"Barack Obama’s senior advisers have drawn up plans to lower expectations for his presidency if he wins next week’s election, amid concerns that many of his euphoric supporters are harbouring unrealistic hopes of what he can achieve."
Hmmm. I wonder why?
"One senior adviser told The Times that the first few weeks of the transition, immediately after the election, were critical, “so there’s not a vast mood swing from exhilaration and euphoria to despair”.
So lets see if I have this right. Your saying your not going to be able to do what you told people you could do during the campaign. So basically your admitting your lying to the American people now in order to get elected. Way to be a new kind of politician there Obama.
"Not only will the next president take office with the country sliding into a potentially long recession — and mired in debt — but the challenges abroad are immense. There is an unfinished war in Iraq, a worsening situation in Afghanistan and an unstable and nuclear-armed Pakistan to contend with. Iran appears intent on acquiring the bomb and there remains the ever-present threat from al-Qaeda and Islamic extremists."
So your saying it won't be Obama's fault if his tax policy forces us into another depression. Or if his foreign policy is a disaster. Wow it must be nice to know that whatever happens the media won't blame you. Somehow I don't think McCain will get the same treatment.
"Mr Obama’s first legislative goals will be to follow through on his pledge to cut taxes for the middle class and raise them for the wealthiest Americans, and to push through a hugely expensive Bill to provide near-universal health insurance."
So your saying the first thing he is going to do is redistribute wealth and ruin the American health care system while increasing the debt. Brilliant! My only question is, can Obama really bankrupt and ruin the greatest country on earth in four years? I don't know but I'm not willing to take that chance, are you?
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/us_elections/article5051118.ece
If you liked this article go vote for it.
http://readerarticles.realclearpolitics.com/?period=all
Friday, October 31, 2008
Obama supporter gets drunk and makes calls
Hat tip: The Palmetto Scoop
Apparently some Obama supporters can't seem to stay sober long enough to make phone calls for the candidate. It's o.k. I knew you guys had to be on some sort of drug to be supporting him. Luckily for all of us this kid left a message on voicemail. Here's a transcript of the call.
“This is Brad, I’m calling from Florida for the Obama… cam-pain,” the caller stutters between long pauses. “I’ve got this script they want me to read, you know, forget about it.
“Anyway, I just wanted to touch, I’m doing this on my dime, I don’t care if my phone bill is $200, you know, we gotta get this guy in. I can’t have my grandkids go to war, nah, you know, I mean, we can go all day with the issues, but, alright Ken, thanks for your support. I hope you had a good day at work because that’s probably where you’re at, just like everybody in this wo-, in this country. Alright my friend, take care now, thank you.”
I can't seem to figure out how to load the call. So you can go to
http://www.palmettoscoop.com/2008/10/29/obama-drunk-dial/ if you want to here it.
And you want to hear it. The transcript can't do it Justice. Just don't forget to come back here after you listen to the voicemail.
Apparently some Obama supporters can't seem to stay sober long enough to make phone calls for the candidate. It's o.k. I knew you guys had to be on some sort of drug to be supporting him. Luckily for all of us this kid left a message on voicemail. Here's a transcript of the call.
“This is Brad, I’m calling from Florida for the Obama… cam-pain,” the caller stutters between long pauses. “I’ve got this script they want me to read, you know, forget about it.
“Anyway, I just wanted to touch, I’m doing this on my dime, I don’t care if my phone bill is $200, you know, we gotta get this guy in. I can’t have my grandkids go to war, nah, you know, I mean, we can go all day with the issues, but, alright Ken, thanks for your support. I hope you had a good day at work because that’s probably where you’re at, just like everybody in this wo-, in this country. Alright my friend, take care now, thank you.”
I can't seem to figure out how to load the call. So you can go to
http://www.palmettoscoop.com/2008/10/29/obama-drunk-dial/ if you want to here it.
And you want to hear it. The transcript can't do it Justice. Just don't forget to come back here after you listen to the voicemail.
Thursday, October 30, 2008
Twas the Night Before Elections
No idea who wrote this just showed up in my e-mail.
'Twas the night before elections
And all through the town
Tempers were flaring
Emotions all up and down!
I, in my bathrobe
With a cat in my lap
Had cut off the TV
Tired of political crap.
When all of a sudden
There arose such a noise
I peered out of my window
Saw Obama and his boys
They had come for my wallet
They wanted my pay
To give to the others
Who had not worked a day!
He snatched up my money
And quick as a wink
Jumped back on his bandwagon
As I gagged from the stink
He then rallied his henchmen
Who were pulling his cart
I could tell they were out
To tear my country apart!
" On Fannie, on Freddie,
On Biden and Ayers!
On Acorn, On Pelosi"
He screamed at the pairs!
They took off for his cause
And as he flew out of sight
I heard him laugh at the nation
Who wouldn't stand up and fight!
So I leave you to think
On this one final note-
IF YOU DONT WANT SOCIALISM
GET OUT AND VOTE!!!!
If you like this post vote for it
http://readerarticles.realclearpolitics.com/?period=all
'Twas the night before elections
And all through the town
Tempers were flaring
Emotions all up and down!
I, in my bathrobe
With a cat in my lap
Had cut off the TV
Tired of political crap.
When all of a sudden
There arose such a noise
I peered out of my window
Saw Obama and his boys
They had come for my wallet
They wanted my pay
To give to the others
Who had not worked a day!
He snatched up my money
And quick as a wink
Jumped back on his bandwagon
As I gagged from the stink
He then rallied his henchmen
Who were pulling his cart
I could tell they were out
To tear my country apart!
" On Fannie, on Freddie,
On Biden and Ayers!
On Acorn, On Pelosi"
He screamed at the pairs!
They took off for his cause
And as he flew out of sight
I heard him laugh at the nation
Who wouldn't stand up and fight!
So I leave you to think
On this one final note-
IF YOU DONT WANT SOCIALISM
GET OUT AND VOTE!!!!
If you like this post vote for it
http://readerarticles.realclearpolitics.com/?period=all
Warning to all employees
Hit Tip Patriot Room:
http://patriotroom.com/?p=3500
As of November 5, 2008, when President Obama is officially elected into office, our company will instill a few new policies which are in keeping with his new, inspiring issues of change and fairness:
1. All salespeople will be pooling their sales and bonuses into a common pool that will be divided equally between all of you. This will serve to give those of you who are underachieving a “fair shake.”
2. All low level workers will be pooling their wages, including overtime, into a common pool, dividing it equally amongst yourselves. This will help those who are “too busy for overtime” to reap the rewards from those who have more spare time and can work extra hours.
3. All top management will now be referred to as “the government.” We will not participate in this “pooling” experience because the law doesn’t apply to us.
4. The “government” will give eloquent speeches to all employees every week, encouraging it’s workers to continue to work hard “for the good of all.”
5. The employees will be thrilled with these new policies because it’s “good to spread the wealth.” Those of you who have underachieved will finally get an opportunity; those of you who have worked hard and had success will feel more “patriotic.”
6. The last few people who were hired should clean out their desks. Don’t feel bad, though, because President Obama will give you free healthcare, free handouts, free oil for heating your home, free food stamps, and he’ll let you stay in your home for as long as you want even if you can’t pay your mortgage. If you appeal directly to our Democratic Congress, you might even get a free flat screen TV and a coupon for free haircuts (shouldn’t all Americans be entitled to nice looking hair?) !!!
If for any reason you are not happy with the new policies, you may want to rethink your vote on November 4th.
Of course it seems to me a couple of rules were missed I'll add them here
7. No one shall critize the government especially "The One." Those who decide to ignore this rule will have their background search and their flaws will be subject to public scrunity and humiliation. i.e. Joe the Plummer. This law is also known as The Fairness Doctrine.
8. All women must agree with the precepts of the National Organization of Women. If you do not agree with NOW you will refer to has a FIBO female in biology only.
Looking for two more. Put yours in the comments section.
http://patriotroom.com/?p=3500
As of November 5, 2008, when President Obama is officially elected into office, our company will instill a few new policies which are in keeping with his new, inspiring issues of change and fairness:
1. All salespeople will be pooling their sales and bonuses into a common pool that will be divided equally between all of you. This will serve to give those of you who are underachieving a “fair shake.”
2. All low level workers will be pooling their wages, including overtime, into a common pool, dividing it equally amongst yourselves. This will help those who are “too busy for overtime” to reap the rewards from those who have more spare time and can work extra hours.
3. All top management will now be referred to as “the government.” We will not participate in this “pooling” experience because the law doesn’t apply to us.
4. The “government” will give eloquent speeches to all employees every week, encouraging it’s workers to continue to work hard “for the good of all.”
5. The employees will be thrilled with these new policies because it’s “good to spread the wealth.” Those of you who have underachieved will finally get an opportunity; those of you who have worked hard and had success will feel more “patriotic.”
6. The last few people who were hired should clean out their desks. Don’t feel bad, though, because President Obama will give you free healthcare, free handouts, free oil for heating your home, free food stamps, and he’ll let you stay in your home for as long as you want even if you can’t pay your mortgage. If you appeal directly to our Democratic Congress, you might even get a free flat screen TV and a coupon for free haircuts (shouldn’t all Americans be entitled to nice looking hair?) !!!
If for any reason you are not happy with the new policies, you may want to rethink your vote on November 4th.
Of course it seems to me a couple of rules were missed I'll add them here
7. No one shall critize the government especially "The One." Those who decide to ignore this rule will have their background search and their flaws will be subject to public scrunity and humiliation. i.e. Joe the Plummer. This law is also known as The Fairness Doctrine.
8. All women must agree with the precepts of the National Organization of Women. If you do not agree with NOW you will refer to has a FIBO female in biology only.
Looking for two more. Put yours in the comments section.
I watched the Obama infomercial
I can sum it up in three words. Boring and untrue. The first is my opinion the second comes from the AP.
Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama was less than upfront in his half-hour commercial Wednesday night about the costs of his programs and the crushing budget pressures he would face in office.
Obama's assertion that "I've offered spending cuts above and beyond" the expense of his promises is accepted only by his partisans. His vow to save money by "eliminating programs that don't work" masks his failure throughout the campaign to specify what those programs are -- beyond the withdrawal of troops from Iraq.
A sampling of what voters heard in the ad, and what he didn't tell them:
THE SPIN: "That's why my health care plan includes improving information technology, requires coverage for preventive care and pre-existing conditions and lowers health care costs for the typical family by $2,500 a year."
