Obama

[Shammu]

Yes, there are quite a few. The following video is one that I think that all should see.

http://www.viddler.com/explore/ATLAHWorldwide/videos/27/755.078/

Brother, I wish you had told me how big this video is. After 30 minutes, I only had 2 minutes of the video. I'm on dial up but, from what I did see, James David Manning is right on!!

[Soldier4Christ]

Sorry about that. I should have warned about it's size. It loaded up on my computer quite quickly so I didn't think to look at the size.

[Soldier4Christ]

Obama donor ordered Big Brother probe of Joe the Plumber
State agency director authorizes child-support check on senator's critic

Following the third presidential debate, a state agency director and maximum donor to the Barack Obama presidential campaign immediately authorized a government background check of Joe the Plumber's child-support records.

Helen Jones-Kelley, director of the Ohio Department of Job and Family Services and a $2,500 contributor to the Obama campaign, permitted state employees to conduct a check on Samuel Joseph Worzelbacher, the Columbus Dispatch reported.

Now Ohio Inspector General Thomas P. Charles is seeking to determine whether at least four probes on state computers were legal.

Jones-Kelley denies the Support Enforcement Tracking System search was politically motivated and claims the check was ordered to verify that Worzelbacher was not behind on child-support payments.

While the state agency director would not share information about Joe the Plumber's record with the Dispatch, Worzelbacher reportedly lives with his 13-year-old boy, and it is uncertain whether he has ever been ordered to pay child support.

Jones-Kelley said such background checks are not unusual.

"Our practice is when someone is thrust quickly into the public spotlight, we often take a look," she said. "Our practice is to basically look at what is coming our way."

Ohio's Democrat Gov. Ted Strickland told the Dispatch his appointee, Jones-Kelly, did not authorize the check for political purposes.

"Based on what we know to this point, we don't have any reason to believe the information was improperly accessed or disclosed by a state employee," his press secretary told the paper.

Name searches on Joe the Plumber were also conducted at the Bureau of Motor Vehicles, where his registration and driving records were pulled. The State Highway Patrol has seized a government computer at the Ohio Department of Insurance as evidence. A separate search was conducted in the Toledo Police Department's criminal database.

[Soldier4Christ]

'Fairness Doctrine' rejected 'absolutely'
'The president has made his position very clear'

The momentum among Democrats for a return to the federal "Fairness Doctrine," a regulatory procedure that would censor radio stations and other broadcast outlets, is growing, with Sen. Jeff Bingaman, New Mexico, joining the chorus.

But President Bush still believes there's no need for such restriction on speech freedoms.

Les Kinsolving, WND's correspondent at the White House, raised the issue at a press briefing today.

"New Mexico's Senator Jeff Bingaman has just joined other leading Democrats in calling for restoration of the so-called Fairness Doctrine. And my question: Does the president believe that this yearning for electronic media censorship is right, when there is no such calling for a Fairness Doctrine for newspapers, magazines or wire services?" he asked.

"The president has made his position very clear on the Fairness Doctrine," said White House spokeswoman Dana Perino. "He absolutely does not support it."

The doctrine was instituted in 1949 by the Federal Communications Commission and soon was recognized as a tool for silencing views authorities found objectionable. The FCC repealed the rule in 1987 after admitting the plan "had the net effect of reducing rather than enhancing the discussion of controversial issues of public importance."

Bingaman in recent days joined with those who are seeking federal government control over the messages on the airwaves.

He was in a radio interview with KKOB radio talk show host Jim Villanucci.

Villanucci asked Bingaman, "Talk radio listeners are concerned about the Fairness Doctrine. Do you think there will be a push to reinstate the Fairness Doctrine?"

"I don't know, I certainly hope so," Bingman responded.

"You support it?" Villanucci asked.

"I do," Bingaman said.

"You would want this radio station to have to change?" the host asked.

"I would. I would want this station and all stations to have to present a balanced perspective and different points of view instead of hammering on one side of the political…" Bingaman said.

When Villanucci pointed out there are numerous alternatives within his market area, Bingaman said radio – and media in general – "should have a higher calling than just to reflect a particular point of view."

He pointed out KKOB previously existed under a Fairness Doctrine.

