Tag Archives: Politics

2008 Election, Media, Politics, War On Terror

CAIR Challenges 'Obsession' To The FEC

Following up on a recent post entitled ‘Delivering Propaganda,’ a group called CAIR (more on them later) is asking the Federal Election Commission to investigate whether The Clarion Fund, a nonprofit group that distributed the documentary ‘Obsession, Radical Islam’s War Against The West,’ is a “front” for an Israel-based group with a stealth goal of helping Republican presidential candidate John McCain.

Don’t you just love conspiracy theories? Please check your tinfoil turban at the door, and, watch out for those black helicopters. They’re coming for you.

It is quite telling that this Muslim group thinks that making people aware of ‘radical Islam’ is a political statement that helps a particular political party. To which all I can say is, oh well, if the shoe fits, wear it.

CAIR spokesman Ibrahim Hooper said . . .

If you heighten the hysteria over national security or terrorism or do anything to make people more fearful, it’s clear they would trend toward McCain because that’s been his mantra throughout the campaign.

Continue reading CAIR Challenges 'Obsession' To The FEC →

2008 Election, Politics

All About Hillary?

By now you’ve heard about the big rally in New York protesting the appearance of Iranian leader Mahmoud Ahmadinejad at the United Nations. Sen. Hillary Clinton had been scheduled to speak at the rally months ago. But when she learned that Gov. Sarah Palin was also invited to speak, she pulled out. She made what should have been a bipartisan, and non-political show of solidarity against the Iranian dictator, political. It’s all about Hillary.

But that wasn’t the only reason Clinton would not attend. She didn’t want to be upstaged by, the growing in popularity, Sarah Palin. And she didn’t want to be there to hear Jewish voters yelling ‘Sarah, Sarah.’ It’s not just about Hillary. Maintaining the Jewish block vote was also at stake and Democrats saw the presence of Palin as a political threat to ‘their’ constituency. Aryeh Spero writes in Human Events . . .

This direct connection that Sarah Palin, a woman from and of the people, would have had with a Jewish audience was something the liberals had to stifle. It certainly could have made a difference in the election and perhaps have provided the impetus for the long awaited shift among many Jews from Democrat to Republican.

So why was Gov. Palin disinvited? Because of pressure from Democrat operatives who threatened the sponsoring non-profit Jewish organizations with investigations into their tax exempt status if Palin were to attend. How it is not a political event when Hillary is there, but is a political event if Palin were there is for the lawyers to figure out, but for Jonh Q. Public it makes no sense whatsoever. Assemblyman Dov Hikind, D-Brooklyn, told CBS 2 HD . . .

“This is insulting. This is embarrassing, especially to Gov. Palin, to me and I think it should be to every single New Yorker.” “It’s an absolute shame that this has happened,” Hikind said. “To threaten organizations … to threaten the Conference of Presidents that if you don’t withdraw the invitation to Gov. Palin we’re going to look into your tax exempt status … that’s McCarthyism.”

The organizers bowed to the pressure rather than risk their tax exempt status. (What was the name of Rev. Wright’s tax exempt church again? Trinity something?) Sen. John McCain said this . . .

Governor Palin was pleased to accept an invitation to address this rally and show her resolve on this grave national security issue, regrettably that invitation has since been withdrawn under pressure from Democratic partisans. We stand shoulder to shoulder with Republicans, Democrats and independents alike to oppose Ahmadinejad’s goal of a nuclear armed Iran. Senator Obama’s campaign had the opportunity to join us. Senator Obama chose politics rather than the national interest.”

Just an example of hardball politics, where the Democrat party and their run for the White House comes before standing up against probably the next biggest threat to the world. If there ever was a non-partisan issue to get behind, this would be it.

related links: Palin Disinvited from Anti-Iran Rally | Intense Pressure Led To Palin UN Snub | The Jewish Community’s Palin Gap

Judiciary, Media, Politics, Race Relations, Uncategorized

FBI Investigates Student For Palin E-mail Hack Job

It is good to see some progress being made. It will be better to see that they have the perpetrator under arrest. But for now, we know this much . . .

