2008 Presidential Elections

[Brian Baldwin]

http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/...ral_cloth.html

The reigning media narrative is that because this is a heavily Democratic year, Senator McCain is a clear underdog to Senator Obama. The narrative has almost nothing to do with the appeal of the candidates' respective policies -- and it's clear the Obama campaign is concerned voters will begin to notice.


Consequently, in order to position himself for the general election, Obama has been running furiously toward the center-- deemphasizing his liberalism with the adroit use of linguistic jiu jitsu. As NBC recently reported, Obama declared:

"Let me tell you something. There's really nothing liberal about wanting to reduce money in politics that is common sense (sic). There's nothing liberal about wanting to make sure [our soldiers] are treated properly when they get home. There's nothing liberal about wanting to make sure everybody has health care, but we are spending more on health care in this country than any other advanced country. We got more uncovered.

There's nothing liberal about saying that doesn't make sense, and we should do something smarter with our health care system. Don't let them run that okie doke on you!"

The person running the okie doke is Obama, who, with media acquiescence, has changed his rhetoric if not his positions on issues such as campaign finance, gun control, troop withdrawal, welfare reform, NAFTA and terrorist surveillance -- just to name a few.


Yet even with his recent attempts at moderation he retains positions on several significant issues indistinguishable from those of Dennis Kucinich. Most of those positions are opposed not only by overwhelming majorities of all Americans, but in several cases, majorities of Democrats as well.


Whenever a proposition polls in the 60% range, it's considered to be in landslide territory. That doesn't necessarily mean that someone supporting the minority viewpoint is a nut or an extremist, but at some point it may fairly be said that a person on the short end of several of these propositions is out of the mainstream. Here are just some of the issues in which Obama's on the fringe of American opinion:*


Obama opposes offshore drilling for oil. Voters support drilling by 67% to 18%. (Rasmussen, June 2008).


Obama supports giving driver licenses to illegal immigrants. Americans oppose this 76% to 23%. (CNN/ Opinion Research, Oct. 2007)


Obama supports affirmative action in public employment, contracting and university admissions. Americans oppose giving an advantage in these areas on the basis of race by a margin of 82% to 14%. (Newsweek, July 2007)


Obama says that he will cut funding for research and development of missile defense systems. 89% of Americans support development of or research for missile defense -- 8% don't. (Program on International Policy Alternatives, March 2004) It's worth noting that Obama's closer to a pre-9/11 view of missile defense. An August 2001 Bloomberg News poll showed only 49% favored missile defense at that time whereas 41% opposed it.


Obama voted against a ban on partial birth abortions. Americans support a ban by a margin of 66% to 28%. (CNN/Opinion Research, May 2007)


Despite his equivocal statements regarding the recent Supreme Court decision striking down the D.C. gun ban, Obama has never met a gun ban he didn't like. Although many Americans support certain types of restrictions on guns, they oppose broad bans by a margin of 68% to 30%. In fact, 58% insist no new gun laws should be passed.(Gallup, Oct. 2007)


Obama opposed the Induced Birth Infant Liability Act while in the Illinois state legislature. The measure is designed to prevent abortion providers from withholding medical care and sustenance from infants born after surviving an abortion attempt. There's no national polling data on this state issue, but when the Senate voted on a analogous piece of legislation -- the Born Alive Infant Protection Act -- the measure passed unanimously.


Obama voted against a bill that would make English the official language for conducting business with the U.S. government. Americans support making English the official language 85% to 11%, including 79% of Democrats. (Rasmussen, July 2006)


While in the Illinois state legislature, Obama voted against parental notification requirements for abortions for minors. Americans support parental notification laws by a margin of 79% to 17%. Even 64% of those identifying themselves as pro-choice support such laws. (Fox News/Opinion Dynamics, April 2005)


Obama maintains that the Supreme Court's recent decisions prohibiting the use of race in determining public school assignments are wrong. In contrast, 71% of American agree with the decisions and only 24% disagree. (Quinnipiac, July 2007)


Of course, Obama's positions on other issues are more mainstream, but over the course of the primary season he made a number of statements that will play poorly in the general election: Obama plans to raise taxes significantly -- not just income taxes -- but payroll and capital gains taxes as well; he will re-invade Iraq if things fall apart when he withdraws the troops; he promises unconditional talks with leaders of countries that are state sponsors of terror; Obama vows to slow the development of future weapons systems, without any indication that this would be contingent upon other nations slowing the development of their systems as well; he will appoint federal judges in the mold of Justice Stephen Breyer and Ruth Bader Ginsburg and; he supports giving foreign terrorists habeas rights.


All presidential candidates take at least one position that's unpopular with the electorate; it's impossible not to in a heterogeneous society. And a candidate who's nothing but a weathervane of public opinion isn't likely to become an inspiring leader. But few, if any, serious presidential contenders have ever taken so many positions supported by so few.


In the circles in which Obama has been traveling much of his career, his positions on the issues are hardly remarkable. But the general election campaign will reveal that even in a strongly Democratic year, those circles remain a tiny sub-set of the American electorate.


*(Obviously, the surveys cited above aren't the only ones on the respective issues but are generally representative of the latest polls on the topics.)

[Brian Baldwin]

http://elections.foxnews.com/2008/07...-help-workers/

McCain touts plan to create jobs, help workers, and balance the budget.

