Monday morning links

Posted by: Sister Toldjah on September 22, 2008 at 9:33 am

Monday mornings are usually very busy for me and this one is no different. Here are some links to get your day started – hope to be back in the early afternoon to blog some:

—– Ed Morrissey’s got the story, via Jawa Report, on a brewing controversy that may involve David Axelrod trying to underhandedly target Gov. Palin that is hard to explain in just a few words. Make sure to read both posts in full. If what the Jawas have researched and concluded is accurate, Axelrod will have a lot to answer for. Memeorandum has the growing list of reactions from bloggers to this story.

—– Michelle Malkin has a good post up with questions regarding Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson and the $700B bailout (which we know is going to be much bigger than that). The big question: Should we trust him without oversight to use the mega-billion dollar check the government’s going to give him? Answer? No. Bring on the oversight, bring on the agency reviews.

And while on the subject, Team McCain needs to keep hammering home the point that one of the two nominees for president actually tried to do something about this mess before it happened, while the other one turned the other cheek.

—– Did Gov. Palin’s campaign stop in The Villages, FL attract a crowd of 60,000? There are varying reports that suggest it was between 25,000 and 60,000. Either way, it was a record crowd for a big ticket GOP’r since McCain won enough delegates to put him over the top earlier this year. The mediots, predictably, are saying it was such a big crowd because it’s a town that is reliably Republican (Jay Nordingler notes the theme here). Funny how they rarely mention the “reliable” factor when it comes to Obama’s big rallies in reliably Democrat cities like Portland, OR and Philadelphia, PA.

—– And speaking of the O-man, the count on the Sunday rally here in Charlotte was somewhere in the neighborhood of 25-30,000.

—– Here’s the speech Gov. Palin would have given had she not been disinvited from an anti-Iran rally in front of the UN after Hillary Clinton pulled out once she found out Gov. Palin was going to be there as well. Read more on that here and here.

—– It’s about time: Campaign notebook: Campaign notebook: McCain plans to boost effort in N. Carolina. Nothing on any potential future visits from McCain and/or Gov. Palin, but this is a good start – they need to know they can’t take this state for granted, as it has become very competitive and “less red” over the last 10 or so years.

—– Phyllis Schlafly slams feminists who are whining about Gov. Palin’s candidacy here.

RSS feed for comments on this post.

10 Responses to “Monday morning links”

Comments

  1. Great White Rat says:

    The MSM and the Obama campaign (sorry, that’s redundant) are pushing their latest theme hard: if you don’t vote for the Dalai Bama, you’re a racist.

    The latest piece pushing the party line is in today’s Philadelphia Daily News: Philly Dems note discomfort over Obama among some white voters

    The whining goes something like this:

    “I’m hearing a lot of people saying, ‘He’s too young, he’s too inexperienced,’ ” said Philadelphia AFL-CIO President Pat Eiding. “What they’re really saying is, ‘He’s black.’ ”

    So now young and inexperienced are code words for black! Uh huh. l-)

    But wait…there’s more:

    Mark Sawyer, director of the Center for the Study of Race, Ethnicity and Politics at UCLA, told the Daily News that those casting racially motivated votes against Obama might cite his inexperience, or say he’s too arrogant, or too liberal.

    So if you happen to take note that Obama is rated as the most liberal member of the Senate, that’s racist too. If you think he’s arrogant when he thumbs his nose at all of small-town America – you know, the bitter people who cling to their religion – then you can go get in line with the rest of the racists.

    John Street, an African-American who won two mayoral races in Philadelphia, said that this election “has the great potential to help us come to grips with the issue of race in the USA, or it could set race relations back 50 years.”

    Translation: if you don’t vote for Obama, you are personally setting race relations back 50 years.

    No doubt…they’ll be hammering away at the “white guilt” theme for the next 6 weeks. Get used to this nonsense. :-&

  2. Lorica says:

    it could set race relations back 50 years

    Does this mean that if Barry doesn’t win, that Black folk will be rioting all over America??? That seems a tad racist to me. – Lorica

  3. Baklava says:

    Vote for Sarah in this online PBS poll.

    Sorry, It’s still an active poll so I posted this again.

  4. Lorica says:

    Oil is up 16 bucks a barrel today and they want to blame it on our current economic problems. I actually believe that it is due to the new “energy” plan that Congress has put forth. Let’s face it, oil prices would have dropped if they wouldn’t have so many restrictions on new drilling. – Lorica

  5. Lorica says:

    Phyllis Schafly is right. Since the NOW gang has backed Barry over Mac, I guess we can throw any pretense out that they actually care about women. Apparently abortion is more important than the overall acheivement of women. – Lorica

  6. NC Cop says:

    Has anyone noticed that all of the economic problems we have began about 1 1/2 years after the dems took over Congress and Senate? I could have sworn the Republicans warned about jacking up the minimum wage too high, because it would cause the unemployment rate to go up. Here we are with the highest unemployment rate we’ve had in several years.

    It seemed to be doing just fine for the first 6 years of Bush’s presidency and then all of a sudden after the dems take over, it goes in the tank. Coincidence?!?!

  7. Trish says:

    NC–
    Sure, that’s the way of it. During the Clinton years, the Republican congress improved the economy. Guess who got the credit?

  8. Great White Rat says:

    Interesting….the Democrats pressured the anti-Iran rally organizers to disinvite Governor Palin because they wanted a “non-political” rally. So go to ST’s link above and read the speech she planned to deliver.

    (Governor Palin, not ST). :d

    Notice anything? The speech is about as non-partisan and non-political as you can get. You won’t find one word of criticism for the Democrats in there. The only Dem she mentions is Hillary – and she says Hillary gets it right on Iran:

    Senator Clinton understands the nature of this threat and what we must do to confront it. This is an issue that should unite all Americans.

    So once again…the only ones using this event for a political showcase are the Democrats, who think a nutjob in Tehran with nuclear weapons will be less of an enemy than a hockey mom from Alaska.

  9. Baklava says:

    Time reports that McCain would be among the most intelligent presidents in history.

    Got this from Tammy Bruce’s site:

    Last week his campaign staff allowed TIME to review those records–roughly 1,500 pages of them. The upshot: not only has McCain never displayed signs of a psychological disorder, but also in many cases his doctors’ reports read more glowingly about his mind than McCain’s best-selling autobiography. Wrote a doctor in 1974: “Patient is a very intelligent, ambitious, competitive, intellectually curious, caring person.” [...]

    The most revealing reports are from the early years. In March 1973, two weeks after McCain’s release, a psychiatrist deems his “emotional status” to be “stable” and says McCain has an “overdeveloped superego,” or sense of conscience and morality, and an “unrealistically high” need for achievement…

    Included in the records is a 1984 IQ test. His score, 133, would rank him among the most intelligent Presidents in history.

    The last paragraph of the Time piece reads:

    That McCain felt compelled to release all this information is testimony to two things: first, to the power of the whispered allegations against him; and, second, to McCain’s instinct for candor. At a holiday party last Friday night, McCain joked about how the moderators at last week’s debate seemed obsessed with his temper. “They kept asking, ‘Are you crazy? Are you crazy?’” Answer: No crazier than anyone else who would run for President.

    –By James Carney/Washington

    This piece was written on Dec 13th, 1999

  10. Lorica says:

    No crazier than anyone else who would run for President.

    Crazy or power obsessed if you are running for the Dem ticket. – Lorica