Left-Leaning Washington Post Goes After Bob McDonnell

In an article for Human Events, Christian Toto remembers something that I also remember from last year's election.

I remember a junior Senator from Illinois who admitted to smoking pot and snorting cocaine, broke bread with admitted domestic terrorist Bill Ayers, sat in a church pew for 20 years listening to the racial, bigoted, anti-semetic and anti-American hatred of Rev. Wright and admitted that his goal was to redistribute wealth, or as he put it, "spread the wealth." What I don't remember is the Washington Post or any other leftist news outlet ever bothering to cover these stories.

Washington Post Confesses To Biased Reporting During The 2008 Presidential Campaign
84rules
November 11, 2008

Ostensibly, the reason for the non-coverage is because the junior Senator is a Democrat and the the Post simply did not want to do anything that would hurt his chances to become president.

But, when the candidate is a Republican running for Governor of the Commonwealth of Virginia, then the Washington Post adopts a different, completely hypocritical set of standards.

From Toto's article:

Now, the newspaper has unearthed a decades old college thesis from gubernatorial GOP hopeful Robert F. McDonnell. And – given the multiple stories it’s already run – the paper thinks McDonnell’s thesis – written 25 years ago -- could affect the balance of the race. McDonnell currently leads Democratic candidate Creigh Deeds by at least seven points in a recent poll. Can the Post serve as a political kingmaker again for the Old Dominion State? Or will a feisty alternative media rise up to stop any attempts to turn a college assignment into a campaign killer? And if so, why didn’t the paper pull out all the stops regarding another candidate’s past?

Because just as it did last year, the Post has abandonded all pretenses of journalistic objectivity in the Virginia Governor's race. The paper might as well rename itself the Left-Leaning Washington Post.

You can access the complete article on-line here:

WaPo Opens Jihad Against McDonnell
Christian Toto
Human Events
September 2, 2009

Crowley-Gates Incident: Maybe Obama Should Teach Himself

It's not easy dealing with an infant suffering from Reactive Airway Disease. I've spent the last three days taking care of my seven-month-old son. But, I'm back to make a small contribution here.

The arrest of professor Louis Henry Gates has been all over the news recently. Everyone knows the story and everyone knows how Obama reacted during a nationally televised press conference designed to push socialized medicine.

But Obama also refers to this as a "teachable moment." Yes, the president who promised us a "post-racial" America and made a major gaffe in criticizing the Cambridge police before he even knew all the facts, wants to teach us something.

Well, I've learned that Obama is nothing even resembling "post-racial" and perhaps he needs to teach that to himself.

Pat Buchanan writing for Town Hall has this:

Sunday, professor Louis Henry Gates retreated from his threat to sue Sgt. James Crowley. Friday, President Obama retreated from his charge that the Cambridge cops "acted stupidly." As Crowley has not budged an inch -- his arrest of Gates was correct, and there will be no apology -- there is no doubt who won this face-off. Game, set, match, Crowley and the Cambridge cops.

Gates and Obama can try to spin this all they want, but it is clear that they were trying to use this incident to somehow stick it to "whitey." What we are really seeing here is how well Obama listened during the twenty years he sat in the pews and listened to the racist and anti-American sermons of Rev. Jeremiah Wright.

Here is what happened:

Answering a 911 call about a break-in in progress, Crowley encountered the professor inside the house. According to Crowley's report, his request for Gates' I.D. was initially rebuffed, and he was accused of hassling Gates because he was black. The professor made a slurring reference to Crowley's "mama." The professor then raised such a ruckus Crowley arrested and cuffed him. Once in the street, Gates bellowed, "This is what happens to a black man in America." Gates then called Crowley a "rogue cop." Gov. Deval Patrick declared Gates' arrest "every black man's nightmare." Obama said the Cambridge cops had "acted stupidly" and went on to elaborate, on nationwide TV, on the sad history of racial profiling of blacks and Hispanics by police. Thus the two most powerful black elected officials in the U.S., with no hard knowledge of what happened, came down on the side of a black professor, their buddy, against a white cop and his department, implying racial motivation in the arrest of Gates.

Teachable moment? Yes. We need to teach that the reactions of Gates, Obama and Deval Patrick were the wrong reactions to have.

Here is some eveidence that you will not hear Obama, Patrick or Gates ever mention (lest they make fools of themselves):

Crowley's partner in the arrest was a black officer who said he stands "100 percent" behind Crowley and that Gates acted "strange." Sixteen years ago, Crowley gave CPR to an unconscious Boston Celtics star, Reggie Lewis, in an attempt to save his life. The memory of his failure caused Crowley to break down in tears and haunts him to this day. Crowley was selected by a black police lieutenant to teach fellow officers about racial profiling. He has been doing this for five years. And watching TV coverage for a week, this writer has yet to hear one cop anywhere condemn Crowley's handling of the incident.

Teachable moment? Yes. We need to teach that minorities screaming "racism" when no racism is present devalues the word and makes it easier to ignore true instances of racism.

