<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<feed xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
   <title>WhatsAPundit</title>
   <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.gojou.net/whatsapundit/" />
   <link rel="self" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://www.gojou.net/whatsapundit/atom.xml" />
   <id>tag:www.gojou.net,2009:/whatsapundit/3</id>
   <updated>2009-03-15T00:37:36Z</updated>
   <subtitle>Because opinion is the new opiate of the masses</subtitle>
   <generator uri="http://www.sixapart.com/movabletype/">Movable Type 3.33</generator>

<entry>
   <title>From &quot;Yes We Can!&quot; ...</title>
   <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.gojou.net/whatsapundit/2009/03/from_yes_we_can.html" />
   <id>tag:www.gojou.net,2009:/whatsapundit//3.152</id>
   
   <published>2009-03-15T00:28:19Z</published>
   <updated>2009-03-15T00:37:36Z</updated>
   
   <summary>... to &quot;It&apos;s not my fault!&quot; In his inaugural address, President Obama proclaimed &quot;an end to the petty grievances and false promises, the recriminations and worn-out dogmas that for far too long have strangled our politics.&quot; It hasn&apos;t taken long...</summary>
   <author>
      <name>Mark Poling</name>
      <uri>http://gojou.net/whatsapundit</uri>
   </author>
         <category term="Obama" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
         <category term="Progressive Degeneration" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
   
   <category term="199" label="lameness" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
   <category term="177" label="Obama" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
   <category term="198" label="partisanship" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
   
   <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://www.gojou.net/whatsapundit/">
      <![CDATA[<p>... to "<a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/03/13/AR2009031303486.html">It's not my fault!</a>"</p>

<blockquote>In his inaugural address, President Obama proclaimed "an end to the petty grievances and false promises, the recriminations and worn-out dogmas that for far too long have strangled our politics."<br /><br />

It hasn't taken long for the recriminations to return -- or for the Obama administration to begin talking about the unwelcome "inheritance" of its predecessor.<br /><br />

Over the past month, Obama has reminded the public at every turn that he is facing problems "inherited" from the Bush administration, using increasingly bracing language to describe the challenges his administration is up against. The "deepening economic crisis" that the president described six days after taking office became "a big mess" in remarks this month to graduating police cadets in Columbus, Ohio. </blockquote>

<p>Hope. Change. Whatever.</p>]]>
      
   </content>
</entry>
<entry>
   <title>This explains a lot</title>
   <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.gojou.net/whatsapundit/2009/02/this_explains_a_lot.html" />
   <id>tag:www.gojou.net,2009:/whatsapundit//3.151</id>
   
   <published>2009-02-05T22:41:39Z</published>
   <updated>2009-02-05T22:45:28Z</updated>
   
   <summary>No wonder professional Democrats never worry about raising taxes. Apparently they believe only suckers pay them....</summary>
   <author>
      <name>Mark Poling</name>
      <uri>http://gojou.net/whatsapundit</uri>
   </author>
         <category term="Progressive Degeneration" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
   
   <category term="197" label="Suckers pay taxes" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
   
   <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://www.gojou.net/whatsapundit/">
      <![CDATA[<p>No wonder professional Democrats never worry about raising taxes.</p>

<p>Apparently they believe <a href="http://pajamasmedia.com/instapundit/68786/" target="insty">only suckers pay them</a>.</p>

 ]]>
      
   </content>
</entry>
<entry>
   <title>Entirely Appropriate</title>
   <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.gojou.net/whatsapundit/2008/12/entirely_appropriate.html" />
   <id>tag:www.gojou.net,2008:/whatsapundit//3.150</id>
   
   <published>2008-12-23T17:18:44Z</published>
   <updated>2008-12-23T17:30:22Z</updated>
   
   <summary>Me, I think Obama is paying tribute to a man who did a pretty good job in handling the worst crisis this country has ever faced. The Emancipation Proclamation was a pretty big deal. York needs to lighten up.</summary>
   <author>
      <name>Mark Poling</name>
      <uri>http://gojou.net/whatsapundit</uri>
   </author>
         <category term="Kudos" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
         <category term="Obama" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
   
   <category term="193" label="Byron York" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
   <category term="177" label="Obama" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
   <category term="195" label="The Corner" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
   
   <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://www.gojou.net/whatsapundit/">
      <![CDATA[This, I think, is <a href="http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=MjIxZTY0YWJhYmQ5NDg0MmExNmVlYTBkNTkzYmYwNzI=" target="corner">entirely appropriate and strikes an excellent tone</a>: 

