Obama wants to wait on olympic boycott

From NYTimes,

'now Senator Barack Obama is suggesting a more cautious approach.

Mr. Obama said Wednesday that President Bush should leave open the option of boycotting the opening ceremonies of the Olympic Games if the Chinese government did not take steps to help stop genocide in Darfur as well as improving human rights for the people of Tibet. Still, he said, a decision to boycott should be made closer to the Games.'

Why do you want to wait? Do you think China gives a hoot? The sooner you support the boycott the more pressure you can put on China.

Obama Get A Clue

Here is the understatement of the day by Obama on the cost of the war.

"When you have finite resources, you've got to define your goals tightly and modestly," he said.'

Duh. But what about the opportunity costs when you have a terrorist threat against US citizens and your military?

Liberal Economist Krugman thinks a black candidate will lose the election

From the economist regarding Paul Krugman '

'In his well-read column, he’s said variously that we should fear a backlash against Mr Obama’s “mystique” and admire Hillary’s relatively concerted focus on winsome economic issues; he’s noted too that Mr Obama has never faced a serious Republican and is anyway not sufficiently partisan.

But now he says—on the record, and yet not so audibly—that there is one big, singular reason not to prefer Mr Obama as the Democratic nominee. He wishes it didn’t have to be said aloud. In fact, he almost avoids saying it. Turning from the historical discussion of the Southern strategy and its million effects, he finally comes round to the subject for which we’ve all been waiting. This year ought to be the Democrats’, by rights, what with the economy tanking, Bush hatred soaring and Iraq a persistent disaster. Which Democrat’s? Ahem. Squirm. “Let’s abstract from what I just said for a moment…[sigh, frustrated]”. “Okay…[regretful laughter] And there are other reasons …” (Namely, Mr Obama’s not partisan enough, and also his health-care plan stands to the right of Mrs Clinton’s and Mr Edwards’s.)

May we say it for him, rudely? He thinks that a black candidate will lose a national election. So it’s bad tactics to support Mr Obama.

Obama's Luck, Not Smarts

A common refrain from Obama is that how he was against the war in Iraq from the start. The liberal lemmings have taken the leap of faith that Obama has the smarts on this topic.

Here is a a comment from Obama:

"We have more than 150,000 Americans in the middle of two wars, brave men and women on their second or third or fourth tours of duty in Iraq, a place where we're spending $400 million a day to help a government that refuses to help itself, a war that never should have been authorized and never should have been waged," Obama told the North Dakota State Democratic Convention on Friday.'

Seems like the State Senator from IL got lucky in 2002 when he first blurted this out. 73 Senators including 29 Democrats (including notable Intelligence committee veterans like Joe Biden (Delaware) and Bob Graham (Florida) ) and had more information than Obama, including classified and independently verifiable information, to make this decision. Some of these Senators have more experience and knowledge than Obama.

Note the Senators had access to additional information like the 92-page National Intelligence Estimate on Iraq’s ability to attack the U.S. (which most of them may not have read!) which Obama did not have access to.

It was not just the Senate, foreign policy experts and commentators (like Frareed Zacharia, Thomas Friedman) also supported this decision.

The dissenting Senators main objection was not that we should not go to war with Iraq but that the resolution passed on Oct 11th 2002 was too broad and premature.

Here is the main part of the resolution:

"The president is authorized to use the armed forces of the United States as he determines to be necessary and appropriate in order to (1) defend the national security of the United States against the continuing threat posed by Iraq, and (2) enforce all relevant United Nation Security Council resolutions regarding Iraq."

In decision sciences you can get lucky for making the right decision with the wrong outcome or make an uninformed decision with the right outcome.

Obama was not smart in making this decision. He got lucky. Luck plays a role more often than what people give credit for.

A Taste of Populism

Another example of Obama's pandering to populism. He is no different than your typical politician peddling change and prosperity using a feel good message.

From CBS

'A health nut, Obama (Ill.) has consumed hot dogs, french fries and homemade chocolates. He has sipped a few Yuengling beers. He has largely skipped arena-filling rallies in favor of town-hall-style events and casual visits, delivering populist appeals to the small-town, working-class voters who have proven most resistant to his candidacy.'

Obama's Gay Issues

What exactly is Obama's stance on gay rights?

