Archive for October 4th, 2008
From Gateway Pundit:
Wow!… You can’t even do this in Iraq!
The Obama Campaign is holding several illegal “Get Out the Muslim Vote” Drives at swing state mosques this week!
Now you can go to Eid Celebrations and sign up to vote for Obama at the same time!!
Central Ohioans Against Terrorism is reporting that Muslim Americans for Obama has announced a series of “get out the vote” events at mosques in Michigan, Pennsylvania, New York, New Jersey, Virginia, and Ohio this week during Ramadan celebrations.
These “get out the vote” events flagrantly violate the tax exempt status of these participating mosques which are strictly prohibited from supporting or endorsing any kind of partisan political activity.
October 4th, 2008
This article was written by an Iranian American and is spot on about BO. I still have chills after reading it. Gives great psychological profile of Obama and why people are so obsessed with him. It’s a must read. The author gives permission to use the article whole or in part. I guess he’s deperate to get the word out about BO. (© Copyright: Permission is granted to reprint and distribute this article in its entirety or in part.) It’s long but very interesting …
When cheering for someone turns into adulation, something is wrong. Excessive adulation is indicative of a personality cult. The cult of personality is often created when the general population is discontent. A charismatic leader can seize the opportunity and project himself as an agent of change and a revolutionary leader. Often, people, tired of the status quo, do not have the patience to examine the nature of the proposed change. All they want is change. During 1979, when the Iranians were tired of the dictatorial regime of the late Shah, they embraced Khomeini, not because they wanted Islam, but because he promised them change. The word in the street was, “anything is better than the Shah.” They found their error when it was too late.
Khomeini promised there would be separation between religion and state. He lied and they did not care to look into his past to see whether he actually meant what he said. Had they done that they would have seen that he always believed in caliphate and the rule of Islam. People gobbled everything he told them uncritically. They wanted to believe and therefore closed their eyes so they did not see what they did not want to see. Eyes welled when he spoke. Masses poured into the streets by the millions, screamed and shouted to greet him. People kissed his pictures. Some saw his portrait reflected on the Moon.
Listening to Obama … it harkens back to when I was younger and I used to watch Khomeini, how he would excite the crowd and they’d come to their feet and scream and yell.
There are other disturbing similarities. Like Hitler and Khomeini, Obama also likes to create a cult of personality around himself. As stated above, when a large number of a population is discontent, a charismatic leader can seize the opportunity and present himself as the agent of change. He can create a cult of Personality by associating himself with the idea of change. He convinces everyone that things are terrible and a drastic change is needed. He then casts himself as the only person who can deliver this revolutionary transformation that everyone is waiting for. He portrays himself as a benevolent guide; the only one who cares about people and their needs and can pull them out of their alleged misery. In reality, they have no clue about how to address the problem - have no experience, no track record. But they are convincing because they are self assured.
October 4th, 2008
Damn straight it will.
ATI-News/Zogby asked likely voters: “Do you think that Barack Obama’s plan
to increase taxes on businesses and the wealthy will make you better or worse
off?”
The results are astounding. Fifty-two percent of voters think Obama’s tax
plan would make them worse off, while only 36 percent think it would make them
better off. A majority of Independents (52 percent) and women (51 percent) say
“worse off” as do 25 percent of Democrats, and 22 percent of self-described
Liberals. Surprisingly, 18 percent of Obama’s own supporters said his tax plan
would make them worse off.
In addition, a majority of voters in all regions of the country felt they
would be worse off as opposed to better off, especially the swing state rich
Central region (53 percent). Even 52 percent of young voters aged 18-29, a key
voter group for Obama, feel they’d be worse off. A majority in every income
group also felt they’d be worse off under Obama’s tax plan, including a
majority of those Americans making less than $25,000 per year.
“This poll clearly shows that a majority of voters, including
Independents, women and lower-income Americans, think that if Obama’s tax plan
is put into effect it will cause them personal economic pain,” said O’Leary.
October 4th, 2008
If you value the constitution, specifically the 1st and 2nd Amendment, do not vote for Obama!!
Barack Obama has already brought change. He’s ended the “chilling effect.”
Any restrictions on speech — real or imagined — were once inevitably deemed to have a “chilling effect” on people who would otherwise exercise their First Amendment rights if they weren’t so frightened by the possibility of running afoul of the law. Claims of a “chilling effect” were the most reliable weapon in the American Civil Liberties Union’s absolutist campaign against, say, even the most common-sensical laws against obscenity.
But the politics of free speech has been subtly shifting. Opponents of the ACLU on the Right are increasingly worried about overreaching rules against “hate speech” defining legitimate opinions as out of bounds. Meanwhile, the same people who forever decry the country’s imminent descent into the dark night of fascism are now comfortable regulating political speech in federal law and banning speech on college campuses. The Left has learned to like some chill with its free speech.
Enter the Obama campaign, which reflects the new ethos. It twice issued “Obama Action Wire” alerts for activists to call a Chicago radio station and try to shut down appearances by two Obama critics, writers Stanley Kurtz and David Freddoso. No “chilling effect” here. CNN and the Chicago Tribune reported on the effort to silence Obama’s detractors, but mostly by way of noting the Obama camp’s tech-savvy mustering of its supporters.
When an outside group ran TV ads pointing out links between Obama and the former Weatherman terrorist Bill Ayers, the Obama campaign asked the Bush Justice Department — yes, that Bush Justice Department, the fount of all evil — to open a criminal investigation.
The Obama campaign’s effort dovetails with the work of an outfit called Accountable America, run by a former MoveOn.org operative. It is devoted to threatening conservative donors with legal action and exposure of any embarrassing details of their private lives if they give money to groups running ads against Obama. The New York Times account says the group hopes to create “a chilling effect,” but the phrase is used non-pejoratively.
Liberal editorial boards have apparently lost their former zest for the First Amendment. Consider this approving sentence from a New York Times editorial: “The wholesale descent into Swift Boat campaigning has been blocked — for now — by a federal judge in Virginia.” It was written about a judge denying an injunction against the Federal Election Commission sought by a pro-life group running radio ads attacking Obama. The group thinks the First Amendment protects political speech; unfortunately, the courts disagree.
But the Times goes beyond mere legalities. It asserts with no evidence that the group’s advertising is “lies,” then urges the FEC to “be vigilant for what will inevitably be fresh attempts to mislead voters with fresh lies.” Here’s a newspaper charging a governmental agency with policing and shutting down campaign ads it doesn’t like.
It’s all just a taste of what’s to come if Obama wins and Democrats have even bigger majorities in Congress, emboldening them to try to crush their antagonists once and for all. “Hate is not a family value” was a popular bumper sticker on the left during the 1990s. Now, the left has embraced hate as, if not a family value, the organizing spirit of its long assault on George W. Bush, and anyone else in the way, from Joe Lieberman to Sarah Palin.
America’s partisan politics has always featured its share of rancorous abuse, but there’s something rancid at the heart of the new, blog-driven left that believes its bullying childishness has led the way out of the wilderness. This spirit will inevitably seep into an Obama administration. Whatever Obama’s professions of his commitment to cross-partisan understanding, he’s never confronted the left of his own party and has always been willing to engage in hardball when it suits his purposes.
Little Keith Olbermanns will surely be burrowed throughout his executive branch, eager to chill the speech of the “worst people in the world.”
From Rich Lowry
October 4th, 2008
I know all our resident liberals like to mention the online polls but this is why they are useless unless you can only vote once. Unfortunately, their devious plan as noted on the dailykos thread does sway voter opinions. It is time to get this out into the open.
I especially like #7:
Vote early and vote often! You can vote multiple times on many of these polls by using different browsers (IE then Firefox, etc.) by deleting cookies from the poll site or just by voting over and over again.
October 4th, 2008
Be sure to pass this along to all your friends … Also, I cannot stress enough the need for ALL McCain-Palin supporters to GOTV. You can sign up on the McCain web site and make calls from your house. How easy is that? Make ten calls, twenty calls, fifty calls TODAY. (They duplicate the lists several times over, too, just in case some Obot decides to screw things up for us.)
The odds are against John McCain and Sarah Palin winning this election. It’s not easy to make up a 6-point deficit in the last four weeks. But it can be done.
Look at history. The Gore-Lieberman ticket gained about 6 points in the final two weeks of the 2000 campaign. Ford-Dole came back more than 20 points in less than two months in the fall of 1976. Both tickets were from the party holding the White House, and both were running against inexperienced, and arguably risky, opponents.
What’s more, this year’s race has already–twice–moved by more than 6 points over a span of only a few weeks. The race went from McCain up 2 (these are the Real Clear Politics averages) on September 14 to Obama plus 6 on October 2, less than three weeks later. In the four weeks before that, the race had moved from Obama plus 5 on August 12 to McCain plus 2 on September 12.
So while there’s reason for McCain-Palin supporters to worry, there’s no reason to despair.
Despair is what the Obama campaign is hoping and working for. If a campaign can convince supporters of the other candidate that the race is effectively over, the enthusiasm and volunteer efforts drop off–as does, ultimately, their turnout on Election Day. Just as important, undecided and loosely affiliated voters become persuaded there’s no real contest and lose any incentive to look closely at the candidates. This explains the efforts of the Obama campaign –aided by a colluding media–to sell the notion that the race is over, that McCain supporters should give up, and undecided voters should tune out.
That’s why the events at the end of last week were so important.
On Thursday night, Sarah Palin more than held her own in the vice-presidential debate against Joe Biden. She may well have stopped the McCain campaign’s slide and, with her assaults on Obama’s tax-and-spend liberalism and his willingness to lose in Iraq, set up McCain for a strong performance in Tuesday night’s debate.
On Friday, enough House Republicans came around to pass the $700 billion financial bailout. It’s no magic bullet, either in terms of the economy or the McCain campaign. But it gives both a chance.
McCain’s decline in the second half of September is easily explained. A huge financial crisis coming to a head less than two months before Election Day is going to hurt the candidate of the incumbent party. The situation was made worse by the perception that not only was a Republican administration presiding over a financial meltdown, but congressmen from the same party were obstructing efforts to deal with it.
McCain’s decision to come back to Washington to try to work out a deal was therefore sensible. While the Bush administration and the congressional Republicans were squabbling and Rome burned, McCain had no chance. Now there is a deal, and the political bleeding may have been staunched. McCain can go on the offensive for the final weeks.
But what kind of offensive?
The positive component is pretty straightforward: McCain and Palin are common sense conservatives and proven reformers. The record of reform can be emphasized and contrasted with Obama’s and Biden’s record of conventional, go-along, get-along liberalism. And implicitly: If McCain and Palin are reformers and outsiders, it’s not Bush’s third term. More important is the negative message. The McCain campaign has to convince 51 percent of the voters they can’t trust Barack Obama to be our next president. This has an ideological component and a character component.
Read more here.
October 4th, 2008
It’s about time. The MSM can pull wool over the sheeps’ eyes and sweep BO’s dirt under the rug for only so long.
The Chicago Sun-Times reports that the FBI is looking into whether or not former Obama pal Tony Rezko — convicted in June of attempted extortion, mail and wire fraud, and aiding and abetting bribery — paid for all or part of $90,000 worth work on the Northwest Side Chicago home of Gov. Rod Blagojevich.
Rezko apparently liked helping out his politician pals on their real estate transactions. As you may recall, Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., and Rezko’s wife, Rita, bought adjacent properties in a controversial and complicated series of real estate transactions, one of which Obama later called “boneheaded” because it might cause people to think he’d been done a favor in exchange for something untoward, which he denies is the case. Rezko at the time was under federal investigation.
A federal judge Wednesday froze more than $100,000 of Rezko’s cash. Rezko’s sentencing is scheduled for Oct. 28.
The conservative Judicial Confirmation Network is running a TV ad tying Obama to not just Rezko, but William Ayers (now using cartoons to spread his ideas) and the bombastic Rev. Jeremiah Wright.
“We don’t know who Barack Obama would choose” as a Supreme Court justice, the ad says, “but we know this. He chose as one of his first financial backers a slumlord now convicted on 16 counts of corruption. Obama chose as an associate a man who helped to bomb the Pentagon and said he ‘didn’t do enough.’ And Obama chose as his pastor a man who has blamed America for the 9/11 attacks.”
October 4th, 2008
