Holy Toledo - is he allowed to SAY something like that?!?! I hope he has someone watching his back. At all times. Oh, but you’re not gonna believe some of the things our “media” have cooked up. Check this out:

Perhaps it was the announcement that NBC News is coming out with a DVD titled “Yes We Can: The Barack Obama Story.” Or that ABC and USA Today are rushing out a book on the election. Or that HBO has snapped up a documentary on Obama’s campaign.

Perhaps it was the Newsweek commemorative issue — “Obama’s American Dream” — filled with so many iconic images and such stirring prose that it could have been campaign literature. Or the Time cover depicting Obama as FDR, complete with jaunty cigarette holder.

Are the media capable of merchandizing the moment, packaging a president-elect for profit? Yes, they are.

Okay. NBC. ABC. Two of the major networks using OUR AIRWAVES have lost all semblance of journalistic integrity.

What the HELL is the matter with these people?!?!? Good grief, how in the world will they ever cover anything remotely challenging for The One??? Oh, right - what they care? They are clearly making a lot out of this:

What’s troubling here goes beyond the clanging of cash registers. Media outlets have always tried to make a few bucks off the next big thing. The endless campaign is over, and there’s nothing wrong with the country pulling together, however briefly, behind its new leader. But we seem to have crossed a cultural line into mythmaking.

“The Obamas’ New Life!” blares People’s cover, with a shot of the family. “New home, new friends, new puppy!” Us Weekly goes with a Barack quote: “I Think I’m a Pretty Cool Dad.” The Chicago Tribune trumpets that Michelle “is poised to be the new Oprah and the next Jacqueline Kennedy Onassis — combined!” for the fashion world.

Whew! Are journalists fostering the notion that Obama is invincible, the leader of what the New York Times dubbed “Generation O”?

I’m sorry - were you saying something? I couldn’t hear you through the grinding of my teeth. When did the MSM and the National Enquirer change places? If you will recall, this year, it was the latter that that actually broke some real news. The MSM? Not so much:

Each writer, each publication, seems to reach for more eye-popping superlatives. “OBAMAISM — It’s a Kind of Religion,” says New York magazine. “Those of us too young to have known JFK’s Camelot are going to have our own giddy Camelot II to enrapture and entertain us,” Kurt Andersen writes. The New York Post has already christened it “BAM-A-LOT.”

“Here we are,” writes Salon’s Rebecca Traister, “oohing and aahing over what they’ll be wearing, and what they’ll be eating, what kind of dog they’ll be getting, what bedrooms they’ll be living in, and what schools they’ll be attending. It feels better than good to sniff and snurfle through the Obamas’ tastes and habits. . . . Who knew we had in us the capacity to fall for this kind of idealized Americana again?”

I am seriously on the verge of being ill here. “It’s a Kind of Religion”??? Worshiping this lying, cheating, bamboozling, hoodwinking, race-baiting sham of a politician who hasn’t had an original idea I can discern, who got everywhere he is by stepping on the throats of others? THIS is a “kind of religion”? Okay, it is clear to me. We have gone to hell in a hand basket.

No doubt, Thomas Jefferson, who knew the importance of the Fourth Estate for maintaining a democracy, would be, check that, probably IS, rolling over in his grave right now. Kurtz asks the right question about this, well, INSANITY:

But aren’t media people supposed to resist this kind of hyperventilating?

“Obama is a figure, especially in pop culture, in a way that most new presidents are not,” historian Michael Beschloss says. “Young people who may not be interested in the details of NAFTA or foreign policy just think Obama is cool, and they’re interested in him. Being cool can really help a new president.”

So can a sense of optimism, reflected on USA Today’s front page. “Poll: Hopes soaring for Obama, administration,” the headline said, with 65 percent saying “the USA will be better off 4 years from now.”

Yeah, I saw that headline, too. I wondered who the hell they were talking to first, then realized it was probably an AP article. Sure enough, it was. Like they haven’t been in the tank all year long. Hahahaha.

And why, pray tell, would these young people think Obama is “cool,” yet know NOTHING for which he stands?? I mean, really - on what, exactly, are they making that determination? His listening to Ludacris? The misogyny? Reverend Wright’s racist ravings? What?? What a bunch of ridiculously uninformed children. And THEY are the future? Yikes. Sure will be interesting to see what happend if they ever get more than one brain cell to rub against another. Or as Kurtz puts it:

But what happens when adulation gives way to the messy, incremental process of governing? When Obama has to confront a deep-rooted financial crisis, two wars and a political system whose default setting is gridlock? When he makes decisions that inevitably disappoint some of his boosters?

