Vote Obama-Biden or Elect McCain-Palin

Journalism is dead.
It's no secret that the news media is controlled by democrats. Major studies and polls have more than demonstrated that fact. No link required, use your brain.
In fact they don't even really bother to try and hide it anymore.
So, if you want to pick up the newspaper or turn on the news everyday for the next 4 years and hear about how great things are under President Obama and how no matter what goes wrong... it was Bush's fault, then vote for Obama-Biden.
If you want to increase taxes on those already paying over 95% of the taxes vote for Obama-Biden.
If you want to increase YOUR taxes vote Obama Biden.
If you think America is the problem and not the solution... vote Obama Biden.
If you want our military downgraded, degraded and put on the back burner... vote Obama-Biden. If you want more government in your life, more spending (over $1 trillion new programs proposed) out of your pocket... then vote Obama-biden.


If you want to piss-off the Democrat run news media, Hollywood and extreme leftists who are trying to socialize our country and in the process protect our country from terrorists (instead of meeting with them) restore our economy (by lowering taxes not raising them) stand up to our enemies and protect our friends,... then elect McCain-Palin. If you want to eliminate corruption in Washington you don't bring in a "community organizer" from Chicago to do it. You bring in a corruption fighting pit-bull from Alaska and a tough old maverick from Arizona. If you don't let the news media decide who you vote for, then elect McCain-Palin.
If you believe it is time for a woman to be Vice President... and save this country from socialism. then elect McCain-Palin.
If you really-truly want to vote for change, then elect McCain- Palin.
Besides, without Sarah Palin, Tina Fey will have to go back to being a cute SNL second tier bit player.

Memo To John McCain; Take Off The Gloves

Memo to McCain: Take the Gloves Off

by Larry Elder

1o-02-08
McCain loses -- the first debate, that is.

Blown opportunities? Let us count the ways:

Obama says, without rebuttal, that his plan lowers taxes on "95 percent of working families." This is flatly impossible because 32 percent of income tax returns filed (some 43 million Americans) pay absolutely nothing in federal income taxes. Obama makes his claim by offering a $500 "Making Work Pay" tax credit to everybody ($1,000 per family), by expanding the Earned Income Tax Credit, and creating other credits. If your tax credit is more than your tax liability, you receive a check from the Treasury and you pay no taxes. That is not a "tax cut." McCain, too, offers a tax credit -- a $5,000 tax credit for health care. Yet neither the media nor McCain calls it a "tax cut."

Obama says, without rebuttal, that his tax hikes only affect those earning more than $250,000. Yet when you consider his spending plans, and the amount of money he expects to raise by "closing corporate loopholes" and taxing the rich, it simply does not add up. Moreover, he calls raising taxes a) good economic policy, and b) a matter of fairness. Obama, pointing to the sluggishness of the economy, recently said he might "defer" the tax hikes. Hold it, McCain should have said. If raising taxes on the so-called rich makes good economic policy, why "defer" it? Doesn't the economic sluggishness create even greater urgency in order to, as Obama claims, "jump-start" the economy?
Obama recently said, without a debate response from McCain, that because of the faltering economy, he may cut back on some of his proposed spending. Again, didn't Obama call the spending an "investment" in education and health care, job training and "volunteering"? If "investing" means a more productive and dynamic economy, doesn't an economic slowdown cry out for more spending?

Obama claims, without rebuttal, that he "pays for" the increased spending. If "closing corporate loopholes" and increasing taxes on the rich pay for more social spending, why put those off simply because of an economic downturn? Obama's latest backtracks on taxes and spending say one thing, loudly and clearly -- they hurt the economy. And by his own admission!

Missed opportunities on foreign policy:

Obama calls, without rebuttal, the Iraq war a blunder. Is it? By an almost even margin, 39 percent of Americans call Iraq a failure, while 41 percent say that history will judge it as a success. The numbers considering it a future success increased from 29 percent last August, while the it-will-be-deemed-a-failure crowd fell from 57 percent.

Obama still claims, without rebuttal, that while the surge succeeded, it failed to bring about the "political reconciliation" intended. This is patently false. In addition to meeting or making progress on nearly all of the 18 political benchmarks set by Congress, the Iraqi government, just last week, set a time for provincial elections -- perhaps the most important benchmark. McCain never mentioned it. Instead of a fledgling democracy and a potentially strong Muslim ally in the Middle East in the war on terror, Obama wanted a precipitous withdrawal. As former Secretary of State James Baker said, "If we picked up and left right now, you would see the biggest civil war you've ever seen." Even the liberal, anti-Bush Washington Post recently published an editorial pointing to Iraq's continuous improvement, and criticized Obama for his insistence on a timed withdrawal: "Democrat Barack Obama continues to argue that only the systematic withdrawal of U.S. combat units will force Iraqi leaders to compromise. Yet the empirical evidence of the past year suggests the opposite: that only the greater security produced and guaranteed by American troops allows a political environment in which legislative deals and free elections are feasible."

