http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=24426
<http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=24426> 
Presidential Politics Must Defy Political Correctness
by Jed Babbin, 14 January 2008

Did Lil' Billy - our "first black president" - commit a racist act? 
Or is it the greatest irony of our new century to hear our former 
Apologist-in-Chief again humble himself to multi-culti dogma?

Republicans are paying a lot of attention to the Democrats' primary 
contest, but not the most important aspect of it. It matters not 
which of the top three Dems - Nurse Ratched, Obambi, or the 
Hairhead - wins their nomination because they are fungible liberals. 
Oh, dear. Did I give Aunt Pittypat a case of the vapors by using 
those not-so-affectionate nicknames? Good.

This is called free speech, and part of it is ridicule, sarcasm and 
parody. If Republicans don't join my Sarcasm Caucus, they will lose 
this fall. 

Because that's the biggest issue in this campaign debate: can the 
issues that comprise each of the candidates' character - not just 
their records (and, in the case of the three liberal stooges, lack of 
qualifications) - be debated openly? Or will the political 
correctness cowards win the day and bar what should be said in the 
race to November?

I never thought I would ever write these words: what Bill Clinton 
said was correct. Obama's campaign is a fairy tale: a series of 
fantasies about Obama that prop him up as a candidate with a 
plausible claim to the presidency. Obama is a young, charming 
and highly intelligent man. But he has done nothing on which to base 
his candidacy. Bambi - the baby deer - is the basis of a good 
nickname for Obama because he will, if faced with the reality of 
governing in time of war, slip and slide and belly-flop on the ice 
of tough decisions on fast-moving global events.

A couple of months ago, on Alan Colmes' radio show, I called Obama 
"Obambi." He, and the other guest (whose name I happily forgot) 
harrumphed loudly, asking if I'd have called a white candidate by 
that name and saying it was a racist remark. That was a slander on 
my character. I called Alan's producer and said that if I didn't 
get an apology from Alan, I'd never be on the show again. To his 
credit, Alan called the following morning and apologized. But after 
Lil' Billy said Obama's campaign was the biggest fairy tale he'd 
ever seen, it was Clinton who apologized.

Last week, Billy called Al Sharpton's radio show and said,

"First of all, it's not true. It's not a fairy tale. He might win. I 
think he's a very impressive manŠ"

Why Al Sharpton is the designated apology-receiver for the black 
community is a puzzle. The man is a fraud. (See? Free speech can be 
grammatically correct, stated bluntly and factual all at the same 
time.) But the apology was not justified: it was, like every Clinton 
apology that came before it and those that will follow, sheer 
pandering.

Hillary is basing her candidacy on fictional experience. Talking to 
Chinese leaders about women's rights is a far cry from having to 
weigh intelligence matters and decide if US special forces should try 
to seize Pakistani nuclear weapons if it looks like that nation will 
fall into the hands of a Talibanista regime. But Hillary is also 
campaigning on the fact that she would break the "highest glass 
ceiling" that is barring American women from ultimate success. If 
she wants to play the estrogen card, why isn't it fair to parody her 
ashtray-tossing temper, her utter lack of accomplishment and 
play - over and over in campaign commercials - her "I have a million 
ideas. The country can't afford them all" quote?

It's not only fair, it's essential. No Republican candidate can shy 
away from making those points and hope to beat her in the fall. 
Hillary once said,

"I suppose I could have stayed home and baked cookies and had teas, 
but what I decided to do was to fulfill my profession which I 
entered before my husband was in public life."

Why not combine her contempt for stay-at-home moms with Harry 
Truman's "If you can't take the heat, get out of the kitchen" 
description of presidential politics? There's no reason not to, 
other than political correctness. As Finley Peter Dunne said long 
ago, "politics ain't beanbag." Nor should it be.

As to Obama, Republicans had better decide right now: you can't let 
him off the hook or he will beat you. In his memoir (a 45-year old 
pol writing a "memoir" is beyond parody) he admits to drug use: "Pot 
had helped, and booze; maybe a little blow when you could afford it. 
Not smack, though." Well, that's comforting. Booze, marijuana and 
cocaine, but not heroin. 

