Obama Tardiness Habitual

There are many possible reasons for habitual tardiness. The most common cause is usually one of two things. Either the person really doesn't want to be where he's supposed to be, therefore oft times showing up late...or sometimes not at all, OR it's a question of vanity. Sometimes those who arrive after the meeting has started simply wish, through some unconscious desire, to draw attention to themselves. It's as if he wants to jump up and down and dance about crying "look at me!!! look at me!!! In the case of The Anointed One, it's a tough call.

Would it be racist of me to suggest the possibility of laziness? After all he did vote "present" over a hundred times in the Illinois Legislature (except for the Illinois Born Alive Infants Protection Act which he voted against FOUR TIMES, but then we all have our pet issues, don't we?). But then again, we may find the real reason he was late all those times was that Michelle Obama took too long dressing him in the morning. Maybe an obstinate Barack "couldn't" get his fists through his cuffs and whined about not remembering how to tie his shoes, saying "do it for me!" There is just no telling as to why he was always late. But shouldn't it bother us more simply that he was? And so often?

(h/t: Ala)

Al Franken to Catholics: Vote For Me, You Big Fat Idiots

In a tight race for Minnesota's contested seat in the US Senate beginning to slightly shift in favor of Republican incumbent Norm Coleman, it doesn't help Democratic candidate-comedian Al Franken to have his anti-Catholic bigotry erupt back in his face at this time. The Catholic League's press release details some choice morsels of Franken's hate speech, including mocking the Eucharist and the crucifixion of Jesus. To the devout and sensitive, that brand of "comedy" is less amusing than sitting on the Kaiser's spiked helmet by mistake. In a race where every single vote's going to count, Catholics should give Franken the spike in remembrance.

The Christian Case Against Obama

To see the Christian case against voting for Obama, go here. Click the full page spandex thingie in the upper right of the page viewer. It fits on a single printable page, and holds links to supporting evidence on each point made for those who are interested.

The guide comes from CatholicVote.com, but no Christian can afford to draw divisive sectarian lines at a time like this. Heck, I'd say run with it if it were from JehovahsWitnessesVote.com. (Now that, ah say, that's a joke, son!)

NRA Taking Heat For Anti-Obama Ads

Anyone who values their 2nd Amendment rights should head on over to NRA websites and show your support. Anyone valuing their 2nd Amendment rights who is considering casting a vote for Obama-Biden after seeing these videos should have his/her head examined.

GunbaNObama

Click HERE for news on legal heat taken by NRA for anti-Obama ads.

The Spectator: Is America Really Going To Do This? (Good Question)

My friend Paul sent me a link to a British online magazine called The Spectator with a piece written by Melanie Phillips: Is America Really Going To Do This? In it she makes a powerful summation of why the election of Obama would be a catastrophe not only for America, but also for Israel and the West. Here is an excerpt:

[...the only way to assess their position is to look at each man in the round, at what his general attitude is towards war and self-defence, aggression and appeasement, the values of the west and those of its enemies and – perhaps most crucially of all – the nature of the advisers and associates to whom he is listening. As I have said before, I do not trust McCain; I think his judgment is erratic and impetuous, and sometimes wrong. But on the big picture, he gets it. He will defend America and the free world whereas Obama will undermine them and aid their enemies.

Here’s why. McCain believes in protecting and defending America as it is. Obama tells the world he is ashamed of America and wants to change it into something else. McCain stands for American exceptionalism, the belief that American values are superior to tyrannies. Obama stands for the expiation of America’s original sin in oppressing black people, the third world and the poor.

Obama thinks world conflicts are basically the west’s fault, and so it must right the injustices it has inflicted. That’s why he believes in ‘soft power’ — diplomacy, aid, rectifying ‘grievances’ (thus legitimising them, encouraging terror and promoting injustice) and resolving conflict by talking. As a result, he will take an axe to America’s defences at the very time when they need to be built up. He has said he will ‘cut investments in unproven missile defense systems’; he will ‘not weaponize space’; he will ‘slow our development of future combat systems’; and he will also ‘not develop nuclear weapons,’ pledging to seek ‘deep cuts’ in America’s arsenal, thus unilaterally disabling its nuclear deterrent as Russia and China engage in massive military buildups.

