2008 Presidential Election

Farrakhan out of the closet on support for Obama

2008-11-23T21:48:00.001-05:00

How Obama Got Elected... Interviews With Obama Voters

2008-11-18T12:04:00.001-05:00

Three Presidents and their dogs

2008-11-10T15:06:00.001-05:00

A True Veterans Day

2008-11-10T14:50:00.001-05:00

Obama Win Causes Obsessive Supporters To Realize How Empty Their Lives Are...

2008-11-07T13:34:00.001-05:00

Obama Win Causes Obsessive Supporters To Realize How Empty Their Lives Are

Voting Twice

2008-11-05T22:33:00.001-05:00

Obama Is Going To Pay For My Gas And Mortgage!!!

2008-11-04T21:02:00.001-05:00

Black Panther w/ Billy Club at Polling Place in Philly

2008-11-04T18:07:00.001-05:00

Security... haha

Obama Added To Mount Rushmore

2008-11-02T23:27:00.001-05:00

Spread The Wealth Around

2008-11-02T21:40:00.001-05:00

Ha ha!!!

537 Economists Say McCain's Economic Plan is Better For America Than Obama's

2008-11-02T00:59:00.002-04:00

We enthusiastically support John McCain's economic plan. It is a comprehensive, pro-growth, reform agenda. The reform focuses on the real economic problems Americans face today and will face in the future. And it builds on the core economic principles that have made America great.

His plan would control government spending by vetoing every bill with earmarks, implementing a constitutionally valid line-item veto, pausing non-military discretionary government spending programs for one year to stop their explosive growth and place accountability on federal government agencies.

His plan would keep taxes from rising, because higher tax rates are exactly the wrong policy to restore economic growth, especially at this time.

I can't fit the whole statement or all the signatures of the economists who signed it but visit the site below for a point by point discussion of both plans. The site also provides PDF's of the actual Economic Plans of the candidates. You owe it to yourself and your country to get educated on the facts...

http://www.economistsformccain.com/McCainStatement.html

Philip J. Berg/Michael Savage Interview (Part 1 of 2)

2008-11-02T00:39:00.001-04:00

Phil Berg on Michael Savage Show October 23, 2008 Part II - Obama Sued over Citizenship

2008-11-02T00:38:00.001-04:00

IOUSA (Byte Sized)

2008-11-01T12:43:00.001-04:00

60 Seats: Now That's Scary

2008-10-31T23:14:00.001-04:00

Obama Hasn't Done Anything Yet

2008-10-31T00:47:00.001-04:00

Gaza Man Works Phones for Obama

2008-10-30T12:25:00.001-04:00

Obama: I Chose My Friends Carefully... Including Marxists

2008-10-30T01:21:00.001-04:00

Obama Insistes That Everyone Vote EARLY... But Barack Always Seems To Be LATE!!

2008-10-29T13:10:00.001-04:00

Megyn Kelly vs. Bill Burton on Fox News coverage

2008-10-27T23:26:00.001-04:00

A Good Lesson on Obama's Weath Redistribution Plans

2008-10-27T20:27:00.002-04:00

Originally Posted on Bits & Pieces:

Yesterday on my way to lunch at Doe’s, I passed one of the homeless guys in that area, with a sign that read; “Vote Obama, I need the money.”

Once in the Doe’s my waiter had on a “Obama 08″ tee shirt. When the bill came, I decided not to tip the waiter and explained to him while he had given me exceptional service, that his tee shirt made me feel he obviously believes in Senator Obama’s plan to redistribute the wealth. I told him I was going to redistribute his tip to someone that I deemed more in need; the homeless guy outside. He stood there in disbelief and angrily stormed away.

I went outside, gave the homeless guy $3 and told him to thank the waiter inside, as I had decided he could use the money more. The homeless guy looked at me in disbelief but seemed grateful.

As I got in my truck, I realized this rather unscientific redistribution experiment had left the homeless guy quite happy for the money he did not earn, but the waiter was pretty angry that I gave away the money he did earn.

Well, I guess this redistribution of wealth is going to take a while to catch on with those doing the work.

Biden Bans Philly Station For "Ambush Journalism"

2008-10-27T20:02:00.001-04:00

What questions does the Obama Campaign find acceptable? Let's talk about the Philly's...

Newsmax Article: Hillary Backers Decry Massive Obama Vote Fraud in Primaries

2008-10-27T00:33:00.002-04:00

Newsmax: Maybe the truth about what Obama did in the Primary will finally come out.

Hillary Backers Decry Massive Obama Vote Fraud

Sunday, October 26, 2008 9:02 PM

By: Kenneth R. Timmerman

With accusations of voter registration fraud swirling as early voting begins in many states, some Hillary Clinton supporters are saying: “I told you so.”

Already in Iowa, the Obama campaign was breaking the rules, busing in supporters from neighboring states to vote illegally in the first contest in the primaries and physically intimidating Hillary supporters, they say.

Obama’s surprisingly strong win in Iowa, which defied all the polls, propelled his upstart candidacy to front-runner status. But Dr. Lynette Long, a Hillary supporter from Bethesda, Md, who has a long and respected academic career, believes Obama’s victory in Iowa and in twelve other caucus states was no miracle. “It was fraud,” she told Newsmax.

Dr. Long has spent several months studying the caucus and primary results.

“After studying the procedures and results from all fourteen caucus states, interviewing dozens of witnesses, and reviewing hundreds of personal stories, my conclusion is that the Obama campaign willfully and intentionally defrauded the American public by systematically undermining the caucus process,” she said.

In Hawaii, for example, the caucus organizers ran out of ballots, so Obama operatives created more from Post-its and scraps of paper and dumped them into ice cream buckets. “The caucuses ended up with more ballots than participants, a sure sign of voter fraud,” Dr. Long said.

In Nevada, Obama supporters upturned a wheelchair-bound woman who wanted to caucus for Hillary, flushed Hillary ballots down the toilets, and told union members they could only vote if their name was on the list of Obama supporters.

In Texas, more than 2,000 Clinton and Edwards supporters filed complaints with the state Democratic Party because of the massive fraud. The party acknowledged that the Obama campaign’s actions “amount to criminal violations” and ordered them to be reported to state and federal law enforcement, but nothing happened.

In caucus after caucus, Obama bused in supporters from out of state, intimidated elderly voters and women, and stole election packets so Hillary supporters couldn’t vote. Thanks to these and other strong-arm tactics, Obama won victories in all but one of the caucuses, even in states such as Maine where Hillary had been leading by double digits in the polls.

Obama’s win in the caucuses, which were smaller events than the primaries and were run by the party, not the states, gave him the margin of victory he needed to win a razor-thin majority in the delegate count going into the Democratic National Convention.

Without these caucus wins – which Dr. Long and others claim were based on fraud – Hillary Clinton would today be the Democrats’ nominee running against John McCain.

Citing a detailed report on the voting results and delegate accounts by accountant Piniel Cronin, “there were only four pledged delegates between Hillary and Obama once you discount caucus fraud,” Dr. Long said.

Dr. Long has compiled many of these eyewitness reports from the 14 caucus states in a 98 page single-spaced report, and in an interactive Web site: http://www.caucusanalysis.org.

ACORN involvement

The Obama campaign recently admitted that it paid an affiliate of ACORN, the controversial community organizer that Obama represented in Chicago, more than $832,00 for “voter turnout” work during the primaries. The campaign initially claimed the money had been spent on “staging, sound and light” and “advance work.”

ACORN is now under investigation by state and federal law enforcement in eleven states for voter registration fraud. ACORN workers repeatedly registered voters in the name of “Mickey Mouse,” and twice registered the entire starting line-up of the Dallas Cowboys – once in Nevada, and again in Minnesota.

A group that has worked with ACORN in the past registered a dead goldfish under the name “Princess Nudelman” in Illinois. When Beth Nudelman, a Democrat, was informed by reporters that her former pet was a registered voter, she said, “This person is a dead fish.”

ACORN was known for its “intimidation tactics,” says independent scholar Stanley Kurtz, a senior fellow with the Ethics and Public Policy Center in Washington, DC. who has researched Obama’s long-standing ties to the group.

Fully 30 percent of 1.3 million new voters ACORN claims to have registered this year are now believed to be illegitimate.

Dr. Long shared with Newsmax some of the emails and sworn affidavits she received from Hillary supporters who witnessed first-hand the thuggish tactics employed by Obama campaign operatives in Iowa and elsewhere.

Jeff, a precinct captain for Clinton from Davenport, Iowa, thought his caucus was in the bag for his candidate, until just minutes before the voting actually began.

“From 6-6:30 pm, it appeared as I had expected. Young, old males, females, Hispanics, whites, gay and lesbian friends arriving. Very heavily for Ms. Clinton, a fair amount for Edwards and some stragglers for Obama,” he said.

That makeup corresponded to what he had witnessed from many precinct walks he had made through local neighborhoods.

“My mind began to feel victory for my lady,’ he said. “THEN: at 6:50 pm, over 75 people of African-American descent came walking in, passed the tables and sat in the Obama section. I knew one of them from my canvassing. I knew another one who did not live in this precinct. And aside from 4 or 5 families that live on Hillandale Road, there are no other black people in this unusually white precinct. And one of those black couples were in my Hillary section,” he said.

Thanks to the last-minute influx of unknown Obama supporters, Obama won twice the number of delegates from the precinct as Hillary Clinton.

After it was over, “a very large bus was seen in the parking lot afterwards carrying these folks back” to Illinois, Jeff said.

Obama’s flagrant busing of out-of-state caucus participants from Illinois was so obvious that even Joe Biden – today his running mate, then his rival – pointed it out at the time.

At a campaign stop before the Jan. 3 caucus at the JJ Diner in Des Moines, Biden “said what we were all thinking when he got on stage and said, ‘Hello Iowa!’ and then turned to Barack’s crowd and shouted, ‘and Hello Chicago!’” another precinct captain for Hillary told Dr. Long.

Thanks to Illinois campaign workers bused across the border into Iowa, all the precincts in eastern Iowa went for Obama, guaranteeing his win in the caucuses, Dr. Long says.

Obama supporters were also bused into northeast Iowa from Omaha, Nebraska, where Obama campaign workers were seen handing out “i-pods and free stuff – t-shirts, clothes, shoes, and free meals” to students and people in homeless shelters,” according to eyewitness reports collected by Dr. Long.

In Iowa City, red and white chartered buses with Illinois license plates arrived from Illinois packed with boisterous African-American high school students, who came to caucus for Obama in Iowa after being recruited by Obama campaign workers.

2,000 complaints in Texas

In a change in the Democratic National Committee rules for this year’s election season, four states had caucuses and primaries: Washington, Nebraska, Idaho and Texas. “But Texas is the only one that counted both the caucus result and the primary result,” Dr. Long told Newsmax. “The others didn’t count the primary at all, calling it a ‘beauty contest.’”

Because caucuses are more informal, and can last hours, they tend to favor candidates with a strong ground operation or whose supporters use strong-arm tactics to intimidate their rivals.

“There is inherent voter disenfranchisement in the caucuses,” Dr. Long says. “Women are less likely to go to caucuses than men, because they don’t like the public nature of the caucus. The elderly are less likely to go to a caucus. People who work shifts can’t go if they work the night shift. And parents with young children can’t go out for four hours on a week night. All these people are traditionally Clinton supporters,” she said.

But Obama’s victories in the caucuses weren’t the result of better organization, Dr. Long insists. “It was fraud.”

In state after state, Hillary was leading Obama in the polls right up until the last minute, when Obama won a landslide victory in the caucuses.

The discrepancies between the polls and the caucus results were stunning, Dr. Long told Newsmax. The most flagrant example was Minnesota.

A Minnesota Public Radio/Humphrey Institute poll conducted just one week before the Feb. 5 caucus gave Hillary a 7-point lead over Obama, 40-33.

But when the Minnesota caucus results were counted, Obama won by a landslide, with 66.39 percent to just 32.23 percent for Hillary, giving him 48 delegates, as compared to 24 for Clinton.

“No poll is that far off,” Dr. Long told Newsmax.

Similar disparities occurred in 13 of 14 caucus states.

