The problem that the Republican Party has is that its voting base is just plain tired of the same old politics inside the Washington beltway. They are fed up with the ever increasing gasoline prices at the pump to fill their cars. They are shocked at the rise of the price of oil to heat their homes and the lack of proper planning to end the war in Iraq. Indeed, every voter is weary of the ongoing partisanship and corruption that permeates Washington, D.C.

In 2008, in every public opinion poll, an overwhelming majority across the United States feel that the country is heading in the wrong direction. The voter does not want politics as usual, they want new ideas and attractive candidates who think of ways to improve government process. The voter desires smart, honest, reform candidates that can think outside of the box and are not trapped in the beltway mindset of the status quo. Indeed, the voter wants government managers not just a career campaign manager interested in the next political election.

It is with this background that John McCain will soon make his selection for Vice President on the 2008 Republican ticket for the fall election. In general, the Republican Party is in need of a candidate with a young, vibrant, fresh approach. The Party needs someone with integrity and intelligence. The person needs to be a manager with a vision and an ideological purpose. So, here is the speech announcing his selection of the Republican Vice Presidential nominee that John McCain should consider making at the Republican National Convention in August 2008.

” I am honored today to announce my selection of Vice President. The man whom I have chosen will make an excellent running mate for me in the 2008 Presidential election. In addition, I have no doubt that he will become an important leader in the Republican Party of the future. The man I have chosen as a running mate is a graduate of Brown University. He has received a Masters degree from New College, Oxford and graduated as a Rhodes Scholar. In the private sector, he has worked for McKinsey and Company, a consulting firm, where he advised many of the large Fortune 500 companies.

He was put in charge of Louisiana’s state hospitals and health department at the early age of 27. He then served as executive director of the National Bipartisan Commission on the Future of Medicare and was named assistant secretary of Health and Human Services for planning and evaluation under George W. Bush.

The man I have chosen is the highest elected Indian American in the nation and its youngest serving governor. He is the son of Indian immigrants. He has been chosen by Scholastic Update magazine as “one of America’s top 10 extraordinary young people for the next millennium.” In addition, he was India Abroad’s Person of the Year in 2005.

He served in the United States House of Representatives before his election as the Governor of Louisiana last year. Immediately after his election, he established a new era of integrity in state government through the passage of legislation that promotes ethics reform. This man also understands first hand the limitations of a large federal government bureaucracy while using his experience from the private sector to promote solutions to government problems that require fresh new ideas.

It is certainly a testament to his success and integrity that he currently enjoys an approval rating of over 70% as the Governor of the state of Louisiana. Ladies and Gentlemen, my choice for Vice President of the United States for the 2008 Republican ticket is Louisiana’s distinguished Governor, Bobby Jindal.”

There are many qualified people who could be selected to run as Vice President on the Republican ticket. There are politically safe choices and some that would probably bring more immediate strategic value. However, the selection of Bobby Jindal would be an excellent choice for the Republican Party as it looks to its future. It is a party that needs to rebuild a brand identity that should endorse integrity and ethics, creative thinking, intelligence, efficient management, limited government, low taxes, and reform. The selection of the Louisiana Governor for Vice President would signal that the Republican Party was serious in the creation of such an identity. Indeed, Bobby Jindal would be a Republican Vice President for the next generation.

James William Smith has worked in Senior management positions for some of the largest Financial Services firms in the United States for the last twenty five years. He has also provided business consulting support for insurance organizations and start up businesses. Visit his website at http://www.eWorldvu.com
Article Source

I’m reminded of the line from Barry Goldwater’s 1964 acceptance speech that chased the “moderates” in the New York delegation from the hall. And what awful thing did he say?

“I would remind you that extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice! And let me remind you also that moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue!” Apparently the “moderates” did not believe that liberty and justice should be pursued with everything we’ve got.

Unfortunately the actions of more and more Republicans shows that they too would run away from this statement. The most notable are the three who broke from a party just discovering the value of unity. While not from New York, it should be recognized that they are also from the northeast. What can be said of those who supported the current spending orgy coming out of the land inside the beltway?

Can they really be thought of as moderate in any way, shape or form? Can the rest of us join in their excitement at having trimmed a hundred billion dollars from an eight hundred billion dollar spending package? If you had three children, could you be happy if you convinced a kidnapper to only take one rather than all three? Would we have felt any better if only 2,000 hundred people died on 9/11 rather than 3,000?

