Sunday, August 31, 2008

William Ayers', Barry's BFF, resume

This is the work of Mark Levin, former attorney who worked in the Reagan Justice Department as chief of staff. If you aren't familiar with him or his radio show, give him a listen. or listen on any number of stations like or www.wntp. Over the past few months I've come to respect him enormously and he's funny. And he loves dogs.

Remember that Barry's political career was launched at Ayers' house. William Ayers' wife, Bernadette Dohrn

worked with Michelle in the same law firm for a period of time. But Barry lies and says Ayers is just a guy from the neighborhood, someone he hardly knew. That lie will be put to rest when Stanley Kurtz finishes with the Annenberg papers just released this week.

7 October 1969 – Bombing of Haymarket Police Statue in Chicago, apparently as a “kickoff” for the “Days of Rage” riots in the city October 8-11, 1969. The Weathermen later claimed credit for the bombing in their book, “Prairie Fire.”

8-11 October 1969 – The “Days of Rage” riots occur in Chicago in which 287 Weatherman members from throughout the country were arrested and a large amount of property damage was done.

6 December 1969 – Bombing of several Chicago Police cars parked in a precinct parking lot at 3600 North Halsted Street, Chicago. The WUO stated in their book “Prairie Fire” that they had did the explosion.

27-31 December 1969 – Weathermen hold a “War Council” meeting in Flint, MI, where they finalize their plans to submerge into an underground status from which they plan to commit strategic acts of sabotage against the government. Thereafter they are called the “Weather Underground Organization” (WUO).

13 February 1970 - Bombing of several police vehicles of the Berkeley, California, Police Department .

16 February 1970 – Bombing of Golden Gate Park branch of the San Francisco Police Department, killing one officer and injuring a number of other policemen.

6 March 1970 – Bombing in the 13th Police District of the Detroit, Michigan. 34 sticks of dynamite are discovered. During February and early March, 1970, members of the WUO, led by Bill Ayers, are reported to be in Detroit, during that period, for the purpose of bombing a police facility.

6 March 1970 – “bomb factory” located in New York’s Greenwich Village accidentally explodes. WUO members die . The bomb was intended to be planted at a non-commissioned officer’s dance at Fort Dix, New Jersey. The bomb was packed with nails TO INFILICT MAXIMUM CASUALTIES UPON DETONATION.

30 March 1970 – Chicago Police discover a WUO “bomb factory” on Chicago’s north side. A subsequent discovery of a WUO “weapons cache” in a south side Chicago apartment several days later ends WUO activity in the city.

10 May 1970 – Bombing of The National Guard Association building in Washington, D.C..

21 May 1970 – The WUO under Bernardine Dohrn’s (Ayers’ current wife) name releases its “Declaration of a State of War” communique.

6 June 1970 – The WUO sends a letter claiming credit for bombing of the San Francisco Hall of Justice; however, no explosion actually took place. Months later, workmen in this building located an unexploded device which had apparently been dormant for some time.

9 June 1970 - Bombing of The New York City Police Headquarters.

27 July 1970 - Bombing of The Presidio army base in San Francisco. [NYT, 7/27/70]

12 September 1970 – The WUO helps Dr. Timothy Leary, break out and escape from the California Men’s Colony prison.

8 October 1970 - Bombing of Marin County courthouse. [NYT, 8/10/70]

10 October 1970 - Bombing of Queens traffic-court building . [NYT, 10/10/70, p. 12]

14 October 1970 - Bombing of The Harvard Center for International Affairs [NYT, 10/14/70, p. 30]

1 March 1971 - Bombing of The United States Capitol . “ [NYT, 3/2/71]

April, 1971 – abandoned WUO “bomb factory” discovered in San Francisco, California.

29 August, 1971 - Bombing of the Office of California Prisons . [LAT, 8/29/71]

17 September 1971 - Bombing of The New York Department of Corrections in Albany, NY [NYT, 9/18/71]

15 October 1971 - Bombing of William Bundy’s office in the MIT research center. [NYT, 10/16/71]

19 May 1972 - Bombing of The Pentagon . [NYT, 5/19/72]

18 May 1973 - Bombing of the 103rd Police Precinct in New York

28 September 1973 - Bombing of ITT headquarters in New York and Rome, Italy . [NYT, 9/28/73]

6 March 1974 - Bombing of the Department of Health, Education and Welfare offices in San Francisco

31 May 1974 - Bombing of The Office of the California Attorney General.

17 June 1974 - Bombing of Gulf Oil’s Pittsburgh headquarters .

11 September 1974 – Bombing of Anaconda Corporation (part of the Rockefeller Corporation).

29 January 1975 - Bombing of the State Department in (AP. “State Department Rattled by Blast,” The Daily Times-News, January 29 1975, p.1)

16 June 1975 - Bombing of Banco de Ponce (a Puerto Rican bank) in New York .

September, 1975 – Bombing of the Kennecott Corporation .

October 20, 1981 - Brinks robbery in which several members of the Weather Underground stole over $1 million from a Brinks armored car near Nyack, New York. The robbers murdered 2 police officers and 1 Brinks guard. Several others were wounded.

1981 “Guilty as hel*. Free as a bird. America is a great country,” Ayers said when interviewed by David Horowitz.

September 11, 2001 “I don’t regret setting bombs. I feel we didn’t do enough.” Ayers is quoted in a New York Times article.

A Real Rockstar on a Sears Rockstar

Rockbama Does Invesco
by Ted Nugent

(UPDATED): While Senator Obama was giving his acceptance speech at Invesco Field in Denver to tens of thousands of Fedzilla supporting numbskulls, I was busy pummeling musical fun gluttons at the New York State Fair with my R&B spirit-infested guitar as I’ve done over 6,000 times so far in my gravity-defying career.

My ace crew taped Senator Obama’s speech so that I could watch it after I got off stage and now I’m slamming this out on my laptop. I won’t go away. Write that down. Again.

Before I slice and dice the Obaminator’s speech, let’s get one thing clear. Though the Obaminator may be treated like a rockstar, he has much more in common with a one hit wonder, no talent pop star.

The Obaminator brought in Fedzilla musicians Sheryl Crowe and Stevie Wonder to electrify the throngs of Fedzilla supporters. Political ideologies aside, these gentlemen and their killer musicians are the real McCoy when it comes to music, and I salute them for that.

The title of rockstar is meaningless and petty, and typically indicative of a fashion-driven dope. Like those dedicated musicians still celebrating our honed craft 50 plus years later, it is the soul and genuine emotion and authority of the music of our black heroes like Bo Diddly and Chuck Berry that still lives on in my musical dreams that puts timeless integrity into every glowing guitar lick. Not the transparent symbolism of celebrity or rockstar sillyness. Go figure.

The musical Gods have indeed blessed me and I continue to create musical fire on the best tour of my life in 2008 by playing blistering rhythm and blues music to well over a billion people around the world, so far. Unlike the windjammer Obaminator, my music is black enough I have a talent that has been honed through sheer will power, sweat and persistence. That's the American Dream. I wouldn't dare let Fedzilla tamper with my dream.

The Obaminator will say anything, change any position, and obfuscate his socialist intentions and beliefs to get elected. I’ve never compromised or wavered on my musical vision. I only play music that singes the pure, aboriginal musical soul.

As I’ve written before on HUMAN EVENTS, in my cursory review of the history of presidential politics, the Obominator is the least qualified person in the history of America to run for president, and his speech proved it once again. With all the believability of a talking head beauty queen, no one buys it for a minute that he is going to save the children, end world poverty or bring peace to humankind.

Pure condescending fluff.

I wasn’t expecting a detailed policy speech from the Obaminator; that’s not the purpose of a presidential acceptance speech. The purpose was to electrify the Socialist Party, formerly known as the Democrat Party.

The Obaminator gave an over-the-top inspiring speech if you are a member of the
Fedzilla addicted, bloodsucker, anti-free market, European socialist cult of denial of America.

In the America facing a pandemic of self imposed obesity and gluttonous, irresponsible credit card debt, it is understandable how Obama's celebration of such behavior resonated.

If you’re a rugged individualist, pro-free market, freedom loving, lower tax and less spending supporting capitalist, you had to shake your head in painful disbelief over how far left the Socialist Party has plummeted. President Kennedy, who supported lower taxes and stood up to the Commies in Cuba, would surely hang his head in shame and disbelief that this convention asks not what it can do for its country, but what its country must do for them. Shameful.

No one wants to be in the Iraq War, but the reality is that we are, and therefore, we must fight to win it. No timetable for withdrawal, total warfare should our military policy. Turning and running like we did in Mogadishu in 1993 under President Bubba Clinton’s failed military policies emboldened the very enemies America is fighting today.

