Crossposted from Flopping Aces

I normally do not post too many articles from one site, but I am trying to make a point. This man is downright dangerous!

In His Own Words…

In an interview with Fox News, Obama admits that his work with Bill Ayers gave him the qualifications to run for political office:

Can we stop pretending that Bill Ayers is nothing more than a casual acquaintance?

And:

Obama Youth Brigades?

Youth in paramilitary uniforms marching and saluting while pledging support for Obama? Downright SCARY!

This took place at the Urban Community Leadership Academy a charter public school operating in Kansas City, Missouri. Presumably this activity is being supported with taxpayer funds:

I’m sure I don’t need to remind readers what happened the last time a youth group developed around a cult of worship for a national leader:

And:

Why are there Americans Who Will Vote on the Content of Race and not on Character and Shared Values?

When will it cease to matter? Do we really need Barack Obama as the proof that America is moving beyond race? He is everything I disagree with on policy issues. Not too keen on his character, either.

I got the following in an email, from a friend of mine (who is not an Obama supporter)

On Wed, Oct 1, 2008 at 1:07 AM, donna wrote:

So tonight at the college while Nika was training , I spoke with a black
guy coach doing his privates.
He had Obama written on his chest.
I asked him in one sentence why Obama, he said
” he’s black, end of story”

I let him go on and basically he represents a future for his son, that if he
can make it to the white house than his son can.
I told him, but what if, what if>>>> he’s not the right guy, the smartest choice?
He said, blood is thicker than water, and his pigmentation says he’s the right guy.

This coach is no idiot either….but his passion ran so deep, he was jumping off
the walls talking about it.
Interesting huh?

I told my friend to send that coach this video:

I ask cajole plead implore beg grovel for everyone to take the time to watch it. This man simply rocks!

Hat tip for the video: Pierre Legrand

And:

Is There A Double Standard for Racism?

Would You Vote For A Man Who Belonged to the KKK To Become President?

Then why would anyone consider voting for a man who belonged to THIS?

Finally:

The Obama-Ayers TKO punch McCain should use…

If Palin’s recent utterance of the Ayers word in her latest campaign trail speeches is a harbinger, the media now anticipates McCain will be going after Obama for his connection to former Weather Underground domestic terrorist, William Ayers in the next Presidential debate.

Conservatives have felt this is a long overdue strategy. Personally, I’ll reserve judgment until I see what McCain’s tact will be. There is the viable and pertinent issue… Obama & Ayers’ culpability in failed education reform, their mismanagement of funds, and their political *and* financial support for organizations that were instrumental in risky subprime loans.

Then there is the (already out there) defense the Obama camp will take… an insistence the relationship between Ayers and Obama is remote, but not close. So they will lessen the villianous appearance of Ayers, and emphasize the “regard” for Ayers in the Chicago area for his educational efforts… or as the info outdated WaPo put it back in Feb 2008, member of the Chicago intelligentsia… and his personal transformation from an unrepentive radical into a more passive, productive IL citizen.

To use Obama’s favorite expression… let me be clear… If McCain attempts to merely use a “guilt by association” strategy , it is a losing endeavor. If the Obama faithful and undecided haven’t been deterred by longevity with the Rev. Wright; Obama’s rapid political rise with the aid of the players of the Chicago political machine (Daley, Rezko, Emil Jones along with Ayers); or his close relationship with Israel hating, Palestine supporter Rashid Khalidi, any relationship with William Ayers will fall on deaf ears, and end up in a negative for the McCain column.

But there is a strategy that is not only a valid issue, but serves as proof that Obama’s severely limited executive leadership is not only an abject failure in both educational reform, but an example of the same old cronyism for economic waste, and highlights Obama’s personal contribution to the subprime crisis.

(more…)

BY BRUJO BLANCO

And Here is Another Reason!

There is a group of activists in Missouri that are known as “Prosecutors for Obama” which aroused my curiosity and serious concern for this country. Barack Obama may end up being our president and what he has done in the past and what he is doing now shows us what type of president he may be.

I am concerned that he may be the type of president that feels that everyone is entitled to his opinion so keep your opinion to yourself.

It seems this group of prosecutors have determined that they are going to make certain that Obama is not defamed in their state. They have succeeded at obtaining the support of several sheriffs in the state. Their announced intentions are to be on the lookout for lying and misleading political information and to go after the violators. There was some mention of criminal libel laws which, in my opinion, fly in the face of fairness and the 1st Amendment.

It should be noted that there are only 17 states that have criminal libel laws most of which do not enforce such laws. Under the criminal libel laws one can be found guilty of libeling a public official criminally if the statement was both false and made with malice. Note the broadness of such a comment. Who makes the decision to pick-up (arrest) and individual for such a charge? Who determines if a statement is false and/or malicious? If it’s the people in power it may end up being a political party making such a decision.

Former Attorney General of Missouri Robert McCulloch made the comment that “If they are not going to tell the truth, somebody’s got to step up and say, ‘That’s not the truth. This is the truth.” It is suspected that the entire thrust of this move is to provide the Obama campaign with a means of blocking advertisements to which they object. It is clear to Brujo that the Obama campaign is terrified of the truth.

