Friday, October 31, 2008

Brokaw to Rose..."Who's Barry?"

This sums up the expansive media coverage of little barry in 2008. Tom Brokaw and Charlie hash is out on Thursday night television for us. From the site of Rush Limbaugh.

Brokaw & Rose: Who Is Obama?

October 31, 2008

RUSH: Now, on Charlie Rose Show last night on PBS. Are they doing their pledge drive yet? Is PBS doing their drive? Because, you know, "Without your Pledge, we cannot dust." He had on Tom Brokaw last night, ladies and gentlemen. Here's a montage. Now, this is last night. As you listen to this, keep in mind everything you've heard from Brokaw and others in the Drive-Bys can for the past six months, three months, two months or whatever. This is a montage of Charlie Rose and Brokaw trying to figure out who Obama is.

ROSE: I don't know what Barack Obama's worldview is.

BROKAW: No, I don't, either.

ROSE: I don't know how he really sees where China is.

BROKAW: We don't know a lot about Barack Obama and the universe of his thinking about foreign policy.

ROSE: I don't really know. And do we know anything about the people who are advising him?

BROKAW: Yeah, it's an interesting question.

ROSE: He is principally known through his autobiography and through very aspirational (sic) speeches.

BROKAW: Two of them! I don't know what books he's read.

ROSE: What do we know about the heroes of Barack Obama?

BROKAW: There's a lot about him we don't know.

RUSH: Incredible! (laughing) Let's send the journalist to find out! Why, have you guys ever thought of that, Tom? Have you ever thought about sending a reporter to find out who the guy is? Charlie! You got plenty of reporters there at PBS, at least on the... Have you ever thought about sending anybody out to find out who he is, besides the two books? (laughing) I cannot believe this. We know who his heroes are -- and, of course, that's the point! We know who his heroes are and we know who his alliances are with. We know who his friends are. We know that he chose them all. But to hear... This is last night. This is, what, four days, five days before the election. These are two of Obama's biggest media supporters! You gotta... I gotta hear this again. This is hilarious if it weren't so damn maddening, because the answer to this is, "Hey, Tom? Talk to the bureau chief in Washington, the new guy who replaced Russert. What you do is, you assign a reporter to go out and find out who Obama is."

ROSE: I don't know what Barack Obama's worldview is.

BROKAW: No, I don't, either.

ROSE: I don't know how he really sees where China is.

BROKAW: We don't know a lot about Barack Obama and the universe of his thinking about foreign policy.

ROSE: I don't really know. And do we know anything about the people who are advising him?

BROKAW: Yeah, it's an interesting question.

ROSE: He is principally known through his autobiography and through very aspirational (sic) speeches.

BROKAW: Two of them! I don't know what books he's read.

ROSE: What do we know about the heroes of Barack Obama?

BROKAW: There's a lot about him we don't know.

RUSH: Well, we know one of his heroes is a member of the Communist Party, Frank Davis. He mentored him in Hawaii. There's a lot we know, Tom. (laughing) Does this not ice it? Does this not ice...? We know as much as can be known about Obama, far more than he wants us to know, and here are these two pillars of Drive-By journalism. "I don't know. I don't know. It's an interesting question, Charlie. It's an interesting question." (laughing) I just think this is... "That's true." Two pillars of journalism, one has an audience and one doesn't, but it doesn't matter. They're both still pillars. Hey, Tom, Charlie, I think we can help here about his view of China. This was last night on MSNBC, and he was asked this question, Obama was. "Is there a possibility you could see in your first term if elected and we need an economic stimulus, an FDR style public works program?"

OBAMA: I've actually talk about this. I think we have to rebuild our infrastructure. Look at what China's doing right now. They, uh, er, uh -- Their trains are faster than us. Their ports are better than us. They are preparing for a very competitive Twenty-First Century economy, and we're not.

