Barack Obama spent $5.3 Million On The Stage and Lighting Used For His Coronation in Denver…

Personally, I did not waste my time watching Barack Obama’s acceptance speech at Invesco Field in Denver, a field he transformed into a Greek theater which shall go down in infamy as the Barackopolis.

It seems excessive even by narcissistic standards to spend $5.3 million dollars to construct a stage that was going to be used for one night and one night only, to deliver a speech that could have been delivered with the same impact at the Pepsi Center, where the rest of the convention was held.

I just hope that the media shows the same outrage and gives this the same exposure as it did to the $150,000 spent on Sarah Palin’s wardrobe. Here are excerpts from the Denver Business Journal story on the convention:

The Denver 2008 Convention Host Committee said Thursday that $60.9 million was raised to stage the Democratic National Convention — well over the $40 million the city originally promised to raise.

Most of that money went to pay expenses of the Democratic National Convention Committee, the party organization that staged the DNC. Nine percent of the host committee’s money went to pay its own expenses, which included salaries, marketing and staging various events off the convention grounds.

Convention expenses paid by the committee included $14.1 million for construction costs, including the stage and lighting, at the Pepsi Center and $5.3 million at Invesco Field.

Who else stages elaborate coronation ceremonies? Why other narcissistic crooks of course…

Posted by PUMA Pundit

WHY WE PROTEST 

WHY  WE  PROTEST

submitted by an anonymous PUMA

In this historic election year, when the press has been interested, it has expressed confusion regarding why some Clinton supporters won’t get behind Obama and support the Democratic Party.  Many commentators, news analysts, op-ed journalists and others have stated that it seems unfathomable that someone who supports Clinton’s values and platform would not support Obama.  What they fail to realize, however, is that the issue goes far beyond candidate preference.  The core of the issue now lies in how the candidate came to be the Democratic Party’s nominee in the first place.

It is has often been stated that Obama won fair and square and Clinton’s supporters, who have been described as “bitter”, “vitriolic”, and “rabid”, need to “get over it”.  However, Obama did not “win” fair and square, and herein lies the problem.

Media

• The media was calling upon Senator Clinton to drop out of the race after Senator Obama won the Iowa caucus and continued the pressure her to drop out of the race throughout the primaries.  This was done despite what ultimately resulted in Clinton winning more primaries than any other candidate in history.  In a refreshing and well researched piece, journalist Eric Boehlert (4/30/08, Media Matters for America) describes the media’s pressure placed upon Senator Clinton to drop out of the race as being “unprecedented”.  He notes that, historically, there has been no example of the media intervening in the primary process by telling a candidate when they should end their campaign.  Boehlert cites numerous examples in the press, ranging from small city newspapers to national publications such as The Washington Post providing example after example of the media’s relentless pressure for Clinton to drop out.

• The media did not vet Senator Obama, and instead gave him a free pass on numerous very important issues that deserved scrutiny.  The mass media literally swooned over Senator Obama from the get go, from the now famous references about getting chills up his let uttered by Chris Mathews on MSNBC to gushing op-ed pieces in which even journalists themselves commented that they had to make an effort “not to drink the cool aid”.  The debates between Obama and Clinton revealed enormous discrepancies regarding how the candidates were treated.  And after the final debate, moderated by Charlie Gibson and George Stephanopoulos ended, the media pounded with voracity, claiming the debate was “shoddy”, “despicable” and “embarrassing”.  Why?  It appears that Senator Obama was finally held to the same degree of scrutiny as Clinton.  Meanwhile, as Obama enjoyed cheers, support, sympathy and applause from the media, Clinton was persistently painted in a negative light.  She was cast as a “shrill”, “driven solely by ambition” “untrustworthy” candidate who only got to where she is today because of her husband.  The media pounded away, day after day, with disrespectful caricatures of Clinton, leaving no stone unturned.  They ridiculed her laugh, her body size and form, her wrinkles, her earrings, her “bitchiness” her emotional “instability”.  The Gallop Poll, among others, validated that most in the country agreed that Clinton (and McCain) were treated more harshly by the press than Obama.

DNC

• The DNC was calling on Senator Clinton to drop out of the race early on in the primaries.

