2008 Presidential Candidate Talking Point Comparison

Check out the following blog post from my mirror site:

2008 Presidential Candidate Talking Point Comparison

(Sorry, but I could not get the html code to cooperate with me on this blog.)

John David Powell: Don't Underestimate Race And Trust In Choosing A President

I just got a hold of this article. It is a gem that contains nuggets of wisdom that will go a long way to helping people see clearly what is happening in the politcal arena right now and what will happen in the years to come.

John David Powell takes a look at a couple of the issues we have been facing in this election and how the Obama campaign responded to them compared to how other campaigns responded in the past.

Let's start with playing the race card:

[T]oday, less than two weeks from Election Day, it’s easy to understand why some non-black voters don’t want others to know they do not support Obama. Who can blame them when any criticism or questioning of the candidate of change results in immediate old-school accusations of racism?

I've even had some comments left on certain posts of this blog accusing me of racism despite the fact that the issue of race was never brought up in those postings. Just the fact that I am opposed to a socialist candidate was enough justification for commenters to bring out the race card and a braod-brushed, unsubstantiated charge. As Dustin Hoffman said in Hook: "Bad form."

And we always seem to come back to domestic terrorist William Ayers:

And that brings us to the second factor, the issue of trust. Obama never really condemns the past and current political views of fellow Chicagoan Bill Ayers, pointing out, instead, that Ayers’ terrorist activities occurred when Obama was 8 years old, and, therefore, have no connection to Obama today. If that’s true, then Obama’s position negates the argument of some black people who push for reparations because their ancestors were slaves. That’s because slavery occurred before those living today were born, and, therefore, has no connection to anyone today.

That is a dead-on-target shot that the Obama campaign cannot dodge. If Barack Obama cannot be held accountable for being a friend and business partner to a man who committed terrorist acts when Obama was 8 years old, then neither can white people in general be held accountable for something that occurred long before any of them were even born. To hold such a double standard seems to be standard for the Democrats though. They hold a low standard for themselves and high standard for everyone else.

But what is Obama hiding by not being completely forthcoming with his past? And what is he afraid will happen if his past is brought up and scrutinized by the MSM? He certainly can't be afraid of losing the election. Powell looks at this too:

But Citizen Obama does not fully trust the American people to know his full and true relationship with Ayers, because he does not trust the American people to look at his life and accept him as our president. The American people knew George W. Bush grew up around such neo-con luminaries as Don Rumsfeld and Dick Cheney, but we elected him twice to the presidency. The American people knew Bush was an average college student, and at one time was what some would call a drunkard who even lost his driver’s license for drunk driving, but we elected him twice to the presidency. The American people knew Bush was an unsuccessful businessman and person not glib or quick on his feet, but we elected him twice to the presidency. The American people only know about Obama what Obama wants us to know. And mistrust in the judgment of the American people may tip enough votes to McCain, a candidate the American people know well.

Yes, we knew more about George Bush in 2000 than we know about Barack Obama in 2008. We also know more about John McCain than we know about Barack Obama because John McCain is not afraid of people looking into his past.

That's trust.

You can access the complete column on-line here:

Don't Underestimate Race And Trust In Choosing A President
John David Powell
MensNewsDaily.com
October 21, 2008

Hypocrisy Of The Leftist Media And The Obama Campaign

So, now that Joe Wurzelbacher has forced Barack Obama into admitting that he is a socialist, what does the media do? They attack Joe. But that is not the crux of this post.

Charles Krauthammer has penned a column that pretty much pegs Old Media and the Dems in general for their hypocritical stances on stories relating to the campaign.

From his column at Town Hall:

Let me get this straight. A couple of agitated yahoos in a rally of thousands yell something offensive and incendiary, and John McCain and Sarah Palin are not just guilty by association -- with total strangers, mind you -- but worse: guilty according to The New York Times of "race-baiting and xenophobia." But should you bring up Barack Obama's real associations -- 20 years with Jeremiah Wright, working on two foundations and distributing money with William Ayers, citing the raving Michael Pfleger as one who helps him keep his moral compass (Chicago Sun-Times, April 2004) and the long-standing relationship with the left-wing vote-fraud specialist ACORN -- you have crossed the line into illegitimate guilt by association.

And it isn't just what the libs are reading into these situations. Sometimes, they make things up knowing that other libs are going to be gullible enough to believe it.

Remember McCain's Berlin/celebrity ad that showed a shot of Paris Hilton? An appalling attempt to exploit white hostility at the idea of black men "becoming sexually involved with white women," fulminated New York Times columnist Bob Herbert. He took to TV to denounce McCain's exhumation of that most vile prejudice, pointing out McCain's gratuitous insertion in the ad of "two phallic symbols," the Washington Monument and the Leaning Tower of Pisa. Except that Herbert was entirely delusional. There was no Washington Monument. There was no Leaning Tower. Just photographs seen in every newspaper in the world of Barack Obama's Berlin rally in the setting he himself had chosen, Berlin's Victory Column.

These charges of racism and other bogus claims are getting tiresome. One wonders where Old Media was when Obama supporters sported tee-shirts that referred to Hillary Clinton in derogatory terms. And where are the media charges of sexism whenever Obama supporters sport tee-shirts that read "Sarah Palin is a c*nt?"

Nowhere to be found. Old Media is so deep in the tank for Obama that you wonder why they haven't drowned yet.

But, the libs are attacking Democrats too.

On Tuesday night, Rachel Maddow of MSNBC and Jonathan Alter of Newsweek fell over themselves agreeing that the "political salience" of the Republican attack on ACORN is, yes, its unstated appeal to racial prejudice. This about an organization that is being accused of voter registration fraud in about a dozen states. In Nevada, the investigating secretary of state is a Democrat. Is he playing the race card too?

In essence, here is what has happened:

Obama has a relationship with domestic terrorist William Ayers: Ols Media ignores it.
Obama has a relationship with racist, America-hating Reverend Wright: Old Media ignores it.
Obama has a relationship with scandal-ridden ACORN: Old Media ignores it.