RUSH: Okay, Charlie? Tom? You just heard Obama say after you're wondering where he is on China, he thinks they're better than us! And, by the way, to be grammatical correct it would be "better than we." You don't say "better than us are." You say "better than we are." The trains run on time? All this infrastructure? Look at the infrastructure that cannot handle a .0001 earthquake! Basically a giant taking a couple of steps will crap some buildings over there. But here's Barack Obama singing, once again, the praises of China, a communist country -- and what? Criticizing the United States. It was an interesting point. It was a very interesting point to an interesting question. Tom Brokaw said it was "an interesting question," What is his attitude on China, the people advising him. Here it is. He loves China, he thinks the United States sucks. Barack Obama, last night on PMSNBC.

END TRANSCRIPT

Wednesday, October 29, 2008

Who Enforces the Constitution's Natural Born Citizen Clause?


(Click on bold headline for complete story)

Tuesday, October 28, 2008

ACORN Owes Millions in Taxes


Amazingly, this widely discredited outfit continues to receive government funding at taxpayer expense as they apparently don't have to play by the rules.(Click on bold headline for complete story)

Saturday, October 25, 2008

We, the American People, Have No Standing...Apparently A Candidate Doesn't Have To Comply With A Constitutional Requirement

Judge Surrick has dismissed the case.

Well, the question is what does the American population have as standing before the politicians in Washington? Apparently, this constitutional requirement of natural born citizenship is inconvenient and is basically for show? (Click on bold headline for complete story)

Thursday, October 23, 2008

Birth Certificate Issue on Limbaugh, Savage

On his nationally syndicated radio broadcast today, Rush Limbaugh mentioned Philip J. Berg's lawsuit demanding that the DNC and little Barry produce proof that he is a natural born citizen of the United States. Limbaugh said it was a story percolating on the internet. Michael Savage, of Savage Nation, went further and actually had Berg live on his show. Savage is linking the MP3 recording on his website which is available 24/7 and emailable.

Barry could have made this all go away last August by simply producing the necessary paperwork. Hhe has not. He has not because he apparently can't. He is not qualified to serve as the President of the United States of America.

http://wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=78931

http://www.newsmax.com/headlines/obama_birth_certificate/2008/10/24/143882.html

What was most shocking was the admission that MI6, CIA and FBI personnel have confided with Berg that their departments KNOW little Barry was born in Kenya. But, there is literally no controlling legal authority responsible to vet a candidate. That responsibility has been left to each of the major political parties. And, for 200+ years, no one has ever been so audacious as to perpetrate such a fraud on the population of the United States of America.

Stunning for sure. As Savage posited, we may be experiencing the greatest fraud ever attempted in the history of this country. (Click on bold headline for complete story)

Tuesday, October 21, 2008

Barry's Post-Partisan? Really?


Stanley Kurtz is very readable. Perhaps, before election day, a few more of the masses should read a bit more of Barry's past affiliations and efforts to radicalize America. I wish!

During his first campaign for the Illinois state senate in 1995-96, Barack Obama was a member of, and was endorsed by, the far-left New Party. Obama’s New Party ties give the lie to his claim to be a post-partisan, post-ideological pragmatist. Particularly in Chicago, the New Party functioned as the electoral arm of the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN). So despite repeated attempts to distance himself from ACORN, Obama’s New Party ties raise disturbing questions about his links to those proudly militant leftists. The media’s near-total silence on this critical element of Obama’s past is deeply irresponsible.(Click on bold headline for complete story)

Friday, October 17, 2008

Case No. 2 ...Barry, your birth certificate please!

