Quayle Hunt Gets Under Way

by John Kass - August 30th, 2008 - Chicago Tribune

It's the political reform, stupid!

The young Alaska Republican put her political career on the line by challenging the corrupt, old Alaskan Republican bulls on their sleazy pay-for-play politics and their use of the public trust to fill the pockets of their friends. She didn't merely talk about abstract change in Washington. She challenged corruption at home, challenged her own party bosses—some of whom are already in prison—at great risk to her political future.

It is something I've begged and begged Obama to do with the ham-fisted pols in Chicago and Illinois—to not merely talk about change far away, but to take a principled stand even if that stand runs counter to his political interests at home; to challenge the thugs of his own party, to give us a reason to believe he's the man he says he is. He has politely declined.

In this, Obama obviously has more experience than Palin.

Leave it to a Democrat to sum up the most important point about Sarah Palin that may get missed by both sides. This article by John Kass is surprising for someone who is an Obama supporter. I suppose he wrote it because he is from Chicago and really does seem disappointed in Obama for never taking on the corrupt Chicago Democrat party.

That point is actually why the Democrats will have a hard time smearing Palin like they smeared Quayle. She is a fighter and ethical. How far can their smears go?

Obama’s ‘I Have A Scheme’ Speech

by Ron Hart - August 31st, 2008 - Panama City News Herald

Barack left out the most important part of any grand scheme: How? The most curious article of faith among the Democrats is that somehow they are going to create good-paying, blue-collar factory jobs in the U.S., and not ship this off to other countries. They are going to do this by taxing corporations (we currently have the second-highest corporate tax rate in the world) and successful business owners at higher rates. And they are going to give more power and rights to unions.

That will certainly get the job creating genius of our entrepreneurs going, won't it? Of course that also suggests what Barack Obama has planned for that huge new police force he says he wants to create . . . funded equal to our military is the way he put it. He plans to enslave the upper class like the Soviet Union did and MAKE them build new plants and create jobs. Freedom and individual liberty will become something you earn by behaving the way Obama says you should behave.

Selcted Comments From Democrat Blogs

Obama is the only one that understands the horrible deterioration of our country. This is worse than the depression.

McCain and the Republicans will only keep us fighting against each other until we're ALL doomed. America has had enough of their hate-filled, divisive rhetoric.

McCain has secured the votes of the ignorant and the moronic. Barack Obama a socialist? Michelle Obama hates America? Idiots.

Cindy McCain is a rich witch and adultress. What a whining liar! She hates America and has no values. Go take your pain meds, witch.

Geez - it looks like the Obama haters and Republican smear merchants are taking over ... America has had enough of their hate-filled, divisive rhetoric. We have a choice of uniting together now, or failing as a nation ...

Sarah "Baracuda" [Palin] is a fascist bitch who is under investigation for abuse of power. What a choice.


I guess "hate-filled, divisive rhetoric" was in the Democrat talking points memo for the day, since it showed up in numerous blog comments.

As for the reason there are so few comments here, I avoided the Democrat blog comments that were mostly profanity and vulgarity. That limited my choices considerably.

Self-Made Man Or Mysterious Stranger?

by Charles Krauthammer - August 31st, 2008 - Townhall.com

So where are the colleagues? The buddies? The political or spiritual soul mates? His most important spiritual adviser and mentor was Jeremiah Wright. But he's out. Then there's William Ayers, with whom he served on a board. He's out. Where are the others?

The oddity of this [Democratic] convention is that its central figure is the ultimate self-made man, a dazzling mysterious Gatsby. The palpable apprehension is that the anointed is a stranger -- a deeply engaging, elegant, brilliant stranger with whom the Democrats had a torrid affair. Having slowly woken up, they see the ring and wonder who exactly they married last night.

Of course there is Tony Rezko, the typical buddy you find in the cadre surrounding a Chicago politician like Barack Obama. However he is one more of the people in Barack Obama's life that he cannot be seen with now. How long does the list have to grow before the liberals are going to accept, they have nominated an "empty suit." A man who is unfit to be President.

The Audacity of Hype

by William Safire - August 31st, 2008 - The New York Times

In a speech aptly titled “The American Promise,” Obama promised to “end this war in Iraq responsibly,” even as it is already ending responsibly. He promised in a militant phrase not merely to end but to “finish the fight” (meaning to win) in Afghanistan. In one catchall sentence, Obama promised to defeat “terrorism and nuclear proliferation; poverty and genocide; climate change and disease.” Because the charge that he would raise taxes obviously nettles him, he promised to “eliminate capital gains taxes for the small businesses” run by obedient high-tech executives, and to “cut taxes for 95 percent of all working families.”

In promising to “end our dependence on oil from the Middle East,” he stopped pandering for a moment to oppose the majority of Americans urging we increase supply by drilling for oil here: “Understand that drilling is a stop-gap measure, not a long-term solution.”

He is no longer promising to end global warming just by being nominated. Maybe Obama is convinced that it is already happening since the global warming alarmists are so concerned that we may be entering a period of global cooling that they have switched their rhetoric to "climate change" to hedge their bets. Watch for Obama to take credit for that change soon.

This is an excellent article by William Safire and it delineates a number of additional flaws in this self righteous speech by what more and more are calling "the empty suit."

The part of the speech that caused me to turn it off was when Obama adopted his look of anger and vitriol and proceeded to denounce John McCain in language that was purely outrageous. Find a picture of that anger and you will see the real Obama. Obama is like the angry and outraged anti-war extremists who hate war so much they are perfectly willing to KILL you if you dare disagree with them.

I am not sure that if I wrote this article I would not have called it the Audacity of Hate. He hides it well but Barack Obama is one bitter man who, to paraphrase his famous speech, clings to socialism and abortion.

'I'll Quit US If McCain Gets In'

by Jon Bennett - August 30th, 2008 - Sky News (London)

Asked what he felt it would mean for America if McCain wins the election, Stipe smiled and said: "Well I'd have to move to England" . . .