• The DNC, repeatedly referring to “rules”, initially “punished” Florida and Michigan for holding their primaries earlier than they had been allowed to do, depriving millions of voters from having their votes fully and honestly represented.  On May 31, 2008, The DNC Rules and Bylaws Committee voted to give the Florida delegation a half vote each.  The committee’s ruling pertaining to Michigan was even more complex, whereby the committee allocated votes to Senator Obama that had literally not been case for him.  Both Michigan and Florida were states where Senator Clinton won.  Once Senator Obama’s nomination appeared secured well in advance of the convention, the Obama campaign and the DNC then decided to give Florida and Michigan full voting privileges.  Their willingness to make a dramatic shift in their position regarding the rules leaves anything thinking person suspect as to their motives for their decisions and the timing of these choices.

• The DNC did not defend Senator Clinton when the media bombarded the American public with relentlessly biased coverage, coverage that often treated Senator Clinton in a disrespectful way due to her gender.  While Senator Clinton was subjected to a deluge of outrageous treatment by the media, the Obama campaign and the DNC fell silent.  After the fact, Howard Dean offered a sad excuse by saying that he doesn’t watch television.  And, two weeks after Senator Clinton suspended her campaign, Speaker Nancy Pelosi half-heartedly acknowledged that Clinton had been subjected to sexist treatment by the media.

• Although Senator Clinton ultimately won more primaries than any candidate in history and won the popular vote, the DNC continued to press her to withdraw from the race throughout the primary season.  In so doing, they sent the message that they already had the candidate in mind who they wanted to be their nominee, irrespective of the fact that millions and millions of Democrats continued to go to the polls to cast their vote for Senator Clinton.

Super Delegate Votes Bought

• It appears that Super Delegates votes were bought and that the dollars show a heavy financial influence from the Obama campaign, in particular. Per Foon Rhee’s 2/14/08 article in The Boston Globe, since 2005, Senator Obama’s pac contributed over $694,000 to the political campaigns of various superdelegates as compared to a total of $195,000 in contributions from Senator Clinton’s pac during that same time period. In addition, at the time the article was written, nearly half of the 81 superdelegates who had already come out in support of Senator Obama had received donations that totaled more than a quarter of a million dollars. In contrast, only 13 of the 109 superdelegates (less than 10%) who had announced their support for Senator Clinton had received contributions and the total amount of those contributions was less than $100,000. In sum, Obama’s pac gave more money to more superdelegates who came out in support of him, compared to Clinton’s pac which gave far less money, if any, to a much smaller percentage of the superdelegates who supported her candidacy.

Caucus System and Voter Fraud

• The very nature of a caucus system is undemocratic and disenfranchises voters.  Succinctly stated in The News Tribune (Tacoma, WA) regarding the caucus system, “This method of nominating presidential candidates is outdated, undemocratic and limiting.”  Huge blocks of voters are disenfranchised for countless reasons, including those that are too old or ill to attend a caucus, people working split shifts, those who working in the helping professions who must be on call 24/7, people whose religious obligations prohibit them form being able to partake of a caucus held at a specific time, parents with young children, those who are unable to cope with the often hectic and disorganized environment of a caucus, voters with no transportation to get them to and from caucus sites that are often far from home, as well as voters who may not want to announce their vote (typically a very private thing) in public in front of friends and neighbors.

• Voter fraud and intimidation was rampant in many states, particularly caucus states.  Clinton supporters were accosted, some were even physically attacked.  Sign in sheets were stolen, rules were not followed, and votes from people who did not live in the county or who were not living at all were registered, individuals voted without having to show any identification, among other offenses, all to the benefit of Senator Obama.  The litany of violations is long and disturbing and is documented in pain staking detail in an ongoing research project initiated and written by Dr. Lynette Long.

