Posts Tagged ‘Election 2008’

More on Obama

June 9, 2008

The “Messiah” gets some more exposure that he may not care for.

“Obama’s unique persona and talents will have to be countered with a laser focus on his leftist views and radical history. If the race comes down to speaking ability, or likeability, Obama will win. No amount of charm, however, will change the fact that Obama is the most liberal candidate for president in a generation. He is a committed leftist with historical ties to radical organizations and parties. He offers nothing but the failed big government solutions of the past dressed up with fancy words and vague symbolism… Obama’s leftist positions should come as no surprise. After all, Obama sought the support of the far left New Party when he ran for state senate in Illinois. This is a party who felt the Democrats were not liberal enough and was organized by a collection of Marxist/socialists seeking government control of the economy. Obama has a clear history of working with these leftist groups in Chicago, and steering money and power their way. The question of this election is whether the American people are going to mistake Obama’s charm and charisma for real leadership and effective solutions; if they are going to ignore his troubling past because he gives a good speech and looks good on TV; if they are going to fall for the promise of a government who can give them everything.” —Richard Collins Don’t worry, it gets better!

“The irony too bitter to swallow is that Barack Obama’s identity politics trumped Hillary Clinton’s identity politics… No real disagreement over identity goals and targets would ever emerge in a debate between Obama and Hillary, who after all was coaching first base in 1993 when her husband nominated the identity-rights theorist Lani Guinier (now a Harvard Law professor) to head the Justice department’s civil rights division. It could come up in an Obama-McCain debate. I suspect these two have profoundly different notions of how America works. John McCain by instinct, biography and upbringing is prone to see America as a common civic culture. The vocabulary of ‘unjust’ class distinctions familiar to Obama is alien to the McCain worldview. Sen. McCain should think about this and figure out a way to talk about it. If Americans are going to affirm a president making appointments on the basis of race, gender, class and sexuality, they should know it in 2008, rather than 2009-2012.” —Daniel Henninger  So? did Obama out Clinton the Clinton machine..?

And on that note:

“It is the most amazing thing that a young black man who was just a few short years ago unknown to most of his countrymen—really, unknown—could… win the presidential nomination of one of our two great political parties. It is even more amazing that this historic news could be overshadowed by the personal drama and spite of the woman who lost to him. I like it that she spent the campaign accusing America of being sexist, of treating her differently because she is a woman, and then, when she lacked the grace to congratulate the victor, she sent her stewards out to tell the press she just needs time, it’s so emotional. In other words, she needs space because she’s a woman.” —Peggy Noonan

Face it, women are just plain cruel to each other …

all the preceding, other than following comments are from The Patriot Post

This is the end, my only friend, the end …

June 4, 2008

Well, I guess the party is over. It’s been rather fun watching Hillary and Obama rip each other seemingly on a daily basis. Just how much can be attributed to “Operation Chaos?” I personally believe that Rush Limbaugh had little to do with it. All the internal strife within the Democrat party that is.

This was, I believe, more about the Clinton Machine being defeated than anything else. The Clinton’s are, and were appeasers. The Democrat Party, after all has been taken over by those that are on the extreme far left of the political spectrum, and they are not the types that are willing to compromise.

Big government authoritarianism is raising it’s ugly head here in America. It matters not whether it is from the right or the left of the political spectrum. If you are an individual then you had better watch out. You are about to become one with the “Borg,” to borrow some Star Trek terminology. Atlas Shrugged indeed! But, it took a few years past 1984, in order for George Orwell’s prescience to become a very real possibility.

I call it metastatic communism, because, like a virulent cancer it spreads, and destroys that which feeds it. First it was social welfare issues that were meant to be last ditch attempts at saving people from themselves, that is, from failure. The best example that I can think of here in America would be the Social Security program. Soon, it will be basic private property rights, after all, the benefit of the many far outweighs your own needs. Just because you earned that gadget means nothing. Be sure that you never question any of this, for, after all, should you do so you will be deemed mentally incompetent, if not a dangerous subversive as well. yes, then there is that little “dangerous” clause to all this righteous indignation that the elitist’s with authoritarian ideology worry about. Any danger to them ( The elitist’s.) is a danger to all, after all is said and done. What to do about that..? Simple! Disarm any that hold different beliefs. That will pave the way to the utopia that is to be our future!

That, will be the methodology of the Neo-Communist. That, is democracy, and why a Constitutional republic, is so superior.

The Page – by Mark Halperin – TIME

April 24, 2008

The Page – by Mark Halperin – TIME

Utter nonsense, period. That man is a racist, that played the racist card for years so that he could profit from the hate that spewed from his pulpit. Blacks will never get ahead in life or society as long as they continue to feed from the trough of despair that people like this pastor hand out.

