Quote of the Day

"There's so much Obama hero worship, we're having to walk this line where we can't directly criticize him," he said. "But we are expressing concern."

- Kevin Martin, executive director of Peace Action on Obama's inclinations towards Democratic insiders who voted for the War in Iraq for top cabinet posts.

Don't you worry your pretty little head, Kev. We've got that angle covered.

Take your best shots... Please.

A few thoughts on the whirlwind that has been the Sarah Palin Labor Day weekend experience.

B-Daddy commented that he was worried about McCain’s judgement with respect to what has appeared to be a rather lax vetting process and that his selection appears to be a living, breathing example of “Maverick’s” fighter pilot’s gut instinct taking precedent over a rational, contemplative proceedings that either score a direct hit or crash and burn. He’s right, but, also and along those same lines, the selection of Palin is just the perfect continuation of our theme for supporting McCain, in the first place.

For all the “baggage” Palin is supposedly carrying around and for all her alleged inexperience, just remember who’s 3rd in terms of succession, folks. And also remember that John Edwards was only a one-term Senator himself when he was Kerry’s running mate 4 years ago

And “Troopergate”…? Or did you mean “Troopergate?” Just what is it with these governors from rural states starting with the letter “A” and their law enforcement agencies?

The reason we’re bringing this up is because these two aforementioned issues are indeed legitimate issues. The “experience” charge can be legitimately leveled and legitimately countered. That’s how civil discourse and debate works. That’s how people make up their mind on who they will vote for in a democracy. “Troopergate” is a legitimate issue. We hope the facts come out and that Governor Palin accounts for herself in a truthful manner regarding what sort of influence she did exert.

But over the weekend what do lefty bloggers, instead, latch onto and what does the press dutifully lap-up but the controversy surrounding Sarah Palin, her son Trig who suffers from Down’s Syndrome and her oldest daughter Bristol. The Daily Kos, who has been at the forefront of this noble truthing effort was forced to take down a post claiming Sarah Palin was lying about her giving birth to Trig as she was covering for the fact that Trig was actually Bristol’s son. All this based upon a photo taken that showed Bristol with an alleged “baby-bump”. Go ahead and look at the photo. What Bristol possesses, however, is what we down here in the Lower 48 and which possess an I.Q. above room temperature and who do not have hearts seething with rage refer to as “baby-fat”. Nice work, Kos.

The Left has ample material on Palin by which to work but what do they focus on instead: the motherhood of a young boy with Down’s syndrome and the propriety of a mother of 5 taking on the duties of Vice President which is highly ironic, of course, as it betrays the liberal/Left mantra of “having your family and career, too”.

Didn’t seem to be an issue with John Kennedy… oh, he was the dad…the husband. Got sexism?

Anyway, we encourage those on the Left who wish to pursue these sordid and disgusting storylines as its apparent it makes them feel all tingly inside, sends a thrill up their leg to talk about teen sex and satisfies their desire to take down a self-made woman who is not perfect, whose family is not perfect and to our knowledge never made claims to the contrary. And we welcome them also for purely selfish reasons as, if they continue, may prove to turn this election into a walk.

Backlash is a bitch, y’all.

Nice read here from Rich Lowry on PDS

They Just Can't Help Themselves

B-Daddy here. The picture at left is supposed to represent a donkey's foot giving the boot to a "blue dog." Over at Slate.com, nut-roots blogger Glenn Greenwald looks at the extremely low approval ratings of Congress and immediately concludes that, clearly, Congress isn't "progressive" enough. His solution? Launch internecine warfare to purge the ideologically impure from the ranks of Democrat office holders. His organization, Blue America, intends to do exactly that. Doesn't this carry risks, you ask? Not for the true believer. Best to sum up his logic by excerpting one paragraph:

The Blue America campaign also ran ads against Blue Dog Rep. John Barrow in Georgia, who did have a progressive primary challenger, state Sen. Regina Thomas. It was always clear that Barrow was highly likely to defeat Thomas in the primary. It was also clear that if Thomas beat the odds and won the primary, her chances of beating the Republican in the general election was far less than the chances of the more conservative and incumbent Barrow, who himself had to fight hard to win reelection in 2006. Knowing that a Barrow defeat in the primary might make a Republican win more likely in November, Blue America nonetheless ran ads against him. [emphasis BwD's] We believed that even if Barrow prevailed in his primary (as he ultimately did), the ad campaign against him would undermine his reputation in his district and could thus force Barrow, the Blue Dog Caucus and the Democratic leadership to devote far more resources to defending his seat for November. That is what it means to attach a price to trampling on the political values of Democratic supporters.

By the way, we at BwD, welcome this tom-foolery on the part of the nut-roots crowd. It only proves that they are still adolescents at heart, and will never be ready to take power or be taken seriously.

H/T RealClearPolitics

Quote of the Day

"Blackwater is getting a bad rap."

So who do suppose handled Obama's security when he was over there in Iraq and Afghanistan? More nutroot heartache surely to ensue.

H/T: Protein Wisdom via Hot Air

P.S. Part and parcel to BDS is the hatred and vilification of any and everything associated with Bush and particularly with regard to the War on Terror. We remember with great clarity how it was that Haliburton’s contract for their work for the military in Kosovo was renewed back in the late 90s under Bill Clinton without competitive bidding with nary a peep from anybody as by all accounts they were doing a bang-up job providing logistical and infrastructure support for the war effort there.

Its pretty simple - the U.S. military is at its best when it can devote the maximum resources possible to killing the bad guys. And when this is done overseas it requires a massive degree of logistical coordination and resources (our day job allows for some keen insight into this area). And when U.S. troops are deployed for long periods of time these logistical resources that house, cloth and feed our troops (to name just the most basic elements – there are many more) are stretched beyond the DOD’s organic capacity because it’s simply too costly and inefficient to maintain these standing resources during peacetime.

This is why outfits like Haliburton and Blackwater are so critical to the effectiveness of our armed forces. Any clear-headed rational assessment of their value will bear this out and this is why it is so frustrating to see them attacked on purely political grounds. Companies like Haliburton and Blackwater aren’t going anywhere…. woops, that’s right – Blackwater is drastically cutting back their security services because the shit they have been taking is not worth the corporate headache. Again, we hope everyone’s happy with this latest development.