Monday, March 31, 2008


More ‘mis-speaks or just plain lies form Sen. Obama have surfaced just in the past week. Obama has been confronted about the FARC recordings (for those no familiar with the FARC is the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia. It was Established in 1964 as the military wing of the Colombian Communist Party, the FARC is Colombia’s oldest, largest, most capable, and best-equipped Marxist insurgency. Just this past week they have been linked to obtaining small yield nukes from none other than Obama’s friends in the middle east, Iran. I call them his friends because he would rather sit down and have tea and crumpets with them rather than confront them in their terrorist activities and supplying terrorist activities around the world . Of course another one of his friend’s Chavez, President of Columbia, well known US hater, now has the nukes and he would love nothing more than to drop off a dirty bomb in the US.

Then came the Rezko’s fiasco and the denial that Rezko was involved in his campaign in any major way . Of course he also lied about his pastor, the Rev . Wright not being involved to a large extent and not having any real influence in his life. However his book, in his own words, refute this. Was it a mis-speak or just a plain outright lie. Back in the mountains where I originally came from we’d call it a dang bald-face lie and not stutter about it.

He claims he has a plan for Iraq and will immediately begin to withdraw the troops. However his own former foreign advisor Samantha Powers in her interview with the BBC says he really doesn’t but he wants it to appear that he does. Obama has shown that even he is not sure about his so-called plan. He has stated that perhaps he would move the troops to Pakistan and I am sure that brought gales of laughter from our military leaders in that area. But then he could always claim that he got the troops out of Iraq even though he started another war in Pakistan. We know for sure that the terrorist are already involved heavily in Pakistan and would love the opportunity to expand their war against the US in that country as well.

The latest comes from his story about the Selma marches, which he droned on an on about how Kennedy’s financed his fathers trip to the US. Well that is another lie, not a misspeak, but a bold face lie but then if you are going to lie about that you might as well really make it a good one and usurp the Kennedy name and hope that folks will let it slide because of the Kennedy’s. . We know for a fact, the Kennedys did not finance the 1959 air lift nor was the program even their brainchild. The truth is that they were approached by the program to help fund the 1960 air lift, for which Richard Nixon also helped secure financing.

He claimed parents married because of events there: “There was something stirring across the country because of what happened in Selma, Alabama, because some folks are willing to march across a bridge. So they got together and Barack Obama Jr. was born. So don’t tell me I don’t have a claim on Selma, Alabama. Don’t tell me I’m not coming home to Selma, Alabama.” Only problem is it’s another lie. Selma events he speaks of didn’t occur until 1965, Obama was born in Hawaii in 1961. This mess of lies just keeps on getting bigger and bigger and Obama just can’t seem to keep up with them all. Of course he attempted to explain that lie by saying , I meant the whole Civil Rights movement.” ”Not just there” and the LSM let him slide once again and the Obamazoids shook their empty heads in disbelief that anyone would question their messiah’s word much less call him an outright, bold faced liar.

Well it just keeps on getting better, even better than a John Edwards story about how poor he was, when Obama said “You see, my Grandfather was a cook to the British in Kenya. Grew up in a small village and all his life, that’s all he was — a cook and a house boy.” Wow, what a way to appeal to the folk who don’t know any better or have never read any part of his book or want to believe that “he be just one of us.” Truth, well if you can now believe anything that he wrote or said is that he described his grand-father in his book as “a prominent farmer, an elder of the tribe, a medicine man with healing powers.” Well now was he a cook and house boy or a voodoo doctor, farmer or elder in the tribe. At this point it’s hard to tell but some of his grandfathers voodoo must have stuck and he is using it on the Obama-ites to keep them fooled and let such lies just slide. After a while that “slick on slick” is going to all rub off and he’s gonna be stuck.

Well, that’s the old news from a couple of weeks ago and such but now Obama got called on his statement about not taking money from oil companies. He claims it all came from employees, you know, the guys that sweat and grunt to get the crude out of the ground. Well, it seems that Obama aint’ telling the whole truth on that subject either.
According to NBC he “mis-spoke” again or else he considers CEO’s like. Robert Cavnar, CEO of a Texas oil company named Mission Resources Corp., raised $50,000-$100,000 for the campaign. George Kaiser, billionaire CEO at Kaiser-Francis Oil Company, raised the same amount. That sure didn’t leave a lot of cash for the guys who work in the oil patch to donate to his campaign. Knowing a few of those guys here in North Texas, I have my doubts that they would be contributing anything to get Obama elected. Those guys don’t hang around were the lefties do, like the coffee shops and cyber-bars in downtown Dallas where you pay an arm and a leg for a latte or a White Whine Spitzer…. Ooops that should have been White Wine but then one usually hears more Whine than talk of wine in those places.
Again it looks like the LSM and the lefties have been able to let Obama slide some more “slick” over on them and will get away with another bold-faced lie. Now I know why Obama never campaigned in the mountains of East Tennessee or Western North Carolina. He picked the “progressive” towns where a lie ain’t a lie until you describe the definition of a lie.
Well one thing I learned growing up in the mountains and it carried over to here in N. Texas cause we got our share of critters, is that you don’t go poking one of them two-toned kitties with a fluid drive cause if you do, it are goin to stank to high heavens. About now it would seem that Obama is beginning to “stank” more than jest a hair bit.