Politics is said to be the art of compromise. However when we are faced with a choice of right or wrong, only the morally ambiguous can feel satisfied with a compromise. Suppose FDR had been able to negotiate a treaty with Adolf Hitler, whereby only 3 million Jews would have been slaughtered. Would the former paper hanger have been less of a monster?

No, there are times when, win or loose, we need to take a stand against something that is patently wrong. To compromise and give our assent to something that is plainly wrong lessens our stature among those around us and in our own eyes. When these people abandoned their core principles, or at least what they said were there core principles, they showed themselves to be untrustworthy and unreliable. They showed themselves to be something many thought did not exist. By siding with liberals, they became indistinguishable from them. They showed themselves to be Liberal Republicans.

Arlen Specter, Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins are not alone. Each just unmasked themselves one more time. Knowing there are such beasts among us should help us to be prepared to deal with them and not be afraid to root them out as soon as possible. If we don’t we will be lulled into a false sense of security by simply looking at numbers. Beware – you may run into Democrats in Republican clothing. I certainly have.

—————————————————————–

After far too many years of working in IT and involvement in political activity, Larry Miller recently began the web site and blog www.PoliticalChristian.org as a resource for Christians in the public arena.
Article Source

An extreme stance on an issue usually isn’t very productive. Not only is it politically impractical, but it’s often not all that sound. Life seems to be designed so that most of the time there are no easy answers. This notion galls purists, like libertarians, who want all issues decided by nice neat little formulas.

But zealots get more attention. Zealots in the media on issues like immigration would have us believe that they speak for the “People.” They tell us what the “base” wants. They know because they’ve been out on book tours, and everyone who shows up for book signings echos what they believe. What a surprise. So when a political issue comes up they don’t like, they stir up anger and unleash their loyal listeners on key Senators and Congressmen, who get flooded with email and phone calls, and are eventually cowed. And voila, the voice of the “People” has spoken!

This Blitzkrieg method of influencing public policy has worked pretty well. The accepted wisdom apparently is that candidates for the Republican nomination must now be hardline on immigration if they want to win. Even John McCain appears to be distancing himself from his once tenacious position on immigration reform. The position on his website now seems to fall in line nicely with the acceptable talking points. The President is one of the few major Republican figures who apparently hasn’t been fazed by the constant drumbeat in the new media and talk radio.

What’s so startling is that this issue is not new, and Bush was elected, not once but twice, making his position well known. What is new is that the so-called spokespersons for the Republican Party, pundits and talk-show hosts, have handed down their edicts on the matter, and that seems to be that. Don’t let the “Elites” shove reform down your throat!

There’s no question that something must be done to curb illegal immigration. But is the country really draconian on how to deal with the hard-working, decent ones who are already here? Or are we hearing a vocal minority? The way the Republican Party took in it the shorts in 2006 suggests the latter. Senate Republicans, who had been more willing to compromise on the issue, did not take near the hit the Congress did, where Republicans felt the political heat to be intransigent. Several politicians who ran on a hardline stance were defeated. J.D. Hayworth and George Allen had been shoe-ins in the past until they became shrill on the issue.

Whenever he has run for office, Pat Buchanan has been clear as a bell on issues: a staunch social conservative, protectionist, immigration hardliner, anti-Nafta, etc. He would appear to mesh well with the vocal crowd that claims to speak for the “People.” We all know his political track record. Maybe the “People” are not as hardline as many try to tell us.

The problem is: how do you coalesce moderates? It’s a little easier to unite those who see issues like abortion in black and white. “All abortion is murder!” “ No, it’s my body – I’ll do what I want!” What would be the slogan of the moderate on the abortion issue? “As much as I personally find abortion horrifying, it should be legal in the first trimester, although there should be parental and spousal notification and informed consent, and the health of the mother should be considered, and states should have a say-so, and courts should interpret law not make law?” That wouldn’t fit very well on placards or bumper stickers. There’s not even a label for a middle-ground position. You’re either pro-life (like Mitt Romney) or pro-choice (like Mitt Romney).

What label could you have for the middle ground? Pro*? Kind of like the name Prince went by a while back? (I can’t find that symbol on my keyboard).

