The Real Obama

I think this 13min video should be required viewing for anyone voting in this years election….

http://www.eyeblast.tv/Public/Video.aspx?RsrcID=2036&offset=2

Had enough “change” yet?

When the Democrats took over control of Congress in the election of 2006, consumer confidence stood at a 21/2-year high, regular gasoline sold for $2.19 a gallon and the unemployment rate was 4.5 percent.

Since the Democrats took over, consumer confidence is down, gasoline has soared to $4.00 a gallon and the unemployment rate, as we learned this morning, has climbed to 5.5 percent.

Mutual and stock fund losses now total in the trillions, and an increasing number of home mortgages are in foreclosure.

Meanwhile, Democrats continue to block homegrown efforts to drill for domestic oil, build new refineries, produce more clean-burning natural gas, increase our use of atomic energy and fully exploit our coal resources, including making motor fuel from coal. The United States will never become energy independent until we are allowed to develop the many sources of energy which are our own.

The voters opted for change in 2006, and the Democrats certainly gave it to them. Now Barack Obama and his band of merry pranksters that is the Democrat Party want voters to approve even more “change” in 2008. I don’t think our economy can stand it - do you?

- JP

The real battle now begins

To this point Obama has survived largely on the votes of young democrats that believe a politician when he talks about hope and change even if his true beliefs reflect neither.  That was fine for the primaries but how will Obama transform himself into a candidate that can win in November?  If you read most polls less than 30% of Hillary’s supporters would vote for Obama in November, how does he change that?  He must articulate similar positions that Hillary did, the problem is that by doing that he must abandon the hope and change mantra and thus alienate the young voters that got him where he is.

He has really painted himself into a corner because he can’t win in November without a greater share of Hillary supporters, he can’t get those without alienating at least an equal number of the young college types, and he will find it impossible to get conservatives to support him.  Most seniors seem to have supported Hillary, they vote more reliably than the young impressionable skulls full of mush that seemingly made Obama the nominee.  For Obama to win would mean that McCain will absolutely have to implode, not a far fetched possibility given his history, or democrat voters will have to fall for the greatest job of slick marketing and packaging in American History.

Obama is going to have to debate McCain at some point, and that is not what he is good at.  He’s good at prepared speeches, making young college girls faint (a trait even Bill Clinton didn’t possess), but he’s not shown that he can think on his feet or discuss foreign policy issues at a 10th grade level.  Ok given the state of education in this country perhaps he could have that discussion at a 10th grade level, but the point is the guy can speak, outside of that he’s not that intelligent.

It is my belief that most American’s will see Obama for what he really is, the 2nd coming of Jimmy Carter, if not we’re in for Jimmy Carter’s 2nd four years…

Obama gets flawed foreign policy advice

Sen. Barack Obama is a foreign policy disaster just waiting to happen.

Consider Obama’s evolving stance on Iraq. In 2002 he was a staunch opponent of the war. Then in his book The Audacity of Hope, he confessed that he “began to suspect” that he “might have been wrong” about the war. In 2003 he told CNN that he absolutely wanted “to make sure that the troops have sufficient support to be able to win.” During the DNC convention in 2004, the junior Senator stated that failure in Iraq would be “a disaster and a betrayal of the promise that we made to the Iraqi people, and it would be hugely destabilizing” for our national security. But again, he might have been wrong, for he told the New York Times, “I’m not privy to Senate intelligence reports. What would I have done? I don’t know.” By November of that same year, Obama seemed to be sure again, telling Charlie Rose that he would have voted against the Iraq War resolution had he been in Congress at the time. But the following summer, he told the Chicago Tribune that there really wasn’t that much difference between his position on the war and George Bush’s position “at this stage.” This isn’t flip-flopping. It’s more like Mighty Morphin. Obama must have been a Power Rangers fan.

Ed Lasky, in an excellent piece for American Thinker, draws attention to how Obama’s willingness to throw the Iraqi people under the bus could spell trouble for more countries than just Iraq:

This willingness of Senator Obama to turn his back on something he proclaimed an “absolute obligation” should be particular concern to the millions of supporters of Israel in America. When campaigning, Senator Obama has made similar promises regarding the safety and security of Israel. How long will those promises last? Until January, 2009?