The sheriffs that are supporting this policy have made a statement to the effect that they plan to “go after” anyone that makes false statements against Obama during his campaign. They plan on going after individuals that put out false or misleading ads on Obama. The comment was made that such activity violates Missouri’s ethics laws.

This type of activity is being pushed by the Obama campaign. The NRA is on this hit list in that the Obama organizers have ordered publications not to carry NRA ads. Obama has been clear about firearms. On one hand he claims to support the 2nd Amendment and then he will speak of restricting the use of firearms particularly for self defense. Obama also pushes to have taxes on guns and ammunition. Obama’s weenies have actually sent cease and desist letters to the NRA. This is a serious problem with Obama’s people. They really believe they have the authority to tell people to keep their mouths shut and not rock their boat.

Obama is also a pusher for the Fairness Doctrine. This is an old doctrine which was designed to allow all people to express their opinion on the airwaves. Strictly enforced it would require a show, such as Rush Limbaugh, to provide equal time for individuals that disagree with him on his show. This doctrine would cripple talk radio and conservatives in particular. There are those that want this doctrine to be applied to religious shows and to the internet. Can you imagine the complicated machine it would take to effectively police this doctrine? Consider fairness if it was put into place. A government agency would have the authority to determine what conservative talk is and what liberal talk is. Partisan persons making such distinctions can develop the system to the point wherein only one point of view can be expressed claiming that they are evaluating properly when in fact they are not.
(more…)

Crossposted from Red Maryland

–by Richard E. Vatz

Democrats whetted their whistles. How could the unprepared, error-prone Alaskan Governor, fresh from disastrous interviews with Katie Couric, win a contest even-up with the time-tested Delaware Senatorial veteran? Well, she did better than anyone could reasonable have expected. She did not, however, “win.”

It was like watching an exhibition game between a Major League Baseball team and a minor league team in which the latter had something to prove, but the former was destined to win because, after all, bragging rights just could not go to the pretenders. There was concern that the umpire-moderator, Gwen Ifill, would be unfair, but although she should have recused herself in light of her upcoming book on racial change in America — one with Sen. Barack Obama in the title — she was not a factor in the debate. Still, one would like to have seen at least an addressing of the plagiarism issue that caused Sen. Biden to withdraw from the 1988 presidential race.

Plucky Gov. Sarah Palin came through without any major errors and hit a couple of home runs, but the honest winner of the contest was Sen. Joe Biden. She brought up, as Sen. McCain did in the first Presidential debate, the “surge,” the best example of head-to-head policy competition which was fought on a level playing field and which the Republicans won: the Democratic Presidential and Vice Presidential contenders both opposed this successful military tactic and have never been able – or willing — to rhetorically deal with their mistake. She also may have also scored on her ticket’s emphasis on expanded drilling for new oil, a policy that Democrats have weakly opposed without any alternative other than promoting insufficient new energy sources, which the Republicans support as well.

But that and the generally confident, ingenuous debating of Gov. Palin could not overcome the knowledgeable, articulate and convincingly passionate Sen. Biden, who had been arguing these issues for decades and had the arguably weak record of a problematic presidential administration to provide the grist for his attacks and promise of “change.” It did not help, parenthetically, that pursuant to Sen. Biden’s charge that the Republican ticket offered no change from President Bush’s administration that Gov. Palin immediately used and overused the president’s mispronunciation of nuclear (“nuculer”).

Biden’s onslaught of attacks was parried by Gov. Palin through her strong support and consistent iteration of her conservative values, but too often she just let points drop. When Biden went through his litany of criticisms of Sen. McCain’s voting record, Gov. Palin was silent. She simply may not, as Governor of Alaska, have been sufficiently familiar with Sen. McCain’s voting record to offer different interpretations. The Senator’s relentless citing of the economic and foreign difficulties hovering over the United States was difficult to overcome by anyone, much less a person out-of-the-loop. Republicans may think this is Gov. Palin’s strong point, but rhetorically it leaves her with a knowledge gap.

In the end some people (this writer, for example), thought that a truly terrible performance could have induced Gov. Palin to voluntarily leave the ticket with a chance that a late, pinch-hitting Kay Bailey Hutchinson or Mitt Romney could somehow have rescued the team. But, alas, Gov. Palin did too well. Anyone who would suggest such a thing would now be seen as unfair, jumping down the throat of a contender who had redeemed herself. Gov. Palin did indeed redeem herself and in the process may have ensured a Democratic victory in November.

Professor Vatz teaches Political Rhetoric at Towson University

The link is here.

She even handled Biden very well on his turf, foreign policy - meeting him head-to-head on every issue, and winning. (more…)

Crossposted from Flopping Aces

Some reactions to the debate tonight from the blogosphere and the MSM (transcript to debate here). But first….Joe Biden’s outright lies during the debate:

1. TAX VOTE: Biden said McCain voted “the exact same way” as Obama to increase taxes on Americans earning just $42,000, but McCain DID NOT VOTE THAT WAY.

2. AHMEDINIJAD MEETING: Joe Biden lied when he said that Barack Obama never said that he would sit down unconditionally with Mahmoud Ahmedinijad of Iran. Barack Obama did say specifically, and Joe Biden attacked him for it.

