Obama leaves Trinity

Politico.com reported Obama yesterday sent a letter to Trinity United Church of Christ to inform them that he is leaving the congregation.

Why did it take himthis long to see he had to do that. If he is elected, will he be this indecisive running the country?

... The move would give Obama a flat answer to questions about the congregation -- that he's left it. But it would also acknowledge that Trinity is in some basic way out of step with the his public figure, and beg the question of why he only left the summer before the presidential election.

Clinton's 'briar patch' scenario

Jim Tankersley wrote in The Swamp At the end of a rally in Oregon last month, during a question-and-answer session with the candidate, a woman asked Barack Obama about his campaign's battle with Hillary Clinton's over how to count delegates from two disputed states. Couldn't you just give them Florida? she asked. Several audience members laughed. Obama's winding answer included no promises to "give them Florida" or Michigan, the two states whose delegate fate is set to be decided by leaders of the Democratic National Committee today.

And that is an indication of why he is not qualified t be president. He should have said he is willing for the FL and MI reslts to be counted completely (and not at the 1/2 level as will probably be decided today), he would have given Clinton some additional pledged delegates, but they still would not have overtaken him, and it would have made him look so good that the super delegates would have rushed to his side, and Clinton would have had no reason to take this to the Convention in August. But he is too stupid to see that.

Should he? Is the best way to wrap up the nomination next week to agree to Clinton's every demand on both states? That's the argument M.S. Bellows Jr. makes in the Huffington Post this week in a piece titled "The Trap: Clinton's "Briarpatch" Strategy For The DNC Rules Committee Meeting."

"Barack Obama and Howard Dean are about to walk into Harold Ickes' trap tomorrow,: he writes, "and they aren't likely to even realize their mistake until Hillary Clinton cries "foul!" next week and announces that "justice" and "voters' rights" are forcing her to carry her campaign all the way to the Democratic Convention next August.

Precisely. And whether FL and MI get a 100% penalty or a 50% penalty, she will have that justification.

"By leaning toward implementing a compromise "split the baby" decision tomorrow on how to allocate the Michigan and Florida delegates -- a compromise that nearly all observers see as a setback for Clinton -- the DNC Rules & Bylaws Committee ("RBC"), the Obama campaign and other well-meaning Democrats will actually be throwing Brer Clinton into the briar patch -- giving her exactly the excuse she wants to continue her Quixotic campaign." Bellows makes an intriguing case, but is he underplaying two key factors: money and momentum?

It is not going to cost a lot of money for Hillary to whine about how the votes of FL and MI were stolen, and she can send emails on this basically for free, and include in them statements about any gaffe Obama makes between now and then. The only way to stop that is to not take away the FL and MI votes. And just hope that Obama makes no more gaffes (which he will certainly do).

Bellows' argument, essentially, is that Clinton has no intention of quitting the Democratic race after primary voting ends next week. Her goal, he says, is to push the contest all the way to the August convention in Denver, aggressively courting pledged delegates and superdelegates along the way. Technically, there's nothing to stop her. All delegates are free to change their minds up to the floor vote, per DNC rules. Bellows predicts Clinton is simply looking for an excuse to keep going - and that the best one she could possibly have is to appeal the DNC's decision on Florida and Michigan (even if those states are satisfied with this weekend's ruling).

When will Obama kick Trinity Under the Bus?

Obama responded "As I have traveled this country, I've been impressed not by what divides us, but by all that that unites us. That is why I am deeply disappointed in Father Pfleger's divisive, backward-looking rhetoric, which doesn't reflect the country I see or the desire of people across America to come together in common cause."

Did you see that same thing during the 20 years you stayed at Trinity?

Rev. Michael L. Pfleger said "I regret the words I chose on Sunday. These words are inconsistent with Senator Obama's life and message,

But are they consistent with what you believe?

and I am deeply sorry if they offended Senator Clinton

Why would she not be offended?

or anyone else who saw them."