In Colorado and Idaho, Obama had a two-point edge over Hillary Clinton in the polls, but won by more than two to one in the caucuses, sweeping most delegates.

In Kansas, Hillary had a slight edge over Obama in the polls, but Obama won 74 percent of the votes in the caucus and most of the delegates. In nearly every state, he bested the pre-caucus polls by anywhere from 12 percent to more than 30 percent.

This year’s primary rules for the Democrats favored the caucus states over the primary states.

“Caucus states made up only 1.1 million (3 percent) of all Democratic votes, but selected 626 (15 percent) of the delegates,” says Gigi Gaston, a filmmaker who has made a documentary on the caucus fraud.

In Texas alone, she says, there were more than 2,000 complaints from Hillary Clinton and John Edwards supporters of Obama’s strong-arm tactics.

One Hillary supporter, who appears in Gaston’s new film, “We Will Not Be Silenced,” says she received death threats from Obama supporters after they saw her address in an on-line video she made to document fraud during the Texas caucus. “People called me a whore and a skank,” she said.

John Siegel, El Paso Area Captain for Hillary, says “some people saw outright cheating. Other people just saw strong-arm tactics. I saw fraud.”

Another woman, who was not identified in the film, described the sign-in process. “You’re supposed to sign your names on these sheets. The sheets are supposed to be controlled, and passed out – this is kind of how you maintain order. None of that was done. The sheets were just flying all over the place. You could put in your own names. You could add your own sheets or anything. It was just filled with fraud.”

Other witnesses described how Obama supporters went through the crowds at the caucus telling Hillary supporters they could go home because their votes had been counted, when in fact no vote count had yet taken place.

“I couldn’t believe this was happening,” one woman said in the film. “I thought this only happened in Third World countries.”

On election day in Texas, Clinton campaign lawyer Lyn Utrecht issued a press release that was widely ignored by the national media.

“The campaign legal hotline has been flooded with calls containing specific accusations of irregularities and voter intimidation against the Obama campaign,” she wrote. “This activity is undemocratic, probably illegal, and reflects a wanton disregard for the caucus process.”

She identified 18 separate precincts where Obama operatives had removed voting packets before the Clinton voters could arrive, despite a written warning from the state party not to remove them.

The hotline also received numerous calls during the day that “the Obama campaign has taken over caucus sites and locked the doors, excluding Clinton campaign supporters from participating in the caucus,” she wrote.

“There are numerous instances of Obama supporters filing out precinct convention sign-in sheets during the day and submitting them as completed vote totals at caucus. This is expressly against the rules,” she added.

But no one seemed to care.

Despite Clinton’s three-and-a-half point win in the Texas primary – 50.87 percent to 47.39 percent – Obama beat her in the caucus the same day by 56 to 43.7 percent, giving him a 38 to 29 advantage in delegates.

Dr. Linda Hayes investigated the results at the precinct level in three state Senate districts. Under the rules of the Texas Democratic Party, participants in the caucuses had to reside in the precinct where they were caucusing, and had to have voted in the Democratic primary that same day.

When she began to see the results coming in from the precincts that were wildly at variance with the primary results, “I could see that something was wrong,” Hayes said.

Dr. Hayes says she found numerous anomalies as she went through the precinct sign-in sheets.

“Many, many, many Obama people either came to the wrong precinct, they did not sign in properly, they did not show ID, or they did not vote that day.” And yet, their votes were counted.

In a letter to Rep. Lois Capps, a Clinton supporter calling himself “Pacific John” described the fraud he had witnessed during the caucuses.

“On election night in El Paso, it became obvious that the Obama field campaign was designed to steal caucuses. Prior to that, it was impossible for me to imagine the level of attempted fraud and disruption we would see,” he wrote.

“We saw stolen precincts where Obama organizers fabricated counts, made false entries on sign-in sheets, suppressed delegate counts, and suppressed caucus voters. We saw patterns such as missing electronic access code sheets and precinct packets taken before the legal time, like elsewhere in the state. Obama volunteers illegally took convention materials state-wide, with attempts as early as 6:30 am.”

The story of how Obama stole the Democratic Party caucuses - and consequently, the Democratic Party nomination - is important not just because it prefigures potential voter fraud in the November 4 presidential election, which is already under way.

It’s important because it fits a pattern that Chicago journalists and a few national and international commentators have noticed in all of the elections Obama has won in his career.

NBC correspondent Martin Fletcher described Obama’s first election victory - for Illinois state senate – in a recent commentary that appeared in the London Telegraph.

“Mr. Obama won a seat in the state senate in 1996 by the unorthodox means of having surrogates successfully challenge the hundreds of nomination signatures that candidates submit. His Democratic rivals, including Alice Palmer, the incumbent, were all disqualified,” Fletcher wrote.

Obama’s election to the U.S. Senate “was even more curious,” conservative columnist Tony Blankley writes in The Washington Times.

Citing an account that appeared in The Times of London, Blankley described how Obama managed to squeeze out his main Democratic rival, Blair Hull, after divorce papers revealed allegations that Hull had allegedly made a death threat to his former wife.

Then in the general election, “lightning struck again,” Blankley writes, when his Republican opponent, wealthy businessman Jack Ryan, was forced to withdraw in extremis after his divorce papers revealed details of his sexual life with his former wife.

Just weeks before the election, the Illinois Republican party called on Alan Keyes of Maryland to challenge Obama in the general election. Obama won a landslide victory.

“Mr. Obama’s elections are pregnant with the implications that he has so far gamed every office he has sought by underhanded and sordid means,” Blankley writes, while “the American media has let these extraordinary events simply pass without significant comment.”

Hillary Clinton supporters, belatedly, now agree.

Obama Bombshell Redistribution of Wealth Audio Uncovered

2008-10-27T00:03:00.001-04:00

"I'll Tell You Why You Shouldn't Vote For Obama!!!"

2008-10-23T22:42:00.001-04:00

Larry Grathwohl (Weather Underground member) Discusses Ayers' Plan

2008-10-23T22:19:00.001-04:00

Larry Grathwohl was an underground agent who infiltrated Bill Ayers’ Weather Undergound movement. Here he discusses what would happen next after they overthrow the USA government.

“…… And they were dead serious”.

So, do too many MSMers and Democrats still think that an affiliation for years with Bill Ayers is a harmless little thing?

Barney Frank: Plenty of rich people that we can tax

2008-10-21T22:39:00.001-04:00

This PUMA “Proudly” Endorses the McCain/Palin Ticket…

2008-10-21T13:57:00.001-04:00

From P.U.M.A. by PUMA Pundit

Ever since Hillary Clinton was thrown out of the race, I have been an undecided voter. I wasn't going to reward Barack Obama and the DNC with my vote, so I had a few other choices:
1) Simply not cast a vote for President
2) Write Hillary Clinton in
3) Vote for a third party candidate, Cynthia McKinney/Rosa Clemente of the Green Party came to mind
4) Vote for McCain/Palin

Ultimately, after months of deliberation and careful consideration, I decided to use my vote in the best way possible, and that is to vote for the McCain/Palin ticket.

Why did I choose McCain/Palin?

Well, here's why:

In John McCain we have a true patriot. A man who has time and time again put service to his country ahead of any personal considerations. Whether it was continuing in active duty despite nearly losing his life in the USS Foresstal fire, or refusing an early release from Vietnamese POW camp as a result of his father's high position in the Navy, John McCain served our country proudly, faithfully and unwaveringly.

Despite what were obvious opportunities to enter the private sector and engage in self service after leaving the Navy in 1981, John McCain chose to dedicate his time and energy to public service.

Even though he has always served as a Republican, John McCain has a track record of being one of the most moderate members of Congress, first as a member of the House, and later on as a member of the US Senate.

Time and time again, when forced to choose between the public good and party interest, John McCain had no qualms in standing with the people, challenging both the GOP Caucus in Congress and a GOP controlled White House in the process if the occasion demanded it.

He did this on the issue of Campaign Finance Reform, Immigration Reform and even in his support of President Clinton's nominees for the US Supreme Court, Stephen Breyer and Ruth Bader Ginsburg .

If he brings his life experience with him to the White House, I am sure he will make a fantastic President.

Of course supporting McCain for President also means supporting Sarah Palin for VIce-President. This I gladly do for a few reasons, the least of which is that in close to two decades of public service, Sarah has never shied away from taking positions which might not be deemed popular, but which she personally believed in.

While entrenched politicians served their personal interests, Sarah always put accountability, fiscal discipline and the needs of her constituents first. Whether it was cutting down wasteful spending, approving the Alaska Gas Pipeline, or decreasing reliance on earmarks while simultaneously increasing state revenue to $10 billion in 2008, it is no surprise that she has the highest approval rating of any of the nation's 50 governors.

Lastly, I know that a McCain/Palin administration shall preserve the American way of life, one where the individual and not the government is the fundamental force which drives all endeavor. An administration where wealth is not "spread" around by the state, but given voluntarily by those who have acquired it legally. They shall have an administration where people are not afraid to speak out for fear of being considered "enemies of the President", and most importantly an administration which respects the most fundamental characteristic of US Democracy, our right to vote, and actually have our votes counted. A McCain/Palin administration shall NOT view elections as commercial affairs where votes can not only be bought, but also manufactured at will, something that Barack Obama and Joe Biden obviously have no qualms with.

Ladies and gentlemen, on November 4th, I intend to PROUDLY cast my vote for John McCain/Sarah Palin, I encourage you to do so too.

A September to Remember

2008-10-20T18:19:00.001-04:00

It is vital we remember what it is like to have a nice guy who is unprepared to handle a crisis in the White House. It also is instructive to remember that it was John McCain who bucked the Republican leadership and pressed the issue of having the 9-11 Commission. That would not have happened without McCain’s intervention.

Just another uncomfortable fact

Here is what Joe Biden just said at a fundraiser yesterday:

“Mark my words,” the Democratic vice presidential nominee warned at the second of his two Seattle fundraisers Sunday. “It will not be six months before the world tests Barack Obama like they did John Kennedy. The world is looking. We’re about to elect a brilliant 47-year-old senator president of the United States of America. Remember I said it standing here if you don’t remember anything else I said. Watch, we’re gonna have an international crisis, a generated crisis, to test the mettle of this guy.”

“I can give you at least four or five scenarios from where it might originate,” Biden said to Emerald City supporters, mentioning the Middle East and Russia as possibilities. “And he’s gonna need help. And the kind of help he’s gonna need is, he’s gonna need you - not financially to help him - we’re gonna need you to use your influence, your influence within the community, to stand with him. Because it’s not gonna be apparent initially, it’s not gonna be apparent that we’re right.”

Not only will the next administration have to deal with foreign affairs issues, Biden warned, but also with the current economic crisis.

“Gird your loins,” Biden told the crowd. “We’re gonna win with your help, God willing, we’re gonna win, but this is not gonna be an easy ride. This president, the next president, is gonna be left with the most significant task. It’s like cleaning the Augean stables, man. This is more than just, this is more than – think about it, literally, think about it – this is more than just a capital crisis, this is more than just markets. This is a systemic problem we have with this economy.”

“I’ve forgotten more about foreign policy than most of my colleagues know, so I’m not being falsely humble with you. I think I can be value added, but this guy has it,” the Senate Foreign Relations chairman said of Obama. “This guy has it. But he’s gonna need your help. Because I promise you, you all are gonna be sitting here a year from now going, ‘Oh my God, why are they there in the polls? Why is the polling so down? Why is this thing so tough?’ We’re gonna have to make some incredibly tough decisions in the first two years. So I’m asking you now, I’m asking you now, be prepared to stick with us. Remember the faith you had at this point because you’re going to have to reinforce us.”

“There are gonna be a lot of you who want to go, ‘Whoa, wait a minute, yo, whoa, whoa, I don’t know about that decision’,” Biden continued. “Because if you think the decision is sound when they’re made, which I believe you will when they’re made, they’re not likely to be as popular as they are sound. Because if they’re popular, they’re probably not sound.”
Biden emphasized that the mountainous Afghanistan-Pakistan border is of particular concern, with Osama bin Laden “alive and well” and Pakistan “bristling with nuclear weapons.”
“You literally can see what these kids are up against, our kids in that region,” Biden said in recalling when his helicopter was forced down due to a snowstorm there. “The place is crawling with al Qaeda. And it’s real.”

