Condi Rice Removes Free School Lunch For Obama

In an glaringly partisan move, under the umbrella of a non-partisan move, Condi "The Eliminator" Rice sent a memo to overseas embassies - right before Obama left for his Global trip, forbidding any embassy from giving Obama undue assistance.

"The night before presumptive Democratic nominee Sen. Barack Obama (D-IL) left for Afghanistan, Iraq and Western Europe for a tour of US bases overseas, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice issued a cable to US missions forbidding them from holding events for presidential candidates or arrange meetings for them.

Rice issued no such cable prior to foreign excursions by presumptive Republican nominee Sen. John McCain (R-AZ).

In a cable sent late Thursday, according to a copy leaked to the Washington Times, Rice enjoined American diplomats to treat the candidates as "members of Congress visiting in personal or semi-personal capacities," but "with additional restrictions based on rules related to political activity."

"Provide de minimis assistance to the candidate with logistical arrangements," said the cable, according to the Times. "If the campaign staff wants to rent a bus for press, tell them where they can rent a bus."
http://rawstory.com//news/2008/Night_before_Obama_flies_abroad_Rice_0721.html

Rice didn't issue the same demands in advance of travel by Sen. McCain. McCain visited the Middle East four months ago -- but officials told the paper they didn't make similar demands because he was part of an "official congressional delegation." ******

"American embassies and consulates around the world are actively engaged in official visits by members of Congress and other government leaders, the paper noted. "Diplomats meet the visitors at the airport, accompany them to meetings, most of which they have arranged, and host public events for them."

Rice made an effort in her cable to distance herself from claims that her decision might have been influenced by politics.

"It is imperative that, in implementing these various requirements, we treat both major presidential candidates evenhandedly," she wrote. "Our interactions with the candidates need to be made in the context that they are also sitting U.S. senators and very important U.S. visitors with special security concerns."

But she forbid them from any attempts to "hold or arrange receptions or public events for the candidate," "arrange the candidate's meetings" or "use official funds and resources, beyond a de minimis level, to support a political trip." "

Ohhhhkay. Has anyone ever seen this kind of "memo" sent out to embassies prior to a Presidential election before? I certainly haven't. Moreover, a commenter on Therawstory.com noted,

******"Rice didn't issue the same demands in advance of travel by Sen. McCain.

McCain visited the Middle East four months ago -- but officials told the paper they didn't make similar demands because he was part of an "official congressional delegation."

AND on another article it says:The Illinois senator — traveling in a congressional delegation with Sens. Jack Reed, D-R.I., and Chuck Hagel, R-Neb. — arrived in the country early Monday. Their first stop was Basra, the U.S. Embassy said."

Something smells fishy to me. When John McCain panders around the globe with fellow congressional backers, erm, I mean, delegates, it's fine. But when Obama does the same thing, he is to be treated like a rabid animal...provide no assistance, and capture and sedate if possible.

This is just one of the blatant news items coming out of the WH that nobody will raise a finger about...because we're all too busy ranting about it on the Internet on blogs no one will ever see.

New Yorker Forgets What Satire Means

Regarding the cover of the New Yorker Magazine, in which Obama terrorist jabs/fist bumps his wife, while dressed in evil Islamic garb, this writer finds that the joke is on...well everybody.

Writer David Remnick, responding to an email from a Huffington post reporter, had this to say:

"Remnick responded by email: "Obviously I wouldn't have run a cover just to get attention — I ran the cover because I thought it had something to say. What I think it does is hold up a mirror to the prejudice and dark imaginings about Barack Obama's — both Obamas' — past, and their politics. I can't speak for anyone else's interpretations, all I can say is that it combines a number of images that have been propagated, not by everyone on the right but by some, about Obama's supposed 'lack of patriotism' or his being 'soft on terrorism' or the idiotic notion that somehow Michelle Obama is the second coming of the Weathermen or most violent Black Panthers. That somehow all this is going to come to the Oval Office.""
http://rawstory.com/news/2008/New_Yorker_cover_angers_Obama_supporters_0713.html

It's all a big joke! Can't you see that? Says the New Yorker.

Well, I have news for you...satire is only funny if the person gets the joke. If not, its usually rude, offensive, and inane. For instance, though wikipedia is not the cast iron source that it should be, it has this to say in it's definition of satire:

"A very common, almost defining feature of satire is its strong vein of irony or sarcasm, but parody, burlesque, exaggeration, juxtaposition, comparison, analogy, and double entendre are all frequently used in satirical speech and writing. The essential point, however, is that "in satire, irony is militant"[2]. This "militant irony" (or sarcasm) often professes to approve the very things the satirist actually wishes to attack." (bold/italics added)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Satire

So there you go. Satire, or militant irony/sarcasm, is a literal attack on something that ISN'T SUPPOSED TO BE TAKEN LITERALLY.

Well, how is someone supposed to know that? Taken out of context, or by a reader/viewer who doesn't automatically assume the New Yorker has such a sharp wit, this cartoon does seem to be an attack on Obama. It's a blatant attack, in fact. Because, usually, when the New Yorker posts such a cartoon, it is actually making fun of the people portrayed. So, how is someone supposed to know when the New Yorker is being sarcastic, facetious, or downright obnoxious?

Oh, you don't really it's a joke? Well, geez, where is your sense of humor?

Please. Whoever decided to run that cartoon, ON THE FRONT COVER NO LESS, is an arrogant heavy handed moron who should get out of the office more.

It's disgusting, it's distasteful, and most of all...I bet it's something that Fox News wishes it had thought of first. And that is pretty much the worst insult there is.

No One Else's Ad

Well, the political mudslinging season is heating up, now that the official race between McCain and Obama has begun. So we turn our eyes to the first of many New York Slime's 'objective coverage' editorials.

Today, we thank William Kristol for his vitriol-laced op-ed that skewers the latest MoveOn.org ad.

Here is the link: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/23/opinion/23kristol.html?hp

And a description of the Ad:

" “Hi, John McCain. This is Alex. And he’s my first. So far his talents include trying any new food and chasing after our dog. That, and making my heart pound every time I look at him. And so, John McCain, when you say you would stay in Iraq for 100 years, were you counting on Alex?

Because if you were, you can’t have him.”

Take that, warmonger!

Now it might be pedantic to point out that John McCain isn’t counting on Alex to serve in Iraq, because little Alex will only be 9 years old when President McCain leaves office after two terms." "

Okay, fine, that ad is a bit much. But then Kristol says,

"I’m not persuaded. Having slandered a distinguished general officer, MoveOn has now moved on to express contempt for all who might choose to serve their country in uniform."

Okay fine...but then what say you about the Swiftboaters who lambasted Kerry for his truly cowardish actions that are far from as heroic as he says they were?

....Nothing...

I just find it very onesided that everyone attacks Democrats for trying to show how destructive the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan...but it seems perfectly legitimate to slander a genuine war hero...so that the next president can start and continue more wars. Doesn't that seem Ironic to anyone else?

If not, well, then damn, I must be more perceptive than I thought.