THE FACTS: His plan does not lower premiums by $2,500, or any set amount. Obama hopes that by spending $50 billion over five years on electronic medical records and by improving access to proven disease management programs, among other steps, consumers will end up saving money. He uses an optimistic analysis to suggest cost reductions in national health care spending could amount to the equivalent of $2,500 for a family of four. Many economists are skeptical those savings can be achieved, but even if they are, it's not a certainty that every dollar would be passed on to consumers in the form of lower premiums.
THE SPIN: "I also believe every American has a right to affordable health care."
THE FACTS: That belief should not be confused with a guarantee of health coverage for all. He makes no such promise. Obama hinted as much in the ad when he said about the problem of the uninsured: "I want to start doing something about it." He would mandate coverage for children but not adults. His program is aimed at making insurance more affordable by offering the choice of government-subsidized coverage similar to that in a plan for federal employees and other steps, including requiring larger employers to share costs of insuring workers.
THE SPIN: "I've offered spending cuts above and beyond their cost."
THE FACTS: Independent analysts say both Obama and Republican John McCain would deepen the deficit. The nonpartisan Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget estimates Obama's policy proposals would add a net $428 billion to the deficit over four years -- and that analysis accepts the savings he claims from spending cuts. The nonpartisan Tax Policy Center, whose other findings have been quoted approvingly by the Obama campaign, says: "Both John McCain and Barack Obama have proposed tax plans that would substantially increase the national debt over the next 10 years." The analysis goes on to say: "Neither candidate's plan would significantly increase economic growth unless offset by spending cuts or tax increases that the campaigns have not specified."
THE SPIN: "Here's what I'll do. Cut taxes for every working family making less than $200,000 a year. Give businesses a tax credit for every new employee that they hire right here in the U.S. over the next two years and eliminate tax breaks for companies that ship jobs overseas. Help homeowners who are making a good faith effort to pay their mortgages, by freezing foreclosures for 90 days. And just like after 9-11, we'll provide low-cost loans to help small businesses pay their workers and keep their doors open. "
THE FACTS: His proposals -- the tax cuts, the low-cost loans, the $15 billion a year he promises for alternative energy, and more -- cost money, and the country could be facing a record $1 trillion deficit next year. Indeed, Obama recently acknowledged -- although not in his commercial -- that: "The next president will have to scale back his agenda and some of his proposals."
http://elections.foxnews.com/2008/10/29/ap-fact-check-obama-ad-avoids-budget-realities/
I really thought Obama would at least say something that made me mad, but he didn't. Apparently Obama's plan was to make us so bored we'd miss all the facts he was just making up. Sorry Barack it didn't work.
Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama was less than upfront in his half-hour commercial Wednesday night about the costs of his programs and the crushing budget pressures he would face in office.
Obama's assertion that "I've offered spending cuts above and beyond" the expense of his promises is accepted only by his partisans. His vow to save money by "eliminating programs that don't work" masks his failure throughout the campaign to specify what those programs are -- beyond the withdrawal of troops from Iraq.
A sampling of what voters heard in the ad, and what he didn't tell them:
THE SPIN: "That's why my health care plan includes improving information technology, requires coverage for preventive care and pre-existing conditions and lowers health care costs for the typical family by $2,500 a year."
THE FACTS: His plan does not lower premiums by $2,500, or any set amount. Obama hopes that by spending $50 billion over five years on electronic medical records and by improving access to proven disease management programs, among other steps, consumers will end up saving money. He uses an optimistic analysis to suggest cost reductions in national health care spending could amount to the equivalent of $2,500 for a family of four. Many economists are skeptical those savings can be achieved, but even if they are, it's not a certainty that every dollar would be passed on to consumers in the form of lower premiums.
THE SPIN: "I also believe every American has a right to affordable health care."
THE FACTS: That belief should not be confused with a guarantee of health coverage for all. He makes no such promise. Obama hinted as much in the ad when he said about the problem of the uninsured: "I want to start doing something about it." He would mandate coverage for children but not adults. His program is aimed at making insurance more affordable by offering the choice of government-subsidized coverage similar to that in a plan for federal employees and other steps, including requiring larger employers to share costs of insuring workers.
THE SPIN: "I've offered spending cuts above and beyond their cost."
THE FACTS: Independent analysts say both Obama and Republican John McCain would deepen the deficit. The nonpartisan Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget estimates Obama's policy proposals would add a net $428 billion to the deficit over four years -- and that analysis accepts the savings he claims from spending cuts. The nonpartisan Tax Policy Center, whose other findings have been quoted approvingly by the Obama campaign, says: "Both John McCain and Barack Obama have proposed tax plans that would substantially increase the national debt over the next 10 years." The analysis goes on to say: "Neither candidate's plan would significantly increase economic growth unless offset by spending cuts or tax increases that the campaigns have not specified."
THE SPIN: "Here's what I'll do. Cut taxes for every working family making less than $200,000 a year. Give businesses a tax credit for every new employee that they hire right here in the U.S. over the next two years and eliminate tax breaks for companies that ship jobs overseas. Help homeowners who are making a good faith effort to pay their mortgages, by freezing foreclosures for 90 days. And just like after 9-11, we'll provide low-cost loans to help small businesses pay their workers and keep their doors open. "
THE FACTS: His proposals -- the tax cuts, the low-cost loans, the $15 billion a year he promises for alternative energy, and more -- cost money, and the country could be facing a record $1 trillion deficit next year. Indeed, Obama recently acknowledged -- although not in his commercial -- that: "The next president will have to scale back his agenda and some of his proposals."
http://elections.foxnews.com/2008/10/29/ap-fact-check-obama-ad-avoids-budget-realities/
I really thought Obama would at least say something that made me mad, but he didn't. Apparently Obama's plan was to make us so bored we'd miss all the facts he was just making up. Sorry Barack it didn't work.
Obama says constitution a fundamentaly flawed document.
Obama is caught on tape saying the constitution doesn't say what the government must do for you. That's the intent Obama our founding fathers didn't want to government involved in making decisions for us. Plus, "anything the government can give you the government can take away." I don't know who said that first, but whoever it was is a very smart person.
Hat tip Conservative Attack Dog: http://www.conservativeattackdog.com/
Hat tip Conservative Attack Dog: http://www.conservativeattackdog.com/
Wednesday, October 29, 2008
Speculation on what the Khalidi tape said.
Scott Martin: Conservatism Today
http://www.conservatismtoday.com/my_weblog/
Read this funny, and probably all too accurate "transcript" of the Obama/Khalidi tape that the LA Times continues to refuse to release. Chicagoans Against Obama
An excerpt:
uhh….It is truly refreshing to be surrounded by such a large group of people in which…uh.. I can truly see eye-to-eye with…uh…and completely agree…
Reverend Farrakhan..ughh…great to see you tonight…you always look great in a yellow bow-tie…and..uhh…tonight is no exception….
Bill..Bernadine….I see you everyday…so I don’t need to say much…but…ughh…you know I love you….keep doing the work you do….it’s time to start a revolution
Reverend Wright…..ughh…you are the father that I never had….I’ve never missed a sermon…and…uhh….I never will…
Michelle, while I find your frown so beautiful….I hope to one day make you proud of this country..and uhh…happy…and finally see you smile….
The author makes a good point at the end:
IN LIGHT OF THE LOS ANGELES TIMES NOT RELEASING THEIR COPY OF THE TAPE….CONSIDER THIS PROBABLE TRANSCRIPT TO BE ACCURATE, AND FEEL FREE TO DISTRIBUTE IT TO ALL OF YOUR FRIENDS AND FAMILY SO THAT THEY CAN MAKE AN HONEST ASSESSMENT OF SENATOR OBAMA, PRIOR TO CASTING THEIR VOTE
If any Obamabots object to my writing, please call the Los Angeles Times, and convince them to release the original copy to prove me wrong.
Yes, please do.
http://www.conservatismtoday.com/my_weblog/
Read this funny, and probably all too accurate "transcript" of the Obama/Khalidi tape that the LA Times continues to refuse to release. Chicagoans Against Obama
An excerpt:
uhh….It is truly refreshing to be surrounded by such a large group of people in which…uh.. I can truly see eye-to-eye with…uh…and completely agree…
Reverend Farrakhan..ughh…great to see you tonight…you always look great in a yellow bow-tie…and..uhh…tonight is no exception….
Bill..Bernadine….I see you everyday…so I don’t need to say much…but…ughh…you know I love you….keep doing the work you do….it’s time to start a revolution
Reverend Wright…..ughh…you are the father that I never had….I’ve never missed a sermon…and…uhh….I never will…
Michelle, while I find your frown so beautiful….I hope to one day make you proud of this country..and uhh…happy…and finally see you smile….
The author makes a good point at the end:
IN LIGHT OF THE LOS ANGELES TIMES NOT RELEASING THEIR COPY OF THE TAPE….CONSIDER THIS PROBABLE TRANSCRIPT TO BE ACCURATE, AND FEEL FREE TO DISTRIBUTE IT TO ALL OF YOUR FRIENDS AND FAMILY SO THAT THEY CAN MAKE AN HONEST ASSESSMENT OF SENATOR OBAMA, PRIOR TO CASTING THEIR VOTE
If any Obamabots object to my writing, please call the Los Angeles Times, and convince them to release the original copy to prove me wrong.
Yes, please do.
McCain's amazing three week campaign.
Since the Debate on October 15th has run a great campaign. Hitting Obama on the issue of taxes has been a winner without question. He has also been able to put some doubt into people's mind regarding Obama's judgement. Just today I heard him make a great speech about foreign policy in which he said that Obama hopes we forget about achieving victory in Iraq. He's climbing steadily in the polls and may pull this thing out after all. My question is what was going on before October 15th.
The McCain campaign made several mistakes right after the convention that allowed Obama to build this big lead. The biggest was definatly trying to control Sarah Palin. Palin is a great speaker and is used to answering questions honestly and not having a prepared response to every question. It was obvisous early on that the McCain campaign was telling Palin exactly what to say word for word. Of course that created the Katie Couric interview which I think we can all say was awful for both Palin and McCain. However they apparently have turned her loose, or she's broken loose, according to what story you believe. I saw her make a great speech about energy policy today. Here a clip from that speech.