You can access the complete column on-line here:

Sgt. Crowley, A Cop In Full
Pat Buchanan
TownHall.com
July 28, 2009

Debbie Stabenow Wants 'Hearings' For Fairness Doctrine Censorship

Check out this exchange between Debbie Stabenow (D-MI) and radio host Bill Press:

BILL PRESS: Yeah, I mean, look: They have a right to say that. They’ve got a right to express that. But, they should not be the only voices heard. So, is it time to bring back the Fairness Doctrine? SENATOR DEBBIE STABENOW (D-MI): I think it’s absolutely time to pass a standard. Now, whether it’s called the Fairness Standard, whether it’s called something else — I absolutely think it’s time to be bringing accountability to the airwaves. I mean, our new president has talked rightly about accountability and transparency. You know, that we all have to step up and be responsible. And, I think in this case, there needs to be some accountability and standards put in place. BILL PRESS: Can we count on you to push for some hearings in the United States Senate this year, to bring these owners in and hold them accountable? SENATOR DEBBIE STABENOW (D-MI): I have already had some discussions with colleagues and, you know, I feel like that’s gonna happen. Yep.

First, it is a well-known fact that attempts to bring back censorship under the guise of a "Fairness Doctrine" are nothing more than attempts to squelch the opposition's point of view.

But even more interesting is that Stabenow want hearings on the issue.

I say: "Bring it on!"

I'll bet that Sean Hannity, Rush Limbaugh, Laura Ingraham, Monica Crowley and Mark Levin will have a five-way fist fight to see who will be the first to march into those hearings and rake those Senators over the coals.

The conservative talk radio hosts who do show up and testify will expose every hypocrisy and every double-standard people like Stabenow hold. For example, why does Stabenow want "fairness" brought to talk radio but is perfectly willing to allow programs like Today Show, Good Morning America, Larry King and newspapers like The Washington Post and New York Times, to continue to be biased towards the leftist-liberals?

That is exactly the type of hypocrisy that would be highlighted during these hearings.

Further, talk radio hosts will bring to the fore-front many stories that television and print media largely ignored. For example, why did the media give Obama a pass for his relationship with the racist Reverend Jeremiah Wright but came down so hard on Sarah Palin for her main-stream religious views? Why was Obama not fully vetted by the media while an Army of reporters stormed Alaska looking for any dirt they could find?

These and other issues will come to light if Stabenow really does hold these hearings.

I say: "Let's do it! Let's start peeling back the onion!"

It would be one of the best things to happen in America in a long time.

You can access the transcripts and a video on-line here:

Sen. Stabenow Wants Hearings On Radio 'Accountability'; Talks Fairness Doctrine
Michael Calderone
The Politico
February 5, 2009

The Fierce Urgency Of Pork: Charles Krauthammer Column Could Kill Stimulus Bill

This column is amazing. Not for what it says or who wrote it. But for the fact that it was published in the uber-liberal Washington Post.

Sometimes, someone writes a column that is so hard-hitting, so to-the-point that it cannot be ignored for long. You won't hear about this column on any of the left-leaning television networks, but you should read it and take to heart what it says.

Charles Krauthammer writes:

"A failure to act, and act now, will turn crisis into a catastrophe." -- President Obama, Feb. 4. Catastrophe, mind you. So much for the president who in his inaugural address two weeks earlier declared "we have chosen hope over fear." Until, that is, you need fear to pass a bill.

That's just for starters. Krauthammer rightly asks about why we should be scared into passing this "pork spending" bill.

The column goes on to describe all of the unethical and outright illegal conduct that the Obama administration has been trying to legitimize, as exampled by Timothy Geithner and Tom Daschle's tax avoidance problems.

More:

And yet more damaging to Obama's image than all the hypocrisies in the appointment process is his signature bill: the stimulus package. He inexplicably delegated the writing to Nancy Pelosi and the barons of the House. The product, which inevitably carries Obama's name, was not just bad, not just flawed, but a legislative abomination. It's not just pages and pages of special-interest tax breaks, giveaways and protections, one of which would set off a ruinous Smoot-Hawley trade war. It's not just the waste, such as the $88.6 million for new construction for Milwaukee Public Schools, which, reports the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, have shrinking enrollment, 15 vacant schools and, quite logically, no plans for new construction. It's the essential fraud of rushing through a bill in which the normal rules (committee hearings, finding revenue to pay for the programs) are suspended on the grounds that a national emergency requires an immediate job-creating stimulus -- and then throwing into it hundreds of billions that have nothing to do with stimulus, that Congress's own budget office says won't be spent until 2011 and beyond, and that are little more than the back-scratching, special-interest, lobby-driven parochialism that Obama came to Washington to abolish. He said.

Now, in the words of the racist Reverend Jeremiah Wright, Obama's "chickens have come home to roost." Clearly, Obama lied to America in order to get the votes. But what is really insulting here is that Obama expected to get away with it. Apparently, he expected America to forget about his promises and statments. Instead, Obama forgot about the Internet that he so masterfully used to come to power.

