Subscribe to Wake up America by Email (Opens in new window)
Check out the blog buzz at memeorandum.


Tuesday, September 30, 2008

That Sound You Heard Today

cross-posted from TOCB

This post was written and posted at TOCB the day the unconstitutional Wall Street bail out bill failed…

~Snooper~

That sound you heard today was Common Sense once thought to be dead and buried coming to life and coming home to roost.

That sound you heard today was the United States Constitution making itself noticed.

That sound you heard today was We The People getting our message made known.

That sound you heard today was socialists screaming from the rooftops in anguish and pain.

That sound you heard today was Collective Reasoning forcing itself upon the unreasonable and the intolerant.

That sound you heard today was the fat cats, crooks and robbers screeching in agony as their reign of deceit, lies and charlatanism being exposed.

That sound you heard today was Free Markets fixing itself in spite of government fabricated cure intrusion.

That sound you heard today was defective government meddling into financial markets coming to a screeching halt.

That sound you heard today was the sound of the demanding of Personal and Professional Accountability of those responsible for the current self-induced quagmire.

That sound you heard today was the sound of charlatans admitting, without the integrity to actually admit, failure.

That sound you heard today was the groans of those responsible being made known.

That sound you heard today were those trying to not get caught red-handed lying as being exposed as liars and having to face the American People for their lies.

That sound you heard today was the death of an unconstitutional Wall Street Bail Out Bill.

That sound you heard today was the politicians that actually still care about the United States Constitution standing up to be recognized as the Constitutional Caretakers that they are, both Democrat and Republican alike.

That sound you heard today was the Free Market Ghosts of days past being revived as if to say, "Leave us alone and we will take care of ourselves, thank you very much."

That sound you heard today was foolish people knowing that their days of defrauding the American People are gone.

That sound you heard today was a message being sent to CONgress and those in CONgress responsible for the self-induced idiocy CONgress has become: "The party is over."

That sound you heard today was the sound of We The People dictating to CONgress and not the other way around.

That sound you heard today was the American People reclaiming their Constitution and once more claiming it as their own as it does not belong to the government and never has.

That sound you heard today was the sound of Freedom annihilating the Socialist Demons of the Democrat and Republican Parties.

That sound you heard today was Free Enterprise reasserting itself.

That sound you heard today was Capitalism reasserting itself and granting the ability to either succeed or fail on one's own merit and not some governmental intrusion and fabricated reality.

That sound you heard today was Reality settling in.

That sound you heard today was Personal Responsibility raising its ugly head.

That sound you heard today was the inevitability of the official acknowledgment of the total and complete lack of leadership qualities of the Speaker of The House Nancy Pelosi being revealed for what it is...the worse leadership in the People's House in the history of this Nation.

That sound you heard today was the inevitability of the official acknowledgment of the total and complete lack of leadership qualities of the Senate leader Senator Harry Reid being revealed for what it is...the worse leadership in the People's Senate in the history of this Nation.

And I will ask the following: what program, policy or legislation of note that has had a positive influence on our Nation that the SoH Pelosi or Senate Leader Reid has accomplished in their two years of service? Someone please name me one. Just one. That is all I ask. I have been searching and I have not detected any. And they dare criticize others within and without or Nation? Please. Stop insulting our intelligence.

That sound you heard today was the Death Knell of American Socialism.

Selah.

Boston Herald Endorses John McCain: 'No Room For A Naif In The Oval Office'

The Boston Herald has come forward and endorsed John McCain today in a piece titled "McCain for president: A certain leader for uncertain times."

The Boston Herald piece starts out saying the last week has shown the need for a leader who is steady in the face of crisis, mature in judgment and has the ability to reach across the aisle to break the "gridlock" that has gripped Washington for too long.

The go to state "That man is Sen. John McCain and at this critical moment in history, this paper is pleased to endorse his candidacy for president of the United States."

The paper wonders what it would have happened had Mccain won the party's nomination in 2000 and goes on to explain how, in their opinion, it is "impossible to envision the future of this great nation being put in the hands of an articulate but inexperienced first-term senator from Illinois."

•This Senate maverick has spent years forging coalitions - on campaign finance reform, immigration reform, on judicial nominations - all with the intent of getting things done in the toxically partisan world of Washington.

His efforts at budget reform, at controlling congressional earmarks - not just because taxpayers can no longer afford them, but because of the corrupting effect they have on the political process - have surely not endeared him to fellow Republicans. But McCain has never shied away from a good fight - on issues worth fighting for.


The Boston Herald goes on to list more reasons why they believe John McCain should be elected in November and then states "There is no room for a naif in the Oval Office," referring to what they consider Obama's inexperience.

But being president is also about character. During his decades of service to his country John McCain has given us all ample evidence of his courage, his character and his leadership. And never more has this nation needed a president with all that John McCain has to offer.


In December of 2007, the Boston Herald also endorsed John McCain over his other Republican rivals for the GOP nomination.

.

Mermaid Jingle Jam: Getting Creative With Videos Can Help Stop Hunger



Chicken of the Sea and Feeding America have formed a partnership in creating a contest which is being dubbed "Mermaid Jingle Jam," where people are asked to join a video contest to help stop hunger.

The video above is a Mermaid Jingle Jam Video Contest Montage. (YouTube URL here)

As Hunger Action Month ends, Feeding America has sent out a news release to remind people there are still ways to help fight hunger, including the online video contest dubbed Mermaid Jingle Jam.

The contest asks people to create a 30-second-90-second video and jingle which incorporates "Chicken of the Sea's original jingle lyrics and a new verse using key themes," and contestants can win individual prizes as well as putting seafood into the hands of hungry Americans.

The Feeding America food bank in the hometown of the winner will receive $100,000 worth of Chicken of the Sea seafood.

Feeding America Spokesperson Ross Fraser says, "We've seen some really creative entries, and we are excited about the contest because it provides a fun and unique way for people to get involved, while helping raise awareness about the issue of hunger in America."

Contestants have until Nov. 7 to upload a video at MermaidJingleJam.com.

Sample videos and a compilation of current entries can be viewed at YouTube.com/TheMermaid2008.

The first 100 valid entries will receive iPod shuffles(R) and the next 50 valid entries will receive $10 iTunes(R) Gift Cards. In addition to the $100,000 worth of seafood for their local food bank, the grand-prize winner will receive a celebrity-style trip to Universal Studios Hollywood(SM), complete with a behind-the-scenes tour, airfare, hotel and dinner at a Hollywood hotspot.

All participants must be registered Mermaid Club members and meet all eligibility requirements to enter.


You can find out more about Feeding America at their website and more about Chicken of the Sea at their website.

.

Congratulations to Catherine Moy from Move America Forward

Via email from Mary Pearson at Move America Forward!!!:

In case you haven't heard, our very own Catherine Moy, Fairfield/Solano RWF has just been appointed to fill the seat left by Frank Kardos, of the Fairfield City Council!
Catherine (Cat) is also the Executive Director of Move America Forward. You can read her daily words on our website www.MoveAmericaForward.com as well in many Blogs, such as Human Events! She has been nominated for a Pulitzer Prize for her writings and speaks to Patriotic Americans everywhere! She has been the guest on Fox News many times and Cat has lead the charge against many wrongs against our finest, our Military! She is currently leading the way with the MAF Freedom Pac, helping our brave men and women have their votes counted as they put their lives on the line for all of us everyday!
When we feel our plates are to full, think of this wonderful woman who is such a shining example of a Lady who gives all her roadblocks to our Heavenly Father above and prays daily for the strength to continue with all she does, whether it is fighting the evils in our world today or being a wonderful Mom and wife! Cat will make a difference and she knows God never gives us more than he knows we can handle, so we know the City of Fairfield has filled that seat with a "true leader!"
I started to write that Cat is the shining example of the "Women of Today," but the words of our Heavenly Father in Proverbs 31:10-31 of the "Virtuous Woman," describes our Catherine Moy completely! I hope you know of or will read the words to learn of why I am so proud to call Cat my dear friend! And I'm sure all of you that know Cat, will agree!
God's Blessings to her and all she is doing! We love and are so proud of her and keep her in your prayers for her healtlh and strength to face each day!
God Bless America and our Troops!
Mary


Congratulations to Catherine Moy.... a big win for the good guys!

.

From Lionheart: The Latest in the New Battle of Britain


l Quds Counter demo London 28th September


The sleeping English Lions are stirring are you one of them?
The Islamic Kingdom of Great Britain staged one of their annual demonstrations through the streets of London on Sunday showing their support for their Islamic Palestinian brothers and sisters in Israel.

The Al Quds brigade is an arm of the extreme Islamic Palestinian organisation Islamic Jihad that is operating in Israel, so this should show the mentality behind those who were demonstrating on OUR streets at the weekend.

Amongst other groups present in their lines, they were joined by the British wing of the extreme Islamic group Hiz But Tahrir whose open mandate is to transform Great Britain into an Islamic State and who call for Jews to be murdered wherever you find them. The Moslem Council of Britain which is a Government funded organisation that helps to influence policy making within OUR Country, and the extreme Left Wing Political Party Respect that is a terrorist supporting British Political party.

Why these groups are not banned from spewing their hatred on OUR streets is any ones guess, but at least now there is an uprising amongst the people of this Land who have sat back watching this hatred promoted for long enough and have finally said 'enough is enough' and taken to the streets to counter the hate.

This is the start of much bigger things as people start to wake up and realise what is happening to their Country. When they do they will now see that there are people out there already who are standing up and demonstrating for everything the hold dear within their ancestral homeland, which is the protection of OUR women and children and everything the Realm in which we live encompasses.

This is OUR Country so what right have these Molems to be doing and saying what they are on OUR streets?

It's a free for all for them now in OUR Country and all in the name of multiculturalism. Its their right, its their culture, its their religion, lets let them do what they want because it's a part of multiculturalism.

NO, they shouldn't be allowed to do just what they want, just like British citizens are not allowed to do what they want, I think the term for this is ANARCHY

This is National suicide being inflicted upon the people by the political class and then enforced upon us against OUR will by the 'Power of the State', and by their Civil servants who need to put food on their families tables so are actively helping the destruction of their Nation.

When all is said and done they and their families will know what part they played in the genocide of Great Britain just like those who worked for the Gestapo in Nazi Germany knew what part they played in the Holocaust with the genocide of Millions of innocent Jews.

The actions of the Islamic Kingdom of Great Britain and its followers are an affront to the British peoples society and way of life, not only that, it endangers and threatens peaceful minorities who are living in OUR Land. This is OUR Land and any guests or long term residents have a right to be protected by the heirs of the British Isles, just like the Police are now doing by bending over backwards to protect Moslems and their benign religion from even the smallest offence like written words which might hurt their feelings. Moslems in Britain have brought everything upon themselves because of the Koran in which they follow. Protection of others is the hospitality that the British people extend to any foreign natives upon OUR Isles as long as they do not threaten the peaceful co-existence of the people living here and the society to which we belong that has been built over millennia by OUR ancestors.

This is OUR Ancestral homeland no one else's!

Many people now within Great Britain realise that by its nature the Islamic religion and the conduct of its Moslem followers are both highly un-conducive to OUR civilized society and are a direct threat to our living environment.

Moderates/Radicals, if they uphold their Religion then they are one and the same just playing different parts of the ultimate religious agenda within OUR Land which is to transform OUR Nation into an Islamic State ruled by Sharia Law.

The problem has gone way past the point of no return for the Political Class who now serve the interests of this benign religious force just too keep the peace under the guise of multiculturalism, with the real problems of this course of action now felt by the innocent men and women on the streets who are now face to face with this invading religious military political force that is exercising its new found strength and power over the innocent people of OUR Nation and OUR way of life.

The heirs of these Isles along with every other innocent race and creed who live peacefully along side of us have had enough of this evil confrontation from the Islamic religion and its Moslem followers that threatens our very human existence and OUR way of life.

The anti-Al Quds demonstration this weekend is the start of the uprising amongst the people who have said 'enough is enough' we don't want these people on OUR streets, we don't want them to be freely allowed to spew their hatred against us and against OUR peaceful friends, and have decided to leave the comfort of their own homes, give up their days off and take to the streets in protest.

There are hundreds of thousands more people like this out there and its is just a matter of time and circumstances until they too take to the streets in protest.

It must be very unsettling to the minority 300,000+ Jewish residents of Britain to see such hatred towards them actually allowed to be promoted on British streets, but they can rest assured that the heirs of this land stand 'shoulder to shoulder' with them in such uncertain days that we are no living through and not just here in the UK but throughout the World.

Islamic teaching says that the end will not come until all the Jews are killed, that is why all prominent Islamic organisations throughout the World justify and actively promote the murder of innocent Jews just like Hitler did during the Holocaust. They are openly and actively calling for another Holocaust in our generation.

People should look at Moslems and the beliefs and desires they hold dear and realise just what savage barbarians they are just like Hitler and the Nazis were.

Not all those who claim the label Moslem are Moslems just like not all who claim the label CofE are Christian, it is the ones who live by their religion and the teachings and example of their child molesting warmongering false prophet Mohamed.

You will see from the photographs and the video that the Moslems demonstrating on OUR streets were holding placards saying 'We are all Hezbollah now'. Hezbollah is a designated terrorist organisation in the 'War on Terror' and we have these people living amongst us saying we are all Hezbollah.

What would the World say if there were people marching through the streets of London saying 'War are all Nazis'?

It is no different and just as hate filled yet it is allowed and condoned under the banner of multiculturalism.

The inevitable has finally arrived and long overdue and I take my hat off to the leaders of March for England and the U.B.A who have organised an grass roots movement to make OUR voices heard, and to all those who stand behind them and have taken to the streets in protest of everything that is now happening in OUR society, and what OUR Country has become.

In their own words:

U.B.A stands shoulder to Shoulder with Sikhs, Jews, in fact anyone whom unites aginst the new nazism that we struggled through world wars to remove... hence you see us stand besides the jewish flag... if you look at the lambeth palace i held a danish and jewish flag.. as the police thought we was right wing, a right wing idiot would die before hold a isreali flag.

March For England is for England... and in that atmosphere anything that threatens our way of life is against the English... be it terrorists, governments e.t.c... united as one but for Queen and Country

U.B.A is solely against terrorists (islam) over-riding our country.....

this is where we unite... two groups united even though we hold strong to the union jack, and they the St George... it is a strong enemy which via government has slowly started to over-ride our freedom, way of life...e.t.c... so both have united,.. but under an umbrella in support.


Both groups joined SIOE (Stop the Islamisation of Europe) recently when they marched to Lambeth Palace on September 11th to demonstrate against the introduction of Sharia Law into OUR Country.

The time has come for people to stand up before it's too late!

No surrender is the British motto, and may God bless these organisations, fill their ranks and bring other groups by their side (no-Neo Nazi's welcome here thank you) to join forces to let the peoples of these Isles voices be heard for the sake of everything we hold dear now, and for the sake of OUR children and grandchildren in the future.

What would OUR forefathers say about what has become of the 'Realm' that they handed down to us, that which has been handed down from generation to generation for safe keeping and protection from ancient of days.

Deus Vult

Beware: Some colourful English language

U.S. House Puts Limit On Constituent Emails To Prevent Website Crash

The U.S. House of Representatives are limiting the amount of emails their constituents can send to individual House members due to the volume of emails coming in regarding the "bailout". They fear too many will crash the House website.

A spokesman for the spokesman for the Chief Administrative Office (CAO), Jeff Ventura, who is responsible for the House website and email services says "We were trying to figure out a way that the House.gov website wouldn’t completely crash."

To that end, the CAO sent out a letter on Tuesday morning stating his office had place a limit on the number of emails that could be sent using the "Write Your Representative" function found at the House of Representatives website. The limit would be in effect during peak email traffic times according to The Hill.

“This measure has become temporarily necessary to ensure that Congressional websites are not completely disabled by the millions of e-mails flowing into the system,”the letter reads.


Ventura continued to explain how this function would work by saying "What we had to do was basically install the digital equivalent of a traffic cop. It was a question of inconveniencing everybody or inconveniencing some people some of the time, while servicing other people the other half of the time.”

Members of the house starting noticing massive amounts of emails coming in regarding the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008, otherwise known as the "bailout" package, as more people became aware of the text of the bill itself and had some type of comment they wanted to make in communications with their respective representatives.

The error message that is seen reads: (Right now the message below shows at the "Write your Representative" link on the U.S. House website.

"The House of Representatives is currently experiencing an extraordinarily high amount of e-mail traffic. The Write Your Representative function is therefore intermittently available. While we realize communicating to your Members of Congress is critical, we suggest attempting to do so at a later time, when demand is not so high. System engineers are working to resolve this issue and we appreciate your patience.”


Ventura admits the problems the email volume caused to the website might not be fixed until the economic package was finalized.

This will make it extremely difficult for constituents to contact their representative to communicate their feelings about any bill that comes up for a vote, including any further bailout bills.

Another option for contacting Congress is the by telephone at (202)225-3121 for the U.S. House switchboard operator.

See, this mass email to the Reps happened with the immigration reform bill and it was because of the massive emails, phones calls, letters and people close enough stopping in, that forced Congress to defeat it.

Guess what? Those millions of emails did not force a "limit" on how many emails the House site allowed. We crashed their switchboard a time or two and we certainly brought the site down to a crawl, but they didn't do this.

This is far more than just limiting for the sake of their site, they are, in MY opinion, deliberately trying to stop the public from threatening their members reelection chances by telling them straight up, "vote for this, get voted out."

It is so obvious that I cannot believe they are even trying it.

Hence my making sure to provide the phone number. Constituents should always be able to email their reps...this is bull.

UPDATE:

Now we know why they are limiting the emails, via Malkin:

A Senate bailout vote is scheduled tomorrow at 9pm Eastern.

Schedule:

(1)Motion to concur on the House message, H.R. 2095, Rail Safety;
(2)a Dorgan amendment relating to H.R. 7081, the U.S. - India Nuclear agreement;
(3)a Bingaman amendment relating to H.R. 7081, the U.S. - India Nuclear agreement;
(4)passage of H.R. 7081, the U.S. - India Nuclear agreement;
(5)a Dodd amendment to H.R. 1424, relating to the bailout package; and
(6)passage of H.R. 1424, the bailout.

Get your fingers dialing:

202-224-3121.


No details on whether any changes have been made to the bill that failed to pass.

.

McCain Ad Highlights Bill Clinton Blaming Democrats For Fannie Mae And Freddie Mac

McCain video ad titled "Rein" below and found at YouTube.



In a one minute ad released by the McCain campaign they highlight Bill Clinton's words in a recently reported interview where he said Democrats resisted Republican efforts and his own to tighten standards on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

When the Bill Clinton interview with Chris Cuomo of ABC News was first reported, reactions from the liberal forums, blogs and websites were also shown, with them criticizing him for giving conservatives and Republicans more ammunition against liberals and Democrats.

Clinton's words were in response to Chris Cuomo asking him "A little surprising for you to hear the Democrats saying, "This came out of nowhere, this is all about the Republicans. We had nothing to do with this." Nancy Pelosi saying it. She signed the '99 Gramm Bill. She knew what was going on with the SEC. They're all sophisticated people. Is that playing politics in this situation?

Clinton's answer, as shown in the McCain video ad above was "Well, maybe everybody does that a little bit. I think the responsibility the Democrats have may rest more in resisting any efforts by Republicans in the Congress or by me when I was President to put some standards and tighten up a little on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac."

Text of the video ad above titled "Rein":

ANNCR: John McCain fought to rein in Fannie and Freddie.

The Post says: McCain "pushed for stronger regulation"..."while Mr. Obama was notably silent."

But, Democrats blocked the reforms.

Loans soared.

Then, the bubble burst.

And, taxpayers are on the hook for billions.

Bill Clinton knows who is responsible.

PRESIDENT BILL CLINTON: "I think the responsibility that the Democrats have may rest more in resisting any efforts by Republicans in the Congress or by me when I was President to put some standards and tighten up a little on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac."

ANNCR: You're right, Mr. President. It didn't have to happen.

JOHN MCCAIN: I'm John McCain and I approve this message.


At the time the Bill Clinton interview was released, he was being called and "absolute disgrace" said be the "Underminer" and those were the most polite of criticisms shown.

With the blame game going on in Washington DC at the moment over the failure of the bailout plan not passing the US House, some are trying to determine where the mess on Wall Street started, how it could have been prevented and what can be done about it that will have the support of the American people.

Some liberals believe Bill Clinton handed the ammunition and the weapon to John McCain and he even loaded it for them, and many believe it was only a matter of time before they used it.

Popular opinion is, more of Bill Clinton's interviews over the last couple of weeks, will be part of any ads produced and released by the Republican National Committee and the John McCain campaign as well as outside groups.

According to The Politico, this ad will be aired nationally and it is the first appearance of Bill Clinton in a campaign ad this general election campaign season.

.

Ohio Drunken Drivers Will Be Listed On Searchable Database

An Ohio law takes effect today which will require courts to send information on repeat drunk driver offenders to the Ohio Department of Public Safety for the creation of a searchable database.

Any driver that has been convicted of driving drunk at least five times in a 20 year period will be listed on a new manageable searchable data base created by the Ohio Department of Public Safety with information sent to them by Ohio courts.

Their name, birth date and address will be listed on the database for Ohio residents to search and discover who in their neighborhood is a multiple offender.

Other offenses related will also qualify towards the five-conviction minimum, such as vehicular assault, vehicular homicide or driving under the influence of drugs as reported by The Columbus Dispatch.

One supporter of this new law, Scott Woodworth, has been convicted 13 times and believes he poses a danger to the public and says the database is a good idea saying "People have a right to know who among them is a drunk."

Woodworth is 49 years old and is currently serving a 5 year sentence at Pickaway Correctional Institution in Orient.

The new legislation was pushed hard by Senator Timothy J. Grendell, a Geauga County Republican, who also helped get further restrictions applied, such as anybody with at least two drunk driving convictions will not be allowed to refuse a blood test when stopped by the police.

Grendell states "You don't come up to a murder scene and have a man standing there with a smoking gun and allow him to say, 'No, I refuse to hand you the best evidence you've got. So why should suspected drunk drivers be allowed to keep our evidence from authorities?"

Further portions of the newly passed legislation mandates earlier court ordered treatments and more utilization of a device that requires drivers to blow into it to prove no alcohol has been consumed before allowing the car to start. Also those who violate their court probation will have to wear an ankle bracelet which will monitor the amount of alcohol in their sweat.

In the past 11 years, 2,979 people have gone to an Ohio prison for felonious drunken driving. An additional 462 went in for drunken driving and other crimes.

The repeaters are overwhelmingly male and white. Their average age is 39 1/2 .

In July, the most recent month for which statistics were available, Woodworth was one of 541 impaired drivers in Ohio prisons.


Woodworth asserts that if there had been devices to prove no alcohol consumption before allow people to drive, it would have kept him off the streets for all the previous years and it was by "God's grace" he never killed anyone, continuing on to say "I don't think I ever hit anything. At least that I know about."

The Ohio Department of Public Safety has until the end of the year to have the database up and running but according to spokeswoman Lindsay Komlanc, they are not sure when it will be ready.

.

Glide America Launches, Providing Access From Main Street To Elected Officials

Glide America has just launched to provide direct access to Washington, DC from ordinary citizens to have their voices heard in a direct line from voters to their elected officials.