He covered all the liberal bases in the cloudy, vague terms we’ve become used to from his predecessors, Bill Clinton and Jimmy Carter. Boiling this down in the Tedfurnace, it’s easy to get down to this. He favors gay marriage, he wants to renew the idiotic “assault weapons” ban, spend us into bankruptcy with socialized medicine and -- get this -- give the GI bill to people who serve their “communities.”

Hey, pal: the GI Bill is for those who wore the uniform, not tye-died jeans and a dirty t-shirt.

Listening to the internationalist Obaminator speak made me shudder for the safety and security of America. It appears the Obaminator is more concerned about shoveling almost a trillion dollars of our tax dollars to the United Nations for world wastefare programs than he and Senator Biden are about defending America. Good grief.

The Obaminator spoke of Fedzilla taking over the nation’s health care. He believes Fedzilla can do it better, cheaper, more effective and provide better health care than the free market. Only a bloated Michael Moore illiterate stooge could possibly believe this lie and risk putting the nation’s health care under the care of Doctor Fedzilla. Assisted suicide is one thing; engineered suicide is beyond the pale.

The Obominator was right when he said that government can’t solve all the problems. The federal government meddling creates social and cultural problems, ruins individuals, and destroys communities. I give you Lyndon Johnson’s Great Society, which has been an abysmal failure to eradicate poverty.

Communities solve community problems. Families solve family problems. Individuals solve individual problems. Responsible people know that if you want to solve domestic problems, the first obstacle to remove from the equation is Fedzilla.

It was refreshing to hear that the Obominator wants to reduce the dependence on foreign energy. Welcome to the energy party, pal. Drill here and drill near is the near term answer. Long term energy solutions do not include wind, solar or biofuels. Nuclear energy is the key to energy independence. Nuke me.

The Obominator said he would cut taxes for 95% of Americans. Cutting taxes for everyone—businesses large and small and individual Americans—coupled with a dramatic cut in government spending is the key to long-term success. Lower taxes and less government spending is fuel in the tank of America. But if he's cutting taxes for 95% of Americans, he's going to raise taxes on those 5% who already pay the vast majority of the taxes that flow into Fedzilla. Which means they'll be better at finding ways to protect their money and Fedzilla will go deeper in debt.

The Obominator spoke of government meddling in health care, education and economy. None of these three key components to the American way of life can be maximized by central planning out of Washington DC. Less meddling by Fedzilla will reduce healthcare costs, improve education, and ignite an economic conflagration.

Let us pray for America that the Obaminator is a flash in the political pan. Once the American public realizes the only substance to his message is higher taxes and more government spending and that he has zero experience that qualifies him to be the leader of the free world, he will hopefully become a political footnote and we can then get back to the tough business of running the nation.

Senator Obama is not ready to lead anyone who isn’t a trendy rock fan looking for symbolism over substance.

Saturday, August 30, 2008

He Completes Us

The Obamessiah!

What Makes Barry Run

One must wonder what Barry's mindset is this weekend. I take that back because he's not like us. He's really not like us. I'm assuming we're a balance of all emotions and experiences. That's what it means to grow up into adulthood, you learn to balance all the disparate events of your life and, like an alchemist, you turn it into you. Sometimes we lose our balance and one element predominates for a snippet of time but like a gyroscope, we return to center.

Barry is not like this. His needs are way out of whack. I don't know how it could be otherwise given his very dysfunctional childhood. I do not blame his grandparents at all even though they were of course typical white people. Barry's father was a rogue and left them and his mother apparently had better things to do like living out the feminist dictums of having a career and self-actualizing so much like Casey Anthony who only wanted to party without Caylee being a millstone around her neck, Stanley Ann dumped the little mulatto boy with the racist grandparents while she went off to express her inner goddess or whatever was calling to her.

Little cafe au lait boy in a white world with no parents. It's a hole in his heart, in his psyche. No approval could be enough for him. There is not one iota of the humble in his being. He may say he is but then he has a rally in a football stadium to 80,000 cheering obamabots. Antithesis of humble. Call it compensation for what he lacks inside.

I must say I feared the worst for this rally and if you saw my vid "See Hope!" you know what I expected. Luckily he's actually no Hitler who really must have both had something extraordinary about him and caught a wave of German angst at the peak moment. Barry is a good speaker compared to everyone else on the scene today but he can't sell a bullshit idea like Adolf could. So while there were people crying in the audience calling it a transformative experience, freak me, people said the same thing about JZ Knight who was channeling a spirit guide, too. It just wasn't as great as he/his ego needed it to be.

So we have an egomaniac, a very slick one granted, running for the presidency with another miniature man as his running mate. Joe Biden is a mean-spirited man. This happens when you seek to elevate yourself by tearing other people down and he's a master at this gambit. What psychological insufficiency pushed Barry into this choice is a topic for another post.

It all looked pretty grim until yesterday morning when Sarah Palin was added to this equation.
Instead of everyone fawning over the pretend wonder of Barry's acceptance speech and fireworks display, everyone is talking about Sarah Palin.

The McCain team is playing Barry like a fiddle. This is Barry's true vulnerability. It's not that he's a socialist, that he chooses friends and mentors unwisely or that he can be gotten on his less than no experience issue. The vulnerability is that he's got a soft spot. He's flat-footed. He cannot think on his feet and he's not a man of action. He is easily out-maneuvered. It's like putting a Piper Cub up against an F-16. Mac knows something about flying jets and apparently he is skilled in maneuvers as well.

It's a long way to Tipperary and it's a long way to the election. A lot can happen between then and now but for the first time I feel relieved to have Mac driving this plane.

Friday, August 29, 2008

The Incredible Shrinking Man

Today, John McCain put the former mayor of a town of 9,000 with zero foreign policy experience a heartbeat away from the presidency.--Camp Obama

One hardly knows where to begin addressing all the reasons why this man is not fit for higher (or even lower) office. He is tactless and graceless. He is not a statesman, he is not a gentleman. He is so full of his self-importance that there is nowhere for him to go but down. The sooner the better for the United States of America--a country he has no regard for anyway.

What's his foreign policy experience? Oh. I forgot. He went to school in Indonesia.

Tuesday, August 26, 2008

I'm Not The Only One Who Can't Stand Her

The lady doth protest too little
By Spengler

Michelle Obama's negatives in opinion polls are the worst ever registered for a candidate's wife, deep enough, perhaps, to turn the election against Barack. Presumably that is why the Democratic Party wheeled out a chipper, perky, sunny and smiling African-American female who claimed to be Michelle Obama in the keynote slot of its national convention Monday night. This alleged Michelle Obama bore a striking physical resemblance to the candidate's wife observed during the campaign, but the differences in attitude and rhetoric were extreme enough to warrant verification.

Mrs Obama's appearance was the star event on an otherwise lackluster first evening. She was introduced by her brother, basketball coach Craig Robinson, who mentioned that as a child
she had memorized every episode of the popular television comedy, The Brady Bunch. That was perhaps the most informative political introduction in the history of American politics, and a moment of magical realism. For a moment, the incautious listener might have felt transported back into the situation-comedy world of 1950s American television, into The Obama Bunch .

The lady who has often protested against America's unfairness protested much too little. Gone was the woman who told a television audience last February 18, "For the first time in my adult lifetime, I am really proud of my country and not just because Barack has done well, but because I think people are hungry for change. And I have been desperate to see our country moving in that direction and just not feeling so alone in my frustration and disappointment."

Never before has a candidate's wife delivered a major address to a national convention of either party. The break in precedent stems evidently from the urgent need to remake the image built up by sections of the media of Michelle Obama as a rancorous and resentful woman. But it also may reflect the extraordinary degree of her influence in her husband's campaign. She is reported to have ruled out Senator Hillary Clinton as a vice presidential candidate, although polls showed that Clinton would strengthen the ticket more than any other choice.

Women wept in the Colorado Convention Center as Michelle spoke not of "frustration and disappointment", but of how she embodied the success of the American dream. Thanks to her parents "faith and hard work", both she and her brother Craig "were able to go on to college. So I know firsthand from their lives and mine that the American dream endures".

She spoke of "knowing that my piece of the American dream is a blessing hard won by those who came before me. That is why I love this country. And Barack and I were raised with so many of the same values: that you work hard for what you want in life; that your word is your bond and you do what you say you're going to do; that you treat people with dignity and respect, even if you don't know them and even if you don't agree with them. And Barack and I set out to build lives guided by these values and pass them on to the next generation, because we want our children and all children in this nation to know that the only limit to the height of your achievements is the reach of your dreams and your willingness to work for them."

Watch for a big bounce in Michelle's numbers, which until now represented a vulnerability to Obama's campaign. No candidate's spouse ever has drawn an "unfavorable" opinion by 30% of the voters, not even Hillary Clinton after her suspicious commodity trading profits were reported in the summer of 1992. Teresa Heinz Kerry's haughtiness (for example, her comment that the former schoolteacher and librarian Laura Bush never had held down a real job) helped sink John Kerry's campaign in 2004.