There is more lies that I can list but then my blog would run best selling novel length. One other that comes to mind real quick, was the whopper he tried to pull on Sen. McCain and of course “Screamin Dean” did the same thing. It seems that they tried desperately to come say that Sen. McCain would only sit around and let the economy get worse but for folks who can read something other than the “progressive rags” will know that that is just another one of the “mis-speaks” commonly known in non-PC circles as bold-faced lie. Sen. McCain appears to have a better grip on the situation than some hastily draw up “sound good” or “feel good’ speech. He actually had this to say in regard to Obama and Dean’s “mis-speaks”: I will not play election year politics with the housing crisis. Unlike Screamin’ Dean, Obama, and Hillary (emphasis mine), I will evaluate everything in terms of whether it might be harmful or helpful to our effort to deal with the crisis we face now." He went on to say, "I will consider any and all proposals based on their cost and benefits (emphasis mine). In this crisis, as in all I may face in the future. I will not allow dogma to override common sense."

The last sentence is something that the progressive left of the Democrat Party has yet to understand, or else they lack the common sense to understand common logic to any situation. McCain went on to say, "I have always been committed to the principle that it is not the duty of government to bail out and reward those who act irresponsibly, whether they are big banks or small borrowers." He added, "Government assistance to the banking system should be based solely on preventing systemic risk that would endanger the entire financial system and the economy."
Stay tuned for what will certainly be a continued item. Given Obama’s track (mis-speak) record so far it is for sure that there will be bigger and better lies.

Friday, March 28, 2008

Obama Still Foolin 'em With The Easy Way Out


When will Obama actually say something original? He started out with, “It’s time for a change.” Same thing Hillary had been saying since her run for Senate the first time, and she has repeatedly said the same thing over and over again, even though she has done little to change anything. People forget as well that John McCain has been the Maverick in the Congress for years, saying and voting to change the status quo, especially on spending by the Congress. But, Obama is the man! Obama can talk the slick off of slick, but he doesn’t know what to do with it once the slick is off. His campaign slogan, “Yes, We Can,” is plagiarized from Bob the Builder on National Public Television. He even copied someone else’s speech on the economy while being critical of McCain for “just sitting back and waiting.” Believe me, I would rather have someone leading me who waited to have ALL the facts before acting than some empty suit with no facts leading us off a cliff.

Obama and his lemmings raved over how great the speech was, but when the flashy wheel stops turning, we can see that it was just a warmed over speech given by Hillary Clinton.

So when will Obama stop with the copycat speeches that have been plagiarized from others and give us what he REALLY believes can be a solution?


Have you noticed how lazy people have become? Teachers are expected to train up the children in the way they should go. The news media surely must have researched and done their homework before reporting to us what’s going on in the world; I’ll just have to take their word for it! Our ministers can do all of that studying and praying to find out what God wants. Just give us better entertainment to take our minds off of all the problems, and we’ll be happy!

Everybody is looking for the easy button, so that no actual thinking is required. There was a time when Christian believers “wrestled” over the Word of God and discussed it among themselves in order to find truth. Now it's search for the easy button. Our lives are much too busy, and we are much too important to be concerned with such a mundane thing as a worldview.

Even Obama is lazy in the way he is taking others’ speeches, warming them over, and calling them his own. His so-called “great race speech” was nothing more than a Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, and Bro. Farrakhan bunch of speeches thrown together in a new form, but it was still the same old con game. Even Obama’s “YES, WE CAN” was plagiarized. I’m sure he has a big “EASY” button on his desk.

When asked about the housing situation and the economy, Obama smacked his easy button and out popped a speech. Not once, however, did he say anything about how he would really solve the problem. He only flipped out a band-aid to distract his followers and immediately clamored that McCain didn’t have a plan and would just sit and watch what happened. We all know—that is, those of us who don’t have an easy button—that John McCain did not say that. He said that he would gather ALL the information together and have ALL the facts and then put forth a plan. Now that takes some wrestling and is not the easy way out.

Obama’s easy way: Fix Medicare? Raise taxes. Perscription drugs? Raise taxes. Free College? Raise taxes. Socialized medicine? Raise taxes. Obama’s solution to everything is to raise taxes. In other words, take the easy way, and don’t worry about the consequences to the American people. Don’t worry about cutting spending, cutting the pork, cutting those unnecessary “entitlement” programs, dubbed this because they have been around so long that the ones wanting the easy way in life think they are entitled to them by the Constitution. As Ken Blackwell said, “Big Brother on steroids,”—the quick and easy way to become a champion, as demonstrated by lazy (so-called) atheletes. Remember this, however: Obama’s easy way will be funded by your paycheck .

Most folks want an easy way out of everything, from government, to work, to religion. Obama’s pastor preaches that the easy way is blaming someone else for his supposed woes. Guess he forgot that Jesus never preached or taught the easy way. When Jesus was calling his followers, He admonished them to leave all that they had behind. One very rich young man who was seeking an easy way just shook his head and walked away.

Jesus told those who would follow Him that He had no place to lay his head, no shelter from the storm, and no promise of an easy life. He never spoke to His disciples of an easy way, but told them: If any of you wants to be my follower, you must turn from your selfish ways, take up your cross, and follow me. (Mark 8:34 NLT).

Two thousand years later John F. Kennedy said a similar thing in a political tone in his inaugural speech, “Ask not what your country can do for you but what you can do for your country.” Certainly JFK understood that there is no easy way.

Today, politicans, such as Senators Obama and Clinton, are telling us that we need to take it easy and just allow them to decide what is best for us, and they will provide us an easy way of life. They have failed to tell us one thing: what the cost will be. Jesus told his followers in Luke 14:28-29 NLT: “But don’t begin until you count the cost. For who would begin construction of a building without first calculating the cost to see if there is enough money to finish it? Otherwise, you might complete only the foundation before running out of money, and then everyone would laugh at you.”

