About Me

Name:Neophyte Pundit
Biography
Loading...

Create Your Own Blog Find Other Townhall Blogs

Comments

Archives

Blog Search

Surrender Monkeys: Attack on Freedom of Speech- First Freedom To Go?

A great piece over at City Journal posits the following:
What has not been widely recognized is that the Ayatollah Khomeini’s 1989 fatwa against Satanic Verses author Salman Rushdie introduced a new kind of jihad. Instead of assaulting Western ships or buildings, Kho­meini took aim at a fundamental Western freedom: freedom of speech. In recent years, other Islamists have joined this crusade, seeking to undermine Western societies’ basic liberties and extend sharia within those societies.
The cultural jihadists have enjoyed disturbing success. Two events in particular—the 2004 assassination in Amsterdam of Theo van Gogh in retaliation for his film about Islam’s oppression of women, and the global wave of riots, murders, and vandalism that followed a Danish newspaper’s 2005 publication of cartoons satirizing Mohammed—have had a massive ripple effect throughout the West. Motivated variously, and doubtless sometimes simultaneously, by fear, misguided sympathy, and multicultural ideology—which teaches us to belittle our freedoms and to genuflect to non-Western cultures, however repressive—people at every level of Western society, but especially elites, have allowed concerns about what fundamentalist Muslims will feel, think, or do to influence their actions and expressions. These Westerners have begun, in other words, to internalize the strictures of sharia, and thus implicitly to accept the deferential status of dhimmis—infidels living in Muslim societies. (Emphasis mine)
 
We are beginning to lose the battles.  When will our leaders stand up and call evil, evil?  When will murderous Islamofascists be called what they really are?  Oh, sorry, I can't say Islamofascist, either.  One of the best sites for information regarding the War that our enemies are fighting, and that we now seem to be capitulating in, is Counterterrorism Blog.  The blog has many recent posts on what is happening in the halls of our government, from Condi Rices' dismissing jihadist, to the use of the term 'extremist' rather than 'jihadist.' 
 
Couple that with the possibility that we might have an inexperienced, apeasement driven, way left president, and we are in trouble!  I am very frightened about the potential that we may have a McGovernesque dimocratic presidential nominee.  Regardless of the current kerfuffle that Obama is combatting (Rev. Wrigt is going play up his 15 minutes of fame, to the hilt) he is a liberal's liberal.  His comments about sitting down with our enemies, seemingly without precondition, will doom US foreign policy.
 
Obama sat for 20 years in the pews of a man that literally hates, abhors, condemns US foreign policy as tantamount to terrorism.  He has compared  US actions in the world are no better than those of al Qaeda, and then he has uttered the infamous words: 'the chickens are coming home to roost.'  Rev. Wright's defense is that he is merely quoting former Ambassador (Peck) to Iraq.  Those words are far more inflamatory than he is trying to dupe the masses into believing.
 

On Dec. 1, 1963, immediately after the assassination of John F. Kennedy, the Nation of Islam leader Malcolm X responded to that event with the comment that, "Being an old farm boy myself, chickens coming home to roost never did make me sad; they've always made me glad," prompting the audience, according to a newspaper account, "to loud applause and laughter." When, shortly after, Malcolm X explained his comment in an interview with Louis Lomax, his views closely anticipated Wright's:

I meant that the death of Kennedy was the result of a long line of violent acts, the culmination of hate and suspicion and doubt in this country. You see, Lomax, this country has allowed white people to kill and brutalize those they don't like. The assassination of Kennedy is a result of that way of life and thinking. The chickens came home to roost; that's all there is to it. America—at the death of the President—just reaped what it had been sowing. (Source: Daniel Pipes)
 
Therefore, don't let the reverend fool you.  He wants change in America, and the change he desires and encourages from the pulpit are scary.  Now, I ask you, Obama sat in Wright's church for 20 years, had the reverend marry him to Michelle, and then baptize their children.  I have always screamed at the television when Obama talks about change to tell me how and what.  Would he implement the changes that Wright, Malcolm X, Louis Farrakhan, to mention a few?  Is the change he claims to want to foster inclusive or punitary?  Is the hope he speaks of for everyone or limited to those he feels have been subject to injustices at the hands of the US government?  There is no definition behind those words, "hope" and "change."  Are we ready to accept what I believe he is hiding?
 
