Why the Liberal establishment is losing

[mayor]

This is an absolutely BRILLIANT piece from the National Review. It's lengthy, but I believe the author, Victor Davis Hanson, nails it in words that I wish were mine...

Mayor

----------------

Nat Review ^

September 24, 2004

Dan Rather's initial, furious street-side defense of an amateurish forgery — smug, huffy, self-righteous — brings to mind one of those bad movies about the Paris barricades, especially the grainy, black-and-white shots of powdered and wigged aristocrats on their way to the Guillotine, yelling out of their carriages at pitchfork-carrying peasants.

Worse than being duped, worse than cobbling together a highly politicized hit-piece during a war and in the waning days of an election, worse than the shady nature of the "unimpeachable" sources and the likely sordid origins of the story, and worse even than the pathetic nature of CBS's "expert" witnesses — worse than all that was Rather's ten-day denial of reality, culminating in the surreal half-admission that the phony documents could not be verified as accurate. That's the equivalent of saying that a corpse cannot be proven to be alive.

Commentators have envisioned Rather's fall as symbolic of a "paradigm shift" and the "end of the era" — an event that has crystallized the much larger and ongoing demise of the old establishment media. Allegories from the French Revolution and the emperor without any clothes to the curtain scene in The Wizard of Oz have been evoked to illustrate Rather's dilemma and the hypocrisy of all that went before. We have come a long way since the 1960s: The once-revolutionary pigs taking over the manor are now bloated and strutting on two legs as they feast on silver inside the farmhouse.

First CBS went into denial; then it tried to smear its critics; next it emulated the Nixonian two-step; and finally it stonewalled altogether, hoping that the 24-hour news buzz would fade before it ultimately did. Meanwhile, more and more Americans yawn and have already switched the channel to cable news. We keep waiting for Mike Wallace on Sunday's 60 Minutes to stare down Dan Rather on the set of Tuesday's 60 Minutes, sticking his mike in Dan's face, springing on him a long list of his previously unknown sins, capped off with the zoom shot on a fidgety, sweating Rather, as the tick, tick, tick fades into a primetime commercial.

The Big Three may deride the newsreaders at Fox as blond bimbos, but millions of Americans learned long ago that there are probably more liberals on Fox than conservatives on PBS, NPR, CBS, ABC, and NBC combined — and the former are honest about politics in a way the latter are not.

The New York Times talks about standards and "journalistic integrity," but given its recent public record no one was surprised by the existence of a Jayson Blair, or by the fact that under Howell Raines a once-grand paper became a caricature of 19th-century yellow journalism, with possibly fewer daily readers than Matt Drudge. Elites may lament that someone who did not go to the Columbia School of Journalism can affect more readers than the Times, but instead of the usual aristocratic snarls they should ask themselves how and why that came about — and why, for example, watching a PBS documentary by Bill Moyers or listening to Garrison Keillor on NPR is now to endure a publicly subsidized extension of their silly rants at lectures and in op-eds.

It has taken a lot to end the credibility of the liberal dynasty, inasmuch as there were many prior provocations — Peter Arnett airing a blatantly dishonest 1998 mythodrama on CNN about Americans using Sarin gas in Laos; Dan Rather giving a flawed 1988 account of American grotesqueries in Vietnam (The Wall Within), replete with phony veterans spinning lies about horrific war crimes. But then we have not quite seen anything like the shamelessness of airing forged documents backed by unhinged witnesses and verified by suspect "experts" — all in a time of war and with the intent of smearing a sitting conservative president.

True, given his history and influence, Dan Rather was the most logical person to pull all that off — and so now he is the right person to take the collective fall for the sins of his brethren. How strange that bloggers are far more representative of democratic culture than Rather; that dittoheads are grassroots in a way that NPR is not; and that cable news is more honest in its politicking than Peter Jennings. No wonder CBS has gone from being controversial to annoying, and soon irrelevant — the ultimate sin given the corporate bottom line.

