By the way, do you know when the Americans with Disabilities Act was passed? That’s right, 1990 — when Republicans were in control. The “ergonomics” standards that you tout have nothing to do with disabled people; they have to do with forcing businesses to provide unnecessary and expensive equipment, and would have eliminated thousands of jobs due to higher costs.

The reality is that McCain has said that he is learning how to use the Internet. However, he could have learned earlier how to use a computer and the Internet earlier if he wanted. Millions around the world with disabilities use the Internet. In fact, it’s the law in many countries that commercial websites follow accessibility guidelines.

Of course, one of the ironies of your comments is that many Republicans, including President Bush, have fought against workplace laws that require technology to allow physically challenged people to work. Remember the ergonomics rules that Clinton put in place? Killed by the Bush Administration.

Case in point: any given lefty troll posting on this blog.

Absolutely. I’ve said so many times. I’ve been voting for nearly forty years now, and I have never seen a candidate or a campaign that was so predictably, consistently stupid — not even McGovern or Dukakis came close (and they were both pretty stupid). And the best way for McCain to win is just to let these dolts keep on doing what they’re doing.

Meanwhile, the press isn’t much brighter. They can only thank themselves for inoculating Palin against any criticism, no matter how valid, and driving public symapthy to the GOP ticket. What fools.

Kudos to them for highlighting their dark side in a way that no one else could!

You’d think those little nazis would be the LAST ones talking about child molestation. But no one ever accused liberals of intelligence.

Speaking of stupid, I really am convinced that Barack Obama is the stupidest (yes, its a word because I say so) candidate to run for office in at least my lifetime. And his VP wanabee isnt far behind.

John McCain can take off and land fighter planes from the deck of an aircraft carrier in the middle of the pacific ocean at night and Mr Fifty Seven States wants to try to portray him as technologically unsaavy. While his running mate, Dumberer, is asking wheelchair bound men to stand up and take a bow.

Dumbest… ticket… ever!

If an AirAmerica talk show host rants and there’s no audience listening, is he still wrong?

(P.S. AirAmerica still exists?!)

Computers are perhaps the most empowering technology for people with handicaps. We really only know who Stephen Hawking is BECAUSE he can use a computer. I have worked with people with MS before that were confined to wheelchairs, who could barely move their arms at all … and they knew how to use computers.

McCain’s own words are that he is ‘illiterate’. Not that he is ‘incapable’ and indeed there is plenty of video out there of him doing things with the same motor skills he would use to operate a computer.

Ed Lasky

Barack Obama apparently wishes his two autobiographies to be the definitive record of his past. He has blocked efforts by others who wish to independently examine his past.

He won’t allow his transcript from his undergraduate days at Columbia University to be released.

He “lost” his thesis on Soviet nuclear policy (see “Where in the World is Obama’s Missing Thesis” which might provide insight regarding his seeming lack of knowledge about Soviet policy during the Kennedy years).

He won’t answer questions about his days at Harvard Law School.

He “lost” his Illinois Senate records.

He will only release a simple one-page letter from his doctor on his medical condition.

He won’t release his application to the state bar, which, as National Review’s Jim Geraghty notes raises questions about whether he told the truth about parking tickets and drug use, among other issues.

He won’t disclose list of his clients from his law firm days or the nature of the work he did for them as a lawyer (his clients include the indicted political fixer Tony Rezko).

He walks away from uncomfortable questions about Rezko at a news conference.

His cultists try to shut down inquiry into his stewardship of the Chicago Annenberg Challenge by sliming a journalist investigating his days at the helm of that group, which blew through $100 million dollars with no discernible benefit for the schools and students that it was putatively designed to help (what does the constitutional law lecturer say to the chilling of free speech by his acolytes?).

He tries to muddle his long-standing ties with Pastor Wright by producing a version of his attendance record at Trinity Church that is sharply at variance with previous versions he has given (“Obama Re-invents his Trinity Church History”).

The Wall Street Journal joins the battle over Obama’s past in today’s editorial (“Obama’s Lost Years”):

The Columbia years are a hole in the sprawling Obama hagiography. In his two published memoirs, the 47-year-old Democratic nominee barely mentions his experience there. He refuses to answer questions about Columbia and New York — which, in this media age, serves only to raise more of them. Why not release his Columbia transcript? Why has his senior essay gone missing? [....]

Voters and the media are now exercising due diligence before Election Day, and they are meeting resistance from Mr. Obama in checking his past. Earlier this year, the AP tracked down Mr. Obama’s New York-era roommate, “Sadik,” in Seattle after the campaign refused to reveal his name. Sohale Siddiqi, his real name, confirmed Mr. Obama’s account that he turned serious in New York and “stopped getting high.” “We were both very lost,” Mr. Siddiqi said. “We were both alienated, although he might not put it that way. He arrived disheveled and without a place to stay.” For some reason the Obama camp wanted this to stay out of public view.