“We do not have the military capacity, nor have we ever, quite frankly, in the last 20 years, to dictate outcomes,” he cautioned. “It’s so much more important than that. It’s so much more complicated than that. And Barack gets it.”

Just what should we expect? And what is it that the Obama administration will do that we may question? Hmmm.... could he be refering to something regarding Israel, maybe Pakistan, maybe a US Draft... who knows with Obama, but we can certainly trust him, right? I mean he's so straightforward and upfront with the people... yeah right!

2008-10-20T15:36:00.001-04:00

National Republican Trust PAC - License

2008-10-18T18:02:00.001-04:00

LOOK Who's Supporting Obama Now...

2008-10-17T23:50:00.001-04:00

Should Some People Not Vote

2008-10-17T19:43:00.001-04:00

John McCain Brings Down The House - Al Smith Dinner Part 1

2008-10-17T01:48:00.001-04:00

This is really funny...

John McCain Brings Down The House - Al Smith Dinner Part 2

2008-10-17T01:42:00.001-04:00

Fred Faces a Dirty Campaign

2008-10-17T01:29:00.001-04:00

Lynn Forester de Rothschild on Cavuto

2008-10-16T01:06:00.000-04:00

Shocking Development: Mrs. Obama decides enough is enough...

2008-10-15T23:51:00.002-04:00

Shocking development: Mrs Obama decides enough is enough: “My husband was born in Hawaii and adopted by his step father, does that make him unpatriotic; she asks”, on a direct telephone to API. Posted by africanpress on October 15, 2008

http://africanpress.wordpress.com/2008/10/15/shocking-development-mrs-obama-decides-enough-is-enough-my-husband-was-born-in-hawaii-and-adopted-by-his-step-father-does-that-make-him-unpatriotic-she-asks-on-a-direct-telephone-to-api/

Accusing API of colluding with American internet bloggers in an effort to bring down her husband, Mrs Obama said she decided to call API because of what she termed, API’s help to spread rumours created by American bloggers and other racist media outlets in their efforts to damage a black man’s name, saying she hopes African Media was mature enough to be in the front to give unwavering support to her husband, a man Africans should identify themselves with.

When API told her that our online news media was only relaying what the American Bloggers and other media outlets had discovered through their investigations, Mrs Obama was angered and she came out loud with the following: “African press International is supposed to support Africans and African-American view,” and she went to state that, “it is strange that API has chosen to support the racists against my husband. There is no shame in being adopted by a step father. All dirt has been thrown onto my husband’s face and yet he loves this country. My husband and I know that there is no law that will stop him from becoming the president, just because some American white racists are bringing up the issue of my husband’s adoption by His step father. The important thing here is where my husband’s heart is at the moment. I can tell the American people that My husband loves this country and his adoption never changed his love for this country. He was born in Hawaii, yes, and that gives him all the right to be an American citizen even though he was adopted by a foreigner; says Michelle Obama on telefon to API.”

This is a very interesting turn of events. The American man Dr Corsi was recently reported to have been arrested in Kenya because there was fear that he might reveal information on Obama when he wanted to hold a press conference in Nairobi.

The question now is why he was arrested and who ordered his arrest. Was Obama’s hand in this in any way? We will never know the truth but what is clear is that Dr Corsi was seen as a threat while in Kenya.

When API asked Mrs Obama to comment on why Dr Corsi was arrested by the Kenyan government and whether she thought Kenya’s Prime Minister Mr Raila Odinga was involved in Dr Corsi’s arrest, she got irritated and and simply told API not to dig that which will support evil people who are out to stop her husband from getting the presidency.

When asked who she was referring to as the evil people, she stated that she was not going to elaborate much on that but that many conservative white people and even some African Americans were against her husband, but that this group of blacks were simply doing so because of envy.

On Farakhan and his ministry, Mrs Obama told API that it was unfortunate that Mr Farakhan came out the way he did supporting her husband openly before the elections was over. That was not wholehearted support but one that was calculated to convince the American people that my husband will support the growth of muslim faith if he became the president, adding “even if my husband was able to prove that he is not a Muslim, he will not be believed by those who have come out strongly to destroy his chances of being the next President. Do real people expect someone to deny a religion when 80 percent of his relatives are Muslims?; Mrs Obama asked.

Mrs Obama asked API to write a good story about her husband and that will earn API an invitation to the innoguration ceremony when, as she put it , her husband will be installed as the next President of the United States of America next year.

———————–

Published by African Press International - API

The Obama -Ayers Connection Revealed! New Video Surfaces

2008-10-15T15:48:00.003-04:00

Stern Interviews Mindless Obamabots...

2008-10-13T21:33:00.001-04:00

I know Stern is a sexist pig mostly but this is an amazing experiment with Obamabots. By replacing Obama's policies with those held by McCain the Obamabots still fully support them.

Obama Admits His Intent to Redistribute Wealth... Telling a Middle Class Plumber He Will Pay More Taxes

2008-10-13T21:05:00.001-04:00

Wealth
by luvnews

Guilt By Participation

2008-10-13T14:09:00.001-04:00

October Surprise - Why Obama Won't Produce Documentation to Prove He is an American Citizen

2008-10-12T16:24:00.001-04:00

OBAMA CAUGHT SAYING ACORN AND FRIENDS WILL SHAPE HIS PRESIDENTIAL AGENDA

2008-10-12T16:17:00.001-04:00

The Second American Revolution

2008-10-12T01:39:00.001-04:00

Louis farrakhan Calls OBAMA the messiah! Helter Skelter

2008-10-11T12:34:00.001-04:00

Barack Obama in Town Hall Setting...

2008-10-11T00:03:00.001-04:00

BILL AYERS: IED Maker & Obama Mentor (Must See...)

2008-10-10T22:09:00.000-04:00

As Rezko starts to sing… Barack Obama might be days away from an indictment…

2008-10-10T21:58:00.001-04:00

from P.U.M.A by PUMA Pundit

Avid PUMAs may remember the article we had about Alexi Giannoulias alleged banker to the mob, Obama fundraiser, DNC Convention speaker, and Illinois' State Treasurer.

We got word earlier this week that Tony Rezko had started talking about Alexi as part of his plea-bargain negotiations. Earlier today, Michael Sneed, columnist for the Chicago Sun Times had this blurb:

Sneed hears rumbles political fund-raiser/fixer Tony Rezko, who is now singing sweetly to the feds from his cell at the Metropolitan Correctional Center, has been talking about his "dealings" with a Chicago bank, which has political connections.
Stay tuned.

Hmmmm. Hillbuzz it seems also got independent confirmation on the "bank" in this blurb being Broadway Bank. Giannoulias was the bank's vice president and chief loan officer under whose watch more than $15 million in loans was approved. Some of these loans went to Michael "Jaws" Giorango, a Chicagoan twice convicted of bookmaking and running a nationwide prostitution ring.

What the heck is the Rezko connection in here you may wonder, PUMA Pundit, aren't you merely grasping for straws you may think? Not at all, there is a major connection.

According to an article in The Chicago Sun Times , in 2006 Rezko wrote $450,000 in bad checks drawn to this bank, at a time Alexi Giannoulias listed himself both as President and as Chairman of the Board. Coincidentally, and I use this word lightly, in 2003:

Rezko also pushed for the appointment of Chicago banker Demetris Giannoulias, brother of Democratic state Treasurer Alexi Giannoulias, to the Illinois Finance Authority board, records show.

But wait, there's more. What do we know about Demetris Giannoulias? Well for starters, based on his profile at Crossroads Fund where he serves as a member of the Board of Directors:

Demetris Giannoulias, Chief Financial Officer of Broadway Bank in Chicago, is interested and involved in community organizing and economic development in low-income communities.

Community organizing? Guess which organization has been getting grants from the Crossroads Fund? ACORN of course… Incidentally, Bill Ayers and Bernardine Dhorn are active fundraisers for the fund. Last year when the fund held its 25th anniversary, Barack Obama was one of the Honorary Hosts.

But enough about the Crossroads Fund, let's get back to Demetris and Rezko.

Professionaly, here is what Demetris has been doing with Broadway Bank:

Since 2000, Mr. Giannoulias has been responsible for the administration and oversight of Broadway Bank… first as Chief Financial Officer, and currently as President and CEO.

Ok, that was kind of round-aboutish, here's the consice and condensed version:

In 2002, under the guise of funding a construction project, Rezko and his then-business partner, Daniel Muhra had borrowed $10.9 million from Broadway Bank an institution headed by Demetris and Alexei. In 2003, Demetris was recommended by Rezko to Governor Rod Blagojevich for a seat on the Illinois Finance Authority Board, for reasons yet unknown, Demetris was not appointed.

In 2003/2004 Tony Rezko was one of Obama's biggest fundraisers during his Senate run. Among the contributors to the Obama campaign fund other than Rezko were Demetris and Alexi Giannoulias, both still executive officers of Broadway Bank.

Obama's Campaign Funds were kept in … You guessed it, Broadway Bank.

In 2006, Alexi Giannoulias was endorsed by Barack Obama for Illinois State Senator. This is despite the fact that most other leading Illinois Democrats were puzzled as to what qualifications a then 28 year old Alexis had to run for such a position.

Between March and July of that same year, Tony Rezko was charged with writing over $450,000 in bad checks in Las Vegas. Checks which were drawn to Broadway Bank. On November 7th, Alexis was elected into office.

It is worthy to note that Rezko is not alleged to have gambled the money, merely to have gotten casino chips and cash in exchange for the checks. In other words; reverse money laundering, if there is such a term. $450,000 in unmarked, untaxed bills. Demetris was President and CEO of the bank at the time. Since even grocery stores have check verification capabilities, I am sure Vegas Luxury Hotels do to, therefore there is no way someone could have written $450,000 in bad checks over the course of 5 months and not had his account shut down, or the checks refused. In other words, to say the least, someone at Broadway Bank played a role in facilitating the verification of those checks.

Fast forward to 2008, without bothering to justify why, Obama gives Alexi Giannoulias a slot to speak at the DNC.

Rezko is now a convicted felon.

Obama is in the Senate, attempting to become President, Demetris is still "running" the bank, Alexi is still the State Treasurer and Rod Blagojevich is the Governor. Tony Rezko is now a convicted felon (yes, I'm saying it twice for emphasis).

Before he is convicted however, Rezko promises not to squeal as long as Obama and Blagojevich take care of him:

"Your Honor, the prosecutors have been overzealous in pursuing a crime that never happened," he wrote. "They are pressuring me to tell them the 'wrong' things that I supposedly know about Governor Blagojevich and Senator Obama. I have never been a party to any wrongdoing that involved the Governor or the Senator."

"Despite my belief in my innocence, I understand I may well lose this case, If I do, I am prepared to serve my sentence."

Unfortunately for him, his coded message fell on deaf ears, and Obama and Blagojevich decided not to intervene. Realizing jail is not such a fun place, Rezko has chosen to do what he threathened to do; squeal.

So there you have it folks. Connect the dots. Where this will lead, I don't know. The question one has to ask is whether George Bush will authorize the DOJ to indict the first "black" nominee of a major party, with less than30 days left to go before the election? I don't have the answer to that question, but if the spirit of the law is followed, Obama might be in federal custody in the not too distant future.

The October Surprise Is No Surprise At All

2008-10-10T01:21:00.001-04:00

Posted by: Erick Erickson

Don't underestimate the McCain campaign.

What type of movie do Americans really like? Not the popcorn flicks, but the ones that leave you saying "holy sh--" at the end when the credits roll. The Usual Suspects comes to mind.

Here's a movie where you have multiple story lines coming together toward the end, all connected to a central character, and when it finally dawns on you what just happened, wow — it is one heck of a movie. Separate plot elements dramatically merge into one coherent narrative and you realize had you been paying attention all along you would have seen it.

It really works. Those stories have powerful staying power.

