Facts don’t matter.

On Meet the Press this morning, Tom Brokaw asked Democrat Nancy Pelosi when life begins. Her response:

“I would say that as an ardent practicing Catholic this is an issue that I have studied for a long time, and what I know is over the centuries the doctors of the Church have not been able to make that definition. And St. Augustine said three months. We don’t know. The point is it that it shouldn’t have an impact on a woman’s right to chose.”

Well, of course, why should the minor detail of whether the baby is alive have any “impact on a woman’s right [sic] to choose.”

h/t: Kathryn Jean Lopez

Post-politics….

National Review on Obama’s hypocrisy:

There is something to be said for Obama selecting a running-mate who can make up for his obvious deficits (which Biden himself pointedly noted in the primaries) and who knows Washington well enough that he can presumably help Obama govern should he be elected. But Biden runs counter to all of Obama’s justifications for his candidacy. If opposing the Iraq war from the outset was the most important test of judgment in a potential commander-in-chief, Biden failed it, voting for the war (however reluctantly). If commitment to “change” is measured in how little time one has spent in Washington, Biden must be a confirmed agent of that status quo. If the “new politics” is characterized by rising above negativity, Biden firmly represents the old politics, since Obama picked him partly because he can be trusted to be a zealous attack dog.

 

Good question.

Will Biden apologize for his statements on Haditha?

h/t: Glenn Reynolds

 

How the Olympics changed China

Not so much.

Racially tinged gaffes are a strength

 

…when you’re a Democrat chosen by The One.

 

 

What media bias?

From the New York Times today:

In the beginning, Senator Barack Obama was not entirely sold on Senator Joseph R. Biden Jr. And Mr. Biden told friends that he was pessimistic of his chances of becoming Mr. Obama’s Democratic running mate.

Over the course of two months, as the dynamics of the presidential campaign and world events shifted quickly, Mr. Biden’s stock rose through one of the most rigorous vice-presidential vetting processes that Democrats could recall.

 

“In the beginning”?!?!? Are you kidding me?

And, how could this possible be “one of the most rigorous” VP vetting processes when it didn’t include Hillary Clinton. The New York Times’ piece doesn’t even mention her name.

Do celebrities secretly support McCain?

A “celebrity handbag designer” has come out with a handbag “based on the signs used by [Obama’s] campaign at rallies and speeches.” On the link, you can see “photos of Barack Obama’s biggest celebrity fans.”

Again, whose side are these clowns on?

 

hat tip: Jennifer Rubin

This is going to be fun!

Biden says that he is not from a “Northeast liberal” state because – I’m not making this up – “My state was a slave state, my state was a border state, my state has the 8th largest black population….”

hat tip: Jake Tapper

Will Biden be a strong campaigner? Maybe not.

More Silliness

Another silly statement from The One:

“Everybody’s watching what’s going on in Beijing right now with the Olympics. Think about the amount of money that China has spent on infrastructure. Their ports, their train systems, their airports are vastly the superior to us now, which means if you are a corporation deciding where to do business, you’re starting to think, ‘Beijing looks like a pretty good option.’ ”

 

Leaving aside whether what Obama said is even true, and I realize that Obama is probably trying to say that America must do better, but what is it with Democrats always praising countries other than the one that want to lead?

Also, how does that square with the Democrats’ complaints that Americans use too much energy (we are only three percent of the world’s population but use 25% of the world’s energy). Remember this gem from Obama?

We can’t drive our SUVs and eat as much as we want and keep our homes on 72 degrees at all times … and then just expect that other countries are going to say OK. That’s not leadership. That’s not going to happen.

 

How does he think that we’re going to catch up to China’s “vastly superior” infrastructure without using more energy? Or is the point that we (i.e., the Obama Administration) will prioritize how we use our energy – so we (i.e., not Obama himself) will sacrifice our SUVs and our comfortable homes so that we can have infrastructure like the ChiComs?