On immigration, the moderate position likewise does not fit well into a sound-bite: Strengthen the border, stem the flow of illegal immigrants, provide for an ID system and stronger work-place enforcement, and provide a path to legal status for those who have been here for some time and have shown themselves to be decent members of society, provided any back taxes and a fine is paid. A little cumbersome. But you would think such a reasonable approach would at least be worth putting to a vote in Congress. Nope, it makes idealists livid. You might as well ask Inspector Javert to cut Jean Valjean some slack.

Moderates, probably by definition, don’t generally have knee-jerk reactions to issues. They ponder them, discuss them, and modify their position until they believe they’ve reached the correct one. While they’re pondering, the black and white crowd has already mobilized and taken to the streets. The moderate position is nuanced and therefore doesn’t lend itself well to the formation of a grassroots movement. How does a groundswell movement spring up on a middle-ground position? “Some, but not all, abortion should be illegal! Come on guys, let’s go!”

It’s much easier for extremists. For the pro-choice zealot, any restriction on abortion, no matter how reasonable, is heresy. For the hardliner on immigration, even the DREAM Act, a bill which would have provided a path to citizenship for individuals who came to this country when they were children and had no choice in the matter, was an outrage. Let them continue to live in the shadows even though the U.S. is their home. Too bad! Life’s not fair! What part of illegal don’t you understand?

Is a moderate approach sometimes not the best course of action? Of Course. Fighting Islamic terror is a good example. Even moderation needs to be exercised in moderation! The point is that every issue needs to be examined on its own, and the tendency to automatically align with the extreme side of an issue is not productive.

Whether the vehemence of the pundits and bloggers on immigration is reflective of the will of the people will soon be seen. In the meantime, the GOP, in Wile E. Coyote fashion, is strapping the hardline stance on its back and getting ready to head for the cliff. Maybe this time it will resonate with the American people . . .

So where does a moderate go to be heard on the issues? To the polls.

H.C. Coburn is an attorney practicing in Southern California and a freelance writer.
Article Source

(October 10, 2008) Missouri Gov. Matt Blunt issued the following statement on news reports of Barack Obama’s use of Missouri law enforcement to threaten and intimidate his critics:

“St. Louis County Circuit Attorney Bob McCulloch, St. Louis City Circuit Attorney Jennifer Joyce, Jefferson County Sheriff Glenn Boyer, and Obama and the leader of his Missouri campaign Senator Claire McCaskill have attached the stench of police-state tactics to the Obama-Biden campaign. What Senator Obama and his helpers are doing is scandalous beyond words, the party that claims to be the party of Thomas Jefferson is abusing the justice system and offices of public trust to silence political criticism with threats of prosecution and criminal punishment. This abuse of the law for intimidation insults the most sacred principles and ideals of Jefferson.” (See full article:pumasunleashed.wordpress.com/2008/09/28/doj-may-open-investigation-into-obamas-use-of-law-enforcement-to-quell-critics/)

In addition to the above, there are mounting negative reports on Barack Obama. They include:

* Obama’s Illegal Donations – nypost.com/seven/10062008/news/politics/barack_took_illegal_donations__gop_132272.htm

* ACORN, an Organization With Ties to Obama, Steals Votes – marketwatch.com/news/story/rnc-cnn-exposes-how-acorn/story.aspx?guid={E0F68C91-381A-43E8-9857-D990EFC33B34}&dist=hppr

* Obama’s Ignorant and Delusional Statements, like, he’s campaigned in 57 states – jewishpress.com/pageroute.do/36534/In_The_Tank_For_Obama_Editorial_Board.html

* Obama’s Association With Terrorist Ayers – elections.foxnews.com/2008/10/09/weather-underground-victim-says-obama-known-ayers-past/

* Obama Tried to Stall Gis’ Iraq Withdrawal – nypost.com/seven/09152008/postopinion/opedcolumnists/obama_tried_to_stall_gis_iraq_withdrawal_129150.htm

It’s mind-boggling enough to think there is anyone in this country who is willing to vote for Obama, it’s even harder to understand how Obama ever reached the 50% mark in polls.

Apparently, Americans are susceptible to celebrity-type images to the point where logic and reason go out the window. If you’re planning to vote for Obama, here’s a quick one-question test to help you sort out whether you’re choice is a logical one.

If you were looking to hire a new employee, would you hire someone with the above list of problems in his background? Even if you questioned one or two items, would you feel comfortable with that person? If your answer is yes, you’re fooling yourself, you’re not a businessman, or your business is going south. No one in his right mind would want to hire someone with the above background.

