Clinton White House or April Fools Day?

"Journalists seeking to talk a little foreign policy with high-profile Obama administration officials live from the G20 meetings in London this week were solicited for phone sex instead after ringing up the toll-free number given by the White House.

In a press release, the White House accidentally listed a sex line number for journalists seeking an "on-the-record briefing call with Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and National Security Advisor Jim Jones to discuss the NATO summit."

But after dialing, a soft-voiced female recording that was clearly not Clinton asked for a credit card number if you "feel like getting nasty." " Fox News

And then someone who watched the G20 press conference wrote on a wiki (blog?): "First and foremost, why isn't the national and international media making fun of President Obama for being a stammering idiot with a puny vocabulary? I didn't believe it until I just watched for myself, but Obama is a stuttering fool and seems to barely be able to manage a coherent sentence. He speaks worse than I write!

After President Obama's G20 press conference was over, I was stunned. Again he made numerous gaffs and can't seem to answer a question without going off on some tangent that has nothing to do with the original question. Obama continually called on reporters that are allies to the socialist cause and Obama knew would ask softball questions that would make himlook good, which is know easy task.

From day one, the American media attacked G.W. Bush for speaking exactly as Obama does, stammering and making little or no sense. I would readily admit that Bush was much worse at public speaking than Obama, but Obama clearly lacks the ability to speak without a teleprompter in front of him."

I was in the car, but I think I picked up a few -er, -uh, -um's during a news break and changed the station. That man hurts my ears. Even the sentences that do make sense, seem awfully elementary and repetitious. Doesn't he rehearse?

Where Hillary misjudged Barack

I was reading through a January 2007 article "Hillary, Barack: The Differences And Similarities," By E.J. DIONNE JR and noticed where she, and the McCain-Palin campaign made their mistake:

In a 2002 speech, Clinton signaled her respect for this approach by praising Al From, the DLC's founder and chief executive, for understanding "from the very beginning . . . that the right ideas were more important even than improving technology, organization or fundraising." Both Clintons have employed Mark Penn, the premier DLC pollster who is incessant in his efforts to locate the political center.

If Obama had the right ideas he'd be a lot further ahead; if he had no ideas, he'd still be ahead; he has every tired, worn-out socialist marxist idea that failed around the world, that guarantees our economy will be crushed under more regulation and more taxes, he's stomping the center left and he's still ahead.

The economy collapsed after the 2008 conventions (although I was blogging about Fannie and Fred 18 months ago) making the race about something totally different, and it was the Democrats' fault, and yet the Obamachine was able to grab that brass golden ring and ride the Merry Go Round and Round and Round with it. Clever clips, better graphics, and much faster responses. Their turn around time on a McCain slip was amazing, but McCain might take days to bring up an Obama flip or flim-flam. When we walked out of the Nationwide Arena Friday evening, all pumped up by Ahnold, Hank Jr., and McCain, what was projected on the white building across the street, but an Obama ad about 50 ft high. Brilliant.

And even if Americans--decent, hard working, religious people who close their eyes and ears to his socialist garbage, his dangerous economic plan, and his disgusting abortion views--really understood his ideas, he'd still be ahead. Even when they clearly know that he can't reduce taxes for 95% of Americans because a huge percentage don't pay taxes, and by increasing taxes on business he drives them out of the country, he'd still be ahead. Even if they went on line and totalled the trillions we've spent on poverty programs, he'd still be ahead. He's got what Hillary said wasn't as important as the ideas--TECHNOLOGY, ORGANIZATION AND FUNDRAISING.

Love him or hate him, admire or denigrate him, his minions and lackeys are masters of puppetry, show, fluff, alinskyized groups, speed and visual impact. He picks an old-time, aging liberal for a running mate and uses text messaging to announce it, and the kiddoes swoon from excitement, ignorning the fact that Democrats refused Biden several times. They get little old ladies to leave their home in Illinois and paint store fronts and make coffee in Wisconsin; they get honor scholars to come home from Europe and give false addresses in Ohio and live in a dump so they can bus in the homeless and confused who haven't voted in years, or maybe never. They build a Greek Temple for $5 million to announce what we all knew--he was going to be the candidate and then rip into Palin for her clothes; he prances around Europe posing with fascist imagery but the kids have never studied history, so still they swoon. His agents and organizers, managers and gurus understand that what matters is the feeling, the excitement of the moment, not the facts. Reminds me of the movie Face in the Crowd.

