<?xml version="1.0" encoding="ISO-8859-1"?>
<rss version="2.0"
  xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
  xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
  xmlns:wordzilla="http://www.cadenhead.org/workbench/wordzilla/namespace">
  <channel>
    <title>Drudge Retort: Jeffj's blog</title>
    <link>http://www.drudge.com/user/jeffj</link>
    <description>New links and comments.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <docs>http://www.rssboard.org/rss-specification</docs>
    <generator>Wordzilla/0.58</generator>
    <ttl>10</ttl>
    <atom:link rel="self" href="http://www.drudge.com/feed/Discussion" type="application/rss+xml" />
    <item>
      <title>Welfare's Devastating Effects</title>
      <link>http://www.drudge.com/news/115273/welfares-devastating-effects</link>
      <wordzilla:destination>http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/Read.aspx?GUID=3346E319-955A-4E9C-B33C-E5EB6FEC98F3</wordzilla:destination>
      <description>To most people, I imagine, welfare seems an obviously good thing. But in fact the corrosive and iniquitous side of welfare has been evident for many decades. It's only now that people are poking their heads out of the trench and daring to say so. You can see the devastating effects of welfare in Britain, for example, in the exponential rise in single motherhood. The figures are astonishing. In the 1950s almost all children in Britain were brought up by their natural parents. Today, only around half the children in Britain are brought up by their natural parents. Half!</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 24 Nov 2008 13:19:39 -0500</pubDate>
      <dc:creator>jeffj</dc:creator>
      <comments>http://www.drudge.com/news/115273/welfares-devastating-effects#discuss</comments>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">tag:drudge.com,2005:weblog.115273</guid>
      <category>discussion,</category>
      <wordzilla:id>115273</wordzilla:id>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Obama Declares War on Conservative Talk Radio</title>
      <link>http://www.drudge.com/news/115157/obama-declares-war-conservative-talk-radio</link>
      <wordzilla:destination>http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/11/obama_declares_war_on_conserva.html</wordzilla:destination>
      <description>Barack Obama sought to silence his critics during his 2008 campaign.  Now, with the ink barely dry on this November's ballots, Obama has begun a war against conservative talk radio. &lt;p&gt;Obama is on record as saying he does not plan an exhumation of the now-dead &quot;Fairness Doctrine&quot;. Instead, Obama's attack on free speech will be far less understood by the general public and accordingly, far more dangerous...</description>
      <wordzilla:extended>...Team Obama and the &quot;localism&quot; weapon
&lt;p&gt;
The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) rule in question is called &quot;localism.&quot;  Radio and television stations are required to serve the interests of their local community as a condition of keeping their broadcast licenses.  
&lt;p&gt;
Obama needs only three votes from the five-member FCC to define localism in such a way that no radio station would dare air any syndicated conservative programming.
&lt;p&gt;
Localism is one of the rare issues on which Obama himself has been outspoken.  
&lt;p&gt;
On September 20, 2007, Obama submitted a pro-localism written statement to an FCC hearing held at the Chicago headquarters of Rev. Jesse Jackson Sr.'s Operation Push.
&lt;p&gt;
Furthermore, the Obama transition team knows all about the potential of localism as a means of silencing conservative dissent.  The head of the Obama transition team is John Podesta, President and CEO of the Center for American Progress.
&lt;p&gt;
In 2007, the Center for American Progress issued a report, The Structural Imbalance of Political Talk Radio.  This report complained that there was too much conservative talk on the radio because of &quot;the absence of localism in American radio markets&quot; and urged the FCC to &quot;[e]nsure greater local accountability over radio licensing.
&lt;p&gt;
Podesta's choice as head of the Federal Communications Commission's transition team is Henry Rivera.
&lt;p&gt;
Since 1994, Rivera has been chairman of the Minority Media Telecommunications Council.  This organization has specific ideas about localism:
&lt;p&gt;
In other words, it would not do for broadcasters to meet with the business leaders whose companies advertise on their station.  Broadcasters must reach beyond the business sector and look for leaders in the civic, religious, and non-profit sectors that regularly serve the needs of the community, particularly the needs of minority groups that are typically poorly served by the broadcasting industry as a whole.
&lt;p&gt;
Rivera's law firm is also the former home of Kevin Martin, the current FCC chairman.  Martin is himself an advocate of more stringent localism requirements.  
&lt;p&gt;
It was on Martin's watch that on January 24, 2008, the FCC released its proposed localism regulations.  According to TVNewsday: &quot;At the NAB radio show two weeks ago, Martin said that he wanted to take action on localism this year and invited broadcasters to negotiate requirements with him.&quot;
&lt;p&gt;
FCC complaints as politics by other means
&lt;p&gt;
Remember that an FCC license is required for any radio or television station to legally operate in the United States.  A single complaint from anyone can significantly hinder a station's license renewal process or even cost the station its FCC license entirely.