A person who identified himself as a witness tells 10 News that agents with the FBI served a federal search warrant at the Fort Sanders residence of David Kernell early Sunday morning. Kernell lives in the Commons apartment complex at 1115 Highland Ave. David Kernell is the son of Mike Kernell, a Democratic state representative from Memphis.

No surprise there, if true. Bi-partisan condemnation, including jail time for the perpetrator is what would be surprising. The fraud involved in hacking the private email account is one felony, and disseminating that information is another.

Unfortunately, there is not a good history for prosecution in cases such as this. In December, 1996, Alice and John Martin who recorded a cell phone conversation of Newt Gingrich, which ended up in the hands of ‘Baghdad’ Jim McDermott, then ranking member of the House Ethics Committee, who turned it over to the New York Times for publication, never served time. And neither did McDermott. He was ultimately ordered to pay over $700,000 in damages and court costs. That’s it. He is still in Congress. So I wouldn’t get my hopes up for real justice in this case either. Now, if the shoe were on the other foot?

link: Update: FBI serves search warrant against UT student in Palin case | Appeals Court rules against McDermott in taped call dispute

Politics

Ownership Is Better Than Taxing-ship

There are a lot of people to blame for the current financial crisis, but naming names doesn’t seem to be as fashionable as it was back in the Enron days. I do know that a couple of them are currently advisers to Sen. Barack Obama, but that’s beside the point now. This morning that tab on a temporary fix was $750 billion. Now, 12 hours later it seems to be $1.5 trillion. Any way you look at it, the tab is enormous.

And where is the money going to come from? From us. Or maybe also Dubai. There is an attractive aspect that I have not heard of yet pertaining to this ‘fix’ and it is this. Rather than tax the life out of the economy. Make us investors instead.

If you just look at an average, based on a population of 300,000,000, at $750 billion, the tab amounts to $2,500 per person. At $1.5 trillion, it amounts to $5,000 per person. Realizing that some people can invest more than others, and some not at all, wouldn’t it make sense to offer some ownership into the solution? We make an investment and we share in the profits, or at the very least will minimize our loss. Having a private enterprise solution as opposed to a socialist solution makes more sense to me. Instead of taxing me for the solution, let me invest into the solution. What do you think?

2008 Election, Immigration, Politics, Race Relations

Barack Obama's Spanish Language Campaign Ad

Beginning tomorrow, a response to Obama’s ad will run in Spanish, to tell Spanish-speaking Americans, and others, about how Barack Obama, the man running his campaign himself, has been lying to them and stoking racial prejudice about them, in order to get their vote. The self-professed ‘candidate of change,’ who professes to be above race and political party, is acting more like a segregationist from the 50’s and 60’s. Rush Limbaugh’s comments from a Wall Street Journal piece . . .

Mr. Obama’s campaign is now trafficking in prejudice of its own making. And in doing so, it is playing with political dynamite. What kind of potential president would let his campaign knowingly extract two incomplete, out-of-context lines from two radio parodies and build a framework of hate around them in order to exploit racial tensions? The segregationists of the 1950s and 1960s were famous for such vile fear-mongering.

Obama’s Spanish language campaign ad . . .

In 2006, in the heat of the immigration debate, Rush put out the Limbaugh Laws, which is a parody of Mexico’s immigration laws. This was the source that Sen. (words, just words) Obama took out of context to make his ad.

From 2006, The Limbaugh Laws video . . .

What is Obama’s strategy? Divide with the race card. In this case, Hispanics. Because there is virtually no difference between McCain’s views of so-called ‘comprehensive’ immigration reform (McCain-Kennedy anyone?) and that of Obama, he will lie about Rush and tell the non-suspecting Hispanic community that McCain and Rush and, while he’s at it, Bush, are like three peas in a pod that don’t want or respect Hispanics.

