Say Anything Blog

There’s one Democrat who would seem to have little or no chance of being picked by Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) to be his running mate – his former opponent, Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.).

But it’s not for the reason you think.

Could it be the lackluster performance of ‘support’ she has given to him?

What she has said on the campaign trail when running against him?

The fact that she still calls Obama, her ‘opponent?’

No?

“She was never vetted,” a Democratic official reported. “She was not asked for a single piece of paper. She and Senator Obama have never had a single conversation about it. How would he know if she’d take it?”

The official also said Clinton never met with Obama’s vetting team of Eric Holder and Caroline Kennedy.

And the official said she was never asked for medical records or for any financial 2008 information about her or former President Bill Clinton. The last information the couple has disclosed about taxes and financial holdings was for 2007.

The Clintons also were not asked about donors to the William J. Clinton Presidential Library.

“This would be the biggest leap of faith ever,” the official said. “She’s waiting for the text message like everyone else.”

Link

SHE was never vetted....

Reverse rolls, America and Obama, OBAMA has never been vetted.....

“This would be the biggest leap of faith ever,”

Are willing to take that leap of faith?

Obviously Obama isn’t....why should we?

If your in San Antonio and happened to be filling up with Premium at Dill Food Market, you might have found the deal of a life time.

The manager says no one reported the error in premium gasoline price, which was supposed to be $3.89 (that is still CHEAP compared to Michigan).

If you were filling up before the problem was fixed, you got yourself a great deal of getting Premium Gasoline at 38 Cents a Gallon.

That’s right, 38 cents.

Duke says the “pump malfunction” involving a misplaced decimal point was fixed by Wednesday afternoon.

Nobody reported the mistake, which WOAI-AM reported apparently started Tuesday afternoon.

Link

I wouldn’t have either (reported the mistake), but I sure would be filling up quick like.

Duke said he noticed a lot of vehicles were being filled with premium and people were paying at the pump. He went out to check Wednesday and noticed the price error.

Doesn’t gas prices show inside also where they do pre-pay for pumps?

Needless to say, the business lost quite a bit of money and have not yet tallied the amount lost because of the ‘glitch.’

How honest are you.....

Would you have told them about the glitch?

I have run across more than a few that have claimed many portions of Obama records have not been released.

Is this true?

1. Occidental College records—Not released

2. Columbia College records—Not released

3. Columbia Thesis paper—“not available”

4. Harvard College records—Not released

5. Selective Service Registration—Not released

6. Medical records—Not released

7. Illinois State Senate schedule—“not available”

8. Law practice client list—Not released

9. Certified Copy of original Birth certificate—Not released

10. Embossed, signed paper Certification of Live Birth—Not released

11. Harvard Law Review articles published—None

12. University of Chicago scholarly articles—None

The question isn’t an attack, but a query, is the above TRUE?

Has he not been vetted, or has he been given a pass on this information or lack of information?

Interesting article to read on some of this: HERE

Now I am not sure if this is just conspiracy theory or not, but something interesting none the less:

Independent analysts, working separately, claim to have discovered that the original Hawaiian Certificate of Live Birth used in the fabrication of the Barack Obama “birth certificate” belongs to the Presidential candidate’s younger half-sister, Maya.

Examining the high resolution image originally posted by the “Daily Kos” left-wing blog and subsequently claimed as authentic by the campaign, and posted in lower resolution on the campaign official “Fight the Smears” website, at least two analysts have been able to independently discern the name “Maya Kassandra Soetoro” from artifacts left behind in the process of forging a new fake document for Barack from an image of Maya’s original document. Additional confirmatory information, such as her birthday and the nationality of her father have also been resurrected. A full report documenting all details is to be published in the coming days. Israel Insider has not yet seen proof that would validate the claim.

LINK

If this is true, and I say IF, does this automatically disqualify Obama as President?

Does that make Hillary the new candidate or do the Democrats have to go through the process again?

Also, if this is true, does Obama have to step down as a US Senator?

I am curious of what the repercussions of something like would be if found to be true.

Campaigning for Republican John McCain in York, Pa., Tuesday, Lieberman appeared to question Obama’s patriotism when he called the election a choice “between one candidate, John McCain, who has always put his country first, worked across party lines to get things done, and one candidate that has not.”