For more than two months the Republicans have pushed the ACORN story — a corrupt, radical organization that operates through voter fraud to disrupt American democracy, destabilize our financial system, agitate against business, etc. Just this week the FBI State Attorney General raided ACORN in Nevada and discovered how prevalent their voter fraud operation is. The FBI is expected to get involved.

Separately, the GOP started painting a picture of Obama's campaign donations. He's been extremely secretive. In a bit of Marxist doublespeak, the Obama campaign is saying it is the most transparent campaign ever, but won't provide a list of its donors, destroyed Obama's Illinois legislative files, won't provide his health records, etc. The more we learn about his small donors, the more questions we have about foreigners trying to sway the American democratic system.

And then there is the McCain campaign. It has gone zealously after Bill Ayers's connection to Obama. Ayers hired Obama to run the Chicago Annenberg Challenge, after launching Obama's political career in his living room.

Bill Ayers, in applying for the Annenberg Challenge grant, said the purpose of the money would be to radicalize students to agitate for change. Who did he put in charge of the program? Barack Obama.

Who did Obama give the money to?

ACORN.

And the separate plots begin to connect. The ACORN narrative, the Ayers narrative, the foreign donor narrative — they intersect, combine, tangle, and paint a very ugly picture of Barack Obama

What Obama did on the board with the Annenberg money and what he'd do with your money come in to the narrative.

But I'm told there will be a surprise twist in this plot that will make it even neater to watch unfold.

The next month is going to be tumultuous and fun.

The October Surprise is that there is no "surprise." It's been in front of us all along. Only now the various story lines are getting connected.

Obama tried to sway Iraqis on Bush deal

2008-10-10T01:09:00.001-04:00

Friday, October 10, 2008

Barbara Slavin

EXCLUSIVE:

At the same time the Bush administration was negotiating a still elusive agreement to keep the U.S. military in Iraq, Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama tried to convince Iraqi leaders in private conversations that the president shouldn't be allowed to enact the deal without congressional approval.

Mr. Obama's conversations with the Iraqi leaders, confirmed to The Washington Times by his campaign aides, began just two weeks after he clinched the Democratic presidential nomination in June and stirred controversy over the appropriateness of a White House candidate's contacts with foreign governments while the sitting president is conducting a war.

Some of the specifics of the conversations remain the subject of dispute. Iraqi leaders purported to The Times that Mr. Obama urged Baghdad to delay an agreement with Mr. Bush until next year when a new president will be in office - a charge the Democratic campaign denies.

Mr. Obama spoke June 16 to Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari when he was in Washington, according to both the Iraqi Embassy in Washington and the Obama campaign. Both said the conversation was at Mr. Zebari's request and took place on the phone because Mr. Obama was traveling.

However, the two sides differ over what Mr. Obama said.

"In the conversation, the senator urged Iraq to delay the [memorandum of understanding] between Iraq and the United States until the new administration was in place," said Samir Sumaidaie, Iraq's ambassador to the United States.

He said Mr. Zebari replied that any such agreement would not bind a new administration. "The new administration will have a free hand to opt out," he said the foreign minister told Mr. Obama.

Mr. Sumaidaie did not participate in the call, he said, but stood next to Mr. Zebari during the conversation and was briefed by him immediately afterward.

The call was not recorded by either side, and Mr. Zebari did not respond to repeated telephone and e-mail messages requesting direct comment.

Mr. Obama has called for a phased U.S. withdrawal of all but a residual force from Iraq over 16 months, a position the Iraqi government appears to have embraced.

U.S. and Iraqi officials have been struggling for months to finalize a deal that will allow U.S. troops to remain after Dec. 31, when a U.N. mandate sanctioning the military presence expires. Iraqi officials have said that the main impediment is agreement over a timeline for U.S. redeployment and immunity from Iraqi prosecution for U.S. troops and civilians.

Obama campaign spokeswoman Wendy Morigi said Mr. Obama does not object to a short-term status of forces agreement, or SOFA.

Mr. Obama told Mr. Zebari in June that a SOFA "should be completed before January and it must include immunity for U.S. troops," Miss Morigi wrote in an e-mail.

However, the Democratic nominee said a broader strategic framework agreement governing a longer-term U.S. presence in Iraq "should be vetted by Congress," she wrote.

She said Mr. Obama said the same thing when he met in July with Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki and Mr. Zebari in Baghdad.

A recent article in the New York Post quoted Mr. Zebari as saying that Mr. Obama asked Iraqi leaders in July to delay any agreement on a reduction of U.S. troops in Iraq until the next U.S. president takes office.

Miss Morigi denied this. She said the request for Senate vetting was bipartisan and noted that the first Obama-Zebari conversation took place 12 days after four other members of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee - including Republican Sens. Richard G. Lugar of Indiana and Chuck Hagel of Nebraska - wrote to Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates urging consultation over any agreements committing U.S. troops and civilian contractors to Iraq "for an extended period of time."

When Mr. Obama spoke to Mr. Zebari, he was speaking in his capacity as a senator and a member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Miss Morigi said. "It's obvious that others are trying to mischaracterize Obama's position, [but] on numerous occasions he has made it perfectly clear that the United States only has one president at a time and that the administration speaks with one voice."

Sen. Jack Reed, a Rhode Island Democrat who accompanied Mr. Obama in Iraq along with Mr. Hagel, said they made "no suggestion of any type of delay" in any agreements.

A congressional aide who was also present and spoke on the condition of anonymity said the senators asked for a congressional role similar to that required by the Iraqi Constitution for Iraq's parliament.

Still, the fact that the Illinois Democrat on June 3 clinched enough delegates to be assured the Democratic presidential nomination gives his comments special force - something that also applies to the Republican nominee, Sen. John McCain of Arizona, a key proponent of the surge of extra U.S. forces to Iraq last year.

As a U.S. senator, Mr. Obama "has a foot in both camps," said Ross K. Baker, a professor of political science at Rutgers University. "It's within the jurisdiction of his committee and something he's entitled to speak about. It doesn't raise a red flag for me."

White House spokesman Gordon Johndroe declined to comment on the matter.

Leslie Phillips, a press officer at the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad, also declined to comment even though an embassy note-taker was present during the senators' meeting in Iraq. "The embassy's role is purely to facilitate the meetings," she said.

Presidential nominees traditionally have not intervened personally in foreign-policy disputes, although campaign surrogates have done so.

Historian Robert Dallek has documented meetings with South Vietnamese diplomats in 1968 by Republican vice-presidential candidate Spiro Agnew and Anna Chennault, widow of Gen. Claire Chennault, the commander of "Flying Tiger" forces in China during World War II.

Mr. Dallek, author of "Flawed Giant: Lyndon Johnson and His Times 1961-1973," obtained tapes of the conversations from bugs the Johnson administration had placed in the South Vietnamese Embassy in Washington.

Negotiations to end the Vietnam War were taking place in Paris at the time between the Johnson administration and the North and South Vietnamese.

Mr. Agnew and Mrs. Chennault "signaled the South Vietnamese that they would get a better deal with Richard Nixon as president instead of the Democrat" Hubert Humphrey, Mr. Dallek said.

"Johnson was furious and said that Nixon was guilty of treason," Mr. Dallek said, but neither he nor Mr. Humphrey disclosed the matter before the election, which Mr. Nixon won.

McCain Releases Letter To Obama

2008-10-09T16:18:00.001-04:00

McCain Releases Letter to Obama
February 6, 2006
Washington D.C. – Today, Senator McCain sent the following letter to Senator Obama regarding ongoing Congressional efforts towards bipartisan lobbying reform. The following is the text from that letter:

February 6, 2006

The Honorable Barack Obama

United States Senate

SH-713

Washington, DC 20510

Dear Senator Obama:

I would like to apologize to you for assuming that your private assurances to me regarding your desire to cooperate in our efforts to negotiate bipartisan lobbying reform legislation were sincere.

When you approached me and insisted that despite your leadership's preference to use the issue to gain a political advantage in the 2006 elections, you were personally committed to achieving a result that would reflect credit on the entire Senate and offer the country a better example of political leadership, I concluded your professed concern for the institution and the public interest was genuine and admirable.

Thank you for disabusing me of such notions with your letter to me dated February 2, 2006, which explained your decision to withdraw from our bipartisan discussions. I'm embarrassed to admit that after all these years in politics I failed to interpret your previous assurances as typical rhetorical gloss routinely used in politics to make self-interested partisan posturing appear more noble.

Again, sorry for the confusion, but please be assured I won't make the same mistake again.

As you know, the Majority Leader has asked Chairman Collins to hold hearings and mark up a bill for floor consideration in early March. I fully support such timely action and I am confident that, together with Senator Lieberman, the Committee on Governmental Affairs will report out a meaningful, bipartisan bill.

You commented in your letter about my "interest in creating a task force to further study" this issue, as if to suggest I support delaying the consideration of much-needed reforms rather than allowing the committees of jurisdiction to hold hearings on the matter. Nothing could be further from the truth. The timely findings of a bipartisan working group could be very helpful to the committee in formulating legislation that will be reported to the full Senate.

Since you are new to the Senate, you may not be aware of the fact that I have always supported fully the regular committee and legislative process in the Senate, and routinely urge Committee Chairmen to hold hearings on important issues. In fact, I urged Senator Collins to schedule a hearing upon the Senate's return in January.

Furthermore, I have consistently maintained that any lobbying reform proposal be bipartisan. The bill Senators Joe Lieberman and Bill Nelson and I have introduced is evidence of that commitment as is my insistence that members of both parties be included in meetings to develop the legislation that will ultimately be considered on the Senate floor.

As I explained in a recent letter to Senator Reid, and have publicly said many times, the American people do not see this as just a Republican problem or just a Democratic problem. They see it as yet another run-of-the-mill Washington scandal, and they expect it will generate just another round of partisan gamesmanship and posturing. Senator Lieberman and I, and many other members of this body, hope to exceed the public's low expectations. We view this as an opportunity to bring transparency and accountability to the Congress, and, most importantly, to show the public that both parties will work together to address our failings.

As I noted, I initially believed you shared that goal. But I understand how important the opportunity to lead your party's effort to exploit this issue must seem to a freshman Senator, and I hold no hard feelings over your earlier disingenuousness. Again, I have been around long enough to appreciate that in politics the public interest isn't always a priority for every one of us. Good luck to you, Senator.

Sincerely,

John McCain

United States Senate

Obama and Fannie Mae

2008-10-09T16:12:00.001-04:00

2008-10-09T14:42:00.000-04:00

Sen. Biden Has a Much Higher IQ Than You!

2008-10-09T14:41:00.001-04:00

Chose

2008-10-09T12:14:00.001-04:00

Cornell West on Brother Barack Obama

2008-10-09T12:03:00.001-04:00

Ayers

2008-10-09T11:52:00.001-04:00

McCain/Palin Interview

2008-10-08T23:57:00.000-04:00

Which Candidate Wins The “Who Gives A Crap About Me” Contest? A Debate Roundup.

2008-10-08T23:55:00.001-04:00

By Ani closeAuthor: Ani
Name: Ani Ai
Email: susanunpc@gmail.com
Site:

About:
See Authors Posts (65) on October 8, 2008 at 9:40 PM

I've been voting in Presidential elections for nearly 30 years, and always a straight Democratic ticket. Lord knows, the DNC has given me some doosies to vote for – probably why we've won so few of the last 10 contests. Whoever eventually wound up in the White House, I usually felt like it didn't matter. I did not exist for them. That is until 1992, when I got to vote for Bill Clinton. Even though I was certainly a lot less political then, I just had a sense that this was the first candidate who actually cared about me or what mattered to me.

Now, when I watch candidates speak to voters, I adopt Ani's 'who gives a crap-o-meter' regarding their rhetoric and their policies. Unfortunately, Democrat though he claims to be, Senator Obama, with his ceaselessly aloof and dispassionate behavior, leaves the 'who gives a crap-o-meter' pointing in the low single digits.

Likewise, Senator Obama's past voting record, his flip-flopping on so many important campaign promises, and his sidling up to Bush's policies, leave me feeling like I am watching nothing but a spin-meister, no matter how much the media lauds him or gives him 'style' points. How bizarre that McCain, the maverick Republican, came across as more connected to the American people and more empathetic to their concerns in last night's debate.