Glide America's technology combines the ability to disseminate information regarding government initiatives and deliberations and provides citizens with the technology to organize and act, which includes advanced communication and collaboration tools to make a citizens voices heard by their elected officials.

From the official news release, accessible with a subscription to PRNewswire for Journalists.

Currently information is accessible on the internet from news sites, blogs and official government sites. Government contacts are available through official government directories. Software exists to prepare documents and communicate. Forums exist to vent frustrations and express opinions in social networking and other web 2.0 sites. Who has time to sift through all of that? Glide America provides a total solution. It brings all of those things together into an active community with the capacity for the ordinary citizen to make his appeal directly to the appropriate government officials with public transparency into the timeliness and quality of the official response.


Glide America features include:

Government Transparency & Accountability- tracks government officials' responsiveness to citizens through statistical analysis of response times to citizen emails and other online communications. Monthly reports will include statistical data on response rates from the officials.

Government Address Book- It is being called the "People's Rolodex, of federal government contacts which are integrated into the Glide America email account the site offers the citizens that join.

This Rolodex will contain extensive government contact information, including phone numbers and email access from your computer and/or mobile phone. The contact information includes access to Congress, Senators, Government Departments, etc...

Advanced Communication & Collaboration Tools- This includes integrated email, group organization and online meeting applications which allows the user to individually or collectively communicate with fellow citizens and Government Officials.

Additionally the Glide America site offers group discussions and the ability to add any documents, images, videos, audio files, bookmarks, contacts or calendar events to the group discussion and well as tracking tools to determine whether their messages are being read and how long it takes for officials to respond.

Others tools provided:

-- You can quickly and easily send large group emails as individual personalized emails bypassing spam filters that are programmed to flag emails that contain many recipients.

-- You can easily manage multiple email lists and group discussions.

-- You can opt in to receive automated email notifications for upcoming legislation.

-- Issue Management Group Discussions are automatically created for upcoming legislation for you to participate in.

Information Portal- This will offer the latest news on legislation, politics and business with links to informational sites including official government, candidate, election, news and other sites.

Dynamic Desktop/Apps/Hard Drive- Offers 10 free GBs of storage in the Glide America free account free and compatible word processor, presentation application, spread sheet and other features.

Once signed up to Glide America, it provides a desktop which automatically updates information on the presidential campaign and pending legislation with links to learn more, voice your opinion and join group discussions.

The service also provides the ability of File Synchronization where the user can sync their home computer and your work computer for secure access to any file from your mobile phone or desktop in a group discussion, online meeting or email exchange.

According to TransMedia's Chairman & CEO, Donald Leka, "Our institutions of government are precariously faltering in their ability to serve the best interests of the American people. The American people must reassert themselves in the governance of this great nation and Glide America is a vehicle to that end."

Leka continues on to say "Glide America is change initiated by the American people through their cell phones and desktops and we are thrilled to provide this innovative service to our fellow citizens."

After creating the Glide America account, which takes only a few minutes, the desktop includes tabs for Desktop, Glide HD and Portal.

The Desktop offers icons which lead to email, creation of your own Glide America website, account tools, profile tools, groups, access to the tools mentioned above, photo editing, calendars and more.

The Glide HD tab opens to offer access to your files you have saved in the Glide America account, including videos, documents, groups, bookmarks, the desktop and calendar and more.

The Portal provides one click access to other links and websites.

Glide America can be accessed at http://www.glideamerica.org/

.

RNC Launches New Ad: 'Worse'

The video below is the RNC's new ad, titled "Worse." (YouTube URL here)



AD TEXT:

VO: Meltdown.


Wall Street squanders our money and Washington is forced to bail them out with - you guessed it - our money.

Can it get any worse?

Under Barack Obama's plan, the government would spend a trillion dollars more, even after the bailout.

A trillion dollars.

Who pays?

You do.

New taxes.

New spending.

New debt.

Barack Obama's plan: It will make the problem worse.


Paid for by the Republican National Committee.

www.gop.com

Not authorized by any candidate or candidate's committee.


The ad will run in Wisconsin, Ohio, Michigan, Pennsylvania, Virginia and Indiana.

According to The Politico, the RNC is spending $5 Million on the ad buy.

.

Monday, September 29, 2008

Mother Admits Bodies Found In Her Freezer Are Her Two Adopted Daughters

(43 year-old Renee Bowman- Courtesy Calvert Sheriff's Deaprtment)

Maryland Police visited the southern Maryland home of 43 year-old Renee Bowman to investigate abuse allegations and discovered the remains of two children in a freezer in the basement. Bowman admits they were her two adopted daughters.

The police were implementing a search warrant to investigate abuse of another young girl who had run away from Bowman and in the words of the sheriff's department, "showed signs of extreme abuse and neglect," when they discovered the remains of two other children in the freezer kept in the basement of the house as reported by CNN.

She is charged with first-degree child abuse in the beating of the runaway 7-year-old, who was found wandering in the neighborhood wearing only a blood- and feces-soaked T-shirt. The girl escaped from a locked bedroom by jumping out a second-story window, and Bowman admitted beating her with a "hard-heeled shoe," officials said.


According to the reports, the 7 year-old girl jumped out of a window on Friday night and went door-to-door searching for help. One resident gave her clothes and dialed 911.

The child had open sores and lesions on her buttocks and thighs, marks on her neck made by a cord,rope or other item and bruises on her hands and lips. She told authorities she jumped out of the window so she could "free herself from her mother's relentless beatings."

Bowman is being held without bond at this time.

According to Lt. Bobby Jones of Calvert County Sheriff's Office, it is believed the mother is responsible for the death of the two children found in the freezer, aged 9 and 11 years old.

Bowman had adopted three girls from the District of Columbia, the one that is seven now and the other two would be ages 9 and 11.

Autopsies must be complete for police to know if the remains are of the two adopted girls even after Bowman admitted they were.

Bowman also admitted to the police she transported the freezer with the bodies in it, from her home in Rockville to her newer home in Lusby when she moved in February. Authorities are trying to determine when the two older girls were last seen alive.

Bowman has not yet been charged in the death of the two older girls as of yet.

[Update] The Calvert Sheriff's Department press release about this case provided by the Washington Post.

.

Sarah Palin To Hit The Radio Talk Shows

Now we're talking.

The Politico reports Sarah Palin with start making the rounds on conservative radio shows, allowing the public to have more access to her.

Palin heads to McCain's cabin in Arizona today to prepare for her Thursday debate, and while she's there she'll do a round of conservative talk radio interviews.

"Talk radio is a convenient, powerful and effective outlet," said the aide.

Rush Limbaugh, who hosts the most popular radio show in the country, noted in an e-mail that he doesn't invite guests on and alluded to his rocky relationship with the top of the GOP ticket.

"The McCain camp doesn't trust me," Limbaugh said.

But asked if he'd welcome a call from Palin, the conservative talker said: "Of course."


The report also says Palin was much more aggressive in another Couric interview with one aide saying "Sarah Barracuda showed up today," and further encouraging CBS to show this interview from beginning to end.

About time.

.

Obama Supporter Paints Nude Portrait Of Palin To Hang In His Ale House


(Click image to enlarge)


A co-owner of the Old Town Ale House in Chicago's North Side, Bruce Elliott, painted a portrait of a nude Sarah Palin for his ale house, using his daughter as the model. The portrait was unveiled Thursday and has started drawing crowds and buzz.

The portrait is done as an oil painting, stands four-foot-tall and represents a nude Sarah Palin, with her trademark glasses, red stiletto heels and nothing else, leaning on a gun and standing on a polar bear skin.

An uncensored version of the painting with other nude portraits beside it can be found at Flickr, showing this type of art is not unusual for the Old Town Ale House.

Elliott says the idea came to him the week before when he noticed his daughter Grace doing an impression of Palin, saying "My daughter is a heck of a stand-in for Sarah Palin. She can even do the voice."

From there it was a simple matter of getting his daughter to pose nude for him, which she says wasn't a problem because "He changed my diapers,"

Elliott, who says he’s pulling for Barack Obama in the election, worked on the portrait for seven to eight hours a day for a week. While the piece qualifies as a quick grab for attention, it’s also very much the creation of someone immersed in the coverage of Palin, whom he refers to as “a real nasty piece of work” while also admitting feeling attracted to her.


The report from Windy Citizen says the Palin portrait is becoming the bars "star attraction" with people coming in, even from rival bars to see it and take photographs of it.

Elliott states he will not sell the portrait and neither will he paint another version of it, the he says this of Palin, "I don’t see how she could be offended by this. I made her into a sex figure."

.

Reactions Coming Over Defeat Of BailOut Bill

By now most know the bailout bill known as Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 failed to pass the House with a vote of 228 NAYS to 205 YEAHS.

Reactions are starting to come out with people blaming each other and many blaming Nancy Pelosi for her very divisive speech on the floor at the end of the debate, video will be shown below.

The White House spokesman, Fratto, said, "There's no question that the country is facing a difficult crisis that needs to be addressed." He went on to say Bush was disappointed and further stated "Obviously we are very disappointed in this outcome.There's no question that the country is facing a difficult crisis that needs to be addressed. The president will be meeting with his team this afternoon to determine the next steps and will also be in touch with congressional leaders."

Several Republican aides said House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., had torpedoed any spirit of bipartisanship that surrounded the bill with her scathing speech near the close of the debate that blamed Bush's policies for the economic turmoil.

Without mentioning her by name, Rep. Adam Putnam, R-Fla., No. 3 Republican, said: "The partisan tone at the end of the debate today I think did impact the votes on our side."

Putnam said lawmakers were working "to garner the necessary votes to avoid a financial collapse."

But the defeat was already causing a brutal round of finger-pointing.

"We could have gotten there today had it not been for the partisan speech that the speaker gave on the floor of the House," House Minority Leader John Boehner said. Pelosi's words, the Ohio Republican said, "poisoned our conference, caused a number of members that we thought we could get, to go south."

Rep. Roy Blunt, R-Mo., the whip, estimated that Pelosi's speech changed the minds of a dozen Republicans who might otherwise have supported the plan.


Below is the speech from Pelosi which possibly guaranteed she would not receive the votes need to pass what has been called the "crap sandwich" which many said "sucks".



Pelosi never did know when to keep her mouth shut. She may have single handedly helped to stop a very bad bill from passing, even though that is contrary to what her intent was.

I wonder how much lower her ratings can go?

Malkin... must read.

.

Bailout Plan Fails to Pass The House

Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 (109 page PDF file) failed to get passed through the House.

Roll call on the final vote will be found here as soon as they get it up.

Vote is 228 NAYS to 205 YEAS with 1 not voting.

More analysis at CNN Money.

More at Michelle Malkin.

Malkin provides roll call of who voted for the bill and who voted again.

I will continue to update.

.

2004, Democrats Insist Nothing Wrong At Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac

Hat Tip Hot Air...watch the 2004 video which shows how our country got into this financial mess we are in.



It is an 8 minute, 37 second video and if you watch it, then no commentary is really needed from me.

If you haven't watched it, let me give you a few examples Hot Air provided:

Maxine Waters: Through nearly a dozen hearings, we were frankly trying to fix something that wasn’t broke. Mr. Chairman, we do not have a crisis at Freddie Mac, and particularly at Fannie Mae, under the outstanding leadership of Franklin Raines. [Raines would barely avoid prosecution for fraud.]

Gregory Meeks: … I’m just pissed off at OFHEO [the regulators trying to warn Congress of insolvency at the GSEs], because if it wasn’t for you, I don’t think we’d be here in the first place. … There’s been nothing that indicated that’s wrong with Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac has come up on its own … The question that then comes up is the competence that your agency has with reference to deciding and regulating these GSEs.

Lacy Clay: This hearing is about the political lynching of Franklin Raines.

Barney Frank: I don’t see anything in this report that raises safety and soundness problems.



Read the rest over at HA, it is a comprehensive analysis, so I am not going to attempt to improve on a good thing, just watch the video and read the rest there.

I am watching C-span now and it looks like the clowns are getting ready to blow up the circus.

.

Barack Obama and the Strategy of Manufactured Crisis

Here is documentation that irrefutably chains Barack Obama to the most odious leftist movements in the United States today. Furthermore, it presents conclusive evidence that Obama not only knows of, but has participated in promotion of the Left's apocalyptic strategy of destruction for the United States: the Cloward-Piven Strategy of manufactured crisis. Don't miss the flow chart!

Quote from Saul Alinsky - Rules for Radicals 1989: Make the enemy [Conservative thought] live up to their (sic) own book of rules," When pressed to honor every word of every law and statute, every Judeo-Christian moral tenet, and every implicit promise of the liberal social contract, human agencies inevitably fall short. The system's failure to "live up" to its rule book can then be used to discredit it altogether, and to replace the capitalist "rule book" with a socialist one.

*****

Barack Obama and the Strategy of Manufactured Crisis
American Thinker, September 28, 2008 by Jim Simpson
Published at the request of Jim Simpson

Jim Simpson is a former White House staff economist and budget analyst. His writings have been published in American Thinker, Washington Times, FrontPage Magazine, DefenseWatch, Soldier of Fortune and others. His blog is Truth and Consequences..

America waits with bated breath while Washington struggles to bring the U.S. economy back from the brink of disaster. But many of those same politicians
caused the crisis, and if left to their own devices will do so again.

Despite the mass media news blackout, a series of books, talk radio and the blogosphere have managed to expose Barack Obama's connections to his radical mentors -- Weather Underground bombers William Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn, Communist Party member Frank Marshall Davis and others. David Horowitz and his Discover the Networks.org have also contributed a wealth of information and have noted Obama's radical connections since the beginning.

Yet, no one to my knowledge has yet connected all the dots between Barack Obama and the Radical Left. When seen together, the influences on Obama's life comprise a who's who of the radical leftist movement, and it becomes painfully apparent that not only is Obama a willing participant in that movement, he has spent most of his adult life deeply immersed in it.

But even this doesn't fully describe the extreme nature of this candidate. He can be tied directly to a malevolent overarching strategy that has motivated many, if not all, of the most destructive radical leftist organizations in the United States since the 1960s.

The Cloward-Piven Strategy of Orchestrated Crisis

In an earlier post, I noted the liberal record of unmitigated legislative disasters, the latest of which is now being played out in the financial markets before our eyes. Before the 1994 Republican takeover, Democrats had sixty years of virtually unbroken power in Congress - with substantial majorities most of the time. Can a group of smart people, studying issue after issue for years on end, with virtually unlimited resources at their command, not come up with a single policy that works? Why are they chronically incapable?

Why?

One of two things must be true. Either the Democrats are unfathomable idiots, who ignorantly pursue ever more destructive policies despite decades of contrary evidence, or they understand the consequences of their actions and relentlessly carry on anyway because they somehow benefit.

I submit to you they understand the consequences. For many it is simply a practical matter of eliciting votes from a targeted constituency at taxpayer expense; we lose a little, they gain a lot, and the politician keeps his job. But for others, the goal is more malevolent - the failure is deliberate. Don't laugh. This method not only has its proponents, it has a name: the Cloward-Piven Strategy. It describes their agenda, tactics, and long-term strategy.

The Strategy was first elucidated in the May 2, 1966 issue of The Nation magazine by a pair of radical socialist Columbia University professors, Richard Andrew Cloward and Frances Fox Piven. David Horowitz summarizes it as:
The strategy of forcing political change through orchestrated crisis. The "Cloward-Piven Strategy" seeks to hasten the fall of capitalism by overloading the government bureaucracy with a flood of impossible demands, thus pushing society into crisis and economic collapse.
Cloward and Piven were inspired by radical organizer [and Hillary Clinton mentor] Saul Alinsky:
"Make the enemy live up to their (sic) own book of rules," Alinsky wrote in his 1989 book Rules for Radicals. When pressed to honor every word of every law and statute, every Judeo-Christian moral tenet, and every implicit promise of the liberal social contract, human agencies inevitably fall short. The system's failure to "live up" to its rule book can then be used to discredit it altogether, and to replace the capitalist "rule book" with a socialist one. (Courtesy Discover the Networks.org)
Newsmax rounds out the picture:
Their strategy to create political, financial, and social chaos that would result in revolution blended Alinsky concepts with their more aggressive efforts at bringing about a change in U.S. government. To achieve their revolutionary change, Cloward and Piven sought to use a cadre of aggressive organizers assisted by friendly news media to force a re-distribution of the nation's wealth.
In their Nation article, Cloward and Piven were specific about the kind of "crisis" they were trying to create:
By crisis, we mean a publicly visible disruption in some institutional sphere. Crisis can occur spontaneously (e.g., riots) or as the intended result of tactics of demonstration and protest which either generate institutional disruption or bring unrecognized disruption to public attention.
No matter where the strategy is implemented, it shares the following features:
  1. The offensive organizes previously unorganized groups eligible for government benefits but not currently receiving all they can.
  2. The offensive seeks to identify new beneficiaries and/or create new benefits.
  3. The overarching aim is always to impose new stresses on target systems, with the ultimate goal of forcing their collapse.
Capitalizing on the racial unrest of the 1960s, Cloward and Piven saw the welfare system as their first target. They enlisted radical black activist George Wiley, who created the National Welfare Reform Organization (NWRO) to implement the strategy. Wiley hired militant foot soldiers to storm welfare offices around the country, violently demanding their "rights." According to a City Journal article by Sol Stern, welfare rolls increased from 4.3 million to 10.8 million by the mid-1970s as a result, and in New York City, where the strategy had been particularly successful, "one person was on the welfare rolls... for every two working in the city's private economy."

According to another City Journal article titled "Compassion Gone Mad":
The movement's impact on New York City was jolting: welfare caseloads, already climbing 12 percent a year in the early sixties, rose by 50 percent during Lindsay's first two years; spending doubled... The city had 150,000 welfare cases in 1960; a decade later it had 1.5 million.
The vast expansion of welfare in New York City that came of the NWRO's Cloward-Piven tactics sent the city into bankruptcy in 1975. Rudy Giuliani cited Cloward and Piven by name as being responsible for "an effort at economic sabotage." He also credited Cloward-Piven with changing the cultural attitude toward welfare from that of a temporary expedient to a lifetime entitlement, an attitude which in-and-of-itself has caused perhaps the greatest damage of all.

Cloward and Piven looked at this strategy as a gold mine of opportunity. Within the newly organized groups, each offensive would find an ample pool of foot soldier recruits willing to advance its radical agenda at little or no pay, and expand its base of reliable voters, legal or otherwise. The radicals' threatening tactics also would accrue an intimidating reputation, providing a wealth of opportunities for extorting monetary and other concessions from the target organizations. In the meantime, successful offensives would create an ever increasing drag on society. As they gleefully observed:
Moreover, this kind of mass influence is cumulative because benefits are continuous. Once eligibility for basic food and rent grants is established, the drain on local resources persists indefinitely.
The next time you drive through one of the many blighted neighborhoods in our cities, or read of the astronomical crime, drug addiction, and out-of-wedlock birth rates, or consider the failed schools, strapped police and fire resources of every major city, remember Cloward and Piven's thrill that "...the drain on local resources persists indefinitely."

ACORN, the new tip of the Cloward-Piven spear

In 1970, one of George Wiley's protégés, Wade Rathke -- like Bill Ayers, a member of the radical Students for a Democratic Society (SDS) -- was sent to found the Arkansas Community Organizations for Reform Now. While NWRO had made a good start, it alone couldn't accomplish the Cloward-Piven goals. Rathke's group broadened the offensive to include a wide array of low income "rights." Shortly thereafter they changed "Arkansas" to "Association of" and ACORN went nationwide.

Today ACORN is involved in a wide array of activities, including housing, voting rights, illegal immigration and other issues. According to ACORN's website: "ACORN is the nation's largest grassroots community organization of low-and moderate-income people with over 400,000 member families organized into more than 1,200 neighborhood chapters in 110 cities across the country," It is perhaps the largest radical group in the U.S. and has been cited for widespread criminal activity on many fronts.

Voting

On voting rights, ACORN and its voter mobilization subsidiary, Project Vote, have been involved nationwide in efforts to grant felons the vote and lobbied heavily for the Motor Voter Act of 1993, a law allowing people to register at motor vehicle departments, schools, libraries and other public places. That law had been sought by Cloward and Piven since the early1980s and they were present, standing behind President Clinton at the signing ceremony.

ACORN's voter rights tactics follow the Cloward-Piven Strategy:
  • 1. Register as many Democrat voters as possible, legal or otherwise and help them vote, multiple times if possible.
  • 2. Overwhelm the system with fraudulent registrations using multiple entries of the same name, names of deceased, random names from the phone book, even contrived names.
  • 3. Make the system difficult to police by lobbying for minimal identification standards.
In this effort, ACORN sets up registration sites all over the country and has been frequently cited for turning in fraudulent registrations, as well as destroying republican applications. In the 2004-2006 election cycles alone, ACORN was accused of widespread voter fraud in 12 states. It may have swung the election for one state governor.

ACORN's website brags: "Since 2004, ACORN has helped more than 1.7 million low- and moderate-income and minority citizens apply to register to vote." Project vote boasts 4 million. I wonder how many of them are dead? For the 2008 cycle, ACORN and Project Vote have pulled out all the stops. Given their furious nationwide effort, it is not inconceivable that this presidential race could be decided by fraudulent votes alone.

Barack Obama ran ACORN's Project Vote in Chicago and his highly successful voter registration drive was credited with getting the disgraced former Senator Carol Moseley-Braun elected. Newsmax reiterates Cloward and Piven's aspirations for ACORN's voter registration efforts:
By advocating massive, no-holds-barred voter registration campaigns, they [Cloward & Piven] sought a Democratic administration in Washington, D.C. that would re-distribute the nation's wealth and lead to a totalitarian socialist state.
Illegal Immigration

As I have written elsewhere, the Radical Left's offensive to promote illegal immigration is "Cloward-Piven on steroids." ACORN is at the forefront of this movement as well, and was a leading organization among a broad coalition of radical groups, including Soros' Open Society Institute, the Service Employees International Union (ACORN founder Wade Rathke also runs a SEIU chapter), and others, that became the Coalition for Comprehensive Immigration Reform. CCIR fortunately failed to gain passage for the 2007 illegal immigrant amnesty bill, but its goals have not changed.

The burden of illegal immigration on our already overstressed welfare system has been widely documented. Some towns in California have even been taken over by illegal immigrant drug cartels. The disease, crime and overcrowding brought by illegal immigrants places a heavy burden on every segment of society and every level of government, threatening to split this country apart at the seams. In the meantime, radical leftist efforts to grant illegal immigrants citizenship guarantee a huge pool of new democrat voters. With little border control, terrorists can also filter in.

Obama aided ACORN as their lead attorney in a successful suit he brought against the Illinois state government to implement the Motor Voter law there. The law had been resisted by Republican Governor Jim Edgars, who feared the law was an opening to widespread vote fraud.

His fears were warranted as the Motor Voter law has since been cited as a major opportunity for vote fraud, especially for illegal immigrants, even terrorists. According to the Wall Street Journal: "After 9/11, the Justice Department found that eight of the 19 hijackers were registered to vote..."

ACORN's dual offensives on voting and illegal immigration are handy complements. Both swell the voter rolls with reliable democrats while assaulting the country ACORN seeks to destroy with overwhelming new problems.