Link


First, not sure where the article comes up with Lieberman questioning Obama’s patriotism, he never said anything about that.

What he does say, is that McCain has reached out across party lines to put this country first, while Obama has not.

For all of Obama’s rhetoric about reaching across party lines / bringing sides together, he has done no such thing.

While McCain has reached across the aisle far more often than Conservatives like, even to the point of rebuking Republicans and praising Democrats, much to Republican's dismay. Which is another reason why he is not doing as great (McCain), because of such actions he has sorely tested the Conservatives, and thier support.

“You’re right,” Pelosi said. “Joe Lieberman has said things that are totally irresponsible when it comes to Barack Obama. Here we have a leader for the future, really a great leader for the future and one that comes along only every now and then, and they know it so they have to undermine him. And one of their best weapons, of course, is someone who is considered by some to be a Democrat.”

I like the end statement, considered by SOME to be a Democrat. Doesn’t sound like it is something she considers.

So, did Lieberman LIE?

Was this totally irresponsible to point out the difference between who reaches across the aisle to get things done and who doesn’t?

But she warned that Lieberman’s top spot on the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee could be in jeopardy next year if the Democrats gain seats in the Senate in November.

“The Democrats in the Senate are in a tough spot. They have 51 votes. Joe Lieberman organizes with them,” she said. “In 85 days or something, they will have five more Democrats they won’t need him to make the majority. And it will be interesting to see what the leadership in the Senate, the Democratic leadership in the Senate, does at that point in terms of Joe Lieberman’s chairmanship of his committee.”

Only reason Lieberman is tolerated now by the democrats, is because he normally votes thier way (except on the war), but if they gain a few more seats, they won’t need him. It will be interesting to see the venom of the democrats against him when he is no longer needed.

Lastly.....

Pressed about whether Hillary Clinton could have been more gracious to Obama, the San Francisco Democrat responded, “I think Hillary Clinton has been very gracious. I think some of her supporters have been less than gracious.”

I am curious about what she means by “gracious”.

I am sure Hillary supporters are not going to like this being said about them and might just irritate them a bit more.

As for Hillary in all this, I don’t think she is done yet. I think Obama may have a surprise coming.......

Myth of Consensus Explodes: APS Opens Global Warming Debate

“Considerable presence” of skeptics

The American Physical Society, an organization representing nearly 50,000 physicists, has reversed its stance on climate change and is now proclaiming that many of its members disbelieve in human-induced global warming. The APS is also sponsoring public debate on the validity of global warming science.  The leadership of the society had previously called the evidence for global warming “incontrovertible.”

LINK


I believe that bears repeating in case you missed it....


..an organization representing nearly 50,000 physicists, has reversed its stance on climate change and is now proclaiming that many of its members disbelieve in human-induced global warming.

But...but...but.....The Debate is over!!!!

Hardly, and I think about 50,000 physicists say the debate hasn’t even begun yet. But it will.

In a posting to the APS forum, editor Jeffrey Marque explains,"There is a considerable presence within the scientific community of people who do not agree with the IPCC conclusion that anthropogenic CO2 emissions are very probably likely to be primarily responsible for global warming that has occurred since the Industrial Revolution.”

The APS is opening its debate with the publication of a paper by Lord Monckton of Brenchley, which concludes that climate sensitivity—the rate of temperature change a given amount of greenhouse gas will cause—has been grossly overstated by IPCC modeling.  A low sensitivity implies additional atmospheric CO2 will have little effect on global climate.

Larry Gould, Professor of Physics at the University of Hartford and Chairman of the New England Section of the APS, called Monckton’s paper an “expose of the IPCC that details numerous exaggerations and “extensive errors”

In an email to DailyTech, Monckton says, “I was dismayed to discover that the IPCC’s 2001 and 2007 reports did not devote chapters to the central ‘climate sensitivity’ question, and did not explain in proper, systematic detail the methods by which they evaluated it. When I began to investigate, it seemed that the IPCC was deliberately concealing and obscuring its method.”