When the truth about this finally reaches the Hispanic community, they will see who does not respect them and who takes them for granted. Obama is not acting very presidential. Well, unless this was Venezuela instead of the United States.

related links: Obama Is Stoking Racial Antagonism | Las Mentiras de Obama | Obama Invokes Rush Limbaugh in New Spanish-Language Ads

2008 Election, Media, Politics

Obama On Abortion

Here’s some more news from Obama’s PR wing of his campaign, the Associated Press. Headline is ‘Obama calls out McCain on abortion.’ Does he really want to go there? It is Obama that is in favor of retroactive abortions.

With the current state of technology in stem cell research, there is absolutely no need to use embryonic stem cells any longer. But, abortion being the holy sacrament of the Democrat party’s platform, they continue to cling to embryonic stem cell research.

McCain opposes abortion rights except when the life of the mother is in danger and, unlike Palin, in cases of rape or incest. He has voted for abortion restrictions permissible under Roe v. Wade and has said the 1973 decision that guaranteed abortion rights should be overturned, leaving states to decide. Advisers say he would not seek a constitutional amendment banning abortion, although he has expressed support for such a measure in the past even while saying he doubts one is likely.

Obama does not oppose killing babies born as a result of live-birth abortions. He voted against a bill that would protect ‘the least among us.’ His actions are contrary to his glowing ‘words, just words.’

links: Obama calls out McCain on abortion | Obama’s Definition Of Parenthood Includes Retroactive Abortion | Obama More Pro-Choice Than NARAL

2008 Election, Energy, Politics, Russia

Obama's Energy Plan For Independence Runs On Hope

In the last few days, Democrat candidate for President Sen. Barack Obama gave us the benefit of two one-on-one interviews to get to know some of what he has planned for an Obama administration. One was with Bill O’Reilly last week and the other was at Columbia University in New York tonight called the ServiceNation Summit Forum. In both settings, Obama addressed his plan for energy independence. And where energy independence is concerned, he has no plan, and here’s why.

With Bill O’Reilly on the subject of energy independence, Obama said he has a plan. It is to spend $150 billion (coming from oil companies) over ten years to develop solar, wind, and hydroelectric power. To be realistic about it, $150 billion over ten years is not all that much considering the task at hand. He didn’t say anything about nuclear power until O’Reilly asked him about that specifically. He then said ‘oh yeah, sure we’ll expand nuclear power.’ He did not mention drilling for more oil and gas. Instead, he rested his case on the hope that we will be able to actually become energy independent with scientific breakthroughs that he hopes will come. And he justified this position by saying ‘Kennedy didn’t know how we were going to get to the moon.’ I’m beginning to see what he means by hope and change. The change is we’re going to govern on hope.

Obama addresses energy one more time near the end of the interview when discussing the problem with Putin invading Georgia and threatening the United States if we put a defensive missile system in Poland, and what he would do about Putin. Obama’s said short of a military response, there are two levers we can use. One is economic which would require help from Europe. Because Russia is economically tied to Europe and to a lesser extent the United States. The other he said, was to ‘get our energy policy straight.’

Fast forward to tonight at Columbia University. The sum of his statement on energy was this one sentence. From the transcript . . .

We’re going to have a bold energy plan that says that we are going to reduce our dependence on foreign oil by 20 or 30 percent over the course of a decade or two.

Twenty or thirty percent over a decade or two? In a matter of a week, his plan went from 10 years to 20 years. And he is not sure by how much he can do it. 20% OR 30%? Is that even a goal? And even at that, there is no independence. Right now, we import 70 percent of our oil. Do the math with me here. If Obama can cut that by 20 or 30 percent then his definition of energy independence is to import 40 to 50 percent from foreign sources instead of 70 percent.

If this is what Barack Obama calls energy independence, and getting our energy policy straight, then he isn’t the one to get us there.

links: O’Reilly interview video | ServiceNation Summit Forum transcript