McCain points out Obama's relationship with domestic terrorist William Ayers: Old Media accuses McCain of being racist.
Talk Radio and New Media bring to light Reverend Wright's anti-American speeches: Old Media accuses Talk Radio and New Media of being racist.
Republicans point out the relationship between Obama and ACORN: Old Media accuses the Republicans of being racist.

Notice the theme here? The only ones who are bringing up race are the libs and the Dems.

I don't know about the rest of you, but I am getting really tired of these false accusations being thrown around.

The parting shot shows exactly how Obama has been playing the race card:

Just weeks ago, in Springfield, Mo., and elsewhere, he warned darkly that George Bush and John McCain were going to try to frighten you by saying that, among other scary things, Obama has "a funny name" and "doesn't look like all those other presidents on those dollar bills." McCain has never said that, nor anything like that. When asked at the time to produce one instance of McCain deploying race, the Obama campaign could not. Yet here was Obama firing a pre-emptive charge of racism against a man who had not indulged in it. An extraordinary rhetorical feat, and a dishonorable one. What makes this all the more dismaying is that it comes from Barack Obama, who has consistently presented himself as a healer, a man of a new generation above and beyond race, the man who would turn the page on the guilt-tripping grievance politics of Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton.

That's right. When confronted with the truth, the Obama campaign couldn't show any evidence of racism at all.

You can access the complete column on-line here:

Obama's Betrayed Message
Charles Krauthammer
TownHall.com
October 17, 2008

ACORN Tries To Register Mickey Mouse In Florida

ACORN has got to be the biggest news story of the decade and Old Media outlets (ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN, Washington Post and New York Times) are completely ignoring it. I say "ignoring" because the information is out there and everybody knows it's happening. But, because of the bad press it would give to the Democrats and Barack Obama, the news outlets won't touch it.

This is from the St. Petersburg Times:

Mickey Mouse tried to register to vote in Florida this summer. Orange County elections officials rejected his application, which was stamped with the logo of the nonprofit group ACORN. ... Nationwide, ACORN is a favorite GOP target for allegations of voter registration fraud this year. That's not new. Similar complaints followed the 2004 elections. A criminal investigation in Florida found no evidence of fraud. ACORN even has a cameo role in the scandal over the 2006 firings of several U.S. attorneys by the Bush Justice Department. ... Brevard County elections officials have turned over 23 suspect registrations from ACORN to prosecutors. The state Division of Elections has received two ACORN-related complaints, in Orange and Broward counties. ACORN wasn't active in the Tampa Bay area. Last week, however, Pinellas County elections officials gave local prosecutors 35 questionable registrations from another group, Work for Progress. The GOP accuses ACORN of registration fraud all over the country. In Las Vegas, authorities said the group's petitions included the names of the starting lineup of the Dallas Cowboys. "This is part of a widespread and systemic effort … to undermine the election process," says Republican National Committee chief counsel Sean Cairncross, who describes ACORN as a "quasicriminal organization."

If you aren't paying attention, you should start doing so. Bogus voter registrations for names like "Mickey Mouse" are easy to spot. But what if bogus voter registrations had names like "William Jackson," "Jennifer Hanson," or "Robert Hopkins?" (I randomly made up these names. My apologies to anyone who actually has them.) They wouldn't be so easy to detect. As such, it would become possible for one person to cast more than one vote.

We need to vigilant about this stuff. We need a President who will stand against voter fraud. Right now, Barack Obama doesn't stand against it. He simply complains about people rightfully linking him to ACORN.

You can access the complete column on-line here:

Vote Drives Defended, Despite Fake Names
Richard Danielson
St. Petersburg Times
October 14, 2008

Governor Palin Attacks Obama-Ayers Connection, Obama Campaign Responds With Misleading Smears

For weeks now, the Conservatives and Republicans have been telling John McCain to take the gloves off. Well, Governor Sarah Palin did just that this past weekend and revived the debate over Barack Obama's association with domestic terrorist William Ayers. The association is real and deserves to be looked into. But the Obama campaign came out with a response that was nothing short of misleading, if not completely irresponsible.

Here is what Rep. Rahm Emanuel, said in response on CNN:

"If we are going to go down this road _ you know, Barack Obama was eight years old, somehow responsible for Bill Ayers," he said. "At 58, John McCain was associating with Charles Keating." "If we really want to talk who is associating with who, we will," Emanuel said. "The American people will lose in that transaction."

No, we will not lose. We will gain a clear understanding of exactly who Barack Obama is and what his true beliefs are.

William Ayers is an unrepentent terrorist who planted bombs at the Pentagon and local Police Stations back in the 70's with a domestic terrorist organization called the Weathermen. That is a fact.

Barack Obama worked with Ayers in the Chicago Annenberg Project and even launched a political campaign from Ayer's living room but still refers to him as "just a guy in my neighborhood." We need to know more about the relationship between the Democrat Presidential Candidate and his domestic terrorist friends. Obama's actions as an adult cannot simply be chalked up to the ignorance of an 8-year-old.

As for John McCain's role in the Keating scandal, he was exonerated of any wrong-doing. Who says so? The New York Times said so back in 1999:

Three other members of the Keating Five were more seriously rebuked by the ethics panel and all of them retired rather than face difficult re-election battles. John Glenn of Ohio, who was exonerated with Mr. McCain, was also re-elected in 1992, but retired in 1998.

Don't you find it rather interesting that Rahm Emanuel neglected to mention the fact that McCain was exonerated by a Democrat lawyer who was investigating the whole scandal?

Yes, I agree. The omission not only misleading, it is irresponsible.

You can access these stories on-line here:

Senate Inquiry In Keating Case Tested McCain
Jill Abramson and Alison Mitchell
The New York Times
November 21, 1999

Obama Ad Links McCain To Keating Scandal
Charles Babington
Associated Press
October 5, 2008

Check Out The Website RightChange.com

I saw this ad on TV and decided to go check it out. It is a website called RightChange.com. It exposes the truth behind Barack Obama's rhetoric and shed's light what he has really been doing during his rise to power. It also brings to light certain facts and figures that are conspicuously missing from the Democrats' campaign ads.

