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…

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.

‘The Axis of Idiots’ by J. D. Pendry - Sergeant Major, USMC, Retired

‘The Axis of Idiots’

 
Jimmy Carter, you are the father of the Islamic Nazi movement.  You threw the Shah under the bus, welcomed the Ayatollah home, and then lacked the spine to confront the terrorists when they took our embassy and our people hostage.  You’re the runner-in-chief. 
 
Bill Clinton, you played ring around the Lewinsky while the terrorists were at war with us.  You got us into a fight with them in Somalia and then you ran from it.  Your weak-willed responses to the U.S.S. Cole and the First Trade Center Bombing and Our Embassy Bombings emboldened the killers.  Each time you failed to respond adequately, they grew bolder, until 9/11/2001. 
 
John Kerry, dishonesty is your most prominent attribute.  You lied about American Soldiers in Vietnam ..  Your military service, like your life, is more fiction than fact.  You’ve accused our military of terrorizing women and children in  Iraq ..  You called Iraq   the wrong war, wrong place, wrong time, the same words you used to describe Vietnam ..  You’re a fake.  You want to run from Iraq and abandon the Iraqis to murderers just as you did the Vietnamese.   Iraq , like Vietnam , is another war that you were for, before you were against it. 
 
John Murtha, you said our military was broken.  You said we can’t win militarily in Iraq ..  You accused United States Marines of cold-blooded murder without proof and said we should redeploy to Okinawa .   Okinawa, John?   And the Democrats call you their military ex pert!   Are you sure you didn’t suffer a traumatic brain injury while you were off building your war hero resume?   You’re a sad, pitiable, corrupt and washed up politician.  You’re not a Marine, sir.  You wouldn’t amount to a good pimple on a real Marine’s backside.  You’re a phony and a disgrace.  Run away, John. 
 
Dick Durbin, you accused our Soldiers at Guantanamo of being Nazis, tenders of Soviet style gulags and as bad as the regime of Pol Pot, who murdered two million of his own people after your party abandoned Southeast Asia to the Communists.  Now you want to abandon the Iraqis to the same fate.  History was not a good teacher for you, was it?  Lord help us!  See Dick run.. 
 
Ted Kennedy, for days on end you held poster-sized pictures from Abu Ghraib in front of any available television camera.  Al Jazeera  quoted you saying that Iraqi’s torture chambers were open under new management.  Did you see the news, Teddy?   The Islamic Nazis demonstrated another beheading for you.  If you truly supported our troops, you’d show the world poster-sized pictures of that atrocity and demand the annihilation of it.  Your legislation stripping support from the South Vietnamese led to a communist victory there.  You’re a bloated, drunken fool bent on repeating the same historical blunder that turned freedom-seeking people over to homicidal, genocidal maniacs.  To paraphrase John Murtha, all while sitting on your wide, gin-soaked rear-end in  Washington … 
 
Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, Carl Levine, Barbara Boxer, Diane Feinstein, Russ Feingold, Hillary Clinton, Pat Leahy, Barack Obama, Chuck Schumer, the Holly wood Leftist morons, et al, ad nauseam; Every time you stand in front of television cameras and broadcast to the Islamic Nazis that we went to war because our President lied, that the war is wrong and our Soldiers are torturers, that we should leave Iraq, you give the Islamic butchers - the same ones that tortured and mutilated American Soldiers - cause to think that we’ll run away again, and all they have to do is hang on a little longer. It is inevitable that we, the infidels, will have to defeat the Islamic jihadists. Better to do it now on their turf, than later on ours after they have gained both strength and momentum. 
 
American news media, the New York Times particularly:  Each time you publish stories about national defense secrets and our intelligence gathering methods, you become one united with the sub-human pieces of camel dung that torture and mutilate the bodies of American Soldiers.  You can’t strike up the courage to publish cartoons, but you can help Al Qaeda destroy my country.  Actually, you are more dangerous to us than Al Qaeda is.  Think about that each time you face Mecca to admire your Pulitzer.
 
You are America ’s ‘AXIS OF IDIOTS.’  Your Collective Stupidity will destroy us.  Self-serving politics and terrorist-abetting news scoops are more important to you than our national security or the lives of innocent civilians and Soldiers.  It bothers you that defending ourselves gets in the way of your elitist sport of politics and your ignorant editorializing.  There is as much blood on your hands as is on the hands of murdering terrorists.  Don’t ever doubt that.  Your frolics will only serve to extend this war as they extended Vietnam …  If you want our Soldiers home as you claim, knock off the crap and try supporting your country ahead of supporting your silly political aims and aiding our enemies.
 
Yes, I’m questioning your patriotism.  Your loyalty ends with self.  I’m also questioning why you’re stealing air that decent Americans could be breathing.  You don’t deserve the protection of our men and women in uniform.  You need to run away from this war, this country.   Leave the war to the people who have the will to see it through and the country to people who are willing to defend it. 
 