<blockquote>On January 20th, President-elect Barack Obama will take the oath of office using the same Bible upon which President Lincoln was sworn in at his first inauguration.  The Bible is currently part of the collections of the Library of Congress.  Though there is no constitutional requirement for the use of a Bible during the swearing-in, Presidents have traditionally used Bibles for the ceremony, choosing a volume with personal or historical significance.  President-elect Obama will be the first President sworn in using the Lincoln Bible since its initial use in 1861.</blockquote>

<p>My reading of Mr. York's commentary is that he's mocking Obama's hubris:</p>
<blockquote>Obviously, I buried the lead.  It should have been "Obama Joins Distinguished Predecessors Harding and Carter in Choosing Bible Used By A Previous President." (OK, Eisenhower too, but just half.)</blockquote>

<p>Me, I think Obama is paying tribute to a man who did a pretty good job in handling the worst crisis this country has ever faced. The Emancipation Proclamation was a pretty big deal. York needs to lighten up.</p>

<p>Byron, if it helps, remember that Lincoln was the first Republican President, too.</p>]]>
      
   </content>
</entry>
<entry>
   <title>Hope for Libertarianism</title>
   <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.gojou.net/whatsapundit/2008/11/hope_for_libertarianism.html" />
   <id>tag:www.gojou.net,2008:/whatsapundit//3.149</id>
   
   <published>2008-11-07T20:19:49Z</published>
   <updated>2008-11-07T21:29:46Z</updated>
   
   <summary>Just as the draft produced a generation that was leery (at best) of the military, one can hope this will produce a generation that wants government to get the hell out of it&apos;s face.</summary>
   <author>
      <name>Mark Poling</name>
      <uri>http://gojou.net/whatsapundit</uri>
   </author>
         <category term="Ch-ch-changes" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
   
   <category term="177" label="Obama" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
   
   <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://www.gojou.net/whatsapundit/">
      <![CDATA[<p>Just as the draft produced a generation that was leery (at best) of the military, one can hope <a href="http://www.change.gov/americaserves/">this</a> will produce a generation that wants government to get the hell out of it's face.</p>]]>
      
   </content>
</entry>
<entry>
   <title>A loss well-earned</title>
   <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.gojou.net/whatsapundit/2008/11/a_loss_wellearned.html" />
   <id>tag:www.gojou.net,2008:/whatsapundit//3.148</id>
   
   <published>2008-11-06T17:57:19Z</published>
   <updated>2008-11-06T18:08:09Z</updated>
   
   <summary>Which of course is why the Republican Party is in the mess that it&apos;s in; the establishment had gotten so comfy that it lost sight of some minor issues like doing what&apos;s best for the country first.</summary>
   <author>
      <name>Mark Poling</name>
      <uri>http://gojou.net/whatsapundit</uri>
   </author>
         <category term="Stupid Pachyderm Tricks" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
   
   <category term="187" label="Palin" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
   
   <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://www.gojou.net/whatsapundit/">
      <![CDATA[<p>Heather in a <a href="http://www.commentarymagazine.com/blogs/index.php/rubin/41981?cp=1#comment-2140861">comment</a> on a <a href="http://www.commentarymagazine.com/blogs/index.php/rubin/41981">blog post by Jennifer Rubin</a> said:</p>

<blockquote>If those staffers are right and Palin was this bad, what does the vetting and selection of Palin say about McCain? Nothing good. If these McCain staffers are this vindictive and mean to a women they were support to help, What does it say about the McCain? Nothing good. I say this as a McCain voter, I’m glad Obama won.</blockquote>

<p>In the comment before Heather's someone repeated a rumor that ex-Romney people were behind the smears of Palin. That's the first thing I've read that makes sense, although it wouldn't have to be Romney people; anyone with a dog (other than Palin) in the 2012 race might be motivated to bring the pretty pit bull down.</p>

<p>Which of course is why the Republican Party is in the mess that it's in; the establishment had gotten so comfy that it lost sight of some minor issues like <i>doing what's best for the country first</i>.</p>

<p>The creeps doing the back stabbing better have something to fall back on. First guess: most will take media jobs. "And here's our pet Republican, who will now parrot our party line."</p>

<p>Losers.</p>]]>
      
   </content>
</entry>
<entry>
   <title>The honeymoon post</title>
   <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.gojou.net/whatsapundit/2008/11/the_honeymoon_post.html" />
   <id>tag:www.gojou.net,2008:/whatsapundit//3.147</id>
   
   <published>2008-11-05T14:25:27Z</published>
   <updated>2008-11-05T14:38:21Z</updated>
   
   <summary>My countrymen. My country. My President. It&apos;s a package deal.