No Opinion

Michelle Obama 8/08




Cindy McCain




Teresa Heinz Kerry 7/04




Laura Bush




Laura Bush




Tipper Gore




Elizabeth Dole




Hillary Clinton



‘00 polls by Gallup. Source: ABC News [1]

Giving Michelle the keynote address at the convention is consistent with the Obama campaign's overall defensive strategy. The choice of Democratic Senator Joseph Biden of Delaware as running mate seemed odd given Biden's poor performance during the Democratic primaries, but it provides a response of sorts to the perception that Barack Obama has insufficient experience in foreign policy. Michelle Obama carries baggage that might weigh down the campaign, and an unprecedented role at the convention appears intended to rehabilitate her image.

Although the party delegates received her rapturously, this level of visibility for the candidate's wife has its risks, for it allows journalists to put difficult questions to her. Her Princeton undergraduate thesis, for example, expresses open sympathy for the black radicalism of Stokely Carmichael, as well as a dour pessimism regarding the ability of black Princeton students to integrate into the American dream (see Sing, O Muse, the wrath of Michelle Asia Times Online, March 4, 2008) .

Although Michelle Obama can exult in the American dream (her hospital administrator job pays mid-six-figures), she has urged working-class audiences not to do precisely what she did, telling an Ohio group, "We left corporate America, which is a lot of what we're asking young people to do. Don't go into corporate America. You know, become teachers. Work for the community. Be social workers. Be a nurse. Those are the careers that we need, and we're encouraging our young people to do that."

The promotional video introducing her speech to the convention made a great deal of the fact that Michelle left a corporate law firm to tutor disadvantaged children, but did not mention her re-entry into the corporate world. Her role at the convention, again, leaves her open to pointed questioning about the discrepancy between her rhetoric and her own career choices.

Whether the Michelle Obama we saw on Monday night has the sangfroid to stand up to the inevitable hazing by the press corps remains to be seen. What is clear is that the Obama campaign is playing defense, a stance that has helped the candidate in the polls to date.

(Sorry the graph got all bollixed. Blogger's having problems this morning.)

Monday, August 25, 2008

Barry Thru Muslim Eyes

It doesn't really matter what we say, it only matters what they say because we won't kill him for being an apostate. Extrapolate for extra points.

Barack Obama through Muslim Eyes

by Daniel Pipes
August 25, 2008

How do Muslims see Barack Hussein Obama? They have three choices: either as he presents himself – someone who has "never been a Muslim" and has "always been a Christian"; or as a fellow Muslim; or as an apostate from Islam.

Reports suggests that while Americans generally view the Democratic candidate having had no religion before converting at Reverend Jeremiah Wrights's hands at age 27, Muslims the world over rarely see him as Christian but usually as either Muslim or ex-Muslim.

Lee Smith of the Hudson Institute explains why: "Barack Obama's father was Muslim and therefore, according to Islamic law, so is the candidate. In spite of the Quranic verses explaining that there is no compulsion in religion, a Muslim child takes the religion of his or her father. … for Muslims around the world, non-American Muslims at any rate, they can only ever see Barack Hussein Obama as a Muslim." In addition, his school record from Indonesia lists him as a Muslim

Thus, an Egyptian newspaper, Al-Masri al-Youm, refers to his "Muslim origins." Libyan ruler Mu‘ammar al-Qaddafi referred to Obama as "a Muslim" and a person with an "African and Islamic identity." One Al-Jazeera analysis calls him a "non-Christian man," a second refers to his "Muslim Kenyan" father, and a third, by Naseem Jamali, notes that "Obama may not want to be counted as a Muslim but Muslims are eager to count him as one of their own."

A conversation in Beirut, quoted in the Christian Science Monitor, captures the puzzlement. "He has to be good for Arabs because he is a Muslim," observed a grocer. "He's not a Muslim, he's a Christian," replied a customer. Retorted the grocer: "He can't be a Christian. His middle name is Hussein." Arabic discussions of Obama sometimes mention his middle name as a code, with no further comment needed.

"The symbolism of a major American presidential candidate with the middle name of Hussein, who went to elementary school in Indonesia," reports Tamara Cofman Wittes of the Brookings Institution from a U.S.-Muslim conference in Qatar, "that certainly speaks to Muslims abroad." Thomas L. Friedman of the New York Times found that Egyptians "don't really understand Obama's family tree, but what they do know is that if America — despite being attacked by Muslim militants on 9/11 — were to elect as its president some guy with the middle name ‘Hussein,' it would mark a sea change in America-Muslim world relations."

Some American Muslim leaders also perceive Obama as Muslim. The president of the Islamic Society of North America, Sayyid M. Syeed, told Muslims at a conference in Houston that whether Obama wins or loses, his candidacy will reinforce that Muslim children can "become the presidents of this country." The Nation of Islam's Louis Farrakhan called Obama "the hope of the entire world" and compared him to his religion's founder, Fard Muhammad.

But this excitement also has a dark side – suspicions that Obama is a traitor to his birth religion, an apostate (murtadd) from Islam. Al-Qaeda has prominently featured Obama's stating "I am not a Muslim" and one analyst, Shireen K. Burki of the University of Mary Washington, sees Obama as "bin Laden's dream candidate." Should he become U.S. commander in chief, she believes, Al-Qaeda would likely "exploit his background to argue that an apostate is leading the global war on terror … to galvanize sympathizers into action."

Mainstream Muslims tend to tiptoe around this topic. An Egyptian supporter of Obama, Yasser Khalil, reports that many Muslims react "with bewilderment and curiosity" when Obama is described as a Muslim apostate; Josie Delap and Robert Lane Greene of the Economist even claim that the Obama-as-apostate theme "has been notably absent" among Arabic-language columnists and editorialists.

That latter claim is inaccurate, for the topic is indeed discussed. At least one Arabic-language newspaper published Burki's article. Kuwait's Al-Watan referred to Obama as "a born Muslim, an apostate, a convert to Christianity." Writing in the Arab Times, Syrian liberal Nidal Na‘isa repeatedly called Obama an "apostate Muslim."

In sum, Muslims puzzle over Obama's present religious status. They resist his self-identification as a Christian while they assume a baby born to a Muslim father and named "Hussein" began life a Muslim. Should Obama become president, differences in Muslim and American views of religious affiliation will create problems.

Judged By The Friends You Keep

Isn't that what your mother told you? If this has changed since my grammar school days, I didn't get the memo on it. Please resend.

Biden has deep ties to Rezko accomplice

JOSEPH CARI | 30-year friend of VP pick guilty in kickback scheme

August 25, 2008

DENVER -- No matter what help Barack Obama might get from Sen. Joseph Biden, his newly named vice presidential running mate won't give Obama much cover on the Tony Rezko front.

Biden has described himself as a 30-year friend of a key figure in the Rezko trial who's pleaded guilty to a federal extortion charge in Chicago and is awaiting sentencing.

When the Delaware senator began contemplating his own 2008 presidential run, he initially was helped by Chicago lawyer Joseph Cari Jr., who also served as Biden's Midwest field director in his failed 1988 bid for president.

In 2005, Cari admitted to taking part in an $850,000 kickback scheme that prosecutors say was part of a larger political fund-raising operation for Gov. Blagojevich overseen by Rezko, who was convicted in June of wide-ranging corruption involving state deals.

On the day Cari's name first surfaced in the federal probe of the state Teachers Retirement System, the former finance chairman for the Democratic National Committee and for the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee was to have hosted a Biden fund-raiser in Chicago. Cari was a no-show at that July 25, 2005, event.

Offering Cari a vote of confidence at the time, Biden said, "All I know is Joe Cari is a friend, and he's an honorable guy, but I don't know anything beyond that."

Biden took $2,000 in campaign contributions from Cari in the early and mid-1990s, federal campaign-finance records show.

Two other donors whose names surfaced in the Rezko case -- Chicago lawyers Myron "Mike" Cherry and Anthony Licata -- donated to Biden's U.S. Senate campaign, as well. Cherry has given Biden $5,900, while Licata gave $1,000. Neither Cherry nor Licata has been accused of any criminal wrongdoing.

Earlier this year, in a bid to distance Obama from Rezko, the Illinois senator's campaign fund gave away to charity an amount equal to what had been contributed to the Democratic presidential hopeful by Cari, Cherry and Licata.

The Obama campaign downplayed the significance of Cari's contributions to Biden, noting that Cari was a prolific donor to an array of other politicians, from Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-N.Y.) to Illinois' other Democratic senator, Dick Durbin.

Still, an Obama spokesman said Biden would follow Obama's lead and divest his campaign fund of any money from Cari.