“We’re celebrating a moment as much as a man, I think,” says Newsweek Editor Jon Meacham, whose new issue, out today, compares Obama to Lincoln. “Given our racial history, an hour or two of commemoration seems appropriate. But there is no doubt that the glow of the moment will fade, and I am sure the coverage will reflect that in due course.”

FDR?? LINCOLN?? Are they INSANE????? LINCOLN??? The ONLY thing Obama has in common with Lincoln is living in IL. FDR? What are you people SMOKING???

And, sure. You just know you can count on the media to reflect reality at SOME point, right? Because they have demonstrated time and again how willing they are to reveal the realities of who Obama really is, and what he has really done. Oh, yeah.

And not for nothing, but I sure as hell don’t remember the media being so glowing and positive about Hillary Clinton, who, since they were clearly unaware of this, was a “historical” figure by being a woman who received more votes than any other Democrat ever, as well as winning a primary, and a lot more than one. But hey, let’s bury THAT “moment” as quickly as possible so no one intrudes on The One’s ascension.

Thankfully (or despairingly), there is an itsy bitsy teensy weensy ray of light:

One of the few magazines to strike a skeptical tone is the London-based Economist, which endorsed Obama. “With such a victory come unreasonably great expectations,” its lead editorial says.

Naturally, it is European based, not US based. Big surprise. One could say that:

Web worship of Obama is nearly limitless. On YouTube alone, the Obama Girl song, “I’ve Got a Crush on Obama,” has been viewed 11.7 million times. Even an unadorned video of the candidate’s election night speech in Chicago has drawn 3.5 million views.

Can someone please tell me how it is that this virtual unknown with the thinnest resume I have ever seen, who couldn’t even get a full time job in any university or business on his lack of documentation, has manipulated the masses so masterfully with “words, just words” and no real deeds of which to speak? I mean, besides the characteristics he has demonstrated thus far besides those listed above?

Yes, this is a change:

I am not trying to diminish the sheer improbability of what this African American politician, a virtual unknown four years ago, has accomplished. Every one of us views his victory through a personal lens. I thought of growing up in a “Leave It to Beaver” era, when there were no blacks in leading television roles until Bill Cosby was tapped as the co-star of “I Spy” in 1965. When the Watts riots broke out that year, the Los Angeles Times sent an advertising salesman to cover it because the paper had no black reporters. The country has traveled light-years since then.

Is it nitpicky to point out that Obama is bi-racial, reared by his white and Indonesian family, not his African one at any time? But hey - why rain on (more of) their delusion? Those pesky facts, why am I bringing THOSE up? This is SPECIAL, you know:

It is hard to find a precedent in American history. Ronald Reagan was a marquee star because of his Hollywood career, but mainly among older voters, since he made his last movie 16 years before winning the White House in 1980. Jack Kennedy was a more formal figure after winning the 1960 election — “trying to look older than he was, because he thought youth was a handicap in running for president,” Beschloss says — but quickly took on larger-than-life dimensions.

“The Kennedy buildup goes on,” James MacGregor Burns wrote in the New Republic in the spring of 1961. “The adjectives tumble over one another. He is not only the handsomest, the best-dressed, the most articulate, and graceful as a gazelle. He is omniscient; he swallows and digests whole books in minutes; he confounds experts with his superior knowledge of their field. He is omnipotent.”

Soon afterward, Kennedy blundered into the Bay of Pigs debacle.

The media would be remiss if they didn’t reflect the sense of unadulterated joy that greeted Obama’s election, both here and around the world, and the pride even among those who opposed him. Newspapers were stunned and delighted at the voracious demand for post-election editions, prompting The Washington Post and other papers to print hundreds of thousands of extra copies and pocket the change. (When else have we felt so loved lately?) Demand for inaugural tickets has been unprecedented. Barack is suddenly a hot baby name. Record companies are releasing hip-hop songs, by the likes of Jay-Z and Will.I.Am, with such titles as “Pop Champagne for Barack.” Consumers, the Los Angeles Times reports, are buying up “Obama-themed T-shirts, buttons, bobblehead dolls, coffee mugs, wine bottles, magnets, greeting cards, neon signs, mobile phones and framed art prints.”

“Unadulterated joy”? That the MEDIA ITSELF created, and for which it fanned the flames?? Yeah, absolutely - don’t start having any kind of ethics now on our behalf! We might all fall over dead from the shock of it. So, please, just spare us and keep us in our little Happy Obama Place. Oh, yuck - making myself sick now…

Oh, and just in time for the holidays:

A barrage of Obama-related books are in the works. Newsweek’s quadrennial election volume is titled “A Long Time Coming: The Historic, Combative, Expensive and Inspiring 2008 Election and the Victory of Barack Obama.” Publishers obviously see a bull market.

Oh, JOY!!!! Another way for Americans to spend all of our hard earned, ever dwindling dollars! Yay!

