The Democrats new puppet rising star has landed a three-book deal worth 1.9 million dollars.

Crown Publishing Group and Random House Children’s Books, divisions of Random House Inc., announced Friday that Obama will write two books for adults and one for children.

He’ll be paid an $850,000 advance for each adult book and $200,000 for the children’s book, said Obama spokesman Robert Gibbs. Proceeds from the children’s book, which Obama will work on with his wife, Michelle, and their two young daughters, will go to charity, Gibbs said.

The contract is contingent on the approval of the Senate Ethics Committee, he said.

The first book is due out in spring of 2006, and “will focus on Obama’s political convictions.” If you never bothered to look them up, you might ask yourself “What are Barack Obama’s political convictions?”

David Freddoso took a look at Obama’s record as a state senator, and his political convictions are hardly worth an $850,000 advance - nor are they ones most people would want to advertise for free. Freddoso revealed that Obama “twice voted against bills prohibiting tax funding of abortions. In April 2002, he voted against a bill to protect babies born alive after a failed abortion procedure.” He also did not vote on an Illinois partial-birth abortion ban.

Perhaps even more disturbing is this guy is writing a children’s book. Not only has his politics shown a lack of caring about protecting children before they are born, but he also doesn’t seem at all interested in protecting them after they are born.

n 1999, Obama voted against requiring school boards to put Internet pornography filters on school computers meant for students’ use. In 2001, he voted “present” on a bill to keep pornographic book and video stores and strip clubs from setting up within 1,000 feet of schools and churches. In 2003, he voted in the Health and Human Services Committee for a bill requiring “age appropriate” sex-education for students in kindergarten through fifth grade.

And if that wasn’t enough, “in 1999, he was the only state senator to vote against a bill prohibiting early prison release for criminal sexual abusers.”

So here’s a guy who wanted pornography in schools and sex offenders back on the streets as early as possible. He’s now getting a $200,000 advance from from Random House Children’s Books.

How convenient it must be for Democrats that more ballots have magically appeared in recent days — from Seattle’s heavily Democratic King County.

With Washington state in the middle of a recount of its amazingly close governor’s race, election officials in Seattle’s King County entered a warehouse Friday and found a plastic tray containing 150 misplaced ballots.

The discovery brings the number of belatedly discovered ballots to 723 in the heavily Democratic county - potentially enough to swing the election to Democrat Christine Gregoire.

Republican Dino Rossi won the Nov. 2 election over Gregoire by 261 votes in the first count and by 42 after a machine recount of the 2.9 million ballots cast. On Thursday, with every county except King, Pierce and Spokane reporting, Rossi had pulled ahead by 74 votes.

Like a magician pulling a rabbit out of a hat, the Democrats are really trying hard to trick everyone. “We want to get some answers about these very suspicious ballots,” said Republican State Party Chairman Chris Vance.

Well, they can just cry me a river…

A Democratic city councilman has demanded that a baker remove photos of President Bush from his stand in Lancaster’s venerable farmers’ market, saying the city needs a “healing period” following the bitterly contested presidential election.

City Council member Nelson Polite approached David Stoltzfus last month and asked him to remove the pictures. When Stoltzfus refused, Polite vowed to pursue a city ordinance that would ban all political items from public places in the city.

Polite said the photo offended city Democrats.

“I just feel that since it was a close election and the city’s so divided, that we should have a healing period,” Polite told the New Era of Lancaster.

Awww, poor baby. What’s next, are Democrats going to protest history books in public schools that show Bush’s picture in the back of the book amongst all the other Presidents?

Now that Kerik is out, Joe Lieberman’s name is again being tossed around as a possible replacement for Tom Ridge to head the Homeland Security Department:

The Connecticut Democrat’s status is this: He’s not denying sources’ reports that he’s been approached to join the Bush team. And while it’s a longshot Lieberman would get one of the rumored jobs: Homeland Security secretary, National Intelligence Director or United Nations ambassador - nothing can be ruled out.

Lieberman has refused to discuss the matter since the reports re-surfaced last week after an initial flurry a few weeks ago, and he maintained that position Sunday.

I think this is a bad idea. George W. Bush could “reach across the aisle” and offer the post to Lieberman… It might look good for a little while, but then we’ll have certain liberals accusing Bush of playing politics because with Lieberman as Secretary of Homeland Security he can’t be a Senator, and this would result in a special election in Connecticut to replace him. This election is bound to have a lot of money from both parties thrown at it. The Democrats will want to keep the seat blue, and the Republicans will try and get another red seat in the Senate.

In the end, Bush would never get credit for reaching out to a Democrat.

This would also give the Democrats a greater opportunity to play politics with our Homeland Security, and this is too important an issue to put the Democrats in that position.

He must be threatened by my opinions or something… he just loves to blog about me and whine…

In response to my previous blog entry on how the Democratic Party is responsible for dividing this country, Oliver, probably trying to convince himself more than anything, suggests that what I said was “dumb” and rebuts with this little rant:

One of the two major political parties in America made a decision to push for war with Iraq in the Summer of ‘02. Said party drew a line in the sand and said that anyone who didn’t think war with Iraq was warranted was against America, never mind how strongly they supported invading Afghanistan. That, I think, would contribute significantly to divisions in America. The party that engaged in these tactics wasn’t the one with the donkey as its logo.