According to Monckton, there is substantial support for his results, “in the peer-reviewed literature, most articles on climate sensitivity conclude, as I have done, that climate sensitivity must be harmlessly low.”

Monckton, who was the science advisor to Britain’s Thatcher administration, says natural variability is the cause of most of the Earth’s recent warming.  “In the past 70 years the Sun was more active than at almost any other time in the past 11,400 years ... Mars, Jupiter, Neptune’s largest moon, and Pluto warmed at the same time as Earth.”

C’mon Global Alarmists, break out the pitchforks and pickets, scream at him that he is a flat earther, a denier, that he should be jailed for not being a believer!!!

Get the police so you can Jail these Deniers and try them for high crimes against humanity and nature, because they are on par with Holocaust Deniers.

But what are they going to blame kidney stones on?

Got kidney stones? Blame global warming study says.

At least they will have serious debates on Global Warming and not have this type of idiocy:


Click image for story.

Or Television Sets Cause Global Warming

Except when tuned to anything but Fox right?

In all seriousness, the debate has yet to start, and what you are seeing is not a consensus, but a very large group and growing of people who do not bow at the altar of the Goracle.

DAYTONA BEACH, Fla.—A police lieutenant in Daytona Beach was fired over accusations that he threatened slower emergency response times if he was not given complimentary specialty Starbucks coffee drinks.

However, when recently denied free coffee from new management, Garvin allegedly told managers that he could change the police department’s response time if they refuse to give him complimentary drinks.

Garvin is accused of saying, “If something happens, either we can respond really fast or we could respond really slow. I’ve been coming here for years and I’ve been getting whatever I want. I’m the difference between you getting a two-minute response time, if you needed a little help, or a 15 minutes response time.”

Corrupt cops are not needed.

When a police officer, especially a Lieutenant, threatens the service and protection you get from law enforcement because he doesn’t get what he wants, free things from Starbucks, makes me wonder just what or where else he has done this at.

However, when confronted about the comments, police said Garvin agreed to take a polygraph test.

When asked whether or not he threatened managers with adverse response times, Garvin responded, “no.”

But polygraph test results suggested that the officer was lying, Local 6’s Tarik Minor reported. Garvin was then fired.

Makes me wonder why he wanted ot take a polygraph test. Did he believe he could fool it?

Regardless, it showed that he lied, and he was fired from his job.

We do not need people such as this as police officers. This person abused thier position and thier authority.

I am glad he was fired.

Starbucks employees said Garvin visited the Starbucks store six times a day during his shifts and intimidated some workers during visits.

“I want somebody protecting my streets who is honest and trustworthy,” Starbucks customer Adam Cuddy said. “So, if he is going to fail a polygraph, whether it is about coffee or anything, I don’t know how comfortable I feel as a citizen being protected.”

The investigation also revealed that Garvin requested the complimentary coffee even when he was not on duty.

Link

Whats the price of a specialty drink? $4 or $5 per drink?

He was coming to get his ‘free’ specialty coffees 6 times a day during his shift, then coming in when he wasn’t on duty also. Costing Starbucks $20 - $30 a day to give this corrupt cop his free drinks. Working 5 days a week (coming in on off times also) costing Starbucks somewhere in the vicinity of $150 - $200 a week to give him his free coffees.

Again, this type of person is not wanted or needed in law enforcement.

Maybe he can find another job where they can pay..."Protection".

Robert Redford:

”I think Obama is not tall on experience . . . but I believe he’s a really good person. He’s smart. And he does represent what the country needs most now, which is change.

“I hope he’ll win. I think he will. If he doesn’t, you can kiss the Democratic Party goodbye. I think we need new voices, new blood. We need to get a whole group out, get a new group in.”

Link

I will start with this first:
I think Obama is not tall on experience . . .

Even Redford admits that that Obama is lacking in experience. While everyone and their brother seems to point at minor or non-existent ‘bills’ and an abysmal voting record as Obama’s experience.

I agree, he isn’t tall on experience at all.

And he does represent what the country needs most now, which is change.

I am tired of the word change already, and I think before the end of this election, we are going to be sick to death of the word CHANGE.