RightChange.com

For example, here is a good analysis of Barack Obama's Tax Porposals:

In 2009, Barack Obama and the Democratic Congress have an idea for a bill. Well, really, it’s a lot of bills that will be paid for by nearly every American in the form of higher taxes and higher costs for food, energy and other products. So if you have a retirement account, work in or shop at a small business, are close or in retirement, or even flip on a light switch, then there are a few things that you should consider. Under that plan: Small main street businesses would be forced to pay tax rates as high as 62.3% under Senator Obama’s tax proposals.1 Senator Obama’s tax plan would tax small businesses at a higher rate than large corporations!2 Taxes on retirement income and savings could increase by at least 33%, hitting millions of seniors when they need these resources the most.3 4 million workers over the age of 50 – those eagerly looking forward to retirement – would be hit with increased tax bills.4 Millions of Americans would only keep 38 cents of every dollar that they earn.5 Senator Obama’s tax plan would reduce the after tax wages of millions of workers by 17.7%.6 It will take 227 days per year, nearly 8 months, just to pay your tax bill!7 97,065 carpenters, 110,908 police officers, 254,992 nurses, 208,562 postsecondary teachers and 237,000 dentists would see tax increases, if the earnings cap was successfully eliminated.8 10.3 million workers would see an average of $5,650 taken from their paycheck and given to government programs.9 Even YOU might be considered “Rich.”

The citations for the above points can be found on-line here:

Citations

All nice and researched.

This is a very good website for information with proper references to back it up.

You can read more about the issues on-line here:

The Issues. Get The Facts.
RightChange.com

Vice Presidential Debate Moderator Is In The Tank For Barack Obama: Gwen Ifill

Gwen Ifill is clearly in the tank for Obama and has somehow managed to land the moderator slot for the Palin-Biden Debate.

This should be a wake-up call for America. When our journalists lie to us by claiming objectivity where no objectivity exists, we should call them on it and bring it out into the open. That is why the New Media and the blogosphere has been such a good thing for us.

Ifill has a book coming out soon. It is entitled: The Breakthrough: Politics and Race in the Age of Obama. How anyone can pen a book like that and claim to be impartial is beyond the realm of rationally thinking people.

Michelle Malkin over at TownHall has more on this:

In an imaginary world where liberal journalists are held to the same standards as everyone else, Ifill would be required to make a full disclosure at the start of the debate. She would be required to turn to the cameras and tell the national audience that she has a book coming out on Jan. 20, 2009 -- a date that just happens to coincide with the inauguration of the next president of the United States. ... 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?

Ifill should do the disclosure thing and tell the entire nation right before the debate that she is an Obama supporter and that she has a vested interest in an Obama/Biden win. If not, Governor Palin should do it for her frequently throughout the debate.

Will Ifill be fair? Let's look at that record so far:

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. ... During the Democratic National Convention, Ifill offered her neutral analysis on NBC News before Michelle Obama's speech: "A lot of people have never seen anything that looks like a Michelle Obama before. She's educated, she's beautiful, she's tall, she tells you what she thinks and they hope that she can tell a story about Barack Obama and about herself." During the Republican National Convention, the PBS ombudsman fielded numerous complaints about Ifill's coverage of Sarah Palin's speech. Wrote Brian Meyers of Granby, Ct.: "I was appalled by Gwen Ifill's commentary directly following Gov. Sarah Palin's speech. Her attitude was dismissive and the look on her face was one of disgust. Clearly, she was agitated by what most critics view as a well-delivered speech. It is quite obvious that Ms. Ifill supports Obama as she struggled to say anything redemptive about Gov. Palin's performance. I am disappointed in Ms. Ifill's complete disregard for journalistic objectivity." Like Obama, Ifill, who is black, is quick to play the race card at the first sign of criticism. In an interview with the Washington Post a few weeks ago, she carped: "[N]o one's ever assumed a white reporter can't cover a white candidate."

You knew the race card was coming, right? Seems that we can't get away from that particualr tactic, even when race isn't in question.

Ifill should recuse herself from this debate, or at the very least, give a full disclosure of her interests at the very beginning.

And if she doesn't give full disclosure, Governor Palin should do it for her.

You can access the complete column on-line here:

A Debate "Moderator" In The Tank For Obama
Michelle Malkin
TownHall.com
October 1, 2008

Barack Obama Truth Squads To 'Target' Opposition Voices

This post harks back to one of my earlier postings about Obama's attempt at trampling Free Speech. This one too.

One of the hallmarks of a socialist agenda is control of information. The Nazis did it back in the 1930's, the Communists have done it since the 1917 October Revolution. And now, Barack Obama is bringing that type of censorship here to the shores of America.

The big story out of Missouri is that Barack Obama has begun enlisting law enforcement personnel in targetting those who may oppose his candidacy and working to silence their criticisms of him and his socialist policies. This does not bode well for the Republic. Nothing good can come from anyone in any position of power who attempts to silence dissent either by force, or the threat of force.

According to KMOW News in St. Louis:

Senator Barack Obama's presidential campaign has asking Missouri law enforcement to target anyone who lies or runs a misleading television ad during the presidential campaign.

Those were the exact words. They want to "target" anyone who has an opposing viewpoint to Brack Obama.

But, these self-appointed "truth-squaders" are extremely partisan in their selection of what the truth is. For example, the Obama campaign ran an ad stating that John McCain was against all stem-cell research. This is a blatant lie as John McCain has expressed support for adult stem-cell research.

Or how about all the lies the Democrats put out about Gov. Sarah Palin? When the Dems spread the lie that trig was really britol's baby? Where was the truth-squad then? When the Dems spead the lie that Gov. Palin wanted to ban books? Where was the truth-squad then?