JFK understood the cost of freedom and the cost to provide the nation success. McCain intends to take the time to count the cost. It seems that Obama, and too many others, care only about how easy it’s going to be.

Wednesday, March 26, 2008

More of "Screamin' Dean's" Spin

"Instead of offering a concrete plan to address the crisis at all levels, McCain promised to take the same hands-off approach that President Bush used to lead us into this crisis," Democratic Party Chief Howard Dean said.

Once again the Democrat’s chief bungler, “Screamin Dean” has twisted words to suit what he wants and to suit the leftist agenda. It must be very difficult to be unable to read or hear and comprehend what someone else says because you are convinced that nothing they say has any meaning. Typical again of the head-in-the-sand progressive left. McCain was very clear on the housing crisis, unlike Obama and Hillary, who throw out a lot of words with absolutely no plan to implement in case something does stick to the proverbial wall. Sen. McCain stated very clearly, "I will not play election year politics with the housing crisis. Unlike Screamin’ Dean, Obama, and Hillary (emphasis mine), I will evaluate everything in terms of whether it might be harmful or helpful to our effort to deal with the crisis we face now." He went on to say, "I will consider any and all proposals based on their cost and benefits (emphasis mine). In this crisis, as in all I may face in the future, I will not allow dogma to override common sense."

The last sentence is something that the progressive left of the Democrat Party has yet to understand, or else they lack the common sense to understand common logic to any situation. McCain went on to say, "I have always been committed to the principle that it is not the duty of government to bail out and reward those who act irresponsibly, whether they are big banks or small borrowers." He added, "Government assistance to the banking system should be based solely on preventing systemic risk that would endanger the entire financial system and the economy."

He is correct on both points, and, unlike the Democrats who offer half measures, McCain would not act without all the facts. I am amazed at how quickly Obama and Hillary are willing to throw out a half-baked, half-thought-through plan in order to say, “I have a plan.” On paper it may look good, in speeches it may sound good, but when it comes to working, the proof is in the pudding. Neither have shown that they even know how to make pudding, much less serve it.

It seems the Democrats will jump up and throw out a line that sounds good and then be unable to deliver. Does anyone remember all the promises made by the Democrats when they wanted to win the House and Senate in ’06? Pelosi promised that, in the first 100 days, the Democrats would:

• Put new rules in place to "break the link between lobbyists and legislation." They failed, and, in fact, things have gotten worse due to the ineptness of the Democrat leadership in both the House and Senate.

• Enact all the recommendations made by the commission that investigated the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001. They failed again and bit off more than they could chew.

• Raise the minimum wage to $7.25 an hour, maybe in one step. They got this one through, for all the good it did. Again, just talk with nothing to go along with it.

• Allow the government to negotiate directly with the pharmaceutical companies for lower drug prices for Medicare patients. Failed, but tried to blame the Republicans for the failure. Claimed the Republicans are in the drug companies’ pocket, but failed to realize that most are stupid enough to buy that when all they have to do is look and see who among the Democrats own stock in the largest drug manufacturers.

• "Pay as you go," meaning no increase in the deficit, whether the issue is middle class tax relief, health care or some other priority. Again, this was a lot of talk and the Democrats have done nothing except talk, finger point and posture. They had no firm plan in mind with which to do all the things promised.

To do that, she said, Bush-era tax cuts would have to be rolled back for those above "a certain level." She mentioned annual incomes of $250,000 or $300,000 a year and higher, and said tax rates for those individuals might revert to those of the Clinton era. Details will have to be worked out, she emphasized. They still haven’t worked out the details. Again, they had a lot of talk and no plan.

"We believe in the marketplace," Pelosi said of the Democrats, then drew a contrast with Republicans. "They have only rewarded wealth, not work." And the Democrats are the party that rewards WHAT? Can we say dependence, welfare, give-away programs and higher taxes, lots of posturing and finger pointing, but no real results.

"We must share the benefits of our wealth" beyond the privileged few, she added. And the plan to do that is to tax those who already pay the majority of taxes in this country. To tax the ones who create the jobs, the businesses, and invest in the community and business place to keep the economy alive. Already with anticipation of higher taxes, the market is running scared.

And the biggest failure was the promise to end the war in Iraq and bring the troops home. Still no plan. Hillary has no plan, and Obama has no plan. More talk and no real plan with which to carry out the posturing. They can talk the talk, but when it comes to walking the walk, they are lame and beyond moving.

Have the Democrats really presented anything of value since ’06 for which they actually had a plan and an idea of what it would cost? I have searched high and low, and I have yet to find anything substantial. Again, typical rhetoric coming from “Screamin’ Dean,” who criticizes a man who wants to have the facts in hand before going off half cocked, as the Democrats have done for the last two years and many years before that. To expect a competent candidate to come up with a plan that is so far reaching as the housing situation without having the facts is ridiculous, but then “Screamin’ Dean” has shown in the past just how ridiculous he can be and, once more, removes all doubt as to his ability to judge a situation and act in a manner requiring some common sense. Once again, he would rather throw something on the proverbial wall to see if it sticks than to take time to study to have all of the facts. When will the Democrats learn to stop shooting themselves in the foot? And when will “Screamin’ Dean” stop lying through his teeth, believing no one will know the difference?

Tuesday, March 25, 2008

Media Quiet on Iraq

It would seem that the LSM, namely the NYT, the alphabet TV news outlets and such have grown suddenly quite on Iraq. Of course the LSM explains that there is less interest in Iraq with all the national political goings on or it could be, according to them, that it is much “too dangerous” to have people in the area to report the terrible news and of course it is “very expensive” to continue carrying news from that area and “we are having to cut out budgets”.

