Tom Barrett, Conservative Truth.org

 

Obama has promised “change,” and, if elected, he’ll make sure we get it. The result of his “change” will be that you won’t have any paper money in your pockets – all you’ll have is change. If you think we have economic problems, wait until you see the changes Obama’s Socialism will bring to America. (For a preview, consider the devastation Obama-style economic “reform” brought to Russia: economic ruin, complete with bread lines.)

 

Why am I talking about Socialism? Everyone knows that this election is about the economy, right? Not really. It’s about MONEY. Following this election, either Capitalism or Socialism will control the economy, and thus the money.

 

Guess who got the money after the Russian Revolution? The Communist Party leaders. Sure, they gave wonderful speeches about how the ordinary comrade in the streets would have more money after their Glorious Revolution. But we all know what happened. The comrades were soon starving in the streets. And the party leaders were living in luxury. Read article.

 

Editorial, NY Post.com

 

Clearly, much is at stake Nov. 4.

 

When Barack Obama talks about wealth redistribution, he really means it.

 

He doesn't just want to spread it around himself, as he so famously told Joe "The Plumber" Wurzelbacher.

 

He yearns also to change the Constitution so that the courts can divvy the loot, too.

 

No joke: He said as much in 2001.

 

On a radio show in 2001, Obama called it "a tragedy" that the '60s civil-rights movement lost track of "community organizing and activities on the ground" - think ACORN - "through which you bring about redistributive change."

 

The audio went on the Web yesterday.

 

"The Supreme Court never ventured into the issues of redistribution of wealth and . . . economic justice," Obama says regretfully. But he sees a clear "rationale for bringing about economic change through the courts" - though such a route, he says, may be impractical.

 

"You start getting into all sorts of separation of powers issues," he notes. The Democrat also complains that the Constitution "doesn't say what the federal government or the state government must do on your behalf."

 

If only he were president to do the "administering," he must have thought . . . Read article.

 

Steven G. Calabresi, OnlineWSJ.com

 

One of the great unappreciated stories of the past eight years is how thoroughly Senate Democrats thwarted efforts by President Bush to appoint judges to the lower federal courts.

 

Consider the most important lower federal court in the country: the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. In his two terms as president, Ronald Reagan appointed eight judges, an average of one a year, to this court. They included Robert Bork, Antonin Scalia, Kenneth Starr, Larry Silberman, Stephen Williams, James Buckley, Douglas Ginsburg and David Sentelle. In his two terms, George W. Bush was able to name only four: John Roberts, Janice Rogers Brown, Thomas Griffith and Brett Kavanaugh.

 

Although two seats on this court are vacant, Bush nominee Peter Keisler has been denied even a committee vote for two years. If Barack Obama wins the presidency, he will almost certainly fill those two vacant seats, the seats of two older Clinton appointees who will retire, and most likely the seats of four older Reagan and George H.W. Bush appointees who may retire as well.

 

The net result is that the legal left will once again have a majority on the nation's most important regulatory court of appeals. Read article.

 

David Limbaugh.com

 

I am sincerely worried that if Obama wins, the checks and balances incorporated into our Constitution may not be enough to prevent a radical and irreversible diminution of our individual liberties because a confluence of factors has emerged to create a climate conducive to fundamental change.

 

These factors are: a shockingly unknown candidate, whose mysterious past and numerous shady alliances are deliberately left unexplored by a corrupt, supportive media; the candidate's charismatic qualities that inspire a cultish loyalty; his intellectual trappings that create a fascination and allure among the intellectual elite, including some hypnotized conservatives; a major financial crisis that exacerbates the people's fears and uncertainties; a largely manufactured cloud of negativity placed over America by the media and a grossly partisan Democratic Party that places its self-interest above the national interest; and an apparently discredited Republican Party and conservative movement that have been blamed for our actual and perceived problems.

 

All of these could lead to entrusting this man with unprecedented power, giving him a license to operate with minimum scrutiny and an opposition party effectively impotent to oppose his radical blueprint for America. Read article.

 

Thomas Sowell, Townhall.com

 

Although Senator Barack Obama has been allied with a succession of far left individuals over the years, that is only half the story. There are, after all, some honest and decent people on the left. But these have not been the ones that Obama has been allied with-- allied, not merely "associated" with.

