Welcome Instapundit Readers!  While you’re here, you might want to check out my tributes to Karl Malden, my co-blogger’s reflections on the President’s tanking poll numbers, a thought on how some gay marriage activists have made demonizing Mormons their modus operandi and my observation that the MSM see Obama and Palin as blank screens upon which to project their prejudices.

Today, the Labor Department released figures showing unemployment hitting new highs, continuing to exceed even the level the Obama Administration forecast it would have attained without the “stimulus”–and considerably higher (considerably, considerably) than Democrats promised if Congress passed the legislation which may well have ended Arlen Specter’s political career. (Hey, ya’ gotta find a silver lining somewhere.)

(Chart courtesy of Innocent Bystanders.)

No wonder the President’s support is taking a hit, particularly on the economy.

Apparently, Obama is more interested in exploiting the economic crisis to achieve his own political goals* than to first accomplish what he was elected to do.  Recall, how the polls started shifting in the Democat’s direction as the scope of the financial meltdown became clear.  He used the economic downturn to his political advantage.  People trusted him to fix the economy.

But, now instead of focusing on the economy, he continues forward a myriad of initiatives, many of which would place burdens on private industry, you know, companies which tend to create new jobs.  Instead of getting us out of the mess that Obama “inherited,” the “stimulus” has made it worse.

Small businesses aren’t hiring because they are “paralyzed by regulatory uncertainty.” If they had greater confidence in the Administration’s economic plans, were less skeptical about its attitude toward the private sector, these employers might be expanding their businesses, hiring new workers and spurring economic growth.

Given the regulatory schemes proposed by the Obama Administration and the legislation proposed by the Democratic Congress, no wonder the economy continues to stagnate.  Unless the President develops economic plans which work, based on models of successful recoveries, rather than adhere to theories similar to past policies which failed to end economic crises, expect unemployment to continue its upward climb.  But, then again, if the economy fails to recover, expect Obama’s failures should help end the political careers of Barbara Boxer, Russ Feingold, Patty Murray and Hary Reid.

Like I said, ya’ gotta find a silver lining.

* (more…)

Wow.  As PatriotPartner said to me — “Want to see a lead balloon?  Go to Rasmussen today“. (h/t - HotAir)

Ed Morrissey sums it all up nicely over at HotAir.

Rasmussen’s new poll, taken before the release of June’s unemployment numbers, shows significant slippage for Barack Obama on the economy, his central issue.  Only 42% of American voters give him excellent or good marks on handling the economy, the lowest ratings he has yet received.  His personal approval rate has fallen to 53%.

The demographics of his decline portend more bad news for Obama and his Democratic allies in Congress.  Only the youngest voters support him on fiscal policy, and only barely, 52%-46%. Every other age demographic above 30 years of age has majorities now showing disapproval.  Independents have begun to run away in massive numbers; they now oppose him 75%-23%, a huge break away from Obama and a sign that his supposed moderate stances have been exposed as shams. Every income level except the lowest also has majorities disapproving of his handling of the economy.  Voters outside the “political class” oppose Obama 65%-33%.

Obama doesn’t fare well on national security, either.  Rasmussen reports that Obama only has 44% approval on these issues, and 55% opposing him.  Majorities of both women and men view him disfavorably.  Every income level has majorities opposed to Obama, and independents disapprove 68%-31%.  Obama only wins within the $60K-$75K income level; even his base of support among the lowest income earners narrowly reject Obama’s national-security policies, 52%-47%.

Obama isn’t just coming back to Earth in the polling.  He’s losing independents and demonstrating his radical bent on policy, and more and more Americans have begun to see it.

Perhaps the grown-ups in America are waking up before it is too late.  The awakening will only increase over the July 4th weekend as talk of our shared economic disaster will trump Michael Jackson around the patio.

As I said on Twitter earlier today…

Is it 1979 again??? 10% unemployment. Americans being taken hostage by Islamists. President coddles dictators.

-Bruce (GayPatriot)

On every first date, I try to let the conversation flow naturally so each of us can get to know the other as he is, instead of matching ourselves us to some ideal image of the perfect mate, I do try to get two things across, the first about my politics because I know that’s a deal-breaker for some gay leftists and the second about monogamy because his eagerness for an open relationship would be a deal-breaker for me.

The question always arises that, once you start dating, when does the monogamy attach?  Obviously it hasn’t yet attached to the (first) date I had this weekend where I did broach the monogamy issue (but not the political one). So, I assume it attaches when we define ourselves as boyfriends, agreeing to be faithful to one another.