Of course McCain has also been helped by comments Obama made about taxes. Joe the plumber may very well go down as the most influcial citizen of all time after asking Obama this question and getting Obama's response.
Spread the wealth is possibly the worst phase that can be used in a capitalistic system. It tells people don't bother working hard the government will just take from the rich people and give you money. So now there is no incentive to try and get ahead. Which means much fewer people will be working to create new industries and technologies. Therefore we will have fewer jobs and more people on government subsidies. This will eventually bankrupt the government.
Joe knows what he thinks of Obama's plan, he thinks it sounds like socialism.
McCain has hit Obama calling him socialistic since that comment. "At least in Europe, the Socialist leaders who so admire my opponent are upfront about their objectives," This has cut into Obama's numbers on the economy Obama has dropped from an eighteen point lead on that issue to just a ten point lead. There is still a week left for McCain to cut further into Obama's lead on this issue and I believe he will.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081018/ap_on_el_pr/mccain
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/Vote2008/story?id=6128334&page=1
Alot of people felt like it was a mistake by McCain and Palin to go after the associations that Obama has had in the past. However if they did not go after them would the story about Obama speaking at an event honoring a former PLO spokesman come out. I highly doubt it. McCain is asking for the tape to be released the L.A. times is refusing to release the tape saying it promised it's source they would never release the tape just report on what was on it. Ayers was also reportedly in attendence.
http://www.conservatismtoday.com/my_weblog/2008/10/la-times-continues-to-hold-back-khalidi-tapes.html
http://embeds.blogs.foxnews.com/2008/10/29/mccain-presses-la-times-to-release-videotape/
McCain has issued two new ads, besides the Joe the plummer ad. I think both of them are brillant. This one shows what a McCain Presidency will look like and compares it to an Obama Presidency
This one is about the direction McCain wants to take the country.
I feel sure there is even more I could say about McCain's three week campaign with started on Oct 15th. However with just one week left in this three week campaign for the Presidency I think maybe the more important question is why didn't McCain start talking about these issues sooner?
The McCain campaign made several mistakes right after the convention that allowed Obama to build this big lead. The biggest was definatly trying to control Sarah Palin. Palin is a great speaker and is used to answering questions honestly and not having a prepared response to every question. It was obvisous early on that the McCain campaign was telling Palin exactly what to say word for word. Of course that created the Katie Couric interview which I think we can all say was awful for both Palin and McCain. However they apparently have turned her loose, or she's broken loose, according to what story you believe. I saw her make a great speech about energy policy today. Here a clip from that speech.
Of course McCain has also been helped by comments Obama made about taxes. Joe the plumber may very well go down as the most influcial citizen of all time after asking Obama this question and getting Obama's response.
Spread the wealth is possibly the worst phase that can be used in a capitalistic system. It tells people don't bother working hard the government will just take from the rich people and give you money. So now there is no incentive to try and get ahead. Which means much fewer people will be working to create new industries and technologies. Therefore we will have fewer jobs and more people on government subsidies. This will eventually bankrupt the government.
Joe knows what he thinks of Obama's plan, he thinks it sounds like socialism.
McCain has hit Obama calling him socialistic since that comment. "At least in Europe, the Socialist leaders who so admire my opponent are upfront about their objectives," This has cut into Obama's numbers on the economy Obama has dropped from an eighteen point lead on that issue to just a ten point lead. There is still a week left for McCain to cut further into Obama's lead on this issue and I believe he will.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081018/ap_on_el_pr/mccain
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/Vote2008/story?id=6128334&page=1
Alot of people felt like it was a mistake by McCain and Palin to go after the associations that Obama has had in the past. However if they did not go after them would the story about Obama speaking at an event honoring a former PLO spokesman come out. I highly doubt it. McCain is asking for the tape to be released the L.A. times is refusing to release the tape saying it promised it's source they would never release the tape just report on what was on it. Ayers was also reportedly in attendence.
http://www.conservatismtoday.com/my_weblog/2008/10/la-times-continues-to-hold-back-khalidi-tapes.html
http://embeds.blogs.foxnews.com/2008/10/29/mccain-presses-la-times-to-release-videotape/
McCain has issued two new ads, besides the Joe the plummer ad. I think both of them are brillant. This one shows what a McCain Presidency will look like and compares it to an Obama Presidency
This one is about the direction McCain wants to take the country.
I feel sure there is even more I could say about McCain's three week campaign with started on Oct 15th. However with just one week left in this three week campaign for the Presidency I think maybe the more important question is why didn't McCain start talking about these issues sooner?
Tuesday, October 28, 2008
Dow up almost 900 today! McCain closed the gap on Obama Yesterday
The Dow rose 900 one day after polls showed McCain closing the gap on Obama. Now I'm not saying the two have anything to do with each other, yes I am. It's well known that McCain has the support of the business community in America. A poll of small business owners had McCain up 64-36 among that group. McCain also has a four to one advantage with CEO's. With 74% of these CEO's saying Obama would be a disaster for the country.
www.bizjournals.com/jacksonville/stories/2008/09/15/daily37.html
http://www.richmond.com/business/25684
He has this support because these entreprenuers understand the Obama's plan of raising taxes and imposing strict enviromental regulations on them would cripple their ablity to expand and cause them to lose money. If companies lose money they cut cost, and how do you cut cost? By firing employees. So Obama's plans will cause businesses to cut jobs, if they don't leave the country all together.
Obama would take America back into the double digit unemployment and the foreign policy disaster that was the Carter Administration. We have one week left let's do everything we can for McCain
www.bizjournals.com/jacksonville/stories/2008/09/15/daily37.html
http://www.richmond.com/business/25684
He has this support because these entreprenuers understand the Obama's plan of raising taxes and imposing strict enviromental regulations on them would cripple their ablity to expand and cause them to lose money. If companies lose money they cut cost, and how do you cut cost? By firing employees. So Obama's plans will cause businesses to cut jobs, if they don't leave the country all together.
Obama would take America back into the double digit unemployment and the foreign policy disaster that was the Carter Administration. We have one week left let's do everything we can for McCain
Monday, October 27, 2008
Obama says he won't have time to destory the country.
From Scott Martin
http://www.conservatismtoday.com/my_weblog/
Talk about a less than reassuring refutation of his desire to further invite ocialist redistribution and race-based reparations to the United States. H/T to Ben Smith:
Well, look, I think that my main concern right now is just making a case for why we need to change the economic policies that have gotten us into such a mess over the last eight years. I want to collaborate with Democrats and Republicans in getting that done. And you know, there are a lot of Democrats who may be elected who’ve made a commitment to their constituents to be centrist, I don’t think they’re gonna want to have sudden lurches to the left.
I think what we need to do is to create a responsive enough government that we’re dealing with our heath care crisis, dealing with energy in a serious way, pushing through a more balanced tax program so that middle class families are benefitting and responsibly ending the war in Iraq. Those things are going to take up a huge amount of time, you know when we’re also trying to stabilize the financial market.
I don’t think we’re going to have time to engage in a bunch of crazy things that people, the McCain campaign specifically, has suggested we might.
His first response is that his Democrat colleagues aren't nearly as prone to lurching suddenly to the left as he would be. That's reassuring.
His second response doesn't say a damn thing about him not having a bunch of crazy, moonbat ideas. No, it's just that he won't have the time to engage in his crazy, moonbat, socialist impulses. He will only have time to do the crazy, moonbat, socialist ideas that he's already succeeded in making America comfortable with.
He will only have time to bring about socialized healthcare, punish the people who bring us our much needed oil and subsidize automobiles that run on hope, steal from the successful to subsidize the unsuccessful, and flee our responsibility in Iraq.
With a Democrat-controlled congress, all of that should take about 25 minutes. What is he gonna be doing with the rest of his time?
Is he saying he's going to be voted out in four years, and that's why he won't have enough time? Or that he's a slow mover, not very good at getting things done, and couldn't accomplish major reform in eight years?
http://www.conservatismtoday.com/my_weblog/
Talk about a less than reassuring refutation of his desire to further invite ocialist redistribution and race-based reparations to the United States. H/T to Ben Smith:
Well, look, I think that my main concern right now is just making a case for why we need to change the economic policies that have gotten us into such a mess over the last eight years. I want to collaborate with Democrats and Republicans in getting that done. And you know, there are a lot of Democrats who may be elected who’ve made a commitment to their constituents to be centrist, I don’t think they’re gonna want to have sudden lurches to the left.
I think what we need to do is to create a responsive enough government that we’re dealing with our heath care crisis, dealing with energy in a serious way, pushing through a more balanced tax program so that middle class families are benefitting and responsibly ending the war in Iraq. Those things are going to take up a huge amount of time, you know when we’re also trying to stabilize the financial market.
I don’t think we’re going to have time to engage in a bunch of crazy things that people, the McCain campaign specifically, has suggested we might.
His first response is that his Democrat colleagues aren't nearly as prone to lurching suddenly to the left as he would be. That's reassuring.
His second response doesn't say a damn thing about him not having a bunch of crazy, moonbat ideas. No, it's just that he won't have the time to engage in his crazy, moonbat, socialist impulses. He will only have time to do the crazy, moonbat, socialist ideas that he's already succeeded in making America comfortable with.
He will only have time to bring about socialized healthcare, punish the people who bring us our much needed oil and subsidize automobiles that run on hope, steal from the successful to subsidize the unsuccessful, and flee our responsibility in Iraq.
With a Democrat-controlled congress, all of that should take about 25 minutes. What is he gonna be doing with the rest of his time?
Is he saying he's going to be voted out in four years, and that's why he won't have enough time? Or that he's a slow mover, not very good at getting things done, and couldn't accomplish major reform in eight years?
U.S. strikes Syria captures Al Qadea terrorist.
The U.S. captured Abu Ghadiyain, Al Qaeda's senior coordinator operating in Syria. The U.S. believe Abu Ghadiyain was sending money, weapons and fighters into Iraq to be used against American troops. "Ninety percent of foreign fighters enter Iraq through Syria, according to U.S. intelligence estimates, bringing cash to Al Qaeda in Iraq's chief. They also are deadly — trained in bomb-making and willing to sacrifice themselves in suicide attacks."
U.S. military official in Washington confirmed Sunday that special forces had conducted a raid in Syria that targeted the network of Al Qaeda-linked foreign fighters moving through Syria into Iraq. "We are taking matters into our own hands," the official told The Associated Press, speaking on condition of anonymity because of the political sensitivity of cross-border raids."