3. OFFSHORE OIL DRILLING: Biden said, “Drill we must.” But Biden has opposed offshore drilling and even compared offshore drilling to “raping” the Outer Continental Shelf.”

4. TROOP FUNDING: Joe Biden lied when he indicated that John McCain and Barack Obama voted the same way against funding the troops in the field. John McCain opposed a bill that included a timeline, that the President of the United States had already said he would veto regardless of it’s passage.

5. OPPOSING CLEAN COAL: Biden says he’s always been for clean coal, but he just told a voter that he is against clean coal and any new coal plants in America and has a record of voting against clean coal and coal in the U.S. Senate.

6. ALERNATIVE ENERGY VOTES: According to FactCheck.org, Biden is exaggerating and overstating John McCain’s record voting for alternative energy when he says he voted against it 23 times.

7. HEALTH INSURANCE: Biden falsely said McCain will raise taxes on people’s health insurance coverage — they get a tax credit to offset any tax hike. Independent fact checkers have confirmed this attack is false

8. OIL TAXES: Biden falsely said Palin supported a windfall profits tax in Alaska — she reformed the state tax and revenue system, it’s not a windfall profits tax.

9. AFGHANISTAN / GEN. MCKIERNAN COMMENTS: Biden said that top military commander in Iraq said the principles of the surge could not be applied to Afghanistan, but the commander of NATO’s International Security Assistance Force Gen. David D. McKiernan said that there were principles of the surge strategy, including working with tribes, that could be applied in Afghanistan.

10. REGULATION: Biden falsely said McCain weakened regulation — he actually called for more regulation on Fannie and Freddie.

11. IRAQ: When Joe Biden lied when he said that John McCain was “dead wrong on Iraq”, because Joe Biden shared the same vote to authorize the war and differed on the surge strategy where they John McCain has been proven right.

12. TAX INCREASES: Biden said Americans earning less than $250,000 wouldn’t see higher taxes, but the Obama-Biden tax plan would raise taxes on individuals making $200,000 or more.

13. BAILOUT: Biden said the economic rescue legislation matches the four principles that Obama laid out, but in reality it doesn’t meet two of the four principles that Obama outlined on Sept. 19, which were that it include an emergency economic stimulus package, and that it be part of “part of a globally coordinated effort with our partners in the G-20.”

14. REAGAN TAX RATES: Biden is wrong in saying that under Obama, Americans won’t pay any more in taxes then they did under Reagan.

And now onto the reactions.

Hugh Hewitt:

After the wave of assalts on her , Sarah Palin shows the nation why John McCain picked her and why the center-right loves her. She has a great night. Joe Biden does well too, but this was all about Sarah Palin, and she delivered a strong, strong message of energy and change.

The one great line of the debate: “It is so obvious that I am a Washington outsider,” Palin says, “soemone not used to the way you guys operate” as she points out Joe Biden’s attempt to doubletalk his way to Obama’s position.

Ramesh Ponnuru:

Any conservative who was white-knuckled going into this is relaxing by now. There were some points where she was a bit more platitudinous than one would ideally want, but overall–she’s cleaning up. Biden is sighing more as the night goes on, and I can see why.

Jim Geraghty:

My thinking is that it’s a tie or near-tie, which is very good news for Palin. Both played to their strengths. Biden was a bit less of a blowhard than I expected, but I’m pretty sure he got some basic facts wrong. His “I was taken out of context” excuse on the “no coal plants here in America” line is laughable. He had some classic Biden moments, confusing Articles I and II in the Constitution and saying America spent more in less than one month in Iraq than in seven years in Afghanistan” off by, oh, 2000%, says the Western Standard.

Sarah Palin, on the other hand… I was a Gloomy Gus heading into this. I continue to wonder how so many Americans were instantly triggered to a frothing rage by this woman’s debut on the national stage. But after some subpar television interviews, I braced for a rough debate.

Instead, she provided much crisper answers, much more professional. She didn’t seem overbriefed; in fact she was able to rattle off a level of policy detail that worked for the conversational style of her answers.

Did she pass the could-she-lead-in-a-time-of-crisis test? Let me put it this way. I could picture the woman on stage tonight leading in a crisis. I couldn’t picture the woman interviewed by Gibson and Couric doing that.

She’s a natural saleswoman. She certainly saved her prospects for national office in 2012, if she so chooses. She certainly, my guess is, reenergized the GOP base and independents, centrists, and undecided, if they’re honest with themselves, will conclude that they witnessed an impressive woman tonight. Many Democrats will continue to loathe her.

Erik Erickson:

Sarah Palin just field dressed Joe Biden like a moose. She was awesome. She connected with the people. She had fun. She was relaxed. She was awesome.

Biden literally blew this debate — sighing heavily in the microphone. Rolling his eyes. Being condescending. Flagrantly lying about policies that Palin repeatedly called him on.

Ifill herself did wind up showing her bias. She rarely gave Palin the last word. By the end of the debate it was almost 3 to 1 with Biden getting the last word. She also tried to disrupt Palin’s relationship with evangelicals by framing gay marriage around Alaska, mischaracterizing it too. LIkewise with global warming.

The line of the night will be “Say it ain’t so, Joe.” Palin was willing to break with the GOP and show how Biden and Obama have not ever broken with the Democrats.