 
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (1) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Obama Mispoke or Was He Misinterpreted

   Obama's defense of his SmallTown USA has come full circle.  At first he has admitted that he had magled his words.  That he didn't say it quite correctly.  He didn't say what he meant, he meant to say that people are frustrated, that they are angry at being left behind.  That government has not worked for them.
 
   Then, Senator Obama, why did you single out SmallTown, PA?  Was that what you "mangled?"  Or, was it the "bitter" part that was incorrect?  Do you really believe that SmallTown USA "clings" to religion, guns, and racism in the form of anti-immigration?  Or, was that the part that you mangled?
 
   Senator Obama, you are painting yourself as the candidate above stereotypes, above race, and a new kind of politician, right?  Then why did you, in the presence of high-powered liberal in San Francisco fall back to stereotyping SmallTown America?  If stereotypes are anathema to your campaign, why use it?  I must say that this incident is just one in a series that have really concerned the SmallTown USA voter.
 
   Did you really sit in the pews of your church with Reverend Wright for 20 years and you never heard him spew his venom  that you now say you diagree with and have distanced yourself from?  Can you tell me why the man that led you to Christ and married you and Michelle and who Baptised your girls has now sequesters himself in a gated community that is less than 2% African American? 
 
   Now, Senator Obama, do you really intend to tell the voters of America that your relationship with the former WeatherUnderground leader, Bill Ayers, is one of distance.  That your kids were in school together?  That you spoke at events together?  That he held a fundraising/welcoming event on your behalf at his home?  And, he has never expressed regret at bombing the Capitol, the Pentagon, etc.?  That he feels that he may not have done enough?  All of this on, poor timing on his part, 9/11, in a printed article in the NYTimes?  Do you really believe that he is merely an English Professor?  What will we find when we listen to his lectures and speeches?
 
   You are known by the company that youkeep.  Are there more characters in your friendships that we need to know about?  And, lastly, how do you respond to the National Journal rating you the most Liberal Senator?  Even more liberal than Teddy Kennedy?  Would you accept a conservative who had a close a relationship with a member of the KKK in the past? 
 
   Frankly, I must say that the more I learn about you the more I dislike you, the more distrustful of you I am.  I think you are merely another blue blooded Liberal.  And I come to this conclusion based upon your voting record, your current offerings of government programs, and the company you keep.  I believe you were in your element in San Francisco.  I believe you felt comfortable in saying what you did.  You were comfortable that what you said was merely between you and the liberal fundraisers that you feel are on your level and you truly looked down your nose at SmallTown America, and that you would have no trouble looking down your nose at all faithful believers (religious clingers-on), certainly at those who believe in their rigth to bear arms, and those who would want our broders protected, not because of the color of the skin of those who come over but rather those who would break our laws, and those who would come illegally with the sole purpose of delivering harm upon the American people.
 
   So, no Senator Obama, I donot buy the snake oil medicine that you are selling, I will not drink the kool-aid, and will not swoon upon your eloquent speeches.  As everything points to something completely different than your public persona.  Frankly, you scare me, and I wonder at your veracity.  Oh, I think I may have called you a liar, just as I have called Hillary a liar, Bosnia was not a mere misspoken word, nor misremebered...she said what she thought was politically expedient, and got caught, just as you have, sir...
 
What Say You?
 
Freedom prospers when religion is vibrant and the rule of law under God is acknowledged.
~~Ronald Reagan

Government's first duty is to protect the people, not run their lives. 
~~Ronald Reagan
 
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (1) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Patriot Post and the Anti-patriot

The Patriot Post

Founders' Quote Daily

“It is the madness of folly, to expect mercy from those who have refused to do justice; and even mercy, where conquest is the object, is only a trick of war; the cunning of the fox is as murderous as the violence of the wolf.”
 
 
   The Anti-patriot, the worst president ever, Jimmy Carter.  There is no one who has set back peace more than the anti-patriot.  He is meeting today with Syrian leaders.  Earlier he has embraced a Hamas leader.  He has legitimized Hamas, and made promises that he can't keep.  He has no way of ensuring that either side can deliver any peaceful means.  As a nation we should no longer foot his bill for his presidential library. Frankly, all libraries should be using private funds and donations, not taxpayer money.
 
Nobel Peace Prize winner Jimmy Carter is
spending quality time with terrorists again.
 
 
 
 
 
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (2) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Dean Panics; Delegates Decide Now!

   Howard Dean is in full panic mode.  The Dimocratic presidential candidates are bloodying each other, and the punches landing are doing some serious damage.  The longer the campaign drags on, the more mud there is to sling. 