According to many news sources I checked, the debate produced no clear winner. The news media's bias notwithstanding, both pundits and bloggers alike kept looking for some sort of "knockout blow" by McCain to change the dynamic of the race. I honestly don't know what they expected. How about if he said this:

Senator Obama , you are an duplicitous, unrepentant liar who has spent the last 20 years associating with criminals, radicals and divisive, dangerous individuals. You don't have an original thought in your head. You don't have the savvy or experience to do this job and you couldn't stick to a policy or find loyalty to an idea or a person to save your soul.

Would that have done the trick? Fortunately, the crafty McCain was smart enough not to fall into this trap in a town hall setting. He would have been termed 'desperate' had he started in on all the Bill Ayers stuff – leave that to the campaign trail, and Gov. Sarah-'cuda' Palin to point out. I'm sure they'll be hammering Senator Obama on his associations for the next 27 days non-stop and keep him just off balance enough.

Last night, McCain needed to accomplish several goals

• Tie Senator Obama to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.
• Point out the sharp difference between rhetoric vs. record.
• Show he's got a grip on how to help our faltering economy.
• Remind voters he's the guy with the foreign policy bona-fides who will not make naïve mistakes.
• Be calm, cool and collected in the midst of a very difficult time for Americans both at home and abroad;
oh yeah, and…
• Show he actually gives a crap about the American people – not just about winning.

From various pundits' statements I read – he damned well did the job.

Commentary Magazine's Daniel Casse:

"McCain is delivering tight, crisp, and extremely effective answers. Every answer has a similar structure: (a) I care about this issue (b) I've stood up against Bush/special interests on this issue (c) Obama has never taken a stand, never acted on this (d) so let's compare records."

He scored points right away letting voters know that Obama was tied to the Freddie Mac/Fannie Mae debacle, whereas McCain co-sponsored a bill to provide stricter oversight. McCain warned of this crisis in 2005. Very interesting that Obama's opening remarks on the financial crisis brazenly placed blamed on John McCain while ignoring the fact that Obama and other Dems did not want regulations of Fannie and Freddie.

Balz, Kornblut, Abromowitz of the Washington Post weighed in:

McCain played the role of the aggressor throughout the 90-minute debate…"I have a clear record of bipartisanship," he said. "The situation today cries out for bipartisanship. Senator Obama has never taken on his leaders of his party on a single issue."

McCain statement was a good reminder to voters that he was willing to put country first by suspending his campaign in an effort to get the rescue bill passed, while Obama was content to declare "Congress will call me if they need me" and all of America got to watch one of Obama's biggest champions, the unpopular Nancy Pelosi, insult Republicans in order to sabotage the bill's passage – playing politics with people's livelihoods. Nice, Nancy — you get a ZERO on the 'who gives a crap-o-meter.' Obviously Nancy and Barack don't give a crap about you or me if they were playing shenanigans like this.

Most important, ABC's Charlie Gibson pointed out McCain made the one new proposal of the night:

McCain used the debate to promote another approach to solving the economic crisis, saying he would have the government buy up bad mortgages and renegotiate them at the current lower housing values, thereby allowing struggling homeowners to remain in their homes. He argued that until the housing markets stabilize, the economy will continue to falter, and he sought to use the idea to demonstrate his independence from the Bush administration.

"It's my proposal, it's not Senator Obama's proposal, it's not President Bush's proposal," he said. "But I know how to get America working again, restore our economy and take care of working Americans."
…
The plan, he said, would turn such mortgages over to the government, replacing them with "manageable, fixed-rate mortgages" for homeowners to reduce the chances of default. His advisers circulated talking points to Republican surrogates telling them to describe it as a "bold initiative" and to call it the "McCain Resurgence Plan."

ABC's George Stephanopoulos: "I thought Senator McCain started out very strong when he said we have to address this financial crisis by having a plan to buy up all of the bad mortgages in the country showed real compassion and empathy there..."

NBC's Andrea Mitchell: "[W]ith the economy in such a tail spin, [McCain] came armed with a new proposal to have the government buy up failing mortgages … That was a gutsy move."

Well, actually, I believe this was Hillary's plan – good move, John! And today, in the NY Times, the McCain campaign gives her credit for the same - better move, John!

Even Charles Krauthammer, no fan of Johnny Mac, thought "McCain won the first hour on domestic (issues)." Strange since Obama's ace in the hole is supposed to be the economic situation. McCain really hit Obama over the head about his tax proposals, so it could have been comments like this that did the trick:

"Nailing down senator obama's tax proposal is like trying to nail
jell-o to the wall" and "the last time a president raised taxes in an economic crisis like this was Herbert Hoover."

Ouch. McCain nailed Obama on the difference between talking the talk and walking the walk. But this was the comment that had all the pundits' tongues wagging:

"There was an energy bill on the floor of the Senate loaded down with goodies, billions for the oil companies. And it was sponsored by Bush and Cheney. You know who voted for it? You might never know. That one," McCain said, gesturing toward his rival. "You know who voted against it? Me."

They may be trying to make hay out of "that one" not sounding warm and fuzzy – but he got his point across. He also said it with a smile. If it sounds like McCain doesn't have a lot of respect for Senator Obama, well when a neophyte Senator keeps trying to outshine his opponent with pretty promises not matched by his actions, what do you expect?

According to WaPo:

Foreign policy occupied the last third of the debate, with the candidates clashing repeatedly on Pakistan and on their overall approaches to the use of U.S. military forces. McCain sharply criticized Obama's opposition to the troop surge in Iraq and his response to Russian aggression in Georgia, as he sought to sow doubts about his challenger's capacity to handle the commander-in-chief functions.

"In his short career, he does not understand our national security challenges," McCain said. "We don't have time for on-the-job training."

MSNBC's Pat Buchanan:

"I think McCain did come in with more heart and more fight. And I agree with you, he was the aggressor. He was throwing the punches. He did it in a better way than he did it last week when I thought he had won on points. Here he smiled. He looked at his opponent. He looked at Tom Brokaw. He talked to the audience, and he did it in a more calm fashion. And I think he clearly scored more points than Barack Obama did."

Another telling moment was described by The Politico's Jonathan Martin:

"McCain, taking a question from a naval retiree, gives him a pat on the shoulder and a firm handshake. 'Everything I ever learned about leadership, I learned from a chief petty officer,' says one old sailor to another. It was surely a moment that won a lot of nodding heads from vets all over the country."

When McCain shook the man's hand and said he appreciated his service, it came from his heart. Senator Obama walked over to the man, similarly thanking him for his service – another moment that had no resonance whatsoever. After the bracelet nonsense of the last debate, I would have thought Obama would find a way to be a little more genuine about addressing someone in our military. But there is still a fundamental disconnect between Obama's statements and any heartfelt conviction behind them. And that is always where he loses me. The trust issue. The 'does he really give a crap' issue. The 'what will he give away when I'm not looking cause it really doesn't matter to him' issue.

CNN's Bill Bennett said "The last comments [John McCain] made, I thought, were quite impressive and quite moving." Mr. Bennett is right. Senator McCain closing remarks were extremely moving.

Was the debate sort of boring otherwise, yeah. Is Obama a smoother speaker than McCain, sure. But what Senator Obama staccato style never ever communicates to me is the one thing we need in a President at this time more than ever: heart. Senator McCain's closing remarks about spending a lifetime serving his country and being lifted up by his comrades bespeak a gratitude and an allegiance and dedication to our country's principles that is undeniable and comes from a place of deep conviction. Likewise, every policy proposal, every idea that came out of his mouth last night may not have sounded like Shakespeare, but each one was concise, and spoken from a place of knowledge, caring and a record he could stand on. I never worry that McCain will flip flop at a crucial moment.

At the end of the day, whether or not we agree on all the issues, I trust McCain's experience and character to win the day more than I trust Obama's rhetoric.

Perhaps there was a winner after all.

Obama is Hiding a Radical Past!

2008-10-07T20:12:00.001-04:00

By Matthew Weaver closeAuthor: Matthew Weaver
Name: Matthew Weaver
Email: matthew@theindependentview.com
Site:
http://www.theindependentview.com
About:
See Authors Posts (43) on October 7, 2008 at 6:09 PM in Barack Obama, Current Affairs

Did you know that Barack Obama was a member of the leading socialist party? In a small omission, Barack Obama apparently forgot to include in his resume, he entered politics as a socialist. This just keeps getting better and better. Barack Obama was active participant in the 1990s of the Chicago New Party and, importantly, the Chicago DSA, a group of socialists affiliated with the Democratic Socialists of America.

Barack Obama attended and participated in meetings the Chicago New Party and the Chicago DSA, the local affiliate of the Democratic Socialists of America.
Barack Obama sought the endorsement of the Chicago DSA.
Barack Obama actively used the endorsement from the Chicago DSA.
Barack Obama won his DSA-endorsed and backed campaign to secure his seat in the Illinois State Senate.
Barack Obama continued his involvement with the Chicago DSA and received their endorsements in subsequent campaigns.

Obama's participation in and endorsement from the Chicago New Party and Chicago DSA, the local affiliate of the Democratic Socialists of America (which is the U.S. affiliate of the Socialist International) is quite clear:

According to the write-up on the July 1995 meeting of Chicago DSA and New Party membership, Barack Obama was one of about 50 people attending out of their then-300 member local group. Other documents below will demonstrate Barack Obama attended and participated in subsequent meetings.
The New Party rigorously evaluated its candidate endorsements and claimed "a winning ratio of 77 of 110 elections." This was no passive endorsement.
Candidates must be approved via a NP political committee. Once approved, candidates must sign a contract with the NP. The contract mandates that they must have a visible and active relationship with the NP.—New Ground
Candidate Barack Obama participated as a panelist at the DSA-sponsored Town Meeting on February 25, 1996, entitled "Employment and Survival in Urban America". As reported in New Ground,
Barack Obama observed that Martin Luther King's March on Washington in the 1960s wasn't simply about civil rights but demanded jobs as well. Now the issue is again coming to the front, but he wished the issue was on the Democratic agenda not just on Buchanan's.
One of the themes that has emerged in Barack Obama's campaign is "what does it take to create productive communities", not just consumptive communities. It is an issue that joins some of the best instincts of the conservatives with the better instincts of the left. He felt the state government has three constructive roles to play.
The first is "human capital development". By this he meant public education, welfare reform, and a "workforce preparation strategy". Public education requires equality in funding. It's not that money is the only solution to public education's problems but it's a start toward a solution. The current proposals for welfare reform are intended to eliminate welfare but it's also true that the status quo is not tenable. A true welfare system would provide for medical care, child care and job training. While Barack Obama did not use this term, it sounded very much like the "social wage" approach used by many social democratic labor parties. By "workforce preparation strategy", Barack Obama simply meant a coordinated, purposeful program of job training instead of the ad hoc, fragmented approach used by the State of Illinois today.
The state government can also play a role in redistribution, the allocation of wages and jobs. As Barack Obama noted, when someone gets paid $10 million to eliminate 4,000 jobs, the voters in his district know this is an issue of power not economics. The government can use as tools labor law reform, public works and contracts.
Obama subsequently secured his endorsement from the Chicago DSA
The local Democratic Socialists of America affiliate issued their Chicago DSA Endorsements in the March 19th Primary Election:
Barak Obama is running to gain the Democratic ballot line for Illinois Senate 13th District. The 13th District is Alice Palmer's old district, encompassing parts of Hyde Park and South Shore.
Mr. Obama graduated from Columbia University and promptly went into community organizing for the Developing Communities Project in Roseland and Altgeld Gardens on the far south side of Chicago. He went on to Harvard University, where he was editor of the Harvard Law Review. He graduated with a law degree. In 1992, he was Director of Illinois Project Vote, a voter registration campaign that made Carol Moseley Braun's election to the U.S. Senate much easier than it would have been. At present, he practices law in Judson Miner's law firm and is President of the board of the Annenberg Challenge Grant which is distributing some $50 million in grants to public school reform efforts.
What best characterizes Barak Obama is a quote from an article in Illinois Issues, a retrospective look at his experience as a community organizer while he was completing his degree at Harvard:
"… community organizations and organizers are hampered by their own dogmas about the style and substance of organizing. Most practice … a 'consumer advocacy' approach, with a focus on wrestling services and resources from outside powers that be. Few are thinking of harnessing the internal productive capacities, both in terms of money and people, that already exist in communities." (Illinois issues, September, 1988)
Luckily, Mr. Obama does not have any opposition in the primary. His opponents have all dropped out or were ruled off the ballot.
Barack Obama Continued Attending Membership Meetings of the Chicago DSA New Party
Obama attended membership meeting on April 11, 1996 where he expressed his gratitude for their support. The report shared that "Barack Obama, victor in the 13th State Senate District, encouraged NPers to join in his task forces on Voter Education and Voter Registration."
Obama won his election with the help of the Chicago DSA's New Party.
Chicago DSA notes in 1998 that Barack Obama eulogized Saul Mendelson, co-founder of the Debs Dinner.
In the fall of 1998, Chicago DSA's New Ground's editor offered nomination of Barack Obama for reelection.
When Barack Obama challenged Bobby Rush for the 1st Congressional District in 2000, the Chicago DSA opted to recommend both:

For Congressman of the 1st Congressional District, the Executive Committee was faced with two very good candidates. As we are not making endorsements but merely recommendations, we felt no conflict in recommending both Bobby Rush and Barak Obama.

