Via TPM Election Central comes word that Barack Obama's presidential campaign is once again trying to create a new marketing theme, and this one will launch tomorrow.

Why this design?

According to an Obama aide, the new effort dovetails with a renewed push by the Obama team in Pennsylvania to poke fun at John McCain's recent claim that he would rather hear the roar of "50,000 Harleys" than the cheering of 200,000 Berliners.

As the Obama camp was quick to point out, McCain opposed legislation that would have forced the U.S. government to buy American-made motorcycles.

The Obama camp's push on the issue includes running this recent ad, which was running in the York market and mocks McCain's Harley quote while pointing out McCain's position on American-made bikes, in two new markets in Pennsylvania beginning tomorrow -- the Pittsburgh and Scranton/Wilkes-Barre markets.

Obama's Pennsylvania campaign, the aide says, will be hitting the ground this weekend in around five towns around the state with stickers and flyers bearing the above "Buy American, Vote Obama" logo.

The events will feature a few dozen actual Harley riders for Obama that have been recruited for the weekend's events.

"Harley riders aren't typically supportive of Democratic candidates," the aide says. "But we're making a play for them by saying that Obama's economic policies are the true patriotic ones."

They. Don't. Get. It.

Patriotic purchasing doesn't come from buying products just because they're made in America, but instead comes from choosing American-made products because you have faith that American companies such as H-D put the time and effort into building a quality American-made product you can be proud of, making you want to own it.

There is nothing patriotic about forcing Americans to buy specific products, but socialists like Obama are by nature anti-capitalistic, so should we be surprised that his campaign gets this wrong?

Perhaps progressives really think that bikers are bitter, clingy knuckle-draggers that can be influenced by such a half-hearted effort, but I think they are going to be sorely disappointed. The pandering is simply too transparent and insincere.

Should Obama need bikers, however, I think we can find some that are a bit more his speed.

To thine own self be true, Obamamessiah.

Posted by: Confederate Yankee at 10:09 PM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 379 words, total size 3 kb.

I never quite appreciated how good of a fit Matt Yglesias was for his new home at Think Progress until I got a chance to see him in action this morning, hacking away with the intellectual dishonesty that has given Think Progress the reputation it has so richly earned (but surprisingly, hasn't yet found a way to tax).

John McCain deems the Georgia-Russia war the "first serious crisis internationally since the end of the Cold War"...

Satyam notes "the Gulf War, 9/11, and the Iraq War, to name a few" as possible alternatives. But beyond McCainÂ’s seemingly poor memory, the interesting thing is the confusion in terms of high-level concepts. It was just a little while ago that McCain was giving speeches about how "the threat of radical Islamic terrorism" is "transcendent challenge of our time." Now Russia seems to be the transcendent challenge. Which is the problem with an approach to world affairs characterized by a near-constant hysteria about threat levels and a pathological inability to set priorities.

I'm no McCain fan by any stretch of the imagination, but it takes a person of true intellectual dishonesty to twist McCain's words the way these Soros drones have done.

As we now stand, Russia and the United States, two nuclear powers equipped with continent-killing ICBMs with MIRV warheads, are indeed in a diplomatic crisis over the recent Russian invasion and occupation of Georgia. It is the first serious international crisis since we last stood toe-to-toe with Moscow during the Cold War.

Is Yglesias actually daft enough to suggest that acknowledging a new or renewed threat is wrong, and that it should be ignored so you can stick with your party's pre-planned script? That's not mature statecraft. That's sticking your head in the sand... beach sand.

The Iraq War was and is a regional conflict, with little threat of expanding into a serious international crisis. The same holds true with the lower-intensity invasion of Afghanistan that began after 9/11; neither country had the weaponry or diplomatic power to engage in serious force projection outside of their regional spheres.

McCain was perfectly precise with his choice of words to describe the current crisis, just as he was when he described Iraq as the first major conflict since 9/11, leaving out Afghanistan precisely because it wasn't a major conflict, but a campaign waged primarily via special forces teams incorporating with indigenous forces and air support.

Of course, no one at Think Progress understands the first thing about the military other than the mention of them gets their spit glands revved, so that is hardly surprising.

That Yglesias would use his own blanket ignorance as an excuse to once again imply McCain is going senile is pathetic, but it's what we'd come to expect from the support mechanism of the community reality-based he now so deservedly calls home.

Posted by: Confederate Yankee at 10:58 AM | Comments (13) | Add Comment
Post contains 480 words, total size 3 kb.

You've got to hand it to the Obama Truther Movement (a driven mix of Hillary loving PUMAs and conservatives)... they let few things stand in the way of their absolute certainty that Barack Obama is an Indonesian-Kenyan Muslim draft dodger...including the facts.

What I can't get is why they spend so much time focusing on trying to disqualify him using questionable documents, when his proven record is so much worse.

Who gives a crap if his last name was Soetoro as a child, when he choses infanticide today?

Why should I care if Barack Obama was labelled a Muslim (obviously meant to imply he might be a terrorist), when he started his political career at the home of proud, publicly known domestic terrorists with whom he's had a long relationship?

There are plenty of real reasons to criticize Barack Obama. Let's stick to those, shall we?

Posted by: Confederate Yankee at 02:53 PM | Comments (7) | Add Comment
Post contains 154 words, total size 1 kb.

Chef Julia Child: OSS spy?

Posted by: Confederate Yankee at 06:44 AM | Comments (5) | Add Comment
Post contains 13 words, total size 1 kb.

Details are still coming in, but it appears a man showed up at Democratic Party headquarters, asked for chairman Bill Gwatney by name, was denied a meeting, and then pushed his way in and then shot Gwatney before fleeing.

KATV reports that police chased the suspect and that he is now believed to be dead, though that is unconfirmed at this time; Fox 16 only confirms he was shot by police.

Please pray for Mr. Gwatney and his family.

We'll update as more information becomes available.

Update: Ark Times blog has the most detail on this developing story, including the claim that the shooter switched vehicles during his attempted escape, and that he in custody. There are contradicting reports about the shooter's condition.

