- HE IS MORE POPULAR THAN HILLARY, (EXCLUDING THE FACT THAT SHE WON MORE VOTES!)
- HE'S NOT MORE QUALIFIED, NOT MORE EXPERIENCED, NOT MORE INTELLIGENT - OR ANYTHING ELSE.
- SHE EVEN HAS MORE BALLS THAN HE DOES.
- THIS FALL WON'T BE A POPULARITY CONTEST.
- IT WILL BE AN ELECTION.
- AMERICANS WILL BE CHOOSING A COMMANDER ION CHIEF.
- ONLY ONE OF THE TWO MEN RUNNING IS QUALIFIED.
DEDICATED TO EXPOSING DISINFORMATION AND PROPAGANDA AND TO PROMOTING UNIVERSAL HUMAN RIGHTS - WITH SHARP ANALYSIS AND BLUNT COMMENTARY. NO ADS. NO TIP-JAR. JUST THE TRUTH.
Saturday, June 07, 2008
HOW OBAMA BEAT HILLARY: HE TURNED IT INTO A POPULARITY CONTEST
THE REAL HEROES INTERPRETING FOR COALITION FORCES IN AFGHANISTAN
- OF COURSE, HE WAS WRONG BECAUSE AFGHANIS DO NOT SPEAK ARABIC; THEY SPEAK PASHTUN, AND OTHER LANGUAGES.
HERE'S A TRUE STORY ABOUT THESE HEROIC INTERPRETERS - MOST OF THEM NATIVE AFGHANIS:
Lucky was 17 and working as a doctor's assistant at a Kabul hospital in 2001 when Afghanistan spiralled into war and he answered the call to head to the front lines.RTWT.
But like hundreds of other educated, young Afghan men, both nationals and expatriates, he didn't join the country's struggling army. Instead, he put his dreams of becoming a doctor on hold and proudly signed up to be a military interpreter for the coalition forces.
“It is dangerous, but if we don't help our people, who will help them?” he said.
Like other Afghan military interpreters, who are nicknamed “terps” by soldiers, he can't use his real name or be photographed for fear insurgents will target him or his family. He goes by Lucky because Westerners have trouble pronouncing his given name.
After working for the U.S. Army, then the British, Lucky, who is tall, slender and always neatly dressed, was recruited by the Canadian military. He is currently commanding a small interpreter pool at Canada's forward operating base in Masum Ghar, about 40 kilometres southwest of Kandahar.
Like interpreters stationed with Canadians at other outposts, these unarmed men follow soldiers wherever they go, often right into harm's way.
This week, an Afghan interpreter was injured along with three Canadian soldiers when they were hit by a homemade bomb during an operation in the Zhari district.
- REMEMBER: OBAMA IS MERELY A CORRUPT - (AS IN REZKO AND THE COOK COUNTY MACHINE), HYPOCRITICAL - (HE SAYS HE'S POST-RACIAL BUT BELONGED TO A RACIST CHURCH FOR 20 YEARS), PHONY RACIST MORON WHO TALKS PRETTY.
BRITS IN AFGHANISTAN LAUNCH AND WIN BIGGEST BATTLE IN YEARS
TELEGRAPH:
YOU WON'T READ ABOUT THIS IN THE US MSM - MIGHT MAKE PEOPLE THINK WE WERE WINNING.
In one of the biggest air assaults in their history, troops from the Parachute Regiment have spent the last four days deep in Taliban territory.RTWT.
Breaking one of the last insurgent strongholds in southern Afghanistan, the "Battle of Qarat-e-Hazrat" in Zabul Province ended in an enemy rout.
The Daily Telegraph's Defence Correspondent Thomas Harding watched as British firepower finally turned the tide in the Taliban's own "back yard".
Witnessing the firefight, he reports on a fight which destroyed the idea of Afghanistan's "mythical warriors".
Paratroopers fought their biggest battle in Afghanistan for two years as the Taliban attempted to push them out of their "backyard".
But the inability of the insurgents to make an impact on the British force during its fourth day deep in enemy territory was demonstrated by a brutal rebuff which resulted in an enemy rout.
YOU WON'T READ ABOUT THIS IN THE US MSM - MIGHT MAKE PEOPLE THINK WE WERE WINNING.
Colombia Nabs Venezuelan With Ammo For FARC
LAT:
Just asking...
Colombia arrested a Venezuelan national guard officer who authorities said was carrying 40,000 AK-47 assault rifle cartridges to Marxist rebels, a charge that could increase already high tensions between the countries.
The man, identified as Manuel Agudo, was captured Friday in the southern Colombian province of Vichada, near the Venezuelan border along with another Venezuelan and two Colombians, Attorney General Mario Iguaran said.
- ER, UM... IF SOCIALISM WAS SO GOOD, WHY MUST IT ALWAYS BE IMPOSED BY TERRORISTS USING DEADLY THREATS?
- AND IF SOCIALISM WAS SO GOOD, THEN WHY DID THE USSR AND CHINA STARVE UNDER IT - AND THRIVE UNDER A FEW DECADES OF "RUTHLESS CAPITALISM"?
- AND WHY DO DEMOCRATS STILL FAVOR SOCIALISTS OVERSEAS?
Just asking...
MCCAIN AND OBAMA HAVE ALREADY BOTH BEEN GIVEN THE SAME LEADERSHIP TEST - AND OBAMA FLUNKED
FRED KAGAN VIA MEMORANDUM:
SAY NO MORE, 'CEPT...
VOTE ACCORDINGLY.
It would be hard to design a better test for the job of commander in chief than the real-life test senators John McCain and Barack Obama have undergone in the last two years.OBAMA IS NOT EQUIPPED TO PERFORM - UNLESS YOU FEEL A GAFFE-PRONE APPEASER IS JUST WHAT THE FREE WORLD NEEDS.
As the situation in Iraq deteriorated during 2006 and the war reached its most critical moment, both senators served on national security committees: McCain on Armed Services, Obama on Foreign Relations.
From those positions, with access to classified situation reports as well as the public testimony and private advice of those who knew the situation in Iraq best, each man reached an understanding of the facts on the ground and the interests at stake.
And each proposed a strategy.
It was as close as a presidential candidate could get to showing how he would respond to a national security crisis without already being in the White House.
... For any voter trying to choose between the two candidates for commander in chief, there is no better test than this:
When American strategy in a critical theater was up for grabs, John McCain proposed a highly unpopular and risky path, which he accurately predicted could lead to success.
Barack Obama proposed a popular and politically safe route that would have led to an unnecessary and debilitating American defeat at the hands of al Qaeda.
The two men brought different backgrounds to the test, of course. In January 2007, McCain had been a senator for 10 years and had served in the military for 23 years. Obama had been a senator for 2 years and before that was a state legislator, lawyer, and community organizer.
But neither presidential candidates nor the commander in chief gets to choose the tests that history brings.
Once in office, the one elected must perform. [MY PARAGRAPHING]
SAY NO MORE, 'CEPT...
VOTE ACCORDINGLY.
THE PSYCHOTIC MEGALOMANIA OF BARACK OBAMA
In a speech on Tuesday announcing that he now considered himself to be the putative Democrat Party nominee for the office of President of the United States, Barack [middle name redacted] Obama said:I am absolutely certain that generations from now, we will be able to look back and tell our children that this was the moment when we began to provide care for the sick and good jobs to the jobless; this was the moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow and our planet began to heal; this was the moment when we ended a war and secured our nation and restored our image as the last, best hope on earth.First of all, it is bizarre to claim that "generations from now" "we will be able to look back," unless "we" are going to have lifetimes that span more generations than any lifetimes in human history since the days of Methuselah.
Second of all, it is apparent to all of us who aren't revolutionary communists that American society already provides "care for the sick." In fact, we already provide free care for millions of the sick who have no legal business within our borders. And as for "good jobs for the jobless," the American economy already has millions of jobs that attract jobless aliens who are willing to break the law and steal across the border to take them.
It's easy to prove that Obama is bloviating on those points, spewing leftist propaganda that is completely unconnected to reality.
But more importantly, consider the nature of Obama's boldest assertion.
He doesn't merely claim that the moment he decided he could with a straight face claim that he will win the nomination was a moment of political victory for him and his blame-America, hate-America groupies. He claims that:
this was the moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow and our planet began to healNot the moment when he might be inaugurated; not the moment when as President he might actually have accomplished something besides blowing more hot air across the planet, but the moment when he claimed the nomination was
the moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow and our planet began to healThere's a name for his attitude: psychotic megalomania. Tell it like it is; the man is nuts.
(Hat tip for the picture: The Right Stuff.)
Infidel Bloggers Alliance Writer Sentenced to Prison In Finland
In addition to my duties as a writer here at Astute Bloggers, I am also the editor/administrator of the Infidel Bloggers Alliance.
IBA is an international blog featuring writers from all over the world. We have writers from places as far-flung as Indonesia, Malaysia, Sudan, Russian, Albania, the Phillipines, USA, UK, Germany, Ireland, Spain, Italy, etc.
A Finnish writer and contributor to Infidel Bloggers Alliance has been sentenced to prison for speech violations. His name is Seppo Lehto. He is most well-known for having made this video:
Get the whole story at IBA (warning - graphic content).
IBA is an international blog featuring writers from all over the world. We have writers from places as far-flung as Indonesia, Malaysia, Sudan, Russian, Albania, the Phillipines, USA, UK, Germany, Ireland, Spain, Italy, etc.
A Finnish writer and contributor to Infidel Bloggers Alliance has been sentenced to prison for speech violations. His name is Seppo Lehto. He is most well-known for having made this video:
Get the whole story at IBA (warning - graphic content).
OBAMA: THE CANDIDATE FOR 12 YEAR OLDS
DINOCRAT:
More on left-wing fear-mongering HERE.
It’s hard to imagine that one of America’s great political parties is ready to nominate for President a candidate who apparently can spout nonsense such as this with a straight face:I HAVE ONE LITTLE QUIBBLE WITH THIS: DEMS ARE DUPES, NOT 12 YEAR OLDS!We can’t afford more of the same timid politics when the future of our planet is at stake. We are already breaking records with the intensity of our storms, the number of forest fires, and the periods of drought. By 2050, famine could force more than 250 million from their homes. And if we do nothing, sea levels will rise high enough to swallow large portions of every coastal city and town.Famine, drought, fires, and storms — all at once? A presidential candidate says this and is not laughed off the stage? We said the other day that America had apparently turned into a TV show. Maybe things are even worse than that. Maybe Americans have been dumbed down to the level of a disaster movie for 12 year olds.
More on left-wing fear-mongering HERE.