Mortgage Crisis

And now we have the mortgage crisis, which has sent a shock wave through Wall Street and panicked world financial markets like no other since the stock market crash of 1929. But this is a problem created in Washington long ago. It originated with the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA), signed into law in 1977 by President Jimmy Carter. The CRA was Carter's answer to a grassroots activist movement started in Chicago, and forced banks to make loans to low income, high risk customers. PhD economist and former Texas Senator Phil Gramm has called it: "a vast extortion scheme against the nation's banks."

ACORN aggressively sought to expand loans to low income groups using the CRA as a whip. Economist Stan Leibowitz wrote in the New York Post:
In the 1980s, groups such as the activists at ACORN began pushing charges of "redlining"-claims that banks discriminated against minorities in mortgage lending. In 1989, sympathetic members of Congress got the Home Mortgage Disclosure Act amended to force banks to collect racial data on mortgage applicants; this allowed various studies to be ginned up that seemed to validate the original accusation.
In fact, minority mortgage applications were rejected more frequently than other applications-but the overwhelming reason wasn't racial discrimination, but simply that minorities tend to have weaker finances.
ACORN showed its colors again in 1991, by taking over the House Banking Committee room for two days to protest efforts to scale back the CRA. Obama represented ACORN in the Buycks-Roberson v. Citibank Fed. Sav. Bank, 1994 suit against redlining. Most significant of all, ACORN was the driving force behind a 1995 regulatory revision pushed through by the Clinton Administration that greatly expanded the CRA and laid the groundwork for the Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac borne financial crisis we now confront. Barack Obama was the attorney representing ACORN in this effort. With this new authority, ACORN used its subsidiary, ACORN Housing, to promote subprime loans more aggressively.

As a New York Post article describes it:
A 1995 strengthening of the Community Reinvestment Act required banks to find ways to provide mortgages to their poorer communities. It also let community activists intervene at yearly bank reviews, shaking the banks down for large pots of money.

Banks that got poor reviews were punished; some saw their merger plans frustrated; others faced direct legal challenges by the Justice Department.
Flexible lending programs expanded even though they had higher default rates than loans with traditional standards. On the Web, you can still find CRA loans available via ACORN with "100 percent financing . . . no credit scores . . . undocumented income . . . even if you don't report it on your tax returns." Credit counseling is required, of course.

Ironically, an enthusiastic Fannie Mae Foundation report singled out one paragon of nondiscriminatory lending, which worked with community activists and followed "the most flexible underwriting criteria permitted." That lender's $1 billion commitment to low-income loans in 1992 had grown to $80 billion by 1999 and $600 billion by early 2003.

The lender they were speaking of was Countrywide, which specialized in subprime lending and had a working relationship with ACORN.

The revisions also allowed for the first time the securitization of CRA-regulated loans containing subprime mortgages. The changes came as radical "housing rights" groups led by ACORN lobbied for such loans. ACORN at the time was represented by a young public-interest lawyer in Chicago by the name of Barack Obama. (Emphasis, mine.)
Since these loans were to be underwritten by the government sponsored Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the implicit government guarantee of those loans absolved lenders, mortgage bundlers and investors of any concern over the obvious risk. As Bloomberg reported: "It is a classic case of socializing the risk while privatizing the profit."

And if you think Washington policy makers cared about ACORN's negative influence, think again. Before this whole mess came down, a Democrat-sponsored bill on the table would have created an "Affordable Housing Trust Fund," granting ACORN access to approximately $500 million in Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac revenues with little or no oversight.

Even now, unbelievably -- on the brink of national disaster -- Democrats have insisted ACORN benefit from bailout negotiations! Senator Lindsay Graham reported last night (9/25/08) in an interview with Greta Van Susteren of On the Record that Democrats want 20 percent of the bailout money to go to ACORN!

This entire fiasco represents perhaps the pinnacle of ACORN's efforts to advance the Cloward-Piven Strategy and is a stark demonstration of the power they wield in Washington.

Enter Barack Obama

In attempting to capture the significance of Barack Obama's Radical Left connections and his relation to the Cloward Piven strategy, I constructed the following flow chart. It is by no means complete. There are simply too many radical individuals and organizations to include them all here. But these are perhaps the most significant.

Cloward Piven Strategy

The chart puts Barack Obama at the epicenter of an incestuous stew of American radical leftism. Not only are his connections significant, they practically define who he is. Taken together, they constitute a who's who of the American radical left, and guiding all is the Cloward-Piven strategy.

Conspicuous in their absence are any connections at all with any other group, moderate, or even mildly leftist.
They are all radicals, firmly bedded in the anti-American, communist, socialist, radical leftist mesh.

Saul Alinsky

Most people are unaware that Barack Obama received his training in "community organizing" from Saul Alinsky's Industrial Areas Foundation. But he did. In and of itself that marks his heritage and training as that of a radical activist. One really needs go no further. But we have.

Bill Ayers

Obama objects to being associated with SDS bomber Bill Ayers, claiming he is being smeared with "guilt by association." But they worked together at the Woods Fund. The Wall Street Journal added substantially to our knowledge by describing in great detail Obama's work over five years with SDS bomber Bill Ayers on the board of a non-profit, the Chicago Annenberg Challenge, to push a radical agenda on public school children. As Stanley Kurtz states:
"...the issue here isn't guilt by association; it's guilt by participation. As CAC chairman, Mr. Obama was lending moral and financial support to Mr. Ayers and his radical circle. That is a story even if Mr. Ayers had never planted a single bomb 40 years ago."
Also included in the mix is Theresa Heinz Kerry's favorite charity, the Tides Foundation. A partial list of Tides grants tells you all you need to know: ACLU, ACORN, Center for American Progress, Center for Constitutional Rights (a communist front,) CAIR, Earth Justice, Institute for Policy Studies (KGB spy nest), National Lawyers Guild (oldest communist front in U.S.), People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA), and practically every other radical group there is. ACORN's Wade Rathke runs a Tides subsidiary, the Tides Center.
Carl Davidson and the New Party

We have heard about Bomber Bill, but we hear little about fellow SDS member Carl Davidson. According to Discover the Networks, Davidson was an early supporter of Barack Obama and a prominent member of Chicago's New Party, a synthesis of CPUSA members, Socialists, ACORN veterans and other radicals. Obama sought and received the New Party's endorsement, and they assisted with his campaign. The New Party also developed a strong relationship with ACORN. As an excellent article on the New Party observes: "Barack Obama knew what he was getting into and remains an ideal New Party candidate."

George Soros

The chart also suggests the reason for George Soros' fervent support of Obama. The President of his Open Society Institute is Aryeh Neier, founder of the radical Students for a Democratic Society (SDS). As mentioned above, three other former SDS members had extensive contact with Obama: Bill Ayers, Carl Davidson and Wade Rathke. Surely Aryeh Neier would have heard from his former colleagues of the promising new politician. More to the point, Neier is firmly committed to supporting the hugely successful radical organization, ACORN, and would be certain back their favored candidate, Barack Obama.

ACORN

Obama has spent a large portion of his professional life working for ACORN or its subsidiaries, representing ACORN as a lawyer on some of its most critical issues, and training ACORN leaders. Stanley Kurtz's excellent National Review article, "Inside Obama's Acorn." also describes Obama's ACORN connection in detail. But I can't improve on Obama's own words:
I've been fighting alongside ACORN on issues you care about my entire career (emphasis added). Even before I was an elected official, when I ran Project Vote voter registration drive in Illinois, ACORN was smack dab in the middle of it, and we appreciate your work. - Barack Obama, Speech to ACORN, November 2007 (Courtesy Newsmax.)
In another excellent article on Obama's ACORN connections, Newsmax asks a nagging question:
It would be telling to know if Obama, during his years at Columbia, had occasion to meet Cloward and study the Cloward-Piven Strategy.
I ask you, is it possible ACORN would train Obama to take leadership positions within ACORN without telling him what he was training for? Is it possible ACORN would put Obama in leadership positions without clueing him into what his purpose was?? Is it possible that this most radical of organizations would put someone in charge of training its trainers, without him knowing what it was he was training them for?

As a community activist for ACORN; as a leadership trainer for ACORN; as a lead organizer for ACORN's Project Vote; as an attorney representing ACORN's successful efforts to impose Motor Voter regulations in Illinois; as ACORN's representative in lobbying for the expansion of high risk housing loans through Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac that led to the current crisis; as a recipient of their assistance in his political campaigns -- both with money and campaign workers; it is doubtful that he was unaware of ACORN's true goals. It is doubtful he was unaware of the Cloward-Piven Strategy.

Fast-forward to 2005 when an obsequious, servile and scraping Daniel Mudd, CEO of Fannie Mae spoke at the Congressional Black Caucus swearing in ceremony for newly-elected Illinois Senator, Barack Obama. Mudd called, the Congressional Black Caucus "our family" and "the conscience of Fannie Mae."

In 2005, Republicans sought to rein in Fannie and Freddie. Senator John McCain was at the forefront of that effort. But it failed due to an intense lobbying effort put forward by Fannie and Freddie.

In his few years as a U.S. senator, Obama has received campaign contributions of $126,349, from Fannie and Freddie, second only to the $165,400 received by Senator Chris Dodd, who has been getting donations from them since 1988. What makes Obama so special?

His closest advisers are a dirty laundry list of individuals at the heart of the financial crisis: former Fannie Mae CEO Jim Johnson; Former Fannie Mae CEO and former Clinton Budget Director Frank Raines; and billionaire failed Superior Bank of Chicago Board Chair Penny Pritzker.

Johnson had to step down as adviser on Obama's V.P. search after this gem came out:

An Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight (OFHEO) report[1] from September 2004 found that, during Johnson's tenure as CEO, Fannie Mae had improperly deferred $200 million in expenses. This enabled top executives, including Johnson and his successor, Franklin Raines, to receive substantial bonuses in 1998.[2] A 2006 OFHEO report[3] found that Fannie Mae had substantially under-reported Johnson's compensation. Originally reported as $6-7 million, Johnson actually received approximately $21 million.

Obama denies ties to Raines but the Washington Post calls him a member of "Obama's political circle." Raines and Johnson were fined $3 million by the Office of Federal Housing Oversight for their manipulation of Fannie books. The fine is small change however, compared to the $50 million Raines was able to obtain in improper bonuses as a result of juggling the books.

Most significantly, Penny Pritzker, the current Finance Chairperson of Obama's presidential campaign helped develop the complicated investment bundling of subprime securities at the heart of the meltdown. She did so in her position as shareholder and board chair of Superior Bank. The Bank failed in 2001, one of the largest in recent history, wiping out $50 million in uninsured life savings of approximately 1,400 customers. She was named in a RICO class action law suit but doesn't seem to have come out of it too badly.

As a young attorney in the 1990s, Barack Obama represented ACORN in Washington in their successful efforts to expand Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) authority. In addition to making it easier for ACORN groups to force banks into making risky loans, this also paved the way for banks like Superior to package mortgages as investments, and for the Government Sponsored Enterprises Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to underwrite them. These changes created the conditions that ultimately lead to the current financial crisis.

Did they not know this would occur? Were these smart people, led by a Harvard graduate, unaware of the Econ 101 concept of moral hazard that would result from the government making implicit guarantees to underwrite private sector financial risk? They should have known that freeing the high-risk mortgage market of risk, calamity was sure to ensue. I think they did.

Barack Obama, the Cloward-Piven candidate, no matter how he describes himself, has been a radical activist for most of his political career. That activism has been in support of organizations and initiatives that at their heart seek to tear the pillars of this nation asunder in order to replace them with their demented socialist vision. Their influence has spread so far and so wide that despite their blatant culpability in the current financial crisis, they are able to manipulate Capital Hill politicians to cut them into $140 billion of the bailout pie!

God grant those few responsible yet remaining in Washington, DC the strength to prevent this massive fraud from occurring. God grant them the courage to stand up in the face of this Marxist tidal wave.

.

Barack Obama and the Strategy of Manufactured Crisis

UPDATED: This article is now available, in full, on Wake up America here.

Here is documentation that irrefutably chains Barack Obama to the most odious leftist movements in the United States today.

Sunday, September 28, 2008

Obama’s 'Truth Squad' Threatens Freedom of Speech

A bold maneuver, unprecedented in American politics, has pitted the Obama campaign against freedom of speech. Missouri authorities will pursue criminal charges against those who speak “falsely” against Barack Obama.

"Enlisting Missouri law enforcement to intimidate people and kill free debate is reminiscent of the Sedition Acts - not a free society.” (From a statement issued by Governor Matt Blunt on Sept. 24)

St. Louis City Circuit Attorney Jennifer Joyce and St. Louis County Circuit Attorney Bob McCulloch, both members of The Obama Truth Squad, have threatened to bring libel charges against those who speak out falsely against Barack Obama. Some say that such threats by Missouri authorities to pursue criminal charges violate civil rights. Many see this as an attempt by the Obama campaign at voter intimidation.

KMOV has a Sept. 23 video news report on this story. The report clearly shows involvement by the Obama campaign. This is an excerpt from the KVOV report:

“Sen Barack Obama’s Presidential campaign is asking Missouri law enforcement to target anyone who lies or runs a misleading television ad during the Presidential campaign . . . Prosecutors and sheriffs from across Missouri are joining something called the Barack Obama Truth Squad . . .”

According to Saint Louis CofCC Blog the attempts by the Obama campaign at voter intimidation are clear, but in actuality “virtually nobody that levels criticism at Barack Obama can be charged criminally for doing so.”

The implication here is also clear — if people with badges and guns are getting involved, they want Obama critics to shut up lest some cop will arrest them and send them to jail. We also found out from this news clip that this is indeed all at the behest of the Obama campaign. . .

Based on the 1964, the U.S. Supreme Court landmark decision, New York Times vs Sullivan, Saint Louis CofCC Blog goes on to explain that if a “prosecutorial authority brings criminal libel charges against a defendant on behalf of a plaintiff, as McCulloch and Joyce are threatening to do, then the prosecutor has to prove beyond a reasonable doubt to twelve out of twelve jurors that the defendant knowingly said or wrote something factually incorrect about the defendant.”

The two key concepts here are “knowingly” and “factual.” Successful civil libel lawsuits brought by public figures are exceedingly rare, because it’s very difficult to prove that the defendant “knowingly” said or wrote something factually incorrect. Criminal libel prosecutions thereof, because they require a unanimous jury and a higher legal standard of proof, are virtually impossible.


As for “factual,” it means that the statement made cannot relate to an opinion. If you say that Barack Obama isn’t really a Christian, that’s not a statement of fact, because religion is mostly subjective. The Catholic Church still really doesn’t consider Protestants to be Christians, and in some cases, some radical Protestants don’t think that Catholics are really Christians. Therefore, if one says that Barack Obama isn’t a Christian, it isn’t actionable, because it’s somebody’s opinion. Now, if Obama were a Catholic, and really was Confirmed as such, and someone for whom that it can be proven does know he is a Confirmed Catholic goes out and says that he isn’t, that’s actionable. The reason is that Confirmation in the Catholic Church is (usually) provable by ecclesiastical records.

Federal civil rights lawsuits could be brought against Missouri officials and the Obama campaign under several statutes such as the First Amendment Retaliation (under 42 USC Section 1983), or “under the KKK Act (42 USC Section 1985) – it is unlawful for two or more persons to form a conspiracy to use threats or intimidation to prevent the exercise of civil rights (including voting).”

Instapundit.com has listed several other attempts at free speech intimidation by the Obama campaign.

Stephen Kruiser of America Needs Me writes:

. . .There is a disturbing pattern of thuggish behavior by Obama and his supporters. Obama himself finally let the mask slip for a moment when he told supporters to go out and “get in peoples’ faces”. He then dispatched his minions to threaten and silence critics.

The Fredericksburg Free Lance Star has an editorial about the Obama campaign banning signs and banners during his rally Saturday at the University of Mary Washington in Virginia.

. . .Mr. Obama, the Democratic nominee for president, is scheduled to speak at a rally at the university today. The public is invited to this forum, on property it, the public, owns. However, signs and banners will not be allowed, according to the organizers and compliant campus officials. Suddenly, UMW is a First Amendment-Free, or at least a First Amendment-Crippled, Zone, subject to the self-serving preferences of politicos. Why does an Obama rally–or a McCain rally or a Nader rally–justify taking a little off the top of Americans’ most fundamental rights?


A UMW spokeswoman says that the Obama campaign required the sign-and-banner ban. That campaign tells us that the ban is for “security” reasons. But a spokesman for the U.S. Secret Service, responsible for protecting presidential candidates, says that the service has no objection to signs at rallies, provided that no “part of the sign could be used as a weapon”–e.g., a heavy metal pole or a sharpened stick. Finally, the McCain campaign tells us, “We encourage people to make signs at our events.” . . .


The First Amendment guarantees the freedoms of religion, speech, the press, peaceable assembly, petition of the government. Will one who aspires to the title Defender of the Constitution begin inhibiting these First Freedoms even before he is in office--at a public university?

Some are drawing inferences that Obama’s Truth Squad is a precursor to Obama’s plan for a civilian national security force. In July World Net Daily wrote:

Democrat Sen. Barack Obama's stunning assertion in a recent speech that the U.S. needs a "civilian national security force" that would be as powerful, strong and well-funded as the half-trillion dollar Army, Marines, Navy and Air Force is not included in published transcripts of his prepared remarks. . . Campaign officials have declined to return any of a series of WND telephone calls over several days requesting comment. Nor have they posted a transcript of the speech on their website.

Gateway Pundit warns Obama Stalinist Police State Already Taking Form

. . .Reminiscent of the beginning of the Stalin purges, the Obama “Truth Squads” seem to be the beginning of Obama’s plan to end free speech and create a police state that is beholden only to its secular messiah. Note: Stalin’s purges were affected by his country-wide police forces to silence political opponents. The Obama campaign has also advised Missouri law enforcement throughout the state to look for anything that the Obama campaign determines a lie. . . One of the most frightening aspects of all of this—as if it could become any more horrific—is that Missouri law enforcement now appears to be following Obama’s marching orders and it is being allowed to get away with these gangster tactics! . .

Here’s the statement issued by Governor Matt Blunt on Sept. 24.


Gov. Blunt Statement on Obama Campaign’s Abusive Use of Missouri Law Enforcement


JEFFERSON CITY - Gov. Matt Blunt today issued the following statement on news reports that have exposed plans by U.S. Senator Barack Obama to use Missouri law enforcement to threaten and intimidate his critics.


“St. Louis County Circuit Attorney Bob McCulloch, St. Louis City Circuit Attorney Jennifer Joyce, Jefferson County Sheriff Glenn Boyer, and Obama and the leader of his Missouri campaign Senator Claire McCaskill have attached the stench of police state tactics to the Obama-Biden campaign.


“What Senator Obama and his helpers are doing is scandalous beyond words, the party that claims to be the party of Thomas Jefferson is abusing the justice system and offices of public trust to silence political criticism with threats of prosecution and criminal punishment.


“This abuse of the law for intimidation insults the most sacred principles and ideals of Jefferson. I can think of nothing more offensive to Jefferson’s thinking than using the power of the state to deprive Americans of their civil rights. The only conceivable purpose of Messrs. McCulloch, Obama and the others is to frighten people away from expressing themselves, to chill free and open debate, to suppress support and donations to conservative organizations targeted by this anti-civil rights, to strangle criticism of Mr. Obama, to suppress ads about his support of higher taxes, and to choke out criticism on television, radio, the Internet, blogs, e-mail and daily conversation about the election.


“Barack Obama needs to grow up. Leftist blogs and others in the press constantly say false things about me and my family. Usually, we ignore false and scurrilous accusations because the purveyors have no credibility. When necessary, we refute them. Enlisting Missouri law enforcement to intimidate people and kill free debate is reminiscent of the Sedition Acts - not a free society.”

Scotland Yard Foils Plot By Islamic Extremists To Kill Publisher Of Muhammad Novel

Scotland Yard has foiled an alleged attempt by Islamic extremists to assassinate Dutch publisher Martin Rynja, because of his intention to publish a controversial novel featuring Muhammad and his child bride Aisha.

TimesOnline reports that undercover officers from Scotland Yard's counter-terrorist command arrested three men after they put a firebomb through the door at the home of Martin Rynja.

According to officials the motive behind the alleged plot was because Rynja's publishing firm, Gibson Square, is preparing to publish a romantic novel about Aisha, child bride of the Prophet Muhammad.

The book is called Jewel of Medina and it was withdrawn from publication last month by Random House because they feared a violent reaction by “a small radical segment” of Muslims after receiving information saying the book could incite violence.

Random House reacted after Islamic scholars objected to its contents, saying it treated the wife of the Prophet as a sex object. One of them, Denise Spellberg, of the University of Texas at Austin, described the novel as “soft-core pornography”, referring to a scene in which Muhammad consummates his marriage to Aisha. She called it “a declaration of war” and a “national security issue”.


The author of the book, Sherry Jones, received death threats after Random House withdrew the book from publication, yet she maintains the book is not disrespectful to Islam, saying, "Anyone who reads the book will not be offended. I wrote the book with the utmost respect for Islam."

After Random House withdrew, Gibson Square evidently agreed to publish the book and the Metropolitan police were tipped off with information saying Martin Rynja would be the target of an attack.

After receiving the tip, the police then went undercover and started following the suspected terror gang arresting them after they put a "petrol bomb" through the door of Rynja's north London home.

The fire brigade smashed down the front door and put the fire out and the undercover police arrested three men who are alleged to have been responsible for the attempted murder plot.

A Met spokesman said three men had been arrested in “a preplanned intelligence-led operation” at about 2.25am on Saturday.

Two of the suspects were arrested in the street outside Rynja’s four-storey townhouse in Lonsdale Square, Islington, while the third was stopped by officers in an armed vehicle near Angel Tube station.

They were being questioned yesterday on suspicion of the commission, preparation or instigation of acts of terrorism, a spokesman said.


It is believed that Rynja is now under police guard.

Sherry Jones' agent Natasha Kern, expressed shock when she learned of the attack and said the book had been "misinterpreted by its critics and did not contain sex scenes," further stating, "I honestly believe that if people read the book they will see it is not disrespectful of Muhammad, and moderate Muslims will not be offended. I don’t want anyone to risk their lives but we could never imagine that there would be some madmen who would do something like this. I’m so sad about this act of terrorism. Moderate Muslims will suffer because of a few radicals.”

When asked whether she thought the book should be withdrawn as Random House had done, she replied, "That’s up to Martin, and I still need to absorb the fact that he was at risk. I’m just so glad he has not been hurt.”

The Jewel of Medina is scheduled to be published next month.

.

Soldier's Family Asked Obama Not To Make Son's Death A Campaign Issue



YouTube URL of the video above found here.

There has been much said about Barack Obama's "I have a bracelet too" moment from the first presidential debate in Mississippi, but NewsBusters brings us yet more in showing people that according to the father of Sergeant Ryan David Jopek, the name of the fallen soldier on the bracelet that Barack Obama wore during the Mississippi debate, the soldier's mother, Tracy Jopek, had asked him to stop wearing the bracelet and using her son's name as a campaign issue.

On a Wisconsin Public Radio, Route 51, the host of the show, Glenn Moberg, asked Ryan's father Brian Jopek, what he and his ex-wife thought about Barack Obama wearing the bracelet the grieving mother had given to him, on the campaign trail.