Rigged Democratic Convention

• In the days leading up to the Democratic convention, the Obama campaign and the DNC made it clear that having Senator Clinton’s name placed in nomination was not a done deal.  Senator Obama engaged in negotiations with Senator Clinton regarding this issue and it appeared from several press reports that Senator Obama had the ultimate power and final say so on this issue.  With precious few days remaining until the convention, in order to ensure Senator Clinton’s name be placed in nomination, many pledged delegates began to collect the required number of signatures to be presented on the convention floor as an alternative avenue toward this goal.  Some states discouraging pledged delegates from collecting signatures, urging them to hold off until the results of these negotiations were known.  At the same time, Senator Obama’s campaign began contacting delegates to inquire into how they planned to vote.

• The Democratic Convention roll call vote was a sham.  Per an August 27^th, 2008 CNN report replete with video footage, pledged delegates were pressured before voting to avoid any “drama” on the convention floor.  The subtext being quite obvious: Cast your vote for Senator Obama in order to reduce the number of votes for Senator Clinton during the roll call thereby skewing the results so as not to reveal how very close this election was.  Video tapes from the breakfast meetings of the California delegation at the convention show speaker after speaker touting Obama, calling for delegates to chant “We will unite” and “Yes we can”.  What message did such relentless speeches send to delegates who were pledged to cast their vote as assigned, each vote reflecting thousands of Democratic voters who went to the polls during the primary to cast their vote, 18 million of whom cast their vote for Clinton.  Ultimately, the roll call vote was a sham and did not even come close to reflecting Senator Clinton’s historic achievement.  As of this writing, all of what went on behind the scenes has yet to come to light.  From what we know thus far, it is apparent the vote was rigged.  Unlike Jesse Jackson’s historic campaign for the Democratic nominee in 1984 when his name was placed in nomination and his 465 ½ delegate votes were accurately recorded for the history books, Senator Clinton’s delegate votes ultimately did not reflect the will of the voters.  As a result, the fact that she won more primaries than any candidate in history and that she was a woman will forever remain obliterated from the official record.

This is what many of us are railing against.  We cannot support a candidate or a party that selects a candidate in the face of so many egregious acts.  Nor can we support a candidate or a party that condoned and nurtured such corruption.  It goes against the very fabric of our democracy.

This is why in past years many of us who had our preferred candidate lose the nomination but who still voted for the Democratic ticket cannot do so this year.  Because this is about far more than the fact that our candidate “lost”.  This is about the very nature of how Barack Obama came to be the nominee.  The journey has been anything but fair and square, honest and open.

For many of us who are Democrats, it is unacceptable for our party to operate in this way.  We will not tolerate it.  It will not stand.

The fact that Barack Obama is so inexperienced and has a history of affiliating himself with highly questionable characters is bad enough.  The fact that the Democratic Party selected him as they have and exhibited a tolerance for misogyny and fraud is even worse.   It would appear from an analysis of the data, that the Obama campaign and the Democratic party stole the election from Senator Clinton.

So, yes, we do protest and will do so for as long as we see fit.  This is America, after all.  We treasure our democratic values.  And we hold our right to dissent and speak out freely in the face of wrong doing near and dear.

WE ARE THINKING DEMOCRATS - NOT YELLOW DOGS

 

WE ARE THINKING DEMOCRATS - NOT YELLOW DOGS

by Bill Boe

 

Hillary’s speech answers the burning question that has been on the minds of her supporters since that Saturday afternoon when she suspended her candidacy—quo vadis? (i.e. dear girl whither go’est thou?). Are you still the war goddess we saw on the night of the South Dakota  victory just waiting for the right opportunity to launch a counteroffensive; or have you abandoned the quest and if so why? The answer is neither.  Instead, Hillary has decided to wrap herself in the tattered principles of the party, and the highest ideals of our nation, and to dare the rest of us friend and foe alike to follow her lead.  In this safe haven, she finds personal and political salvation. She knows who Obama is and supports him only to that extent.

The more I think about it the more I realize that this is the right answer for Hillary. Consider the matter from her perspective: you have given everything you have to this ship of fools called the Democratic Party–everything.  During the past eighteen months you made a clear, cogent and convincing case for your candidacy, your party and this nation. It resonated with the American People. You made them feel that they were a part of something wonderful which was about them and more than them.  Big Media dismissed the historic nature of your candidacy but we did not. You re-energized women and caused conservative men to rethink the whole issue of women’s rights at a time when this country needs all heads in the game. You connected with real people and changed the world for the better.