And speaking of cheers:

MSNBC, which was accused of cheerleading for the Democratic nominee during the campaign, is running promos that say: “Barack Obama, America’s 44th president. Watch as a leader renews America’s promise.” What are viewers to make of that?

There is always a level of excitement when a new president is coming to town — new aides to profile, new policies to dissect, new family members to follow. But can anyone imagine this kind of media frenzy if John McCain had managed to win?

Obama’s days of walking on water won’t last indefinitely. His chroniclers will need a new story line. And sometime after Jan. 20, they will wade back into reality.

Do you PROMISE, Mr. Kurtz? Because I am WAY over all of this Messiah worship we have had to endure, even as the most qualified candidate in decades was kicking his butt in the primaries on a whole helluva lot less money (that untraceable mountain of Obama’s money. See Ani’s post, “Obama’s Questionable Internet Donations Raise Suspicion at WaPo.“). But hey - that never stopped the “media” from promoting their rapturous tale of who Obama was, how he was the One for whom we had been waiting, regardless of what the people said with their votes…I mean, really - how much reporting did they even do on the Michigan fiasco? How many people in this country really knew what happened there? How many people outside the states where there were caucuses actually knew about the vast amount of caucus fraud? Close friends in Baton Rouge had no idea about a lot of this because their state wasn’t contested, so how would THEY know what had really been going on? As one of them said, they sure didn’t see this on ABC News! No, indeed. And that is exactly the problem. So many of the issues that should have been covered about Obama simply were not, or left to the “News Briefs” section. Not so for anything the least bit suspect or negative about any of the other candidates (or if it was one of Obama’s BFFs, like John Edwards. In that case, the MSM buried critical information the voters deserved to know.). And on it goes…

You may have seen this new video already, but personally, I find this to be a glaring indictment of the Fourth Estate,as if the above was not enough (H/T to American Girl in Italy for the heads up on this):

Holy Toledo. Add these results of the Zogby Poll commissioned by John Ziegler of “How Obama Got Elected“, and bear in mind these were MULTIPLE CHOICE QUESTIONS:

512 Obama Voters 11/13/08-11/15/08 MOE +/- 4.4 points

97.1% High School Graduate or higher, 55% College Graduates

Results to 12 simple Multiple Choice Questions

57.4% could NOT correctly say which party controls congress (50/50 shot just by guessing)

81.8% could NOT correctly say Joe Biden quit a previous campaign because of plagiarism (25% chance by guessing)

82.6% could NOT correctly say that Barack Obama won his first election by getting opponents kicked off the ballot (25% chance by guessing)

88.4% could NOT correctly say that Obama said his policies would likely bankrupt the coal industry and make energy rates skyrocket (25% chance by guessing)

56.1% could NOT correctly say Obama started his political career at the home of two former members of the Weather Underground (25% chance by guessing).

And yet…..

Only 13.7% failed to identify Sarah Palin as the person on which their party spent $150,000 in clothes

Only 6.2% failed to identify Palin as the one with a pregnant teenage daughter

And 86.9 % thought that Palin said that she could see Russia from her “house,” even though that was Tina Fey who said that!!

Only 2.4% got at least 11 correct.

Only .5% got all of them correct. (And we “gave” one answer that was technically not Palin, but actually Tina Fey)

Just to be clear - Palin did not ask for the clothes the MSM made such a brouhaha about, and she did not keep them. They were given to, or will be auctioned off for, charity.

For an added bonus, you can watch this John Stoessel interview of voters:

YIKES. Are people not required to take Civics classes any longer?? Really??

What a sad, sad state of affairs, for our educational system, for the Fourth Estate, for democracy, and for this country. We reap what we sow…

What is going to happen IF Obama is elected president? Are the WORMS going to have to go into overdrive? Will Obama have a special committee of WORMers?

What will happen if he has a meeting with someone like Ahmadinejad, and they are over heard discussing Obama’s book, where he wrote: “I will stand with them, (Muslims) should the political winds of war shift in an ugly direction.”

Will the WORMers scurry out behind him, screaming WORM WORM WORM?

What will happen if once he is President, and the LA Times releases the video they have of Obama, celebrating with a group of Palestinians who are openly hostile towards Israel. Barack Obama even gives a toast to a former PLO operative at this celebration.

Will the WORMers scurry out behind him, screaming WORM WORM WORM?

What will happen, if during a meeting with the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Obama is informed of a conflict between, say… Georgia and Russia, in which Russia attacked Georgia, and Obama launches an attack on Georgia?

Will his minions scurry behind him, screaming WORM WORM WORM?

What happens if Obama is president and, while visiting a foreign head of state, say…in Iceland, and then prattles on and on about how lovely the rolling green hills of Ireland are? (don’t kid yourself, the guy thinnks he visited 57 states, and never remembered where the heck he was)

Will his handlers scurry behind him, yelling WORM WORM WORM?