OBAMA IS A CLOSE PERSONAL FRIEND OF FORMER PLO TERRORIST, RASHID KHALIDI
- RASHID KHALIDI SUPPORTED PLO TERRORISM, AND WAS A PAID EMPLOYEE OF THE PLO WHEN IT WAS DESIGNATED A TERRORIST ORGANIZATION.
- OBAMA - AND HIS WEATHERMAN BUDDY AYERS - STEERED KHALIDI AND HIS FRONT GROUP MONEY.
- AND HELD A LAVISH GOING AWAY PARTY WHEN KHALIDI MOVED FROM CHICAGO TO NYC TO TAKE OVER EDWARD SAID'S JOB AT COLUMBIA.
- OBAMA HAS PUBLICLY SAID THAT HE AND MICHELE FREQUENTLY DINED AT KHALIDI'S HOME - THIS IS NOT TYPICAL OF MERE ACQUAINTANCES, BUT FRIENDS.
- MUST WATCH VIDEO VIA HOT AIR:
BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA: PALSY-WALSY WITH UNREPENTANT FORMER PLO TERRORISTS.
VOTE ACCORDINGLY.
Who in the hell is behind $5 gas?
John Hinderaker explains:
To help illustrate:
Vote accordingly in 2008.
More info: Gateway Pundit has additional illustrations.
For several decades, the Democratic Party has pursued policies designed to drive up the cost of petroleum, and therefore gas at the pump. Remarkably, the Democrats don't seem to have taken much of a political hit from the current spike in gas prices. Probably that's because most people don't realize how different the two parties' energy policies have been.
To help illustrate:
| Democrats against | Republicans for |
ANWR Exploration  | |
| 86% | 91% |
Coal-to-Liquid | |
| 78% | 97% |
Oil Shale Exploration | |
| 86% | 90% |
Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) Exploration | |
| 83% | 81% |
Refinery Increased Capacity | |
| 96% | 97% |
SUMMARY | |
| 86% | 91% |
91% of House Republicans have historically voted to increase the production of American-made oil and gas. 86% of House Democrats have historically voted against increasing the production of American-made oil and gas.
Vote accordingly in 2008.
More info: Gateway Pundit has additional illustrations.
GREAT NEW BLOG: "OBAMA GAFFES"
HE MAKES SO MANY YOU'LL HAVE TO VISIT A FEW TIMES A DAY TO KEEP UP!
CLICK ON PIC' - NOW!
CLICK ON PIC' - NOW!
Belgian Bishop Hauled before Court for Church Teaching on Homosexuality: Now Cleared of Charges
We read:
"A Belgian bishop has been cleared of charges laid against him by a homosexual activist group. Monsignor Andre-Mutien Leonard, Bishop of Namur, was charged with homophobia under the pretext of the country's 2003 Anti-Discrimination Act. The accusations against Bishop Leonard pertained to his comments in an interview that appeared earlier this year in TeleMoustique, a weekly magazine in Belgium.Posted by John Ray. For a daily critique of Leftist activities, see DISSECTING LEFTISM. For a daily survey of Australian politics, see AUSTRALIAN POLITICS Also, don't forget your roundup of Obama news and commentary at OBAMA WATCH
In the April 2008 interview, Bishop Leonard, when asked his stance on homosexuality, stated that his position was that of the famous early psychoanalyst Sigmund Freud's - that homosexuality is the result of hindered sexual development. "Homosexuals have encountered a blockage in normal psychological development, rendering them abnormal. I know very well that in a few years, I could be imprisoned for holding this position, but this could mean a bit of a vacation for me", said Bishop Leonard.
Last week, after the reading of the interview in question, the Belgian courts ruled that, though the Bishop's comments may have been hurtful to homosexuals, they were not severe enough to be considered slander or discrimination.
Source
The Irrelevance of the Status of Oughts
Philosophy can be a hard slog but moral philosophy is nonetheless something of a must for those of us who wish to combat the constant nihilistic chant "There is no such thing as right and wrong" that comes from the Left. So I think that the short post below by Scott Scheule should have a wider audience. I add some further comments of my own at the foot of it
I think it is hard to disagree with Scheule's point that all moral discourse is ultimately reducible to personal feelings, preferences, beliefs, opinions etc. Scheule correctly points out however that this is not all that important. What he does not go on to say, however, it what IS important.
My basic comment on the matter is that morality is largely genetically inherited. We behave in various moral ways because we have evolved to do so over many hundreds of thousands of years. But no genetic inheritance in human beings is a set of mental railroad tracks. It is more of a general tendency that can be modified or redirected to some degree -- by reason, circumstances etc. So while all human societies perceive some wrongness in killing others, for instance, exceptions are often made to that -- as in warfare.
So the Leftist rejection of morality is of a piece with their usual rejection of all things genetic -- except in the case of homosexuality, of course. The hollowness of their rejection is however very much in evidence all the time -- in the many moralistic utterances they make about "the poor", "the planet", "racism" etc. They are living testimony to the falseness of their own claims. They too are in the grip of moral feelings. They can't talk any other way.
One imagines that it would be a much happier world if Leftists faced reality and entered into an honest discussion about just how present-day circumstances might modify or channel the moral impulses that we all have. What they in fact do is refuse to have any discussion, just as they so often refuse to look at the full facts of a matter. Quite clearly, they do all they can to avoid the irrationality in their arguments being exposed. They are in deep fear that they would lose a rational argument. In short, morality is just one of the many realities that Leftists ignore -- to our almost certain detriment. It is only the fact that we DO live by rules that makes civilized life possible.
I have written at greater length on the inborn nature of morality here Readers may also be interested in Steven Pinker's comments on the matter.
Posted by John Ray. For a daily critique of Leftist activities, see DISSECTING LEFTISM. For a daily survey of Australian politics, see AUSTRALIAN POLITICS Also, don't forget your roundup of Obama news and commentary at OBAMA WATCH
Much is made of whether morality is objective or subjective. While it's an interesting ontological question, when it comes down to the question of which moral system is right or preferable, the question is entirely irrelevant.
To wit, some seem to think that if they can prove morality subjective, then utilitarianism wins over rights theories. This is bullshit. If morality is subjective, then even the basic axioms of utilitarianism are subjective. There is no objective command: Thou shalt increase utility. Rather, there is only the preference of the individual for a world with more utility, which is just as subjective as the preference of an individual for a world with strong property rights, or no capital punishment, etc. By the same token, if morality is objective, then one can equally well believe that it is objectively right to increase utility or that it is objectively right to respect deontological rights.
Some also seem to think that believing morality subjective leads to moral relativism. This is just as wrong. To be sure, my subjective moral preference may be for a world where right or wrong is decided by community standards. But my subjective preference may just as well be otherwise. And by the same token, moral relativism could easily be true, if morality is objective. It would be a fact of the matter that whatever the community standards are, they fix right and wrong. Or not.
There is a tendency for some to pass off a particular morality as objective, while others are just baseless opinions. Economists love this. It gives one side a rhetorical punch--they can claim to be the one who doesn't believe in spooky disembodied moral commands. Rather they believe in cold hard scientific fact--that is, of course, they believe in their personal moral preferences. This leads to the same conversation again and again, where the other side has to point out that the ontological status of morality cuts both ways. But there's no winner in this game of More Materialist Than Thou.
In sum, the question of whether morality is subjective or objective, like the blogosphere, has theoretical but no practical import.
More here
I think it is hard to disagree with Scheule's point that all moral discourse is ultimately reducible to personal feelings, preferences, beliefs, opinions etc. Scheule correctly points out however that this is not all that important. What he does not go on to say, however, it what IS important.
My basic comment on the matter is that morality is largely genetically inherited. We behave in various moral ways because we have evolved to do so over many hundreds of thousands of years. But no genetic inheritance in human beings is a set of mental railroad tracks. It is more of a general tendency that can be modified or redirected to some degree -- by reason, circumstances etc. So while all human societies perceive some wrongness in killing others, for instance, exceptions are often made to that -- as in warfare.
So the Leftist rejection of morality is of a piece with their usual rejection of all things genetic -- except in the case of homosexuality, of course. The hollowness of their rejection is however very much in evidence all the time -- in the many moralistic utterances they make about "the poor", "the planet", "racism" etc. They are living testimony to the falseness of their own claims. They too are in the grip of moral feelings. They can't talk any other way.
One imagines that it would be a much happier world if Leftists faced reality and entered into an honest discussion about just how present-day circumstances might modify or channel the moral impulses that we all have. What they in fact do is refuse to have any discussion, just as they so often refuse to look at the full facts of a matter. Quite clearly, they do all they can to avoid the irrationality in their arguments being exposed. They are in deep fear that they would lose a rational argument. In short, morality is just one of the many realities that Leftists ignore -- to our almost certain detriment. It is only the fact that we DO live by rules that makes civilized life possible.
I have written at greater length on the inborn nature of morality here Readers may also be interested in Steven Pinker's comments on the matter.
Posted by John Ray. For a daily critique of Leftist activities, see DISSECTING LEFTISM. For a daily survey of Australian politics, see AUSTRALIAN POLITICS Also, don't forget your roundup of Obama news and commentary at OBAMA WATCH
DON'T GIVE UP ON THE REPUBLICAN PARTY!
Sean Hannity was on fire the other day, concerned about how McCain was being "too nice" to Obama in his speech and how Obama just lit into McCain. He talked about how Obama will be attacking McCain day and night and McCain is going to be "above it all" while continuing to snub his own base.
This is exactly why McCain is going to have an extremely hard time winning. He seems to be very confused as to which side he's on and is nice to the people who attack him mercilessly while spitting in the face of those in his own party.
As I was listening to a passionate Hannity, it hit me how he and Rush and others have already done so much of the heavy lifting exposing Obama and McCain has just been able to sit on the sidelines as the "nice guy". Its pretty frustrating, especially when you are extremely aware that McCain will never show them the appreciation they deserve.
Yesterday, continuing on the same theme, Hannity was honest about his extreme frustration with McCain over numerous issues but acknowledged how dangerous Obama would be for our country. He echoed what many of us have been saying that it is CRUCIAL for McCain to pick a VP that the base will be happy with. Whether that will happen or not is anyone's guess. I sure wouldn't bet any money on it.
My top 2 choices are still J.C. Watts and Governor Sarah Palin but they are both long shots for numerous reasons. That said, we shouldn't lose heart and we shouldn't give up on the Republican party.
Below is an email that I have sent to 2 blogging friends who have declared they are leaving the Republican party because of McCain and the direction he is trying to take the party:
I saw your post about leaving the Republican party. I want to urge you to re-consider. I, of all people understand your anger. As you know, I literally despise John McCain and I am livid that we are stuck with him this time around, but I still have a lot of hope for our party. McCain and Schwarzenegger want to take over the party but they won't be able to when there are people like you and me involved.That is indeed the message I want to convey, don't lose heart. I'm not concerned with whether you vote for McCain in the fall or not. I, myself still haven't decided. What I am concerned about is that conservatives still get out and vote for local Republicans and for their U.S. Senators and Representatives.