"Yeah, we played music," Villanucci agreed.

In a second question, Kinsolving asked, "Former Speaker Newt Gingrich has compared the Soviet-dominated Polish press attacks on Lech Walesa to what he termed the 'vicious, dishonest' and totally biased media treatment of Governor Palin. And I wondered if – does the president believe Mr. Gingrich is wrong? And if so, why?"

"I haven't spoken to the president about Newt Gingrich's comparison," Perino said.

WND reported just a day earlier when an ATI-News/Zogby poll revealed supporters of Barack Obama like the idea of a "Fairness Doctrine" that would crack down on talk shows like those of Sean Hannity and Rush Limbaugh, and their enthusiasm grows when the idea of taking the radio icons off the air is introduced.

"Barack Obama has shown a stunning lack of tolerance for free speech throughout the course of this campaign," said ATI-News president Brad O'Leary. "His presidency, combined with supermajorities for Democrats in Congress, would almost certainly bring back the so-called 'Fairness Doctrine' and allow the Democrats to snuff out any broadcasters with whom they disagree."

[Soldier4Christ]

Obama Advisor Praises Iran

“Welcome to the future of our foreign relations under Barack Obama. Much like his campaign, it involves dreams and fantasy.” This from Ed Lasky in his superb editorial response to The Boston Globe. Now more than ever, in these last few days before this fateful election, it is vitally important to thoroughly understand what is at stake here, and to remember that what is happening in America right now has happened before.

One of the biggest misconceptions about Germany’s infamous Third Reich is that Adolf Hitler somehow seized power and that the worst excesses of Nazism were later unleashed on the unsuspecting German people after he had assumed the reins of government. (Note: Before letting out that exasperated sigh and saying, Oh no, not another Hitler parallel, please read on). Thus the German Volk have been disingenuously portrayed as innocent victims rather than the complicit participants they most certainly were. The truth of the matter is a little less attractive. The overt murderous racism, the horrors of the Holocaust, the ruthless military aggressions, the almost complete suppression of civil rights, the ultimate invasion of Russia — all of these fateful and ultimately catastrophic realizations of the goals of the Third Reich were clearly spelled out for all to see long before January 1933 when Hitler finally assumed the Chancellorship of Germany.

Throughout the pages of Mein Kampf, and in all of the Nazi manifestos, and in their hundreds of widely-publicised speeches their intentions were made crystal clear. And, far from seizing power, Hitler and the Nazis were legally voted into office. Subsequently, through a whole series of votes and referendums, all of Hitler’s wildest ambitions were easily ratified and given the force of law.
Why? A wildly popular and charismatic leader had promised change. And the German people desperately wanted change. And they most certainly got it.

Here once again we are being seduced by the siren song of yet another popular charismatic leader who is promising us change. And in his Twenty-First century version of Mein Kampf, and in all of his party’s manifestos, and in all of his innumerable speeches, his wildly ambitious and ultimately disastrous agenda is laid out openly for all to see. This article is just one more example of what we can expect from an Obama government. This will be our impotent answer to the existential threats posed by the mad mullahs. This will be our future.

If Barack Obama wins this election this coming Tuesday, no matter how horrific the consequences of an Obama presidency might be, we cannot pretend that we didn’t know what was coming, and that a majority of Americans didn’t enthusiastically embrace it.

Please God give us the courage and the wisdom to steer the right course through these perilous waters.

___________

Ed Lasky

Well, is it that hard to believe in this day and age that a major American newspaper offers up an op-ed filled with praise for Iran? This would be Friday’s Boston Globe in an op-ed written by Lawrence Korb and Laura Conley, both of whom work for the liberal minded Center for American Progress.

By the way, the fact that Korb has been identified as a key foreign policy adviser to Barack Obama is completely unmentioned - a major journalistic lapse but not a surprising one by the New York Times-owned Boston Globe.

Korb and Conley look upon Iranian efforts to help topple the Taliban as proof of the potential for Iran to work with America in bringing about some sort of Pax Persia in the region. This is a fallacy. Iran opposed the Taliban because the Taliban - a Sunni extremist group - hated the Shiite Persians that were on its border and hated the Shiites within Afghanistan. The Taliban murdered Iranian regime officials. The downfall of the Taliban was in the interest of the regime and their help when America sought to oust the Taliban was based strictly on self-interest. In the diplomatic realm, nations don’t have permanent friends, they have permanent interests. The interests of the Iranian regime is regional hegemony and the acquisition of nuclear bombs.

