Print This E-mail This

ShareThis

Comments (0)

Remember to visit "Never Find Out.org?" - CLICK HERE TO VIEW THE INFORMATION.

 

 

Kathryn Jean Lopez, NRO.com

 

‘She has ignited something unusual,” John McCain said of his running mate, Sarah Palin, during a St. Louis-area radio interview earlier this week.

 

In a sense it’s nothing at all unusual. It’s all too usual and common. It’s just not what Washington tends to send out on the campaign trail. It took an outsider to change American politics.

 

“I’m a simple talker,” Palin told Rush Limbaugh when she called in to the talk-radio king and his 20 million or so listeners on Tuesday.

 

As Rush framed it, she is waging a campaign against most of the mainstream media in this country. Palin is representing “good, commonsense, patriotic hard-working Americans” — the people who don’t always feel adequately represented: for example, when the mortgage industry collapses, and they see themselves bailing out irresponsible people because the people they sent to Washington looked the other way while a quasi-governmental agency gave cut-rate loans to undeserving borrowers.

 

“He picked someone who does not have to pretend to relate to me, my family, and the challenges we face every day.”

 

That comes from an e-mail I received this week. It reflects thousands of e-mails that I have received since John McCain chose Sarah Palin as his running mate. It is a very different attitude toward the Arizona senator’s choice of the Alaskan governor than you’ll hear from others. Read article.

 

One Cosmos.Blogspot.com

 

I was reading an article at American Thinker, Sarah Palin and the Narcissistic Wounds of the Left, when an important point clicked into place. The click was so loud, it made my household gnome, Petey, jump out of his skinlessness.

 

Lewis notes how, for the left, Obama "is entitled to the presidency." You see, for them "It's only justice. Think about that word 'justice' and try filling in 'revenge.' 'Social justice' means the revenge of the poor against the rich, of the radical women against the men who've stood them up and hurt their feelings all their lives, and the revenge of black people finally doin' down the whites -- as Jeremiah Wright makes so abundantly clear."

 

What the left calls "social justice" is actually "the revenge of the psychologically oppressed against people who look happier and more satisfied with their lives." As such, it is intimately related to the psychoanalytic understanding of envy, which is an unconscious mechanism that goes about destroying what one does not have, in order to eliminate the emotional pain of not having it. Read article.

 

Jay Ambrose, ScrippsNews.com

 

So now, in the midst of a financial disaster, presidential polls indicate we will elect Barack Obama, the man who practically cheered this mess on and now promotes ideas that would worsen it.

 

I know, I know, he's a saint, and it doesn't matter that he emerged out of a shady Chicago political machine. Or that his community organizer days accomplished nothing. Or that he hobnobbed with a racist preacher and a now-convicted influence peddler. Or that he evaded tough issues with "present" votes in the Illinois legislature.

 

No question, he is eloquent and smart. He is also inexperienced and a consistent leftist, but let's focus first on how his solutions to a situation brought about by excess are more excess. He wants ultra-spending to pay employers for creating jobs, to further subsidize mismanaged auto corporations, to dish out dough to undisciplined cities and states, and to wrap an extreme welfare state around the citizenry.

 

His craving, in short, is for more of the extravagance now bringing us to our knees. But then, considering his other campaign enthusiasms, this instinct for simplistic, interventionist overreach should come as no surprise.

 

We have, after all, witnessed his regulatory gusto, his sense that anything goes to bring unions back to power, his anti-trade demagoguery, his desire to take from one portion of the population to give freebies to the rest, his implied stance that government is the one-and-only answer for everything and an apparent desire to spend us into oblivion. Read article.

 

Mike Gallagher, Townhall.com

 

I understand what it means to fight hard, but fight fair. After a lifetime of making my living offering opinions on the radio, I try and follow that philosophy each and every day.

 

Many of us wear our beliefs on our sleeves. You know where we stand on issues, ideology and politicians.

 

But we don’t lie.

 

We don’t make stuff up out of whole cloth in a desperate attempt to win the argument.

 

We find it repulsive to try and trick people into believing things that aren’t true.

 

And after this week’s third and final presidential debate, I was dumbfounded by the audacity of lies that came from the Democrat candidate on that Hofstra University stage.

 

I know that calling someone – anyone – a liar is a serious charge. But in just one brief period of time, Sen. Obama demonstrated his enthusiasm for outright falsehoods, over and over again.

 

The lies ranged from the silly to the intricate. Read article.

 

Obama's agenda: Forcing us to 'share'

Editorial, UnionLeader.com

 

The devil hath power………To assume a pleasing shape. -- "Hamlet," Act II, Scene 2.

 

There is no question, Barack Obama the man is a new and exciting presence on the national stage. His plan for governing this country is not. It is nothing more than failed redistributionism wrapped in pretty new paper. That isn't change. It is a failure of imagination. And it is a betrayal of trust in the American people and of the ideals on which this great and free nation was founded.

 

Sen. Barack Obama overflows with disarming charm and silver-plated oratory. In his visits to New Hampshire, he has made crowds of thousands swoon. He promises the most pleasing of things: purity in government, harmony on earth. Poets champion him; artists enshrine him; romantics love him.