Update: Among other sources, WREG seems to be going the "airing the theory" route, noting Gwatney owns multiple car dealerships and that the suspect made comments about losing his job recently. That does not mean the suspect was a Gwatney employee of course—he could just as easily have some other reason for targeting Gwatney, personal or political—but until the suspect is identified, we simply won't know more.

The most recent update to the Ark Times blog also notes that Gwatney's dealerships had recent layoffs, the shooter was apparently one of Gwatney's employee's (still not officially confirmed), and that the shooter died en route to the hospital.

The national media is slow to catch up on the suspected motivations of the shooter. I'm certain that this is out of concerns for accuracy, and not an attempt to let misplaced anger simmer for as long as possible for those who would ascribe a political motivation.

Like clockwork: The paranoids denizens of the Democratic Undergound, Think Progress, and other "progressive" sites have laid the blame squarely at the feet of conservatives, talk radio... and racists?

Update: Gwatney has died.

There is some disagreement over the suspect's ID but the aforementioned Ark Times blog presently states:

...the suspect was a former employee of a Gwatney car dealership. News reports are identifying him as Tim Johnson, 50, of Searcy. According to one report, unconfirmed he was a body shop worker at a Gwatney dealership in Sherwood. A woman who answered the phone there hung up after issuing a no comment to a question. A Little Rock police spokesman, however, told Arkansas Business that the shooter was not a Gwatney dealership employee.

RTT News (a source I am not familiar with) cites police sources as confirming Johnson as the shooter.

Posted by: Confederate Yankee at 12:54 PM | Comments (8) | Add Comment
Post contains 433 words, total size 4 kb.

Our buddy Jules Crittenden married up quite well, but did you know she could write, too?

"Tethered " is her new novel, and it appears to be attracting some buzz.

Proud husband Jules gushes here.

Posted by: Confederate Yankee at 11:38 AM | Comments (3) | Add Comment
Post contains 41 words, total size 1 kb.

Sorry to whiz in the conspiracyverse's corn flakes, but here's one anti-Obama rumor conclusively put to rest.

Now if we can just get other folks to drop their quixotic quests to target Obama over inane technicalities, we can more focus on dismantling him based upon things that actually matter, such as his character, his experience, his associations, and his radical political goals.

Posted by: Confederate Yankee at 12:14 PM | Comments (6) | Add Comment
Post contains 70 words, total size 1 kb.

If he's superstitious about the old wives tale of deaths coming in threes, Samuel L. Jackson should be very afraid. Jackon's movie Soul Men is in post-production. Also starring in Soul Men?

Bernie Mac and Isaac Hayes.

Posted by: Confederate Yankee at 11:36 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 47 words, total size 1 kb.

Via WRAL:

Mohammed Taheri-azar, the man accused of trying to run over students at UNC-Chapel Hill two years ago, pleaded guilty Tuesday morning to nine counts of attempted first-degree murder.

He will be sentenced later this month.

Taheri-azar was accused of driving a Jeep Cherokee through The Pit, a popular student gathering space on campus, in March 2006.

He was charged with nine counts of attempted murder. At the time of the attack, Taheri-azar told police he wanted to injure people in response to the U.S. government's treatment of Muslims abroad.

This is the Pit, the area where Taheri-azar, a UNC graduate, tried to kill his fellow students. In a March 5, 2007 court appearance he stated he "hates all Americans" and "hates all Jews."

Shockingly, the Iranian-born American citizen didn't hate American enough to leave it.

Posted by: Confederate Yankee at 10:06 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 147 words, total size 1 kb.

Your latest global warming hysteria, courtesy of one Oliver Tickell:

We need to get prepared for four degrees of global warming, Bob Watson told the Guardian last week. At first sight this looks like wise counsel from the climate science adviser to Defra. But the idea that we could adapt to a 4C rise is absurd and dangerous. Global warming on this scale would be a catastrophe that would mean, in the immortal words that Chief Seattle probably never spoke, "the end of living and the beginning of survival" for humankind. Or perhaps the beginning of our extinction.

The collapse of the polar ice caps would become inevitable, bringing long-term sea level rises of 70-80 metres. All the world's coastal plains would be lost, complete with ports, cities, transport and industrial infrastructure, and much of the world's most productive farmland. The world's geography would be transformed much as it was at the end of the last ice age, when sea levels rose by about 120 metres to create the Channel, the North Sea and Cardigan Bay out of dry land. Weather would become extreme and unpredictable, with more frequent and severe droughts, floods and hurricanes. The Earth's carrying capacity would be hugely reduced. Billions would undoubtedly die.

Why, isn't that just peachy?

Tickell's solution to the problem? He doesn't actually have one, but he won't tell you that because he's busy whoring a book, trying to cash in on the fear to the same easily-fooled people who bought into the end of the world event known as Y2K... and we know how that turned out.

Here's the facts, folks.

The temperature of the Earth rose nearly one whole degree over the past century, but has actually been falling for the past decade (PDF).

As it now stands, the global temperature now is roughly near the median temperature of the last 2,400 years.

The highest temperatures, as recorded via the chemical record of deep-core Greenland glaciers, were during the height of the Roman Empire. Obviously, this was due to Nero's fiddling while Rome burned fossil fuels.

Over a longer-term view, the relative stability of the global temperature during the most recent interglacial period is more pronounced.

Again, current global temperatures are roughly around the median temperature of the past 10,000 years. Thag the caveman must have had a Buick.

Now let us look at the past 100,000 years, so that we understood how good we've had it as humans—there wasn't a bikini season for the previous 90,000 years.

"Ah-hah!" I can hear Global Warming true believers shouting. "See how the rise of human civilization coincides with global warming? Die, Heretic!" Rest assured I will at some point, but it most likely won't be because of global warming, as an even longer view reveals. Let's look back 420,000 years.

I'm pretty sure we weren't burning many fossil fuels way back when, as "we" didn't exist.