Of course, he clearly seems to have forgotten (or probably really just ignored) that members of his party were warning us about Saddam Hussein for years. Including Clinton and his adminstration throughout the 1990s, as well as Tom Daschle, and yes, oh yes John Kerry — even leading up to the war. Things changed when the primaries started heating up and Howard Dean was pulling ahead in the polls. Gradualy, all Democrats had changed their views on taking action against Saddadm Hussein. Yeah, Oliver doesn’t want to remember that now does he? No, it makes him feel better to believe that Republicans divided this country. It’s pretty sad… but I guess I can’t blame Oliver for desperately wanting to blame Republicans for something that his own party is responsible for.

We all have our own opinions, but no one is entitled to their own truth — and the undeniable truth is that Democrats were advocating taking action against Saddam Hussein for years before Bush actually did take action… they just decided to change their minds when it was politically convenient to do so.

It’s the Democrats who put politics before national security. There’s no use in denying that.

The Washington Times reports that the disgraced chairman of the DNC has used Pearl Harbor to slam Republicans…

Democratic National Committee Chairman Terry McAuliffe, in a special Pearl Harbor Day statement, said national unity 63 years ago enabled Americans to go forward and defeat the country’s enemies, but the same kind of unity needed now was being undermined by Republican disagreements over provisions of the yet-to-be-voted on intelligence reform bill.

“While we as a nation are united in this fight, there are clearly deep divisions within the Republican Party, divisions that are impeding our fight against terrorism,” he said.

If Terry McAuliffe wants to have a debate over who really has put politics before security, and which party really is behind the bitter division of this country, I’ll tell him right now to bring it on. The country did come together in the aftermath of 9/11, and who then decided to divide the country back up? The Democrats. Which party worked with Republicans on bills like the PATRIOT Act and the No Child Left Behind Act - only to completely turn the tables when the election got closer and opposed those bills.

One criticism in particular about the PATRIOT Act was there was little time to adequately debate the measures of the bill - some have since been selectively singled out by Democrats as a means to blemish the bill and paint is as evil and connect it solely to Bush and Republicans. Now, Terry McAuliffe are saying that it’s okay to rush through debate on the 9/11 Intelligence Reform Bill and just vote on it? For what? So in 2008 they can wash their hands of all the bad things in the bill they don’t want to take credit for and blame it on Republicans?

Is this part of a plan by Democrats to try and capture the White House in 2008? Are they going to do to the 9/11 Intel Reform Bill in 2008 what they did with the PATRIOT Act in 2004? Let it pass with bipartisan support then pick out the things they don’t like about it later and blame it on Republicans?

UPDATE: David Limbaugh has more on this McAuliffe gaffe.

Supporters of Kerry (or more likely haters of Bush) gathered for a their first group therapy session in Florida yesterday, and according to Boca Raton News they screamed “epithets at President Bush as they shared their emotions with licensed mental health counselors.”

The first of several free noontime therapy sessions at the American Health
Association in Boca Raton was designed to treat what mental health counselors have dubbed Post Election Selection Trauma (PEST). “If I had a cardboard cutout of President Bush, and these people wanted to throw darts at it, I would let them do it,” Robert J. Gordon, AHA executive director, told the Boca News after the session. “It’s no joke. People with PEST were traumatized by the election. If you even mention religion, their faces turn blister-red as they shout at Bush.”

Oh no! Not religion… Ahhhhhhhh! What a sad bunch. Post Election Selection Trauma? I guess that’s the new way to describe mental illness that can be blamed on the election. I keep thinking about what Kerry supporters and Bush haters would be doing today if Bush had lost. I imagine that if you multiplied the gloating I’ve done since November 2, you could increase that 10 fold, and it wouldn’t even come close to the kind of activity the Left would have been engaging following a Kerry victory.

Reading through this article, one thing is clear, Bush’s victory is not the cause of their mental instability. When you look at the things these anguished people lament about, they are regurgitations of Democratic talking points and Kerry campaign rhetoric.

“I’m scared … Democracy is at stake and nobody is rising to protest this president.”
“I want to be a patriot, but it’s impossible to be a patriot in an immoral war.”
“Bush is breaking up marriages and dividing families by keeping our troops in Iraq.”

The meeting facilitator also said, “The media outlets, especially Rush Limbaugh and his ilk on talk radio, scare our patients to death.” One patient is reported to have that he thinks the country “is now run by fascists.” “Another felt personally threatened by the president’s love for big business. Many believe Bush is going to draft their grandchildren. The anxiety may not affect them every day, but it affects their energy level.”

Finally at the end of the article it is revealed that “many of the Kerry supporters had visited [the trauma specialist] for severe mental problems prior to the election.” So here we have people with a history of mental problems claiming to have a bogus condition called Post Election Selection Trauma and repeating arguments and accusations made by the Democrats.

Who made these wackos even worse?? John Kerry and the Democratic Party.

Despite devastating loses in the elections last month and basically the past four years, Democrats have been raising plenty cash, certainly hoping to build up a war chest to try to save a little bit of face.

The DNC announced Tuesday that it had raised at least $13 million in November. The total includes $10 million collected after the Nov. 2 election in which President Bush won a second term and Republicans strengthened their House and Senate majorities.

Due in part to growth in fund raising over the Internet, the DNC raised more this election cycle than it did before corporate, union and big individual donations known as soft money were outlawed by a 2002 law.

The committee raised at least $400 million in the 2003-04 election cycle, compared to $210 million in 1999-2000, the last presidential election cycle in which it could collect unlimited donations.

Now, the national Democratic and Republican party committees can only collect up to $25,000 a year from each individual donor or political action committee.

All the power to them. Money can’t buy a victory. It takes a lot more than good fundraising to win over the voters. Don’t believe me? Ask Howard Dean, or the Kos Dozen.