What will happen if Obama is President, and is in a meeting with, say the leader of Israel, and slips and says something about his Muslim faith?

Will George Stephanopoulos come running into the room, screaming WORM WORM WORM!

I ask, because I have YET to hear Obama go off script, and NOT have to have one of his supporters follow up with a WORM. Hell, even the media does it.

The Obama camp, liberal media and blogs clean up for him constantly, over his comments on socialism, taxes, his supporters not voting for Hillary spreading the wealth, his relentless race card playing, the five dollar bill comments, his flip flops on guns, FISA, abortion, withdrawal from Iraq, healthcare, his bitter, clinging to guns comments… Constantly. (And as I am writing this, Andrea Mitchell is on Morning Joe, WORMing for Obama. When did it become the job of reporters to WORM for a candidate? What is happening?

Any time he goes off script, and works without a teleprompter. He lies about the most obvious things, and constantly gets busted, by youtube, or old news stories. And then his supporters flood the networks screaming WORM WORM WORM!

It happens so often, it is a running joke, and it is even an online game.

I just find it quite frightening that a gaffe master like Obama (and his sidekick Biden Gaffetastic), who can’t seem to speak without a teleprompter, is already writing his inauguration speech.

Will he need a WORM for that, too?

Factual reality is stubborn, however. The overwhelming majority of Americans are like “Joe The Plumber” as well as you and me. We’re people who have grave concerns about Obama’s fitness and qualifications for the presidency. No, Mr. Obama. You can’t force most Americans into silence with false accusations of racism or homicidal thoughts. Your latest trick, in last night’s debate and of course played at deafening volume on MSNBC’s Countdown with Keith Olbermann (surprise, surprise), has been exposed by the Times-Leader newspaper, whose reporter — what an enterprising fellow — interviewed the Secret Service. An interview with those who protect Obama! What an idea! Try it sometime, Keith!

Secret Service says “Kill him” allegation unfounded

SCRANTON – The agent in charge of the Secret Service field office in Scranton said allegations that someone yelled “kill him” when presidential hopeful Barack Obama’s name was mentioned during Tuesday’s Sarah Palin rally are unfounded. …

The Scranton Times-Tribune first reported the alleged incident on its Web site Tuesday and then again in its print edition Wednesday. The first story, written by reporter David Singleton, appeared with allegations that while congressional candidate Chris Hackett was addressing the crowd and mentioned Obama’s name a man in the audience shouted “kill him.”

News organizations including ABC, The Associated Press, The Washington Monthly and MSNBC’s Countdown with Keith Olbermann reported the claim, with most attributing the allegations to the Times-Tribune story. …

I’m confident that Keith Olbermann will promptly issue a prominent retraction. As will ABC, the A.P., and other news outlets who reported Barack Obama’s allegation as fact, without checking.

And pigs will fly …

Maybe Barack should just stick to the “race card.” That’s worked quite well enough in silencing the timid, in-the-tank media.

What else is going on in the world? And how are all of you “racists” who hang out at this blog?

Kool-Aid Teetotalers, let us click our glasses together because we’re not really so bad, are we. (And maybe we can fill our glasses with some of Larry’s Scotch!)

:::

Thanks to Andy for the story tip.

Dusted off, here’s my July 23rd story on Obama’s gaffe and related fall-out:

Yet Another Worrisome “Obamaism”: The Banking Committee Is “My Committee” [UPDATES], July 23, 2008:

At today’s press conference, Barack Obama said that the U.S. Senate’s banking committee is his committee, which will surely come as a surprise to the chairman of the Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs committee, Christopher Dodd, an Obama sycophant.

Not only is the U.S. Senate Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs not HIS committee, Barack Obama is not even a member of the committee:

Perhaps Senator Obama is having a “senior moment”? It’s reminiscent of his stating that there are 57 states in the U.S. Actually, I think that Obama probably doesn’t remember which committees he is on, given his dilatory, lackluster inattention to his duties on the committees on which he does serve. Shall we bring up his failure to hold a single hearing as Chair of the Subcommittee on European Affairs, which is part of the Senate’s Foreign Policy Committee? As Joseph Wilson wrote here:

As chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations subcommittee on Europe, with jurisdiction over NATO, he has held not a single oversight meeting because, as he admitted, he was too busy running for president, even though NATO’s presence in the Afghanistan war is critical to success in that venture.