   An increasingly firm Howard Dean told CNN again Thursday that he needs superdelegates to say who they’re for – and “I need them to say who they’re for starting now.”

“We cannot give up two or three months of active campaigning and healing time,” the Democratic National Committee Chairman told CNN’s Wolf Blitzer. “We’ve got to know who our nominee is.”

After facing criticism for a mostly hands-off leadership style during much of the primary season, Dean has been steadily raising the rhetorical pressure on superdelegates. He said Thursday that roughly 65 percent of them have made their preference plain, but that more than 300 have yet to make up their minds.
   As I have said, all that McCain needs to do is sit back and laugh. Just think had Hillary been persuaded to quit the race after the last vote, we wouldn't have Bosnia, wouldn't have bittergate/clinggate.  These incidents are bringing the dimocratic candidates are revealing  their true colors.  Obama is a liberal's liberal, left of Teddy Kennedy, and truly an elitist. 
 
   I had a conversation with the wife last night.  She watches politics from the fringe.  Her comments about Obama are devastating: "you can't trust him, the more I learn about him the more suspicious I am of him. She then went on to explain her nervousness about Obama; he reminds her of a character in the series "Left Behind."  The character is a young, charismatic politician who rises from nowhere to become president. The character aligns the USA with many countries thought to be it's enemies(ed. note: note sure if this is correct, apologies to authors and readers, correct me if I am wrong) and forms an alliance that dominates the world.  This character is the anti-Christ.
 
   I am not saying that Obama is the anti-Christ, ringing in the End Times.  However, he has said that he will sit with our enemies and
"talk." He has put no preconditions on talking with Iran's leader, the Cuban dictators, the mini-me dictator of Venezuela, and so on.  That is a dangerous proposition.  The worst president ever, Jimmy Carter, has legitimized a terrorist griup.  By embracing Hamas he may well have set back Peace in the Middle East by decades.  That is precisely what Obama would do.  As you peel away the carefully crafted personna of Obama, and expose his character, the less and less there is to like.  His character and thought processes are coming into question.
 
   That leaves us the gaffes that Hillary has made.  Hillary has always been thought of as less than truthful.  Her Bosnia lie is a classic example of say anything to get elected mentallity.  Her seizing upon Obama's comments regarding SmallTown USA is another.  She has become the defender of the Second Ammendment; really, in the past she has been the complete opposite.  All of a suddne she has becomes a hunters hunter, shooting at ducks.  There is an image I just can't see; Hillary in fatigues squating behind a duck blind, non-reflecting hunters glasses, with the rifle butt resting on her shoulder, aiming to shoot.  Ha! She is the anti-NRA, opposing the Second Ammendment.  
 
   Neither Hillary nor Obama are likely to go quietly.  However, the longer they wait to have a clear winner in the race, the more serious the gaffes and the more revealing of their character occurs.  McCain and his people have got to be happy.  They are gathering shots everyday for commercials.  The more ammo they have to come out against either candidate.  McCain just needs to sit back and offer up speeches with policy and legislative directives.  He can continue to talk foreign policy, gather funds, etc.  I for one have found this quite fun.
 
    Howard, quiet please!
 
   What say you?
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Founding Father's Quote

Perhaps,  we as a nation have forgotten how hard fought and how fragile liberty and freedom really are...

The Patriot Post

Founders' Quote Daily

 "The value of liberty was thus enhanced in our estimation by the difficulty of its attainment, and the worth of characters appreciated by the trial of adversity."

~~ George Washington (letter to the people of South Carolina, Circa 1790)

 

Reference: Maxims of George Washington, Schroeder, ed. (16); original The Writings of Thomas Jefferson, Fitzpatrick, ed., vol. 31 (67)

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Wow! Words Do Matter: Obama's Slide and GCGF

GCGF- New Acronym- God, Country, Guns, and Family
 
Whoa!!! Obama's comments regarding SmallTown USA has actually mattered.  It seems, unoriginal thought, that Obama has had his John Kerry moment.  I think the shine has come of the bright, shiny, new penny.  His luck has run it's course. 
Pennsylvania
Democrats Mar
7-8
Mar
26-27
Apr
5-6
Apr
11-13
Clinton 52% 51% 45% 57%
Obama 41% 39% 45% 37%
Someone else 1% 2% 4% 2%
Undecided 6% 8% 6% 4%
                                                            Source: American Research Group, April 14, 2008
 
Obama's slide, is this poll an out lier?  Have his words had impact on the Electorate as a whole?  Are Independent's abandoning the Change and Hope candidate?  Are Dimocrats jumping ship and merely going to Clinton?  Clinton gained 12 points, really? 
 
