Friday, October 31, 2008
And here is Sgt. Cook on Fox News with Shepard Smith.
Though I cannot recall ever endorsing a presidential candidate I am going to do so in this column. In this, I am following the lead of the dean of conservative columnists, the excellent Charles Krauthammer. Last week he endorsed Sen. John McCain. Count me for McCain, too.I read a lot of conservative writers, but Tyrrell and Krauthammer sit on top of the heap. Neither is in the habit of endorsing candidates and neither may have ever done it before. This election is that important for our nation. Read Emmett Tyrrell and Charles Krauthammer both as they make their case for McCain and against Obama.
The ant works hard in the withering heat all summer long, building his house and laying up supplies for the winter.
The grasshopper thinks the ant is a fool and laughs and dances and plays the summer away. Come winter, the ant is warm and well fed.
The grasshopper has no food or shelter, so he dies out in the cold.
MORAL OF THE STORY: Be responsible for yourself
Obama's MODERN VERSION:
The ant works hard in the withering heat all summer long, building his house and laying up supplies for the winter.
The grasshopper thinks the ant is a fool and laughs and dances and plays the summer away.
Come winter, the shivering grasshopper calls a press conference and demands to know why the ant should be allowed to be warm and well fed while others are cold and starving.
CBS, NBC, PBS, CNN, and ABC show up to provide pictures of the shivering grasshopper next to a video of the ant in his comfortable home with a table filled with food. America is stunned by the sharp contrast.
How can this be, that in a country of such wealth, this poor grasshopper is allowed to suffer so?
Kermit the Frog appears on Oprah with the grasshopper, and everybody cries when they sing, 'It's Not Easy Being Green.'
Jesse Jackson stages a demonstration in front of the ant's house where the news stations film the group singing, 'We shall overcome.' Jesse then has the group kneel down to pray to God for the grasshopper's sake.
Nancy Pelosi & Barack Obama exclaim in an interview with Larry King that the ant has gotten rich off the back of the grasshopper, and both call for an immediate tax hike on the ant to make him pay his fair share.
Finally, the EEOC drafts the Economic Equity & Anti-Grasshopper Act retroactive to the beginning of the summer.
The ant is fined for failing to hire a proportionate number of green bugs and, having nothing left to pay his retroactive taxes, his home is confiscated by the government.
Hillary gets her old law firm to represent the grasshopper in a defamation suit against the ant, and the case is tried before a panel of federal judges that Bill Clinton appointed from a list of single-parent welfare recipients.
The ant loses the case.
The story ends as we see the grasshopper finishing up the last bits of the ant's food while the government house he is in, which just happens to be the ant's old house, crumbles around him because he doesn't maintain it.
The ant has disappeared in the snow.
The grasshopper is found dead in a drug-related incident and the house, now abandoned, is taken over by a gang of spiders who terrorize the once peaceful neighborhood.
MORAL OF THE STORY: Be careful how you vote in 2008.
Remember the "Hollow Military" when President Jimmy Carter got the knife in his hands?
But let us not forget that Obama also promises to repeal the Bush tax cuts, which means you'll be getting a massive tax hike if you make as little as $42,000. That's change you can believe in. Spare change to rattle in your pocket after Obama takes all your folding green for his Socialist programs.
And here's another Anti-Jewish video featuring Muslim Khalid al-Mansour, who helped Obama get into Harvard. (The anti-semitism is 1:08 into the video).
And for the hat trick, here's "Minister Louis Farrakhan" as Obama always refers to this famous Jew-hating racist. Minister of what? Hatred? Racism?
Thursday, October 30, 2008
Change you can believe in, especially when you see the tax withholding on your paycheck under "President Barack Obama." I don't know about you, but that title ain't no thrill up my leg. That's a cold chill running up my back and all over. Lord, deliver us from "President Barack Obama!"
Katie Favazza at Townhall.com posted it with these comments:
A reader who saw my post about the relationship of Rashid Khalidi and Barack Obama emailed me a great video, which he found through The Jawa Report.
He suggested that I post this, as it provides more information regarding Obama and his Palestinian ties.
Amanda Carpenter at Townhall.com gives the highlights:
A former Countrywide executive who worked close with CEO Angelo Mozilo said the politicians who got under the table deals on their mortgages "absolutely" knew they were getting the discounts because of their influential political position.
Among those who received sweetheart deals were Democratic Sen. Chris Dodd, Sen. Kent Conrad and former Fannie Mae CEO's James Johnson and Franklin Raines.
Before this scandal broke, Johnson was leading Barack Obama's vice presidential vetting team and Dodd was considered to be a VP contender.
Wednesday, October 29, 2008
Here are some of Barney Frank's -- and his Democratic friends' -- attempts at "reform."
So, as the slick lawyer told the jury, "Who ya gonna believe, Barney Frank or your lying eyes and ears?"
