Matt Gonzalez, progressive VP running mate to Ralph Nader in their independent run for the White House, is not all peachy keen for the Democratic Party nominee. Read why.
PART OF ME SHARES the enthusiasm for Barack Obama. After all, how could someone calling themself a progressive not sense the importance of what it means to have an African-American so close to the presidency? But as his campaign has unfolded, and I heard that we are not red states or blue states for the 6th or 7th time, I realized I knew virtually nothing about him.
Like most, I know he gave a stirring speech at the Democratic National Convention in 2004. I know he defeated Alan Keyes in the Illinois Senate race; although it wasn't much of a contest (Keyes was living in Maryland when he announced). Recently, I started looking into Obama's voting record, and I'm afraid to say I'm not just uninspired: I'm downright fearful. Here's why:
This is a candidate who says he's going to usher in change; that he is a different kind of politician who has the skills to get things done. He reminds us again and again that he had the foresight to oppose the war in Iraq. And he seems to have a genuine interest in lifting up the poor.
But his record suggests that he is incapable of ushering in any kind of change I'd like to see. It is one of accommodation and concession to the very political powers that we need to reign in and oppose if we are to make truly lasting advances.
Gonzalez outlines and covers in some detail the miasma that passes for change in the Obama playbook:
The War In Iraq...
Class Action Reform...
Credit Card Interest Rates...
Limiting Non-economic Damages...
Mining Law Of 1872...
Regulating Nuclear Industry...
Single-payer Health Care...
North American Free Trade Agreement...
and a few other loose ends Obama has left along the trail. Read it all.
HERE, HERE. CONGRESSMAN Dennis Kucinich (D-OH) has come out with damning evidence that full-time Democratic presidential candidate and part-time US SenatorBarack Obamahas thrown Main Street under the bus, resolutely contradicting his flamboyant posture just days ago. The following is part of an exchange between the Ohio Democrat and reporter Amy Goodman.
AMY GOODMAN: Congressman Kucinich, can you explain how it is that the Democrats are in charge, yet the Democrats back down on their demand to give bankruptcy judges authority to alter the terms of mortgages for homeowners facing foreclosure, that Democrats also failed in their attempt to steer a portion of any government profits from the package to affordable housing programs?
REP. DENNIS KUCINICH: Well, I mean, those are two of the most glaring deficiencies in this bill. And I would maintain there was never any intention to—you know, well, many members of Congress had the intention of helping people who were in foreclosure. You know, this—Wall Street doesn’t want to do that. Wall Street wants to grab whatever change they can and equity that’s left in these properties. So—
AMY GOODMAN: Right, but the Democrats are in charge of this.
REP. DENNIS KUCINICH: Right. You know, I’ll tell you something that we were told in our caucus. We were told that our presidential candidate, when the negotiations started at the White House, said that he didn’t want this in this bill. Now, that’s what we were told.
AMY GOODMAN: You were told that Barack Obama did not want this in the bill?
REP. DENNIS KUCINICH: That he didn’t want the bankruptcy provisions in the bill. Now, you know, that’s what we were told. And I don’t understand why he would say that, if he did say that. And I think that there is a—the fact that we didn’t put bankruptcy provisions in, that actually we removed any hope for judges to do any loan modifications or any forbearance. There’s no moratorium on mortgage foreclosures in here. So, who’s getting—who’s really getting helped by this bill? This is a bailout, pure and simple, of Wall Street interests who have been involved in speculation.
EARLIER TODAY the emergency Wall Street bailout bill was rejected by the House by a substantial margin. Both parties wavered. America the Beautiful lives another day more comfortably in capitalist pinstripes than socialist rags. We the People spoke loudly and spoke clearly. The message was no business as usual for the fat cats. If we are to suffer, so shall they. Now for the trillion dollar question, what's next? House leaders promise another vote. So let's review, especially since Barack Obama has publically said that John McCain should get no credit for the bill, inferring that all credit should go to him, while McCain also stated publically on the morning talk show circuit that he wanted no credit. Now that the bill has failed to pass, one wonders how the two campaigns will spin the facts on the ground.