More on the Obamanation

April 22, 2008

Some time ago a contributor here got mad because I told him to do his own research about Obama. I do things like that from time to time, especially when I have previously posted, with citation. See, there is this old Irish theory about learning that says that what you earn, as in work for, stays with you longer.

Now, I stated that Obama hung out with gangsters. What was the rage a short time ago? Tony Resco, that’s what. I said that Obama attended a racist church. What blew across the newswaves? His pastor, and that’s still going on. I stated that he was a socialist. Whats all across the web now? Obama the collectivist, that’s what. I also said trhat he is anti second amendment, and low and behold. He tries acting like he is a supporter of the Constitution, and it is blowing up in his face.

What got me onto the Obamination early? Well, that can best be summed up over at Make-A-STATEMENT.org.

The Essence Of Obama by Jim Cash

First, Obama refused to display the American Flag on his lapel. Then, he refused to distance himself from his America hating, racist, and self promoting minister, the despicable Reverend Wright. Now, he is giving some lame excuse for not respecting and following proper protocol when our National Anthem is played.

That lame Obama excuse is, “as I have said before, I do not want to be perceived as taking sides”. Further, he says, “There are a lot o people in the world to whom the American Flag is a symbol of oppression. And, the anthem itself conveys a war-like message. You know, the bombs bursting in air and all. It should be swapped for something less parochial and less bellicose. I like the song—I’d like to teach the World to Sing—If that was our anthem, then I might acknowledge it”. I would sure like to know who he is afraid to take sides with.

This is the man who wants to become the Commander-in-Chief of our armed forces, leader of the free world, and role model to our children.

Please allow me to share with you the level at which our flag and anthem is honored on all our military bases. First, the flag is never displayed at night unless properly lighted. Early in the morning after sunrise, every military installation in the nation has a ceremony as the flag is hosted. Prior to sunset, a similar ceremony is performed where the flag is brought down, and folded with great care, then stored for the night. It is never allowed to touch the ground. These ceremonies are conducted by impeccably dressed uniformed personnel and accompanied by appropriate music. During the ceremony all traffic on base is brought to a halt, again, in honor of the flag. When the flag becomes old and faded, it is retired with ceremony, and burned. Military personnel love the flag, as it is a symbol of our country, and that is what they have taken an oath to defend—to their deaths.

Military personnel, both active and retired, stand and salute the flag as it passes by. I have seen wheel-chair bound vets struggle to stand when the flag passes by. The same respect is paid when our National Anthem is played. Sometimes, I wonder if our military members are the only America loving group left in this country. Berkley, you should truly be ashamed!!!!

I am sure you can imagine how veterans feel when an America hating, low life individual is allowed to burn the flag, or spit on it, or stomp on it with dirty feet. But, can you imagine how they will feel watching their Commander-in-Chief degrade it, refuse to honor it, and even change our National Anthem to, “I’d like to teach the world to sing in perfect harmony”???

How can we justify supporting a man who has spent over two decades attending a church, whose minister instead of proclaiming, “God-Bless America” in front of our children, shouts, “God-Damn America” over and over. Does anyone out there really believe that Obama did not know what was going on in that church? TO DENY IS TO LIE!!! Both right and left all know deep down that he is very good at that.

Never in my life did I think I would look at Hillary Clinton with any kind of positive thought. However, it appears that there is a group of people in this country so ill informed, so blinded by charisma, so deaf to nonsense, that they will support a far-left, anti-American, silver-tongued, foolish man with a Socialist agenda like Barrack Hussein Obama. He makes Hillary Clinton appear angelic. I realize that she is obsessed with winning and totally self-serving also, but I have never heard her say, or do, anything that leads me to believe she hates this country, or openly displays obvious racist tendencies.

However, I have heard Obama say several times that, “We live in the greatest nation in the world, and I am going to change it”. Again, my question is, “what does he mean by change? What is he going to change it to?”

I somehow understand the youth of America being taken in by a young, black, silver-tongued, motivational speaker. Their experience is limited, and their attitudes will change as their life progresses, and they feel the sting of a burn or two. However, I have no patience at all with mature Americans who seemingly cannot think their way out of a paper bag. I am speaking of those who go to rallies and act like groupies, applauding Obama when he blows his nose. FOLKS, WE MUST WAKE UP!!!!! There are good people out there who understand what I am talking about here, but they are remaining far too quiet.