Some wait until they have had a ceremony, but the point is that there is a clear, definable moment when monogamy attaches. And that leads to the question, when does it “detach.” And that’s not always so clear.  If two parties plan on divorcing, need they wait until the divorce goes through?  Or can they start seeing other people once they make their intentions clear?  And  say a married couple separates, should each partner then remain celibate?

It would seem that in some such cases, celibacy would be unwarranted. And that makes Senator Ensign’s affair a bit less problematic, but it doesn’t excuse Mark Sanford. While the South Carolina Governor has been separated from his wife for “about two weeks,” all evidence indicates the affair had begun long before that separation. Ensign, by contrast, was separated from his wife while sleeping with a campaign aide and ended the affair when he reconciled with his wife. Even so, his lady friend was married at the time, so while his marital vows may been on hiatus, hers were not. It was definitely adultery.

Despite this wrong, there is no evidence the Nevada Senator abused hs position as a public official.  Sanford, however, appears to have used state resources to fund his tryst.  So, I’m with John Podhoretz on this one, he really has “no choice but to resign.“

But, this all leads me to wonder if the media would give the Nevada Republican a pass if he had had different partisan affiliation?

UPDATE:  Glenn links a great article this morning on Reason where Steve Chapman offers some thoughts on adultery which pretty much parallel my own.  He does not, however, address the separation “conundrum.”  Since Sanford was not separated at the time his affair began, he was clearly violating his marital vows.   Chapman pretty much echoes my views, holding “Sex without marriage is OK. Sex in violation of marriage is not“: (more…)

OBAMA HEALTHCARE INFOMERCIAL A RATINGS BUST.

Looks like he’ll need more than personality to sell health care reform.

UPDATE:  Seems people’s failure to tune in suggests that people don’t see our health care system is as dire straits as the President contends:

Such a pressing issue that we must not wait, we can’t afford to hesitate, government has to act … and act now. Television viewers acted. They changed the channel, yielding ratings on par with some 8 p. m. comedy repeats.

UP-UPDATE: Obama’s Michael Dukakis moment.

Please note that if I had written or said something similar about a nation’s governor or, God forbid, the Supreme Leader Obama, I’d be getting a visit today by Gestapo Janet’s thugs from DHS.  John Kerry ‘jokes’ about Sanford/Palin. (h/t - The Corner)

The Bay State senator was telling a group of business and civic leaders in town at his invitation about the “bizarre’’ tale of how South Carolina Gov. Mark Sanford had “disappeared for four days’’ and claimed to be hiking along the Appalachian Trail, but no one was really certain of his whereabouts.

“Too bad,’’ Kerry said, “if a governor had to go missing it couldn’t have been the governor of Alaska. You know, Sarah Palin.’’

The Democratic-centric crowd laughed.

Ha, ha, ha.  Oh, that’s so funny.  I’m buckling over with haughty laugher.  How original, too – a Democrat demeaning a woman.  And he is such a moron, he had to remind people that he was talking about Palin.  Or maybe that says more about Democrats in Massachusetts?

Thank God this man will never be President.  Although you may have heard that he served in Vietnam.

-Bruce (GayPatriot)

Earlier today, I tried working on a post on Obama, gay bloggers and DADT.  But, for some reason, I couldn’t think to string words together to make a coherent and thoughtful sentence, so I decided to take the afternoon off from blogging.  (I do hope to get that up before I go to bed tonight, but we’ll see.)

As I’m working on two pieces (which pay) for other websites, I may not be able to devote as much attention to this blog as I’d like until later in the afternoon Thursday, early evening GayPatriot blog time.  I had intended to blog on writing and compassion–how today’s difficulty writing filled me with compassion for others.   It seems sometimes that when we do show kindness to others, it is not so much our own nobility as our own consciousness of the difficulties we face.

Those of you who have read George Eliot may suspect that I’ve been reading some of her books lately as the above idea is akin to much that she has said.   And you’d be right; as yesterday’s post suggests, I’ve been re-reading Scenes of Clerical Life.  

When, after taking my break and finding the words for that post, I was checking the web and learned about South Carolina Governor Mark Sanford’s latest travails, I wondered at how news breaks on days when I’m not following it.  And yes, I do have some sympathy for the Governor, understanding the pressures he’s faced in standing up for principle, against a spendthrift legislature controlled by his own party and against a tenacious White House, trying to force him to take “stimulus” cash.