And in the "people who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones" line, how about this example of how Obama has such great wisdom in picking the people he wants to listen to for 20 years.
And here's a second video with more details of Hagan's attendance at a fundraiser hosted by Godless Americans PAC in Boston, Mass. Wouldn't go over too well back home, but who will ever find out if she rubs shoulders and takes money from "Godless Americans" in Massachusetts?
BTW, I've met Liddy Dole. Quite a nice lady, but definitely one of the famed Steel Magnolias. Yet another pit bull with lipstick. Give 'er hell, Liddy! Kay Hagan don't believe in hell anyway.
Let's go for a twofer. If Obama's tax-hike plans to "spread the wealth around" isn't scary enough, how about Obama's statement that Iran is "just a tiny little country" that "doesn't pose a serious threat" to anyone? Muslim nutjobs building nuclear bombs and vowing to wipe Israel off the map are "not a serious threat"? Only serious enough to start World War III, that's all.
Heck, we're on a roll here, let's go for a threefer. More Obama scary statements about sitting down to chat with the world's leading terrorist states.
So since we can't see that video about one Palestinian Obama supporter, how about this one? It's done by Al Jazeera TV, all anti-Israel all the time network news, but though Ace managed to find it, somehow all the mainstream media missed it. Imagine that.
Tuesday, October 28, 2008
Here’s a couple of interesting photos for gun nuts like me. First shows the gas cloud, shock wave and projectile as an AK-47 assault rifle is fired.
Then there’s the same effect as a revolver is fired, showing the gas cloud escaping around the cylinder as well as the muzzle.
Photos are by Gary Settles of Penn State University, part of a slide show illustrating an article about his amazing photography in the New York Times: The Mysterious Cough, Caught on Film
Now doesn’t that give you the proper warm fuzzy feeling to rush right out and vote for the most anti-gun presidential candidate in our history?
Monday, October 27, 2008
So I can sympathize entirely with print journalist Michael S. Malone's admission that he's ashamed of his profession for the overwhelmingly obvious bias being shown by pro-Obama mainstream media in: Editing Their Way to Oblivion: Journalism Sacrificed For Power and Pensions
The sheer bias in the print and television coverage of this election campaign is not just bewildering, but appalling. And over the last few months I’ve found myself slowly moving from shaking my head at the obvious one-sided reporting, to actually shouting at the screen of my television and my laptop computer.
But worst of all, for the last couple weeks, I’ve begun — for the first time in my adult life — to be embarrassed to admit what I do for a living. A few days ago, when asked by a new acquaintance what I did for a living, I replied that I was “a writer”, because I couldn’t bring myself to admit to a stranger that I’m a journalist...
But nothing, nothing I’ve seen has matched the media bias on display in the current Presidential campaign. Republicans are justifiably foaming at the mouth over the sheer one-sidedness of the press coverage of the two candidates and their running mates. But in the last few days, even Democrats, who have been gloating over the pass - no, make that shameless support - they’ve gotten from the press, are starting to get uncomfortable as they realize that no one wins in the long run when we don’t have a free and fair press. I was one of the first people in the traditional media to call for the firing of Dan Rather - not because of his phony story, but because he refused to admit his mistake - but, bless him, even Gunga Dan thinks the media is one-sided in this election.
Now, don’t get me wrong. I’m not one of those people who think the media has been too hard on, say, Gov. Palin, by rushing reportorial SWAT teams to Alaska to rifle through her garbage. This is the Big Leagues, and if she wants to suit up and take the field, then Gov. Palin better be ready to play. The few instances where I think the press has gone too far - such as the Times reporter talking to Cindy McCain’s daughter’s MySpace friends - can easily be solved with a few newsroom smackdowns and temporary repostings to the Omaha Bureau.
No, what I object to (and I think most other Americans do as well) is the lack of equivalent hardball coverage of the other side - or worse, actively serving as attack dogs for Senators Obama and Biden. If the current polls are correct, we are about to elect as President of the United States a man who is essentially a cipher, who has left almost no paper trail, seems to have few friends (that at least will talk) and has entire years missing out of his biography. That isn’t Sen. Obama’s fault: his job is to put his best face forward. No, it is the traditional media’s fault, for it alone (unlike the alternative media) has had the resources to cover this story properly, and has systematically refused to do so.
Why, for example to quote McCain’s lawyer, haven’t we seen an interview with Sen. Obama’s grad school drug dealer - when we know all about Mrs. McCain’s addiction? Are Bill Ayers and Tony Rezko that hard to interview? All those phony voter registrations that hard to scrutinize? And why are Senator Biden’s endless gaffes almost always covered up, or rationalized, by the traditional media?