I refuse to give any money to the party in general (I will give to specific candidates) or to John McCain because of him. But believe me, I've looked at the alternatives and they are frightening. The Constitution Party held their convention right here in KC and a friend of mine who is a libertarian interviewed all of the candidates who were running for President, and they were ALL nut jobs, without exception.
What gives me hope is what a wonderful State Representative here in my area said when he gave a speech on the philosophy of the Republican Party. Re-read that, and if you don't agree with it, then you can leave the Republican party.
What you have to remember is that before we got Reagan, Republicans were DUMB ENOUGH to vote for Ford OVER Reagan in the primaries. It took us Jimmy Carter to get Reagan and unfortunately it may take Obama to get our next great Republican president. This year sucks, its a lot like the Ford and the Dole years and we lost both of those times. I keep going back to Tammy Bruce's statement. If we are going to be driven into a wall at 80 miles an hour, I'd rather it be done by a real liberal than a fake conservative.
I totally get how hard this time is. I am a cheerleader who is obsessed with politics and I have ABSOLUTELY no one to cheer for right now, its hard. But don't lose heart.
Don't punish good Republicans for what some of the bad ones have done. And don't give up on a party that has some bad members.
Friday, June 06, 2008
THE IRISH MIGHT SAVE EUROPE, AFTER ALL: IN A SURGE, "NO" TAKES FIRST LEAD IN LISBON TREATY POLLS
BBC: No camp 'gains' in Irish EU vote
LEFT UNCHECKED, THE CONTINUNED THE COMBINATION OF SOVIETIZATION AND ISLAMIZATION WILL DESTROY EUROPE.
Irish and EU officials say they are confident the EU reform treaty will pass an Irish referendum despite a poll suggesting the No vote is surging.I'M PRAYING IRELAND DOES THE RIGHT THING - AND VOTES AGAINST THE SOVIETIZATION OF EUROPE.
A survey published by the Irish Times on Friday suggested 35% of people would vote No - more than twice the figure polled two weeks ago - against 30% Yes.
It is the first poll to put the Nos in the lead, ahead of Thursday's vote.
Ireland is the only country holding a referendum on the treaty. A No vote would throw the process into chaos.
The other 26 members of the EU are using parliamentary votes to ratify the Lisbon Treaty but Ireland is obliged to hold a referendum because it involves changing the constitution.
LEFT UNCHECKED, THE CONTINUNED THE COMBINATION OF SOVIETIZATION AND ISLAMIZATION WILL DESTROY EUROPE.
OBAMA: NO CHARACTER, NO JUDGMENT, NO RECORD
Even Barack [middle name redacted] Obama's supporters realize that there is nothing to him. He is the quintessential "empty suit," a sort of portmanteau candidate into which his admirers are invited to pour all of their hopes and fantasies, rather than evaluate what is really inside his mind, his character, and his record.
Today Mark Monford, a columnist for the San Francisco Chronicle, suggests that Obama's candidacy is based not on his politics, not on his record, not on his qualifications, but on his very being:
The fact is, Obama has no record to speak of. Were it not for the way he is portrayed in the press by the starry eyed hypnotized, his accomplishments as a two-term State Senator and part-of-one-term U.S. Senator would be recognized as nugatory. He has never been responsible for any legislative accomplishment.
In today's Wall Street Journal, NPR commentator Juan Williams noted:
The fact is, Obama has no judgment to speak of. On the single important foreign policy and national defense issue which was debated during his tenure in the United States Senate, the so-called "surge" strategy in Iraq, he was dead wrong. Watch Amb. Crocker and General David Petraeus set him straight here:
The fact is, Obama has no character to speak of. He has been associated from the very earliest beginnings of his political career in Chicago with convicted felon Antoin Rezko -- who may have been a Saddam bagman in the oil-for-food crimes. He has admitted that he engaged in a slimy land deal with Rezko. Obama launched his political career by having his lawyers invalidate petitions nominating long-time 13th District Senator Alice Palmer for re-election.
The fact is, Obama is not an enlightened being. He is little more than another Chicago machine hack. He is no uniter. In the Senate, he has never deviated from hard left voting positions, he has never "crossed the aisle" to work with any Republican, and he was in fact taken to the woodshed by Senator John McCain for a particularly egregious double-cross:
Far from being a racial healer, he is at heart an angry, bitter racist who for 20 years sat at the feet of Jeremiah Wright and Michael Pfleger. And directed hundreds of thousands of tax dollars to their projects.
And although he threw both Pfleger and Wright under the bus, and the Church which he said he could never repudiate, and his grandmother (that "typical white person") under the bus, he has not to this day repudiated the unrepentant terrorists Bill Ayers and Bernadine Dohrn, whom he continues to refer to as "mainstream" political figures.
He has shown himself to be more loyal to his hard left extremism than he is to his Christian religion.
On every count, and in every respect, John McCain towers over Barack Obama. Senator McCain's sterling character, his accomplished record, and his insightful judgment stand in sharp contrast to Obama's deficits. I will devote a separate post to praising his qualities, since it would not be decorous to mention them in the same post as this account of Obama's failings. But compare these men fairly and --
as Reliapundit says, VOTE ACCORDINGLY.
RELIAPUNDIT ADDS: Well said, Punditarian. AND HERE'S SOWELL'S TAKE:
Elections are not ideal contests; they are about choices. We have only two: Obama or McCain. Only one man of these two men has the proven character, the proven record and the proven judgment to be president.
Er um... VOTE ACCORDINGLY!
Today Mark Monford, a columnist for the San Francisco Chronicle, suggests that Obama's candidacy is based not on his politics, not on his record, not on his qualifications, but on his very being:
They're already offering excuses for the fact that this pathetic new version of Dhimmi Carter would likely have a disastrous, failed presidency, if this Nation were condemned to his election, Heaven forbid. He won't actually accomplish any of his promises, but he will "usher in a new way of being on the planet." That of course is the old communist promise to create the "new man," a project usually attempted through concentration camps, re-education camps, starvation, and torture.Dismiss it all you like, but I've heard from far too many enormously smart, wise, spiritually attuned people who've been intuitively blown away by Obama's presence - not speeches, not policies, but sheer presence - to say it's just a clever marketing ploy, a slick gambit carefully orchestrated by hotshot campaign organizers who, once Obama gets into office, will suddenly turn from perky optimists to vile soul-sucking lobbyist whores, with Obama as their suddenly evil, cackling overlord.
Here's where it gets gooey. Many spiritually advanced people I know (not coweringly religious, mind you, but deeply spiritual) identify Obama as a Lightworker, that rare kind of attuned being who has the ability to lead us not merely to new foreign policies or health care plans or whatnot, but who can actually help usher in a new way of being on the planet, of relating and connecting and engaging with this bizarre earthly experiment. These kinds of people actually help us evolve. They are philosophers and peacemakers of a very high order, and they speak not just to reason or emotion, but to the soul.
NO RECORD
The fact is, Obama has no record to speak of. Were it not for the way he is portrayed in the press by the starry eyed hypnotized, his accomplishments as a two-term State Senator and part-of-one-term U.S. Senator would be recognized as nugatory. He has never been responsible for any legislative accomplishment.
In today's Wall Street Journal, NPR commentator Juan Williams noted:
Most American voters know him only as a fresh face with an Ivy League education, an outstanding credential – editor of the Harvard Law Review – an exciting speaker, and a man who stands for much-desired change.There could be nothing more pathetic than the fact that this Presidential candidate's "outstanding credential" is that he was selected to be the editor of the law review while he was in law school two decades ago.
NO JUDGEMENT
The fact is, Obama has no judgment to speak of. On the single important foreign policy and national defense issue which was debated during his tenure in the United States Senate, the so-called "surge" strategy in Iraq, he was dead wrong. Watch Amb. Crocker and General David Petraeus set him straight here:
NO CHARACTER
The fact is, Obama has no character to speak of. He has been associated from the very earliest beginnings of his political career in Chicago with convicted felon Antoin Rezko -- who may have been a Saddam bagman in the oil-for-food crimes. He has admitted that he engaged in a slimy land deal with Rezko. Obama launched his political career by having his lawyers invalidate petitions nominating long-time 13th District Senator Alice Palmer for re-election.
The fact is, Obama is not an enlightened being. He is little more than another Chicago machine hack. He is no uniter. In the Senate, he has never deviated from hard left voting positions, he has never "crossed the aisle" to work with any Republican, and he was in fact taken to the woodshed by Senator John McCain for a particularly egregious double-cross:
February 6, 2006Obama chose to use his genetic background as a shield for criticism of his extremist leftist positions.
The Honorable Barack Obama
United States Senate
SH-713
Washington, DC 20510
Dear Senator Obama:
I would like to apologize to you for assuming that your private assurances to me regarding your desire to cooperate in our efforts to negotiate bipartisan lobbying reform legislation were sincere. When you approached me and insisted that despite your leadership’s preference to use the issue to gain a political advantage in the 2006 elections, you were personally committed to achieving a result that would reflect credit on the entire Senate and offer the country a better example of political leadership, I concluded your professed concern for the institution and the public interest was genuine and admirable. Thank you for disabusing me of such notions with your letter to me dated February 2, 2006, which explained your decision to withdraw from our bipartisan discussions. I’m embarrassed to admit that after all these years in politics I failed to interpret your previous assurances as typical rhetorical gloss routinely used in politics to make self-interested partisan posturing appear more noble. Again, sorry for the confusion, but please be assured I won’t make the same mistake again.
As you know, the Majority Leader has asked Chairman Collins to hold hearings and mark up a bill for floor consideration in early March. I fully support such timely action and I am confident that, together with Senator Lieberman, the Committee on Governmental Affairs will report out a meaningful, bipartisan bill.
You commented in your letter about my “interest in creating a task force to further study” this issue, as if to suggest I support delaying the consideration of much-needed reforms rather than allowing the committees of jurisdiction to hold hearings on the matter. Nothing could be further from the truth. The timely findings of a bipartisan working group could be very helpful to the committee in formulating legislation that will be reported to the full Senate. Since you are new to the Senate, you may not be aware of the fact that I have always supported fully the regular committee and legislative process in the Senate, and routinely urge Committee Chairmen to hold hearings on important issues. In fact, I urged Senator Collins to schedule a hearing upon the Senate’s return in January.