The best thing possible for this country would be for Obama to become a great President. So that&apos;s what I&apos;m hoping for.
</summary>
   <author>
      <name>Mark Poling</name>
      <uri>http://gojou.net/whatsapundit</uri>
   </author>
         <category term="Presidency &apos;08" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
   
   <category term="177" label="Obama" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
   
   <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://www.gojou.net/whatsapundit/">
      <![CDATA[<p>Barak Obama is my President.</p>

<p>He wasn't my guy in the race. As a matter of fact, my vote was much more "against" Obama than it was "for" McCain. And I don't expect to be soft on Obama during his Administration.</p>

<p>But my fellow citizens have chosen Obama, and the system of government that I hold in awe has once again produced a remarkable change in management without harming the fabric of society.</p>

<p>My countrymen. My country. My President. It's a package deal.</p>

<p>The best thing possible for this country would be for Obama to become a great President. So that's what I'm hoping for.</p>

<p>Good luck Barack. Do good and be well.</p>]]>
      
   </content>
</entry>
<entry>
   <title>My civic duty</title>
   <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.gojou.net/whatsapundit/2008/11/my_civic_duty.html" />
   <id>tag:www.gojou.net,2008:/whatsapundit//3.146</id>
   
   <published>2008-11-04T18:17:48Z</published>
   <updated>2008-11-04T18:40:48Z</updated>
   
   <summary>I hadn&apos;t really thought that possible until today. And I still think it&apos;s unlikely; I think McCain has to win Pennsylvania to have a shot, and if my neighborhood is typical of black urban turnout, then metro Philly is going to swamp the central and western part of the state.
But if McCain manages to win, I can see how a big Blue Coasts turnout could easily give Obama a comfortable popular vote margin. 
That would be serious icksville.</summary>
   <author>
      <name>Mark Poling</name>
      <uri>http://gojou.net/whatsapundit</uri>
   </author>
         <category term="Presidency &apos;08" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
   
   <category term="173" label="McCain" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
   <category term="177" label="Obama" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
   
   <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://www.gojou.net/whatsapundit/">
      <![CDATA[<p>So, I took the twins for their first trip to the voting booth today.</p>
<p>Wow.</p>
<p>We went at 11:30. I figured that was safely in a quiet period, before a lunch rush but well after people would be at work.<p>
<p>The line was still 40 minutes long.</p>
<p>The kids handled it well. Hunter was in one of our <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Chicco-05061459200070-C6-Stroller-Tangerine/dp/B000FFS9VM/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&s=baby-products&qid=1225823132&sr=1-2">umbrella strollers</a>, and Aden was riding high in our new <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Kelty-K-I-D-S-Frame-Child-Carrier/dp/B000W9TUUK/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=baby-products&qid=1225823383&sr=1-1">Kelty carrier</a>. I think they did handle it well because the mood on the line was very upbeat. I heard a dad with a kid in a stroller behind me talking on his cell phone about it, and he said he was cautiously optimistic about Obama winning.</p>
<p>I hope he's typical, if Obama happens to lose. Otherwise, a lot of people are going to be <em>extremely</em> angry if we end up with another 2000 scenario, where Obama wins the popular vote and loses the Electoral College.</p>
<p>I hadn't really thought that possible until today. And I still think it's unlikely; I think McCain has to win Pennsylvania to have a shot, and if my neighborhood is typical of black urban turnout, then metro Philly is going to swamp the central and western part of the state.</p>
<p>But if McCain manages to win, I can see how a big Blue Coasts turnout could easily give Obama a comfortable popular vote margin. </p>
<p>That would be serious icksville.</p>
<p>As much as Obama worries me, if he wins the popular vote, I hope like hell he wins the Electoral College as well.</p> ]]>
      
   </content>
</entry>
<entry>
   <title>An unfair rip</title>
   <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.gojou.net/whatsapundit/2008/11/an_unfair_rip.html" />
   <id>tag:www.gojou.net,2008:/whatsapundit//3.145</id>
   
   <published>2008-11-04T18:12:46Z</published>
   <updated>2008-11-05T15:23:56Z</updated>
   
   <summary>Evan Coyne Maloney: “Big-L” (as in the party) Libertarians seem to attract an uncomfortable mixture of conspiracy theorists, isolationists and pacifists. The Libertarian Party is the political equivalent of a Star Trek convention That&apos;s unfair. To Star Trek conventions....</summary>
   <author>
      <name>Mark Poling</name>
      <uri>http://gojou.net/whatsapundit</uri>
   </author>
         <category term="Libertarian Lemmings" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
   
   <category term="189" label="Libertarians" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
   <category term="191" label="Star Trek" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
   
