The concession speech that Sen. Obama delivered last night was an exercise in intellectual dishonesty. In delivering such a dishonest speech, he’s re-inforcing the notion that he’s just another intellectually dishonest politician. Here’s part of his intellectual dishonesty:

John McCain believes that George Bush’s Iraq policy is a success, so he’s offering four more years of a war with no exit strategy; a war that’s sending our troops on their third tour, and fourth tour, and fifth tour of duty; a war that’s costing us billions of dollars a month and hasn’t made us any safer.

That’s a steaming pile of BS. Sen. McCain criticized President Bush’s policy. Sen. McCain frequently told people that he didn’t have confidence in Don Rumsfeld, that they needed more troops in Iraq. Had President Bush implemented the surge right after his reelection, Iraq likely would’ve been largely cleaned up by now.

Though that’s the biggest half-truth Sen. Obama said, it certainly wasn’t his only whopper:

John McCain said that George Bush’s economic policies have led to “great progress” over the last seven years, and so he’s promising four more years of tax cuts for CEOs and corporations who didn’t need them and weren’t asking for them; tax cuts that he once voted against because he said they “offended his conscience.”

Sen. Obama knows that Sen. McCain isn’t “promising four more years of tax cuts for CEOs”; Sen. McCain is advocating making the Bush tax cuts permanent. Sen. McCain is advocating that because he knows that letting the tax cuts expire is a huge tax increase.

Let’s also draw a contrast between President Bush’s economic policies and the policies that Sen. McCain is advocating. Sen. McCain is committed to eliminating earmarks. He’s threatening vetoes to bills with lots of wasteful spending. President Bush didn’t veto an appropriations bill until after Democrats regained control of the House and Senate. Here’s another portion of the speech that’s worth laughing at:

We can be a party of those who only think like we do and only agree with all our positions. We can continue to slice and dice this country into Red States and Blue States. We can exploit the divisions that exist in our country for pure political gain.

Or this time, we can build on the movement we’ve started in this campaign, a movement that’s united Democrats, Independents, and Republicans; a movement of young and old, rich and poor; white, black, Hispanic, Asian, and Native American. Because one thing I know from traveling to forty-six states this campaign season is that we’re not as divided as our politics suggests. We may have different stories and different backgrounds, but we hold common hopes for the future of this country.

Talk about worthless tripe. If Sen. Obama is the great uniter, why did he get his head handed to him in Pennsylvania? If Sen. Obama is the great uniter, then why can’t he attract blue collar workers? If he’s this great uniter, why is he getting his head handed to him with so many traditional pro-Democratic demographic groups?

Here’s what the WSJ is reporting about last night’s primary:

Pennsylvania delivered a 10-point win for Hillary Clinton last night, the same margin by which she carried demographically similar Ohio last month. Since the two states together are vital to Democratic chances in the fall, their primary results provide an important window on how Mrs. Clinton and Barack Obama are faring with key voter groups after the events of the last seven weeks.

The circumstantial evidence is that Mr. Obama lost ground among those “bitter” rural voters he described in his infamous San Francisco comments as likely to “cling” to religion and guns.

Mr. Obama lost weekly churchgoers (who made up over a third of Pennsylvania voters) by a clear 58% to 42% margin. In Ohio last month, weekly churchgoers voted 51% to 49% for Mrs. Clinton. Catholics, a conservative social group in both states, gave Mr. Obama only 31% of their votes in Pennsylvania and only 37% in Ohio. No numbers are available for gun owners in Ohio, but in Pennsylvania gun owners turned thumbs down on Mr. Obama by 62% to 38%.

All in all, only 63% of Pennsylvania Democratic voters told exit pollsters they would be satisfied if Mr. Obama won the nomination, down from 66% who said the same thing in Ohio. This translates into an opportunity for John McCain. Ten percent of Democrats said they would sit on their hands in a McCain-Obama race, and 15% said they would vote for McCain over the Illinois senator. That’s a significantly higher “grumble factor” than in a possible McCain-Clinton race, in which 6% of those voting said they would stay home and 11% said they would vote for Mr. McCain over Mrs. Clinton.

Given that Pennsylvania voted for John Kerry over George W. Bush by barely two points in 2004, the exit polls in last night’s Democratic primary are an open invitation for Mr. McCain to spend lots of time and money in the state.