John McCain is promising to balance the ballooning federal budget by 2013 as he further promotes his jobs and economic plan in the face of a struggling U.S. economy.
McCain intends to do so by chopping out wasteful spending — a hallmark of his political identity — and targeting what is known as “the third rail”: Social Security and other entitlement programs that are about half of government spending, according to a 15-page policy paper distributed by the McCain campaign on Monday.
“In the long term, the only way to keep the budget balanced is successful reform of the large spending pressures in Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid,” reads the policy paper.
Watch John McCain speak live at 2 p.m. ET on FOXNews.com
The campaign also suggests it could start dropping war costs, and start paying for debts that have accumulated since 2001.
“The McCain administration would reserve all savings from victory in the Iraq and Afghanistan operations in the fight against Islamic extremists for reducing the deficit. Since all their costs were financed with deficit spending, all their savings must go to deficit reduction,” reads the McCain paper.
McCain and Barack Obama continue to discuss economic policy this week, promoting rival plans on housing, jobs, taxes and energy as U.S. home foreclosures continue to rise and fuel costs hover at record highs.
In excerpts of a speech to be delivered in Denver later Monday, McCain blasts both Congress and the Bush administration for its excess spending.
“This Congress and this administration have failed to meet their responsibilities to manage the government,” the speech reads, calling an eight-year, 60 percent growth in government “simply inexcusable.”
In the speech, McCain vows to “veto every single bill with wasteful spending. We aren’t going to continue mortgaging this country’s future.”
Earlier this year, McCain had backed off a balanced-budget pledge — pushing it back to the end of a would-be second term.
Politico.com reported that Obama economic adviser Jason Furman called McCain’s plan “preposterous.”
Citing Congressional Budget Office figures, Furman told the Web site that with an estimated annual deficit of $443 billion by 2013, a number that incorporates extending tax cuts pushed by President Bush, McCain would have to cut discretionary spending, including defense funding, by about one-third.
“McCain would have to pay for all of his new tax cuts and other proposals and then, on top of that, cut an additional $443 billion from the budget — which is 81 percent of Medicare spending or 78 percent of all discretionary spending outside defense,” the Politico quoted Furman saying.
The Obama campaign also pushed back against another criticism on the tax issue, distributing an analysis from Factcheck.org of Republican claims that Obama “voted 94 times for higher taxes.” The Web site says the claim is misleading, and Obama has “voted consistently to restore higher tax rates on upper-income taxpayers, but not on middle- or low-income workers.”
In an effort to blunt criticism from his Democratic opponent, McCain rolled out a statement signed by 300 economists.
“It is a comprehensive, pro-growth, reform agenda,” the statement from the economists reads. “The reform focuses on the real economic problems Americans face today and will face in the future. And it builds on the core economic principles that have made America great.”
In addition to McCain’s pledge on earmarks, the economists touted McCain’s support on several issues: a line-item veto, pausing non-military discretionary spending for one year, cutting the corporate tax rate to 25 percent, eliminating the alternative-minimum tax, simplifying the tax system, and broadening international trade.
The economists also lauded McCain’s call to double the tax credit for dependent children from $3,500 to $7,000.
McCain also is expected to acknowledge the steep drop in U.S. jobs in remarks and confront the issue with a can-do spirit of pledging to lower taxes.
And he will restate his support of free trade, while noting it “is not a positive for everyone.” He is promising to retrain workers who lose their jobs to overseas plants, and repeating his call to build at least 45 new nuclear plants, which he says “will create over 700,000 good jobs to construct and operate them.”
The political environment is tough for Republicans, with Bush’s approval rating at low levels as the U.S. teeters economically and fights terrorists in Afghanistan and Iraq. National polls vary widely, but they have one common point: Nearly all show Obama ahead of McCain.
Click here to read the analysis of Obama tax policy on Factcheck.org.
Click here to read the report in the Politico.
The Associated Press contributed to this report.

Actually this looks pretty good on the surface... I'd have to dig a lot deeper though before I jumped on board with it.

[American Patriot]

Obama on Iran (May 18, 2008. Obama, "Iran is not a threat")
You Tube ^ | 5/18/2008 | eiofjmckwjdas Obama on Iran!


(Excerpt) Read more at youtube.com ...


Can't post at work

[American Patriot]

VIDEO: Obama: 'Make Sure Your Child Can Speak Spanish'...
Youtube ^ Your child should speak Spanish.

(Excerpt) Read more at youtube.com ...

[Jag]

JESSE JACKSON SAYS HE WANTS TO CUT OBAMA'S 'NUTS OUT'

By CHARLES HURT, D.C. Bureau Chief


Jesse Jackson and Barack Obama



Last updated: 9:49 pm
July 9, 2008
Posted: 6:35 pm
July 9, 2008

WASHINGTON - In a vulgar tirade caught on tape by Fox News, the Rev. Jesse Jackson said he wanted to "cut his [Barack Obama's] nuts out" and he accused the fellow Chicagoan of "talking down to black folks" by giving moral lectures to African-Americans, source said Jackson's shocking quotes were picked up by a hot mic before an interview on health care in Fox's Chicago studio last Sunday..

Fox planned to air the recording on Bill O'Reilly's "The Factor" show.
In an effort to blunt the controversy, Jackson issued an apology.
"For any harm or hurt that this hot mic conversation may have caused, I apologize," Jackson said in a statement.

Jackson said he couldn't recall everything he'd said in the studio but couched the remarks as part of a discussion about Obama speaking to black churchgoers.

In such settings, Obama has urged greater emphasis on fatherhood, advised parents to choose reading books over playing video games and most recently told young students to stick with school and forget about a career as a rap star or professional basketball player.

Jackson said that in doing so Obama was hurting his relationship with black voters, "that the senator was cutting off his you-know-whats with the black people and black churches."

Jackson told CNN that he called the Obama campaign to apologize and reiterated his support for the campaign of the first black nominee of a major party.