Bush’s laws will be scrutinized

Reuters.com reported Maybe it’s his background teaching constitutional law. If elected president, Democratic White House hopeful Barack Obama said one of the first things he wants to do is ensure the constitutionality of all the laws and executive orders passed while Republican President George W. Bush has been in office. Those that don’t pass muster will be overturned, he said.

Well this former constitutional law teacher should know that while a president can change an executive order, he cannot "overturn" a law passed by Congress and signed by a President.

During a fund-raiser in Denver, Obama — a former constitutional law professor at the University of Chicago Law School — was asked what he hoped to accomplish during his first 100 days in office. “I would call my attorney general in and review every single executive order issued by George Bush and overturn those laws or executive decisions that I feel violate the constitution,” said Obama

Ao he is going to act as the Judiciary branch AND the Legislative branch.

Other goals for his first 100 days: work out a plan to withdraw troops from Iraq; make progress on alternative energy plans and launch legislation to reform the health care system.

I will step in

Pelosi vows to prevent fight at Dem convention reported House Speaker Nancy Pelosi says she will step in

What the heck does she think she can do? Both candidates want the nomination, and there is not much she can do to change that.

if necessary to make sure the presidential nomination fight between Hillary Rodham Clinton and Barack Obama does not reach the Democratic National Convention - though she believes it could be resolved as early as next week.

So she wants credit for being willing to step in when she does not think it will be necessary.

Pelosi predicted Wednesday that a presidential nominee will emerge in the week after the final Democratic primaries on June 3, but she said "I will step in" if there is no resolution by late June regarding the seating of delegates from Florida and Michigan, the two states that defied party rules by holding early primaries. "Because we cannot take this fight to the convention," she said.

Why hold the convention if it is not going to be any fun?

"It must be over before then."

If The DNC Is Going To Strictly Apply The Rules

TalkLeft reported If The DNC Is Going To Strictly Apply The Rules.... The upshot of strictly applying the rules as described above would be:

A. In Iowa, Obama, Clinton and Edwards would lose one half of their delegates. My understanding is that this would result in a net loss for Obama of 6 in his pledged delegate margin over Clinton.

B. In New Hampshire, the three candidates would lose one half of their delegates with no net change in the delegate margin between Clinton and Obama.

C. In South Carolina, the three candidates would lose one half of their delegates with a net loss in Obama's delegate margin of 9.

D. In Michigan, Clinton would gain 37 delegates. In addition there would be 28 uncommitted delegates. A net gain of 37 delegates for Clinton.

E.In Florida, if the entire delegation is seated, Clinton gains 93 delegates Obama 55, and Edwards 13. A net gain of 38 delegates for Clinton.

I bet they will ignore the other three states that violated the rules.

Honoring the troops

John Amato wrote on Crooks and Liars You keep saying that you’ll bring the troops home with honor. When have they not been honored? Can you please give examples?

Troops returning from http://www.soldiersangels.org/ietnam were spat upon. Even troops coming back from Iraq have not been allowed to go into the airport in uniform at some airports.

C&L and many other sites fight everyday for the rights of our troops, their health care, benefits and the conditions of Walter Reed.

Do yu fight for them to have the financial support they need to be successful. How many of your readers are signed up for Soldier's Angels?

And the best way I know how to fight for them is to never send them to war without a true cause

This war has a true cause. Several different causes have been suggeste, but the left rejects all of them.

and bring them home now so their families can see them alive and healthy.

And so the terrorists will win, and we will have to go back and lose even more lives.

You are against Sen Webb’s GI Bill not because it doesn’t give them adequate compensation for their service, but as you say, it will lead to many more troops leaving the armed forces sooner:

They are very hard to replace. Encouraging people to choose to not become noncommissioned officers would hurt the military and our country very badly.” McCain argues his bill would have a smaller impact on retention rates

Precisely. It gives them more, the longer they stay in, and it allows their families to use the education money.

than the legislation that the Senate passed.

Is that an honorable argument?

Absolutly

Train wreck

Roger Simon wrote on Politico.com Those people who believe all problems have solutions may be unfamiliar with the inner workings of the Democratic Party.