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,444199,00.html
I'm glad to see our military is still on the offensive against terrorist. However if McCain doesn't win the election then those days will come to an end. Obama will take us back to sitting on our hands and waiting to be attacked again.
U.S. military official in Washington confirmed Sunday that special forces had conducted a raid in Syria that targeted the network of Al Qaeda-linked foreign fighters moving through Syria into Iraq. "We are taking matters into our own hands," the official told The Associated Press, speaking on condition of anonymity because of the political sensitivity of cross-border raids."
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,444199,00.html
I'm glad to see our military is still on the offensive against terrorist. However if McCain doesn't win the election then those days will come to an end. Obama will take us back to sitting on our hands and waiting to be attacked again.
Saturday, October 25, 2008
Iran Captures suspected U.S. Spies
The Iranians have captured two U.S. Spies in the city of Natnaz near the countries nuclear facility. The spies were captured with metal rings and invisable string attached to them. The suspected spies are describe as black with a stout-body, short necks, short slender bills with a fleshy cere. An Iranian source declined to say what happened to them now that they've been captured, but I'm betting they had them for dinner. Picture below.
Yes they are saying we were using trained spy pigeons to spy on their nuclear activity.
Yes they are saying we were using trained spy pigeons to spy on their nuclear activity.
Wealth Redistribution in Action
Another great read from Scott Martin's Blog.
Today on my way to lunch I passed a homeless guy with a sign that read "Vote Obama, I need the money." I laughed.
Once in the restaurant my server had on an "Obama 08" tie, again I laughed as he had given away his political preference--just imagine the coincidence.
When the bill came I decided not to tip the server and explained to him that I was exploring the Obama redistribution of wealth concept. He stood there in disbelief while I told him that I was going to redistribute his tip to someone who I deemed more in need--the homeless guy outside. The server angrily stormed from my sight.
I went outside, gave the homeless guy $10 and told him to thank the server inside as I've decided he could use the money more. The homeless guy was grateful.
At the end of my rather unscientific redistribution experiment I realized the homeless guy was grateful for the money he did not earn, but the waiter was pretty angry that I gave away the money he did earn, even though the actual recipient deserved money more.
I guess redistribution of wealth is an easier thing to swallow in concept than in practical application.
http://www.conservatismtoday.com/my_weblog/
I think we should all spend the rest of our time showing people what Obama's policies our instead of trying to tell them. For instance next time you go out to eat instead of tipping your serving tell them you giving their tip to charity in their name. You could also just give the tip to someone else in the resturant you saw working hard like the bus boy, the dishwasher, or even another server. Just make sure they understand they your just redistributing the wealth like Obama would.
Today on my way to lunch I passed a homeless guy with a sign that read "Vote Obama, I need the money." I laughed.
Once in the restaurant my server had on an "Obama 08" tie, again I laughed as he had given away his political preference--just imagine the coincidence.
When the bill came I decided not to tip the server and explained to him that I was exploring the Obama redistribution of wealth concept. He stood there in disbelief while I told him that I was going to redistribute his tip to someone who I deemed more in need--the homeless guy outside. The server angrily stormed from my sight.
I went outside, gave the homeless guy $10 and told him to thank the server inside as I've decided he could use the money more. The homeless guy was grateful.
At the end of my rather unscientific redistribution experiment I realized the homeless guy was grateful for the money he did not earn, but the waiter was pretty angry that I gave away the money he did earn, even though the actual recipient deserved money more.
I guess redistribution of wealth is an easier thing to swallow in concept than in practical application.
http://www.conservatismtoday.com/my_weblog/
I think we should all spend the rest of our time showing people what Obama's policies our instead of trying to tell them. For instance next time you go out to eat instead of tipping your serving tell them you giving their tip to charity in their name. You could also just give the tip to someone else in the resturant you saw working hard like the bus boy, the dishwasher, or even another server. Just make sure they understand they your just redistributing the wealth like Obama would.
Friday, October 24, 2008
Thursday, October 23, 2008
Iran Endorses Obama
Hat Tip: Powerline
The speaker of the Iranian Parliment has come out in favor of Obama. "We are leaning more in favor of Barack Obama because he is more flexible and rational, even though we know American policy will not change that much," Larijani said at a press conference during a visit to Bahrain.
Well I have to agree that Obama is flexible. From promising to take Public financing for his campaign then renegging. To saying he'd sit down without preconditions then denying he said it. Obama is the king of flexing himself to be able to say whatever it is that benefits him at the time. I could come up with many other examples, but I don't have that kind of time these days.
Here's an idea why don't you post all of Obama's flexible stances in my comments area. I'll copy and paste them to and post them here. I'll be sure to put the name of the person who posted it beside the comment. Let's make it a top ten list everyone post your favorite Obama flex now.
The speaker of the Iranian Parliment has come out in favor of Obama. "We are leaning more in favor of Barack Obama because he is more flexible and rational, even though we know American policy will not change that much," Larijani said at a press conference during a visit to Bahrain.
Well I have to agree that Obama is flexible. From promising to take Public financing for his campaign then renegging. To saying he'd sit down without preconditions then denying he said it. Obama is the king of flexing himself to be able to say whatever it is that benefits him at the time. I could come up with many other examples, but I don't have that kind of time these days.
Here's an idea why don't you post all of Obama's flexible stances in my comments area. I'll copy and paste them to and post them here. I'll be sure to put the name of the person who posted it beside the comment. Let's make it a top ten list everyone post your favorite Obama flex now.
Looks like someone did the research to back up my article about polls.
I wrote an article yesterday saying we should stop looking at the polls. I said they were biased, but didn't have any research to back it up. I thank Wizbang and Scott Martin for doing the work for me.
A Look at Polling Bias
Wizbang has a post up that may explain the difference we repeatedly see between polls and election results, and which definitely sheds some light on the bizarre big leads many polls are showing both nationally and state-by-state:
2006 was a bad year for republicans, a year when republicans stayed home and democrats used the opportunity to win a number of close races and take over control of the House and Senate. In a number of states, therefore, it's not surprising that democratic party supporters gained a few points (usually 1 to 3 points) relative to 2004 in voter participation. So I went back and looked at voters by party affiliation, and compared those balances to this year's weighting by Survey USA. In thirty-six states, the party affiliation weights for democrats used by SUSA was five points or more higher than in 2006, a high-water mark for democrats. In twenty states, the party afiiliation weights for democrats used by SUSA was ten points or more higher than in 2006, and in eight states, the party affiliation weights used for democrats by SUSA was thirteen points or more higher than in 2006. Significant battleground states affected by this bias are as follows:
Pennsylvania: D+5 in 2006, SUSA using D+19, 15 point variance
Indiana: R+14 in 2006, SUSA using R+1, 13 point variance
Nevada: R+7 in 2006, SUSA using D+6, 13 point variance
Colorado: R+3 in 2006, SUSA using D+9, 12 point variance
Iowa: R+2 in 2006, SUSA using D+10, 12 point variance
Virginia: R+3 in 2006, SUSA using D+9, 12 point variance
Ohio: D+3 in 2006, SUSA using D+13, 10 point variance
Missouri: R+1 in 2006, SUSA using D+7, 8 point variance
North Carolina: R+1 in 2006, SUSA using D+5, 6 point variance
So in nine battleground states we are seeing major variances between the actual voter turnout during an election with a very depressed Republican electorate and this election, in which the electorate seems rather charged up. Where is the logic in that?
If it has to do with increased voter registrations favoring Democrats, you have to ask at least two questions:
1. What is the likelihood of these new registrations actually voting? Historically it is quite low, but with the dynamics of this election it could be higher than usual.
2. They are completely ignoring the tens of thousands of people in many of these states who were employing "Operation Chaos" during the primaries and switching their registration to vote for Hillary Clinton in order to keep her alive in the race. Why is this? The news of the large amounts of these Rush Limbaugh voters was certainly widely reported.
Additionally, as has been pointed out before, national polls focus largely on urban areas, which tend to be much more liberal-oriented. Even if they get the party percentages close, they are much more likely to attract "strong democrats" and "weak republicans."
I'm so sick of polls.
see more from Scott Martin here:
http://www.conservatismtoday.com/my_weblog/
A Look at Polling Bias
Wizbang has a post up that may explain the difference we repeatedly see between polls and election results, and which definitely sheds some light on the bizarre big leads many polls are showing both nationally and state-by-state:
2006 was a bad year for republicans, a year when republicans stayed home and democrats used the opportunity to win a number of close races and take over control of the House and Senate. In a number of states, therefore, it's not surprising that democratic party supporters gained a few points (usually 1 to 3 points) relative to 2004 in voter participation. So I went back and looked at voters by party affiliation, and compared those balances to this year's weighting by Survey USA. In thirty-six states, the party affiliation weights for democrats used by SUSA was five points or more higher than in 2006, a high-water mark for democrats. In twenty states, the party afiiliation weights for democrats used by SUSA was ten points or more higher than in 2006, and in eight states, the party affiliation weights used for democrats by SUSA was thirteen points or more higher than in 2006. Significant battleground states affected by this bias are as follows:
Pennsylvania: D+5 in 2006, SUSA using D+19, 15 point variance
Indiana: R+14 in 2006, SUSA using R+1, 13 point variance
Nevada: R+7 in 2006, SUSA using D+6, 13 point variance
Colorado: R+3 in 2006, SUSA using D+9, 12 point variance
Iowa: R+2 in 2006, SUSA using D+10, 12 point variance
Virginia: R+3 in 2006, SUSA using D+9, 12 point variance
Ohio: D+3 in 2006, SUSA using D+13, 10 point variance
Missouri: R+1 in 2006, SUSA using D+7, 8 point variance
North Carolina: R+1 in 2006, SUSA using D+5, 6 point variance
So in nine battleground states we are seeing major variances between the actual voter turnout during an election with a very depressed Republican electorate and this election, in which the electorate seems rather charged up. Where is the logic in that?
If it has to do with increased voter registrations favoring Democrats, you have to ask at least two questions:
1. What is the likelihood of these new registrations actually voting? Historically it is quite low, but with the dynamics of this election it could be higher than usual.
2. They are completely ignoring the tens of thousands of people in many of these states who were employing "Operation Chaos" during the primaries and switching their registration to vote for Hillary Clinton in order to keep her alive in the race. Why is this? The news of the large amounts of these Rush Limbaugh voters was certainly widely reported.