Change without precursors is just a code word, change what? How will he change America for the better? He has no experience in CHANGE either, so how will Obama make America better?

Seriously, I want to know. Straight answers, what is this CHANGE and how will it affect America?

If he doesn’t, you can kiss the Democratic Party goodbye.

Now here is a telling thought by Redford. He believes that if Obama is not elected, the Democratic Party is done for.

Do you agree?
It is possible.

We need to get a whole group out, get a new group in.”

I actually agree with Redford on this.

In Democrats and in Republicans, I think there needs to be a changing of the guard here, because these idiots Democrats and Republicans have been in office too long.

It is time for new blood, new ideas, new ideals, less secrecy (remember that transparency we were supposed to have with the Democrats?).

Asked what he would say to the G8 leaders if he was at their summit in Hokkaido this week, Redford said he would challenge the argument that drilling in places such as Alaska was more essential than ever now that oil prices were so high.

”I would make a great case for why that’s absurd and why there’s a better picture to be drawn from new technologies. I would hit that point very hard.”

See, there is a problem with this.

I have no problem at all seeking new technologies and better ways of reducing fuel consumption, but those technologies are a long way off and we still will be oil dependent for quite some time till we make headway in new technologies.

Drilling allows us to because less dependent on foreign oil, driving the prices lower.

That doesn’t mean with new drilling or a drop in prices that we should stop our quest for new and better technologies to become less dependent on oil. We must always keep looking forward for new and better technologies, but not through the means Democrats seem to want to take us, by pushing and inflating gas prices, home heating, ect to try and force America to search for this new technology. It is not going to happen over night, but making Americans suffer till better ways come along is not the way either.

Here are some good topics and information to discuss on Obama.

No, this is not a hit list, but verified facts with links, both good and bad.

Barack Obama Voting Record

In 1999, Barack Obama was faced with a difficult vote in the Illinois legislature — to support a bill that would let some juveniles be tried as adults, a position that risked drawing fire from African-Americans, or to oppose it, possibly undermining his image as a tough-on-crime moderate.

In the end, Mr. Obama chose neither to vote for nor against the bill. He voted “present,” effectively sidestepping the issue, an option he invoked nearly 130 times as a state senator.

Sometimes the “present’ votes were in line with instructions from Democratic leaders or because he objected to provisions in bills that he might otherwise support. At other times, Mr. Obama voted present on questions that had overwhelming bipartisan support. In at least a few cases, the issue was politically sensitive.

....

Although a present vote is not unusual in Illinois, Mr. Obama’s use of it is being raised as he tries to distinguish himself as a leader who will take on the tough issues, even if it means telling people the “hard truths” they do not want to hear.

Link

I believe alot of the polishing of Obama’s resume has been exaggerated in his accomplishments though.

He voted against requiring medical care for aborted fetuses who survive. He supported allowing retired police officers to carry concealed weapons, but opposed allowing people to use banned handguns to defend against intruders in their homes. And the list of sensitive topics goes on.

Obama was known in the Illinois Capitol as a consistently liberal senator who reflected the views of voters in his Chicago district. He helped reform the state death penalty system and create tax breaks for the poor while developing a reputation as someone who would work with critics to build consensus.

He had a 100 percent rating from the Illinois Planned Parenthood Council for his support of abortion rights, family planning services and health insurance coverage for female contraceptives.

One vote that especially riled abortion opponents involved restrictions on a type of abortion where the fetus sometimes survives, occasionally for hours. The restrictions, which never became law, included requiring the presence of a second doctor to care for the fetus.

....

Abortion opponents see Obama’s vote on medical care for aborted fetuses as a refusal to protect the helpless. Some have even accused him of supporting infanticide.

Obama — who joined several other Democrats in voting “present” in 2001 and “no” the next year — argued the legislation was worded in a way that unconstitutionally threatened a woman’s right to abortion by defining the fetus as a child.

....

For six years, Obama served in a Republican-controlled Senate, so he and fellow Democrats only got a fraction of their bills signed into law.