Do you really buy into those “lame” excuses that they attempt to pass off as real reasons? If so then you have been afflicted with the “progressive mind set”, total devoid of reality.

The real reason is that WE are succeeding in Iraq and for the “progressives “ that is totally unacceptable since now they will have nothing to blame the ills of this country upon other than Bush and he won’t be around much longer. Of course that will not stop the progressive mind since they are still stuck in the year 2000 and blaming all the ills on an election that Al Gore could not win since he could not even carry his own home state of Tennessee.

The “surge” began a little over a year ago and by June all the troops were in country. Gen. David Petraeus had a new counterinsurgency strategy that put a premium on protecting Iraqi civilians and spreading US troops in a wider area to create areas of security. According to records there had been 1.600 sectarian killings in Iraq going into December. Within six months that number was cut in half. Before the surge Anbar province was under al Qaeda’s control but that also turned around. While the US had not been defeated militarily it seemed that they had been defeated politically both in Iraq and in the US and for those who have forgotten that is where wars are won or lost in the eyes of the LSM and politicians. The situation is still tenuous and a sudden withdrawal as called for by wannabe POTUS Sen. Obama would be a disaster not only for the US but for the people of Iraq and eventually the entire Middle East region.

However it seems that the LSM and the progressives have had some “great news” in the past week in which they could rejoice and once again see the eventually defeat of the US military and the retreat from Iraq. Well at least in their deluded mindset. Indeed al Qaeda and it’s terrorist groups have renewed the bombings which can bring about the largest number of casualties in one single blow. The LSM splashed it all over the news and headlines along with 4000 KILLED IN IRAQ SINCE ONSET OF WAR. While one casualty is a sad occurrence the numbers, less than 900 per year, do not even come close to the loses in Viet Nam in just a few weeks and months and certainly not even equal to one day in WW2 the LSM and the progressives attempt to make a mountain out of an ant hill, no , not even a mole hill but an ant hill.

The attacks will continue as election day moves closer for certainly the al Qaeda and it’s terrorist groups such as Hamas and Hezballoh certainly wish to see an Obama or a Hillary elected. They actually prefer Obama because of his lack of experience, lack of character and certainly lack of stomach to bring those who would tear down the country that has done so much for him to it’s knees. The terrorist know that the Democrats would withdraw and leave the Middle East for them to just walk in an open door and take over without any great resistance. Next step would be Europe where they already have made great inroads and have strongholds and groups ready to take over the governments in those countries as well. The Islamic radicals are once again beating the drums over the so called “irreverent” cartoons by the Danish cartoonist. In Australia, Islamic cleric Abu Bakar Bashir has returned to his hard line rhetoric calling for his followers to “beat up” Western tourist and for young Muslims to die as martyrs.

“In the sermon, organised by an Islamic youth organisation and delivered a few kilometres from the home village of convicted Bali bombers Amrozi and Mukhlas, Bashir likened tourists in Bali to "worms, snakes, maggots", and specifically referred to the immorality of Australian infidels.

The address was caught on video by an Australian university student.

"The youth movement here must aspire to a martyrdom death," said the cleric, who was convicted of conspiracy over the 2002 Bali bombings that killed 202 people, including 88 Australians, but was later cleared and released from prison.

"The young must be first at the front line - don't hide at the back. You must be at the front, die as martyrs and all your sins will be forgiven. This is how to achieve forgiveness." You can read the rest of his outrageous sermon, which reminds one of Sen. Obama’s pastor, the Rev. Wright and his rants against the US here.

Why this man is walking free and preaching his hate once again can be laid at the feet of the “progressives “ and bleeding hearts in that part of the world. Yes , even Australia has their share of those folks. It seems that they are no different in Australia or others parts of the world than in the US. They seem to be in a continual state of denial and believe that if we play nice with these terrorist that they will join in at the table and sing Kumbuya and have tea and crumpets.

Look for more of these attacks as election day draws closer. Look for the LSM to blow it out of proportion and for the Democrats to attempt to make political hay out of it claiming another “100 years” of the same is in store if they are not elected. One thing to remember, the Democrats are not very good at keeping their word on such things as the war since they promised their followers that they would end the war if given the Congress in 2006. So far they have only postured, finger pointed, gone on vacation, and come up with resolutions and nothing more. Remember too for all of Obama’s claims of ending this war he has absolutely no plan, that from his former foreign advisors lips and his own words.

Talk is cheap and so far Hillary,Obama and the Democrats have offered nothing but talk. The LSM loves talk. The progressives love talk because that is what they are best doing, talking and no action. That does not work with the Islamic terror groups as has been proven time and time again.

Friday, March 21, 2008

More Excuses From Obama

Obama made his speech today in hope of recovering from the shadow of racism which the Rev. Wright has certainly shown exists in the Black Community as much if not more than in the white community. It certainly seems to exist within the Black churches based on comments from those interviewed today by the various media outlets. Some claimed that such statements are true and should be made. Some said that it was part of being an American. Sorry but to say that your country is responsible for planting the AIDS virus in the black community to destroy it is not in any way what America or Americans should be saying since it is totally false and the Rev. Wright knows it, Obama knows it, but both pass it off with excuses that it comes from a different experience. The excuses for the Rev Wright continued to come from Sen. Obama in saying he was speaking of a different time, from a different time in history.