All that said, he should have known better.  He was wrong to violate his marital vows.  And he should have realized that when you’re a public figure, particularly in the age of a multi-source news media, people are going to find out.

It’s particularly disappointing to see such a principled conservative suffer such a public embarrassment.  Unlike Senator Ensign, he was truly someone Republicans could turn to as a plausible presidential candidate.   (more…)

Gov. Huntsman - Gone to China.

John Ensign - Out.

Mark Sanford - Out.

Huckabee better watch his back.  Palin must have voodoo dolls in Alaska!

-Bruce (GayPatriot)

If I were to advise those Republicans formulating the opposition to the President’s policies, I would tell them to study his campaign from the end of the Democratic convention until the beginining of the financial meltdown.  Then, the otherwise much (and rightfully so) vaunted Obama organization was an inept operation.  Hugh Hewitt quipped that “We are watching a crack-up under pressure.”  Obama’s team, while great on offense, had no clue how to mount an effective defense.

When John McCain stumbled badly as the financial crisis came to dominate the headlines, Obama no longer needed a good defense; he could return to his original battle plan.

Watching Obama’s presidency unfold, it seems hs agility on offense is related to the same skill which makes him such an effective speaker with a teleprompter.  He’s great when he follows a predetermined plan.

Which brings me to ice cream.

There is no doubt in my mind that his excursion with his daughters this Father’s Day weekend to an Alexandria ice cream parlor was a piece of political theater.  All that said, for all Barack Obama’s flawas as chief executive, all evidence indicates him to be a good father.  That he would bring his mother-in-law to live in the White House suggests a concern for the welfare of his children, that they have an adult there to guide and supervise them when affairs of state keep him and his wife busy.

Even though he could rustle up any kind of ice cream for his family via the White House kitchen and enjoy more quiet time alone with them that way than he would in a public place where he’d be surrounded by a gaggle of reporters, security and curious onlookers, he went to just such a place so the reporters would cover the excursion and show him to be just a regular Dad on the weekend when we’re all thinking of our own Dads.  Clever political theater that.

He likely planned this excursion long before the citizens in Iran rose up against a fraudulent election and a repressive regime.  No Burkean he, he didn’t realize the need to adjust his plan because of world circumstances.   What looked like great political theater in the planning stages was perceived by many as indifference in the execution.  He just didn’t anticipate how some would react.

Or maybe he thought he wouldn’t matter, assuming all the media, save FoxNews and the conservative blogs would cover for him — while they would have howled in outrage had his predecessor done that very thing.

We have reached the tipping point in the public waking up about the dangers (at home & abroad) of the Obama Administration.

The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Sunday shows that 32% of the nation’s voters now Strongly Approve of the way that Barack Obama is performing his role as President. Thirty-four percent (34%) Strongly Disapprove giving Obama a Presidential Approval Index rating of -2. That’s the President’s lowest rating to date and the first time the Presidential Approval Index has fallen below zero for Obama.

Uh oh…. the minority of wingnuts can’t keep their incompetent President afloat any longer.

I wonder if his chilly reception to democracy and free elections in Iran has been the last straw for Americans who support liberty and freedom around the world?

UPDATE: And so much for the “demise” of the Republican Party.  The GOP & Dems are TIED for the second straight week in Congressional preference.  These are the same levels seen right before the 1994 GOP tsunami, by the way.  Sorry, Buckeye.

-Bruce (GayPatriot)

What a big contrast of photos this weekend…. heroes and cowards

While the Iranian people are yearning for freedom from a dictator and putting their lives on the line — President Obama chooses not to golf this weekend, but rather to go get some ice cream.

I am confident that Presidents Reagan, Bush (both) and Clinton would be forcefully encouraging pro-democracy efforts in Iran — as their policies have dictated throughout those years.  While we are on the verge of a huge victory for freedom in the Post 9/11 world, our President fiddles.

The best President Obama can do is send chilly signals to the Iranian people while the ice cream slides down his throat.  Pathetic and disappointing.

[RELATED:  Obama Dithers While Iran Burns - The Weekly Standard]

Obama supporters defended his silence. Anything he said to endorse the protests, they argued, would taint the protesters’ message and damage their cause.