TRANSCRIPT

Brian Jopek: Because of some of the negative feedback she's gotten on the Internet, you know Internet blogs, you know people accusing her of... or accusing Obama of trying to get votes doing it... and that sort of thing.

Radio Host Moberg: Yeah

Jopek: She has turned down any subsequent interviews with the media because she just didn't want it to get turned into something that it wasn't. She had told me in an email that she had asked, actually asked Mr. Obama to not wear the bracelet any more at any of his public appearances. Which I don't think he's...

Moberg: It has been a while since he's brought it up.

Jopek: Right. But, the other night I was watching the news and he was on, uh, speaking somewhere and he was still wearing it on his right wrist. I could see it on his right wrist. So, that's his own choice. I mean that's something Barack Obama, that's a choice that he continues to wear it despite Tracy asking him not to... Because she is a Barack Obama supporter and she didn't want to do anything to sabotage his campaign, so, if he's still wearing the bracelet then, uh, that of course is entirely up to him.

Moberg: Maybe there's a difference between wearing it and making a point to bring it up in your speeches?



That was back in March.

Many candidates speak to the parents and family members of fallen soldiers and receive gifts from them. I have seen Bush use a pen to veto a supplemental bill with it because the gold star father, Robert Derga, (parent that has lost a child) asked him to. I have seen the bracelet on John McCain's wrist and I have seen parents ask their story to be told and their child remembered publicly.

There is nothing wrong with honoring the fallen, just as there nothing wrong with Obama wearing a gift he was given by a supporter as Tracy Jopek is.....unless he is ignoring her request that it remain a private gift and to ignore her asking him to stop using her son as a campaign issue....is as disrespectful as one can get to family that has lost a loved one in service to America.

You can download and listen to the radio interview with Mr. Jopek here, it is at approximately the 10 minute mark.

Additional thought: Now the mother, Tracy, is in a spot, because people will be asking her about this. Since she is an Obama supporter, I wonder if she will give him some political cover and say she changed her mind in the last months?

Would he go as far as to ask her to do that?

.

Saturday, September 27, 2008

Paul Newman Dies at 83 - RIP


Legendary film actor Paul Newman died at the age of 83, on Friday after suffering with cancer.

You can see more about Newman and his career here.

Just a few memories which stick out in my mind when I think of Newman.

Paul Newman and Robert Redford in "The Sting" (1973)



Newman in "Cool Hand Luke" (1967)






Redford and Newman in "Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid" (1969)



"The Life and Times of Judge Roy Bean" (1972)



Newman and Tom Cruise in "The Color Of Money" (1986)



There are so many movies, appearances and shows that Paul Newman did but those are a few of my favorites.

More at Market Watch, CNN and NYT.

RIP Paul.

.

The Mississippi Presidential Debate: Preconditions and Henry Kissinger

Last night while watching the debate, one specific portion caught my eye, which was when John McCain spoke about Barack Obama saying he would meet with Iranian President Mahmud Ahmadinejad with "preconditions."

Top of the Ticket
provides the transcript.

The exchange went as follows:

McCain:Senator Obama twice said in debates he would sit down with Ahmadinejad, Chavez and Raul Castro without precondition. Without precondition. Here is Ahmadinenene [mispronunciation], Ahmadinejad, who is, Ahmadinejad, who is now in New York, talking about the extermination of the State of Israel, of wiping Israel off the map, and we're going to sit down, without precondition, across the table, to legitimize and give a propaganda platform to a person that is espousing the extermination of the state of Israel, and therefore then giving them more credence in the world arena and therefore saying, they've probably been doing the right thing, because you will sit down across the table from them and that will legitimize their illegal behavior.

The point is that throughout history, whether it be Ronald Reagan, who wouldn't sit down with Brezhnev, Andropov or Chernenko until Gorbachev was ready with glasnost and perestroika.

Or whether it be Nixon's trip to China, which was preceded by Henry Kissinger, many times before he went. Look, I'll sit down with anybody, but there's got to be pre-conditions. Those pre-conditions would apply that we wouldn't legitimize with a face to face meeting, a person like Ahmadinejad. Now, Senator Obama said, without preconditions.

OBAMA: So let's talk about this. First of all, Ahmadinejad is not the most powerful person in Iran. So he may not be the right person to talk to. But I reserve the right, as president of the United States to meet with anybody at a time and place of my choosing if I think it's going to keep America safe.

And I'm glad that Senator McCain brought up the history, the bipartisan history of us engaging in direct diplomacy.

Senator McCain mentioned Henry Kissinger, who's one of his advisers, who, along with five recent secretaries of state, just said that we should meet with Iran -- guess what -- without precondition. This is one of your own advisers.

Now, understand what this means "without preconditions." It doesn't mean that you invite them over for tea one day. What it means is that we don't do what we've been doing, which is to say, "Until you agree to do exactly what we say, we won't have direct contacts with you."

There's a difference between preconditions and preparation. Of course we've got to do preparations, starting with low-level diplomatic talks, and it may not work, because Iran is a rogue regime.

But I will point out that I was called naive when I suggested that we need to look at exploring contacts with Iran. And you know what? President Bush recently sent a senior ambassador, Bill Burns, to participate in talks with the Europeans around the issue of nuclear weapons.

Again, it may not work, but if it doesn't work, then we have strengthened our ability to form alliances to impose the tough sanctions that Senator McCain just mentioned.

And when we haven't done it, as in North Korea -- let me just take one more example -- in North Korea, we cut off talks. They're a member of the axis of evil. We can't deal with them.

And you know what happened? They went -- they quadrupled their nuclear capacity. They tested a nuke. They tested missiles. They pulled out of the nonproliferation agreement. And they sent nuclear secrets, potentially, to countries like Syria.

When we re-engaged -- because, again, the Bush administration reversed course on this -- then we have at least made some progress, although right now, because of the problems in North Korea, we are seeing it on shaky ground.

And -- and I just -- so I just have to make this general point that the Bush administration, some of Senator McCain's own advisers all think this is important, and Senator McCain appears resistant.

He even said the other day that he would not meet potentially with the prime minister of Spain, because he -- you know, he wasn't sure whether they were aligned with us. I mean, Spain? Spain is a NATO ally.

MCCAIN: Of course.

OBAMA: If we can't meet with our friends, I don't know how we're going to lead the world in terms of dealing with critical issues like terrorism.

MCCAIN: I'm not going to set the White House visitors schedule before I'm president of the United States. I don't even have a seal yet.

Look, Dr. Kissinger did not say that he would approve of face-to- face meetings between the president of the United States and the president -- and Ahmadinejad. He did not say that.

OBAMA: Of course not.

MCCAIN: He said that there could be secretary-level and lower level meetings. I've always encouraged them. The Iranians have met with Ambassador Crocker in Baghdad.

What Senator Obama doesn't seem to understand that if without precondition you sit down across the table from someone who has called Israel a "stinking corpse," and wants to destroy that country and wipe it off the map, you legitimize those comments.

This is dangerous. It isn't just naive; it's dangerous. And so we just have a fundamental difference of opinion.

As far as North Korea is concerned, our secretary of state, Madeleine Albright, went to North Korea. By the way, North Korea, most repressive and brutal regime probably on Earth. The average South Korean is three inches taller than the average North Korean, a huge gulag.

We don't know what the status of the dear leader's health is today, but we know this, that the North Koreans have broken every agreement that they've entered into.

And we ought to go back to a little bit of Ronald Reagan's "trust, but verify," and certainly not sit down across the table from -- without precondition, as Senator Obama said he did twice, I mean, it's just dangerous.

OBAMA: Look, I mean, Senator McCain keeps on using this example that suddenly the president would just meet with somebody without doing any preparation, without having low-level talks. Nobody's been talking about that, and Senator McCain knows it. This is a mischaracterization of my position.

When we talk about preconditions -- and Henry Kissinger did say we should have contacts without preconditions -- the idea is that we do not expect to solve every problem before we initiate talks.

And, you know, the Bush administration has come to recognize that it hasn't worked, this notion that we are simply silent when it comes to our enemies. And the notion that we would sit with Ahmadinejad and not say anything while he's spewing his nonsense and his vile comments is ridiculous. Nobody is even talking about that.

MCCAIN: So let me get this right. We sit down with Ahmadinejad, and he says, "We're going to wipe Israel off the face of the Earth," and we say, "No, you're not"? Oh, please.

OBAMA: No, let me tell...

MCCAIN: By the way, my friend, Dr. Kissinger, who's been my friend for 35 years, would be interested to hear this conversation and Senator Obama's depiction of his -- of his positions on the issue. I've known him for 35 years.

OBAMA: We will take a look.

MCCAIN: And I guarantee you he would not -- he would not say that presidential top level.

OBAMA: Nobody's talking about that.

MCCAIN: Of course he encourages and other people encourage contacts, and negotiations, and all other things. We do that all the time.

LEHRER: We're going to go to a new...

MCCAIN: And Senator Obama is parsing words when he says precondition means preparation.

OBAMA: I am not parsing words.

MCCAIN: He's parsing words, my friends.

OBAMA: I'm using the same words that your advisers use.

Please, go ahead.



First lets tackle whether McCain was "mischaracterizing" Obama's words as Obama accused him of doing.

The video below (YouTube URL here) shows when this topic first came up in July of 2007 at a Democratic debate:



Anderson Copper allowed a YouTube video question: This exchange can be found at the transcript of that debate, page 13 and 14.

Question: In 1982 Anwar Sadat traveled to Israel, a trip that resulted in a peace agreement that has lasted ever since. In the spirit of that type of bold leadership, would you be willing to meet separately, without preconditions,during the first year of your administration, in Washington or anywhere else, with the leaders of Iran, Syria, Venezuela, Cuba and North Korea, in order to bridge the gap that divides our countries.

Obama: I would. And the reason is this, the notion that somehow not talking to countries is punishment to them, which has been the guiding diplomatic principle of this administration, is ridiculous.

Now, Ronald Reagan and Democratic presidents like JFK constantly spoke to Soviet Union at a time when Ronald Reagan called them an evil empire. And the reason is because they understood that we may not trust them and they may pose an extraordinary danger to this country, but we had the obligation to find areas where we can potentially move forward.

And I think that it is a disgrace that we have not spoken to them. We’ve been talking about Iraq -- one of the first things that I would do in terms of moving a diplomatic effort in the region forward is to send a signal that we need to talk to Iran and Syria because they’re going to have responsibilities if Iraq collapses.

They have been acting irresponsibly up until this point. But if we tell them that we are not going to be a permanent occupying force, we are in a position to say that they are going to have to carry some weight, in terms of stabilizing the region.


Hillary Clinton answered the question right after Obama did and she said:

Clinton: Well, I will not promise to meet with the leaders of these countries during my first year. I will promise a very vigorous diplomatic effort because I think it is not that you promise a meeting at that high a level before you know what the intentions are.

I don’t want to be used for propaganda purposes. I don’t want to make a situation even worse. But I certainly agree that we need to get back to diplomacy, which has been turned into a bad word by this administration.

And I will purse very vigorous diplomacy.

And I will use a lot of high-level presidential envoys to test the waters, to feel the way. But certainly, we’re not going to just have our president meet with Fidel Castro and Hugo Chavez and, you know, the president of North Korea, Iran and Syria until we know better what the way forward would be.


Barack Obama's website also discusses the matter under the topic of Diplomacy:

Obama supports tough, direct presidential diplomacy with Iran without preconditions. Now is the time to pressure Iran directly to change their troubling behavior. Obama and Biden would offer the Iranian regime a choice. If Iran abandons its nuclear program and support for terrorism, we will offer incentives like membership in the World Trade Organization, economic investments, and a move toward normal diplomatic relations. If Iran continues its troubling behavior, we will step up our economic pressure and political isolation. Seeking this kind of comprehensive settlement with Iran is our best way to make progress.

Since Henry Kissinger was spoken about and used as an example by Barack Obama, I think everyone knew that by this morning, Kissinger would be weighing in one way or another, and sure enough, I open memeorandum and see the headline "TWS Exclusive: Kissinger Unhappy About Obama."

The Weekly Standard shows the statement by Kissinger:

Senator McCain is right. I would not recommend the next President of the United States engage in talks with Iran at the Presidential level. My views on this issue are entirely compatible with the views of my friend Senator John McCain. We do not agree on everything, but we do agree that any negotiations with Iran must be geared to reality."



The questions we are left with are, did Barack Obama mischaracterize Kissinger's stance and did McCain mischaracterize Obama's statement?

.

The Debate: Barack Obama's Most Important Statement


Why bother weighing in with just one more take on Friday night's Presidential Debate? By now, every conceivable angle has been covered. Predictably, both camps have claimed victories. What could be said that hasn't already been said, and said by more astute pundits than myself?
Well, there is one little thing. One little sentence that sticks out in my mind and just will not go away. One small phrase which Obama uttered that to me has more significance than everything else he stated during this contest. And here it is: "America is the greatest country in the world, but--" But. That's the word that matters, folks. That's the word that more than any other reveals the goals of this candidate. America, he goes on to explain, is not the same country it was when his Kenyan father spoke of America with those high expectations. Children around the world no longer look at America the same way. This, then, would be the sacred crusade of an Obama presidency: to restore that faded luster to our American star. To get people around the world to like us once again. To make it possible for his wife to be truly proud to be an American for the first time in her lifetime. Barack Obama sees it as his mission to make it up to the world for all of America's past transgressions. To make America more universalist.

My God. Where has this man learned his American history? From the Reverend Wrights of this world? Is this what we want? What we need right now? Is this the new America? A regretful America, ashamed of itself and of its history? A humbled America, apologizing to the world for its existence and for its success? Do we really want a more internationalist America, an America more beholden to the world's agenda than to our own? Do we really want to relinquish more of our sacred national identity?

Just ask the poor betrayed Brits how they like their new found internationalism. Their merging of cultures and their loss of their own. Ask the Brits how they feel about the EU and Brussels.

What a President Obama would do about the present financial crisis on Wall Street is important, very important. What a President Obama would do about the emerging Russian Bear, or the crazy Atom Bomb-coveting Iranian Mullahs is very important. His views on the best way to manage the GWOT are extremely important. But, to this particular writer, his stated vision of America and what he wants America to be could very well be the most important issue of them all.

Regardless of your party affiliation, if you feel, as I do, that the United States of America owes no one any apologies, and has every right to promote its own interests and to protect those interests, without interference from any foreign powers or organizations of foreign powers, then we just cannot let this man win the presidency. We cannot give away this great nation of ours this easily. - rg

Friday, September 26, 2008

The Choice of Ole Miss to Host This Evening's Debate Sends a Message to the World: Here We Go again

For Ole Miss, presidential debate marks racial progress


School tries to overcome history of segregation
In this Oct. 2, 1962 photo [above], students crowded the car carrying James Meredith to the University of Mississippi campus in Oxford. He had to be escorted by the National Guard and US marshals. (Associated Press/File)
By Emily Wagster Pettus

For Ole Miss, presidential debate marks racial progress

Boston Globe

OXFORD, Miss. - Two generations ago, bullets flew and tear gas canisters exploded among the magnolias as segregationists fought federal authorities over the court-ordered admission of the first black student to the University of Mississippi.
It was the flagship school in what was then the most defiantly white supremacist state in the union. Now, Ole Miss is a diverse university where racial conflict is a topic for history classes, not a fact of everyday life, and it is hosting the first presidential debate featuring a black nominee for a major party.

"I think what we have here is really a confluence of two lines of history, where you have a new Ole Miss, a postracial Ole Miss, and you have a postracial black candidate running for president," said David Sansing, professor emeritus of history at the university. "Nowhere in America could these two forces reinforce each other as they do here at Ole Miss."

Barack Obama was a 14-month-old toddler in Hawaii when James Meredith, a 29-year-old Air Force veteran, broke the color barrier at the University of Mississippi in the fall of 1962.

Ole Miss chancellor Robert Khayat welcomes the Sept. 26 debate between Obama and John McCain as a chance to show the world an up-to-date image of the school. He recognizes that some people's only impression comes from grainy black-and-white footage from 46 years ago.

"It took a lot of years for the university to get beyond that. But we've done it," said Khayat.



-----------------------------------------------------
A note from Radarsite: This choice of Ole Miss to host the 2008 presidential debates is a symbolic gesture to the world which may in fact be the most determinate factor of this entire campaign. This is what it's all about,folks. Sending a message to the world. We are telling the world that we're sorry. We're admitting our past failures and our primary responsibility for most of the world's present day problems. Our shameful record of racism and white supremacism has finally been overcome. Just look at us now, world. Look at how far we have come.
For those people here in America and around the world who truly embrace this view of the racist imperialistic United States, this message is probably even more important than the outcome of these debates. For no matter how our symbolic candidate performs tonight, his devotees will not be changing their minds or their votes. They are convinced that America is the problem in this world, and that the only solution to this problem lies in changing what it means to be an American. And Barack Hussein Obama personifies America's unqualified acceptance of its historical guilt and its commitment to change.
God help us all.

Obama Campaign Memo: Debates Are Not A Good Format For Obama

[Update] Live blogging event for the Mississippi presidential debate will be activated at 8:40 p.m. ET, at this link.

In what many are calling Team Obama's attempt to lower expectations about Barack Obama's debate performance tonight, the campaign has released a memo showing how McCain is hailed by pundits as a good debater and how debates are not a good format for Obama

The memo was sent to "interested parties" and "from the Obama campaign", with the re: listed as "Home-field advantage: John McCain," referring to the debate itself.

The Atlantic.com site says "If it's 2pm the day of the debate, it must be an expectations-lowering memo."

The beginning of the memo lists the Obama's campaigns talking points about John McCain and the latter part of the memo shows different pundits and news organizations speaking to both candidate's debate performance capabilities and meant to show the "expectations" set out for both John McCain and Barack Obama.

The start with the header of "McCain Debate Performance", all in capital letters.

The Obama team memo shows recent articles from the New York Times on 9/23/08, saying "New York Times: A Review Of Debates Show That McCain Is Most Comfortable And Authentic When The Subject Is Foreign Policy," and showing a portion of the NYT article which said "review of several of Mr. McCain's debates shows that he is most comfortable and authentic when the subject is foreign policy. And in a stroke of good fortune, foreign policy is the topic for Friday, the first of three 90-minute debates with Senator Barack Obama, the Democratic nominee."

They list multiple examples like the one above from organizations like the International Herald Tribune on 9/23/08, The New Republic on 9/23/08, three pieces from the Atlanta Journal Constitution on 9/21/08, and lastly a piece from the New York Magazine on 9/21/08.

All articles listed speaking about McCain having the "edge" in the debate or McCain' entering the debate as a "substantive favorite."

Then the memo moves to the expectations for Barack Obama headlining that portion with "Obama Debate Performance" and directly under that in capital letters and in bold print, it states "DEBATES ARE NOT A GOOD FORMAT FOR OBAMA."

They list articles about Obama's debate expectations from media outlets like the New York Times on 9/23/08, Associated Press on 9/20/08, the Atlantic in September of 2008, and CNN on 8/22/08.

The Associated Press article declares that Obama comes across as "Lifeless, Aloof, And Windy," during debates and the Atlantic asserting that Obama has "Never Managed To "Receive Big Acclaim After A Debate," with CNN saying the Democrats are worried that Obama is "Professorial Or Too Subdued."

Those "interested parties" which received the memo are discussing whether a memo from team Obama, claiming Obama is very bad at debates and John McCain is very good at debates, was the image they wished to receive from the Obama campaign right before his first presidential debate.

.

The Open Debate Coalition Ask McCain And Obama To Open Debates

A new coalition has been formed including Conservatives and Liberals and they are asking John McCain and Barack Obama open the remaining presidential debates to the public domain.

The LA Times' Top of the Ticket target="_blank">reports of a new coalition of what they call Internet pioneers from all sides of the political spectrum want two things.

First they want the debates open to public domain with Lawrence Lessig, law professor and Stanford Law School & Founder, saying "Copyright, in my view, is essential and important, in some places. This isn't one," referring to the debates.

The second issue at hand for the Open Debate Coalition is how the questions are decided for presidential debates and they are asking the two presidential candidates to insist on a new method of choosing the questions.

Right now choosing the questions is up to whoever is hosting and moderating the debate although during the primary season, some formats included questions received online.

The suggestion from the coalition for deciding the questions is that online questions be submitted and voted on putting the most voted on questions at the top of the list and choosing from the top 25 on the list.

The Presidential Commission on Debates has only offered a limited amount of new technology into their debate rules of late, so the newly formed coalition decided to go around the Commission and trying to directly influence the candidates to insist on altering the current methods.

In one portion of the letter the Open Debate Coalition has sent to the candidates, they state, "This is a historic election. The signers of this letter don’t agree on every issue. But we do agree that in order for Americans to make the best decision for president, we need open debates that are 'of the people' in the ways described above. You have the power to make that happen, and we ask you to do so."

The members of the Open Debate Coalition include, Lawrence Lessig – Professor, Stanford Law School & Founder, Center for Internet and Society, Glenn Reynolds – Professor, University of Tennessee Law, and founder of Instapundit.com blog, Craig Newmark – Founder, Craigslist, Jimmy Wales – Founder, Wikipedia, David Kralik – Director of Internet Strategy, Newt Gingrich's American Solutions, Eli Pariser – Executive Director, MoveOn.org Political Action, Adam Green – Director of Strategic Campaigns, MoveOn.org Political Action, Mindy Finn – Republican strategist, former Mitt Romney Online Director, Patrick Ruffini – Republican consultant, Bush/Cheney 2004 eCampaign Director, Arianna Huffington – Founder, Huffington Post, Markos Moulitsas – Founder, DailyKos.com, Jon Henke – New media consultant, including for Fred Thompson, George Allen, and Senate Republican
Caucus, Mike Krempasky – Founder of RedState.com, Matt Stoller – Founder/Editor, OpenLeft.com, James Rucker – Executive Director, ColorOfChange.org, Robert Greenwald – President, BraveNewFilms, Kim Gandy – President, National Organization for Women, Carl Pope – Executive Director, Sierra Club. Micah Sifry – Co-Founder, Personal Democracy Forum and TechPresident.com, Shari Steele - Executive Director, Electronic Frontier Foundation,
Josh Silver – Executive Director, Free Press, Carl Malamud – Founder, Public.Resource.Org, Roger Hickey – Co-Director, Campaign for America's Future.

It is not often, if ever, the political blogosphere sees these names together promoting any issue.

.

The Debate Is On- Live Blogging The Presidential Debate

The McCain statement via Politico:

Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) announces: "The McCain campaign is resuming all activities and the senator will travel to the debate this afternoon. Following the debate, he will return to Washington to ensure that all voices and interests are represented in the final agreement, especially those of taxpayers and homeowners.


More at YouDecide 2008.

I will be live blogging the presidential debate tonight over at DJ, along with Editor in Chief, Chris Hogg, so please join us!!!

This will be the link, it will be activated at 8:45 p.m.



Statement from Team McCain regarding the negotiations:

John McCain’s decision to suspend his campaign was made in the hopes that politics could be set aside to address our economic crisis.

In response, Americans saw a familiar spectacle in Washington. At a moment of crisis that threatened the economic security of American families, Washington played the blame game rather than work together to find a solution that would avert a collapse of financial markets without squandering hundreds of billions of taxpayers’ money to bailout bankers and brokers who bet their fortunes on unsafe lending practices.

