Lazy and careless is as lazy and careless does…

Or is that “Stupid is as stupid does”?

[Note: originally, “careless” above read the interestingly typo-ed, “carfeless”-careless of me, eh? ;-)]

Which one did their homework and which one just took The Obamassiah’s press release straight to print?

Washington Wire – WSJ.com : Obama Camp Routed Out Illegal Donations from Palestinians

August 5, 2008, 5:13 pm

Obama Camp Routed Out Illegal Donations from Palestinians

Glenn R. Simpson reports on the presidential race.

Obama campaign officials said a trio of Palestinian brothers in the Middle East attempted last year to make $33,000 in illegal donations to the campaign via the internet.

The brothers sought to buy “Obama for President” T-shirts in some 97 attempts, 32 of which were initially successful.

They wrongly identified themselves as American citizens, campaign officials said, and listed their address as “GA”, the abbreviation for Georgia, when in fact they live in a refugee camp in Gaza, a rump city-state between Israel and Egypt that is under the control of Hamas.

The donations came in between Sept. 20 and Dec. 6 and virtually all of the money, about $33,500, was returned by December 6. But the refunds weren’t reported to the Federal Election Commission due to a technical error, campaign officials said.

Washington Wire – WSJ.com : Obama Camp Routed Out Illegal Donations from Palestinians.

But for another view

ELECTION 2008
Arabs deny Obama camp returned illegal donations
Candidate’s staffers insist Gaza brothers refunded, but men say, ‘We did not receive any money back’
Posted: August 06, 2008
10:48 am Eastern

By Aaron Klein
© 2008 WorldNetDaily

Sen. Barack Obama’s campaign contends it returned $33,500 in illegal contributions from Palestinians in Hamas-controlled Gaza, but the donors told WND today they have not received any money…

… The Obama camp insisted the remaining $2,500 was refunded Monday and all of the refunds will be reflected soon in an amended report. The campaign said new controls are in place to prevent any similar attempts in the future.

But WND asked two of the brothers – Monir and Hasam Edwan – to respond to the campaign’s claims.

“No, we did not receive any money back from the Obama campaign at any time,” said Monir Edwan.

Shame on the WSJ for simply running with a press release from The One’s Obamabots. Ask questions, guys. Look for sources to verify or refute claims. What? Is the WSj in the tank for The Obamassiah now, too?


h.t. Right Voices

What a difference an unconfessed bias makes

[Hey, Charlie! Denial’s not a river in Egypt… ]

Via Powerline, The Anchress offers this compare/contrast matchup of different Charlie Gibson interviews:

Obama interview:

How does it feel to break a glass ceiling?
How does it feel to “win”?
How does your family feel about your “winning” breaking a glass ceiling?
Who will be your VP?
Should you choose Hillary Clinton as VP?
Will you accept public finance?
What issues is your campaign about?
Will you visit Iraq?
Will you debate McCain at a town hall?
What did you think of your competitor’s [Clinton] speech?

Palin interview:

Do you have enough qualifications for the job you’re seeking? Specifically have you visited foreign countries and met foreign leaders?
Aren’t you conceited to be seeking this high level job?
Questions about foreign policy
-territorial integrity of Georgia
-allowing Georgia and Ukraine to be members of NATO
-NATO treaty
-Iranian nuclear threat
-what to do if Israel attacks Iran
-Al Qaeda motivations
-the Bush Doctrine
-attacking terrorists harbored by Pakistan
Is America fighting a holy war? [misquoted Palin]

Instructive, no?

Mending Walls: Politics

“Good fences make good neighbors.”


In several posts over the years here at twc, I’ve invoked the principles of Classicism. Usually these invocations are in aid of addressing the artistic merits–or more often lack thereof–of different expressions claiming artistic merit, but I think the principles have a broader application to society at large, as well. For review, here they are:

Aside from technical matters of form, the principles of Classicism, as found in Classical Music, were

  • balance
  • clarity
  • accessibility
  • expressiveness
  • edification

Think about it a bit. Wouldn’t it be better were political discourse to be balanced? No more thumb on the Mass Media Podpeople Hivemind scales or being in the tank for one viewpoint or candidate over another, just balanced reports by reporters who are aware of their biases and attempt to be fair in reporting the viewpoints and positions of those with whom they disagree? And wouldn’t it be amazing if that behavior were to spill over into political speech by candidates? What a boon for participatory government that would be!

And how about clarity? If politicians would seek to be clear, open and transparent instead of obfuscating their views with obscurantist babble and long-winded perorations and rambling perambulations designed to conceal the fact that they’re avoiding questions, people might actually listen with understanding (even appreciation! Amazing thought). Clear, unequivocal statements that lean heavily on fact and reason to persuade would be refreshing in politics, don’t you think?

And with clarity, accessibility goes hand-in-hand. If politicians were accessible, open to honest inquiry and continually aiming to make themselves available for discussion with The People, continually striving to make their policies, goals and purposes understandable instead of hiding behind doubletalk, perhaps we’d be able to have more political discussions about policy than about personality.

Expressiveness. Is anyone else besides me tired almost to death with the low quality of political speaking? Persuasive speech that depends on projecting phony emotion rather than full of genuine emotion powered by real reasons is a paper tiger. Even reading from teleprompters, it seems most contemporary politicians have the persuasive speaking ability of a doped chimp. Not pointing fingers, exactly, but when The One is held up as an example of expressive and persuasive public speaking, I begin to suspect the ones describing him so of being lobotomized and deaf.

Or perhaps it’s just that they’ve been around contemporary examples of political speech too long and have become effectively brain damaged by those examples. Could be. Rather in the manner of a public that laps up the artistic poison that is top 40 “artists'” manufactured “music” because their ears have been long dulled by exposure to similar noise.

Could it be that Sarah Palin’s convention speech electrified so many in part because it embodied at least some elements of Classical principles? My exhortation to her would be: Punch up the good stuff, Sarah. More clarity, please. Be balanced and restrained when dealing with jackasses like Charlie Gibson. Remain accessible. You need no lessons on expressiveness; just keep it up; more, please. And continue to build up (edify) our coutry, our people, by talking about what’s right about America. Proudly display the confidence that faith trumps doubt, that real hope and real change, as opposed to the phony hope n change (or is that “shuck n jive”–oops! now I’ll be accused of being a racist! My bad. *yawn*) of empty rhetoric, must come from the People.

Maybe some of it’ll rub off on the smart pols. I’ll not hold my breath, but maybe.


Trackposted to The Pink Flamingo, Phastidio.net, Wingless, Political Byline, Conservative Cat, and Stageleft, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.

The Bell Curve

No, not that one (although there are strong corelations); I’m talking about the reality bell curve, where the left-hand side indicates propensity toward fantasy unrelated to reality (or “reality-based fantasy” among its most rational inhabitants) and the right-hand side indicates a propensity toward a connection with “real” reality in ones thinking. Or think of such a bell curve as left-hand side: arational; right-hand side: rational.

In such a model, the political Left/Right divide begins to make sense…

Those of us stuck in the middle can only fantasize about politics driven by reason.

<hr />

Hmmm… Harvey has another take on the issue.