"My support for Senator Obama's campaign is wide, deep and unequivocal," he said in his statement. "I cherish this redemptive and historical moment."

Obama had no comment.

http://www.nypost.com/seven/07092008...ama_119161.htm

Anyone else watch Bill tonight? I laughed till I cried....There's more but Fox and O'Reilly won't show it...yet...said it was worse than the nut comment. If it can be found somewhere please post it. Laugher is good for the soul.
Jag

[American Patriot]

Obama' Flip-Flops Anger the Liberal Base
Townhall.com ^ | July 10, 2008 | Donald Lambro

WASHINGTON -- Barack Obama is coming under increasingly heavy fire from his left flank for abandoning long-held liberal positions in an abrupt swing toward the center that threatens his candidacy.

After racing away from hardcore positions on trade protectionism, gun control, government wiretapping, the death penalty and even his vaunted troop-pullout plans for Iraq, his once-diehard supporters on the left are attacking his character and honesty and threatening to withhold campaign contributions or, worse, shift their allegiance to Ralph Nader.

"We've been hearing more from voters who are disconcerted about Obama's move to the right. We're hearing from antiwar folks, civil-liberties people and other activists concerned about his flip-flops and considering voting for Ralph," said Nader campaign representative Chris Driscoll.

Nader has seen a big increase in the past two weeks in his online fundraising, and a recent CNN poll shows his support rising to 6 percent, small by electoral standards, but enough to deny Obama a crucial battleground state where the vote is close.

Nowhere is the anger level toward Obama more intense than in the blogosphere, the cyberspace world that has helped to raise hundreds of millions of dollars from more than 1.7 million donors and whose activists have been his biggest fans.

"There is a line between 'moving to the center' and stabbing your allies in the back out of fear of being criticized. And, of late, he's been doing a lot of unnecessary stabbing, betraying his claims of being a new kind of politician," said Markos Moulitsas, leader of the Daily Kos Web site, the bible of the liberal netroots community.

"Not that I ever bought it, but Obama is now clearly not looking much different than every other Democratic politician who has ever turned his or her back on the base in order to prove centrist bona fides," Moulitsas told his millions of readers last week.

To demonstrate his displeasure with Obama's flip-flops on core liberal issues, Moulitsas announced he was withholding his $2,300 contribution to the campaign. "I simply have no desire to reward bad behavior," he said.

The biggest complaint from the party's grassroots activists concerned Obama's support for a Bush-backed bill to give legal immunity to telecommunication companies helping the government intercept terrorist calls and e-mails.

Complaints were coming into Obama's Web site so heavily last week that he personally went online to explain his new position. He said that telecommunications surveillance was "a vital counterterrorism tool ... to keep the American people safe."

But it did little to quell his supporters' outrage. On Democrats.com, a liberal advocacy group, Web-site president Bob Fertik said "progressives were shocked last week" over Obama's changed position. He urged supporters to temporarily hold their contributions in escrow accounts "until he demonstrates progressive leadership on issues we care about, like warrantless wiretapping."

Over at the heavily funded, ultra-left HuffingtonPost.com, blogger Joseph A. Palermo accused Obama of "blurring the line between church and state" with his faith-based program and warned the Obama camp that it was "treading on thin ice.

"If he continues to move to the right, he's going to alienate his most enthusiastic supporters ... who were responsible for catapulting him this far," Palermo wrote.

But if the Obama campaign thinks the reaction to his sudden lurch to the center on guns, trade and the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act is hurting him, wait until the full weight of his political shift on the Iraq war comes crashing down.

Soon after my Monday column revealed that a top defense adviser was recommending that significant levels of U.S. military forces should stay in Iraq to ensure its stability, Obama was sending clear signals that he was indeed moving in that direction.

In an interview with the Military Times on Monday, Obama suggested he was indeed rethinking his plan for a complete military pullout. Instead, he said, any troop withdrawals would be done "in a deliberate fashion in consultation with the Iraqi government, at a pace that is determined in consultation with Gen. (David) Petraeus and the other commanders on the ground."

If Iraq's security was in any danger at that time, "then that's going to have to be taken into account," he said. In other words, conditions on the ground, Iraq's security needs and the American commander in Iraq will shape and influence his decision.

Obama campaign representative Robert Gibbs dropped deeper hints of a more gradual withdrawal strategy Monday, telling CNN, "Obviously, you have to give commanders on the ground flexibility. We'd be crazy not to."

In other words, Barack Obama has abandoned the core promise of his presidential candidacy that he would end the war by withdrawing all U.S. combat forces from Iraq within 16 months -- a preposterous position in the first place.

Obama's new position is that it may take longer than that -- a lot longer. He promised his supporters "change you can believe in," but now, how can they believe anything he says?

[American Patriot]

WND Exclusive ELECTION 2008
Obama worked with terrorist
Senator helped fund organization that rejects 'racist' Israel's existence
Posted: February 24, 2008
5:44 pm Eastern

By Aaron Klein
© 2008 WorldNetDaily


JERUSALEM – The board of a nonprofit organization on which Sen. Barack Obama served as a paid director alongside a confessed domestic terrorist granted funding to a controversial Arab group that mourns the establishment of Israel as a "catastrophe" and supports intense immigration reform, including providing drivers licenses and education to illegal aliens.

The co-founder of the Arab group in question, Columbia University professor Rashid Khalidi, also has held a fundraiser for Obama. Khalidi is a harsh critic of Israel, has made statements supportive of Palestinian terror and reportedly has worked on behalf of the Palestine Liberation Organization while it was involved in anti-Western terrorism and was labeled by the State Department as a terror group.