Once again, global temperatures seem to be part of a natural, poorly understood cycle, and our current interglacial period seems ominously close to being at an end.

I'll now turn you over to Drs. Richard A. Muller and Gordon J. MacDonald, whose charts I've been so shamelessly borrowing thus far from the introduction of Ice Ages and Astronomical Causes: data, spectral analysis, and mechanisms, for the big let down for the Global Warming Faithful.

From this plot, it is clear that most of the last 420 thousand years (420 kyr) was spent in ice age. The brief periods when the record peaks above the zero line, the interglacials, typically lasted from a few thousand to perhaps twenty thousand years.

These data should frighten you. All of civilization developed during the last interglacial, and the data show that such interglacials are very brief. Our time looks about up. Data such as these are what led us to state, in the Preface, that the next ice age is about to hit us, any millennium now. It does not take a detailed theory to make this prediction. We don't necessarily know why the next ice age is imminent (at least on a geological time scale), but the pattern is unmistakable.

The real reason to be frightened is that we really don't understand what causes the pattern. We don't know why the ice ages are broken by the short interglacials. We do know something – that the driving force is astronomical. We’ll describe how we know that in Chapter 2. We have models that relate the astronomical mechanisms to changes in climate, but we don't know which of our models are right, or if any of them are. We will discuss these models in some detail in this book. Much of the work of understanding lies in the future. It is a great field for a young student to enter.

Muller and MacDonald end their book's introduction noting that we'll probably see gradual rises in temperature through the middle of this century, but the historical record suggests that it is a cooling, nor a warming, that is in the Earth's future, and that the mechanisms are not understood, clearly predate human influence, and that there is absolutely nothing we can do about it.

Feel free to disagree. However, as you run to higher ground, please just leave me the keys to the beach house, will you?

Posted by: Confederate Yankee at 09:19 AM | Comments (4) | Add Comment
Post contains 915 words, total size 6 kb.

Richard Serrano published a story in the Los Angeles on Sunday entitled U.S. guns arm Mexican drug cartels.

In a marked improvement in the accuracy of Times stories, Serrano did not utter a factual inaccuracy until the third word of the article's first sentence.

High-powered automatic weapons and ammunition are flowing virtually unchecked from border states into Mexico, fueling a war among drug traffickers, the army and police that has left thousands dead, according to U.S. and Mexican officials.

The rifles being picked up along the border are of course not automatic weapons—machine guns—but are instead semi-automatic weapons which fire one bullet per trigger pull.

Further down in the article Serrano relates without question the claim that the FN Five-seveN pistol is armor-piercing, without bothering to see if armor-piercing ammunition is available for the pistols in the United States... and of course, it isn't, being barred for all but military and police sale by federal law.

Being ever helpful, I sent Mr. Serrano an email explaining where his story was wrong and needed corrections. Serrano has thus far neither responded, nor corrected his article.

In hopes of spurring some sort of interest in correcting the article, I emailed the National section editors of the Times, and made the radical suggestion that for future articles, they may want to consider interviewing actual gun experts instead of Mexican drug dealers when discussing the capabilities of firearms.

I doubt they'll listen to such suggestions, but we can always hope.

Posted by: Confederate Yankee at 03:36 PM | Comments (6) | Add Comment
Post contains 260 words, total size 2 kb.

Unable to beat the Israeli Defense Forces via conventional tactics, the crack Hamas Line Dancing Battalion prepares for an achy-breaky cross border raid.

Posted by: Confederate Yankee at 11:37 AM | Comments (6) | Add Comment
Post contains 29 words, total size 1 kb.

Sadly, he appears to be serious:

In classic "Wag The Dog" scenario there is a neat little war brewing between American and Russian proxies, and real Russian troops, in the Caucacus Mountains on the Russian border.

It couldn't come at a better time for the Republicans.

McCain gets to act and talk tough against the Russians, while Obama is on vacation in Hawaii, issuing "can't we all get along statements."

It perfectly augments Republican campaign points: Obama is not ready. He is not tough, experienced enough to deal with a dangerous world.

Do you appreciate the power and planning that went into this? I don't think you do.

Not only did McCain engineer the the build-up of Russian forces along the border of South Ossetia and Abkhazia, he also orchestrated the Georgian offer of a ceasefire last week, the South Ossetia separatist's response of shelling Georgia, and the Georgian counterstrike that triggered the pre-planned Russian invasion— all carefully timed to coincide with Barack Obama's vacation.

As it is obvious to see, thousands of people have been killed and a country invaded and ripped apart, just to give John McCain a chance to sound tough. But the plot is even more insidious than HuffPo author Blake Fleetwood suggests.

Not only did McCain carefully orchestrate three armed forces in two countries in such a way that it looked like they were acting selfishly in their own best interests instead of as agents of a U.S. Presidential campaign, he also managed to convince Barack Obama to give a spineless response that made McCain sound like a far more knowledgeable, experienced, and competent leader that Obama has ever pretended to be.

The kicker?

In the absolutely most fantabulous move of all, McCain then convinced Obama to flip-flop on his previous spineless position to poorly echo McCain's stance, reinforcing it as the correct one, while gutting his own credibility and showing himself to be hopelessly incapable of performing as a President.

John McCain: He bends steel and breaks candidates and countries with his mind.

Posted by: Confederate Yankee at 10:25 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 355 words, total size 2 kb.

Sadly, he appears to be serious:

In classic "Wag The Dog" scenario there is a neat little war brewing between American and Russian proxies, and real Russian troops, in the Caucacus Mountains on the Russian border.

It couldn't come at a better time for the Republicans.

McCain gets to act and talk tough against the Russians, while Obama is on vacation in Hawaii, issuing "can't we all get along statements."

It perfectly augments Republican campaign points: Obama is not ready. He is not tough, experienced enough to deal with a dangerous world.

Do you appreciate the power and planning that went into this? I don't think you do.