Much of Obama’s hidden socialist agenda for the United States comes directly from George Soros, and in turn through his network of leftist funded organizations. This includes the influential funding of organizations that advocate abortion, open borders, amnesty for illegal aliens, a cap and trade tax, to prevent man-made global warming, huge cuts in defense spending, increasing the minimum wage and the world poverty tax just to name a few.
Soros likes to be considered a “stateless" statesman. In fact, he is more accurately described as the Godfather of World Socialism.
Too bad Poppa Soros has not apparently read or understood the works of Friedrich Hayek, Karl Popper’s good friend and author of The Open Society and Its Enemies for which Soros’ Open Society Institute (OSI) is named.
The stock markets have reeled today, the Dow Jones Industrial falling nearly eight hundred points as word of the failed passage spread, but many of us in the radical centrism blogsosphere have voiced opinions that we may very well prefer a full blown depression and subsequent reorganization risking everything we own to a lightning round bailout of the guilded tycoons at this point. Others of us want simply a closer look at the details before deciding anything, especially prior to having this thing is shoved down our throats.
By the way; these two Democrats voted no: 1) Jesse Jackson, Jr. (huge Obama supporter) 2) Sheila Jackson Lee (huge Clinton supporter)
Why is the University of Mary Washington inhibiting free speech at today's Obama-Biden rally?NOT ALL COUNTRIES guarantee their citizens the right to virtually unbridled freedom of speech. The United States does. Would someone please tell the campaign of Sen. Barack Obama? And the dozing guardians of liberty at the University of Mary Washington?
Mr. Obama, the Democratic nominee for president, is scheduled to speak at a rally at the university today. The public is invited to this forum, on property it, the public, owns. However, signs and banners will not be allowed, according to the organizers and compliant campus officials. Suddenly, UMW is a First Amendment-Free, or at least a First Amendment-Crippled, Zone, subject to the self-serving preferences of politicos.
Why does an Obama rallyor a McCain rally or a Nader rallyjustify taking a little off the top of Americans' most fundamental rights?
A UMW spokeswoman says that the Obama campaign required the sign-and-banner ban. That campaign tells us that the ban is for "security" reasons. But a spokesman for the U.S. Secret Service, responsible for protecting presidential candidates, says that the service has no objection to signs at rallies, provided that no "part of the sign could be used as a weapon"e.g., a heavy metal pole or a sharpened stick. Finally, the McCain campaign tells us, "We encourage people to make signs at our events."
Regarding today's event, one would expect better from a campaign bearing the name of a former professor of constitutional law. (See Ambrose Bierce's definition of a lawyer: "one skilled in circumventing the law.") And one would expect much better from a university that, in pursuit of a day of celebrity, a boost in prestige, and profits from its book store's planned commemorative Obama T-shirts (now scotched), shaves away an American liberty purchased by men who turned white snow red and dry dirt wet with their sacrificial blood. This is a lot to swap for a mess of pottage. Remarks the Rutherford Institute's John Whitehead, who has turpentined the Bush administration's civil-rights record, "The Secret Service has a better free-speech viewpoint than the college."
The First Amendment guarantees the freedoms of religion, speech, the press, peaceable assembly, petition of the government. Will one who aspires to the title Defender of the Constitution begin inhibiting these First Freedoms even before he is ushered into officeat a public university?
I was disgusted when l read last night that the Obama team are picking up buslaods of homeless in Ohio to register them, and at the same time vote! But don't tarry here, folks. There's much more to uncover in this startling and punitive grasp for absolute power by the Obama camp. Doesn't take a weatherman to know whivch way the wind blows. My prediction is that within one year of an Obama presidency, the same people who elected him will be howling for his impeachment.
The handwriting is on the wall, the internet is also under fire since it's just a little too free for some people. Here’s a frightening page that will interest. Its author accuses the Google’s Blogger folks of shutting down, or freezing anti-Obama blogs it hosts. Read with intelligence. Connect the damn dots. Wake up America!