Or they just have not been paying attention the last couple of months.

On Saturday, the party’s Rules and Bylaws Committee will try to solve a big problem, in order to avoid a huge problem in order to prevent a train wreck.

A train wreck would be much more fun to watch.

The big problem is what to do about Michigan and Florida, two states stripped last year of their delegates to the Democratic National Convention because both broke party rules and moved their primaries up too early in the election year.

Actually the real problem is if you give in ane seat the delegates, how do you keep all the states in line in the future.

The rules committee will try to work out a compromise Saturday to try to seat those states in some form or fashion. It will be difficult, and the 30 members of the committee, who come from all over the nation, have been warned to keep their hotel rooms Saturday night, because the meeting may go into Sunday.

And Monday, and Tuesday, and Wednesday, ....

The huge problem is what happens if one side or another does not like the rules committee’s compromise. In that case, the controversy would go to the 186-member Credentials Committee, which will convene in July or August. And if that happens, the party will be presented with a possible train wreck:

I want to see a train wreck.

Whatever the Credentials Committee decides will have to be voted on by the Convention in late August as its first order of business. And this could create what the media might love but the party dreads: a floor fight in Denver.

And this would make the convention fun to watch.

A proposed solution for Fla. and Mich

Lanny J. Davis wrote in Politico.com Here are two important neutral principles that should guide the Democratic National Committee’s Rules Committee when it meets May 31 to decide whether to seat the Michigan and Florida delegations — and, if so, how to allocate them between Sens. Barack Obama and Hillary Rodham Clinton. One principle is based in law, the second in pragmatic politics. Both principles result in the same solution: in some rough approximation, honoring the results expressed by almost 600,000 Michigan Democrats and more than 1.7 million Florida Democrats, who turned out in record numbers though they were told their votes didn't count, were not responsible for the rules violations, and don't want to be disenfranchised.

And both give Hillary a netter chance of claiming she won.

The legal principle supporting that solution is pretty simple. In U.S. contract law, the party breaching a contract usually has the right to "cure" the violation during the term of the contract. But if the other party stands in the way of that cure, the breaching party cannot be further sanctioned — and certainly, as a matter of fairness, the party preventing the cure should not stand to benefit.

That is, in fact, what happened in 2008 to Michigan and Florida. Those states violated the party rules when they scheduled their primaries before Feb. 5. But then in March, elected officials and party leaders in both states were willing to "cure" — i.e., to hold new primaries and raise the money privately to pay for them. In Michigan, Gov. Jennifer Granholm and Sen. Carl Levin proposed a "fire house" primary in June, in which voters could revote at local fire houses or libraries. In Florida, Sen. Bill Nelson and others supported a revote by mailed ballots and perhaps also offering the fire house alternative for those voters who preferred to vote in person.

DNC Chairman Howard Dean said at the time that such revotes were permissible and would bring Michigan and Florida back into compliance. And there was precedent: In 1996, Delaware Democrats held a party caucus earlier than the permissible date, resulting in a rule violation. But state Democrats were allowed to hold another caucus later on and were then found to be back in compliance.

In March and April 2008, Clinton publicly supported the revote proposals of Michigan's Granholm and Levin and Florida's Nelson. She repeatedly invited Obama to join her and do the same. He never did — and the revotes never occurred.

John Hinderaker blogged Barack Obama must be the most gaffe-prone politician in memory. Today, he delivered a Memorial Day speech in New Mexico. After greeting the local Democratic Party dignitaries, he began:

On this Memorial Day, as our nation honors its unbroken line of fallen heroes -- and I see many of them in the audience here today -- our sense of patriotism is particularly strong.

Obama's sense of patriotism is triggered by seeing dead people in the audience. Does he like Zombie films?

Memorial Day honors those who have died in our nation's military service. Is it possible that Obama does not know this?

He may know it, but just not care. It gave him an opportunity to pander to people who might be stupid enough to vote for him. Note, the video of this clip is below the fold.

Sometimes the things that come out of his mouth defy understanding.


... QUESTION: What would you do with Blackwater?