The protesters, many of whom held signs written in English, seemed to disagree. “On several occasions, I’ve had supporters of Mousavi say we need President Obama,” reported CNN’s Reza Sayah, from Tehran. When Wolf Blitzer asked Sayah directly whether the protesters want Obama to speak out in support of their cause, Sayah responded: “I think they do, but they’re realistic.”

-Bruce (GayPatriot)

While technically, their favorables are statitiscally indistinguishable, i current trendlines continue, Nancy Pelosi’s favorables will slip below those of Geoge W. Bush at the nadir of his popularity.  They’ve been in constant decline since the beginning of the Obama Administration while the former Vice President’s have spiked upwards.

Current 34% of Americans view the Democratic House Speaker favorably while 37% view the Republican former Vice President favorably.

No wonder Jim Geraghty is reporting that House Republicans Concur Pelosi Should Hit the Campaign Trail.

UPDATE:  Greg Sargent explains:

The Gallup poll finds that two of the leading officials on either side of the torture argument — Cheney and Nancy Pelosi — have equally poor favorability ratings. But here’s the key point: They are at parity because Cheney’s ratings have gone up and Pelosi’s have dropped during the period that both were heavily identified with the torture issue. . . . 

Top Dems (Obama aside) have taken Cheney about as seriously as a circus sideshow, chortling about his low approval ratings while rarely rebutting his actual arguments. Result: His claims have continually gone largely unchallenged, and he’s largely framed the debate. My bet is that this helps explain why Cheney seems to be rising in the polls and Pelosi is sinking: Dems have given Cheney an opening, and Cheney took it.

Via Instapundit.

Even though the MSM drooled over the Obama’s $24,000 Broadway date to NYC on Saturday, the fact of the matter is the Obama’s are millionaires and they used taxpayer funds to go on the junket.  UPDATE:  Or was it actually $70,000?

In addition, using the website GreenStudentU.com, I have calculated the Obama’s “carbon footprint” for their trip.  I believe this is a VERY conservative estimate.

GreenStudentU estimates that three planes flying to/from DC to NYC used approx 0.4 tons of CO2. This is probably a low estimate as they were private planes and the carbon footprint was spread over fewer people than a commercial airline.

Then I estimated the carbon footprint of at least a 6 car Lincoln Navigator motorcade to/from The White House and Andrews AFB, and then the necessary driving in and around New York City.   Motorcade’s carbon footprint?  0.24 tons of CO2.

Total Obama Broadway Cost To The Environment?  0.63 tons of CO2 for less than a day.  (As a reference, I calculated my home’s carbon footprint for a year:   3.82 tons of CO2 – for a year.)

If you are as furious as I am about the Obama’s carelessly using taxpayer money for a Broadway junket, please sign my petition to ask for the full cost of the trip to be refunded to We, The People.

Thank you for your time.  It will be interesting to see the next stunt that “Ovita” pulls with taxpayer money.  Oh yeah, $30B more today for General Motors — I forgot that.

-Bruce (GayPatriot)

My only response:  I TOLD YOU SO.

AMERICAblog reports:

Obama joked about gay protesters asking him to keep promises: “I don’t know which promise he was talking about.”

So, Mr. Obama doesn’t know which promise the protester was talking about? Did he even know what was going on in California? About the Prop. 8 decision? Does he know who Lt. Choi is? Who briefs Obama on LGBT issues? Anyone? Because, it was well known that the LGBT community would be protesting. And, as for promises, there were several. To remind him, we could say check the White House website for a list of the promises Obama made to the LGBT community during the campaign. But, that wouldn’t probably wouldn’t do any good.

HAHAHA.

Obama, The First Gay President?  Hardly.  The ADVOCATE is reporting today that the White House will not move on Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.

Here’s a wise commenter from the ADVOCATE story:

I read all these comments slamming Obama, but we all know he will still get your votes when he runs again, regardless of his stance on “don’t ask, don’t tell” and the Defense of Marriage Act.  How do I know this?  Because he has a D after his name, and when it comes to discrimination, being a Democrat means never having to say your sorry.

Here’s another news item that should set the Gay Left’s panties on fire this weekend:

Washington Blade: Gay rights bills remain stalled in Congress

So let me get this right.   When the Democrats held the Congress for nearly 40 years (until 1995), there was no significant gay-rights legislation passed.  And now, after all of the promises and money given by The Gays — no progress after the Democrats have held Congress for two more years and now the White House.

Hey, Gays Who Support Democrats:  You are suckers.  Hopeandchange, hopeandchange!