Read on:

The Age of Obama begins with perhaps the greatest frenzy of old-politics influence peddling ever seen in Washington. By the time the stimulus bill reached the Senate, reports the Wall Street Journal, pharmaceutical and high-tech companies were lobbying furiously for a new plan to repatriate overseas profits that would yield major tax savings. California wine growers and Florida citrus producers were fighting to change a single phrase in one provision. Substituting "planted" for "ready to market" would mean a windfall garnered from a new "bonus depreciation" incentive. After Obama's miraculous 2008 presidential campaign, it was clear that at some point the magical mystery tour would have to end. The nation would rub its eyes and begin to emerge from its reverie. The hallucinatory Obama would give way to the mere mortal. The great ethical transformations promised would be seen as a fairy tale that all presidents tell -- and that this president told better than anyone. I thought the awakening would take six months. It took two and a half weeks.

Two and a half weeks. That would make a great name if someone ever made a documentary about the disaster that Barack Obama is shaping up to be.

This column that Charles Krauthammer wrote is a classic for the ages. It is right up there with the fable about the emperor who wore no clothes.

You can access the complete column on-line here:

The Fierce Urgency Of Pork
Charles Krauthammer
The Washington Post
February 6, 2009

And you might also want to read why this spending bill will mean more inflation for the rest of us:

Why 'Stimulus' Will Mean Inflation
George Melloan
Wall Street Journal
February 6, 2009

Racial Bigotry Alive And Well Under President Obama

In spite of promises to the contrary, Barack Obama has not left the racial hatred of Jeremiah Wright behind. Instead, he invited it back under a different name: Joseph Lowery.

Rev. Lowery invoked race in a derogatory way after Obama was sworn in. According to the Associated Press:

After the first black president had been sworn in, Rev. Joseph Lowery' ended his benediction with a rhyme familiar to black churchgoers: "We ask you to help us work for that day when black will not be asked to get in back, when brown can stick around..." ... "... and when white will embrace what is right."

Of course, the implication of such a statement is that all white people are racist. It took less than one hour for Obama to abandon his "post-racial" promise.

Nothing like a president who judges by color of skin, eh?

You can access the complete article on-line here:

AP Describes Black Minister's Mockery Of Whites As Not Right As 'Note Of Racial Caution'
Tim Graham
NewsBusters.org
January 20, 2009

What Obama "Didn't Know" And Now His Appointees "Didn't Know" Either

Have you ever noticed how many things Barack Obama “didn’t know” about the people he associates with? There appears to be a very disturbing pattern emerging here.

Obama “didn’t know” that Jeremiah Wright preached racial hatred from the pulpit.

Obama “didn’t know” that Tony Rezko was a crooked real estate developer.

Obama “didn’t know” that Bill Ayers was a domestic terrorist.

And now, Obama “didn’t know” that Rahm Emanuel had more contact with Rod Blagojevich than was previously reported. Further, Obama's pick for Attorney General also "didn't know" about his own connection with Blagojevich.

These two stories both come from the Chicago Sun-Times. First, about Rahm Emanuel's contact with Blagojevich despite Obama's early claims that no such contact took place:

President-elect Barack Obama's incoming chief of staff, Rahm Emanuel, was pushing for Obama's successor just days after the Nov. 4 election, sources told the Chicago Sun-Times. Emanuel privately urged Gov. Blagojevich's administration to appoint Obama confidante Valerie Jarrett, and the Sun-Times learned Tuesday that he also pressed that it be done by a certain deadline. Jarrett was initially interested in the U.S. Senate post before Obama tapped her to be a White House senior adviser, sources say. The disclosure comes days after Obama's camp downplayed Jarrett's interest in the post.

It seems as though the Obama camp's story changes every time the wind in the Inner Loop changes direction. But we can't be sure of what the truth is because Obama himself has obfuscated it so much, just like a typical politician. (So much for "change" or any kind of transparant investigation.)

And what about Attorney General designate Eric Holder and his relationship with Blagojevich? Turns out there was a big one, a relationship worth $300,000 to Holder.

Before Eric Holder was President-elect Barack Obama's choice to be attorney general, he was Gov. Blagojevich's pick to sort out a mess involving Illinois' long-dormant casino license. Blagojevich and Holder appeared together at a March 24, 2004, news conference to announce Holder's role as "special investigator to the Illinois Gaming Board" -- a post that was to pay Holder and his Washington, D.C. law firm up to $300,000. Holder, however, omitted that event from his 47-page response to a Senate Judiciary Committee questionnaire made public this week -- an oversight he plans to correct after a Chicago Sun-Times inquiry, Obama's transition team indicated late Tuesday.

Maybe Holder "didn't know" that the relationship, especially the dollar amounts involved should have been reported? Or maybe, because of the Chicago-style politics being played, Holder arrogantly assumed that he was above the law and therefore had no need of disclosing anything?

These two stories may have nothing to do with Blagojevich trying to sell the vacated Illinois Senate seat, but it is very important that this infomation comes to light. Especially since the United States has approved of Obama's team transplanting its corrupt Chicago-style politics to Washington D.C.

Besides, remember the non-outing of Valerie Plame and how that led to a completely unrelated charge against Scooter Libby? Americans, especially Democrats, were okay with that. If they are fair and apply the same standard here, these same Americans, and especially the Democrats, will be okay with us learning everything we can about the corruption that will soon make its way from Illinois to D.C.