Wife and I went to another DC event last night sponsored by one of the partners at her office. Several staunch Republicans I have known for years, senior citizens and a couple of thirty-somethings, have all either defected to Obama or declared that they will sit this one out. These people know government. They are Washington lobbyists, and those Republicans who now are voting for Obama claim to be protecting their jobs. I suspect the senior partners who have said they will vote for neither candidate, are doing so less because McCain is too liberal for them, but because they don’t want to go on the record. What in the cheesecake is happening to this country?
I feel like the Big Takeover is upon us. This is simply far too much change way too quickly. Something drastic, some Brave New World Order stealth maneuver seems to be happening…
Here's some friendly advice to our Obama-supporting friendswhen your interests are aligned with those of Iran's President and Hitler-wannabe Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, it's time to consider a re-assessment of priorities.
Democrat activists this week gave Ahmadinejad a huge gift that keeps on giving in his circle of despots by sabotaging a major bipartisan anti-Iran rally. More important to these cracked activists than Iran, apparently, was the slick opportunity to marginalize popular Republican vice-presidential candidate Governor Sarah Palin.
To recap, the rally was organized by wide coalition of mostly Jewish organizations, including the Conference of Presidents of Major Jewish Organizations, the respected non-partisan umbrella group that seems to be the closest thing the American Jewish community has to single and unified voice. They assembled an impressive protest of the presence of Ahmadinejad at the United Nations, to sound the alarm over his nuclear weapons program, and to urge world leaders gathered this week in New York to act stronglyand soonto prevent a nuclear Iran which seems to be in the sole business of threatening Israel, America, and the world.
The organizers secured a number of high-profile speakers, including Nobel laureate Elie Wiesel, recent Democrat presidential candidate Senator Hillary Clinton and Vice-Presidential nominee Sarah Palin. It is not yet clear whether Clinton was coordinating with Democrat strategists, but when she found out Palin was also invited, she bailed out. Too bad-having America's two highest profile female politicians together on the same stage condemning the misogynistic (among its many attributes) Iranian regime would have been a powerful image.
Following Clinton's lead, two of the sponsoring organizations-led by left-wing Democrat activists-demanded that Palin be barred from speaking lest the rally be a "partisan" event. The organizers pleaded with both Joe Biden and Barack Obama to speak, but both declined. Although Congressman Robert Wexler, a prominent Obama surrogate, was available to speak, the Democrats (including members of Congress) relentlessly pushed to have the Palin invitation rescinded.
Their argument was part naked pretext and part veiled threat: that maintaining the invitation just might prompt the IRS to investigate all sponsoring organizations' non-partisan tax-exempt status-an interesting understanding of "partisan" considering the invitations to Clinton, Obama, Biden and Wexler. (Perhaps this gives a clue how an IRS run by Obama lieutenants might treat political opponents). In an effort to maintain an appearance of Jewish unity against the evil of Iran, the organizers were forced to cave; Palin was given the boot. Game over. The Democrats won.
And so did Ahmadinejad. This had the makings of rally with impact. Besides being a tremendous show of bipartisan unity opposing Iranian aggression, the massive media attention paid to Palin's appearances would have brought the Iranian danger to the forefront of American consciousness. The rally was also attended by Iranian dissidents, human rights activists, gays, Christians, Jews and Iraqis, all of whom suffer at the hands of the mullahs' regime. Their under-reported causes could have used the publicity boost. Deflating the event by removing its star power did all these groups a huge disservice. We're sure Ahmadinejad cannot believe his good fortune. Thank you, Democrats!
Don't the Democrats vainly claim to be the party of the powerless and the voice of the voiceless? Fighters for human rights and protectors of liberty? They shouldn't flatter themselves. How did they help those causes this week? By strong-arm tactics, stifling dissent and sacrificing their "principles" for some perceived marginal political gain? Aren't those the sorts of things they're supposed to be protesting against? Perhaps they should tell us which principles they won't trample in order to gain fleeting political advantage.
Read it all. And now because of his own draconian positions, wavering back and forth as he tends to do, Obama wants all NRA ads banned from the airwaves. The Obama camp has been threatening television and radio stations to keep them from airing anti-Obama ads. The latest target is the NRA and stations in Pennsylvania.