 

This dashing figure might be weeks away from elevation to the most powerful position in the history of the world. Soothed by the pleasing tones and comforting words of Obama's rhetoric, too few Americans have asked themselves what this man would actually do with so much power if given it.

 

Removing Obama's glistening rhetorical veneer, what one finds at the core of his campaign is the rotting carcass of American socialism -- that is, socialism leavened with certain freedoms granted at the pleasure of the government, and removable at its displeasure. Read article.

 

Arnold Ahlert, PoliticalMavens.com

 

The ascendancy of Americans who believe somebody “owes” them something without regard to mitigating factors such as hard work, ambition and personal responsibility is breath-taking.

 

Barack Obama’s entire political philosophy is based on the premise that America is essentially flawed. Not essentially good with some tweaking needed, but a net minus as a nation. That this essential contempt for America resonates with the likes of Jeremiah Wright, Bill Ayers, Jesse Jackson, Louis Farrakhan, Hollywood celebrities, and the mainstream media is nothing new. Hating one’s country–even as it has made you rich and/or famous–is what much elitist behavior is all about.

 

The rise of Barack Obama suggests that this contempt is no longer limited to the ivory towers of academe, Manhattan or San Francisco cocktail parties, the mainstream media, the aging hippies, the radicals, the misfits and the neer-do-wells. It suggests that we may have reached a watershed moment in American history: those who disdain this country may finally outnumber those who love it. Those who complain may outnumber those who achieve. Those who take may outnumber those who give.

 

Perhaps Barack Obama is truly a man ahead of his time. He has seemingly tapped into a wellspring of discontent as powerful as it is misguided. “Robbing Peter to pay Paul” sounds attractive–but only as as long as one has a steady supply of Peters ready,willing, and able to be bludgeoned by suffocating government. Read article.

Atlas Shrugs.com

 

Among the 72 individuals and organizations that contributed money to Odinga's 2007 presidential run in Kenya, Shabbir lists "Friends of Senator B.O." as having donated 66,000,000 Kenyan schillings, about $950,000.

 

Saif el-Islam Gadhafi, the Libyan strongman's second oldest son, reportedly donated 53,450,000 Kenyan schillings, about $765,000.

 

According to a document obtained by WND, Obama was a major contributor to the violent agitator and brutal dictator Raila Odinga.

 

This page from a memo prepared by the head of Raila Odinga's campaign finance accounting section shows donations to the Kenyan leader by "friends" of Sen. Barack Obama and a son of Libyan dictator Muammar Gadhafi.

 

Back on January 4th, Dr. Wheeler and I broke the story of Obama's nefarious support and alliance with Obama's bias for his fellow Luo was so blatant that a Kenya government spokesman denounced Obama during his visit as Raila's "stooge." Kenya, once a shining beacon of democracy in Africa, was hurled into of Odinga fueled violence and ethnic cleansing.

 

Obama raised a million dollars for this violent inciter? From where? Foreign sources? The same foreign soures illegally funding his own presidential campaign? Read article.

 

Ross Mackenzie, Townhall.com

 

If the economy has taken a clear No. 1 position - beyond terror and national security - as the issue of most concern to the voters, why is the McCain-Palin ticket spending so much time attacking Barack Obama for his past associations?

 

Because the fundamental issue in this campaign is Obama - his values, his beliefs, his character. Having done practically zero as an Illinois state senator, and absolutely zero during three years in the U.S. Senate, Obama has no substantive legislative record. So we're left with judging him (a) by what he says (and he has an oily ability to say anything on just about every side of every issue), and (b) by the company he keeps (and has kept).

 

But what does it matter - really - that he hung around with William Ayers for a decade, sat for two decades in the pews of Jeremiah Wright, was enabled early in his political career by imprisoned real-estate developer Antoin "Tony" Rezko, or retains as a campaign advisor a past head of Fannie Mae?

 

Let me count the ways. (1) Ayers is an unrepentant domestic Osama who bombed buildings in which people died. He's currently an advisor to Venezuela's America-hating Hugo Chavez. (2) Wright is a racial separatist who has sermonized saying egregious things.

Obama has repudiated the actions and statements of both. He has added that he hardly knew Ayers and, while a church-member, never heard Wright's hateful preachings.

 

Of course he has. What's more (3) Rezko was central to launching Obama into politics, and represents a major tie to the Chicago machine that raised Obama up. (4) Raines headed Fannie Mae from 1998 to 2004, the years when it did its worst, for which he walked away with nearly $100 million in salary and bonuses. The collapse of Fannie is a huge factor in the mayhem currently hammering the financial markets.

 

It's so mean, so extreme, even racist - and certainly desperate - for John McCain and Sarah Palin to bring these things up.

 

Let's speculate. If McCain - for instance - boasted Enron's Ken Lay as a campaign advisor (compare Raines), or had held an early-career campaign fund-raiser in the house of an unrepentant bomber of abortion clinics (compare Ayers), or had dozed through 20 years of sermons by a white-supremacist minister, would it be mean and extreme to mention them?