In 2001, the Woods Fund, a Chicago-based nonprofit that describes itself as a group helping the disadvantaged, provided a $40,000 grant to the Arab American Action Network, or AAAN, for which Khalidi's wife, Mona, serves as president. The Fund provided a second grant to the AAAN for $35,000 in 2002.

Obama was a director of the Woods Fund board from 1999 to Dec. 11, 2002, according to the Fund's website. According to tax filings, Obama received compensation of $6,000 per year for his service in 1999 and 2000.

Obama served on the Wood's Fund board alongside William C. Ayers, a member of the Weathermen terrorist group which sought to overthrow of the U.S. government and took responsibility for bombing the U.S. Capitol in 1971.

Ayers, who still serves on the Woods Fund board, contributed $200 to Obama's senatorial campaign fund and has served on panels with Obama at numerous public speaking engagements. Ayers admitted to involvement in the bombings of U.S. governmental buildings in the 1970s. He is a professor at the University of Illinois at Chicago.

The $40,000 grant from Obama's Woods Fund to the AAAN constituted about a fifth of the Arab group's reported grants for 2001, according to tax filings obtained by WND. The $35,000 Woods Fund grant in 2002 also constituted about one-fifth of AAAN's reported grants for that year.

The AAAN, headquartered in the heart of Chicago's Palestinian immigrant community, describes itself as working to "empower Chicago-area Arab immigrants and Arab Americans through the combined strategies of community organizing, advocacy, education and social services, leadership development, and forging productive relationships with other communities."

It reportedly has worked on projects with the Illinois Coalition for Immigrant and Refugee Rights, which supports open boarders and education for illegal aliens.

The AAAN in 2005 sent a letter to New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson in which it called a billboard opposing a North Carolina-New Mexico joint initiative to deny driver's licenses to illegal aliens a "bigoted attack on Arabs and Muslims."

Speakers at AAAN dinners and events routinely have taken an anti-Israel line.

The group co-sponsored a Palestinian art exhibit, titled, "The Subject of Palestine," that featured works related to what some Palestinians call the "Nakba" or "catastrophe" of Israel's founding in 1948.

According to the widely discredited Nakba narrative, Jews in 1948 forcibly expelled hundreds of thousands - some Palestinians claim over one million - Arabs from their homes and then took over the territory.

Historically, about 600,000 Arabs fled Israel after surrounding Arab countries warned they would destroy the Jewish state in 1948. Some Arabs also were driven out by Jewish forces while they were trying to push back invading Arab armies. At the same time, over 800,000 Jews were expelled or left Arab countries under threat after Israel was founded.

The theme of AAAN's Nakba art exhibit, held at DePaul University in 2005, was "the compelling and continuing tragedy of Palestinian life ... under [Israeli] occupation ... home demolition ... statelessness ... bereavement ... martyrdom, and ... the heroic struggle for life, for safety, and for freedom."

Another AAAN initiative, titled, "Al Nakba 1948 as experienced by Chicago Palestinians," seeks documents related to the "catastrophe" of Israel's founding.

A post on the AAAN site asked users: "Do you have photos, letters or other memories you could share about Al-Nakba-1948?"

That posting was recently removed. The AAAN website currently states the entire site is under construction.

Pro-PLO advocate held Obama fundraiser, describes Obama as 'sympathetic'

AAAN co-founder Rashid Khalidi was reportedly a director of the official PLO press agency WAFA in Beirut from 1976 to 1982, while the PLO committed scores of anti-Western attacks and was labeled by the U.S. as a terror group. Khalidi's wife, AAAN President Mona Khalidi, was reportedly WAFA's English translator during that period.

Rashid Khalidi at times has denied working directly for the PLO but Palestinian diplomatic sources in Ramallah told WND he indeed worked on behalf of WAFA. Khalidi also advised the Palestinian delegation to the Madrid Conference in 1991.

During documented speeches and public events, Khalidi has called Israel an "apartheid system in creation" and a destructive "racist" state.

He has multiple times expressed support for Palestinian terror, calling suicide bombings response to "Israeli aggression." He dedicated his 1986 book, "Under Siege," to "those who gave their lives ... in defense of the cause of Palestine and independence of Lebanon." Critics assailed the book as excusing Palestinian terrorism.

While the Woods Fund's contribution to Khalidi's AAAN might be perceived as a one-time run in with Obama, the presidential hopeful and Khalidi evidence a deeper relationship.

According to a professor at the University of Chicago who said he has known Obama for 12 years, the Democratic presidential hopeful first befriended Khalidi when the two worked together at the university. The professor spoke on condition of anonymity. Khalidi lectured at the University of Chicago until 2003 while Obama taught law there from 1993 until his election to the Senate in 2004.

Khalidi in 2000 held what was described as a successful fundraiser for Obama's failed bid for a seat in the U.S. House of Representatives, a fact not denied by Khalidi.

Speaking in a joint interview with WND and the John Batchelor Show of New York's WABC Radio and Los Angeles' KFI Radio, Khalidi was asked about his 2000 fundraiser for Obama.

"I was just doing my duties as a Chicago resident to help my local politician," Khalidi stated.

Khalidi said he supports Obama for president "because he is the only candidate who has expressed sympathy for the Palestinian cause."

Khalidi also lauded Obama for "saying he supports talks with Iran. If the U.S. can talk with the Soviet Union during the Cold War, there is no reason it can't talk with the Iranians."

Asked about Obama's role funding the AAAN, Khalidi claimed he had "never heard of the Woods Fund until it popped up on a bunch of blogs a few months ago."

He terminated the call when petitioned further about his links with Obama.

Contacted by phone, Mona Khalidi refused to answer WND's questions about the AAAN's involvement with Obama.