Earlier this week, the National Rifle Association's Political Victory Fund released a series of radio and television spots to educate gun owners and sportsmen about Barack Obama's longstanding anti-gun record. In response to the NRA-PVF ads, a clearly panicked Obama campaign and the Democratic National Committee (DNC) are doing everything they can to hide Obama's real record by mounting a coordinated assault on the First Amendment.
This camapign has gone to desperate and outrageous lengths to try to silence the NRA by bullying media outlets with threats of lawsuits if they run NRA-PVF's ads. Here is Obama's letter to station managers.
Obama cannot and should not be trusted. Let me remind you of what our Founding President had to say on this critical topic:
“If the Freedom of Speech is taken away, then dumb and silent we may be led, like sheep to the slaughter.”
HERE IS A FOX NEWS REPORT coming on the heels of the SCOTUS ruling upholding recent regulations aimed at curbing voter fraud in the states of Indiana and Washington. And let's not forget the Obama truthers by revisiting this revealing article by the unflappable Michelle Malkin, conservative pundit extraordinaire, exposing early in the August 29 issue of the New York Post on one of the basic fundamentals of the Obama campaign:
WHERE ARE ALL THE free-speech absolutists when you need them? Over the past month, left-wing partisans and Democratic lawyers have waged a brass-knuckled intimidation campaign against GOP donors, TV and radio stations and even an investigative journalistwho've all dared to question Barack Obama.
On Monday, the Obama campaign demanded that the Justice Department stop TV stations from airing a documented, accurate independent ad spotlighting Obama's longtime working relationship with unrepentant Weather Underground terrorist Bill Ayers. Obama summoned his followers to bombard stations, many of them owned by conservative-leaning Sinclair Communications, with 93,000 e-mails to squelch the ad.
On Tuesday, the Obama campaign sent another letter to the Justice Department demanding investigation and prosecution of American Issues Project, the group that produced the Ayers ad, and Dallas billionaire Harold Simmons, who funded it.
On Wednesday, Obama exhorted his followers to sabotage the WGN radio show of veteran Chicago host (and University of Chicago professor) Milt Rosenberg. Why? Because he invited National Review writer Stanley Kurtz to discuss his investigative findings about Obama's ties to Ayers and the underwhelming results of their collaboration on a left-wing educational project sponsored by the Chicago Annenberg Challenge. The "Obama Action Wire" gave Rosenberg's call-in line and talking points like this:
"Tell WGN that by providing Kurtz with airtime, they are legitimizing baseless attacks from a smear-merchant and lowering the standards of political discourse. . . . It is absolutely unacceptable that WGN would give a slimy character assassin like Kurtz time for his divisive, destructive ranting on our public airwaves."
Behind the glowing, peaceful facade lies Barack "The Silencer" Obama and his silent enablers on the left. While mainstream journalists schmoozed with liberal celebrities in Denver, practiced yoga with left-wing bloggers and received massages at the Google convention tent near Barackopolis, Team Obama was on an ugly, aggressive warpath sanctioned by Mr. Civility.
While compassionate Obama prepared to stand before thousands of worshipers at Invesco Field, purporting to give voice to the voiceless, his Chicago-schooled campaign machine was working overtime to muzzle conservative critics. "We want it to stop," ordered one pro-Obama caller to WGN.
Welcome to the future: the politics of Hope and Change enforced by the missionaries of Search and Destroy. But as the chill wind blows, where are the valiant protectors of political dissent?
On Aug. 11, I called the American Civil Liberties Union national headquarters in New York for comment about the Chicago gangland tactics of a nonprofit called "Accountable America" that's spearheaded by a former operative of the Obama-endorsing MoveOn outfit.
"Accountable America" is trolling campaign-finance databases and targeting conservative donors with "warning" letters in a thuggish attempt to depress Republican fundraising. (The official registered agent of Accountable America is Laurence Gold, a high-powered attorney for the AFL-CIO who has testified before the Senate complaining about the use of campaign-finance laws to stifle the speech of union workersa pet cause of the ACLU.)
The ACLU press office failed to respond to my initial call. On Aug. 13, I followed up through e-mail: "I called on Monday requesting a statement from the ACLU about Accountable America's intimidation campaign against GOP donors. What is the ACLU's position with regard to such efforts? Waiting for your statement."