 

Obama terms it "erratic," "cheap," and a McCain gamble "that he can distract you with smears." It's hardly fair, as Sarah Palin does regarding Obama's associations with Ayers, for example, to say that Obama has "palled around with terrorists who would target their own country."

 

How is it unfair if it's true? Sure Obama wants to parry and deflect attention from these associations. He prefers not to discuss them, wishes they would go away. He understands as well as anyone that they testify to his own judgment in the past and to his honesty about them now. Judgment and honesty lie at the heart of character. Read article.

Amil Imani, American Thinker.com

 

Senator Obama's greatest weakness is his past, a deliberately obscured past that MSM is fiercely trying to make look irrelevant. He, as a sequacious politician, always toes their party's line. Regrettably, a large segment of the population goes along with some irresponsible leftists such as Bill Maher, (a humbug), who, in March 2, 2007 stated, "I'm just saying if he [Dick Chaney] did die, other people, more people would live. That's a fact."

 

Please let me assure you, I do not say that Mr. Obama is a bad person. I say he's not the right person for America. He would lead this country to an abyss. The presidency of the United States is a very prestigious position which entails a great deal of skill, wisdom and high moral values. It cries out for integrity and truthfulness.

 

It is said that you can tell a great deal about people by the company they keep. And who has been Senator Obama's close associates and mentors for many years, a partial list is given below: Read article.

 

Larry Elder, Townhall.com

 

Democratic presidential contender Barack Obama promises to "cut taxes for 95 percent of American workers." That's not possible.

 

Why? More than 30 percent pay nothing in federal income taxes. Obama comes up with this number by calling tax credits "tax cuts." One can debate whether these things are good or bad, but they are not tax cuts.

 

McCain offers refundable tax credits for health care, as well as other credits, but he doesn't insult the intelligence of the American people by calling them "tax cuts." When Obama's credits go to people who pay no federal income taxes or who pay less than the value of the credit, they are not "tax cuts." They are transfers of money from one pocket to another, or redistributions of wealth, but they are not tax cuts.

 

Republican candidate John McCain should tell people in real, human terms how hiking taxes on the so-called rich affects us all. Read article.

Ronald Kessler, NewsMax.com

 

If Barack Obama wins the presidency, he will endanger the country by making us more vulnerable to terrorist attacks, the vice chairman of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence tells Newsmax.

 

Obama “would so weaken our security forces that I personally believe that we would be in much greater danger of terrorist attacks in the United States and abroad,” says Sen. Kit Bond, R-Mo. “I’m very much concerned, because he’s shown weak judgment throughout his career. Throughout his campaign he has taken one position after another that just doesn’t make sense in fighting the war on terror.”

 

Obama voted twice in favor of requiring warrants to intercept communications of foreign terrorists situated overseas, including Osama bin Laden, Bond says.

 

“He voted for all of the amendments to weaken the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act bill and fought to strip it of its power,” Bond says. Read article.

Paul Eidelberg, Political Mavens.com 

 

Senator John McCain and Governor Sarah Palin may lose the November election unless they speak like real mavericks and distinguish their political positions more sharply from those of their mediocre opponents. They are trailing in the polls for several reasons. The most decisive reason is their own mediocre performance. They are preoccupied too much with bread-and-butter issues on which they cannot score many points. Most significant, however, is their avoidance of the paramount issue confronting America, an issue that transcends the present economic crisis but which can arouse and inspire most Americans.   America is at war. To win this war we need to understand ourselves as well as the enemy. This is a two-fold task that McCain and Palin have failed to address in a serious way.

 

The enemy is not Islamic extremists that have hijacked Islam. Brave women such as Dr. Wafa Sultan, Ayaan Hirsi Ali, and Brigitte Gabriel, born and raised respectively in Syria, Somalia, and Lebanon, have shown that the enemy is simply Islam, a religion whose disciples have reportedly slaughtered millions “infidels” since the time of Muhammad.

 

Without mentioning this horrible fact, it needs to said that the principle of Jihad is diametrically opposed to the principles of the American Declaration of Independence, for example: “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness.” 

 

Of the many issues that need to be clarified in the campaign, none is more crucial that Iran. No one should underestimate the dangerous ambition of Iran, a nation of 70 million people whose mullahs are driven by a 1,400-year tradition of Islamic imperialism. Here are some facts that McCain and Palin need to convey: Read article.

 

Salena Zito, Pittsburgh Live.com

 

Most Americans wake every morning to news that Barack Obama will win next month's presidential election. Strategists even say the word "landslide" aloud.

 

Every poll shows it, every pundit echoes it, and every analyst predicts it -- therefore it must be true, right?

 

Let's take this political axiom to some of those who do the predicting, to project what America will look like under an Obama administration, governing with a Democrat congressional majority led by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid.

 

One insider, who refuses to predict on the record, says privately that Obama will quickly announce his appointments to the Cabinet positions of state, defense, treasury and attorney general. He believes Obama's Cabinet is shaping up to look like this: retiring U.S. Sen. Chuck Hagel, R-Neb., as defense secretary; Massachusetts Democrat Gov. Deval Patrick as attorney general; New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg, a political independent, at treasury; Susan Rice as national security adviser; Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass., as secretary of state. Read article.