Tuesday, September 30, 2008
The background: Braceletgate is the instance where, in last Friday's presidential debate, John McCain told the moving story about the bracelet he wears, representing a U.S. Soldier who died in Iraq. Barack Hussein Obama, Junior eagerly jumped into the conversation screaming, "I've got a bracelet too." Only Obama stammered, stumbled and fumbled over the name of the U.S. Soldier on his bracelet. It was a clear attempt by Obama in pandering to supporters and families of The Military.
Now comes evidence that the family of the U.S. Soldier whose name is on Obama's bracelet have asked him repeatedly not to wear the bracelet and not to exploit their son's death for his political purposes. Does Obama respect the wishes of the family? Oh, HELL NO!
Brian Jopek, the father of Ryan Jopek, the young soldier who tragically lost his life to a roadside bomb in 2006, recently said on a Wisconsin Public Radio show that his family had asked Barack Obama to stop wearing the bracelet with his son's name on it. Yet Obama continues to do so despite the wishes of the family.
Radio host Glenn Moberg of the show "Route 51" asked Mr. Jopek, a man who believes in the efforts in Iraq and is not in favor of Obama's positions on the war, what he and his ex-wife think of Obama continually using their son's name on the campaign trail.
Jopek began by saying that his ex-wife was taken aback, even upset, that Obama has made the death of her son a campaign issue. Jopek says his wife gave Obama the bracelet because "she just wanted Mr. Obama to know Ryan's name." Jopek went on to say that "she wasn't looking to turn it into a big media event" and "just wanted it to be something between Barack Obama and herself."
[Mrs. Jopek] wanted Obama to stop wearing the reminder of her son's sacrifice that he keeps turning into a campaign soundbyte.
[Mrs. Jopek] has repeated that she asked Obama not to mention her son on the campaign trail and this AP report confirms that.
Something tells me that if John McCain was doing what Obama is doing, the MSM - and especially Liberal Talk Radio - would be all over this story. Not surprisingly, they are not.
Bailout, To Rescue To Buy-In
You gotta love Liberals like Speakeress of The House Nanny Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (heh, "leader"). No one - and no political party - is better at using euphemisms and metaphors as are The Dems. And Speakeress Pelosi.
In the course of a little over a week, she has called the Wall Street-Subprime Fiasco that she and her fellow Democrats are SOLELY RESPONSIBLE FOR a bailout, a "rescue" and on Sunday and Monday she was calling it a "buy-in."
Democrats are famous for putting more and more lipstick on a pig. Unfortunately, the pig is still a pig, no matter how much lipstick it is painted with.
As I wrote on Monday, it is the Republicans who are looking out for the best interests of average, Middle Class Americans. The Dems, as they always do, want to saddle the Middle Class with bailing out - uh, excuse me - "buying-in" to billions of dollars of bad debt.
Nowhere is this more evident than in Monday's vote-down of the bill. From Forbes:
In a suspenseful vote of 205-228, the House of Representatives squashed a bill granting the Treasury $700 billion to shore up the U.S. financial system. Clearing the House was seen as the bill's biggest hurdle, and now the proposed bailout is thrown into disarray.
The bill had majority support from House Democrats, at around 140-95. It was killed by staunch opposition from House Republicans, 65-133. The voting was left open for several minutes, while congressional leaders tried to get members to change nay votes, and the tallies shifted slightly but not enough to pass.
September 19, 2008, Democrat Presidential Candidate Barack Hussein Obama, Junior says he backs the $700 Billion bailout.
September 25, 2008, Obama voices support for the bailout.
September 29, 2008, Obama still supports the bailout. This is funny. Obama and President George W. Bush both backing the bailout. This must mean - as Liberals so often say - that Obama is just as much a Fascist as is Bush.
On September 24, Bloomberg reported that a survey showed most Americans do not favor a bailout:
By a margin of 55 percent to 31 percent, Americans say it's not the government's responsibility to bail out private companies with taxpayer dollars, even if their collapse could damage the economy, according to the latest Bloomberg/Los Angeles Times poll.
By a margin of almost two-to-one the American public thinks the government is doing the right thing in investing billions of dollars to try to keep financial institutions and markets secure. Reacting to initial reports of the federal bailout plan over the weekend, 57% said the government was doing the right thing, while 30% said it was doing the wrong thing. At the same time, only 19% of the public believes that the government is currently doing an excellent or good job in handling the financial problems on Wall Street.
When you stop to think about it, it's amazing that it takes no more than a mere $700 Billion Dollar bailout...uh, buy-in....proposed by Bush with Pelosi and Harry Reid agreeing with the president that they love to hate on this issue.
Someone once said, "let the forest burn. The forest that regrows and replaces it will be stronger, better and more healthy." I agree. Yes, it will be hot and the burning embers will last a while. But growth doesn't happen overnight.
In the meantime, we still have the Pig with Lipstick, also known as The Wall Street Fiasco, created by Democrats such as Jimmy Carter, Bill Clinton, Cluck Schumer, Barney Frank, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, Pelosi, Reid, Obama and so many other Democrats through the decades. These are the people who need to be held responsible and accountable. They fiddled while the forest burned.
This mess is entirely the fault of the Democrats. From Jimmy Carter's Community Reinvestment Act, to Bill Clinton's repeal of the Glass-Steagall Act. From Barney Frank and Cluck Schumer ignoring years and years of warnings from President Bush, former Treasury Secretary John Snow and former Fed Chairman Alan Greenspan. The Dems ignored all the warnings, every single one of them.
The Dems could have passed the bailout on Monday, all on their own, without any help from the Republicans. Remember this...for all that is good...please, please remember this. The only reason they didn't pass it on their own is because they did not want to be held accountable or responsible. Typical, typical Liberal Mindset.
Louis Rukeyser, Where Are You?
I can only imagine that the late Financial Guru Louis Rukeyser is looking down from Heaven, shaking his head and thinking, "what in all that is holy has happened since I left?"
Larry Kudlow, Jim Cramer and others - they're all good at what they do. But I'm sorry to say that no one - nobody - comes close to the knowledge and savvy that Mr. Rukeyser possessed. We sure could have used Mr. Rukeyser's insight and intelligence these days.