 

ACORN is not just an organization on the left. In addition to the voter frauds that ACORN has been involved in over the years, it is an organization with a history of thuggery, including going to bankers' homes to harass them and their families, in order to force banks to lend to people with low credit ratings.

 

Nor was Barack Obama's relationship with ACORN just a matter of once being their attorney long ago. More recently, he has directed hundreds of thousands of dollars their way. Money talks-- and what it says is more important than a politician's rhetoric in an election year. Read article.

 

Col. Bob Pappas, Gulf1.com

 

I have predicted for months that Obama will not be elected to the Presidency. I did not know the why with scientific precision, but had a good feel for it. First, despite spending about 600 million dollars, easily the most money any person has spent in pursuit of the office, and hundreds of millions of favorable media promotion that incidentally qualifies as donations in kind by any reasonable standard, Obama is barely ahead in the polls, in my opinion probably not at all and speaks volumes of un-polled information.

 

Second, if anyone besides me is watching, listening and reading, it is evident that the Obama campaign has shifted into the "band wagon" mode. Such things as "meeting with his transition team," "the lead in the polls," "U.N. praying that he will be elected," media coverage of a "world waiting with bated breath," and etc. etc. Obama would not need the propaganda effort if this were going to be the slam-dunk that the left is predicting. The truth is, they are scared that despite all of their effort, money and lying, the election is slipping through their fingers and they are powerless to do anything about it. Read article.

 

Burt Prelutsky, Townhall.com

 

These days, I am perplexed in a similarly frustrating fashion by the rapture induced by Barack Obama. I know for a fact that not every single Democrat is an ignoramus, that not every last liberal has the emotional instability of a giddy teenage girl in the presence of a rock star, and that not all left-wingers actually believe that the junior senator is a messiah who will make the blind see and the lame dance a jig. For that matter, I’m certain they realize he will not bring the dead to life, although his disciples in ACORN will try to make sure they get to vote.

 

Why is it that people who should know better -- adults, I’m talking about, not the kids being indoctrinated on college campuses by tenured Communists and former terrorists -- are falling for Obama’s call for class warfare?

 

Why are so many Americans so eager to accept that corporations are the enemy when corporations not only provide employment, but pay dividends to tens of millions of middle-class Americans either directly or through their pension funds? Why are the same folks who are waging war on corporate America so reluctant to utter even an unkind word about Islamic terrorism? Read article.

 

Melanie Phillips, Spectator.co.uk

 

What’s happening in this terrifying, Orwellian US presidential race is the flip side of the madness that’s been on display since 9/11 itself, when swathes of the UK population decided that ‘America had it coming to it’ because it supported Israel, and that George W Bush was the most dangerous man on the planet.

 

After the Iraq war started this irrationality swelled into pathological proportions on both sides of the Atlantic, when the ‘Bush lied, people died’ narrative fuelled a hatred of Bush and ‘the neocons’ exceeded in its hallucinatory and murderous venom only by the truly deranged way in which the media and intelligentsia systematically either ignored evidence that did not fit this narrative or, even more astoundingly, reported it in such a way that it delivered the opposite of what was actually happening or being said.

 

In this way not only has history been rewritten, not only have Britain and America been to a greater or lesser extent turned against themselves and demoralised by the propaganda of their mortal enemies recycled as truth by our fifth-column Big Media, but they have been incited to an ugly and dangerous level of irrationality, hatred and hysteria which history tells us presages the twilight of freedom.

 

It is that media class which, in refusing to tell the public what it needs to know about Barack Obama, may now finally install in the White House the man who personifies the repudiation of the American power and western values that the media and left-wing intelligentsia (of which the media is the mouthpiece) have themselves spared no effort to destroy these past seven years. Read article.

 

Jonathan Mark, JWR.com

 

Every big-city Jewish and mainstream newspaper has steadily charted the Jewish vote in this presidential election, wondering at every step along the way if any Jew not voting for Sen. Barack Obama might secretly be motivated by his inner racist or Zionist doubt. Democratic supporters and Jewish leaders have reassured Jews, as best they could, that they know Obama, and he's really a "great friend of Israel."