It seems the Senator overlooks the fact that the Rev Wright is speaking in the present and speaking what he believes in his heart and to excuse his remarks as being part of the Black experience is beyond reality and serves no unifying purpose. It only serves those who would use race as a hammer with which to hammer more of the "guilt nails" directed toward white society for the past forty plus years. It may be the hammer that will drives the nails in the coffin of Obama's dreams the presidency, a position for which he is not qualified nor one which he has the character required to hold such an office. Only an outright condemnation of the Rev Wright, his statements and total disavowal of any influence would suffice. However such would be a lie since the Senator chose to stay 22 years under the preaching of this man and it certainly shows his lack of judgment. A trait that is certainly needed by the POTUS and just another trait of character which he lacks. Too many red flags keep cropping up for Senator Obama and so far he has yet to sufficiently answer, explain and to disavow without excuses.

The media may fawn over his speech and call it one that no white candidate could give but that within itself brands the type of racism that exist and has existed from the beginning in the Obama candidacy. A subtle form that has been played well by Obama and his handlers. No white candidate could have spoken those words because Obama and his camp along with the left wing media would have immediately branded them as racists. Why is it that a Black candidate can speak of such things when no white candidate is allowed to do so? It is because the Black community would have branded them racists and claimed that they have no right nor experience from which to speak. Obama attempting to speak of the feelings of the whites is no different than a white person speaking of the feelings of the Black man. The difference is that Obama and the Black community see themselves as “different” and no one is allowed to speak of such nor against them. Senator "Uniter" should ask himself "What is wrong with this picture"? . It rears in the face of the American people as a dare to question Obama's character, his comments, his wife and her commnets, and his pastor. To question anything about Obama and refuse to fall down and worship at the feet of the “black” savior of white America is heresy in the new religious movement. Obama says he is the one who will set the guilty free and make the wounds suddenly go away in a flood of "feel good" emotion only if America electes him ,a Black man as President. It is subtle racism but it seems that many have seen the light about Sen. Obama and those with whom he associates with. The old adage of Birds of a feather flock together is certainly fitting in this situation. Another old adage of a zebra can not change it’s stripes also comes to mind.

It seems the Senator has put but another blot on his character with all the backstage playing from the onset of his candidacy when he began by keeping the Rev on his staff but attempted to hide his presence by not allowing him to pray or speak at the candidacy announcement. The question is Why? Did he know that the Rev. would use the opportunity to spew his hate filled rants during a prayer to what ever god he supposedly serves? If Obama disagreed with his statements last week , why didn’t he disagree enough with them at the beginning of his candidacy to dismiss the Rev as a the racist that he is and disassociate himself from the church which supports such rancor? He didn’t and now he attempts to play the game by disagreeing but yet continuing to make excuses for him. The Senator shows himself to be no better than the Rev.

I frankly will hope that he is nominated and that he receives the worst defeat at the polls that any candidate has ever experienced. His excuse-itis has destined the Democrat party to a defeat that will exceed the defeat in 1968,but then what were we to expect when the candidate Obama comes from the same mold and same segment of the party as John Kerry, Ted Kennedy and Tom Daschle, the left of the left within the party. The wing that represents the angry anti-American, self-loathing, defeatist wing of the party. The wing which loses time and time again and loses big.
The Clintons could have not gotten better results by playing the McGovern card for Obama's own racism has now done more damage than any comparison to the anti-war, defeatist, George McGovern. They should thank their lucky stars and Gerldine for her comments. It may have had the effect that they needed.

Friday, March 14, 2008

Too Many Red Flags!

The negative stack on Obama just keeps building. Playing footsies with the terrorist group FARC in South America, his relationship with Chicago gangsters, terrorist groups, foreign investors, and foreign government officials. Based on his campaign so far, Obama favors meeting and negotiating with rogue leaders without preconditions, passing secret messages to foreign countries at odds with his public positions, and tolerating Che-flag wielding leftists among his supporters who advance a radical agenda in his name. And of course the matter that ALMOST went away, his wonderful Pastor of 22 years and the church where he and his wife sat for 22 years listening to Anti-American tirades and Black Supremacy sermons, and we wonder why Michelle said for the first time she “feels proud of America.”

As I stated in a previous post (Senator Obama, Some Answers Please), something smells. Something is just not right with the picture that is beginning to form of Senator Obama. However, it seems that the Obama-zombies just ignore the red flags and continue to lambaste those who bring up these very important issues as “desperate right wingers.” Well, I’ve got news for you. I am no desperate right winger, not even close, but I am one who believes in questioning everything, especially when it comes to those who would lead this country. I want to know where they would lead us and, so far, looking at Obama’s plan, it’s the wrong path. Everything from his barely-mentioned forays to the hidden agenda in his Global Poverty Bill, his tax plan which, would assuredly drive more businesses out of the country and certainly dry up investment in new business due to taxes on those who have the money to invest in such endeavors, to his so-called plan for Iraq, which turns out to be a no plan according to his own words and those of his former advisor, Samantha Powers.

There are too many red flags appearing, and it seems that this may just be the beginning. I find his attempt to downplay these things to be as an attempt at hiding something he does not his voters to know. I find his constant calling for apologies from Sen. McCain and Sen. Clinton and staff to be just another form of playing the race card, but he attempts to make it appear that he is taking the “high road.” I see it as yet another red flag.