The uniter ‘genie’ is out of the bottle as is the elitist snob genie. I don’t see a plausible scenario that helps Sen. Obama put those genies back in their respective bottles now that the video and audio are bouncing around the internet is beyond me.

It takes alot to change a powerful first impression. Voters’ first impression of Sen. Obama has been changed, which speaks volumes about the powerful imagery of the Pastor J-Wright tapes.

Finally, it’s difficult for me to picture a scenario as to how Sen. Obama can win in Pennsylvania or Michigan if he can’t repair the damage that he’s done to himself with his fundraiser speech. How that damages down-ticket Democrats is another consideration in all this. Don’t think that Howard Dean is only worried about whether Sen. Obama is a viable general election candidate. If Obama is seen as elitist, alot of those freshmen will start running away from Obama, putting both themselves and Sen. Obama at risk.

Technorati Tags: Obama, Howard Dean, Unity+Candidate, John Kerry, John McCain, Michigan, Pennsylvania, Election 2008

Cross-posted at LetFreedomRingBlog

1. Your argument is weakened by the fact that you fail to make the distinction between what McCain has said since running for President and what he said prior to running for President. McCain has flip flopped like so many politicians do to garner more support from their respective party. Oh and by the way, I have been a Republican for 16 years and have already voted for Obama once and will do so again in November. That kind of pull is why Obama is considered to be the great unifier and I can tell you I am not alone in my new allegiance. There are many, many others which is why the Republicans are freaked out. I will not vote for Clinton but I won’t vote for McCain either. McCain thinks we can “win” this war. He needs a history lesson…there is no winning religiously fueled wars and the US cannot afford to spend 100 years over there simply fueling the fire.
   The generalizations you make in your most recent entry are laughable at best. You are foolish to speak for all voters as, like many Republicans, you are clearly out of touch with the current mindset of the majority of American people. You should retitle your blog to be the silent minority not majority if you desire to be more accurate in your assertions.

   Comment by Erin — April 23, 2008 @ 9:19 pm

2. John Mc Cain didnt say we’d be there a hundred years, he said we’d be there a hundred if that’s what it took, meaning nothing more than he would stay as long as necessary, that one statement has been mis quoted out of context by the hysterical and nut roots everytime Iraq is brought up. Obviously Mc Cain is not going to be President a hundred years.

   On the other hand, the constant over reaching by conservative writers that “Uh-oh, Obama stepped in it good this time” is equally unrealistic. He hasn’t stepped in it, he’s not been really hurt much at all despite his gaffs and loony friends, he’s got the delegates, and he’s probably going to be the nominee, despite Hillary’s last charge.

   And we are divided. Between those who see the future with a benevolent socialist federal government passing out free tickets for everything from baby cradles to caskets, and those of us who see the same thing and are horrified at the prospects of the ever increasing tax burden and loss of personal freedom such a governemnt would bring.

   But what the hell do I know, Ive only been watching us decline to this sad state of affairs for the last 40 years. Im truly sorry, that I am not leaving my children with as good, as free, and as morally decent a country as my father gave me, that that we are left with the choice of an elitist socialist hiding behind his race, and a lukewarm moderate for President.

   Comment by T. A. Gray — April 23, 2008 @ 11:10 pm

3. John McCain does nothing different to change what is happening in Iraq. He can denounce Bush all he wants, but the damage has been done and McCain has no answer for what should happen next, despite that retarded 100 year comment. The troops are on stop-loss, serving their second, third, or fourth tour. American is deeper in debt to China to pay for this occupation.

   At this point, America needs to either fully commit themselves to winning this war, which means initiating a draft to provide the numbers we need to achieve true victory and raising taxes to fund this war without skimping on “the army you’d wish for”, or pull out of this religiously volatile region, cut our losses, and preserve what we have left.

   I’ll take an elitist president over someone who will leave my kids burdened with paying for the prolonged occupation of Iraq that has already cost America billions of dollars and its international credibility.

   T.A. Gray, I’d really like to hear your thoughts on how your children will be better off if McCain is elected.

   Comment by Liem — April 24, 2008 @ 4:34 pm

4. “ll take an elitist president over someone who will leave my kids burdened with paying for the prolonged occupation of Iraq that has already cost America billions of dollars and its international credibility.”

   I hope your not saying that if Obama is elected the debt for this war will mystically disappear!