Israelis and friends of that besieged democracy have good reason to be worried about a possible Barack Obama presidency. To advise him on the Middle East, the junior Senator from Illinois chose Robert Malley, who has held a lifelong position which is not exactly Israel-friendly, to put it mildly.

How about the rest of his foreign policy team? Who has the inexperienced Senator’s ear on matters of worldwide import?

Though Samantha Power had to resign fom his campaign after calling Hillary Clinton “a monster”, Obama’s foreign policy team still carries her stamp and reflects her thinking. Power authored an op ed for TIME, in which she argued that the U.S. needs to sit down and talk with Iran’s extremist leaders and get ourselves over such foolish fears that the Iranians might just use their nuclear program to brew up some weapons-grade uranium to blow those pesky Joos clean out into the Mediterranean Sea.

The most senior of Obama’s foreign policy advisors in terms of age is the 79 year-old Zbigniew Brzezinski, who served the failed president Jimmy Carter, known for his failed foreign policy, as national security advisor. Brzezinski is another Obama advisor well known for his harsh criticism of the U.S.’s close ties to Israel and his naive view of world Islamic fundamentalism:

Q: And neither do you regret having supported the Islamic [fundamentalists], having given arms and advice to future terrorists?
*
Brzezinski: What is most important to the history of the world? The Taliban or the collapse of the Soviet empire? Some stirred-up Moslems or the liberation of Central Europe and the end of the cold war?
*
Q: Some stirred-up Moslems? But it has been said and repeated: Islamic fundamentalism represents a world menace today.
*
Brzezinski: Nonsense! It is said that the West had a global policy in regard to Islam. That is stupid. There isn’t a global Islam. Look at Islam in a rational manner and without demagoguery or emotion. It is the leading religion of the world with 1.5 billion followers. But what is there in common among Saudi Arabian fundamentalism, moderate Morocco, Pakistan militarism, Egyptian pro-Western or Central Asian secularism? Nothing more than what unites the Christian countries.

Then there’s Susan Rice - no relation to Condi - although both are touted as “brilliant” black women who are products of prestigious Stanford University. Obama’s Rice was senior advisor for national security affairs on the Kerry-Edwards campaign and served President Bill Clinton under the tutelage of Madeline Albright. That latter resume entry alone should set off the sirens of emergency warning systems from coast to coast. Rice has been just wrong about Abu Musab al Zarqawi, Iraq and a great many other things. Rice was involved up to her neck in the Clinton Administration’s costly mistake of asking Sudan for its files on Al-Qaeda, then declining to accept them. She, along with Tony Lake - who I’ll get to in a paragaph or two, is (dis)credited with persuading Clinton’s national security adviser Sandy Berger to refuse Sudan’s offer to hand over Osama Bin Laden to the United States.

BTW, I happened to catch this woman on a talking head segment on cable news this morning. Memo to the Obama campaign: Thanks for putting this person on the air. She comes across as strident, angry and apparently incapable of managing to smile. In other words, about as lovable as Cruella De Vil, but not even close to being as entertaining a character to watch. Between Susan Rice and Michelle Obama, you’ve got the bitter female demographic cornered.

Another major player in the Obama foreign policy advisor game is Anthony Lake. While not as anti-Israel as most of his colleages in the Obama campaign, Lake has issues of his own. Tony Lake is yet another alumnus of the Jimmy Carter administration, a rather common thread among Obama’s team.

No wonder Obama always seems to be standing on shaky ground when he talks about foreign affairs. With a cast of character such as this one advising him on foreign policy matters, the play is always a farce.

- JP

McCain Throws Election With More Anti-Right’s Demands!

On more than just shaky ground with all Americans already, Juan McCain has just thrown the election by coming right out and saying that he would sign illegal legislation to end all private sales of firearms at gunshows which is the precursor to ending all private sales. Ask Gore what single issue destroyed any chance he had of winning the presidency and he’ll tell you it was his anti-right’s positions. ( He might refer to it by a disloyal name. )

Senator McCain! The ONLY time criminals are stopped in their tracks is when the law abiding are armed…there is no other effective way nor will there ever be.

Write, Call and Fax McCain to publicly denounce his own ludicrous assumptions or we will be suffering Barack “Ban all semi-autos” Obama.