According to the Quinnipiac University, April 15th polling of 2,103 likely Democratic primary voters shows Clinton at 50% and Obama at 41%. The week prior, April 8th, polling had Clinton at 50% and Obama at 44%.  The news cycle at that timw was that Obama was closing the gap.  The trendlines (to use The Architect's term, the favorite of Dimocrats, Karl Rove) are not good for Obama.  I think that 20% is an outlier, and that the gap is somewhere around 10%, in favor of Clinton. 
 
So, if one is to take the polling seriously, one must conclude that Obama's comments have done serious damage to his campaign in Pensylvania.  Can the same be said of national polls?
 
The RealClear Politics average shows a that the gap has narrowed, somewhat:
Polling Data
Poll Date Sample Obama Clinton Spread
RCP Average 03/28 - 04/13 - 48.0 41.6 Obama +6.4
Gallup Tracking 04/11 - 04/13 1271 V 50 40 Obama +10.0
Rasmussen Tracking 04/10 - 04/13 900 LV 48 44 Obama +4.0
AP-Ipsos 04/07 - 04/09 489 LV 46 43 Obama +3.0
CBS News/NY Times 03/28 - 04/02 510 LV 46 43 Obama +3.0
Hotline/FD 03/28 - 03/31 342 LV 50 38 Obama +12.0
Obama had opened up a double digit lead against Clinton.  Now the trendline has turned.  The polling average is current, as of April 13th.  Now, this week is going to see the Vast Right Wing Conspiracy in full tilt.  Rush, Hannity, Ingraham, and Hewitt are pounding the airwaves with Obama's comments.  Much more so than the MSM.  Obama and his defenders continue to say that he misspoke, and used, regrettably, the wrong words, namely clinging and bitter. 
 
Then we hear Obama say that he spoke the truth.  That there is real frustration and, yes, bitterness throughout the country.  Then. I ask you, why single out "SmallTown, Pennsylvania?"  IF it is true that SmallTown, USA is frustrated and bitter, why is God, Country and Guns the bread and butter of the Flyover Country?  The love of GCG- one can add Family,too- are staples of SmallTown, USA.  SmallTown USA didn't just turn to GCGF during the Bush Administration.  One might argue that GCGF has been a part of SmallTown USA since the Revolution.
 
When one watches the HBO mini-series, or the David McCullough tome, one sees that John Adams -Patriot, President, Father, Husband, Believer- was one staunch supporter of GCGF.  Would Barack also say that the Founding Fathers were clinging to, and bitter of- GCGF?
As a character is know to say: Obama you has some 'splaining to do.
 
Obama said what he meant, and meant what he said.  These words rolled out of Obama's mouth, and they were deliberate.  Obama was in front of a very sympathetic crowd.  I bet he felt very secure, that he could say anything he wanted and it would not only be accepted and applauded.  A group of San Francisco liberal Dimocrats- and most of the liberal Dimocrats from the coasts- would protect him.  The fundraiser was closed to the press.  How poignant that it was HuffPo that broke the story.  Now Ariana Huffington has been drafted by the VRWC, conscripted to do the bidding of the Right's talking heads.  Rush, Hannity, Ingraham, and Hewitt are proud and now are running with Obama's words.  This "controversy" has legs and won't die down unless and until either Dimocrat makes another blunder. the Reverend Wright must be putting the polishing touches on his next sermon, and certainly he will express his disdain.
 
Obama was looking down his nose at SmallTown USA and was certain he was safe.  He and liberal coastal Dimcrats have nothing but disdain for GCGF.  No question.
 
What say you?
 
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Hillary We Never Knew Ye: She SHoots Guns?!?! Obama's Shoot's Back

   This is great fun.  I ask you, who looks more presidential?  Hillary evry man's man, and ervery woman's woman.  She will say anything that fit's the moment.  And who is the real Barack Hussein Obama.  Yes, I think it is fair to use his whole name, because we really don't know who is.  And all John McCain needs to do is sit back and wait for the two Dimocrats to sucker punch one another.  He need not react to anything they say.  However, what he neds to do is come out every day and outline what he will do, give real issue speeches and outline his administration's policies.  Stick to the economic policies, judicial appointments, foreign policy endeavors, success in Iraq, and so on.  And, he can wait to announce his Vice Presidential nominee until the dustup between Clinton and Obama settles, and the bloodied Dimocratic nominee rises out of the ashes...
 