You can access both articles on-line here:

Rahm Emanuel Pressed For Jarrett Appointment To Senate
Natasha Korecki And Fran Spielman
Chicago Sun-Times
December 17, 2008

Holder Omitted Blagojevich Link From Questionnaire
Chris Fusco
Chicago Sun-Times
December 17, 2008

It might very well happen that the Obama Administration is going to be the most corrupt in history.

Barack Obama: The New Race-Baitor In The White House

Yes, you read the title correctly. I purposely wrote it that way and will stand by it, especially after an interview he gave that was published in the Chicago Tribune and the Los Angeles Times. Basically, Obama reasserted his promises to make sure that Hispanics and blacks are scrutinized less by the criminal justice simply because of their skin color, no matter what the severity of the crime or how much evidence is against them. Obama might as well have said that if a white person commits a crime, prosecute them to the full extent of the law, but if a non-white commits the same crime, let them go because of their skin color.

It may be that I am being blunt, but taking someone's skin color into consideration is a complete departure from Dr. Martin Luther King who said that "content of character" was paramount and "color of skin" should not be considered at all.

Writing for Front Page Magazine, John Perazzo looks at the issue more closely and brings up some very thought provoking points. It turns out that racial profiling does not play a significant role in the judicial system decision making process, but that other factors do:

The most exhaustive, best designed study of this matter—a three-year analysis of more than 11,000 convicted criminals in California—found that the severity of offenders’ sentences depended heavily on such factors as prior criminal records, the seriousness of the crimes, and whether guns were used in the commission of those crimes. Race was found to have no effect whatsoever. In fact the researcher, Joan Petersilia, was forced to admit that these results contradicted conclusions she had drawn from an earlier study—in which she had not taken prior convictions and the use of firearms into account.

But what about the race issue? Where is that coming from?

Read this:

Black overrepresentation is almost entirely at the arrest stage—reflecting the simple fact that the “average” black breaks the law more frequently than the “average” white.

And this:

The National Crime Victimization Surveys, conducted annually by the Census Bureau, show that statistically the “average” black is far more likely than the “average” white to be identified, by a victim or witness, as the perpetrator of a violent crime. This racial gap, moreover, is approximately equal to the racial gap in actual arrest rates. “As long ago as 1978,” says Manhattan Institute scholar Heather MacDonald, “a study of robbery and aggravated assault in eight cities found parity between the race of assailants in victim identifications and in arrests—a finding replicated many times since, across a range of crimes.”

The fact that blacks engage in more crimes than whites is never mentioned by Old Media and was certainly not mentioned by the Barack Obama campaign or transition team. It is an embarrassment to them to tell the truth about this issue. If they did tell the truth, they wouldn't be able to play the race card.

In fact, the decisions after the arrest tend to favor blacks more than whites:

More:

At all the decision points subsequent to arrest, the outcomes are virtually identical for blacks and whites alike—and the slight differences that do exist tend to favor blacks.[2] In studies that consider all relevant variables—such as the defendant’s prior criminal record, the severity of the crime in question, the offender’s demeanor with police, whether a weapon was used, and whether the crime in question was victim-precipitated—no differences have been found in sentencing patterns, either in relation to the victim’s race or the offender’s race.[3]

Barack Obama's comments about the alleged disparities in the criminal justice system are nothing more than attempts at race-baiting a la Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton and Jeremiah Wright. For a man who says he didn't know about Wright's racial tirades and would have left the church had he known, Obama sure does seem to want to implement Wright's philosophy of racial hatred in his policies.

While Obama harps on this, notice that he is also ignoring things like the fact that inter-racial crime is more likely to be black-on-white than any other scenario. If Obama really wants to be the "post-racial" candidate, rather than the same-old, same-old race-baitor of the past thirty years, he will demonstrate "change" by taking the racial rhetoric out of his policies and go foward with Dr. King's dream of "not by color of skin but by content of character" fresh in his mind.

You can access the complete article on-line here:

Obama: Tilting At Racial Windmills
John Perrazzo
FrontPageMagazine.com
December 16, 2008

Dennis Prager: Minorities Should Express Shame, Not Only Pride

Let's start off with Dennis Prager's first few paragraphs:

Gay Pride. Jewish Pride. Black pride. Hispanic Pride. Multiculturalism. Ethnic pride. Minority rights vs. tyranny of the majority.

That's right. You can't turn anywhere these days without seeing something about celebrating any one of these issues. But what you don't see is any celebration of white Christian heterosexual males.

In fact, usually, the only time you ever hear about white Christian heterosexual males is when some activist group has something bad to say about them or is criticizing them for some imagined transgression.

Why does one almost never hear expressions of group shame from members of any American group other than white Christians (specifically, white Christian male heterosexuals)? Are the only evildoers in America white male heterosexual Christians? Is there something inherently wrong about members of minorities expressing anything but group pride? Are there no minority sins worthy of shame? The latter is in fact the argument advanced by many intellectuals concerning black racism, for example. For a generation, college students have been taught that it is impossible for blacks to be racist because only the racial group in power, i.e. whites, can express racism. Of course, that is nonsense. A black can be a racist just as a white can be one. A minority race might not have the power to implement racist national policies but that hardly means that no minority group, or any individual, can be a racist.