At the same time, what you have done for this country has come at a high personal cost– in terms of heartbreak, betrayal, and disappointment. We admire your commitment to duty and the self discipline it requires. But no human being is immune from such sentiments.  Thus, we can only imagine how it broke your heart to see two of your closest friends and allies suffer tragic deaths in the days leading up to the Convention.  Or to see your beloved daughter savaged by the likes of David Schuster and his MSNBC cronies.  Likewise, we can only imagine how it felt to see people like Bill Richardson forget all you have done for them and turn their backs on you in your hour of political need—after they promised to support you.  Or to be targeted by traitors like Dean, Pelosi and Brazille who conspired with the likes of Karl Rove to undermine your candidacy, and the standing of centrist   Democrats in the party. Or insiders like Patty Solis Doyle who betrayed your confidence and made you wonder who you can trust. Finally we understand the bitter disappointment of winning the popular vote only to be cheated out of the nomination by the forces of corruption, and thus deprived of the rightful opportunity to do great things for the country you love.

The Democratic Party has made a fatal mistake in nominating Barack Obama to be President of the United States. Now they will do everything fair and foul to foist that mistake on the American People.  They will hack voting machines in key states, they will lie cheat and steal, and they will launch the same misogynistic attacks against Palin that they did against you while Obama maintains plausible deniability. No doubt, you will do what you can to prevent this but it is not in your hands. Rather it is in the hands of people like Axelrod who are devoid of moral scruples and in the primary we saw the lengths to which they would go to disenfranchise voters. They are left wing ideologues of various stripes, their goal is to take over the country as they have the party and if they fail then they will try to make you a scapegoat. 

These people cannot connect with the traditional base of the party and they know it.  Therefore, they will cast you into the breach. They will ask you to sell their candidate to the same audiences who previously rejected him in favor of you.  Then they will ask you to spearhead the attack against Palin  to neutralize the gender issue.  I hope you will tell them that Obama and Biden must sell themselves to these audiences—it cannot be done by proxy. Furthermore, I hope you refuse to attack Palin personally and confine the discussion to policy related issues.  Everyone knows your candidacy is what made hers possible. And, you know that if you attack her on behalf of Obama then you will diminish the good will you have worked hard to establish with those audiences.  Lest we forget, it is Biden’s job as vice presidential nominee to handle any attack on Palin. If he is sane, sensible and sober, then he will keep it to a bare minimum.  There are plenty of snarling hyenas in the press who are chomping at the bit to destroy any opponent of Obama for a Pulitzer, a promotion and a passport to hell.

We are your supporters and we are thinking Democrats—not yellow dogs.  The party of Barack Obama is no place for centrist democrats. When Howard Dean calls the Republican Party the white peoples party, when the Chairman of the North Carolina Democratic Party tells black voters to not support white candidates, when Obama himself claims that people who live in small town America are bitter, cling to guns and religion, and when former Democratic Chairman Don Fowler hopes a hurricane will hit New Orleans during the Republican Convention something is clearly amiss. Furthermore, we know who is running the party now and what their real agenda is. Finally, we know who Obama is, who he is not and if he is elected then woe betide the country. We need leaders within the party who remember how things were before he took over and continue to fight for the American People.  But the Obama cancer is metastasizing throughout the party and the only way it will be cured is through a sweeping defeat at the ballot box.

It is clear to us that this train is headed in the wrong direction. Therefore, we must step off and switch to another train for the time being.  Yes, Obama talks a good game but if past is prologue then he will break his promises to the American people, and honor the ones he makes to big business and to a new coalition that does not include us.  We are freer than you are in this respect, since we do not have a constituent base to serve, or a senate position to protect. We can flatly state that an Obama presidency would be an unmitigated disaster for the country.  Consequently, we cannot possibly vote for him. So keep the torch lit dear girl, fight for us as best you can and lord willing we will rendezvous with you in after the election when Barack is beaten and this fever has passed.  Until then we bid you a fond adieu.  

Hillary previews speech… No mention of Obama…

In his coverage of Hillary’s preview speech for the LA Times, Peter Nicholas reports that Hillary never asked her audience to support Obama, however, she did urge support for “all our nominees”.