Bobby Rush is the incumbent Congressman. He was also a candidate for Mayor of Chicago in the last municipal elections, endorsed by Chicago DSA. While he hasn't always been the ideal Congressman from a left perspective (being a cosponsor of the "NAFTA for Africa" bill, for example), he's generally been quite good. To volunteer, call 773 264 7874. Contributions may be made to Citizens for Rush, 514 E. 95th St., Chicago, IL 60619.

Barak Obama is serving only his second term in the Illinois State Senate so he might be fairly charged with ambition, but the same might have be said of Bobby Rush when he ran against Congressman Charles Hayes. Obama also has put in time at the grass roots, working for five years as a community organizer in Harlem and in Chicago. When Obama participated in a 1996 UofC YDS Townhall Meeting on Economic Insecurity, much of what he had to say was well within the mainstream of European social democracy.

Conclusion
Barack Obama has a long-term and sustained relationship with the Chicago DSA, an affiliate of the Democratic Socialists of America, and with the Chicago New Party. He participated in multiple membership meetings and in DSA-sponsored events, repeatedly sought their endorsement. This does not answer all questions about Barack Obama's past relationships with multiple socialist groups. What the media needs to find out is has Barack Obama broken his ties with them. If so, when and why?

Cross-posted on my blog, The Independent View.

Barack Obama and Raila Odinga -- Did the Illinois senator violate the Logan Act in campaigning for his 'genocidist' cousin's bi

2008-10-07T20:08:00.001-04:00

Sen. John McCain in Albuquerque, NM

2008-10-06T18:22:00.001-04:00

Finally... taking the gloves off.

Obama's Friends

2008-10-06T14:41:00.001-04:00

Obama discusses his role as Chair of the Chicago Annenberg Challenge

2008-10-05T19:43:00.001-04:00

Obama and Biden Drunk at 3am

2008-10-04T10:51:00.001-04:00

Somewhere a village is missing their idiot...

Has Joe Biden been drinkin?

2008-10-04T10:47:00.001-04:00

Joe Biden Tells Chuck Graham to Stand Up

2008-10-04T10:45:00.001-04:00

For those who don't know, Chuck Graham is in a wheelchair. Disabled and unable to stand up, but I'm sure it made him feel better when Joe Biden in an effort to cover his gaffe requested the others at the rally to stand up.

Joe Biden in Primary Debate Hilarious

2008-10-04T10:42:00.001-04:00

Enron, Worldcom, Tyco vs. Fannie/Freddie

2008-10-04T10:38:00.001-04:00

O'Reilly squares off with Frank over the mortgage crisis

2008-10-04T10:27:00.001-04:00

Why John McCain’s Experience And Bi-Partisanship Are Essential To Economic Solutions

2008-10-01T10:44:00.001-04:00

By Texas Hill Country

Author: Texas Hill Country

We face serious problems and we need serious leaders with serious solutions. We are on the brink of total economic collapse, and our collapse may trigger a world-wide depression on a scale like we have never seen before. The worst part is that the public is still behind the times on the crisis.

Mortgages were, like, soooo last year.

The real looming monster in the room that no one wants to admit is there yet are the credit default swaps. If these start going down the tubes, we are completely screwed. Completely.

The problems we face go so far beyond the basic problems of the mortgage crisis, it is hard to even describe the real problems we face in layman's terms.

On a basic level, everyone broke up their risky stuff into little tidbits and sold them to a bunch of different places… spreading around the risk, therefore supposedly lowering the risk exposure for each party.

Then, at the same time, everyone was buying other places tidbits of risk and paying a premium… because the returns were big and the overall risk was low due to it being spread over a group rather than a single party. And the risk was further minimized because they owned tidbits of risk from several different parts of the financial sector and from several different companies, so if one part had trouble, no big deal… it was balanced out by all the others.

You see, the only way all these little tidbits could pose any real problem is if the whole sector were to grind to a screeching halt. And that could never happen… could it?

Instead of having individual companies running into problems and shutting down, now everyone owns a part of everyone else's risk… and in the aggregate, those little tidbits of risk add up to a lot of risk, especially if the whole financial system becomes threatened… you know, like now.

So the potential for future problems is immense. Mortgages are just the beginning.

We need a leader with honor, experience and a willingness to work with both sides of the aisle.

John McCain has been in DC and part of the solution for the S&L Crisis, 1987's Black Friday, the Tech Bubble burst, the collapse after Sept 11th and now the Mortgage Meltdown. He has experience in dealing with both the delicate political and tenuous economic situations.

In addition, much like Obama's touted "foresight" and speech on Iraq, John McCain put forth legislation in 2005 and warned about the coming meltdown. If we are to give Obama credit that his initial opposition to the Iraqi invasion speaks to some sort of judgement, then this must be trumped by McCain's prediction of the troubles in the mortgage industry because no one will dispute that the troubles with the economy are by far the most important.

Barack Obama, on the other hand, not so good on the judgement tip. Barack Obama not only stayed silent on the coming crisis, but supported the very groups and people responsible for the crisis. Among those in Obama's inner circle you can find two former heads of Fannie Mae and the grand dame and architect of the sub-prime mortgage crisis. In addition, Obama has been one of the top recipients of contributions from Wall Street… second only to Chris Dodd. And then there is ACORN… Oh, God… I don't even know where to begin with these scam artists…

Barack Obama's complete ignorance and total naivete' when it comes to real estate and economics has a long track history of devastation. From the boarded up tenements his buddy Rezko left all over the southside of Chicago to the meltdown of the mortgage industry cheer on by his friends, advisors and former employers… Barack Obama is bad for housing and bad for the economy.

This is a big crisis, one that the majority of Americans agree is the biggest crisis we face. We cannot leave it to an ignorant neophyte with a history of destructive decision making that has shown little propensity to change his stance, even less leadership, a near complete lack of bi-partisanship and an affinity for earmarks.

Barack Obama didn't even want to go back to DC to deal with the mortgage crisis in the first place, didn't even bother to contact any of the Democrats that were on the fence the morning of the bailout vote… but bi-partisanship and an aversion to earmarks are essential.

John McCain has a long and well documented history of bi-partisanship, one which is lauded by just about everyone in DC including both Hillary and Bill Clinton as well as Joe Biden.

In addition, these bills dealing with the economy need to be free of the clutter, partisanship and politics that earmarks represent. John McCain has never once asked for an earmark… ever.

This stands in stark contrast to Obama and his friends, who wanted to earmark the bailout bill to give ACORN, Obama's former employer, BILLIONS of dollars and who sunk the vote through their rabid partisanship (ie Pelosi and her rant.)

When facing the precipice of complete economic meltdown, we need someone that has experience, someone that listens to all sides, has the foresight to recognize coming problems, works in a bi-partisan way and does not use crisis situations to earmark and gain political advantage.

We need John McCain.

This is cross posted from Texas Hill Country

Gwen Ifill - Chosen as the Unbiased Moderator for the VP Debate

2008-10-01T10:31:00.001-04:00

Does she sound unbiased to you?

As Michelle Malkin observes:

Ifill and her publisher are banking on an Obama/Biden win to buoy her book sales. The moderator expected to treat both sides fairly has grandiosely declared this the “Age of Obama.” Can you imagine a right-leaning journalist writing a book about the “stunning” McCain campaign and its “bold” path to reform timed for release on Inauguration Day – and then expecting a slot as a moderator for the nation’s sole vice presidential debate?—Michelle Malkin

Malkin points out Ifill’s clear bias over the past several months:

Despite the protestations of her colleagues that she will be fair, Ifill has appeared on numerous radio and TV talk shows over the past several months to cash in on her access to the Obama campaign. She recently penned a fawning cover story on the Obamas for Essence magazine that earned much buzz. The title? “The Obamas: Portrait of an American Family.”

Karl Rove Reacts to the No Vote on the Bailout!

2008-09-30T13:01:00.001-04:00

The Color of Money

2008-09-28T22:03:00.001-04:00

First 2008 Presidential Debate (Full Video)

2008-09-28T21:30:00.001-04:00

Biden Continues to Distort and Deceive

2008-09-28T00:17:00.001-04:00

by Kevin Holtsberry

Another day, another lie...

Obama started the distortion last night:

Just one last point I want to make, since Senator McCain talked about providing a $5,000 health credit. Now, what he doesn't tell you is that he intends to, for the first time in history, tax health benefits.

True? Nope. Washington Post pulls out the Four Pinochios:

John McCain wants to drastically overhaul the health insurance system in order to encourage Americans to go out and buy their own health care plans rather than relying on employer-based plans. To achieve this, he plans to tax employer-provided health benefits and provide a $2,500 tax credit ($5,000 for families) toward the cost of health insurance.

By most independent calculations, the McCain plan will leave most taxpayers better off in strictly financial terms, at least until 2013. After 2013, the benefits will begin to diminish. By 2018, taxpayers in the top quintile will be slightly worse off, but middle-income taxpayers will either break even or be slightly ahead. According to the non-partisan Tax Policy Center, the McCain proposals will result in a net benefit of $1,241 to the average tax payer in 2009, $895 in 2013, and $386 in 2018.

"It is not fair to pull out just one part of the McCain proposal," said Eric Toder, a TPC analyst. "It is a package. They are giving back more than they are taking away."

At what point does Obama and Biden get called on the fact that every day on the trail seems to bring a new lie or deceptive claim. At what point do Biden's gaffes stop being a joke and start being a vulnerability?

Say The Wrong Obama Thing in Missouri, Get Arrested! Not So Fast, Says Governor.

2008-09-27T23:46:00.001-04:00

By Uppity Woman
Author: Uppity Woman
Email: susanunpc@gmail.com
Site: http://uppitywoman08.wordpress.com

No kidding folks. This is happening right here in what is left of Democracy in America. It seems that Barack I Love FISA Obama is practicing for his Planned borderline Communist government in Missouri–or so he thinks.

I was nearly speechless when I saw the video below. What a freaking thug Barack Obama truly is. We are worried about his Marxist Socialist pals? This is down righta Communist behavior! No wonder Putin and N. Korea’s “Dear Leader” think he’s swell. No wonder every whackjob failed fringe anti-democracy, anti-capitalism party from the 60s loves him.

The threat?: If somebody in Missouri does an Ad that Barack Obama deems “A Lie,” then the sheriff and the State Prosecutor are coming for you. And as we all know, when it comes to Barack Obama, EVERYTHING ANYBODY says is “A Lie,” even if it’s true.

See the Video first and let your jaw drop. Then see Governor Blunt’s horrified and disgusted press release.

This is happening right here in the United States of America, compliments of Obama and his goon squad. Be afraid. Be very afraid.

THE TRUTH SQUAD COMETH FOR YOU!

Simply. Amazing. Isn’t it? Well the Governor of Missouri thought so too. He issued this totally pissed-off press release, exposing Barack Obama and his sycophants for the childish, malicious Neo Liberal Radical Communist thugs they are.