Obama's campaign headquarters did not reply to a list of WND questions sent by e-mail to the senator's press office.

Obama, American terrorist in same circles

Obama served on the board with Ayers, who was a Weathermen leader and has written about his involvement with the group's bombings of the New York City Police headquarters in 1970, the Capitol in 1971 and the Pentagon in 1972.

"I don't regret setting bombs. I feel we didn't do enough," Ayers told the New York Times in an interview released on Sept. 11, 2001

"Everything was absolutely ideal on the day I bombed the Pentagon," Ayers wrote in his memoirs, titled "Fugitive Days." He continued with a disclaimer that he didn't personally set the bombs, but his group set the explosives and planned the attack.

A $200 campaign contribution is listed on April 2, 2001 by the "Friends of Barack Obama" campaign fund. The two taught appeared speaking together at several public events, including a 1997 University of Chicago panel entitled, "Should a child ever be called a 'super predator?'" and another panel for the University of Illinois in April 2002, entitled, "Intellectuals: Who Needs Them?"

The charges against Ayers were dropped in 1974 because of prosecutorial misconduct, including illegal surveillance.

Ayers is married to another notorious Weathermen terrorist, Bernadine Dohrn, who has also served on panels with Obama. Dohrn was once on the FBI's Top 10 Most Wanted List and was described by J. Edgar Hoover as the "most dangerous woman in America." Ayers and Dohrn raised the son of Weathermen terrorist Kathy Boudin, who was serving a sentence for participating in a 1981 murder and robbery that left 4 people dead.

Obama advisor wants talks with terrorists

The revelations about Obama's relationship with Khalidi follows a recent WND article quoting Israeli security officials who expressed "concern" about Robert Malley, an adviser to Obama who has advocated negotiations with Hamas and providing international assistance to the terrorist group.

Malley, a principal Obama foreign policy adviser, has penned numerous opinion articles, many of them co-written with a former adviser to the late Palestinian Authority President Yasser Arafat, petitioning for dialogue with Hamas and blasting Israel for numerous policies he says harm the Palestinian cause.

Malley also previously penned a well-circulated New York Review of Books piece largely blaming Israel for the collapse of the Israeli-Palestinian negotiations at Camp David in 2000 when Arafat turned down a Palestinian state in the West Bank, Gaza and eastern sections of Jerusalem and instead returned to the Middle East to launch an intifada, or terrorist campaign, against the Jewish state.

Malley's contentions have been strongly refuted by key participants at Camp David, including President Bill Clinton, then-Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak and primary U.S. envoy to the Middle East Dennis Ross, all of whom squarely blamed Arafat's refusal to make peace for the talks' failure.

To interview Aaron Klein, contact M. Sliwa Public Relations by e-mail, or call 973-272-2861 or 212-202-4453.

[Ryan Ruck]

Rapper chants "Obama or Die" at the BET Awards

Sean "Diddy" Combs led the way for the BET Awards to become a Barack Obama rally by reprising and amending his 2004 motto. Instead of "Vote or Die", Combs chanted "Obama or Die", as other entertainers also took turns issuing endorsements for Obama in the upcoming presidential race — albeit in slightly less existential terms (via Jim Geraghty):

"If we all register and vote, we will have the first black president in the history of America," Sean "Diddy" Combs told the crowd Tuesday at the Shrine Auditorium before chanting "Obama or Die" - a declarative remix of his neutral "Vote or Die" motto from the 2004 presidential election, when he attempted to boost the youth vote.

Uh, excuse me? "Obama or Die"? That can be taken in two different ways. The first is that "Diddy" thinks that a loss by Obama would mean the death of African-Americans in the US, or alternately, that Diddy plans on killing people if Obama doesn't win. Either way, it's more than a little extreme, and a great example of how the Messiah complex has really taken root among Obama's base.

As always, the fine folks at South Park anticipated this all the way back to the 2004 cycle. This is definitely not safe for work, but it's hilarious. And for those who feel less than thrilled about the choices they have in November, the intro is not to be missed:



Update: Breitbart has the video:

diddy obama
by dollarsandsense123

[Ryan Ruck]

Obama Supporters Resist Clearing Clinton Campaign Debt

A prominent donor to Senator Barack Obama recently sent an e-mail plea to other supporters, asking them - for the sake of Democratic unity - to write checks to Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton to help retire her $23 million in campaign debt.

Some of the replies are unprintable, given the coarse language, the donor said. A sampling of others included:

"Why would I help pay off debts that Hillary amassed simply to keep damaging Sen. Obama?"

"Gas prices are up, the markets are in turmoil, my kid's fall tuition bill is coming soon. Writing checks to politicians I don't like is not at the top of my list."

"Not a penny for that woman. Or her husband. Or - god forbid - Mark Penn," a reference to Clinton's former senior strategist, whose firm is still owed several million dollars for work that included attacks on Obama.

As Obama and Clinton prepare for their first joint fund-raisers to benefit the Obama campaign, in New York City on Wednesday and Thursday, their two camps are straining under the weight of continued resentments, recriminations and feelings that remain raw since the long primary battle.

Obama has asked his top donors to help raise money for her debt, and so far they have come up with less than $100,000 (though more in pledges), Clinton campaign officials said - a "paltry sum," in the words of one.

Several Obama donors said in interviews that they were balking at Obama's call for help because they believed Clinton accumulated most of her debts after she had lost any mathematical chance of winning the nomination and was hanging on only in hopes of an Obama collapse. The idea of helping her now - and lining the pockets of Penn, a reviled figure in the Obama camp - is galling to them, they said, especially at a time when they say any available money should go to defeating Senator John McCain and the Republicans in November.