Yes, it is nonsense. Rev. Jeremiah Wright is a prime example of a black racist. So are Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton and Louis Farrakhan and several recent leaders of the NAACP.

From Old Media, we are bombarded with ideas that only whites can be racist or prejudicial. Reality shows otherwise. For example, the FBI's Uniform Crime Report shows clearly that most inter-racial crimes are black on white crimes. Further, it also shows that blacks are more likely to be victims of crimes committed by other blacks than by whites. And yet, only the white on black crime ever makes the news.

And gay pride? Where is the pride in being the major group vector for HIV infections? I never hear any gay leaders expressing regret that the homosexual community is still leading the spread of AIDS. Or how about terrorizing a little old lady in California? Where is the pride in that?

Prager has more examples of a serious skew in pride vs. shame:

The relative absence of expressions of shame in the Muslim world over the atrocities committed in Islams name is an example of the above. The labeling of blacks who express shame over disproportionate rates of violent crime and out-of-wedlock births in the black community as Uncle Toms is another. The absence of any expression of shame in the gay community over the current blacklisting -- and attempts to economically destroy -- anyone who donated to the California proposition defining marriage as between a man and a woman is another example.

This column is very thought provoking on many levels. Read it and then ask yourself, "Would I be proud if my ethnic/social group engaged in such shameful behavior?"

Prager's parting shot:

Expressing group shame when morally necessary is not airing dirty linen or giving solace to ones ideological enemies. It is, rather, one of the highest expressions of moral development. And it is therefore universally applicable. Being a minority doesnt exempt its members from moral responsibility. It will be a great day for America and the world when minorities begin to express shame as well as pride. In fact, there is real pride in expressing shame. Minorities should give it a try.

You can access the complete column on-line here:

Minorities Should Express Shame, Not Only Pride
Dennis Prager
TownHall.com
December 16, 2008

Kathleen Parker Admits Her Own Religious Bigotry While Barack Obama Searches For A New Church

Kathleen Parker has become one of the biggest blemishes in the Conservative movement to date. I understand why her columns are still carried at the uber-liberal Washington Post but am wondering why she is still covered by the Conservative website Town Hall. Her latest column was nothing more than hateful, spiteful religious bigotry and that sort of attitude has no place among true Conservatives.

Writing for National Review, Jonah Goldberg takes her to task and expresses the sentiments that most Conservatives would like to express to Parker's face. From his blog post:

I don't know what's more grating, the quasi-bigotry that has you calling religious Christians low brows, gorillas and oogedy-boogedy types or the bravery-on-the-cheap as you salute — in that winsome way — your own courage for saying what (according to you) needs to be said. Please stop bragging about how courageous you are for weathering a storm of nasty email you invite on yourself by dancing to a liberal tune. You aren't special for getting nasty email, from the right or the left. You aren't a martyr smoking your last cigarette. You're just another columnist, talented and charming to be sure, but just another columnist. You are not Joan of the Op-Ed Page. Perhaps the typical Washington Post reader (or editor) doesn't understand that. But you should, and most conservatives familiar with these issues can see through what you're doing.

These are very strong words considering the fact that Jonah Goldberg is Jewish.

And for the record, Parker really did use the words "low brows, gorillas and oogedy-boogedy types" in her column to describe Christians. You'll have to go and research that on your own as I will not give her any more recognition with a link to her work. She doesn't deserve that.

But you can read an excerpt from her column and Jonah's comments on-line here:

Quit It Kathleen
Jonah Goldberg
National Review Online
November 19, 2008

---

And according to CBN, Barack Obama is looking for a new church to attend in Washington, D.C.

In just over two months, the Obama family will make the White House their new home. But they'll also be looking for a new church home. Since the Obamas left Chicago's Trinity United Church of Christ over the Reverend Jeremiah Wright controversy, they haven't had a church home. President-elect Barack Obama has been spending his Sunday mornings at the gym. Some DC churches hope that'll change once the Obamas hit town.

It shouldn't be too hard for him to find one. There are several all-black churches in Washington D.C. that preach hatred of white people. Given that Barack Obama spent twenty years attending and listening to the racist sermons of Jeremiah Wright (despite his claims to the contrary), he'll fit right in.

But, I do find it ironic that the libs who criticized President Bush for his faith are praising Obama for his faith. Double-standard anyone?

You can access the complete article on-line here:

Obama Searches For New Church Home
Paul Strand
CBN.com
November 19, 2008

Three Lies Told By Barack Obama During The Campaign

First: Barack Obama claims that his relationship with domestic terrorist Bill Ayers went no further than Ayers being "a guy who lives in my neighborhood." Well, Bill Ayers himself does not agree with Barack Obama on this.

Rex W. Huppke of the Chicago Tribune has this to say:

In a new afterword to his memoir, 1960s radical William Ayers describes himself as a "family friend" of President-elect Barack Obama ...