Rapist Killed In Home Invasion
INDIANAPOLIS (WISH) - An intruder is dead after breaking into a northwest side home early Sunday morning.
His intended victim was a 17-year-old girl. Investigators say the girl's dad fought off 52-year-old David Meyers who turned out to be a registered sex offender. When police found Meyers he was in a choke hold inside a home on West 79th Street.
"He did not accomplish what his objective was," said Sgt. Matt Mount of the Indianapolis Metro Police Department.
Paramedics pronounced Meyers dead inside the house early Sunday morning.
"He had served a 10 year of a 20 year sentence for criminal confinement and sexual deviate conduct," said Sgt. Mount.
Before Meyers died he allegedly broke into the home. What police say he had on him is puzzling. According to police, the intruder had gained access into the house through a window next to the intended victim's bedroom. Police also say he wasn't wearing clothing except for a mask and latex gloves.
"He had in his possession a knife, some rope, some condoms," said Sgt. Mount.
Investigators say Meyers even made it to his intended victim's bedroom.
"She awoke, saw this naked man in the bedroom with the mask on. She started screaming," said Sgt. Mount.
Police say the 17-year-old girl's father heard her screams and ran to her help.
"His wife called 911 and that's when the police arrived and found him on the floor with his arm around the neck of Mr. Meyers struggling, holding him down," said Sgt. Mount.
Investigators say when the homeowner removed Meyers' mask, he recognized him.
"He was the nephew of the homeowner they were renting the home from. So he was familiar with the floor plan of the house," said Sgt. Mount.
Police started to put handcuffs on Meyers, but they realized he was not breathing.
"Don't know whether it was a heart attack or asphyxiation from the choke hold that was put on him," explained Sgt. Mount. "What could have been a very tragic situation for a 17-year-old girl has turned into the death of the assailant."
Police are calling Meyers' death a homicide, but say most likely no charges will be filed.
Meyers was wanted in Boone County for failure to register as a sex offender. Investigators say he was not registered in Marion County. The prosecutor will review the case Monday.
...this is what is called "Instant Karma"! Good job Dad! You protected your daughter, just like all good parents should protect their children from predators! Can we buy a steak from Ruth's Chris?
Nelson says, HA HA.
This man deserves to be honored at the sate capitol with a state event hosted in his honor- this is truly great news.
A filthy attacker killed in the act, never to victimize again, the daughter safe, and.... NO COST to taxpayers- this man should be nominated for president instead of OBAMA/MCCAIN nightmare we are living through. This guy is my HERO!
Dead criminals seldom become repeat offenders.
Monday, September 29, 2008
Obama For Bailout Of Wall Street Fat Cats
Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama on Sunday gave his tentative support to a $700 billion Wall Street bailout proposal that has been brokered by the Bush administration and the U.S. Congress.
Labels: Osama Obama
Tired Of Your Kids?
Abandon Them In Nebraska!
Since July, when Nebraska lawmakers passed a unique “safe-haven” law allowing parents to abandon children as old as 18, at least 16 children, some of them teenagers have been abandoned, making officials to consider revising the law.
“If we see another family being left off, then we’re going to have to do something immediately,” state Sen. Arnie Stuthman, who introduced legislation that was the basis for the law, said.
For now the “safe-haven” law permits parents to hand over their children to state-certified medical centers. Even though it aimed at protecting infants, the legal measure’s language was amended to contain the word “child,” which was left undefined. Therefore, many interpreted the law as referring to all minors, thus including all children under the age of 19.
The most troubling case of parental abandonment so far occurred Wednesday when Gary Staton left five boys and four girls aged 1 to 17 at Creighton University Medical Center’s emergency room. He has a 10th child as well, a daughter who is 18. According to his sayings, his wife died early last year after delivering their youngest child and he could not handle bringing his children up by himself.
Before Wednesday's drop-off, at least four children between the ages of 11 and 15 had been abandoned by parents since the law took effect.
In these conditions, Sen. Stuthman said lawmakers need to make clear the maximum age for children who can be handled over the state before January. However, it’s not clear whether Gov. Dave Heineman will call a special session to modify the law although he has said it should be changed.
Arnie Stuthman, an alleged "Non Partisan" who votes like a Liberal
So, Arnie introduces the legislation to abandon children and the bill passes. Then it comes back to haunt him and what is his reaction? "We have to do something immediately." Absolutely no foresight on his part at all when he introduced the legislation.
I know what you're thinking because I was thinking the same thing. Arnie MUST BE A DEMOCRAT. Well, his actual party affiliation is "Non-Partisan." I think that's a nice way to vote like a Liberal but claim that you're not.
Arnie sure votes like a Liberal. Let's examine some of his record.
In 2006, based on lifetime voting records on gun issues and the results of a questionnaire sent to all state legislative candidates, the National Rifle Association Political Victory Fund assigned Senator Stuthman a grade of D. Sounds pretty Liberal to me.
Arnie also voted to override a veto of increasing the Nebraska state tax on gasoline. The override was successful, thus increasing the tax on gasoline. Sounds pretty Liberal to me.
Arnie also voted YES for Nebraska's statewide ban on cigarette smoking. Sounds pretty Liberal to me.
Arnie voted YES to eliminate the opt-out provision of the statewide smoking ban. Sounds pretty Liberal to me.
Regarding Nebraska's handgun Conceal/Carry bill, Arnie...guess what...decided not to vote on the issue. Awwwwwwww, Arnie was afraid that if he voted to approve conceal/carry it might anger his Liberal base. He also knew that if he voted against it, it might anger the many hunters, sportsmen/women and Second Amendment supporters in Nebraska. So he did the safe thing and abstained. Sounds pretty Liberal to me.
Arnie voted YES to pass a bill that allows children of
I could list more examples of Arnie voting in a most Liberal fashion, but you can hit the links above and find out as much, or more than I did.
By the way, if your children are grating on you, just abandon them in Nebraska. You have Arnie to thank for that.
Oh, Those Good, Olde Fashioned
Sir Winston Churchill Said...
Sir Winston Churchill, statesman, Soldier, author.