The absolute nadir (though I hate to commit to that, as we still have two weeks before the election) came with Joe the Plumber. Middle America, even when they didn’t agree with Joe, looked on in horror as the press took apart the private life of an average person who had the temerity to ask a tough question of a Presidential candidate. So much for the Standing Up for the Little Man, so much for Speaking Truth to Power, so much for Comforting the Afflicted and Afflicting the Comfortable, and all of those other catchphrases we journalists used to believe we lived by.So what happened to "objective journalism"? Malone reveals who the real culprits are, the "wizards" behind the curtain pulling the levers.
Who are the real villains in this story of mainstream media betrayal?
The editors. The men and women you don’t see; the people who not only decide what goes in the paper, but what doesn’t; the managers who give the reporters their assignments and lay-out the editorial pages. They are the real culprits.
Why? I think I know, because had my life taken a different path, I could have been one: Picture yourself in your 50s in a job where you’ve spent 30 years working your way to the top, to the cockpit of power . . . only to discover that you’re presiding over a dying industry. The Internet and alternative media are stealing your readers, your advertisers and your top young talent. Many of your peers shrewdly took golden parachutes and disappeared. Your job doesn’t have anywhere near the power and influence it did when your started your climb. The Newspaper Guild is too weak to protect you any more, and there is a very good chance you’ll lose your job before you cross that finish line, ten years hence, of retirement and a pension.
In other words, you are facing career catastrophe -and desperate times call for desperate measures. Even if you have to risk everything on a single Hail Mary play. Even if you have to compromise the principles that got you here. After all, newspapers and network news are doomed anyway - all that counts is keeping them on life support until you can retire.
And then the opportunity presents itself: an attractive young candidate whose politics likely matches yours, but more important, he offers the prospect of a transformed Washington with the power to fix everything that has gone wrong in your career. With luck, this monolithic, single-party government will crush the alternative media via a revived Fairness Doctrine, re-invigorate unions by getting rid of secret votes, and just maybe, be beholden to people like you in the traditional media for getting it there.
And besides, you tell yourself, it’s all for the good of the country . . .Been there, done that. Wrote the stories that never saw print because they died on the editor's spike. Laid out the pages and wrote the headlines that got rejected. And shouted "Glory Halleleujah! Free at last, free at last!" when I left that last newspaper job behind forever.
Exhibit 1: Wolf at Blackfive.net has a story about Obama's mistress which he says the media knows but won't report, audio podcast here. And photos of the mistress are here. The prosecution rests.
Sunday, October 26, 2008
I've been thinking this for a while so I might as well air it here. I honestly never thought we'd see such a thing in our country - not yet anyway - but I sense what's occurring in this election is a recklessness and abandonment of rationality that has preceded the voluntary surrender of liberty and security in other places. I can't help but observe that even some conservatives are caught in the moment as their attempts at explaining their support for Barack Obama are unpersuasive and even illogical. And the pull appears to be rather strong. Ken Adelman, Doug Kmiec, and others, reach for the usual platitudes in explaining themselves but are utterly incoherent. Even non-conservatives with significant public policy and real world experiences, such as Colin Powell and Charles Fried, find Obama alluring but can't explain themselves in an intelligent way.And Melanie Phillips at The Spectator in London asks Is America really going to do this?
There is a cult-like atmosphere around Barack Obama, which his campaign has carefully and successfully fabricated, which concerns me. The messiah complex. Fainting audience members at rallies. Special Obama flags and an Obama presidential seal. A graphic with the portrayal of the globe and Obama's name on it, which adorns everything from Obama's plane to his street literature. Young school children singing songs praising Obama. Teenagers wearing camouflage outfits and marching in military order chanting Obama's name and the professions he is going to open to them. An Obama world tour, culminating in a speech in Berlin where Obama proclaims we are all citizens of the world. I dare say, this is ominous stuff.
Even the media are drawn to the allure that is Obama. Yes, the media are liberal. Even so, it is obvious that this election is different. The media are open and brazen in their attempts to influence the outcome of this election. I've never seen anything like it. Virtually all evidence of Obama's past influences and radicalism — from Jeremiah Wright to William Ayers — have been raised by non-traditional news sources. The media's role has been to ignore it as long as possible, then mention it if they must, and finally dismiss it and those who raise it in the first place. It's as if the media use the Obama campaign's talking points — its preposterous assertions that Obama didn't hear Wright from the pulpit railing about black liberation, whites, Jews, etc., that Obama had no idea Ayers was a domestic terrorist despite their close political, social, and working relationship, etc. — to protect Obama from legitimate and routine scrutiny. And because journalists have also become commentators, it is hard to miss their almost uniform admiration for Obama and excitement about an Obama presidency. So in the tank are the media for Obama that for months we've read news stories and opinion pieces insisting that if Obama is not elected president it will be due to white racism. And, of course, while experience is crucial in assessing Sarah Palin's qualifications for vice president, no such standard is applied to Obama's qualifications for president. (No longer is it acceptable to minimize the work of a community organizer.) Charles Gibson and Katie Couric sought to humiliate Palin. They would never and have never tried such an approach with Obama.