   <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://www.gojou.net/whatsapundit/">
      <![CDATA[<p><a href="http://brain-terminal.com/posts/2008/11/04/holding-my-nose-and-pulling-the-lever" target="bt">Evan Coyne Maloney</a>:</p>
<blockquote>“Big-L” (as in the party) Libertarians seem to attract an uncomfortable mixture of conspiracy theorists, isolationists and pacifists. The Libertarian Party is the political equivalent of a Star Trek convention</blockquote>
<p>That's unfair. To Star Trek conventions.</p>
]]>
      
   </content>
</entry>
<entry>
   <title>This has got to mean something</title>
   <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.gojou.net/whatsapundit/2008/10/this_has_got_to_mean_something.html" />
   <id>tag:www.gojou.net,2008:/whatsapundit//3.144</id>
   
   <published>2008-10-31T20:16:18Z</published>
   <updated>2008-10-31T20:48:23Z</updated>
   
   <summary>Make of this what you will: (Click on the thumbnail for the full story.) Oh, and here&apos;s the link to the eBay auction....</summary>
   <author>
      <name>Mark Poling</name>
      <uri>http://gojou.net/whatsapundit</uri>
   </author>
         <category term="Presidency &apos;08" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
   
   <category term="187" label="Palin" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
   
   <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://www.gojou.net/whatsapundit/">
      <![CDATA[<p>Make of this what you will:</p>

<p><a href="http://www.gojou.net/whatsapundit/ebay_cabbage_candidates1.html" onclick="window.open('http://www.gojou.net/whatsapundit/ebay_cabbage_candidates1.html','popup','width=1049,height=708,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img alt="ebay_cabbage_candidates-thumbnail.png" src="http://www.gojou.net/whatsapundit/ebay_cabbage_candidates-thumbnail.png" width="225" height="70" /></a></p>
<p>(Click on the thumbnail for the full story.)

<p>Oh, and <a href="http://stores.ebay.com/Auction-Cause_W0QQfsubZ481950014" target="ebay">here's the link</a> to the eBay auction.</p>]]>
      
   </content>
</entry>
<entry>
   <title>The most wrong thing about this election</title>
   <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.gojou.net/whatsapundit/2008/10/the_most_wrong_thing_about_thi.html" />
   <id>tag:www.gojou.net,2008:/whatsapundit//3.143</id>
   
   <published>2008-10-31T14:43:45Z</published>
   <updated>2008-10-31T15:50:51Z</updated>
   
   <summary>So, you may not agree with me, but please do me and those like me a favor and assume our positions are arrived at honorably. It is the post-racial, post-partisan thing to do. </summary>
   <author>
      <name>Mark Poling</name>
      <uri>http://gojou.net/whatsapundit</uri>
   </author>
         <category term="Presidency &apos;08" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
   
   
   <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://www.gojou.net/whatsapundit/">
      <![CDATA[<p>There's certainly a lot to dislike about McCain. For me, he was the fourth best Republican. (Rudy, Fred Thompson, then Bill Richardson - yes, I know he's a Democrat by affiliation, but he's more of a Republican than McCain - were my "conservative" choices.)</p>]]>
      <![CDATA[<p>I can understand those who don't like Palin for her socially conservative personal beliefs. I'd argue that she hasn't let any of those beliefs interfere with a basically Libertarian approach to governing (no books were, in fact, banned, no abortions thwarted, no gays or minority rights infringed upon, etc.) but an honest concern about how she would act as President should the need arise is fair game. (Purely class-based attacks on her I find reprehensible, not least because I identify with the Palins from my own background.)</p>

<p>In short, I can respect people who are opposed to the running Republicans, and are mostly voting against them. Hell, I'd vote against the top of the ticket too; if Palin wasn't on the ticket I might not bother to vote at all this year. </p>

<p>I can also respect people who are strongly for Obama; if I believed he stood for the things my friends believe he does, I'd be for him too. I'd live with the anti-Libertarian principles in order to get a smart, tough, principled President whom most Americans could admire even if they disagreed with him.</p>  

<p>What makes me sad and a little angry though is that I fear that my being very much against Obama isn't (or wouldn't be) treated with the same respect.</p> 

<p>I'll say it again; if I believed Obama represented a <em>positive</em> change in the way politics are played in Washington, I'd be posting nothing but pro-Obama stuff. But I don't. He's been on every side of the serious questions during this election cycle; he's been at best unforthcoming, at worst blatantly dishonest when questioned about his history; and while claiming to be opposed to negative politics and racial divisiveness, his campaign and surrogates have done things that would make Karl Rove blush.</p> 

<p>I think a person running on his or her character is a valid strategy. Obama has run on his, and on examination I've decided I just can't vote for him.</p> 

<p>I really hope I'm wrong. If Obama is elected, and if he turns out to be ethical and effective, it will be one of the best things to happen to this country since the Civil Rights movement united so many Americans in the pursuit of justice. The trouble is, I just can't convince myself I'm wrong.</p>