His quotes are as relevant today - (if not more relevant) - than they were when he originally said them:
"A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject." - Wow, if that doesn't perfectly describe Obama Cultists and Liberals who never allow facts to interfere with their beliefs.
"An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last." - A major tenet of Liberalism.
"However beautiful the strategy, you should occasionally look at the results." - Results? What are those, ask Liberals. Well, like the disastrous results of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac - take a look at the post below this one and you'll get the idea.
"One ought never to turn one's back on a threatened danger and try to run away from it. If you do that, you will double the danger. But if you meet it promptly and without flinching, you will reduce the danger by half." - This is such a significant quote, considering all we hear from Liberals is that we should "run away" from terrorists and by doing so, they will leave us alone. What foolish mentality on behalf of the Liberal Pacifists, Appeasers and all the "war is always wrong" naysayers. I wonder if these people realize that if it wasn't for a certain war, we'd all be speaking German?
I'm also quite fond of this quote that has made its way all around the web. I don't know from whom or where it originated, but I agree with it completely: "If you can't stand behind our Troops, why don't you stand in front of them?"
Why The Bailout Rush?
Dems Are Afraid Of Blame!
The Dems are scrambling to fix this because they know they are to blame for this mess.
And by the way, in case you haven't noticed - especially all you Obama Cultists and dyed in the wool Liberals - IT'S THE REPUBLICANS WHO ARE LOOKING OUT FOR THE BEST INTERESTS OF THE CONSUMER, AVERAGE AMERICANS AND MAIN STREET in this bailout legislation.
IT'S THE DEMOCRATS WHO WANT TO BAIL OUT WALL STREET.
It is President George W. Bush who also wants to rush this legislation through, and if you've been paying attention to this blog and you are objective, you will know that I have been as critical of Bush on many issues as I have been of Liberals.
All of sudden the Democrats - Pelosi and Reid and others - are on the side of Bush in the bailout. IT'S THE REPUBLICANS WHO ARE SAYING, "WHOA...LET'S PULL BACK AND TAKE A SECOND AND THIRD LOOK AT THIS."
Isn't it paradoxically ironic that the Dems are on the side of the President they love to hate on this bailout?
The Bush Administration, in April of 2001 warned congress of a potential financial crisis. In their 2002 budget requests they declared the size of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac "A potential problem... and can cause strong repercussions in the financial markets."
In 2003, the White House upgraded the warning on real estate mortgage loans. Their experts said that the way loans were being handled could spread beyond the housing sector. In fall of 2003 the Bush Administration was pushing congress hard to create a new federal agency that would monitor and supervise Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac; both are Government Sponsored Enterprises (GSE).
John Snow, Treasury Secretary at the time called for regulations and supervision of GSEs. He said in September 2003 "We need a strong world-class regulatory agency to oversee the prudential operations of the GSEs and the safety and the soundness of their financial activities."
Snow was pushed back from this position, by then ranking member, but the eventual Chairman of the Senate Banking Committee, Barney Frank (D) from Massachusetts.
Frank denied there was any problem and was quoted as saying, "Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are not in crisis."
In fact, Barney Frank was encouraging the government to do more to get low income families into homes.
"The more people, in my judgment, exaggerate the threat of safety and soundness, the more people conjure up the potential for serious financial losses.... [a problem] I do not see. We see entities that are fundamentally sound financially and would stand some of the disastrous scenarios. But, even if there were a problem the government wont bails them out. The more pressure we see there then there is less, I think, we see in terms of affordable housing," Barney Frank said in September of 2003.
The creation of a regulatory agency to oversee GSEs was ultimately blocked.
In February of 2005, Alan Greenspan spoke about the dangers of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac after Fannie leaders admitted to accounting screw-ups.
Greenspan said, "Enabling these institutions to increase in size, and they will, once the crisis in their judgment passes. We are placing the total financial system of [in] the future at a substantial risk."
Later that year Greenspan warned, "If we fail to place GSE regulation, we increase the possibility of insolvency and crisis."
Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac had some strong defenders. One of them was democrat New York Senator Charles Schumer.
In April 2005 Schumer said, "I think Fannie and Freddie have done an incredibly good job, and are an intrinsic part of making America the best housed people in the world. If you look over the last 20 or whatever years, they've done a very, very good job."
Senator John McCain co-sponsored legislation pushing for regulation of GSEs like Freddie and Fannie.
In a speech on the senate floor, McCain said, "For years I have been concerned about the regulatory structure that governs Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.... and the sheer magnitude of these companies and the role they play in the housing market... the GSEs need to be reformed without delay."
In 2006, Barney Frank took over the chairmanship of the Senate Banking Committee and on his first day declared that he was going to work on making housing more affordable for low-income owners and that loans would be easier to get by relaxing loan regulations.
That bill (THE FEDERAL HOUSING ENTERPRISE REGULATORY REFORM ACT) made it out of the senate banking committee with a party line vote. All the democrats voted against it. By then there had been an election and democrats had won back control of the Senate.
Republicans, knowing they did not have the numbers to get the bill passed, did not even bring it up for a vote that 2006 session.
Well, then try this account of the Fannie-Freddie Fiasco from Bloomberg:
...in 2005 Alan Greenspan told Congress how urgent it was for it to act in the clearest possible terms: If Fannie and Freddie ``continue to grow, continue to have the low capital that they have, continue to engage in the dynamic hedging of their portfolios, which they need to do for interest rate risk aversion, they potentially create ever-growing potential systemic risk down the road,'' he said. ``We are placing the total financial system of the future at a substantial risk.''
What happened next was extraordinary. For the first time in history, a serious Fannie and Freddie reform bill was passed by the Senate Banking Committee. The bill gave a regulator power to crack down, and would have required the companies to eliminate their investments in risky assets.
If that bill had become law, then the world today would be different. In 2005, 2006 and 2007, a blizzard of terrible mortgage paper fluttered out of the Fannie and Freddie clouds, burying many of our oldest and most venerable institutions. Without their checkbooks keeping the market liquid and buying up excess supply, the market would likely have not existed.
But the bill didn't become law, for a simple reason: Democrats opposed it on a party-line vote in the committee, signaling that this would be a partisan issue. Republicans, tied in knots by the tight Democratic opposition, couldn't even get the Senate to vote on the matter.