Korb and Conley blame Bush for failure to reach out to the Iranians. This argument falls flat. In fact, various Bush officials have sought to reach out to the regime (as even the op-ed mentions in passing) but have been rebuffed - as have a long line of other Presidents who have tried to establish relations with the Iranians. This is a fact that the op-ed ignores.

The op-ed also seems to blame Bush for the progress of the Iranian nuclear program. This is absurd. The program did not start under Bush (and was actually temporarily put on hold in the wake of our invasion of Iraq) but had its origins going back to the 1980s. The program has progressed apace - under Democrat and Republican Presidents. We have sought, along with the United Nations and our European allies, to work with the Iranians to curb their nuclear program in return for various “carrots” offered to them. The result? Rebuff after rebuff, as the centrifuges spin away.

What is especially striking in this op-ed is the complete silence regarding the nature of the Iranian regime. One would hope that a foreign policy expert close to Barack Obama would at least recognize how important it is to consider the nature of a regime when advocating diplomatic outreach. Where is the recognition that the regime is - and has long been - designated as the number one terror-sponsoring nation in the world (as Bill Clinton so designated Iran)? Where is the recognition that Iran has been helping kill Americans in Iraq and has done so in Lebanon and Saudi Arabia, or the awareness that Iranian proxies have killed innocent Argentineans, Lebanese, Israelis and for that matter Iranians (a regime that hangs children and gays and brutalizes women wins praise from Korb and Conley?).
That little matter of denying the Holocaust while openly boasting of plans to bring about another one? The theological and apocalyptic musings of its leaders (not just President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad), the talk of halos and apocalypse spoken by Ahmadinejad from the podium of the United Nations to bring about the return of the missing Imam? Sheer piffle, not worth mentioning. We will see more of these efforts to burnish Iran in the days ahead. The Iran lobby is stepping up efforts in Washington. The Persian red carpet is being rolled out.

Welcome to the future of our foreign relations under Barack Obama. Much like his campaign, it involves dreams and fantasy.

Ed Lasky is the news editor for American Thinker.

[Soldier4Christ]

Quotes from Hidden LA Times Video of Obama at Jew Bash?

Doug Ross gets a note from a reliable source:

Saw a clip from the tape. Reason we can’t release it is because statements Obama said to rile audience up during toast. He congratulates Khalidi for his work saying “Israel has no God-given right to occupy Palestine” plus there’s been “genocide against the Palestinian people by Israelis.”
It would be really controversial if it got out. Tha’s why they will not even let a transcript get out.

If the above is true, no wonder the LA Times won’t release it. However, if its true that tape needs released more than ever. Right now the above quote is only rumor. It will remain to be only rumor until we have evidence. We can not have evidence without the tape being released.

The LA Times is being pressured by various entities including the McCain campaign to release the tape immediately. It is my hope that they will do so and very soon.

[HisDaughter]

Supremes asked to halt Tuesday's vote
Constitutional crisis feared over Obama's 'qualifications'

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted: October 30, 2008
11:00 pm Eastern

© 2008 WorldNetDaily

The U.S. Supreme Court is being asked to help the nation avoid a constitutional crisis by halting Tuesday's election until Democratic presidential nominee Barack Obama documents his eligibility to run for the top office in the nation.

Democratic attorney Philip Berg had filed a lawsuit alleging Obama is ineligible to be president because of possible birth in Kenya, but as WND reported, a federal judge dismissed the complaint claiming Berg lacks standing to bring the action.

The 34-page memorandum that accompanied the court order from Judge R. Barclay Surrick concluded ordinary citizens can't sue to ensure that a presidential candidate actually meets the constitutional requirements of the office.

Instead, Surrick said Congress could determine "that citizens, voters, or party members should police the Constitution's eligibility requirements for the Presidency," but that it would take new laws to grant individual citizens that ability.

"Until that time," Surrick says, "voters do not have standing to bring the sort of challenge that Plaintiff attempts to bring."

Berg has maintained that uncertainty about how the U.S. does enforce the requirements of presidency may result in a constitutional crisis should an ineligible candidate win the office.

In a statement today, Berg said he is applying to Justice David Souter for an "Immediate Injunction to Stay the Presidential Election of November 4, 2008."

"I am hopeful that the U.S. Supreme Court will grant the injunction pending a review of this case to avoid a constitutional crisis by insisting that Obama produce certified documentation that he is or is not a "natural born" citizen and if he cannot produce documentation that Obama be removed from the ballot for president," Berg said.

"We must legally prevent Obama, the unqualified candidate, from taking the office of the presidency of the United States," Berg said.

Get the book that started it all – Jerome Corsi's "The Obama Nation," personally autographed for only $4.95 – an amazing $23 discount! 

The issue of Obama's eligibility first got traction among Internet bloggers and later was heightened when several campaigns were launched to determine whether a "certificate of live birth" posted on the Internet by the Obama campaign was valid.

The issue gained more attention when Berg told radio talk show icon Michael Savage he had an admission from Obama's grandmather that she was at his birth – in Kenya.

"This is a question of who has standing to stand up for our Constitution," Berg told Jeff Schreiber of America's Right blog. "If I don't have standing, if you don't have standing, if your neighbor doesn't have standing to ask whether or not the likely next president of the United States – the most powerful man in the entire world – is eligible to be in that office in the first place, then who does?"

As WND reported, Berg filed suit in U.S. District Court in August, alleging Obama is not a natural-born citizen and is thus ineligible to serve as president of the United States. Berg demanded that Obama provide documentation to the court to verify that the candidate was born in Hawaii, as Obama contends, and not in Kenya, as Berg believes.

[HisDaughter]

Bill Clinton: Obama Got Lots of Help on Economic Crisis Response
Bill Clinton says at a rally that Barack Obama called a round of advisers during the height of the economic crisis and said, "tell me what ... to do."

Barack Obama cultivated the image of a cool and collected leader during the height of the economic crisis last month, when lawmakers on Capitol Hill scrambled to draft a workable bailout package after a meltdown on Wall Street.

And when John McCain suspended his campaign to dive head first into the fray, Obama's campaign accused the Republican of being "unsteady."

But to hear Bill Clinton tell it, the Democratic nominee didn't quite have a handle on the situation himself.

"I haven't cleared this with him and he may even be mad at me for saying this so close to the election, but I know what else he said to his economic advisers (during the crisis)," Clinton told the crowd at a Wednesday night rally with Obama in Florida. "He said, 'Tell me what the right thing to do is. What's the right thing for America? Don't tell me what's popular. You tell me what's right -- I'll figure out how to sell it.'"

Clinton said when the crisis broke, Obama called his own advisers as well as those of the former two-term president, Hillary Clinton, Warren Buffet and others.

"He called those people. You know why? Because he knew it was complicated and before he said anything he wanted to understand," Clinton said. "That's what a president does in a crisis."

The seeming praise may come off as a backhanded compliment, especially since Obama repeatedly accuses McCain of admitting he doesn't know much about the economy. McCain's campaign said Clinton's remark shows Obama was uncertain when Wall Street seemed to be on the verge of crumbling.

"Barack Obama had no idea what the right thing to do is or at least that's Bill Clinton's impression," McCain spokesman Michael Goldfarb said.

"It's disturbing that ... Barack Obama's response to this is 'Tell me what to do and I will sell it,'" Goldfarb added. "That's been Barack Obama's entire campaign -- is one big sales job."

During the height of negotiations in late September, McCain briefly suspended his campaign to work on the economic bailout package and even threatened to sit out the first presidential debate.

Obama teased him for it, and after a mid-week summit with President Bush, congressional leaders and the presidential candidates ended in disarray, his Democratic supporters criticized McCain for "injecting" presidential politics into the debate.

Before the inter-campaign sniping began, the two presidential nominees released a joint statement urging the nation to "rise above politics for the good of the country."

Goldfarb said he can't speculate on the content of the advice Obama solicited in late September but that, "The result was to sit back and do nothing."