While few other presidential candidates have ever amassed so much personal and campaign debt en route to losing the nomination as has Clinton, both Clinton and Obama donors say the larger problem for Democrats is that if the Obama camp is seen as unhelpful, Clinton, her husband and their supporters could prove something less than a force for unity.

Among the complaints from Obama campaign officials is that Clinton's expectation for help has been a moving target; in other words, it is unclear how much money from Obama supporters will satisfy the Clintons. Even Clinton officials and donors were at a loss to specify a number, saying only that Clinton was helping Obama with the understanding that he would do more for her.

"There is no lack of emotion among some supporters of both candidates, but what I think the sensible elements of good will are trying to achieve is debt relief for Hillary consistent with getting Barack elected president," said Steven Rattner, a New York investment banker and leading fund-raiser for Clinton, who is working with both camps to help Clinton retire her debt.

The bitterness in the Clinton camp about the primary battle is well known, but several Clinton donors and campaign officials said a deeper issue remained unsettled: The belief - or, perhaps, the perception - that Obama and his aides are half-hearted in their efforts to help Clinton and include her top donors on his leadership team.

Some of them griped that major Clinton donors were not being invited to crucial fund-raising meetings; were not being made to feel that they would receive credit for helping Obama win in November; and were not being given titles within the Obama campaign. An Obama aide said it was still early in the integration process of the two campaigns; he also added that the Obama operation was not as title-driven as the Clinton operation, which had various donors serving as "chairs," "co-chairs" and "Hillraisers."

Clinton donors and campaign officials say they remain surprised - and, in some cases, offended - that Obama has refused to ask his entire list of donors, more than 1.5 million people, to send $5, $10 or more to chip away at Clinton's debt. (Obama officials said they did not want to distract their donors for the main task at hand, raising money to defeat McCain.)

"The Obama effort hasn't yielded much, but we hope it will increase," said Alan Patricof, a top Clinton fundraiser and family friend.

"I think most people - I can't say everyone - thinks that helping Barack is the best way to get help from the Obama camp to help retire her debt, which is a major source of concern for her right now," Patricof added.

Clinton owes about $12 million to consultants and vendors, like Penn; she also lent her campaign more than $11 million. That $11 million is listed as a debt, though Clinton has told her fundraisers that she does not expect them or the Obama camp to repay her.

Clinton campaign officials estimated that the millions owed to Penn and his team was by far the largest part of Clinton's debt, though they emphasized that the money was going not only for Penn's time but also for the services provided by his colleagues and his polling and strategy firm. Clinton officials said they could not provide a breakdown of those amounts.

"We're focused on the vendor debts, especially the Kinko's, the truck drivers and the small-business folks who helped us along the way," said Jonathan Mantz, the Clinton campaign's finance director.

A crucial test will come at the fundraisers in New York this week, both sides said. Obama is expected to ask supporters there to help Clinton, and Clinton donors said they were hoping for a great deal more money to come in from people heeding his call.

The New York events are on behalf of the Obama campaign, his aides said; Clinton will not receive a cut of the take, but rather, in theory, benefit afterward from Obama donors who decide to help her.

Both Obama and his wife have already written checks for $2,300, the maximum individual donation, to Clinton.

Correction

An article on Thursday about Hillary Rodham Clinton's campaign debt misstated its historical significance. Clinton did not amass more personal and campaign debt than any other candidate on the way to losing the nomination. At least two other losing presidential candidates, Mitt Romney in 2008 and Steve Forbes in 1996, had more total debt, including what they had lent their campaigns. This article has been revised to reflect the correction.

This will not endear Clinton supporters to Obama…

[Ryan Ruck]

By the way... In that above article, they had this picture at the link:



When I saw that, the first thing that jumped to mind was that ad put out in 1984 by Apple during the Super Bowl...



The similarity is frightening!

For anyone who hasn't seen the ad, look here.

[Ryan Ruck]

All the while Russia is churning out more and more nuclear weapons and weapon systems.

Obama Calls for U.S. Nuclear Drawdown

The United States must reduce its arsenal of nuclear weapons if it hopes to stem proliferation by other nations, Democratic presidential candidate Senator Barack Obama (Ill.) said yesterday (see GSN, Oct. 2, 2007).

"It's time to send a clear message: America seeks a world with no nuclear weapons," Obama said during a speech in Washington. "As long as nuclear weapons exist, we must retain a strong deterrent. But instead of threatening to kick them out of the G-8, we need to work with Russia to take U.S. and Russian ballistic missiles off hair-trigger alert; to dramatically reduce the stockpiles of our nuclear weapons and material; to seek a global ban on the production of fissile material for weapons; and to expand the U.S.-Russian ban on intermediate-range missiles so that the agreement is global.

"By keeping our commitment under the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, we'll be in a better position to press nations like North Korea and Iran to keep theirs. In particular, it will give us more credibility and leverage in dealing with Iran," he added.

The Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty requires the five recognized nuclear powers — China, France, Russia, the United Kingdom and the United States — to take "effective measures" toward disarmament but sets no schedule for completion. Iran is party to the treaty and says its nuclear program is strictly civilian in nature (see related GSN story, today). North Korea withdrew from the pact in 2003.

"We cannot tolerate nuclear weapons in the hands of nations that support terror. Preventing Iran from developing nuclear weapons is a vital national security interest of the United States. No tool of statecraft should be taken off the table," Obama said. "I will use all elements of American power to pressure the Iranian regime, starting with aggressive, principled and direct diplomacy — diplomacy backed with strong sanctions and without preconditions."