She was smiling, gregarious, and clearly enjoying the night.

Michelle Malkin:

First, I would like to see all the Sarah doubters and detractors in the Beltway/Manhattan corridor eat their words.

Eat them.

Sarah Palin is the real deal. Five weeks on the campaign trail, thrust onto the national stage, she rocked tonight’s debate.

She was warm, fresh, funny, confident, energetic, personable, relentless, and on message. She roasted Obama’s flip-flops on the surge and tea-with-dictators declarations, dinged Biden’s bash-Bush rhetoric, challenged the blame-America defeatism of the Left, and exuded the sunny optimism that energized the base in the first place.

McCain has not done many things right. But Sarah Palin proved tonight that the VP risk he took was worth it.

Markos Moulitos from the Daily KOS:

Sarah Palin won!

Amanda Carpenter:

Palin was at her strongest debating Biden on foreign policy… Palin deftly reminded viewers, over and over, Biden had openly criticized Barack Obama’s positions on the war, funding and withdrawal throughout the Democratic primaries. “I watched those debates, so I know what that was about,” she grinned. She knowingly gave the media an open invitation to replay those old tapes against the contradictory statements he made this evening.

McCain camp:

“Tonight, Governor Palin proved beyond any doubt that she is ready to lead as Vice President of the United States. She won this debate, putting Joe Biden on defense on energy, foreign policy, taxes and the definition of change. Governor Palin laid bare Barack Obama’s record of voting to raise taxes, opposing the surge in Iraq, and proposing to meet unconditionally with the leaders of state sponsors of terror. The differences between the Obama-Biden ticket and the McCain-Palin ticket could not have been clearer. The American people saw stark contrasts in style and worldview. They saw Joe Biden, a Washington insider and a 36-year Senator, and Governor Palin, a Washington outsider and a maverick reformer. Governor Palin was direct, forceful and a breath of fresh air.” –Jill Hazelbaker, McCain-Palin 2008 Communications Director

Stop the ACLU:

Both Biden and Palin did considerably better then McCain and Obama did during their debate. Biden kept most of the cocky foot in mouth disease missing, but, some of his heavy breathing, and his near meltdown at the end is a small worry. Palin started out OK, but then really picked it up, matching life and executive experience with direct talk to middle America. Joe kept going back to Bush, Bush, Bush. All in all, they both worked it, but, Sarah was on topic, on point, and really wacked Joe with a stick. I saw him move a few times like she pulled out a Birch switch to the hamstrings a few time!

The Anchoress:

I thought both debaters helped their candidates a bit tonight, and I will always like Joe Biden, but I will call Palin the winner, first because she had to prove she is not the caricature being developed by the media, and she did that, but also because of the stunning consensus of the Frank Luntz audience in St. Louis, who declared her the hands-down winner and expressed a real connection. When I saw that audience response to Palin I thought: here in a nutshell is why the other side has worked so vociferously to destroy her, so quickly. What the folks in St. Louis were talking about tonight (and they said they now thought she was “qualified” to be president is what Camille Paglia saw in Palin’s first, informal speech at her introduction. Sarah Palin unfiltered, is a force to be reckoned with.

Mark Levin:

I have been involved in and observed politics for a long time. Governor Palin is a truly unique national figure. She is down to earth, personable, and smart as hell. That’s right. She has been on the national scene for a little over a month, she has been campaigning everywhere, she has had to bone up on all kinds of national issues, and she has shown class throughout. Too often too many are persuaded by the mainstream media’s opinion and react to that. This should be another lesson in that regard. As for some of her populist views, she cannot openly campaign against the positions of her presidential running mate. She is the bright light in this campaign from my perspective.

Kathryn Jean Lopez:

Sarah Palin won this debate and puts the campaign in a great position to rail against the media. Whatever she did before this debate — prayed? – is what she should always fall back on. And my impression is what she does. And why she’s come so far so fast.

Sarah Palin is the breath of fresh air on the political scene so many hoped she is. And she’ll be honored to beat the guy who’s been in the Senate since she was in the second grade.

JammieWearingFool:

Poor old Joe looked defeated and tired, spewing his talking points in repetition while Governor Palin appealed to mainstream Americans.

No colossal gaffes from either side, but I was struck by the odd look on Biden’s face. When did he have plastic surgery? He looks very strange now.

Paul Mirengoff:

I thought that Joe Biden and Sarah Palin were both excellent tonight. Biden hammered McCain relentlessly, which is the traditional role of the vice presidential candidate. Palin, forced by circumstances to prove her merit to an increasingly skeptical electorate, accomplished that mission and then some. Having done so, she is once again in a position to help the ticket by energizing the conservative base and appealing to at least a segment of the undecided vote.