   Hillary Clinton on the campaign trail made this (fact checkers please) astounding fond memory known:
“You know, my dad took me out behind the cottage that my grandfather built on a little lake called Lake Winola outside of Scranton and taught me how to shoot when I was a little girl,” she said. (Source: FOXNews, CNN Politics)
   So, fact checkers, get out your glasses and a glass of wine (or case of beer, as this will take awhile).  Has Hillary Clinton ever talked about shooting guns before now?  Or is this another example of Hillary Clinton making up stories?  All of a sudden, now that Obama is talking about SmallTown USA "clinging" to guns and religion? Is Hillary a Second Amendment supporter?  Is she a card carrying NRA member? Nah, that can't be right...
 
   Well, Obama is not to be left out of the guns debate.  He struck right back with this zinger:
"She is running around talking about how this is an insult to sportsmen, how she values the Second Amendment. She's talking like she's Annie Oakley," Obama said, invoking the famed female sharpshooter immortalized in the musical "Annie Get Your Gun." (Souce: FOXNews: Fox and Friends, Washington Post)
   Having my mornig coffe has turned into an exercise of pain.  As when these two go at it, and I am taking a sip, it inevitably shoots out my nose, as I lay on the floor laughing!!!  I don't know which is more absurd, Hillary as gunslinger, or Hillary as Annie Oakley!
 
   Oh, and there's more!  The right Reverend Wright has resurfaced, and he is now taking shots.  His timing is impeccable.  Just what Obama needs right now.  The great orator Reverend Wright comes out of hiding, and his comments are just as firery and acerbic as ever...
 

“FOX News can’t understand that,” Wright said to rousing cheers and applause. “[Bill] O’Reilly will never get that. Sean Hannity’s stupid fantasy will keep him forever stuck on stupid when it comes to comprehending how you can love a brother who does not believe what you believe. [Pincham’s] faith was a faith in a God who loved the whole world not just one country or one creed.” (Source: FOXNews) Click here to listen to Reverend Wright's "sermon." 

   So, here are the images for the day, at least this is what I see on the blogosphere, talk radio talk, and the news shows.  Well, this may last wll week, until, that is, Obama and Clinton land new jabs at one another.  Since, I don't have the skill to Photoshop (maybe I will try later, unless someone has beat me to it) Hillary "Annie Oakley" Clinton in her finest western togs, and the Reverend Wright with Obama, again...

 

 What say you...comments open...
 
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Comments Open: Were Obama's Comments Hurtful or Helpful To His Campaign?

The way I see it Obama's comments were extremely hurtful.  His appearance in front of San Fran liberal elitist's makes his comments indefensible.  He is going to suffer this week, during a very important vote: Pennsylvania on Tuesday hits the polls.  My wife, who is know political junkie, unlike me, made the comment last night, after I read Obama's comments to her, that she couldn't understand why he would even make the comments in the first place?  She tied right back to the Rev. Wright's comments.  Obama brought religion right to the forefront.  In light of Wright's screeching on the 'United States of KKK-A' and 'God Damn America' Obama should have left all religion out of his discussions.
 
The comments got lots of play on Friday's news cycle.  Problem is, those comments came late in the day, or the momentum really picked up late in the day.  Talk radio hasn't had a chance to sink their teeth in to the comments.  How many times on Rush, Hannity, and Hewitt will those comments run?  You bet, all day long!  From 6am until 6pm on Monday those comments are going to get play, and SmallTown, USA citizens will make the call and vent their outrage.  And, I believe rightly so.  The Sunday news shows will also make hash out of the comments.
 
Those comments, even in his comfort zone of San Fran liberals, were bound to get out.  I don't like Obama's retort either.  Saying that there is real resentment in the flyover country, and of course, it's all Bush's fault.  It doesn't fly.  He sounded downright cynical.  He was looking down his nose at Smalltown, USA.  The vast majority of those in the flyover country do take God, Country and gun ownership seriously.  They believe that makes life bearable.  Obama got it wrong.  They don't flock to God, country and famil because of resentment, they do it out of a snese duty, and love.  This is certainly the biggest snub Obama could have made.
 