"It is unfathomable to me as an American and a world citizen that anyone would vote for that man," he said.

Here we go again. Every election there is a parade of left wing extremists, theoretically American, who parade around the world insisting that anyone but the Democrat candidate getting elected would require them to "leave America". They always say these things overseas, I assume so that their hatred for their country will not become common knowledge, yet they are never embarrassed when it gets back to the American people.

I wonder if they ever think about the fact that conservatives NEVER plan to leave America just because a liberal gets elected? Do they think that means we do not hate and despise liberal tyranny? Do liberals never consider that conservatives love our country so much that threatening to leave it just never crosses our minds? When we vent our hatred for an ideology that we see as traitorous to the idea of individual liberty, do they never consider that our denunciation of their acts and positions as treason are because of the number of their fellow travellers who say things like this lead singer for REM has said?

Liberals constantly demand that conservatives not call them traitors, even when we haven't done so. Maybe they react that way because they are surrounded by friends who are traitors to our nation and the guilt is simply too much.

Obama Should Come Clean On Ayers, Rezko And the Iraqi Billionaire

by John Fund - August 30th, 2008 - The Wall Street Journal

Even as Barack Obama gave his soaring speech Thursday night, his campaign was playing hardball with its critics.

Team Obama has launched an offensive against WGN, the Chicago Tribune's radio station, for interviewing Stanley Kurtz. Mr. Kurtz is a conservative writer who this week forced the University of Illinois to finally open its records on Sen. Obama's association with William Ayers, the unrepentant 1970s Weather Underground terrorist.

This is incredible. Barack Obama has stymied and obfuscated on serious issues about his background. There is still no valid birth certificate that proves he is an American citizen and his campaign refuses to allow the State of Hawaii to provide the one that is supposed to be in their files. He has blocked access to the Chicago Annenberg Challenge records to investigate the extent of his ties to Bill Ayers, the America hating Marxist whose home was the location of the fund raiser that launched Obama's career. Latest amazing example of the constant cover up? Obama's application to practice law along with his test to pass the bar are "missing".

However the press is all over the fact that Sarah Palin wanted a state trooper, divorced from her sister, fired after he threatened to kill her father. This is a serious problem but Obama's missing records and connection to radical extremists is simply ignored by the Obama adoring MSM. Obama has become so confident that he can get away with anything that they are now pressuring anyone who dares to criticize Obama.

Coal Back-Up For Wind Power 'Will Cost £100bn'

That's 200 Billion Dollars!

by Jenny Haworth - August 30th, 2008 - The Scotsman

. . . wind energy is so unreliable that even if 13,000 turbines are built to meet EU renewable energy targets, they could be relied on to provide only 7 per cent of the country's peak winter electricity demand.

I wonder if our buddy T Boone Pickens has bothered to investigate the reality that wind rarely blows at night, meaning at the times when we need energy the most we will never be able to rely on wind.

Pelosi In Exchange With McCain Backers

By Berny Morson - August 26th, 2008 - Rocky Mountain News

"Right here? You want to drill right here?" Pelosi asked as John McCain supporters began their chant. "Can we drill your brain?"

Think drilling is needed for America to get control of its energy problems? Nancy Pelosi thinks you are an idiot. Dare to disagree with her and you too can be the recipient of her sarcasm and bile. "Can we drill your brain?" Pelosi asks. Yeah Nancy. Real class there.

Title IX Tied Our Hands At The Olympics

by Phyllis Schlafly - August 26th, 2008 - Townhall.com

Title IX regulations have forced educational institutions to eliminate men's teams until the number of men and women on sports teams is the same ratio as the number of men and women enrolled in academic classes. In the numerous colleges that are now 60 percent female in academic enrollment, Title IX requires that men's teams be eliminated until only 40 percent of the athletes are men.

Title IX quotas have caused the elimination of all but 19 men's college gymnastics teams. This deprives boys of the scholarship incentive to take up gymnastics as a sport in high school and takes away the competition needed to improve their skills in college.

The effect of this injustice hit us hard in Beijing. The Chinese (who are not restricted by feminist nonsense) destroyed our men's gymnastics team and won seven out of eight gold medals, while our men's gymnastics team failed to win a single gold medal in eight events.

Then there is men's freestyle wrestling, a sport that the United States had repeatedly dominated at the Olympics. Over the years, we had won a very high percentage of medals in wrestling.

But Title IX's gender quotas have forced the elimination of 467 wrestling teams from our colleges. This has nothing to do with lack of funding, since wrestling is one of the most inexpensive of sports, it's due to feminist ideology that demands eliminating macho sports in order to meet the foolish Title IX quotas.

Feminists hate men. Let me repeat that. Feminists hate men. Between the anti-white hatred by blacks and Hispanics and the anti male hatred of feminists, America today is a state of tyranny and denigration for young white males. Of course you will find no one who cares about this in government. Even to suggest it invites ridicule and invective. That does not mean that it is just or fair. It also does not mean it will not ultimately face the same backlash that Jim Crow laws and laws that denied women the vote created. It does not mean that the sanctimonious pride of feminists who got Title IX passed to exact their vengeance on males, will without any doubt be the basis for the gender war that white males will wage in years to come against all females, not just feminists.

The same thing applies to affirmative action and the reparations program proposed by the black Democrat who is their candidate for President this year. Hatred of whites by a 12% minority is an amazing display of arrogance. Does the certainty of a backlash never cross the mind of some of those who are demanding that white males today pay a price, not for what they have done, but for what others did in the past before they were born? Does the premise that these people will get even never become a thought?

Europe has spent centuries with one country after another taking its turn on top and then waiting for the vengeance that came around as certainly as the sun rises every day. America is simply playing this same game of vengeance but with different parameters. The consequences will be just as certain.