Here is an excerpt from USA Today:

' Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., says on his Senate website that he personally believes marriage is between a man and woman. But he voted in 2006 against amending the Constitution to make that declaration. He said decisions about marriage should be left to the states. Obama said he supports civil unions that would give same-sex couples the same benefits as married couples, including hospital visitation rights and health insurance coverage. Obama has also said he would repeal the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act, which set a federal definition of marriage as between a man and a woman and said states don’t have to recognize same-sex marriages performed by another state.'

I personally believe that two people can be married even if they are of the same sex. Why aren't more of his gay backers calling him on this issue.

More and more companies are offering their gay employees and couples the same benefits and coverage as straight employees and couples so his actions won't a a whole lot of impact.

Loaning $$ to Investment Banks vs Help Home Mortgage Owners

The federal government should not be helping home owners who spent beyond their means. Think about it, if banks foreclose on a home they usually take a haircut or a loss because they have to dispose of the property quickly. That loss comes from their current income or if in worst case from the equity of the shareholders (not depositors).

This lowers the price of the home in a low demand environment because the supply of homes is higher than demand (too much supply leads to lower demand). It also reduces the prices of other like properties on the market. This lower price environment allows new home buyers to enter the market as the home prices become more affordable. The new entrants are lower risk and higher quality buyers. So the loss goes to the lender who took the risk and the borrower who mid misjudged their ability to pay.

The Fed should LOAN not bail out investment banks because these banks possess a huge risk to the entire financial framework. In fact the Fed forced the market to take a loss (in this case the Bear shareholders) and is holding on to collateral that will (most likely) not loose its value over time. It is providing a SHORT TERM loan and will unwind this transaction in the future.

Here is a good explanation of why the Fed acted from Paul Kedrosky blog.

'It is important to understand that investment banks now perform many of the economic functions traditionally associated with commercial banks, and they are also vulnerable to a sudden loss of liquidity. Unlike commercial banks, which rely significantly on deposits for funding, investment banks operate according to a business model in which they fund large portions of their balance sheets on a secured, short-term basis in what is known as the repo market. Because the assurance of access to short-term secured funding on a daily basis is such a critical component of business functioning for these entities, they are vulnerable to the possibility of a sudden pullback in short-term lending, or a reduction in the willingness of investors to lend against certain classes of securities'

Think twice when Obama wants to save the homeowners! Yes We Can - save reckless folks!

Manic Masses' Misunderstandings

Recent poll respondents think this:

'The poll found that Americans blame government officials for the crisis more than banks or home buyers and other borrowers. Forty percent of respondents said regulators were mostly to blame, while 28 percent named lenders and 14 percent named borrowers.'

Blame the banks! Don't take any responsibility! Blame the regulators! Blame everybody else!

Oh yea, while the economy is slowing, raise taxes on earned income! If you earn money based on your endowments and effort then you should be taxed. If you happen to make a lot of money, MOST people save more of their money (as they make more). These savings are invested back into the economy in the form of equity for new businesses and loans!

The democratic candidates are pandering to this sentiment!! Shame on them. Yes We Can!

'Fifty-eight percent of respondents said they would support raising taxes on households making more than $250,000 to pay for tax cuts or government programs for people making less than that amount. Only 38 percent called it a bad idea. Both Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton and Senator Barack Obama, the Democratic presidential candidates, have made proposals along these lines.

More broadly, 43 percent of those surveyed said they would prefer a larger government that provided more services, which is tied for the highest such number since The Times and CBS News began asking the question in 1991. But an identical 43 percent said they wanted a smaller government that provided fewer services.

And although both Mrs. Clinton and Mr. Obama have blamed trade with other countries for some of the economy’s problems, Americans say they continue to favor trade — if not quite as strongly as in the past. Fifty-eight percent called it good for the economy; 32 percent called it bad, up from 17 percent in 1996.'

Give Credit to the Clinton Club

You have gotta give credit to the Clinton strategy team.

They rolled up their sleeves and fought a scrappy street fight with the Obamanuts. They were able to make him stumble by getting the press to look at his record and his associations.