I guess it might play out like the 1976 GOP Convention with Regan and Ford all over again.  As George Stephanopolous  notes over at ABCNews.com:

Sore losers cripple Presidential nominees. Think of what Ronald Reagan did to Gerald Ford in 1976. After Ford crushed Reagan’s late challenge and refused to offer him the VP slot, he had to beg Reagan to speak at the convention. The 798 words he got were no help. Barely a mention of Ford, not a word of praise. While Reagan’s ringing defense of the GOP platform laid the groundwork for his 1980 campaign, it did nothing for Ford — who barely lost to Jimmy Carter come November.

Here is part of what Peter Nicholas wrote:

She never spoke his name.

In a seven-minute speech to women supporters, Hillary Rodham Clintonurged voters to get behind “our nominees’’ but did not specifically mention her old rival, Barack Obama.

Clinton’s appearance in an outdoor courtyard here was a kind of time warp. Hundreds of supporters wore Clinton buttons and T-shirts and said they were heart-broken about her defeat in the Democratic primary. During the event, loudspeakers blared theme songs from her unsuccessful primary bid, including Tom Petty’s “American Girl.”

She previewed the speech she is to deliver later tonight, saying, “I believe with all my heart that the Democratic Party represents a much better future for everything we believe in and care about and I will be making a very strong case tonight that we stand behind our nominees in order to keep pushing progress forward.’’

Clinton also made reference to a sore point during the primary: gender bias. Commending the hosts of the event, an organization called WomenCount, she said, “I urge all of you to support women running at all levels of government, but also on behalf of other concerns that were raised during the course of the campaign. WomenCount will continue to stand up against the pervasive bias we saw in the media.’’

Reading between the lines; Bill Clinton speaks… Update: Video Added

Of course this is NOT in reference to Obama, although this PUMA is 100% in agreement with what our beloved former Commander-in-Chief (and honorary PUMA-in-Chief is implying here…

Taken from TheHill.com

He said: “Suppose you’re a voter, and you’ve got candidate X and candidate Y. Candidate X agrees with you on everything, but you don’t think that candidate can deliver on anything at all. Candidate Y you agree with on about half the issues, but he can deliver. Which candidate are you going to vote for?”

Then, perhaps mindful of how his off-the-cuff remarks might be taken, Clinton added after a pause: “This has nothing to do with what’s going on now.”

Well, he did say “he” not “she”, so maybe he isn’t referring to Hillary… yeah right…!

Here’s the vid:

Hillary 2 Delegates: When it comes to voting, Vaya Con Dios…

There you have it folks, Hillary Clinton refused to release her delegates this morning. She has indicated she is voting for Obama, but says when it comes to you and your vote; let your conscience be your guide.

Of course it doesn’t take much to figure out how PUMA delegates shall vote…

Politico Reports

Speaking to reporters after her address to the New York delegation, Clinton offered delegates no instruction on how to cast their votes, Amie Parnes reports.

“I will be telling my delegates that I will vote for Barack Obama,” she said. “How they vote is a more personal decision. They want to have their chance to vote for me. That is what traditionally happens … some people are having to make up their minds because there are arguments pulling them both ways.”

Rezko’s Boys: Obama and Biden

It doesn’t happen often, but it’s about to happen in 2008. A convicted fixer is about to have two of his boys as the official nominees of the democratic party.

Who might those two be? Why, Obama and Biden of course.

In today’s Chicago Sun-Times it is indicated that Biden’s Midwest Campaign manager in the 1988 presidential primary, a guy who also maintained ties with Biden in the early part of his 2008 run, is a key figure in the Tony Rezko trialk. We are referring to none other than Joseph Cari.

Cari pled guilty to a federal extortion charge this year, and like his “mentor”, Tony Rezko is currently awaiting sentencing.

Here is an excerpt from the actual article:

Biden has described himself as a 30-year friend of a key figure in the Rezko trial who’s pleaded guilty to a federal extortion charge in Chicago and is awaiting sentencing.

When the Delaware senator began contemplating his own 2008 presidential run, he initially was helped by Chicago lawyer Joseph Cari Jr., who also served as Biden’s Midwest field director in his failed 1988 bid for president.