Hypocrisy and aristocratic smugness are drawing the ancient regime to its death. Rather's now-ossified generation came of age in the heady Vietnam era, on the apparent premise that Main Street, USA, and the Kiwanis had given us Vietnam, Watergate, racism, and the other isms and phobias — and that only hip, swashbuckling 60s-types could tell the American people the "truth" about what the "establishment" was up to.

Ever so incrementally along this inevitable road to Rathergate, John Kerry's searing Cambodia-patrol story, and Kitty Kelley's Reagan and Bush pseudographies, many Americans began to worry about the ends-justifying-the-means culture of the sanctimonious Left. The counterculture was defended on the dubious premise that the activists needed to fight fire with fire as they exposed everything from Nixon's lies to the embarrassing Pentagon Papers.

But in the process there also began a professional devolution, as questionable legal and ethical methods were excused in the name of the greater good. We got the Ellsberg pilfered documents, the blank check of "unnamed sources," trips to Hanoi and Paris to meet the enemy, Peter Arnett broadcasting gloom and doom live from Baghdad — all culminating in the two-bit forgeries used for the "higher" cause of unseating George Bush. Daniel Ellsberg, Jane Fonda, and CBS may have done things that were legally wrong (like the latter's promulgating fraudulent government documents to defame a government official), but in postmodern logic they were morally "right" given their superior knowledge, character, and progressive intentions.

We do not expect any more citations of sources in Bob Woodward's "inside" history, even when he uncovers thought processes buried deep inside someone's brain; after all, he discovered Deep Throat and broke Watergate. The list of plagiarist historians is long and growing, yet mitigating circumstances are advanced since such mendacity is useful in exposing the bad gun and bomb lobbies or praising the good Kennedys.

Wasn't it wrong that Jimmy Carter campaigned for a Peace Prize by venomous criticism of his country on the eve of war — and was praised for it by the Nobel committee, which gave him the medal at that precise time? No problem, he builds houses for the poor and loves the U.N. Who cares that Teresa Heinz-Kerry and John Edwards rant on about those who are "un-American"? They, of all people, can't be employing McCarthyesque invective, can they?

But the regime is crumbling on campuses as well. Too many university professors in the humanities dropped long ago their allegiance to the disinterested search for truth, or to teaching students facts and methods. How could one be so constrained and parochial when a war was raging on, and millions of youth needed to be prepared as ideological warriors in the struggle to remake our culture? Meanwhile, teaching loads decreased, annual tuition soared higher than the rate of inflation, and the baccalaureate no longer reflected much erudition. Surely, progressive academics, of all people, would not stand by while their curriculum was politicized, free speech suppressed, their part-time lecturers systematically exploited, their working-class students priced out of the market, and their research tainted with bias?

The U.N. also seems to be going the way of CBS. Only a little over a quarter of our citizenry feels that the organization reflects American values. Kofi Annan was blind to the greatest financial scandal of our time, one that contributed to the deaths of thousands in Iraq and enriched cronies, including perhaps his own son. He survives only because a biased media has judged that his progressivism warrants shielding him from the type of scrutiny afforded Halliburton.

Under Mr. Annan, the U.N. won't say a word about Tibet or do anything about the thousands butchered in Africa — how can it when murdering states such as Cuba, Algeria, and Iran are on its committees overseeing human rights? Kofi Annan's U.N. has lost its ideals, become counterfeit, and thus is now mostly irrelevant.

Those who profess to be Democrats are reaching historically low numbers. Many prominent Democrats are hypocrites: Feminists Ted Kennedy and Bill Clinton were uncouth womanizers; the principled war critic Senator Byrd cut his teeth in the Klan; and the self-proclaimed moralists Senators Harkin and Kennedy have both been caught in postmodern problems with the truth. Being rich and a lawyer helps too. Most prominent Democrats and their enablers are either lawyers or multimillionaires, and now often both. Running a hardware store may explain your Republicanism; inheriting the profits from a chain of 1,000 hardware franchises will likely make you a new Democrat.