Furthermore, I have consistently maintained that any lobbying reform proposal be bipartisan. The bill Senators Joe Lieberman and Bill Nelson and I have introduced is evidence of that commitment as is my insistence that members of both parties be included in meetings to develop the legislation that will ultimately be considered on the Senate floor. As I explained in a recent letter to Senator Reid, and have publicly said many times, the American people do not see this as just a Republican problem or just a Democratic problem. They see it as yet another run-of-the-mill Washington scandal, and they expect it will generate just another round of partisan gamesmanship and posturing. Senator Lieberman and I, and many other members of this body, hope to exceed the public’s low expectations. We view this as an opportunity to bring transparency and accountability to the Congress, and, most importantly, to show the public that both parties will work together to address our failings.
As I noted, I initially believed you shared that goal. But I understand how important the opportunity to lead your party’s effort to exploit this issue must seem to a freshman Senator, and I hold no hard feelings over your earlier disingenuousness. Again, I have been around long enough to appreciate that in politics the public interest isn’t always a priority for every one of us. Good luck to you, Senator.
Sincerely,
John McCain
Far from being a racial healer, he is at heart an angry, bitter racist who for 20 years sat at the feet of Jeremiah Wright and Michael Pfleger. And directed hundreds of thousands of tax dollars to their projects.
And although he threw both Pfleger and Wright under the bus, and the Church which he said he could never repudiate, and his grandmother (that "typical white person") under the bus, he has not to this day repudiated the unrepentant terrorists Bill Ayers and Bernadine Dohrn, whom he continues to refer to as "mainstream" political figures.
He has shown himself to be more loyal to his hard left extremism than he is to his Christian religion.
On every count, and in every respect, John McCain towers over Barack Obama. Senator McCain's sterling character, his accomplished record, and his insightful judgment stand in sharp contrast to Obama's deficits. I will devote a separate post to praising his qualities, since it would not be decorous to mention them in the same post as this account of Obama's failings. But compare these men fairly and --
as Reliapundit says, VOTE ACCORDINGLY.
RELIAPUNDIT ADDS: Well said, Punditarian. AND HERE'S SOWELL'S TAKE:
Senator John McCain has been criticized in this column many times. But, when all is said and done, Senator McCain has not spent decades aiding and abetting people who hate America.IOW: "YOU FIGHT FOR THE WHITE HOUSE WITH THE CANDIDATE YOU HAVE, NOT THE CANDIDATE YOU WISH YOU HAD."
On the contrary, he has paid a huge price for resisting our enemies, even when they held him prisoner and tortured him. The choice between him and Barack Obama should be a no-brainer.
Elections are not ideal contests; they are about choices. We have only two: Obama or McCain. Only one man of these two men has the proven character, the proven record and the proven judgment to be president.
Er um... VOTE ACCORDINGLY!
NY POST: "GET READY FOR THE OIL-PRICE DROP
UPDATED! SCROLL DOWN!
The New York Post must be reading Astute Bloggers, because we've been predicting this for weeks. From NY Post:
The Washington Post is singing the same tune:
UPDATE (RELIAPUNDIT): THE NYTIMES - BIG BIG BIG HEADLINE THIS AFTERNOON:The New York Post must be reading Astute Bloggers, because we've been predicting this for weeks. From NY Post:
Go read the whole thing.June 6, 2008 -- THE price of crude oil has jumped as high as $135 lately, up from $87 in early February. The news encouraged some Wall Street analysts to suggest oil might approach $200 before long. In fact, that's quite impossible: The world economy can't handle current energy prices, much less a big increase.
Which in turn means that oil prices will fall.
Market analysts often claim oil prices are almost entirely determined by supply. Demand is said to be insensitive ("inelastic") to price. The standard example is that many Americans have to drive to work and most gas-guzzling SUVs will still be on the road even if the affluent few can trade theirs for a Prius. Whatever the price,
we'll pay it.
This idea rests on two fallacies. The first is to exaggerate the United States' importance when it comes to ups and downs in worldwide oil demand. In fact, America is using no more oil than we did in 2004.
The second fallacy is to greatly exaggerate the importance of passenger cars in the United States. It's true that Americans are driving less and buying four-cylinder cars - but that's not where we should be looking for serious "demand destruction."
Two-thirds of petroleum in the United States is used for transportation - but half of the transportation sector's fuel flows into commercial trucks, trains, buses, airplanes and ships. As a result, only 44 percent of each barrel of oil is used to produce gasoline in this country, and some of that gasoline fuels business - delivery vans, landscapers' trucks, fishing boats, industrial and farm machinery, etc.
Most crude oil is used to produce diesel fuel for trucks, ships and trains, heavy fuel oil for industry, aviation fuel, asphalt, home heating oil, propane, wax, and innumerable petrochemical products ranging from detergents and drugs to synthetic fabrics and plastic.
In short, a huge share of crude oil is used to produce and distribute industrial products. That explains why the price of oil is extremely cyclical - that is, it tends to rise during economic booms and fall during contractions. It dropped 44 percent in the last recession (from November 2000 to November 2001), 48 percent from October 1990 to January 1992 - and 71 percent from July 1980 to July 1986.
The Washington Post is singing the same tune:
Hedge funds and big Wall Street banks are taking advantage of loopholes in federal trading limits to buy massive amounts of oil contracts, according to a growing number of lawmakers and prominent investors, who blame the practice for helping to push oil prices to record highs.And more, from Jordan Kahn :
The federal agency that oversees oil trading, the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, has exempted these firms from rules that limit speculative buying, a prerogative traditionally reserved for airlines and trucking companies that need to lock in future fuel costs.
The CFTC has also waived regulations over the past decade on U.S. investors who trade commodities on some overseas markets, freeing those investors to accumulate large quantities of the future oil supply by making purchases on lightly regulated foreign exchanges.
Over the past five years, investors have become such a force on commodity markets that their appetite for oil contracts has been equal to China's increase in demand over the same period, said Michael Masters, a hedge fund manager who testified before Congress on the subject last month. The commodity markets, he added, were never intended for such large financial players.
Commodities have become especially enticing to investors as the credit crisis has roiled other investment opportunities such as stocks and debt-related securities. The recent flood of investment money has transformed the markets for oil, as well as uranium, wheat, cotton and other goods, into a volatile realm that some insiders call the Wild West of Wall Street.
Global oil consumption grew 2% in the first quarter of this year, while production increased 2.5%.
So there is not an outsized amount of demand being physically consumed.
That means that a large amount of demand is coming from speculators, who drive the futures prices of oil higher purely for investment reasons.
BUSINESS | June 7, 2008DOES THIS MEAN IT'S NOT A BUBBLE AND IT'S NOT GOING TO BURST???
Dow Slides Nearly 400 Points; Oil Surges
By ABHA BHATTARAI
The markets were hit by a remarkable rise in the price of crude oil and a spike in the unemployment rate.
NOPE.
IT ACTUALLY PROVES IT'S A BUBBLE.
HERE'S WHY:
The DOW plunge and the oil surge are both speculative.
The DOW plunge (on increased RECESSION fears) should make oil lose value - because a recession would REDUCE the demand for oil.
The whole surge in oil prices on recession-news stinks of OVER-EMOTIONAL VOLATILITY.
Markets function that way sometimes: a bubble is a distortion - which always gets corrected.
The current volatility is caused the MSM: people are being egged on by an MSM which wants a recession so they can anoint/elect Obama.
A great post by Evil Glenn:
Are we in a recession? Possibly -- it's unknowable until the data come in. But that's always true, since calling a recession is a retrospective act, and the media coverage -- which is what I'm critiquing, remember -- is all couched in terms that suggest that the data clearly indicate that we're in a recession right now, or something more like the Great Depression, when that's not what the data we have indicate so far. Meanwhile, contrary to his assertion, my posts aren't just anecdotal, but point to data. As I've noted before, I can't call the economy better than experts -- who themselves can't call the economy very well -- but I can spot a media bulldozing operation when I see one, and I see one now.RELIAPUNDIT: THE MSM DOESN'T WANT YOU TO RELY ON THEIR "ECONOMIC DATA" FOR YOUR HOUSEHOLD FINANCIAL STRATEGY, JUST YOUR VOTING!
That said, this is good advice: "Build savings. Be careful when starting new projects or switching jobs. Carefully watch the risk in their households’ balance sheets." But, then, it's always good advice, to be followed in good times and bad, regardless of what's on the news. If you rely on media reports to set your household financial strategy, you'll have the financial equivalent of bipolar disorder.
Worried About a Recession? Don't Blame Free Trade
Excerpt:
Speculation is growing that the U.S. economy may have already slipped into recession. If the past is any guide, politicians on the campaign trail will be tempted to blame trade and globalization for the passing pain of the business cycle. But an analysis of previous recessions and expansions shows that international trade and investment are not to blame for downturns in the economy and may, in fact, be moderating the business cycle.
In recent decades, as foreign trade and investment have been rising as a share of the U.S. economy, recessions have actually become milder and less frequent. The softening of the business cycle has become so striking that economists now refer to it as "The Great Moderation." The more benign trend appears to date from the mid-1980s. If the U.S. economy does tip into recession this year, free trade and globalization will be among the likely scapegoats.
The Great Moderation means that Americans are spending more of their time earning a living in a growing economy and less in a contracting economy. Our economy has been in recession a total of 16 months in the past 25 years, or 5.3 percent of the time. In comparison, between 1945 and 1983, the nation suffered through nine recessions totaling 96 months, or 21.1 percent of that time period.
America's recent experience of a more globalized and less volatile economy has not been unique in the world. Other countries that have opened themselves to global markets have been less vulnerable to financial and economic shocks. Countries that put all their economic eggs in the domestic basket lack the diversification that a more globally integrated economy can fall back on to weather a slowdown. A country that increases trade as a share of its gross domestic product by 10 percentage points is actually about one-third less likely to suffer sudden economic slowdowns or other crises than if it were less open to trade. As the authors of this study concluded:
Some may find this counterintuitive: trade protectionism does not "shield" countries from the volatility of world markets as proponents might hope. On the contrary...economies that trade less with other countries are more prone to sudden stops and to currency crises.
Globalization is not the only possible cause behind the moderation of the business cycle. Improved monetary policy, fewer external shocks (what some economists call "good luck"), and other structural changes in the economy may have all played a role. For example, the decline in unionization and the resulting increase in labor-market flexibility have allowed wages and employment patterns to adjust more readily to changing market conditions, mitigating spikes in unemployment. Better inventory management through just-in-time delivery has reduced the cyclical overhangs that can disrupt production.
Combined with those other factors, expanding trade and globalization have helped to moderate swings in national output by blessing us with a more diversified and flexible economy. Exports can take up slack when domestic demand sags, and imports can satisfy demand when domestic productive capacity is reaching its short-term limits. Access to foreign capital markets can allow domestic producers and consumers alike to more easily borrow to tide themselves over during difficult times.