    – “Legitimate questions of judgment, experience” by Joseph Wilson, May 4, 2008

As the Chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee subcommittee on Europe, he has not chaired a single substantive oversight hearing, even though the breakdown in our relations with Europe and NATO is harming our operations in Afghanistan. Nor did he take a single official trip to Europe as chairman. This is the sum total of his actions in the most important responsibility he has had in the Senate. What are his actual experiences that reassure us that when the phone rings at 3 a.m. he will know what to do, which levers of power to pull, or which world leaders he can count on?

    – “Obama’s Shallow Credentials on National Security Are Dangerous for the Country” by Joseph Wilson

:::::::

Thanks to PPM for sending me the link to the video.

I find this appalling on many levels.

First, it is wholly inappropriate to refer to any committee as “MY” committee. It is not only ungentlemanly, it is egotistical.

Second, it is a flat-out lie that shows his utter lack of attention to his Senate duties in the VERY short time he has been a U.S. Senator.

Third, here is the list of committees on which Senator Obama theoretically serves.

:::::::

UPDATES: Memeorandum.com is tracking the story; CNN’s Political Ticker and several blogs have reported Obama’s (to be polite) misstatement. The Chicago Tribune has picked up the story. I’m certain that MSNBC and Keith Olbermann will be all over this too, especially since Keith constantly criticizes other news networks for not being “fair and balanced.” LATEST UPDATE: “THE FINE LINE BETWEEN PANDERING AND LYING.”

(I used to say, “Imagine if Hillary had said this.” Now, I say, “Imagine if McCain had said this. It’d be reported at the top of every news show.”)

There’s the now only-infamous-on-the-right “‘I’ve Got a Bracelet, Too’” gaffe.

“Jim, let me just make a point. I’ve got a bracelet too. From, Sergeant, uh, uh, from the mother of, uh, Sergeant, Ryan David Jopek.”

As Matthew Sheffield notes:

Had a Republican, say Sarah Palin, made this gaffe, who wants to bet that we wouldn’t hear this clip repeated endlessly during the post-debate spin shows and in the days ahead? How much would the sincerity of our hypothetical Republican politician be called into question.

Shockingly, MSNBC’s tingly Chris Matthews — who also described McCain as “troll-like” and “grumpy” — is angry with Barack. Matthews told Obama press person Linda Douglass: “Linda, my friend, why did your candidate agree so much, openly and relentlessly, with his opponent tonight?”

Now, just imagine if John McCain or, during the primaries, Hillary Clinton had made the following gaffes. The MSM “mantra,” even on Fox News, is mostly that neither candidate made any notable errors or misstatements. But, as I watched the debate live, I gasped as I heard Obama remark below, from CNN’s transcript. Okay, it was really just a misstatement, but again imagine if Hillary had said it. Or, if McCain had said it, the MSM would be clamoring to hint that it’s an indicator that he’s too old for the presidency.

MCCAIN: … I supported Nunn-Lugar back in the early 1990s when a lot of my colleagues didn’t. That was the key legislation at the time and put us on the road to eliminating this issue of nuclear waste and the nuclear fuel that has to be taken care of.

OBAMA: I — I just have to correct the record here. I have never said that I object to nuclear waste. What I’ve said is that we have to store it safely.

And, Senator McCain, he says — he talks about Arizona.

LEHRER: All right.

OBAMA: I’ve got to make this point, Jim.

LEHRER: OK.

OBAMA: He objects…

MCCAIN: I have voted for alternate fuel all of my time…

OBAMA: He — he — he objects…

LEHRER: One at a time, please.

OBAMA: He objected…

LEHRER: One at a time.

MCCAIN: No one can be opposed to alternate energy.

OBAMA: All right, fair enough. Let’s move on. You’ve got one more energy — you’ve got one more question.

Then there also these doozies last night:

Still, Obama had several moments where he was either at a loss for words or seemed to have forgotten what he was supposed to say. One particularly bad exchange for Obama came when Lehrer asked what programs Obama would cut in light of the tight budgets that will almost certainly result from the current economic crisis. At first, Obama said nothing. Then he brought up energy, but initially just said that he wanted to be sure the U.S. is still investing in energy. Finally, he seemed to remember the question and said that while he’s committed to investing in energy some of those investments might have to wait. Awkward.

In the very next sentence, he referred to McCain as “Tom”–saying “Tom called me wildly liberal.” He said this in reference to McCain’s claim that Obama was the Senate’s most liberal member and explained that he probably just seemed liberal because he was opposing George W. Bush. (Weak.) Obama followed that by citing his bipartisan work with Tom Coburn, a conservative senator from Oklahoma. It’s fair to wonder whether he jumbled them a bit. … (Read all of “Scoring the Debate.”)

Go ahead and scan the transcript.

I’m sure there’s plenty more there those came from.

P.S. It cracks me up every time that Obama brags about his relationship with Tom Coburn, who is just about as reviled on the left as is possible. However, when “The One” lauds his coziness with the far-right arch-conservative, it’s all way cool, man.