If we wonder why CBS is in trouble, why no one trusts the universities or the U.N., or why the Democrats may soon lose the Senate, the House, the presidency, and the Supreme Court, the answer has a lot to do with arrogant hypocrisy — the idea that how one lives need have nothing to do with what one professes, that idealistic rhetoric can provide psychological cover for privilege and preference, and that rules need not apply for those self-proclaimed as smarter and nicer than the rest of us. But none of us — none — get a pass simply because we claim that we are more moral, educated, or sophisticated than most.

In the meantime, as this unclean tale slowly reaches it end — and it will — CBS soon may have to decide between having Dan Rather and having an audience. Dan Rather, in his abject non-professionalism and in his overweening arrogance, has become the symbol of all that has gone so terribly wrong with our once-romantic but now confused, compromised, and aging generation of change. Such are the wages for those who destroy timeless rules and proven protocols for short-term expediency and thus find no sanctuary in their own hour of need.

Mr. Rather would do well to remember Leo Amery's famous evocation of Cromwell, when he once bade Neville Chamberlain to get out:

"You have sat too long here for any good you have been doing. Depart, I say, and let us have done with you. In the name of God, go."

So, Dan, go, and let us have done with you — in the name of God, go now.

— Victor Davis Hanson is a visiting professor for the month of September and a fellow of Hillsdale College.

[blueaguave]

its over dude. The professors are liberal, the students are conservative. Outside places like Boston, NYC,Berkley, its almsot laughable to be a liberal anymore.
Who cares about CBX. We have so many on our side now--shmuley.com, drudge, Rush, Fox News..even the washington Post is pretty balanced these days.
And kudos to Ted Koppel, he spoke out against fradulent antics by Rather..keep on bloggin in the free world Mayor

[pandybat]

Only time will tell.

[bobkoure]

Nothing so stupid as arguing on a forum - unless it's maybe arguing in a news group.
That said, the article is primarily about how a reporter went too far in the search for a sensational story - and got caught.
It then goes on to use this as a basis as to why the "liberal establishment" (whatever that is) is about to fail.

There are fools, idiots, whatever (including too-aggressive reporters) on all sides of the political spectrum. Using one to damn the rest is pretty easy - and just as meaningless.

I certainly don't think Fox news is "fair and balanced" (laughably far from it) - and the National Review has (ahem) a bit of a slant as well.
Just thinking that might put me in your "liberal establishment", even though I don't particularly think of myself as one...

[FUNdamental]

Mayor, again, was acting like a fool for the Republicans. First, The New York Times has in fact apologized for the Jason Blair incident-something FOX NEWS has never done in their mis-reporting. Second, Are we not done with TNR? I mean, we all remember the "ties" between Osama and Saddam nonsense that they reported and you posted here on DoD as justification for going to war. Boy were you duped. Mayor, you need to apologize to all those you personally kicked off this board because they questioned the silly reports you actually believed and posted here on DoD. You were wrong, Mayor, it is time you admitted it.

[FUNdamental]

Hey everyone. Do you think "Mayor" should apologize for using this board to spread what turned out to be false information in order to justify the run up to the war? Do you recommend "Mayor" should reinstate all those he personally "banned" from this board for questioning "Mayor's" reposting TNR nonsense about "ties" between Iraq and Ossama? Should "Mayor" also admit he was duped to support going to war with Iraq by White House propaganda? Should Mayor apologize for deleting posts that truthfully challenged his own posts that supported going to war with Iraq?

I understand "this board is not a democracy," (Mayor's words), but Mayor really went out of his way to squelch anyone questioning Iraq's WMDs, chemical labs, link to Ossama, etc. Do you think "Mayor" was abusive with his "selective" deletion policy?