Both parties in both houses of Congress and the administration needed to come together to find a solution that would deserve the trust of the American people. And while there were attempts to do that, much of yesterday was spent fighting over who would get the credit for a deal and who would get the blame for failure. There was no deal or offer yesterday that had a majority of support in Congress. There was no deal yesterday that included adequate protections for the taxpayers. It is not enough to cut deals behind closed doors and then try to force it on the rest of Congress — especially when it amounts to thousands of dollars for every American family.

The difference between Barack Obama and John McCain was apparent during the White House meeting yesterday where Barack Obama’s priority was political posturing in his opening monologue defending the package as it stands. John McCain listened to all sides so he could help focus the debate on finding a bipartisan resolution that is in the interest of taxpayers and homeowners. The Democratic interests stood together in opposition to an agreement that would accommodate additional taxpayer protections.

Senator McCain has spent the morning talking to members of the Administration, members of the Senate, and members of the House. He is optimistic that there has been significant progress toward a bipartisan agreement now that there is a framework for all parties to be represented in negotiations, including Representative Blunt as a designated negotiator for House Republicans. The McCain campaign is resuming all activities and the Senator will travel to the debate this afternoon. Following the debate, he will return to Washington to ensure that all voices and interests are represented in the final agreement, especially those of taxpayers and homeowners.


.

Thursday, September 25, 2008

Time's Joe Klein on McCain's Return to Washington: A Despicable New Low for Political Commentary


"...the old fighter jock may be frightened that he's about to ditch another plane" - Joe Klein, Time-blog.

On Oct. 26, 1967, John McCain was flying his 23rd bombing mission over North Vietnam, when his A-4E Skyhawk dive bomber was shot down and he was forced to bail out. Badly injured, he was subsequently captured as a prisoner of war by the North Vietnamese. He was held in horrific conditions from 1967 to 1973, experiencing episodes of torture and refusing an out-of-sequence early repatriation offer; his war wounds would leave him with lifelong physical limitations.

Or, perhaps you'd prefer this alternative version, as characterized by TTS earlier this year:

McCain was bombing women in a lightbulb factory (according to Newsweek) when shot down in North Vietnam. He has never failed to defend any illegal or violent war in which the US leaders involved the citizens.
Of course, despicable political commentary has been around for a long time, but, with this latest piece of hateful garbage, Mr. Klein has managed to bring it down to an historical new low. Here are some excerpts from his new post in his approriately named Swampland:

From Time-blog.com
September 25, 2008 10:32
What Actually Happened Yesterday
Posted by Joe Klein
John McCain faced another crisis yesterday--a political one, not the financial emergency he used as an excuse for his rash actions--and once again he overreacted. This is becoming a pattern (as is his "greatest crisis since..." formulation: yesterday, since World War II; previously--on Georgia--since the end of the cold war), and it is not very reassuring behavior in a potential President...

The political crisis was real. And it wasn't merely that he was slipping a bit in the polls...

Happily, in the end, McCain did the responsible thing...but he did it foolishly, in a panicky fashion. What McCain didn't understand was that the legislative crisis was already receding when he made his melodramatic--and somewhat wild-eyed--suspension of campaign activities statement...

In any case, the crisis was receding because the Bush Administration was caving to the Democrats' modifications In any case, Obama's cool steadfastness has put him in the driver's seat on this one...

And that raises an interesting question: Why was McCain so quick to pull out of the debate? After all, with the momentum slightly in Obama's direction, he needed a game-changer--and foreign policy is, allegedly, his area of expertise. His peremptory actions yesterday was not the behavior of a confident man. It was the behavior of a man uncertain, despite all the macho bluster, about his chances in the most important theater of battle in any presidential campaign, one where gimmicks, diversions and untruths can be directly countered by his opponent. McCain may clean Obama's clock in the coming debates--but it seems entirely possible that the old fighter jock may be frightened that he's about to ditch another plane.


Through the eyes of our lovely Mr. Klein and friends, John McCain's bail out over Vietnam was most likely some kind of a slick political maneuver, and his later courageous refusal to accept early release based on his father's propaganda importance was just another political ploy. What, I wonder, must it be like to be a Mr. Klein? What must it be like to look at this world of ours through those cynical jaded eyes?
By choosing the interests of his country over the interests of his political campaign, John McCain has once again demonstrated that bravery and loyalty for which he has justly become famous.
And once again, our infamously biased leftist media has demonstrated its unconscionable amorality.
I know, I should be used to it by now. We all should. It was, after all, to be expected and should come as no great surprise. And yet it does surprise me. This utter contempt for truth and fairness from one of our most prestigious publications can still shock me, still make me recoil in disbelief and disgust, can still make me almost physically sick.
I know, we're not supposed to hate; it's a negative drain on our psyche. But I'm sorry, I just can help it. I truly despise all of the liars and cheats of this world, and all of those ideologues who put their personal political interests over the welfare of their country and the honor of truth. I despise our Mr. Klein and all the Mr. Kleins of this world. And I firmly believe that sooner or later truth will prevail, it always does, and these despicable cheats and liars will go down in flames just like our honorable candidate's doomed A-4E Skyhawk. - rg

Bill Clinton Blames Democrats For Resisting 'Tightening' Up On Fannie Mae And Freddie Mac

NewsBusters catches a portion of a video shown by Political Radar, where Bill Clinton blames Democrats for resisting Republicans and himself regarding tightening up on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

Key exchange:

CHRIS CUOMO, ABC NEWS: A little surprising for you to hear the Democrats saying, "This came out of nowhere, this is all about the Republicans. We had nothing to do with this." Nancy Pelosi saying it. She signed the '99 Gramm Bill. She knew what was going on with the SEC. They're all sophisticated people. Is that playing politics in this situation?

BILL CLINTON: Well, maybe everybody does that a little bit. I think the responsibility the Democrats have may rest more in resisting any efforts by Republicans in the Congress or by me when I was President to put some standards and tighten up a little on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.


The video can be found at the Political Radar site, linked above, and it is approximately at the 2 minute 45 second mark.

Someone want to remind me which political party Bill Clinton belongs to again?

It seems that it is getting harder and harder to tell.

[Update] It is no surprise that Clinton would give his opinion on the economic crisis facing us today, even to the point of telling people not to read to much into John McCain's suggestion about postponing the first of the presidential debates on Friday, saying "We know he didn't do it because he's afraid because Sen. McCain wanted more debates," he continued on to say "You can put it off a few days the problem is it's hard to reschedule those things. I presume he did that in good faith since I know he wanted -- I remember he asked for more debates to go all around the country and so I don't think we ought to overly parse that."

His comments about McCain and the debates might not have been overly surprising, but what has caught many people's attention is how Clinton is placing much, not all, of the blame for the financial crisis on Democrats, especially this close to the presidential election.

Evidence of this surprise can be found on liberal blogs and forums across the web, such as Taylor Marsh, who was once known as the hub for anything Hillary, then went on to support Barack Obama after Hillary suspended her campaign.

Marsh says :

WJC is truly testing my patience. There's no doubt he doesn't need to get nasty or partisan, you know, like the old Bill of the 1990s who went on to win two general elections, plus beat off the wingnuts handily. But he could at least choose to quit pontificating and serving up quotes that actually aid the other side. It certainly doesn't help Hillary with the activist base and Obama supporters; you know, those people Bill knows she'll need if this election doesn't turn out so well. Just read some of the comments he's getting from Dems across the web that is beginning to blow back on Hillary, which is what matters to me. Hillary has been nothing but stalwart in her work for Obama. So I'm done biting my tongue, especially after hearing WJC played back on Rush today, who riffed, then dissed the debates, which was *!@&ing infuriating.


Another point about Bill Clinton was his praise for John McCain when he introduced him to speak at the Clinton Global Initiative this morning as shown by Fox.

Clinton's statement:

I want to say one thing in particular about John McCain in bringing him out here. When most people in his party were thinking that global warming was overstated and maybe even admit designed to let people like me who love solar and wind get into it. He decided to look into it and everyone of us by the way with every thorny problem we face need to be in the looking into it business and he and the Junior Senator from New York, with whom I have a passing acquaintance took 2 astonishing trips. One to your state to the point barrel of Alaska, the northern most community in the United States,” Clinton said referring to Palin, “where the Eskimos told them they thought their way of life was coming to an end because of changes in the climate and one to the northern most settlement on Planer Earth. It’s on an island 600 miles north of Norway above the Arctic Circle where they study the changes in the planet where there were signs on their cabin don’t go out at night without a gun or a light or the polar bears will eat you.”


Clinton went on to say "The point I want to make is there were any votes on this in Arizona. He just wanted to know and they dragged along some very skeptical Republican senators who now are prepared to vote for some kind of bipartisan legislation which will put America in a position to be a part of what is coming up by 2010 which is figuring out where we go next in the struggle against climate change. That’s what we want from everybody. We want some of us to be on the left, some of us to be on the right but all of us to want to know. John McCain wants to know and I am profoundly grateful to him coming here today.”

LA Times Top of the Ticket, describes Clinton's words about Obama's speaking to the group later by satellite feed from Florida, was "less warm" and they think Clinton is "hedging his bets," in the race for presidency between Barack Obama and John McCain.

The liberal blogosphere is not very happy with that tidbit of news either as evidenced by progressive sites all over the web.

Yglesias at Think Progress is dripping with sarcasm when he says "It sure was nice of Bill Clinton to put important national concerns above petty partisanship by agreeing to host a John McCain campaign speech and help the GOP nominee burnish his bipartisan credentials."

Lawyers, Guns & Money, believes Bill Clintons behavior is "an absolute disgrace."

The New Republics' The Plank is calling Clinton "The Underminer."

Those are just reactions from the left.

With Clinton's recent appearances on The View and elsewhere, to which Obama supporters have been overtly criticizing him for lavishing praise on Sarah Palin and highlighting his extreme affection and admiration for John McCain at every turn, this all begs the question, has Bill Clinton changed his party affiliation and we just missed the news?

.

Commission Rules Obama-McCain Debate to go Ahead as Planned

The Commission on Presidential Debates issued a statement saying the planned presidential debate scheduled for September 26, 2008, will be moving forward as originally scheduled.

Last night John McCain had proposed postponing the presidential debate to be held this Friday, until the Wall Street bailout plan had been agreed to by Congress.

Today the Commission on Presidential Debates just issued a statement:

"The Commission on Presidential Debates (CPD) is moving forward with its plan for the first presidential debate at the University of Mississippi in Oxford, Miss. this Friday, September 26. The plans for this forum have been underway for more than a year and a half. The CPD’s mission is to provide a forum in which the American public has an opportunity to hear the leading candidates for the president of the United States debate the critical issues facing the nation. We believe the public will be well served by having all of the debates go forward as scheduled.”

No word yet from either candidate on this statement and no word whether John Mccain will attend.

Last night it was reported by Political Ticker, that Lindsey Graham as well as another senior McCain adviser, asserted that "the Republican nominee will not go to the debate Friday if there's no deal on the bailout."

President Bush had invited both presidential candidates to a meeting to discuss the bailout plan today and as reported last night, they accepted.

Updates will be added as information comes out.

.

Barack Obama Bundler Meets With Mahmoud Ahmadinejad On Wednesday

(Founding member of Code Pink and Barack Obama bundler, Jodie Evans disrupts acceptance speech of Republican Vice Presidenial nominee, Sarah Palin at Republican National Convention in Minneapolis)


Hat Tip Melanie Morgan.

Jodie Evans, a member of Code Pink and a bundler for Barack Obama according to his website, was part of a group of activists that met with Iranian President, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, on Wednesday September 24, 2008.

A bundler is is a person that help collect money for a specific campaign and according to Barack Obama's website, Evans is listed as one of Obama's bundlers.

Jodie Evans and Medea Benjamin, both Code Pink members, joined other activists in a meeting with Iranian officials, including Ahmadinejad.

Iran is listed as a state sponsor of terrorism by the State Department and is believed by many to be developing Nuclear weapons.

Who is Jodie Evans?

Jodie Evans is listed under the "Who are Senator Obama's bundlers?" listed as "Raising from $50,000 to $100,000."

Jodie Evans co-hosted Barack Obama's first major fundraiser in Hollywood in February of 2007 as reported by Canada Free Press and other media outlets.

According to Evans’ Code Pink co-founder Medea Benjamin, Evans is on a first name basis with Obama and discussed Iraq policy with Obama at another Hollywood fundraiser on June 24, 2008.


Evans was also a guest at another fundraising dinner as recently as September of 2008 according to Hollywood Insider which provides a list of the guests. She is also a prominent member of the activist group Code Pink along with the groups founder Medea Benjamin, who also participated in the meeting with Ahmadinejad.

Evans has also stated her agreement with Osama bin Laden’s motives for attacking America on September 11, 2001 in an interview broadcast June 3, 2008:

Jodie Evans:..."We were attacked because we were in Saudi Arabia, that was the message of Osama, was that because we had our bases in the Middle East, he attacked the United States.”

Paul A. Ibbetson
: “Do you think that’s a valid argument?”

Evans: “Sure. Why do we have bases in the Middle East? We totally violated the rights of that country. Why do we get to have bases in the Middle East?”

Also in that interview, Evans said Code Pink’s goal is to “undermine the war effort (of the United States") and that she wished Saddam Hussein was still in power.

Toward that goal, Evans has worked with the governments of Saddam Hussein (in 2003), Hugo Chavez and the Castro brothers, as well as pro-insurgent elements in the Middle East.


Evans was one of the two women removed from the Republican National Convention after trying to disrupt Sarah Palin's speech, as reported by Twin Cities. com, dated before Evans attended the September fundraising dinner for Barack Obama.

Meeting with Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

According to the release announcing the activists meeting with Ahmadinejad, it was to be held at a Mid-town Manhattan, in a location convenient to the United Nations on Wednesday, September 24th from 5:00 to 7:00 pm.

Who: Over 150 leaders of the U.S. peace movement (see selected list below) and Iranian leaders, including President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki, and U.N. Ambassador Mohammad Khazaee.


Two of the people listed as participants were, Medea Benjamin, cofounder, Global Exchange and CodePink; Jodie Evans, cofounder, CodePink.

As per the Code Pink release sent out after the meeting, the meeting was held as planned at the Grand Hyatt Hotel and Code Pink touts the meeting as a “major step forward” in relations between Iran and the United States.

[Update] When asked for her reaction about the Obama bundler, Evans, attending this meeting with Ahmadinejad, former radio talk show host, best selling author and chairman of Move American Forward, Melanie Morgan, tells me "The reckless disregard of American foreign policy which leaves each of us more vulnerable by Senator Obama’s campaign supporters is stunning. It is long past time for the Department of Justice to launch an investigation into CodePink, and its co-founders Jodie Evans and Medea Benjamin. Senator Obama should be ashamed of himself for taking their blood money.”

Move America Forward is a non-partisan, not-for-profit charitable organization committed to supporting America’s efforts to defeat terrorism and supporting the brave men and women of our Armed Forces.

.

Wednesday, September 24, 2008

John McCain Suspending Campaign, Advertising and Fundraising Until Wall Street Crisis Solved

I started on this when I walked in the door and heard, so the previous piece is here, but this is a little more comprehensive with multiple sources.

Earlier today, John McCain suggested Friday's presidential debate should be canceled so he could travel to Washington to focus on Wall Street bailout negotiations. Further reports now indicate he suspended his campaign and advertising entirely.

McCain suggested he and Obama postpone the presidential debate on Sept. 26, in order to help the congressional negotiations on the Wall Street bailout plan. But further news reports indicate McCain is also suspending campaign activities until the deal is done, according to Fox News and other sources.

After delivering an address at President Clinton’s Global Initiative on Thursday, John McCain will be leaving the campaign trail to travel to Washington DC to help with the Wall Street bailout negotiations.

The McCain campaign has also canceled a Wednesday afternoon taping of The Late Show With David Letterman show and a Thursday interview with FOX News and will be canceling all campaign ads and fundraising until the legislation passed by Congress.

Drudge has McCain full statement, but the portion dealing with suspending his campaign states "Tomorrow morning, I will suspend my campaign and return to Washington after speaking at the Clinton Global Initiative. I have spoken to Senator Obama and informed him of my decision and have asked him to join me."

McCain's statement to reporters in New York:

America this week faces an historic crisis in our financial system. We must pass legislation to address this crisis. If we do not, credit will dry up, with devastating consequences for our economy. People will no longer be able to buy homes and their life savings will be at stake. Businesses will not have enough money to pay their employees. If we do not act, ever corner of our country will be impacted. We cannot allow this to happen.


According to the Fox report, McCain has worked hard on negotiations for the first debate to be about Foreign policy and National Security which is what has been known as his strong suit, so his desire to cancel the Friday debate is suggestive of how serious he is about the importance of dealing with the Wall Street crisis.

McCain adviser Nancy Pfotenhauer said that McCain is just following his belief in putting the country first. She noted that he suspended the Republican National Convention when Hurricane Gustav hit the Gulf Coast and in defending the troop surge has said that he would rather win the war than win an election.

“We all watched the (Senate) hearings yesterday. … The bottom line is he did not think we would reach a conclusion and it’s absolutely imperative that we do so. This is vintage John McCain. He is going to put the country first and suspend the campaign,” she told FOX News.


Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell applauds McCain's decision.

Politicker reports the announcement of McCain suspending his campaign, meant for McCain volunteers was accidentally emailed to the entire Colorado press corps by McCain regional spokesperson Tom Kise.

ABC's Political Radar has more from McCain spokesperson, Brian Rogers, showing it isn't just the campaign stops and advertising McCain is suspending but also the fundraising as he states "To be clear, in addition to suspending his campaign to return to Washington to work for a bipartisan solution to this problem, this campaign is suspending its advertising and fundraising."

Via email, I see White House press secretary Dana Perino has also released a statement:

We welcome Sen. McCain's announcement. We are making progress in negotiations on the financial markets rescue legislation, but we have not finished it yet. Bipartisan support from Sens. McCain and Obama would be helpful in driving to a conclusion."


[Update] The Politico reports John McCain's campaign is in the process of notifying televisions stations to ask them to to take his political ads off the air and when asked how long the campaign would be going "dark", Tucker Bounds, another spokesman said "We're taking our guidance from Sen. McCain on that."

[Update] McCain's political director Mike Duhaime issued a statement, via Weekly Standard:

Quite frankly, I think you could ask Sen. Obama if he’s going to do what he thinks is right. I mean, he has never -- I believe -- never once made a decision that is an unpopular decision or went against the orthodoxy of his party, and was one that was one that was a tough decision to make. . . . Sen. McCain has done that throughout his entire career, his entire life -- not just in politics, but his life.”

[Update]
More on McCain's proposed plan for the debate postponement from Lindsey Graham who says the McCain campaign will suggest to the commission if there is no deal by Friday, they will suggest the debate to be held in Mississippi, will be held in the same location, but on October 2, 2008, which is the scheduled date for the VP debate, and the VP debate will be moved to another date.

If there is no deal on the bailout, Graham asserts John McCain will not be attending the Friday debate.

[Update] The president has invited the congressional, bipartisan leadership, and the two senators running for president, to the White House tomorrow "to work on driving to a bipartisan and timely solution," according to NYT's The Caucus.


This story is developing...

.

McCain Suspends Campaign To Deal With Wall Street Bailout Negotiations

A more in depth piece here on the following thread.

John McCain announced he is suspending his campaign to travel back to Washington to join in with the Wall Street bailout negotiations, via Fox News:

John McCain announced that he will suspend his presidential campaign on Thursday to return to Washington to help with Wall Street bailout negotiations. He urged his opponent Barack Obama to do the same.

The Arizona senator also asked the Presidential Debate Commission to postpone Friday’s scheduled debate with Obama so that he can work on the financial crisis bailout plan now on Capitol Hill.

“America this week faces an historic crisis in our financial system. We must pass legislation to address this crisis. If we do not, credit will dry up, with devastating consequences for our economy. People will no longer be able to buy homes and their life savings will be at stake. Businesses will not have enough money to pay their employees. If we do not act, ever corner of our country will be impacted. We cannot allow this to happen,” McCain said in remarks to reporters from New York.

A senior Obama campaign official told FOX News that Obama still plans to go forward with Friday’s debate. Obama is expected to issue a statement shortly.

McCain said he will leave the campaign trail after delivering an address to former President Clinton’s Global Initiative on Thursday morning. He canceled a Wednesday afternoon taping of The Late Show With David Letterman show and a Thursday interview with FOX News
.

Political Radar says Obama is not willing to cancel the debate to focus on the Wall Street bailout.

ABC News’ George Stephanopoulos and Rick Klein report: Sen. John McCain on Wednesday said he would “suspend” his presidential campaign to come to Washington to help negotiate a financial bailout bill, a dramatic move designed to seize a powerful issue.

However a senior Obama campaign official said Obama "intends to debate."

"The debate is on," a senior Obama campaign official told ABC News.

McCain said he called on the Commission on Presidential Debates to postpone the debate scheduled for Friday in Mississippi, to ensure quick congressional action. The campaign is also suspending its advertising, pending an agreement with Obama.

“I have spoken to Senator Obama and informed him of my decision and have asked him to join me,” McCain planned to say in New York City, according to advance excerpts released by his campaign. “I am calling on the president to convene a meeting with the leadership from both houses of Congress, including Senator Obama and myself. It is time for both parties to come together to solve this problem.”


Considering National Security is Mccain's strong suit, this shows a seriousness on his part to deal with the bailout issue and Obama should be happy not to have to debate but his reluctance to cancel everything in the fact of getting this taken care of, shows a lack of willingness to put country before politics.

Just walked in so this is all I have right now, will update once I catch up.

.

Huffington Post: If Obama Loses It Is All Bill Clinton's Fault

There are two themes of going around the Internet of what the reason will be, preemptively, if Barack Obama loses the election for presidency in November 2008 despite his lead in polls. Racism or the fall back of "It is all the Clinton's fault."

In August of 2008, Slate magazine declared the only reason Barack Obama could lose the election was because of racism and because the majority of Americans are racists.

If it makes you feel better, you can rationalize Obama's missing 10-point lead on the basis of Clintonite sulkiness, his slowness in responding to attacks, or the concern that Obama may be too handsome, brilliant, and cool to be elected. But let's be honest: If you break the numbers down, the reason Obama isn't ahead right now is that he trails badly among one group, older white voters. He does so for a simple reason: the color of his skin.


Today we see there is another reason why Barack Obama could lose and if he does, according to Huffington Post, it will all be Bill Clinton's fault.

Bill Clinton has come out in support of Barack Obama and lately has made the rounds with talk shows and interviews, in doing so, he is being accused of not showing "enough" support for Barack Obama and also being criticized for speaking well of John McCain and "lavishing praise" on Sarah Palin by saying she should not be underestimated.

Popular opinion among Obama supporters is that Bill Clinton's support for Obama is "tepid", his heart isn't in it and some think he is deliberately trying to sabotage Barack Obama is a stealthy manner.

Yesterday Barbara Sowell pointed out Clinton's appearance on The View, with video, as well as a New York Times' Caucus piece stating Clinton was "waxed folksy" about Palin.