In 2005, Cari admitted to taking part in an $850,000 kickback scheme that prosecutors say was part of a larger political fund-raising operation for Gov. Blagojevich overseen by Rezko, who was convicted in June of wide-ranging corruption involving state deals.

On the day Cari’s name first surfaced in the federal probe of the state Teachers Retirement System, the former finance chairman for the Democratic National Committee and for the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee was to have hosted a Biden fund-raiser in Chicago. Cari was a no-show at that July 25, 2005, event.

Offering Cari a vote of confidence at the time, Biden said, “All I know is Joe Cari is a friend, and he’s an honorable guy, but I don’t know anything beyond that.”

Amazing isn’t it, I mean what are the chances that both Barack and Biden have political ties to the Rezko corruption scandal.  It isn’t far fetched to wonder what Cari did for Biden, what Rezko did for Obama, and what role this played in Obama deciding to announce Biden (at 3am no less) as his running mate.

At this point in time, it doesn’t take a rocket scientist to see that Obama’s “Change” mantra is as grounded in reality as finding a leperchaun at the end of the rainbow.

Just in case you missed all the above, here’s a summarized version: Obama has a convicted fixer (Rezko) raising money for him throughout most (if not all) of his political career, Biden on his own part has an admitted and convicted extortionist running part of his 1988 campaign, and advising him on this one.

Only the delegates can save the Democratic Party from this spectacle in Denver, we PUMAs hope they vote based in their conscience and not the effects of Obama’s Rezko tainted Kool-Aid…

Posted by GRANDPUMA

The DNC Pretends that the Convention is a Done Deal

 

http://heidilipotpourri.blogspot.com/2008/08/confusion-and-illusion-dncc-and-dnc.html

CLINTON DELEGATE INITIATIVE CELEBRATES VICTORIES

The grassroots petition that roared.

When the Clinton and Obama campaigns announced last week that Senator Clinton’s name would be placed into nomination, a group of Clinton delegates cheered for a moment and went right back to work. With Hillary Clinton’s name “officially” on the ballot, the petition signatures were no longer technically needed. But this group of determined individuals pressed on. 

“When we started this effort, it was the ONLY way for us to be able to vote in Denver to represent the people who elected us,” said a Clinton delegate from Texas. “We’re proud of what we did. We’re going to see it to the end. Just like our candidate – we don’t quit.” 

According to DNC rules, a floor nomination petition needs a minimum of 300 signatures from voting delegates to be submitted. In July, a small but determined group of Clinton delegates and volunteers started reaching out to fellow delegates in true grassroots fashion – one by one – to collect the signatures. This proved to be slow going since Democratic Party officials would not provide contact lists for delegates. The 300 Delegate Petition group was born.

After national and international mainstream media attention, petitions started pouring in. When they received the requisite number of petitions, they once again took a breather and went back to work. DNC rules state that no more than 600 petitions can be submitted. They’re working on it.

“We’ve got well over 300 petitions now in hand,” explained Sue Castner, a Clinton delegate from Portland, OR. “Since we never consulted with Senator Clinton’s campaign, we don’t know if ‘the petition that wouldn’t die’ had anything to do with the two joint campaign announcements made last week. We will probably never know but it certainly made us feel good.” 

Signatories include a governor or two, county Democratic party chairs, members of the diplomatic corps, and even some brave Obama delegates. The names of those who signed the petition will remain a mystery unless Senator Clinton decides to file the petition, in which case, their names will be a part of recorded history.

As a meager reward for those delegates who saw the nomination process as a path to party unity and signed this historic document, a numbered commemorative pin will distinguish them from fellow delegates. Rest assured, the green pin, featuring the number 300 with a pen, will be THE most coveted pin in Denver.

 

 

Obama, Biden and PUMA…

Folks,

As most of you know, Barack Obama announced that he had picked Delaware Senator Joe Biden as his running mate at 3am this morning.