Equality of opportunity has become the quota driven equality of results. This is not what America stands for.

Obama Seeks To Silence Ad Tying Him To 60s Radical

by Jim Kuhnhenn - August 25th, 2008 - Associated Press

"Barack Obama is friends with Ayers, defending him as, quote, 'Respectable' and 'Mainstream,'" the group's ad states. "Obama's political career was launched in Ayers' home. And the two served together on a left-wing board. Why would Barack Obama be friends with someone who bombed the Capitol and is proud of it? Do you know enough to elect Barack Obama?"

This is the ad that Barack Obama is trying to get banned from TV. Obama says it is lies and that is his reason for wanting it banned. However the question you MUST ask is what is the lie.

Defending Ayers as "Respectable and mainstream" is an exact quote from Obama. Can it be a lie to quote someone?

Claiming Obama's political career was "launched" in Ayers home when it was the site of his first fundraiser is opinion. Opinion cannot be honestly called a lie. Is Obama ashamed of having associated with Ayers? What is the lie?

Ayers created an organization called the Chicago Annenberg Challenge and people involved with that organzation have said that Ayers chose Obama to be the chairman of the organization whose board Ayers also served on. It has been described as having a radical agenda to foster socialism in our schools. Is it a lie to equate this as serving together on a left wing board? Is the characterization of "left-wing" what Obama is calling a lie? Is Obama arguing that it was not an advocay group for radical left wing theories?

Bill Ayers did bomb the Capitol and is still bragging about the fact that he would do it again. Bill Ayers is expressing the opinion that he did not do enough to bring down America. Is Obama saying he is not friends with Bill Ayers? He knows him. He will not denounce him. They have worked together for years on a common agenda. Is it really a "lie" to equate this pattern with friendship?

When did free speech come to mean speech subservient to a poltical agenda of socialists? If Barack Obama is willing to try this hard to end free speech now, what will he do if he gets the powerful federal police force he has advocated to replace our military? How is this Obama agenda not just radical socialism, but fascism as well?

Barack Obama is frightening to anyone who still believes in freedom.

If you doubt that just listen to what David Brooks, New York Times synchophant and Obama supporter claims are Barack Obama's strengths.

He is unconnected with the tired old fights that constrict our politics. He is in tune with a new era. He has very little experience but a lot of potential. He does not have big achievements, but he is authentically the sort of person who emerges in a multicultural, globalized age. He is therefore naturally in step with the problems that will confront us in the years to come.

If you can find anything but vague platitudes in that list, let me know. What I can say is that every one of these statements is provably false, starting with the reality that Obama plays hardball without a qualm. Trying to stop the ad above by intimidating the media is a perfect example of how Obama will govern.

The Verbal Revolution

How the Prague Spring broke world communism's main spring.

by Christopher Hitchens - August 25th, 2008 - Slate

The Ogre does what ogres can,
Deeds quite impossible for Man,
But one prize is beyond his reach,
The Ogre cannot master Speech.
About a subjugated plain,
Among its desperate and slain,
The Ogre stalks with hands on hips
While drivel gushes from his lips.

Christopher Hitchens refers to W.H. Auden, author of the eight line poem above, as "the greatest English-language poet of the 20th century." Not being a reader of poetry, I can only surmise that someone of Hitchens' ability would at the least be speaking of a very accomplished poet.

He uses this poem for a lesson on something that was a powerful time in 20th century history, what has become known as the Prague Spring. It was a time during which the Russian-dominated Soviet Union, and its puppets known as the Warsaw Pact, invaded Czechoslovakia. The importance of this time is reflected in the current invasion of the two Georgian provinces by the remnant of the Soviet Union known as Russia.

Those who are like Hitchens, followers of Marxist thought, saw the Prague Spring as monumental for its fracturing of the unity of socialist thought they had previously proclaimed. Recently that unity has been re-established as one of the premises of the global socialist movement, based strongly on Marxist ideology, which has backed Barack Obama with such passion.

The question that is stressing this movement currently is the impact for Obama of the Georgian invasion. It reminds the world that the global socialist movement has never been free of nationalist impulses from the strongest members of the movement. Nor has unity ever been as solid as it is sometimes perceived. Russia is still the strongest member. The Georgian invasion is a big deal. What is most important is how global socialists view its imnpact on unity.

Hitchens does not answer that question but implies some really good questions of his own with his concluding paragraph.

Now, overt Russian imperialism is back, after a very short absence from the scene, and it is no more amiable or benign from the many toxic resentments it acquired during its period of decline and impotence and eclipse. Its propaganda is no longer bureaucratic and collectivist and prosaic; it has been thickened and enriched by patriotic songs, old poems and ballads, and the hymns and incantations of priests. It is now we, sunk in the banalities of democratic discourse, who stammer to find an apt form of words in which to defend and justify ourselves and our once-again menaced friends to the east.

Hitchens is (as always) a great read. The Prague Spring still has lessons for us as we deal with the global socialist movement's desire to end free enterprise . . . and we had best learn them if we want to retain the basis for our own amazing economic success.

Biden's Brilliance

by Noah Pollak August 24th, 2008 - Commentary Magazine

. . . Biden's 2006 proposal for dividing Iraq into three cantons and withdrawing American forces:

"The idea, as in Bosnia, is to maintain a united Iraq by decentralizing it, giving each ethno-religious group — Kurd, Sunni Arab and Shiite Arab — room to run its own affairs, while leaving the central government in charge of common interests. We could drive this in place with irresistible sweeteners for the Sunnis to join in, a plan designed by the military for withdrawing and redeploying American forces, and a regional nonaggression pact."

The title to this article is the ultimate in sarcasm. If Iraq was divided into three autonomous regions, it would result in a Shia region that would be quickly engulfed by Iran and a Kurdish region that would be invaded by Turkey. The small Sunni region left would have no oil. All of the oil would be in the Kurdish and Shia regions.