<p>So, you may not agree with me, but please do me and those like me a favor and assume our positions are arrived at honorably. It is the post-racial, post-partisan thing to do.</p> ]]>
   </content>
</entry>
<entry>
   <title>How to donate millions to the Obama campaign</title>
   <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.gojou.net/whatsapundit/2008/10/how_to_donate_millions_to_the.html" />
   <id>tag:www.gojou.net,2008:/whatsapundit//3.142</id>
   
   <published>2008-10-30T14:53:58Z</published>
   <updated>2008-11-14T05:58:45Z</updated>
   
   <summary>Now the really brilliant thing about this scam is how many firewalls there are between Obama and the original source of funds. Obama&apos;s own fraud auditors (ineffective as they may be) still have no real reason to suspect any kind of coordinated dollar-dump. The card companies see nothing but small, cash-based transactions from a issuing partner. Even the Bank or Banks could claim that the agencies setting up the account looked legitimate; Banks aren&apos;t in the business of turning away high-volume depositors.</summary>
   <author>
      <name>Mark Poling</name>
      <uri>http://gojou.net/whatsapundit</uri>
   </author>
         <category term="Presidency &apos;08" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
   
   <category term="185" label="dirty tricks" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
   <category term="177" label="Obama" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
   
   <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://www.gojou.net/whatsapundit/">
      <![CDATA[<p>Okay, let's say you're an unethical person/corporation rolling in cash, and you see it to be in your interest to give a whole lotta love to the Obama campaign. Like, millions love.</p>
<p>Not a problem!</p>
<p>Here's what you do:</p>
]]>
      <![CDATA[<ul>
<li>Find a bank (or ten) that doesn't mind doing transactions <a href="http://www.puma08.com/2008/10/10/as-rezko-starts-to-sing-obama-might-be-one-note-away/" target="_blank">on the down low</a>.</li>
<li>Set up an arbitrary number of accounts that include debit cards.</li>
<li>Fund those accounts in any way you see fit. Wire transfers are always nice, but you might want to avoid the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Privacy_International#The_SWIFT_affair" target="_blank">SWIFT network, all things considered</a>.</li>
<li>Buy a list of names. Be sure to buy a boring list.</li>
<li>Buy a list of addresses. This list doesn't need to have anything to do with the first list, and in fact shouldn't.</li>
<li>Hire a programmer who will:</li>
<ol>
<li>Randomize the first list.</li>
<li>Randomize the second list.</li>
<li>Pair up items in the two lists.</li>
<li>Randomly match debit card numbers from the previously established accounts to the new names-and-addresses.</li>
<li>Write a routine that will post donations (all of which need to be under $200) to the Obama campaign's website, which conveniently <a href="http://hotair.com/archives/2008/10/29/credit-card-experts-explain-the-extent-of-obamas-deception/" target="_blank">doesn't bother validating the cardholder's identity</a>.</li>
<li>Repeat as necessary.</li>
</ol>
<li>When the desired amount of love successfully clears, close the accounts</li>
<li>Repeat as necessary.</li>
</ul>
<p>Now the really brilliant thing about this scam is how many firewalls there are between Obama and the original source of funds. Obama's own fraud auditors (<a href="http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2008/10/adolf_hitler_donates_to_obama.html" target="_blank">ineffective as they may be</a>) still have no real reason to suspect any kind of coordinated dollar-dump. The card companies see nothing but small, cash-based transactions from an issuing partner. Even the Bank or Banks could claim that the agencies setting up the account looked legitimate; Banks aren't in the business of turning away high-volume depositors.</p>
<p>And since there's a definite whiff of Chicago in this scenario, the geek who writes the code can be dealt with.</p>
<p>This is not a far-fetched scheme. If I could think of it, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Axelrod_(political_consultant)" target="_blank">David Axelrod </a>could think of it. And I'm pretty sure it would work.</p>
<p>Change we can believe in. Yeah.</p>]]>
   </content>
</entry>
<entry>
   <title>Our Broken Political Class</title>
   <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.gojou.net/whatsapundit/2008/09/our_broken_political_class.html" />
   <id>tag:www.gojou.net,2008:/whatsapundit//3.140</id>
   
   <published>2008-09-29T20:50:47Z</published>
   <updated>2008-09-29T21:38:23Z</updated>
   
   <summary>There&apos;s an old saying that Conservatives think Liberals are stupid, and Liberals think Conservatives are evil.