Apparently, the Obama truth-squaders are perfectly okay with Dems telling lies.

Gov. Matt Blunt of Missouri released a statement about the situation:

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.

You can read more about this story at the following links:

Gov. Blunt Statement On Obama Campaign’s Abusive Use Of Missouri Law Enforcement
Gov. Matt Blunt
Missouri Governor Website
September 27, 2008

Missouri Sheriffs' And Prosecutors' Obama 'Truth Squad' Getting Old Media Silence
Tom Blumer
NewsBusters
September 29, 2008

St. Louis Prosector Who Joined Obama 'Truth Squad' Pleads Innocent
Rick Moran
American Thinker
September 29, 2008

Obama’s Missouri Goon Squad Plays The Victim
Michelle Malkin
MichelleMalkin.com
September 29, 2008

Iraq Veteran Produces YouTube Video Endorsement For John McCain

Check out the following video from YouTube:

Iraq Veteran Endorses John McCain

Be sure to send this link to everyone you know.

My Take On The Proposed Bailout And A Look At Some Gaffes

The big topic of conversation this week is about the lending houses on Wall Street. There is a bailout plan in Congress right now that has a minimum price tag of $700 billion and an estimated price tag of $3 trillion. I know there are pros and cons to each side, but I am coming out against the bailout.

Why?

Because I am one of those Americans who works hard, ensures that I stay gainfully employed, pays all of my bills on time and doesn't live beyond my means. But, because I am one of those hard workers, I am also in the group who will have to pay for this bailout.

On the other side, we have people who do not work so hard, don't live within their means and we also have lending houses making very bad business decisions and when those decisions came back to haunt them, they ran crying to the Federal government and asked then to saddle people like me with the bill.

I don't want to pay. I mean, hey, if it is okay for others not to pay their mortgages or take on more debt than they can pay back, why should anyone expect me to be the responsible one? If others can shirk their responsibilities, I can too. Correct?

Of course that is correct. That is why I am against this bailout. I, and the millions like me, should not be punished for someone else's mistakes.

Further, this bailout fails to correct the government mechanism that allowed this crisis to occur: The Community Reinvestment Act Of 1977. This law forced banks into making bad loans. The Clinton Administration expanded on it in the 90's to force banks to take on even higher risks. That law is still on the books and as long as it is there, it will create more problems down the road.

Now those risks have blown up in our faces. It is time to let the lending industry fail so that it can be rebuilt in a more rational manner.

Saddling me, my children and my grandchildren with more debt is not the answer. Holding the people responsible for this accountable is the right answer.

Call Congress and tell them not to approve this bailout.

---

So, Joe Biden made another gaffe. He says that back in 1929, when the markets collapsed and the depression began, President Roosevelt didn't just sit there. No, he got on television and began pitching his plan to fix it.

There is just two problems with this. Roosevelt wasn't President in 1929 and television was not a staple of mass communications yet.

One has to wonder, with all the gaffes that Biden (and Obama) have pulled, where do the Democrats come off with all of their criticisms of Sarah Palin?

Let's look at some of these gaffes.

For Biden:

- Biden invites a wheelchair bound State Senator to "stand up and take a bow."

- Biden contradicts Obama on clean coal.

And what of Obama?

- 57 states.

- Forgetting that he was in Kansas City rather than St. Louis.

- Saying John McCain would be Geroge Bush's "4th term."

- Telling a seven-year-old little girl that America was a "mean country."

- Having to be reminded that he was a Christian rather than a Muslim.

Before the Dems start any more false rumors about Sarah Palin, they might want to have a sit-down with the two guys on their own ticket. Right now, the biggest advantage the Republicans have is the Democrat ticket.

Joe Biden Speaks: What Is He Saying (And Thinking)?

Sen. Joe Biden might want to sit in on a few meetings with the Obama campaign staff before going out and making anymore statements in the name of Barack Obama. Two of his most recent quotes show exactly why.

On the recent attack ad that Barack Obama put out against John McCain, TownHall reports this:

Asked about the negative tone of the campaign, and this ad in particular, during an interview broadcast Monday by the "CBS Evening News," Obama's running mate, Sen. Joe Biden, said he disapproved of it. "I thought that was terrible, by the way," Biden said. Asked why it was done, he said: "I didn't know we did it and if I had anything to do with it, we'd have never done it."

Later, Biden backtracked when he discovered the Barack Obama had seen the ad and approved of it.

On "Clean Coal" power plants, The Politco has this to say:

Some great rope line video from Joe Biden's recent Ohio swing, where he was asked by an anti-pollution campaigner about clean coal -- a controversial approach in Democratic circles for which Obama has voiced support, particularly during the Kentucky primary. Biden's apparent answer: He supports clean coal for China, but not for the United States. "No coal plants here in America," he said. "Build them, if they're going to build them, over there. Make them clean." "We’re not supporting clean coal," he said of himself and Obama. They do, on paper, support clean coal.

Unless Barack Obama has switched his position and is now against clean coal. This statement shows that the Obama campaign is not really for any kind of real domestic energy production.

You can access both articles on-line here:

Biden Aays Ad Mocking McCain Is 'Terrible'
TownHall.com
September 23, 2008

Biden: 'No Coal Plants Here In America'
Ben Smith
The Politico
September 23, 2008

Obama Campaign Engages In Chicago Style Election Fraud: Norfolk, Virginia

Apparently, when Barack Obama was a community organizer in Chicago, he learned the tools of the Chicago style politcal trade very well. "Vote early. Vote often." That was the mantra for Mayor Daley.

Barack Obama is trying to bring that mantra to Norfolk, Virginia where they have effectively ordered the local election board to waive a voter registration requirement of filling out a residency form. The residency form is necessary to ensure that voters really are Virginia residents and therefore qualified to vote in Virginia. Without the form to determine eligibility, it becomes possible for a voter to cast two or more votes.