But beyond the elites and the media, my greatest concern is whether this election will show a majority of the voters susceptible to the appeal of a charismatic demagogue. This may seem a harsh term to some, and no doubt will to Obama supporters, but it is a perfectly appropriate characterization. Obama's entire campaign is built on class warfare and human envy. The "change" he peddles is not new. We've seen it before. It is change that diminishes individual liberty for the soft authoritarianism of socialism. It is a populist appeal that disguises government mandated wealth redistribution as tax cuts for the middle class, falsely blames capitalism for the social policies and government corruption (Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac) that led to the current turmoil in our financial markets, fuels contempt for commerce and trade by stigmatizing those who run successful small and large businesses, and exploits human imperfection as a justification for a massive expansion of centralized government. Obama's appeal to the middle class is an appeal to the "the proletariat," as an infamous philosopher once described it, about which a mythology has been created. Rather than pursue the American Dream, he insists that the American Dream has arbitrary limits, limits Obama would set for the rest of us — today it's $250,000 for businesses and even less for individuals. If the individual dares to succeed beyond the limits set by Obama, he is punished for he's now officially "rich." The value of his physical and intellectual labor must be confiscated in greater amounts for the good of the proletariat (the middle class). And so it is that the middle class, the birth-child of capitalism, is both celebrated and enslaved — for its own good and the greater good. The "hope" Obama represents, therefore, is not hope at all. It is the misery of his utopianism imposed on the individual.
Unlike past Democrat presidential candidates, Obama is a hardened ideologue. He's not interested in playing around the edges. He seeks "fundamental change," i.e., to remake society. And if the Democrats control Congress with super-majorities led by Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid, he will get much of what he demands.
The question is whether enough Americans understand what's at stake in this election and, if they do, whether they care. Is the allure of a charismatic demagogue so strong that the usually sober American people are willing to risk an Obama presidency? After all, it ensnared Adelman, Kmiec, Powell, Fried, and numerous others. And while America will certainly survive, it will do so, in many respects, as a different place.
The impact of the financial crisis on the American presidential election has somewhat obscured the most important reason why the prospect of an Obama presidency is giving so many people nightmares. This is the fear that, if he wins, US defences will be emasculated at a time of unprecedented international peril and the enemies of America and the free world will seize their opportunity to destroy the west.My prayer is that insanity will dissipate and sanity will strike in the voting booths.
Personally, I don’t give any credence to the ‘support’ for one candidate over the other that has been expressed by the enemies of civilisation (Iran and Hamas ‘support’ Obama, while an al Qaeda blogger ‘supports’ McCain). Their agenda is simply to sow confusion and promote American recriminations and disarray. Nor do I set much store by many of the remarks made by either candidate during the latter stages of this election campaign, since under this kind of pressure both will now say pretty much anything to win it. The New York Times has run a useful analysis of the candidates’ foreign policy campaign statements which shows how Obama has carefully tacked to the ‘hard power’ agenda while McCain has in turn nodded towards ‘soft power’.
No, the only way to assess their position is to look at each man in the round, at what his general attitude is towards war and self-defence, aggression and appeasement, the values of the west and those of its enemies and – perhaps most crucially of all – the nature of the advisers and associates to whom he is listening. As I have said before, I do not trust McCain; I think his judgment is erratic and impetuous, and sometimes wrong. But on the big picture, he gets it. He will defend America and the free world whereas Obama will undermine them and aid their enemies.
Here’s why. McCain believes in protecting and defending America as it is. Obama tells the world he is ashamed of America and wants to change it into something else. McCain stands for American exceptionalism, the belief that American values are superior to tyrannies. Obama stands for the expiation of America’s original sin in oppressing black people, the third world and the poor.
Obama thinks world conflicts are basically the west’s fault, and so it must right the injustices it has inflicted. That’s why he believes in ‘soft power’ — diplomacy, aid, rectifying ‘grievances’ (thus legitimising them, encouraging terror and promoting injustice) and resolving conflict by talking. As a result, he will take an axe to America’s defences at the very time when they need to be built up. He has said he will ‘cut investments in unproven missile defense systems’; he will ‘not weaponize space’; he will ‘slow our development of future combat systems’; and he will also ‘not develop nuclear weapons,’ pledging to seek ‘deep cuts’ in America’s arsenal, thus unilaterally disabling its nuclear deterrent as Russia and China engage in massive military buildups.
McCain understands that an Islamic war of conquest is being waged on a number of diverse fronts which all have to be seen in relation to each other. For Obama, however, the real source of evil in the world is America. The evil represented by Iran and the Islamic jihadists is apparently all America’s fault. ‘A lot of evil’s been perpetuated based on the claim that we were fighting evil,’ he said. Last May, he dismissed Iran as a tiny place which posed no threat to the US -- before reversing himself the very next day when he said Iran was a great threat which had to be defeated. He has also said that Hezbollah and Hamas have ‘legitimate grievances’. Really? And what might they be? Their grievances are a) the existence of Israel b) its support by America c) the absence of salafist Islam in the world. Does Obama think these ‘grievances’ are legitimate?