What can be said with some certainty is that Mr. Obama lived off campus while at Columbia in 1981-83 and made few friends. Fox News contacted some 400 of his classmates and found no one who remembered him.

Barack Obama is the least-examined Presidential candidate in American history. Partly this may be due to the fact that he has a paper-thin resume and few accomplishments. However, he does have a record and past (he is, after all, approaching 50 years old). An informed electorate is the foundation of American democracy — a principle which Senator Obama has ignored. The mainstream media — with a few courageous exceptions (the pages of National Review, Weekly Standard, ABC News correspondent Jake Tapper) — have aided and abetted Barack Obama’s quest to change history retroactively by immunizing him from any serious examination. Meanwhile they send the journalistic equivalent of the dogs of war to create their own history of Governor Sarah Palin (notably by pulling journalists off the terrorism “beat” to cover Palin’s record in Alaska).

He accuses people who scrutiny his record of being engaged in distractions or pulls the race card out and slurs them as racists. At times, he has all but accused people who inquire about his record as being stupid. He imperiously declares some areas of his life as being “off limits”.

For a man who constantly trumpeted the importance of transparency he seems to be adverse from applying that principle to his own life. He owes the voters a clear accounting of his past.
Why have journalists allowed Barack Obama to avoid scrutiny? The media has been called the Fourth Estate for its crucial role in ensuring that democracy thrives. When journalists abdicate their role, we all suffer. What is Barack Obama afraid of regarding his past? What do journalist fear to find?

When they rely on Barack Obama’s version of his life to become their stories they become nothing more than campaign workers laboring away for free.

Come to think of it, this does not seem so far from the truth.

I’m not a lawyer… and I’d guess at least one of those alleged facts is in dispute… but, assuming all those facts and conclusions…

Couldn’t Obama simply head down to the nearest courthouse and swear out an oath of allegiance? Then he’d be a citizen again, and would still have been born a citizen. Technically, one might parse things finely and rule him out — but I can’t imagine any real court actually doing so.

On a barely related note… the constitutional requirement is that a candidate be a “natural born citizen” with no further explanation. Anyone think there’ll be a legal challenge to the first Presidential candidate who was born by IVF? Could a case be made against a candidate who was born by Caesarian section?

In a technical, legal sense — perhaps. In a practical, what-would-a-real-judge-say sense — not a chance.

Obama can keep his staff just as it is… when someone is making an ass of himself, who are we to interfere?

I’d love to see Steve Schmidt (McCain campaign manager?) issue a blanket response to these Obamanations along the lines of “we just don’t have the enough staff to keep track of the tsunami of crap coming from the other side”.

The lawyer who filed the case has a site here

http://www.obamacrimes.com/

In the brief they lay out this case

- There’s controversy that he might have been born in Kenya

But regardless of that

- His mother subsequently married an Indonesian and relocated to Indonesia

The lawyer who filed the case has a site here

In the brief they lay out this case

- There’s controversy that he might have been born in Kenya

But regardless of that

- His mother subsequently married an Indonesian and relocated to Indonesia

- Under Indonesian law, when you marry an Indonesian and live there, the mother becomes a citizen of Indonesia

- Under US law, when a person aquires a new nationality, their US citizenship is revoked

- Under US law, when a minor’s guardian aquires a new nationality, the minor loses his citizenship

- Under US law, when a former citizen returns to the US, they could regain their citizenship by swearing an oath of allegence at an embassy or court.

Barry never did this, additionally, when he was 20 years old,, he went to Pakistan with an Indonesia passport

Berg v. Obama, et al. Civil Case No. 08-cv-04083

Answers are due from the various parties to the lawsuite as follows:

Barrack Obama September 24, 2008;

DNC: September 24, 2008 and

FEC: October 21, 2008 (Federal and Government Employees and Entities have sixty (60) days)

The lawyer who filed the case has a site here

http://www.obamacrimes.com/

In the brief they lay out this case

- There’s controversy that he might have been born in Kenya

But regardless of that

- His mother subsequently married an Indonesian and relocated to Indonesia

- Under Indonesian law, when you marry an Indonesian and live there, the mother becomes a citizen of Indonesia

- Under US law, when a person aquires a new nationality, their US citizenship is revoked

- Under US law, when a minor’s guardian aquires a new nationality, the minor loses his citizenship

- Under US law, when a former citizen returns to the US, they could regain their citizenship by swearing an oath of allegence at an embassy or court.

Barry never did this, additionally, when he was 20 years old,, he went to Pakistan with an Indonesia passport

Berg v. Obama, et al. Civil Case No. 08-cv-04083

Answers are due from the various parties to the lawsuite as follows:

Barrack Obama September 24, 2008;

DNC: September 24, 2008 and

FEC: October 21, 2008 (Federal and Government Employees and Entities have sixty (60) days)

Can we get michael to do BHO’s next few ads?

He can list all the genetic inferiors that must be put to death so that the resources of the fatherland are not wasted on them.

With michael covering their PR, the rest of the Obama campaign staff can do what they do best… lip-syncing to show tunes.