-Bruce (GayPatriot)

For all intents and purposes, the United States and South Korea are again at war with North Korea.  The MSM won’t say it that way, but it is true after NK made this declaration today:

North Korea threatened a military response to South Korean participation in a U.S.-led program to seize weapons of mass destruction, and said it will no longer abide by the 1953 armistice that ended the Korean War.

“The Korean People’s Army will not be bound to the Armistice Agreement any longer,” the official Korean Central News Agency said in a statement today. Any attempt to inspect North Korean vessels will be countered with “prompt and strong military strikes.” South Korea’s military said it will “deal sternly with any provocation” from the North.

Meanwhile, Russia fears a nuclear exchange over the rising tensions.

Does any rational, thinking person think that any of this would be happening under President George W. Bush or VP Dick Cheney’s watch?  They reduced the proliferation of nuclear weapons (Iraq & Libya).  Obama has increased it by at least one (North Korea), and soon Iran.

Folks, we are bound to protect South Korea from an invasion from the North and we have tens of thousands of US troops in between.  Do they still teach all this in the publik skools?

I’d like to see how Obama and Hillary are going to shake hands, push the “reset button” and talk their way out of this one.

-Bruce (GayPatriot)

Imagine if a conservative Supreme Court Justice nominee had said the following… wouldn’t that be grounds for automatic dismissal of his appointment in the court of public opinion as well as the United States Senate?  In fact, it almost sounds like something Robert Byrd would have said at sometime in his life.

“I would hope that a wise white man with the richness of his experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a Hispanic woman who hasn’t lived that life.”

Well, The Architect of “Hopeandchange” has picked a SCOTUS nominee who made this doozie of a statement of her belief system:

“I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn’t lived that life.”

As Seth & Amy would say on Saturday Night Live – “REALLY, JUDGE SOTOMAYOR?  REALLY.”

If anyone is looking for a SCOTUS nominee to follow the Constitution and not their feelings, this “borderline” racist statement the video below are enough to disqualify Sotomayor in my book.

I don’t feel as white man that she will have my feelings at heart.  And as an American, she obviously disregards 2/3 of the American system of government.

Finally, I cannot wait until a GOP Senator asks: “Do you believe marriage (straight or otherwise) is a Constitutional right?”   And I know for a fact that question is coming.   *big grin*

UPDATE: GOProud weighs in:

This morning, President Barack Obama nominated Federal Court of Appeals Judge Sonia Sotomayor to the Supreme Court of the United States. In response, GOProud’s Executive Director, Jimmy LaSalvia, released the following statement:

“This morning President Obama missed an important opportunity to select a Supreme Court nominee that could enjoy wide, bi-partisan support. Instead of selecting such a nominee, President Obama instead chose to play identity politics and select a highly controversial nominee in Judge Sotomayor.

“Judge Sotomayor’s nomination to the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals was held up in the Senate for more than a year and her nomination was eventually opposed by 29 Senators. It is clear that President Obama placed identity politics above all else in his nomination of Judge Sotomayor.

“Judge Sotomayor’s record, both on and off the bench, is troubling. GOProud will closely scrutinize the entirety of Sotomayor’s record before making a decision to endorse or oppose her candidacy.

“Let me be clear, however, GOProud will not support a nominee that fails to understand the proper and limited role of the federal judiciary, and will not support a nominee who fails to protect the rights enshrined in our Constitution.”

-Bruce (GayPatriot)

We might all better appreciate the most stirring epic in the English language were it not for the tragic events of 1066 which led to the corruption of our language.  Beowulf celebrated the heroic deeds of one of the greatest men of all time, the eponymous Geatish hero, who did not need a weapon to slay the monster Grendel.  That brave warrior was reputed to have the strength of thirty men in his right hand.

Unlike some warriors, many with lesser accomplishments than he, Beowulf did not readily boast of his deeds.  He only related the story of how he slew nine sea monsters to answer Unferth’s challenge that he lost a swimming competition to his friend Breca.  Perhaps that challenge strengthened the hero’s resolve to defeat Grendel — which he did later that night.

Beowulf knew that he would be measured not by his words, but by his deeds.  No wonder the harbor guard reminded him as much in welcoming him to Denmark:  “Each sharp shield-warrior/shall understand the difference (between) words and deeds.”  It wouldn’t be enough for Beowulf to tout his accomplishments as monster-slayer, he would have to slay the actual monster ravaging Hrothgar’s hall.