&lt;p&gt;
There have been some attempts to utilize the FCC complaint process for partisan political ends, most memorably in 2004, when Sinclair Broadcasting agreed to air a documentary questioning Senator John Kerry's war record:
&lt;p&gt;
Poised to pre-empt programming on its 62 television stations to run a negative documentary about Sen. John Kerry, Sinclair Broadcast Group has come under fire from critics calling it partisan and questioning whether it is failing federal broadcast requirements to reflect local interests. 
&lt;p&gt;
Members of Congress and independent media groups have questioned the company's willingness to respect &quot;localism,&quot; a section of federal law that requires media companies to cover local issues and provide an outlet for local voices. 
&lt;p&gt;
One group, The Leftcoaster, went further:
&lt;p&gt;
But what isn't done a lot which requires the broadcaster to rack up expensive legal fees, is to challenge every one of their affiliates' FCC license renewals as they come up this year and next.  ... [T]here still is time to organize and file Petitions or objections by November 1, 2004 for Sinclair stations in North Carolina and South Carolina, and for Florida by January 1, 2005.
&lt;p&gt;
More recently, the National Asian Pacific American Legal Consortium issued a &quot;fill in the blanks&quot; official FCC complaint form which begins &quot;Anything that you feel is offensive is worth reporting.&quot;
&lt;p&gt;
Community advisory boards as permanent complaint departments
&lt;p&gt;
These random efforts could be far more effective at silencing conservatives if they could only be systematized and institutionalized.  That is exactly what the FCC proposed on January 24th.   Every radio and television station would be required to create:
&lt;p&gt;
[P]ermanent advisory boards comprised of local officials and other community leaders, to periodically advise them of local needs and issues, and seek comment on the matter. ...  
&lt;p&gt;
To ensure that these discussions include representatives of all community elements, these boards would be made up of leaders of various segments of the community, including underserved groups.
&lt;p&gt;
The &quot;community advisory board as permanent complaint department&quot; model may well be based upon the 1995 revisions of the Community Reinvestment Act, as described by Howard Husock in City Journal:
&lt;p&gt;
[T]the new CRA regulations also instructed bank examiners to take into account how well banks responded to complaints. ... [F]or advocacy groups that were in the complaint business, the Clinton administration regulations offered a formal invitation.  ...
&lt;p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;By intervening-even just threatening to intervene-in the CRA review process, left-wing nonprofit groups have been able to gain control over eye-popping pools of bank capital, which they in turn parcel out to individual low-income mortgage seekers. A radical group called ACORN Housing has a $760 million commitment from the Bank of New York...[emphasis in original]. 
&lt;p&gt;
Understand that even allowing conservatives to be radio talk show guests may provoke a FCC licensing complaint.  Just ask &quot;right wing hatchet man&quot; Stanley Kurtz.
&lt;p&gt;
For Obama, when it comes to radio talk, silence is golden, at least when it comes to conservatives...
&lt;p&gt;</wordzilla:extended>
      <pubDate>Thu, 20 Nov 2008 12:51:45 -0500</pubDate>
      <dc:creator>JeffJ</dc:creator>
      <comments>http://www.drudge.com/news/115157/obama-declares-war-conservative-talk-radio#discuss</comments>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">tag:drudge.com,2005:weblog.115157</guid>
      <category>discussion,</category>
      <wordzilla:id>115157</wordzilla:id>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Obama Out-Gores Gore at Climate Summit</title>
      <link>http://www.drudge.com/news/115155/obama-out-gores-gore-climate-summit</link>
      <wordzilla:destination>http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/11/obama_outgores_gore_at_climate.html</wordzilla:destination>
      <description>Barack Obama managed to say all the wrong things at this week's Governors Global Climate Summit in Los Angeles -- without even showing up.  The President-elect appeared to the green faithful on Tuesday in the form of a mammoth video image, and opened his pre-recorded pledge to &quot;take the lead&quot; in addressing global warming with these eerily familiar words:</description>
      <wordzilla:extended>&quot;Few challenges facing America -- and the world -- are more urgent than combating climate change. The science is beyond dispute and the facts are clear. Sea levels are rising. Coastlines are shrinking. We've seen record drought, spreading famine and storms that are growing stronger with each passing hurricane season.&quot;</wordzilla:extended>
      <pubDate>Thu, 20 Nov 2008 12:44:53 -0500</pubDate>
      <dc:creator>JeffJ</dc:creator>
      <comments>http://www.drudge.com/news/115155/obama-out-gores-gore-climate-summit#discuss</comments>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">tag:drudge.com,2005:weblog.115155</guid>
      <category>discussion,</category>
      <wordzilla:id>115155</wordzilla:id>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>World waits to see Barack's true colours</title>
      <link>http://www.drudge.com/news/114686/world-waits-see-baracks-true-colours</link>
      <wordzilla:destination>http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,24608173-7583,00.html</wordzilla:destination>
      <description>SO now we know for sure. The Noam Chomsky-John Pilger-Phillip Adams view of America is wrong. In George W. Bush's America, a land allegedly rife with militarism and racism, the white military hero lost and the black memoirist won a slashing election victory...&lt;p&gt;</description>
      <wordzilla:extended>...It is indeed a wonderful thing for the US to have its first black president. No African-American child need ever fear there is any limit to what they can achieve. Whatever you think of Obama's policies and capacity to govern well -- and I have my doubts -- his election is a powerful symbol of America's inclusiveness and opportunity. Which other big, rich, predominantly white society has elected a member of a racial minority to be its head of government? Not Australia. 