"As the former national finance director for the DSCC and DNC, Mr. Cari was a fund-raiser for many prominent elected officials," spokesman Ben LaBolt said. "If any contributions from Mr. Cari have not been returned or donated it is an oversight, and they will be immediately.",CST-NWS-rezko25.article

Sunday, August 24, 2008

It's a Question of Judgment Part Freakin' 2

Frank Marshall Davis, alleged Communist, was early influence on Barack Obama

New details about a black poet in Hawaii who was a key early influence in Barack Obama’s life can be revealed by The Telegraph. By Toby Harnden in Washington

Although identified only as Frank in Mr Obama’s memoir Dreams from My Father, it has now been established that he was Frank Marshall Davis, a radical activist and journalist who had been suspected of being a member of the Communist Party in the 1950s.

Obama's true colours: Making of the man who would be US president

Mr Davis moved to Honolulu from Chicago in 1948 with his second wife Helen Canfield, a white socialite, at the suggestion of his friend the actor Paul Robeson, who advised them that there would be more tolerance of a mixed race couple in Hawaii than on the American mainland.

A bohemian libertine who drank heavily and loved jazz, he became friends with Stanley Dunham, Mr Obama’s maternal grandfather in the 1960s. Mr Davis died in 1987 at the age of 81, five years before Mr Dunham.

“He knew Stan real well,” said Dawna Weatherly-Williams, a close friend of Mr Davis “They’d play Scrabble and drink and crack jokes and crack jokes and argue. Frank always won and he was always very braggadocio about it too. It was all jocular. They didn’t get polluted drunk. And Frank never really did drugs, though he and Stan would smoke pot together.”

While his mother was in Indonesia during part of his teenage years, Mr Obama lived with his white grandparents. Mrs Weatherly-Williams said that the poet was first introduced to the future Democratic presidential candidate in 1970 at the age of 10.

“Stan had been promising to bring Barry by because we all had that in common - Frank’s kids were half-white, Stan’s grandson was half-black and my son was half-black. We all had that in common and we all really enjoyed it. We got a real kick out of reality.”

Maya Soetoro-Ng, Obama's half-sister, told the Associated Press recently that her grandfather had seen Mr Davis was “a point of connection, a bridge if you will, to the larger African-American experience for my brother".

In his memoir, Mr Obama recounts how he visited Mr Davis on several occasions, apparently at junctures when he was grappling with racial issues, to seek his counsel. At one point in 1979 Mr Davis described university as “an advanced degree in compromise” that was designed to keep blacks in their place.

Mr Obama quoted him as saying: “Leaving your race at the door. Leaving your people behind. Understand something, boy. You’re not going to college to get educated. You’re going there to get trained.”

He added that “they’ll tank on your chain and let you know that you may be a well-trained, well-paid nigger, but you’re a nigger just the same.”

It has also been established that Mr Davis, who divorced in 1970, was the author of a hard-core pornographic autobiography published in San Diego in 1968 by Greenleaf Classics under the pseudonym Bob Greene.

In a surviving portion of an autobiographical manuscript, Mr Davis confirms that he was the author of Sex Rebel: Black after a reader had noticed the “similarities in style and phraseology” between the pornographic work and his poetry.

“I could not then truthfully deny that this book, which came out in 1968 as a Greenleaf Classic, was mine.” In the introduction to Sex Rebel, Mr Davis (writing as Greene) explains that although he has “changed names and identities…all incidents I have described have been taken from actual experiences”.

He stated that “under certain circumstances I am bisexual” and that he was “ a voyeur and an exhibitionist” who was “occasionally mildly interested in sado-masochism”, adding: “I have often wished I had two penises to enjoy simultaneously the double – but different – sensations of oral and genital copulation.”

The book, which closely tracks Mr Davis’s life in Chicago and Hawaii and the fact that his first wife was black and his second white, describes in lurid detail a series of shockingly sordid sexual encounters, often involving group sex.

One chapter concerns the seduction by Mr Davis and his first wife of a 13-year-old girl called Anne. Mr Davis wrote that it was the girl who had suggested he had sex with her. “I’m not one to go in for Lolitas. Usually I’d rather not bed a babe under 20.

“But there are exceptions. I didn’t want to disappoint the trusting child. At her still-impressionistic age, a rejection might be traumatic, could even cripple her sexually for life.”

He then described how he and his wife would have sex with the girl. “Anne came up many times the next several weeks, her aunt thinking she was in good hands. Actually she was.

“She obtained a course in practical sex from experienced and considerate practitioners rather than from ignorant insensitive neophytes….I think we did her a favour, although the pleasure was mutual.”

On other occasions, Mr Davis would cruise in Hawaii parks looking for couples or female tourists to have sex with. He derived sexual gratification from bondage, simulated rape and being flogged and urinated on.

He boasted that “the number of white babes interested in at least one meeting with a Negro male has been far more than I can handle” and wished “America were as civilised as, say, Scandinavia”. He concluded: “I regret none of my experiences or unusual appetites; for me they are normal.”

According to Mrs Weatherly-Williams, Mr Davis lost touch with Mr Dunham some time in the 1980s. John Edgar Tidwell, who wrote the introduction to Davis's memoir and edited a collection of his work, said that there was no mention of Mr Dunham or Mr Obama in any of Mr Davis’s papers.

It's a Question of Judgment

If you can say one thing about Barry, he really knows how to pick people to be close to him.

Biden's Son, Brother Named in Two Suits

By Kimberly Kindy and Joe Stephens
Washington Post Staff Writers
Sunday, August 24, 2008; A09

A son and a brother of Sen. Joseph R. Biden Jr. (D-Del.) are accused in two lawsuits of defrauding a former business partner and an investor of millions of dollars in a hedge fund deal that went sour, court records show.

The Democratic vice presidential candidate's son Hunter, 38, and brother James, 59, assert instead that their former partner defrauded them by misrepresenting his experience in the hedge fund industry and recommending that they hire a lawyer with felony convictions.

The legal actions have been playing out in New York State Supreme Court since 2007, and they focus on Hunter and James Biden's involvement in Paradigm Companies LLC, a hedge fund group. Hunter Biden, a Washington lobbyist, briefly served as president of the firm.

A lawsuit filed by their former partner Anthony Lotito Jr. asserts in court papers that the deal was crafted to get Hunter Biden out of lobbying because his father was concerned about the impact it would have on his bid for the White House. Biden was running for the Democratic nomination at the time the suit was filed.

Hunter Biden was made president with an annual salary of $1.2 million, despite his inexperience in the hedge fund industry, the lawsuit said. Before that, he had been part of the Washington law firm Oldaker, Biden & Belair, which earned $1.76 million in lobbying revenue in the first half of 2006, according to Congressional Quarterly's CQ MoneyLine. One of its biggest clients is the National Association of Shareholder and Consumer Attorneys, a District-based group representing law firms specializing in investment and corporate law.

Hunter Biden is one of many children and relatives of prominent members of Congress who have made their careers as lobbyists. He returned to lobbying after less than a year with Paradigm.

Lotito's lawsuit alleges that James Biden called him in January 2006 to arrange a job for Hunter Biden. It says James Biden told him that his brother (Sen. Biden) "was concerned with the impact that Hunter's lobbying activities might have on his expected campaign for the 2008 Democratic presidential nomination," and, "Biden told Lotito that, in light of these concerns, his brother had asked him to seek Lotito's assistance in finding employment for Hunter in a non-lobbying capacity."

Lotito does not provide any direct evidence of the senator's involvement and offers no witnesses to the assertion.

The campaign of Sens. Barack Obama and Biden declined to comment on the case, referring questions to Nicholas Gravante Jr., a lawyer representing Hunter and James Biden. Gravante said assertions that Joseph Biden told his brother he was concerned about his son's lobbying are "absolutely false."

"This lawsuit has nothing to do with Joe Biden, and there is absolutely no truth to those allegations," Gravante said. "It is a business dispute between former partners. The suit is baseless."

Brian C. Wille, an attorney for Lotito, said the lawsuit alleges no wrongdoing by Sen. Biden, only that his concerns set in motion the business deal.

"There was a concern that Hunter Biden's role as a lobbyist would have an impact on the senator's proposed presidential run," Wille said. "That's what James Biden told Mr. Lotito. . . . Was it true? Who knows? There is no allegation the senator was involved in any of these events."

In an affidavit, Hunter Biden said his father had nothing to do with the deal and that it is Lotito who swindled the Bidens.

He said Lotito lied about being a "fully licensed and accredited securities professional" with hedge fund experience.

In addition, he said Lotito recommended a lawyer to vet the business deal who was under investigation and was ultimately convicted on several felony charges of conspiracy and wire and mail fraud in a scheme to steal millions from a computer company.