McCain understands that an Islamic war of conquest is being waged on a number of diverse fronts which all have to be seen in relation to each other. For Obama, however, the real source of evil in the world is America. The evil represented by Iran and the Islamic jihadists is apparently all America’s fault. ‘A lot of evil’s been perpetuated based on the claim that we were fighting evil,’ he said. Last May, he dismissed Iran as a tiny place which posed no threat to the US -- before reversing himself the very next day when he said Iran was a great threat which had to be defeated. He has also said that Hezbollah and Hamas have ‘legitimate grievances’. Really? And what might they be? Their grievances are a) the existence of Israel b) its support by America c) the absence of salafist Islam in the world. Does Obama think these ‘grievances’ are legitimate?]

The article gets even more alarming as she continues...and you can read it HERE in its entirety.

What a catastrophe it would be if our country elected an inexperienced, extreme liberal simply based upon his non response to a mortgage crisis for which he and his Democrat cronies are largely responsible, only to realize the mistake after we are surrounded by enemies giving us the ultimatum of servitude and bondage vs. extermination. History (if anyone will be allowed to write it by then) will ask..."Where was the Media?"

From now until election day I will try to make the time to present other convincing arguments I find or that friends send my way.

Obamaween: Scary Indeed!

MSM's Obama Bias Will Be Damaging For Country

This is how I blog when I'm in a big hurry.

From Laura Ingraham's E-Blast:

[NO NEWS IS GOOD NEWS AT THE LOS ANGELES TIMES

What if a few years ago John McCain had partied the night away with a house-full of assorted terror sympathizers and Fox News had a video of the festivities that it refused to air? The national media would not stop until they shamed Fox into releasing the tape. According to National Review's Andy McCarthy, the Los Angeles Times was given a copy of a tape of Sen. Obama at a farewell party in 2003, held in honor of Rashid Khalidi, the erstwhile terrorist mouthpiece for Yasser Arafat. The newspaper has declined to release the tape. Yesterday we asked listeners to write the Times and demand that the tape be made public. Here's one response:

Readers Rep
Date: Monday, October 27, 2008 16:14
Subject: RE: Not read: The L.A. Times Suppressing Obama's Khalidi Bash Tape?

Thanks for your note. More than six months ago the Los Angeles Times published a detailed account of the events shown on the videotape. The Times is not suppressing anything. Just the opposite -- the L.A. Times brought the matter to light. Please read the article at: http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/washingtondc/la-na-obamamideast10apr10,0,3025411.story Thanks again for taking the time to write.

Jamie Gold
Readers' Representative

Nice try, Jamie. How can the Times possibly argue that the content of this video is not newsworthy?! It's one thing to read what Obama said at the party--it's another to hear him talk about "his friend" in his own words. Big shock that with this lack of news sense and obvious pro-Dem bias, the Times is bleeding money, losing circulation, and laying off staffers.] (end of E-Blast)


It is obvious to most people, especially Hillary supporters, that the Main Stream Media is extremely biased in favor of Obama. Never in recent memory has the MSM ever sold their souls for a candidate. Makes one wonder if several of them have been paid off from the hundreds of millions that Obama has received from "donors" both here and abroad. But the last time the media really came down on one side vs. the other was in 1992 (though not as badly or more obvious than today) in showing their support for Clinton over Bush '41. That resulted in many Republicans accusing Clinton and the Media of "stealing" the election. And I don't have to remind anyone of the seething hatred felt toward the Clinton administration for eight full years. An Obama victory under the current circumstances may result in a country more polarized than anytime since the Civil War.

Joe Biden Unaccustomed To Real Questions

Look how this arrogant bozo shakes his head in disbelief at receiving Katie Couric-style questions that actually challenge the premise of the Obama plans. I am sure that in all the MANY years of his senate career his feet have never been held to the fire like a typical Republican. Welcome to the party, Joe. Now be a man and stop whining.

Best Mark Steyn To Date...

Welcome back, Mark. You have been sorely missed.