A "new afterward." Not an old one, but a new one. Sounds like Ayers was at least a little more than some guy who lived in the Obama's neighborhood.

Second: Barack Obama claimed that he never knew that the pastor at his church was a racist hate-monger. But back in 2004, he told a different story. According the Cybercast News Service:

[An interview was conducted] on March 27, 2004 by Chicago Sun-Times religion writer Cathleen Falsani for a story on Obama’s faith, but the interview was not released in its entirety until now. “One of the churches that I became involved in was Trinity United Church of Christ,” Obama said in the interview. “And the pastor there, Jeremiah Wright, became a good friend. So I joined that church and committed myself to Christ in that church.” Obama began attending the church in 1988 and formally joined Trinity in 1992. Falsani asked, “Do you still attend Trinity?” Obama answered, “Yep. Every week. 11 o’clock service. Ever been there? Good service.

Anyone care to guess why that interview was put under wraps? Probably because it would have exposed Barack Obama as a race-baiting liar.

Third: The Obama campaign claimed that they would move away from lobbyists as he brought "change" to Washington D.C. Well, that promised change was a lie.

One of the people brought on-board by Obama is Mark Gitenstein, a lobbyists who engineered a twelve million dollar contract with the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and promoted Boeing and General Dynamics. More recently, he lobbied for AT&T, Merrill Lynch, KPMG and Ernst & Young. (Bailout anyone?)

Look at the other lobbyists Obama is bringing into his fold. According to Ed Morrissey at Hot Air:

Ron Klain - Joe Biden’s chief of staff, had lobbied for Fannie Mae on “regulatory matters” until 2004, when the fraud got uncovered after years of Congressional interference with regulators. Klain also lobbied for companies defending asbestos lawsuits and for ImClone, the drugmaker that faced charges of fraud. John Podesta - The man running Obama’s transition spent the last few years lobbying for the far-Left group Center for American Progress. Patrick Gaspard - Lobbied on health care issues on behalf of the SEIU, now associate personnel director for the transition team Podesta has an even more interesting tie to lobbying. Bill Clinton enacted a five-year ban on former White House staffers lobbying present and future administrations in order to curtail influence peddling. However, after George Bush won in 2000, Clinton rescinded the order to help his staffers get jobs in the wake of the Republican sweep to victory. The man who helped write the revocation? John Podesta.

Once, Barack Obama spoke against lobbyists. Now, he has surrounded himself with them. And no, I don't believe he is emulating Jesus who surrounded himslef with sinners in an effort to redeem them. This Obama administration is all about power, not redemption.

You can access the stories on-line here:

Bill Ayers: Barack Obama A 'Family Friend'
Rex W. Huppke
Chicago Tribune
November 13, 2008

Despite Campaign Claim, Obama Told Paper He Attended Trinity Church ‘Every Week’
Fred Lucas
CNSNews.com
November 13, 2008

Lobbyists In Key Positions In Team Obama Transition Team
Ed Morrissey
HotAir.com
November 15, 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

Funny, But Unfortunately Very True: How Obama Supporters See Things

Obama's De Facto Running Mate And A Brief For Whitey

Bill O'Reilly has labeled it the "Pastor Disaster." Yes, I am talking about Jeremiah Wright. I know, Old Media tried to bury the story by inserting a small gaff John McCain made in Iraq, but that turned out to be small potatoes compared to this. Even Hillary Clinton is turning the spotlight back to this story.

But I am revisiting it for a different reason. While growing up, many in the establishment tried to make me feel guilty for being a white man. Well, I'm not. Apparently, Barack Obama is banking on people like me have this "white guilt." He's going to lose on that bet. I have no white guilt to give. And here is why: racism coming from blacks is just as bad as racism coming from whites.

Doug Patton gives a good example of how Obama is simply a black racist. From his most recent column:

Barack Obama would not have stayed in this Afrocentric, separatist church run by a paranoid, bigoted leader if he did not subscribe to the rhetoric that was being preached. His insistence on defending Jeremiah Wright tells us a great deal about what Obama himself believes.

Nothing could be simpler, or more clear, or more to the point.

Patton goes on to tell us more about what an Obama Presidency would mean to us:

He believes the government is a tool for redistributing wealth from those who earn it to those who don't. He thinks government, which rarely does anything efficiently, could and should dispense health care to 300 million people. He believes our borders should remain wide open and would do nothing to close them. He believes that abortionists should have the right to kill a newborn child who somehow miraculously survives an abortion. He wants to wave the white flag in Iraq, the central front in the war against radical jihadism, thereby surrendering to forces which will be further emboldened by our timidity, just as they were after Bill Clinton's misadventures in Somalia. ... He wants to raise taxes to levels this nation has never seen. His reckless collectivist economic policies would destroy small businesses, make everything more expensive and empower government to have more control over our lives than at any time in our history.

Any questions?

You can access the complete article on-line here:

Obama Has Chosen His Running Mate
Doug Patton
GOPUSA.com
March 25, 2008

---

So, why don't I have "white guilt?" Well, Pat Buchanan explains that with a no-holds-barred column about that very topic.