During his last two years, Democrats controlled the chamber and he was the go-to guy on a variety of issues. He helped pass legislation overhauling Illinois’ troubled capital punishment system and was a key figure in requiring a massive statewide study of traffic stops to look for signs of racial profiling. Although police groups opposed the legislation, they say Obama listened to their concerns and accepted some of their suggestions to improve the bill.

Even when he was in the political minority, Obama sometimes played a critical role. He helped write one of the rare ethics laws in a state known for government corruption and worked on welfare reform with Republicans.

He sponsored legislation to bar job and housing discrimination against gays, and he helped create a state version of the earned income tax credit for the poor. Obama also led efforts to reject federal rules that would have put workers’ overtime checks in jeopardy.

Link


The biggest thing that bothers me with Obama is that vote against medical care for aborted fetus’s that survive the procedure.

This REALLY bothers me.



Barack Obama Committee Assignments:

Senate Foreign Relations Committee

Senate Committee on Veterans’ Affairs

Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions

Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs



Obama voted for higher taxes:

Republicans claim Obama “voted 94 times for higher taxes.” But their count is inflated and misleading.

The McCain campaign and the Republican National Committee both claim that Obama has voted 94 times “for higher taxes.” We find that their count is padded.

After looking at every one of the 94 votes that the RNC includes in its tally, we find:

Twenty-three were for measures that would have produced no tax increase at all; they were against proposed tax cuts.

Seven of the votes were in favor of measures that would have lowered taxes for many, while raising them on a relative few, either corporations or affluent individuals.

Eleven votes the GOP is counting would have increased taxes on those making more than $1 million a year – in order to fund programs such as Head Start and school nutrition programs, or veterans’ health care.

The GOP sometimes counted two, three and even four votes on the same measure. We found their tally included a total of 17 votes on seven measures, effectively padding their total by 10.

The majority of the 94 votes – 53 of them, including some mentioned above – were on budget measures, not tax bills, and would not have resulted in any tax change. Four other votes were non-binding motions related to conference report negotiations.

It’s true that most of the votes the GOP counts would either have increased taxes for some, or set budget targets calling for such increases. But by repeating their inflated 94-vote figure, the McCain campaign and the GOP falsely imply that Obama has pushed indiscriminately to raise taxes for nearly everybody. A closer look reveals that he’s voted consistently to restore higher tax rates on upper-income taxpayers but not on middle- or low-income workers. That’s consistent with what he’s said he’d do as president, which is to raise taxes only on those making more than $250,000 a year.

The GOP has distorted the votes Obama has done for higher taxes, but while they may be distorted to a high amount, he has voted for higher taxes.

Obama Polishes his Resume:

Presumptive Democratic nominee Barack Obama’s first ad of the general election aims to play up his Midwestern roots, his patriotism and his concern for working families.

Obama goes on to tout his legislative accomplishments, and those claims don’t stand up as well under scrutiny. In order to establish his bona fides as a politician who cares about working families, Obama cites his success with three relevant bills. But he doesn’t mention that two of the three pieces of legislation were actually passed by the Illinois Senate, not the U.S. Senate. Obama’s campaign tells us that when he says, “I passed laws moving people from welfare to work,” he is referring to the bill that created Illinois’ Temporary Assistance for Needy Families program in 1997. Obama was one of five original sponsors of the bill, which set limits on public assistance and required welfare recipients to outline plans for moving into the workforce. The law that “cut taxes for working families” is a 2000 bill, on which Obama and 35 others were later added as cosponsors, instituting an earned income-tax credit for the state. Both bills affected only Illinois residents.

The only national law in Obama’s ad is the one that “extended health care for wounded troops,” and it’s dubious whether he can claim full responsibility for that one. H.R. 4986, which became public law 110-181 in 2008, includes provisions from several Obama-sponsored bills. His ideas made it into law, but Obama was not a sponsor or cosponsor of H.R. 4986 itself.

Finally, it has always been our position that it’s misleading when a member of a legislative body says that he or she “passed a law,” “cut taxes” or makes any similar claim to single-handed lawmaking. It takes more than one legislator to get these things done. In addition to the sponsors and the cosponsors, sometimes dozens of them, the bill needs the support of a majority in both houses. Usually, a governor or president needs to then sign a bill into law, unless the legislature comes up with a veto-proof majority.