Obama claims, without rebuttal, that he consistently opposed the war. Did he? Obama, after his anti-war speech in 2002, later said he understood why senators voted for the Iraq war and admitted he was "not privy to Senate intelligence reports"; that it "was a tough question and a tough call" for the senators; and that he "didn't know" how he would have voted had he been in the Senate. More than a year after the war began, Obama said, "There's not much of a difference between my position and George Bush's position at this stage." Given Obama's 97 percent record of voting with his party, why accept the idea that this cautious get-along, go-along "present"-voting former state senator, now U.S. senator, would have defied the majority of his party -- including all of his fellow senators running in the presidential primaries -- and voted against the war?

McCain foolishly "suspended" his political campaign to go to Washington and deal with the economic crisis. But when the polls show the other guy ahead, and he leaves the debate with no blood, no ambulance -- you lose.

McCain wants to "put his country first."

The best way is simple: Get aggressive and win the election.

---

Mr. Elder is an attorney, syndicated columnist, syndicated radio talk-show host and author of Showdown: Confronting Bias, Lies, and the Special Interests That Divide America. (St. Martin's Press, 2002)

Indoctrinating School Children: Democrat Strategery

Thanks to Spank That Donkey...

Okay boys and girls gather around for today's indoctrination class into the Obama-nation.
Everyone sing along as we become good little socialist democrats.
Your tax dollars at work ladies and gentlemen... even though the video says it was filmed in someone's house... it sure looks like a grade school to me...



And the new re-cut version of the above....

Will The Real Barack H Obama Please Stand Up?

Hiding the Ball

by David Limbaugh

09/26/2008
Thanks to Human Events.com

Print This

Forward

Feedback

Digg This!

Why does Barack Obama play "hide the ball" with his personal résumé, concealing his extreme leftist ideology and denying his damning associations? Question kind of answers itself, wouldn't you say?
Be concerned, very concerned.

Obama hides his liberalism for the same reason every other liberal presidential candidate has: The electorate tilts center-right. This isn't just my gut speaking or some self-serving theory I'm propounding.

The Battleground poll -- a well-respected bipartisan affair conducted by the Terrance Group, a Republican polling organization -- and Lake Research Partners, a Democratic organization, tells us 60 percent of Americans identify themselves as conservatives.

But the specifics are even more telling. Twenty percent consider themselves very conservative, 40 percent somewhat conservative, 2 percent moderate, 27 percent liberal, 9 percent very liberal, and 3 percent don't know or didn't answer.

So John Kerry in 2004 and Barack Obama in 2008 didn't deny they were the most liberal senators because liberalism has become a dirty word through a clever conservative propaganda campaign. They denied it because liberalism is a minority position in reality, albeit an extraordinarily effective vocal minority.

Obama will only come clean about his liberalism when he thinks he is in safe territory, as he did at the San Francisco fundraiser where he trashed small-town Americans, thinking his words wouldn't reach those he was belittling. Nor is Obama upfront about the liberal nature of his policy proposals, choosing instead to mask their liberalism and even disguise them as conservative.

How else do you explain his whopper that he is recommending a tax cut for 95 percent of Americans when we know that the bottom 50 percent of income earners pay very little income tax at all? His plan calls for giving many of these people tax credits, even though they are paying no tax or are paying a small enough amount that the credit would result in them netting money from the government. As others have pointed out, this is welfare, not a tax cut. "Tax cut" resonates well among center-right voters; "welfare" does not.

On foreign policy, suffice it to say that Obama would never want the center-right electorate to know the extent of his appeasement and retreat-and-defeat orientation, his support for the bankrupting and sovereignty-forfeiting Global Poverty Act or his goal of eliminating U.S. nuclear weapons, as reported by The New York Times.

But where Obama is really playing hide the ball is in his past and present associations. His campaign operatives and the mainstream media have done their best to divert any attention from these relationships by saying it's dirty campaigning to smear him through the acts of others. Well, folks, that's not how ordinary people think. In sizing up someone's character, we often consider with whom they associate. Sue us if you wish -- even start a class action -- but it won't change human nature, which leads us, rationally, to consider this factor.

Endless reports and many books have been written documenting Barack Obama's discipleship in the thug tactics of Saul Alinsky's "Rules for Radicals." For Obama, community organizing was not an innocuous vehicle for assisting the needy. It was and is a cynically dangerous vehicle for the politics of extortion and intimidation and the usurpation of power by socialists, whose ideology and methods more closely resemble those of Josef Stalin than those of Mother Teresa.