Now the state of Washington has special requests to attend to along with Pennsylvania regarding suits on candidate qualifications. Perhaps more are in the offiing. Once again, if the birth certificate is a simple matter of exposure, then why not show it? Let's have it, Barry?
(Click on bold headline for complete story)

Wednesday, October 15, 2008

Your Birth Certificate, Please

We've heard plenty of speculation on Barry's missing birth certificate and his questionable status of U.S. citizenship which could all be dispelled very easily. Since it is a requirement of a candidate to fulfill the office, one would think this certificate should be produced once and for all. So, show us the records, right? What's the problem then?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gA6_k3NtXZs

Barry and the DNC are now willing to spend money on delaying the production of this original birth certificate until AFTER the election. WHY? The rules don't apply to Barry? Let's keep up with this search. (Click on bold headline for complete story)

Don't miss http://obamacrimes.com/

Tuesday, October 14, 2008

Barry's View on Babies (or Preference To Abort)

Just in case you were unclear on little Barry's pro-abortion views, this essay explains the big-eared boy's devotion-to-death positions which include the taxpayer funding of all abortions, his opposition to both the Hyde Amendment and the Mexico City Policy (which essentially requires U.S. taxpayers to fund abortion abroad), his opposition to parental consent and notification laws, conscience protections, and the denial of funding alternatives to embryo-destructive research, and his unyielding support for partial birth abortions.

Here's your summary from Robert P. George, McCormick Professor of Jurisprudence and Director of the James Madison Program in American Ideals and Institutions at Princeton University. (Click on bold headline for complete story)

Friday, October 10, 2008

1 VOTER, 72 REGISTRATIONS 'ACORN PAID ME IN CASH & CIGARETTES' - 19 year old Ohioan


ACORN, ACORN, ACORN ... let's not mistake this name. ACORN, ACORN, ACORN. The privilege to vote in this country is simply a joke to them. And, Barry's campaign fronted them something like $800,000 for this election cycle. Well, perhaps you get what you pay for. (Click on bold headline for complete story)

Thursday, October 9, 2008

Statement from John M. Murtagh on Barack Obama's Relationship with William Ayers

ARLINGTON, Va., October 8 /Standard Newswire/ -- Today, John M. Murtagh made the following statement on Barack Obama's relationship with William Ayers:

"When I was 9 years-old the Weather Underground, the terrorist group founded by Barack Obama's friend William Ayers, firebombed my house. Barack Obama has dismissed concerns about his relationship with Ayers by noting that he was only a child when Ayers was planting bombs at the Pentagon and the U.S. Capitol. But Ayers has never apologized for his crimes, he has reveled in them, expressing regret only for the fact that he didn't do more.

"While Barack Obama once downplayed his relationship with Ayers, today his campaign took that deceit one step further. Barack Obama now denies he was even aware of his friend's violent past when, in 1995, Ayers hosted a party launching Obama's political career. Given Ayers' celebrity status among the left, it's difficult to believe. The question remains: what did Obama know, and when did he know it? When did Obama learn the truth about his friend? Barack Obama helped Ayers promote his book in 1997, served on charitable boards with him through 2002, and regularly exchanged emails and phone calls with him through 2005. At what point did Barack Obama discover that his friend was an unrepentant terrorist? And if he is so repulsed by the acts of terror committed by William Ayers, why did the relationship continue? Any honest accounting by Barack Obama will necessarily cast further doubt on his judgment and his fitness to serve as commander in chief.

"Barack Obama may have been a child when William Ayers was plotting attacks against U.S. targets -- but I was one of those targets. Barack Obama's friend tried to kill my family."


In February 1970 John Murtagh's father was a New York State Supreme Court justice presiding over the trial of the so-called "Panther 21," members of the Black Panther Party indicted in a plot to bomb New York landmarks and department stores. Early on the morning of February 21, three gasoline-filled firebombs exploded at their home on the northern tip of Manhattan, two at the front door and the third tucked neatly under the gas tank of the family car. The same night, bombs were thrown at a police car in Manhattan and two military recruiting stations in Brooklyn. A few weeks after the attack, the New York contingent of the Weathermen blew themselves up making more bombs in a Greenwich Village townhouse. In late November that year, a letter to the Associated Press signed by Bernardine Dohrn, Ayers's wife, promised more bombings.