In the hedge fund business deal, Lotito and the Bidens created a company called LLB Holdings USA and together agreed to pay $21.3 million for 54 percent interest in Paradigm.

In the lawsuit, Lotito said that soon after creating LLB, the Bidens crafted a "secret deal" to create their own company that was designed to buy out his shares in Paradigm for a low rate, to which he agreed. He said he knew nothing of the secret deal until later and now believes he was defrauded out of millions of dollars and his share in the company.

In the second lawsuit against the Bidens, which was filed in June, Lotito is also named as a defendant. Stephane Farouze, now an executive with Deutsche Bank, seeks $10 million, saying the Bidens and Lotito promised to buy his shares in the hedge fund company but reneged.

Out of Touch

Barry didn't grow up here and his parents sure weren't anything like Ozzie & Harriet.
He doesn't understand us/US. He just wants to do his socialist thing with his pals like Billy Ayers and Bernie Dohrn.

Isn't this amazing? That the potential president of the United States is BFF with someone who was on the FBI's 10 Most Wanted? There's some CHANGE for us!

To hell with Barry (seriously). As the summer draws to a close, here's something N0bama and his little woman don't get about Americans. We're nice people. As a culture, as a society, we're downright nice.

What Barry Doesn't Get

We'll talk, after I finish my waffle.

Saturday, August 23, 2008

This Obama I Like

Does Jobama Have Any Credibility?

Perfect match. Two guys who love the sound of their own voices.

Thursday, August 21, 2008

Don't Blame It On Our Coca-Cola Bottles

A short interlude between Barry gaffes

Was that a compassion deficit, Michelle?

No, that's only for typical white people. It doesn't apply to Senator Mengele. That's too strong an appellation, isn't it? Leaving live babies to die...some lefty help me out. Why is that ok?

This man is a nightmare.

MOWBRAY: Obama's falsehood

Misrepresents his abortion actions

Joel Mowbray
Thursday, August 21, 2008


For the first time in this presidential cycle, social issues such as abortion took center stage this past week, courtesy of the candidates' high-profile, back-to-back interviews at a mega-church last weekend.

Yet the mainstream media only days later is starting to address what might be the biggest story in this frame: Barack Obama - whether knowingly or not - provided false information about a controversial abortion vote he made in the Illinois Senate in 2003.

After his nationally televised interview with Pastor Rick Warren on Saturday night in Orange County, Calif., Mr. Obama sat down with Christian Broadcasting Network's David Brody and went on the attack against pro-life activists, whom he said were "lying" about his vote to kill a bill protecting babies born alive following botched abortions.

At issue is an Illinois bill in 2003 called the Born Alive Infants Protection Act that Mr. Obama voted against, which was modeled on federal legislation enacted the previous year declaring that in failed abortions resulting in a live birth, the baby must be given normal medical treatment. This was in response to a gruesome practice whereby abortions involving induced labor were resulting in unintended live births - and those infants were simply being left to die. It had passed the U.S. Senate without any dissent.

Mr. Obama contended that he "would have been completely in, fully in support of the federal bill that everybody supported," but that he voted against the 2003 Illinois bill because "that was not the bill that was presented at the state level." Except that it was.

As it turns out - and as even Mr. Obama's campaign admitted Monday to the New York Sun - the National Right to Life Committee wasn't lying; Mr. Obama was. The specific difference cited by Mr. Obama in the CBN interview was that the Illinois bill didn't contain the federal legislation's language explicitly stating that it would not "undermine Roe vs. Wade." (This was not merely off-the-cuff, as the campaign had issued a written statement to CNN in June offering the same rationale.) Not only did the bill contain the exact provision from the federal bill, but Mr. Obama voted in favor of adding it as an amendment. After the state bill was changed to be almost identical to the unanimously passed federal law, Mr. Obama voted against it.

CNN, to its credit, did report on Obama's Illinois actions before the Democrat's accusation that his critics were lying. The New York Times first reported on Mr. Obama's Illinois record two weeks ago - almost 900 words into a 1,400-word piece on page A16. In a page A18 story this Wednesday dedicated solely to the controversy, the Times' Larry Rohter carries Mr. Obama's water, stretching to offer excuses for his vote that even Mr. Obama did not suggest until after misstating his own record last weekend.

The highest-profile mainstream-media piece to date ran this Wednesday in The Washington Post, a page A1 article titled, "Candidates' Abortion Views Not So Simple." In its reporting, however, The Post seemed to dismiss the significance of Mr. Obama's opposition to the 2003 Illinois legislation by referring to it as an "obscure law." The Post further presents as fact the Obama position that the Illinois bill Mr. Obama opposed was solely about "pre-viable" babies. The testimony of former nurse Jill Stanek, who witnessed babies surviving botched abortions at Christ Hospital just outside Chicago, discussed babies past 20 weeks, including into the third trimester - thus not "pre-viable."

Though understanding the legislative process is not a common strength in political journalists, most of the reporters in question are smart enough to sift through the plentiful documentation of Mr. Obama's voting history on the Born Alive Infants Protection Act in Illinois at the Web site of the National Right to Life Committee. Further, they could even read the simple, yet thorough, narrative of National Review's David Freddoso, who has written two stories spelling out the timeline and Obama's actions along the way. (Some of the reporting is adapted from his new book, "The Case Against Barack Obama.") Mr. Obama's camp has shifted explanations this week, now claiming that the Democrat merely wanted a provision in the bill clarifying that it would not impact existing state laws. Yet as several pro-life activists have noted, Mr. Obama was the chairman of the legislature's health committee when the bill came up again in 2003 and easily could have offered such an amendment. He didn't.

Regardless of the reasons for his vote, Mr. Obama cannot say that his critics are lying. He did oppose a bill virtually identical to the one unanimously passed in the U.S. Senate. And now, five years later, he might end up paying a political price for that decision.

Joel Mowbray occasionally writes for The Washington Times.

Tuesday, August 19, 2008

I'm A Thinker

I Feel Better Now

Batman and Rush: Why McCain Will Win
By Jeffrey Lord
Published 8/19/2008 12:08:37 AM

OK. I'll walk out on a limb.

This election has already been decided. It's over. The winner is John McCain.

How, you are asking, could anybody be so utterly stupid to say such a thing in August? What about the polls showing Obama ahead? Haven't I heard about Obama-mania? The conventions haven't even been held!

Well, since you asked, I'll tell you.

Yes, I know how to read the polls. I've seen the television coverage of the adoring Obama crowds. Followed the "triumph" of the Obama European tour. Know that in some eyes McCain is "old." I've heard all the usual buzz about potential VPs and which possible number two brings what to which ticket. Listened to the usual back-and-forth between the rival campaigns. "Did so!" "Did not!" Yada-yada-yada, as Seinfeld might say.

To which I say: So what?

If you really want to know the outcome of this election, the answers are out there to be found right now. Look around. Take a good hard look at what is going on around us all. It requires only that we understand what we are seeing, beginning with two much reported events of the summer.

First, The Dark Knight broke movie records with first day earnings of over $66 million. The film has broken one record after another, just as films like Star Wars or a Star Wars sequel or Spiderman or a Spiderman sequel did in their time. All by himself, Bloomberg tells us, Batman is poised to boost Hollywood towards a record year of $10 billion in box office sales.

Second. Simultaneous to the huge success of The Dark Knight, Rush Limbaugh has celebrated his 20th year as the host of his nationally syndicated number one radio show, signing an 8-year contract for a reported $400 million. His show is heard on approximately 600 stations around the country, with the president of Premiere Radio Networks saying the show enjoys an "unprecedented platform of radio affiliates." In recent weeks Rush has received one big happy fist pump from everyone including but not limited to the President of the United States and the "Dittoheads" who listen to him regularly as part of an audience of 20 million a week.

So, as might be phrased by another character out of the world of Batman, riddle me this.

Why is Batman so popular? Why is Rush so popular? And what in the world does the popularity of either have to do with asserting as fact that Senator McCain has already won the presidential election over Senator Obama?

The answer is: you. "You" defined as a cultural American.

NO ONE OUT THERE -- with the exception of novelist Andrew Klavan's recent perceptive piece on Batman and President Bush in the Wall Street Journal -- seems to understand just why The Dark Knight is such a hit. With all due respect to the filmmakers, actors Christian Bale and the late Heath Ledger, the real star of this film is indisputably Batman. But just who is Batman? And why does he make those connected with him so rich every time he shows his cowl?

Batman is the cinematic (and comic book) personification of the way Americans like to see themselves. He is a rebel against the Establishment (and likewise with the Star Wars crew and Spiderman.) He is unafraid to act. He is willing to take risks. He could not possibly care less about what "feels good" or whether anything he says or does "makes sense" to a single other person. He runs on instinct. He is here to do the right thing. Nothing more, nothing less. He has a vision of Gotham City, a dream, that is not unlike the favorite phrase associated with his friend Superman (another movie sensation): Truth, Justice and the American Way.