&lt;p&gt;So as we salute Obama, let's salute America as well. 
&lt;p&gt;The left liberal caricature of America was always nonsense. The militarism of American society is vastly overstated, just as its profound willingness to make sacrifice for other people's freedom is under-appreciated. This is the fifth presidential election in a row in which the candidate with the stronger military record lost to the candidate who didn't serve, or served only in the National Guard...But at this stage we have no idea of how Obama will govern. The first real sign will come when he appoints his cabinet. Then perhaps we can answer the question this long campaign has so far not addressed: politically, who is Barack Obama?
&lt;p&gt;-The Australian
&lt;p&gt;</wordzilla:extended>
      <pubDate>Fri, 07 Nov 2008 05:39:36 -0500</pubDate>
      <dc:creator>JeffJ</dc:creator>
      <comments>http://www.drudge.com/news/114686/world-waits-see-baracks-true-colours#discuss</comments>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">tag:drudge.com,2005:weblog.114686</guid>
      <category>discussion,</category>
      <wordzilla:id>114686</wordzilla:id>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Do You Need an Obama to Believe?</title>
      <link>http://www.drudge.com/news/114685/do-you-need-obama-believe</link>
      <wordzilla:destination>http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/11/do_you_need_an_obama_to_believ.html</wordzilla:destination>
      <description>&quot;Does Obama's victory, as a black man, make you feel that you can do anything?&quot; Someone asked me that on election night.&lt;p&gt;It is a caricature of America that, pre-Obama, major obstacles blocked achievement. It is equally a caricature that Obama's win suddenly creates opportunity that did not exist before.&lt;p&gt;</description>
      <wordzilla:extended>...Born in Athens, Ga., and eventually raised in Chattanooga, Tenn., my dad never knew his biological father. The only father figure in his life was harsh, distant and cold. His mother, because he made &quot;too much noise&quot; for her then-boyfriend, threw him out of the house at age 13.
&lt;p&gt;So this penniless boy, living in the Jim Crow South as the Great Depression loomed, started knocking on doors. He finally got a job running errands and tending the yard for a white family. One day, the family's cook failed to show up. But my dad, having watched her in the kitchen, whipped up a passable meal. The family let the other helper go, and a cook was born....
&lt;p&gt;</wordzilla:extended>
      <pubDate>Fri, 07 Nov 2008 05:21:13 -0500</pubDate>
      <dc:creator>jeffj</dc:creator>
      <comments>http://www.drudge.com/news/114685/do-you-need-obama-believe#discuss</comments>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">tag:drudge.com,2005:weblog.114685</guid>
      <category>discussion,</category>
      <wordzilla:id>114685</wordzilla:id>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>The American Eagle Needs Two Wings to Soar</title>
      <link>http://www.drudge.com/news/114601/american-eagle-needs-two-wings-soar</link>
      <wordzilla:destination>http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/11/the_american_eagle_needs_two_w.html</wordzilla:destination>
      <description>More than a week before Election Day, a prominent MSNBC commentator was clearly irritated that McCain was continuing to campaign strongly and, at least in her view, with extreme negative attacks.  She surmised that the only purpose behind this campaign push must be to undermine (her word) the upcoming Obama presidency.</description>
      <wordzilla:extended>...Now that he's won, letting The Great Unifier rule without opposition would be risky and inimical to the American political tradition.  Obama is peddling the tired notion that America is weary of the divisiveness of partisan politics but his own record shows no evidence of unifying ability.  It's obvious that people are frustrated by Congress' inability to make even the most minor progress on the great issues of our day, but partisan bickering is only a symptom of a general lack of leadership in both houses and both parties - and not something the election came close to solving.  Aside from being great entertainment, aggressively partisan debates are just a standard part of making laws, and they're real debates, not the sanitized snoozers put on by a debate commission...
