h/t Free Republic

The audacity of chutzpah.

After 20 years of church membership, Senator Gravitas now claims he had no idea of the anti-American, leftist hate speech from his pastor,

“None of these statements were ones I had heard myself personally in the pews,” Obama told FOX News. “Once I saw them I had to be very clear about the fact that these are not statements that I am comfortable with. I reject them completely they are not ones that reflect my values or my ideals.”

Right.

Are we back to parsing statements, and redefining the meaning of “is?”

Better yet, why don’t we just define what Obama is lying about.

If in fact he never heard Wright’s hate-filled sermons, it simply means that he wasn’t in attendance on the numerous times that Wright went on a rant.

But, it doesn’t mean that Senator Gravitas wasn’t aware of Wright’s words, or his separatist views. And it doesn’t explain why he waited until now to disavow Wright.

It simply means he never heard it from the pews. And frankly, that’s just not good enough.

It’s clever, but not clever enough.

Ok Hillary, the ball is teed it up for you. If you don’t slap this sucker baldheaded, then you don’t deserve the nomination.

Bob’s Bites asks, Is Obama Lying?

He expects us to believe, that in twenty years of attending the same church, he never knew his pastor hated America. I find it hard to believe he didn’t know about the hatred Rev. Wright has for America. This man preaches about America spreading HIV to blacks on purpose, planning Sept. 11, 2001, and preaches God Damn America. How in the world can Obama not have heard about this in 20 years of attending this church.

Update : The Smoking Gun ….. In a story by the NYT [ screenshot ] dated March 6, 2007, Jeremiah Wright recalls a telephone conversation with Obama. In that call, Obama explains why it was necessary to distance himself from Wright.

“You can get kind of rough in the sermons, so what we’ve decided is that it’s best for you not to be out there in public.”

That clanging sound you hear is the sound of all four tires flying off the Obamagasm Express.

+++++

Update : Obama campaign throws Wright under the bus. But, MSNBC is not above a little moral equivalence, comparing Wright’s hate speech with recent comments by Geraldine Ferarro…

Wright was the latest in a series of advisers to Obama and Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, D-N.Y., who have stepped aside as supporters of both candidates trade racially charged accusations.

+++++

Update : Youtube pulls the Wright “G-D America” video (h/t velvethammer)

+++++

From SNL’s TV Funhouse …. (Coke spew warning)

I liveblogged the Democrat debate in Ohio two weeks ago, but several statements from the previous debate in Austin, especially some comments by Sen. Obama, have stuck in my mind, kind of like an annoying jingle that just won’t go away. This is from the transcript, (source CNN)

…the question is, on the critical issues that we face right now, who’s going to show the judgment to lead? And I think that on every critical issue that we’ve seen in foreign policy over the last several years — going into Iraq originally, I didn’t just oppose it for the sake of opposing it.

I said this is going to distract us from Afghanistan; this is going to fan the flames of anti-American sentiment; it’s going to cost us billions of dollars and thousands of lives and overstretch our military. And I was right.

Obama went on to say, “I was right“ several more times, especially regarding the war in Iraq, which he called “the most important foreign policy issue of our generation.“

In March of 2003, Operation Iraqi Freedom was begun after a year of military buildup, and many UN speeches and Security Council resolutions, all of which was met with defiance by Saddam H.

Shortly thereafter, Libya initiated a dialog when it requested Britain to broker talks with the US on WMDs. A US-led naval operation in October 2003 interdicted a shipment of uranium-enrichment components bound for Libya, resulting in the seizure of thousands of uranium centrifuge parts. This seizure prompted Libya to make its pledge to dismantle weapons of mass destruction. Libya allowed US inspectors to visit weapons sites, which were more advanced than Washington previously thought.

Without the aggressive use of force in Iraq in 2003, we would now be facing a nuclear armed Libya.

On Afghanistan and Pakistan, Obama said… “I’ve said very clearly that we have put all our eggs in the Musharraf basket. That was a mistake. We should be going after al Qaeda and making sure that Pakistan is serious about hunting down terrorists, as well as expanding democracy.

And I was right about that.

On the issues that have come up that a commander in chief is going to have to make decisions on, I have shown the judgment to lead.

I’m not sure where Obama would have staged the military buildup for an Afghan campaign. Pakistan was not our ally at the time. Musharraf was the only player in the theater. After the naval seizure of the Libyan nuclear shipment, and responding to mounting US pressure, Musharraf began two months of investigations which concluded that two of Pakistan’s top nuclear scientists, A.Q. Khan and Mohammed Farooq had supplied sensitive technology to Iran and Libya and North Korea through a black market based in Dubai.

Without the aggressive use of force in Iraq in 2003, the A.Q. Khan network would have continued supplying nuclear weapons technology to our enemies.

And, without the aggressive use of force in 2003, Saddam H. would have continued to defy UN sanctions, continued to pursue WMDs, continued to reward Palestinian suicide bombers, continued to fire on coalition aircraft which were patrolling the “no-fly” zone, etc, etc, etc.

And yet, Senator Obama claims to be “right” on the most important foreign policy issue of this generation.

I know it is unrealistic to expect the media to draw him out this, but if the Republicans fail to do so, then they deserve to lose this election.

++++

(thank you to the excellent resource globalsecurity.org )

From last night’s debate in Austin:

BHO:

“I heard from a Army captain, who was the head of a rifle platoon, supposed to have 39 men in a rifle platoon. Ended up being sent to Afghanistan with 24, because 15 of those soldiers had been sent to Iraq. And as a consequence, they didn’t have enough ammunition; they didn’t have enough humvees.

They were actually capturing Taliban weapons because it was easier to get Taliban weapons than it was for them to get properly equipped by our current commander in chief. Now that’s a consequence of bad judgment, and you know, the question is on the critical issues that we face right now who’s going to show the judgment to lead.”

This doesn’t pass the smell test with me on several levels.

First, if there were any truth to this, the media would not have hesitated to use it to bash George Bush. It would have been all over the news.

Second, some of my military readers might want to weigh in here, but, how common is it for an Army Captain to be a Platoon leader? Captains don’t lead platoons, they lead Companies.

Third, how does a under-equipped, under-supplied, half-strength platoon capture munitions, weapons and supplies from the enemy? You mean the Taliban is just handing them over?

BHO is not only revealing himself to be a plagiarist and a demagogue, but a liar as well.