Obama said he was also prepared to face the threat of terrorist acquisition of a nuclear weapon. Civilian sites around the world, some with minimal security, hold roughly 50 tons of highly enriched uranium, he said. The candidate said that, if elected, he would seek during his first term to ensure that all loose nuclear material is placed under safeguards (Senator Barack Obama presidential campaign release, July 15).

[American Patriot]

An email from Scotland to their brethren in the States...a point to ponder, whatever your political affiliation:

We in Scotland canna figure out why people are even botherin' to hold an election in the United States.

On one side, ye have a pants-wearing lawyer, married to a lawyer who cannot keep his pants on, who just lost a long and heated primary against a lawyer who goes to the wrong church who is married to yet another lawyer who doesn't even like the country her husband wants to run.

Now...On the other side, you have a nice, old war hero whose name starts with the appropriate Mc terminology married to a good looking younger woman who owns a beer distributorship.

What in Lord's name are ye lads thinkin' over there in the colonies??

[American Patriot]

---

---

ELECTION 2008
Obama: 9-11 happened because al-Qaida lacks 'empathy'

Senator lectures U.S. military, blames terror on 'poverty, ignorance, despair'

---

Posted: July 20, 2008
2:43 pm Eastern

By Aaron Klein
© 2008 WorldNetDaily

JERUSALEM – The 9-11 attacks were carried out because of a lack of "empathy" for others' suffering on the part of al-Qaida, whose terrorist ideology "grows out of a climate of poverty and ignorance, helplessness and despair," Sen. Barack Obama explained in largely unreported comments eight days after the mega-terror attacks that rocked the nation.


Obama went on to imply the September 11th attacks were in part a result of U.S. policy, lecturing the American military to minimize civilian casualties in the Middle East and urging action opposing "bigotry or discrimination directed against neighbors and friends of Middle-Eastern descent."


"Even as I hope for some measure of peace and comfort to the bereaved families, I must also hope that we, as a nation, draw some measure of wisdom from this tragedy," Obama wrote in a piece about 9-11 published on Sept. 19, 2001, in Chicago's Hyde Park Herald.
The senator continued: "Certain immediate lessons are clear, and we must act upon those lessons decisively. We need to step up security at our airports. We must re-examine the effectiveness of our intelligence networks and we must be resolute in identifying the perpetrators of these heinous acts and dismantling their organizations of destruction," wrote Obama.


"We must also engage, however, in the more difficult task of understanding the sources of such madness. The essence of this tragedy, it seems to me, derives from a fundamental absence of empathy on the part of the attackers: an inability to imagine, or connect with, the humanity or suffering of others. Such a failure of empathy, such numbness to the pain of a child or the desperation of a parent is not innate; nor, history tells us, is it unique to a particular culture, religion or ethnicity. It may find expression in a particular brand of violence, it may be channeled by particular demagogues or fanatics.
"Most often, though, it grows out a climate of poverty and ignorance, helplessness and despair.


"We will have to make sure, despite our rage, that any U.S. military action takes into account the lives of innocent civilians abroad. We will have to be unwavering in opposing bigotry or discrimination directed against neighbors and friends of Middle-Eastern descent. Finally, we will have to devote far more attention to the monumental task of raising the hopes and prospects of embittered children across the globe – children not just in the Middle East, but also in Africa, Asia, Eastern Europe and within our own shores."


Obama's piece gained little notice outside the Hyde Park Herald, which covered Obama's district as a Chicago state senator. The Hyde Park area is heavily influenced by the Nation of Islam.


Obama's remarks gained more traction on Internet blogs the past few days after the statements were republished last week by the New Yorker magazine in a piece that caused a campaign storm when the magazine printed a cover image depicting Obama in Muslim garb and wife Michelle sporting an afro and carrying a machine gun in the Oval Office. A picture of Osama bin Laden hangs over the fire place in which an American flag is being burned.


The New Yorker explained its image was meant to be a satirical depiction of the distorted way some Americans view Obama.


Regarding Obama's remark that al-Qaida is unable to imagine the suffering of others, Michelle Malkin responded in a National Review Online piece, "Is this man for real? Osama bin Laden’s murderous legions are plenty able to 'imagine' the 'suffering of others.' Go watch an al-Qaeda beheading snuff video. Just Google it or surf YouTube. Imagining the suffering of infidels is covered amply in basic Jihadi Training 101."


Robert Spencer, director of the Jihad Watch website, noted, "Barack Obama, back in late September 2001, completely ignored Islam itself. He found the roots for Muslim terrorism not in Islam but in 'a climate of poverty and ignorance, helplessness and despair.'


"What Obama could not, and apparently cannot, allow himself to do is to investigate the nature of Islam, to find out what it teaches about Believers and Infidels. I can help out a bit. I can tell him, right now, right here, that Islam is based on a clear division of the universe between Believers and Infidels."


In an opinion piece in Commentary Magazine, writer Abe Greenwald, responding to Obama's belief terrorists act out of despair, commented, "'[P]overty and ignorance, helplessness and despair.'



Strange, considering our attackers were wealthy and educated, connected and ecstatic. You know, if Obama is going to keep ex-terrorists around, he should at least utilize them. He could have asked Bill Ayers, 'Bill, did your 'failure of empathy' stem from your impoverished upbringing as the son of the CEO of Commonwealth Edison?"


Indeed Obama's notion terrorists act out of desperation and poor living conditions was directly contradicted in a WND interview last year with a recruited Palestinian suicide bomber.


The recruited bomber said he is driven to carry out a suicide operation to "satisfy Allah and his instructions. No money interests, nothing. No brainwash, no pressure; it is my decision."


