Monday, March 03, 2008

Obie the Maleficent & the New York Times

There are little rips starting to show in Obie's curtain. Opinion Journal notes:

Sen. Barack Obama's campaign announced he would co-sponsor legislation introduced yesterday by his political ally Sen. Claire McCaskill (D-Mo.) to ensure that John McCain can become president, even though he was born in the Panama Canal Zone," reports the Washington Post's Web site:

The issue of McCain's eligibility was raised in a New York Times article noting the constitutional requirement that a U.S. president be a "natural-born citizen" had never been fully defined.
The McCaskill bill, submitted immediately after she scrawled it onto a notepad on the Senate floor in response to the Times story, would establish the eligibility of anyone born to a U.S. citizen who is serving overseas as an active or reserve member of the U.S. armed forces. . . .
"Senator McCain has earned the right to be his party's nominee, and no loophole should prevent him from competing in this campaign," Obama said.

We have to agree with blogress Ann Althouse that this is a ridiculous stunt. No one seriously disputes that McCain is a natural-born citizen, and thus eligible to run for president. And if he were constitutionally disqualified--as are, say, Govs. Arnold Schwarzenegger and Jennifer Granholm, both naturalized citizens--Congress could not remedy this by statute.

As Althouse notes:

Obama, co-sponsoring the bill, is acting generous, as though he is forbearing making an attack. But since there is no attack to make, he's not actually being magnanimous. He's only putting on a show.
What is more, offering a statutory solution sends the message that there is a problem to be fixed. So in fact, it's a crafty way of saying that McCain is not now currently qualified!
Of course, it's not just Obama who's a maleficent manipulator, but the New York Times who asks about McCain's eligibility as though it were a valid, relevant question.

But it is not.

Are they just ignorant of American law, unable to do the research, or have they just completely given up any semblance of serious new reporting and degenerated into tabloid, scandal sheet "journalism"? Or perhaps their love affair with Obie is at the heart of it.

Whichever, they have demonstrated, yet again, that they have lost all credibility with any intelligent consumer of honest news.

The Gunslinger

8 comments:

  1. Ahhh the NYT's; they giveth and they taketh away. Three months ago when we had viable alternatives to Juan Pablo McCain they courted him like a wealthy debutant. Now that he's the contender (the Huckster's belief in miracles not withstanding), the Times is throwing its diminishing weight around to undermine what they practically shoved down our throat.
    The entire issue was bogus to begin with. Before the esteemed Jimmy Cahteh gave away OUR canal, the PCZ was considered American soil. Plus the fact, Juan Pablo was born to U.S.citizens which would make him a citizen regardless of where he was born.
    Obie can shove his benevolence up his half breed ass and the New York Times can kiss mine.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Perhaps The Gunslinger and Alphadog should explore a comedy act..
    Gunny could set them up and Alphadog could mow them down!!

    ReplyDelete
  3. "The Dog & Gun show."

    I like it.

    ReplyDelete
  4. jagwio,

    Perhaps Alphadog does not buy into the anti-First Amendment pc crap and is very willing to "call a spade a spade"?
    It is still America isn't it?

    ReplyDelete
  5. Jag,
    I would hate for anyone to have to guess at what I think, therefore I'll spell it out.
    I think it's a shame that we've become so sensitive and politically correct that we fall over backward avoiding to say what we think for fear of offending; I think it's a shame that we've become so easily offended.
    I think it's a shame that anybody who even looks sideways at Obie is labeled a racist.
    I think it sucks that liberal white America is laboring under some sort of monumental guilt complex and so we get saddled with minority set asides, employment quotas, civil service exams that are handicapped in favor of minorities, college entrance requirements that are slanted in favor of minorities and a host of other reverse discrimination policies.
    I absolutely hate it that we've become a pussified nation of whiners and tort happy, irresponsible, incompetents.
    It pisses me off to no end that some asshole with a gun goes off the deep end and the way to solve the problem is to step on my Second Amendment rights.
    There are so many things that twist my guts.
    The acceptance of mediocrity.
    The abysmal condition of our school systems.
    The great Global Warming hoax.
    Failed social programs that we keep throwing money at in a futile effort to fix.
    A tax system that requires no new taxes when all that has to be done is revise the tax code in order to further bleed us out at gun point.
    Safe Haven cities for illegals.
    Liberals demanding that somebody do something about the energy situation and our dependence on foreign oil while at the same time banning drilling in the Gulf and the ANWR, no new refineries, no new nuke plants, no wind farms that might disturb their view and corn prices that are ridiculously high because so many have mistakenly bought into the myth that ethanol is our energy salvation.
    I could go on but by now I'm sure you've figured out that I'm the stereotypical "Angry White Male". While I would never suppose that I speak for anyone other than myself, I don't think I'm alone in my sense of frustration. And yet I still believe, perhaps foolishly, that this period of darkness can be overcome.
    Look not to the candidate that promises to do the most for you, but to the candidate that will do the least to you.

    ReplyDelete
  6. A.dog - What I think is a shame is that you would use a racial slur as a way to put someone down.

    Not slurring peoples' race is just the civilized thing to do. I don't care who you tell what to shove up their ass, but brining race into it is shameful.

    I'd like to stay on topic, perhaps we could discuss the rest of your comment another time (I certainly don't disagree with everything you said).

    jack - last time I checked, I'm not the federal government. I'm exercising my 1st amendment right and so is everyone else here. However, name calling should always be looked down on especially when you are slurring someone's race in the process.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Is there never a time when some races just need slurrin'...like some people need killin'?

    ReplyDelete
  8. GS - No, there is never a time to slur someone's race. It's pointless, hateful, and divisive. An actually productive alternative would be to convince the person about the issues at hand - race has as much meaning as what color shirt you are wearing.

    The only time to kill someone is when they threaten your life. No one "needs" killing. It is always sad to kill even in self defense. And it represents a failure of humanity (whether anything could have been done to show that person why their violence was wrong or not).

    ReplyDelete