No, Mr. President, you don’t get off the hook, either.  Our country has two enemies: Those who want to destroy us from the outside and those who attempt it from within.  Your Soldiers are dealing with the outside force.  It’s your obligation to support them by confronting the AXIS OF IDIOTS.
 
America must hear it from you that these self-centered people are harming our country, abetting the enemy and endangering our safety.  Well up a little anger, please, and channel it toward the appropriate target.  You must prosecute those who leak national security secrets to the media.  You must prosecute those in the media who knowingly publish those secrets.
 
Our Soldiers need you to confront the enemy that they cannot.  They need you to do it now.

Hillary Can’t Wait: Screw’emGate

 In another Fowler report from a liberal author, Ben Barber, who witnessed a very revealing remark from Hillary Clinton and then wrote about it giving her a close enough shave to draw blood in his book ” The Truth of Power”, it’s obvious Hillary isn’t going to wait for the Oval office or be outdone with Obama’s BitterGate to start her own scandal with this skeleton falling out of her closet ( and it’s a BIG closet )…of course, this isn’t news to any of us not suffering from memory loss; 

Clinton: Screw’em  http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2008/04/17/907891.aspx

“In January 1995, as the Clintons were licking their wounds from the 1994 congressional elections, a debate emerged at a retreat at Camp David. Should the administration make overtures to working class white southerners who had all but forsaken the Democratic Party? The then-first lady took a less than inclusive approach.

“Screw ‘em,” she told her husband. “You don’t owe them a thing, Bill. They’re doing nothing for you; you don’t have to do anything for them.”

Hildabeast  http://hilldabeast.com/index.php?m=s

Downside Legacy at Two Degrees of Bill Clinton  http://alamo-girl.com/index.htm

The Clinton Legacy  http://clinton-legacy.org/

Hillary’s List of Lies ( A partial list anyway. )  http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/03/hillarys_list_of_lies.html

“At the core of liberalism is the spoiled child - miserable, as all spoiled children are, unsatisfied, demanding, ill disciplined, despotic, and useless. Liberalism is the philosophy of sniveling brats.” - P.J. O’Rourke

Endorsing Liberalism

The National Review has endorsed Mitt Romney, top liberal on the republican ticket.  This boggles the imagination, how can one of the mainstays of conservatism support a man for President who, by his positions and actions in the past, is only slightly right of Hillary Clinton?  I am not certain what is in the water over there at National Review but reading this garbage makes me want to support a clean water act or something.

Many conservatives are finding it difficult to pick a presidential candidate. Each of the men running for the Republican nomination has strengths, and none has everything — all the traits, all the positions — we are looking for. Equally conservative analysts can reach, and have reached, different judgments in this matter. There are fine conservatives supporting each of these Republicans.

Actually conservatives have few options this year when it comes to Presidential Candidates.  We have but one conservative, Fred Thompson, and a litany of liberal Republicans trying to redefine what conservatism is.  Now we have normally consistent conservative voices like National Review helping them.

Our guiding principle has always been to select the most conservative viable candidate. In our judgment, that candidate is Mitt Romney, the former governor of Massachusetts. Unlike some other candidates in the race, Romney is a full-spectrum conservative: a supporter of free-market economics and limited government, moral causes such as the right to life and the preservation of marriage, and a foreign policy based on the national interest..

I would like the people over at National Review to enlighten us as to what criteria they used to determine that Mr. Romney is either Conservative or Viable?  He was Governor of the most Liberal state in the country, the size of government increased while he was governor, he raised taxes while governor, he did nothing except ignore illegal immigration while governor, and lastly he signed into law a healthcare mandate that is so close to Hillary’s one has to question whether or not he’s guilty of plagiarism.  This is not a full spectrum conservative!

Fred Thompson is as conservative as Romney, and has distinguished himself with serious proposals on Social Security, immigration, and defense. But Thompson has never run any large enterprise — and he has not run his campaign well, either. Conservatives were excited this spring to hear that he might enter the race, but have been disappointed by the reality. He has been fading in crucial early states. He has not yet passed the threshold test of establishing for voters that he truly wants to be president.

You have to wait until nearly the end of the article to get to Fred and then they insult him by calling him “as conservative as Romney”.  This is an absolute joke, who’s writing the drivel over there, moveon.org?  Nice of them to acknowledge that Fred is the only candidate that has put forth serious proposals on Social Security, immigration, and defense.  Seeing as none of the others, including Romney, have bothered to.  Fred has been clear from the beginning that he is not going to run the same campaign as everyone else. 

He has not run a worse campaign, in fact he has run a better one.  He’s running around to every media outlet saying look at me, look at me.  He’s running around talking to people, the voters.  The news media seems to think that they will choose the candidates and elect the next President.  If that was the case then the people of this country would not have drafted Fred Thompson to run in the first place.

If there are a few of you that would like to read this garbage for yourself then here is the link