Not only did McCain engineer the build-up of Russian forces along the border of South Ossetia and Abkhazia, he also orchestrated the Georgian offer of a ceasefire last week, the South Ossetia separatist's response of shelling Georgia, and the Georgian counterstrike that triggered the pre-planned Russian invasion— all carefully timed to coincide with Barack Obama's vacation.

As it is obvious to see, thousands of people have been killed and a country invaded and ripped apart, just to give John McCain a chance to sound tough. But the plot is even more insidious than HuffPo author Blake Fleetwood suggests.

Not only did McCain carefully orchestrate three armed forces in two countries in such a way that it looked like they were acting selfishly in their own best interests instead of as agents of a U.S. Presidential campaign, he also managed to convince Barack Obama to give a spineless response that made McCain sound like a far more knowledgeable, experienced, and competent leader that OBama has ever pretended to be.

The kicker?

In the absolutely most fantabulous move of all, McCain then convinced Obama to flip-flop on his previous spineless position to poorly echo McCain's stance, reinforcing it as the correct one, while gutting his own credibility and showing himself to be hopelessly incapable of performing as a President.

John McCain. He bends steel and breaks candidates and countries with his mind.

Posted by: Confederate Yankee at 10:25 AM | Comments (17) | Add Comment
Post contains 354 words, total size 2 kb.

From Russia, With Love.

Or As Barack Obama's childhood mentor "Uncle" Frank would say, Smash On Victory-Eating Red Army.

And as a bona fide imperialist war for oil intensifies, the progressive Left remains strangely muted.

Update: As his meager voting record show, he doesn't have what it takes to be a leader, but Barack Obama makes a great follower.

Posted by: Confederate Yankee at 07:44 AM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 63 words, total size 1 kb.

There is the claim that Barack Obama took an anecdote in The Audacity of Hope from a story told about G. Gordon Liddy in All the President's Men from 1976, or perhaps 1962's Lawrence of Arabia.

The YouTube video comes courtesy of the G. Gordon Liddy show, so it is rather obvious which source he'd prefer Obama cite, but I'm not willing to to say Obama necessarily borrowed this story. The only reason this claim merits a second look is the fact that Obama used the words of his friend Deval Patrick on several occasions without immediate attribution.

I've seen similar firsthand stupid tricks at parties and bars from high school through college, performed by young men fueled with testosterone and alcohol and a momentarly lapse of common sense. This form of a tough guy routine, followed with some sort of gritty catch phrase, is almost certainly older than Obama or Liddy or Lawrence of Arabia, and I would not be surprised at all to discover similar acts of bravado in ancient Greece or Rome.

Posted by: Confederate Yankee at 06:56 PM | Comments (10) | Add Comment
Post contains 183 words, total size 1 kb.

1 A psuedo-macho anecdote may be a trifle, but what if he IS just remembering that scene from elsewhere? What else has been pilfered?

Posted by: DoorHold at August 10, 2008 11:31 AM (RyoGi)

2 Actually, there was a famous Gaius Mucius Scaevola of Rome who burnt his hand in the fire to show that he was fearless.

Posted by: Nikolay at August 11, 2008 09:01 AM (RNpZs)

3 Here is a link to the full scene from Lawrence of Arabia. It's has more similarity than the scene from All the President's Men. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tY6iKJn-HK4

Posted by: Eric at August 12, 2008 09:52 AM (fF2Om)

4 hi there,

Posted by: renghator at August 14, 2008 02:18 AM (FSRIz)

5 great site,

Posted by: joshuaez at August 14, 2008 02:19 AM (FSRIz)

6 hello,

Posted by: ganry at August 14, 2008 03:18 AM (FSRIz)

7 hi there,

Posted by: ganjaboy at August 14, 2008 04:19 AM (FSRIz)

8 hello, buy site soma, xalvr, information on soma, 93091,

Posted by: boy at August 14, 2008 04:19 AM (FSRIz)

9 hi there, carisoprodol drug soma, > )), cheap fioricet, 7915,

Posted by: crazy at August 14, 2008 05:19 AM (FSRIz)

10 hi there,

Posted by: sad at August 14, 2008 05:19 AM (FSRIz)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

The funny thing about true believers of any religion is how accidentally appropriate their signs and symbols may be seen by others. The L.A.-based ad agency sees—uh—"people coming together" for Obama.

Those of us who aren't as in love with the Freshman Senator would rather not grasp the symbolism.

Update Baldilocks finds a creepy Star Trek parallel.

This is a little closer to the reality he promises:

Next Up: His new campaign song, Don't Fear the Reamer.

Posted by: Confederate Yankee at 10:21 PM | Comments (26) | Add Comment
Post contains 81 words, total size 1 kb.

A man has be arrested for making threats against Barack Obama.

Notice any difference in how the story is told, however?

CNN's version:

A man is being held in Florida on charges he threatened to assassinate Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama, according to court documents.

An affidavit filed by a Secret Service agent in U.S. District Court claims that Raymond Hunter Geisel, of Marathon, Florida, threatened to "kill, kidnap and cause bodily harm upon a major candidate for president of the United States, that is, Senator Barack Obama."

The affidavit says Geisel made the threats while attending a bail bondsman training class in Miami.

During an interview with the Secret Service, Geisel denied threatening Obama, but told agents that "if he wanted to kill Senator Obama he would simply shoot him with a sniper rifle."

He later said that comment was a joke, the agent said in the document.

AP's version:

A man who authorities said was keeping weapons and military-style gear in his hotel room and car appeared in court Thursday on charges he threatened to assassinate Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama.

Raymond Hunter Geisel, 22, was arrested by the Secret Service on Saturday in Miami and was ordered held at Miami's downtown detention center without bail Thursday by a federal magistrate.

A Secret Service affidavit charges that Geisel made the threat during a training class for bail bondsmen in Miami in late July. According to someone else in the 48-member class, Geisel allegedly referred to Obama with a racial epithet and continued, "If he gets elected, I'll assassinate him myself."

Obama was most recently in Florida on Aug. 1-2 but did not visit the South Florida area.