Well, the House of Representatives today showed that it&apos;s not an either/or proposition.</summary>
   <author>
      <name>Mark Poling</name>
      <uri>http://gojou.net/whatsapundit</uri>
   </author>
         <category term="Congress" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
         <category term="Progressive Degeneration" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
         <category term="Stupid Pachyderm Tricks" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
   
   
   <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://www.gojou.net/whatsapundit/">
      <![CDATA[<p>There's an old saying that Conservatives think Liberals are stupid, and Liberals think Conservatives are evil.</p>

<p>Well, the House of Representatives today showed that <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/30/business/30bailout.html?hp=&pagewanted=all"  target="beeee-atch">it's not an either/or proposition</a>.</p> 

]]>
      <![CDATA[<p>Okay, I can kinda/sorta understand significant Republican opposition to the bailout. Limited Government it ain't. But then again, the last Great Depression we had didn't do good things for the "Conservative" brand (not to mention the rather extensive growth in government services and powers it produced) so you might maybe have thought the Republicans would eat their sh*t sandwiches like men.</p>

<p>Well, some did, but two-thirds didn't.</p>

<p>But the Democrats, well, a lot of them (95) understood <i>quite</i> well that a lot of Americans are pretty pissed that 700 billion of their tax dollars were going to bail out guys who took morning choppers (and I don't mean the Harley-Davidson kind) to work. So they said, "count me out."</p>

<p>But bottom line, Republicans are supposed to be the smart ones; the Conservative position is to <i>avoid</i> the Great Depression of '08. </p>

<p>(Pelosi didn't cover herself in glory by trying to <a href="http://www.breitbart.tv/html/184803.html" target="beeee-atch">score partisan points pre-vote</a> either. See? Stupid <i>and</i> evil, but that's neither here nor there.)</p>

<p>Republicans who think they're going to get a break by blaming the failure to pass on Democrats (who really do control the House of Representative, no matter what impression Speaker Pelosi seems to be trying to make) is <i>also</i> <a href="http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=ZGNiYmU2ZThhNTI1YjU4NjgxMjI3YmExZGU5OWU4YTI=" target="beeee-atch">stupid</a>; Republicans are always blamed when the average Joe takes a hit in an economic downturn (thanks, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Franklin_Delano_Roosevelt" target="beeee-atch">Frankie D! </a>You too, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herbert_Hoover" target="beeee-atch">Herbie H!</a>) Never mind who's <a href="http://www.slate.com/id/2200160/" target="beeee-atch">bright idea</a> it was to subsidize mortgages for people who shouldn't have them. A Republican President was on-watch when the music stopped, and we're about to elect a <a href="http://www.liberallyconservative.com/?p=2462" target="beeee-atch">Community Organizer for ACORN</a>, and you Republicans are going to have to live with that for at least four years, <i>and</i> get another New Deal in the bargain.</p>

<p>How's that working for the Reagan-worshiping two-thirds of you?</p>]]>
   </content>
</entry>
<entry>
   <title>B**** Slap</title>
   <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.gojou.net/whatsapundit/2008/09/b_slap.html" />
   <id>tag:www.gojou.net,2008:/whatsapundit//3.139</id>
   
   <published>2008-09-23T05:57:39Z</published>
   <updated>2008-09-23T06:06:52Z</updated>
   
   <summary>Obama also made Biden write on the board 50 times &quot;You&apos;re my daddy, O.&quot;</summary>
   <author>
      <name>Mark Poling</name>
      <uri>http://gojou.net/whatsapundit</uri>
   </author>
         <category term="Presidency &apos;08" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
   
   <category term="183" label="B****slaps" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
   <category term="181" label="Biden" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
   <category term="177" label="Obama" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
   
   <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://www.gojou.net/whatsapundit/">
      <![CDATA[<p>We break this extended break to repeat this:</p>
<blockquote><a href="http://www.politico.com/blogs/jonathanmartin/0908/Biden_criticizes_Obama_ad_hitting_McCain_as_technologically_inept.html?showall" target="stupid_ad_tricks">I was asked about an ad I’d never seen</a>, reacting merely to press reports.  As I said right then, I knew there was nothing intentionally personal in the criticism of Senator McCain’s views which look backwards not forwards and are out of touch with the new economic challenges we face today. Having now reviewed the ad, it is even more clear to me that given the disgraceful tenor of Senator McCain’s ads and their persistent falsehoods, his campaign is in no position to criticize, especially when they continue to distort Barack’s votes on an issue as personal as keeping kids safe from sexual predators.</blockquote>
<p>Obama also made Biden write on the board 50 times "You're my daddy, O."</p>
<p>HT: <a href="http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=Y2IxMWY1NWIyMDU5MjQ4ZmY1ODgzNDIzNDAyNGYxOTI=" target="thecorner">The Corner</a></p>]]>
      