More here
Posted by John Ray. For a daily critique of Leftist activities, see DISSECTING LEFTISM. For a daily survey of Australian politics, see AUSTRALIAN POLITICS Also, don't forget your roundup of Obama news and commentary at OBAMA WATCH
Speculation is growing that the U.S. economy may have already slipped into recession. If the past is any guide, politicians on the campaign trail will be tempted to blame trade and globalization for the passing pain of the business cycle. But an analysis of previous recessions and expansions shows that international trade and investment are not to blame for downturns in the economy and may, in fact, be moderating the business cycle.
In recent decades, as foreign trade and investment have been rising as a share of the U.S. economy, recessions have actually become milder and less frequent. The softening of the business cycle has become so striking that economists now refer to it as "The Great Moderation." The more benign trend appears to date from the mid-1980s. If the U.S. economy does tip into recession this year, free trade and globalization will be among the likely scapegoats.
The Great Moderation means that Americans are spending more of their time earning a living in a growing economy and less in a contracting economy. Our economy has been in recession a total of 16 months in the past 25 years, or 5.3 percent of the time. In comparison, between 1945 and 1983, the nation suffered through nine recessions totaling 96 months, or 21.1 percent of that time period.
America's recent experience of a more globalized and less volatile economy has not been unique in the world. Other countries that have opened themselves to global markets have been less vulnerable to financial and economic shocks. Countries that put all their economic eggs in the domestic basket lack the diversification that a more globally integrated economy can fall back on to weather a slowdown. A country that increases trade as a share of its gross domestic product by 10 percentage points is actually about one-third less likely to suffer sudden economic slowdowns or other crises than if it were less open to trade. As the authors of this study concluded:
Some may find this counterintuitive: trade protectionism does not "shield" countries from the volatility of world markets as proponents might hope. On the contrary...economies that trade less with other countries are more prone to sudden stops and to currency crises.
Globalization is not the only possible cause behind the moderation of the business cycle. Improved monetary policy, fewer external shocks (what some economists call "good luck"), and other structural changes in the economy may have all played a role. For example, the decline in unionization and the resulting increase in labor-market flexibility have allowed wages and employment patterns to adjust more readily to changing market conditions, mitigating spikes in unemployment. Better inventory management through just-in-time delivery has reduced the cyclical overhangs that can disrupt production.
Combined with those other factors, expanding trade and globalization have helped to moderate swings in national output by blessing us with a more diversified and flexible economy. Exports can take up slack when domestic demand sags, and imports can satisfy demand when domestic productive capacity is reaching its short-term limits. Access to foreign capital markets can allow domestic producers and consumers alike to more easily borrow to tide themselves over during difficult times.
More here
Posted by John Ray. For a daily critique of Leftist activities, see DISSECTING LEFTISM. For a daily survey of Australian politics, see AUSTRALIAN POLITICS Also, don't forget your roundup of Obama news and commentary at OBAMA WATCH
A letter to Obama
My name is Leon Weinstein. I am an American. I am also Jewish. I was born in the Soviet Union, was fortunate to get out in 1974 and lived in Israel until my second immigration to the US in 1986. I have family in Israel, including my brother, parents, and my bellowed nephews. As you see I have a stock in Israel, and wouldn't want this country to be bombed by nukes (or conventional rockets), annihilated or buldozered to the Mediterranean, all of the above being proposed by the esteemed leaders of practically all neighboring Israel nations. I am not a partial and neutral bystander. I am one very angry and concerned citizen and below I will try to explain to you why I am angry and concerned.
You might become our next President, Leader and Commander-in-Chief, but we the people know precious little about who you are, your ability to withstand pressure, your philosophy, sympathies and preferences, your experience and your judgment. During your recent campaigning we hear from you many wonderful words like "unification of America", "no more blue or red states", "help to humanity", "care for those that need care", and I applaud those words. If your words are supported by your past actions, then you might be the man for the job. If your words contradict or are unsupported by what you did before the Presidential race, then you are not what you say you are, right? In order to find that out I attempted to examine whom you hang out with, what words you and your friends were saying in private and in public and how all that can affect our lives.
First, I decided to look who is endorsing you (according to the information that can be found on Internet), who likes where you stand on issues. I found among others a scaring host of anti-Semitic and anti-Israeli people and organizations:
- Louis Farrakhan (Nation of Islam Leader, racist, anti-Semite)
- Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigades (Islamic Terror Organization)
- Raila Odinga (Fundamental Islamic Candidate, Kenya, some say he is your cousin)
- Daniel Ortega (Marxist Sandinista Leader, Nicaragua)
- Raul Castro (Hard-line Communist Leader, Cuba)
- Socialist Party USA (Marxist Political Party)
- The New Black Panther Party (Black Militant Organization)
- Hamas Terrorist Organization (Islamic Terrorist Organization).
I was really surprised to find so many American enemies routing for you (Hamas, Sandinistas, Cuban Marxists), but what really frightened me was that there is a well-organized effort on the Middle East to call American voters at random asking them to vote for Obama. Who pays them for the expensive phone calls to America? Who trained them what to say and who gave them names and phone numbers of the American voters? This was reported by Al Jazeera: "After studying Obama's campaign manifesto I thought this is a man that's capable of change inside of America." said one of pro-Obama Middle Eastern organizers.
"But may be" I was arguing with myself, "I can't blame you for that, since you didn't ask for their endorsements or their help? You may be even do not know about it, or do you? On the other hand if our enemies (Hamas, Sandinistas, Cuban Marxists) love you so much, may be it says something about your agenda?"
Enough about those that like you. Let's look at whom you like, whom you planning to bring to the White House to govern America. You invited Zbigniew Brzezinski to become your chief political advisor. Brzezinski signed a letter demanding dialogue with Hamas, whose charter calls for Israel's destruction. He has also an interesting view on Communism that I am afraid you may share: "Communism has the intellectually tantalizing possibility that for the world at large. It was . a blessing in disguise". WOW! "Blessing in disguise?" Half of my family was murdered in Gulags. My beloved grandfather died after a stroke at the KGB headquarters.
Your advisor on nuclear policies Joseph Cirincione in response to reports that the site in Syria that Israel bombed was a potential nuclear facility being established with the help of North Korea, said that the reports were the product of two nefarious, agenda-driven groups: (1) Bush administration hardliners seeking to derail "the U.S.-North Korean agreement" and (2) Israelis who "want to thwart any dialogue between the U.S. and Syria." WOW again!
Your financial backer billionaire George Soros repeatedly says in his speeches: "The main obstacle to a stable and just world order is the United States." How many times in one letter I can repeat WOW! Another obstacle he considers Israel. If you have an obstacle on your way, you remove it, right? Do you share the same ideology that Soros professes? As a matter of fact, looks like your wife does. Soros is the power behind moveon.org, and this is he who puts money in your campaign coffins. In the old world we had a saying, "he who dines the girl, is dances her as well". What dance you promised Soros?
"The world powers established this filthy bacteria, the Zionist regime, which is lashing out at the nations in the region like a wild beast."- this is what President of Iran Ahmadinejad says of Israel. He consistently calls for destruction of Israel and the "Big Satan", the United States. Iran harbors and finances terrorists around the globe. At the same time your most senior military adviser retired Gen. Merrill McPeak says President Bush and Israel is to blame for Iran's bad behavior: "It was us that insulted them by including them in the 'axis of evil' and making sure they understood we didn't like them very much. That drove us apart," says McPeak and continues: "Obama's idea is, why not talk to them. Why not see if there isn't some common ground. Certainly, the fight against al Qaeda would be one of them."
Dear Senator, hate of Israel would also be a good common ground with Iran, Hesbollah and Hamas. I remember the overwhelming joy on the Iranian and Palestinian streets when they heard about 9/11. Same joy I recall when Hezbollah dragged on the streets of Gaza killed Israeli soldiers in front of TV cameras. The same joy they experienced when masked terrorists beheaded Americans and many other infidels they kidnap, torture and videotape their murders.
Simon Malley, another of your foreign policy advisors loathes Israel. The anti-Israel activism became a crusade for him. He spent countless hours with Yasser Arafat and became a close friend of Arafat. He was, according to Daniel Pipes, a sympathizer of the Palestinian Liberation Organization --- and this was when it was at the height of its terrorism wave against the West. His efforts were so damaging to France that President Valerie d'Estaing expelled him from the country. Now you want him to give you an advice regarding Middle East and relations with Israel.
I can go on and on. My big question to you is - usually we surround ourselves with like-minded people. Didn't you notice that all those people quite contradicting your public speeches? Or may be they express your hidden thoughts and agenda?
During an ABC interview Stephanopoulos asked you: "So you would extend our deterrent to Israel?" your answer was: "As I said before, I think it is very important that Iran understands that an attack on Israel, is an attack on our strongest ally in the region, one that we -- one whose security, we consider paramount. And that would be an act of aggression that we would -- that I would consider an attack that is unacceptable. And the United States would take appropriate action."
It is important to notice that you didn't say, "We will come after them and will respond in full force". Dear Senator - what is this "appropriate action" of yours? We already know that your mentors Reverend Wright and socialist billionaire Soros think that the US and Israel stand in a way to the "progress". May be the appropriate action, as you and your team understand it will be to tell Iranians "Good job, guys"?
Israel is an American alley that brings to the relations its fair share. I want you to read exerts from two articles written by Ambassador (ret.) Yoram Ettinger, who is an expert on U.S. Middle East policy:
Former secretary of state and NATO supreme commander Gen. (ret.) Alexander Haig refers to Israel as the largest, most cost-effective combat-experienced U.S. aircraft carrier - one that does not require American personnel, cannot be sunk and is located in a region critical to U.S. national security interests. In 1967, Israel defeated a pro-Soviet Egypt/Syria axis. In 1970, Israel forced the rollback of an invasion by pro-Soviet Syria of pro-U.S. Jordan, preventing a pro-Soviet Domino Effect in the Persian Gulf. In 1981, Israel destroyed Iraq's nuclear reactor, enabling the U.S. to proceed with conventional military options in its wars against Saddam Hussein. In 1982, Israel destroyed Syrian-operated Soviet surface-to-air missile batteries, which were considered impregnable. Israeli-developed unmanned aerial vehicles have been employed by U.S. Marines in Afghanistan and Iraq, providing otherwise unattainable intelligence and preempting terrorist strikes. The Israeli-developed Lightning Pod navigation guidance system eliminated Al-Zarqawi, the arch Al-Qaeda terrorist. Absent Israel and its contribution to U.S. national security, Washington would have to deploy, to the eastern flank of the Mediterranean, aircraft carriers and tens of thousands of servicemen, costing scores of billions of dollars annually.
