cheapseats

It is not surprising that Associated Press Chairman of the Board Dean Singleton mistakenly referred to Osama bin Laden as Obama bin Laden.

Back when Barack Hussein Obama was launched into limelight politics, prior to which I had never heard of you, I remarked upon the implausibility...nay, the perversity...of Democrats embracing an unknown, two-thirds of whose name is either almost or exactly the same as one-half of the names of two of our arch enemies. It borders on preposterous, really, and yet here we are.

Who’s on first?

What?

What’s on second. Who’s on first?

Who’s on first.

That’s what I’m asking you, who's on first?

That’s what I’m telling you, Who's on first.

Osama/Obama...WHO'S KIDDING WHOM?

Your anemic response to the head of MediaNews Group erroneously uttering your name in place of the name of the mastermind of 9/11 is also not surprising. I have noticed a MARKED discrepancy between your eloquence when reading from prepared texts...speeches written by Jon Favreau, for instance...and your averageness when speaking on the spur of the moment, off the top of your head.

When asked whether you could envision sending many more US troops to Afghanistan, where Obama bin Laden is still at large, you came back with “I think that was Osama bin Laden.” Good one.

What IS surprising is that I did not hear of this exchange on any of America’s mainstream broadcasts nor did I read about it in America’s blogosphere, both of which venues have...hmmm, how shall I put it...penchants for sensationalism and hairsplitting.

An internet trail on Warren Jeffs lead me to the Sydney Morning Herald, and the page that contained a Jeffs story contained also an eye-catching ‘I’m Obama, Not Osama’ link. You will know from being handsome that people gravitate to eye-catching. People click on provocative.

What IS surprising...and disturbing, I think..is that this was reported in Australia but not America. Our media and your supporters do neither you nor anyone bent on Reform a favor by playing softball with you, for the neoconservatives will not. They are strictly hardball, with a deep bench. If would be foolish of you and your unthinking fans think that neoconservatives won’t have a field day with your name in the General Election. What you need to be is prepared, not protected.

Now, maybe I missed it. Maybe I just happened upon the item in an Australian source and missed it in my regular sources and, if that’s so, I will stand corrected.

Tell you what. I’ve got several other questions that nag at me about you. If I will gather and submit them all at once, perhaps you will find it convenient to address them in one fell swoop. Since it will not be possible to vote for you without satisfactory answer to these questions, I hope you will not simply ignore them, as you ignored the concerns expressed by anti-war protesters prior to the Iowa Caucuses. You’ll understand that I won’t be delivering the questions to campaign headquarters...I can’t risk your people having me arrested, as they had those anti-war protesters arrested.

Who is on first? Alrighty then, we just need to sort out Who is Who.

Just Words, One Letter, What The Hell

__________________

ocealdia

Just another example of how Barack is the media's little darlin.

The_Heretic

Yeah right. They love him so much they pound on him over every little thing while letting Hillary's lies slide until they're embarassingly obvious like sniper fire.

__________________

John McCain: "He's in Iraq... with a few centuries to kill."





You won't fight for the Bill of Right? Fine! I won't fight for you in the ballot box!