&lt;p&gt;...A spirit of generosity in opposition will be important -- the key is to be happy warriors, as William F. Buckley was fond of pointing out.  Loyal opposition is critical to make American politics work the way it should.  Critics should be prepared at the outset to be labeled racists by angry Obama supporters.  The stronger and more valid the criticism, the more likely the racist label will be applied.  They should have a reasonably good-natured response with a dose of humor and not otherwise back down.  If the Obama administration is forced to play that card early and often it will quickly lose its power.
&lt;p&gt;
Voters across this center-right nation ultimately decided Tuesday that if Republicans were going to act like Democrats, they may as well go ahead and elect Democrats.  That's hardly a ringing endorsement of the Obama agenda.  Democrats took over Congress two years ago and it has lower approval ratings than President Bush (17% to Bush's 25% at this writing), something the media almost always fail to mention.  Obama will gain support when he deserves it and when his ideas make sense (e.g., Clinton with NAFTA and welfare reform).  It will be apparent in the support these initiatives receive in the House of Representatives.  The country will benefit from conservatives waging the good fight with an unwavering return to low tax, small government principles - if conducted with discipline, honor, and conviction, the outcome should be pleasing in the 2010 elections.</wordzilla:extended>
      <pubDate>Wed, 05 Nov 2008 05:37:29 -0500</pubDate>
      <dc:creator>jeffj</dc:creator>
      <comments>http://www.drudge.com/news/114601/american-eagle-needs-two-wings-soar#discuss</comments>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">tag:drudge.com,2005:weblog.114601</guid>
      <category>discussion,</category>
      <wordzilla:id>114601</wordzilla:id>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>In the Tank: A Statistical Analysis of Media Bias</title>
      <link>http://www.drudge.com/news/114488/tank-statistical-analysis-media</link>
      <wordzilla:destination>http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/Read.aspx?GUID=D7971545-30B0-4C9C-85BD-E671BBCBE0FF</wordzilla:destination>
      <description>During the 2008 presidential election, even center-left observers have noted the unmistakable bias of the prestige news media toward Democratic candidates and the Democratic Party in general. As we shall reveal, the bias of the media is pervasive, ideologically motivated, and quantifiable: that is, it has been admitted, measured, and analyzed in statistical terms. Those results reveal a media doggedly out-of-touch with the political center and tilted decidedly leftward.</description>
      <pubDate>Sun, 02 Nov 2008 20:48:34 -0500</pubDate>
      <dc:creator>jeffj</dc:creator>
      <comments>http://www.drudge.com/news/114488/tank-statistical-analysis-media#discuss</comments>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">tag:drudge.com,2005:weblog.114488</guid>
      <category>discussion,</category>
      <wordzilla:id>114488</wordzilla:id>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Election 2008: Objective journalism the loser</title>
      <link>http://www.drudge.com/news/114286/election-2008-objective-journalism-loser</link>
      <wordzilla:destination>http://www.bostonherald.com/news/opinion/letters/view/2008_10_28_Election_2008:_Objective_journalism_the_loser/</wordzilla:destination>
      <description>Did you see that amazing video obtained by the Los Angeles Times of Sen. Barack Obama toasting a prominent former PLO member at an Arab American Action Network meeting in 2003? The video in which Obama gives Yasser Arafat's frontman a warm embrace, as Bill Ayers look on?&lt;p&gt;You haven't seen it? Me, neither. The Los Angeles Times refuses to release it.</description>
      <wordzilla:extended>....At the risk of violating union rules, allow me to do a bit of reporting: A new study by the Pew Research Center found that, while 71 percent of Obama's recent media coverage has been &quot;positive&quot; or &quot;neutral,&quot; almost 60 percent of McCain's coverage over the same period has been &quot;decidedly negative.&quot;
&lt;p&gt;And how much positive coverage did the media give McCain? Fourteen percent....