Read John Murtagh's Account of the Weather Underground's Attack

(Click on bold headline for complete story)

Wednesday, October 8, 2008

Barry's Got Ayers in His Tyres

Barry's alliance with socialist William Ayers is not as wholesome as B. Hussein's campaign cares to admit. (Click on bold headline for complete story)

Tuesday, October 7, 2008

Wake Up, America

Wake Up, America

By INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY | Posted Monday, October 06, 2008 4:20 PM PT

A nation that doesn't know history is destined to repeat its serious mistakes. People swayed by carefully crafted political propaganda relentlessly repeated and effectively delivered can easily lose their freedom and way of life.



How many times have you been told by soaring, almost hypnotic oratory that "the direct causes of our financial crisis and subprime real estate loan mess were the greedy banks, big corporations and the failed economic policies of George Bush"?

It's common to blame the one in power. This time, however, it's 100% wrong.

Every American, young or old, must be told who was really behind the subprime loan disaster that threw our economy off track and injured the good people who lost their homes — like those now boarded up in Cleveland and other major cities — plus the millions of other citizens hurt by yet another failed Big Government-run program gone awry.

In 1977, Jimmy Carter and a Democrat Congress created the Community Reinvestment Act mandating that banks make more housing loans to lower-income and inner-city borrowers. It was for a well-intended social cause and even appeared to work in the 1980s.


View larger image
But in 1995, President Clinton imposed even tougher regulations that forced banks to make dramatically more subprime loans to previously unqualified people with lower credit scores in higher-risk areas.

Government regulators rated banks by how well they performed in meeting these strict new CRA obligations. Failure to comply meant stiff penalties and limits on mergers, acquisitions and expansion.

Big Government forced the lowering of long-proven safe-lending standards. Most of the more than $1 trillion of new subprime CRA loans had adjustable rates. Many required no documentation of the borrower's income and little or no down payment.

For the first time, the Clinton regulatory rules allowed and encouraged lenders to bundle the new, riskier subprime loans with prime loans and sell these packages to other institutions. The first one hit the market in 1997. That tragic blunder let loan originators make their profits faster and eliminate any future risk for those lower-quality loans. It let them turn around and make even more CRA-type loans and sell them off in packages again, with little future risk.

It was a government-sponsored pyramid scheme, with Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac providing the implied government backing by buying ever larger amounts of these risky subprimes.

Freddie and Fannie also became heavy donors to top members of Congress. These included Sen. Chris Dodd, a young Sen. Barack Obama and Rep. Barney Frank, who aggressively defended the highly leveraged, extremely risky lending against any reforms.

Ironically, the Bush administration repeatedly went to Congress in 2004, 2005 and 2006 to obtain stronger oversight and some limits on Freddie and Fannie's reckless subprime lending. And each time, it was voted down by Democrats in Congress, led by Frank, now chairman of the Financial Services Committee.

Bottom line: This whole mess was another Big Government program created, designed and run by Democrats. It started with great intentions but resulted in typically awful unintended consequences that materially hurt the very people they were supposed to help.

Worse, this incompetence put our financial system in jeopardy. It's reminiscent of LBJ's two lost wars — the War in Vietnam and the War on Poverty.

Many government housing projects, though well-intended as part of LBJ's War on Poverty, later deteriorated into slums that became recruiting grounds to get very young new gang members.

That's how we got into this financial mess — and why the $700 billion rescue package was passed. But what about the future? What serious threats does America face in the next five years? The list isn't comforting:

• Iran's Ahmadinejad and his mullah bosses, the leading terrorist country in the world that will have nukes, and want to wipe out Israel and have a world with no USA.

• Al-Qaida and other radical Islamic global terrorists that want to strike us again.

• Putin's resurgent Russia, which desires to take back Georgia and Ukraine, plus give nuclear capabilities to Venezuela and re-arm Cuba and Nicaragua.

• Communist China's increasing military capabilities.

• Foolish decisions that would result in weakening our ability to defend ourselves.