There has been a lot of talk about who is to blame for this crisis. A look back at the story of 2005 makes the answer pretty clear.
Oh, and there is one little footnote to the story that's worth keeping in mind while Democrats point fingers between now and Nov. 4: Senator John McCain was one of the three cosponsors of S.190, the bill that would have averted this mess.
Then again, why should Liberals and Obama Cultists care about facts when they make up their own "truths"? It's much easier for them to keep their heads firmly ensconced deep in the recesses of their colons, isn't it Libs? Isn't it Obama Cultists?
Sunday, September 28, 2008
Obama, I've Got A Bracelet Too!
John McCain mentioned how he wears a bracelet in memory of fallen U.S. Soldier Matthew Stanley and how Stanley's mother asked McCain not only to wear the bracelet in memory of her son, but to also ensure that the effort and work of U.S. Soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan is not reduced or tempered in favor of political certitude and returning home in defeat.
The moment McCain completed his statement Obama - like a child, jealous of his sibling, shouting to his parents, "look at me, I can do a somersault too" - piped up, "I've got a bracelet too." Obama then stumbled, fumbled, stammered and stuttered for several seconds - unable to articulate the name of the Soldier on his bracelet. He didn't even know whose name was on his bracelet until he read the name from it. Shameful, simply shameful, using a Military Bracelet for his own political expediency. McCain, on the other hand, knew exactly whose name is on his bracelet.
Here's the video from the debate:
Presidential Debate Number One Analysis
Moderator and longtime PBS trough-feeder Jim Lehrer's Liberalism was on full display with his continued interrupting of McCain while he allowed Obama to drone on and on and on. And if you think his performance was biased, wait until the Vice Presidential debate moderated by super-duper-uber Liberal Gwen
* Obama wore his U.S. Flag Lapel pin just as I predicted. Yep, he sure does a good job impersonating that he's a Patriot and an American.
* When did Obama pick up the sibilant "s"? I noticed this a few months ago.
* Obama said al-Qaida is "stronger than ever before." No, al-Qaida is not. Every intelligence report from the U.S. and our Allies proves Obama's statement is false. al-Qaida itself admits it is weakened and nowhere near the force it used to be.
* Obama's behavior was worse than an unruly spoiled school child with his continual interrupting of McCain and Lehrer. Obama was disrespectful, arrogant, haughty and bigheaded. This is the behavior that many foreigners label The Ugly American. Is this how Obama, as president, will conduct himself with foreign leaders, by interrupting them, by condescending to them, by being impatient with them? Obama likes the sound of his own voice and would prefer not to hear the voices of others.
* Obama said that the infrastructure of China is better than the infrastructure of the United States. The roads, bridges and highways, buildings, sewer and water systems, electric grid, rail and telecommunications systems in China are better than that of the U.S.? Obama's statement is laughable and patently false.
* Obama's statement of, "broadband for everybody," is absurd and preposterous.
* Obama stammered, stumbled and fumbled over the U.S. Soldier's name on the bracelet that he wears. It was obvious he isn't even vaguely familiar with Soldier. McCain didn't even have to look at his bracelet, McCain knows the name of the Solider on his bracelet.
* Obama plagiarized Hillary Clinton's Democrat Convention line of "a little extra money leftover at the end of each month." He mentioned something to the effect of parents having, "a little extra money at the end of the month for a computer for their kids or for the gas tank." This is all the Democrats want average Americans to have, "a little extra money." Not a lot, mind you, just "a little." It's obvious the Dems have little desire to enact any meaningful legislation to reduce the Middle Class tax burden.
* Obama repeated his promise that he will not be able to keep of a "tax cut for 95% of Americans." This is financially and mathematically impossible considering his plans of expanding entitlement programs and growing the size of government. Bill Clinton made a similar campaign promise that he could not keep. May I remind everyone of his 1995 statement: "People in this room are still mad at me at that budget because you think I raised your taxes too much. Well, it might surprise you to know I think I raised them too much, too."
* Obama couldn't name one program or issue where he would implement budget cuts or reductions. Not one thing. Obama is the textbook definition of a Liberal Tax and Spender.
* Obama will increase corporate taxes. What will corporations do? They will relocate their businesses to countries with lower tax rates. Obama said he will give incentives to corporations that keep their business located in the U.S. Huh - I guess that means he's going to give tax breaks (i.e. "incentives") to businesses, something for which Obama Cultists vilify Republicans. Never underestimate the amazing ability of Liberals to rationalize.
* At one point, Obama referred to John McCain as, "Tom." Did Obama hit the crack pipe prior to the debate? Could be.
* Obama continued pimping the decision to go to war in Iraq was a bad one. The cow is out of the barn on this. We can't travel back in time - yet - and undo this decision. Obama neglects holding responsible and accountable all his fellow Democrats who voted to authorize the War in Iraq. The question becomes where do we go from here, and McCain has the right approach on this and Obama doesn't. It's that simple.
* Obama blamed current financial problems on the last eight years of Bush policy. While this is a popular myth that sells, it is simply tripe. The current financial problems are tied to Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton's presidencies of the Community Reinvestment Act, a lack of oversight on lending institutions and the Democrats pressuring banks and mortgage lenders to provide loans to people who were not financially qualified to repay them. Bush and McCain fought for reform but the Democrats blocked it every chance they could.
* Obama failed in articulating his plans of deploying U.S. Troops from Iraq. McCain hit it out of the ballpark.
* Obama wants more troops in Afghanistan. Using Liberal Logic (not that there is such a thing), this means that Obama is a warmonger, that he loves bloodshed and destruction. Remember, it's the Liberals who say, "war is always wrong," yet his supporters will not hold him to the same standard that they do a Republican who would advocate more Troops being sent to Afghanistan. Never underestimate the ability of Liberals to remain in a deep state of denial.
* Obama mentioned some strange country that he named and pronounced as, "Pock-ee-stan." Where is this "Pock-ee-stan"? Maybe an Obama Cultist can tell me where this esoteric country exists on a map. Heh, and the Libs made fun of George W. Bush for some of his mispronunciations. Once again, where is this "Pock-ee-stan"?