"[My idea of suicide martyrdom] became stronger when I understood what status I will have in heaven if I scarify myself for Allah."


Asked about media reports portraying Palestinian suicide attackers as acting in response to occupation or poor living conditions, the recruited bomber called those media claims "lies" and "Israeli propaganda."

[American Patriot]

Good news: Obama to be president for the next “eight to 10 years”

posted at 8:10 pm on July 20, 2008 by Allahpundit
Send to a Friend | printer-friendly

A harmless slip but nonetheless post-worthy because (a) our commenters seem to be enjoying it, (b) if ABC thinks it’s worth mentioning, I guess it’s news, (c) there’s a school of thought in this election, more so than in any other that I can remember, that every word from a candidate’s mouth is capital-S Significant, so here’s something for tomorrow’s lesson, and (d) it gives me an excuse to link Karl’s post, which ties in to the question being put to the Messiah here. Why won’t he take questions from foreign journalists, anyway?

Link: sevenload.com

[American Patriot]

2:32pm UK, Friday July 25, 2008
Dominic Waghorn, Middle East correspondent



http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/Wor...ing%2BWall%2BN

Is nothing sacred, even in the Holy Land? It seems not, when it comes to Jerusalem's Wailing Wall and its most recent famous visitor, Barack Obama.


Obama at Wailing Wall



In time honoured tradition, the Democratic White House hopeful wedged a prayer note in a crack in the wall when he visited in the early hours on Thursday.


When he had gone, someone took it out again.


A message intended by Obama for his Maker alone, could be read by Israelis over their breakfast, reprinted in full on the front page of a national newspaper.


"Worshippers could not resist the curiosity and pulled out the note," reads the caption on Maariv, unable to resist publishing it, either.


In the private note, handwritten on the headed letter paper of the hotel where he was staying, the presidential hopeful asks God to: "Give me the wisdom to do what is right and just" and "protect my family".


Predictably, the publication has ignited an unholy row.


The wailing or western wall, as it is also known, is the holiest place Jews can visit, because it is the remains of the foundations of the Second Jewish Temple, destroyed by Romans two thousand years ago.
Rabbis for the site have condemned the publication of the note as "disgraceful" saying reading any prayer note is forbidden.


More than a hundred people have complained on the newspapers' website.


Twice a year, religious authorities collect the thousands of prayer notes stuffed into the wall and bury them on the Mount of Olives.
In the digital age, making a western wall prayer note no longer requires paper or going there.


On the wall's official website, a free service allows you to send your own message which will then be printed off and stuck into the wall.
A more confidential service future high profile visitors may prefer to use, given what has happened to Obama.

[Ryan Ruck]

Election stunt... I wouldn't put it past him to have had someone remove it and "leak" it to the press just so everyone could see how really benevolent and kind Black Jesus is.

[American Patriot]

Yup my thoughts too.

[Luke]

I have been lurking on this thread since its begining. I haven't given much input but I have been been both highly entertained and informed by the many links.

It would appear to me that this election will come down to Vice-Presidential appointments. I say that because at this point in time I would not feel comfortable with either of the leading candidates for the office of the President.

Sen. McCain seems lost and confused in many of his "soundbites", while Sen. Obama sounds like he would say anything for a vote in his "soundbites".

With that being said and hoping I don't get a knock on my door by the Secret Service, I don't think either person will survive a four year term as President of the United States making the Vice Presidential appointee a very important position. The strain of the office I feel will be more than Sen. McCain can bear and Sen. Obama's leftists veiws will be more than some "lone nut" will bear.

It is also my opinion that The Office of the President has on occasion changed many men, sometimes for the better, sometimes for the worse.

I also don't think that any of the candidates actually feel that they will be harming the country. I am sure that each feels his platform to be in the best interest of the country.

It would seem that the time is ripe for a legitimate 3rd party to gain control. The Libratarians will be gaining more members as time goes on, but I do not see them as gaining control for sometime now.

As for me I think I will rent the old Robert Redford movie "The Candidate" again,but first I have to answer the doorbell.......................................... .....

[Beetle]

Say Luke,

I hear you and understand where you are coming from, but I have a different take. If you don't mind, I think McCain is an untrust worthy RINO. I also feel that Nobama is very untrust worthy. I feel that Nobama is a socialist pig and should not be in Congress let alone the White House. Why do I feel Nobama is Socialist? Well, he is the most liberal voter in Congress. I don't care if you have been in Congress for two years or twenty years, if you are the most liberal then you are socialist at best or you're a stinkin' commie sob. The further left you are, the more you support socialist and communist ideas.

I do believe that McCain will do what is right for our Troops, but we will have to keep a eye on him in regards to some of our Social issues. If Nobama gits it, he will be a huge pain to Military and God knows what all.

Have you ever seen the moment before pain?
fficeffice" />>>
>

That moments just before the pain begins...

That is the way I see Nobama. I don't think he will care if he drives America into the dirt. I think his socialist goal permits him to do so.
>

[Ryan Ruck]

Luke,
You are 100% right, at least for me.

My voting for McCain (as I am NOT currently planning on doing) will hinge on whether or not he picks a truly Conservative VP. Someone like Bobby Jindal would get me to cast a vote for McCain. That guy, while he doesn't have much executive experience, has very Conservative credentials.

As I've said previously in this thread, I am just plain old sick and tired of having these middle-of-the-road, wishy-washy Republican candidates shoved down my throat. I would certainly never vote for a liberal Democrat but the time has come that I cannot in good conscience vote for a liberal Republican.

I know there are others with this same line of thought. Maybe not tons but, hopefully enough that the GOP "leadership" sits up and takes notice and starts pandering to the people that REALLY matter, Conservatives.