From Judicial Watch:

Taking orders from Barack Obama’s campaign, election officials in a crucial battleground state are waving procedures for registering new voters even though doing so violates state election laws. The Democratic presidential candidate complained that college students—a demographic that he says ardently supports him—in Norfolk Virginia were discouraged from registering to vote because they had to complete a questionnaire to determine residency. Virginia law requires local registrars throughout the state to decide eligibility based on residency and the questionnaire was designed by the state elections office to confirm where the new voters live. In Norfolk many college students come from out of state and must register to vote in their home districts. Case in point; a student from Georgia who registered to vote in Virginia yet pays out-of-state tuition there, is declared as a dependent in Georgia and has a Georgia driver's license and car registration.

So, Barack Obama, true to his Socialist nature, wants his supporters to vote as many times as possible while the rest of us only get to vote once.

Obama certainly didn't wait to long to start stealing this election, did he?

You can access the complete article on-line here:

Obama Gets Virginia City To Wave Election Law
Judicial Watch
September 22, 2008

What Does Barack Obama Really Stand For And Do You Agree With Him? Take The Test!

Take the Barack Obama test and see if you know what he really stands for and how often you agree or disagree with his positions:

The Barack Obama Test

Videos Of Barack Obama On The O'Reilly Factor

It doesn't matter whether or not you like Bill O'Reilly. What does matter is that this interview was the first time Barack Obama had to answer some hard questions. Even Associated Press reporter David Bauder had to admit this when he wrote:

The Democrat waded into cable TV's blood feud, between Keith Olbermann of MSNBC and Bill O'Reilly of Fox News Channel, becoming as much a bit player as any even-odds presidential candidate can be. In one interview Obama had to fight — not always successfully — to keep from being shouted down. In the other he couldn't succeed in keeping a straight face at the ease of the softballs tossed at him. We'll leave you to guess which is which.

Even though there were no shout-downs on O'Reilly. But still, it is a huge admission as to the bias of NBC.

That article can be found on-line here:

Obama On Cable: Duel Of Softballs Vs. Shout-Downs
David Bauder
Associated Press via Google News
September 9, 2008

I think it best that the general public get a chance to see all of the videos and make their own decisions, their own camparisons between the O'Reilly interview and how Obama got treated on other networks.

You can access the videos on-line here:

Video: Barack Obama On The O’Reilly Factor (Part 1)
YouDecide2008.com

Video: Barack Obama On The O’Reilly Factor (Part 2)
YouDecide2008.com

Video: Barack Obama On The O’Reilly Factor (Part 3)
YouDecide2008.com

Troopergate: Meet The Investigators. Also: Pigs And Lipstick

By now, those thirty lawyers and other political hacks who have descended on Juneau and Wasilla, Alaska are beginning to regret ever having taken on the job of trying to dig up dirt on Governor Sarah Palin. As a result of their research, certain partisan details of TrooperGate are coming to light and it does not bode well for the Democrats or Barack Obama.



Notice the above picture. The balding man standing fifth from the left is the lead TrooperGate investigator, Democrat State Senator Hollis French. Clearly, since this man is a supporter of Brack Obama, his objectivity in the matter must be brought under question. Further, the motives behind his announcement that he would have a conclusion in late October (i.e. "October surprise" time) must also be brought under scrutiny.

Now, a request was made that he be taken off of the investigation since his objectivity seems to be severely compromised. Alaska State Representative John Coghill made this request. The request was turned down by Democrat State Senator Kim Elton who said that he was sure partisan politics can be kept out of the probe. If you want to know who Kim Elton is, he is the man standing at the far left of the picture.

Given the venue in which this picture was taken, anyone care to make bets as to what their final report is going to say?

---

I think that when historians look back at the 2008 election, they will wonder about the reason why the losing candidate lost. In Barack Obama's case, that will be easy to explain.

Ultimately, will have been Obama's response to the Palin effect. It got the Democrats so unhinged that they began making up these ridiculously crazy stories about her and spreading them around the Internet. Now, Barack Obama, to his credit, came out and said that a candidate's family is off-limits, but his surrogates in the media didn't get that memo. Every time a new smear was released against Sarah Palin, the McCain/Palin ticket picked up more voters. Barack Obama's big mistake here was his failure to condemn such smears. Had he done so, he might have kept a few more voters on his side, but his silence on the matter made it look like he was giving his tacit approval.

Now, a week later, after Sarah Palin made her famous remark: "They say the difference between a hockey mom and a pit-bull? Lipstick." Barack Obama made a gaffe that magnified his failure to condemn the news outlets that were attacking the GOP Vice Presidential nominee. He said: "If you put lipstick on a pig, it's still a pig."

He may not have meant it as a shot at Sarah Palin, but the crowd he was addressing sure thought so. And so did millions of women who, when they heard what Obama said, became very angry and began marching into the McCain camp in even larger numbers.

If Barack Obama loses this campaign (and as things stand right now, that is the most likely possibility), I believe that these two acts, one of omission and one of commission, will be regarded as the two main reasons why he lost.

Sliming Palin: FactCheck.org Comes Out With The Facts

This comes from Newsweek. That's right. Newsweek. Hardly what you would call a bastion of right-wing Conservatism. But they've checked the facts, and it is not looking good for the people who are grasping for any reason to slime the GOP Vice-Presidential candidate Sarah Palin.

