Away.''

Even though Krugman's award was for his economic theories and not his criticism of Bush, the prize elevates the profile of an already-prominent Bush critic, said Jim Davis, a political science professor at Washington University in St. Louis.

``People will just see that a well-informed economist who has been critical of the Bush administration got the Nobel Prize, that's the take-away here,'' Davis said.

Of the more than 800 Krugman pieces listed on the Times Web site since he
became a columnist in 1999, almost 600 of them mention ``Bush,'' a search of the
site shows.

`Takes the Food'
On Feb. 11, 2005, he referred to Bush as someone who takes food from the mouth of babes and gives the proceeds to his millionaire friends.'' On Jan. 22, 2007, Bush, with his plan to use tax credits to buy health insurance, is ``not even trying to hide his fundamental indifference to the plight of the less- fortunate,'' Krugman wrote.

Krugman is a fierce critic of Bush's foreign policy and was an early opponent of the war in Iraq. Of the president's case for removing Saddam Hussein, Krugman
wrote on Feb. 11, 2003, ``Mr. Bush's America does not look like a regime whose
promises you can trust.''

``People claim to be shocked by the Bush administration's general incompetence,'' Krugman wrote on Oct. 8 last year. ``But disinterest in good government has long been a principle of modern conservatism.''

Krugman is not the first Bush critic to win a Nobel Prize. Former President Jimmy Carter's Nobel Peace Prize in 2002 ``was more of a slap in the face,'' said Stephen Hess, a political scientist at the Brookings Institution in Washington.

Krugman's award could bring Bush face-to-face with his antagonist. The president typically invites Nobel Prize winners to the White House in November or December.

White House spokeswoman Dana Perino declined to comment on the award.