Rush Limbaugh is the Batman of the airwaves. The reason Rush is celebrating 20 years on the air and is being rewarded with that great contract is precisely because he has the same qualities as Batman. Rush Limbaugh is a conservative rebel, instinctively so. He believes in the power of the American dream. Most importantly, he lives it, right down there in his own Bat Cave, his "Southern Command." He is completely unafraid to say exactly what's on his conservative mind, and couldn't care less what his liberal establishment critics say about him. Like Batman, he runs on his instincts, hopping into his broadcasting Batmobile daily and saying forthrightly that he knows what's wrong and how it should be fixed.

But what, you ask, does all of this have to do with predicting a McCain victory over Obama? For this I turn to my own guide to American culture, my friend Dr. Clotaire Rapaille. The man who, as mentioned awhile back, is famous for designing the Chrysler PT Cruiser, getting Americans to drink vast quantities of Folger's coffee and serving as a cultural consultant to companies like GE, AT&T and Boeing, among many others. Before the 2008 campaign got under way, Rapaille had similarly applied his culture theories to presidents and presidential campaigns, his conclusions as startling as they were accurate.

What is it that makes Americans choose anything the way they do? And specifically what does this mean when it comes to choosing presidents?

First, he explained to me, we should understand that every human has a brain divided into three parts. The cortex is the seat of logic, while the limbic deals with emotions. It is what he calls the "third brain" -- the "reptilian brain" -- that unmistakably dominates the other two. It houses a person's fundamental instinct for two and only two things: survival and reproduction. While every human walking the planet has these two instincts, some people are more "reptilian" than others. Those others could be depending more on their "cortex" -- the part of the brain that is home to logic, that controls intelligence. Or they can seem to run mostly on emotion. Yet without question, the research shows again and again that whether the subject is picking cars, coffee or presidents, people respond with their instincts. When this fact of life is overlaid with culture -- in the case of voters for president of the United States, American culture -- the result is easy to see.

While other cultures put a premium on thinking (the French) or order (the Germans), Americans want our presidents to respond just as we do in our culture -- with their gut. An American presidential candidate, Rapaille says, "doesn't need to be extremely reptilian, only more reptilian than his opponent is." In particular, and he says this in terms of a cultural observation as opposed to a subjective condemnation, Americans are not culturally disposed to thinking. We prefer, as the Nike commercial has long said, to "just do it." We are a culture of action, of rebellion, of instinct. When Europeans or American liberals deride a George W. Bush or a Reagan as a "cowboy," they think they are hurling an insult. Yet most Americans see cowboys as heroes, so the insult effectively backfires. When it comes to choosing between two candidates for president, we gravitate instinctively to the one perceived as more "reptilian." Rapaille puts it this way: "We don't want our presidents to think too much."


Rush Limbaugh has made the observation that when Obama is away from his teleprompter the candidate's soaring rhetoric stumbles into a non-stop succession of hems and haws. Lots of "ahhhhs" and "uhhhhs" and "uhhhh...ahhhh...uhhhhs." To illustrate in entertaining fashion Limbaugh has even assembled a tape of Obama's hemmings and hawings from a solitary press conference, stringing them together to hilarious effect.

Rush is on to something here, a big something. What, after all, is Obama doing while he stutters around in verbal no man's land? The next time you see Obama in an unscripted TV appearance watch his face as he does this and you will see it in a flash. Obama is...yes...thinking. Telegraphing in utterly unconscious fashion to voters precisely what Rapaille says they do not want: a potential president who "thinks too much." Thinking translated here as indecisiveness, weakness, dawdling, timidity.

Remember Reagan on his philosophy about ending the Cold War? "We win, they lose," he said. The Soviets, he said, were "an evil empire." Nothing complicated. No Carter-esque agony of thought. Just a simple and direct use of the reptilian brain. If the striking air traffic controllers didn't stop breaking the law and get back to work pronto, Reagan said he would fire them. Pure and simple. They didn't -- so he did. His poll numbers shot up. Remember all those "thinkers" over at the State Department who kept eliminating a specific phrase from Reagan's now famous speech in front of the Berlin Wall? Reagan kept putting it back. On the interesting grounds that it was he who had been elected president, not some State Department bureaucrat. The phrase: "Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall." The moment is now enshrined in American historical memory. Recall FDR on the Depression: "The American people want action and action now." Or Teddy Roosevelt demanding the return of a hostage by sending a telegram stating his expectation of the hostage-taker in the following fashion: "This government wants Pedicaris alive or Raisuli dead."

In each case, this was the bottom line of the survival instinct, the reptilian brain at work in a president. It is no coincidence that Reagan, FDR and TR were three of America's most popular presidents.

ONCE I UNDERSTOOD Rapaille's point, I went back in American presidential history to look for myself at the outcome of every presidential election. Without question, unless there was some extraordinary circumstance (like a secret back room deal in the 1824 Adams-Jackson election) like clockwork the American people had elected the more "reptilian" candidate of those available as they perceived him to be. Issues came and issues went with the centuries, but the American tendency to go instinctively for the guy who seemed the most instinctively action oriented appeared time and time again. A roll call of winners perceived by the voters of their day (in direct comparison to their opponents) as action oriented, candidates who fearlessly went with their gut, include Andrew Jackson, Lincoln, the two Roosevelts, Wilson, Truman, Ike, JFK, Reagan, Clinton and George W. Bush. The sharper the image of a candidate as a serious thinker, a man who hesitates or who is perceived more as a talker than a doer, the more certain his defeat -- as with a John Quincy Adams, a Thomas E. Dewey, an Adlai Stevenson, a McGovern, Dole, Dukakis, Gore, or Kerry.

And, my bet is, Obama.

What, after all, are among McCain's supposed liabilities? His temper -- an action indicator if ever there was one. His support for the Iraq War -- war being the ultimate call to action. In the acknowledged asset column is McCain's own war record, the epitome of the reptilian American brain at work. This candidate flew directly over the heart of the enemy capital to drop his bombs, then gets captured and tortured, with the great good luck of having his enemies film his literal fight for survival for full display in a later presidential campaign. For that matter, what, after all, was McCain in his youth? A fighter pilot. Or, as they say, a "flyboy." A modern equivalent of the American cowboy. And what is the cowboy to Americans? A hero. Batman in a hat.

Take note of the difference in the McCain and Obama reactions to the crisis between Russia and Georgia. McCain instantly refers to "the invasion of Georgia." Obama says he wants to "condemn the outbreak of violence." The difference between the two is vivid. McCain, listening to his gut, is sharply blaming the Russians. He wants them the hell out of there ASAP. Obama is once again the "thinker." Careful not to offend, he refers not to an "invasion," which would imply fault, but an "outbreak of violence," as if both the Georgians and the Russians are equally to blame. And what does Obama's foreign policy adviser Susan Rice say of McCain? She criticizes McCain for "shooting from the hip."

Who in American culture shoots from the hip? Cowboys, of course. Heroes. John Wayne. Gary Cooper. Wyatt Earp. Matt Dillon. One has to ask of Ms. Rice: Is she a secret plant being paid by the McCain campaign to say these things? One can only laugh at the utterly unconscious inability of Obama and his fellow eggheads to understand their own fellow countrymen, let alone human beings around the rest of the world. All things being equal, who do you think most Americans would prefer to see dealing with the big bad Russians in Georgia? Barack Obama -- or Batman?

THESE COMPETING IMAGES of McCain as the man of action and Obama as the egghead thinker are slowly sinking in with the American electorate of 2008. The same electorate that has rewarded Batman and Rush with millions of viewers, listeners and dollars. The same electorate that gets up every single day in this country and looks in the mirror to see their own personal hero or heroine, their own version of Batman or Rush, someone who is fighting with everything they have in their reptilian brain to survive and thrive.

These Americans aren't looking to be led by someone who has to think the whole thing through -- hemming and hawing as they go.

One last irony. It is much commented that the mainstream media is in the tank for Obama. And so they are. What seems not to be understood is that the mainstream media's idea of promotion for Obama is exactly what it was for Kerry or Gore and Dukakis and in the long ago was used as a reason to support a Thomas E. Dewey or Adlai Stevenson. They see the "thinking man as candidate" as a cause for celebration. It escapes them completely that the American people see the same thing as a cause for concern. A gut reason to vote against.

A classic example is the massive coverage given to Obama's European trip. The media -- and certainly Obama -- saw this as a reaching out to others. Displaying Obama's willingness to listen to what others (European others at that) are thinking -- that word again -- and therefore try to please them. Big mistake.