Dear Senator, we all would want to hear you saying words that in uncertain terms will tell our enemies that you are not their friend, that you stand and will stand for our country and for the principals of the founding fathers of our country. How about repeating the pledge that Professor Wichman of Mechanical Engineering at MSU wrote to a group of "outraged by Jewish behavior" Muslim students in his University:
I (Barack Hussein Obama) will stand firmly against beheadings of civilians, cowardly attacks on public buildings, suicide murders, murders of Catholic priests (the latest in Turkey), burnings of Christian churches, the continued persecution of Coptic Christians in Egypt, the imposition of Sharia law on non-Muslims, the rapes of Scandinavian girls and women (called 'whores' in extreme Muslim culture), the murder of film directors in Holland, and the rioting and looting in Paris France. This is what offends me, and many, many of my fellow Americans. This shall be stopped and stopped immediately. I will not tolerate it on my watch. As a US President I will stand firm to stop this aggressive, brutal, and uncivilized behavior. I will defend our allies including Israel, and will destroy any one who will try to destroy them. Amen!
Looks like you are not going to do it. This will make your Far Left friends angry with you. You will hide behind words and smiles and half-truths. Exactly as you were hiding your controversial pastor in the basement of the building before you announced your bid for the US presidency.
Dear Senator, I received the below written text by email. I do not know the sender, but I agree with him/her hundred percent. And I want you and your sponsors, supporters and advisors to read it as well:
Source
Posted by John Ray. For a daily critique of Leftist activities, see DISSECTING LEFTISM. For a daily survey of Australian politics, see AUSTRALIAN POLITICS Also, don't forget your roundup of Obama news and commentary at OBAMA WATCH
You might become our next President, Leader and Commander-in-Chief, but we the people know precious little about who you are, your ability to withstand pressure, your philosophy, sympathies and preferences, your experience and your judgment. During your recent campaigning we hear from you many wonderful words like "unification of America", "no more blue or red states", "help to humanity", "care for those that need care", and I applaud those words. If your words are supported by your past actions, then you might be the man for the job. If your words contradict or are unsupported by what you did before the Presidential race, then you are not what you say you are, right? In order to find that out I attempted to examine whom you hang out with, what words you and your friends were saying in private and in public and how all that can affect our lives.
First, I decided to look who is endorsing you (according to the information that can be found on Internet), who likes where you stand on issues. I found among others a scaring host of anti-Semitic and anti-Israeli people and organizations:
- Louis Farrakhan (Nation of Islam Leader, racist, anti-Semite)
- Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigades (Islamic Terror Organization)
- Raila Odinga (Fundamental Islamic Candidate, Kenya, some say he is your cousin)
- Daniel Ortega (Marxist Sandinista Leader, Nicaragua)
- Raul Castro (Hard-line Communist Leader, Cuba)
- Socialist Party USA (Marxist Political Party)
- The New Black Panther Party (Black Militant Organization)
- Hamas Terrorist Organization (Islamic Terrorist Organization).
I was really surprised to find so many American enemies routing for you (Hamas, Sandinistas, Cuban Marxists), but what really frightened me was that there is a well-organized effort on the Middle East to call American voters at random asking them to vote for Obama. Who pays them for the expensive phone calls to America? Who trained them what to say and who gave them names and phone numbers of the American voters? This was reported by Al Jazeera: "After studying Obama's campaign manifesto I thought this is a man that's capable of change inside of America." said one of pro-Obama Middle Eastern organizers.
"But may be" I was arguing with myself, "I can't blame you for that, since you didn't ask for their endorsements or their help? You may be even do not know about it, or do you? On the other hand if our enemies (Hamas, Sandinistas, Cuban Marxists) love you so much, may be it says something about your agenda?"
Enough about those that like you. Let's look at whom you like, whom you planning to bring to the White House to govern America. You invited Zbigniew Brzezinski to become your chief political advisor. Brzezinski signed a letter demanding dialogue with Hamas, whose charter calls for Israel's destruction. He has also an interesting view on Communism that I am afraid you may share: "Communism has the intellectually tantalizing possibility that for the world at large. It was . a blessing in disguise". WOW! "Blessing in disguise?" Half of my family was murdered in Gulags. My beloved grandfather died after a stroke at the KGB headquarters.
Your advisor on nuclear policies Joseph Cirincione in response to reports that the site in Syria that Israel bombed was a potential nuclear facility being established with the help of North Korea, said that the reports were the product of two nefarious, agenda-driven groups: (1) Bush administration hardliners seeking to derail "the U.S.-North Korean agreement" and (2) Israelis who "want to thwart any dialogue between the U.S. and Syria." WOW again!
Your financial backer billionaire George Soros repeatedly says in his speeches: "The main obstacle to a stable and just world order is the United States." How many times in one letter I can repeat WOW! Another obstacle he considers Israel. If you have an obstacle on your way, you remove it, right? Do you share the same ideology that Soros professes? As a matter of fact, looks like your wife does. Soros is the power behind moveon.org, and this is he who puts money in your campaign coffins. In the old world we had a saying, "he who dines the girl, is dances her as well". What dance you promised Soros?
"The world powers established this filthy bacteria, the Zionist regime, which is lashing out at the nations in the region like a wild beast."- this is what President of Iran Ahmadinejad says of Israel. He consistently calls for destruction of Israel and the "Big Satan", the United States. Iran harbors and finances terrorists around the globe. At the same time your most senior military adviser retired Gen. Merrill McPeak says President Bush and Israel is to blame for Iran's bad behavior: "It was us that insulted them by including them in the 'axis of evil' and making sure they understood we didn't like them very much. That drove us apart," says McPeak and continues: "Obama's idea is, why not talk to them. Why not see if there isn't some common ground. Certainly, the fight against al Qaeda would be one of them."
Dear Senator, hate of Israel would also be a good common ground with Iran, Hesbollah and Hamas. I remember the overwhelming joy on the Iranian and Palestinian streets when they heard about 9/11. Same joy I recall when Hezbollah dragged on the streets of Gaza killed Israeli soldiers in front of TV cameras. The same joy they experienced when masked terrorists beheaded Americans and many other infidels they kidnap, torture and videotape their murders.
Simon Malley, another of your foreign policy advisors loathes Israel. The anti-Israel activism became a crusade for him. He spent countless hours with Yasser Arafat and became a close friend of Arafat. He was, according to Daniel Pipes, a sympathizer of the Palestinian Liberation Organization --- and this was when it was at the height of its terrorism wave against the West. His efforts were so damaging to France that President Valerie d'Estaing expelled him from the country. Now you want him to give you an advice regarding Middle East and relations with Israel.
I can go on and on. My big question to you is - usually we surround ourselves with like-minded people. Didn't you notice that all those people quite contradicting your public speeches? Or may be they express your hidden thoughts and agenda?
During an ABC interview Stephanopoulos asked you: "So you would extend our deterrent to Israel?" your answer was: "As I said before, I think it is very important that Iran understands that an attack on Israel, is an attack on our strongest ally in the region, one that we -- one whose security, we consider paramount. And that would be an act of aggression that we would -- that I would consider an attack that is unacceptable. And the United States would take appropriate action."
It is important to notice that you didn't say, "We will come after them and will respond in full force". Dear Senator - what is this "appropriate action" of yours? We already know that your mentors Reverend Wright and socialist billionaire Soros think that the US and Israel stand in a way to the "progress". May be the appropriate action, as you and your team understand it will be to tell Iranians "Good job, guys"?
Israel is an American alley that brings to the relations its fair share. I want you to read exerts from two articles written by Ambassador (ret.) Yoram Ettinger, who is an expert on U.S. Middle East policy:
Former secretary of state and NATO supreme commander Gen. (ret.) Alexander Haig refers to Israel as the largest, most cost-effective combat-experienced U.S. aircraft carrier - one that does not require American personnel, cannot be sunk and is located in a region critical to U.S. national security interests. In 1967, Israel defeated a pro-Soviet Egypt/Syria axis. In 1970, Israel forced the rollback of an invasion by pro-Soviet Syria of pro-U.S. Jordan, preventing a pro-Soviet Domino Effect in the Persian Gulf. In 1981, Israel destroyed Iraq's nuclear reactor, enabling the U.S. to proceed with conventional military options in its wars against Saddam Hussein. In 1982, Israel destroyed Syrian-operated Soviet surface-to-air missile batteries, which were considered impregnable. Israeli-developed unmanned aerial vehicles have been employed by U.S. Marines in Afghanistan and Iraq, providing otherwise unattainable intelligence and preempting terrorist strikes. The Israeli-developed Lightning Pod navigation guidance system eliminated Al-Zarqawi, the arch Al-Qaeda terrorist. Absent Israel and its contribution to U.S. national security, Washington would have to deploy, to the eastern flank of the Mediterranean, aircraft carriers and tens of thousands of servicemen, costing scores of billions of dollars annually.
Dear Senator, we all would want to hear you saying words that in uncertain terms will tell our enemies that you are not their friend, that you stand and will stand for our country and for the principals of the founding fathers of our country. How about repeating the pledge that Professor Wichman of Mechanical Engineering at MSU wrote to a group of "outraged by Jewish behavior" Muslim students in his University:
I (Barack Hussein Obama) will stand firmly against beheadings of civilians, cowardly attacks on public buildings, suicide murders, murders of Catholic priests (the latest in Turkey), burnings of Christian churches, the continued persecution of Coptic Christians in Egypt, the imposition of Sharia law on non-Muslims, the rapes of Scandinavian girls and women (called 'whores' in extreme Muslim culture), the murder of film directors in Holland, and the rioting and looting in Paris France. This is what offends me, and many, many of my fellow Americans. This shall be stopped and stopped immediately. I will not tolerate it on my watch. As a US President I will stand firm to stop this aggressive, brutal, and uncivilized behavior. I will defend our allies including Israel, and will destroy any one who will try to destroy them. Amen!
Looks like you are not going to do it. This will make your Far Left friends angry with you. You will hide behind words and smiles and half-truths. Exactly as you were hiding your controversial pastor in the basement of the building before you announced your bid for the US presidency.
Dear Senator, I received the below written text by email. I do not know the sender, but I agree with him/her hundred percent. And I want you and your sponsors, supporters and advisors to read it as well:
Any nation or culture that tried to mess around with the nation of Israel was destroyed -- while we Jews kept going! Egypt? Anyone knows where their empire disappeared to? Greeks? Alexander of Macedonia? The Romans? Does anyone today speak Latin? The Third Reich? Anyone heard any news about it lately? And look at us, the Nation from the Bible, from Slavery in Egypt. We are still here, speaking the same language! Do not even think about positioning the United States of America against Israel and Jews.