Another person in the class quoted Geisel as saying that "he hated George W. Bush and that he wanted to put a bullet in the president's head," according to the Secret Service.

Geisel denied in a written statement to a Secret Service agent that he ever made those threats, and the documents don't indicate that he ever took steps to carry out any assassination. He was charged only with threatening Obama, the presumptive Democratic nominee, but not for any threat against President Bush.

Geisel's court-appointed attorney declined comment.

In the interview with a Secret Service agent, Geisel said "if he wanted to kill Senator Obama he simply would shoot him with a sniper rifle, but then he claimed that he was just joking," according to court documents.

A search of Geisel's 1998 Ford Explorer and hotel room in Miami uncovered a loaded 9mm handgun, knives, dozens of rounds of ammunition including armor-piercing types, body armor, military-style fatigues and a machete. The SUV was wired with flashing red and yellow emergency lights.

Geisel told the Secret Service he was originally from Bangor, Maine, and had been living recently in a houseboat in the Florida Keys town of Marathon, according to court documents. He said he used the handgun for training for the bail bondsman class, had the knives for protection and used the machete to cut brush in Maine.

In the affidavit, the Secret Service said Geisel told agents that he suffered from psychiatric problems including post-traumatic stress disorder, but he couldn't provide the names of any facilities where he sought treatment.

Sorry, AP, I don't want to get sued, but need the whole thing for comparative purposes.

The suspect also hated President Bush and is quoted as wanting to put a bullet in his head, so he's an equal opportunity assassination fantasist.

Why CNN didn't think that detail was newsworthy?

CBS 4's hack editing job was even worse, cutting the Bush reference out of the middle of the story but overlooking the reference in the last line:

Federal authorities in Florida are holding a man accused of threatening to assassinate Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama.

The man, Raymond Hunter Geisel, was ordered held without bail at a Thursday court hearing.

The Secret Service says Geisel made the threat while training to be a bail bondsman in Miami in late July. A search of Geisel's SUV and hotel room uncovered a loaded handgun, knives, dozens of rounds on ammunition, boy armor, and a machete. The SUV was also wired with emergency lights.

Geisel claims he's originally from Bangor, Maine. He said he made no threat against either Obama or the president.

I can only speculate as to why the media would remove the threat against Bush in these accounts. Is it because it is harder to portray Obama as the victim when he isn't the only one threatened, or just harder to sell the meme that the offender is probably a murderous racist when he threatens a white president as well?

Update: Updated to include AP's story. Will remove it if they ask.

Update: Interesting. After two hours of commenters blaming ignorant/racists/morons/Republicans/Hillary Clinton fans/Southerners/rednecks/anti-black/Fox News/Rush Limbaugh and white people in general, CNN shut down comments on their story at 6:45 PM, just two minutes after "hollowpoint" posted:

While he wasn't arrested for it, the racist nutjob also said that he'd like to put a bullet in Bush's headÂ… yet CNN doesn't feel that was relevent enough to include on their blog story? The extra two sentences would've taken up too many bytes?

Or was it that CNN wanted to portray the nutjob in question as a "typical" right wing racist who wanted to kill Obama? Letting your partisan mask slip a bit are you, CNN?

Given the nature of this election, don't even try to make the excuse that it wasn't relevant, or that the story as presented doesn't create a false impression of the man arrested.

Sometime later—perhaps the 8:19PM update now showing—CNN finally posted the entire story, including the threats made by the suspect against President Bush.

After 3-4 hours of letting half-truths percolate to establish the narrative, CNN then they filled in the rest of the story, after the damage was done.

They could have posted the correct story, the entire story, before 4:00 PM. CNN posted only part of the story, allowing paranoia, biases, and dark fantasies to fester. All of these raging emotions would have been muted, if not eliminated, if it was revealed what CNN know for the beginning, which was the fact that Bush was also a target of Geisel's rage.

CNN significantly altered a story to play upon people's fears.

That cannot lightly be excused.

Update: Curiouser and curiouser... you can still access the original URL of the CNN story at:
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/08/07/breaking-man-held-for-obama-assassination-threat/

Interestingly enough, however, if you go to the CNN Political Ticker and scroll down, the exact same story now has this URL:

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/08/08/new-details-man-held-for-alleged-obama-assassination-threat/

Perhaps most telling however, is that all the comments associated from the previous story—the racially-tinged, poltically motivated anger they helped generate with their selective editing"have not been ported over to the new URL.

The whitewash continues... and then gets worse.

Posted by: Confederate Yankee at 04:00 PM | Comments (32) | Add Comment
Post contains 1145 words, total size 8 kb.

After having Matthew Mosk's attack on John McCain discredited within hours yesterday, the Washington Post was forced into running this embarrassing correction to the A1 story.

Correction to This Article

An earlier version of this story about campaign donations that Florida businessman Harry Sargeant III raised for Sen. John McCain, former New York Mayor Rudolph Giuliani and Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton incorrectly identified three individuals as being among the donors Sargeant solicited on behalf of McCain. Those donors -- Rite Aid manager Ibrahim Marabeh, and lounge owners Nadia and Shawn Abdalla -- wrote checks to Giuliani and Clinton, not McCain. Also, the first name of Faisal Abdullah, a McCain donor, was misspelled in some versions of the story.

In other words, the premise of the entire article was fatally undermined because a Obama-supporting journalist and his editors didn't take the time to do the basic fact-checking Amanda Carpenter did in a matter of minutes.

The same "journalist", Mosk had attempted to smear McCain in a previous manufactured story about a land deal in May.

The Washington Post's editors, perhaps thinking they can save on the cost of paper and ink by adopting the editorial business practices of the New York Times, let Mosk go to print again today with another smear, one that amounted to stating that—gosh darn it!—there was nothing illegal going on with MCCain's fund-raising, but there should be:

Sargeant told The New York Times this morning that he at times left the task of collecting the checks to a longtime business partner, Mustafa Abu Naba'a. The problem with that is that Abu Naba'a is not an American citizen. According to court records, Abu Naba'a is a dual citizen of Jordan and the Dominican Republic.