An excerpt:

[McCain vs Obama is not the choice many of us would have liked in an ideal world. But then it’s not an “ideal world”, and the belief that it can be made so is one of the things that separates those who think Obama will “heal the planet” and those of us who support McCain faute de mieux. I agree with Thomas Sowell that an Obama-Pelosi supermajority will mark what he calls “a point of no return”. It would not be, as some naysayers scoff, “Jimmy Carter’s second term”, but something far more transformative. The new president would front the fourth great wave of liberal annexation — the first being FDR’s New Deal, the second LBJ’s Great Society, and the third the incremental but remorseless cultural advance when Reagan conservatives began winning victories at the ballot box and liberals turned their attention to the other levers of the society, from grade school up. The terrorist educator William Ayers, Obama’s patron in Chicago, is an exemplar of the last model: forty years ago, he was in favor of blowing up public buildings; then he figured out it was easier to get inside and undermine them from within.]

Enjoy the rest of the article HERE at NRO. Another excellent read before voting.

Fred Thompson's Election Address

This video should be seen by everyone who plans to vote this year.

Laura Ingraham: Obama's Ministry Of Truth

One of several topics discussed in Laura's latest E-Blast:

[OBAMA'S MINISTRY OF TRUTH: Should Obama win in November, thanks and credit will be in order to his 1984-inspired alteration of the historical record. In only the last few months, we've seen the following: When it was revealed in the "Fight the Smears" section of his website that he was lying about his involvement with ACORN (minimizing an actually long-established partnership), his site quietly scrubbed the falsehoods; when a blogger noticed that Michael Klonsky, an unashamed communist education "reformer" happened to be blogging on Obama's site, any hint of his existence was expunged; after Rev. Wright became a household name for his desire to send America to Hell, Obama's site suddenly stopped boasting of his involvement in the campaign; when a video of young California kids appeared singing Obama's glories in a style reminiscent of North Korea, that too was wiped from the e-book of history.

With such a cavalier approach to information control, what exactly we know about Obama -- really and truly -- is harder to discern every day.]

I couldn't agree more. You can subscribe to Laura' E-Blast by going to her website HERE.

The Truth Of Obama-Ayers Begins To Surface

NRO has been doing some really intense research on the Obama-Ayers relationship which the Main Stream Media certainly overlooked in its vetting of Obama during the Primary. In previous posts I've drawn your attention to Stanley Kurtz's NRO column, but the latest from Andrew McCarthy blows the Obama lies about his relationship with William Ayers out of the water. Here is an excerpt:

[Obama and Ayers shared all kinds of views. That is why they worked so well together at the Chicago Annenberg Challenge (CAC), funding the likes of Mike Klonsky, a fellow SDS and Maoist associate of Ayers who, as Steve Diamond relates, used to host a “social justice” blog on Obama’s campaign website. With Obama heading the board of directors that approved expenditures and Ayers, the mastermind running its operational arm, hundreds of thousands of CAC dollars poured into the “Small Schools Workshop” — a project begun by Ayers and run by Klonsky to spur the revolution from the ground up.

Precisely because they shared the same views, Obama and Ayers also worked comfortably together on the board of the Woods Fund. There, they doled out thousands of dollars to Jeremiah Wright’s Trinity Church to promote its Marxist “black liberation theology.” Moreover, they underwrote the Arab American Action Network (AAAN) founded by Rashid Khalidi, a top apologist for Yasser Arafat. As National Review’s David Pryce-Jones notes, Khalidi once directed WAFA, the terrorist PLO’s news agency. Then, like Ayers, he repackaged himself as an academic who rails at American policy. The AAAN, which supports driver’s licenses and public welfare benefits for illegal aliens, holds that the establishment of Israel was an illegitimate “catastrophe.”]

McCarty goes on to explain how easily (and likely) Obama and Ayers met while living in the same neighborhood in Morningside Heights (NYC), as well as who likely introduced them, how they both made the move to Chicago at about the same time, and worked with many of the same people fighting for the same causes, etc... (more of an advocacy than an association). It's a rather long article, but if the subject matter indeed matters to you, I suggest you take the time and read it. It is the most definitive article to date on the issue, IMHO. Read the entire column HERE. It should be very clear to all (except who the MSM succeeds in fooling) that Obama outright lied in the final debate with McCain about the Ayers issue.