&lt;p&gt;</wordzilla:extended>
      <pubDate>Wed, 29 Oct 2008 03:16:23 -0400</pubDate>
      <dc:creator>jeffj</dc:creator>
      <comments>http://www.drudge.com/news/114286/election-2008-objective-journalism-loser#discuss</comments>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">tag:drudge.com,2005:weblog.114286</guid>
      <category>discussion,</category>
      <wordzilla:id>114286</wordzilla:id>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>The Mass Media Mugs Joe the Plumber</title>
      <link>http://www.drudge.com/news/113982/mass-media-mugs-joe-plumber</link>
      <wordzilla:destination>http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/Read.aspx?GUID=A5E69844-0451-4847-BD6F-F3BCEB6C3604</wordzilla:destination>
      <description>...My real problem with this scene is what the media has done to Joe. The media has treated Joe as an enemy and probed his personal life...</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 22 Oct 2008 11:57:30 -0400</pubDate>
      <dc:creator>JeffJ</dc:creator>
      <comments>http://www.drudge.com/news/113982/mass-media-mugs-joe-plumber#discuss</comments>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">tag:drudge.com,2005:weblog.113982</guid>
      <category>discussion,</category>
      <wordzilla:id>113982</wordzilla:id>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Who's the funniest person on Drudge?</title>
      <link>http://www.drudge.com/news/113931/whos-funniest-person-drudge</link>
      <wordzilla:destination>http://www.drudge.com/user/JeffJ</wordzilla:destination>
      <description>Please nominate whom you feel is the funniest person on the DR.</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 21 Oct 2008 12:27:17 -0400</pubDate>
      <dc:creator>jeffj</dc:creator>
      <comments>http://www.drudge.com/news/113931/whos-funniest-person-drudge#discuss</comments>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">tag:drudge.com,2005:weblog.113931</guid>
      <category>discussion,</category>
      <wordzilla:id>113931</wordzilla:id>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>A Liberal Supermajority</title>
      <link>http://www.drudge.com/news/113784/liberal-supermajority</link>
      <wordzilla:destination>http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122420205889842989.html</wordzilla:destination>
      <description>If the current polls hold, Barack Obama will win the White House on November 4 and Democrats will consolidate their Congressional majorities, probably with a filibuster-proof Senate or very close to it. Without the ability to filibuster, the Senate would become like the House, able to pass whatever the majority wants.&lt;p&gt;</description>
      <wordzilla:extended>Though we doubt most Americans realize it, this would be one of the most profound political and ideological shifts in U.S. history. Liberals would dominate the entire government in a way they haven't since 1965, or 1933. In other words, the election would mark the restoration of the activist government that fell out of public favor in the 1970s. If the U.S. really is entering a period of unchecked left-wing ascendancy, Americans at least ought to understand what they will be getting, especially with the media cheering it all on.....
&lt;p&gt;</wordzilla:extended>
      <pubDate>Fri, 17 Oct 2008 14:27:47 -0400</pubDate>
      <dc:creator>jeffj</dc:creator>
      <comments>http://www.drudge.com/news/113784/liberal-supermajority#discuss</comments>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">tag:drudge.com,2005:weblog.113784</guid>
      <category>discussion,</category>
      <wordzilla:id>113784</wordzilla:id>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Sowell:  The Real Obama</title>
      <link>http://www.drudge.com/news/113388/sowell-real-obama</link>
      <wordzilla:destination>http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/10/the_real_obama.html</wordzilla:destination>
      <description>Critics of Senator Barack Obama make a strategic mistake when they talk about his &quot;past associations.&quot; That just gives his many defenders in the media an opportunity to counter-attack against &quot;guilt by association.&quot;&lt;p&gt;</description>
      <wordzilla:extended>We all have associations, whether at the office, in our neighborhood or in various recreational activities. Most of us neither know nor care what our associates believe or say about politics.
&lt;p&gt;Associations are very different from alliances. Allies are not just people who happen to be where you are or who happen to be doing the same things you do. You choose allies deliberately for a reason. The kind of allies you choose says something about you.
&lt;p&gt;  Jeremiah Wright, Father Michael Pfleger, William Ayers and Antoin Rezko are not just people who happened to be at the same place at the same time as Barack Obama. They are people with whom he chose to ally himself for years, and with some of whom some serious money changed hands.
&lt;p&gt;Some gave political support, and some gave financial support, to Obama's election campaigns, and Obama in turn contributed either his own money or the taxpayers' money to some of them. That is a familiar political alliance-- but an alliance is not just an &quot;association&quot; from being at the same place at the same time.
&lt;p&gt;Obama could have allied himself with all sorts of other people. But, time and again, he allied himself with people who openly expressed their hatred of America. No amount of flags on his campaign platforms this election year can change that.
&lt;p&gt;Unfortunately, all that most people know about Barack Obama is his own rhetoric and that of his critics. Moreover, some of his more irresponsible critics have made wild accusations-- that he is not an American citizen or that he is a Muslim, for example.