This is one brutal press release for one brutal, deserving Chicago-Thug candidate. Bravo, Governor Blunt. You just said what we all think:

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.”

I’m telling you folks. Take Heed. Barack Obama has VERY little interest in Democracy. If he is pulling this kind of thing now, imagine a Presidency under this gangster.

The Democratic ACORN bailout

2008-09-27T16:58:00.001-04:00

By Ed Morrissey (http://hotair.com/archives/2008/09/26/the-democratic-acorn-bailout/)

House Republicans refused to support the Henry Paulson/Chris Dodd compromise bailout plan yesterday afternoon, even after the New York Times reported that Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson got down on one knee to beg Nancy Pelosi to compromise. One of the sticking points, as Senator Lindsey Graham explained later, wasn't a lack of begging but a poison pill that would push 20% of all profits from the bailout into the Housing Trust Fund — a boondoggle that Democrats in Congress has used to fund political-action groups like ACORN and the National Council of La Raza:

In the Roosevelt Room after the session, the Treasury secretary, Henry M. Paulson Jr., literally bent down on one knee as he pleaded with Nancy Pelosi, the House Speaker, not to "blow it up" by withdrawing her party's support for the package over what Ms. Pelosi derided as a Republican betrayal.

"I didn't know you were Catholic," Ms. Pelosi said, a wry reference to Mr. Paulson's kneeling, according to someone who observed the exchange. She went on: "It's not me blowing this up, it's the Republicans."

Mr. Paulson sighed. "I know. I know."

Graham told Greta van Susteren that Democrats had their own priorities, and it wasn't bailing out the financial sector:

And this deal that's on the table now is not a very good deal. Twenty percent of the money that should go to retire debt that will be created to solve this problem winds up in a housing organization called ACORN that is an absolute ill-run enterprise, and I can't believe we would take money away from debt retirement to put it in a housing program that doesn't work.

Here's the relevant part of the Dodd proposal:

TRANSFER OF A PERCENTAGE OF PROFITS.

DEPOSITS.Not less than 20 percent of any profit realized on the sale of each troubled asset purchased under this Act shall be deposited as provided in paragraph (2).
USE OF DEPOSITS.Of the amount referred to in paragraph (1)
1. 65 percent shall be deposited into the Housing Trust Fund established under section 1338 of the Federal Housing Enterprises Regulatory Reform Act of 1992 (12 U.S.C. 4568); and
2. 35 percent shall be deposited into the Capital Magnet Fund established under section 1339 of that Act (12 U.S.C. 4569).

REMAINDER DEPOSITED IN THE TREASURY.All amounts remaining after payments under paragraph (1) shall be paid into the General Fund of the Treasury for reduction of the public debt.

Profits? We'll be lucky not to take a bath on the purchase of these toxic assets. If we get 70 cents on the dollar, that would be a success.

That being said, this section proves that the Democrats in Congress have learned nothing from this financial collapse. They still want to game the market to pick winners and losers by funding programs for unqualified and marginally-qualified borrowers to buy houses they may not be able to afford — and that's the innocent explanation for this clause.

The real purpose of section D is to send more funds to La Raza and ACORN through housing welfare, via the slush fund of the HTF. They want to float their political efforts on behalf of Democrats with public money, which was always the purpose behind the HTF. They did the same thing in April in the first bailout bill, setting aside $100 million in "counseling" that went in large part to ACORN and La Raza, and at least in the former case, providing taxpayer funding for a group facing criminal charges in more than a dozen states for fraud.

It's bad enough that taxpayers have to pay the price for Congress' decade-long distortions of the lending and investment markets. If we realize a profit from the bailout, that money should go to pay down the debt or get returned to taxpayers as dividends from their investment — not to organizations committing voter fraud, and not to restarting the entire cycle of government meddling in lending markets. I'd support a rational bailout package, but anything that funds the HTF needs to get stopped.

Update: Here's the video with Graham:

Update II: The Wall Street Journal reported on the HTF/ACORN/Democratic connections in July:

The housing bill signed Wednesday by President George W. Bush will provide a stream of billions of dollars for distressed homeowners and communities and the nonprofit groups that serve them.

One of the biggest likely beneficiaries, despite Republican objections: Acorn, a housing advocacy group that also helps lead ambitious voter-registration efforts benefiting Democrats. …

Partly because of the role of Acorn and other housing advocacy groups, the White House and its allies in Congress resisted Democrats' plans to include money for a new affordable-housing trust fund and $4 billion in grants to restore housing in devastated neighborhoods. In the end, the money stayed in the bill; the White House saw little choice.

What most riles Republicans about the bill is the symbiotic relationship between the Democratic Party and the housing advocacy groups, of which Acorn is among the biggest. Groups such as the National Council of La Raza and the National Urban League also lobby to secure government-funded services for their members and seek to move them to the voting booth. Acorn has been singled out for criticism because of its reach, its endorsements of Democrats, and past flaws in its bookkeeping and voter-registration efforts that its detractors in Congress have seized upon.

Once again, the Democrats want to set up a self-funding mechanism, this time by exploiting a severe financial crisis. Despicable.

Graham, McCain working overtime on bailout

2008-09-27T16:51:00.001-04:00

Burning Down The House: What Caused Our Economic Crisis?

2008-09-27T14:46:00.001-04:00

Democrats in their own words Covering up the Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac Scam that caused our Economic Crisis

2008-09-27T14:42:00.001-04:00

John McCain vs. Barack Obama: The Best President

2008-09-27T02:03:00.001-04:00

'Some men use change to promote their careers and some men use their careers to promote change.' S.P.

John McCain Discusses His Bracelet

2008-09-27T01:59:00.001-04:00

and Obama says: I...uh...uh... I have a bracelet too... except he has to read the name on it to remember the soldier's mother's name who gave it to him. What a farce... what disrespect. He should send it back to her because he clearly doesn't respect the significance of the the gift.

McCain Is Right

2008-09-26T23:29:00.001-04:00

Michael Bloomberg Criticizes Bush Economic Stimulus Plan

2008-09-26T16:50:00.002-04:00

NYC mayor Michael Bloomberg recalls his reaction when Congress first voted for the economic stimulus package.

Bloomberg considered the foolish plan to be like "buying an alcoholic a drink."

Bloomberg discussed his long term job infrastructure plan with Governors Edward Rendell and Arnold Schwarzenegger.

Crisis on Wall Street - Paul Krugman Weighs In...

2008-09-26T15:21:00.001-04:00

Obama’s Whining, Will it Work?

2008-09-26T15:11:00.002-04:00

By Larry Johnsonclose

Name: Larry Johnson
Email: larry_johnson@earthlink.net
Site:
http://NoQuarterUSA.net

As noted in previous posts I am in Europe finishing up work on a project related to national security. This gives me a great perch to observe the wave of financial news bearing down on the United States with the markets closing in Asia and the markets in Europe just getting started. So I am watching CNBC's Europe version and there is Barack Obama on the tube whining about "this didn't happen on our watch."

Couple of observations. First, it doesn't come off as Presidential as all. Finger pointing in such a hesitant manner looks weak. Second, you are dead wrong. The wheels came off when Democrats controlled the Congress and ignored repeated warnings from Bernake and Paulson about the impending crisis. Try to sell that.

Then there is the matter of the money you, Barack Obama, pocketed over the last four years. When Senators Dodd and Kerry, not exactly newbies on the Hill, are the only legislators who have taken more money than you from Fannie Mae, how do you maintain the lie that you had nothing to do with this? Fannie Mae just gave you money cuz you're a nice guy?

What about the $600,000 plus from Goldman Sachs or the almost $400,000 from Citi Group? Dude, you've only been in the Senate for less than four years and you've pulled more money from financial lobbyist fat cats than any other Senator on a per annum basis. How long before the media catch on and ask you to explain?

Fox News has picked up the scent:

And now your buds at ACORN are trying to get their nose into the bailout trough to the tune of $140,000,000.00 Are you shitting me? One of the reasons we are in this mess is because your buds, Dodd and Frank, kept pushing to raise the amount of money that could be loaned to the low income housing efforts advocated by ACORN. I venture to say if ACORN had not been called out in the blogosphere for the corrupt thugs they are you might have pulled this off. But not now. The American people are awakening to the fraud perpetrated on them by the likes of ACORN and others. On this one we are saying no way, now how.

You can't find a video of the head of Fannie Mae celebrating any Republicans. But Barack, the CEO is praising the Congressional Black Caucus while you are sitting there beaming. Not on your watch?

If you want to read more about ACORN's complicity in this mess go here (hat tip Nancy).

31 of Obama’s Flip-Flops: Do you know where he will stand on these issues if elected?

2008-09-26T02:23:00.001-04:00

1) was against 1990s welfare reform, now for it

2) was for Washington, DC gun ban, now against it

3) was against death penalty for any reason, now favors it for child rapists and Osama Bin Laden

4) was against NAFTA, now for it

5) was against Cuban embargo, now for it

6) promised to accept campaign spending limits/matching funds if McCain did, now refuses to participate even though McCain does

7) was "strongly" against FISA, then voted for it

8) was against homosexual marriage, now supports it

9) was against personally displaying patriotism via flag lapel pins, now wears one

10) was against Jerusalem being the undivided capital of Israel, now for it

11) was for chatting unconditionally with Iran's President, now for conditions

12) had promised never to "disown" Reverend Wright, now Wright is disowned

13) for 20 years was for family's membership in hateful so-called "Trinity Church", now against it

14) was for mental health exceptions for allowing partial-birth abortions, now against them

15) voted against laws protecting abortion survivors, now for such laws

16) claimed to be for several town hall-style debates with Senator McCain before the conventions, but his campaign later said only one, and only at a time no one would watch (Independence Day)

17) promised to never use negative ads, yet started using them against McCain before McCain went negative

18) was against President Bush's faith-based initiatives, now for them

19) had demanded that Bush boycott Olympic opening ceremonies, then he financially supported the ceremonies by buying advertising time during them

20) was for pulling troops out of Iraq per timetable, with little or no regard to conditions, now "entirely conditions-based"

21) two years ago, promised to bring assistance to impoverished African school where 10 of his relatives attend, but nothing yet

22) said in June that "my party" wouldn't take money from lobbyists, but as of late July his campaign as well as his party have accepted tens of thousands of dollars from individual registered lobbyists

23) was against all offshore drilling, now for it as long as it's "carefully circumscribed"

24) as of 7/7, was against using oil from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve to bring about a "decrease in gas prices", now for it

25) was for punishing Michigan and Florida delegates by not seating them at the Dem convention, now he wants them seated

26) said in June that "my party" wouldn't take money from PACs, but as of mid-August he's accepting large donations from PACs and unions

27) said before PA primary, no "bagmen"*, but will have them for general election

28) was against 527s (PACs, special-interest groups, and non-affiliated political allies) advertising in his behalf, but now he's allowing it

29) was for raising taxes on many individuals and corporations, but now that the economy is better, he says those tax increases will have to wait until the economy is much better

30) called for bipartisan commission on Wall Street oversight in April, but after McCain recently agreed, Obama rejected the idea as a political dodge

31) said every candidate should reveal complete earmark history when it was him vs. Hillary, but now that earmark king Biden is his partner, secrecy is OK

(list by jgapinoy)

Obama’s lawyer threatens TV stations that run NRA ad

2008-09-26T02:13:00.002-04:00

Usually in cases like this, Obama has his cult followers inundate the offending station with irate, semi-coherent phone calls, like they did recently to try to knock hatemongering smear merchant David Freddoso off the air for the crime of committing journalism critical of The One. For whatever reason they've decided that won't work here, so they're opting for Plan B. Straight out of the Democratic handbook Harry Reid used to threaten ABC's broadcast license for showing the "Path to 9/11," here's Obama lawyer Robert Bauer warning station managers not to air the NRA's new anti-Obama "Hunter" ad if they want to stay in the FCC's good graces. Follow the link and read his letter and the NRA's rebuttal for point/counterpoint. Is the NRA attributing gun policy positions to Obama which he no longer holds? Hard to say. Is there such a thing as a consistent Obama gun position? He flip-flopped opportunistically on the D.C. gun ban and was caught lying a few months ago about whether he'd ever seen that 1996 questionnaire in which his campaign claimed he supported a total ban on guns. Read Dave Kopel's painstaking response to FactCheck's piece on the NRA ads for more cases of obfuscation, noting particularly Obama's habit of speaking of gun regulations not in terms of what he does or doesn't support but what is and isn't "politically practicable" at a given moment. No wonder Guy Benson's worried about him bringing back the Fairness Doctrine. What happens when a deep blue Congress make that "politically practicable" too?