Yet, for some strange reason, there are people who are willing to vote such an utterly incompetent human being into the highest office of our land.

What people don’t seem to realize is this election is unlike any in our history. This election really isn’t about a liberal Democrat. It’s about an individual who will, in all likelihood, bring this country completely down on its knees.

There is absolutely no indication that Obama is capable of carrying out any of his promises. There is nothing in Obama’s background that gives us any assurance that his word even means anything, even if he were capable of bringing his promises to fruition. Yet some people are willing to stake the future of their country on someone who’s substanceless speeches — speeches that obviously do not come from experience, but from rehearsals — “sound good?”

You know what makes a good con artist? When you can’t tell the person’s conning you! If he wasn’t good at it, he’d never reach the level of “artist” — he’d remain just another hapless flunky.

What’s particularly astonishing is how the worse our economy gets, the higher Obama’s ratings go. Why? Does anyone honestly believe someone with Obama’s background is capable of doing anything to help our economy? Absolutely ridiculous!

If you think things are bad now, one year with a President Obama, I’m convinced, will totally ruin whatever is left of our great country.

John McCain may not be the Messiah we need. But what he says is honest, it comes from the heart, and it comes from experience. He has a record as a decent human being — an extremely important component in any endeavor — which at least allows you to have reasonable confidence that he will make every effort to help this country. You absolutely cannot say this about Obama — you have no idea what Obama will do, you have no idea what Obama’s capable of doing, you’re not even sure he will not simply cater to a small portion of Americans and to hell with the rest. Are you willing to take that risk?

In a different election, McCain might not have been the perfect candidate. But in the current one McCain looks pretty damn good, and every vote for Obama is, in my opinion, another nail in the coffin of America. Don’t take that chance. The country you save may be your own.

by Josh Greenberger

My letters and articles have appeared in The New York Post, New York Daily News, New York Times, Village Voice, Jewish Press, Hamodia and others. Articles (JoshGreenberger.com) have ranged from humor to scientific to current events. Wrote a book disproving the theory of evolution (Human Intelligence Gone Ape a.k.a. Who Let The Apes Out (WhoLetTheApesOut.com), available in stores and online. Have written several screenplays. As a computer consultant, have developed software for NASA’s Goddard Institute of Space Studies, AT&T, Charles Schwab, Bell Laboratories and Chase Manhattan Bank.
Article Source

James Dale Davidson has enjoyed astounding personal success founding new companies in a variety of industries. A graduate of Oxford University, Mr. Davidson is also a renowned venture capitalist and the author of bestsellers such as Blood In The Streets and The Great Reckoning.
Article Source

Obama argued last week that the war in Afghanistan, which he called “the central front in our enduring struggle against terrorism and extremism,” could not be separated from the volatile border area with Pakistan, where Al-Qaeda and Taliban elements have regrouped.”My administration is committed to refocusing attention and resources on Afghanistan and Pakistan and to spending those resources wisely,” said Obama when he appointed Richard Holbrooke as US envoy to Pakistan and Afghanistan on Thursday.As part of his diplomatic push, the president said he would work with NATO allies and other states in the region, which could include central Asian countries and India — Pakistan’s arch-rival.A debate is brewing over Obama’s 16-month timeline for withdrawal from Iraq, where 143,000 US troops are currently deployed.Following their meeting with Obama on January 21, Gates and Mullen shied away from endorsing the accelerated timetable. Gates cautioned that the session was just “the beginning of a process of evaluating various options.”Gates and Mullen have stressed that a series of elections in Iraq make this an important year for stabilizing the country.Provincial elections are scheduled for January 31, marking the first time that Iraq’s Sunnis will be going to the polls in large numbers after boycotting the last elections in 2005.Obama will face the demands of the military joint chiefs, who want to ease the stress on their forces deployed on both fronts for several years, and those of General Raymond Odierno, commander of US forces in Iraq, who worries that a precipitous withdrawal could threaten security gains there.US Marines Corps Commandant James Conway said he was ready to send “20,000 or less” Marines to Afghanistan, where about 2,200 Marines are currently deployed. He cautioned however that “anything you put into Afghanistan must necessarily come from a reduction of the number of Marines in Iraq.”Under an agreement signed between Washington and Baghdad in November, the US military is due to withdraw its combat troops from the country by the end of 2011.In his first formal interview as president earlier this week, Obama told the pan-Arab Al-Arabiya television network his administration would be more actively engaged in Middle East diplomacy than Bush.He told the Muslim world that “Americans are not your enemy,” and pledged that his administration would “do a more effective job of reaching out, listening as well as speaking to the Muslim world.”

yes
Article Source

By Michael Webster: Investigative Reporter Aug 22, 2008 10:30 AM PST

 The complaint is asking for declaratory (asking the court to declare Obama is not a US citizen, a “natural born” citizen and not eligible under the qualifications of the US Constitution to run for Office of President).