Turkey has made it clear that they will only tolerate Iraq's current borders if the Kurdish region of Iraq does not get to retain all of the oil profits and use them to fund the civil war with its own Kurdish region.

As this article indicates, the idea by Biden is borderline insane. It is typical of the Biden propensity for gaffes of monumental proportions. Having this man one heart beat away from the Presidency should not give anyone comfort based on the illusion that he has learned anything in his 36 years in the Senate. The MSM keeps insisting Biden is an expert on foreign affairs. The Biden idea above proves that is nonsense.

We Tilt At Windmills As World War Looms

by Simon Jenkins - August 24th,m 2008 - The London Times

Is the world drifting towards a new global war? From this week the dominant super-power, America, will for three months pass through the valley of the shadow of democracy, a presidential election. This is always a moment of self-absorption and paranoia . . .

Meanwhile, along history’s fault line of conflict from Russia’s European border to the Caucasus and on to Iran, Afghanistan and Pakistan, diplomats are shifting uneasily in their seats, drums are sounding and harsh words are spoken. The world is now run by a generation of leaders who have never known global war. Has this dulled their senses?

This is an interesting look at the world from the liberal perspective. Simon Jenkins dismisses as irrelevant and harmful the concept that Islamo-fascism is, in this day of nuclear proliferation, anything more than a police issue. He also says that we have ignored the threat that states like Russia can cause in the world. Have we?

I don't agree with those assessments, but I do believe he has something when he says that the Presidential election will distract most Americans from the important issues we need to address. We have an economy that is not roaring ahead, but that is nevertheless strong. Unemployment is at classically low levels. We have suffered a horredous blow, due to an amazingly stupid energy policy over several decades, as gas prices have skyrocketed. Yet our economy has not collpased but merely struggled. And this is a problem we can fix by simply ending the idiocy of importing cheap energy and hoping to offset that by using expensive energy.

Yet the attitude of Americans is that our economy is in horrible shape and we are looking for "change". We do not seem to have a clue what that change will be. We have allowed illusions about global warming to become the basis of public policy that transfers nearly a trillion dollars out of our pockets into the pockets of nations that hate us.

Below are the three real threats to our nation. They are not illussions about weather.

We are being invaded by the Hispanic nations of the Americas, especially Mexico, for the transfer of wealth it provides them from $50 billion annually sent home by the alien invaders. We do nothing about it.

We are under attack around the world by the richest elements of Muslim nations who have become mesmerized by the idea of world domination of an Islamic Caliphate. Liberals who hate us as much as these Islamo-fascists invent excuses that we are bringing this on ourselves by not sharing our wealth with their poor. Trying to do "something" to deal with Islamo-fascists has created a partisan war over how to deal with this among our politicians.

Global socialism has not died as some have claimed. Today it is fostered by two separate forces. One force is the idealists who dream of utopia, both here and abroad. Idealists like Barack Obama and his naive quest for change. They are aided by the second force . . . the Totalitarian Nation States such as Russia, China, North Korea, Cuba and Venezuela who combine socialism with their national dreams to attack us. Weakness of military power . . . or weakness of vision combined with waffling commitment to freedom . . . will end our free enterprise based wealth. We are losing this war with even Republicans moving to support government programs and socialism such as Bush's "compassionate conservative" agenda. The major concern is that this threat, global socialism, has both an idealist component and a nation state component and both are real. We are losing the philosophical battle and the public erroneously believes the nation-state battle ended with the death of the soviet union.

These three wars against us, Hispanic economic invasion, Islamo-fascist terrorism and global socialist subversion (or war), must all be resisted. America cannot accept the delusion that we can focus on one war and survive. Resisting in all three wars is needed if we expect to keep freedom and prosperity for our kids.

What Jenkins is right about is that we are tilting at windmills while our nation is at risk.

Eastern Carolina's Oil Riches

One of the things that most infuriates me is the determination of Democrats to pick winners and losers in business. Here in North Carolina that determination has led to a bizarre situation. As noted here, the petroleum industry in North Carolina is "predicted" to be one of the major areas for LOSS of jobs in our state. The reason is that the Democrats have banned drilling off our coast. That has killed Eastern North Carolina's future.

This does not make sense. The shape of our borders makes for some great opportunities, as our borders point outward, putting a huge section of the Atlantic petroleum and natural gas fields within our state. We need to reverse that prediction linked above and make petroleum a source of jobs.

A friend who is a high level petroleum drilling industry manager in Louisiana discussed the future and the history of job creation in off shore drilling where he lives. He is a geologist who has always made his living as what he calls a "mud engineer" in petroleum. Petroleum and natural gas drive the Louisiana economy and have changed the state from being a poor one to being a rich one.

His opinion? North Carolina's petroleum and natural gas is deeper than off Louisiana where he works, but that it is probably just as large a field. We need to find out. However the research will not be done unless the petroleum and natural gas industries can make money.

My friend's prediction? Off shore production in North Carolina could bring 100,000 jobs paying $100,000 in a few short years. That huge job growth would fuel an Eastern North Carolina boom that would end our image as the poor part of the state.

The question I have, "Why are we blocking this?" We are a poor region and the natural gas off the coast of North Carolina could dramatically reduce the heating costs for our poor citizens during our cold winters.

I am an environmentalist and I understand the need to be careful. However I cannot resist pointing out that any environmental problems caused by oil spills has always been a short term problem. They are never permanent. The first major spill, Santa Barbara, happened before much of the technology to prevent or recover from a spill was invented. However within a few short years, it was nearly impossible to find evidence of the spill, even with the most sophisticated scientific measuring devices. The damage was not permanent. I lived in California for many years and have walked most of the beaches affected. They are beautiful and natural and have been since right after the spill back in the 60s. We must retain some perspective

That is one aspect of the problem that is ignored by the environmental extremists. We are causing permanent damage to the economy and putting people's lives subservient to a temporary (and merely potential) problem for the environment. I have always been amused by one quote about environmental damage I heard many years ago. "Sure you have to worry about mother nature, but you must never forget that mother nature is a mean bitch!" Nature is tough. Survival requires you to be tough. We have proved that even a small effort at being environmentally friendly goes a long way to assuring the environment can recover and the damage disappears.