The voters know much about Hillary and how she operates, what she stands for and what she wants to do because we have heard it for over 12 years. There is little that is unknown about Hillary, and this has been reflected in the voting patterns across the country. Obama, on the other hand, is an unknown with the exception of the small tidbits that the Obama camp has thrown out to the press, like throwing scraps to the dogs to keep them occupied. The Obama camp has tried to keep the voters in the dark about the things we need to know about him as a candidate, such as his character, and his plan has paid off. The unknowing have joined the uninformed and the who-cares-he’s-different crowd, and he has managed to roll on with little known about him and where he really stands, not his website con material.

ABC asked questions today about the Pastor. Now it’s time for the LSM to become an active media and start asking Sen. Obama some real questions concerning his dealings, his character, and where he “really” wants to lead this country, rather than just accepting the “dog scraps” thrown to them by his handlers. As another red flag, just who are the behind-the-scenes handlers, the kingmakers, for, as yet, the identities have been vague and slow in coming to the front.

Too many red flags, too many questions, too many doubts. I think the American people deserve better explanations than the sound bites released by the Obama camp so far.

Wednesday, March 12, 2008

Obama and His Global Poverty Bill

Senator Obama wants to tie the U.S. into spending millions, if not billions, on Global Poverty. His Senate Bill S-2433, along with the already passed House version, never mentions the money involved, and for good reason. They don’t want anyone to know how much the money would be. The attempt at hiding the money in this Bill is ingenious to say the least. However, it is outright prevaricate, for it certainly took some maneuvering and underhanded thinking on the part of Rep. Adam Smith (D-WA) in his HR 1302 and by Sen. Barack Obama (D-IL) in his S2433 to come up with the idea.

The claim that there is no money provided for in this Bill is partially true in that it never directly mentions the money needed to fund this act. However, if one reads the U.N. Millennium Development Goals as set forth by Jeffery Sachs, it is easy to find out where the money is hidden.

The Democrat leadership in the Senate has attempted to “fast track” this Bill as was done in the House, but it seems that a few GOP Senators were smart enough to have done their homework after the House fiasco. Of course, we find all kinds of “conservative“ Senators singing the praises of this Bill, but we have to remember that this is election year, and who would want to be accused of not caring for a “poor starving child.” Well, it is not true. A vote against this Bill would not be a vote against “poor starving children.” It would be a vote in retaining the sovereignty of the United States and not giving it to the UN in small bits and pieces as we have done over the past 50-plus years. However, the Leftists in this country will scream that we can spend billions on a war in Iraq but not a few paltry billion on “starving children.” Again, that is a deception and a good one, for certainly the conservatives who had not done their homework in the House were caught in this web of deceipt woven by the House Democrats in order to look good during election time.

The U.S. is the most generous country in the world in their giving to poor nations. Of the $122.8 billion in foreign aid provided by Americans in 2005 (the most current data available), $95.5 billion, or 79 percent, came from private foundations, corporations, voluntary organizations, universities, religious organizations and individuals, says the annual Index of Global Philanthropy.

Dr. Mark W. Hendrickson makes a very well stated argument against this Bill and tells the pitfalls that politicians face if they stand against it. As it stands now, the Bill is being stalled, as mentioned above, by a handful of GOP Senators who have had the good sense to do their homework and also to stop this being used as a political tool in favor of Sen. Obama and against the GOP.

The Senator from Illinois, as well as the rest of the Senators in this country, would do well to read Dr. Hendrickson’s article. I do not hold out a great deal of hope that this will be done by the Senator and certainly not by those who have become Obamaized.

By posting this, at least a few will know and understand the meaning of this horrendous Bill and how, little by little, the Leftists in this country have been giving away the sovereignty of the United States.

*Hat tip to Fred Gregory.

Just What Is Obama's Withdrawal Plan

Obama’s quote on the war in Iraq in reply to Hillary. "I will end it in 2009," he said. "She doesn't have standing to question my position on this issue."

Just how Obama plans to end the Iraq situation in '09 is beyond me, as well as the majority of the military leaders and thinking individuals. Of course, it is simple to his emotionalized, hypnotized, and many brain-dead followers. He just says it’s over, so pack up the troops and the equipment and come home. Poor misguided Obama doesn’t understand that it is just not that easy. The military does not end a conflict and move just because he says so, and it certainly does not move all of the equipment and material that we have there in a matter of days, weeks, or even months. He’s dreaming, or else he’s been smoking some of that crack he smoked as a kid. So good luck, Obama, IF you even get elected. I find that Obama is assuming a lot of things and has yet to be elected.

As we have read, Samantha Powers was fired for calling Hillary a “monster,” which I found to be hilarious. Word has it that a lot of former Secret Service people would agree with her description. However, Samantha was also one of Obama’s top foreign policy advisors, and she had a lot to say about Senator Obama’s plan, or should we say non-plan, for troop withdrawal, should he be elected POUS.

Anyone who knows anything about the military knows that Sen. Obama really doesn’t have a clue how to accomplish his withdrawal boast. Samantha was quoted on BBC as saying: It’s the best case scenario [referring to a 16-month withdrawal plan as being negotiable]. Ultimately, Barack has no idea how quickly he can withdraw forces. He has no idea if it can even be done.

Obama has said that he will withdraw the troops and place them in another country. He recently named that country as Pakistan. Uh, does anyone see anything wrong with this picture? Does the Senator not think that the terrorists, who are already well entrenched in Pakistan, will not attack our troops there, thus, furthering the war? Perhaps then we can call it Obama’s War, or would that be politically incorrect. Certainly for the Leftists it would be.