[mrbowler]

Originally Posted by FUNdamental

Hey everyone. Do you think "Mayor" should apologize for using this board to spread what turned out to be false information in order to justify the run up to the war? Do you recommend "Mayor" should reinstate all those he personally "banned" from this board for questioning "Mayor's" reposting TNR nonsense about "ties" between Iraq and Ossama? Should "Mayor" also admit he was duped to support going to war with Iraq by White House propaganda? Should Mayor apologize for deleting posts that truthfully challenged his own posts that supported going to war with Iraq?

I understand "this board is not a democracy," (Mayor's words), but Mayor really went out of his way to squelch anyone questioning Iraq's WMDs, chemical labs, link to Ossama, etc. Do you think "Mayor" was abusive with his "selective" deletion policy?

Did "Mayor" personally ban people on the board or was this the action of selected Mod's? I think it would be fair on Mayors part to provide his current thoughts on some of the question/allegations made earlier. Have you sent a private/email asking for a response??

[FUNdamental]

Mayor not only sent emails to those he banned telling them of the banning (my brother was one of them), he justified it to the complaining Mods by stating that he owned the board, and this board was NOT a democracy. Even if it were just the mods who did the banning, a hypothetical that has no basis in factual history, Mayor over the last several years has had the authority to remove the ban. He has not. What does this inaction tell you?

Unfortunately the vitriol spread on this board towards "Libs" and "Dems" between 2001 and 2004 caused a lot of people to leave. One time, Mayor posted a connection between al Qaeda in Indonesia and the Iraqi army because names on two separate lists were "similar" to one another. Mayor boasted that the news was a "slam dunk" in justification for going to war (he got the story from the Weekly Standard who got the propaganda from the White House). This justification stayed up for a month here on DoD. When the Washington Post published a piece discrediting the story completely, my brother posted it on Mayor's thread. Then, the entire thread was removed quickly. My brother complained that pro-war misinformation was allowed to stay up for a month, but as soon as that information was discredited, the whole thread was removed. He complained that many on DoD were only able to see the propaganda and not the whole story. My brother was banned immediately.

Look at the above thread Mayor posted, and the others that somehow survived. Can you see the "attitude" Mayor disseminated back then toward "libs," "dems," and the antiwar crowd? Can you see how Mayor used this board to spread nonsense propaganda? Look at Telos' "duh" thread; who is really saying "duh, duh duh..." about the reasons for going to war with Iraq, now? The MO for Mayor and many of his mods back in 2001-2004 was to attack the "libs" and the "dems" any chance they could. How many anti John Kerry myths did Mayor post before the 2004 election (John kerry Hangs Himself Again," was a common title for a Mayor posting) ? Do you remember thread "Liberals; hide your head in the sand"? Someone simply made up a news story, and Mayor came to the conclusion that the story was correct and posted it with his own commentary slamming "liberals" in the process. Well, mayor, the story wasn't true. Are you going to apologize to all the liberals who were upset over your mean spirited partisan tactics (including banning) toward them back in the day? Doubt it.

It would be nice if Mayor would apologize to my brother and the others who were treated so badly here on DoD, and remove the ban, but I doubt he will. I don't believe my brother will be returning, anyway. Most of the people that were here on DoD he enjoyed communicating with are gone, most likely because the treatment and name calling they received from Mayor, Telos2000, Jeskibuff, and the few other conservative loud mouth propagandists that are "hiding their heads in the sand" now.

Did you read that Telos really still thinks lots of other countries thought Iraq had WMD's and were building more?! That's what you get when Fox News Channel is your official information source.

Mr. Mayor is more than welcome to respond, and I respectively ask he do so in non politically mean spirited way. Telos hasn't apologized, Jeskibuff hasn't apologized, I doubt "Mayor" will apologize. Dale Carnegie states "when you are wrong admit it quickly and clearly." I hope mayor sees an apoligy and reinstatement as the "right" thing to do.

[pandybat]

I said it once, I'll say it again........

Originally Posted by pandybat

Only time will tell.