Now Obama’s supporters are beginning to grouse that there’s a huge gap between the Democrat’s rhetoric and his deeds.  We see this in so many areas, but, notably in the Administration’s decision not to move forward on repealing the Don’t Ask/Don’t Tell (DADT) policy banning gays from serving openly in the nation’s armed forces.

Words will only get you so far.  If Obama truly wishes to be a great leader, he needs to emulate one whose very actions defined courage and very manner defined leadership.  The Beowulf-poet left it to someone other that his hero to say what that man knew in his heart; it is the doing which matters.

Years from now, people will only remember the president’s words if he ties them to actual accomplishments.

Last week, when I saw Rasmussen reported that for “the second straight week . . . Republican candidates . . . lead Democrats by a single point this week in the Generic Congressional Ballot,” I noticed, when perusing the actual numbers, that this was not so much a shift to the GOP, but rather a shift from the Democrats.

To note, in Rasmussen’s last pre-election poll (11-02-08), Democrats led 47-41, while last week (05-10-09), they had fallen to a 39-40 deficit.  The Democrats had fallen 8 points while the GOP tally was virtually unchanged.  

Today, Jim Geraghty has a post which appears to confirm that slippage, linking a Gallup poll which shows parity for the parties, significant slippage for the Democrats, insignificant for the GOP:

Their most recent poll, conducted May 7–10, splits 32 percent for each party, with 34 percent for independents. When they press the independents for which party they lean towards, it comes out to another split, this time 45 percent for each.

Perhaps, when the Republican Party, just now beginning to show some signs of life, regains some of the credibility it lost when it abandoned the principles which defined it, it can gain from the Democrats’ losses.

For now, it appears, the the American people have lost confidence in both parties.  Should that mistrust increase, it can only benefit the party out of power, now the GOP, as it benefitted the Democrats in 2006 and 2008.  

Because memories of the most recent Republican President are still fresh, perhaps people still don’t see the GOP as the out-of-power party.

When future historians start to seriously consider the record of the immediate past President of the United States, George W. Bush, they will wonder at how a man so moderate in temperament could have attracted criticism so vicious.

They will certainly rate him above many of those who preceded him in the late Twentieth Century, well above Jimmy Carter, LBJ and Nixon and slightly above Gerald R. Ford, but well below the the Gipper.   They will wonder why, in 2005, after his reelection with expanded majorities for his party in the House and Senate, he failed to push any significant conservative reforms while having promoted the need to mend Social Security and to deal with problems at Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.  (Though it can be argued that he can and did “push” reforms of those two Government-Sponsored Enterprises (GSEs).)

And they will wonder why he hesitated to shift strategy in Iraq in 2005 and 2006 when it would have been far easier for him to do so, both in terms of his own political capital and his party’s control of Congress than it was when he did change course in 2007 when he faced more of a challenge.  The war had then become increasingly unpopular.  The Iraq Study Group (led by former Secretary of State James A. Baker, III) proposed policy changes which were popular in our nation’s capital.  The Democrats had taken control of Congress.

Yet, he ignored that group’s recommendations and undertook a bolder course, with little support even from his own party.  And that course, the “surge,” succeeded.

Those historians will wonder why he waited so long when it would have been far easier for him to shift course immediately after his reelection or in the year or so immediately following.

As I said last week — Democrats, you can have this old coot.  He’s not only an arrogant and selfish SOB, it sounds like he’s crazy now (or more crazy than usual).

“Well, I was sorry to disappoint many people. Frankly, I was disappointed that the Republican Party didn’t want me as their candidate,” Mr. Specter said on CBS’s “Face the Nation.” “But as a matter of principle, I’m becoming much more comfortable with the Democrats’ approach. And one of the items that I’m working on, Bob, is funding for medical research.”

Mr. Specter continued: “If we had pursued what President Nixon declared in 1970 as the war on cancer, we would have cured many strains. I think Jack Kemp would be alive today. And that research has saved or prolonged many lives, including mine.”

So just to be clear, if we all went back in time (say, in a DeLorean) and pursued the Democrat healthcare agenda (which Specter thinks is like Nixon’s) — then Jack Kemp wouldn’t have died.

I’m not even sure what there is to say about this ranting.  Except:  I’ll be surprised if he is still the Senator from Pennsylvania after November 2010.

-Bruce (GayPatriot)

-Bruce (GayPatriot)