&lt;p&gt;All that such false charges do is discredit Obama's critics in general. Fortunately, there is a documented, factual account of what Barack Obama has actually been doing over the years, as distinguished from what he has been saying during this election campaign, in a new best-selling book.
&lt;p&gt;That book is titled &quot;The Case Against Barack Obama&quot; by David Freddoso. He starts off in the introduction by repudiating those critics of Obama who &quot;have been content merely to slander him-- to claim falsely that he refuses to salute the U.S. flag or was sworn into office on a Koran, or that he was born in a foreign country.&quot; 
&lt;p&gt;This is a serious book with 35 pages of documentation in the back to support the things said in the main text. In other words, if you don't believe what the author says, he lets you know where you can go check it out.
&lt;p&gt;Barack Obama's being the first serious black candidate for President of the United States is what most people consider remarkable but how he got there is at least equally surprising.
&lt;p&gt;The story of Obama's political career is not a pretty story. He won his first political victory by being the only candidate on the ballot-- after hiring someone skilled at disqualifying the signers of opposing candidates' petitions, on whatever technicality he could come up with. 
&lt;p&gt;Despite his words today about &quot;change&quot; and &quot;cleaning up the mess in Washington,&quot; Obama was not on the side of reformers who were trying to change the status quo of corrupt, machine politics in Chicago and clean up the mess there. Obama came out in favor of the Daley machine and against reform candidates.
&lt;p&gt;Senator Obama is running on an image that is directly the opposite of what he has been doing for two decades. His escapes from his past have been as remarkable as the great escapes of Houdini.
&lt;p&gt;Why much of the public and the media have been so mesmerized by the words and the image of Obama, and so little interested in learning about the factual reality, was perhaps best explained by an official of the Democratic Party: &quot;People don't come to Obama for what he's done, they come because of what they hope he can be.&quot;
&lt;p&gt;David Freddoso's book should be read by those people who want to know what the facts are. But neither this book nor anything else is likely to change the minds of Obama's true believers, who have made up their minds and don't want to be confused by the facts.
&lt;p&gt;</wordzilla:extended>
      <pubDate>Wed, 08 Oct 2008 04:50:46 -0400</pubDate>
      <dc:creator>JeffJ</dc:creator>
      <comments>http://www.drudge.com/news/113388/sowell-real-obama#discuss</comments>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">tag:drudge.com,2005:weblog.113388</guid>
      <category>discussion,</category>
      <wordzilla:id>113388</wordzilla:id>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Does Obama Have America's Interests at Heart?</title>
      <link>http://www.drudge.com/news/113387/does-obama-have-americas-interests-heart</link>
      <wordzilla:destination>http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/10/what_if_obama_doesnt_have_amer.html</wordzilla:destination>
      <description>I prefer to give people the benefit of the doubt. I've said to myself and to others more than once: &quot;While it is true that Democrats are seriously misguided, at least they believe they're doing what is right for the country.&quot;  And by that I have meant that their motives are far less insidious than is our wont to portray them.</description>
      <wordzilla:extended>...Surely the average Democrat at least imagines his way of thinking-a way that resists thinking things through-serves his country well. Can I assume that most Democrats are not actually trying to undermine America?
&lt;p&gt;...But here's the thing: While I continue to use this idea of &quot;populistic ignorance&quot; to describe Democrats, including most of their leaders (Joe Biden might serve as their poster child), I'm not so sure about Obama. When I compare him to other prominent Democrats, I come away with a very different appraisal, one in which my own fear becomes nearly as pronounced as the admiration felt by his followers.
&lt;p&gt;
In thinking of Hillary Clinton, for example, I don't sense in Obama Hillary's obsessive drive for historical significance. In thinking of Hillary's husband, I don't see an Obama lusting for narcissistic fulfillment (not to mention just plain lusting). In thinking of Nancy Pelosi or Harry Reid, I don't find in Obama fecklessness or stupidity. In thinking of Ted Kennedy, I can't imagine an Obama of old money entrenchment built upon the encouragement of class warfare (not yet, anyway).
&lt;p&gt;
It is probably very true that we will find in Obama all these things and more, but the point is, if they are in there, he hides them very well. And that's what frightens me about him.
&lt;p&gt;...The reaction to Obama by the people of America is disturbing, to say the least. I have not seen anything quite like it in America. Ronald Reagan, for example, was also very popular, but his name evoked enthusiasm and, at his death, reverence. But never the sort of idolatry inspired by Obama. Even Obama's detractors do not seem to loathe him, at least not in the way that they have loathed the Clintons or Gore or Kerry. I have heard more than one Republican say, &quot;Well, if I have to put up with him for four or more years, at least he's tolerable.&quot; Obama's mass appeal is uncommon and frightening.