Additionally, as has been pointed out before, national polls focus largely on urban areas, which tend to be much more liberal-oriented. Even if they get the party percentages close, they are much more likely to attract "strong democrats" and "weak republicans."
I'm so sick of polls.
see more from Scott Martin here:
http://www.conservatismtoday.com/my_weblog/
The October Surprise?
This is an interview done by a french reporter just after McCain was released for Hanoi. It's powerful stuff.
Quit looking at the polls
At this point the polls don't matter anymore. They are all over the map and I'm not sure they trustworthy anyway. Actually I know their not. These polls are all over the map. Two coming out today have it a 1 or 2 point race. While others have a 10 or 14 point spread for Obama.
The polls are all over the map. I have a feeling it's alot closer to one or two point spread myself. These polls are in many cases slanted by having more Democrats than Republicans involved. They are also conducted by people with an agenda. I think the polls that have Obama up double digits are very biased, and also way off. At this point the only thing left to do is sprint to the finish and go vote. Really outside of that nothing else matters, not the polls, or the pundits. Whatever you do don't get discouraged by poll numbers because the only number that matters is getting John McCain 270 electorial votes on Election Day. We can do it if we all do our part and keep working hard.
The polls are all over the map. I have a feeling it's alot closer to one or two point spread myself. These polls are in many cases slanted by having more Democrats than Republicans involved. They are also conducted by people with an agenda. I think the polls that have Obama up double digits are very biased, and also way off. At this point the only thing left to do is sprint to the finish and go vote. Really outside of that nothing else matters, not the polls, or the pundits. Whatever you do don't get discouraged by poll numbers because the only number that matters is getting John McCain 270 electorial votes on Election Day. We can do it if we all do our part and keep working hard.
Tuesday, October 21, 2008
Those Who Don't Learn the Lessons of History, Doom, Repetition and the Like
This Post comes from Conservatism Today
Those Who Don't Learn the Lessons of History, Doom, Repetition and the Like
I've often expressed this opinion, but never took the time to find the cold, hard facts to back it up. But about ten minutes ago I came across a wonderful new conservative blog that laid it out. The failing cities in America are failing because they have been run by Democrats forever. From PC America:
What do the top ten cities with the highest poverty rate all have in common?
Democrat Leadership!
Cities with the highest poverty rates:
1. Detroit, MI (Hasn't elected a Republican mayor since 1961)
2. Buffalo, NY (Hasn't elected a Republican mayor since 1954)
3. Cincinnati, OH (Hasn't elected a Republican mayor since 1984)
4. Cleveland, OH (Hasn't elected a Republican mayor since 1989)
5. Miami, FL (Has never had a Republican Mayor)
6. St. Louis, MO (Hasn't elected a Republican mayor since 1949)
7. El Paso, TX (Has never had a Republican Mayor)
8. Milwaukee, WI (Hasn't elected a Republican mayor since 1908)
9. Philadelphia, PA (Hasn't elected a Republican mayor since 1952)
10. Newark, NJ (Hasn't elected a Republican mayor since 1907)
Einstein once said : 'The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.'
Note that none of them have had a Republican mayor since Reagan left office. Hmmmm. And most of them failed to benefit like the rest of the world under Ronald Reagan. I wonder why.
Click that link and check out Ashley's site. Good stuff there, especially for a relative newcomer. If you look at that list, you will see that New Orleans is not even on it. Why is that? Because the Democrat nanny-state so sheltered the people of New Orleans that the poor couldn't even manage to get their asses out of town to avoid Hurricane Katrina. They are now mostly living in other cities, and hopefully have learned an important lesson. Too bad Detroit hasn't learned it. Or Milwaukee, where I have many quite well-off conservative-minded family members who continue to buck the trend.
Now it's time for my take. I've also always thought the same thing. You can go back to Hurricane Katrina and learn that the state that handled the storm worse was Louisiana, and the town that handled it worse was New Orleans. Louisana was the only state involved with a Democratic Governor. The mayor of New Orleans is also a Democrat. They actually re-elected the guy. That's something I will never understand. On the upside they ended up with Bobby Jindal, a possible future President, as their Governor.
Those Who Don't Learn the Lessons of History, Doom, Repetition and the Like
I've often expressed this opinion, but never took the time to find the cold, hard facts to back it up. But about ten minutes ago I came across a wonderful new conservative blog that laid it out. The failing cities in America are failing because they have been run by Democrats forever. From PC America:
What do the top ten cities with the highest poverty rate all have in common?
Democrat Leadership!
Cities with the highest poverty rates:
1. Detroit, MI (Hasn't elected a Republican mayor since 1961)
2. Buffalo, NY (Hasn't elected a Republican mayor since 1954)
3. Cincinnati, OH (Hasn't elected a Republican mayor since 1984)
4. Cleveland, OH (Hasn't elected a Republican mayor since 1989)
5. Miami, FL (Has never had a Republican Mayor)
6. St. Louis, MO (Hasn't elected a Republican mayor since 1949)
7. El Paso, TX (Has never had a Republican Mayor)
8. Milwaukee, WI (Hasn't elected a Republican mayor since 1908)
9. Philadelphia, PA (Hasn't elected a Republican mayor since 1952)
10. Newark, NJ (Hasn't elected a Republican mayor since 1907)
Einstein once said : 'The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.'
Note that none of them have had a Republican mayor since Reagan left office. Hmmmm. And most of them failed to benefit like the rest of the world under Ronald Reagan. I wonder why.
Click that link and check out Ashley's site. Good stuff there, especially for a relative newcomer. If you look at that list, you will see that New Orleans is not even on it. Why is that? Because the Democrat nanny-state so sheltered the people of New Orleans that the poor couldn't even manage to get their asses out of town to avoid Hurricane Katrina. They are now mostly living in other cities, and hopefully have learned an important lesson. Too bad Detroit hasn't learned it. Or Milwaukee, where I have many quite well-off conservative-minded family members who continue to buck the trend.
Now it's time for my take. I've also always thought the same thing. You can go back to Hurricane Katrina and learn that the state that handled the storm worse was Louisiana, and the town that handled it worse was New Orleans. Louisana was the only state involved with a Democratic Governor. The mayor of New Orleans is also a Democrat. They actually re-elected the guy. That's something I will never understand. On the upside they ended up with Bobby Jindal, a possible future President, as their Governor.
Monday, October 20, 2008
Very, Very, Busy
How are all my loyal readers doing? I hope your doing well. I know I haven't been keeping up with the site like I should. Especially with the election so close. The reason is I work on a campaign and am very busy and will continue to be busy until Election Day. Therefore I will be doing alot of cross posting and will be posting videos alot. I will post some of my own stuff too but it will probably be few and far between. It's not the writing it's the research that kills you. Of course if I just get a rant in my head, which sometimes happens, you'll be the first to read it.
You know I wouldn't have to work so hard if I could just win that Million dollars at McDonald's. (I'm begining to think it's just a ploy to keep me fat.) Of course I'd settle for one of my readers giving me a hundred thousand bucks. Why be greedy fifty thousand will get me out of debt. I also accept small donations. Just click that yellow button at the top.
You know I wouldn't have to work so hard if I could just win that Million dollars at McDonald's. (I'm begining to think it's just a ploy to keep me fat.) Of course I'd settle for one of my readers giving me a hundred thousand bucks. Why be greedy fifty thousand will get me out of debt. I also accept small donations. Just click that yellow button at the top.
Obama leaves trial to visit sick grandmother
Barack Obama will be off the campaign trial for two days to visit his ailing grandmother in Hawaii. "Robert Gibbs told reporters Monday that Obama's grandmother, Madelyn Payne Dunham, who helped raise him, was released from the hospital late last week. But he said her health had deteriorated "to the point where her situation is very serious." "It seemed likely that she was close to death, as Gibbs said that "everyone understands the decision that Sen. Obama is making." We can talk about how this effects the campaign another time for now let's all wish Obama's Grandmother a full recovery.
P.S. I've seen this on several conservative sites and so far I only saw one person make a stupid comment about Obama's Grandmother. However if you feel inclined to make said stupid remark please go elsewhere to make it.
http://elections.foxnews.com/2008/10/20/obama-leave-campaign-trail-visit-sick-grandmother/
P.S. I've seen this on several conservative sites and so far I only saw one person make a stupid comment about Obama's Grandmother. However if you feel inclined to make said stupid remark please go elsewhere to make it.
http://elections.foxnews.com/2008/10/20/obama-leave-campaign-trail-visit-sick-grandmother/
McCain supporters run off racist idiots.
I think we may have lost these two people's votes, but I feel sure we gained alot more. I think the best quote was the kid who ask, "Are you trying to Deliberately lose us this election?"
Greg Gutfeld and Fox News takes it to Obama
So Obama thinks that FOX News has hurt him in the polls, saying that even if he watched us, he wouldn't vote for himself either.
Now, I don't think he's wrong. I actually think FOX News does go after him. But hell, someone has to.
For my whole life, every network has been uniformly, heart-bleedingly liberal. Nearly every damn magazine, newspaper and after-school special spits out the same lefty assumptions — rich people greedy, Republicans bad, America evil — as though they are suffering from a Marxist version of Tourette.
And Obama is their guy.
That's why today, every anchor has a woodie for him, and every star-struck pop singer offers the Messiah their services for free. And there's the late night comics, who hammer Republicans seven times more often than Dems. It's just too easy to be funny.
But despite all this, you still have twerps soiling their diapers over FOX News just because it won't comply with an overarching liberal theocracy. You've got celebrity cretins like Tim Robbins, watchdog weenies like Media Matters and crybaby cranks like Keith Olbermann suffering seizures because FOX won't roll over.
I say, stop being a bunch of pussies, you pretty much own the airwaves.
And as for you Obama, stop acting like a kid who complains because you got a 98 instead of a perfect grade. Seriously, you don't need mindless obedience from everyone to win.
So Obama, if you're expecting people here to kiss your ass, you'll need to go elsewhere. I hear there's a guy at MSNBC with a thrill up his leg dying to give you a sponge bath.
And if you disagree with me, then you sir are worse than Hitler.
For the record Greg Gutfeld ends all his monologues with the saying And if you disagree with me, then you sir are worse than hitler. So no he is not calling everyone who disagrees with him Hitler.
Now, I don't think he's wrong. I actually think FOX News does go after him. But hell, someone has to.