It is not like oil spills do not exist in nature. Every single year there is oil seepage at the depths of the oceans that dwarfs the largest oil spills man has ever caused. These "spills" are dealt with by mother nature and we never even notice them.

America today is the most environmentally protected area of the world. That includes Eastern North Carolina.

Eastern North Carolina could retain its natural beauty and still produce huge amounts of oil and natural gas to make our region rich.

It is time we drill.

The Obama-Ayers Top Ten

Highlights of the 20 year Obama-Ayers Connection

by Steve Diamond - August 10th, 2008 - Global Labor and Politics

If you take the Obama campaign at its word, the contention that there is a relationship between Bill Ayers and Barack Obama is “phony,” “tenuous,” a “stretch.” In Obama's own words, Ayers was "just a guy who lives in my neighborhood," certainly not a long time close political ally.

But a review of just the publicly known highlights of the Ayers-Obama relationship suggests a twenty year pattern of connections between the two.

Thanks to blogger "kat in your hat" for the link to Steve Diamond's blog, Global Labor and Politics. Because of the connection between the global labor market and politics, Ronald Reagan became an expert at the workings of the communist party in his day. Steve Diamond has some astute thoughts on the modern workings of the global socialist movement which has replaced the Soviet Union's influence over socialist thought and the huge number of people, including many Democrats, who are dedicated to the elimination of our free enterprise system.

Here Steve blogs on a related subject, the relationship between the Marxist and global socialist hero Barack Obama and the long term left wing extremist Bill Ayers. Those in politics have little illusion about the close ties between any politician and the people who put on his very first fund raiser. So why does Barack Obama belittle that relationship for his first supporter?

Steve Diamond has documented in the posting above some Obama-Ayers history that anyone who is concerned about Obama should read.

Poll Shows McCain In 5-Point Lead Over Obama

by John Whitesides - August 20th, 2008 - Reuters

In a sharp turnaround, Republican John McCain has opened a 5-point lead on Democrat Barack Obama in the U.S. presidential race and is seen as a stronger manager of the economy, according to a Reuters/Zogby poll released on Wednesday.

[snip]

Obama had opposed new offshore drilling, but said recently he would support a limited expansion as part of a comprehensive energy program . . .

"That hairline difference between nuance and what appears to be flip-flopping is hurting him with liberal voters," Zogby said.

Obama's strength in the extreme left wing of politics is the only area where he has not seen erosion in support. It is interesting that the issue of Ayers is starting to get traction in some secondary media areas. The perception of Obama as a truly radical extremist is the one sure point of attack that will lead to a landslide for McCain if it becomes the common perception.

McCain's advisors have not brought up this issue because it is said to be high risk. Yet more and more articles are coming out addressing Obama's extremist and Marxist views, connection to Bill Ayers [The Weathermen bomber], etc. To have a McCain lead without these issues even getting mainstream coverage is something of a surprise to me.

I have been predicting an Obama victory until now. Could I be wrong? Could his extremist views actually be brought out into the open? McCain leading is an interesting development.

Iran's American Protector

by Caroline Glick - August 18th, 2008 - The Jerusalem Post

Today the US strategic posture lies in tatters in the aftermath of Russia's invasion of US ally Georgia. The fact that aside from issuing strong reprimands the administration has no policy for contending with Russia's aggression shows clearly that the move caught Washington completely by surprise.

That Russia was apparently able to invade Georgia without US foreknowledge is a stinging indictment of all US intelligence agencies. As was the case before the September 11, 2001 attacks, again US intelligence agencies have failed their country.

But America's intelligence agencies' failure to comprehend the significance of Russia's intentions was not theirs alone. It was shared as well by Gates and by his State Department counterpart Condoleezza Rice. Both senior cabinet secretaries simply failed to notice what Russia was doing, or how its actions would influence US interests.

This is of great concern right now. That Robert Gates seems to be following a set of policies that are protecting Iran is an interesting hypothesis from Caroline Glick, the writer of this article.

Musharraf is out in Pakistan. The rumor is that the Royal Family in Saudi Arabaia is "concerned". Russia is invading Georgia and despite repeated statements that they will stop, have not actually done so yet. Problems and fear continue to escalate in Estonia which could be invaded by Russia next. Our current leadership seems clueless in all these things. Even George Bush said he "trusted" Putin. Reagan was never so sloppy in his assessments of Gorbachev.

Who can we trust right now? This is a serious problem and I see no one that can keep things together until we get McCain in to office, assuming he actually wins. It is time for those who love America to start doing something. It would not be a bad idea to read this article. It will certainly shock you with a few facts more of us need to know about.

Chicago Annenberg Challenge Shutdown?

by Stanley Kurtz - August 18th, 2008 - National Review Online

Although Obama actually launched his political career at an event at [Bill] Ayers’s and [Bernardine] Dohrn’s home, Obama has dismissed Ayers as just “a guy who lives in my neighborhood,” and “not somebody who I exchange ideas from on a regular basis.” For his part, Ayers [Weather Underground bomber who still hates America] refuses to discuss his relationship with Obama

The fact that such a close relationship is being so carefully hidden has got to worry anyone who loves America. I cannot get over the casual way the press has ignored Obama's threat to create a Civil Police Security Force "equal to the military in funding". What explains his desire to have at his disposal a powerful police force that is not restricted from being used inside the United States as our current military is restricted? What does Obama need this type of police power to accomplish?

This man with his close relationship to a couple that has hated America for more than 40 years shows little love for the average American. In fact he seems to show total disdain for the average American.