McCain Courts NRA, Makes Gun Shop Visit  by Glen Johnson  http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory?id=4871443

“… McCain said the only gun controls he favors are limits to keep guns from people with criminal backgrounds or indications of mental problems.

He added that, as president, he would sign a law that prohibited individuals from buying guns at a gun show without going through the same checks as those buying guns at regular stores.”

What McCain thick-headedly and obviously still doesn’t understand even after twenty plus years with the evidence available to him at his beck and call is that the evil and insane buy guns much more cheaply from other criminals or just outright steals them for themselves. It is therefore irrelevant whether they buy them ‘legally’ or not for just the purchase of the firearm for the purpose to use in any criminal act is also and already illegal.

NO ILLEGAL LAW against law abiding citizens will ever stop criminals from getting their hands on guns or any other tool to commit their crimes. This fact in life can not be prodded or otherwise coerced by the despicably frightened and cowering towards making themselves ‘feel’ better.

Therefore, one more illegal law on top of the some 20,000 already on the books is just more infringement on the law abiding making it more difficult or impossible to have in their own defense when they need it. Those who have and would still pass any such illegal legislation is just as guilty of any and all violent crimes committed on the innocent inwhich the innocent would have otherwise provided for their own defense and therein the chance to survive. 

 The Final Word On Our Inalienable Right of Self Defense and The Second Amendment Right To Bear Arms;

When a law enforcement firearms instructor and his instructors tell you that the most important thing you can do in your entire life is to protect the Second Amendment then you better stop worrying about what anyone else thinks or says and protect it as if your freedom depends on it, because it certainly does….consider yourself so informed.

“[T]he Second Amendment protects an individual right to keep and bear arms. That right existed prior to the formation of the new government under the Constitution and was premised on the private use of arms for activities such as hunting and self-defense, the latter being understood as resistance to either private lawlessness or the depredations of a tyrannical government (or a threat from abroad).” -Parker V. DC,  Senior Justice Silberman

Homosexual AND Incestuous Teaching of 2nd Graders With ‘King and King’

Has anyone at all seen this?? 

Obama  Supports Same-sex Marriage Book  http://fredmartinez.blogspot.com:80/2008/05/obama-supports-same-sex-marriage-book.html

Obama and Hillary give “Thumbs up” to Same-sex Marriage Book

Candidates Split on Pro-Gay Book for 2nd Graders  By Pete Winn  CNSNews.com Senior Staff Writer November 29, 2007

http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewPolitics.asp?Page=/Politics/archive/200711/POL20071129a.html

(CNSNews.com) - Presidential candidates are split on whether a controversial children’s book that promotes or endorses same-sex marriage should be read to second graders.

Republican hopefuls Fred Thompson and Mitt Romney don’t think the book, entitled “King and King,” should be read to children, but Democrats John Edwards, Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton give it a qualified “thumbs up.”

The book is a story for young children about a prince who, instead of marrying a princess, decides to marry her brother instead. Cybercast News Service posed a question to all the major presidential candidates: “Should teachers read the book to second graders as part of the school curriculum? Would you read it — or have read it — to your own children?”

“The answer is no,” Thompson’s chief campaign spokesman told Cybercast News Service. “He’s very clear. There is no wishy-washiness.”… continued at
http://fredmartinez.blogspot.com:80/2008/05/obama-supports-same-sex-marriage-book.html

A prince who marrys HER BROTHER!?!?… Homosexual AND incestuous!?

Why not completely ignore any boundaries of Mother Nature and civilization at all??

The prince could marry her mother.

The prince could marry her favorite pony.

The princess could marry his sheep named Barack.

AND why bother having a princess kiss the frog and change into anything…he can just stay a damn frog!

You could have Queen George marry Princess Phil!…as there is no more reason to exclude pedophiles when you’ve thrown the book out the window!

If any of this was confusing for you what do you think your second grader would make of it?? How could they possibly process this nonsense?
The people who wrote this drivel as well as ANYONE who even remotely suggests this is anywhere near sane, reasonable or acceptable should be locked up in an asylum AFTER being charged with felony child abuse.

AND that’s far too good a fate for them.

« Previous Page — Next Page »