To solve world conflict, Obama places his faith in the UN club of terror and tyranny, which is currently fuelling the murderous global demonisation of Israel for having the temerity to defend itself and is even now preparing for a rerun of its own anti-Jew hate-fest of Durban 2, which preceded 9/11 by a matter of days.
McCain understands that Israel is the victim rather than the victimiser in the Middle East, that it is surrounded by genocidal enemies whose undiminished intention is to destroy it as a Jewish state, and that is both the first line of defence against the Islamist attack on the free world and its most immediate and important target.
Obama dismisses the threat from Islamism, shows zero grasp of the strategic threat to the region and the world from the encirclement of Israel by Iran, displays a similar failure to grasp the strategic importance of Iraq, thinks Israel is instead the source of Arab and Muslim aggression against the west, believes that a Palestinian state would promote world peace and considers that Israel – particularly through the ‘settlements’ – is the principal obstacle to that happy outcome. Accordingly, Obama has said he wants Israel to return to its 1967 borders – actually the strategically indefensible 1948 cease-fire line, known accordingly as the ‘Auschwitz borders’.
Obama would thus speak to Iran’s genocidal mullahs without preconditions on his side (the same mullahs have now laid down their own preconditions for America: pull all US troops out of the Middle East, and abandon support for ‘Zionist’ Israel) but has said he would have problems dealing with an Israeli government headed by a member of Israel’s Likud Party. In similar vein, it is notable that Obama opposed the congressional resolution labelling the Iranian Revolutionary Guards a terrorist organization, which passed the Senate by a wide margin with support from both parties. And had he had his way, there would have been no ‘surge’ in Iraq and America would instead have run up the white flag, with the incalculable bloodbath and strengthening of the jihad that would have followed.
Obama assumes that Islamic terrorism is driven by despair, poverty, inflammatory US policy and the American presence on Muslim soil in the Persian Gulf. Thus he adopts the agenda of the Islamists themselves. This is not surprising since many of his connections suggest that that the man who may be elected President of a country upon which the Islamists have declared war is himself firmly in the Islamists’ camp. Daniel Pipes lists Obama’s extensive connections to Islamists in general and the Nation of Islam in particular, and concludes with this astounding observation:
Obama's multiple links to anti-Americans and subversives mean he would fail the standard security clearance process for Federal employees. Islamic aggression represents America’s strategic enemy; Obama’s many insalubrious connections raise grave doubts about his fitness to serve as America's commander-in-chief.
The hatred that these Islamist connections entertain towards Israel is reflected amongst Obama’s own advisers. With one notable exception in Dennis Ross, whose late arrival in Camp Obama suggests a cosmetic exercise designed to allay alarm among Israel supporters, his advisers are overwhelmingly not only hostile to Israel but perpetrate the loathesome canard that Jews have too much power over American policy.
The former Carter adviser Zbigniew Brzezinski, for example, not only denounced Israel’s war against Hezbollah thus:
I think what the Israelis are doing today  for example in Lebanon is in effect– maybe not in intent – the killing of hostages
but also supports Mearsheimer and Walt’s notorious smear that the Jews have subverted America’s foreign policy in the interests of Israel. Merrill McPeak, vice chairman of Obama’s campaign and his chief military adviser, has similarly blamed problems in the Middle East on the influence of people who live in New York City and Miami (guess who) whom no ‘politician wants to run against’ and who he says exercise undue influence on America’s foreign affairs. Most revolting of all is Samantha Power, a very close adviser whom Obama fired for calling Hillary a ‘monster’ but who says she still expects to be in Obama’s administration. Not only has Power has advocated the ending of all aid to Israel and redirecting it to the Palestinians, but she has spoken about the need to land a ‘mammoth force’ of US troops in Israel to protect the Palestinians from Israeli attempts at genocide (sic) -- and has complained that criticism of Barack Obama all too often came down to what was ‘good for the Jews’.
There are, alas, many in the west for whom all this is music to their ears. Whether through wickedness, ideology, stupidity or derangement, they firmly believe that the ultimate source of conflict in the world derives at root from America and Israel, whose societies, culture and values they want to see emasculated or destroyed altogether. They are drooling at the prospect that an Obama presidency will bring that about. The rest of us can’t sleep at night.
Obama's so-called tax cuts for people who don't pay income taxes, of course, aren't really tax cuts at all, just additional spending in the form of government checks, paid for by us, the American taxpayer.If you haven't taken the time to consider the issues, give Fred 12 minutes of your time.
Are we really expected to believe that the spending needs of the most liberal government in American history, in control of all three branches, will be satified by only raising revenue from the top five percent of American taxpayers?
I think we've heard this tune before — back when Bill Clinton campaigned on a middle-class tax cut and when elected, imposed a middle class tax increase.