&lt;p&gt;
So, I am now imagining a very real scenario -- similar to what I have seen on a smaller scale in the corporate world -- about to be played out on a national, and possibly global, level. Our country seems to be ready to put into the seat of power a man -- good-looking, charismatic, silver-tongued, to be sure -- who has almost no experience, has never served in an executive capacity, has barely held a real job, and has no record of success other than his remarkable campaign.
&lt;p&gt;
This is a man who in less than two years has arisen as a political messiah. He has mesmerized an emergent block of college-age voters (whose chief sources of information, by the way, are comedians). He has inspired &quot;Obama youth&quot; corps and Maoist-style choirs of praise. He has been dubbed &quot;the One&quot; by his Matrix-saturated worshippers. He has captured the hearts and minds of half of America, nearly all of the media, and most of the world itself.
&lt;p&gt;
This is also a man whose voting record (meager as it is) puts him in the &quot;far left&quot; category. He brazenly proposes heavy taxation in the face of a tax-hating citizenry. He is unapologetic about his support of entitlements and has consistently voted for bills laden with pork and earmarks. He believes redistribution of wealth is moral, not immoral, despite his supposed biblical roots. He supports every form of abortion, including infanticide. He has alarming ties to extremists, criminals, radicals, and foreign thugs. He started out as a lawyer who learned, and eventually taught, shakedown tactics. He is not afraid to use the race card even as he touts his biracialism as proof that he is &quot;beyond&quot; race. And his idea of defending our country from enemies is to first understand them.
&lt;p&gt;
If Obama is just another bumbling Democrat, who, armed with a lot of really bad policies, simply wants to do America proud, well, then, if elected, he will muddle through the next four to eight years trying to implement change, will be hindered by the American political system, will enervate liberals and thus energize conservatives, and, eventually, the tide will turn. Like the aftermath of a very disagreeable season, we will have weathered the storm, will survey the damage, and will send in the rescue teams to rebuild.
&lt;p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;</wordzilla:extended>
      <pubDate>Wed, 08 Oct 2008 04:24:27 -0400</pubDate>
      <dc:creator>JeffJ</dc:creator>
      <comments>http://www.drudge.com/news/113387/does-obama-have-americas-interests-heart#discuss</comments>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">tag:drudge.com,2005:weblog.113387</guid>
      <category>discussion,</category>
      <wordzilla:id>113387</wordzilla:id>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Sarah Palin and the Experience Factor</title>
      <link>http://www.drudge.com/news/113151/sarah-palin-and-experience-factor</link>
      <wordzilla:destination>http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/10/sarah_palin_and_the_experience.html</wordzilla:destination>
      <description>Why is it that liberal misrepresentations are never fully addressed before they become established as received wisdom? Whatever the topic may be, the left is consistently allowed to set the terms on which the argument takes place.</description>
      <wordzilla:extended>Opponents may then debate minor points, split hairs, and count angels, but nobody ever seems to get around to looking the basic premises over, even when they're transparently bogus...
&lt;p&gt;In the 2008 election, one of these ruling myths is &quot;Sarah Palin does not have the experience to be vice-president.&quot; 
&lt;p&gt;
Well, let's stomp that one flat right away: out of all four candidates, Sarah Palin is the only one with any of the requisite executive experience required for office. She is the sole candidate who has ever run anything larger than a college debating society. If she is not qualified, none of them are, and we'd better dump em all and start over...
&lt;p&gt;The value of having been a governor is obvious, the progression from there to the presidency apparent. Not so with senators. Whatever it is they do when not traipsing around Washington in their purple-trimmed togas, walking their pet ocelots while the Vestal Virgins strew rose petals in their path, it has nothing in common with executive experience. Typically they get out of law school, work awhile as lawyers, go on to local or state office, then to the House, then to the Senate. At no point do they run anything larger than their own offices. The governor of the smallest state or territory in the union easily trumps them on that score. Often, that's all that's necessary. After his Three Stooges first term, the only edge that Bill Clinton had on Robert Dole was his gubernatorial experience. That was enough.
&lt;p&gt;
Only one person in this race has ever held that kind of responsibility. Only one person has ever actually run a government. Only one person has the necessary experience, and that is Sarah Palin. Yet thanks to a media as obtuse as it is vicious, this undeniable record of experience has been thrust aside in favor of the myth that at least two of the senators in the race -- Obama and Biden -- possess superior experience...