The law on this question appears to be unclear, said Fred Wertheimer, a campaign finance expert who runs the advocacy group, Democracy 21.

"There's probably very little law on this," Wertheimer said. "If it is not illegal for a foreign national to bundle checks, it ought to be, since it's illegal for a foreign national to make contributions in the first place."

As even as Democracy 21 admits, there is nothing illegal about a legal foreign national collecting the legal contributions of law-abiding Americans for a Presidential candidate.

What is perhaps even more revealing that what they said, however, is Mosk's decision to use them as a source. Democracy 21 is a far left advocacy group, run by a former Democratic Senator Dick Clark, and is funded by both George Soros' Open Society Institute, and the Joyce Foundation—yes, where Barack Obama sat on the Board of Directors for eight years.

Mosk's choice of sources is only slightly more objective than contacting MoveOn.Org for their opinion.

Paul Ryan, a lawyer with the Campaign Legal Center, said the Federal Election Commission has not explicitly addressed the question. Ryan said there appeared to be conflicting thoughts on this in a 2004 advisory opinion. For instance, in one opinion the FEC has advised that it is permissible for a foreign national to solicit a contribution, while in another it prohibits foreign nationals from playing any role in participation in a candidate's election activities, such as decisions concerning the making of contributions.

"There's a little bit of tension between these two different interpretations," Ryan said.

Matthew Mosk hasn't been able to find a way to smear John McCain, despite three abortive attempts. The questions isn't so much why Mosk is against McCain, but why the editors of the Washington Post keep letting themselves be used as a platform for his specious attacks.

Posted by: Confederate Yankee at 01:28 PM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 608 words, total size 4 kb.

The Obamamessiah has spoken:

"America is Â…, uh, is no longer, uh Â… what it could be, what it once was. And I say to myself, I don't want that future for my children."

Hot Air caught the story, and has similar statements from American's favorite pessimist, Eeyore Michelle Obama.

For a couple who wants to lead this nation, the Obamas don't seem to have much faith in it.

Update: Yeah, it does sound like him:

"The Republic is no longer what it once was." - Palpatine/Darth Sidious in Star Wars: The Phantom Menace

Though in defense of Obama/Darth Tedious, Palpatine didn't have 20 years of influence from a kooky religion being drummed into his head telling him how horrible his country was...

Posted by: Confederate Yankee at 10:49 AM | Comments (34) | Add Comment
Post contains 141 words, total size 2 kb.

1 Bob- Obama: America Sucks, and Only I Can Save It Generally, that's the message of most non-incumbents. Additionally, would you argue that most people are happy with this country's current direction?

Posted by: D.N. Nation at August 07, 2008 01:34 PM (Ze19B)

2 McCain's latest batch of commercials say that Washington sucks and only he can fix it, but this may be too nuanced a difference for some people to pick up on.

Posted by: BohicaTwentyTwo at August 07, 2008 01:51 PM (oC8nQ)

3 I'm sorry. I missed the part where most of America is apparently happy with how things are, thereby invalidating Obama's statement. So if you and the other dead-enders want to run on that, good luck. Enjoy being backers of a regional party come 2009. The rest of us will be cleaning up the mess you and yours made.

Posted by: Dave at August 07, 2008 02:06 PM (foLN0)

4 Finally some decent links. Does anyone younger than John Sidney McCain really still say "blue picture" when they mean porn?

Posted by: Doctorb at August 07, 2008 02:21 PM (IqVw5)

5 "For a couple who wants to lead this nation, the Obamas don't seem to have much faith in it." Faith in the country? What does thinking that the country has been led in the wrong direction for the last 8 years (which based on Bush's approval ratings is a pretty good running point) have to do with faith that the country can't be better? Yes, the GOP has led this country into the toilet but that doesn't mean we have to sit around with shit on our faces for the next 4 years.

Posted by: Tom at August 07, 2008 02:27 PM (Lbkb5)

6 "The Republic is no longer what it once was." Isn't that the truth. Even the King Bush the First years were better. At least he was smart enough not to drag us into a 6 year war.

Posted by: Tom at August 07, 2008 02:29 PM (Lbkb5)

7 Thanks for underscoring the fundamental difference between liberals and conservatives,gentlemen. Conservatives think that Americans thrive despite the government. Liberals think the government is America.

Posted by: Confederate Yankee at August 07, 2008 02:35 PM (HcgFD)

8 Yes, the GOP certainly has America thriving these days, don't they?

Posted by: Dave at August 07, 2008 03:09 PM (foLN0)

9 Just wait till Obama takes office - then we'll see droves of conservatives bashing this country and talking of impending doom. And the howling and wailing and gnashing of teeth about abuses of execute power will be heard from the right wing for the first time in, well.. 8 years. They'll be screaming about domestic wiretapping and the need for Congressional oversight. Luckily we'll have their hypocrisy about all of these issues well documented, so it should be fun.

Posted by: Ted at August 07, 2008 03:13 PM (gJFD/)

10 "At least [GHWB] was smart enough not to drag us into a 6 year war." Psst. Don't tell anyone, but I doubt GWB would have "dragged" anyone anywhere if a little thing like four airplanes and their innocent passengers being commendeered as human-piloted bombs to kill thousands of other innocent people hadn't happened. I don't know, call me crazy but maybe a little thing like that coupled with Saddam's history or bloody, brutal action and poor judgement with an added dash of twelve years WMD non-cooperation and deception might have had something to do with deciding that entrusting national security to the word of a murderous dictator wasn't the most prudent course of action. Of course, don't let a little thing like objectivity ruin the ten-thousanth repetition of a variant to Bush joke #15.

Posted by: submandave at August 07, 2008 03:20 PM (lLS3Y)

11 So the pollsters find 80% think the country is going in the wrong direction. I'll bet they are split 40-40 as to which direction we should be going.