[T]he final straw for Palin and her allies was the news that the campaign had reported spending $150,000 on her clothes, turning her, again, into the butt of late-night humor.
“She never even set foot in these stores,” the senior Republican said, noting Palin hadn’t realized the cost when the clothes were brought to her in her Minnesota hotel room.
“It’s completely out-of-control operatives,” said the close ally outside the campaign. “She has no responsibility for that. It’s incredibly frustrating for us and for her.”
The Obama campaign whined about WFTV being "unprofessional" when it dared to dish out some tough questions to Vice President hopeful, Joe Biden.How's this for a preview of life under President Barack Obama?
The Obama spokesperson issued this statement about the interview:
"There's nothing wrong with tough questions, but reporters have the very important job of sharing the truth with the public -- not misleading the American people with false information. Senator Biden handled the interview well; however, the anchor was completely unprofessional. Senator Biden's wife is not running for elected office, and there are many other stations in the Orlando television market that would gladly conduct a respectful and factual interview with her."
"This cancellation is non-negotiable, and further opportunities for your station to interview with this campaign are unlikely, at best for the duration of the remaining days until the election."
Saturday, October 25, 2008
Any questions? Vote for McCain-Palin. 'Nuf said.
FACT: Barack Obama opposes four of the five Supreme Court justices who affirmed an individual right to keep and bear arms. He voted against the confirmation of Alito and Roberts and he has stated he would not have appointed Thomas or Scalia.17
FACT: Barack Obama voted for an Illinois State Senate bill to ban and confiscate "assault weapons," but the bill was so poorly crafted, it would have also banned most semi-auto and single and double barrel shotguns commonly used by sportsmen.18
FACT: Barack Obama voted to allow reckless lawsuits designed to bankrupt the firearms industry.1
FACT: Barack Obama wants to re-impose the failed and discredited Clinton Gun Ban.15
FACT: Barack Obama voted to ban almost all rifle ammunition commonly used for hunting and sport shooting.3
FACT: Barack Obama has endorsed a 500% increase in the federal excise tax on firearms and ammunition.9
FACT: Barack Obama has endorsed a complete ban on handgun ownership.2
FACT: Barack Obama supports local gun bans in Chicago, Washington, D.C., and other cities.4
FACT: Barack Obama voted to uphold local gun bans and the criminal prosecution of people who use firearms in self-defense.5
FACT: Barack Obama supports gun owner licensing and gun registration.6
FACT: Barack Obama refused to sign a friend-of-the-court Brief in support of individual Second Amendment rights in the Heller case.
FACT: Barack Obama opposes Right to Carry laws.7
FACT: Barack Obama was a member of the Board of Directors of the Joyce Foundation, the leading source of funds for anti-gun organizations and "research."8
FACT: Barack Obama supported a proposal to ban gun stores within 5 miles of a school or park, which would eliminate almost every gun store in America.9
FACT: Barack Obama voted not to notify gun owners when the state of Illinois did records searches on them.10
FACT: Barack Obama voted against a measure to lower the Firearms Owners Identification card age minimum from 21 to 18, a measure designed to assist young people in the military.11
FACT: Barack Obama favors a ban on standard capacity magazines.12
FACT: Barack Obama supports mandatory micro-stamping.13
FACT: Barack Obama supports mandatory waiting periods.2
FACT: Barack Obama supports repeal of the Tiahrt Amendment, which prohibits information on gun traces collected by the BATFE from being used in reckless lawsuits against firearm dealers and manufacturers.14
FACT: Barack Obama supports one-gun-a-month handgun purchase restrictions.16
FACT: Barack Obama supports a ban on inexpensive handguns.9
FACT: Barack Obama supports a ban on the resale of police issued firearms, even if the money is going to police departments for replacement equipment.9FACT: Barack Obama supports mandatory firearm training requirements for all gun owners and a ban on gun ownership for persons under the age of 21.9
Thursday, October 23, 2008
Republican Rep. Robin Hayes, who is locked in a closely contested House race in North Carolina, has also been criticized after telling a crowd Saturday that "liberals hate real Americans that work and accomplish and achieve and believe in God." Hayes initially denied making the remarks, but he was forced to acknowledge them after an audiotape of the speech surfaced.
"I genuinely did not recall making the statement and, after reading it, there is no doubt that it came out completely the wrong way," Hayes said in a statement released by his campaign. "I actually was trying to work to keep the crowd as respectful as possible, so this is definitely not what I intended."
Hayes had spoken at a campaign rally in Concord, N.C., where Sen. John McCain appeared. The 10-year congressman told the crowd he wanted to "make sure we don't say something stupid, make sure we don't say something we don't mean."
He then went on to praise Palin. "Folks, there's a great American," Hayes said. "Liberals hate real Americans that work and accomplish and achieve and believe in God."
So, what's to apologize for?