The law suite is asking for a temporary restraining order (TRO) prohibiting Obama from running for President until documents are provided proving he is eligible to run for POTUS.

The lawsuit was filed by a Phillip J. Berg (former chair of the PA democratic party)  in Philadelphia courthouse against Barack Obama and the DNC for Obama’s ineligibility to run for President of the United States based on his not being a “natural born” citizen:

The lawsuit contends that Obama has held multiple (Kenya and Indonesia citizenships) and that he was actually born in Kenya, not Hawaii as Obama has claimed.  The lawsuit has also been filed against the DNC.

The prominent Philadelphia attorney and Hillary Clinton supporter filed the suite in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania against Illinois Sen. Barack Obama and the Democratic National Committee. The suite further seeks an injunction preventing the senator from continuing his candidacy and a court order enjoining the DNC from nominating him at the upcoming Demo convention. The law suite claims that Sen. Obama is constitutionally ineligible to run for and hold the office of President of the United States.

Phillip Berg, the filing attorney, is a former gubernatorial and senatorial candidate, former chair of the Democratic Party in Montgomery (PA) County, former member of the Democratic State Committee, and former Deputy Attorney General of Pennsylvania. According to Berg, he filed the suit–just days before the DNC are to hold its nominating convention in Denver–for the health of the Democratic Party.

“I filed this action at this time,” Berg stated, “to avoid the obvious problems that will occur when the Republican Party raises these issues after Obama is nominated.”

Berg cited a number of unanswered questions regarding the Illinois senator’s background, and in the lawsuit documents maintained that Sen. Obama is not a naturalized U.S. citizen or that, if he ever was, he lost his citizenship when he was adopted in Indonesia. Berg also cites what he calls “dual loyalties” due to his citizenship and ties with Kenya and Indonesia.

Even if Sen. Obama can prove his U.S. citizenship, Berg stated, citing the senator’s use of a birth certificate from the state of Hawaii verified as a forgery by three independent document forensic experts, the issue of “multi-citizenship with responsibilities owed to and allegiance to other countries” remains on the table.

In the lawsuit, Berg states that Sen. Obama was born in Kenya, and not in Hawaii as the senator maintains. Before giving birth, according to the lawsuit, Obama’s mother traveled to Kenya with his father but was prevented from flying back to Hawaii because of the late stage of her pregnancy, “apparently a normal restriction to avoid births during a flight.” As Sen. Obama’s own paternal grandmother, half-brother and half-sister have also claimed, Berg maintains that Stanley Ann Dunham–Obama’s mother–gave birth to little Barack in Kenya and subsequently flew to Hawaii to register the birth.

Berg cites inconsistent accounts of Sen. Obama’s birth, including reports that he was born at two separate hospitals–Kapiolani Hospital and Queens Hospital–in Honolulu, as well a profound lack of birthing records for Stanley Ann Dunham, though simple “registry of birth” records for Barack Obama are available in a Hawaiian public records office.

Should Sen. Obama truly have been born in Kenya, Berg writes, the laws on the books at the time of his birth hold that U.S. citizenship may only pass to a child born overseas to a U.S. citizen parent and non-citizen parent if the former was at least 19 years of age. Sen. Obama’s mother was only 18 at the time. Therefore, because U.S. citizenship could not legally be passed on to him, Obama could not be registered as a “natural born” citizen and would therefore be ineligible to seek the presidency pursuant to Article II, Section 1 of the United States Constitution.

Moreover, even if Sen. Obama could have somehow been deemed “natural born,” that citizenship was lost in or around 1967 when he and his mother took up residency in Indonesia, where Stanley Ann Dunham married Lolo Soetoro, an Indonesian citizen. Berg also states that he possesses copies of Sen. Obama’s registration to Fransiskus Assisi School in Jakarta, Indonesia which clearly show that he was registered under the name “Barry Soetoro” and his citizenship listed as Indonesian.