In spite of all of his smooth talk, the swooning teenagers, and teenage-acting females, Sen. Obama is assuming too much. We have discussed his ties with terrorists, his playing footsie in Canada with NAFTA, and on another blog his Bill before the Senate to end Global Poverty. I stated that he plagiarized the Bill in that there was no need to re-write the Bill which the House had already passed and sent forward. That did not please the Leftists, and they claimed that that is the way Bills are done. I haven’t found one yet that was re-written after House passage unless it was to contain different language; this one doesn't. Is Obama a plagiarist? It would seem so, for even his campaign slogan was plagiarized. His catch phrase, ‘Yes we can!’ is straight from Bob the Builder on National Public Television.

And this man wants to be the next POUS? Think about it!

Sunday, March 9, 2008

Senator Obama, some answers please!

Senator Obama, some answers please! It seems that Senator Obama has been working foreign governments and other groups within foreign countries rather diligently. He has had people such as Ms. Snow, an oft mentioned foreign advisor and very left leaning individual, who now is "fired" in the Middle East, the UK, and not to mention the deal making with Canada which it seems that the Lame Stream Media is allowing to go silently by the wayside. It would appear that he is guaranteeing these countries that he will play favorites with them, and now we have this piece of information surfacing. It seems that Senator Obama is now playing footsies with the terrorist group FARC in South America.

When is Senator Obama going to come clean with the American people and tell the truth about all of these clandestine goings on? We can't wait until after the election to have the answers to these questions because by then it will be too late. The LSM needs to wake up and hold Obama's feet to the fire until he comes clean about his relationship with terrorist groups, foreign investors, and foreign government officials. Based on his campaign so far, Obama favors meeting and negotiating with rogue leaders without preconditions, passing secret messages to foreign countries at odds with his public positions and tolerating Che-flag wielding leftists among his supporters who advance a radical agenda in his name. Something smells, and it's not fish in Denmark!

Let’s have some answers, Senator Obama, and have them quickly and straight up. No more of your mumbo jumbo with no substance, just answers. The sound reply to “no answers” on Senator Obama’s part should be, “Bye-bye!” Oh, and to paraphrase your campaign slogan, Yes We Can put an end to your election.

Friday, March 7, 2008

McCain-Reflecting Truman Temperament?

McCain showed a bit of temper today and this may just be what it takes to show the undecided that he is one who will not put up with nonsense from the Congress, our enemies, nor our allies. One of the last Presidents who showed this type of temperament was perhaps Harry S. Truman, and he fared well with all those mentioned. Our enemies certainly were sure as to where he stood, as well as our allies.

As a military man, Truman showed what he was made of during WWI when he was commander of a battery of field artillery. During a sudden attack by the Germans in the Vosges Mountains, the battery started to disperse; Truman ordered them back into position using profanities that he had "learned while working on the Santa Fe railroad." Shocked by the outburst, his men reassembled and followed him to safety. This is the type of leadership most would agree that John McCain showed during his military career. His tenacity served Truman well and could also bode well for McCain.

Truman assumed office under a cloud as "the senator from Pendergast." He gave patronage decisions to Pendergast but always maintained that he voted his conscience. Truman always defended his patronage, saying that by offering a little, he saved a lot.

McCain is often seen as one who has leaned to the left and that infuriates the right, especially the religious right. It seems that, in doing so, he has managed to do as Truman said, offer a little to save a lot. That may well be another point of saving grace for him in November. The undecided, the swing voter, and the independent will understand this and realize that he could very well be the candidate to bring real change. Perhaps they will see that McCain is not one to do a great deal of talking about change but actually can walk the walk when it comes to getting it done.

As a Senator, Truman said: If we see that Germany is winning, we ought to help Russia, and if Russia is winning, we ought to help Germany, and that way let them kill as many as possible, although I don't want to see Hitler victorious under any circumstances. Neither of them thinks anything of their pledged word. His enemies attempted to use it against him and the press has a heyday with his off the cuff comments. McCain has said as much about some of our enemies and understands that none of them think anything of their pledged word. That is something that neither Obama or Hillary understand, especially Obama. His approach to our enemies is more Chamberlin-like than anything else, and we know the results of that type of thought.

Truman's no-holds-barred style of campaigning in the face of seemingly impossible odds became a campaign tactic that would be repeated by, and appealed to by many presidential candidates in years to come. In this against-all-odds stand, most would find McCain an almost mirror image. Now it is up to him to conduct a no-holds-barred campaign, for if he faces Hillary, it is certain she will stop at nothing. Obama will continue to try playing the “snake-oil salesman”
and con his way into office, and any attempt to engage him full throttle will be called racist, but McCain must not allow this game to be played if he is to win in November.

Just as an added note to how McCain must not allow the Obama clan to control how he runs his campaign, again today, when a Congressman from Iowa made a statement concerning how the terrorists will see an Obama victory, the Obama camp immediately seized on the statement and called on McCain to refute the statement. McCain needs to just allow the statement to stand and simply reply that in this country each individual has a right to their opinion and to express such, and if Senator Obama does not agree, then he certainly has no business being President. The Obama camp will attempt to use McCain to fight their battles; he does not have the time and should not give in to manipulation to do so.

Huckabee hanging around for the VP post?

Is Huckabee hanging around for the VP post? The last thing we need is for Huckabee to be on the ballot with McCain in November. That would certainly sink the GOP to the bottom of the ocean never to be found again. The independent voters who will decide this race this year will not vote for a McCain-Huckabee ticket. Huckabee might be able to deliver the Southern religious right vote, but that will be it. There are not enough to carry the election when matched up with the independents and swing voters. Huckabee is a wannabe, in my own opinion, and lacks the character to be President or VP. He certainly is not as conservative as the religious right would believe. His credentials as a SB preacher is what sells that crowd on him, but it won’t fly with the rest of the country. There is too much suspicion that the Republicans, along with the religious far right, are trying to produce a theocracy in this country, and adding a Baptist preacher on the ticket would certainly give the left all the ammunition it needs, as if it needs any more, to sink the Republican ship.