Source
Posted by John Ray. For a daily critique of Leftist activities, see DISSECTING LEFTISM. For a daily survey of Australian politics, see AUSTRALIAN POLITICS Also, don't forget your roundup of Obama news and commentary at OBAMA WATCH
Thursday, June 05, 2008
NYTIMES PUTTING WORST POSSIBLE SPIN ON MORTGAGE CRISIS
SPIN (HEADLINE, OF COURSE!):
HERE'S THE TRUTH:
Nearly 1 in 10 Homeowners Face Loan ProblemsFINE PRINT - (SAME ARTICLE):
Though defaults are rising in many places, it is worst in areas where home prices soared in recent years or where the local economy is now struggling.
California and Florida, for instance, accounted for nearly a third of all mortgages that were in foreclosure or 90 days delinquent.
- THINGS ARE NOT AS BAD AS THE LEFT AND THE MSM THEY CONTROL WANT YOU TO BELIEVE.
- THEY WANT YOU TO THINK THINGS ARE BAD SO YOU VOTE FOR OBAMA AND SOCIALISM.
- FACT: 33% OF US HOMES HAVE NO MORTGAGE AT ALL, SO THE REAL RATE - AS A PERCENTAGE OF HOMES - IS 6%, NOT 9%.
HERE'S THE TRUTH:
- WE'RE WINNING IN IRAQ.
- CLIMATE CHANGE IS NATURAL.
- THERE IS NO HEALTHCARE INSURANCE CRISIS.
- THE ECONOMY IS TEMPORARILY GROWING SLOWLY; WE'RE NOT IN A RECESSION.
THE OBAMARANG EFFECT
Kerry flip-flopped famously: "I was for it before I was against it."
Kerry became known to many as "Flipper."
Well, Obama has so many flip-flops on so many issues he deserves his own name.
LIST OF FLIP FLOPS HERE.
For this ability, may I suggest new moniker?
Here: OBAMARANG.
Because the substance of his eloquent oratory always seems to comes back to haunt him.
OBAMARANG.
(After buyer's remorse sets in, the Democrats will call him Obummer.)
Kerry became known to many as "Flipper."
Well, Obama has so many flip-flops on so many issues he deserves his own name.
LIST OF FLIP FLOPS HERE.
- FLIP FLOP ON IRAQ HERE.
- FLIP FLOP ON CUBA HERE.
- FLIP FLOP ON HEALTH CARE HERE.
- FLIP FLOP ON MARIJUANA HERE.
- FLIP FLOP ON NAFTA HERE.
- FLIP FLOP ON PAYGO HERE.
- FLIP FLOP ON PUBLIC FINANCING HERE.
- FLIP FLOP ON FLAG-PINS HERE.
- FLIP FLOP ON WRIGHT HERE.
- FLIP FLOP ON PATRIOT ACT HERE.
- FLIP FLOP ON HIS CHURCH HERE.
- FLIP FLOP ON ETHANOL HERE.
For this ability, may I suggest new moniker?
Here: OBAMARANG.
Because the substance of his eloquent oratory always seems to comes back to haunt him.
OBAMARANG.
(After buyer's remorse sets in, the Democrats will call him Obummer.)
A PRAYER FOR OUR TIMES - FDR, JUNE 6, 1944
On June 6, 1944, 64 years ago, as the liberation of Western Europe got under way on "D-Day" on the beaches of Normandy, the President of the United States, Franklin Delano Roosevelt, made this radio broadcast, asking the American people to join him -- in prayer:
His words are just as meaningful and relevant today as they were then.
For we require today the same continuance of prayer that President Roosevelt sought on that June day.
Yet what would be the responses of today's media pundits and panjandrums to a similar appeal?
(Hat Tip: Peter.)
His words are just as meaningful and relevant today as they were then.
For we require today the same continuance of prayer that President Roosevelt sought on that June day.
Yet what would be the responses of today's media pundits and panjandrums to a similar appeal?
(Hat Tip: Peter.)
CLIMATE CHANGE IS NATURAL: "Sunspots Vanish, Earth Cools, CAGW Dying"
From Al Fin:
Go read the whole thing.
Although total solar irradiance (TSI) may vary by only 0.1% over time, the
effect this small variance has on the climate of Earth is profound. By charting
trends in solar activity, and factoring in ocean oscillations such as the AMO,
PDO etc, one can explain most of the cyclic variations in Earth's climate
without considering variations in atmospheric CO2.
Since H2O is the predominant greenhouse gas in the Earth climate system, it
is likely that a better understanding of the water cycle will fill in large gaps
remaining in the understanding of ordinary changes in Earth climate.
Catastrophic changes--like glaciations--will likely need longer time scale
explanations that can easily reach outside of our solar system.
The Earth's temperature has not warmed over the past 10 years, even 20
years by some estimates. The recent month
of May was quite cool, globally speaking.
There are no sunspots yet again today. We have had nothing but "sun specks"
recently, and the long overdue Solar Cycle
24 has yet to come out to play with the planets.
Some scientists are even predicting
that sunspots will disappear altogether by the year 2015. It is unlikely
that the sunspots themselves are causing warming or cooling, but the current
paucity of sunspots reveals an unusual, unpredicted prolongation of solar cycle
23--and a delay to the start of solar cycle 24.
Historically, longer solar cycles correlate with cooler temperatures, and
lower numbers of sunspots correlate with lower temperatures.
Go read the whole thing.
PROOF OBAMA AGREED WITH WRIGHT: " WHITE GREED RULES THE WORLD"
VIA GATEWAY, WHO ADDS:
That was something he heard in church, of course.ARABS COULD SAY IT ABOUT JEWS.
Could you imagine a Republican saying something like that about any other ethnic group?
AND IT'S RACISM.
OBAMA IS A RACIST.
VOTE ACCORDINGLY.
WARNING TO INDEPENDENTS: STATISTICS PROVE THAT OBAMA IS A MACHINE POLITICIAN AND A PARTISAN HACK
FACTS AND FIGURES HERE.
BOTTOM-LINE: THE RECORD SHOWS THAT MCCAIN IS 3 TIMES LESS PARTISAN THAN OBAMA.
INDEPENDENTS: VOTE ACCORDINGLY.
BOTTOM-LINE: THE RECORD SHOWS THAT MCCAIN IS 3 TIMES LESS PARTISAN THAN OBAMA.
INDEPENDENTS: VOTE ACCORDINGLY.
MCCAIN AND LIEBERMAN VERSUS OBAMA
There are some reports it's getting testy between Joe and Barack.
It should: Joe is for McCain even though Obama supported Joe against Lamont.
And Joe is now starting an effort to recruit Hillary supporters and independents.
This might be the difference on the race.
And Barack and Axelrod know this.
Hence the testiness.
WHY STATE PENSIONS AND HEALTHCARE ARE INSANE: when the state pays your pension and foryour healthcare, then they have an incentive to deny you care
HYSCIENCE HAS AN EXAMPLE - FROM THE USA, ALBEIT OBAMA-TERRITORY, OREGON:
RTWT.
THE LEFT FAVORS MAKING EVERYONE DEPENDENT ON THE STATE VIA STATE PENSIONS, AND STATE HEALTHCARE.
AND THEY FAVOR EUTHANASIA.
NO COINCIDENCE.
VOTE ACCORDINGLY.
Lung cancer patient, Barbara Wagner, was recently notified that her oncologist-prescribed medication that would slow the growth of cancer would not be covered by the Oregon Health Plan; the plan, however, she was informed, would cover doctor-assisted suicide should she wish to kill herself.WHO IS THE HERO: BIG PHARMA.
That's the bad news and the telling tale of the views of a government that places no value on the gift from God to all of us, including the liberal-progressives that apparently control the Oregon State Government. However, and fortunately for Barbara Wagner, there is a happy ending for the story.
RTWT.
THE LEFT FAVORS MAKING EVERYONE DEPENDENT ON THE STATE VIA STATE PENSIONS, AND STATE HEALTHCARE.
AND THEY FAVOR EUTHANASIA.
NO COINCIDENCE.
VOTE ACCORDINGLY.
A COUP OR A CIVIL WAR MIGHT BE BREWING IN TURKEY
WHY?
SIMPLE: THE MILITARY IS STAUNCHLY SECULARIST AND MIGHT HAVE TO STAGE A COUP TO REMOVE THE RULING ISLAMIST PARTY IN THE EVENT THAT THE TURKISH SUPREME COURT OUTLAWS THEM.
A TURKISH SUPREME COURT DECISION TODAY MAKES IT MORE LIKELY THEY WILL OUTLAW THE AKP...
NYTIMES: Court Annuls Turkish Headscarf Bill
STAY TUNED.
SIMPLE: THE MILITARY IS STAUNCHLY SECULARIST AND MIGHT HAVE TO STAGE A COUP TO REMOVE THE RULING ISLAMIST PARTY IN THE EVENT THAT THE TURKISH SUPREME COURT OUTLAWS THEM.
A TURKISH SUPREME COURT DECISION TODAY MAKES IT MORE LIKELY THEY WILL OUTLAW THE AKP...
NYTIMES: Court Annuls Turkish Headscarf Bill
Turkey's ruling AK party appeared to move a step closer to being shut down on Thursday when the Constitutional Court overturned a reform that would have allowed women to wear Islamic headscarves in universities.IN THE NEXT YEAR, TURKEY MIGHT TURN OUT TO BE AS A BIG POINT OF CONFLICT IN THE GWOT AS THE WEST'S CONFRONTATION WITH IRAN.
The headscarf amendment plays a central role in a separate, crucial case that seeks to outlaw the AK Party for anti-secular activities, and ban 71 members, including the prime minister and president, from belonging to a political party for five years.
"This guarantees the closure of the party. I don't think we can talk of any calm before full chaos," said Cengiz Aktar, a political scientist at Istanbul's Bahcesehir University.
The court said in a statement it upheld, by 9 votes to 2, an appeal from the main opposition CHP party, seeking to block a legal amendment allowing students to wear the garment on campus.
More conservative secularists saw the amendment as a violation of strict separation between Mosque and state, and evidence the AK Party has a secret agenda to introduce a system of Islamic law.
STAY TUNED.
NATIONALIZED HEALTHCARE WOULD KILL TEDDY KENNEDY
NY POST:
THE BRITISH ARE RIGHT.
IF YOU LIKE THE CARE TEDDY IS GETTING, THEN YOU MUSTN'T SUPPORT ANY DEMOCRAT.
... governments that promise to "cover everyone" always wind up cutting corners simply to save money. People with Kennedy's condition are dying or dead as a result.THE LEFT ADVOCATES SOCIALIZING HEALTHCARE AND MAKING OUR SYSTEM MORE LIKE BRITAIN'S, WHICH THE BRITISH THINK SUCKS.