* Obama acts and speaks as if he's running against George W. Bush. He's not. Maybe his campaign puppet masters should inform him of this.
* Obama repeated his willingness to invade a sovereign country, Pakistan. This is the same criticism leveled at Bush by the Lefties and especially from the Obama Cultists with regard to Iraq. Another amazing display of double-standards and hypocrisy from The Left. Invading a sovereign country under Obama is okay, but under a Republican it's bad.
* Obama had to be embarrassed into traveling to Afghanistan and Iraq to meet with U.S. Troops and General David Petraeus. Obama still would not have gone there had he not been shamed into going there.
* Obama clearly does not know the difference between a tactic and a strategy. This came across loud and clear.
* Obama is terrorist-friendly and anti-Israel. His VP running mate Joe Biden is the one who said that Israel better get used to a "nuclearized Iran." I wish McCain had brought up Biden's foolish statement. It's clear neither Obama or Biden care about one of our staunch allies in the Middle East, Israel.
* Obama knows he's in deep doo-doo with his statements of willing to meet, without preconditions, with terrorists and despots. There's nothing he can do to unspin this, no matter how desperately he tries. And he tried Friday night, oh how he tried.
* Obama brought up "The Suitcase Nuke Scenario." Thank you Dems, there you go again, playing The Fear Card, an allegation that The Left never fails in accusing the Republicans of doing.
* Obama referred to McCain as, "John" while McCain referred to Obama as "Senator Obama." Tell me, which candidate possesses class and respect?
* Obama couldn't articulate one thing - not one thing - in the budget that he would cut. Obama, up until a few months ago, was a big proponent of earmarks and pork spending. He suddenly became anti-earmark and anti-pork after he won the Democrat nomination and became the official Dem candidate. My, what convenient timing on his part.
* Obama's exchange on what Henry Kissinger did or didn't say was a feeble and failed attempt of amateur desperation and one-upmanship. Obama failed miserably.
* Obama defended Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae when it was both McCain and Bush who proposed a series of legislation to reign in and reform Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae. It was the Democrats and Obama who blocked the reform every chance Republicans tried to do something about it.
* McCain took a bit to get up to speed, which isn't unusual for anyone in a debate. But he handled himself well. He was articulate and, most importantly, he came across as a statesman and as genuine.
* McCain's answers were thoughtful, complete and based on facts.
* McCain described many instances where he worked in a non-partisan fashion to accomplish legislative action that needed to be done. Obama couldn't list one example of where he did the same.
* McCain's grasp on foreign policy is abundantly obvious. He has a solid history in being right about the Russia-Georgia conflict, the success of the Military "surge", on North Korea, China, Pakistan and Afghanistan. Obama is virtually clueless on foreign policy.
* McCain listed several examples of where he would cut the budget of specific programs and I was overjoyed to hear him say that he would put an end to ethanol subsidies. Ethanol is one of the biggest hoaxes ever perpetrated on the American public. Ethanol would still be at the drawing board stage if it were not for subsidies.
* McCain recognizes that Iraq is a central front and battleground for al-Qaida. McCain knows this while Obama doesn't. , , , 
* McCain brought up ex-Secretary of State Madeleine Albright who, during the Clinton Administration, met with North Korean leader Kim Jong Il. McCain correctly noted what good did it do with Albright meeting with Kimmy? Obama, on the other hand, wants to "talk" with despots.
* McCain has a sense of humor, Obama clearly has none. His attack on McCain of "bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb Iran," is all the evidence anyone needs. Besides, which president bombed the hell out of Kosovo and Serbia? Answer: Democrat President Bill Clinton.
* McCain touted his role - and rightly so - as being against earmarks and pork which put Obama on the defensive. Obama was unable to defend himself on his gratuitous and egregious earmarks for Illinois.
Remember, I plan on not voting and sitting this election out. I've written many times in the past that I am no fan of John McCain.
Thus, I would have to chalk up the first debate as a McCain win and an Obama loss. I'm not the only one thinking this way. As of the publishing of this post, Matt Drudge has an interactive poll on his site asking viewers who won Friday night's debate with the following responses:
MCCAIN: 68% 263,307
OBAMA: 30% 116,347
NEITHER: 3% 9,817
Total Votes: 389,471
 Bin Laden wanted US to invade Iraq, author says, CNN
 U.S. military: Al-Zarqawi was alive after bombing, CNN noting the paragraph: Al-Zarqawi was the leader of one of the nation's many insurgent factions. In October 2004, al-Zarqawi pledged his allegiance to al Qaeda founder Osama bin Laden, and renamed his group al Qaeda in Iraq.
 White House: Bin Laden wanted Iraq as a new base, CNN
 al-Qaeda, Infoplease
Religion Of Peace Firebombs House
From The Guardian:
The London home of the publisher of a controversial new novel that gives a fictionalised account of the Prophet Muhammad's relationship with his child bride, Aisha, was firebombed yesterday, hours after police had warned the man that he could be a target for fanatics.
A petrol bomb is believed to have been thrown through the door of Martin Rynja's £2.5m town house in Islington's Lonsdale Square, which also doubles as the headquarters of his publishing company, Gibson Square. Three men have been arrested on terrorism charges.
The Observer has learned that police told Rynja late on Friday night to leave his property. His company recently made headlines when it announced it was to publish The Jewel of Medina.
Written by US journalist Sherry Jones, the book was due to have been published in August by US giant Random House. But amid controversy the company halted publication, a move denounced by Salman Rushdie, author of The Satanic Verses, as 'censorship by fear'.
Three men have been held under the Terrorism Act after a suspected petrol bombing at the publishing office which released a controversial novel, 'The Jewel of Medina', about the prophet Muhammad and a child bride.
The suspects, aged 22, 30 and 40, were arrested by armed police early yesterday in Islington, north London. It followed a fire at the offices of Gibson Square publishers, which is run by director Martin Rynja.
Four people were arrested in London yesterday over an alleged terror attack on the publisher of a controversial book on the prophet Muhammad.
The arrests are connected to a fire at a property in Islington, north London, which is used as the home and office of Martin Rynja, a publisher.