From a technical standpoint, it was Biden who had the more detailed command of the facts (and the greater ability to fudge them). He was able not just to hammer McCain, but to do so at a level of specificity that Palin could not address. And, on occasion, Palin missed easy opportunities to defend her running mate. I got the sense that, while Palin was getting up to speed on the basic issues, Biden was being prepped for an all-out assault on McCain. Palin got in her share of his shots at Obama, and some of them were quite effective. But, as I suggested, she could not afford to be as single-minded as Biden because she had a greater need to sell herself. Nor, it seems, is it in her nature to be purely a hatchet-woman.

~~~

In any event, Sarah Palin deserves tremendous credit. Three of the four candidates in this race have been debating off and on for a year and a half. All of them performed quite well in their latest round. Palin was entirely out of the loop until about a month ago. Yet her performance was mostly equal, and in some ways superior to, that of McCain, Obama, and Biden.

Ramesh Ponnuru again:

The big loser tonight was Tina Fey.

John Hawkins:

Palin wins, gets more great soundbites off, reassures Americans that she’s up to the job, and helps the ticket about as much as she could have during the debate. All in all, I was very happy with her performance.

Jules Crittenden:

Palin on style, general lifelikeness, failure to drone, ability to speak in simple declarative sentences. Shout out to her peeps was big. Biden might have had it on substance, though with the constant droning about percentages, intermingled with mumbling about amendments and double-reverse voting intricacies, it’s impossible to tell. Game effort to note that once upon a time, he was a real person. He gets points for the choke-up moment, however.

Considered take: Palin, darting around in a cute little coupe, handles all the foreign policy curves nicely and even negotiates that gay-marriage oil spill to get the checkered flag. Approximately one zillion American viewers who have been told for the past two weeks she’s a tongue-tied ignoramous are now wondering why they ever paid any attention to that MSM Palin and most other Americans love to hate. Biden’s Oldsmobile spun out at the starting line, never quite got that engine chugging on all eight cylinders, took his turns a little wide but managed to avoid the rail. No crash, but then again, turns out she didn’t need him to.

Stephen Spruiell:

I thought Palin did well, even though she missed some big opportunities. For instance, when Biden blamed the mortgage meltdown on deregulation, Palin mouthed some platitudes about greed and predatory lenders. She should have responded that no financial players needed stronger regulation more than government-sponsored enterprises Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, and that the Democrats consistently opposed any limitations on Fannie and Freddie’s activities. She did point out that McCain called for greater oversight of the GSEs in 2005, but I would have liked to have seen her convey in stronger terms the extent to which the GSEs caused this crisis, and how the Democrats bear a lot of responsibility for that.

Her folksiness was cloying at times, but no more so than Biden’s incessant references to his kitchen table and how much time he spends hanging out at Home Depot. And she dominated Biden on Iraq, because — like Hillary in those last few Obama-Clinton debates — he couldn’t come up with a convincing way to square his early support for the war with his later opposition to it. He found it even more difficult to square his shifting positions with Obama’s consistent opposition.

Andy McCarthy:

She’s the real deal. I admit: the bit about predatory lenders infuriated me, and I am concerned about her seeming adoption of Condi foreign policy. But both those positions are McCain’s positions — it’d be impossible for her to criticize them if she believed they should be criticized … I just wish she didn’t seem so enthusiastic about them.

All that said, though, she OWNED the last half of the debate, and when she — as a representative of normal people outside Washington — laughed at Biden for being for the war then being against the war, I thought she seemed in such total command she was wishing they could start the debate all over again. (And how moronic of Biden to counter that McCain voted against funding for the troops — does anyone on the planet earth outside the procedure-mongering Lilliputians on the Hill actually think McCain didn’t want the troops funded?)

Palin’s a star. Her instincts are practical and conservative, so I wish she weren’t so bound to McCain. (McCain should wish that too — that’s what’s made her so popular and given him a shot.) Watching her is fun. It’s like watching a rookie who’s taken the league by storm and is hitting .290, and you just know that in two years, she’ll be hitting .340 … while Biden is hitting .210 and belongs back in Double A.

Michael Graham:

For a typical American who had been convinced by the Partisan Press that Sarah Palin is an illiterate redneck who didn’t know Afghanistan from Alabama, she won this debate. She debated a geezer from the Washington establishment to a standstill and forced him into several erroneous statements (I would say “false,” but Sen. Biden talks so much without knowing what he’s talking about, he could be clueless rather than malicious).

Biden did vote for a war resolution. McCain did not vote, as Biden claimed, for the Obama tax hike. And Obama did absolutely nothing about the subprime mess at Fannie Mae except take record amounts of their money.

Sarah Palin wasn’t brilliant. She wasn’t able to adlib like Sen. Biden could to score additional points. She let quite a bit of Biden nonsense go unchallenged.

But six weeks into the race, she went toe-to-toe with a guy who’s run for president twice, and she held her own and even pushed him around a few times.

For the average voter, content was a wash which means this ended up as a personality contest. Which means she wins.

And that means John McCain goes into the next debate on a level playing field. She didn’t leave him in a hole.

More to come…

also:

Is America Ready for a Cylon President?