OBAMA: I am not a believer in private contractors as a mechanism for serving our -- this United States.

So trained soldiers should be wasted as truck drivers or guarding dignitaries in a war zone.

You know, I, in fact, actually currently have legislation that I introduced that would do a full audit on Blackwater.

Ooh, attack them with lawyers and accountants.

And they need to be held accountable for some of the actions that have already been taken.

Are you going to pass an ex-post-facto law, or accept insurgent testimony against people they were inable to kill on the battlefield.

Buyer's Remorse

Democrat Taylor Marsh blogged Ever since the media declared that Barack Obama was “inevitable” after February 19th, based on a two week period when the an unprepared Hillary Clinton campaign suffered “10 straight losses”, rank and file Democratic voters have been sending a message.

They discovered what an empty suit Obama was, and the more they saw him, the less they liked him.

Rather than rally ‘round the “inevitable nominee” that message has been a consistent, loud, and clear message to the Democratic Party – DO NOT WANT.

And considering that means they would be stick with Hillary, and that they now see what conservatives knew in the 90s, that is saying something.

In nearly every demographic category since February 19, Clinton percentage of the vote has risen, while Obama’s has fallen. This includes Obama’s supposed “strong” demographic categories such as voters with college degrees post-graduate degrees and voters whose income is above the national median. And Clinton beat Obama in the primaries in March, April and May in most of the major categories.

G.I. Bill

NYTimes.com editorialized President Bush opposes a new G.I. Bill of Rights.

No he just wants different terms for it.

He worries that if the traditional path to college for service members since World War II is improved and expanded for the post-9/11 generation, too many people will take it.

No he just does not want to encourage soldiers to leave after three years, and then have to train new ones. He wants educational benefits to vest some after each reenlistment, so that they can go to college after six years, and soldiers that make a career of the military can have it used for their children

He is wrong, but at least he is consistent. Having saddled the military with a botched, unwinnable war,

It is winnable, even with the Dems in charge of Congress, and we are winning it.

having squandered soldiers’ lives and failed them in so many ways, the commander in chief now resists giving the troops a chance at better futures out of uniform. He does this on the ground that the bill is too generous and may discourage re-enlistment, further weakening the military he has done so much to break.

Despite the efforts of the Dems who have tried even harder to destroy it. It is amazine how Dems love our freedoms, but hate what it takes to assure them.

Obama Calls FL/MI A Clinton-Contrived Controversy

TalkLeft blogged To Barack Obama, the stripping of the Florida and Michigan delegations is just some contrived controversy driven by Hillary Clinton. 2.3 million voters? Counting the votes? They mean nothing.

To a Democrat the only votes they want to count are votes for them That is why they oppose showing an ID, because more fraudlent votes are for Dems. Hillary wants to count FL and MI because they are for her, and Obama does not want them to count because they are for Hillary.

Obama last night said:

Democrat Barack Obama accused rival Hillary Clinton on Saturday of "stirring up" a controversy over the disqualified Florida primary election because it was her last hope of winning their party's presidential nomination.

Wow! Talk about belittling the voters of Florida and Michigan.Obama continued:

"The Clinton campaign has been stirring this up for fairly transparent reasons," Obama told reporters on the plane from San Juan, Puerto Rico, to Chicago, adding she had not done so earlier in the race when she did not need the delegates to win. "Let's not ... pretend that we don't know what's going on. I mean this is, from their perspective, their last slender hope to make arguments about how they can win, and I understand that," Obama said.

That's all Florida and Michigan mean to Obama? I know that the Media has no qualms showing contempt for Florida and Michigan. It is shocking to me that Obama is willing to state publically he feels the same way. As for what he really thinks about healing the Party, Obama takes it for granted:

"I think that anger will go away once it's resolved," he said, questioning whether those who were upset were only Clinton supporters or other voters as well. "I want to make the Florida delegates seated.

Then stop blocking counting them, even if Hillary gets more votes.

And once they're seated, then I think this is going to be a story that nobody's thinking about come August."

Unbelievable.