Obama Campaign Cease and Desist Letter

"Barack Obama would be the most anti-gun president in our nation's history. That's the truth," concluded Cox. "NRA-PVF has the facts on our side. No amount of running from or lying about his record and then intimidating news outlets in the hope of deceiving American gun owners and hunters is going to work. Those strong arm tactics may work in Chicago, but not in Pennsylvania and Ohio, and not as long as NRA-PVF has anything to say about it."

--nra - pvf--NRA-PVF Response Memo

Barnes: On the Debates

2008-09-26T01:52:00.001-04:00

by Fred Barnes

The *Weekly Standard*

There aren't many outfits as arrogant, self-important, and aggrandizing as the unelected Commission on Presidential Debates (CPD), sponsor of tonight's debate between Barack Obama and John McCain. When John McCain said Wednesday the debate might have to be delayed so he could work on the financial bailout, the commission responded, in effect, "Sorry, John, the debate must go on, whether or not financial markets collapse. The debate is more important."

That was just the latest example of high-handedness by the commission, which has hijacked the debates from the candidates, the campaigns, and the news media. The commission picked the sites for the debates (three presidential, one vice presidential) and charged the colleges involved $1.5 million for the honor. Then CPD announced the moderators for each debate without consulting with Obama or McCain campaigns or even informing them ahead of time.

The moderators are all nice people: Jim Lehrer, Gwen Ifill, Tom Brokaw, Bob Schieffer. But all four of them are liberals, more or less, of the mainstream media variety. Plus, the commission picked no one from cable news, where millions of people who follow campaigns and elections most closely go for their political news.

The McCain and Obama campaigns had little trouble working out their own differences on debate format. Their negotiations were amicable. When the commission stepped in, the talks became less friendly.

Getting the commission to go along with the format agreed upon by the candidates was a problem. In fact, the McCain campaign was so upset by the commission's overbearing attitude that it briefly considered dumping the commission and finding another vehicle for the debates. But the Obama campaign wasn't interested and the McCain folks dropped the idea.

The commission had its own plans for the format. The CPB honchos--Republican Frank Fahrenkopf, Democrat Paul Kirk, and who-knows-what Janet Brown--wanted Obama and McCain to be seated for tonight's debate. The campaigns wanted them to stand, and prevailed on this point. Representatives of Obama and McCain also forced the commission to allow the first debate to be on foreign policy, not domestic issues. And they insisted, against the commission's wishes, to have more questions asked at the town hall presidential debate.

But those changes came about only after a struggle. The commission was set on imposing its own preferences. After all, the commission regards the presidential debates as its property now and forever.

The CPB took over the debates in 1987 after the League of Women Voters was sacked as the sponsor. The league had often irritated the campaigns, especially the campaign of President Carter in 1980. Carter aides privately mocked the league as "the plague of women voters" and "the league of women vultures."

The commission ran the show in 1988, 1992, 1996, 2000, and 2004. One of the biggest complaints this year was the selection of sites in Mississippi, Tennessee, and New York--not battleground states. The vice presidential debate is scheduled for next Thursday in St. Louis, Missouri.

Obama Irrelevant, Dems Want McCain to Help Fix the Financial Meltdown

2008-09-25T10:08:00.001-04:00

By Larry Johnsonclose
Author: Larry Johnson
Email: larry_johnson@earthlink.net
Site: http://NoQuarterUSA.net

When it comes to dealing with the financial meltdown none of the Democratic leaders are asking for Obama to return to town? Why? He is irrelevant. But not John McCain. His participation and leadership are seen as critical, even by Democrats. Just listen:

Anybody hear Reid, Pelosi, or anybody clamoring for the golden child of Illinois to come to Washington to help out? Nope. Nothing but crickets.

So Reid insists McCain get engaged and then, when McCain calls his bluff, Harry Reid wets himself. I guess the Senator from Utah suddenly realized he had invited the lion for dinner. He flipped flopped.

Jake Tapper reports:

A Democrat tells ABC News that, in a phone call late this afternoon, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., told Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., that it would NOT be helpful for him to come back to Washington, D.C., to work on the Wall Street bailout bill.

McCain this afternoon suspended his campaign and said he would skip the first presidential debate in order to return to Capitol Hill to work on the log-jammed Bush administration legislation, which, as of Wednesday afternoon, was in peril.

McCain had phoned Reid to ask about the prospects of him, Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., and others to sit down and work together on hammering out a bipartisan proposal.

“Sorry,” Reid said to him, a Democrat close to Reid says.

Reid then read McCain the statement he had just put out: “This is a critical time for our country,” says the Reid statement. “While I appreciate that both candidates have signaled their willingness to help, Congress and the administration have a process in place to reach a solution to this unprecedented financial crisis. I understand that the candidates are putting together a joint statement at Sen. Obama’s suggestion. But it would not be helpful at this time to have them come back during these negotiations and risk injecting presidential politics into this process or distract important talks about the future of our nation’s economy. If that changes, we will call upon them. We need leadership; not a campaign photo op. If there were ever a time for both candidates to hold a debate before the American people about this serious challenge, it is now.”

A source close to Reid said McCain didn’t have much to say after that. Reid, the source says, thinks McCain’s maneuver is a gimmick born from bad poll numbers and the fact that “debate prep must not be going very well.”

Man, is Reid a pathetic wimp or what? First he wants McCain and then he does not. When faced with the financial equivalent of what Warren Buffet describes as “Pearl Harbor,” John McCain steps up, Barack Obama turns to Jim Johnson (one of the guys who helped create this mess), and Harry Reid is spinning like a top.

Obama Ranks Second In Freddie/Fannie Contributions

2008-09-24T11:52:00.001-04:00

Who is the Real Uniter?

2008-09-24T11:50:00.001-04:00

In an article from USA Today it seems some OpEd writers are actually looking at things as they really are, objectively. Here's part of the article:

McCain, in Congress for 26 years to Obama's four, has the longer record of producing bipartisan alliances on tough issues. He has bucked his party again and again to do just that — on immigration, federal judges and campaign finance, to name three on which he enraged many Republicans by defying the party position and working with Democrats. McCain-the-maverick has reverted to party orthodoxy on taxes and other issues this year, which will put him in a bind if elected: Would he stick with those new positions, or compromise with the Democratic Congress he'd likely be working with?

As McCain points out on the campaign trail, Obama has a much thinner record of bucking his own party. With the exception of tough fights for ethics reforms in the Illinois Senate and in Washington — where he angered Democratic colleagues by insisting on the disclosure of lobbyists who bundle campaign donations — Obama has rarely challenged party dogma on the sort of big, contentious issues he'd face as president. As a U.S. senator, he has taken liberal Democratic positions on most issues. Studies by Congressional Quarterly show Obama has voted with his party almost 97% of the time, vs. about 85% for McCain.

Where Obama has diverged, it has often been rhetorical and reactive: After securing the nomination, he expressed disagreement with a Supreme Court decision that struck down the death penalty in cases of child rape, and he approved a decision that overturned a strict gun control law in Washington, D.C. He has signaled support for a modified form of affirmative action (extending it to poorer whites and denying it to better-off African Americans), and he has supported a key Bush initiative that funnels federal dollars to faith-based groups.

Obama's bipartisan accomplishments in Washington have been on significant, but relatively non-controversial, efforts to secure nuclear weapons and establish a federal-spending database. What he lacks is a record of challenging his own party on divisive, difficult issues — the deficit, immigration, energy — that he'd have to reach out to Republicans on if he's elected. Even with a Democratic majority in Congress, it takes 60 votes in the Senate to pass most major measures.

MSNBC : Biden is Called Out on Earmarks…

2008-09-24T11:34:00.002-04:00

Courtesy of Hotair, read and enjoy:

David Schuster and James Popkin take a closer look at Joe Biden and his earmarks, which Biden has refused to itemize prior to this year — when he's requested over $340 million in pork. Instead of an Olbermann rationalization about Biden's earmarks somehow having the power to transform America when combined with Obamessiah-y goodness, Popkin and Schuster note the staggering hypocrisy between Barack Obama's primary rhetoric and his defense of his running mate now:

Here's the video:

Obama: A Man Who's Cast Tough Votes

2008-09-24T11:28:00.001-04:00

by Brian Faughnan

I was curious about Barack Obama's record of casting 'present' votes in the Illinois legislature, so I decided to go back and look at some Senate transcripts from his first term to see what more I could learn. I was surprised at what I found.

At least in his first two years in the Senate, Obama seemed to have an unusual problem just casting votes -- physically. Sometimes he simply missed the votes (recall his debate admission that he is very disorganized. Other times he cast votes, but later said that he had accidentally voted the wrong way. Some highlights:

March 14, 1997 Thank you Madam Speaker (sic). Will the sponsor yield? I let this – I voted to have this bill come out of committee, because I think it was useful to have this kind of discussion on the bill, and I think the Senator has good intent… So although I did vote Yes to get this out of the committee, I – as currently constituted in light of the discussion, I think that it may – I will probably vote in opposition to the bill.

March 18, 1997 This is actually on the previous bill, 1076. I pressed yes, but my button didn't come up.

March 19, 1997 The – yesterday on Senate Bill 1000, I should have – I was trying to vote Yes on this and I was recorded as a No. Just wanted to have that in the record.

March 20, 1997 Yes, Madam President. On Senate bill 700, I should have pressed a Yes vote; pressed a Present vote. I'd like that reflected in the record, please.

May 13, 1997 Yes, Mr. President. I was off the floor and I was wondering if we were going to go back on 2nd reading. I'd ask the body for 2147. Move it from 2nd to 3rd.

May 28, 1997 Thank you, Madam President. My button seems to be sticking. So I was recorded as not voting on that; I would have voted aye.

October 30, 1997 Thank you, Madam President, Members of the Chamber, the sponsor. Let me start off by just saying that – I want to apologize to the sponsor because the – I'm originally recorded as a – as a Yes vote on this, and it's an indication, I think, that I wasn't paying sufficient attention. I do have concerns on this bill, and I just want to express those concerns very quickly…

November 14, 1997 Thank you, Mr. President. I had the same problem on Senate Bill 493. I'd like to be recorded as a No vote.

[Later that same day]

Thank you, Mr. President. On Senate Bill 452, I was out in the hall when the vote came up and I didn't get back here in time. I would like to be recorded as a Yes vote.

May 22, 1998 I apologize, Mr. President. I was off the floor and missed House Bill 1706. I just wanted to record that I would have voted in the affirmative.

I haven't looked at the rest of his tenure in the Senate to determine if this problem continued after his first term (1997-1998). But it certainly is odd.

There's a maxim among Members of Congress that you can't go too far wrong voting for a bill that fails, or against a bill that passes. In either case, half the people are happy because of the outcome of the vote, and the other half are happy that you voted with them. No one can hold anything against you.

Was Obama trying to take this one step further, and actually vote 'both ways?' If so, then it was a master stroke to hit on the idea of voting 'present.' That's a lot simpler than constantly explaining accidental votes.

Palin meets Karzai, Uribe, Kissinger -- 9.23.08 -- GOP Vice Presidential nominee Governor Sarah Palin sits down with world lead

2008-09-24T11:12:00.001-04:00

McCain @ MN rally, Part 1 -- 9.19.08 -- Road to Victory tour hits Blaine, MN

2008-09-24T02:00:00.001-04:00

McCain @ MN rally, Part 2 -- 9.19.08 -- Road to Victory tour hits Blaine, MN

2008-09-24T01:59:00.001-04:00

Overseas

2008-09-24T01:55:00.001-04:00