Former Hillary Clinton adviser Maria Cardona said Clinton was genuinely trying to pay Obama a compliment Wednesday night, especially after so much was made in the press of the divisions between Obama and Clinton supporters.

"President Clinton was trying to make the point that their campaigns are actually talking to one another quite a bit," she told FOX News. "The point that President Clinton was trying to make is that Senator Obama understands this is a big issue, and he is surrounding himself with people who have that experience."

Bill Clinton has come out forcefully in favor of Obama ever since the Democratic National Convention in late August in Denver.

He declared Wednesday night that, "This man should be our president."

However, he sometimes has had a strange way of showing his support. Clinton has repeatedly praised McCain in interviews, and even described Sarah Palin at one point as an "effective candidate with a compelling story" who cannot be underestimated.

Clinton also said in Florida Wednesday night that Obama has proved himself by running a campaign that "involves so many people," adding: "He has executed this campaign in a way that is different from modern and forward thinking -- something no one else ever could have done. He can be the chief executor of good intentions as president."

It's not clear what he meant, since he pronounced the word 'executer.'

Asked about Clinton's intentions Wednesday, Goldfarb said: "I think ... he clearly chooses his language carefully."

[Soldier4Christ]

Bill Clinton: Obama Got Lots of Help on Economic Crisis Response

Yep, and many of them were the ones that helped cause the crisis. Some really good help. 

[Soldier4Christ]

Obama is now pushing a statement that he is a patriot. My question is in what way and with meaning?

The English word has it's beginnings in 1596 taken from compatriot derived from the French word patriote (15c.), from Latin patriota "fellow-countryman" (6c.), from Greek patriotes "fellow countryman," from patrios "of one's fathers," patris "fatherland," from pater (gen. patros) "father," with -otes, suffix expressing state or condition. Meaning "loyal and disinterested supporter of one's country" is attested from 1605, but became an ironic term of ridicule or abuse from mid-18c. in England, so that Johnson, who at first defined it as "one whose ruling passion is the love of his country," in his fourth edition added, "It is sometimes used for a factious disturber of the government."

Webster's 1828 Dictionary defines it as A person who loves his country, and zealously supports and defends it and its interests. Such tears as patriots shed for dying laws. PAT'RIOT, a. Patriotic; devoted to the welfare of one's country; as patriot zeal.

Todays online Webster Dictionary defines it as "one who loves his or her country and supports its authority and interests."

Again I ask which of these meanings does he say it in the context of? I get the very strong impression that it is not one that is positive for the nation as a whole.

Barack Obama quotes that tell his true nature and agenda:

"There are patriots who opposed the war in Iraq and there are patriots who supported the war in Iraq. We are one people, all of us pledging allegiance to the stars and stripes, all of us defending the United States of America."

All the while he and his associates show disregard and disrespect for the American Flag.

"Change will not come if we wait for some other person or some other time. We are the ones we've been waiting for. We are the change that we seek."

 "I will stand with the Muslims should the political winds shift in an ugly direction."

"My friends, we live in the greatest nation in the history of the world.  I hope you'll join me as we try to change it."

"Call to Islamic prayer is “one of the prettiest sounds on Earth at sunset.”

“You run for president with the friends you have. They’re not the friends you might want or wish to have at a later time.”

[HisDaughter]

Lawmaker wants to know source of leak on Obama's aunt
Posted: 01:09 PM ET
 
Conyers called for an investigation into the leak over Obama’s aunt.
WASHINGTON (CNN) – A Democratic lawmaker on Saturday asked Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff to investigate a leak to reporters regarding the immigration status of Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama's aunt, suggesting the Bush administration may have been behind it.

"I was startled to read in today's Associated Press that a 'federal law enforcement official' has leaked information about an immigration case involving a relative of Senator Obama," said a letter sent to Chertoff by Rep. John Conyers, D-Michigan, who chairs the House Judiciary Committee.

"Even more troubling, the AP reports that it 'could not establish whether anyone at a political level in the Bush administration or in the McCain campaign had been involved,' a very disturbing (suggestion) indeed," the letter said.


"This leak is deplorable and I urge you to take immediate action to investigate and discipline those responsible."

The AP reported Saturday that Obama's Kenyan aunt, Zeituni Onyango, is living in the United States illegally, even though an immigration judge rejected her request for asylum four years ago. The story cites two sources, one of them a federal law enforcement official.