Posted by: Claude Hopper at August 07, 2008 03:23 PM (Z6fQ+)

12 Dave, the country would be doing well without the Democrats. No global warming BS. No energy crisis. Lower taxes, a solution to Social Security. Less government intrusion and a look to the future with foreign policy. One that does not poke ones head in the sand. And lastly, a vital and strong National Defense.

Posted by: Zelsdorf Ragshaft III at August 07, 2008 03:37 PM (J5AYY)

13 Zelsdorf, Really? Because it's the lack of a reasonable energy plan from the GOP that has us bending over to take it from the Saudis. And more drilling won't solve the problem. Lower taxes at the cost of ignoring infrastructure and running up the deficit makes lowering taxes pointless. Here's something to remember; there are TWO sides to the Laffer Curve. And yes, where would we be with the National Defense the GOP has given us, leaving the Army and Marines over-stretched and forced to accept recruits they'd have rejected less than 10 years ago? Based on your command of the facts, I can only assume you have joined us from an alternate universe where things over the past eight years have turned out differently.

Posted by: Dave at August 07, 2008 03:48 PM (foLN0)

14 Hey Dave - you might want to dial that back a little before it bites your hind end clean off. Clinton was the one that shrunk the military in the first place. And if drilling won't solve the problem of our using Saudi oil, what the hell will? I don't know about you, but my car doesn't run on unicorn farts. And the electrical grid over here in Connecticut would fold under the weight of a million plug-in hybrids, so that's kinda out. And I don't put much faith in "right direction/wrong direction" polls, as they never seem to ask these people what direction they think the country ought to be going.

Posted by: brian at August 07, 2008 04:08 PM (Pe8i3)

15 If you have a job (90% of America) the only thing that sucks for you is $4 gas and your house, if you own one, is worth less this year than 2 years ago. In both cases the policies of the Democrats are to blame. So if you think things suck then McCain is obviously the better choice ...

Posted by: Jeff at August 07, 2008 04:12 PM (zQ0HK)

16 Lol. Man, poke a hive full of Obamacons and you can get stung, huh? At least they are getting some accurate information for a change.

Posted by: Darth Tedious at August 07, 2008 04:25 PM (Z/5Pq)

17 I can't believe that people are giving Obama flak for daring to suggest that we should work to improve America. Conservatives are like parents who think that loving their kid means never criticizing him or her, even when they do poorly in school or get in trouble. When the truth is if you really want to show your kid how much you love them, your will criticize their behavior and demand more from them. A truly loving parent is one who gets a report card full of B +'s and says "you can do better." The opposite of love isn't hate, it's indifference. And if you are indifferent to America, you'll say "that's good enough." But if you really love America, you will hold her to a higher standard. In fact, you will hold her to the HIGHEST of standards. And that is precisely what Obama is doing here. I don't want a president who is indifferent to America. I want someone who loves America so much that they only demand to utmost of excellence from her in every regard. And the best way you can show your love to your country is much the same you show love to your kid: through criticism and nudges towards improvement.

Posted by: Justfinethanks at August 07, 2008 04:34 PM (iodlf)

18 'Pollsters say Americans feel that the country is headed in the wrong direction . . .' Well, lets see: We have a Democrat controlled House and Senate, and could very likely elect a Democrat president this fall. Yep. Sounds like we are headed in the wrong direction.

Posted by: wheatley at August 07, 2008 05:10 PM (g/MKW)

19 Justfinethanks: You're actually a lot closer to the McCain camp than you think. I don't think anyone here is criticizing Sen. Obama for wanting to hold America to a high standard. Anyone who loves America and has high hopes for America's future would do that -- and that goes for Democrats and Republicans alike. Where the two sides differ is in what standards to hold America to -- is universal health care more important than tight border security? -- and how to go about it. Reasonable people can (and should!) differ about such things. If you're looking for a Presidential candidate who is not "indifferent to America", but rather "loves America so much", then take another look at Sen. McCain. He loved America enough to bleed and suffer for it. I can't think of a single thing that Sen. Obama has done for his country that Sen. McCain hasn't done more of. Yes, Sen. Obama sure talks purty; that, I think, is what this blog post is making fun of -- his pleasant-sounding platitudes, which, admittedly, we hear plenty of from both sides. But what has Sen. Obama DONE to show his love for America? Basically, he's told us to take it on faith. McCain doesn't do that; he doesn't need to. His love for America is obvious to anyone who knows even a little bit about him. respectfully, Daniel in Brookline

Posted by: Daniel in Brookline at August 07, 2008 05:13 PM (ETuqd)

20 What part of hopey changey aren't you getting, Bob? And why haven't you touched your kool-aid?

Posted by: Bel Aire at August 07, 2008 05:41 PM (ocHBO)

21 I did read about McCain's years in the Hanoi Hilton, and it is doubtlessly inspiring. And I wasn't implying that McCain doesn't love his country. I was more poking fun at our esteemed blogger for stupidly claiming that criticizing America somehow shows a lack of faith in it. Plus as you pointed out, every one on both sides of the aisle criticizes America. I don't think there has been as congressman in history who has ever said "You know what? America's finally perfect. Let's never pass another piece of legislation ever again."

Posted by: Justfinethanks at August 07, 2008 05:51 PM (iodlf)

22 "So this is how liberty dies... with thunderous applause." - Padme Amidala

Posted by: ignatov at August 07, 2008 06:14 PM (uDJ23)

23 Justfinethanks, you don't actually have any kids, do you???

Posted by: Mary in LA at August 07, 2008 06:41 PM (NGf/6)

24 I have a daughter. I'm not one of those childless people who feels like they have license to criticize parents. In fact, I like to think I have earned my license.