 

Current polling suggests that most Jews are convinced, with almost 60 percent supporting Obama. But how are Arab-Americans dealing with all that's known about Obama? Few major newspapers, Jewish or otherwise, have looked into that. According to a headline in The Detroit Free Press (Oct. 10), "Arab Americans Favor Obama By Wide Margin," with Arab-American Muslims supporting Obama over McCain 84-4 percent. But when Arab-American Christians are included, Obama's support drops to 54-33, even worse than Obama is doing among Jews.

 

Obama is seriously "underperforming" among Arab-American Christians, says Zogby International, the pollsters. And when third-party candidates are added to the option, Obama's support among Arab-Americans drops to 46 percent, a full 14 points worse than he's doing among Jews. And yet, there are no articles that we've seen questioning whether Arab-Americans are racist, or that they are asking for promises and reassurance all their own. Read article.

 

Jack Kelly, JWR.com

 

Among the first fruits of an Obama presidency will be an international crisis, his running mate said in Seattle last weekend.

 

"Mark my words. It will not be six months before the world tests Barack Obama like they did John Kennedy," Sen. Joe Biden said at a fund-raiser. "Watch, we're going to have an international crisis, a generated crisis, to test the mettle of this guy."

 

Sen. Obama's response to the crisis may not seem adequate, Sen. Biden said. "We're going to need you to use your influence, your influence within the community, to stand with him, because it's not going to be apparent initially, it's not going to be apparent that we're right," he told the Democratic fat cats.

 

"You all are going to be sitting here a year from now going, 'Oh my G-d, why are they there in the polls? Why is the polling so down? Why is this thing so tough?" Sen. Biden said. "There are going to be a lot of you who want to go 'Whoa, wait a minute, yo, whoa, whoa, I don't know about that decision."

 

This is the most astounding thing a vice presidential candidate has ever said about the top of his ticket during a campaign. Read article.

 

Judith A. Klinghoffer, Political Mavens.com

 

To me honest, I hope Barack Obama’s grandmother is not longer able to understand what is going on around her. Otherwise, her heart must be broken. She has certainly been his horn of plenty. Even her broken hip could not have been better timed to help his cause along.

 

First, he ignored her long term anti-racist activism as well as her sacrifices on his behalf and used her to prove his thesis that we live in a racist world. He called her a “typical White woman,” i.e., inherently racist. He did so in order to explain away Rev. Wright’s flagrant racism. He, too, Barack argues is merely a typical Black pastor and, indeed, a typical member of the Black community, i.e., a racist. Being bi-racial, all he can do is embrace both racisms. His thesis, not mine. To the utter delight of the intellectual elite, Obama emerged as a post modern candidate, a perfect embodiment of Woody Allen’s ZELIG.

 

But that was only the beginning of this unsavory exploitation of the old sick woman who raised him. Ironically, after throwing her under the bus during the primaries, he shamelessly resurrected her during the general elections. Now she no longer represents racism. Now she represents old fashioned, read White values. No, he does not call them white values. He calls them Kansas values but the pictures make the point rather clearly. Few dare make a peep. Read article.

 

Kathryn Lopez, JWR.com

 

 Janet Jackson sang a pop tune back in the 1980s that contained some good advice that's relevant to the presidential election this year: "Let's wait awhile before it's too late. Let's wait awhile, before we go too far." I suggest this catchy number be on every American's iPod, cell phone — wherever they'll listen. Everyone remotely susceptible or already intoxicated needs to take a breath and get some distance from the political rapture of Obamamania.

 

More than a week before Election Day, the Barack Obama camp has moved from campaigning to moving into the White House. It's already setting up a victory-night celebration in Grant Park in Chicago. And the rhetoric, as always, flows copiously. To a crowd of 35,000 in northern Virginia, Obama recently announced, "I feel like we got a righteous wind at our backs here."

 

Across the globe, in a very unrighteous regime, the speaker of the Iranian parliament, Ali Larijani, seemed to agree. He seconded former Republican Secretary of State Colin Powell by endorsing Obama, saying that Iran is leaning toward the Democratic candidate "because he is more flexible and rational." The Persian praise came just days after Obama's running mate, Delaware Sen. Joe Biden, warned that an international crisis is guaranteed if Obama becomes president. Read article.

Print This E-mail This

Share It: