Townhall.com, Where Your Opinion Counts
Talk Radio:   Bill Bennett   Mike Gallagher   Dennis Prager   Michael Medved   Hugh Hewitt   
BREAKING NEWS  LeftArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican   RightArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican  
Columns, funnies & more in your inbox!
  • Check the boxes and send us your email address to receveive your free newsletter
  • Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
  • Townhall.com’s weekly inside scoop on what’s happening behind the scenes in the world of politics. When news breaks, we report.
  • Signup to receive the latest daily Townhall cartoons

Townhall.com The Blogspot for Political, Conservative and Republican Blogs and Bloggers


Wednesday, April 23, 2008
Hill and O Serve Up Competing Narratives on YouTube
Posted by: Mary Katharine Ham at 10:10 AM
With the future of the Democratic primary about as clear after Pennsylvania as the Potomac after a three-day rainstorm, Hillary and Obama are pushing competing narratives this morning. Their YouTube channels serve up their rationales:

Obama: 'Impossible for Obama to Lose His Lead'


Hillary: A Win is a Win, Loser



As much as I'm enjoying the Hillary resurgence, I can't help but think that she's just disastrously unlikeable on the stump. This speech, though Dick Morris and others applauded it, was so very monotone and uninspiring for me. Interestingly, Obama's campaign isn't even posting his concession speech, which was worlds better than Hillary's victory speech, but who needs oratory when you've got delegate math? And, for Hillary, who needs delegate math when you've got the popular vote (if Michigan and Florida are counted). This thing is never going to end.




Tuesday, April 22, 2008
This Obama Concession Speech Brought to You By...
Posted by: Mary Katharine Ham at 10:48 PM
Abercrombie and Fitch. All three men standing behind Obama are wearing A&F logo t-shirts.

Odd placement. Obama: the product placement candidate.

Update: So, nothing is accidental in the placement of the folks behind Obama, right? They're young, white males. Is that the sell? They're also college-aged frat boys with sunburns left over from a Redneck Riviera spring break. Does Obama really need to convince us he can succeed with the kind of voters who drop by the polling place right after a couple keg stands? I was pretty convinced he had that demographic nailed down.





Tuesday, April 22, 2008
Money, Money, Money
Posted by: Mary Katharine Ham at 10:43 PM
Paul Begala, appearing on CNN, says the Clinton campaign e-mails to tell him they've raised $500,000 in the last hour.

Could be hype, but her numbers will undoubtedly go up.





Tuesday, April 22, 2008
Hillary: Serious About One War
Posted by: Mary Katharine Ham at 10:26 PM
Exactly where is the "war on science" taking place? Was that really worth a mention in the acceptance speech?

Could she be less inspiring? I have trouble listening to her, and it's my job to listen to her.





Tuesday, April 22, 2008
Chicken Obama
Posted by: Mary Katharine Ham at 9:46 PM
Coming soon to an N.C. TV near you...




Tuesday, April 22, 2008
Petulance '08!
Posted by: Mary Katharine Ham at 9:27 PM
Republicans have gotta love this in the general:
...more than 60% of Clinton voters say they wouldn't be happy if Obama were the nominee; about half of Obama voters say the same. 25% of Clinton supporters say they'd vote for McCain in the general election; 17% of Obama supporters say they'd vote for McCain in the general election.
And, for all the concerns conservatives have about McCain, it does seem that we, in all our stubborn inability to rally behind any conservative alternative to McCain, stumbled on about the only Republican who can capitalize on the sore loser contingent.





Tuesday, April 22, 2008
Ride the Link
Posted by: Mary Katharine Ham at 4:30 PM

overdoneoverdone


You know who's from Pennsylvania? That's right. Poison.

What to expect in Pennsylvania tonight. Geraghty says Hillary by four, but he's got a lot of "buts" in there. I said Hillary by 8 last week on Hugh Hewitt's show.

Speaking of "buts," the Clinton campaign brings us "ass you can believe in."

Reportedly "astronomical" turnout in Philly. Maybe some of those new voters Obama's counting on to close the gap.

Clinton offers total obliteration...of Iran, in the event of an attack on Israel. In response to this and the OBL ad, I find myself in the very odd position of agreeing with Matt Yglesias, at least on strategy:
At the end of the day, if this is an election about how in uncertain times we need to flee into the arms of a strong, comforting, figure of experience and authority then that figure is John McCain. The alternative story is that in uncertain times we need to turn the pages on disastrous policies that have gotten us into our current mess.
Obama fills that "alternative story" much more comfortably than Hillary, except for when he's touting McCain's ability to be a fine president. Oops.

The right-wing hawks get all giddy when Hill talks like this, though. She's such a naughty girl.

Obama gets Willie Horton-ed.

Using Twitter to relay news about the "colorful" problems Philly voting can pose.

Bill Clinton's Operation Destroy Wife Strategically and Publicly in Work Life, a post-lude to Destroy Wife Emotionally and Publicly in Personal Life continues apace.

Incoming! Pa. spin!

Obama the Wimp solidifies his title.

HRC: "A win is a win."


The first in the David Brock $40 million hit parade on McCain paints him as a Kerry-style playboy with sugar momma. Really lame.

Hillary's whippin' up a win. Better get your oven mitts on, 'cause she's too hot to handle! She's fixin' to nuke Iran like a one of them Velveeta/salsa combo dips. And, all of it's a bit...






Tuesday, April 22, 2008
Obama Offers his First Press Avail Since April 11
Posted by: Mary Katharine Ham at 3:29 PM

He answered all of eight questions without balking. He's asked about his strategic blunder in saying that McCain would be a better president than Bush:

Q: Senator the other day you said that even john McCain would be better than George W. Bush. Did you in effect undercut or weaken the Democrats argument that John MCCain is the same as George Bush by suggesting that all three of you would be better?

BO: Oh no. you know, I know that conventional, text book politics means that unless you completely demonize the other side then you are showing weakness. I don’t believe that. I think Senator Clinton’s suggesting that she and John McCain are the two people who are qualified to be commadner-in-chief is probably something that could end up coming back to haunt us in November. I think to say that John McCain and some of his instincts may be better than George Bush’s, that’s a low bar. And what I also said in the same breath was that his ideas, what he’s offering are warmed over versions of Bush foreign policy and economic policy. So there’s no contradiction there. You know, but I’ve said repeatedly that I think john McCain is a genuine hero and a decent person. I just think he’s got it wrong in terms of where we need to take the country.

The brave new world of Obama's "new" politics includes an awful lot of avoidance of hard questions, no?

Update: Obama was also asked about Clinton's claim that Obama's camp played the race card on him in response to his Jesse Jackson comments in South Carolina. Which, I concede that some of Bill's comments have come under unfair racial fire (the "fairy tale" quote, for instance), but the Jesse Jackson comment was a cut-and-dried attempt to minimize Obama's win because he's the "black candidate."

Bill Clinton is now outright lying about what he said about the "race card" yesterday, and Allah has the transcript and video of Obama responding.

Since Obama's greatest advantage over Hillary is "honesty," I'm sure this will help, Bill. What a doofus this guy is.









Tuesday, April 22, 2008
Rob Portman as Veep?
Posted by: Mary Katharine Ham at 3:05 PM
So sayeth Bob Novak...




Tuesday, April 22, 2008
'We Can Win This War'
Posted by: Mary Katharine Ham at 2:36 PM

Michael Yon's book, "Moment of Truth in Iraq," is now for sale on Amazon.

The war correspondent for the Internet age, Yon has been embedded with American troops who trust him through years of combat in Iraq, from bombing to rebuilding and rancor to awakening.

His book is reviewed in the New York Post today, and reveals a peek at the kind of stories Yon (and other embeds like him) tells that the MSM doesn't:
He shares a rarely reported aspect of the American effort in Iraq - rebuilding: "The American soldier is the most dangerous man in the world," he says, "and the Iraqis had to learn that before they would trust or respect us. But it was when they understood that these great-hearted warriors, who so enjoyed killing the enemy, are even happier building a school or making a neighborhood safe that we really got their attention."
And another:
While in Baghdad he captured another iconic photo - Muslims and Christians rebuilding St John's church in the Dora district. "The most wonderful thing to see was how hard the Muslim neighbors worked to get the church reopened. Local Muslims invited me to see the reopening; they wanted Americans to know they protect Christians in their neighborhood," Yon explains.
Buy his book and donate to embeds like him who are willing to go to Iraq to tell its stories, if you feel they need to be told: Michael Totten and The Long War Journal are a couple of great options.





Tuesday, April 22, 2008
Barack and Hillary in the Ring
Posted by: Mary Katharine Ham at 1:59 PM
Click over for video of the showdown between a Barack impersonator and a Hillary impersonator on WWE last night. As hilarious and ridiculous as one would imagine. You gotta love politics sometimes.




Tuesday, April 22, 2008
McGovern Continues the Revenge 'Swiftboating' of McCain
Posted by: Mary Katharine Ham at 1:15 PM

I was talking to someone last night about the Democrats' commandeering and utter misuse of the word "swiftboating." To "swiftboat" a candidate, in lib parlance, is to call into question some facet of a candidate's character or record that the Left deems unquestionable, and to do it in some dastardly and dishonest fashion. Alternate definitions also include the words "noise machine."

Of course, to those of us who thought the Swiftboat Veterans for Truth brought up some legitimate points-- like the fact that John Kerry lied about being in Cambodia, and ticked off a bunch of honorable veterans by lumping them in with those "reminiscent of Genghis Khan"-- "swiftboating" means raising totally legitimate questions about the centerpiece of a candidate's campaign using his own words, eye-witness accounts, and the testimony of acquaintances to bolster the arguments. The very fact that the Left would rather leave those questions unasked is what makes the process of "swiftboating" dastardly in their eyes.

At any rate, as much as Obama the Wimp and Hillary the Wronged will whine about "swiftboating" throughout this interminable campaign, it's John McCain that's ending up on the wrong side of the dastardly and dishonest attacks.

There's the Hundred Years' War distortion, for which Obama was quickly and effectively shamed thanks to push-back from Camp McCain and the Right blogosphere. There was the distortion of McCain's economic remarks. But those are sort of run-of-the-mill campaign trail fudges of facts.

What's really nasty is the Rockefeller-style attack, questioning McCain' war record and accusing him of malfeasance or callousness in his Vietnam service.

And, we've got another one today from a Democratic surrogate. This is George McGovern being, well, a jerk (emphasis Jim Geraghty's):

Let me tell you what I would say to John McCain: neither of us is an expert on national defense. It's true that you went to one of the service academies but you were in the bottom of the class. It's true that you were a pilot in Vietnam, that you were shot down and spent most of the war in prison and we all sympathize with that and honor you for your courage. But you and I both had these battle experiences, you as a Navy fighter plane, I as an army bomber. I am not going to criticize your war record and your knowledge of national security but I don't want you criticizing mine either.

If I'd be allowed just one little dig at Senator McCain, since he gave me. I would say, 'John, you were shot down early in the war and spent most of the time in prison. I flew 35 combat missions with a 10-man crew and brought them home safely every time.'

Is this really the line of attack they want to try? McCain's war record is certainly not off-limits. It's the centerpiece of his campaign and character much as Kerry's was, though I'd argue McCain is making a much clearer connection between his battle-scarred past and his battle-ready future than Kerry ever did.

Democrats are welcome to talk about this issue, but they should be much more circumspect about it than this. McCain comes off as a much more natural and authentic war hero than Kerry ever did, and is therefore much harder to assail in this manner. Democrats also have much less leeway in attacking military service because the Left wing of their party is openly hostile to it in a way no Republican constituency is (see Code Pink's castigation of "Bush's Death Pimps"). When Republicans were questioning Kerry's war record, let's just say "questioning their patriotism" was much harder than it would have been had they been left-leaning Democrats.

I think the POW card can be overplayed by McCain, and Republicans need to be wary of making the argument that because he was a war hero, he's automatically qualified to be president. That was the exact weakness of Kerry's argument (plus he managed to Upper-Class Twit himself into disfavor with half the country), and we shouldn't wish to repeat it, even with a much more qualified war hero.

But Rockefeller's and McGovern's comments smack of revenge "swiftboating." The Left, scarred enough by the Swiftboat Vets' small but successful attacks on Kerry to make the word into a verb, seems to be hankering to return the favor. It will not play well with the American people, it will remind them that "questioning the patriotism" of elements of the Left is not always a pointless endeavor, and it will give McCain the chance to highlight an honorable war record that plays to his persona as a strong, loyal, courageous leader.

In the end, the counterproductive psychosis of Bush Derangement Syndrome will lead the Left to sink its own ship. They can't win an election in 2008 fighting the battles of 2004.






Monday, April 21, 2008
Ummm, Hill-Rod? Seriously?
Posted by: Mary Katharine Ham at 3:25 PM
She's lucky Obama's so obviously elitist or this might come across as clumsy and forced. Errr...Anyway, without further ado, Hillary's planned appeal to the viewers of Monday Night Raw. All the candidates will be making a statement. I do appreciate the reference to the "people's elbow," but who picked the name? Hill-Rod? It's disgraceful:

Hi, I’m Hillary Clinton. But tonight, in honor of the WWE, you can call me Hill-Rod.

This election is starting to feel a lot like “King of the Ring.” The only difference? The last man standing may just be a woman.

The truth is, this election is so important. The next president will face a stack full of difficult challenges right from the opening bell… to fix the economy, bring our troops home from Iraq, and make college more affordable. You need a president who will go to the mat for you. And that’s exactly what I’ll do.

I’ve been knocked down, but I’ve always gotten back up. And I know how to take a hit for the American people. And if things get a little tough, I may even have to deliver the “people’s elbow.”

Because this country is worth fighting for.

Now, I promise to stick to the political arena. So don't worry Randy Orton you're safe… for now.

When it comes to standing up for the American people though, I am ready to rumble.

Update:  Wow.
Update:Update:






Monday, April 21, 2008
Flailing: Why Obama's Nice, New Politics Won't Survive an Old Game
Posted by: Mary Katharine Ham at 1:50 PM

My how times have changed.

Hillary, who's candidacy rationale was once that she should be the nominee simply because it was inevitable is now clinging to the promise of internal polling in Pennsylvania and the whims of shaky superdelegates for a longshot at delivering the prize she had counted on in the halcyon days of early 2007. Once she was evitable, so to speak, she had no back-up, no secondary rationale. In the months since inevitability fell apart, Hillary has flailed for a new central message. She's been "tested," "vetted," "ready from Day One," and who could forget that she's a "fighter" who's been up against the "noise machine" during her "35 years of public service."

For Obama, the rationale has been that he is a uniter, a new kind of politician, a post-racial advanced breed of public servant fit only for uplift and unfit for mudfights. But, as the Jeremiah Wright dust-up and his small-town voter remarks have begun reveal an arrogance behind his honor, to hint at a shyster behind the smile, does Obama have a secondary rationale to offer? Now that the race has become a mudfight, and he may have to get his hands dirty to win, hasn't he gotten himself into a situation where standard campaign-trail toughness undercuts the very rationale for his candidacy? Slamming Hillary on every stop of a whistle-stop campaign isn't new politics. It's very, very old politics, and the voters of Pennsylvania and media alike are noticing.

On a train tour of Pennsylvania this week, Obama took a tougher tone with Hillary, and not everyone appreciated it:

One woman in the crowd, Lisa Barsky, 55, a psychologist from nearby Bala Cynwyd described herself as a “shifter” who had moved her support from Clinton to Obama because she considered him a greater unifying force. Still, she was a little put off by his attacks.

“I wish he wouldn’t,” she said. “He can be strong. But you don’t have to get down to somebody’s level -- you don’t have to get into the fistfight.”...

“A couple of times I said to myself, ‘That’s not true,’” Jill Carney, 51, an undecided Democrat and college teacher from Lancaster, said of Obama’s comments about Clinton and her policies. Asked what effect his more pointed comments had, she responded, “It makes me go the other way.”
On its face, it makes no sense at all for Jill Carney's distaste for negative politics to cause her to turn tail and run toward the Clintons, of all people, but Obama's negative attacks hurt his image worse than Hillary's do simply because she's never had any compunction about negativity or engaged in the self-righteous tut-tutting of the Obama campaign.

Obama's problems are compounded by the fact that if he's not that nice, new, squeaky-clean politician at all times--and the close fight in the Keystone State will not allow him to be-- he starts to look dishonest. He's been selling Bambi-style politics, but when it comes down to it, he'll become the hunter in a split second, battering Hillary with both barrels to serve his own purposes.

Honesty, of course, is his greatest advantage over Hillary. A recent poll showed him up 23 points on her in the head-to-head on that important quality, which is why he talks about Bosnia on the trail as much as possible. Americans-- left and right, to some extent--perceive him as a decent guy who's honestly interested in playing the game differently. That won't last forever. The Wright and "bitter" incidents have taken some of the shine off, and a knock-down drag-out with Hillary will make everyone wonder if the Messiah was just a snake oil salesman all along.

Obama is going to run into the same problem Hillary ran into in the primary, once his principle rationale falls apart in the heat of this extended Democratic race. Democrats are likely too far into the process to make the switch to Hillary, and Obama will start flailing for a new, improved rationale right around the time the very short general election gets started in earnest.

McCain will have presented himself as a strong leader, a tested decision-maker, and an everyman capable of mingling with the small-town folks Obama feels uncomfortable with. The McCain campaign, with some help from Obama, will have portrayed Obama as an elitist wimp not to be trusted with matters of national importance. McCain's an experienced campaigner who knows himself and who is known by the American people. He will wage a new kind of campaign, with frequent town hall appearances increasing his reputation as an honest, straight-shooting guy while Obama flails for a perfected rationale, likely closing himself off from frequent questioning.

It seems to me it will become rather clear rather quickly who represents more of that "new" kind of politics Obama-maniacs fetishize. An old dog will be teaching Obama more than a few new tricks.

Update: Yep, a friendly, smiley, new kind of politics. No cracking, here:

As Sen. Hillary Clinton was preparing to campaign here today, Sen. Barack Obama was meeting with voters at a diner and apparently pretty hungry.

"Why can't I just eat my waffle?" he said, when asked a foreign policy question by a reporter at the Glider Diner.









Friday, April 18, 2008
ABC to Shrink in Face of Lefty Blogosphere's Open Letter of Wrath!
Posted by: Mary Katharine Ham at 3:25 PM
Take this, ABC:
Neither Mr. Gibson nor Mr. Stephanopoulos lived up to these responsibilities. In the words of Tom Shales of the Washington Post, Mr. Gibson and Mr. Stephanopoulos turned in "shoddy, despicable performances." As Greg Mitchell of Editor and Publisher describes it, the debate was a "travesty." We hope that the public uproar over ABC's miserable showing will encourage a return to serious journalism in debates between the Democratic and Republican nominees this fall. Anything less would be a betrayal of the basic responsibilities that journalists owe to their public.
From the "undersigned," none of whom are afraid to unleash a "pretty vicious rant" or an "important action alert" if circumstances call for it.