You can read the article on-line here:

Sliming Palin: False Internet Claims And Rumors Fly About McCain's Running Mate
Brooks Jackson, Jees Henig, Emi Kolawole, Joe Miller and Lori Robertson
Newsweek
September 8, 2008

And read some excerpts here:

We've been flooded for the past few days with queries about dubious Internet postings and mass e-mail messages making claims about McCain's running mate, Gov. Palin. We find that many are completely false, or misleading. Palin did not cut funding for special needs education in Alaska by 62 percent. She didn't cut it at all. In fact, she tripled per-pupil funding over just three years. She did not demand that books be banned from the Wasilla library. Some of the books on a widely circulated list were not even in print at the time. The librarian has said Palin asked a "What if?" question, but the librarian continued in her job through most of Palin's first term. She was never a member of the Alaskan Independence Party, a group that wants Alaskans to vote on whether they wish to secede from the United States. She's been registered as a Republican since May 1982. Palin never endorsed or supported Pat Buchanan for president. She once wore a Buchanan button as a "courtesy" when he visited Wasilla, but shortly afterward she was appointed to co-chair of the campaign of Steve Forbes in the state. Palin has not pushed for teaching creationism in Alaska's schools. She has said that students should be allowed to "debate both sides" of the evolution question, but she also said creationism "doesn't have to be part of the curriculum." We'll be looking into other charges in an e-mail by a woman named Anne Kilkenny for a future story. For more explanation of the bullet points above, please read the Analysis.

Sadly, those who are most deeply affected by Palin Derangement Syndrome will not allow the facts to stand in the way of their sexist smear campaign against a strong, intelligent woman. But you, gentle reader, can look at this and clearly see what the Dems and the libs truly stand for when it comes to women's issues.

The libs and Dems believe that women should be subservient and completely submit to the leftist liberal agenda. The libs and Dems also believe that all other women should be attacked and their names should be dragged through the mud at all costs, even if it means inventing lies about those women.

The Arrogance Of Randi Rhodes: McCain Was Well-Treated In Vietnam?

Just when I thought broadcast journalism couldn't sink any lower than the attacks on Sarah Palin's family or that the libs couldn't possibly say anything more stupid than what they've already said, uber-leftist Randi Rhodes had to go and prove me wrong.

While it is typical of the Democrat Party and of the left in general to re-write history, Randi Rhodes does it with an arrogance not seen since ... well ... I don't think arrogance like this has ever been seen before.

Rhodes has made the ultra-idiotic claim that John McCain was "well-treated" while a POW in Vietnam. I don't know what her definition of "well-treated" is, but a rationally thinking person would not characterize the torture and brutality of the North Vietnamese Communists as anything good.

Here is what she claims:

RHODES: Of course he (McCain) became very friendly with the Vietnamese. They called him the Prince. He was well treated actually. And he was well treated because he traded these propaganda interviews for good treatment. So look, it's a horrible story anyway you cut it, anyway you look at it, any way you you you deal with it. But, it's not the story Fred Thompson told. Nor is it the story Rudy Giuliani told. Nor is it the story Sarah Palin told. Nor is it the story anybody. Cindy McCain knew to limit herself to 'I think what my husband did in Vietnam was heroic' because she knows the truth too.

Yes, Cindy McCain and Fred Thompson do know the turth, which is why we know Randi Rhodes is deliberately telling lies. Yes, I am calling Randi Rhodes a liar. Got a problem with that? Well, then pull up your big-girl panties and deal with it.

Here are some accurate accounts of what happened to John McCain in Hanoi. From U.S. News & World Report in 1973:

Some North Vietnamese swam out and pulled me to the side of the lake and immediately started stripping me, which is their standard procedure. Of course, this being in the center of town, a huge crowd of people gathered, and they were all hollering and screaming and cursing and spitting and kicking at me. When they had most of my clothes off, I felt a twinge in my right knee. I sat up and looked at it, and my right foot was resting next to my left knee, just in a 90-degree position. I said, "My God--my leg!" That seemed to enrage them —I don't know why. One of them slammed a rifle butt down on my shoulder, and smashed it pretty badly. Another stuck a bayonet in my foot. The mob was really getting up-tight. ... I think it was on the fourth day that two guards came in, instead of one. One of them pulled back the blanket to show the other guard my injury. I looked at my knee. It was about the size, shape and color of a football. I remembered that when I was a flying instructor a fellow had ejected from his plane and broken his thigh. He had gone into shock, the blood had pooled in his leg, and he died, which came as quite a surprise to us—a man dying of a broken leg. Then I realized that a very similar thing was happening to me. When I saw it, I said to the guard, "O.K., get the officer." An officer came in after a few minutes. It was the man that we came to know very well as "The Bug." He was a psychotic torturer, one of the worst fiends that we had to deal with. I said, "O.K., I'll give you military information if you will take me to the hospital." He left and came back with a doctor, a guy that we called "Zorba," who was completely incompetent. He squatted down, took my pulse. He did not speak English, but shook his head and jabbered to "The Bug." I asked, "Are you going to take me to the hospital?" "The Bug" replied, "It's too late." I said, "If you take me to the hospital, I'll get well."

The above accounts are certainly more accurate since John McCain was there to see them and Randi Rhodes was not.

I believe that Randi Rhodes spoke those lies knowing that someone out there was going to be naive and gullible enough to believe them. (It certainly seems that CNN was gullible enough) But, then, I guess the average leftist will believe anything their fellow leftists tell them, even when they are bold-faced lies.

You can access the orignal article on-line here:

Rhodes Claims McCain Was 'Well-Treated' In Vietnam
Brian Maloney
Radio Equalizer
September 8, 2008

And the 1973 U.S. News & World Report article here:

John McCain, Prisoner Of War: A First-Person Account
John S. McCain III, Lt. Cmdr. US Navy
U.S. News & World Report
1973

What The Democrats Think About Sarah Palin: Floats Like A Butterfly, Stings Like A Bee

Despite all of the nutcase conspiracy theories about Sarah Plain, some rationally thinking Democrats have a realistic view of what her candidacy means to this election and to furture elections.

One of those Democrats is former San Francisco Mayor Willie Brown. Here is what he has to say:

The Democrats are in trouble. Sarah Palin has totally changed the dynamics of this campaign. Period. Palin's speech to the GOP National Convention on Wednesday has set it up so that the Republicans are now on offense and Democrats are on defense. And we don't do well on defense. Suddenly, Palin and John McCain are the mavericks and Barack Obama and Joe Biden are the status quo, in a year when you don't want to be seen as defending the status quo. From taxes to oil drilling, Democrats are now going to have to start explaining their positions. Whenever you start having to explain things, you're on defense. I actually went back and watched Palin's speech a second time. I didn't go to sleep until 1:30 a.m. I had to make sure I got the lines right. Her timing was exquisite. She didn't linger with applause, but instead launched into line after line of attack, slipping the knives in with every smile and joke. And she delivered it like she was just BS-ing on the street with the meter maid. She didn't have to prove she was "of the people." She really is the people.