Posted by: Justfinethanks at August 07, 2008 07:08 PM (iodlf)

25 You need to read more, Justfine. But the taking out after Barack Obama for his middle name is the most heinous attack I've seen against a Democratic candidate since Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. was attacked for his alleged sexual prowess with women not his wife. I guess since we have continued to hold Republican racists' feet to the fire the right-wing wacko machine has to find another tactic by which to attack the rising young Democratic star. The line being forwarded by the likes of Ed Rogers and other Republicans, if only by cowardly inference, is that Senator Obama may call himself a Christian, but he's actually a Muslim out to do the U.S.A. harm through his masquerade of faith. Posted by: C-C-G at August 7, 2008 09:55 PM Maybe you're unfamiliar with the term "censored," C-C-G. However, JfT spelled it out pretty clearly if you look. So maybe you could show exactly where in that quote Taylor Marsh said "you should be FORCED to stop emphasizing his middle name."

Posted by: skylark at August 08, 2008 12:43 AM (BKwMs)

26 JfT - Your response was better.

Posted by: skylark at August 08, 2008 01:13 AM (BKwMs)

27 Justfine, your knowledge of your preferred candidate's statements is appalling. Back in May, on ABC's Good Morning America, a national TV show, Obama told people to "lay off my wife." This was, of course, after she had made campaign appearances for him and faced criticism for her statements. The logical conclusion is easy to see. Obama doesn't like criticism of what his wife says when she is campaigning for him. I will now accept a full apology.

Posted by: C-C-G at August 08, 2008 07:23 AM (irkBP)

28 submandave - I know this is hard for you right-wingers to get into your head, but Sadaam had NOTHING to do with 9/11. That was crap made up by our glorious leader Bush the Second. And Sadaam had nothing to do with the anthrax attacks. That was an American citizen who worked for George the Second. And if you really think that GWB believed that Sadaam was involved in either of those things then you must really think he is the stupidest man on the planet. Invading Iraq had nothing to do with the security of the US and have EVERYTHING to do with making George the Second's friends very, very wealthy.

Posted by: Tom at August 08, 2008 08:55 AM (Lbkb5)

29 When was America what it used to be?

Posted by: daleyrocks at August 08, 2008 09:49 AM (i/fLn)

30 Can someone provide a cite for the claim that the quote “The Republic is no longer what it once was” came from Star Wars? Yesterday, I did a Google search and came up with one hit, the Intapundit item. Today, there are seven, but all derived from that one hit. I wrote to Glenn, urging him to check it out, but no response. It may be true, I’m not Star wars expert, but I’m surprised that it doesn’t show up in a Google search.

Posted by: Phil at August 08, 2008 11:06 AM (39DNf)

31 Simple enough. Find the Phantom Menace script, and do a search for "The Republic is."

Posted by: Confederate Yankee at August 08, 2008 11:32 AM (xNV2a)

32 submandave - I know this is hard for you right-wingers to get into your head, but Sadaam had NOTHING to do with 9/11. That was crap made up by our glorious leader Bush the Second. He didn't have to, Tom ... I know how hard it is for y'all to believe the simple is true, but it is Just. That. Simple. Saddam had everything Afghanistan did, including a hatred for America and an abject lack of respect for life and liberty, both demonstrated repeatedly over his entire rule. Yet you'd ask us to continue to trust thugs like that, after 911? And Sadaam had nothing to do with the anthrax attacks. That was an American citizen who worked for George the Second. I don't think that anyone here is definitely saying that the anthrax attacks were Saddam's doing ... OTOH, are you implying a link between the President and the alleged perpetrator? Care to provide some proof? And if you really think that GWB believed that Sadaam was involved in either of those things then you must really think he is the stupidest man on the planet. Invading Iraq had nothing to do with the security of the US and have EVERYTHING to do with making George the Second's friends very, very wealthy. Wrong ... for we have seen how the greedy were acting at that time. They were hip-deep in Crude-for-Food. If the President was as greedy as you say, he would have avoided a messy war, waded right in ... and enriched his friends while possibly scoring a Nobel like Gore and Carter for his efforts in the name of "peace". Methinks instead, that your criticism of this Administration is not based in a sincere concern for life and liberty ... but just like almost every other Leftist I've debated, it is based in an obsession with denigrating all aspects of the conservative worldview ... with the objective of fomenting radical change to produce a society where you can freely scream "NO ONE CAN TELL ME WHAT TO DO!", while muzzling others who do as little as suggesting alternatives to objectively-irresponsible behavior ... and confiscating what wealth they have, to use in celebrating and subsidizing such behavior.

Posted by: Rich Casebolt at August 08, 2008 11:37 AM (FL9H9)

33 OK, I see - the phrase is "the Republic is not what it once was" I was searching for the phrase used by the Instapundit reader: "the Republic is no longer what it once was"

Posted by: Phil at August 08, 2008 12:31 PM (39DNf)

34 He didn't have to, Tom ... I know how hard it is for y'all to believe the simple is true, but it is Just. That. Simple. Saddam had everything Afghanistan did, including a hatred for America and an abject lack of respect for life and liberty, both demonstrated repeatedly over his entire rule. I have often wondered what it is with the right-wing that feels they have to attack anyone who MIGHT be a threat (as long as they have oil - let's not attack North Korea that actually was developing nuclear weapons). But thanks to your post I now understand it. It is fear. You guys are just big cowards. I live in NYC. I worked in the World Trade Center but I never felt so afraid of what Sadaam might do that I demanded we invade. I was never afraid of that ass and never felt that he was a threat to us. The guy who was actually a threat, Osama bin Laden is still alive and happily planning to kill Americans. When do we take him down? I don't think that anyone here is definitely saying that the anthrax attacks were Saddam's doing ... OTOH, are you implying a link between the President and the alleged perpetrator? Care to provide some proof? Sure. George W. Bush is the president of the United States and Bruce Ivins was an employee of the US government. And when Ivins released his anthrax, the president of the US claimed that this was further proof that the US needed to invade Iraq. Fairly convenient timing, don't you think? It certainly is much better proof than CY normally uses to prove that the media wants to elect Obama. And if anyone is still saying that Sadaam had anything to do with the anthrax attacks then they are truly stupid.

Posted by: Tom at August 08, 2008 03:01 PM (Lbkb5)

Hide Comments | Add Comment