[jeskibuff]

Originally Posted by FunDUHmental

the vitriol spread on this board towards "Libs" and "Dems" between 2001 and 2004 caused a lot of people to leave

Most people left because of the action of the mods. I left because Taxman (a conservative) banned me for 2 weeks. I was invited back after the 2-week time-out, but decided to go elsewhere, as the very action offended me. The only reason for my banning was that Taxman could position himself as an "equal opportunity" banner. If he only banned the dumb liberals for their idiotic remarks, he would be considered biased, so he had to show himself to be even-handed. His mistake. Soon after I left, other conservatives bailed too. BWSMOM and Monkey disappeared, and they were two of the members who were intent on exposing the liberal postings as the idiotic mindless drivel that they were. Then someone decided to delete the whole political forum. as if that was the problem. That action alone was motive enough for me to find some other site and leave DealOfDay in the dust. That action eliminated most of the evidence that could now prove you wrong, FunDUHmental, so what are you complaining about? The only reason for my temporary return was that I received an e-mail notification to the old "WMD" post and felt compelled to respond.

Originally Posted by FunDUHmental

When the Washington Post published a piece discrediting the story completely, my brother posted it on Mayor's thread. Then, the entire thread was removed quickly.

I don't remember this and if it happened, it probably occurred after I was gone. But knowing your penchant for twisting the truth, FunDUHmental, I'm sure there are vital elements of the story that you conveniently left out. You are one of the most untrustworthy people I ever had the "pleasure" of meeting!

Originally Posted by FunDUHmental

Look at the above thread Mayor posted, and the others that somehow survived.

I know some threads lived on and others died. The fact is that a whole forum was eliminated (I forgot what it was called then). Some political posts existed outside that forum and were not purged. "WMDs and the psychology of fanaticism" was one of those survivors.

Originally Posted by FunDUHmental

Can you see how Mayor used this board to spread nonsense propaganda?

Obviously you cannot see your own stupid efforts to propagandize everything. Liberal hypocrisy can be exposed so easily. Unfortunately, you have to have a logical, rational mind to be able to realize when your argument is crapola. Liberals don't have those attributes, so even after their argument has been shredded to pieces, they still ignore the evidence and cling to their flawed belief system.

Originally Posted by FunDUHmental

Most of the people that were here on DoD he enjoyed communicating with are gone, most likely because the treatment and name calling they received from Mayor, Telos2000, Jeskibuff, and the few other conservative loud mouth propagandists that are "hiding their heads in the sand" now.

I already explained why many of us disappeared. We're not hiding our heads in the sand. We just have other priorities and have left our political bantering days behind us. After DoD, I found a new home at ConservativeUnderground. I haven't posted there in many months, not because I have anything against it...I just have other things I'd rather spend my time on. It'd be nice to have unlimited time to expose your idiotic theories for the fishwrap that they are. Your every argument is based on some flawed assumption. Whatever I say will not change how stupid and ignorant you are; all it will do is prevent some unsuspecting person from foolishly falling into the liberal mindset. That alone is valuable, but I'll leave it for someone else to try to save the world from fools like you. I did start responding to your posts on "WMDs...part 2", but set the task aside for other priorities. Maybe I'll wrap it up on Monday while I get my oil changed (and if you don't cry to the mods to ban me for calling you "stupid", "a fool" and all those other adjectives that fit so aptly).

Originally Posted by FunDUHmental

Mr. Mayor is more than welcome to respond, and I respectively ask he do so in non politically mean spirited way. Telos hasn't apologized, Jeskibuff hasn't apologized, I doubt "Mayor" will apologize. Dale Carnegie states "when you are wrong admit it quickly and clearly." I hope mayor sees an apoligy and reinstatement as the "right" thing to do.

