Not that he actually responds, but his response, even if it is typically unresponsive, is still a response.

“The office featured in this video is funded by volunteers of the Barack Obama Campaign and is not an official headquarters for his campaign.”

I don’t think that is gonna fly.  Is he suggesting he has no influence?  No opinion?

As NRO notes:

Team Obama: Che Flag Is Inappropriate, Not Ours Anyway

The office with the Che flag isn’t an “official” Obama office, we’re told.

The Fox News report mentions that “paid staffers are expected to man the offices by the end of the week.” I guess their first task will be redecorating.

As he is already fielding criticism for a lack of flag lapels and not holding his hand over his heart during the national anthem, this just adds more fuel to the fire of those who want to paint him as unamerican.

I’m not sure this is as mitigating as Team Obama would like. It’s not like we ever thought Obama himself picked out the decor. The point is Obama seemed like a guy who seemed particularly moderate, thoughtful, who repudiated the “I Hate Republicans And Everything They Stand For” Howard Dean approach, and who seemed to be keeping a healthy distance from the no-enemies-to-our-left fringe. Seeing him enthusiastically backed by the hooray-for-Marxist-murderers crowd, well, it makes those of us who kind of liked Obama, policy differences aside, wonder if he’s just a standard-issue leftist with nicer, deliberately evasive rhetoric.

What does it say that among these Obama volunteers, none of them thought to say, “hey, fellas, you know, this guy ran show trials and executions… Is this really the image of ‘change’ we want to project to the electorate?”

All good questions.

Not that He answers to me, but I think Obama needs to address this head on.

 Trackposted to Outside the Beltway, Rosemary’s Thoughts, Right Truth, Pirate’s Cove, Stuck On Stupid, The Pink Flamingo, A Newt One, Dumb Ox Daily News, Conservative Cat, Right Voices, Adeline and Hazel, and The Yankee Sailor, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.

A very interesting piece on the whole MSNBC and Chelsea fiasco.  Some excerpts:

Chelsea Is All Grown Up

The recent emergence of Chelsea Clinton as a voice for her mother’s campaign has resulted in a chorus of “poor Chelsea” from various sources. Ms. Clinton is still deeply wary of the media, and the sentiment may be valid; her life has been dominated by attention she never chose to engender. But it’s got a nefarious underside, as exhibited by the suspension Friday of David Shuster, a commentator for Hardball who got put in the naughty chair for asking on the air whether Clinton had “pimped out” her daughter. Pimping is a common enough euphemism in modern parlance, but one which an indignant Hillary Clinton has managed to turn into a carnival of pity and remonstrations.

That right there summarizes the entire debacle. 

Here is the reality of politics and family:

The Clinton campaign is seeking a bulletproof spokesperson. Last year, the Edwards campaign made a similar move when it unleashed the candidate’s wife, Elizabeth, as primary attack dog. She was a brilliant, articulate voice for the campaign, and all the more effective because her untreatable cancer diagnosis made her unassailable. You could question Elizabeth Edwards’ policy arguments, but you couldn’t attack her personally. (When John Dickerson questioned the deployment of Elizabeth in Slate, she responded indignantly.) Hillary’s campaign tried to use Bill similarly after Iowa. The former president landed a few good blows before Hillary’s New Hampshire win, but then went further in South Carolina and ended up alienating African-Americans, the Democratic establishment, and everyone who remembered just how divisive the last Clinton White House was.

Note:  I found this video right as I was finishing this, but it is revealing, so I am bumping it to the top.  The video features a few Council Members, including Wozniak opting for more common sense, and Anderson who claims this was “not a diatribe against the Marines”, despite his earlier diatribe against the Marines in Clip 5 of this post.  And yes…I saved it.

Today, the city council in Berkeley was meeting to discuss, among other items, a new resolution concerning the Anti Marine Corps resolution passed last week.  Via Michelle Malkin:

Here’s the council agenda item:

From: Councilmembers Olds and Capitelli

Recommendation:

1) That the City Council, through adoption of this item, publicly differentiate between the City’s documented opposition to the unjust and illegal war in Iraq and our respect and support for those serving in the armed forces.

2) Rescind point 2 of Item 12, of the January 29, 2008 Berkeley City Council Agenda, “Marine Recruiting Office in Berkeley,” regarding communications with the Marine Recruiting Station in Berkeley.

Financial Implications: None

Contact: Betty Olds, Councilmember, District 6, 981-7160

The item they refer to is the original resolution from last month, Item 12 which stated:

Recommendation:

1. Direct the City Attorney to investigate and report back to Council within 60 days on City options for enforcing Chapter 13.28 of the Berkeley Municipal Code, prohibiting discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation, with respect to military recruiting offices in Berkeley;
2. Direct the City Manager to send letters to the Marine Corps Recruiting Station at 64 Shattuck Avenue and to General James T. Conway, Commandant of the United States Marine Corps, advising them that the Marine recruiting office is not welcome in our city, and if recruiters choose to stay, they do so as uninvited and unwelcome intruders;  Abstain – Worthington.
3. Encourage all people to avoid cooperation with the Marine Corps recruiting station, and applaud residents and organizations such as Code Pink, that may volunteer to impede, passively or actively, by nonviolent means, the work of any military recruiting office located in the City of Berkeley.