CNN has not been able to independently verify the aunt's immigration status. Immigration and Customs Enforcement spokeswoman Kelly Nantel declined comment, saying the agency "is prohibited from commenting on any individual's status."


Quit sniveling already.....Geesh.  He's a crook.  He's surrouned by crooks.  He's NOT God.  He's NOT our dictator yet.  ETC, ETC, ETC.....

[HisDaughter]

.....and least of all.......HE'S NOT A PATRIOT......of this country anyway....

[HisDaughter]

About that 'civilian national security force'
Joseph Farrah - Between the Lines (Commentary)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The pieces are coming together.

We're getting a more complete picture of Barack Obama's draconian plans to create a domestic army of radical extremists promoting bigger and more intrusive government.

The plan is to create a boot camp for community agitators – paid for by you, the U.S. taxpayer.

Investor's Business Daily deserves credit for putting together the elaborate jigsaw puzzle. I merely saw the smoke. IBD discovered the fire. But for reference, you will want to read about what I found previously regarding Obama's calls for a "civilian national security force."

It seems Obama was a founding member of a group called Public Allies in 1992. In 1993, he resigned before his wife, Michelle, took over as executive director of the Chicago chapter.

This little-known, but well-funded, band of taxpayer-supported social misfits will, according to IBD, serve as the centerpiece of his "Universal Voluntary Public Service" program.

"Universal voluntary?" Isn't that an oxymoron? Yes, but just consider the moron who is advocating it.

"Big Brother had nothing on the Obamas," write the editorialists for IBD. "They plan to herd American youth into government-funded re-education camps where they'll be brainwashed into thinking America is a racist, oppressive place in need of 'social change.'"

The "Obama Youth" will get a monthly stipend of $1,800, plus paid health and child care, plus a $4,725 grant after their "service" for future education or school loan payoffs.

But this isn't just a make-work program.

IBD says the "real mission is to radicalize American youth and use them to bring about 'social change' through threats, pressure, tension and confrontation – the tactics used by the father of community organizing, Saul 'The Red' Alinsky."

The group boasts that graduates of the program are more than twice as likely as other young people to "engage in protest activities." Isn't that wonderful? That's the real purpose – using your tax dollars to foment extremist political clashes, furthering the reach of Big Government into the lives of all of us.

The government already pays about half the bill for Public Allies through Bill Clinton's AmeriCorps program. Obama seeks to fund it at levels equal to the U.S. Defense Department – close to $500 billion annually.

This is what he meant when he said: "We've got to have a civilian national security force that's just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded" as the military."

IBD concludes: "The gall of it: The Obamas want to create a boot camp for radicals who hate the military – and stick American taxpayers with the bill."

What else is there to say?

Such a program would fundamentally change the character of America – possibly forever.

Someone should ask Obama, who claims to be a legal scholar, where he finds such a program authorized among the enumerated powers of the Constitution.

Now that would be an entertaining question and answer for some intrepid member of the press.

Personally, I won't hold my breath waiting for anyone with access to be so bold.

Remember what programs like this are about. They are about empowering government to take more control over your life. They are about limiting your freedom. They are about picking your pocket. They are about changing the way you think by coercion. They are about making you uncomfortable being an American. They are about total power – and never letting go.

We've seen programs like this before – in Hitler's Germany, Mussolini's Italy, Stalin's Soviet Union and Mao's China.

Never again.

[Soldier4Christ]

CNN has not been able to independently verify the aunt's immigration status. Immigration and Customs Enforcement spokeswoman Kelly Nantel declined comment, saying the agency "is prohibited from commenting on any individual's status."

While it is true that Immigration and Customs Enforcement cannot comment on a persons immigration status Obama's aunt's immigration status is a matter of public record, since a judgment was rendered against her in open court. If her immigration status had changed it would reflect such in the court papers.

[HisDaughter]

While it is true that Immigration and Customs Enforcement cannot comment on a persons immigration status Obama's aunt's immigration status is a matter of public record, since a judgment was rendered against her in open court. If her immigration status had changed it would reflect such in the court papers.

Ah.....Bach.
quote by Radar O'Rielly