©2009 kradeleet. Released under Creative Commons Non-Commercial Attribution License.

Whereas Expose Obama regularly made my blood boil during the election season with is left-field hyperbole and circular logic, now, post-election, it’s just hilarious.

The latest Obamaniacal vast left wing conspiracy? Decimating our military by forcing bigots to consider to choose not to enlist.

From the latest EO emailer:

The language and purpose of the [Military Readiness Enhancement Act] is geared EXCLUSIVELY toward promoting open homosexuality in the Armed Forces!

The MREA’s purpose is, as it admits, to replace the current 16-year-old “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy of tacit acceptance of secreted gayness with — as an increasing number of government agencies have — an explicit sexual orientation non-discrimination policy. But in Bigotland, simply permitting people to be openly gay is explicit promotion of homosexuality. Homosexuality is so damned insidious that the mere admission of being gay turns other men gay, and the logical conclusion of all that gayness is that the human race will die out, because there are no sperm banks and no test tube babies.

By repealing the “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy — which already allows gays in the military, just as long as they don’t admit it — the MREA:

WOULD FORCE GOOD MEN AND WOMEN OUT OF THE SERVICE!

How would it do this, you ask? Well, by way of allowing gays to admit their gayness, homophobes, which apparently comprise 24% of our military, would be BRUTALLY FORCED to CONSIDER to VOLUNTARILY NOT RE-ENLIST.

A recent poll by The Military Times [posed] the question; “If the ‘don’t ask, don’t tell’ policy is overturned and gays are allowed to serve openly, how would you respond?” According to the poll, a full 24 percent of respondents said they would not re-enlist or consider not re-enlisting!

What makes it all the more sinister and damnable is that:

Obama’s NOT calling it a “reduction in force,” nor is he giving ANY indication that the REAL AGENDA is the wholesale destruction of our military.

The fiend!

Written with lipstick for added poetry.

h/t: Blue Hampshire

1. Hillary Clinton is female.
2. The Democratic Party did not majority vote for Hillary Clinton.
3. Therefore, the Democratic Party is anti-female.

Or something.

Some would add #4: Therefore, you should vote for John McCain.

Likewise, #5 would be: Therefore, women who support Barack Obama are traitors to their gender:

Older women particularly feel that Clinton is their only hope of seeing a woman occupy the Oval Office, McCaskill said. One refused to talk with her during a Democratic fundraiser in early April, she said.

And some feel simply that it’s Clinton’s turn, something she’s owed.

“I don’t know, really, where that comes from, the ‘her turn’ stuff,” [said Sen. Claire McCaskill, D-MO]. “I just don’t think we can ever get into the trap of deciding elections based on who’s ‘turn’ it is.

“Nobody ever considered it my turn,” she added. “I had to go out and fight for it.“

Who the fuck are these people?

Make that 31 delegates (well, delegate votes) in eight hours.

The delegate announcements are taking nearly all the attention away from the MT and SD primaries today — the very last primaries of the year.

Hillary Clinton would have to win both states by 75% to prevent Obama from getting the 10 remaining pledged delegates needed for him to win. And both are leaning against her.

But if the current rate of delegate announcements continues, they may not even matter when all is said and done.

Pick your HRC farewell song:

• Hit The Road jack
• Na Na Na Na, Hey Hey Hey, Good Bye
• Another One Bites The Dust
• We Are The Champions
• I’m A Loser Baby
• Bye Bye Bye

Update: I totally did not even think of We Will We Will Barack You. Course, that would be three Queen songs in the mix, seems unfair. :)

Obama has gained 10.5 delegates in the past five hours. Montana and South Dakota aren’t even closed yet.

Of course the vultures are swirling over Hillary more and more all day.

On Friday, Obama was 41 delegates away from clinching the nomination.

Today, Monday, he is 43 delegates away from clinching the nomination.

You wouldn’t otherwise think that, perhaps, two significant landscape-changing events occurred over the weekend.

“Given the increasing diversity of America’s population, the dangers of sectarianism have never been greater. Whatever we once were, we are no longer just a Christian nation; we are also a Jewish nation, a Muslim nation, a Buddhist nation, a Hindu nation, and a nation of nonbelievers.”

-Barack Obama, June 2006 (boldface mine)

I was introduced to this quote by a document, ironically, titled Barack On Faith. In it, he lays out a careful recognition of God and faith, of inclusion among faiths, and of separation of church and state in respecting faiths. At the bottom, it includes a mention not only of the nation’s different faiths, but also specifically mentions those of no faith.

Sure, David Silverman over at AA’s NoGodBlog takes issue with Obama’s repeated use of the cross and his own faith in his campaign, and hints of using his faith as evidence of his morality. But this overlooks the big picture (which he also points out) — that despite Obama using his faith in his campaign, none of the other frontrunners throughout this campaign year — Clinton (member of ur-religious group The Family), McCain (weirdly supersitious), Romney (Mormon) — have been nearly as recognizant of atheists.

Do Google searches for “Atheists for Hillary” versus “Atheists for Obama” and you’ll see the forest beyond the handful of trees.

Yesterday I said that Clinton could stop Obama from getting the nomination if she got 59% of remaining contests and remaining supderdelegates. Well, today, with some superdelegate updates, that’s not quite enough.

Also, it’s pretty unlikely. To date, Clinton has 51.2% of the pledged superdelegates. Assuming she maintains that percentage (which, again, the recent trend does not support this) of superdelegates, she needs 70% of remaining contests to stop Obama. Not to win, mind you, but to stop Obama from tying it up. (She’d need 86% to tie it up herself.)

Let’s take the possibility I alluded to, that Clinton already has the remaining 270 supers in her pocket, waiting to be dropped like a bomb on the primary campaign. Then she would only need 40% of the remaining contests to win. Is that likely? Not sure. The trend of super endorsements is still higher for Obama lately… most of Clinton’s super endorsements were early as she was an early frontrunner. But the continued silence of the remaining supers is getting unnerving.

Just for fun, lets say the remaining supers are in Obama’s pocket. Then the game is over. In fact, with as few as 74% (200) of supers on his side, the game is over.