Consider Jennifer Bell of Norwich, England. In 2006, the 22-year-old complained of headaches for months - but Britain's National Health Service made her wait a year to see a neurologist.
Then she had to wait more than three months before should could get what the NHS decided was only a "relatively urgent" MRI scan. Threedays before the MRI appointment, she died.
Consider, too, the chemo drug Kennedy is receiving: Temodar, the first oral medicine for brain tumors in 25 years.
Temodar has been widely used in this country since the FDA approved it in 2000. But a British health-care rationing agency, the National Institute for Comparative Effectiveness, ruled that, while the drug helps people live longer, it wasn't worth the money - and denied coverage for it.
Barack Obama - and other Democrats - have been pushing a Senate bill to set up a similar US "review board" for Medicare and any future government health-care plan.
THE BRITISH ARE RIGHT.
IF YOU LIKE THE CARE TEDDY IS GETTING, THEN YOU MUSTN'T SUPPORT ANY DEMOCRAT.
Which Veep would help Mccain and the GOP WIN?
Tom Ridge.
I blogged on him yesterday.
Marc Ambinder posted on him today. (We always scoop the biggies!)
Here's some more on why I think Ridge is the best we can hope for AND just what we need:
These are the critical toss-up/swing states which will determine who our next president is.
I argue that Ridge helps in most of them:
PA - he's a native son and a former guv
OH - neighbor and a blue collar kind of guy
VA - he's a VET who lived there
WI - he's a blue collar agri- kind a guy
IA - ditto
MI - ditto
WI - ditto
NH - ditto, and an easterner
CO - ditto
He wouldn't help much in NV or FL - but McCain will trounce Obama in those states no matter who's on the bottom of the ticket.
No other potential Veep helps as much. Rudy has too much baggage. Jindal is too young.
Romney has no true base - but might help in MI.
Lieberman as Veep? Lieberman would be a BIG mistake as Veep - he'd make a good AG.
It will be Ridge. And that's a good thing.
I blogged on him yesterday.
Marc Ambinder posted on him today. (We always scoop the biggies!)
Here's some more on why I think Ridge is the best we can hope for AND just what we need:
CO, FL, IA, MI, NV, NM, NH, OH, PA, VA, WI -
These are the critical toss-up/swing states which will determine who our next president is.
I argue that Ridge helps in most of them:
PA - he's a native son and a former guv
OH - neighbor and a blue collar kind of guy
VA - he's a VET who lived there
WI - he's a blue collar agri- kind a guy
IA - ditto
MI - ditto
WI - ditto
NH - ditto, and an easterner
CO - ditto
He wouldn't help much in NV or FL - but McCain will trounce Obama in those states no matter who's on the bottom of the ticket.
No other potential Veep helps as much. Rudy has too much baggage. Jindal is too young.
Romney has no true base - but might help in MI.
Lieberman as Veep? Lieberman would be a BIG mistake as Veep - he'd make a good AG.
It will be Ridge. And that's a good thing.
AMERICA HAS ENOUGH OIL TO BE THE # 1 OIL-PRODUCING NATION IN THE WORLD
According to NPR, the Rocky Mountains contain three times the oil of Saudi Arabia.
An oil field was just recently discovered in the South Dakota/Montana region which has three times as much oil as the Rockies.
There is also a tremendous amount of oil in the ANWR region.
All that oil, and we don't drill for it.
Why?
Because of pressure from environmentalists.
We could be winning the battle for energy independence, but instead, we choose to lose, and thus forfeit our profits into the hands of Jihadists and Communists the world over.
I repeat, we are losing because we choose to lose, and we do so, primarily because of pressure from environmentalist groups.
That's like a football team choosing to lose because of pressure from their own cheerleaders.
An oil field was just recently discovered in the South Dakota/Montana region which has three times as much oil as the Rockies.
There is also a tremendous amount of oil in the ANWR region.
All that oil, and we don't drill for it.
Why?
Because of pressure from environmentalists.
We could be winning the battle for energy independence, but instead, we choose to lose, and thus forfeit our profits into the hands of Jihadists and Communists the world over.
I repeat, we are losing because we choose to lose, and we do so, primarily because of pressure from environmentalist groups.
That's like a football team choosing to lose because of pressure from their own cheerleaders.
COLOSSAL INJUSTICE: SEATTLE JIHADIST GETS MISTRIAL
Clearly, the justice, or jury system, in Seattle is in very bad shape. As told in this CNN article (via LGF):
SEATTLE, Washington (AP) - A judge declared a mistrial Wednesday in the case of a man who stormed into a Jewish center two years ago and shot six women, killing one, as he ranted against Israel and the Iraq war.I think this should have been a trial without using a jury, but also one where the judge could be more reliable! Maybe that's what should be asked for when the ruling is appealed, but for now, they have made a mockery of justice, and committed an obscenity with how they handled this.
Naveed Haq stormed into a Jewish center two years ago and shot six women, killing one.
Jurors had indicated in questions posed to the judge that they were hopelessly deadlocked and struggling to determine whether Naveed Haq, 32, was not guilty by reason of insanity, as he claimed.
King County Superior Court Judge Paris Kallas ended the jury’s deliberations in their eighth day.
The jurors reached a partial verdict on only one of the 15 counts against Haq, finding him not guilty of attempted first-degree murder of one of the women. But they couldn’t agree on the lesser charge of attempted second-degree murder or any of the other 14 charges, which included murder.
Haq held a teenage girl at gunpoint to force his way into the Jewish Federation of Greater Seattle on July 28, 2006. Once in the second-floor office, he began railing against U.S. policies and opened fire when someone tried to call 911. He shot some people in their cubicles, some in the hall and one, Pamela Waechter, fatally as she fled down a stairwell.
An emergency operator eventually persuaded him to surrender.
Prosecutors quickly announced that they hope to retry Haq this year, and representatives of the Jewish Federation of Greater Seattle expressed their disappointment at the mistrial.
“There is no argument Haq killed Pam. There is no argument he viciously shot five others. There is no argument that he made anti-Israel and anti-Semitic statements. Somehow, all this was not enough,” Jewish Federation President Richard Fruchter said.
GLOBAL COOLING: TEMPERATURES CONTINUE TO FALL
Excerpt:
Confirming what many of us have already noted from the anecdotal evidence coming in of a much cooler than normal May, such as late spring snows as far south as Arizona, extended skiing in Colorado, and delays in snow cover melting in many parts of the northern hemisphere, the University of Alabama, Huntsville (UAH) published their satellite derived Advanced Microwave Sounder Unit data set of the Lower Troposphere for May 2008.
It is significantly colder globally, colder even than the significant drop to -0.046øC seen in January 2008. The global deltaT from April to May 2008 was -.195øC
UAH
2008 1 -0.046
2008 2 0.020
2008 3 0.094
2008 4 0.015
2008 5 -0.180
Compared to the May 2007 value of 0.199øC we find a 12 month deltaT is -.379øC.
But even more impressive is the change since the last big peak in global temperature in January 2007 at 0.594øC, giving a 16 month ?T of -0.774øC which is equal in magnitude to the generally agreed upon "global warming signal" of the last 100 years.
I'm betting that RSS (expected soon) will also be below the zero anomaly line, since it tends to agree well with UAH. HadCRUT will likely show a significant drop, I'm going to make a SWAG and say it will end up around 0.05 to -0.15øC. GISS; I'm not going to try a SWAG, as it could be anything.
Source
Posted by John Ray. For a daily critique of Leftist activities, see DISSECTING LEFTISM. For a daily survey of Australian politics, see AUSTRALIAN POLITICS Also, don't forget your roundup of Obama news and commentary at OBAMA WATCH
Confirming what many of us have already noted from the anecdotal evidence coming in of a much cooler than normal May, such as late spring snows as far south as Arizona, extended skiing in Colorado, and delays in snow cover melting in many parts of the northern hemisphere, the University of Alabama, Huntsville (UAH) published their satellite derived Advanced Microwave Sounder Unit data set of the Lower Troposphere for May 2008.
It is significantly colder globally, colder even than the significant drop to -0.046øC seen in January 2008. The global deltaT from April to May 2008 was -.195øC
UAH
2008 1 -0.046
2008 2 0.020
2008 3 0.094
2008 4 0.015
2008 5 -0.180
Compared to the May 2007 value of 0.199øC we find a 12 month deltaT is -.379øC.
But even more impressive is the change since the last big peak in global temperature in January 2007 at 0.594øC, giving a 16 month ?T of -0.774øC which is equal in magnitude to the generally agreed upon "global warming signal" of the last 100 years.
I'm betting that RSS (expected soon) will also be below the zero anomaly line, since it tends to agree well with UAH. HadCRUT will likely show a significant drop, I'm going to make a SWAG and say it will end up around 0.05 to -0.15øC. GISS; I'm not going to try a SWAG, as it could be anything.
Source
Posted by John Ray. For a daily critique of Leftist activities, see DISSECTING LEFTISM. For a daily survey of Australian politics, see AUSTRALIAN POLITICS Also, don't forget your roundup of Obama news and commentary at OBAMA WATCH
Chesterton & Lewis warn against tyranny
Excerpt:
G. K. Chesterton's helpful assessment of fundamental liberty. By his measure, our liberty is indeed threatened.
Jay at STACLU has a great quote on a similar theme:
Two Christ-professing Englishmen warning us from the early 20th Century, that to give up our freedom "for our own good," is not freedom. It is acquiescing to tyranny with thumb in the mouth, iPod buds in the ear and the tv set on an endless loop of Sex and the City reruns.
More here
Posted by John Ray. For a daily critique of Leftist activities, see DISSECTING LEFTISM. For a daily survey of Australian politics, see AUSTRALIAN POLITICS Also, don't forget your roundup of Obama news and commentary at OBAMA WATCH
G. K. Chesterton's helpful assessment of fundamental liberty. By his measure, our liberty is indeed threatened.
"The free man owns himself. He can damage himself with either eating or drinking; he can ruin himself with gambling. If he does he is certainly a damn fool, and he might possibly be a damned soul; but if he may not, he is not a free man any more than a dog." - Broadcast talk 6-11-35
Jay at STACLU has a great quote on a similar theme:
"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their consciences." -C.S. Lewis"
Two Christ-professing Englishmen warning us from the early 20th Century, that to give up our freedom "for our own good," is not freedom. It is acquiescing to tyranny with thumb in the mouth, iPod buds in the ear and the tv set on an endless loop of Sex and the City reruns.
More here
Posted by John Ray. For a daily critique of Leftist activities, see DISSECTING LEFTISM. For a daily survey of Australian politics, see AUSTRALIAN POLITICS Also, don't forget your roundup of Obama news and commentary at OBAMA WATCH