How can we sanely accept that his threat to create this police power, a power not currently in existence and which will exist under the command of the President, does not by itself make him unfit to be President? Who thinks it will be used to do good?

The Marxist Brother

by Burt Prelutsky - August 18th, 2008 - Townhall.com

If you listen to Obama, you’d get the idea that we’re a third world nation, tottering on the edge of poverty. Every word out of his mouth suggests that America is being ground down by corporations when every sane member of the middle class is well aware that the Democrats, who have never met a tax increase they didn’t love or an illegal alien they didn’t see as a potential vote, and who promote class and race warfare as party policy, pose more of a threat to this country than the Soviet Union ever did.

[snip]

The fact is that when asked a direct question, the man turns into a blithering idiot, even though you would imagine that by this late date he would have memorized the appropriate lines. Perhaps the problem is that this new-style politician is so driven by polls that from moment to moment he’s not sure exactly how he feels about the 16-month deadline in Iraq, the surge, offshore drilling for oil, election financing or dividing the city of Jerusalem. Heck, he even changed his opinion about Reverend Wright overnight. On one notable occasion, during the primaries, he was heard to ask if he could just have a moment to finish his waffle. We all thought he was referring to his breakfast. But apparently that wasn’t the case because the man hasn’t stopped waffling yet.

The above is one of three great articles on the campaign that Townhall.com posted today. The other two are:

Above my Pay Grade? by Kevin McCullough

There is no real consequence to telling untruths in the world of the academic elite that Obama stems from. Every time he opens his mouth it is an opportunity for him to appear as though he is weighing multiple sides of an issue and with his smooth articulation drip words that his sycophantic, brainwashed, supporters believe are divinely inspired script.

But they aren't because he's just a man, just like any other man, with temptations, sin, and deficiencies of judgement. Only Obama's deficiencies in judgement seem unparalleled in recent history.

When asked most forthrightly by Warren as to when a child should have its God given rights protected, Obama balked and claimed "knowing when something" that is obviously living, "begins to live" was, "above his pay grade."

And

Pastor Warren's Politicized Pulpit A Mistake by Starr Parker.

Partisanship is not our problem today. Healthy partisanship is vital to freedom.

Our problem is moral ambiguity. Anyone that thinks this ambiguity is helpful in addressing poverty, crime, and disease is misinformed.

We need political leaders that are more moral, not church leaders that are more political.

It is clear that we are getting to that time which is known as "the real campaign"; when issues of consequence are finally being discussed. As the Democrat Party has moved even further to the Marxist side of the political divide, the Republican Party has moved in the same direction. The only way to stop this is to discuss the slide in the most clear and unambiguous fashion. The media today talks in superficial terms. However they do want people to follow what is going on ... at least to the extent they read the MSM. The media wants Americans to determine issues based on what feels good. Not what works. We are the richest county on Earth because of free enterprise. Moving to Marxism will destroy our wealth. That is the problem that Democrats either do not understand or simply ignore.

Like when Barack Obama was asked why he would support a tax change that has always REDUCED tax revenues, he proclaimed that he did not care because it was about fairness. So reducing taxes on the rich is needed to be fair even if it reduces the funds available to pay for needed services? Some of the things Obama says are frightening. This is the most obviously stupid. Obama plans us to spend our way to his utopia. Yet he is perfectly willing to start this great spending spree by reducing tax revenues in search of fairness.

This is simply ... insane.

Brave Old World

by Victor Davis Hanson - August 14th, 2008 - Townhall.com

In reality, to the extent globalism worked, it followed from three unspoken assumptions:

First, the U.S. economy would keep importing goods from abroad to drive international economic growth.

Second, the U.S. military would keep the sea-lanes open, and trade and travel protected.

[snip]

Third, America would ignore ankle-biting allies and remain engaged with the world -- like a good, nurturing mom who at times must put up with the petulance of dependent teenagers.

But there have been a number of indications recently that globalization may soon lose its American parent, who is tiring, both materially and psychologically.

The United States may be the most free, stable and meritocratic nation in the world, but its resources and patience are not unlimited.

It is time we started to slam nations who are clearly not our friends. A couple that come to mind are Saudi Arabia and Pakistan. Both are enemies and are conducting actions that are clearly acts of war. An action we could take right now that would change that is to allow drilling now. This should include both off shore and in areas removed from our cities. As a part of the enabling legislation we need to expedite the leasing process, block the leases from lawsuits by environmental extremists, assure that tax breaks for oil corporations are dependent on investment in drilling, start a slowly escalating import duty on oil not drilled here in America and expedite new refineries to process the oil.

We need to expedite development of natural gas, oil shale and oil sands by providing more aggressive tax incentives for these fuels. We need to encourage economical use of oil by increasing fuel economy standards and reducing tax incentives for use of oil in energy intensive vehicles. We should not shoot ourselves in the foot by punishing trucking which very cost effectively moves our produce.

We also need to look harder at all countries that oppose us, such as China and India. They are not going to import our goods to make up for our open doors because we are such gullible suckers. Stop this idiocy and make it clear, open up your borders too or watch ours close.

Iraq's Budget Surplus Scandal

by Christopher Hitchens - August 10th, 2008 - Slate

One day I will publish my entire collection of upside-down Iraq headlines, where the true purport of the story is the inverse of the intended one.

[snip]

. . . what used to happen to Iraq's oil wealth, which was prostituted through a U.N. program and diverted to such noble causes as the subsidy of suicide bombers in Gaza and the financing of pro-Saddam and "anti-war" politicians in London, Paris, and Moscow.

You know, the kind of politicians that are aligned with Barack Obama in the current campaign. Perhaps that is why Obama is so stubbornly anti-war to this day. There is a global marxist campaign against individual freedom and free enterprise. The resurgence of Russian expansionism is proof the claim of death for the socialist economic system was premature. Obama is riding that global socialist movement to the Presidency of the United States. Many in America don't seem to recognize that the movement even exists.