For my whole life, every network has been uniformly, heart-bleedingly liberal. Nearly every damn magazine, newspaper and after-school special spits out the same lefty assumptions — rich people greedy, Republicans bad, America evil — as though they are suffering from a Marxist version of Tourette.
And Obama is their guy.
That's why today, every anchor has a woodie for him, and every star-struck pop singer offers the Messiah their services for free. And there's the late night comics, who hammer Republicans seven times more often than Dems. It's just too easy to be funny.
But despite all this, you still have twerps soiling their diapers over FOX News just because it won't comply with an overarching liberal theocracy. You've got celebrity cretins like Tim Robbins, watchdog weenies like Media Matters and crybaby cranks like Keith Olbermann suffering seizures because FOX won't roll over.
I say, stop being a bunch of pussies, you pretty much own the airwaves.
And as for you Obama, stop acting like a kid who complains because you got a 98 instead of a perfect grade. Seriously, you don't need mindless obedience from everyone to win.
So Obama, if you're expecting people here to kiss your ass, you'll need to go elsewhere. I hear there's a guy at MSNBC with a thrill up his leg dying to give you a sponge bath.
And if you disagree with me, then you sir are worse than Hitler.
For the record Greg Gutfeld ends all his monologues with the saying And if you disagree with me, then you sir are worse than hitler. So no he is not calling everyone who disagrees with him Hitler.
Obama wins Jews 2-1. This is good news people.
Obama Hemorrhaging Jews
From My Aisling:
So I scan some headlines, and find this: NYU poll: US Jews favor Obama 2:1.
Oh, no! I collapse to the floor and curl into a fetal position. The tears streaming down my face puddle through my hair. Being practical, I mop the floor in a two-foot square area. Pleased with my effort, I gather myself to face the news.
The Jews, to whom I am blindly devoted as a Conservative Christian (yeah, one of those), have abandoned me! Et tu, Jew-tay? Oy vey! Can it get any worse? My colon goes spasmodic and my sphincter tightens in response. Last thing I need at a moment like this is an “accident.” I’ve been saving Depends coupons (the ones without an expiration date) since I was 45, but I haven’t actually needed any yet.
So I stare at the headline. Something catches my eye. “2:1.” Two to one. That’s 67% to 33%. That’s only 17 points over split. Is that good? It feels good. Let’s see.
This part is my pal Scott Martin at Conservatism Today take on the numbers
"Et-te, Jew-tay?" Too funny. Anyways, Aisling has the hostorical numbers for past presidential elections at the link. Suffice it to say, it seems as if Jews are not as into Louis Farrakhan's pal Barack as they usually are for other democratic socialists. This still begs the question: Are the majority of Jews simply not paying attention to Obama's history? His statements on the Middle East?
From My Aisling:
So I scan some headlines, and find this: NYU poll: US Jews favor Obama 2:1.
Oh, no! I collapse to the floor and curl into a fetal position. The tears streaming down my face puddle through my hair. Being practical, I mop the floor in a two-foot square area. Pleased with my effort, I gather myself to face the news.
The Jews, to whom I am blindly devoted as a Conservative Christian (yeah, one of those), have abandoned me! Et tu, Jew-tay? Oy vey! Can it get any worse? My colon goes spasmodic and my sphincter tightens in response. Last thing I need at a moment like this is an “accident.” I’ve been saving Depends coupons (the ones without an expiration date) since I was 45, but I haven’t actually needed any yet.
So I stare at the headline. Something catches my eye. “2:1.” Two to one. That’s 67% to 33%. That’s only 17 points over split. Is that good? It feels good. Let’s see.
This part is my pal Scott Martin at Conservatism Today take on the numbers
"Et-te, Jew-tay?" Too funny. Anyways, Aisling has the hostorical numbers for past presidential elections at the link. Suffice it to say, it seems as if Jews are not as into Louis Farrakhan's pal Barack as they usually are for other democratic socialists. This still begs the question: Are the majority of Jews simply not paying attention to Obama's history? His statements on the Middle East?
Thursday, October 16, 2008
McCain wins debate hands down
I realize the majority disagrees with me, I just can't figure out why. I think McCain objectivly won last night's debate. He stayed on offense for the whole time. He bought up Joe the plumber, Ayers, and ACORN. He hit Obama almost every possible way he could. I don't think he knocked him out but he won a decisive decision. However, I think people that felt McCain needed a knockout saw he didn't get it and immediatly said he lost for that reason only. I think that's the wrong way of judging a debate. McCain hit him on taxes, abortion, the economy, his plan for universal healthcare. The fact Obama lied about his policies doesn't change the fact they are his policies. There's a video on the patriot room of McCain's new Ad. It includes Joe the plummer and calls Obama tax plan welfare. It's worth watching. http://patriotroom.com/
Biden is at it again.
I've missed the gaffe machine at work the last few weels, but he was back at it today.
Monday, October 13, 2008
Voting for Obama because he's pro-life!
I found this on Conservatism Today and I just had to have it. Howard Stern sent a man into Harlem and asked who are you voting for. When they said Obama he ask questions like Are you for Obama because he's pro-life? Do you have problems with having Sarah Palin as VP if Obama is elected? Basically taking McCain's positions and saying they were Obama's. The results are scary.
Sunday, October 12, 2008
John Lewis (D-GA) compares McCain to George Wallace
Yes that George Wallace, the segregationist former governor of Alabama. "What I am seeing reminds me of too much of another destructive period in American history," Lewis said in a statement released to FOX News.
"Senator McCain and Governor Palin are sowing the seeds of hatred and division, and there is no need for this hostility in our political discourse."
"George Wallace never threw a bomb.(That's more than can be said for some of Obama's friends.) He never fired a gun, but he created the climate and the conditions that encouraged vicious attacks against innocent Americans who were simply trying to exercise their constitutional rights," Lewis added. "Because of this atmosphere of hate, four little girls were killed on Sunday morning when a church was bombed in Birmingham, Alabama."
He then accused McCain and Palin of "playing with fire" in a way that "disregards the value of the political process and cheapens our entire democracy."
Here is McCain's Response: "Congressman John Lewis' comments represent a character attack against Governor Sarah Palin and me that is shocking and beyond the pale," McCain said in a written statement. "The notion that legitimate criticism of Senator Obama's record and positions could be compared to Governor George Wallace, his segregationist policies and the violence he provoked is unacceptable and has no place in this campaign."
http://elections.foxnews.com/2008/10/11/civil-rights-icon-compares-mccain-segregationist/
Are you kidding me? McCain named John Lewis as a person he would seek for advice at the Saddleback forum and this is how he responds. McCain of course showed class in his response to Congressman Lewis. I'm not sure if I could've done the same if the guy just called me a racist, and compared me to a segregationist.
Well I'm sure Obama doesn't want this kind of rhetoic to be assoiciated with his campaign so I'm sure he'll denouce the comment, right? Wrong.
“Senator Obama does not believe that John McCain or his policy criticism is in any way comparable to George Wallace or his segregationist policies. But John Lewis was right to condemn some of the hateful rhetoric that John McCain himself personally rebuked just last night, as well as the baseless and profoundly irresponsible charges from his own running mate that the Democratic nominee for President of the United States ‘pals around with terrorists,’” said Obama spokesman Bill Burton. “As Barack Obama has said himself, the last thing we need from either party is the kind of angry, divisive rhetoric that tears us apart at a time of crisis when we desperately need to come together. That is the kind of campaign Senator Obama will continue to run in the weeks ahead.”
http://embeds.blogs.foxnews.com/2008/10/11/obama-camp-condems-wallace-reference-but-says-lewis-right-on-mcpalin-rhetoric/
Basically Obama's camp said he's not George Wallace, but the rest of the statement is fine with us. After this his spokesman has the nerve to say "the last thing we need from either party is the kind of angry, divisive rhetoric that tears us apart at a time of crisis when we desperately need to come together." I hate to be repetive but, are you kidding me? John Lewis compares McCain to George Wallace, accuses him of creating a climate that encourages vicious attacks against innocent Americans, and then brings up one of the most famous racist killings of all time, the last two which Obama seems to be fine with, and your telling me your not trying to be divisive.
Sorry Obama, I don't live in the same fantasy land that you obvisously do. When someone says McCain is racist, or that he's making racist comments, or playing on race, or whatever the Hell John Lewis was saying. I'd find that to be divisive. Then he accuses McCain of "Creating a climate that encourages vicious attacks against innocent Americans," also divisive.
Lewis also said that McCain was playing with fire. What fire is he playing with exactly? Is Lewis saying that if Obama loses we will have riots in the streets, and that they will be McCain's fault for "creating the climate and the conditions that encouraged vicious attacks against innocent Americans?" For the record I don't think that is true, but is there any other way to read that comment?
McCain has been unbelievably above reproach on this issue. He has gone out of his way to be respectful to Obama. Even taking the mircophone from an old lady at a town hall who said she'd done some research and Obama is an Arab. He then told the crowd that Obama was a decent person that he had disagreements with and that they shouldn't be afraid of him. He's asked crowds at his events to show respect for Obama. Many Republicans believe he has been too respectful and that's why he's behind. Senator McCain I'm glad that you have found it necessary to show respect for Barrack Obama, but judging from this latest revelation he sure isn't showing any for you. GO GET EM!
If you like this story Digg it. http://digg.com/politics/John_Lewis_D_GA_calls_McCain_a_segregationist
"Senator McCain and Governor Palin are sowing the seeds of hatred and division, and there is no need for this hostility in our political discourse."
"George Wallace never threw a bomb.(That's more than can be said for some of Obama's friends.) He never fired a gun, but he created the climate and the conditions that encouraged vicious attacks against innocent Americans who were simply trying to exercise their constitutional rights," Lewis added. "Because of this atmosphere of hate, four little girls were killed on Sunday morning when a church was bombed in Birmingham, Alabama."
He then accused McCain and Palin of "playing with fire" in a way that "disregards the value of the political process and cheapens our entire democracy."
Here is McCain's Response: "Congressman John Lewis' comments represent a character attack against Governor Sarah Palin and me that is shocking and beyond the pale," McCain said in a written statement. "The notion that legitimate criticism of Senator Obama's record and positions could be compared to Governor George Wallace, his segregationist policies and the violence he provoked is unacceptable and has no place in this campaign."
http://elections.foxnews.com/2008/10/11/civil-rights-icon-compares-mccain-segregationist/
Are you kidding me? McCain named John Lewis as a person he would seek for advice at the Saddleback forum and this is how he responds. McCain of course showed class in his response to Congressman Lewis. I'm not sure if I could've done the same if the guy just called me a racist, and compared me to a segregationist.