Let's study the "History Repeats Itself" chart of our Nasdaq index from 1992 to October 2008 and how it has remarkably copied in parallel the Dow Jones industrials, pricewise, from the early 1920s up to the beginning of 1938. One reason for this is that while technology changes over time, human nature doesn't.

Hope and fear, good and bad, and other basic drives are always with us. The market is human psychology on display, and history continually repeats itself.

If our Nasdaq market continues to replicate the 1938 to 1942 market, as it did the prior 16 years, what may be in store for us? What happened in 1938 and 1939 and the early 1930s leading up to '38? What vital lesson does knowing history tell us?

To begin with, Germany's Nazi party in 1928 won only 810,000 votes nationally, elected only 12 to the Reichstag and was considered sort of a joke. But the 1929 crash started the Depression, with unemployment soaring and poverty hitting hard, even among the formerly prosperous middle class.

In 1930, the bad economy helped the Nazi party get 6.5 million votes nationally and put 107 deputies in the Reichstag, becoming the second-largest party. By 1933, again due to a poor economy, Hitler became Germany's chancellor. His storm troopers, Hitler Youth and Goebbels' propaganda departments grew rapidly.

In 1935, Hitler announced a draft to build the national army to 500,000. An air force was already in place in violation of the Versailles Treaty. France and England protested but did nothing.

Hitler said he wanted peace and people believed him. But in 1936 he marched into the Rhineland. France did nothing; Hitler said he had no further territorial demands in Europe.

In 1937, he intimidated Austria and took it over. Only Britain's Neville Chamberlain and France protested. Jewish people were sent to concentration camps or extermination centers. Now we're up to the equivalent of 1938 on our Nasdaq chart — where we are today.

Hitler stirs up demonstrations in Czechoslovakia's Sudetenland, claiming ethnic Germans are being persecuted. Britain's Neville Chamberlain visits Hitler in September 1938. Hitler wants Britain and France to let Germany take the part of Czechoslovakia with a German population.

Chamberlain gives in to Hitler's demands; the Munich Agreement gives Hitler Czechoslovakia's Sudetenland. Chamberlain returns to London in triumph with a letter from Hitler declaring he thereafter would continue to work for peace.

Crowds cheered when Chamberlain said, "I believe it is peace for our time."

In Parliament, one man rose to state his opposition: "We have sustained a total, unmitigated defeat." But Winston Churchill was shouted down.

In 1939, Hitler gobbled the rest of Czechoslovakia. Czechs were killed or enslaved. In September 1939, 1.5 million German troops defeated 30 Polish divisions in 18 days, as Russia invaded the rest of Poland from the east. World War II had begun — and Germany rapidly took one country after another until finally Chamberlain was replaced by Churchill in early 1940.

Why dwell on all this history? Well, history tells us that showing weakness or appeasement by negotiating with tyrants is both gullible and dangerous.

When a young JFK after the Bay of Pigs failure met with Khrushchev, the Soviets immediately moved to build the Berlin Wall. It stayed in place for 28 years. Next, the Soviets installed nuclear missiles in Cuba, threatening to turn the Cold War into WWIII.

When a one-term governor from Plains, Ga., became president, he visited our strongest military ally in the Mideast and stopped selling our fighter aircraft to them. And why? Because Jimmy Carter didn't like the Shah of Iran's treatment of Soviet spies who had been undermining Iran.

Carter preferred the exiled Ayatollah Khomeini as a leader because he was religious. So we stood by as the Shah, an ally, was overthrown. Today, Iran is the world's biggest sponsor of terror and is on track to have nukes in five years — all thanks to Carter's naivete.

We'll have to have an older, wiser, far more experienced president to deal with this dangerous threat. We can't have another Carter or another Chamberlain. Incidentally, after Carter lost Iran in what amounted to total incompetence, he visited Leonid Brezhnev.

Brezhnev afterward promptly invaded Afghanistan and Carter said, "I can't believe he lied to me." While Carter was in office, the Soviets took over a number of countries, including Afghanistan, Angola, Cambodia, Grenada, Mozambique, Ethiopia, South Yemen and Nicaragua.