ACLU press officer Pamela Bradshaw e-mailed back: "Michelle, My apologies that I cannot be of more assistance, but we don't have anyone available. Thanks, Pam."
My reply: "Pamdoes this mean you don't have anyone available today, this week or for the foreseeable future?"
On Aug. 20, after a week of silence, I forwarded the message again to the ACLU press office. No response. So, I won't bother asking the ACLU's opinion of the latest wave of speech-squelching moves by the Obama campaign.
Don't say you haven't been warned. Fascism seems to be coming to our own American streets unless cooler heads prevail, and The Two-Fisted Quorum just doesn't think that this war of "real and perceived grievances" can be averted short of a massive but voluntary reorganization of American priorities because, unfortunately, it's also seems very clear that the once treasured cool and hip quotients festering in the fecund minds of the Left are the metastasizing problem here. As long as we can continue to depend on courts that uphold strong voting regulations, we can still hold hope that our dear nation will survive as a republic. Regardless of how effective one considers the an individual vote, an honest process itself is more important than the sum of our votes.
THE CURRENT FINANCIAL CRISIS is very easily pinned down to a series of legislative acts. Follow the money. Learn just who is the culprit here. And here's a postscript to the previous entry concerning the Missouri law enforcement "Truth Squad" hot on free speech. The Republican governor of Missouri, Matt Blunt has issued a scathing rebuttal to Obama's campaign:
“Barack Obama needs to grow up. Leftist blogs and others in the press constantly say false things about me and my family. Usually, we ignore false and scurrilous accusations because the purveyors have no credibility. When necessary, we refute them. Enlisting Missouri law enforcement to intimidate people and kill free debate is reminiscent of the Sedition Acts—not a free society.”
No word yet on what the governor has in mind for these two named prosecutors who have signed on to this travesty. Meanwhile I have my own mortgage crisis fall into my lap, just as I was making a move in my painting career.
HERE WE GO AGAIN. THIS IS NOT an ugly rumor concocted by the vast right-wing conspiracy. But grab hold of your coffee mug, folks. The harsh reality of nasty political campaigning is shifting into high gear. A team of Obama-supporting prosecutors and sheriffs in Missouri is preparing to pursue legal challenges to any presidential campaign ads deemed to be false or misleading. This is a real story folks. Obama thugs from the Show Me State are out for blood and sinew in this no-holds barred election cycle.
How silly does this "Truth Squad" hijinx sound to the average (non-evangelical) American ear? In Missouri, political punditry which does not meet the emerging Obama "audacity of power" critera for truthiness is now legal fodder for his Chicago-machine apparachiks. We've seen this strong-armed tactic before, my friendshere and here.
Fancy this broadcast from the NBC affiliate in St.Louis MO detailing an in-your-face fascist strategy which is richly laughable given the ridiculous nature of American political campaign packaging if it weren't so damned frightening.
KMOV-TV in St. Louis reports District Attorney Robert McCulloch, a past president of the National District Attorneys Association, saying that where the ads could be attributed to an opponent's campaign itself, or even another organization they will act. "If they're not going to tell the truth, somebody's got to step up and say, 'That's not the truth. This is the truth.'"
Free speech? Under the bus. Truth? Don't ask me. Ask Obama!
I've said it before, and have been called a racist and a fearmonger for my troubles, but surely this can only be a hint of things to come as the so-called politically correct crowd ushers The Chosen One into office and flicks its wrecking ball upon us to demolish the American democratic ship of state to make way for its Brave New World Order. This may only be backwater Saint Louis to some of you comfortably numb types, but make no mistake about it. This is only the tip of the iceberg. The fix is in everywhere we care to look. Just ask a PUMA near you for details. Be scared. Be very scared. Then get over itcompose yourself, empower your principles, and make sure you don't neglect to vote this Fuhrer-in-waiting off the national scene forever before he gets a chance to fertilize his roots...
His lock-step followers are not your friends, either. But this ironic bit of advice seems most a propos under these conditionsforgive them, fair America, for they know not what they do. We would be remiss if we didn't also offer up what the Chinese poet once grinned, "May you live in interesting times."