Excuse me? “Innocent”? Firstly, it was clear from your own crowd’s reaction (gasps followed by applause) that they believed you were referring to Sarah Palin. Secondly, you may think that most of us are bitter, gun-clinging, Bible-totting “white trash,” but we’re not dumb enough to buy that you didn’t mean exactly what you said, Barack. Your remark was a direct response to Sarah Palin’s now forever-famous and -beloved ad lib about hockey moms in her RNC acceptance speech. And, you elitist, by calling Sarah Palin and John McCain “pigs,” you’re reinforcing the stereotype adopted by the D.C. elitists that anybody for McCain/Palin has to be “white trash.”

NOW look at what reporter Warner Todd Huston at Newsbusters.org discovered (via Memeorandum.com):

It is looking like Obama’s comments were not off the cuff, but scripted. And, not only were they scripted, but they were stolen without attribution from a Washington Post political cartoon by Tom Toles from September 5. Will the media notice?

I’m going to “cut to the chase” and show you the results of reporter Huston’s painstaking findings. I’ve cropped the cartoon to show the relevant part, and placed Obama’s actual transcript right beside it:

Here’s the BARACK OBAMA transcript of his lines before he says, “you know, you can’t, you know, you you can put, ah, lipstick on a pig, it’s still a pig.” [sic] “John McCain says he’s about change too. “Exce- and and so I guess his whole angle is - watch out, George Bush - except for economic policy, healthcare policy, tax policy, education policy, foreign policy, and Karl-Rove-style politics, we’re really gonna shake things up in Washington.”

In other words, Newsbusters’s Huston has proven that Obama’s preceding remarks, leading up to the insensitive “pig” line, are almost word for word from the Tom Toles cartoon from September 5.

First, here’s the Obama transcript, in full, from that segment of his off-teleprompter rally spech yesterday:

John McCain says he’s about change too. Exce- and and so I guess his whole angle is - watch out, George Bush - except for economic policy, healthcare policy, tax policy, education policy, foreign policy, and Karl-Rove-style politics, we’re really gonna shake things up in Washington.

That’s not change.

That’s that’s just callin’ sumpin’ the same thing somethin’ different.

But you know, you can’t, you know, you you can put, ah, lipstick on a pig, it’s still a pig.

Now, here’s the Washington Post cartoon, uncropped:

Read the full story at Newsbusters.org.

You can catch other bloggers’ reports on Obama’s, um, “borrowing” of those lines at Memeorandum.com.

If you want to get the big picture on just how huge this story has become, check out the full coverage of almost all the news stories and blog posts on every facet of “Lipstick-gate” at Memeorandum.com.

We plan to write more on this but here is the skinny, quickly, on some of the reasons John McCain easily won the “debate” tonight. (NOTE: We are still waiting for the transcript to appear at CNN. However, Memeorandum.com provides a rich, at-a-glance view of all of the news stories and blog posts about the forum hosted by Rev. Rick Warren.)

(1) Obama can’t come close to the life experiences that John McCain has had, that tested him in a way that most of us will never know.

(2) Obama flat-out lied or misspoke (you choose the verb):

Obama said the most gut-wrenching decision of his life was to vote against the Iraq War. McCain said it was when he declined an offer to leave a prison camp in Vietnam.

Barack Obama was not in the U.S. Senate until 2005. Those who DID have to make that “gut-wrenching decision” were John McCain, Hillary Clinton, John Edwards, John Kerry, and 96 other senators.

[UPDATE] (2A) “Obama: Clarence Thomas Is Just Too Dumb“:

On Thomas: “I don’t think he was a strong enough jurist, or legal thinker.”

On Scalia: … although I don’t think there’s any doubt about his intellectual brilliance.”

I wonder if Obama thinks all black people are dumb? Based upon previous Jesse Jackson comments, Jackson pretty much suggested he does when he accused Obama of talking down to blacks. [HERE IS THE VIDEO.]

(3) A very worried Taylor Marsh said Obama needs to bring a “debate drill sargeant in and do some work.” (What she wrote is below the fold.)

Taylor is correct.

However, there’s a basic problem that no one can solve for Barack Obama. NO COACH IN THE WORLD can give Barack Obama the experiences, the travel worldwide, the meetings with world leaders in countless countries, the study of a multitude of world and domestic issues, the countless meetings in an array of venues that John McCain has had.

Barack Obama is simply not ready for the job. And no coach can teach him enough, especially with the precious little time left, how to fake that experience.