For a time I've pondered as to why Obama has refused to release his Columbia transcripts. First I thought it might be to hide poor grades (like John Kerry, whose GPA was even lower than Bush's). But then I realized it could be to hide the types of classes he took. For instance, someone who took several classes in Communism, Socialism, Marxism, political revolutions, or even Islamic fundamentalism, might be mistaken for a Communist, Marxist, Muslim extremist, etc... In other words it would verify for the whole country what the rest of us have suspected about Obama's true views.

Obama on Infants Born Alive: Let 'em Die

Jill Stanek is a controversial figure. Her detractors (and they are legion) say she's a loon, that Christ Hospital in Oak Lawn, Illinois, fired her as a labor and delivery nurse on grounds of incompetence.

And then there's her side, the one everybody else believes: that Stanek was fired by Christ Hospital because after she discovered they were leaving unwanted newborn babies to starve to death in a dark closet with the dirty linens, she went public with it. Stanek went on to testify before the Illinois Senate, where then-State Senator Obama killed the state version of the Born Alive Infant Protection Act.

This video is simply one of the most stirring productions I've ever seen. Watch it and decide for yourself who's the loon, and who's doing God's work. Don't worry; it's not graphic. Pardon the odd appearing leader and trailer.



More on Jill Stanek: Her home on the Web, syndicated column, and YouTube channel.

Jill's termination by, if you'll excuse my momentary dyslexia, Antichrist Hospital, is a win for the Pro-Life movement and the babies of the world in her greater capacity as a public figure.

The Howard Stern Experiment

I am NOT a Howard Stern fan...BUT this bit they did on 10-13 is well worth passing along. Here he interviews some Obama supporters and substitutes McCain's policies in place of Obama's and asks each subject what they think of both the candidates and the policy. Conservatives will find the results predictable, as Stern proves that Obama supporters really do NOT know their candidate. I wonder how many members of the Main Stream Media would fair as poorly.

ACORN Rotten From Treetop to Roots

From today's New York Post:

[Pushed to meet daily quotas and bullied by bosses if they didn't, Ohio ACORN workers faked voter registrations, signed up people more than once, and even paid off registrants to keep from being fired, its canvassers told The Post.

"Every day, there was pressure on us. Every single day," said Teshika Elder, a Cleveland single mom of three who worked for ACORN this summer.

"We had meetings every morning where they'd go over your quota; they'd yell at you if you were low," said Elder, 21. "They'd sit us down and say if you didn't do better, they'd suspend you. They'd say, 'Try harder next time,' [and] if you didn't get it, you'd be fired."]

Read the rest of the article and learn all about the pitifully corrupt ACORN HERE.

What do normal people who have proper values do when pressured by their bosses to commit illegal acts?

1) Call the police

2) Call the home office and report misbehavior.

3) Quit and get another damn job. It's only office work and probably doesn't pay much anyway. You CAN work somewhere else, you know. Swallow your pride and drive a truck for a living. It pays more and you can sleep at night. I did.

The people running ACORN are corrupt. The people hired by the people running ACORN are corruptible. That's one of the reasons they were hired. They are either people with a liberal mindset who believe in advancing liberal causes by any means necessary, or they simply have no spine and live in constant fear of being replaced. I know I shouldn't judge too harshly. Sometimes these things sneak up on people...gradually. But when a person realizes what they have become, it's time to reform...unless they have no fortitude. Welcome to ACORN.

Barack Hussein Obama has close ties to ACORN. Google Obama and ACORN and see. I'll save you the trouble. See Kurtz's NRO column HERE.

John McCain: Fight

Okay, good content. Need a tad more energy. Those who are undecided this late in the race aren't looking for facts. No, people like that never let a year's worth of facts and issues get in the way of their voting decisions. Kind of makes one wonder why they bother to vote at all. What they are looking for is type of manner, presentation, and emotion. Not necessarily the candidate's emotion, but their own emotions as elicited by the candidate. And these are the people who usually decide close elections. Did I say "God help us all?"

Obama Backs Driver's Licenses For Illegals

There are so many reasons not to vote for this guy, sometimes it's hard to keep track of them all. But this ad shows yet another reason why Obama is dangerously naive and irresponsible. Go HERE for the fact sheet on this issue. Obama has been pretty consistent on this position...for a change.

Glad to meet you, St. Blogustine readers!

Hello, dear readers. This is Kevin Gleeson, looking forward to bringing you some fresh material in the coming days. A special thanks to Matt for inviting me here to guest blog while he completes his mission to infiltrate ACORN in the FBI voter fraud sting operation. (Wait, that wasn't a secret mission, was it, Matt? Oh. Sorry about that, Chief.)

I'm visiting you from my own serious blog and humor site. Their readership and posting frequency are small compared to St. Blogustine. In Star Trek terms, I almost feel like a shuttlecraft pilot promoted to take the helm of a starship (Intrepid class, not Galaxy; that would be Michelle Malkin.) I'm Catholic, conservative in every way, and a humorist. In case you were wondering how one becomes a humorist, you start out by calling yourself one, then you proceed to create funny stuff. If you can get the right people to laugh, eventually they'll find a way to slip you a few bucks for doing it. (So far, they haven't found me yet).

The FedEx man arrived today, and as I unpacked Matt's shipment of the St. B. Golden Keyboard and the Prestigious Attila the Hun Chair to post this entry, I was thinking there's got to, simply got to, be an easier way to take turns blogging here, even as I dread having to recrate the things for FedEx tonight so that Matt can have them back for his next blog post.

We'll work it out. See you back here!

McCain Defends "Joe The Plumber"

Great speech by McCain!

I Voted Today...Legally!

There are a few things I want to talk about before turning the bulk of the postings over to my longtime friend and partner in crime, Kevin Gleeson, who will be a guest blogger for the next few months or as long as he wishes. Things are quite busy at work and require my utmost attention.

First, I voted absentee today and it felt terrific! Even though things don't look promising for McCain-Palin these days poll-wise, It felt great to know that I canceled out another vote by Mickey Mouse and friends come November 4th. And I found out that you can vote early and absentee without any picture ID if you simply tell the guy behind the counter that you have voted there in the past. I didn't actually try this, but the guy admitted to it. Imagine that. Something to keep in mind for '12 when I register 73 times. Or perhaps all of my high school classmates from Sterling, IL will find themselves registered and voting (some even posthumously) in Lancaster Co. PA. Life is strange, and voting in America is no exception. I merely jest here. But you know they would fix everything and make it fair if they wanted to. Right?

Secondly, as I was traveling through Galesburg, IL, I noticed yet another style of Obama-Biden campaign sign that shows Obama's name very prominently (to be expected), but shows poor Joe Biden's name almost invisible (huh??). In fact, if I didn't know better I'd say it almost looks...rather racist. Not that Obama hates white people, we'll leave that to Michelle...and Jeremiah Wright...and Farrakhan...etc. But could it be that Obama is a little insecure about people thinking the white guy will be in charge and therefore downplaying Biden's name on the ticket? Could be a bit of a stretch, ...but for the Obama camp to suggest that Sarah Palin wearing a white outfit suggests a white supremacist attitude, it makes one wonder who is race obsessed and who isn't.

Or perhaps the Obama camp realized its mistake of appointing Joe Biden to the ticket and now wants to really really downplay it. Kind of like George H. W. Bush downplaying Dan Quayle's role. See any similarities here?

J-O-B-S Is Four Letters, Joe! Not Three

Another one from the gaffe-master.

Live From New York! It's John McCain!

Senator John McCain at the Alfred E. Smith dinner knockin' them dead. Hey, we could all use a little levity before the home stretch. And it couldn't hurt his likability factor (or my blood pressure). Could this be the beginning of a new strategy?

(h/t: Gateway Pundit)

Rev. Wright Is Tip Of The Iceberg...

In great detail and from much dogged research, Stanley Kurtz of NRO has pieced together details of Obama's associations with people having extremist hate-filled Afrocentric views similar to those of Reverend Jeremiah Wright. In fact common among them are the beliefs of Leonard Jeffries, who refers to white people as "ice people" (being oppressive and violent) and black people as "sun people" (peaceful and mutually supportive). It seems that not only did Obama share these beliefs, but also funded the spreading of such ideology through the Chicago Annenburg Foundation.

Here is an excerpt from Stanley Kurtz's column:

[It looks like Jeremiah Wright was just the tip of the iceberg. Not only did Barack Obama savor Wright’s sermons, Obama gave legitimacy — and a whole lot of money — to education programs built around the same extremist anti-American ideology preached by Reverend Wright. And guess what? Bill Ayers is still palling around with the same bitterly anti-American Afrocentric ideologues that he and Obama were promoting a decade ago. All this is revealed by a bit of digging, combined with a careful study of documents from the Chicago Annenberg Challenge, the education foundation Obama and Ayers jointly led in the late 1990s.

John McCain, take note. Obama’s tie to Wright is no longer a purely personal question (if it ever was one) about one man’s choice of his pastor. The fact that Obama funded extremist Afrocentrists who shared Wright’s anti-Americanism means that this is now a matter of public policy, and therefore an entirely legitimate issue in this campaign.]

This explosive article is a bit lengthy but well worth the read. It will no doubt shock and horrify. Read it HERE. When you're done, send a link to everyone you know who might consider voting for Obama so they can see what they're getting themselves into.

(h/t Laura)

In a related item you might wish to revisit Sean Hannity's Obama & Friends--A History of Radicalism which appeared on Hannity's America recently. Ala has it all on You Tube HERE.

See McCain's ACORN Ad Here (no longer on You Tube)

Go directly to the source! McCain's website HERE. In fact whenever You Tube declares a McCain ad no longer available, just head over to johnmccain.com.

What Historical Figure Does Obama Bring To Mind?

That is quite a loaded question. I'm sure some of you will say Che Guevara, while others dare compare him to Lincoln or JFK. But when I think of Barack Hussein Obama I think of a man who is very gifted, yet horribly flawed. I see a man who is articulate, charismatic, handsome, and who appeals to a mass audience. But I also see a man who has associated with and surrounded himself with several hate-filled extremists in an effort to advance questionable ideologies, but most of all to advance his own ambitions. Now when I put all that together I come up with no name on anyone else's list. The name that comes to mind is none other than the late, Albert Speer.

Now please don't email me with complaints about me calling Obama a Nazi, because I don't actually believe he is. Obama is much more likely a Marxist, anyway. The comparison between Obama and Speer has less to do with the choices in ideology these two men made, but more to do with their mindsets and how their respective goals were reached.

They have both been opportunists to the utmost degree. Like Obama, Speer was a gifted, articulate, and handsome man who also allowed himself to be used by hate-filled, twisted men to advance extremist causes, while using them in return to climb up the ladder of power. And both Speer and Obama tossed their associates under the bus when they were no longer of use. Speer may have been on board to assist in Hitler's assassination plot, while not actually taking part in the attempt itself, while Obama disowns people from his past who embarrass him or are no longer of use in his election prospects. Both men also have attempted to be all things to all people. Like Speer, Obama thinks he can be of one extreme ideology one moment and then mainstream the next. It all depends upon who he's with and what prize he's aiming for.

But the main comparison has to do with each man's ability to be comfortable with the systematic, mass slaughter of millions of human beings. Albert Speer turned a blind eye to the mass extermination of the European Jewish population, while Obama seems comfortable today with our government allowing mass killings of millions of unborn babies every year. In fact he consistently voted against even allowing babies who survived abortion attempts a chance at life. He chose instead to allow these newborns to be disposed of after forced strangulation, mutilation, or abandonment. And if Obama is elected President, the first thing he plans to do is sign the Freedom Of Choice Act which would strip every restriction on abortion from all levels of government. Read more about that HERE.

Speer, along with the other Nazis, advanced to a position of power due mainly to fallout from The Great Depression. Today's rough economic times seem to be propelling Obama, along with many Democrats responsible for our current mess, into power. A drowning man will reach for even the tip of a sword if he thinks it will save him. God help us all.

Obama Fundraising Suggests Massive Foreign Participation

In an October 7th editorial, IBD asks some very interesting questions about Obama's enormous haul of campaign donations received from sources unknown. And the MSM seems uninterested in investigating this matter.

An excerpt from IBD:

[Newsmax reported last week that Sen. Barack Obama's campaign has collected "the largest pool of unidentified money that has ever flooded into the U.S. election system, before or after the McCain-Feingold campaign finance reforms of 2002."

Federal Election Commission data show that some $222 million of the cash Obama has collected came in the form of contributions of $200 or less, with the Democratic nominee's campaign identifying the donors of less than $40 million of that sum.

Campaigns may accept donations of less than $200 without providing the donors' names and addresses in campaign finance reports, but Sen. John McCain's camp has made its full donor database available on the Internet. Independent campaign finance watchdog organizations have asked the Obama campaign to list all its donors, as well, but it's refused. What is Obama hiding?]

Read the rest of this juicy story HERE.

It feels rather frustrating to be so powerless in stopping someone from blatantly breaking rules, and watching them steal an election by seducing a sycophantic media and literally buying a victory. It seems that all we can do is sit back and watch it unfold until the election is swiped, because no one will be prosecuted before election day. And what happens after? What happens if these funds are proven to have been collected illegally? What if we find that Speaker Pelosi and former President Jimmy Carter traveled to the Middle East to, among other mischief, solicit donations from wealthy foreigners who hate America just to get Obama in power? Probably not much. The people who got elected will not ruin the lives of those who illegally supported them.

Is the story too enticing for the MSM to ignore? Most likely only to a point. According to IBD the main stream media is actually taking notice, but I doubt they will sacrifice their messiah anytime soon.

Latest McCain Ad Linking Obama and Ayers

None of this would be necessary if only the MSM had done its job in vetting Obama properly during the primary.

Thomas Sowell: "Do Facts Matter?"

Thomas Sowell has a new column out challenging the MSM to lay aside their Obama-worship (my words) and report the actual facts about the mortgage crisis, many of which indict both Obama and the Congressional Democrats.

Here is an excerpt:

[Abraham Lincoln said, "You can fool all the people some of the time and some of the people all the time, but you can't fool all the people all the time."

Unfortunately, the future of this country, as well as the fate of the Western world, depends on how many people can be fooled on election day, just a few weeks from now.

Right now, the polls indicate that a whole lot of the people are being fooled a whole lot of the time.

The current financial bailout crisis has propelled Barack Obama back into a substantial lead over John McCain-- which is astonishing in view of which man and which party has had the most to do with bringing on this crisis.

It raises the question: Do facts matter? Or is Obama's rhetoric and the media's spin enough to make facts irrelevant?]

The rest of this very insightful column can be found HERE. In it Mr. Sowell lists the names of the real culprits, several of whom you can see in action HERE in a You Tube video. Quite damning if only the sycophantic main stream media would shine the spot light in the right direction. But then their darling Obama might lose the election.

(photo borrowed from Real Clear Politics)

A Word From The Judicial Confirmation Network...

(h/t: Up North Mommy)

Birth Of A Nation (Fourth Reich)

Where is the same kind of outrage the MSM shows for Christian church camps, The Boy Scouts, or even Indian Guides? None of which indoctrinate children to worship mere mortals to this degree. And what of these children should, Obamamessiah forbid, the Anointed One be defeated in November? At best they will be traumatized, feeling that their own country committed a kind of Diecide.

Should we expect to see videos in the future of Obama-radicalized children wearing suicide belts of TNT wrapped around their little waists, vowing to avenge their God for the shame of losing an election? Sound ridiculous? The Islamofascists, Nazis, and Communists proved you can brainwash children into doing just about anything.

In choosing a video I found it hard to pick just one. All three are well worth viewing, but if your time is limited, pick the middle one.

The Devil Looks After His Own

Enron, Worldcom, and Tyco bankruptcies combined are all much smaller than the mess brought down upon us by Franklin Raines and Jim Johnson, both of whom should be stripped of their fortunes and forced to do the perp walk. But if Obama is elected we should assume that will not happen. For they are both Obama advisers and will be rewarded for their loyalty to their master.

It is past time to sound the bell and spread the word. Shift into high gear and don't stop moving forward. It is safe to say at this point that the very existence of our country and way of life depends upon it.

(h/t: The Anchoress)

Palin Wins! Biden And MSM Looking Tired

Tonight's Vice-Presidential debate was anything but a snoozer, with both candidates performing quite ably throughout. Though the only thing close to a zinger was Sarah Palin's comment that no one got Biden's joke when he announced earlier in the campaign he would never consider accepting the VP nod.