Pat wondered how Obama would respond to the revelations that Wright was a lying, bigoted racist. It turns out that Obama responded using the same old rhetoric that has been used by race-baters since the 70's. In other words, nothing we haven't already heard before.

From TownHall.com:

What is wrong with Barack's prognosis and Barack's cure? Only this. It is the same old con, the same old shakedown that black hustlers have been running since the Kerner Commission blamed the riots in Harlem, Watts, Newark, Detroit and a hundred other cities on, as Nixon put it, "everybody but the rioters themselves." Was "white racism" really responsible for those black men looting auto dealerships and liquor stories, and burning down their own communities, as Otto Kerner said -- that liberal icon until the feds put him away for bribery.

The so-called "leaders" of the black community seem to have only one rule: "Blame Whitey first." Well, Pat also looks at what Whitey has done to atone for the sins of slavery and racism.

Read on:

Barack says we need to have a conversation about race in America. Fair enough. But this time, it has to be a two-way conversation. White America needs to be heard from, not just lectured to. This time, the Silent Majority needs to have its convictions, grievances and demands heard. And among them are these: First, America has been the best country on earth for black folks. It was here that 600,000 black people, brought from Africa in slave ships, grew into a community of 40 million, were introduced to Christian salvation, and reached the greatest levels of freedom and prosperity blacks have ever known. Wright ought to go down on his knees and thank God he is an American. Second, no people anywhere has done more to lift up blacks than white Americans. Untold trillions have been spent since the '60s on welfare, food stamps, rent supplements, Section 8 housing, Pell grants, student loans, legal services, Medicaid, Earned Income Tax Credits and poverty programs designed to bring the African-American community into the mainstream. Governments, businesses and colleges have engaged in discrimination against white folks -- with affirmative action, contract set-asides and quotas -- to advance black applicants over white applicants. Churches, foundations, civic groups, schools and individuals all over America have donated time and money to support soup kitchens, adult education, day care, retirement and nursing homes for blacks. We hear the grievances. Where is the gratitude? Barack talks about new "ladders of opportunity" for blacks. Let him go to Altoona and Johnstown, and ask the white kids in Catholic schools how many were visited lately by Ivy League recruiters handing out scholarships for "deserving" white kids. Is white America really responsible for the fact that the crime and incarceration rates for African-Americans are seven times those of white America? Is it really white America's fault that illegitimacy in the African-American community has hit 70 percent and the black dropout rate from high schools in some cities has reached 50 percent? Is that the fault of white America or, first and foremost, a failure of the black community itself?

If there is to be some sort of dialogue, the above facts must be included in the discussion.

You can access the complete column on-line here:

A Brief For Whitey
Pat Buchanan
TownHall.com
March 21, 2008

Obama's Speech

Damage control. Nothing but damage control. That and a hefty dose of deflection.

Dr. Thomas Sowell said it better than anyone else could have in his most recent column:

Either Barack Obama or his staff must have known then that Jeremiah Wright was not someone whom they wanted to expose to the media and to the media scrutiny to which that could lead. Why not, if it is only now that Senator Obama is learning for the first time, to his surprise, what kinds of things Jeremiah Wright has been saying and doing? No one had to be in church the day Wright made his inflammatory and obscene remarks to know about them. The cable news journalists who are playing the tapes of those sermons were not there. The tapes were on sale in the church itself. Obama knew that because he had bought one or more of those tapes.

There is no doubt in anyone's mind that Obama knew about the racist and anti-American nature of Jeremiah Wright. 20 years worth of attendence? $20,000 in donations? He definitely knew.

Accordingly, Obama's Philadelphia speech -- a theatrical masterpiece -- will probably reassure most Democrats and some other Obama supporters. They will undoubtedly say that we should now "move on," even though many Democrats have still not yet moved on from George W. Bush's 2000 election victory. Like the Soviet show trials during their 1930s purges, Obama's speech was not supposed to convince critics but to reassure supporters and fellow-travelers, in order to keep the "useful idiots" useful.

That really is it. That is the damage control part. Most of middle America will remember this come Election Day. I know I will remember it.

And Dr. Sowell's parting shot:

Shelby Steele depicts Barack Obama as a man without real convictions, "an iconic figure who neglected to become himself." Senator Obama has been at his best as an icon, able with his command of words to meet other people's psychic needs, including a need to dispel white guilt by supporting his candidacy. But President of the United States, in a time of national danger, under a looming threat of nuclear terrorism? No.

An excellent column.

You can access the complete column on-line here:

Obama's Speech
Dr. Thomas Sowell
TownHall.com
March 19, 2008

The Barack Obama Double Standard

So, what would happen if the pastor at President Bush's church, or the Minister in John McCain's church were videotaped making racist and offensive comments during a service? Would Old Media treat them with the same kid gloves that they've treated Barack Obama and the racist pastor of his church, Jeremiah Wright? Would the Republicans have been steadfast in their support?

No, not at all. The Republicans would very rightly denounce their candidate for being even remotely connected to such talk. For some reason, the Dems don't feel the need to become anywhere near that indignant. Neither does Old Media it seems.