   </content>
</entry>
<entry>
   <title>Why I&apos;m Not a Conservative</title>
   <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.gojou.net/whatsapundit/2008/07/why_im_not_a_conservative.html" />
   <id>tag:www.gojou.net,2008:/whatsapundit//3.138</id>
   
   <published>2008-07-27T01:03:01Z</published>
   <updated>2008-07-27T01:36:26Z</updated>
   
   <summary>Guess it goes to show political junkies are all about controlling others by the short hairs. Right or Left just differentiate each other by how literally that truism should be interpreted.</summary>
   <author>
      <name>Mark Poling</name>
      <uri>http://gojou.net/whatsapundit</uri>
   </author>
         <category term="Reactionary Rot" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
   
   
   <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://www.gojou.net/whatsapundit/">
      <![CDATA[<p>Because I loathe nearly everything in this <a href="http://article.nationalreview.com/print/?q=NmM5YTc2YzI1Mjg4OTIxYWE3ZmI5MDQxNWQ2Y2RhZWE=" target="minimal_ad_eyes_to_you">editorial</a> by Kathryn Jean Lopez.</p>

<p>Basically, for the 30th Anniversary of the first IVF human birth (that's "Test Tube Baby" to the uninitiated) she posted a screed that basically says "yeah, but it was still the wrong thing to do."</p>

<p>Well, my babies wouldn't be here without it. And if my wife and I had adopted two perfectly cute babies from WeSellBambinostan, the two human beings going to sleep in their nursery still wouldn't be here.</p>

<p>Basically, I don't think the Pope, let alone Ms. Lopez, has the right to tell anyone how they bring human souls into the world. Or who deserves the chance to nurture those souls. I know a few gay couples and a few "single by choice" moms whom I believe will make damn fine parents, and it's a chance they're getting because of assisted reproduction.</p>

<p>What takes her whole screed from tragic moralizing into political farce, though, is this little throw-away graf:</p>

<blockquote>He also glosses over issues of regulation. The IVF industry, and the market for assisted reproduction, is highly unregulated — an issue, among others, that the president’s bioethics commission took seriously in a report a few years ago. He, further, doesn’t even mention the word “adoption” — an option all too often disregarded, but a generous, beautiful, needed option for infertile couples.</blockquote>

<p>Last I checked, it was part of Conservative dogma that the government shouldn't be in the business of regulating how we live our private lives.</p>

<p>But wait, I guess that only applies when it comes to things like how much we can bequeath tax-free to our children, provided those children were the get of a legally married man and woman who conceived during <a href="http://www.wordreference.com/definition/sexual%20congress">sexual congress</a> in the missionary position <i>only</i>. With the lights out.</p>

<p>And no porn in the background, either, you degenerates.</p>

<p>Guess it goes to show political junkies are all about controlling others by the short hairs. Right or Left just differentiate each other by how literally that truism should be interpreted.</p>]]>
      
   </content>
</entry>
<entry>
   <title>Won&apos;t Get Fooled again</title>
   <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.gojou.net/whatsapundit/2008/04/wont_get_fooled_again.html" />
   <id>tag:www.gojou.net,2008:/whatsapundit//3.136</id>
   
   <published>2008-04-16T21:59:16Z</published>
   <updated>2008-04-16T22:53:43Z</updated>
   
   <summary>There&apos;s are words for a person who will say anything to any crowd, as long as that person thinks the crowds don&apos;t overlap. Inspirational ain&apos;t in the list. Neither are &quot;ethical&quot;, &quot;reliable&quot;, &quot;honest&quot;, etc. For that matter, in the modern world where cell phones can shoot video and little old sycophantic ladies have blogs, &quot;smart&quot; can no longer be applied either.</summary>
   <author>
      <name>Mark Poling</name>
      <uri>http://gojou.net/whatsapundit</uri>
   </author>
         <category term="Presidency &apos;08" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
   
   <category term="177" label="Obama" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
   
   <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://www.gojou.net/whatsapundit/">
      <![CDATA[<p><em>"I'm asking you to believe. Not just in my ability to bring about real change in Washington ... I'm asking you to believe in yours."</em></p>

<p>&mdash; The banner quote at Barak Obama's <a href="http://www.barackobama.com/index.php" target="itschinatownjake">official campaign site</a>. 