   Ill tell what will disappear if he allows cap gains taxes to up to unprecedented highs

   Jobs.

   Comment by T. A. Gray — April 24, 2008 @ 5:42 pm

5. Oh and by the way, so will middle class investments in IRA’s and 401k’s.

   And dont believe for one minute the “rich” will finally pay their fair share, all they’ll have to do is move their accounts offshore.

   Ill give you a perfect example. Few years ago somebody decided it would be really neat to put a luxury tax of diesel yachts and repairs.

   Result, about 20 or so boat repair yards in Southern California and Florida went out of business. Why? Because it suddenly became cheaper to buy and reapair diesel yachts in Ensenada, Mexico and the Bahama’s.

   So just beware of the unintended cinsequences of a punitive tax policy.

   But to answer your question, I dont know if my kids are going to be better off under any president right now, all three leave a bad taste in my mouth. But if you think the way to prosperity is take more money away from wage earners, knock yourself out.

   Your going to be surprised how many of us are “wealthy” a couple years from now, when Obamsa’s tax hikes, if they get through Congress, take effect.

   Comment by T. A. Gray — April 24, 2008 @ 6:13 pm

6. And what about Iraq?

   Comment by Liem — April 25, 2008 @ 8:45 pm

7. Ah yes, your favorite topic isnt it? What about Iraq? Well, what about Iran? What about Syria? Pakistan? Afghanistan? What about Hamas, now that Jimmy has legitimized that gang of thugs?
   You think pulling out of Iraq is all we need to do, vote for your guy Obama.

   Your question should be, When are we going to get out of Korea? We’ve been there 54 years now. Where’s the hue and cry about that?? When are we going to get out of Germany and Italy?? We’ve been there for over 60 years! Why? When is Europe finally going to get off their collective ass and start defending themselves for a change?? Thats what you should be asking.

   You think France or Italy is going to stand up against an internal Islamic jihad, Or continue to cave in to political correctness?

   If you think Islamo-fascism, or a nuclear North Korea with that little drunk egomaniac in power are not threats to world peace, or that Europe will finally find the testicular fortitude to stand up and defend themselves, Obama’s your guy.

   What about Taiwan? Are they worth defending since Carter F’d up that realtionship ? I guess not huh?

   We ARE the free worlds military force - period.

   And for the forseeable future there is always going to be some asshole, like Chavez, Kim Il Jong, or Ahmedinajab we’ll have to defend democracy against. As long as we are democratic ourselves, although I must say I have my doubts how long we will be the way things are going in our own country.

   The world does not like us because we are in Iraq, they don’t like us because we have freedom, free enterprise and a democratic system. So if having the world like us is such a big deal, you know what to do, the future is in your generation’s hands now.

   Comment by T. A. Gray — April 26, 2008 @ 8:42 am

8. Well of course Iraq is my favorite subject; it’s the biggest burden dragging down this country and will continue to do so for quite some time. That is what will weaken America economically and militarily and that is what we leave behind to future generations.

   As for Iran, I’ll go with the NIE that states that Iran halted its nuclear development in 2003. They’re also going to fill the power vacuum in Iraq, and the results of that have yet to be seen. All I know is that conservatives and their pundits have absolutely no credibility when they fill out their “predictions” that just happen to yield the best results for themselves.

   The real problem is along the border of Pakistan and Afghanistan, where the Taliban is reemerging. You remember the Taliban right? Here’s a hint: they weren’t in Iraq.

   Syria has just recently denied claims that they are conducting nuclear activities, aided by the North Koreans. But, as in Iran, it’s not as if we have the capabilities to do anything about it other than bomb the shit out of their countries.

   Your claims over troops stationed in South Korea, Germany, and Japan for that matter are faulty arguments. Troops aren’t being killed and our economic strength isn’t being drained in these regions. Compare to Iraq.

   Europe can defend itself without the US babysitting their borders. And if Europe doesn’t, should we tell them how to run their country? If you say that “we are the free world’s military force” then what the hell are we doing?

   People in the Middle East don’t hate us for our freedoms. They hate us because of our historical intervention in their holy land. And the longer we stay, the larger support will be for extremists.

   Thanks for the post, TA Gray!

   Comment by Liem — April 26, 2008 @ 3:00 pm

9. Yeah whatever.

   Comment by T. A. Gray — April 26, 2008 @ 4:34 pm