The ongoing success in this Iraq battleground in the greater war against Islamo-fasacism, especially when predicted by such adherents as Paul Wolfowitz, should count for something. Even more important is Christopher's belief, "Surely it is those who opposed every step of this emancipation, rather than those who advocated it, who should be asked to explain and justify themselves."

Think the liberal American press will agree? Don't hold your breath. Democrats will never be asked to explain their antipathy to ridding the world of this monster. Any more than they will be called to account for their indirect support for the Islamo-fascisim movement that is still planning to destroy us.

Dems' Ostrich Approach On Oil

by Deroy Murdock - August 11th, 2008 - The New York Post

. . . to pinpoint America's offshore oil deposits, congressional Democrats, starting with Sen. Barack Obama, love disco-era maps. Despite his conditional support for limited offshore drilling, Obama is the sole sponsor of legislation that would block geological research to locate offshore oil.

[snip]

Contemporary 4-D surveying adds the dimension of time. Satellites help find and quantify subsea deposits, track their flows, and predict their next steps. Some 70 percent of 4-D wells hit oil.

Obama's Don't Ask, Don't Drill policy spurns these marvels and embraces outdated information gathered with obsolete instruments. This is the audacity of ignorance.

Is there anyone who wants to challenge the idea that Obama is not seriously committed to drilling for oil? This is typical of his cynical approach to politics. His real supporters are hard core environmental extremists. He is claiming to support drilling while sabotaging the actual process. His supporters note that and laugh at anyone gullible enough to think he has changed his mind.

It is becoming more and more obvious that Barack Obama believes in change . . . that is changing his rhetoric . . . not his true beliefs. His early supporters were Marxists and he is remaining true to their principals.

America needs to wake up to what will happen if this charlatan gets power.

Democracy --- A Flickering Star?

by Patrick Buchanan - August 8th, 2008 - Human Events

What calls to mind the popularity of the Third Reich and the awe it inspired abroad --- even after the bloody Roehm purge and the Nazi murder of Austrian Chancellor Dollfuss in 1934, and the anti-Semitic Nuremberg laws --- is a poll buried in The New York Times.

In a survey of 24 countries by Pew Research Center, the nation that emerged as far and away first on earth in the satisfaction of its people was China. No other nation even came close.

"Eighty-six percent of Chinese people surveyed said they were content with the country's direction, up from 48 percent in 2002. ... And 82 percent of Chinese were satisfied with their national economy, up from 52 percent," said the Times.

[snip]

Contrast, if you will, the contentment of Chinese and Russians with the dissatisfaction of Americans, only 23 percent of whom told the Pew poll they approved of the nation's direction. Only one in five Americans said they were satisfied with the U.S. economy.

Democrats constantly berate Americans and insist we need to give our wealth to our failures, the poor. In the nation with the greatest personal freedom in the history of the world, anyone who has not succeeded is told it is not their fault. Be resentful. Others owed you success and they did not give it. Therefore you can demand more material wealth from those who worked for it. Who cares what the hard workers feel. Tell them they are scum for succeeding.

Democrats also tell Americans that we have no reason to be proud. Our culture is no better than any other. Glorify the attributes of others and be ashamed of your success. At the same time, Russia and China are telling their people that they are better than America. They say we don't deserve our great success. We are weak and they are strong. Though they are not close to having our level of prosperity, the difference in attitude is clear. Extol national pride and people will tolerate tyranny and autocratic control. Berate the successes in a nation and the nation will be unhappy no matter how free.

Though I do not agree with Patrick Buchanan on much, I do respect his ability to see the insanity of our current political dialog. No one in America is allowed to be proud and compare our nation favorably. Yet we are the greatest nation on earth. A great number of the people who live here though hate us and spew vitriol at their fellow citizens. We are told we must be tolerant of their hate.

It is interesting how little time it took for the greatness of our system to be turned against us.

Keeping It Rielle

by Maureen Dowd - August 9th, 2008 - The New York Times

The stunning admission Edwards made to ABC’s Bob Woodruff, and in a written statement from Chapel Hill on Friday afternoon, was that he’s a narcissist.

He admitted that wallowing in “self-focus” out on the trail and thinking you’re “special” can result in a solipsism that “leads you to believe you can do whatever you want, you’re invincible and there’ll be no consequences.”

Auto-psychoanalysis by the perp. That’s really rich.

You have to give Maureen Dowd credit. She can be as sarcastic and belittling to liberal males as she is to conservative males. I don't know if this man hater can be as dismissive to fellow women. She has, nevertheless, written an article about the North Carolina egotist John Edwards that is worth reading. It points out the true story is about sex by a narcissist. I am curious. Is Rielle Hunter less of a narcissist? She has successfully gotten one former lover to write a book about her. Will Maureen Dowd write sarcastically about Edwards' lover? Or are women off limits?

The reality is that we still do not know all the truth. The mainstream press seems to be ignoring that the latest round of stories came out because Edwards was caught in a hotel with the lady and the child he swears is not his. He claims the affair ended in 2006. What was he doing in the hotel? He claims he is willing to take a test over paternity. The mother refuses to allow her child to be tested . . . to protect her child she claims. Is she doing this because she hopes that the two of them will still get together and Edwards has made it clear that will only happen if she protects him?

Stay tuned. Somehow I don't think this song has ended yet.

The Democrat Plan For Losing

by Charles Krauthammer - August 8th, 2008 - Townhall.com

The green fuels the Democrats insist we should be investing in are as yet uneconomical, speculative technologies, still far more expensive than extracted oil and natural gas. We could be decades away. And our economy is teetering. Why would you not drill to provide a steady supply of proven fuels for the next few decades as we make the huge technological and economic transition to renewable energy?

Congressional Democrats demand instead a clampdown on "speculators." The Democrats proposed this a month ago. In the meantime, "speculators" have driven the price down by $25 a barrel. Still want to stop them? In what universe do traders only bet on the price going up?