I was on O'Reilly last night talking about the whiny uproar over the debate. They're icing the kicker, here, and it may work on the next left-leaning moderator charged with working a debate. They're very sensitive to being called right-wing tools, and the Left blogs know it.

Note that the first of the undersigned Guardians of Journalistic Integrity, Spencer Ackerman, turned an intellectual disagreement over a book review last week into a little slur fest for the writer of the book review. After all, it's all right to insult center-right, hawkish gay writers, right? That's the only way to uphold "serious journalism" while it's being attacked by the likes of Charlie Gibson.




Your Blog Postings:
Last updated 12 Minutes 9 Seconds Ago
Last updated 17 Minutes 16 Seconds Ago
Last updated 19 Minutes 53 Seconds Ago
Last updated 21 Minutes 15 Seconds Ago
Last updated 36 Minutes 40 Seconds Ago
 

Archives of our Conservative, Republican, Political Blogs

Blog Search



Townhall Conservative, Republican, Political Blogs Townhall Blogs
Townhall Conservative, Republican, Political Columns Columns
Your Townhall Conservative, Republican, Political Blogs Your Blogs
By Month
 November 2009
 October 2009
 September 2009
 August 2009
 July 2009
 June 2009
 May 2009
 April 2009
 March 2009
 February 2009
 January 2009
 December 2008
 November 2008
 October 2008
 September 2008
 August 2008
 July 2008
 June 2008
By Issue
 A Culture of Life
 Budget & Government
 Campaigns & Elections
 Education
 Energy & Environment
 Faith & Family
 Foreign Affairs
 Health Care
 Immigration
 Jobs & Economy
 Judges & Courts
 Media & Culture
 Property Rights
 Safety & Security
 Science & Technology
 Second Amendment
 Social Security
 Tax Relief
Advertisement

Comments Comments

Axeman
 Re: Pelosi: Buy a $15,000 Policy or Go to Jail
  By NOTW
NeoZionistTool
 Re: Maine vote repeals gay marriage law
  By Careful with that axe, Eugene
David
 Re: Maine vote repeals gay marriage law
  By Careful with that axe, Eugene
Nancy"face of pure evil" Pelosi,,,,,
 Re: Health Care Throwdown: Palin vs. Pelosi
  By colt.45
A final thought
 Re: Maine vote repeals gay marriage law
  By David
More lies
 Re: CBO: PelosiCare Cost Estimate = $3 Trillion Over 10 Years
  By Patrice
Crosseyed
 Re: Health Care Throwdown: Palin vs. Pelosi
  By Careful with that axe, Eugene
NeoZionistTool
 Re: Health Care Throwdown: Palin vs. Pelosi
  By Careful with that axe, Eugene
Here's anuddun
 Re: Maine vote repeals gay marriage law
  By David
Teabagger
 Re: Health Care Throwdown: Palin vs. Pelosi
  By Careful with that axe, Eugene
NeoConScum and dreadnaught
 Re: Maine vote repeals gay marriage law
  By David
Yeah trolls
 Re: Pelosi: Buy a $15,000 Policy or Go to Jail
  By Tea Party
"axe up his butt"
 Re: Health Care Throwdown: Palin vs. Pelosi
  By cottoneyed
TeaParty...
 Re: Health Care Throwdown: Palin vs. Pelosi
  By NeoConScum
I guess it does take an
 Re: Health Care Throwdown: Palin vs. Pelosi
  By cottoneyed
Saw one of CAIR's
 Re: Just Vote No
  By Tea Party
Shut YOUR stupid yap
 Re: Health Care Throwdown: Palin vs. Pelosi
  By Tea Party
Hey Boyd(D) Fl
 Re: Health Care Vote Looms: Where Does Your Rep. Stand?
  By Donnie
NOTW,
 Re: The Undecideds
  By cottoneyed
Crawfish: You are quite right
 Re: Pelosi: Buy a $15,000 Policy or Go to Jail
  By K.G.

The Latest on Town HallThe Latest on Town Hall


Blog Roll Blog Roll