In New Hampshire last November, Obambi told a group of high school students,

"You know, I made some bad decisionsŠ. You know, got into drinking 
and experimenting with drugs. There was a whole stretch of time where 
I didn't apply myself. It wasn't until I got out of Š high school, 
and went to college that I started realizing, man, I wasted a lot of 
time."

So drug use isn't harmful, corrupting or indicative of a character 
flaw. It says a lot about Obama that he believes those things.

It's entirely proper - because American voters need to know - just 
how much did Obama "experiment" with drugs? From the list in his 
memoir, "experimenting" with drugs sounds like it may have been on a 
Timothy Learyesque scale.
What other drugs, Senator Obama? How often did you use them? Did 
you go into drug rehab as a youth? Did you ever sell any to anyone? 
What did you do to get the money to buy them? 

In any debate -- maybe every debate -- those questions should be 
posed. But they may not be because the media will condemn anyone who 
does so. Clinton's New Hampshire campaign chairman Bill Shaheen was 
forced to resign because he raised some of those questions. Hillary 
was cowed by the backlash, and folded like a cheap tent. And does 
her fear of the black vote indicate a political cowardice that will 
allow radical Muslims to control what she says and does?

Why shouldn't a Republican candidate put together a tv commercial 
that superimposes Obama in a Cheech and Chong movie? Outrageous? 
Maybe. But funny, and legitimate political speech. 

What about this "change" campaign Obambi is running? Substitute 
Obama's meaningless mantra for "Help" in the Beatles song, and you 
may have one hugely funny -- and effective -- campaign commercial. 

Hillary's panderfest on yesterday's "Meet the Press" was a 
characteristically humorless retreat from what her husband and Bill 
Shaheen said. And she took the most cowardly path. When host Tim 
Russert pressed her repeatedly to say that Obambi wasn't ready to be 
president, she would only say that it was for the voters to decide. 

The Democrats have surrendered to political correctness. It controls 
their speech, their actions and their nomination process. If 
Republicans also surrender, they, and the November election, are lost.

"CHANGE, I need somebody's CHANGE, not just anybody's CHANGEŠCHANGE 
me if you can, I'm feeling down. And I do appreciate you're being 
'round. CHANGE me, get my feet back on the ground. Won't you please, 
please CHANGE me? OooOooOoo."

Mr. Babbin is the editor of Human Events. He served as a deputy 
undersecretary of defense in President George H.W. Bush's 
administration. He is the author of "In the Words of our 
Enemies"(Regnery,2007) and (with Edward Timperlake) of Showdown: Why 
China Wants War with the United States (Regnery, 2006) and Inside 
the Asylum: Why the UN and Old Europe are Worse than You Think 
(Regnery, 2004). E-mail him at [EMAIL PROTECTED]
<mailto:jbabbin%40eaglepub.com> .




--------------------------
Want to discuss this topic?  Head on over to our discussion list, [EMAIL 
PROTECTED]
--------------------------
Brooks Isoldi, editor
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

http://www.intellnet.org

  Post message: [email protected]
  Subscribe:    [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  Unsubscribe:  [EMAIL PROTECTED]


*** FAIR USE NOTICE. This message contains copyrighted material whose use has 
not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. OSINT, as a part of 
The Intelligence Network, is making it available without profit to OSINT 
YahooGroups members who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the 
included information in their efforts to advance the understanding of 
intelligence and law enforcement organizations, their activities, methods, 
techniques, human rights, civil liberties, social justice and other 
intelligence related issues, for non-profit research and educational purposes 
only. We believe that this constitutes a 'fair use' of the copyrighted material 
as provided for in section 107 of the U.S. Copyright Law. If you wish to use 
this copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use,' 
you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
For more information go to:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/osint/

<*> Your email settings:
    Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/osint/join
    (Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
    mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
    mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    [EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 

Reply via email to