It is time for these Americans to stand up for their Country, their Religion, and their Rights. No other nation on earth supports the standard of living that we experience in America. Every living, breathing, citizen of this country should say a little prayer each night recognizing how fortunate they are to have been born here. If we lose that standard, it will be lost because of the apathy of the American people.

George Bush has many faults, and has made many mistakes. However, it defies gravity to me that the far-left can profess such hate for Bush, and then show strong support for the likes of an Obama. Folks, if you think about it long, hard, and with focus, two plus two will normally make four. Another way to look at it is, if it walks like a duck and it quacks like a duck, it probably is a friggin’ duck.

Jim Cash
B/G, USAF, Ret.

“Pro-Gun” Group Endorses Most Anti-Gun Candidate

April 21, 2008

 

Wolves in sheep’s clothing perhaps? Here’s a fact NRA, none, not one of the three leading candidates supports the second amendment, period.

 

Friday, April 18, 2008
 
As this unusual campaign season has unfolded, we’ve seen the candidates ratcheting up their politically expedient rhetoric in an attempt to distinguish themselves as the “candidate of choice” for every constituency, while testing the far reaches of credibility in the process.  We’ve heard blatantly anti-gun politicians claim to be supportive of the Second Amendment.  We’ve seen hypocrisy, and we’ve heard double-speak and insults to our intelligence. 

When it comes to campaign rhetoric on the Second Amendment, we’ve seen a change in the way many anti-gun politicians campaign.  Rather than talk openly about their desire to ban guns, register gun owners, and regulate firearms sales, anti-gun politicians talk about their “support” for sportsmen.  Rather than admit they oppose the individual right protected by the Second Amendment, they claim they “support firearm ownership for hunting.” 

This is all an effort to mislead and divide the gun owning community and to dilute gun owners’ political impact.  To achieve their goals new organizations have been formed, with names designed to confuse gun owners and hide their real agenda.  The American Hunters and Shooters Association (AHSA) is one of those groups. 

As we’ve reported in the past, AHSA was created to provide political cover for anti-gun politicians by allowing them to claim support from a “sportsmen’s” group.  In truth, the anti-gun credentials of AHSA’s leadership is well documented.  For instance, AHSA president Ray Schoenke has a long history of giving political donations to some of the nations most anti-gun politicians, including Al Gore, John Kerry, Barbara Boxer, Bill Clinton, Dianne Feinstein, and Ted Kennedy.  In 2000, Schoenke donated $5,000 to Handgun Control, Inc. (now the Brady Campaign) and the Ray and Holly Schoenke Foundation also made donations to the Brady Campaign.  AHSA Board member John Rosenthal remains the leader of Stop Handgun Violence, a Massachusetts anti-gun group.  And one of the leading organizers of AHSA is Bob Ricker, who has served as a paid expert witness against gun manufacturers in a number of reckless lawsuits.  And that’s just the tip of the iceberg. 

In keeping with their “pro-gun” stance, this week, AHSA did the last thing one would expect of a pro-gun group—they endorsed Democratic hopeful Barack Obama for President! 

In a statement on the AHSA website titled “Obama: He ‘gets it,’” Schoenke announced the endorsement, saying that Senator Obama’s voting record has clearly demonstrated his commitment to the Second Amendment!  Are you kidding?  Obama’s hostility toward the Second Amendment is so well known and well documented that in the 2004 elections, NRA’s Political Victory Fund (NRA-PVF) issued Obama a well-deserved “F” grade.  Obama is anti-gun.  Period.  And no amount of sugar coating or spin by AHSA will change that fact. 

The AHSA statement closes with the line, “Senator Obama will be a strong and authentic voice for America’s hunters and shooters and it is with great pleasure that we endorse his candidacy.”  While typical of the rhetoric coming out of AHSA, that line is nothing less than ridiculous. 

AHSA would be more correctly called the “American Association for the Protection of Anti-Gun Politicians.”  No gun owner or sportsman should take the group seriously or fall prey to its carefully crafted lies and deceptions, as clearly demonstrated by their endorsement of Barack Obama.

 

SOURCE: http://www.nraila.org/Legislation/Federal/Read.aspx?id=3848

Straight answers from crooked politicians?

April 18, 2008

Wool pulling, and other shenanigans by candidates…

ABC’s Charlie Gibson seemed to abandon the Leftmedia script on Wednesday night at the Democrat debate in Philadelphia, when he aimed some uncharacteristically tough questions at Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama. On the subject of the Second Amendment, Gibson asked Obama whether the District of Columbia’s ban on handguns was consistent with an individual’s right to bear arms. Obama affirmed his belief in an individual right to bear arms, but then said that, like other rights, it is subject to government constraint.

As is typical of Democrats, Obama went on to mention the importance of firearms in the context of “tradition” and “hunting,” but not once did he say anything about the right to self-defense or the role of firearms in keeping the government accountable to the people. (See: “Revolution, American.”) This is hardly surprising, considering that Obama told the Chicago Tribune in 2004 that he favored a national ban on concealed carry. When Gibson asked Obama if he still favored registration and licensing of guns, Obama dodged the question by saying that he favored “common-sense approaches,” another favorite phrase from the Democrat playbook. When Gibson mentioned that Obama’s handwriting was on a questionnaire that supported a total ban on handguns, however, Obama denied it, adding, “[W]hat we have to do is get beyond the politics of this issue and figure out what, in fact, is working.” Obama used Chicago as an example, where “[W]e’ve had 34 gun deaths last year of Chicago public-school children.” Obama failed to say how many of those children were gang members, and he conveniently left out the fact that Chicago, like DC, has had a total ban on handguns for years.

Hillary Clinton’s responses were similarly vacuous. She said that she would renew the so-called Assault Weapons Ban (or as we say in our shop, “the ban on guns with certain cosmetic features”), and that she supports “sensible regulation.” On the question of whether the DC ban was consistent with Second Amendment rights, Hillary evaded by saying she didn’t know the facts of the case. She also praised Philadelphia Mayor Michael Nutter for his (illegal) efforts to curb crime (by banning guns). More on that later.

Of course, Hillary is in favor of “federalism” when it comes to allowing states to have their own restrictive laws concerning guns. She said, “What might work in New York City is certainly not going to work in Montana. So, for the federal government to be having any kind of, you know, blanket rules that they’re going to try to impose, I think doesn’t make sense.” Blanket rules like, you know, the federal “assault weapons” ban?

Speaking of Patriots Day, both gun-grabbing candidates should keep in mind what Justice Joseph Story had to say on the matter. Story was a Supreme Court nominee of James Madison, the author of our Constitution. “The right of the citizens to keep and bear arms has justly been considered,” he said in his Commentaries on the Constitution, “as the palladium of the liberties of a republic.”

source: Patriot Post

Obama: Change For The Sake Of Expediency

April 13, 2008

Well folks, we have more to show you about this epitome of hypocrisy that is endeavoring to become the President of these United States.

source: NRA-ILA

Copyright 2008, National Rifle Association of America, Institute for Legislative Action.
This may be reproduced. It may not be reproduced for commercial purposes.

Friday, April 11, 2008
 
When it comes to the Second Amendment, it’s somehow appropriate that Democratic presidential hopeful Barack Obama is running on a platform of “change.”  Because when it comes to his rhetoric on the issue of gun rights, “change” is an apt description. Last month, we reported on Obama’s hypocrisy.  We detailed his advocacy of a law to forbid federally licensed gun dealers from legally selling constitutionally-protected products (firearms) in huge geographical areas, without holding purveyors of pornography to the same standard. 

Last week, we reported on Obama’s attempt at reassuring pro-gun voters by telling them, “I have no intention of taking away folks’ guns,” then telling the Pittsburgh Tribune “I am not in favor of concealed weapons,” and that he favors “…reasonable, thoughtful gun control measure[s]….”  

Obama is savvy, and he’s a quick study.  His politically expedient stance on the gun issues has morphed from “a ban on all handguns” to his now frequent use of phrases like “protecting sportsmen.”  

Lately, in an effort to curry votes from America’s gun owners, he’s even claiming to believe in the Second Amendment.  A recent campaign “fact sheet” touting Obama’s support for sportsmen claims that Obama “greatly respects the constitutional rights of Americans to bear arms” (note the failure to say “keep” and bear arms).  But read further–to the “fine print” at the end of the statement–and you’ll see his political safety net…an easily down-played but highly significant “qualifier” that he almost always includes in some form.  It reads, “He also believes that the right is subject to reasonable and commonsense regulation.”  In other words, “I support your gun rights, so long as that includes “reasonable” restrictions (wink, wink).”  Very slick.

The next time you hear Obama talking about “protecting sportsmen’s rights,” remember that, among other things, he endorses the D.C. gun ban–which outlaws armed self-defense in the home–declaring that the ban doesn’t violate the Second Amendment.  And that in a “1998 National Political Awareness Test,” he pledged to support a “Ban [on] the sale or transfer of all forms of semi-automatic weapons.”  That includes most handguns and many rifles and shotguns. 

Obama’s alleged support of the Second Amendment is utterly cynical and false.  Barack Obama is not for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms; he’s out to destroy it. 

For more information on Barack Obama’s gun control record, please click here.

More Obamination..?

March 20, 2008

“The latent causes of faction are thus sown in the nature of man.” —James Madison

“We laugh at honor and are shocked to find traitors in our midst.” —C.S. Lewis

“Make yourself an honest man, and then you may be sure that there is one less scoundrel in the world.” —Thomas Carlyle

“The world is weary of statesmen whom democracy has degraded into politicians.” —Benjamin Disraeli

“Freedom has a thousand charms to show, That slaves, howe’er contented, never know.” —William Cowper

“I profoundly believe it takes a lot of practice to become a moral slob.” —William F. Buckley

“[Barack] Obama says Rev. [Jeremiah] Wright is no longer among his campaign’s ‘spiritual advisers.’ Obama should not be asked which of Rev. Wright’s outrageous statements he disagrees with, but rather which ones he does agree with. That Obama remains a member in good standing of Trinity United Church of Christ indicates that he prefers the company of many people who have demonstrated that they believe what their pastor has said.” —Cal Thomas Break“We don’t need a President of the United States who got to the White House by talking one way, voting a very different way in the Senate, and who for 20 years followed a man whose words and deeds contradict [Barack] Obama’s carefully crafted election year image.” —Thomas Sowell

“All you really need to know about Barack Hussein Obama is this: Louis Farrakhan really, really, really wants him to be president.” —Don Feder

“Barack Obama is, of course, a very talented politician with a first-rate political organization at his back. But it does not detract from his merit to say that his race is also a large part of his prominence. And it is undeniable that something extremely powerful in the body politic, a force quite apart from the man himself, has pulled Obama forward. This force is about race and nothing else.” —Shelby Steele

“It’s equally obvious… that if Hillary was male—and not married to Bill Clinton—she wouldn’t be in her position. Hillary came to national prominence not through her own efforts but through the success of her husband. Virtually all her ‘experience’ prior to being elected Senator is in fact Bill Clinton’s experience. She wouldn’t even have been elected to the Senate without Bill.” —Dinesh D’Souza

“[T]here’s a general right to bear arms quite without reference to the militia either way.” —Justice Anthony Kennedy during Tuesday’s hearings on the Second Amendment

“Barack Obama’s story that he never once heard his preacher trash whites and America in hundreds of sermons sounds like Bill Clinton claiming he never inhaled while smoking dope. The mushrooming church scandal has taken the shine off the golden boy of politics, a two-decade regular at ‘unashamedly black’ Trinity United Church of Christ in Chicago. With his phony defense, the Democrat front-runner has exposed himself as both a typical Beltway spinmeister and a hypocrite. From the start of his presidential campaign, Obama has positioned himself as a straight shooter and a uniter—the very antidote to the sinister Clintonian politics of the past… ‘You know what I’m saying is true,’ he reassured voters. Yet his denial over Rev. Jeremiah Wright’s vitriol does not ring true. He’s suddenly shocked—shocked!—that his black nationalist church would spew anti-American venom. ‘I did not hear such incendiary language myself, personally,’ he insisted, ‘either in conversations with him or when I was in the pew.’ Back in February 2007, however, Obama knew Wright might be a political liability. His chief campaign strategist, David Axelrod, was so worried about his provocative statements that he urged Obama to withdraw a request that Wright deliver an invocation at his presidential campaign kickoff. Reluctantly, Obama ‘uninvited’ his long-time friend and mentor, according to Wright’s own account at the time, telling him ‘it’s best for you not to be out there in public.’… Here’s another whopper Obama tells concerning Wright: ‘He hasn’t been my political adviser, he’s been my pastor.’ Yet it turns out Wright quietly had a formal role in Obama’s campaign, and was only pushed out last week as a member of his spiritual advisory committee when the tapes hit the airwaves. Spinning harder, Obama claimed Wright’s remarks are not ‘reflective of the church.’ Yet the videos clearly show fellow members whooping and thumping in their applause of Wright’s hateful rants. These weren’t just a smattering of amens and hallelujahs. They were standing ovations. Point is, these are the folks with whom the Obamas worship and socialize. Yet we’re expected to believe Obama never heard the same incendiary remarks from them, either? His plea of ignorance doesn’t wash.” —Investor’s Business Daily

The above from the Patriot Post:

Remember folks, you heard it all here first. Dating back well over a year ago, only now, it is big news. When I tell someone posting here to do their own research it is because the information is readily available, and people learn better when they actually work at learning. Barak Obama, bad for America, bad for the world.