These sources also prove beyond any reasonable doubt Obama's close -- not remote, not casual -- relationship with the nihilistic, America-hating, Pentagon-bombing radical William Ayers. Obama glibly dismisses the very idea that he should be blamed for a passing acquaintanceship with a guy who was bombing the Pentagon "when (Obama) was 8 years old."

Enough with the insults to our intelligence, Mr. Obama. You were not 8 when you launched your state Senate campaign in Ayers' home. You were not 8 when you served in the Chicago Annenberg Challenge, which Ayers was instrumental in establishing. You are not 8 today, though you are still Ayers' close friend, while he remains an America-hating radical, wholly unrepentant about his terrorist activities, other than to say he didn't do enough.

The fact that Obama would be seen in the same room with this guy should disqualify him from presidential aspirations. But he's not just in the same room. In many ways, he's on the same page, as evidenced by his default instinct to apologize for America and to blame America first.

But Obama will continue striving to hide the ball on this association and many others, including those with the Rev. Jeremiah Wright and Tony Rezko.

But beware; if anyone dares to expose those relationships and their sordid details, he will open himself up to malicious and fraudulent charges of racism and other Saul Alinsky thug tactics that make Bill Clinton's politics of personal destruction look like child's play.

---

Mr. Limbaugh is a nationally syndicated columnist and author of Bankrupt: The Moral and Intellectual Bankruptcy of Today's Democratic Party, Absolute Power and Persecution.

Obama-Biden "Quote of the Decade"

“We create our own narratives, it isn’t a lie if you believe it.” -Barack Obama- 2008

"I exaggerate when I'm angry"- Joe Biden 1988

Democrats Comparing Obama To Jesus

Thanks to SPARK IT UP blog.
Slogan an insult to Christianity
Jesus was not a community organizer, and Pontius Pilate was no elected governor.
To say otherwise might seem clever to the self-righteous, but it is actually a form of demonized name calling. It is a putdown of the Christian religion, which views Jesus as redeemer, the Son of God, the perfect Lamb, the only one who lived a life free of rebellion against God, who is therefore able to justify everyone else’s rebellion against God by choosing of his own free will to pay the price for that rebellion. As a community organizer, Jesus was an utter failure. As savior, he performed perfectly. To equate the Roman-appointed, merciless governor of conquered Judea in ancient times with an elected governor in the United States is shamefully shallow. It suggests a desire for ridicule over intellectual honesty. Two thousand years ago, an elite group of men shouted to crucify an innocent man. We say such things could not happen today. I am not so convinced.
Bob Mannel
Church Hill
Some would call the comparison blasphemy. I think we are seeing some very stupid people who actually believe Obama compares to Christ. United Mine Workers President Cecil Roberts used the comparison at Obama's visit here last week. What a nut. One can only guess to whom Cecil compares himself.

Smearing Sarah Palin

You won't find anything like the above video showing up anywhere in the main stream media.

Take a look at how the media is treating John McCain's VP choice Sarah Palin if you ever wondered if there really is any sort of "media bias" toward the left.

Compare the frenzy to report and re-report attacks on Gov Palin and her family to the almost hidden coverage of John Edwards affair while his wife suffers from cancer or any tough questions asked about Obama's close connections to a former terrorist or questions about Michelle's past.

Compare the two covers of Us Magazine... one shows the Obama's hugging and the headline is "Michelle Obama: Why Barack Loves Her" detailing their love story... the magazine with Palin on the cover holding a baby has a different tone to the headline "Babies, Lies and Scandal".

The NY Times has already had to retract a story (smear) about Sarah Palin. The story was front page... the retraction was buried in their online blogs.

There are reports that her Social Security Number has been released by Democrat operatives, the virtual equivalent of identity theft.
When the left gets worried about losing... they won't debate on issues, but decide to ruin their opponent's credibility any way they can. The media leans left.

In this case however, it is going to backfire on the left. Conservatives have been relatively uninterested in the election, John McCain was not exciting most conservatives to get up and go vote for him... but now, now that the left has brutally attacked Governor Palin this way.
The silent majority is waking up.
This is not good news for Obama supporters I assure you... but look for the insane attacks to continue anyway.
Just, not here.

Just Dropped in to See What Condition My Condition is in

Bush Administration Steps Up Immigration Raids
By STEWART M. POWELL
Houston Chronicle Washington Bureau

WASHINGTON — The Bush administration is vowing to carry out its unprecedented crackdown on undocumented immigrants for the remainder of the year — without regard to any political fallout during the presidential campaign.

In a sign of its resolve, agents with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, or ICE, have detained 1,755 people in raids conducted in May alone.