&lt;p&gt;The last point involves the question of success. Wasilla, the town of which Palin served as mayor, increased its population by 2,000 -- nearly a full third -- under her stewardship. Not bad for a hockey mom...
&lt;p&gt;None of this being the case, we have to ask what precisely is wrong with the progression, city council-mayor-governor-VP candidate. And the answer is -- absolutely nothing. It's as perfectly natural a progression as can be found in politics, the only remarkable element of it being the swiftness with which Palin has traversed it. This implies that she is very good at what she does. Which means, according the media and the Democrats, that we're supposed to question her skill and abilities. Everybody got that? 
&lt;p&gt;
Which brings us to the third objection -- that she wasn't governor for long enough. Only eighteen months, according to the stopwatch. Barely a flicker of the eye, the way they judge time in Washington... Though it happens that Woodrow Wilson was elected governor of New Jersey in 1910, and went on to be elected president in 1912. Are we to take it that the extra six months make all the difference?  
Experience is not simply a matter of duration, but what you do with the time you have. Palin accomplished more in that year-and-a-half than most governors do over full terms, including facing down a corrupt and entrenched old-boys network and bringing the oil companies -- the state's biggest business -- to heel.
&lt;p&gt;And finally, there's the fact that she has no foreign policy experience. None. Zero. Why, no less than Charles Gibson clearly demonstrated that on the tube, with plenty in the way of sighs and head shakes, too.
&lt;p&gt;
...except for the easily demonstrated fact that Governor Palin, on August 27th of this year, completed a pipeline agreement with Canada, which is a foreign country. The agreement had been stymied for over two decades by various interests in Alaskan state government. Palin got it wrapped up in that busy eighteen months. 
&lt;p&gt;
Now, anyone present who has ever successfully concluded an agreement with a foreign country please raise their hands. Uhh... not you, Sen. Obama? Or you either, Sen. Biden? Hmm... I see...
&lt;p&gt;Palin has gained her experience where it counts. Not in the Ivy League, not at the think tanks, not in the Senate. But down in the trenches, where life is for real, and the work gets done because it must be done. There is no more common figure in American history than the &quot;unprepared&quot; backwoods politician who steps forward in the midst of crisis. From Lincoln through Truman, there is no end of them, at all levels of the political sphere...
&lt;p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;</wordzilla:extended>
      <pubDate>Thu, 02 Oct 2008 07:32:02 -0400</pubDate>
      <dc:creator>jeffj</dc:creator>
      <comments>http://www.drudge.com/news/113151/sarah-palin-and-experience-factor#discuss</comments>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">tag:drudge.com,2005:weblog.113151</guid>
      <category>discussion,</category>
      <wordzilla:id>113151</wordzilla:id>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Warnings About Obama Loss May Be Self-Fulfilling</title>
      <link>http://www.drudge.com/news/112766/warnings-obama-loss-may</link>
      <wordzilla:destination>http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/09/liberals_warnings_about_obama.html</wordzilla:destination>
      <description>Seven weeks before the 2008 presidential election, liberals are warning America that if Barack Obama loses, it is because Americans are racist. Of course, that this means that Democrats (and independents) are racist, since Republicans will vote Republican regardless of the race of the Democrat, is an irony apparently lost on the Democrats making these charges.&lt;p&gt;</description>
      <wordzilla:extended>That an Obama loss will be due to racism is becoming as normative a liberal belief as &quot;Bush Lied, People Died,&quot; a belief that has generated intense rage among many liberals. But &quot;Obama lost because of white racism&quot; will be even more enraging. Rage over the Iraq War has largely focused on President George W. Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney. But if Obama loses, liberal rage will focus on millions of fellow Americans and on American society.
&lt;p&gt;And it could become a rage the likes of which America has not seen in a long time, if ever. It will first and foremost come from within black America. The deep emotional connection that nearly every black American has to an Obama victory is difficult for even empathetic non-blacks to measure. A major evangelical pastor told me that even evangelical black pastors who share every conservative value with white evangelical pastors, including pro-life views on abortion, will vote for Obama. They feel their very dignity is on the line.
&lt;p&gt;That is why the growing chorus -- already nearing unanimity -- of liberal commentators and politicians ascribing an Obama loss to American racism is so dangerous...
&lt;p&gt;</wordzilla:extended>
      <pubDate>Tue, 23 Sep 2008 13:21:17 -0400</pubDate>
      <dc:creator>JeffJ</dc:creator>
      <comments>http://www.drudge.com/news/112766/warnings-obama-loss-may#discuss</comments>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">tag:drudge.com,2005:weblog.112766</guid>
      <category>discussion,</category>
      <wordzilla:id>112766</wordzilla:id>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>