His company, Gibson Square, recently bought the rights to a novel which is considered by some to be more controversial than Salman Rushdie's book, The Satanic Verses. The new book, about the prophet Muhammad and his child bride, is entitled The Jewel of Medina.
The blaze yesterday, which led to people being evacuated from the house, may have been started by a petrol bomb pushed through the letter box.
Random House US, the major publishing group, announced in May this year that it was dropping its plans to publish Sherry Jones's debut novel following warnings that it could incite acts of violence from radical Muslims. The Jewel of the Medina was also pulled from bookshops in Serbia last month after pressure from an Islamic group.
Speaking before yesterday's attack, Mr Rynja said: "In an open society there has to be open access to literary works, regardless of fear. As an independent publishing company, we feel strongly that we should not be afraid of the consequences of debate.
"If a novel of quality and skill that casts light on a beautiful subject we know too little of in the West, but have a genuine interest in, cannot be published here, it would truly mean that the clock has been turned back to the dark ages. The Jewel of Medina has become an important barometer of our time."
Saturday, September 27, 2008
Drugs Are Bad Obama!
Obama Afraid Of Criticism, Goes Legal
The Examiner reports:
Have I gone insane, or is KMOV in St. Louis, Missouri, actually reporting that "Senator Barack Obama's presidential campaign is asking Missouri law enforcement to target anyone who lies or runs a misleading television ad during the presidential campaign"?
The report goes on to say that "prosecutors and sheriffs from across Missouri are joining something called the BarackObama truth squad."
Look, politicians are all about lies. It may be annoying (I find it entertaining), but that's for their opponents and good-government groups to counter -- not law enforcement. That's especially true since whether or not criticism is "misleading" is open to debate. What's being said may be simply a different interpretation, a bit of spin -- or a better version of the truth than candidates and their friends like.
By the way, if the report is accurate, it fits all too well with the legal threats the Democratic candidate's campaign is leveling against TV stations that run NRA ads critical of Barack Obama. John Lott, a noted economist and firearms scholar, has copies of the Obama campaign's cease-and-desist letters on his Website. He also defends the content of the ads (emphasizing the debatable nature of "misleading.")
Sue me Obama
Poor Baby Barry. How did this thin-skinned, delicate widdle Mommies-Boy ever get as far as he did in the rough arena of Chicago politics? Buy a sun dress, get a parasol and some high heels, Barry. You're not man enough to be the leader of the Free World. What a sissy boy!
Hubba Hubba, Dirka Dirka!
Labels: Osama Obama
Obama Bombs The Bailout
I'm surprised that so many Big Government Liberals and Progressives are against the $700 Billion Dollar Wall Street Bailout. Why so against it, Libs and Progs? This is the political group that advocates bigger government which is why they support Barack Hussein Obama, Junior.
I love the Liberals and Progressives who have the arrogance and audacity to write that, "I'm rich and we should be paying more in taxes," but they only want to give up their money and pay more in taxes when a Democrat tells them to do this. As I've written before, these are the biggest cheapskates on the face of the earth. One of these folks is on my blogroll, believe it or not, but I won't name the person or the blog. This is someone who actually used to be more objective (or was faking it), but as this presidential campaign continues, the writer has jumped off the diving board and now swims in an Olympic-size pool of bitterness. Why attempt objectivity when blind allegiance to Liberalism requires no thought and no brain power?
Anyone can write a check to the Federal Government in excess of the taxes they owe and contribute to the deficit, but the wealthy Libs and Progs don't do this. Last year the Internal Revenue Service received less than $3 Million dollars in voluntary revenue - "donations", really - above and beyond the tax receipts. The wealthy Libs and Progs aren't writing a check to the government for what they call our "universal goodwill" or "our investment." I told you these people are the cheapest tightwads on the face of the earth.
Why aren't you giving up your own money on your own, Libs? Why does it take someone like Obama to tell you that you have to part with your own money, that you have to sacrifice, that you will have to make do with less before you part with some cash? Could it be because you're a miserly cheapskate? You know it is. You're attitude is that if you must part with your money, then everyone else must also be forced to do so. If he were alive today Karl Marx would pat you on the head saying, "good job, good job."
The self-described "wealthy" Liberals will happily write a check when Obama asks them to, but not when President Bush or a Republican asks them? Yeah, wrap the American flag around yourselves and pretend to be a Patriot. Sing "Yankee Doodle Dandy". The only person you're fooling is yourself. Yeah, this group of people know exactly who they are; the most bitter, partisan, angry, hate-filled, mean-spirited, myopic, narrow-minded, fact-denying, propaganda-spewing phonies on the face of the earth.
It is shocking that the Insane Liberal Clown Posse is against this bailout because approving it means a bigger and expanding federal government, something that causes the ILCP to moisten their underpants in orgiastic nipple-tingling glee.
Pork And Bailout And Over-simplistic Greed
Democrat Barney Frank wants to load up the Bailout bill with millions and millions of dollars of pork for ACORN, the organization that registers non-citizens as Democrat voters! So much for lean, no-nonsense, non-partisan legislation. Where is the outrage directed at Frank? ACORN does not deserve one penny of pork money and NRO has the story on why.
I've read on some Liberal sites the allegation that the Wall Street fiasco was caused by "greed". This the most simplistic and uneducated kneejerk response imaginable. We have educated and degreed economists at opposite ends of the spectrum on whether this bailout will work or not, and pinheads sitting in their parent's basement fire off the accusation that this was caused by "greed". If they mean pure and unadulterated Liberal Greed, then I agree with them in part.
The Democrats have a majority in the U.S. House and Senate. They could - key word "could" - pass the bailout that President George W. Bush and Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson seek. But the Dems won't group together and pass this. Why not...why not? This is the key. The answer is that Americans are against passage of this bill by a 10 to 1 ratio.
The only reason that Democrats want Republicans on board on this bailout is if it fails, the Dems can do what they always do...the Three Tenets of Liberalism:
3) When things go sour, blame the other guy.
In this case, the Dems would blame Republicans. How on earth can Dems Chris
3) Blame the other guy.
Dems Have The Majority To Pass The Bailout, So Why Don't They?