Nearly 3,700 illegal immigrants have been arrested in dozens of business sweeps since October, immigration officials told the Houston Chronicle, far ahead of the previous year's pace.

Houston has seen the results of stepped-up enforcement as well. A total of 1,037 fugitive immigrants have been arrested by federal agents in the Houston area in the first seven months of the fiscal year — a monthly rate 44 percent higher than the previous year.

Identification of illegal immigrants held in prisons also has surged in the Houston area, with more than 5,000 located in the first four months of the current fiscal year — a rate 63 percent higher than a year earlier.

Julie Myers, who heads the immigration agency, said ICE personnel will press dramatic enforcement operations until the moment the Bush administration leaves office Jan. 20, 2009.

"We will continue enforcement of the law," she said. "What we try to do is to try to stay out of the (election-year) rhetoric and do our job and do it well."

But there are signs that high-profile raids on work sites, mounting deportations and SWAT-team-style arrests of fugitive immigrants that galvanize some pro-enforcement conservative voters also may alienate some Latino voters, potentially driving them toward likely Democratic presidential nominee Barack Obama.

Fear among Hispanics

The Bush administration remains "hell bent on moving ahead with this strategy no matter what the cost," said Cecilia Muñoz, a senior vice president at the National Council of La Raza, the nation's largest national Hispanic civil rights and advocacy organization. "This is for show."

Repeated immigration sweeps have prompted some 12th generation Mexican-Americans to carry their U.S. passports to prove their American citizenship, Muñoz said.

A backlash among Latinos could make it harder for presumptive Republican nominee John McCain to match George W. Bush's performance in the Hispanic community. Experts estimate that Bush received between 40 percent and 44 percent of the Latino vote in 2004. The latest nationwide Gallup Poll showed Latinos favoring Obama.

The potential shift in Hispanic support could tilt the results in battleground states such as Florida, New Mexico, Nevada and Colorado. An above-average performance by Bush among Hispanics helped him to carry those states in 2004 en route to a 51 percent to 48 percent victory over Democrat John Kerry.

The Bush administration has stepped up enforcement activities since last June when White House-backed legislation that would have blended enforcement with a pathway to U.S. citizenship failed in the Senate.

The most highly publicized raid led to the arrest of 389 suspected illegal workers at Agriprocessors Inc., in Postville, Iowa, on May 15. The surge in enforcement this year is well on the way to surpassing the 4,490 arrests at businesses for criminal and administrative violations in the last fiscal year.

A necessary step

Deportations are expected to exceed the 282,548 immigrants sent home last year as well. Prosecutions of illegal immigrants inside the nation's prisons also are on track to exceed the 164,000 prisoners identified as undocumented immigrants last year.

The administration's move has been hailed by leading supporters of an enforcement-only approach to immigration.

Rep. Duncan Hunter, R-Calif., who has pressed plans for building a fence along the U.S.-Mexico border in his San Diego congressional district, calls increased enforcement operations "an important and necessary step."

ICE's Myers makes it clear that the administration would prefer to include enforcement as part of a more comprehensive approach to immigration law reform rather than standing alone as a lightning rod for controversy.

"We are very disappointed that comprehensive immigration enforcement did not pass — very disappointed," Myers said. "But we are enforcing the law Congress had on the books."

McCain sees the enforcement effort as a necessary first step to win public support before enacting any sweeping overhaul, which would balance enforcement with a guest worker program and a path to citizenship.

Obama and Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton have voiced support for enforcing existing immigration laws as they press for a broader overhaul that has yet to come together.

Andy Hernandez, a former president of the Southwest Voter Registration Project and co-author of the Almanac of Latino Politics, said he suspects vigorous Bush administration enforcement operations are designed in part to give McCain a boost.

"If you have the Republican administration looking tough with all these raids, then people don't look at McCain's past support for reform," said Hernandez, who now runs the Wesley Center for Family and Neighborhood Development in Austin. "This offensive," he said, "is more about politics than anything else."

Duncan Hunter Endorses John McCain

By Kevin Elliott

The Capital-Journal

Published Sunday, June 08, 2008

WAMEGO — Despite some differences in political opinions, former presidential hopeful Rep. Duncan Hunter, R-Calif., said he will support John McCain in the election.

The presidential election was among the topics when Hunter spoke Saturday at Kaw Valley State Bank in Wamego in support of former Rep. Jim Ryun's bid for the 2nd District Congressional seat.

The conservative Hunter, who has been a strong supporter for establishing a physical fence line to the country's southern border, initially endorsed Mike Huckabee but said he called McCain to give his endorsement after the Arizona senator secured the nomination.

"McCain has committed to the fence," Hunter said. "John will keep his word."

It's good to be back...

-redstater