Huffington Post writer Paul Slansky declared yesterday that if Barack Obama loses it will all be Bill Clinton's fault.

If Obama loses a close election -- one in which even one state where you could have made a difference goes for McCain because you sat home and pouted -- it will be on you. We will remember that you couldn't be bothered to rise above your petty resentments for something as trivial as saving your country from the enemies of everything you profess to believe in. We forgave you for Monica, Bill, but we won't forgive you for this.


The presidential debates are schedule to start Friday, September 26, 2008, yet some are wondering why Slate and Huffington Post as well as many others are already coming up with excuses of why Barack Obama "might" lose despite the fact that he holds a two percentage point lead in today's Rasmussen poll, bringing the poll numbers back to the pre-convention figures.

This makes me wonder why Obama supporters assume if Barack Obama wins, it will be based on policy issues, economy, public stances on a variety of topics, yet if Obama loses to John McCain in November, it is Bill Clinton's fault or America is a nation of racists in the minds of Obama supporters?

For some race might be an issue, just as for others McCain's age might be an issue, some may vote for McCain because they like his choice of Sarah Palin and some might vote for Obama because of his choice for Joe Biden, but those issues aside, one would hope the majority of voters would simply vote for the person they think will do a better job, best represents them and who they feel can run the U.S. best, and casting blame on something or someone "preemptively" is no more than creating "excuses" ahead of time to fall back on if the election doesn't go how they think it should.

They should quit making excuses and understand that neither candidate has been able to grab a double digit lead against the other since the primaries ended and barring some massive mistake on either candidate's part during the debates, we are likely to go into election day with a neck-and-neck race with no one knowing for a fact who will be the president elect the following day.

I have said it before and I will say it again, the day after the November 4, 2008 election, no matter who wins or who loses, I am popping the champagne to toast the end of this particularly grueling campaign season but the one thing I will not be doing is blaming McCain's age, Obama's race or either of the Clintons for the person who loses in November.

The candidates stand or fall on their own records, stances and campaigns and those who cannot admit that are the ones that will be whining for the next four years after the election about how it was all so unfair.

.

Resignation, Accomodation, Capitulation: America's Message to Posterity, "Sorry World, We Tried."


When the German Army mounted its Western Offensive in 1940, it had 2.5 million men and 2,500 tanks. Whereas the French Army had the ability to mobilize 5 million men, the German army supported by motorized infantry units and aircraft easily secured victory.


Germany's subjugation of France took just six weeks, and on June 14, 1940 German troops marched into Paris. The shocking and ignoble surrender was made official when the French formally signed the infamous Second Compiegne Armistice on June 22, 1940. Under the terms of the armistice the Germans were to continue to occupy Northern France, while the southern unoccupied third of France was ostensibly left free to be governed by the French. A collaborationist Government was formed under the aged WWI War hero, Marshal Phillipe Petain, and its new capitol was to be in the small town of Vichy, in central France, a name forever to be associated with her dishonor.















Pétain and the Vichy regime willfully collaborated with the German occupation to a high degree. The French police and the state Milice (militia) organized raids to capture Jews and others considered "undesirables" by the Germans in both the northern and southern zones.


How could this have happened? How could a once strong, proud nation, a nation with a long and glorious military tradition, a nation with one of the most powerful armies in the world, totally cave in and capitulate in a matter of mere weeks?
In 1940 the world had witnessed the tragic results when an entire nation lost its nerve and resigned itself to failure. Dumbfounded, we watched a much larger army defeated by a much smaller army with a much larger will to win. Resignation, accommodation, capitulation. One inevitably following the other, until that final, unequivocal and inescapable humiliation.

Sorry France, we tried. Sorry Poland, we tried. Sorry Czechoslovakia, we tried. Sorry all you poor doomed Jews, we tried.






On September 23, 2008, a defiant Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad spoke to the United Nations General Assembly. Ever the showman, obviously enjoying the world's undivided attention, and obviously undeterred by those virtually toothless sanctions, the Evil Dwarf spewed out his usual defiant harangue of unrelenting hate and vicious lies. Iran, he promised, or warned, would continue on her steady course to fulfill her sacred destiny, whether we in the West liked it or not. Iran would neither be intimidated nor deterred by the machinations of the imperialistic Zionist powers.













The invincible righteous armies of God and Iran are fully prepared for this coming battle, this glorious Armageddon, and no amount of futile Western sanctions or threats would interfere with their noble mission.



Later that evening, on Fox News Live, in one of the most disturbing and disheartening summations I have ever had the misfortune to experience, the events of this fateful day were summed up by famed political commentator, Charles Krauthammer. It was to be, he proclaimed, complete and utter resignation. Unqualified, humiliating resignation. All the useless diplomatic initiatives had failed, the sanctions had had little or no effect. Neither the meaningless condemnations of the meaningless United Nations nor the pitiful attempts of an impotent IAEA to somehow monitor or discourage the steady escalation of the Iranian's nuclear program would have any effect. The present administration would not attack Iran. And most likely, he continued, no new administration would sanction such an attack, either. Israel probably doesn't possess the necessary military wherewithal to pull off a successful attack on Iran and avoid the certain devastating consequences.
So Iran would get the bomb. And what will be will be. Sorry world, we tried.

So that's it? That's all there is? Sorry world. Sorry poor little Israel. Sorry all you hapless future generations of Americans. Sorry, but we tried.

At seven o'clock I turned off the TV and tried not to think about the future

Tuesday, September 23, 2008

Democrats Concede Defeat On Offshore Drilling

Not like they had any choice considering they didn't have enough votes to pass an energy bill without drilling, they didn't have the votes to pass their sham drilling bill that was all show and no meat and they didn't have the votes to continue to the ban....so, they were forced to concede defeat.

Democrats have decided to allow a quarter-century ban on drilling for oil off the Atlantic and Pacific coasts to expire next week, conceding defeat in a months-long battle with the White House and Republicans set off by $4 a gallon gasoline prices this summer.

House Appropriations Committee Chairman David Obey, D-Wis., told reporters Tuesday that a provision continuing the moratorium will be dropped this year from a stopgap spending bill to keep the government running after Congress recesses for the election.

Republicans have made lifting the ban a key campaign issue after gasoline prices spiked this summer and public opinion turned in favor of more drilling. President Bush lifted an executive ban on offshore drilling in July.

"If true, this capitulation by Democrats following months of Republican pressure is a big victory for Americans struggling with record gasoline prices," said House GOP leader John Boehner of Ohio.


Game. Set. Match.

Thank you to the Republicans that fought so hard to see to it that the Democrats couldn't thwart the will of the people who by a good majority told them to get on with it and lets start drilling so that some day we can achieve more independence.

.

AIG, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and Lehman Investigated By FBI For Fraud

Breaking news shows the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) is investigating the financial institutions which have triggered the $700 billion bailout plan.

Associated Press is reporting the FBI is investigating Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc., and insurer American International Group Inc., (AIG) for potential fraud.

Details are sketchy but these investigations will bring the total of corporate lenders under investigation to 26.

[Update] Another Associated Press article says a senior law enforcement official spoke on condition of anonymity because the investigations are in the early stages.

They have received no public comments from the spokes people for the financial groups at this time.

Just last week, FBI Director Robert Mueller put the number of large financial firms under investigation at 24. He did not name any of the companies under investigation but said the FBI also is looking at whether any of them have misrepresented their assets.


Developing..

Stop Iran Now Rally Becomes Anti-Organizer, Anti-Obama Rally

The Stop Iran Now being held outside the United Nations made major headlines last week when Clinton canceled because Palin was attending, then Jewish groups were pressured into disinviting others including Palin. Today we see protesters protested against Obama.

WCBSTV's report on the "Stop Iran Now" rally headlines their article with "Anti-Iran Rally Turns Into Anti-Obama Rally," when protesters not only protested Iranian President Ahmadinejad, but also protested the event's organizers for rescinding Sarah Palin's invitation after Hillary Clinton canceled her appearance, as well as protested Barack Obama.

RECAP.

A number of American Jewish Groups planned a rally to be held outside the United Nations to protest Iranian President Ahmadinejad, and invited members from each political party. Clinton accepted the invite then canceled when told Palin would attend.

Then CBS2 reported on Democrats threatening the Jewish groups until they rescinded a number of politicians invitation, claiming that with Palin attending, it made it a partisan gathering which would endanger the groups' tax exemption status.

CBS 2 also got a Democratic politician, Assemblyman Dov Hikind, on record as saying at the time, "It's an absolute shame that this has happened. To threaten organizations … to threaten the Conference of Presidents that if you don't withdraw the invitation to Gov. Palin we're going to look into your tax exempt status … that's McCarthyism."

TODAY.

Today's report by WCBSTV says protesters, much to the anger of the organizers, were not only protesting Iran and Ahmadinejad, but were also protesting the event organizers, with signs reading "We Want Sarah. Shame On The Rally Organizer." The protests didn't stop with the event organizers either, people also protested Barack Obama with signs saying "Jews Against Obama & Ahmadinejad."

Janice Shorenstein, president of the Jewish Community Relations Council, was upset because the rally was always intended to be a non-partisan group protest against the presence of Ahmadinejad, but the situation rapidly changed changed.

Shorenstein asserts "I am upset by the sign because this is a non-political event. We are here today to cry out against Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, not political. American elections are not part of this event."

Congressman Anthony Wiener, D-NY., disagreed with Shorenstein and stated "I think this is a classic political event in the best sense of the word. Politicians from all corners come here to speak out against Iran. I think it would have been fine for Sarah to speak. We just needed someone of equal stature from the Obama campaign to speak."

The Democratic Congressman wasn't the only one that disagreed with Shorenstein and the organizers decision to disinvite Palin just because Clinton canceled.

One protester by the name of Howard Webber from Brooklyn saying, "As important an event as this is, you needed a unity of Democrats and Republicans to show Ahmadinejad that we're not going to accept a nuclear Iran."

Buddy Macy of Little Fells, New Jersey agreed with Webber, saying ""I'm so disappointed, upset. She would have brought 10,000-20,000 more supporters of Israel. People who were curious were stopped because of partisan action," referring to Palin's invitation being rescinded.

The question is what are the political repercussions not to have politicians speak at the rally?

"Republicans benefitted more than the Democrats did," political consultant Hank Sheinkopf said. "Why? Sarah Palin wanted to be there, but it looks like she was purposely told not to and rejected. It gives her standing, particularly among those people who are thinking about voting Republican anyway."


Anger was evident at the rally with no one appearing to be happy at the turn of events and no matter who political consultants, pundits and the media think benefited politically from those turn of events, others seem to think this was one area where politics could have been set aside and all affiliations could have stood together as one against Ahmadinejad.

.

Press Flap Over Access While Palin Meets World Leaders

It was announced last week Sarah Palin would privately meet with world leaders here for the United Nations annual autumn General Assembly Session. Earlier reports said campaign aides were excluding print and wire media outlets from covering the meetings.

There is much buzz going around the Internet about Sarah Palin's meeting with Afghan President Hamid Karzai, Colombian President Alvaro Uribe and former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger, and how campaign aides originally told print and wire service journalists they were barred from the pool of reporters accompanying Palin to those meetings.

They were told photographers could attend the meetings but not the writers, which set the press into a full scale revolt.

Journalists protested the campaign's decision to exclude all but photographers and a TV crew from Palin's sessions with foreign leaders. CNN decided to withdraw its TV crew, effectively denying Palin the high visibility she sought for her initial foray into world affairs. The campaign then reversed course, saying pool reporters — a small group that provides information to all media — could attend the meetings planned after Karzai hosted Palin at his suite in The Barclay New York Hotel.


(Example of a pool report further down in the article.)

Later campaign spokeswoman, Tracey Schmitt, said it was a "mix-up" and the flap was from miscommunication among the staff and later agreed to allow some pool reporters in.

The Associated Press reports a television producer with a notepad was originally denied access into President Karzai's suite, but a Palin campaign official stepped in and allowed him to pass according to a pool report.

More on that exchange from The Politico, the reporter which was first barred access was CNN’s Peter Hamby and he reports the "handler" who tried to deny him access by saying "no writers" appeared to be with Karzais’ entourage and the Palin official that stepped in was Palin’s deputy chief of staff, Chris Edwards.

The Caucus reports that word now is that a print reporter will be allowed in at the next two meetings.

It is not uncommon for meetings with world leaders to be pooled, but in the past the McCain campaign has at times allowed print reporters and televisions producers to look in and report any color – or exchange of pleasantries, usually banal – that occurs.


Subsequently a CNN producer into the room for the meetings, reports LA Times' Top of the Ticket, and as of the latest reports, reporters will have access to her meetings with remaining leaders.

Routinely reporters are allowed to witness the beginning of private meetings with world leaders, although not allowed to stay for the whole meeting. Generally they are allowed to snap pictures, report the general "meet and greet" portion of the meetings, sometimes yell out a few questions which are usually ignored, then are escorted out.

The flap here was about campaign staff refusing to allow the writers in since Palin nor Karzai were taking questions and simply allowing cameras, and when the press threatened to revolt, the campaign reversed their position and allowed some pool reporters in.

Example of a pool report:

Play-by-play: After the conclusion of the Karzai meeting, your pooler departed the InterContinental shortly after 12:35 p.m. EST in the motorcade headed for 14 E. 76th St. We arrived 12 minutes later, and your pool held briefly in an unlit, musty hallway. We then climbed a white, carpeted staircase and were escorted into an ornate room with a large glass chandelier where the meeting was held.

Your pool was for half a minute. Palin was already seated on a pink stuffed chair, to the right of Uribe, with her legs crossed and her body titled forward. They exchanged pleasantries that your pooler could not hear over the loud clicks of the cameras. On a couch to her right (a few feet back but perpendicular to her chair) sat Scheunemann and Biegun.

Palin exited the building with Uribe around 1:20 p.m. EST. They posed briefly for the cameras (assorted members of the non-pool press, possibly the foreign press, had gathered outside) and exchanged small talk. Your pooler could only hear Palin say to Uribe: “Thank you for your work.”

Palin wore small, gold, dangly earrings in the shape of the state of Alaska. Her hair was tightly secured atop of her head and her shoes were black patent leather round toed heels
.

The Politico article provides the standard pool report from the Karzai meeting and the Uribe meeting, which included a description for each scenario, who sat where and what they were wearing and the what they heard of the greetings and beginnings of conversation, which is one case wasn't much over the loud clicking of the cameras, the reporter says.

Palin has not held a news conference since she was chosen as the GOP vice presidential candidate to John McCain and has had three sit-down interviews, one with ABC's Charles Gibson, one with Sean Hannity from Fox News and an interview along with John McCain for People magazine.

Palin's next interview with be with CBS's Katie Couric.

As you can see from the example of the pool report above, the whole flap is simply amusing. I don't care what kind of earrings Palin wore or her shoe preference or what they two looked like sitting together. All that can be seen from the photos, which makes the actual reporters, redundant.



.

Joe Biden Directly Contradicts Barack Obama: 'We’re Not Supporting Clean Coal'



Joe Biden was in Ohio recently and the video above shows his answer to an anti-pollution campaigner about clean coal to where, among other comments, Biden said, "We’re not supporting clean coal." This directly contradicts Barack Obama's stated position.

The Politico reports the coal comments from Biden, who is the vice presidential running mate to Barack Obama for the Democratic ticket, which included statements about China polluting our air with their coal plants, he states, "No coal plants here in America," he goes on to say "Build them, if they're going to build them, over there. Make them clean," and "We’re not supporting clean coal."

Starting with Barack Obama's website, on his New Energy page, under the header of "Create Millions Of New Green Jobs," the fourth highlighted entry directly references clean coal where it says:



• Develop and Deploy Clean Coal Technology.


On September 20, 2008, the LA Times published science questions and answers from both John McCain and Barack Obama which, in part, dealt with the issue of energy and clean coal was once again spoken about by Obama.

The question was "What is your position on the following measures that have been proposed to address global climate change -- a cap-and-trade system, a carbon tax, increased fuel-economy standards, or research?

Barack Obama's answer:

Specifically, I will implement a market-based cap-and-trade system to reduce carbon emissions by the amount scientists say is necessary: 80% below 1990 levels by 2050. I will start reducing emissions immediately by establishing strong annual reduction targets with an intermediate goal of reducing emissions to 1990 levels by 2020.

. . . I will also create a Technology Transfer Program dedicated to exporting climate-friendly technologies, including green buildings, clean coal and advanced automobiles, to developing countries to help them combat climate change.


On May 13, 2008, ABC News reported that both Clinton and Obama were wooing voters in West Virginia and Kentucky and both spoke about clean coal.

Not to be outdone, Senator Obama's campaign has distributed flyers in Kentucky stating that "Barack Obama believes in clean Kentucky coal." The flyers show a picture of giant barges carrying coal down the Ohio River.


Obama is on record, in many places as being for clean coal technology.

Joe Biden, hasn't been a proponent of clean coal in the United States, as the video above shows as well as an interview he participated in back in 2007, with Grist, where he was asked "What role does "clean coal" play in your vision for energy independence and climate security?

Biden's answer:

I don't think there's much of a role for clean coal in energy independence, but I do think there's a significant role for clean coal in the bigger picture of climate change. Clean-coal technology is not the route to go in the United States, because we have other, cleaner alternatives. But I would invest a considerable amount of money in research and development of clean-coal and carbon-sequestration technologies for export. China is building one new coal-fired plant per week. That's not going to change unless there's a fundamental change in technology, because they have about 300 years of dirty coal, and they're going to use it


Clean coal is a technology that would either turn coal to gas before burning, or else bury the carbon emissions deep underground after burning.

Biden's opposition to clean coal is not new and there is no rule in politics stating a vice presidential candidate must agree with the presidential candidate for their party on every issue that faces them.

With that said, stating publicly "We’re not supporting clean coal," as Joe Biden did, implies he is speaking for the campaign stance and not just his personal stance, which puts him at odds and in direct contradiction of Barack Obama stated stance.

.

Live Blogging Friday's Presidential Debate At Digital Journal

I am just going to post the announcement given at Digital Journal where DigitalJournal.com Editor-in-Chief, Chris Hogg and myself will be live blogging the presidential debate on Friday evening.

The Announcement:

We're happy to announce live coverage of the first U.S. presidential debate this Friday Sept. 26, 2008 at 9 p.m. EST. We've teamed up with a citizen journalist to offer play-by-play commentary, insight, opinion and debate. Join us and share your thoughts!

Digital Journal -- On Friday Sept. 26, John McCain and Barack Obama will take to the stage at the University of Mississippi in the first presidential debate. The world will likely tune-in to the event in droves, wondering how candidates handle hot issues without a teleprompter.

The debate will focus on foreign policy and national security issues. Jim Lehrer of PBS’s The NewsHour will moderate and the format will have each candidate receiving two minutes to respond to a question, followed by an open discussion for another five minutes.

DigitalJournal.com Editor-in-Chief, Chris Hogg, will cover the event live along with DigitalJournal.com Citizen Journalist Susan Duclos. Hogg and Duclos will offer a play-by-play commentary of the debate, along with insight into key issues, reaction to the candidates' stances and a debate as to who handled themselves best.

In a live blog, Duclos and Hogg will deliver up-to-the-second coverage of the debate, and we invite everyone to take part. Using the latest live blogging technology, DigitalJournal.com will feature a continuously-updated widget with as-it-happens coverage, including commentary, photography, reader feedback and live polls. The entire debate coverage will update on its own on DigitalJournal.com, without you ever having to refresh the page.

On Friday Sept. 26, at 9 p.m. EST, we invite all readers, bloggers, citizen journalists and anyone with even a passing interest in politics to take part in the event. The live blog will be moderated by DigitalJournal.com, so you can submit your comments, feedback and opinion in-line with debate coverage. Share your thoughts on Obama and McCain, or express your opinion on the United States and its future foreign policy and national security issues under each leader.

The live blog will be active just before 9 p.m. (EST) on Sept 26., so mark your calendars and take part in one of the most-anticipated media events of the year. The live blog will be located here, as well as on the front page of DigitalJournal.com



Note to Wake up America readers: Feel free to come join in the conversation, everyone will be welcome and it should be a fun event.

.

Monday, September 22, 2008

McCain Camp Needs To Be Pushing Back, and Putting the Blame for the Financial Crisis Where It Belongs...With Democrats!

Crossposted from Stop the ACLU:

Since the current financial crisis is taking place under a Republican administration it is easy for people to automatically blame Republicans. The media have happily pushed this misconception too. Facts the media ignore are things such as the very groundwork for today's problems being rooted in legislation created by Jimmy Carter , or that in 2003 President Bush proposed “the most significant regulatory overhaul in the housing finance industry since the savings and loan crisis that was blocked by Democrats on party lines. However, the media don't report these very important and significant facts and so it is no wonder that the GOP takes the brunt of the blame in this recent CNN poll.

new CNN/Opinion Research Corporation Poll suggests that by a 2-to-1 margin, Americans blame Republicans over Democrats for the financial crisis that has swept across the country the past few weeks — one factor that may have contributed to an apparent increase in Barack Obama’s edge over John McCain in the race for the White House.

In the new survey, released Monday afternoon, 47 percent of registered voters questioned say Republicans are more responsible for the problems currently facing financial institutions and the stock market, with 24 percent saying Democrats are more responsible. One in five of those polled blame both parties equally, and 8 percent say neither party is to blame.


Is it possible that these registered voters are basing their opinions without the full facts? Well, I'm sure the polls would not reflect so favorably for Barack Obama if the American people were properly informed that Fannie and Freddie co-opted over $120,000 to Barack Obama over less than four years.

Throughout his political career, Obama has gotten more than $125,000 in campaign contributions from employees and political action committees of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, second only to Dodd, the Senate Banking Committee chairman, who received more than $165,000.


Perhaps the polls wouldn't reflect so negatively for Senator John McCain if the public were informed that during the same timeframe Obama was pocketing money from these corrupted institutions, John McCain was fighting to reform them.

For years I have been concerned about the regulatory structure that governs Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac–known as Government-sponsored entities or GSEs–and the sheer magnitude of these companies and the role they play in the housing market. OFHEO’s report this week does nothing to ease these concerns. In fact, the report does quite the contrary. OFHEO’s report solidifies my view that the GSEs need to be reformed without delay.

I join as a cosponsor of the Federal Housing Enterprise Regulatory Reform Act of 2005, S. 190, to underscore my support for quick passage of GSE regulatory reform legislation. If Congress does not act, American taxpayers will continue to be exposed to the enormous risk that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac pose to the housing market, the overall financial system, and the economy as a whole.

Ed Morrissey explains why this is important, and why John McCain needs to push back against the way the media has painted this.

We can play blame games for the next several months and years, but what would be the point? In this case, there is a point, and it couldn’t be more clear or important. We have two candidates running for President who would bring much different styles to executive authority over regulatory responsibility. Barack Obama and his allies took the money and stayed on the sidelines rather than take proactive action to resolve the credit crisis. McCain and his co-sponsors of this bill had the right idea and instincts, but could not get any cooperation from Clinton, Schumer, or Obama.


In simple summary, Republicans including John McCain tried to prevent this crisis back in 2005, and Democrats like Barack Obama chose self interest over doing so. Can we expect the media to report these facts? Of course not.

Pray for wisdom indeed.

Who Is a Patriot?


"Patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel." Said Samuel Johnson to Mr. Boswell, and Mr. Boswell and the world took note and remembered. Yet those who most often and most lovingly remind us of this famous aphorism are almost invariably those of a particular breed of skeptic who consider all national loyalties of any kind to be automatically suspect. However they seldom if ever repeat the second part of that renowned quotation, and by this slippery sin of omission they completely distort the true intent of the original phrase.
"But let it be considered," Mr. Boswell continues, "that he did not mean a real and generous love of our country, but that pretended patriotism which so many, in all ages and countries, have made a cloak of self-interest."

Boswell Life of Samuel Johnson


How then are we to determine what is or is not a "real and generous love of our country", and what is merely "pretended patriotism" and just a "cloak of self-interest."? Who then is a patriot? And who is not? Who is our true friend? And who is our true foe?

The people whom we are fighting against are often some of the nicest people in the world. But they are nonetheless wrong. Very wrong. And they do hurt us. And they don’t even see it. These people, often our friends and relatives and neighbors, often suffer from the worst sort of hubris. The pride of sanctified opinion. The firm belief that their opinions, no matter how grossly uninformed or ill-founded have value just because they are their opinions. They see themselves as superior patriots, honorable but objective physicians who are willing to tell their patient the truth about their serious condition, no matter how distasteful it may be. Telling their patients the awful truth has in point of fact become their sacred role, their primary function. Only in this way do they have a chance of saving their suffering charges. And if the truth is a bitter pill to swallow, then so be it. It must be done. It is to be seen as a painful but necessary catharsis.

However, just beneath the surface of this high-minded rhetoric, one can smell that familiar and unmistakable odor of unbounded pride and self-importance. Above all else, our dubiously sincere critics wish to appear profound and well-informed. The concept of actually becoming profound and well-informed through hard work and diligent study is evidently beyond the scope of their apprehension. They remain utterly content and unmoved by the force of reality. They have learned all that they need to know. And that is all that they need to learn.

How often have we seen some well thought-out essay, an obvious product of a great expenditure of effort and research, casually dismissed out of hand by a one sentence insult, or buy some oh-so-clever quip by one of these self-appointed Guardians of Truth. Yet, remarkably, and invariably, these very same people will without the slightest hesitation describe themselves unabashedly as patriots, true patriots who love their country and only wish to help her through her absolutely essential catharsis. In short, they say, the truth hurts. And their truth is of course the only unquestioned version.

God save us from these 'true patriots'. With patriots like these who needs enemies? If these are, as I propose, our false patriots, who then are our true patriots? What after all is said and done, is a true patriot?

First and foremost a patriot is loyal. He has made an oath and he intends to keep it. A patriot is steadfast, he does not waver in the ever-changing winds of opinion. A patriot loves his country and is supportive of her. He does not look for ways to undermine the moral integrity of his country during a time of her utmost peril, during a time of war.

A patriot’s primary concern is in defending his country against any and all assaults upon her character, whether they come from enemies within or from enemies abroad. A patriot does not exercise his right to free speech in order to slander his own home and nation. He does not hold the delusional conceit that by publicly admonishing his country for her purported past and present blunders and atrocities he is thereby somehow helping her. He will not expend his energies seeking to find some new flaws in the character of his country, but rather does whatever he can do to defend her from the attacks of those who would happily bring her down. A patriot is not ashamed to be a trustworthy and loyal champion of his country. Rather, he is her proud protector and her shield. A patriot is unconcerned that his patriotism may be called simplistic and shallow by those false patriots. A patriot who is willing to sacrifice his very life for his honest love of country is not that easily cowed by these petty and effete naysayers.

A patriot does not mindlessly parrot the borrowed opinions of others merely based upon their current popularity. His is totally unconcerned about whether his patriotism is or is not in fashion this year. A patriot does his own independent research and thinks before he speaks. He will not allow his careless words to be used by his country's enemies as weapons to wound her. Rather, a patriot will use his well-chosen words and his deeds to lift his country up even higher.

Finally, and perhaps most importantly, patriots are deeply aware of their value to their community and their country. Patriots love life and they love their families, but are nonetheless willing to sacrifice themselves for their community and their country, not with that blind unthinking obedience of a totalitarian slave, but with an open-hearted generosity and love. With that 'real and generous love of country' of which our good Mister Boswell spoke so long ago.

Sarah Palin's Strategy Of Dealing With Personal Attacks

Sarah Palin has seen Internet rumors and personal attacks since the day it was announced she would be the GOP Veep. Attacks on her children to false claims about her policies, Palin has largely ignored them to expose how petty the attackers are.

The first attacks were immediate, coming from the popular liberal website called Daily Kos which accused Sarah Palin of pretending to be the mother of her youngest child, Trig, who has down syndrome and attacking her daughter with claims that she was the real mother.

Palin announced that her daughter was pregnant and video footage of interviews conducted while in her last months of pregnancy showed those original attacks to be lies and nothing more than rumors reported as news.

From there a long list of rumors started being spread, to which Fact Check.org investigated and exposed them for being lies or mass misrepresentations.

Book banning, belonging to a separatist group called the Alaskan Independence Party, claims she supported Pat Buchanon were all debunked by Fact Check in a piece they called "Sliming Palin."

A few examples of the attacks that have been debunked by Fact Check .org. are:

*Palin did not cut funding for special needs education in Alaska by 62 percent

*She did not demand that books be banned from the Wasilla library. Some of the books on a widely circulated list were not even in print at the time.

*She was never a member of the Alaskan Independence Party

*Palin never endorsed or supported Pat Buchanan for president.

*Palin has not pushed for teaching creationism in Alaska's schools

Other than having a group called the Truth Squad formed to counter online rumor and lies, Palin herself has generally gone about doing her job as the vice presidential candidate, helping to raise campaign funds, making campaign stops, giving interviews and interacting with the people of America from state to state.

Those attacking her on a constant basis are basically being completely ignored by her and I think it is a good strategy on her part to allow those attacking to show themselves for the what they are, small, petty and willing to lie and spread those rumors and lies amongst themselves, with others watching and witnessing, noticing and speaking, about how in their desire to attack, they are ruining their own reputations and any credibility they might have once had.

These are the same type of people that will accuse their opponents of smears, lies and accuse them of attacking others, yet they themselves are becoming the worst offenders of all they speak about.

Better yet as reported by The Hill today, Palin is using those attacks against her for campaign fundraising, turning the tables on her attackers and using their tactics as a tool to help garner support for John McCain and the Republican party.

Why bother getting into the mud with her attackers when she can let them show themselves for what they are and use the public's perception of such attacks and the lowering public opinion of her attackers, to her benefit.

.

Breaking: 13 Injured In Car Attack In Jerusalem, Driver Killed

At least 13 people have been injured in Jerusalem as a driver plowed his BMW into a group of soldiers in Jerusalem's Old City late Monday, with the driver of the car being shot and killed according to Associated Press.

Reports say the driver was a Palestinian resident of east Jerusalem who was acting alone when he drove his vehicle into a group of soldiers, injuring 13 before a soldier shot and killed the driver.

According to Israel TVF the vehicle was registered to a resident of Jabel Mukaber, an Arab village inside the city limits.

Two of the 13 injured are reported to be in serious condition and the others suffered light wounds.

It was the third attack in Jerusalem in which vehicles have been used as weapons in recent months. In July, two Palestinians living in Jerusalem carried out separate attacks using heavy construction machinery that killed three people and injured several others. Both attackers were fatally shot by police and soldiers.


Reuters reports that a police spokesperson, Micky Rosenfeld, said, "A man in a vehicle struck a number of people in Kikar Tzahal. We can confirm it was a terror attack. The man was shot and killed."

Reuters figures show up to 15 people were injured.

.

Obama Campaign Pulls Out Of North Dakota

The Obama campaign has confirmed they are shutting down their 11 North Dakota campaign offices and dispatching their staffers to other states such as Minnesota and Wisconsin.

Barack Obama has approximately 50 staffers in North Dakota in the hopes of being the first Democratic presidential candidate to carry the state since 1964, but with the latest polls showing McCain with a double digit lead in North Dakota, the Obama campaign has decided to pull out.

The Politico reports this is the third long-shot state the Obama campaign is pulling out of to focus on campaigning in states where he can be competitive.

According to Obama's campaign manager David Plouffe, "We have a lot of differing combinations to get to 270, and our strategic imperative is going to be ... to keep as many of those scenarios as possible alive" deep into October."

It was announced previously the Obama campaign had pulled out of Georgia and Alaska.

This change in strategy comes as early voting is about to start in North Dakota and other states. Absentee voting may start as early as Thursday for North Dakota, according to the Associated Press.

The LA Times' Top of the Ticket states this will be the fourth state the Obama campaign is writing off being Idaho was deemed a Democratic write-off early in the campaign.

.

Villages, Turn Out In Masses To See Sarah Palin

Tens of thousands of people from The Villages turned out to see Sarah Palin in Florida over the weekend, with Florida papers saying it was the "largest crowd ever for a political event at The Villages."

The Villages is an upscale retirement community north of Orlando Florida, which houses approximately 70,000 residents, mostly adults and Sarah Palin arrived to crowds which are estimated in one paper as 25,000- 60,000 with other papers saying it was tens of thousands or 60,000, depending on the paper in question. All agree it was the largest crowd to ever turn out for a political event in The Villages.

The Orlando Sentinel reports people sat out in the sweltering heat for so long to see Palin, about 100 people ended up having to be treated for heat-related health problems.

The reasons given to reporters by some attending the event range from curiosity to women "seeing themselves" in Palin, as 63 year-old Louise Grossman states, "I think she's a great benefit to women. I think she's the second original woman's libber. My husband says I'm the first woman's libber."

58-year-old business owner, Jan Hatfield identifies with Palin on a personal level saying Palin embodies the women she sees every day, continuing on to state, "You can keep your faith and your family and still be a strong businesswoman."

Even the men in the crowd spoke of what they admired about Palin:

"Western women have confidence in their capabilities and their femininity so that they don't have to sacrifice one to promote the other," said Wright, 68, of The Villages.


The Palm Beach Post reports Palin T-shirts, buttons, hats and other items were everywhere, many of them referencing lipstick, pit bulls, hockey or some combination of those elements and others just wearing items with Palin's name on them.

That report quotes Conservative Democrats, Republicans and Independents:

Deborah Abriola came from Orlando and wore a button that said "Don't Let the Lipstick Fool You - Pitbulls for McCain-Palin" because she said she feels kinship with Palin as a fellow "lipstick mom."

Abriola described herself as a conservative Democrat who sees Palin as a role model for mothers.

Her friend, Cheryl LeDuc, said she's a Republican but wants to see a shake-up in the GOP. She said Palin "is conservative and she's going to clean up Washington, including the Republicans."

Sue Viera of Micco, in Brevard County, described herself as an independent who had been an "iffy" supporter of McCain.

"When he put Palin on, that really put me over the top," said Viera, who said she sees Palin as someone who is nonpartisan and "will do what's right."


Although some have questions about Palin overall, they say those questions are not enough to stop them from voting for John McCain.

The Post's report did have a set of criticism regarding Palin, from Bobby Gravitz who happened to be the spokesman for Obama's Florida campaign, who said, "Getting lectured by the McCain-Palin ticket on the economy is laughable. McCain's plan is just four more years of Bush's failed economic policies that have led us to this financial crisis."

The News-Press.com offers 23 photos from the event, one of which shows a huge tube of lipstick being handed to Palin from a supporter.

.

Presidential Race, Black Racism, and White Racism

Since the beginning of the race for the White House, there has been a question on everyone's mind, an elephant in the room so to speak; Could Barack Obama, a black man, win the White House? The White House, identified by its beautiful majestic white architecture is more white than just in its shade of paint, it has been dominated by white Europeans since before it was white washed form its traditional eggshell color. This burning question has fueled a large race debate that seems to have taken racial relations back a decade or two. And not back to the days of slavery, but more like to what was deemed as a new form of racism in the 1990's.

A recent poll done by Stanford University shows that the stereotype associated with blacks is still held by some whites. The poll studied a result from a group of people, then isolated the white opinion. After reading this poll I was left with a bad taste in my mouth. They only studied the white opinion separately from the group? This is like asking a loaded question, there is just no way you can answer yes or no to the typical "Do you still beat your wife?"

With that idiocy aside, the findings are interesting. It seems 1 in 5 whites can identify blacks with these stereotypes; lazy, violent, boastful, complaining, and irresponsible. This information of course sent a firestorm across the internet with blacks using the newest study as proof that Barack Obama cannot possibly win the White House because whites are too racist. According to some discussion on Fox News even his campaign says if he does not win it will be due to racism. But this is not a new theme. Just a month ago a writer at slate.com claimed Racism is the only reason Obama might lose.

What the Yahoo-Ap news article did not tell you was that a study using these same typecasts were used in a poll for a book published in the 1990's called The Scar of Race. The book was written by a political science professor a Stanford, Paul M. Sinderman, and Thomas Piazza a Research Specialist and Manager of Technical Services, Survey Research Center, University of California, Berkeley. An article written on FrontPageMagazine.com in 1998 relayed some interesting information found in the book.
In The Scar of Race, authors Paul M. Sniderman and Thomas Piazza note that blacks hold critical views about members of their own race. The authors asked both blacks and whites to respond to a series of statements: "Blacks are aggressive or violent"; "blacks are boastful"; "blacks are complaining"; "blacks are lazy"; and "blacks are irresponsible." Blacks answered "yes" more often than whites!

Interesting dontcha think?

Oh where do I begin? Well first of all, lets flip this. If John McCain loses will it be due to all the blacks who are only going to vote for Barack Obama because of the color of his skin, and the whites who are so self loathing that they are going to vote for Barack only because he is black? Is that racism anything people are worried about? Or do blacks get a free pass on this one?

This double standard is just about as divisive and infantile as anything I have ever been subject to in my entire life. In essence black America is throwing the entire country under the bus and make us look like racists in front of the entire world if Barack Obama doesn't win? This election is neck and neck, one of the closest races I have ever paid attention to that is for sure. How could anyone say that racism is going to be a deciding factor? Especially considering that the same poll they are turning to as yet another piece of evidence of their victimization also says :

Does the fact that if elected, Barack Obama would be the first black president of the United States make you more likely to vote for him, less likely to vote for him, or does it not affect your vote either way?

All Respondents
More likely to vote for him 9
Less likely to vote for him 9
Not affect your vote either way 82
Refused / Not Answered 0

Whites Only
More likely to vote for him 6
Less likely to vote for him 10
Not affect your vote either way 84
Refused / Not Answered 0

Yes whites are 2% higher than the entirety to say that their vote will not be influenced by Barack Obama being black. So basically that means, the majority of whites just don't care about race in this election. Just because a few stereotypes are representative of blacks in the minds of some means nothing, especially if you consider that blacks hold themselves in that esteem. So whether whites are being racist, or blacks are being racist, you know what? It doesn't matter because nobody can pin point what people are being racist about. Why would we accuse blacks of racism for wanting to vote for Barack Obama because he is black? Wouldn't we say they are voting for someone they know identifies with them. So are we going to disdain whites for voting for McCain, even if it is because he is white?

So lemme tell you what is, peoples is peoples.

That's it, peoples is peoples, and if you cannot grasp that little nugget of wisdom from the Muppets Take Manhattan it means simply this.

Peoples is peoples.

Think about it, you'll get it.

Who Is Behind The Sarah Palin Smears?

Rusty over at Jawa Report has done a bang up, no holds barred, investigative piece following the trail of the Sarah Palin smears and where that trail leads him is pretty damning.

Extensive research was conducted by the Jawa Report to determine the source of smears directed toward Republican Vice Presidential candidate Sarah Palin. Those smears included false allegations that she belonged to a secessionist political party and that she has radical anti-American views.

Our research suggests that a subdivision of one of the largest public relations firms in the world most likely started and promulgated rumors about Sarah Palin that were known to be false. These rumors were spread in a surreptitious manner to avoid exposure.

It is also likely that the PR firm was paid by outside sources to run the smear campaign. While not conclusive, evidence suggests a link to the Barack Obama campaign. Namely:

  • Evidence suggests that a YouTube video with false claims about Palin was uploaded and promoted by members of a professional PR firm.
  • The family that runs the PR firm has extensive ties to the Democratic Party, the netroots, and are staunch Obama supporters.
  • Evidence suggests that the firm engaged in a concerted effort to distribute the video in such a way that it would appear to have gone viral on its own. Yet this effort took place on company time.
  • Evidence suggests that these distribution efforts included actions by at least one employee of the firm who is unconnected with the family running the company.
  • The voice-over artist used in this supposedly amateur video is a professional.
  • This same voice-over artist has worked extensively with David Axelrod's firm, which has a history of engaging in phony grassroots efforts, otherwise known as "astroturfing."
  • David Axelrod is Barack Obama's chief media strategist.
  • The same voice-over artist has worked directly for the Barack Obama campaign.

This suggests that false rumors and outright lies about Sarah Palin and John McCain being spread on the internet are being orchestrated by political partisans and are not an organic grassroots phenomenon led by the left wing fringe. Our findings follow.



Right after that they dig deep into certain videos, which according to Ace of Spades, as soon as Rusty's investigative piece came out, the site with those videos, shut down suspiciously.

On to the Jawa Report's piece...it is long, he follows each and every trail and it is a must read for anyone who wants to see the "anatomy of a smear."

The major media could learn a thing or two from Rusty at Jawa Report, about getting out there, doing some actual research and reporting the news instead of trying to hide from it and sweep it under the rug.

.

Sunday, September 21, 2008

SFGate In Regards to Sarah Palin Haters

A must read especially considering the source.

SFGate teaser:

That is obvious from the anguish, indeed the fury, of feminist commentators. They are so intemperate in their criticism that they are incoherent.


Short and sweet because I think it should be read in it's entirety.

Go. Read.

.

Warrant Served In The Sarah palin Email Hacking Case

Tennessean.com:

The FBI is stepping up its investigation into the hacking of personal e-mail of Vice Presidential candidate Sarah Palin by a University of Tennessee student.

A person who identified himself as a witness tells WBIR-Knoxville that agents with the FBI served a federal search warrant at the Fort Sanders residence of David Kernell early Sunday morning.

David Kernell is the son of Mike Kernell, a Democratic state representative from Memphis.

Laura Sweeney, a Department of Justice spokesperson, confirmed there has been "investigatory activity" in Knoxville regarding the Palin case, but she said there are no publicly available search warrants, and no charges have been filed.


More at WBIR.

Now they need to go after every single site that knowingly published the the emails, contacts and photos that were illegally obtained.

Sites like Huffington Post, America Blog and Gawker, just to name a few.

More at Gateway Pundit.

Previous:

Sarah Palin Private Email Account Hacked By Scumbags

Palin Email Hacker Says Nothing Incriminating In Any Emails



.

Is Sarah Palin America's Princess Di?


Is Sarah Palin, the moose-hunting, gun toting, America loving, mother of five, GOP vice presidential candidate, America's princess Diana?

It takes a couple readings to understand the UK's Daily Mail piece which states in their headline "Sarah Palin is as popular as Diana in the hearts of the American public," but the piece brings the comparison down to basics and while not all will agree, some might say it makes an interesting read.

Princess Diana was known as the people's Princess. She cared, she thought of people before she thought of politics and in the Daily Mail piece they point out how some of those not from America are seeing Sarah Palin and they are making the comparison between the two much talked about women.

Feminists have long stated multiple goals, many claiming their main objective was to see women treated equally as men are in every aspect of world affairs.

Clinton feminists and supporters who have come out in support of Sarah Palin on the John McCain/Palin ticket, state they are multiple issue voters that can disagree with Palin on specific issues yet appreciate a working mother, that can handle a demanding a career and raise a family at the same time.

Obama supporters that are feminists seem, to many, to focus only on specific issues such as abortion, to which Palin is a strict opponent of, therefore many state that voting for Palin is voting against feminism.

The Daily Mail piece deals with different issues.

The pro-life, devoutly Christian, happily married mother-of-five has emerged from the political margins to become the most intriguing and divisive woman in today's America.

She has enraged the Left in general and feminists in particular at every turn. What infuriates them most is her rapid rise to the national stage and her ability, like Ronald Reagan before her, to talk to the people in a language they understand with a fundamentalist message many of them want to hear.


The point out Palin's ability to speak to every day Americans, those largely unheard in the political realm, as Diana spoke to and for the people of her country.

In their eyes, while the political elite seem to despise Palin, middle America sees her as a new, fresh face, a new voice, of someone that speaks for them, stands for them and will stand up for them.

They speak of kids skipping school, mothers taking days off of work so they can see her speak, chanting "Sarah, Sarah, Sarah, " and they point out it is likely that American women will be the deciding factor in the 2008 elections.

Women are traditionally more likely to vote than men. And recent polls show most women prefer the McCain/Palin ticket by a margin of anything up to 20 per cent.

One explanation is the Hillary factor. Disgruntled by Obama's rejection of Mrs Clinton, many of Hillary's female supporters, especially the swing voters, are switching to Palin.

Hillary had 10 million women vote for her in the Democratic primaries. There's a lot to play for - and Palin is playing them like a maestro.

Indeed, the Obama camp is so spooked by this shift in the female vote that it has started a frantic campaign to win them back.

They've bought wall-to-wall advertising airtime during women's TV programming, with Michelle Obama and Hillary Clinton herself spearheading the push.

Their problem is that they - like many liberal commentators - just can't fathom why Palin is so popular.

Daily Mail calls her a small town "gal" that has captured the imagination of the American public and has dominated the national conversation.

They point out when they were in Washington, how whether they were at hockey rinks, hair dressers, restaurants or bars, everyone was talking about Sarah Palin, whether they loved her or hated her, she was dominating the conversation.

Each publication had its own take on what she represents. Here was 'Serious Sarah', carrying the hopes of a nation on her shoulders; here was 'Mom Sarah', carrying her Down's syndrome baby Trig on her arm; here was 'Salacious Sarah', dogged by the scandal of her unmarried daughter's pregnancy and claims that two of her teenagers have taken drugs.

These are the complex contradictions that Palin projects - the power-dressed working mum who is pro-life, pro-family, pro-women and, above all, pro-traditional Americans.

Even her mishaps have become her strengths. The moment she arrived on the national scene, she admitted: 'I'm not perfect, my family's not perfect.' And, boy, was she right.


The article points out that no much how much mud the "Democrats" throw at Palin, none seems to stick as the personal attacks actually end up working in her favor.

In Palin they see optimism; in Obama cynicism. In Palin they see pride in her country; in Obama an element of shame.


They also quote an analyst stating, "When most politicians talk of tackling corruption or inefficiency in their own party, it is usually just that - all talk. She's full frontal, she takes no prisoners and has made enemies as a result." They go on to say when she says she will take on the "good ole boy network" she means it because she has done it in her own state of Alaska.

The article continues to attempt to explain what has been called the "Palin phenomenon," but their bottom line is they see a comparison between her rise to popularity and taking over the political conversation, and the way Princess Diana captured the imagination and hearts of people across the world.

There is much more to the Daily Mail article, which should be read in full, but there basic premise as implied in their title is guaranteed to have some disagree with it and wave it away while others sit back and think of everything that Princess Diana stood for and think about the comparisons and ask themselves if they are valid.