The Hawaiian birth certificate, Berg says, is a forgery. In the suit, the attorney states that the birth certificate on record is a forgery, has been identified as such by three independent document forensic experts, and actually belonged to Maya Kasandra Soetoro, Sen. Obama’s half-sister.

“Voters donated money, goods and services to elect a nominee and were defrauded by Sen. Obama’s lies and obfuscations,” Berg stated. “If the DNC officers … had performed one ounce of due diligence we would not find ourselves in this emergency predicament, one week away from making a person the nominee who has lost their citizenship as a child and failed to even perform the basic steps of regaining citizenship as prescribed by constitutional laws.”

“It is unfair to the country,” he continued, “for candidates of either party to become the nominee when there is any question of the ability to serve if elected.” 

For more articles by Michael Webster go to: www.lagunajournal.com 

America’s leading authority on Venture Capital/Equity Funding. A trustee on some of the nations largest trade Union funds. A noted Author, Lecturer, Educator, Emergency Manager, Counter-Terrorist, War on Drugs and War on Terrorist Specialist, Business Consultant, Newspaper Publisher. Radio News caster. Labor Law generalist, Teamster Union Business Agent, General Organizer, Union Rank and File Member Grievances Representative, NLRB Union Representative, Union Contract Negotiator, Workers Compensation Appeals Board Hearing Representative. Investigative Reporter for print, electronic and on-line News Agencies.
Article Source

So, have you heard about the Barack Obama Chia pet head? It’s the HOTTEST product to be released in years from the creators of the world famous Original Chia Pet.It’s also turned out to be very controversial as well and has been pulled from retail chains afraid of offending their customers.So lets take a look at this crazy product that like Barack Obama himself, could “Only Happen in America”……

Although you will usually hear this product referred to as the “Obama Chia Pet”, officially this product is referred to as the “Chia Obama Handmade Decorative Planter”.  It doesn’t quite have the same ring, does it?The Obama Chia was created by Joseph Enterprises, Inc, the same company who created the Original Chia Pet in 1977. This also the same company that brought us “The Clapper”, which was famous for it’s old “Clap on, Clap Off – The Clapper!” jingle.The Obama Chia Head is a handmade pottery planter and comes with a Chia seed packet with enough for 3 plantings, a plastic drip tray and planting & care instructions.

The Obama Chia Pet was licensed exclusively to Walgreens to sell at their nationwide retail /convenience outlets. Their company policy allows stores to choose their own merchandise so they can better serve their individual locations. In the case of the Obama Chia though, once company management received some complaints that the product was “offensive”, Walgreens ordered stores to remove the Obama Chia headfrom the shelves.The controversy around the Obama Chia and the it’s subsequent removal from stores has created an incredible demand for the Chia Obama head planter. The only other major retailer to stock the collectible was Amazon.com, and they have sold out of the Obama Chia. Now the Obama Chia has become a hard to find collectors item. Only in America!

Article Source

Frank and friends had lived in Chicago for some 20 plus years and knew it was ripe for a young Obama to move in and start his “Chess game.”  Ripe, because Chicago was notorious for its violence and corruption – all Obama needed to do was light the flame and keep agitating the people until a bon fire erupted. 

Chicago was where Obama went from a toddler wrapped in liberalistic paraphernalia to a marathon runner equipped with tools of the extreme liberalist and radicals.  Frank, Ayers and Wright, along with a few women served as Obama’s mentors and prepared their student well – Obama jumped into community activities, analyzed the hot spots of the various communities and strategically started the fires. 

Obama didn’t exactly lead anyone or anything, but he mastered the art of using tax payer’s money to fund his radical channels.   If there’s one thing this man can do adeptly, its raising tons of money, note I didn’t say honest money – I just said money.

Stage left, in comes Mayor Harold Washington and his communist buddies who helped Obama makes his way to the Illinois Senate.  Washington was pretty much a “shoo in” when he ran for the office of mayor, because his campaign was backed by the Unions, many churches and special interest groups and getting Obama into the Illinois Senate was a pretty easy task for Washington and his Chicago gang. 

Remember, truth is not relevant literally non-existent during the radical’s feeding frenzy on the less fortunate.  Knowing how to control the masses is the secret – Obama knows that power comes from convincing those who “have not” that they can take power away from those who “have.”  