Doug Patton's latest column is about this very double standard. He writes:

And yet excuses are made for Barack Obama, who now finds himself in exactly this situation. Obama's pastor of more than two decades - the man who married Barack and Michelle Obama, who christened their daughters, who inspired the title of the candidate's book, "The Audacity of Hope," - is now at the center of a storm that would have destroyed the candidacy of any Republican the day the story broke. Rev. Jeremiah Wright, pastor of Trinity United Church of Christ in Chicago for the last 36 years, has been caught on tape denouncing the United States and the white race in terms that should shock and disgust every thinking American. Wright and the church swear allegiance to the "mother country" - Africa. (Presumably this includes the Obama family.) Rather than trying to infuse his congregation with hope and encouragement, Wright poisons them with vitriol about how the U.S. government has tried to commit genocide against the black community using drugs and the AIDS virus as weapons of choice. "Don't say God bless America," Wright screams in one sermon. "God damn America!"

Can you imagine the outcry if that last line had been uttered by a pastor for a church that a Republican attended?

More:

If Barack Obama has not been paying attention in church, it is apparent that his wife, Michelle, has. Campaigning for her husband recently, she said that for the first time in her adult life, she is finally proud of her country. In a separate speech, she said America is "a mean country." Obama is friends with William Ayers, an admitted domestic terrorist with the Weather Underground, which declared war on the United States and claimed responsibility for bombing several government buildings, including the Pentagon and the State Department building, in the 1970s. In an interview with The New York Times, ironically published on the morning of September 11, 2001, Ayers was quoted as saying, "I don't regret setting bombs; I feel we didn't do enough." Now a tenured professor at the University of Chicago (only in America!), Ayers met Barack Obama in the 1990s. They have remained friends ever since. We are judged not just by our words, but by the company we keep. The litmus test should not be whether or not everyone a candidate knows is ideal. That is an impossible standard. The true measure of a man is in his ability to choose friends with which he can be proud to stand shoulder to shoulder, not those about whom he must equivocate and for whom he must apologize.

I can't help but wonder if this is the "change" that Barack Obama supporters keep touting. Change to a racist, militant President? Change to a President that openly keeps friendships with known militants and terrorists?

Perhaps some Barack Obama supporters can leave some comments as to why a racist, terror supporting President would mean a "good change?"

They would have to be some awesomely good comments too. Those of us born after 1964 have no white guilt to give.

You can access the complete,column on-line here:

The Barack Obama Double Standard
Doug Patton
GOPUSA.com
March 17, 2008

---

And before anyone starts to claim that "Obama didn't know," please check out the following at NewsBusters.org:

On June 5th, 2007, Senator Barack Obama spoke before 8,000 people gathered in Hampton University's Convocation Center. Most of them were pastors and ministers attending a conference there. He was there to speak on mostly post Katrina issues and to criticize the Bush administration's efforts during that natural disaster. Obama tried his catch phrase of the moment, saying that a "quiet riot" might be occurring in America and he affirmed that he felt that America was a racist nation, that the reaction to Katrina had just "pulled back the screen" on America's racism. Obama also used rhetoric heavily doused with religious symbolism. But, that boiler plate aside, there was two very interesting segments in Obama's remarks concerning his racist "spiritual mentor," Rev. Jeremiah Wright, Jr. that are not getting the press it deserves. ... As the speech kicked off (at 1:07 into the video), Obama introduced the Rev. Wright to the audience with these glowing and highly personal words: "And then I've got to give a special shout out to my Pastor. The guy who puts up with me, counsels me, listens to my wife complain about me. He's a friend and a great leader not just in Chicago but all across the country, so please everybody give an extraordinary welcome to my pastor Dr. Jeremiah Wright, Jr., Trinity United Church of Christ. Where's he at? There he is. That's him, that's him right there. You wearing a suit today, right"? This reveals a very intimate portrait of Obama and Wright's relationship. Notice the last bit where Obama jokes about Wright's penchant for wearing an Afrocentric style of dress and that his wearing of a suit at that event was uncommon. These are the remarks of a close friend to another loved intimate, not the words of a man making perfunctory comments. Later in his comments Obama mentioned Wright again. (At 13:43 in the video) "You know, I've been on a journey trying to get at the truth that question for a long time. I mention Rev. Wright... I first met Rev. Wright when I moved to Chicago after college. And that's where I met Rev. Wright and started going to Trinity United Church of Christ and he helped me on another journey and introduced me to someone named Jesus Christ. And I learned that my sins could be redeemed. I learned that those things that I was too weak to accomplish myself, maybe he could accomplish them for me if I placed my trust in him. And I learned that ordinary people can achieve extraordinary things when they believe in him and they come together and are guided by him." So, we see that Obama obviously had a close, long-term relationship with Wright not a casual one where Obama might have missed the Reverend’s long-standing agenda.

Obama clearly knew and now is trying to distance himself. Only the most naive will believe that he "didn't know."

Check out the video of the speech here:

Video Library, CBS Chicago 2
CBS Chicago 2
March 16, 2008

You can check out the NewsBusters article on-line here:

Contrary To Claims, Obama Very Close With Racist Preacher, Wright
Warner Todd Huston
NewsBusters.org
March 16, 2008