Either way, some American's may find the view from across the pond to be interesting while others will surely decry they know not what they speak of.

What cannot be argued is that it is not only Americans trying to determine what to make of Sarah Palin, but those around the world are also curious and making their own determinations.

COMMENTARY.

Personally, I find the comparison kind of weird, we do not have royalty here in America and I do not see Palin and some sort of Princess.

With that said, I can see how her speaking as one of the people, does compare to how Princess Diana presented herself.

I just find it quite interesting to see how other countries are looking at palin and making these determinations for themselves.

.

Battleground State Ohio: John McCain Leads Barack Obama

In a poll which was a collaboration among Ohio's largest daily newspapers, they find that in the battleground state of Ohio, John McCain takes the lead.


The first Ohio Newspaper Poll, a collaboration among Ohio's largest daily newspapers, shows Republican Sen. John McCain with a lead over Democrat Sen. Barack Obama in Ohio and provides a snapshot of the political landscape in a state that both campaigns regard as must-win territory.

The survey of Buckeye State voters shows McCain with a 6 percentage point lead, but the poll's margin of error means the race could be much closer. And the potential for change is great: 19 percent say they could change their minds.


There are other nuances in the report but Ohio is critical in this election as is Florida and in both states John McCain holds the lead in poll averages.

This election will come down to certain crucial states and these two are are part of that.

.

Biden On Obama: 'if he tries to fool with my Beretta, he’s got a problem.'

(NRA Mailing- CLICK TO ENLARGE TO READ)

In Castlewood, Virginia , at an annual fishfry, Joe Biden told the United Mine Workers that if Barack Obama tried to take Biden's guns away, then Obama's "got a problem."

Neither Barack Obama nor Joe Biden have a gun control record that will soothe gun owners across America, with Biden himself receiving an F by the NRA, indicating a pro-gun control voting record, not a gun advocacy record.

Barack Obama's voting record on gun control issues is pretty clear.

* Ok for states & cities to determine local gun laws. (Apr 2008)
* FactCheck: Yes, Obama endorsed Illinois handgun ban. (Apr 2008)
* Respect 2nd Amendment, but local gun bans ok. (Feb 2008)
* Provide some common-sense enforcement on gun licensing. (Jan 2008)
* 2000: cosponsored bill to limit purchases to 1 gun per month. (Oct 2007)
* Concealed carry OK for retired police officers. (Aug 2007)
* Stop unscrupulous gun dealers dumping guns in cities. (Jul 2007)
* Keep guns out of inner cities--but also problem of morality. (Oct 2006)
* Bush erred in failing to renew assault weapons ban. (Oct 2004)
* Ban semi-automatics, and more possession restrictions. (Jul 1998)
* Voted NO on prohibiting lawsuits against gun manufacturers. (Jul 2005)

Mailings from the Nation Rifle Association (NRA) have warned their members of Obama's prior voting record when dealing with the Second Amendment and Joe Biden was trying to allay those fears in an area where people take their Second Amendment rights very seriously.

(NRA Mailing- CLICK TO ENLARGE TO READ)


The New York Times' Caucus and Fox News reports Biden's words.

One of rural Democrats’ biggest fears about Obama? That he’ll come after the Second Amendment. Not so, said Biden — and he’d better not try.

“I guarantee you, Barack Obama ain’t taking my shotguns, so don’t buy that malarkey,” Biden said angrily. “They’re going to start peddling that to you.”

“I got two, if he tries to fool with my Beretta, he’s got a problem.”


The NRA has taken an active part in informing the public of what they perceive Obama stands for in relation to the Second Amendment.

They have created a website called "GunbaNObama" website in which they list a number of reasons they believe gun owners should vote against Barack Obama, even making sure to remind people of Obama's April words in San Francisco which were recorded and hit the headlines immediately after when he said, "So it’s not surprising then that they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren’t like them….”

The NRA has multiple pages regarding Obama and on their front page they have a link saying, "Obama's Deceptive Ad", when you click it and page within a page opens which discusses a radio ad the NRA claims is "designed to deceive huntsmen, sportsmen and gun owners."

Of course the ad doesn't mention that Obama supports things like a ban on handguns, an extension of the Clinton gun ban, a 500 percent increase on taxes on firearms and ammunition, a ban on the most common hunting ammunition, a ban on gun stores located within five miles of a school or a park, and prosecuting people who use a gun for self defense in their home.


The NRA has pulled out all the stops and Biden's words might be comforting to those that have not taken a look at Biden's and Obama's records of voting.

Words are one thing, but as a gun owner I can honestly say, we choose to look at both of these politician's prior voting records to see how their votes match or do not match their rhetoric.

.

Protesting Barack Obama

Looks like the golden child is finally being called on his lies, by more than just Fact Check .org, as I wrote about earlier.

Hat Tip to Stop The ACLU, we see Obama doesn't like being questioned which is perhaps the reason he backed down, went against his "anywhere, anytime" statement for townhall meetings.

He doesn't like being called out on his lies and goes as far as to yell at old ladies when they dare question "The One."

Very short video below:



Last week, Obama had blacks in Coral Gables, Florida, interrupting his speech with signs and protests, some signs saying "Blacks against Obama." (Video here)

In Jacksonville Florida, he has people protesting him by air, with a plane flying over his head with a banner that read, "Raising taxes is not patriotic.”

That was in reference to Joe Biden's comment about how paying taxes is patriotic.

The New Hampshire Union Leader Paper has a blistering editorial calling him out as a liar as well.

Yet here he is violating his own professed standards. This is not the Barack Obama so many voters in New Hampshire and elsewhere thought they knew. But it is the real Barack Obama. For despite his rhetoric, he is in fact campaigning so dishonestly that even The Washington Post and The New York Times have called him on it. Which means that he is in practice no different from those regular politicians against whom his entire campaign has been built.


Read the whole thing, they have quite a list.

Looks like people are finally waking up to what Barack Obama really is.

A liar.

Finally the masked man is being revealed.

.

Fact Check Calls Barack Obama Out On More Social Security Lies

Barack Obama is keeping those researchers over at Fact Check .org pretty busy lately and yesterday they called him out on falsehoods and "rank misrepresentation", in a piece they called "Scaring Seniors" and today they say "Obama personally fed senior citizens another whopper," on Saturday.

Summary.

In Daytona Beach, Obama said that "if my opponent had his way, the millions of Floridians who rely on it would've had their Social Security tied up in the stock market this week." He referred to "elderly women" at risk of poverty, and said families would be scrambling to support "grandmothers and grandfathers."

That's not true. The plan proposed by President Bush and supported by McCain in 2005 would not have allowed anyone born before 1950 to invest any part of their Social Security taxes in private accounts. All current retirees would be covered by the same benefits they are now.

Obama would have been correct to say that many workers under age 58 would have had some portion of their Social Security benefits affected by the current market turmoil – if they had chosen to participate. And market drops would be a worry for those who retire in future decades. But current retirees would not have been affected.


They use words like "highly distorted", "whopper", all making it clear that Obama is directly, deliberately, lying to the elderly to confuse them.

Read the whole thing...

.

Saturday, September 20, 2008

Flags of Our Fathers: On Patriotism and Lies



On one fundamental maxim all professional propagandists would agree: It you repeat a lie often enough and loudly enough, sooner or later it becomes accepted truth. Considering the long ignoble record of relentless and vociferous attacks by the Communist-inspired left on our American history, it's a wonder that there can be any true American patriots left.

Immediately following World War Two, and up until this present hour, we have been, and are still being, assaulted with vicious and totally unsubstantiated lies and distortions about the history of our great nation. These outrageous falsifications have been repeated so often by so many that they have indeed become accepted truth. What is worse, however, is the almost total lack of counter arguments and effective rebuttals. The voices of truth, that is, the voices of dissent, have been so weak and limp-wristed that they have been all but useless against this cynical onslaught of manipulative slander. To be an unabashed patriot in this present atmosphere of self-loathing and eagerly embraced guilt is to be an extremist, an ignorant, chest-thumping redneck. The cynics hold the high ground now: they have raised their flag of anti-Americanism, and the knowledgeable world applauds.

The simple patriotism of even the most sincere and committed patriot amongst us is invariably tainted by these insidious lies. We love America, we say to ourselves, despite its failings, despite its long list of tragic and monumental blunders. None of us is perfect, we say. But America comes closer than most. And, besides, we have for the most part admitted our past mistakes and, where possible, made reparations, or at the very least issued heartfelt apologies to our purported victims.

This, my friends, is how deeply we've been penetrated by the enemy's successful propaganda assault. We have embraced their ingenious lies and incorporated them into our national narrative. Seldom, if ever, do we take the time to actually investigate them. After all, we have received these lessons from some of our most credible sources, our teachers, our politicians, our historians and our media. Why should we doubt them?

The tedious litany of America's bloody blunders, that well-publicized list of American mistakes and American atrocities is just too long to attack, item by item, here in this limited space. But perhaps by tackling just a few of the most popular lies in our anti-Americanist's propaganda arsenal we can hopefully raise some doubts about the veracity of some of the others. Maybe, with just a little research into this worthy subject, we can learn -- as I have learned -- to love America because of our history, and not despite it.

Read more at Radarsite

Video- Barack Obama's Support of Infanticide

Jill Stanek, speaks in the video below, was a nurse that witnessed cases of infanticide, babies born alive after failed abortions, and she testified on a national level about how those children were put in a room, alone, and left to die.

Watch the video to know the type of person Barack Obama really is when he voted, three times, against the Born Alive Act, which would have forced care for children born alive after a failed abortion attempt.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VIdbYjmbFzo




This video has been watched, as of right now, more than 1,564,621 times and anyone that could vote for Barack Obama after understanding that he supports infanticide...deserves what they get.

I had trouble embedding the video above, so I have found another where Stanek speaks to Fox News about Barack Obama being the only Senator to speak out against the Born Alive Act, which would make it mandatory to give these babies born alive medial care.

That video is embedded below, but I truly suggest you watch the one linked above as well.



.

Fact Check.Org: Obama Ad Against McCain A 'Rank Misrepresentation'

FactCheck.org says the new Obama-Biden ad claiming John McCain's Social Security (SS) plan would cut SS benefits in half is a "falsehood" and a "rank misrepresentation" which would scare senior citizens who rely on SS checks.

According to Fact Check in an article titled "Scaring Seniors" the "promise" ad says John McCain voted for privatizing social security and quotes him as saying he "campaigned in support of President Bush's proposal."

That is true, as shown by John McCain saying in March of 2008, "I'm totally in favor of personal savings accounts and I think they are an important opportunity for young workers. I campaigned in support of President Bush's proposal and I campaigned with him, and I did town hall meetings with him."

The ad implies that Bush's plan bets the whole lot of Social Security funds on unstable stocks. In fact, it would have "privatized" only a small portion of Social Security taxes that Americans could have invested in private accounts, if they chose to do so.


The "rank misrepresentation" come in when the Obama ad claims it would cut "benefits in half."

Fact check states:

Nobody now getting benefits, or even close to retirement, would have seen any reduction in benefits or cost-of-living adjustments under the plan Bush proposed in April, 2005. What Bush proposed – in addition to creating private Social Security accounts – was to hold down the growth of benefits received by those retiring in the future. He embraced a proposal for "progressive price indexing" of future benefits. This would have been a "cut" only in relation to what the current formula would produce for future retirees, assuming that taxes are increased sufficiently to keep the system going.

The "price indexing" would have tied the growth to the rate of price inflation, rather than to the growth of wages, as is the case now. Wages have historically risen faster than prices, so the current wage-indexed system pushes benefits for future retirees up faster than the rate of inflation. The "progressive" part would have held down the growth only for higher-income and middle-income workers, while allowing benefits for lower-income workers to rise in line with the current wage-based formula.


Fact Check goes on to point out the claims in the new ad attempts to use a report by the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities written by Jason Furman, with Furman now being one of Obama's top economic advisers, then finds the report they are documenting to make their claims actually is "quite different from what the ad claims."

They end their fact checking by saying ads like the Obama-Biden as "misinform" the public and only make the job of fixing the system more difficult.

.

AP-Yahoo News: Race And Competency Drive White Democrats Away From Obama

With Rasmussen now showing Barack Obama with a one percentage point lead against John McCain, a new AP-Yahoo News poll finds that racial bias and competency doubts could cost Barack Obama the White House.

Rasmussen shows Barack Obama taking a one percentage point lead against John McCain for the first time in a week-and-a-half, bringing the polling figures back to where they were before both the Democratic and Republican Conventions were held.

Showing a disconnect from the polling results when issues of race and competency are specifically asked, a new AP-Yahoo News poll finds the two issues steering white Democratic voters away from Barack Obama.

Race.

The poll set out to determine why Obama and McCain were locked in such a tight race given the political landscape this election season which would suggest Obama should be much farther ahead.

The poll was conducted in conjunction with Stanford University and finds one third of white Democratic voters hold negative views towards blacks, but that 58 percent of those will back Barack Obama.

More than a third of all white Democrats and independents — voters Obama can't win the White House without — agreed with at least one negative adjective about blacks, according to the survey, and they are significantly less likely to vote for Obama than those who don't have such views.


They find that 70 percent of self identified Democrats support Barack Obama while 85 percent of Republicans support John McCain. The survey also included racial attitudes among Independents stating they are likely to help determine the outcome of the 2008 election.

Given a choice of several positive and negative adjectives that might describe blacks, 20 percent of all whites said the word "violent" strongly applied. Among other words, 22 percent agreed with "boastful," 29 percent "complaining," 13 percent "lazy" and 11 percent "irresponsible." When asked about positive adjectives, whites were more likely to stay on the fence than give a strongly positive assessment.

Among white Democrats, one third cited a negative adjective and, of those, 58 percent said they planned to back Obama.


The surveys methodology was geared to bypass what is commonly referred to as the Bradley effect which many, including Democratic strategists and lawmakers believe the recent polls are plagued , by as was reported recently by The Telegraph.

The Bradley effect is named for black Democrat Tom Bradley, who lost the California governor’s race in 1982 even though he was ahead in the polls.

It refers to a tendency on the part of white voters to tell pollsters that they are undecided or likely to vote for a Black candidate, when, on election day, they vote for his/her white opponent.

To bypass that effect, the AP-Yahoo News poll interviewed people online after randomly selecting and screening them over the phone. They used this method as is explained in the article because numerous studies have found people are more likely to report their embarrassing behaviors and in this case, biases, when answering questions via the computer rather than speaking with a stranger on the phone.

Among white independents, racial stereotyping is not uncommon. For example, while about 20 percent of independent voters called blacks "intelligent" or "smart," more than one third latched on the adjective "complaining" and 24 percent said blacks were "violent."

Nearly four in 10 white independents agreed that blacks would be better off if they "try harder."


The survey also attempted to sort out the impact of a "huge swath of variables" such as race, ideology, party identification, the hunger for change and the sentiments of Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton's backers.

Competency.

The survey also concluded race is not the biggest factor for what is "driving Democrats and independents away from Obama," but instead it is the issue of competency.

More than a quarter of all Democrats expressed doubt that Obama can bring about the change they want, and they are likely to vote against him because of that.

Three in 10 of those Democrats who don't trust Obama's change-making credentials say they plan to vote for McCain.


Clinton Supporters.

They found 59 percent of white Clinton supporters stated they wanted Obama to be president, with 17 percent of her white supporters saying they will vote for John McCain

Among white Democrats, Clinton supporters were nearly twice as likely as Obama backers to say at least one negative adjective described blacks well, a finding that suggests many of her supporters in the primaries — particularly whites with high school education or less — were motivated in part by racial attitudes.

While the report from the AP-Yahoo news focused mainly on the racial divide they do state the larger issue influencing Democrats and Independents is the issue of competency.

The poll has a sampling error of plus or minus 2.1 percentage points.

.

Democrats Threatened Jewish Groups Over Palin Invite To UN Rally

Groups organized a rally outside the UN to protest Iran's Ahmadinejad, they invited politicians from both sides of the aisle. Clinton canceled upon hearing Palin would attend. Democrats threatened the Jewish Groups, forcing them to disinvite Palin.

CBS2 has a Democratic politician on record with the story of why Sarah Palin's invitation was rescinded after Hillary Clinton pulled out of the event upon hearing that Palin was also invited and planned to attend the rally to protest Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad speaking at the UN, with one Democratic lawmaker calling it "McCarthyism."

Once Clinton canceled and announced she would not attend according to the report, the "axes were out for Palin" and the Jewish Groups which organized the event were told their tax exempt status would be jeopardized if Palin attended but Hillary Clinton or Democratic vice presidential candidate, Joe Biden did not.

CBS 2 spoke to Assemblyman Dov Hikind, Democrat from Brooklyn, who said, "This is insulting. This is embarrassing, especially to Gov. Palin, to me and I think it should be to every single New Yorker."

Hikind goes on to to declare, "It's an absolute shame that this has happened. To threaten organizations … to threaten the Conference of Presidents that if you don't withdraw the invitation to Gov. Palin we're going to look into your tax exempt status … that's McCarthyism."

Hillary Clinton refused to answer any questions about it when CBS 2's Lou Young asked her about it on Thursday, brushing right past her without answering.

Bob Kunst of Defenders.net is a Democrat fed up and states, "I'm absolutely appalled at the behavior of the Democrats. I'm a Democrat and for the first time in my life I'm going to vote Republican. I can't take it anymore."

The Democrats, using Hillary Clinton, deliberately manipulated an event that should have been non-partisan with members from both sides of the political aisle standing up with the Jewish Groups at this rally, pulled Clinton for no other reason than to claim it was then partisan because Clinton chose not to attend, then threatened the Groups to assure themselves Palin could not attend.

That is pathetic and low, even for them.

Yourish.com states it beautifully:


That’s not a political party pressuring groups to do something. That’s outright break-your-kneecap, Mafia-style blackmail threats.

In fact, those are precisely the kinds of tactics that the Jewish groups will be protesting on Monday. We just never expected them from the Democrats.


That is what the Deocratic Party has become and I cannot blame Kunst one iota for leaving the party and now voting Republican.

.

Friday, September 19, 2008

An Email Exchange on the ACLU

Original email I received:

Dear Jay
I probably have some agreement with you that the ACLU takes seperation of church and state way too far.I don't see that a prayer at a graduation is any violation of a so-called seperation of church and state.Jay my problem arises when we look at some of the ultra conservative ideas to expand we have seen lately from the Bush Administration when it comes to shredding our Fourth Amendment and on those issues I'm thankful for the ACLU.In addition with our economy going into a tailspin in part because of the supply-side economics and sillly idea that the markets can regulate themselves of BUsh and MCCain.What I"m trying to say Jay is that the GOP and far right wing pro corporate agenda of the right is almost as sickening as some on the hyper secular left that you talk about.Look we are in a mess Jay, and its not democrats its the 6 years of GOP policy from 2000-2006 so when you combine your rehetoric against the ACLU with rhetoric attacking Obama and complimenting Bush and McCain you have destroy your credibility.TThere are many on the left who are not part of the secular left and would have some agreement with you but any effort to join the GOP team and group together absolutely destroys your credibility and doesn't help our cause to fight for more relisgous liberties and unlike you something i cherish "civil liberties.Travis


My response:

I'm gonna guess that you are a conservative leaning libertarian. I could be wrong, with the way you talk about the "right wing" though. However, I proudly call myself a conservative, and embarrassingly call myself a Republican. It isn't about party. I don't disagree with everything the ACLU does. I just think they are a fraud and dangerously misguided far to the left. I believe in civil liberties. I just think the ACLU take those liberties too far, to a dangerous level. Their advocacy of having child molesters live across the street from playgrounds and elementary schools is too far for me. Their advocacy that looking at child porn should be freedom of speech is too far. Their hypocrisy in fighting against listening in to phone calls to known terrorist over privacy issues while keeping a database of their member's personal financial history is too far. Their attacks on free speech for Christians are too far, and on top of that hypocrisy they have restricted their own board member's speech. I don't want to stop the defending of the bill of rights. I want to stop the perversion of the Constitution. I also want to stop taxpayer funding paying the ACLU's cases they convince left wing judges of, that the majority of American taxpayers don't agree with. I'm tired of these legal groups destroying the foundation of our Constitution. If homosexuals want equal rights, then convince enough people to amend the Constitution like they did for abolishing slavery. They only hurt their cause when they convince judges to push it on a population not ready to accept it. Then they only get reactions from politicians ready to represent the will of the people who put Constitutional amendments to ban such things before the people. The people react, just as you would expect, and it makes everything that much harder. They hurt their own cause by going the route of the judiciary. The ACLU is a partisan organization that should not receive any tax exemption as they do. They separate their organization into two so they can lobby and play the courts. They are evil.


Should I have said more? I'll update this post if and when I get a response. In the meantime, chime in with your responses.

I Accuse...








"Since they dared, I too will dare. The truth I will say, because I promised to say it; if justice, regularly seized, did not do it, full and whole."

J'Accuse...! Emile Zola




We asked: Will the most damaging Obama scandal of them all be buried alive?
And from the entire mainstream media we received our unequivocal answer: Yes.



Did Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama attempt to dally in U.S. foreign and military policy during his first trip to Iraq in July? According to Iraqi Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari in Amir Taheri’s op-ed in Monday’s New York Post, Obama used his trip to privately lobby Iraqi government officials to delay an agreement that would reduce the number of American soldiers in Iraq, while at the same time publicly calling for a unilateral withdrawal.

- Obama’s Questionable Diplomacy in Iraq
From Pajamas Media
September 16, 2008 - by Bob Owens


This could be, should be, the biggest story of the campaign.
This more than any other scandal, or rumor of scandal should be the end of Barack Hussein Obama. However -- and this is a huge 'However' -- will the media give it the attention it so obviously deserves? Or will they bury it under a mass of propaganda and lies? Or, worse still, will they just try to ignore it? This is going to be a test of wills. The will of the American people versus the will of the media elite and the Internationalist, anti-Americanist Obama crowd.
This should be, must be the most important story in this election. If we are to stand a chance of keeping our great country free and American, we simply cannot allow this monumental scandal to be swept under the rug.



I accuse...the major television networks of either gross dereliction of duty, or willful obfuscation in the suppression of this outrageous scandal.

I accuse...the major print media of either gross dereliction of duty, or willful obfuscation in the suppression of this outrageous scandal.

I accuse...the Obama Campaign of willful obfuscation in the suppression of this outrageous scandal.

I accuse...the Democratic Party of willful obfuscation in the suppression of this outrageous scandal.

I accuse...the United States Congress of either gross dereliction of duty, or willful obfuscation in the suppression of this outrageous scandal.

Is this how it will happen? Is this how we will lose our country? Is this all it takes? Can we as a people be this easily manipulated ? Are we actually powerless to fight back? Are we going to just sit back and allow others to dictate what news stories will be covered and what news stories will be suppressed? Are we going to allow this cynical and heartless attempt to manipulate our brave military for the personal political gain of one ruthless politician to pass into oblivion without even a Congressional Inquiry? Has it really come to this? Because, if it has, if we as a people, as a country, can do nothing but meekly submit to the omnipotent will of one potential tyrant, then our great democratic experiment is finished, and we will justly deserve our awful fate. - rg


For the previous Radarsite articles on this subject see here and here and here

Bill Clinton 'Lavished Praise' On Sarah Palin, ' Mistake To Undere