So for Obama to say that he “passed a law” casts him as a legislative Lone Ranger, hogging credit that properly belongs to other parties as well.

Obama seems to have exaggerated his accomplishments, pointing more to himself as the person who has accomplished the tasks, and not the people that actiually were either part of it, or in charge of it.


Is the release of Obama’s Birth Certificate legit?

Yes.

Hawaii state law forbids the release of birth or marriage certificates to anyone but the persons named in the documents or their immediate relatives. This copy carries a date stamp of “Jun 6 - 2007” (which has bled through from the reverse side), and is, therefore, probably a copy obtained by Obama himself at that time.

Did Obama write that he would “stand with the Muslims” and that he nurses a “pervasive sense of grievance and animosity” toward whites?

No. A widely circulated e-mail fabricates some quotes from Obama’s books and twists others.

Link

Did Hamas endorse Barack Obama?

A top adviser to the militant group has spoken favorably about Obama’s candidacy.

This might give you a touch of deja vu: Obama’s campaign has been dogged by baseless smears about his being a radical Muslim with ties to terrorist organizations, and these have turned out to be fabrications. This time, though, McCain is correct: Ahmed Yousef, Hamas’ chief political adviser, has in fact spoken highly of Obama and expressed hope that he will win the election.

Link


It is true that Hamas has spoke out in favor of an Obama presidency, but there has been no mention or showing of Obama supporting or endorsing Hamas.

Obama: I don’t take money from oil companies or Washington lobbyists, and I won’t let them block change anymore.

It’s true that Obama doesn’t take money directly from oil companies, but then, no presidential, House or Senate candidate does. They can’t: Corporations have been prohibited from contributing directly to federal candidates since the Tillman Act became law in 1907.

Obama has, however, accepted more than $213,000 in contributions from individuals who work for, or whose spouses work for, companies in the oil and gas industry, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. That’s not as much as Sen. Hillary Clinton, who has received more than $306,000 in donations from people tied to the industry, but it’s still a substantial amount.

Link


Splitting hairs.

It is illegal to take contributions directly from corporations, but Obama has taken quite a few contributions from individuals who work for the Oil companies.

Regardless, there is good and bad here to discuss on Obama.

Have at it.

A senior Democrat who worked for Mr Clinton has revealed that he recently told friends Mr Obama could “kiss my ass” in return for his support.

Link

Bill sounds a bit miffed at Obama. Perhaps because during the nomination between Obama and Bill’s Wife (Hillary), Obama and surrogates tried to turn anything Bill said into racists statements.

It has long been known that Mr Clinton is angry at the way his own reputation was tarnished during the primary battle when several of his comments were interpreted as racist.

Perhaps, also, because Bill thinks Obama has no chance in winning the working class voters.

I am not so sure about that, but we still have several months for the “love affair” of Obama to fade some and perhaps he can take some real questions without media fawning all over him or getting all "tingly" in thier legs.

Bill Clinton is so bitter about Barack Obama’s victory over his wife Hillary that he has told friends the Democratic nominee will have to beg for his wholehearted support.

Granted this does sound a bit like Bill thinks he IS the Democrat party, or at least a BIG part of it.

What happens if Bill CLinton fades away to obscurity?

What happens if the Democrat party shuns Bill Clinton?

Will he become even more bitter?

What damage could he do if he really wanted to?

The Telegraph has learned that the former president’s rage is still so great that even loyal allies are shocked by his patronising attitude to Mr Obama, and believe that he risks damaging his own reputation by his intransigence.

Which in itself is surprising because Legacy building and how Bill is known has been the front of Bill Clinton. It must be about him.

His wife can’t win without him; the Democrats NEED him...ect.

Maybe he is seeing he is...not all that?

But his lingering fury has shocked his friends. The Democrat told the Telegraph: “He’s been angry for a while. But everyone thought he would get over it. He hasn’t. I’ve spoken to a couple of people who he’s been in contact with and he is mad as hell.

“He’s saying he’s not going to reach out, that Obama has to come to him. One person told me that Bill said Obama would have to quote kiss my ass close quote, if he wants his support.