Here is the latest from NYTimes

'Mr. Obama’s favorability rating among Democratic primary voters has dropped seven percentage points, to 62 percent, since the last Times/CBS News survey, in late February. While that figure is by any measure high, the decline came in a month during which he endured withering attacks from Mrs. Clinton and responded to reports that his former pastor had made politically inflammatory statements from his church’s pulpit in Chicago.

Still, the events of the last month do not appear to have fundamentally altered the race for the party’s nomination or provided what Mrs. Clinton’s campaign has been seeking: evidence of a collapse in Mr. Obama’s standing or an overwhelming preference voiced for Mrs. Clinton by Democratic voters in polls, developments that could be used to persuade uncommitted superdelegates to sign on with her.'

Popping the Kennedy Coochie

Nice statement from David Mamet:

'Bush got us into Iraq, JFK into Vietnam. Bush stole the election in Florida; Kennedy stole his in Chicago. Bush outed a CIA agent; Kennedy left hundreds of them to die in the surf at the Bay of Pigs. Bush lied about his military service; Kennedy accepted a Pulitzer Prize for a book written by Ted Sorenson. Bush was in bed with the Saudis, Kennedy with the Mafia. Oh.'

Still waiting for that critical view of JFK! So many young folks these days have read only the rosy colored history of JFK. With the proliferation of the Internet and the democratization of information you should see a ton of 'truth' on JFK!

Mamet - My Man sees the light - Not the liberal kind!

Surprising that the media did not carry this story!

I love David Mamet and love his movies. Who can forget Glen Gary Glen Ross (Coffee is for closers!) (and the other movies!) and his amazing talent to create dialog that is just fun AND intelligent to listen to!!

He penned a piece in the Village Voice (yes that one) as to why he is no longer a liberal. The title you ask?

Why I Am No Longer a 'Brain-Dead Liberal'

Awesome!! Read it for yourselves to get an alternative view of the other side! Yea take a walk on the wild side!!

Pandering to The Pansies - Positioning Brand Obama

Brand Obama will position itself to the right segment that eat his words up and feel good.

From NYDaily News:

'"The truth is that my foreign policy is actually a return to the traditional bipartisan realistic policy of George Bush's father, of John F. Kennedy, of, in some ways, Ronald Reagan, and it is George Bush that's been naive and it's people like John McCain and, unfortunately, some Democrats that have facilitated him acting in these naive ways that have caused us so much damage in our reputation around the world," he said.

He must be positioning himself for the 'middle' folks!

Fun With Foreign Policy - Obama's Newbie Knowledge Shines Through

Excerpts from a recent WSJ piece:

'Critics in the foreign-policy establishment and from rival presidential camps said his idea could undercut pro-Western forces and legitimize leaders whose power the U.S. wants to undermine, including Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Increasingly, they are presenting his ideas as a radical departure from standard U.S. doctrine.'

'Sen. Obama also has said he would be willing to reach out to Venezuelan President Hugo Chávez and Cuba's new leader, Raúl Castro.

U.S. foreign-policy doctrine has traditionally held that American presidents should be discerning in where and when to use the prestige of their office. During U.S. engagements with the Soviet Union and China, summits by presidents Reagan and Nixon were withheld to the end of the diplomatic process rather than occurring at the start. U.S. leaders have been averse to photo opportunities with the likes of Cuba's Fidel Castro, fearing it could provide them a propaganda tool.'

'Middle East experts said Obama's strategy holds potential pitfalls. In Iran, they said, Sen. Obama could strengthen Mr. Ahmadinejad if as U.S. president he moves too quickly to hold direct talks with Tehran's leader. They note Mr. Ahmadinejad is facing presidential elections in 2009 and could use a summit with Sen. Obama as proof of his enhanced stature. They said Mr. Ahmadinejad also could seek to sell to his people that talks with Washington were a direct result of his hard-line stance.'

'"Saying you'll talk to Syria no matter what undercuts Washington's position," said Emile El-Hokayem, a Middle East expert at the Henry L. Stimson Center, a nonpartisan Washington think tank. "I don't think it's feasible to revolutionize how diplomacy is conducted" with Damascus.'