…not our usual focal point here at FA, and I apologize to any and all who are upset with this intermission, but I simply HAD to post this!!!! I’m an unapologetic BSG fan, and the irony of a McCain/Palin vs Tigh/Roslin ticket is just too amazing to ignore.

link

Finally:

Obama’s Fishy $200 Million

FUNNY MONEY
An auditor for the Federal Election Commission is attempting to have his bosses seek a formal investigation into the collection by the Obama for President campaign of more than $200 million in potentially illegal political donations, including millions of dollars of illegal, foreign donations, and has sought a request for assistance from the Department of Justice or Federal Bureau of Investigation. But the analyst’s requests have largely been ignored. “I can’t get anyone to move. I believe we are looking at a hijacking of our political system that makes the Clinton and Gore fundraising scandals pale in comparison. And no one here wants to touch it.”

One reasons cited by his superiors, says the analyst, is that involvement by the Justice Department or FBI would be indicative of a criminal investigation, something the FEC would prefer not take place a month before the presidential election. Such actions, though, have been used to scuttle Republican campaigns in the past, the most famous being the Weinberger case in the days leading up to the 1992 re-election bid of President George H.W. Bush.

$200 MILLION dollars?! wow. That’s not really a big CHANGE, but we can HOPE.

link

Submitted by Regina Sztajer

Be sure to read the “where they are now” at the end !!

Here is a quick look into 3 former Fannie Mae executives who have brought down Wall Street. Franklin Raines was a Chairman and Chief Executive Officer at Fannie Mae. Raines was forced to retire from his position with Fannie Mae when auditing discovered severe irregularities in Fannie Mae’s accounting activities. At the time of his departure The Wall Street Journal noted, ” Raines, who long defended the company’s accounting despite mounting evidence that it wasn’t proper, issued a statement late Tuesday conceding that “mistakes were made” and saying he would assume responsibility as he had earlier promised. News reports indicate the company was under growing pressure from regulators to shake up its management in the wake of findings that the company’s books ran afoul of generally accepted accounting principles for four years.” Fannie Mae had to reduce its surplus by $9 billion. Raines left with a “golden parachute valued at $240 Million in benefits. The Government filed suit against Raines when the depth of the accounting scandal became clear. http://housingdoom.com/2006/12/18/fannie-charges/ .

The Government noted, “The 101 charges reveal how the individuals improperly manipulated earnings to maximize their bonuses, while knowingly neglecting accounting systems and internal controls, misapplying over twenty accounting principles and misleading the regulator and the public. The Notice explains how they submitted six years of misleading and inaccurate accounting statements and inaccurate capital reports that enabled them to grow Fannie Mae in an unsafe and unsound manner.” These charges were made in 2006. The Court ordered Raines to return $50 Million Dollars he received in bonuses based on the miss-stated Fannie Mae profits. Net windfall . . . $190 million! Tim Howard - Was the Chief Financial Officer of Fannie Mae. Howard “was a strong internal proponent of using accounting strategies that would ensure a “stable pattern of earnings” at Fannie. In everyday English - he was cooking the books. The Government Investigation determined that, “Chief Financial Officer, Tim Howard, failed to provide adequate oversight to key control and reporting functions within Fannie Mae,” On June 16, 2006, Rep. Richard Baker, R-La., asked the Justice Department to investigate his allegations that two former Fannie Mae executives lied to Congress in October 2004 when they denied manipulating the mortgage-finance giant’s income statement to achieve management pay bonuses. Investigations by federal regulators and the company’s board of directors since concluded that management did manipulate 1998 earnings to trigger bonuses. Raines and Howard resigned under pressure in late 2004.

Howard’s Golden Parachute was estimated at $20 Million! Jim Johnson - A former executive at Lehman Brothers and who was later forced from his position as Fannie Mae CEO. A look at the Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight’s May 2006 report on mismanagement and corruption inside Fannie Mae, and you’ll see some interesting things about Johnson. Investigators found that Fannie Mae had hidden a substantial amount of Johnson’s 1998 compensation from the public, reporting that it was between $6 million and $7 million when it fact it was $21 million.” Johnson is currently under investigation for taking illegal loans from Countrywide while serving as CEO of Fannie Mae. Johnson’s Golden Parachute was estimated at $28 Million. WHERE ARE THEY NOW? FRANKLIN RAINES? Raines works for the Obama Campaign as Chief Economic Advisor TIM HOWARD? Howard is also a Chief Economic Advisor to Obama JIM JOHNSON? Johnson hired as a Senior Obama Finance Advisor and was selected to run Obama’s Vice Presidential Search Committee IF OBAMA PLANS ON CLEANING UP THE MESS - HIS ADVISORS HAVE THE EXPERTISE - THEY MADE THE MESS IN THE FIRST PLACE. (more…)

Crossposted from Red Maryland

Some of you may have seen Governor O’Malley on WBAL TV last night offering his “analysis” of the current financial crisis. WBALTV.com does not have the video posted so I can’t give you his exact words, but it was his usual progressive schtick. O’Malley laid the blame on a lack of government regulation and despicable puppy-killing conservatives.

Okay I made the second part up, but David Paulson, excuse me, Oscar Mayer makes things up from whole cloth—and believes them—so why can’t I?

To say that O’Malley’s “analysis” is severely flawed would be an understatement. It lacks grounding in fact and reality.

Lack of government regulation? Indeed, it was government regulation that caused the credit crunch, more precisely regulations altered by O’Malley’s own political benefactor, Bill Clinton.