Tie those comments to Obama's belief that babies are punishment, and Obama has revealed his true face to the general electorate: he is a liberal Dimocrat.  He is an elitist liberal, he truly believe he is head and shoulders above SmallTown, USA.  I've said before that the more we peel away the rhetoric of Obama, he is revealed as the true liberal he is.  He is to the left of Nancy 'San Fran' Pelosi, left of Hilliary Clinton (no, that is not a misspelling, nor did I misspeak or misremember, Hillary is a liar), and even scarier, he is left of Teddy Kennedy...
 
What say you?  Comments open...
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Words Matter; Unless You Are A Liberal Dimocrat

This is driving me insane!  I can't stand the double standard when it comes to words.  Words have consequences, unless you are a Dimocrat...
 
Remember these words, as delivered by Republicans:
 
 "This fellow here, over here with the yellow shirt, macaca, or whatever his name is. He's with my opponent. He's following us around everywhere. And it's just great," George Allen on the campaign trail. (Source: Washington Post)
 
The derogatory word "macaca" brought Senator Allen's career to a screeching halt.  The potential presidential candidate has virtually disappeared from public life.  The cry from the left was deafening, not a moment went by when we didn't hear from Dimocrats that that word had consequences.
 
Just wait, you know there's more:
There isn't a day that goes by that we aren't reminded that those words had consequence.  Even though Bush was careful to say in the speech that "major combat operations" have ceased.  To this day we hear that George Bush thought the war was over and was a "cakewalk."
 
Oh boy, I am on a roll.  then there's this:
 
Speaking Thursday at a 100th birthday party and retirement celebration for Sen. Thurmond (R-S.C.) in the Dirksen Senate Office Building, Lott said, "I want to say this about my state: When Strom Thurmond ran for president, we voted for him. We're proud of it. And if the rest of the country had followed our lead, we wouldn't have had all these problems over all these years, either." (Source: Washington Post)
 The liberals went ballistic.  Lott is no longer the Republican leader, and is rarely even quoted anymore.
 
Okay, my reason for this post is not to rehash those controversies.  It is, rather, to point out that when Republicans (or Conservatives) make comments that are deemed incorrect or impolitic or even impolite they suffer the consequences.  Most have been driven from leadership roles.  I am sure that historians will often quote (or use the picture) of "Mission Accomplished" to tarnish Bush's record.  Again, I am not debating the right or wrong of the words, that is a topic for another post, pehaps.
 
Now, along come some rather important Dimocrats.  So important that one of them might actually be the most powerful leader of the free world.  Historically, these Dimocrats set a new precedent.  Suddenly both have ventures into the fray with words that should have consequences.  If the words uttered by Republicans revealed the man behind those words, surely the words uttered by Senators Clinton and Obama should bring on screams for their heads, right?  I think not.
 
Let's look at candidate number one, Senator Hillary Clinton:
"I remember landing under sniper fire," she said in Washington on Monday. "There was supposed to be some kind of a greeting ceremony at the airport, but instead we just ran with our heads down to get into the vehicles to get to our base."
There is just on little problem with those words: they are an outright lie.  CBS uncovered footage that shows Clinton walking off the plane, Chelsea tagging along, walking the procession line and being greeted by an 8 year old girl who offered the following: "There is peace now because Mr Clinton signed it. All this peace. I love it." (Source: Telegraph)
 
Good husband that he is, Bill Clinton has stood upon the dias to proffer a defense of his wife: she was tired after a long day of campaigning and 'misspoke' when she delivered the memory at 11 pm.  Hillary herself has said that she 'misspoke.'  Again, it is the heat of the campaign that has her so tired that she 'miremembered' the incident.  There's a problem with that defense, too.  She has told the story many times, at one campaign stop it was given at 10 in the morning.
 
I know, I know...she misspoke and misremebered those times, too.  Kind of like the Vince Foster files, the travelgate files, the Whitewater...oh, wait, I am getting off topic.  Actually, I am surprised that both candidate and the former president did not bother to blame the Vast Right Wing Conspiracy!
 
She lied.  Outright lied, and about something trivial.  She could have used the story about the little girl without the embellishment and it would have made a fine story.
 
Well, that was a doozie that I din't think could be topped, but then there's this from candidate Obama:
"You go into these small towns in Pennsylvania and, like a lot of small towns in the Midwest, the jobs have been gone now for 25 years and nothing's replaced them," Obama said. "And they fell through the Clinton Administration, and the Bush Administration, and each successive administration has said that somehow these communities are gonna regenerate and they have not. And it's not surprising then they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations." (Emphasis mine, source: Newsvine)
Man, taking shots at smalltown PA while at a (elitist) San Francisco fundraiser.  Not exactly going to engender the Pennsylvanians to vote for 'change' let alone 'hope.' 
 