Back before the media realized it needed to lie about Obama launching his political career at Ayers' house, the Los Angeles Times provided an eyewitness account from a liberal who attended the event.Read Ann's entire rouge's gallery of former radicals who are now proud members of the intelligentsia on our college campuses, teaching our kids how to be radicals. Gives you a warm fuzzy feeling about electing one of Bill's bestest buddies to lead our great land, don't it?
"When I first met Barack Obama, he was giving a standard, innocuous little talk in the living room of those two legends-in-their-own-minds, Bill Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn. They were launching him -- introducing him to the Hyde Park community as the best thing since sliced bread."
The Times has now stripped this item from its Web page, but the great blogger Patterico has preserved it for posterity on his Web page.
Obama's glib remark that "Bill Ayers is a professor of education in Chicago; 40 years ago when I was 8 years old he engaged in despicable acts with a domestic group. I have roundly denounced those attacks" -- doesn't answer anything.
First of all, the fact that Ayers is a professor of education proves only one thing: He is dumber than any person without an education degree.
Ayers is such an imbecile, we ought to be amazed that he's teaching at a university -- even when you consider that it's an ed school -- except all former violent radicals end up teaching. Roughly 80 percent of former Weathermen are full college professors -- 99 percent if you don't include the ones killed in shoot-outs with the police or in prison -- i.e., not yet pardoned by a Democratic president.
Wednesday, October 22, 2008
See what happens when Christians stand up against wrong. Good overcomes evil. Look it up.
A corporate executive for McDonald's restaurants who had been on board of directors of the National Gay & Lesbian Chamber of Commerce has stepped down following a boycott of the chain organized by the pro-family American Family Association.
McDonald's officials confirmed today to WND that Richard Ellis, who had been named to the "gay" chamber board after McDonald's contributed $20,000 to the organization, "made a personal decision to step down" after he accepted a new position with McDonald's Restaurants of Canada.
McDonald's officials also told AFA the company has no plans to renew its membership in the special interest group when it expires in December.
"We appreciate the decision by McDonald's to no longer support political activity by homosexual activist organizations," AFA chairman Donald E. Wildmon said in a prepared statement.
WND reported in May when McDonald's signed onto the "gay" agenda, and one executive for the fast-food chain later accused Christian advocates of the traditional family of being motivated by "hate."
The AFA called for a boycott and established a website to facilitate the effort. However, AFA officials today said the boycott was being called off after the company notified the AFA Ellis has resigned from the board and "his seat on the board will not be replaced by McDonald's."
"McDonald's stated that the company would remain neutral in the culture war surrounding homosexual marriage," the AFA said.
The pro-family group noted that in an e-mail to McDonald's franchise owners, the company said, "It is our policy to not be involved in political and social issues. McDonald's remains neutral on same sex marriage or any 'homosexual agenda' as defined by the American Family Association."
Hey, it worked out OK for the 9-11 terrorists, didn't it? How bad could it be?
Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac meltdown the economy. Brought to you by Obama and the Democrats.
John Murtha's big mouth has even got the Pennsylvania rednecks going for McCain-Palin. First he calls his own voters racists. Oops. So he apologizes and said he meant to say rednecks. Oops II. When you're in a hole, Big John, first thing to do is stop digging. And keep your big mouth shut.
I hear Obama had Joe Biden and John Murtha locked in the same room until after the election.
Let's just call it the Revenge of the Rednecks, in Pennsylvania and all across the "bitter" country.
The Noo Yawk Times just don't "get" us rednecks. Take redheaded Maureen Dowd, who gives us the penetrating inside story of why Colin Powell decided at the last minute to endorse Obama. It ain't a black thing, Maureen assures, it's because Powell is such a great patriot.
And according to Dowd, Powell stepped into the fray because he was forced to due to "the slimy tenor of the race against Obama." Say what?
The only "slimy tenor" I've read in the Noo Yawk Times is directed toward John McCain, his wife Cindy McCain and Sarah Palin, all three of whom have been subjected to totally false hit jobs for the great sins of being white, male, female and Republicans, but worst of all for challenging the long-planned coronation of NYT's favorite son, Emperor Barack Hussein Obama the 1st, Lord of the Entire Universe, Amen.
And of course, we also have the "slimy tenor" of Dowd trying to use Powell to wipe away doubts of Obama's patriotism and religion(s).
...He got a mass e-mail from a man wanting to spread the word that Obama was reading a book about the end of America written by a fellow Muslim.
“Holy cow!” Powell thought. Upon checking Amazon.com, he saw that it was a reference to Fareed Zakaria, a Muslim who writes a Newsweek column and hosts a CNN foreign affairs show. His latest book is “The Post-American World.”
And instead of being concerned that our "next President" is reading a Muslim book about "the end of America," we should salute his patriotism? Pardon me if I don't stand with my hand over my heart.
