Saturday, June 21, 2008

More troubling Obama news

While I don't doubt that Mike Williams didn't set out to upset Obama supporters, especially those who believe all the amanzing claims the Senator keeps making about himself and "Change you can believe in," portions of his letter today surely will.

Mike begins - - -

Michael Ledeen, writing at the NRO:

In the unlikely event you haven't read this yet, do it over the weekend when you have some time to ponder its implications. I'm talking about Richard Fernandez' exemplary research and analysis of Obama's shifting positions on Iraq, alongside the business activities of his pal Rezko and an Iraqi partner.

In a serious world, this article would win awards, and be discussed in every major forum. It's outstanding journalism. One of the best articles on Obama to date.

Believe it or not, between 2004 and 2006, Obama was all for staying in Iraq. But as Fernandez points out, “there appears to be a direct correlation between the rising and falling prospects of his longtime friend and fundraiser Tony Rezko’s attempts to secure multi-million-dollar contracts to build and operate a power plant in Kurdish Iraq and the senator’s Iraq flip-flops.”

So what are you waiting for? Go read the article! It’s the kind of thing the MSM used to be good at and a real eye-opener.

Over at Power Line, Scott Johnson wonders once again, “Does Obama know what he's talking about?

Speaking at a town hall meeting in Pennsylvania last Saturday, Obama addressed the Supreme Court's Boumediene decision granting Guantanamo detainees the right to challenge their confinement through habeas corpus proceedings in federal court.

Obama asserted that the "principle of habeas corpus, that a state can't just hold you for any reason without charging you and without giving you any kind of due process -- that’s the essence of who we are." He explained:

I mean, you remember during the Nuremberg trials, part of what made us different was even after these Nazis had performed atrocities that no one had ever seen before, we still gave them a day in court and that taught the entire world about who we are but also the basic principles of rule of law.

Now the Supreme Court upheld that principle yesterday.

Except [attorney Johnson continues]:

…the Nuremberg trial was conducted before a military commission composed of representatives of the United States, Great Britain, France and the Soviet Union. The most prominent surviving Nazi leaders were brought for trial before the Nuremberg tribunal in late 1945. Winston Churchill had proposed, not unreasonably, that they be summarily shot. The victorious allies nevertheless subsequently agreed that they would be brought before a military commission to be convened pursuant to the London Agreement of August 8, 1945.

In Boumediene, the Supreme Court disapproved of the system of military commissions Congress had adopted at the Supreme Court's urging. Obama to the contrary notwithstanding, the Nuremberg defendants' "day in court" occurred before the kind of tribunal the Supreme Court found constitutionally inadequate in Boumediene.

The Nazi war criminals were given no access to American courts. (emphasis JinC)

Johnson concludes:

In short, the procedural protections afforded the Guantanamo detainees under the statute before the Supreme Court in Boumediene substantially exceed those accorded the Nuremberg defendants. Obama's unfavorable comparison of the legal treatment of the Guantanamo detainees with that of the Nuremberg defendants suggest either that he does not know what he's talking about, or that he feels free to take great liberties with the truth.

Ed Morrissey at Hot Air is also wondering, “Will the newspapers toss Obama under the bus now?” It’s about Obama’s recent reversal on public financing of his general-election campaign:

Many newspapers consider that to be a key reform issue, and Obama had received over 100 endorsements in the primary on the basis of his reform message. This week’s responses to his abandonment of public financing reflected a great deal of anger at the betrayal, and it could signal a sharp turn in tone from the print media….

Even more damning may be the reasons why he claims to have abandoned the public financing system, in essence charging the GOP with forcing him into it through what turns out to be non-existent 527 efforts and PAC/lobbyist contributions that amounts to less than 2% of the Republican totals — when Democrats raised 10% of their 2004 funds from the same sources.
If Obama can’t keep to his principles under fire, when would he ever keep to them?

Plus, for some of these editors, the issue has become personal. Obama spoke to several of these editors in meetings during the campaign and insisted that he supported the public financing system, including and especially the Washington Post. They now know he flat-out lied to them, personally, and nothing quite gets the blood boiling than that kind of betrayal….

Nevertheless, Obama remains supremely confident:

Yesterday Barack Obama rolled out his very own seal. The New York Daily News reports the comments of the Obama and McCain campaigns in "Barack Obama appears with personalized presidential seal." As the Daily News notes, the Seal of Barack Obama bears an uncanny resemblance to the Great Seal of the presidential seal, though it incorporates the Obama campaign graphic and a nifty new Latin motto: "Vero Possumus."

Andrew Malcolm helps with the translation of the Latin motto. Malcolm explains:


The seal's...got a terrifically impressive motto in Latin -- "Vero Possumus" -- which means "The possum speaks truthily."

No, just kidding. It actually means "Truly we're able" which translates as "Si se puede" which translates as "Yes, we can." [...]

Scott Johnson, again:

I think the campaign may have missed a beat with "Vero Possumus." My Latin is a little rusty, but I think the Seal of Barack Obama clearly calls for something more along the lines of "Obamanum Credimus." You know, "We believe in Obama."

*********************************************************

Message to Mike: You've given all of us - Obama supporters, Obama non-supporters and folks who haven't yet made up their mind about the Senator - a fine summary and links to material we should all consider.

Thank you.

Message to JinC Readers: MSM needs to be providing more information and commentary of the kind Mike offers than "the news" that Michelle Obama is 5'11" and finds panty hose downright uncomfortable.

1 comments:

Archer05 said...

John, this is a great article. I don’t underestimate the Daley machine this election either.
--------------------------
Justice Antonin Scalia: Al Gore to blame for 2000 US election mess
By Toby Harnden in Washington

“------There have long been allegations that Mayor Richard Daley, a Kennedy ally, and his Chicago Democratic "machine" engaged in large-scale electoral fraud.”
----------
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/2200495/Justice-Antonin-Scalia-Al-Gore-to-blame-for-2000-US-election-mess.html