<p>There are a lot of people who would love to find a politician they can believe in, who truly cares more about principle than <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principality" target="wikipedia">principality</a>. A lot of those people are <a href="http://ohprettylady.blogspot.com/" target="pretty_lady">sharp and sophisticated</a>. But Barak just isn't the guy they should buy into.</p>

<p>For what it's worth, I thought when the controversy broke over Obama's long-term pastor the not-quite-right Reverend Wright that it was more a sign of a politician not knowing when to ditch a problematic association than a sign of fealty to <em>anything</em> coming from that pulpit. Being a member of that church gave Obama credibility with his early constituency, and I always assumed it was simply cold calculation that put Barak in those pews.</p>

<p>Nothing I've heard since makes me think any differently.</p>

<p>Still, I liked Obama. He struck me as a smart, articulate political operator who might actually shake things up in Washington. His down-the-line progressive/liberal voting record didn't bother me too much because frankly the Presidency isn't really an Imperial office, and the amount of damage he could do in setting policy from above would be severely limited by his ability to move things (or not) through Congress.</p>

<p>I <em>believe</em> in gridlock, and think it a good thing.</p>

<p>What Obama brought (I thought) was an outsider's perspective to the whole game, impressive native intelligence, and a truckload of charisma. The Obamanicas were not a bug in my mind (unlike the troglodytes who were trolling for Ron Paul) but a feature; the office of the Presidency may not be Imperial, but it is certainly show biz, and both Reagan and Clinton did good by forcing people to respect the position even if they disagreed with the current occupant.</p>

<p>A pair of bookend incidents has changed my mind.</p>

<p>First, something that made a stir, but didn't change the game much. An Obama advisor apparently <a href="http://www.thenation.com/blogs/thebeat?pid=293120" target="_blank">back-channeled to Canada that Obama wasn't serious about screwing around with NAFTA.</a> A lot of explanations were tossed out by the Obama campaign, <a href="http://www.reuters.com/article/topNews/idUSN0338038720080303" target="_blank">Canada tried to make nice-nice</a>, and for the most part it had been forgotten. 

<p>Then the Wright controversy comes along, and Barak's "brilliant" speech explaining why it's okay for some people to preach "God Damn America" because you know they don't really mean it. Or something. And those who do have some history, you dig?</p>

<p>That speech was Obama's biggest blunder up until now. A non-apology apology is almost always worse than saying nothing at all, even if the press reports are loudly effusive though a bit muffled because the reporters are so deeply into kissing tuchus. The love goes away. The quotes don't.</p> 

<p>Then comes <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mayhill-fowler/obama-no-surprise-that-ha_b_96188.html" target="huffpo">Bitter Gate</a>. Or Cling Gate. Whatever you want to call it. Have to repeat the quote:</p>

<blockquote>"You go into some of these small towns in Pennsylvania, and like a lot of small towns in the Midwest, the jobs have been gone now for 25 years and nothing's replaced them," Obama said. "And they fell through the Clinton Administration, and the Bush Administration, and each successive administration has said that somehow these communities are gonna regenerate and they have not. And it's not surprising then they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations."</blockquote>

<p>That's pretty breathtaking. Not since college has someone been more up-front in calling me and my family  not-too-smart, morally damaged, pathetic god-bothering gun-loving rednecks.</p>

<p>So yeah, my estimates of Barak's native intelligence took a nosedive, considering a big win in Pennsylvania keeps Hillary! in the race, and that the quote is going to lose a <i>lot</i> of states for Obama in November, assuming he actually gets there.</p>

<p>But then I read this little factoid from Bill Bradley at Pajamas Media:</p>

<blockquote>And from the standpoint of Obama campaign figures, the material was gotten under false pretenses. One top Obama hand speaks of the campaign and candidate being blindsided. Fowler was a supporter, a contributor, an activist, a blogger, not a reporter. <em>With the event closed to the press</em>, Obama spoke with less care than he would have otherwise had he known a reporter, of any sort, was in attendance. [Emphasis added.]</blockquote>

<p>Everybody has been talking like Obama "misspoke". Obama claims it <a href="http://www.alternet.org/election08/82366/">himself</a>. Excuse me, no. He was speaking to ultra-rich San Franciscans from whom he wished to raise money. It was a "Save the Whales" speech, only instead of large marine mammals, Obama wanted these patrons to contribute to the salvation of the Great White Rednecks. Which obviously contribute less to the cultural zeitgeist than do humpback whales, but one must respect all of Gaia's creatures, no matter how vile.</p>

<p>There's are words for a person who will say anything to any crowd, as long as that person thinks the crowds don't overlap. <em>Inspirational</em> ain't in the list. Neither are "ethical", "reliable", "honest", etc. For that matter, in the modern world where cell phones can shoot video and little old sycophantic ladies have blogs, "smart" can no longer be applied either.</p>

<p>So maybe Obama can still bring show-biz glamour to the Office of the Presidency. I don't know; I honestly don't think he can get there now, considering he's bitch-slapped most of middle America. I just feel sorry for the folks who can't let go of the dream of a politician who isn't a Grade A Bastard.</p>]]>
      
   </content>
</entry>

</feed>