Powell also adds this knee-slapper: "Experience is helpful,” he says, “but it is judgment that matters." Is that sorta like the great judgment that Powell showed in talking President Bush the 1st into stopping the invasion of Iraq so Saddam Hussein could rebuild his army to fight again?
Meanwhile, way down here in bitter, backwoods redneck country, "experts" are predicting Obama will win North Carolina, my home state, which hasn't been carried by a Democrat presidential candidate since Jimmy Carter in 1976. I was one of those fools in '76 who fell for Carter's southern drawl and "born-again" credentials. Last Democrat I've voted for and the "Worst President Evah" who helped turn me into a former Democrat.
I lived through Jimmy Carter the 1st, stagflation, inflation and incompetence. Now here comes another smooth talker who's "always been a Christian" and has even less experience than the one-term governor of Georgia. Spare me from the Second Coming of Jimmy Carter.
Now I'm one of those "certified Republicans" Washington Post writer Kevin Merida refers to in his report on North Carolina's New Blues.
Process engineer Jeff Roberts and cattle farmer Lonnie Carpenter both were work-dusty and tired but boisterous, Roberts a certified Republican who brought Carpenter with him. He boasted of turning his Democratic buddy to the other side, but it wasn't clear that had taken much of a push.
"I don't think he has the guts to handle the job," said Carpenter. "I think he is a mouth full of 'gimme' and a whole lot of 'much obliged.' He hollers 'changes, changes,' and you never hear what the change is."
Take the war in Iraq, he said. "I think wanting to cut back troops, setting a deadline, that's bullcrap."
Roberts agreed. "War is ugly," he said. "War is dirty. You level the city, they learn. I don't think that country knows what freedom is, so they don't know how to accept freedom. McCain has been there and done that. He knows what it is to be locked up. I think McCain will fight for his people."Democrat Lonnie Carpenter sounds like Joe the plumber to me, one of them good ol' boys who ain't as stupid as Obama thinks he is. And who did Merida find that's supporting Obama here? Let's see, we got a homeless "former" drug addict who spent 14 years in jail for murder and just got kicked out of a fleabag motel in Charlotte. We got a Hispanic hot dog lady selling her wares from a street cart in downtown Charlotte. We got a fella runs a black barbershop. We got a young guy who just cut his first rap CD. Whodathunk it? Obama supporters.
And Merida says "Pockets of political enthusiasm keep surfacing in the most unlikely places" for Obama? A fleabag motel, an inner-city sidewalk, a black barber shop and a rap recording studio? What unlikely places to find Obama supporters. Sounds like typical ACORN territory to me.
I bet Merida thought he'd found another Obama voter when he met Pam Demarest in Charlotte, a full-time nurse also working a part-time job as a community college teacher to make up the pay lost when her husband was laid off, plus putting a son through college. Wrong.
Demarest voices concerns I've heard a lot. Folks here like McCain and they love Sarah Palin, but they're going to vote "against" Obama. I've done a windshield survey of my town and 30-minute drive to work in a neighboring county and I've seen many McCain-Palin yard and road signs and very few Obama-Biden signs. It's not a scientific poll and does not include driving through the "projets" as they are known here.
But I've also heard from more than a few yellow-dog Democrats who've never voted for a Republican in their lives and they're saying "Not only no, but hell no, I ain't voting for Obama!" Maybe the big cities and the ivory towers will go to Obama here, but not the rednecks. And though I'm sure the black vote will be overwhelming for Obama, I don't think he can win here without the yellow-dog Democrat rednecks.
And when Obama loses, all us rednecks will be called racists. But it ain't a black thing, it's a redneck thing. It don't matter what color you are, if you come across as "condescending" and untrustworthy to us rednecks, you can promise us the moon, but we just ain't buying any. Blacks, big-city liberals and college eggheads can’t outvote all us rednecks here in North Carolina. Ain’t gonna happen, hide and watch.
Jennifer Rubin at Pajamas Media compares Powell vs. Joe the plumber in terms of impact on the voters as we near the finish line Nov. 4.
Judging from the last couple of days, the MSM media seems more impressed by the Powell endorsement than voters do. The “Joe the Plumber” bump in the polls for McCain which began in earnest with last week’s debate seems, for now, to have exceeded the Powell bump.
But the challenge remains a daunting one for McCain. He trails in national polls and a series of state polls and is being vastly outspent on last minute campaign ads. Is there time for him to pull it out?
Nancy Pelosi says the election is over.
Conservatives beg to differ. The voters will settle the matter in two weeks. One surprising ray of hope for McCain: with the most unpopular president and the worst economy in generations he remains in the thick of the race. That alone tells us something about voters’ comfort level with his opponent.Us rednecks beg to differ, too. It ain't over until the votes are counted and the fat lady sings.
Tuesday, October 21, 2008
If you have some Obamaite-believing friends, this would be a good place to send them. Maybe the Kool-Aid will wear off in time to save our country from an unmitigated disaster.