John McCain temporarily suspends his presidential campaign, demonstrating true leadership and presidential gravitas, travels to D.C. and takes in (absorbs) all the pros and cons over the proposed bailout. Obama doesn't suspend his campaign, reluctantly shows up in D.C. and the entire negotiations collapse. Did you see any of the footage of the meeting? Obama looked like he resented being there and wanted to be anywhere but there, as if this interruption of his campaign was the worst thing that could happen to him.
If Obama has the answers to all domestic and international problems - as he claims he has - then why is he so reticent to offer a solution that will bring both Democrats and Republicans together regarding the bailout?
Obama is just like John "I served in Vietnam" Kerry. Obama says, "he has a plan," but he won't disclose his plan unless he is crowned King of The Country.
Pelosi, Reid, Dudd and the other Dems deferred to Obama as their official bailout spokesman at Thursday's White House conference. Obama failed miserably in articulating reasons why the bailout should be approved. This occurred because Obama didn't have his Little Tykes Teleprompter (thanks, Molson) with him.
There was no agreement among Democrats and Republicans on the bailout before McCain showed up. McCain didn't bungle what Democrats say was a done deal. But let's say he did, let's say McCain is solely responsible for putting the fly in the ointment. Well, then the Liberals who are against this bailout should be happy over this.
We're seeing the Democrats playing The Fear Card and The Crisis Card. The irony is that Speakeress of the House Nanny Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry ReidTard have the votes to pass this bill. They don't need Republicans to vote for the bailout, the Dems have the votes. But the Dems won't do it on their own because they're afraid that if it fails the American public will hold them responsible and accountable. And face it, the last thing Dems want is being held responsible and accountable for their actions. Pathetic, with a capital "P".
The Dem Congress approval rating still remains around 9%. I'm shocked that it's that high.
Friday, September 26, 2008
The Debate Is On
The first of the Presidential Debates between Republican Candidate and demonstrator of leadership John McCain - a war hero and POW - versus the Democrat Candidate, the unqualified, inexperienced, questionable U.S. Citizenship, Big Government-adovcating and stater of "his Muslim Faith" Barack Hussein Obama, Junior begins tonight at 9PM Eastern and 8PM Central Time.
Here's some of what I expect we'll see tonight:
* Barack Hussein Obama, Junior will feign Patriotism and prominently wear his U.S. Flag lapel pin.
* Obama will try to portray himself as an average American, but it will come off as the pompous, phony fraud that he is.
* Obama will not only flip-flop on his previous statements and positions, he will flip-flop and reverse himself several times during the debate.
* Obama will pretend to pass himself off as an America-first type of person, but we know he's really a New World Order/Globalist politician.
* Obama will stammer, hmmmm and haaaaa and uh-uh-uh all over the place since he will be without a teleprompter.
* John McCain will come across as the statesman that he is. (And no, I haven't changed my mind one bit on sitting this election out, but I can recognize someone who's real compared to the candidate being controlled and manipulated by the
* McCain will have done his homework and make Obama look like the neophyte that he is.
* Obama will grin with self-satisfaction at what he thinks is a "zinger" directed at McCain, but McCain will respond with a one-liner that puts Obama squarely in his place.
Bill Clinton Continues Diss'n Obama
Bubba appearing on Thursday's "Good Morning America" praised Republican Presidential Candidate John McCain for temporarily suspending his campaign and returning to Washington to take part in the Wall Street bailout. ABC News:
Former President Bill Clinton defended Sen. John McCain's request to delay the first presidential debate, saying McCain did it in "good faith" and pushed organizers to reserve time for economy talk during the debate if the Friday plans move forward.
"We know he didn't do it because he's afraid because Sen. McCain wanted more debates," Clinton said, adding that he was "encouraged" by the joint statement from McCain and Sen. Barack Obama.
"I presume he did that in good faith since I know he wanted -- I remember he asked for more debates to go all around the country and so I don't think we ought to overly parse that." [McCain did want more debates, but Obama chickened out. - Drake]
The former president thought Bush's address Wednesday night on the economic crisis had a "positive reaction".
"If we're trying to win in Florida, it may be that -- you know, they think that because of who I am and where my political base has traditionally been, they may want me to go sort of hustle up what Lawton Chiles used to call the cracker vote there," Clinton tells King. "But Sen. Obama also has a big stake in doing well in the Jewish community in Florida[.]"
The all important Cracka vote.
Not to be outdone in bigotry and racism, Florida Democrat Congressman Alcee Hastings said the following about Republican Vice Presidential candidate Sarah Palin. International Business Times:
"Anybody toting guns and stripping moose don’t care too much about what they do with Jews and blacks. So, you just think this through."
Hastings spokesman David Goldenberg said the reference to “anybody toting guns and stripping moose” didn’t really mean “anybody” who totes a gun or strips a moose, but only meant Palin because “it’s how Sarah Palin defines herself.”
“It was not intended to be a knock on any hunter or sportsman,” Goldenberg said. “It was intended to use Sarah Palin’s terms the way she defines herself.”
Whew...The Obama Cultists are reaching new depths of desperation.
Oh Those Wacky Democrats! They're so tolerant! They have no prejudices or race or ethnic biases, do they? Their large political tent is open to everyone.
Fannie And Freddie Fund Democrats
Out of the top 25 politicians receiving money from Fannie and Freddie, SIXTEEN ARE DEMOCRATS AND ONLY NINE ARE REPUBLICANS!
And the Number Three recipient of political campaign donations from Fannie and Freddie is none other than Barack Hussein Obama, Junior The Illinois Muslim. If you consider actual time-spent in the U.S. Senate, Obama ranks second as the politician receiving the most contributions from Fannie/Freddie with Chris
This cycle, with Democrats in control, [Fannie and Freddie are] giving [Democrats] 56 percent of their total $1.1 million in contributions. Similarly, Freddie Mac has given 53 percent of its $555,700 in contributions to Democrats this cycle, compared to the 44 percent it gave during 2006.
Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac have also strategically given more contributions to lawmakers currently sitting on committees that primarily regulate their industry.