Does Batman really care what others think of him? Does Rush? Did Reagan or Teddy Roosevelt? Are you kidding? In other words, every time the media thinks they are promoting Obama they are in fact doing him damage. Subtle, yet irreversible damage that will eventually begin to show itself in the polling numbers if it hasn't already.

What will Americans be voting for in 2008? The same thing they have been voting for routinely in every election since the beginning of American presidential elections. They want action. A willingness to risk. They want someone who doesn't give a damn what others think.

They want Batman. They want Rush.

So they will elect McCain.

Jeffrey Lord is the creator, co-founder and CEO of QubeTV, a conservative online video site. A Reagan White House political director and author, he writes from Pennsylvania.

Oh Imperious Emperor, What Havest Thou For Lunch?

Obama: "Stoop So Low as McDonalds"


December 14, 2007 10:15 PM

ABC News' Sunlen Miller reports: Barack Obama often touts his work in the Senate on ethics reform legislation in which meals from lobbyists were eliminated.

At a campaign stop in Manchester, N.H. while talking up his success, he revealed a little bit about his dining establishment preferences with his bravado about the legislation.

Obama recalled a conversation he had with another senator who was giving him grief about working for the meal ban. The other Senator questioned to Obama, “What do you expect me to just start eating at McDonalds all the time?”

Obama recalled his response, “You get paid $160,000 a year, you can even afford Applebee's, you don’t even have to stoop so low as to eat at McDonalds.”

Some in the crowd were seen raising their eyebrows as Obama, the man who touts himself from the South Side of Chicago, critiqued the popular fast food chain.

Monday, August 18, 2008

When Is a Baby Alive and Should Barry Care

Barry shot himself in the foot so many times this month, it's hard to list them all. I admit I had no intention of watching the Saddleback Showdown and didn't--until I saw part of Mac's performance then I watched the rerun. If you don't get all schpilkes when listening to Barry say nothing for an hour, you're a better man than I am, Gunga Din. (Is that racist? Are we allowed to mention fictional Indian characters referenced in poetry?) Man alive, this cat is so cool he's in the freezer. Just give us a straight damn answer! What the heck is the matter with him? And this impresses people?

It's above his pay-grade as to when life begins? When your heart starts beating. Is that a good answer? Inside or outside the womb. But no. The Harvard grad couldn't figure that out. The guy loves abortion. Killing babies is great. Killing terrorists makes Americans the biggest shits on the planet.

Obama Facing Attacks From All Sides Over Abortion Record
By RUSSELL BERMAN, Staff Reporter of the Sun | August 18, 2008

WASHINGTON — When it comes to his abortion record in Illinois, Senator Obama is taking flak from all sides.

Senators McCaina and Obama come together with Saddleback Church pastor Rick Warren in the first joint appearance of candidates Obama and McCain in the 2008 presidential campaign at the Saddleback Civil Forum on Leadership and Compassion on August 16 in Lake Forest, Calif.

First, Senator Clinton accused him of lacking political backbone in voting "present" on a bill that, according to abortion rights advocates, undermined the landmark Supreme Court ruling in Roe v. Wade. Now abortion foes are targeting him from the right over the same question: They say his opposition to legislation aimed at protecting infants born alive after a botched abortion demonstrates his extremism on the flash point social issue.

The conservative attacks have intensified in recent days, with opponents of legalized abortion sending out missives against Mr. Obama and a YouTube video circulating that casts his position on abortion as more extreme than even the most stalwart supporters of a woman's right to choose, including Mrs. Clinton and Senator Kennedy of Massachusetts.

The presumptive Democratic nominee responded sharply in an interview Saturday night with the Christian Broadcast Network, saying anti-abortion groups were "lying" about his record.

"They have not been telling the truth," Mr. Obama said. "And I hate to say that people are lying, but here's a situation where folks are lying." (He can't call a liar a liar. He has to circumnavigate the globe and wait till everyone's boat sinks and forgets what the question was.)

He added that it was "ridiculous" to suggest he had ever supported withholding lifesaving treatment for an infant. "It defies common sense and it defies imagination, and for people to keep on pushing this is offensive," he said in the CBN interview. (He's the victim in this. Not the little baby held by a nurse in a broom closet until it died.)

At issue is the Born Alive Infant Protection Act, a bill in the Illinois state Senate that sought to protect against bungled abortions by requiring that a fetus that survived an abortion be defined as a person. Fearing that the legislation could be interpreted more broadly to protect fetuses that were not yet viable — thus threatening Roe v. Wade, abortion rights advocates pushed for an amendment that explicitly limited the scope of the bill to infants "born alive."

"Nothing in this section," the added sentence reads, "shall be construed to affirm, deny, expand, or contract any legal status or legal right applicable to any member of the species homo sapiens at any point prior to being born alive as defined in this section." A federal version with that added clause passed Congress unanimously in 2002, with the support of Mrs. Clinton and Mr. Kennedy, among others. Mr. Obama said in 2004 and again on Saturday that he would have supported the federal version.

During the Democratic primary, Mrs. Clinton's campaign criticized Mr. Obama for voting "present" — instead of "no" — on the "Born Alive" bill in Illinois, which did not contain a provision protecting the Roe v. Wade decision.

The dispute flared again last week when a leading opponent of legalized abortion, the National Right to Life Committee, posted records from the Illinois Legislature showing that Mr. Obama, while chairman of a Senate committee, in 2003, voted against a "Born Alive" bill that contained nearly identical language to the federal bill that passed unanimously, including the provision limiting its scope.

The group says the documents prove Mr. Obama misrepresented his record.

Indeed, Mr. Obama appeared to misstate his position in the CBN interview on Saturday when he said the federal version he supported "was not the bill that was presented at the state level."

His campaign yesterday acknowledged that he had voted against an identical bill in the state Senate, and a spokesman, Hari Sevugan, said the senator and other lawmakers had concerns that even as worded, the legislation could have undermined existing Illinois abortion law. Those concerns did not exist for the federal bill, because there is no federal abortion law.

In 2005, the campaign noted, a "Born Alive" bill passed the Illinois Legislature after another clause had been added that explicitly stated that the legislation would have no effect on existing state abortion laws.

Told of the campaign's explanation, the legislative director of the National Right to Life Committee, Douglas Johnson, was dubious. "These are newly manufactured and highly implausible excuses," he said. "There is no way that the bill would have had any effect on any method of abortion." Mr. Johnson said the version Mr. Obama voted down clearly applied only to fetuses that emerged from the womb alive.

In addition to the outrage from abortion opponents, a five-minute YouTube video now making the rounds highlights Mr. Obama's opposition to the legislation. The clip, which has been viewed more than 230,000 times, features a testimonial from Jill Stanek, a former nurse who spearheaded the push for the bill in Illinois after witnessing a live infant discarded and left to die at the hospital where she worked. Ms. Stanek appeared at the White House ceremony in 2002 when President Bush signed the federal bill into law.

The McCain campaign yesterday added its voice to the criticism of Mr. Obama. "Americans can differ on the issue of abortion, but Senator Obama's extreme record on this issue and his willingness to misrepresent that record should concern any American who believes that we should be working towards a society where there are fewer abortions, not more," a spokesman for Senator McCain, Brian Rogers, said.

Friday, August 15, 2008

Tragic Hubris

On Russia rolling into Georgia--
“It was a bad crisis for the world. It required tough words but also a smart approach to call on the international community to step in. And I’m very, very happy that the Senator’s request for a ceasefire has been complied with by President Medvedev.”--Tim Kaine, Gov. of Virginia

What happened to America? How did so many people suddenly become so stupid? Has Barry noticed the Russian tanks are rolling toward the capital, Tblisi?

It's as if they believe all Barry has to do is request another country with their own agenda to cease and desist, they will, just like the oceans are receding and whatever crap he said back in June.

Instead of countries around the world complaining about President Bush and what they consider cowboy antics, they should consider what the world would look like without an America to rely upon. What if America had a Gordon Broon style flaccid leader? What if there was no one to defend Europe but Europeans? What if the American president wanted to talk about the nuke that just leveled Warsaw? Their lives depend on Americans picking rightly.

Yet the Germans cheered Ich Bin Ein Beginner Barry. It's just so thrilling, sort of orgasmic, really, a young black man (he's no more black than he's white, is he?) with all this great socialist blather mirroring their own failing political systems. What happens when the New Soviets want East Germany back? Aufweidersein Berlinerins. You're on your own, Germany. Barry is going to gut the military.

Do You Trust This Man With Your Future NOW?

Little Surfer

Little one, make our lives come all undone. Do you love US do you Surfer Dude. Surfer Dude, our little Surfer Dude. (Apologies to The Beach Boys.)

Barry and the kids enjoy some shave ice in Hawaii as Georgians are raped and murdered and Poland is being threatened with nukes. Gives a whole new meaning to cool customer.