High paise coming from a political opponent. While the fringe loonies on the far-left are delving into manufactured scandals complete with fabricated evidence, mainstream Democrats see what is really happening here.

You can access the complete article on-line here:

Palin Floats Like A Butterfly, Stings Like A Bee
Willie Brown
San Franscico Chronicle
September 7, 2008

The Palin Effect: Barack Obama Dispatches Female Surrogates And The Dems Are Now In Trouble

Just about a month ago, the libs were smugly saying to one another, "It must be tough to be a Republican these days what with Barack Obama rising up." Well, those same libs have learned a hard lesson of life: the higher you go up, the further you have to fall. In the space of less than a week, after John McCain sprang a trap that I am certain he planned a long time ago, that fall is upon them.

And it is not just in the politcal arena. The leftist media has seen its numerous vicious attacks against Sarah Palin and her family backfire and blow-up in their faces. One of the most profound examples is how tens of thousands of subscribers have cancelled their subscriptions to Us magazine after they ran a scandalously misleading cover about Gov. Palin (and the magazine's owner got exposed and raked over the coals on FoxNews), as compared to the very favorable cover they ran for Barack Obama.

The American people are seeing it now. They are seeing the sexist hypocrisy of the left. They are seeing the sexist hypocrisy of the Democrat Party. They are seeing the sexist hypocrisy of Old Media. And it all spells bad news for Obama.

Thus, Barack Obama is now being forced to do something in response. He is sending out female surrogates to hawk for him. From the New York Times via MSNBC:

Senator Barack Obama will increasingly lean on prominent Democratic women to undercut Gov. Sarah Palin and Senator John McCain , dispatching Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton to Florida on Monday and creating a rapid-response team to deploy female surrogates to battleground states, Obama advisers said on Thursday.

I wonder how Senator Clinton likes being referred to as a "female surrogate."

More:

With the McCain-Palin team courting undecided female voters, including some who backed Mrs. Clinton in the Democratic primaries, Obama aides say they are counting on not only Mrs. Clinton but also Democratic female governors to criticize their Alaskan counterpart, Ms. Palin — and, by extension, Mr. McCain — including Janet Napolitano of Arizona and Kathleen Sebelius of Kansas.

But this may all come at a price. I don't believe for a minute that Hillary Clinton will be rooting for Barack Obama since it is most definitely to her personal advantage if Obama loses in November. Check out this little tidbit:

Advisers to Mrs. Clinton, who has been on vacation this week, said that she stands ready to help the Obama-Biden ticket, but they urged not to overestimate the effect she could have, noting that she had other commitments this fall, like campaigning and raising money for Senate candidates.

And several Hillary supporters are not happy about her being relegated to such a subservient supporting role.

Looks like party unity just got thrown under the bus.

You can access the complete article on-line here:

Obama To Dispatch Female Surrogates
Patrick Healy and Jeff Zeleny
The New York Times via MSNBC
September 5, 2008

---

And what does this mean overall? Plenty according to former Clinton White House Advisor Dick Morris and Eileen McGann. In their latest column from TownHall, they show that the trials of the Democrats are just beginning, and so far, they have been failing them.

The turning point was the designation of Palin and the personal attacks on her. By stirring up a storm, Democrats assured that Palin would speak to 37 million Americans - just a million fewer than watched Obama's acceptance speech. Anecdotal evidence already suggests that women may have a gut reaction to the establishment's sexist assault on a woman candidate - and flock to McCain. They've seen him stake everything on this one big move of turning toward a woman - in direct contrast to Obama's deliberate decision not to name a woman. They've seen the media and Democrats gang up on her and do their worst. And they've seen Palin stand up and stuff the challenge right back down the establishment's throat. All this may have created an entirely new dynamic in the race.

Yes, a dynamic that Barack Obama and the liberal left was completely unprepared for and won't be able to effectively respond to for the next two months.

I'm not saying that this election is a done deal. No, not by a long shot. But given the events of the past week, it must be difficult being a liberal Democrat these days what with the McCain/Palin ticket rising up.

You can access the complete column on-line here:

Democrats In Trouble
Dick Morris and Eileen McGann
TownHall.com
September 5, 2008

Let The McCain Mutiny Begin! Excerpts From John McCain's Speech Last Night

Senator Obama has been cut off at the knees. First his right knee, then his left knee. John McCain and Sarah Palin have stolen Obama's platform and made it their own. The McCain/Palin ticket now represents true change while the Obama/Biden ticket represents more of the old, stale, self-serving politics that have been going on in the halls of Congress for longer than it ever should have.

As such, John McCain is staging a mutiny. It is a mutiny that began in the Republican Party and now, with his acceptance of the Republican nomination for President, it is a mutiny against the establishment of powers that be in Washington D.C. I would be proud to call myself a McCain Mutineer.

What does this mutiny entail? You can learn that from various points he made during his speech last night. Here are some excerpts:

I’ve fought corruption, and it didn’t matter if the culprits were Democrats or Republicans. They violated their public trust, and they had to be held accountable.

Being that Nancy Pelosi has failed miserably in her promise to end corruption in Congress, it will be the McCain/Palin administration that will finally begin the work that Nancy Pelosi never even started. And what makes this issue stand out in contrast to the Obama/Biden ticket is that there is no equivalent of a John McCain or Sarah Plain in the Democrat Party. None. No Democrat is standing up to the corrupt or questionable behavior of other Democrats. No one.