The article talks about the Democrat plan to "invest" in "green" sources of energy. Let's just remember how rarely government has successfully invested in anything. Picking winners has never been government's forte. Tyranny has always been the one thing government is good at.

I keep trying to remind people the primary goal of liberals is to implement socialist domination of our people. They are wrong when they say man is causing global warming. They are wrong when they say we are running out of oil. They are wrong when they oppose nuclear. They are wrong when they oppose drilling.

However I need to remind everyone that polls claim the American people trust Democrats far more than they trust Republicans. Democrats are proud of that support and are far more concerned with people who support socialist redistribution of wealth than with anyone who works hard for a living.

Reparations By Another Name

Editorial - August 8th, 2008 - Investor's Business Daily

Barack Obama says Washington shouldn't just offer apologies for slavery, but also "deeds." Don't worry, he says, he's not talking about direct reparations. Relieved? Don't be.

[snip]

A few days later, he clarified his remarks, saying he's not calling for direct cash payments to descendants of slaves, but rather indirect aid in the form of government programs that will "close the gap" between what he sees as white America and black America.

[snip]

In other words, reparations by another name.

This is one article that came out recently explaining even more clearly the Marxist goals of Barack Obama. In this case it targets 12% of the American population for special aid based on the actions of "honkies" (the preferred term by those who advocate reparations) who ensalved some of the black population's forebears in the 18th and 19th centuries. The aid will benefit recent immigrants from Africa who have voluntarily come to our nation long after these actions had ended and could not have thus been harmed by these ancestors. Interestingly it will also target for taxation descendants of the 360,000 whites who died in the Civil War to free the slaves, along with the millions of abolitionists who fought to end this scourge, to pay for this special treatment. How is this just? Haven't their families paid the price already? How many times do they have to pay a price for something they not only did not do but actively opposed?

Another article shows exactly how little love Obama has for this nation.

"America Is No Longer What It Could Be, What It Once Was." - Barack Obama

"And I say to myself, 'I don’t want that future for my children.'” --Barack Obama, 8/7/08, in response to the question of a 7-year old on why he was running for president.

Study that for a moment. Let it sink in.

Ask yourself "What could Barack Obama possibly mean?"

At least one question you have to ask Obama is what is the period he is pointing to when America was "what it once was"? Nothing in his program for change will return us to a period from the past. Everything in his program is taking us further down the road to Marxism, something that has never been what America stood for. When is redistribution of wealth expected to be anything but the tyrannical disaster for us that it has been for every country that has ever tried it?

The reality is that Obama is a charlatan, hiding devious wealth redistribution programs for our nation under ambiguous rhetoric of soaring unattainable idealism. Idealism he does not begin to believe because he is in fact a hard nosed left wing politician who plays the political game with a viciousness not seen in years.

Solzhenitsyn: 'Spiritual Death Has... Touched Us All'

by Alexander Solzhenitsyn - February 12th, 1974 - Washington Post (reprinted)

And he who is not sufficiently courageous even to defend his soul -- don't let him be proud of his "progressive" views, and don't let him boast that he is an academician or a people's artist, a merited figure, or a general --let him say to himself: I am in the herd, and a coward. It's all the same to me as long as I'm fed and warm.

[snip]

"Why should cattle have the gifts of freedom? Their heritage from generation to generation is the belled yoke and the lash."

I remember when Alexander Solzhenitsyn was the hero of the right, and the left reviled him. Now, in typical revisionist history, the progressives he reviled for their tolerance of Stalin, Kruschev, Gorbachev and even Putin, are claiming him as their own and arguing that he was fighting against the people who protected him and raised him up.

It is a part of the battle here in America against the socialist, even Marxist, ideology. This tendency to reinvent "truth" by the left is curious. Truth was the great ideal of Sozhenisyn. It was the banner in which he led a battle that attracted the brightest and best. It is sad that the very people that he ridiculed, progressives, now claim him as one of their own. The Republican Party has its own problems with seeing the truth. All you have to do is witness the willingness to embrace socialism under the name of "compassionate conservatism" to recognize how easily we can deceive ourselves. However Solzhenitsyn is too courageous and too honest to allow this rewriting of history by those he opposed in life.

We need to honor Solzhenitsyn and his quest for truth. We must not allow his memory to be degraded. He was . . . and is . . . a great man.

Explosive Issue Of Race Hits Obama-McCain Campaign

by Liz Sidoti - August 1st, 2008 - Breitbart (AP)

Until now, the subject of race has been almost taboo in the campaign, at least in public, with both sides fearing its destructive force.

"I'm disappointed that Senator Obama would say the things he's saying," McCain told reporters in Racine, Wis. The Arizona senator said he agreed with campaign manager Rick Davis' statement earlier that "Barack Obama has played the race card, and he played it from the bottom of the deck. It's divisive, negative, shameful and wrong." The aide was suggesting McCain had been wrongfully accused.

In turn, Obama campaign manager David Plouffe said, "We weren't suggesting in any way he's using race as an issue" but that McCain "is using the same, old low-road politics that voters are very unhappy about to distract voters from the real issues in this campaign."

A couple of weeks back in Florida Obama started this line of attack saying, "They're going to try to make you afraid. They're going to try to make you afraid of me. He's young and inexperienced and he's got a funny name. And did I mention he's black?" Obviously that was too obvious, so he replaced the last sentence with "he doesn't look like all those other presidents on the dollar bills" in later speeches.

Having used the word specifically, it is amusing to see the fraudulent statements that Obama's comments didn't mention black and so it is McCain who is bringing race into the campaign. Obama's campaign acts like the earlier statements in Florida don't count if he revises them to be duplicitous and vague. It is outrageous how the press twists everything to protect Obama and attack McCain. So they of course let the Obama campaign get away with this evasion. Then again, how can anyone be surprised?