Below, I’ve pasted exactly what Taylor wrote:

Obama could have had policy answers ready to help push forward why Democratic policies are grounded in humanity and morality, which proves why he’d be a much better president. Instead he offered his standard word fogs without any goal whatsoever, much like he did in the primaries where Clinton regularly cleaned his clock. McCain came with policy talking points and a goal. Our guy better get a debate drill sargeant in and do some work, because so far there’s no evidence he’s going to best McCain in them. Obama’s hour is now, minus the Clarence Thomas answers, completely forgettable. Not good. McCain even got in an answer on Georgia and Russia, which folded into freedom and energy issues. Minus the ridiculous, ad nauseam “my friend” belches, quite a performance for the neocon McCain. Why do you want to be president? I can’t remember Obama’s answer. McCain’s came in a sound bite: “I want to inspire a generation of Americans to serve a cause greater than their self-interest.” Obama better game up.

Obama-speak works just great in rally settings.

Obama-speak will work in a football stadium.

Obama-speak will not work in a one-on-one debate with a REAL HUMAN BEING who has the vast experience that both Hillary Clinton and John McCain have had.

There is no substitute for having done the work.

There is no substitute for having traveled to 70+ countries, as Hillary Clinton has done. (I don’t know how many countries McCain has visited, but it is probably in the higher double digits.)

There is no substitute for having met world leaders on their turf, several times.

For example, John McCain has PERSONALLY been to embattled Georgia several times.

John McCain knows the country of Georgia. He knows its people. He knows its leaders. He knows its problems. He knows its fears and its dreams.

Barack Obama cannot fake that kind of experience.

And there is not enough time to even begin to learn how to fake it.

Barack Obama is out of his league.

On The Big Orange, Commissar Keith Olbermann decided to whet the appetites of his rabid, but dwindling, fan base by offering “a little preview of an item on tonight’s Countdown” by ordering an EXECUTION:

The headline: Dana Milbank won’t be on the news hour any more.

Dana Milbank of The Washington Post, who notified us today that after four years appearing with us, he had accepted another television offer. This saved your crack Countdown staff an increasingly difficult decision.

Your “crack Countdown staff?”

And what decision was that, Keith? Dana must be brought to heel?

It seems the brouhaha stemmed from Dana Milbank’s article, President Obama Continues Hectic Victory Tour where Dana had the audacity to refer to Barack Obama as “the presumptuous nominee.” In other words, Dana finally woke up from his koolaid-induced stupor and called it like he saw it. And for this, the punishment was to be swift and sure from Herr Olbermann.

Since I covered Dana’s article last week, I thought it only fitting that I share the “reasons” for Keithie’s faux outrage. According to the pompous Olbermann:

For nearly a week we’d been waiting for [Dana] to offer a correction or an explanation for his column from last week in which he apparently reported an Obama quote without a full context turned the meaning of the quote inside-out.

Then he called criticisms of his column “whines” even though the dispute was over whether Obama said the self-deprecating: “It has become increasingly clear in my travel, the campaign — that the crowds, the enthusiasm, 200,000 people in Berlin, is not about me at all. It’s about America. I have just become a symbol of the possibility of America returning to our best traditions” — or only the part about “I have just become a symbol…”

All current evidence indicates that Senator Obama is about as capable of being self-deprecating as Olbermann is of having humility. Secondly, the article covers more of the quote than just the ‘symbol‘ part. Lastly, Keith is whining. That is something he has in common with most Obama surrogates on the receiving end of any criticism for their messiah: to whine.

We had decided not to have Dana on this news-hour again until this was cleared up, and, sadly after some very happy years, he’s apparently chosen to make that cloud permanent. Good luck, Dana.

…he took any further decision-making out of our hands. It was quite a surprise conclusion, obviously, and I’ll take it (before anybody tries to take it back).

So, Keith, what you are really telling us is that Dana Milbank basically told you to go stuff it before you had to make the “difficult decision” of telling him to go stuff it.

As you can see from reading Dana’s article linked above, he had the absolute audacity to criticize ‘the One’ and report honestly that some of the press corps started referring to Obama as a “prom queen.”

Considering Obama’s new supersized logo on his plane, his chair stitched with the word President on it, the usurping of the Presidential Seal, telling the press corps how to dress, not answering any real questions, negotiating with and giving his two cents to foreign leaders, overstepping the bounds of his overseas trip, the list goes on and on…why wouldn’t the press call Senator Obama a prom queen? Or perhaps we can use my favorite new name for him: Il Duce.

To summarize, Olbermann, who has been sipping his own koolaid for some time now and puffing out his chest higher and higher with every stinking broadcast, forbade Dana to come back on the show until Milbank basically bowed down and scraped his knees on the carpet begging Olbermann’s forgiveness.

You can manipulate Obama’s quote any way you want – there are several versions of it from different news sources. But in every single one, he refers to himself as ‘a symbol of returning to America best traditions.’ Obama and Puffy the Clown belong together. They have the same exaggerated sense of their own importance.