BS from BO

Paul Krugman, that liberal NYT Columnist and probably a future Nobel Prize in Economics winner (He won the John Bates Clark Medal for the best economist under 40 in 1992) rip into our boy obama on healthcare:

'On health care Obama is behaving as kind of, "Let's make a deal." The idea that he would be talking even in the primary campaign about the big table is suggesting that he is not all that committed to taking on special interests.' - From TMP Election Central

This guy just wreaks of big government but you can't get that scent from his magical words.

Sure 'Yes We Can'! We can socialize healthcare!

Bollywood Barak

Check this out.

Thanks Sophy!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sA-451XMsuY

I have no idea what is being said but it must in along the lines of

Watch me swing and sway, these liberals eat up what I say, shake my tush any which way, I am gonna be President one day!!

You think?

This Black Guy Can't Bowl

Classic brand positioning misfire.

The team at Brand Obama is positioning Obama as the champion of the average Joe! This Tonight Show episode highlights the folly of this effort and is great fodder for the Clinton team. Who are the kidding.

The Obama brand position has be set since last year. He is the man for the Latte Liberals! Bowling is for the Dunkin Donut crowd :)

I would not be surprised if they came out with some TV spots before the PA primary showing Obama doing average Joe things!!

Rack up another to the Clinton opposition research

I am sure the Clinton opposition research group had a hand in digging up the Rev Wright stuff.

Regardless it had its intended effect!!

Here is something from Reuters:

'Democrat Barack Obama's big national lead over Hillary Clinton has all but evaporated in the U.S. presidential race, and both Democrats trail Republican John McCain, according a Reuters/Zogby poll released on Wednesday.

The poll showed Obama had only a statistically insignificant lead of 47 percent to 44 percent over Clinton, down sharply from a 14 point edge he held over her in February when he was riding the tide of 10 straight victories.

Illinois Sen. Obama, who would be America's first black president, has been buffeted by attacks in recent weeks from New York Sen. Clinton over his fitness to serve as commander-in-chief and by a tempest over racially charged sermons given by his Chicago preacher.

The poll showed Arizona Sen. McCain, who has clinched the Republican presidential nomination, is benefiting from the lengthy campaign battle between Obama and Clinton, who are now battling to win Pennsylvania on April 22.

McCain leads 46 percent to 40 percent in a hypothetical matchup against Obama in the November presidential election, according to the poll.

That is a sharp turnaround from the Reuters/Zogby poll from last month, which showed in a head-to-head matchup that Obama would beat McCain 47 percent to 40 percent.

"The last couple of weeks have taken a toll on Obama and in a general election match-up, on both Democrats," said pollster John Zogby.'

Maureen Dowd needs to take Econ 101

Maureen Dowd shows a utter lack of economics in her OpEd Piece.

Ms. Dowd, the dollar trades in a MARKET driven by supply and demand. Foreigners are dumping dollars because they can get a better return else where! The President nor the Federal Reserve controls the daily foreign exchange rates of the dollar!

Oh yea, the price of gasoline is set also by the MARKET. You know supply and demand! The world is demand a resource that is in short supply!

If you had any clue about economics please show that that intelligence in your OpEd pieces!

Race will go on...In more ways than one

Obama acknowledges race is an issue. Duh!

From the NYTimes

After running a campaign that in many ways tried not to be defined by race, Mr. Obama placed himself squarely in the middle of the debate over how to address it, a living bridge between whites and blacks still divided by the legacy of slavery and all that came after it.

His language reached at times for the inspiration and idealism of the civil rights movement, but for the most part addressed the politics of race in straightforward terms that seemed intended to keep the discussion grounded in the realities of the moment.

Verbal Extortion by any other means

There is going to be a lot of sausage making in Denver during the 2008 Democratic convention.

Here is an excerpt from Slate:

Obama supporters are using this threat of an explosion as leverage with the superdelegates, who have the power to avert the nightmare scenario—or give birth to it. "If the superdelegates intervene and get in the way and say, 'Oh no, we are going to determine what's best,' there will be chaos at the convention," said Obama supporter and Richmond, Va., Mayor Douglas Wilder, who raised the specter of the 1968 convention riots. "If you think 1968 was bad, you watch 2008. It will be worse." When fear of chaos hasn't worked, threats of specific retaliation have been issued. On Meet the Press, Obama supporter Bill Bradley said superdelegates who hold public office will face primary challenges the next time around if they don't follow the expressed will of their constituents.