"Apoligize" (sic) for what? For an offense that you invented in your fertile imagination? This is the standard modus operandi for liberals: repeat a falsehood as frequently as is necessary to get others to believe it's truth. The sad thing is, once others start to join your chorus you actually believe that their agreement confirms your theory! The truth is that a lie is a lie no matter how many people you can hoodwink! A few examples: "this war is all about oil", "steel has never melted before/airplane fuel doesn't burn hot enough to melt steel", "Islam is a peaceful religion", "Clinton is a good man", "Israel is the aggressor", "America is occupying Iraq", "Bush stole the election" and now "you were banned for spreading propaganda". Dan Rather clung tightly to his invented theory even after the average 3rd grader could see how fraudulent his evidence was! How pathetic he was to insist that a lie was the truth! How pathetic the itty-bitty little man was when he failed to apologize to President Bush, thinking that an apology to the rest of the nation would absolve him of his sins. He truly is pond scum, but oh so representative of America's liberal population. And you, FunDUHmental, have the audacity to invent your own "evidence" and demand that others apologize for the offense you invented. Get a clue, will you???

FunDUHmental, your bombastic arrogance never ceases to amaze! Your absolute ignorance is beyond belief! How can you possibly live with yourself? I suppose if you ever dared to be honest about your beliefs, you'd see what a total hypocrite you are, but sadly, honesty is not something you're at all familiar with. Maybe someday you'll be enlightened, but it appears you're still rather entrenched in Mikey Mooron World. You first have to be willing to give up your priority: that personal agenda that is built on a foundation of sand. Every liberal has one and each requires falsehoods to keep it floating. That is the only thing that unifies Democrats: they all need this "foundation of lies" to protect what is most valuable to them. Conservatism undermines that foundation because it is based on common sense, truth and morality.

My only "apoligy" (sic) is that I don't have the time to tear every one of your stupid beliefs to shreds. Each one is predicated on some lie that you choose to believe is true, but to admit it to be a lie would undermine your whole belief system. Until that happens, I suppose you'll have to continue to live in the land of denial that is the place where all liberals find their safe haven.

[FUNdamental]

Hi Jesk, please no name calling, it is against the TOS. How's the President doing these days? Did we get rid of all the Iraqi WMD's the President warned us about?

[FUNdamental]

I agree that the President did knowingly lie and mislead the American people in going to war with Iraq.

[jeskibuff]

Originally Posted by FUNdamental

I agree that the President did knowingly lie and mislead the American people in going to war with Iraq.

Of course you do. If you didn't, something would be terribly amiss. The day when liberals grasp reality instead of clinging to their imaginative fabrications and lies will be the day when H-e-l-l freezes over!

You should also be in full agreement with Rosie - that steel has NEVER melted before. I mean, since you've decided to stick with the idiotic "did knowingly lie and mislead" mantra, you might as well put the stupidity pedal all the way to the metal!

[jeskibuff]

...back on the main subject (even though this thread started way back in 2004!!

...the liberal establishment is losing BIG TIME over their Sarah Palin attacks!

I was encouraged/delighted/amazed to read all 19 pages of a thread on Hillary Clinton's website, of all places.

LIVE: Republican Convention, Day 3 (Sep 3, 200: all discussion here please - Sarah Palin Speech, etc. - www.hillaryclintonforum.net

So far, there are over 900 posts by Hillary Clinton lovers who are fed up with what their Democratic Party has become. They're angry about the nomination of the unqualified poseur and anointed Obamessiah. They're angry about the treatment Hillary got at the convention, from the bogus roll call to the hateful look on Michelle Obama's face as Hillary spoke. They're disgusted at their party's nomination of "elitists" like Obama and Kerry.

More than that, the thread was a play-by-play as they watched Wednesday night's RNC speeches. They were delighted when Rudy tore Obama a new oral anifice (sic). Then when Sarah Palin came on, they were absolutely ecstatic! They were disgusted at how their party attempted to denigrate Sarah by blaming her for her daughter's pregnancy. They were appalled at the attempt to attribute Trig's birth as the result of a father-daughter union between Todd and Bristol.

Their Democratic pals made a HUGE mistake with those slanders! What will be their next desperate move?