Well I'm sure Obama doesn't want this kind of rhetoic to be assoiciated with his campaign so I'm sure he'll denouce the comment, right? Wrong.
“Senator Obama does not believe that John McCain or his policy criticism is in any way comparable to George Wallace or his segregationist policies. But John Lewis was right to condemn some of the hateful rhetoric that John McCain himself personally rebuked just last night, as well as the baseless and profoundly irresponsible charges from his own running mate that the Democratic nominee for President of the United States ‘pals around with terrorists,’” said Obama spokesman Bill Burton. “As Barack Obama has said himself, the last thing we need from either party is the kind of angry, divisive rhetoric that tears us apart at a time of crisis when we desperately need to come together. That is the kind of campaign Senator Obama will continue to run in the weeks ahead.”
http://embeds.blogs.foxnews.com/2008/10/11/obama-camp-condems-wallace-reference-but-says-lewis-right-on-mcpalin-rhetoric/
Basically Obama's camp said he's not George Wallace, but the rest of the statement is fine with us. After this his spokesman has the nerve to say "the last thing we need from either party is the kind of angry, divisive rhetoric that tears us apart at a time of crisis when we desperately need to come together." I hate to be repetive but, are you kidding me? John Lewis compares McCain to George Wallace, accuses him of creating a climate that encourages vicious attacks against innocent Americans, and then brings up one of the most famous racist killings of all time, the last two which Obama seems to be fine with, and your telling me your not trying to be divisive.
Sorry Obama, I don't live in the same fantasy land that you obvisously do. When someone says McCain is racist, or that he's making racist comments, or playing on race, or whatever the Hell John Lewis was saying. I'd find that to be divisive. Then he accuses McCain of "Creating a climate that encourages vicious attacks against innocent Americans," also divisive.
Lewis also said that McCain was playing with fire. What fire is he playing with exactly? Is Lewis saying that if Obama loses we will have riots in the streets, and that they will be McCain's fault for "creating the climate and the conditions that encouraged vicious attacks against innocent Americans?" For the record I don't think that is true, but is there any other way to read that comment?
McCain has been unbelievably above reproach on this issue. He has gone out of his way to be respectful to Obama. Even taking the mircophone from an old lady at a town hall who said she'd done some research and Obama is an Arab. He then told the crowd that Obama was a decent person that he had disagreements with and that they shouldn't be afraid of him. He's asked crowds at his events to show respect for Obama. Many Republicans believe he has been too respectful and that's why he's behind. Senator McCain I'm glad that you have found it necessary to show respect for Barrack Obama, but judging from this latest revelation he sure isn't showing any for you. GO GET EM!
If you like this story Digg it. http://digg.com/politics/John_Lewis_D_GA_calls_McCain_a_segregationist
Friday, October 10, 2008
Maybe their is fire left in this campaign after all.
"WE ARE MAD SO GO GET EM!" That's what a man tells McCain about how he feels about being taken over by socialist, ie the Democratic Party. McCain also takes on ACORN in this clip. "No one should corrupt the most precious right we have, the right to vote." This is a video worth watching.
Hat Tip Patriot Room: http://patriotroom.com/
Hat Tip Patriot Room: http://patriotroom.com/
Thursday, October 9, 2008
Obama's a socialist, Nooooo. (sarcasm)
It appears Obama was a part of the New party in 1992. The New Party was a socialist organization geared toward moving the Democratic Party more to the left. The organization ws defunct in 1999 after the Supreme Court ruled their "fusion policy unconstitutional.
Three NP-members won Democratic primaries last Spring and face off against Republican opponents on election day: Danny Davis (U.S. House), Barack Obama (State Senate) and Patricia Martin (Cook County Judiciary)."
"New Party members and supported candidates won 16 of 23 races, including an at-large race for the Little Rock, Ark., City Council, a seat on the county board for Little Rock and the school board for Prince George's County, Md. Chicago is sending the first New Party member to Congress, as Danny Davis, who ran as a Democrat, won an overwhelming 85% victory. New Party member Barack Obama was uncontested for a State Senate seat from Chicago. "
Let me get me this straight, a man who ran for a State Senate seat has a Socialist is now literally days away from becoming our next President.
Conservatives if you weren't ready to fight for McCain before this you have to be now. If you want to live in France I say great, you can move there. I however have no intention of allowing you to turn America into France. I will be fighting until the bitter end for the soul of my country. There are alot of sources in information about this article that I just don't have time to post. If you want more information go here http://www.conservatismtoday.com
Three NP-members won Democratic primaries last Spring and face off against Republican opponents on election day: Danny Davis (U.S. House), Barack Obama (State Senate) and Patricia Martin (Cook County Judiciary)."
"New Party members and supported candidates won 16 of 23 races, including an at-large race for the Little Rock, Ark., City Council, a seat on the county board for Little Rock and the school board for Prince George's County, Md. Chicago is sending the first New Party member to Congress, as Danny Davis, who ran as a Democrat, won an overwhelming 85% victory. New Party member Barack Obama was uncontested for a State Senate seat from Chicago. "
Let me get me this straight, a man who ran for a State Senate seat has a Socialist is now literally days away from becoming our next President.
Conservatives if you weren't ready to fight for McCain before this you have to be now. If you want to live in France I say great, you can move there. I however have no intention of allowing you to turn America into France. I will be fighting until the bitter end for the soul of my country. There are alot of sources in information about this article that I just don't have time to post. If you want more information go here http://www.conservatismtoday.com
ACORN continues to commit voter fraud!
The community housing/voter registeration group known as ACORN is continuing to commit voter fraud even while they know the world is watching
CLEVELAND - Two Ohio voters, including Domino's pizza worker Christopher Barkley , claimed yesterday that they were hounded by the community-activist group ACORN to register to vote several times, even though they made it clear they'd already signed up.
Barkley estimated he'd registered to vote "10 to 15" times after canvassers for ACORN, whose political wing has endorsed Barack Obama, relentlessly pursued him and others.
Claims such as his have sparked election officials to probe ACORN.
"I kept getting approached by folks who asked me to register," Barkley said. "They'd ask me if I was registered. I'd say yes, and they'd ask me to do it [register] again.
"Some of them were getting paid to collect names. That was their sob story, and I bought it," he said.
"You can tell them you're registered as many times as you want - they do not care," said Lateala Goins, 21, who was subpoenaed.
"They will follow you to the buses, they will follow you home, it does not matter," she told The Post.
I guess we know what happened to all the Ron Paul supporters now.
A third subpoenaed voter, Freddie Johnson, 19, filled out registration cards 72 times over 18 months, officials said.
72 registration cards. If he put a different address on each card he could vote 72 times in every election from here on out. So much for one person one vote. With ACORN it's one person however many times we can get you to register. I wonder how many McCain supporters they registered more than once, or even once.
"It feeds the public perception that there could be [fraud], and that makes the pillars fall down," said local Board of Elections President Jeff Hastings
Could be Fraud! This is Fraud ACORN officals should be rounded up and thrown in jail. This is American so they get a trail, but it doesn't seem like their is much doubt here as to what's going on.
ACORN's Cleveland spokesman, Kris Harsh, said his group collected 100,000 voter-registration cards; only about 50 were questionable, he claimed.
Maybe only 50 were questioned, but I bet at least 5,000 were questionable. Let me and some of my friends go and take a look at them. We'll be honest, unlike ACORN. I bet we uncover massive voter fraud. I'll willing to go now, and I'll do it for free.
As for workers, "We watch them like a hawk," he said.
A hawk, really I guess if the hawk if blind and deaf that would kinda make sense. Maybe they meant now that we've been caught we'll be much more careful about how we commit voter fraud. Because we know ACORN will not stop commiting fraud. Their political wing as come out in favor of Obama and they plan to do everything they can, including cheating, to make sure he wins.
http://www.nypost.com/seven/10092008/news/politics/nuts__132771.htm
CLEVELAND - Two Ohio voters, including Domino's pizza worker Christopher Barkley , claimed yesterday that they were hounded by the community-activist group ACORN to register to vote several times, even though they made it clear they'd already signed up.
Barkley estimated he'd registered to vote "10 to 15" times after canvassers for ACORN, whose political wing has endorsed Barack Obama, relentlessly pursued him and others.
Claims such as his have sparked election officials to probe ACORN.
"I kept getting approached by folks who asked me to register," Barkley said. "They'd ask me if I was registered. I'd say yes, and they'd ask me to do it [register] again.
"Some of them were getting paid to collect names. That was their sob story, and I bought it," he said.
"You can tell them you're registered as many times as you want - they do not care," said Lateala Goins, 21, who was subpoenaed.
"They will follow you to the buses, they will follow you home, it does not matter," she told The Post.
I guess we know what happened to all the Ron Paul supporters now.
A third subpoenaed voter, Freddie Johnson, 19, filled out registration cards 72 times over 18 months, officials said.
72 registration cards. If he put a different address on each card he could vote 72 times in every election from here on out. So much for one person one vote. With ACORN it's one person however many times we can get you to register. I wonder how many McCain supporters they registered more than once, or even once.
"It feeds the public perception that there could be [fraud], and that makes the pillars fall down," said local Board of Elections President Jeff Hastings
Could be Fraud! This is Fraud ACORN officals should be rounded up and thrown in jail. This is American so they get a trail, but it doesn't seem like their is much doubt here as to what's going on.
ACORN's Cleveland spokesman, Kris Harsh, said his group collected 100,000 voter-registration cards; only about 50 were questionable, he claimed.
Maybe only 50 were questioned, but I bet at least 5,000 were questionable. Let me and some of my friends go and take a look at them. We'll be honest, unlike ACORN. I bet we uncover massive voter fraud. I'll willing to go now, and I'll do it for free.
As for workers, "We watch them like a hawk," he said.