Even more interesting (to me, at least) was after the debate when two cable news channels, Fox and CNN, asked their respective samples of voters (equal number of Democrats and Republicans) who the victor was. As you would expect after becoming jaded about the MSM, the Fox sample almost unanimously declared Palin the victor while the CNN sample resoundingly claimed that Biden won. Now how can this be...unless CNN and/or Fox pre-screened their samples to include opposite party members who were closer to sitting on the fence than their preferred counterparts? In other words CNN must have rigged their sample with Republicans who weren't too enthusiastic about McCain-Palin, and/or Fox rigged theirs with less enthusiastic Democrats for Obama-Biden. My guess is that the Fox sample was probably more genuine because they consisted entirely of Anheuser-Busch employees in St. Louis. How are they more genuine? Consider that McCain's wife owns Coors, a direct competitor of Budweiser, and the object of ire in a competitive beer market. That and the fact that CNN once avoided reporting atrocities by Saddam Hussein so they could continue having access there. They've never had credibility in my book.

The debate itself settled the Palin issue. She proved she is an asset to the ticket, not a liability. It may have also worked the same for Biden, in that the rumors of Hillary replacing him will die out soon, if not abruptly tonight.

Palin looked energetic, sounded good, and hopefully restored confidence in her ability to step in for McCain from day one. Biden looked tired but attacked his friend, McCain, often. He also had many facts at his disposal, though some will be called into question.

Laura Ingraham's Eight Bailout Questions

Just received this E-Blast from Laura a few minutes ago and thought enough of it to rush it to print (so to speak). In it she asks some very poignant questions we should all be asking our legislators before they spend nearly a trillion of our and our children's tax dollars for something they HOPE will repair the current financial catastrophe. Here they are:


1) Since the White House introduced the bailout last week, a number of alternative ideas have been proposed. For one, Michigan Republican Thaddeus McCotter wrote a 10-point plan that carries no cost to taxpayers. Others, like George Soros', are significantly less expensive and, in his estimation, likelier to be effective. Can you explain why this bill is the best option, despite being the most expensive?

2) We're told the bailout could actually turn a profit for taxpayers. Assuming that's true, how can we be sure the money actually ends up back in taxpayers' hands? For years the Social Security system took in more money than it paid out, yet instead of putting the surplus revenue toward future benefits, Congress snatched that extra cash for general expenditures. Likewise, Fannie and Freddie's "profits," were used for congressional pet projects. With this track record, how can we trust that this program will be any different?

3) The McCain campaign yesterday pointed out that the most recent housing bill gave the government nearly $1 trillion to purchase mortgages. If this is true, why exactly does Congress need to pass this monstrous legislation?

4) Does the latest version of this bill still "allow the government to purchase troubled assets from pension plans, local governments, and small banks that serve low- and middle-income families"? Americans are having a hard enough time swallowing the idea of a bailout for irresponsible home, car, and student lending. The notion that we'll be on the hook for insolvent pension plans administered by awful, union-controlled lawmakers in cities like Detroit and New York is simply insane.

5) Does the bill's preamble still proclaim that the law "provides authority to the treasury secretary to ... ensure the economic well-being of Americans?" Does anyone know if there are limitations to this seemingly unbridled authority? Otherwise, what prevents the Treasury secretary from becoming a de-facto dictator? This strikes me as especially worth discussion.

6) Are there still no meaningful curtailments of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac? Does the bill contain anything even hinting at accountability?

7) What concrete assurances do taxpayers have that the turmoil's provenance - Carter and Clinton-era social-engineering dictums that upended safe-lending practices in favor of higher minority home ownership - will forever be outlawed? How do we know taxpayers won't be asked to finance another $700 billion bailout in 10 years? What has Congress learned from its past mistakes?

8) After Enron's collapse, former CEO Jeffrey Skilling, then-CEO Ken Lay, and then-CFO Andrew Fastow, were called to testify before Congress. According to the Business and Media Institute, Fannie's and Freddie's overstated earnings were 19 times larger than Enron's fake numbers. So when can we expect Congress to call Jim Johnson, Franklin Raines, Barney Frank, Chris Dodd, and the rest of Fannie's and Freddie's enablers to testify before Congress?