Over at his personal website, our blog-father, Tacitus, aka Josh Trevino, has published what is, I think, a very insightful piece on Barack Obama's speech in Berlin.

The whole piece makes for great reading, but this stands out:

And they get you going.

Therefore they get you.

Case in point:

In 2007, the EEOC sued the Salvation Army when it tried to enforce its "English-only" rule - i.e., its rule requiring employees to speak only English while on the job - in its Thrift Store in Framingham, Massachussetts.

So why not, you may ask? Isn't that just being nasty? If you have employees who are more comfortable communicating with one another in Spanish, then why not let them? Who does it hurt?

You can watch Obama's Berlin speech, here. It's a live feed from the campaign web site.

Right now? Just a shot of an empty podium, some security guys, and, I kid you not, the Rolling Stones singing "Sympathy for the Devil."

Hunh?

Edit: Unless this is some weirdness in my own computer. And it's worth noting, that this is a different mix of the original song. Which I've never heard before. I remain puzzled.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yMB-lOZo0PA

The accents are Napoletano. Aspetti! Fatti cazzi tuoi, eh!

I ask because foreign affairs should be more than just Iraq. This provocative piece causes me to wonder about John McCain's other foreign policy views.

John McCain believes we should kick Russia out of the G8:

Do we agree with John McCain, or not, on this point?

I don't know if anyone of you have seen Pickens' timely (think: ELECTIONS) TV Ads about a "plan for energy independence" and reducing "dependence on foreign oil". They struck me as sophistic as soon as I heard them and rife with appeals to mechantilism and benevolent, nice-sounding cronyism. Being certain it was simply that, I just rolled my eyes and didn't give it much thought.

Well, Jerry Taylor of Cato has given it some thought and it's just what I expected.

Says Taylor:

Thats about the only conclusion I can draw from her proposal to open the Strategic Petroleum Reserve in order to lower gasoline prices. President Bush has been dead set against this idea and he is absolutely right on this point. Unfortunately we're probably going to see plenty of more dumb ideas from politicians about to how to deal with high gasoline prices as the election gets closer.

I've never liked Bob Novak. I've run across him a few times (so to speak) over the years and have had a hard time understanding how he ever acquired a reputation as a 'nice guy'--other than the fact that we cheer for the same basketball team. So this story comes as no surprise: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0708/11985.html

Of late, I’ve been burnishing Bush 41’s reputation. I now take up the cause of John McCain again, as I have before, in hopes that you, too, will give the man a fresh look, freed from the litanies and shibboleths of Gotcha Politics.

Politico finally broke the polite silence today, running a piece that calmly enumerates Senator McCain's various lapses over the last few weeks.

- An Iron Curtain country that no longer exists.
- An imaginary border between Iraq and Pakistan.
- You say 'Somalia' and I say 'Sudan'.
- Name that football team! (The Packers or the Steelers?)

And now, despite CBS's attempt to bury it, Senator McCain seems to have forgotten the timeline regarding the foreign policy success upon which he is now basing his campaign. (That he did so while accusing Senator Obama of not knowing what he was talking about is only the cherry on top of this particular sundae.)

This is two week's work. There are approximately fifteen weeks left in the campaign. It's safe to assume that the gaffes and memory lapses will continue. And possibly at an even greater clip -- fatigue is usually a factor in this, and there is a long and wearying road ahead for both candidates. The question is, at what point -- beyond today's Politico piece -- do people start to openly question whether or not age is a factor in all of this? Is that unfair? Is that bad manners? Is it wrong?

John Cole, among others, suggests that we ignore the age issue. Senator McCain will lose, should he do so, on the complete lack of merit displayed by his campaign. And there's no need to talk about something that is already apparent, and will be even more so, every time the two candidates take a debate stage together.

I'm agnostic for the moment. I'm well aware of Senator Obama's various verbal slips and gaffes. (Tho' I'd be perfectly content with a ten-year term in the Oval Office.) But I'm curious to see if McCain manages to correct this growing problem. Or we're starting to see just how much he either does not know or has somehow forgotten.

But one thing is certain. It's not going away any time soon.

The Politico piece is here. Next week? Forget too old, how about too angry?