Sen.Chris Dodd (D-Conn.) chairman of the Senate banking committee, has received the most from Fannie and Freddie's PACs and employees ($133,900 since 1989). Rep. Paul Kanjorski (D-Pa.) has received $65,500. Kanjorski chairs the House Financial Services Subcommittee on Capital Markets, Insurance and Government-Sponsored Enterprises, and Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae are government-sponsored enterprises, or GSEs.
How Many Shoes Can Fit In
The Mouth Of Joe Biden?
How many shoes (okay, okay, "feet") can Joe Biden fit in his mouth? The correct answer is an infinite amount.
The walking, talking notoriously cheap charitable-giving gaffe machine Biden continues choking on shoes. Okay, feet.
Israel Today reports that...
US Senator and vice presidential hopeful Joe Biden reportedly told Israeli officials three years ago that sooner or later they would have to reconcile themselves to the reality of a nuclear-armed Iran.
Israel's Army Radio reported on the remarks, which Biden is said to have made to visiting Israeli officials in his capacity as chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.
According to the report, Biden reaffirmed to the Israelis his rejection of military action against Iran, but also admitted that diplomatic efforts to halt Iran's nuclear program had little or no chance of success. In essence, Biden resigned himself to the idea of a nuclear-armed Iran and told the Israelis that they, too, would have to accept that outcome.
In a clandestine meeting with unnamed Israeli officials, which was partially covered by the US Jewish Army Radio, Barack Obama's vice-presidential nominee said, "Israel will have to reconcile itself with the nuclearization of Iran."
Biden bascially says get use to a nuclear Iran while he and Obama want to take guns away from law-abiding Americans. What a pile of crap.
Are you Jewish? Do you support the DemocRAT presidential and vice-presidential team of Barack Hussein Obama, Junior and Joe Biden? If so, I have one question: WHY?
Screw The Bailout
Barack Hussein Obama, Junior supports the bailout. What's interesting about this is that very few Liberal bloggers are writing anything critical of him for supporting this bailout. Their bent is based on pure politics. Their unwavering and unquestioning support - their complete blind allegiance to Obama - prevents them from treating him as they would a Republican advocating support for this bailout. President George W. Bush and Obama both favor the bailout. The Obama Cultists call this bailout just another tactic of Bush supporting his wealthy Wall Street friends while not applying the same criticism to Obama and applying the same standard to him. Big surprise?...NOT!
Nanny Pelosi supports the bailout. Obama supports the bailout. Harry ReidTard supports the bailout. Barney Frank supports it. Chris
As this financial mess continued unfolding, it became more clear to me that taxpayers should not be on the hook for "those too big to fail." If these institutions grew too big and took too many risks and find themselves on the brink of extinction, so be it. That Barack Hussein Obama, Junior favors the bailout tells me there's something inherently wrong with it.
Why should Main Street bail out Wall Street? Treasury Secretary Henry "Hank" Paulson wants American taxpayers to pony up $700 Billion with basically no strings attached? Is there anyone out there who thinks that $700 Billion will permanently fix this? Is there anyone out there who thinks that $700 Billion will be the final solution to this mess?
Under mostly Democrat politicians, banks were coerced into writing mortgages for people who were woefully under-qualified to repay these loans. Oversight and regulation - under both Democrats and Republicans - of investment firms were ignored. Does anyone want to tell me how Sarbanes-Oxley prevented failures and book-cooking? Sarbanes-Oxley was merely a band aid slapped on a severed limb.
Take Detroit automakers Ford, GM and Chrysler. How is it that their business in foreign markets is very profitable, yet in the U.S. they're asking for help from the Federal Government? They're over-regulated to death by environmental restrictions. Remove the restrictions and the 30-some boutique fuel standards that their products are required to meet and they won't need a bailout.
I could be wrong, but a $700 Billion infusion seems to do nothing but postpone the inevitable of the bubble bursting. Sometimes things have to get worse before they get better. This is one of those times.
We've entered into a Bear Market, not a shock to anyone who's been paying attention. I am no expert by any means, but anyone thinking a Bull Market would continue uninterrupted doesn't know much about the Market.
We are told that 100 banks are set to fail. So let them fail. Let 'em. Cluck Schumer didn't have a problem pushing IndyMac into failure, so why is he pretending and feigning to care and be concerned now?
Both parties have failed the Middle Class, the Democrats far more culpable and liable than the Republicans. Obama's answer is increasing taxes for everyone. John McCain's answer is naming Andrew Cuomo as the Treasury Secretary when it is Cuomo's own hands that are all over this mess.
The Wall Street mess is a Democrat Scandal that makes Enron look like a minor accounting error at a lemonade stand.
I've had it with political incumbents, both Democrat and Republican. If I had my way, not one single incumbent would be re-elected. Not one. Take a lesson from what Caligula did in Rome. Populate the U.S. Senate with horses. How much worse could it be?
This bailout hinges on one, single, two-letter word: "If". If this bailout works it renders moot a tax increase. If.
Is there anyone out there who believes that any surplus or windfall "if" this bailout works won't be spent by the Democrats? Give me a break.
Economic experts are divided on "if" the bailout will be successful, negligible or a complete failure. Paulson is unable to say with any degree of certainty that this bailout will work. We're supposed to cross our fingers and Hope for the best Change. What a crock.
This will not be the end of the Bailout Mentality from the Federal Government. Another institution down the road will once again be deemed, "too big to fail" and we will be chewing our food a second time. Bet on it.
accordance and compliance with Fair Use Section 107 U.S. Copyright Code.
All other images and content © 2005-2009 David Drake.
Not responsible for content contained at linked sites.
Policy on commenting:
- Anonymous comments have little chance of being published.
- Comments made on posts 60 days old or older have little chance of being published.
- Published comments do not necessarily reflect the views of this blog author.
- Discretion of publishing or rejecting submitted comments rests solely with the owner and creator of this blog.
- Comments that egregiously "plug" (i.e. advertise or promote) another site or blog will be rejected. This doesn't mean you cannot include a link to your story, blog or to another site, but don't go overboard.
- Profanity is not a disqualifying factor, but profane rants solely for purposes of profanity are unlikely to be published.
- The owner and creator of this blog is not liable or responsible for the opinions of those who comment.