The scary thing is that Obama not only is showing his true colors as a true liberal that despises gun owners, those of faith and just about everyone in flyover country.  Again, liberals will close rank and explain it away.  Unfortunately, Obama's shine as the exciting, fresh candidate is beginning to wear off.  And, what do we see underneath: a true blue liberal.
 
Those words as spoken by Hillary and Barack will be explained away or all but ignored.  MSM will let it slide.  Infact, if not for the new media the story of Obama's comments would never have been told.  And Hillary ought to know better, in an age of videos every story is going to checked and rechecked against file footage.  Words are recorded, and campaign rhetoric will be challenged.  Hillary has been caught more than once on the campaign trail telling lies, see my previous post on Hillary's sad story about a woman who died giving birth made worse by the death of the child as well.  All because of that nasty Healthcare crisis in the United States, solved by Hillarycare.
 
All this wil be a blip on the radar screen in a day or two.  Misspeaking, misremembering, all words that if uttered by Bush would become a line in a book of 'Bushisms.'  The layers are being peeled, and what we see of Hillary and Barack is not pretty.  And, we haven't got to the General Election yet.  McCain must laugh everytime he turns on the news and hears "And Hillary said today" or "Obama said..."
 
Yes, Lucy, words matter if you are a Republican, just not if you're a Dimocrat...
 
What say you?
 
 
 
 
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (2) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (1) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Who Is the real Barack Hussein Obama?

Yes, I have made the cardinal sin of using how middle name.  I am purposely using it as I am not sure who the real Obama is.  In light of the many relationships that Obama has fostered over the years, I am skeptical of his persona.  Peal away his layered political persona and who is he really?
 
His relationship with Bill Ayers needs to be explored.  Is he sympathetic to the means by which Ayers and his Weather Underground employed?  Namely, is he bothered by the fact that Mr. Ayers had made comments (written no less in the NYTimes on 9/11) that his bombing campaign may not have been enough, and that he has no regrets.  That bothers me.  I am very unlikely to ever vote for Obama on the very fact that he is a died-in-the-wool, card carrying liberal.  There is something to the fact that he is ranked as the most liberal Senator, based upon his voting record.
 
Now it has come to light that Obama may well be sympathetic to the Palestinian cause.  Is Obama pro-Palestinian and anti-Israeli?  Where does Obama stand with regards to Israel?  Would he abandon our only democratic friend in the Middle East?  Would he more friendly with pro-Hamas and pro-Hezbollah representatives?  My point is not that being sympathetic to the Palestinian cause is wrong, but rather how would an Obama administration treat one our staunchest allies?  And would an Obama administration maintain that we will not negotiate and/or placate terrorists, sponsors of terror, and work to rid the world of the same?  Will Jimmy Carter become Obama's peace ambassador?
 
"...I knew Barack Obama for many years as my state senator-when he used to attend events in the Palestinian community in Chicago all the time. I remember personally introducing him onstage in 1999, when we had a major community fundraiser for the community center in Deheisha refugee camp in the occupied West Bank. And that's just one example of how Barack Obama used to be very comfortable speaking up for and being associated with Palestinian rights and opposing the Israeli occupation." (Source: American Thinker)
 
 
And, today his comments on smalltown Pennsylvania is not going to gain many votes in blue collar and rural PA:

You go into these small towns in Pennsylvania and, like a lot of small towns in the Midwest, the jobs have been gone now for 25 years and nothing's replaced them...And they fell through the Clinton administration, and the Bush administration, and each successive administration has said that somehow these communities are gonna regenerate and they have not.

And it's not surprising then they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations. (Source: Ben Smith, FOXNews reported this afternoon as well)
 
Certainly, if these are true words of Obama, exactly who is he courting?  Which America is he running for the presidency?  And, this man wants to sit down with the dictators of the world (Chavez, Castro, Kim, et al) and the millenialists (Ahmadinejad).  Would he also sit with Nassralah? What about the FARC terrorists in Latin America?
 