“You can’t talk like that about Obama - he’s the nominee of your party, not some house boy you can order around.

“Hillary’s just getting on with it and so should Bill.”

Sounds like a page from McCain’s book.

Bill, vote for Obama, and sit down and shutup.

Just...Get on with it.

“It’s time for him to get over it or go off and do his charitable work. He knows the rules of the road. What’s going on now is kind of strange. I think his behaviour is really, really shocking.”

Get over it Bill.

Go do something charitable, but shutup and just...get over it.

LOS ANGELES, Calif. (AP) - George Carlin, the dean of counterculture comedians whose biting insights on life and language were immortalized in his “Seven Words You Can Never Say On TV” routine, died of heart failure Sunday. He was 71.

Carlin, who had a history of heart trouble, went into St. John’s Medical Center in Santa Monica on Sunday afternoon complaining of chest pain and died later that evening, said his publicist, Jeff Abraham. He had performed as recently as last weekend at the Orleans Casino and Hotel in Las Vegas.

....

Carlin was born May 12, 1937 and grew up in the Morningside Heights section of Manhattan, raised by a single mother. After dropping out of high school in the ninth grade, he joined the Air Force in 1954. He received three court-martials and numerous disciplinary punishments, according to his official Web site.

While in the Air Force he started working as an off-base disc jockey at a radio station in Shreveport, La., and after receiving a general discharge in 1957, took an announcing job at WEZE in Boston.

“Fired after three months for driving mobile news van to New York to buy pot,” his Web site says.

From there he went on to a job on the night shift as a deejay at a radio station in Forth Worth, Texas. Carlin also worked variety of temporary jobs including a carnival organist and a marketing director for a peanut brittle.

In 1960, he left with a Texas radio buddy, Jack Burns, for Hollywood to pursue a nightclub career as comedy team Burns & Carlin. He left with $300, but his first break came just months later when the duo appeared on the Tonight Show with Jack Paar. r Carlin said he hoped to would emulate his childhood hero, Danny Kaye, the kindly, rubber-faced comedian who ruled over the decade that Carlin grew up in—the 1950s—with a clever but gentle humor reflective of its times.

....

Carlin’s first wife, Brenda, died in 1997. He is survived by wife Sally Wade; daughter Kelly Carlin McCall; son-in-law Bob McCall; brother Patrick Carlin; and sister-in-law Marlene Carlin.

Link


Tis a sad day.

I loved his earlier stuff, and loved How to keep people on thier toes. But it seemed the older he got the more cynical and nasty his comedy got.

He definately made an impact on society, radio and TV.

Carlin constantly pushed the envelope with his jokes, particularly with the “Seven Words” routine. When he uttered all seven at a show in Milwaukee in 1972, he was arrested for disturbing the peace.

When the words were played on a New York radio station, they resulted in a Supreme Court ruling in 1978 upholding the government’s authority to sanction stations for broadcasting offensive language.

“So my name is a footnote in American legal history, which I’m perversely kind of proud of,” he told The Associated Press earlier this year.

Some of the humor he is known for:

If someone with multiple personalities threatens to kill himself, is it considered a hostage situation?

Have you ever noticed that anybody driving slower than you is an idiot, and anyone going faster than you is a maniac?

Well, if crime fighters fight crime and fire fighters fight fire, what do freedom fighters fight? They never mention that part to us, do they?







He will be missed.

Goodbye George

Democratic presidential contender Barack Obama said on Friday he expects Republicans to highlight the fact that he is black as part of an effort to make voters afraid of him.

Link

“They’re going to try to make you afraid of me. He’s young and inexperienced and he’s got a funny name. And did I mention he’s black?”

....

He said he was also set for Republicans to say “he’s got a feisty wife,” in trying to attack his wife Michelle.

‘Fiesty’ wife is not what people have a problem with, it is what she said, and having people discuss what she said is not going after your wife.

“We know the strategy because they’ve already shown their cards. Ultimately I think the American people recognize that old stuff hasn’t moved us forward. That old stuff just divides us,” he said.

First I have heard this as a tactic of the opposition, but I do find the last quote very revealing, since it is Obama and not the opposition that is playing politics as usual and he is right, the old stuff just divides us, and playing the race card and victim card is as old as it gets.