Lonesome Rhodes:This whole country's just like my flock of sheep!
Marcia Jeffries: Sheep?
Lonesome Rhodes: Rednecks, crackers, hillbillies, hausfraus, shut-ins, pea-pickers - everybody that's got to jump when somebody else blows the whistle. They don't know it yet, but they're all gonna be 'Fighters for Fuller'. They're mine! I own 'em! They think like I do. Only they're even more stupid than I am, so I gotta think for 'em. Marcia, you just wait and see. I'm gonna be the power behind the president - and you'll be the power behind me!

Obama is lauded as an articulate intellectual when in fact he stammers and stutters and repeats old ideas calling it change; he talks about social programs as though we haven't already spent trillions and suffocated the poor with a well fed, well paid bureaucracy; when he can't face the truth he just jokes about it, tosses someone under the bus, or sends in his goons to destroy the questioner. He has no past that anyone can find--not legislative or personal, but it doesn't matter. In this election it's the money--and he's spent over half a billion (much through theft and fraud), the right technology (some of it in the state offices of Ohio) and a solid organization of adoring volunteers and paid staff.

God and Hillary Clinton

First, let me say that I think candidates for office, whether city council or the presidency of the United States, should be allowed to speak at any forum, even if it is the pulpit of a church. Americans learn democracy in the committees and congregational votes of their churches and synagogues. Black Americans have a long tradition of this--and according to the polls, it hasn't hurt their faith one bit. Second, some Christians are terrible hypocrites about this. Here in Columbus we had a group gang of 31 smug, self-righteous, mainline preachers trying to take the tax exempt status from World Harvest (which draws much bigger crowds than they do) during the 2006 election cycle. Third, I haven't read this book--and probably won't since I'm not a Hillary fan. Still, it's an important topic. Faith does shape one's politics.

I listened to an author interview; he has written other "God and. . ." books. (Here is another interview, but not the one I heard and it addresses different issues.) He said that George W. Bush spoke at a church 3 times in his first 3 years in office, all at memorial services. Hillary Clinton spoke 6 times in churches on one election day (her senate run in New York). Yet she is the one who says she won't "wear her religion on her sleeve" (audience applause) because that would be Pharisaical. She gave many "Why I am a Methodist" speeches when the folks in Arkansas were a bit doubtful about the young couple living in the governor's mansion in the 80s.

If this book is as carefully researched as the author claims, and is accurate just on this "sleeve" issue, Senator Clinton will continue to set up a straw man to divide Christian loyalties to meet her own political goals.

My opinion. Christ taught nothing new about moral and ethical behavior. Our faith is not about what to do, but about who we believe in. So Matthew 25, where Christians are commanded to help the poor, sick and imprisoned is a basic religious tenet for both Christians and Jews. The Gospel of Matthew is a very Jewish book drawing heavily on the Old Testament.

Main line Protestants have no problem using this text to decide that it is the government which needs to do it with everyone's tax dollar, not just the taxes of Christians and Jews. However, the same group is quite vocal about not teaching Creation, the theological bedrock of both faiths in that it deals with God's sovereignty and how death entered the world. They ridicule conservative Christians and side with atheists, agnostics and humanists. They are vocal about blessing gay marriage, even to splitting their denomination, using every passage about marital love in the Bible. They are silent about the killing of the helpless unborn, except to mouth platitudes about "choice," and "saving the poor or deformed from a life of pain."

Today I saw a letter to the editor in WSJ which voiced concern that the Christian right was taking the reins of the Republican party (a very common complaint). Again, I ask all Christians, liberal and conservative to please show me where Christians are having any influence at all in education, economics, politics, entertainment or academe. I wish it were true, but I don't see it. Twice in 60 years we've had a Republican Congress with a Republican President. Show me a single government program or boondoggle that was turned back, slowed down or reversed by conservative Christians.