The more Carter talked, the worse it got for the U.S.

Of our three youngest presidents since WWII, Kennedy, Carter and Clinton, Bill Clinton was 46 when sworn in. He was a great salesman and a smart, popular politician.

He had never been in the military and didn't know much about it and was not successful in dealing with al-Qaida, who tested him only one month into office in February 1993, when terrorists trained in Afghanistan bombed the World Trade Center in New York.

That October, al-Qaida hurt us in Somalia when they shot down our Black Hawk helicopters; 73 Americans wounded, 18 killed.

Next, a joint Saudi-U.S. facility was bombed, then our Khobar Towers housing complex. July 1996, al-Qaida defectors tell us their direction; 1998, bin Laden declares "war on America"; 1998, they blew up our embassies in Nairobi, Kenya, and Dar es Salaam; 200 killed, 5,000 injured.

In answer, we fired a couple of missiles into the vacant desert and an aspirin factory. October 2000, the USS Cole was bombed.

The 9/11 report showed that the Clinton administration had up to 10 chances to get bin Laden when they knew where he was, but failed to act.

In 12 different surveys by historians, the most recent in 2005 (and all available on the Internet), America's presidents are ranked: Of the 43 presidents, Ronald Reagan ranked 6th; Harry Truman 7th; Dwight Eisenhower 7th; John Kennedy, 15th; Bill Clinton 22nd; Jimmy Carter, 34th.

Reagan was weeks from being 70 when inaugurated, Truman was 60, and Eisenhower 62; Kennedy was only 43, Clinton 46 and Carter 52. History shows that our very best, most productive, successful presidents were older.

Why? They had the most experience, maturity and sound judgment in defending America.

Harry Truman said our most handsome presidents that to the public looked presidential were Warren Harding and Franklin Pierce.

How did they do? Harding in the 2005 survey ranked 39th, while Pierce ranked 38th. Could they have been a little less tested?

So who do you think history tells us may be the most experienced person we can trust to be commander-in-chief and deal with Iranian terrorists with nukes; Putin's resurgent Russia that backs Iran and wants to give nuclear capability to Venezuela, re-arm Cuba and Nicaragua; an al-Qaida that wants to strike America again; and, let's not forget, up-and-coming China?

(Click on bold headline for complete story)

Saturday, October 4, 2008

A Flawed But Necessary Rescue

Like the ever widening federal tax code, the rescue bill swelled from three pages and $700 billion in its first incarnation to more than $800 billion and 451 pages in just a matter of days. Days. As if these additional 450 pages just appeared without any aforethought?

The IBD (Investor's Business Daily) article goes on to add: The disgraceful way this legislation weaved its way through the process is a measure of how corrupt U.S. lawmakers have become. This Congress has earned its all-time low approval rating.

The people of the United States have lost the control of their own government. (Click on bold headline for complete story)

Do Facts Matter?

Thomas Sowell weighs in on the lastest media effort to provide cover and diversion for the Frank and Dodd perps regarding Fannie Mae.
(Click on bold headline for complete story)

Thursday, October 2, 2008

Palin and the Experience Question

Senators? Experienced? At what? What have Senators ever run? (Click on bold headline for complete story)

Get Out The Yard Signs

Vinyl sheeting ... weatherproof and very strong. Don't forget to post 'em everywhere. Let your neighbors know where you stand.

Wednesday, October 1, 2008

Congress Needs An Ethics Bailout

Congress in America. Great work if you can get it. Great perks, absolutely no accountability, and the rules and laws are marginally applicable to them at best. We're losing what little control we ever had on our government. They answer to no one.
(Click on bold headline for complete story)

Pelosi paid husband with PAC funds $99,000 for rent, utilities, accounting fees

Once again, that gravy trains floweth for those on Capitol Hill. It's great work if you can get it. (Click on bold headline for complete story)