If anything I believe the opposition, both Republican, Democrat and Independents that do not like Obama, will avoid using anything associated with race for the very fact in doing so will make Obama the victim.

So, I figure Obama knows this, and has gone out of his way to make sure to point this out, and make himself a victim before anything has ever been said from those that opppose him.

Courtesy of Villainous Company:



He has good company, Cythia McKinney is another who liked to play this card:



Of course hers was to distract away from her ignorance and wrongdoing…

....So what is Obama trying to distract from?

Larry Elder has a good book that Obama should read:

Stupid Black Men: How to Play the Race Card--and Lose

This isn’t the first time Obama has ‘whipped this out’, he has done the same thing to Hillary Clinton during his campaign:

The Obama campaign’s most effective gambits have been far more egregious and dangerous than the hypocritical deployment of deceptive and disingenuous attack ads. To a large degree, the campaign’s strategists turned the primary and caucus race to their advantage when they deliberately, falsely, and successfully portrayed Clinton and her campaign as unscrupulous race-baiters--a campaign-within-the-campaign in which the worked-up flap over the Somali costume photograph is but the latest episode. While promoting Obama as a “post-racial” figure, his campaign has purposefully polluted the contest with a new strain of what historically has been the most toxic poison in American politics.

More than any other maneuver, this one has brought Clinton into disrepute with important portions of the Democratic Party. A review of what actually happened shows that the charges that the Clintons played the “race card” were not simply false; they were deliberately manufactured by the Obama camp and trumpeted by a credulous and/or compliant press corps in order to strip away her once formidable majority among black voters and to outrage affluent, college-educated white liberals as well as college students. The Clinton campaign, in fact, has not racialized the campaign, and never had any reason to do so. Rather the Obama campaign and its supporters, well-prepared to play the “race-baiter card” before the primaries began, launched it with a vengeance when Obama ran into dire straits after his losses in New Hampshire and Nevada--and thereby created a campaign myth that has turned into an incontrovertible truth among political pundits, reporters, and various Obama supporters. This development is the latest sad commentary on the malign power of the press, hyping its own favorites and tearing down those it dislikes, to create pseudo-scandals of the sort that hounded Al Gore during the 2000 campaign. It is also a commentary on how race can make American politics go haywire. Above all, it is a commentary on the cutthroat, fraudulent politics that lie at the foundation of Obama’s supposedly uplifting campaign.

Link


Reading more on Obama it is quite funny actually, to read on how this is, how he acts and reacts, and then to see him pictured with a Halo in pictures or in front of a pulpit.

Question: If Republican has done what Obama has, preaching from the pulpits, had preachers preaching to congregations in support of him, being portraited with halos in pictures, redesigning the Executive Seal, making the gaffes, stumbles and have the inexperience Obama has…

What would the media be portraiting this Republican as?

Just ponder that for a bit....

Martha Stewart has been refused a visa to Britain because of her criminal convictions for obstructing justice, the Daily Telegraph has learned.

The lifestyle guru, convicted four years ago in the US for obstructing justice, was planning to speak at the Royal Academy and to hold meetings with several figures in the fashion and leisure industry, including Jasper Conran, and was due to travel within the next few days.

The refusal by the UK Border Agency was sent to Ms Stewart, aged 66. A spokesperson for the business magnate said: “Martha loves England and hopes this can be resolved and that she will be able to visit soon.”

....

“It is a bit silly given some of the other people allowed into the country,” the official added.

It was not clear if Ms Stewart had been singled out or was a victim of a blanket rule imposed by the new agency. In 2004 she served five months in prison for lying to federal agents investigating the sale of shares shortly before they fell sharply in value.

The UK Border Agency said it would not comment on individual cases. A spokesman added: “We continue to oppose the entry to the UK of individuals where we believe their presence in the United Kingdom is not conducive to the public good or where they have been found guilty of serious criminal offences abroad.”

Telegraph

Nice to see the laws enforced, unfortunately it seems to be in the UK.

I am sure there will be some sort of special allowance made for Stewart, but I figured this was too funny to pass up sharing.