The Clinton administration played identity politics with credit standards. With threats of accusations of redlining, from the Clinton administration and allies like ACORN, they forced banks to loosen their lending policies and approve subprime mortgages to people, who could not afford to repay the loans (ACORN got a lot of scratch out of the deal too).

Aside: Loosening lending standards to expand credit to poor minorities not qualified for it… some might call that progressive, but I digress.

Democratic created and protected government sponsored enterprises (GSE) Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac bought billions of dollars in subprime loans. The GSEs then worked with Wall Street to sell the loans to investors as mortgage-backed securities, and you know the rest.

Governor O’Malley, just in case you didn’t read that right the first time, GSE stands for GOVERNMENT sponsored enterprises.
(more…)

The link is here.

By backing an alternative, McCain forces Obama to defend the Democratic/Bush package. He can tie Obama to Bush and to the Washington insider/Wall Street crowd. He can give his populism a programmatic reality and a topical relevance. Obama would have to spend the rest of the election defending the $700 billion turkey the length and breadth of the country.
(more…)

Crossposted from Flopping Aces

I think it’s safe to call them a cult now.

Indoctrination, it’s not just for grownups anymore.

This video posted earlier on Gateway Pundit is too much to believe.

Brought to you by Jeff Zucker, President & CEO of NBC Universal:

WE’RE GONNA CHANGE THE WORLD
Music and lyrics by Lily Campbell, age 9

We’re gonna spread happiness
We’re gonna spread freedom
Obama’s gonna change it
Obama’s gonna lead ‘em

We’re gonna change it
And rearrange it
We’re gonna change the world.

SING FOR CHANGE
Music and lyrics by Kathy Sawada

Now’s the moment, lift each voice to sing
Sing with all your heart!
For our children, for our families,
Nations all joined as one.
Sing for joy and sing abundant peace,
Courage, justice, hope!
Sing together, hold each precious hand,
Lifting each other up;
Sing for vision, sing for unity,
Lifting our hearts to Sing!

YES WE CAN
Music and lyrics by Kathy Sawada

Yes we can
Lift each other up
In peace, in love, in hope
Change! Change!

Also:

Senate overwhelmingly buys into the Wall Street buy out…
Obama says public doesn’t know what’s good for the country

Putting increasing pressure on the House “no” voters to fall in line, the Senate voted (74-25) overwhelmingly in favor of a $700 bil government purchase of bad debt from Wall Street … with lots of extra caveats.

I’m not going to to into the caveats now. Let’s just say that the 3 page draft has morphed into over 100 400 pages, with new government department for oversight of the Sec’y of Treasury’s decisions (but only via “consultation and recommendations…), and sundry other details (increasing FDIC insurance limits).

The basics remain the same. The government will buy bad assets at whatever the Sec’y of Treasury deems appropriate, hold them until whenever he deems appropriate, then sell them at what he deems appropriate. Who that is? Today, it’s Henry Paulson. After January or thereafter? Serves at will of the POTUS with Congressional approval.

Gee… I feel so much better. NOT! But at least I do know what new job I want….

And it was ironic that, while the Senate vote was going on, the stock market results were on the ticker tape news across the bottom. Goldman Sachs up over 400 some odd points. Gee… that’s the Warren Buffett buyout/rescue. The one where he used a model of preferred stocks that might serve as a better foundation model than we have to choose from today. Certainly it would be at less cost and risk to the taxpayers.

But these options were tossed aside by the elected ones… never to be entertained. Forget the oversight and little extra perks added “to protect Main Street”. The US government has only one fix in mind - and that’s going into the business of buying real estate for the taxpayer…

…and considering they are suspending the “mark to market” authority, and doing one of their famous “studies”, we can safely assume they aren’t even buying in at a wise price.

(more…)

by Regina Sztajer

John McCain’s poll numbers are down because of the economic crisis and the sooner it settles down and off the front pages the better off he will be. Try as he may the Democrats will downplay his efforts and try to blame him and the Republican’s for the crisis. Banks are falling, the financial markets are teetering and the earth is trembling. Who is at fault? There is plenty of fault to go around. The problem is greed!!!! With the country in a crisis and the public in shock the Democratic Congress tried to slip language into the bailout legislation to provide slush funds for political- action groups such as ACORN and the National Council of La Raza..

The Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN,) is a left-wing direct action and agitation group that claims 50 cities and 100,000 dues-paying members. Do you remember the Sixties agitators that couldn’t get tenure in our universities and colleges?… Well their back!!! Thanks to the Republican’s this attempt to reward ACORN and La Raza ( a key player in advocating for legalization of illegal immigrants), was stripped out of the bailout-bill. The Democrats just don’t get it that groups like ACORN are the cause of this economic mess.

Under the umbrella of community organizing they agitate for higher minimum wages, try to unionize welfare workers ( those welfare recipients who are obliged to work in exchange for their welfare benefits.) They also, try to thwart school reform, and organize voter registration for Democrats only. The problem is while they are self-righteous in their demands for justice they often are not legal in their efforts. For example in 2006, ACORN registered 1,800 new voters in Washington but with the exception of six, all the names submitted were fake. This was the “worst case of election fraud in our state’s history,” said the secretary of Washington state. (www.realclearpolitics.com, Mona Charen, 9/30/08.) ACORN workers told investigators they went to the public library and filled out registration forms with made up names, addresses, and Social Security numbers. Some sat at home, smoking marijuana filling out forms. Similar stories were heard in Missouri, Ohio, Michigan and Colorado (swing states.) What is their sick philosophy? Everyone has the right to vote even if illegally, living or dead. Election fraud is a serious problem in the United States that must be fixed.

The Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) of 1977 gave ACORN the opportunity to tout affirmative action lending and it pressured banks to make sub-prime loans. A Chicago ACORN leader Madeline Talbott, boasted of “dragging banks kicking and screaming ” into dubious loans. www.realclearpolitics.com 9/30/08.)Another result of ACORN was that it became advisors to banks seeking regulatory approval. For example. J.P. Morgan & Co. suddenly began donating thousands of dollars to ACORN. The same corporations that pay ransom to Al Sharpton and Jessie Jackson were paing ransom to ACORN.
(more…)

From Monoblogue

The link is here.

Voters understand that our economy is vulnerable and teetering on the brink of a black hole. McCain needs to capitalize on this new sense of vulnerability and hammer away at the Obama tax proposals. He needs to say that our system is starving for capital. Raising capital gains taxes, much less doubling it as Obama proposed during the primaries (but now is trying to backtrack), is like taxing water in the desert. McCain has to talk about Obama’s spending proposals and mock the idea that he can spend a trillion and still give “95% of Americans” a tax increase.
(more…)

Crossposted from Flopping Aces

You just can’t make this stuff up. The “moderator” of the Vice Presidential debate will be a partisan hack who loves herself some Obama. Ms. Gwen Ifill:

Michelle Malkin:

My dictionary defines “moderator” as “the nonpartisan presiding officer of a town meeting.” On Thursday, PBS anchor Gwen Ifill will serve as moderator for the first and only vice presidential debate. The stakes are high. The Commission on Presidential Debates, with the assent of the two campaigns, decided not to impose any guidelines on her duties or questions.

But there is nothing “moderate” about where Ifill stands on Barack Obama. She’s so far in the tank for the Democratic presidential candidate, her oxygen delivery line is running out.

In an imaginary world where liberal journalists are held to the same standards as everyone else, Ifill would be required to make a full disclosure at the start of the debate. She would be required to turn to the cameras and tell the national audience that she has a book coming out on Jan. 20, 2009 — a date that just happens to coincide with the inauguration of the next president of the United States.

The title of Ifill’s book? The Breakthrough: Politics and Race in the Age of Obama. Nonpartisan my foot.

Random House, her publisher, is already busy hyping the book with YouTube clips of Ifill heaping praise on her subjects, including Obama and Obama-endorsing Mass. Gov. Deval Patrick. The official promo for the book gushes: “In ‘The Breakthrough,’ veteran journalist Gwen Ifill surveys the American political landscape, shedding new light on the impact of Barack Obama’s stunning presidential campaign and introducing the emerging young African American politicians forging a bold new path to political power.

She gushes about Obama, she writes a book to be released on inauguration day (in a blatant attempt to boost sales IF, and only if Obama is elected), and she is supposed to be impartial? The success of her book and the Age of Obama hinges on him winning and if Biden doesn’t do so well then it doesn’t help her man.

Impartial my ass.

They might as well let Oprah moderate the thing, pretty much the same outcome would result.

also:

How Democrats Played to Lose in the House Financial Bailout Vote

Another example of Democrats who put politics first!

Yesterday, I speculated that Nancy Pelosi delivered a sharp partisan attack on the House floor moments before the bailout bill was defeated because she really did not want the bill to pass.

Despite the fact that many Democrats tried to claim credit for negotiating the agreement to bring the bill to the floor of the House we now have more confirmation that indeed Democrats did not make any effort to seek the bill’s passage which might have alleviated the sense of crisis surrounding this issue:

Democrat Leaders Played to Lose
By The Prowler
The American Spectator
9/30/2008

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi ordered her Majority Whip, Jim Clyburn, to essentially not do his job in the runup to the vote on Monday for the negotiated Wall Street bailout plan, according to House Democrat leadership aides.

“Clyburn was not whipping the votes you would have expected him to, in part because he was uncomfortable doing it, in part because we didn’t want the push for votes to be successful,” says one leadership aide. “All we needed was enough to potentially get us over the finish line, but we wanted the Republicans to be the ones to do it. This was not going to be a Democrat-passed bill if the Speaker had anything to say about it.”
… (more…)

From Brian Griffith

If Congress chooses to not pass a bailout, there is no question that it would destabilize the economy both here and abroad. I think that no reasonable person would disagree with that. But it is entirely possibly, dare I say likely, that the results of the bailout will be far far worse for the economy and the American taxpayer than by letting things take their course. (more…)

BY BRUJO BLANCO

1st Amendment: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or respecting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for redress of grievances.

The only problem with this is that there are organized left wing groups that only say they believe in free practice of religion. In reality they are working to end the free practice of religion as we know it. Their strongest official ally is the Internal Revenue Service (IRS). The IRS along with groups such as Americans United for the Separation of Church and State (AU) and the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU).

IRS has written into its rules a series of qualifications for a church to be a church under tax regulations. If a church does not meet these standards then the church is subject to being taxed by the feds. If the