Why don’t they just go do a sweat lodge and sing songs around the campfire and smoke a doobie and get it over with.

Olbermann accusing Milbank of taking something out of context is a tad disingenuous considering he is the one who would go on nightly unjustified, self-righteous and outrageous diatribes against Hillary Clinton, mentioning the Clintons in the same sentence with the racist David Duke, and other disgusting rants. This is the man who said:

“A Super Delegate needs to take Hillary Clinton into a room and only he comes out. That kind of scenario.”

When viewers exploded with outrage, his big apology was that he “used the wrong pronoun.” That’s it.

MSNBC took the cake in terms of the worst misogynist slurs against Senator Clinton – the unforgivable remarks were compounded daily.

In addition to every other outrage from MSNBC, it appears they are practicing censorship. Because Dana Milbank finally decided to tell the truth about Senator Obama’s arrogant and unseemly behavior, Milbank was to be denied the opportunity to appear on the show and possibly express such dissent.

Olbermann was not worried about Dana offering an “explanation.” The threat was clear – either fall in line or you’re out of a job over here. Dana refused and took another offer instead.

I hope Keith Olbermann can enjoy his ever-lower ratings; currently around the rank of “the Butterfly Channel,” as I believe Bill O’Reilly so eloquently put it.

I see that freedom of speech and freedom of expression are not welcome on Countdown. I have long since written off this program, but more worrisome is the dread I have that dissent and honest expression are also being crushed in other parts of the news media. While Olbermann is arguably the worst offender, he is not alone.

I remember reading that Greta Van Susteren noted a reporter colleague of hers on another network could not file a report critical of Obama without it being watered down, whereas stories critical of Senators McCain and Clinton were left untouched. Highly disturbing to say the least.

There is no love lost for Dana Milbank, given most of his reporting this season. Like many in the media who complain about Obama now, they did so only after they spent many months unfairly kicking the far more qualified Senator Clinton in the teeth.

That stated, I am glad Dana had the good sense not to bow and scrape before Olbermann – a man whose character would be best served in a profession having nothing to do with disseminating ‘news’ to a public desperate for the truth.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

NoQuarterUSA Action Of The Day:

We ask that you take part in the I Own My Vote Virtual Platform Committee Meeting now! It takes five minutes. Click here to start. If you have not yet signed the pledge, click here to do so.

(I used to say, “Imagine if Hillary had said this.” Now, I say, “Imagine if McCain had said this. It’d be reported at the top of every news show.”)
……………………………………………………

At today’s press conference, Barack Obama said that the U.S. Senate’s banking committee is his committee, which will surely come as a surprise to the chairman of the Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs committee, Christopher Dodd, an Obama sycophant.

Not only is the U.S. Senate Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs not HIS committee, Barack Obama is not even a member of the committee:

Perhaps Senator Obama is having a “senior moment”? It’s reminiscent of his stating that there are 57 states in the U.S. Actually, I think that Obama probably doesn’t remember which committees he is on, given his dilatory, lackluster inattention to his duties on the committees on which he does serve. Shall we bring up his failure to hold a single hearing as Chair of the Subcommittee on European Affairs, which is part of the Senate’s Foreign Policy Committee? As Joseph Wilson wrote here:

As chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations subcommittee on Europe, with jurisdiction over NATO, he has held not a single oversight meeting because, as he admitted, he was too busy running for president, even though NATO’s presence in the Afghanistan war is critical to success in that venture.

    – “Legitimate questions of judgment, experience” by Joseph Wilson, May 4, 2008

As the Chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee subcommittee on Europe, he has not chaired a single substantive oversight hearing, even though the breakdown in our relations with Europe and NATO is harming our operations in Afghanistan. Nor did he take a single official trip to Europe as chairman. This is the sum total of his actions in the most important responsibility he has had in the Senate. What are his actual experiences that reassure us that when the phone rings at 3 a.m. he will know what to do, which levers of power to pull, or which world leaders he can count on?

    – “Obama’s Shallow Credentials on National Security Are Dangerous for the Country” by Joseph Wilson

:::::::

Thanks to PPM for sending me the link to the video.

I find this appalling on many levels.

First, it is wholly inappropriate to refer to any committee as “MY” committee. It is not only ungentlemanly, it is egotistical.

Second, it is a flat-out lie that shows his utter lack of attention to his Senate duties in the VERY short time he has been a U.S. Senator.

Third, here is the list of committees on which Senator Obama theoretically serves.

OBAMA: Well, let me — let me be absolutely clear. Israel is a strong friend of Israel’s. It will be a strong friend of Israel’s under a McCain government — administration. It will be a strong friend of Israel’s under an Obama administration. So that policy is not going to change.