A hawk, really I guess if the hawk if blind and deaf that would kinda make sense. Maybe they meant now that we've been caught we'll be much more careful about how we commit voter fraud. Because we know ACORN will not stop commiting fraud. Their political wing as come out in favor of Obama and they plan to do everything they can, including cheating, to make sure he wins.
http://www.nypost.com/seven/10092008/news/politics/nuts__132771.htm
Tuesday, October 7, 2008
Debate Reaction
What happened? Sorry I fell asleep half way through. This was not nearly as entertaining has the first debate. Brokaw couldn't have picked more boring questions if he tried. Their were none on abortion, guns, marriage, or any social issues. The answers were all the same has you would hear on a campaign. Absolutely nothing new came out of this debate. I'll probably going to watch it again since I was blogging during the event. However I doubt I'll enjoy it.
Monday, October 6, 2008
Who is Barack Obama? The John McCain version
I wrote an article entitled Who is Barack Obama a few days ago. Maybe McCain read it.
Live blogging on the 2nd Presidential debate will be here
Tuesday night I will be hosting a live blog for the 2nd Presidential debate. If you want to participate put your e-mail address in the comments section and I will send you an invite.
Sunday, October 5, 2008
There are still black Republicans!
Hat Tip: Smart Girl Politics
This is a great video about what the Democratic party has done to African Americans in this country. I could say it myself, but I think this man as more creditablity.
This is a great video about what the Democratic party has done to African Americans in this country. I could say it myself, but I think this man as more creditablity.
Looks like more Biden Blunders
Here are some quotes from Biden that have been fact checked by the New York Post. It should come to as no surprise that Biden was wrong or lying about many of the things he said in the VP Debate. I feel sure this is just a the ones the Washington Post had room for in their paper.
It's "simply not true" that Barack Obama said he'd meet Iran's president without preconditions, Biden insisted.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e3Oj7Jn9rv4
I wanted to post the video, but embedding has been disabled upon request. I wonder who would request such a thing? In case you just want to take my word for it he said it and it's on tape.
* Biden said he's "always supported" clean-coal technology - after stating emphatically only last month, "We're not supporting clean coal."
* Biden asserted - repeatedly - that the US spends more money on three weeks' combat in Iraq than it's spent in Afghanistan since the war began.
That claim's only remotely intelligible if he limits Afghan expenditures merely to US rebuilding efforts - and even then, he's off by a factor of three, according to State Department numbers.
* Also on Afghanistan, Biden insisted - repeatedly - that "our commanding general in Afghanistan said the surge principle in Iraq will not work" there.
That may not be an out-and-out lie, but it took supposed foreign-policy neophyte Sarah Palin to bring any context or nuance to the statement.
What Gen. David McKiernan had said was that tribal realities in Afghanistan are very different than in Iraq - requiring a different form of cooperation.
But he flatly said more troops, and more local engagement, are needed.
* Then there was what might have been the biggest head-scratcher of the night. Said Biden of the Bush administration's supposed Middle East follies:
"When . . . along with France, we kicked Hezbollah out of Lebanon, I said and Barack said, 'Move NATO forces in there. Fill the vacuum, because if you don't, Hezbollah will control it."
We never kicked Hezbollah out of Lebanon we kicked Syria out of Lebanon in 2005. By the way who else thinks that there in no chance that the countries in Nato would have sent their troops to fight Hezbollah in Lebanon. They won't even help us with Al Qaeda in Afgahnistan.
It's "simply not true" that Barack Obama said he'd meet Iran's president without preconditions, Biden insisted.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e3Oj7Jn9rv4
I wanted to post the video, but embedding has been disabled upon request. I wonder who would request such a thing? In case you just want to take my word for it he said it and it's on tape.
* Biden said he's "always supported" clean-coal technology - after stating emphatically only last month, "We're not supporting clean coal."
* Biden asserted - repeatedly - that the US spends more money on three weeks' combat in Iraq than it's spent in Afghanistan since the war began.
That claim's only remotely intelligible if he limits Afghan expenditures merely to US rebuilding efforts - and even then, he's off by a factor of three, according to State Department numbers.
* Also on Afghanistan, Biden insisted - repeatedly - that "our commanding general in Afghanistan said the surge principle in Iraq will not work" there.
That may not be an out-and-out lie, but it took supposed foreign-policy neophyte Sarah Palin to bring any context or nuance to the statement.
What Gen. David McKiernan had said was that tribal realities in Afghanistan are very different than in Iraq - requiring a different form of cooperation.
But he flatly said more troops, and more local engagement, are needed.
* Then there was what might have been the biggest head-scratcher of the night. Said Biden of the Bush administration's supposed Middle East follies:
"When . . . along with France, we kicked Hezbollah out of Lebanon, I said and Barack said, 'Move NATO forces in there. Fill the vacuum, because if you don't, Hezbollah will control it."
We never kicked Hezbollah out of Lebanon we kicked Syria out of Lebanon in 2005. By the way who else thinks that there in no chance that the countries in Nato would have sent their troops to fight Hezbollah in Lebanon. They won't even help us with Al Qaeda in Afgahnistan.
Thursday, October 2, 2008
Debate Reaction
My first Reaction is Sarah Palin at the very least held her own. In a focus group at the end of the debate on Fox News almost everyone said Palin won the debate. The group on Fox said Obama won the debate last time. So there goes your argument about bias liberals.
I think we'll know more about who one after the fact checkers get their spin out tomorrow morning. Until then I'm withholding my opinion except to say that Palin did well and exceeded expectations.
I think we'll know more about who one after the fact checkers get their spin out tomorrow morning. Until then I'm withholding my opinion except to say that Palin did well and exceeded expectations.
Wednesday, October 1, 2008
Senate passes new bail out bill 74-25
The Senate passed the new bail out bill today. The 74-25 majority gives it momentum heading into the House. The bill also includes extra tax cuts and an increase in teh FDIC insurance to $250,000.
The real story here is that Jim Demitt and Bernie Sanders are in agreement.
Sen. Jim DeMint, R-S.C., a leading conservative, said the step was "leading us into the pit of socialism."
Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont, an independent who's a self-described socialist, said the rescue was fundamentally unfair.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,431561,00.html
More on that development tomorrow night.
The real story here is that Jim Demitt and Bernie Sanders are in agreement.
Sen. Jim DeMint, R-S.C., a leading conservative, said the step was "leading us into the pit of socialism."
Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont, an independent who's a self-described socialist, said the rescue was fundamentally unfair.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,431561,00.html
More on that development tomorrow night.
Live blogging tomorrow night over at the Patriot Room
I think their had been some confusion. I will doing the next Presidential debate. We've decided to go back to the Patriot Room to watch Palin destory Biden tomorrow night.
The Scariest thing I've ever seen
This is just frightening. It creeped me out watching it. I saw a post on another site that side it was Children of the cornish. I couldn't place it at the time but that's exactly the felling I got. I've seen Children of the Corn and that's exactly what this reminds me of. If you haven't seen the movie rent it and then try and tell me you don't agree. If you change the word Obama to God it's the song I sung in Church this Sunday. It's a worship song to Obama. These kids have been brainwashed by liberals. Maybe when they're old enough to think for themselves they'll meet some conservatives who can save them.
The other distrubing thing NBC President Jeffery Zucker is behind the video. This should be enough proof for the three people that still thought NBC was fair to admit they were wrong.
Update:
The video went down about the time I made this post. If I find it somewhere else I'll repost it. Looks like the Dems weren't too happy with conservatives talking about what they were doing.
Update
Video back up. Looks like it was a problem with You Tube. I'm still blaming the liberals, it just seems like the right thing to do. lol
Bail out Bill killed in House taken up by Senate
This is a tough situation to be in, but we are in it. It was be great if the Democrats had listened to John McCain about Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac instead of insisting there was nothing wrong. Instead they inferred the Republicans were racist for saying there was a problem. Honestly, looking at those hearing they might as well have just said, "You just don't want minorities to own houses." However it happened were here and something needs to be done.
Yesterday the Economic rescue package was dead. It was killed after Speaker Pelosi delivered a partisan speech on the House floor right before the bill. The speech blame Republicans for the entire problem and left many Republican lawmakers thinking they were about to be thrown under the bus with Rev. Wright and Obama's Grandmother. The vote come down 228-205. Only 65 Republicans supported the measure. That is far fewer than the 100 that was projected earlier. It appears that a partisian speech by Pelosi may have caused so few Republicans to vote for the bill.
However the bill is not dead. The Senate will take up the matter tomorrow. If it passes, and all indications are it will it will be sent back to the house for approval. The new verison will include an increase of FDIC insured money from $100,000 to $250,000. It also includes tax cuts for businesses.
"Another possible change to the bill would modify "mark to market" accounting rules. Such rules require banks and other financial institutions to adjust the value of their assets to reflect current market prices, even if they plan to hold the assets for years.
Some House Republicans say current rules forced banks to report huge paper losses on mortgage-backed securities, which might have been avoided.
Congressional leaders hope the half-dozen changes under discussion will be enough to persuade as few as six House Republicans and six Democrats to undo Monday's stunning vote."
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,431101,00.html
So even though Speaker Pelosi tried to kill this bill by putting all the blame for the problem on Republicans, then following it up by putting all the blame for the bill's failure on Republicans. We may have an improved conservative version signed into law by week's end.
Yesterday the Economic rescue package was dead. It was killed after Speaker Pelosi delivered a partisan speech on the House floor right before the bill. The speech blame Republicans for the entire problem and left many Republican lawmakers thinking they were about to be thrown under the bus with Rev. Wright and Obama's Grandmother. The vote come down 228-205. Only 65 Republicans supported the measure. That is far fewer than the 100 that was projected earlier. It appears that a partisian speech by Pelosi may have caused so few Republicans to vote for the bill.
However the bill is not dead. The Senate will take up the matter tomorrow. If it passes, and all indications are it will it will be sent back to the house for approval. The new verison will include an increase of FDIC insured money from $100,000 to $250,000. It also includes tax cuts for businesses.
"Another possible change to the bill would modify "mark to market" accounting rules. Such rules require banks and other financial institutions to adjust the value of their assets to reflect current market prices, even if they plan to hold the assets for years.
Some House Republicans say current rules forced banks to report huge paper losses on mortgage-backed securities, which might have been avoided.
Congressional leaders hope the half-dozen changes under discussion will be enough to persuade as few as six House Republicans and six Democrats to undo Monday's stunning vote."
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,431101,00.html
So even though Speaker Pelosi tried to kill this bill by putting all the blame for the problem on Republicans, then following it up by putting all the blame for the bill's failure on Republicans. We may have an improved conservative version signed into law by week's end.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)