J.C. Watts of Oklahoma, a conservative, is young and certainly not as controversial as Huckabee would be. J.C. Watts has no blots on his record in Congress. He certainly was not in the pocket of any lobbyists, and he represented his part of the state well. He was the first black member of Congress not to join the Congressional Black Caucus, and that right there says a great deal about his character. It says that he is his own man and doesn’t need to belong to a “club” to be accepted. Watts was selected in 1997 to deliver the Republican response to President Bill Clinton's State of the Union Address. During the speech, Watts chastised some black Democrats and civil rights leaders as "race-hustling poverty pimps" whose careers he said depend on keeping Blacks dependent on the government. He certainly was not afraid to call things as they are. He was selected to be the chairman of the House Republican Conference, the fourth highest position of leadership in the House of Representatives (behind the Speaker, the Majority Leader, and the Majority Whip), a great accomplishment for a young man and what many would consider a green horn in the Congress.

Watts should satisfy the Baptists since he has spent a great deal of time working in Baptist churches as a youth pastor and youth leader. His name recognition might be a problem outside the SW; he has not been in the news since he did not stand for re-election in 2002.

Says Watts: “Republicans want to say we reach out. But what we do instead is 60 days before an election, we'll spend some money on black radio and TV or buy an ad in Ebony and Jet, and that's our outreach. People read through that.”

Watts has been critical of the Republican party's 2008 presidential candidates because they "don't show up" for black voters. Watts is a friend of GOP presidential candidate John McCain and considering him as running mate might not be a bad idea.

Now there is an idea for a running mate. Anyone have any more?

Wednesday, March 5, 2008

Hillary hangs on. So what's next?

Hillary Rodham Clinton, fresh off a campaign-saving comeback, hinted Wednesday at the possibility of sharing the Democratic presidential ticket with Barack Obama — with her at the top. Obama played down his losses, stressing that he still holds the lead in number of delegates.

Could this be the beginning of the Clinton Camp Playing the McGovern Card as I wrote about back in February? If you recall, McGovern had the largest number of votes going into the 1976 nomination convention but came away empty handed, and Hubert Humphrey gained the nomination. McGovern had been offered the second spot in the '72 race and turned it down. He was not going to settle for second spot when he was leading in the vote count going into convention, as Obama is currently. Would Obama, leading now and probably leading at convention time, settle for second place? Doubtful, since his upbringing does not allow him to be subservient to females. The women in his life have had a great influence in view of the world and this country. Obama also believes he has the upper hand in the Super delegate vote as well; so did McGovern in 1976. Members of McGovern’s own party painted him as the radical candidate of "acid, amnesty, and abortion." Could the same case be made against Obama when it comes to amnesty for illegals, his stand on abortion, and his admitted drug use as a youth? Given the history of the Clinton Campaign and their use of dirty tricks, it is entirely possible. Hillary will stop at nothing to gain the nomination, and the “McGovern card” would be so easily played against Obama.

I wrote previously about Obama's Bill: Fighting Global Poverty or a Step Closer to a New World Order? Hillary could use this against him since it calls for the U.S. to become subservient to the UN in the giving of trillions of dollars to that corrupt organization to be distributed in the cause of eradication of hunger. Of course, Hillary has presented much the same in her socialist book, It Takes A Village, but she has not gone as far as Obama in actually introducing such a costly bill.

It is going to get interesting over the next few months, and I look for the Clinton Camp to empty their bag of dirty tricks in order to gain the nomination. Obama will then empty the bag of dirty laundry that the Clintons have left carelessly strewn about over the past 12 years, and the fight will be down and dirty. One can only hope that the GOP will gallop in with a big box of Tide and wash them both away in November.


Looks like the Clinton Camp is going to play the McGovern Card!

Monday, March 3, 2008

The Battle in Texas

Tomorrow will likely tell the story of how the Democrat nomination goes. Will it be a much-needed victory for Hillary Clinton, or will it be the Clinton Alamo? She declares that she will go on regardless.

On the Republican side, it seems that it is time for the full effect of an Alamo to fall on Huckabee. He has stuck around too long and, like company and fish, he is beginning to be bothersome and is beyond stink. He has performed his Judas kiss, and it's time for him to take his thirty pieces of silver and go.

Meanwhile, Hagee, the wannabe Kingmaker from San Antonio, joined in with the small group of American Taliban (Don Wildmon, Tony Perkins, James Dobson, et al), and by offering his support to McCain, has done no more good than the crowd standing in Pilate's court cheering "crucify him" when McCain's name is mentioned. This band of Pharisees and Saducees has done their harm, and it's time for them to get out of the political scene before they completely destroy this country. Their brand of agenda-driven Theo-politics has no business in the political arena.

Obama-mania continues, but the question remaining is how long the LSM will continue to give him a pass on issues that any other candidate would have been flayed on the public square over. Great examples are his wife's comments on her feelings toward this country and Obama's attempt to smooth it over. Any other candidate, especially a white candidate, would have been publicly drawn and quartered, but Obama gets a pass. His latest flub, especially going into Ohio, is his denial of assuring Canada on NAFTA, and it gets a pass from the LSM as well.

Any other candidate, especially a Republican, would have been crucified by the progressives in the LSM. I'm just wondering how long the media, and the people, will continue to allow his lack of substance and his double-speak to continue.