There is much we simply don't know about Obama.  The more we learn the more scared I become...
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Michael Ramierez' Editoon: Dimocratic Buffoonery

From Investors Business Daily (http://www.investors.com/editorial/cartoon.asp):
 
Cartoons By Michael Ramirez
 
Yep, Dimocrats clearly don't understand the real issue about how to manage our energy markets. Speak the truth Michael!
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Ah, Why Indeed? Friday Patriot Quote

The Patriot Post

Founders' Quote Daily

"Why has government been instituted at all? Because the passions of men will not conform to the dictates of reason and justice without constraint."

~~ Alexander Hamilton (Federalist No. 15)

 Reference: Hamilton, Federalist No. 15.
 
 
The Federalist Papers
Ah, Alexander Hamilton speaks the truth.  If not for government, chaos would reign supreme.  But, is the form of government the right one?  The fact is we are moving toward destruction, as legislation is being promulgated for the sake of getting one's 15 minutes of fame.  Legislation is not for the betterment of the nation or to give the individual greater rights or more natural rights given by the Supreme Being.
 
Since when is healthcare or better health insurance a right?  It is an entitlement plain and simple.   What is next?  A car in every home?  The government must ensure that every citizen have a car, those who don't can't get ahead in life.  Should the government ensure that every adult have a home given at the expense of the taxpayer?
 
Communism has failed, miserably so.  Taking from the "rich" and giving tothe "poor" is not in the spirit of the founding fathers.  Now, that is not to say that there should be some "safety net."  Those who can't earn a living, for legitimate reasons, need to get a helping hand.  Those who can't afford insurance should have a basic plan that ensures that they will be well and not get to catastrophic spot where it costs even more to take care of them.
 
My father always taught me to pick myself up by the bootstraps, and work hard.  I think Ivdone pretty wel for myself.  It makes me sick when I see those with means work the system to get what they feel they are owed.  It is a perpetual cycle.  Welfare is the classic example.  Moms having babies for the government handout.  They ar trapped.  The Dimocrats want to do the same for Health Insurance.
 
We don't have a healthcare crisis in the United States.  The fact that there are a plethora of those who are not insured does not a healthcare crisis.  They are uninsured.  But when the Dimocrats want Universal Healthcare it is all about power.  The power that is given by ensnaring votes!  That is what it is all about.  By giving Universal Healthcare they lock in votes.  The same is true of Welfare.  The more Dimocrats are seen to "take care of" welfare recipients the more votes they gain.  The reverse is true of Republicans.  They are seen as evil because they are taking away welfare or Universal Healthcare.
 
The debate over Universal Healthcare has been hijacked by the Dimocrats.  They own the issue, and they have framed the debate.  The Republicans must storm the Bastille and take back the debate, frame it in a different light.  If anything we need to offer the safety net, for those who can't afford it.  Those who have to decide about eating dinner versus buying insurance should be given the opportunity to get government subsidies (isn't that what Medicare is?).  But to make every taxpayer take the government insurance program is foolhardy, and as Social Security and Medicare have shown us, the government can not be trusted to manage the program frugally.  Both are headed for "bankruptcy" that will only be solved by either changing the rules (increase the retirment age), cutting the benefit, and/or raising taxes.
 
And, I don't trust the Dimocrats when it comes to raising taxes on the "rich."  Today being rich means owning assets that esceed $250,000.  I must say that my family earns clsoe to that amount, and we are by no means "rich."  Granted, we are comfortable, but we can't simply go out and by a car with cash, or jet off to Paris on a whim.  When taxes are raised, certainly in 2011 when the Bush tax cuts expire, and tax revenues fall off what will happen?  Better, what happens when the cost of the Universal Helathcare is underestimated and the costs skyrocket (can anyone say perscription drug coverage?) what will the response be.  "Tax the rich" of course.  But now since $250,000 was the prior mark, now $175,000 is the new target, then $125,000, and so on.  I guarantee it!  Let me tell you that $125,000 is nothing in Southern California.  Middle class certainly, rich no.
 
So watch your wallet.  Give the Dims more power (by electing a Dimocratic President and/or a greater majority in Congress) and you can guarantee that your taxes are going up.  the question being, how high and what will "rich" be considered?  Not only is this election about those who take the fight against Islamofascism but it also about your tax rate.  So, we have the War on Terror, tax hikes, and we can not forget about the judiciary.  Are we going to have strict constructionist (the Constitution fo rwhat it is) or for activist judges (those who believe the Constitution is a living document, to be molded to the social mores of today, or even considered with the rulings of those in Europe and elsewhere). 

In conclusion, this election is extremely important!  What kind of United States of America do you want?
 
What say you?
 
 
 
 
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | Comments