Surfer Dude

Sunday, August 10, 2008

Not Ready For Primetime or Any Time

When I started this blog back in March, I wasn't sure anyone was paying strict attention to Barry but what were voices in the distance are now becoming a roar. I find 2 different streams this morning, one from the trustworthy Powerlineblog and another that relates yet again to this COLB.

As an aside, I love how 2 months ago I wouldn't know what COLB stands for and now we all know Certificate of Live Birth. Much like the throbbing memo and all the intricacies of fonts and kerning we learned courtesy of Dan Rather.

Is Barry a US citizen? Is he Indonesian? Was he born in Kenya? There are so many elements to this story one hardly knows where to go with it. One is tempted to say there must be something there because it's so convoluted. Was the name on the COLB he presented to us actually his sister's name?

This may be very like the Kennedy assassination. For years I believed Oswald did not do it alone. There was a very convincing documentary called The Men Who Killed Kennedy. That made me certain I had been right all along. Oswald called himself a patsy in this and I was believing him.

Then a documentary was made that focused on the magic bullet. How could it have possibly turned in mid-air, how could it have fallen onto the gurney at Parkland Hospital, how could it have been pristine after doing all that damage. The documentary went through it all step by step recreating exactly what happened and very convincingly wound up with a pristine bullet. I gave up on the guy hiding in the sewer, I gave up on the Grassy Knoll. It's exhausting. It takes away from real life.

Is this birth certificate the same thing? There certainly seem to be anomalies. The easiest way for this to be put to rest is for Barry to produce the actual birth certificate, come clean if you will, and we can all relax about this issue. But he won't. Why not if it's such a nothing little thing. But I'm not going to preoccupy myself with it altho I will provide a link for you so you can partake of the very exciting and tempting tidbits Texas Darlin offers up. Like Holy Blood, Holy Grail, it may just be a fairy tale.

"Meaningless Statements"

Barack Obama has been criticized for acting as though he is already President. That's natural, since the actions in question have been presumptuous: the pseudo-Presidential seal, the speech in Germany, and so on. Today, one might say that John McCain is acting as though he is already President, but in a substantive and positive way. In his response to Russia's invasion of Georgia, McCain is giving us a preview of what sort of President he would be.

McCain has strongly and unequivocally come out in support of our ally Georgia, while placing the onus for the war squarely where it belongs, on Russia. In this, he has aligned himself with our most loyal European allies. Obama, on the other hand, issued the sort of vapid statement that would ingratiate him with the State Department while not requiring any distraction from his Hawaii vacation. An interesting point, by the way: McCain is supposed to be the old guy, but Obama is the one who needs a vacation.

Here is the latest from the McCain campaign:

This afternoon I spoke, for the second time since the crisis began, with Georgian President Saakashvili. It is clear the situation is dire. Russian aggression against Georgia continues, with attacks occurring far beyond the Georgian region of South Ossetia. As casualties continue to mount, the international community must do all it can to avert further escalations. Tensions and hostilities between Georgians and Ossetians are in no way justification for Russian troops crossing an internationally recognized border. I again call on the Government of Russia to immediately and unconditionally withdraw its forces from the territory of Georgia.

Given this threat to Euro-Atlantic security, I am pleased to see the United States, the European Union, and NATO acting together by sending a delegation to the region, in an effort to broker a cease fire. This is an important first step.

The United Nations has been prevented from taking any meaningful action by Russian objections. In view of this, I welcome the statements of democratic nations defending the sovereignty of Georgia and condemning Russian actions.

I strongly support the declaration issued by the Presidents of Poland, Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania, and their commitment that 'aggression against a small country in Europe will not be passed over in silence or with meaningless statements equating the victims with the victimizers.'

I doubt that the Europeans were thinking of Obama when they wrote this, but who knows? Maybe they had seen this "meaningless statement equating the victims with the victimizers" from the Obama campaign:

It’s both sides’ fault — both have been somewhat provocative with each other.

McCain's statement continues:

I share their regret that NATO's decision to withhold from Georgia a Membership Action Plan may have been viewed as a green light for aggression in the region. As they propose, a new international peacekeeping force should be created, in light of -- as they observe -- the 'obvious bankruptcy of Russian "peacekeeping operations" in its immediate neighborhood.' In addition, Finnish Foreign Minister Stubb, the Chairman of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe, has said there can be no return to the status quo in South Ossetia and that Russia cannot serve as a mediator in the South Ossetian conflict. Each of these leaders represents a country that has undergone what Georgia is now experiencing.

That last is a key point, but one that is no doubt lost on Obama and his advisers. It is often said that Obama is not ready to be President, but I don't think this is exactly right. It seems pretty obvious that Obama, given his temperament, his self-regard, his blithe ignorance of history and of the material conditions of life on this planet, will never be ready to be President. He is not unready: he is unsuited for, and inadequate to, the office.

And for the entertainment value (at this point) the Barry Soetoro thing

Saturday, August 9, 2008

Barry Bias?

Biased media easily entranced by Obama’s magic

August 09, 2008 08:00:00 AM

The writer, winner of the 1968 Ernie Pyle Award for war reporting, covered Vietnam, the Middle East and other conflicts for Scripps Howard Newspapers. He lives in Panama City.

By Don Tate

Few things are more worthy than journalism going into the heart of darkness and bringing out the truth. Few things are more worthless than journalists, leaking bias like malarial sweats, in the pose of objectivity.

Unfortunately, a large portion of today's media chasing after Barack Obama like an army of lapdogs waiting for him to whistle would make Dr. Joseph Goebbels' Ministry of Public Enlightenment and Propaganda proud of such peerless objectivity.

"Bias? I don't see that at all," opined one such peerless observer.

August presences of the fourth estate, such as The New York Times, which has thus far denied printing John McCain's reply to Obama on its op-ed page, are so deep in the tank for Barack they would need a giant periscope to see if there's even another world out here.

When a journalist does try to actually nail down the senator on whether the surge has worked in Iraq, he glides into Obamaspeak and wriggles, dodges, reverses field toward the center, zags back left and stutter-steps down the sidelines not like a "new" politician, but just another pol from Chicago. If he would dare say that, yes, he was flat wrong when he declared that the surge would fail, or that McCain, in the face of heavy criticism ("the surge will fail ... the war is lost ...") stood his ground against the boo birds and congenital defeat-mongers and has been proved right, that would be breathtakingly, almost heroically new.

Obama proffers his Einsteinien theory of battlefield relativity (Iraq, in the heart of the Arab world, is less important Afghanistan), and refuses to admit that had his policy, his "sound judgment" been followed, the U.S. would have already suffered its most humiliating defeat since Vietnam, or that Iraq and the greater Middle East would have turned into a bloodier mess than even his eloquent position parsing could groove its way out of.

The magic of Obama is that even with his vast non-experience in war and foreign affairs, he was able to touch down and scoot through the Middle East, spending an entire day or so in Iraq, disagree with Gen. Petraeus about the dangers of too-fast withdrawal, and yet swoop up all he needed to establish his battlefield credentials and reinforce his "strategic vision" and "world view" beyond the south side of Chicago.

That may be possible because Barack was apparently born with "sound judgment" about this, that and most things, such as "bringing us together." Obama said recently, "The way you know where someone is going is by where they've been." As he has spent his entire political life in deep left field, where is the shining togetherness to which he would bring us?

Even sitting in rocket range of Jeremiah Wright's rants and blasts about the evils of America for 20 years did not affect his sound judgment, he maintains, because somehow he didn't hear any of it. And to many truth-seekers in TV land and Printsville, that is understandable and forgivable, and thou shalt not question him too closely - that is divisive.

The magic of Obama is that he can sneeze and an opinion-maker feels a "thrill" run up his leg. Another feels his knees "quake." These are supposed to be journalists. This ex-correspondent remembers a Pulitzer Prize winner, whom I'll call Crock, coming to Vietnam for a five-day look see at the war, who never got out of Saigon, but confirmed his direst convictions about Saigon's inferior restaurants and no damn nozzle on his hotel shower, after which he returned to give his first-hand report to the American people.

Of course, one can believe any reported twaddle if one wants to believe.

In Obamaworld, mere mortals gasp as they are transported up, up and away on his oratorical balloon. He flaps his rhetorical feathers and women faint. He has a great smile. He swaggers a little. He's cool. He is the darling of Hollywood. He's got a rockstar jump shot. He can utter any contradiction he wants on gun bans, domestic surveillance, public financing, gun-toting Bible clingers, the surge - you name it ("As I've always said," he always says, maybe for an hour), and for the believers it's automatic yea, clap, cheer, sigh. Write it down.

And the hard-nosed Crocks of the media, self-proclaimed watchdogs of the republic, are moved to coo and blink their big dewy eyes in worshipful acquiescence. The magic of Obama.