Other than the obvious choice of 3am as a direct jib at Hillary’s famous 3am ad, the fact that he never even considered Hillary for the Vice-President position, the fact that despite raising over $50 million each for two consecutive months he has done absolutely nothing to reduce Hillary’s campaign debt (it’s only been reduced by $1.3 million thus far), it is obvious that Obama does not take Hillary Clinton and the 18 million people who voted for her with any amount of seriousness nor does he treat us with aany sort of respect.

Meanwhile, the Messiah chose a person whose track record reflects the following:

“The White House isn’t the place to learn how to deal with international crisis, the balance of power, war and peace, and the economic future of the next generation,” said a TV ad for Sen. Joe Biden’s 1988 presidential campaign.  “A President has got to know the territory, but that’s not enough.”

The ad says, “Joe Biden thinks its time to remind the world of what America stands for. Freedom. Equality. Justice. Opportunity. He thinks it’s time to put courage over compromise, time to express America’s outrage once again towards repression, brutality, violence, the abuse of human dignity around the world. And if the sparks fly, so be it.”

He said the following to Jeffrey Goldberg three years ago, “The Lord Almighty, or Allah, whoever, if he came to every kitchen table in America and said, ‘Look, I have a Faustian bargain for you, you choose. I will guarantee to you that I will end all terror threats against the United States within the year, but in return for that there will be no help for education, no help for Social Security, no help for health care. What do you do?’ My answer is that seventy-five per cent of the American people would buy that bargain.”

Campaigning for president in New Hampshire in 1987, Biden admitted he had misstated several facts about his resume after a man named Frank questioned his Syracuse Law School resume.

”I think I have a much higher I.Q. than you do,” Biden responded.

He added that he ”went to law school on a full academic scholarship - the only one in my class to have a full academic scholarship,” adding that he ”ended up in the top half” of his class (not true) and ”graduated with three degrees from college” (not true).

Five months later, Biden acknowledged that he graduated 76th in a class of 85. ”I did not graduate in the top half of my class at law school and my recollection of this was inaccurate,” he said in a statement.  He graduated with one degree — a B.A. — in two majors, history and political science.

”I exaggerate when I’m angry,” Biden told the New York Times, ”but I’ve never gone around telling people things that aren’t true about me…’I guess every single word I’ve ever said is going to be dissected now.”

More recently, Biden raised eyebrows as a presidential candidate running in 2008, telling an Indian-American, “In Delaware the largest growth in population is Indian-Americans, you cannot go to a 7-11 or a Dunkin’ Donuts unless you have a slight Indian accent.” (Watch HERE.)

Responding to a question from Fox News’ Chris Wallace about how a Northeastern liberal like him could compete in the South, Biden said, “you don’t know my state. My state was a slave state, my state was a border state, my state has the 8th largest black population, it’s anything but a Northeast liberal state.” (Watch HERE.)

He has a grittiness, a candor, a feistiness.

He said he would shove a troop funding bill veto down President Bush’s throat. (Watch HERE.)

He called former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani “the most underqualified man since George Bush to seek the presidency…Rudy Giuliani, there’s only three things he mentions in a sentence — a noun, and a verb and 9/11.” (Watch HERE.)

And of course he said of Obama himself, “I mean, you got the first mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy.” The implication that other African-American leaders weren’t clean or articulate certainly raised some hackles.

“Barack Obama is probably the most exciting candidate that either the Democratic or Republican party has produced at least since I’ve been around,” Biden later qualified. “He’s fresh, he’s new, he’s insightful.”

Biden said he regretted that “some have taken totally out of context my use of the word ‘clean.’..My mother has an expression ‘clean as a whistle, sharp as a tack,’” Biden said. “Look, the idea is, this guy is something brand new no one has seen before.”

According to Biden, Obama told his colleague, “‘Joe, you don’t have to explain anything to me.’” Biden said he felt Obama “knew what I meant by it.”

Oh well, I guess Obama has yet again shown superior judgement…

Meanwhile, as PUMAs, on to Denver we go…

Some of this stuff was taken from Jack Tapper @ ABCNews.Com

Meanwhile, here is a picture of the Democratic Party’s Proposed Dream Team courtesy of Exurbanleague.com

 

Meanwhile, in a parallel universe, here is what Joe Biden did NOT say about Obama this year…

 

Posted by: GrandPUMA

Next Page »