You certainly probably have never seen THESE videos of Obama's drunken VP pick:
[Only registered and activated users can see links. Either login above or Register Now]
[Only registered and activated users can see links. Either login above or Register Now]
...and certainly though they thought Bristol was fair game, there wasn't much said about the multiple arrests of Biden's daughter, was there?
[Only registered and activated users can see links. Either login above or Register Now]

These Hillary lovers saw how strong and genuine Sarah was. Although they still prefer Hillary to McCain (God knows why?), they're SOLIDLY in the McCain/Palin camp now. Who knows how many millions of others share their sentiments? If representative of the population, the Obama/Biden ticket is in BIG trouble!

This may not be another Bush/Gore or Bush/Kerry nail-biter. These people are realizing that the Obama team is an empty promise and the real substance is in the McCain/Palin team! Not only that, but they're FINALLY seeing how the media wants to twist the truth in every manner to get Obama into office. One poster calls him/herself "I hate CNN and NBC", and others obviously recognize the propaganda those networks are guilty of. Some are calling themselves "DemMcCrats" and others say "Republicans are the NEW Democrats".

Maybe it's not a wholesale conversion, but it appears their eyes are finally being opened to the liberal double-standards. They're becoming aware of who the bad guys really are, and that's REALLY ENCOURAGING!

The liberal establishment suffered a BIG defeat over the last week, but they're still too well established. Here's hoping there will be more self-destruction on the slate over the next two months.

...and knowing there were some limerick-lovers on this site years ago, I'll post this set I wrote and posted on ConservativeUnderground in a thread started by Elspeth (who declares herself a Hillary afficianado who is now voting for McCain/Palin):
[Only registered and activated users can see links. Either login above or Register Now]

For the White House the Dims sure do long
But it's tough 'cause they're always so wrong
Their mantra is "hope"
But their brains are on dope
Obama/Joe is the new Cheech & Chong

Is Obama evil like Sauron?
He's sure good at leading the poor on
True, some think him smart;
that he'll bring a new start
But he's not all that bright (more like "moron")

I'm sure he would take Al Gore's lead
Adopting the "Inconvenient" screed
The words of that chump
will cost dear at the pump
How much are you willing to bleed?

Barack ridiculed Bush's surge
"We must pull from Iraq" he did urge
Bush's plan sure did work!
Obama looks like a jerk
Now he's scrambling for history's purge

He also thinks jihad's a joke:
"bin Laden's a regular bloke"
"We just did him wrong"
"Say, could you pass the bong?"
"Or just let me take one more toke?"

Could Obama develop some guts
To get our wheels out of ruts?
Can he heal racial tension?
Get an honorable mention?
Not while Jesse holds knife to his nuts!

How much is this candidate worth?
His followers are dancing in mirth
While they're all in a lather
Looks like dear old Dan Rather
Printed up his certificate of birth

With mentors like Davis and Wright
Why even question why there is fright?
It's true that his mommie
Was a practicing commie
Don't forget Ayers and Rezko! GOOD NIGHT!

Believe in the man if you must
He's not the kind I would trust
He'll tax where he can
That's his ENTIRE plan
So no surprise when the nation goes bust!

With Democrats mending their schism
They'll get right into tax-and-spend rhythm
Corporations will flee
Move their "ops" over sea
And those good-paying jobs will go with 'em

Our economy will be all asunder
The Dems will ponder and wonder
Tax income will dwindle
Who next can they swindle?
Of course they'll blame Reps for their blunder

Whiny Democrats scream like the banshee
And insist that we follow their fancy
Since their thought-deprived minions
Foist their stupid opinions
We end up with "leaders" like Nancy

Too long have we heard "impeach Chimp!"
Out of Rangel and other such pimp
But fight some other day
When your base is so gay
(For you can't pack a punch with wrist limp!)

The deluge of news you must master
As events fly by ever faster
You just should remember
If Barack wins in November
Prepare for ensuing disaster!

To the polls in two months, do not tarry!
Show Obama how we liked Gore and Kerry
All three think they're heroes
But each one's mental zeros
More like Moe and Curly and Larry

[LBSO]

don't be blinded by ideology.