And this:

I’ve fought the big spenders in both parties, who waste your money on things you neither need nor want, and the first big-spending pork-barrel earmark bill that comes across my desk, I will veto it. I will make them famous, and you will know their names. You will know their names.

I have no doubt whatsoever that when Senator McCain spoke those words, hundreds of members of Congress had to go and grab a bottle of Tums or Rolaids to counteract the acid reflux that results when fear suddenly enters the body. This is the promise of a transparent government. Senator McCain has just promised the American people that bills and legislation that get passed as a result of back-room deals made outside the view of television cameras will be made public and he will reveal the names of those who made the deals and what they were personally expecting to get out of those deals.

We Mutineers have chosen our ringleader well.

And one of the most refreshing points on the current state of affairs in D.C. is thus:

We lost — we lost the trust of the American people when some Republicans gave in to the temptations of corruption. We lost their trust when rather than reform government, both parties made it bigger. We lost their trust when instead of freeing ourselves from a dangerous dependence on foreign oil, both parties — and Senator Obama — passed another corporate welfare bill for oil companies. We lost their trust when we valued our power over our principles. We’re going to change that. We’re going to recover the people’s trust by standing up again to the values Americans admire. The party of Lincoln, Roosevelt and Reagan is going to get back to basics.

The ship of state will set a new course, under a new captain. And the baseline of that new course will be the basic principles that the GOP adheres to:

In this country, we believe everyone has something to contribute and deserves the opportunity to reach their God-given potential, from the boy whose descendents arrived on the Mayflower to the Latina daughter of migrant workers. We’re all God’s children, and we’re all Americans. We believe — we believe in low taxes, spending discipline, and open markets. We believe in rewarding hard work and risk-takers and letting people keep the fruits of their labor. We believe ... We believe — we believe in a strong defense, work, faith, service, a culture of life ... ... personal responsibility, the rule of law, and judges who dispense justice impartially and don’t legislate from the bench. We believe in the values of families, neighborhoods, and communities. We believe in a government that unleashes the creativity and initiative of Americans, government that doesn’t make your choices for you, but works to make sure you have more choices to make for yourself.

And the differences between John McCain and Barack Obama have become unambiguously clear:

I will keep taxes low and cut them where I can. My opponent will raise them. I will open… I will open new markets to our goods and services. My opponent will close them. I will cut government spending. He will increase it. My tax cuts will create jobs; his tax increases will eliminate them. My health care plan will make it easier for more Americans to find and keep good health care insurance. His plan will force small businesses to cut jobs, reduce wages, and force families into a government-run health care system where a bureaucrat ... ... where a bureaucrat stands between you and your doctor.

And every mutiny is usually the result of some sore point among the crew that the captain is not adequately addressing or simply ignoring altogether. Here is what John McCain said:

Education — education is the civil rights issue of this century. Equal access to public education has been gained, but what is the value of access to a failing school? We need… We need to shake up failed school bureaucracies with competition, empower parents with choice. Let’s remove barriers to qualified instructors, attract and reward good teachers, and help bad teachers find another line of work. When a public school fails to meet its obligations to students, parent — when it fails to meet its obligations to students, parents deserve a choice in the education of their children. And I intend to give it to them. Some may choose a better public school. Some may choose a private one. Many will choose a charter school. But they will have the choice, and their children will have that opportunity. Senator Obama wants our schools to answer to unions and entrenched bureaucrats. I want schools to answer to parents and students. And when I’m president, they will.

As a parent of a teenager who would have been forced to attend a sub-standard public school had we not the means to send him to a private school, I can certainly relate to this. The McCain Mutiny is spreading farther. And it will continue to spread as the American people become more and more aware of the power they hold as individuals empowered with free will under the law.

And the big issue on all Americans minds, whether Democrat or Republican:

My fellow Americans, when I’m president, we’re going to embark on the most ambitious national project in decades. We’re going to stop sending $700 billion a year to countries that don’t like us very much, and some of that money… We’ll attack — we’ll attack the problem on every front. We’ll produce more energy at home. We will drill new wells off-shore, and we’ll drill them now. We’ll drill them now. We’ll — we’ll — my friends, we’ll build more nuclear power plants. We’ll develop clean-coal technology. We’ll increase the use of wind, tide, solar, and natural gas. We’ll encourage the development and use of flex-fuel, hybrid and electric automobiles. Senator Obama thinks we can achieve energy independence without more drilling and without more nuclear power. But Americans know better than that. We must use all resources and develop all technologies necessary to rescue our economy from the damage caused by rising oil prices and restore the health of our planet. My friends ... ... it’s an ambitious plan, but Americans are ambitious by nature, and we’ve faced greater challenges. It’s time for us to show the world again how Americans lead. This great national cause will create millions of new jobs, many in industries that will be the engine of our future prosperity, jobs that will be there when your children enter the workforce.

Senator McCain knows, as most of America does, that the main component of the current economic downturn is rising energy prices. Senator McCain also knows you counter that by producing more energy. Senator Obama thinks that this can be solved by levying more taxes on those who produce the energy.

His final plea to the American people:

I’m going to fight for my cause every day as your president. I’m going to fight to make sure every American has every reason to thank God, as I thank him, that I’m an American, a proud citizen of the greatest country on Earth. And with hard work — with hard word, strong faith, and a little courage, great things are always within our reach. Fight with me. Fight with me. Fight for what’s right for our country. Fight for the ideals and character of a free people. Fight for our children’s future. Fight for justice and opportunity for all. Stand up to defend our country from its enemies. Stand up for each other, for beautiful, blessed, bountiful America. Stand up, stand up, stand up, and fight. Nothing is inevitable here. We’re Americans, and we never give up. We never quit. We never hide from history. We make history.

The battle is joined. It is us against the establishment. In the 1980's we had the Reagan Revolution.

Today, we have the McCain Mutiny.

Onward to November!

You can access the complete transcript of the speech on-line here:

RAW DATA: Transcript of McCain’s Nomination Speech At Republican Convention
FoxNews.com
September 4, 2008