So Obama’s job during this Presidential Race is to fuel the fire, create discontent, anger and confusion in the “have nots.”   The “have nots” are much like a flock of geese and their only job is to follow the leader.   Obama keeps the “have nots” hungry, wanting more, dreaming of what may be and he constantly changes the game plan or tactics so the troops don’t experience boredom. 

 The Obama philosophy is “power in numbers,” never letting the right hand know what the left is doing and tearing down the opponent’s defense.   He loves to hit below the belt as we saw with Governor Sarah Palin and Biden was chosen over Hillary for one reason only.  Obama couldn’t control Hillary and frankly was afraid of her, but Biden was somewhat like the stray out on the streets who would sit up and bark or shake hands for a few pats and a pot full of earmarks. 

Now, Senator Obama with the help of Acorn, Project Vote and all his “pet” radical groups are showing Americans their uncanny control over our voting system.  The officials at the polls are overwhelmed, over worked and totally confused, which is exactly what Obama and friends have counted on with their devious tactics.  Obama plays stupid and Acorn just laughs all the way to the bank with their $ 800,000 dollars. 

So America if you want an honest man, a real leader and one who places country first and foremost on his agenda – vote for senator McCain.  If you want a deceitful, smooth talking attorney with lots of money who places radicals first, poor next and completely ignores the “middle class,” then Obama’s your man.

By the way, if you’re interested in Frank – just start surfing for Frank Marshall Davis: he was a great friend of Obama’s grandfather and a mentor to Barack Obama.  

See you later @ http://www.yourannie.com

As Always, Annie

Article Source

When newly-elected President Barack Hussein Obama launched his Forgive Us Our Trespasses Tour around the globe, I – among many others – sounded the alarm that his target audience was not interested in overtures of peace but rather signs of weakness which they could exploit. We warned that the bad actors around the world were not cheering his new message of peace as much as they were applauding their long-awaited opportunity to misbehave at will with no deterrent standing in their way. Signs of their emboldenment abounded, with the ratcheting up of rhetoric from Mahmoud Ahmedinejad concerning Israel to Hugo Chavez and Daniel Ortega arrogantly chastising the United States while its new leader sat passively and listened without protest or rebuttal.

Possibly the worst moment up to that point was the “gift” from Chavez to Obama of a book that our president accepted with a smile and a handshake from the wannabe dictator. Chavez may as well have said to Obama, “Please accept this gift which details how much your country sucks, and I thank you for agreeing”. It was not to be the worst moment of all, however, as they continue to mount much as a snowball rolling downhill on a fresh, moist fall. In addition to the nauseating mea culpas delivered to foreign foes by this president have been the shocking shunnings of our traditional allies. Between his embraces of hard-line socialist and Islamic leaders, Obama has managed to sprinkle in some not-so-subtle snubs of Sarkozy and Gordon Brown, not to mention a classless encounter with the Queen of England.

Perhaps the most alarming betrayal, however, has been the nearly total abandonment of Israel, our strongest ally in the Middle East and a long time friend. Thankfully, one New York congressman has not slumbered through the current session. Rep. Peter King (R-NY), has introduced a resolution in the House that would force the U.S. government to support the Israeli blockade of the Gaza Strip. Coming on the heels of the recent raid by the Israeli military on the first flotilla, sent from Turkey by alleged “peace activists”, King wants the U.S. to stand firm with her ally in the face of international criticism based on misinformation and propaganda. (The first casualty of such nonsense was long time White House Press reporter, Helen Thomas, who was dispatched via self-inflicted wound). But King’s resolution could not come at a more opportune time, as Iran – perhaps seizing on the telegraphed impotency of Obama – has offered (threatened?) to have its Revolutionary Guard escort the next flotilla through the Israeli blockade. If this were to happen, it would most likely mark the beginning of the first naval war since World War II. The big question is whether Israel will fight it alone.

Perhaps the world has become spoiled by the comfort of the true leaders and commanders of military might America has historically wielded, and that may be well and good, since America has been the most powerful and benevolent country to ever inhabit the Earth. But it seems that – being in the middle of Obama’s only term – it may be time for a Churchill to emerge. If not for another true leader, we may see the power structure shift dramatically. Much like Jack London’s White Fang losing his footing in the circle of excited sled dogs.

http://sanitysentinel.blogspot.com/
Article Source