.comment-link {margin-left:.6em;}
Heavy-Handed Politics

"€œGod willing, with the force of God behind it, we shall soon experience a world
without the United States and Zionism."€ -- Iran President Ahmadi-Nejad

Friday, August 22, 2008


Wonder why Barack Hussein Obama's been plunging in the polls? Consider how he's elevated a policy dispute into a character issue.

Sen. Obama thinks he can sell icicles to Eskimos. That self confidence is likely what brought him to Pastor Rick Warren's mega-church last weekend to woo evangelicals.

Mr. Obama thought he had an opening, because religious young people are as attracted to what's hip and cool as much as their less religious contemporaries, and young evangelicals tend to be very concerned about the environment and helping the poor.

But far and away the most important issue for evangelicals, young and old, is abortion, and Sen. Obama has one of the most radically pro-abortion records of any politician in America. The less evangelicals -- and most ordinary Americans -- know about it, the better for Sen. Obama.

So a politician with less ego and more judgment would have stayed as far away from the Saddleback Church as possible. As Arnold would say, big mistake. - Jack Kelly


To The Point News

Written by Dr. Jack Wheeler
Thursday, 05 June 2008

The O-man, Barack Hussein Obama, is an eloquently tailored empty suit. No résumé, no accomplishments, no experience, no original ideas, no understanding of how the economy works, no understanding of how the world works, no balls, nothing but abstract empty rhetoric devoid of real substance.

He has no real identity. He is half-white, which he rejects. The rest of him is mostly Arab, which he hides but is disclosed by his non-African Arabic surname and his Arabic first and middle names as a way to triply proclaim his Arabic parentage to people in Kenya. Only a small part of him is African Black from his Luo grandmother, which he pretends he is exclusively.

What he isn't, not a genetic drop of, is "African-American," the descendant of enslaved Africans brought to America chained in slave ships. He hasn't a single ancestor who was a slave. Instead, his Arab ancestors were slave owners. Slave-trading was the main Arab business in East Africa for centuries until the British ended it.

Let that sink in: Obambi is not the descendant of slaves, he is the descendant of slave owners. Thus he makes the perfect Liberal Messiah.

It's something Hillary doesn't understand - how some complete neophyte came out of the blue and stole the Dem nomination from her. Obamamania is beyond politics and reason. It is a true religious cult, whose adherents reject Christianity yet still believe in Original Sin, transferring it from the evil of being human to the evil of being white.

Thus Obambi has become the white liberals' Christ, offering absolution from the Sin of Being White. There is no reason or logic behind it, no faults or flaws of his can diminish it, no arguments Hillary could make of any kind can be effective against it. The absurdity of Hypocrisy Clothed In Human Flesh being their Savior is all the more cause for liberals to worship him: Credo quia absurdum, I believe it because it is absurd.

Thank heavens that the voting majority of Americans remain Christian and are in no desperate need of a phony savior.

Obama is a Zero. There is nothing really there. O=Zero. You can get a O=Zero bumper sticker for your car, a O=Zero t-shirt, encourage your friends to do the same, and get the message out there:

That his candidacy is ridiculous and should not be taken seriously by any thinking American.


Researchers have studied silver and bronze past medal winners from previous Olympics. What they say they found out is typically the bronze winners were happier than the silver.

Those Olympians that won the silver were more likely to have regrets - regrets that they did not win the top prize - the gold medal. The participants that won the bronze were happy that they got a medal - knowing finishing one spot down - fourth - would have meant no medal at all..

Dr. Thomas Gilovich of Cornell University was the lead researcher and summarized thusly:

"The key to understanding happiness is not to think about it as a trait but as a talent. Happy people have a talent - they are able to argue that life is a glass half full."

Candor Counts

By Hugh Hewitt

In the days since Rick Warren sat down with the major party presidential candidates, it has become obvious that Senator McCain helped himself a great deal with values voters, but also that Senator Obama hurt himself with the same group--and not just because of his answers, but because of the subsequent revelations that he was less than candid on a number of issues.

Senator Obama stated that he worked across party lines with John McCain--when in fact he didn't. He said he wasn't in favor of same-sex marriage--when he is in fact working to defeat California's Proposition 8. And Senator Obama got in an angry clash with a reporter over his opposition to the Born Alive Infant Protection Act--an argument which his campaign later acknowledged was triggered by a false assertion by Senator Obama.

Character counts--and candor is a part of character. Senator Obama ought to stop the smooth talking and start speaking honestly about his record.

Thursday, August 21, 2008

Governing is Above Obama's Pay Grade

Michael Reagan:
Anybody who watched Barack Obama’s sorry performance during Saturday Night’s Saddleback Civil Forum on the Presidency with Pastor Rick Warren had to come away with the question, “What is this guy doing running for president of the United States?”

The worshipping media described his comments as “nuanced,” the word they use to describe “wishy-washy.” It was full of those “on the other hand” answers to Pastor Warren’s probing questions.

Obama was anything but wishy-washy, however, when he said that knowing when human life begins was “above his pay grade.” He was just plain evasive, obviously seeking to play down his extremist view that abortion at any time, in any circumstance, is perfectly acceptable to him.

This isn’t surprising since he took the lead in the Illinois Senate in fighting a bill that would outlaw the... [read more]

Obama's Code Words

Marvin Olasky:
Journalists used to complain that George W. Bush's speechwriters slipped into his oratory phrases like America's "wonder-working power" that meant one thing to general audiences and another to evangelical supporters aware of the "wonder-working power in the blood of the Lamb." Far-fetched? Maybe, but this year Barack Obama is proving to be a master of that art.

"Economic justice" and "restoring fairness to the economy" are two of Obama's favorites. Who can oppose justice and fairness? To many Obama disciples, though, those words mandate not just equality of opportunity but a socialistic equality of result. Some in the general public would be less rhetorically transfixed if they understood the code.

Here's a more subtle example: Obama's call for ... [read on]

McCain vs. Obama: Showdown at Saddleback

Larry Elder:
Oh, no, not another "town hall" meeting.

Or at least, that's how I first reacted when I learned Rev. Rick Warren of Saddleback Church intended to host an Obama-versus-McCain town hall forum at the evangelist's California church.

But the rules, this time at least, seemed intriguing. Warren intended to ask each candidate one-on-one questions for one hour, with the rival offstage unable to hear questions and answers. The second candidate would then come out and answer the same questions in the same order.

Obama, via a coin toss, went first, and answered the often simple, straightforward questions carefully or, as many in the mainstream media later reported, in a "nuanced" way. And then came McCain. He came across as funnier, more personable, more thoughtful, more specific and, for the most part, more direct.

Some highlights. [Read on]

Blame Everyone But Russia!

Victor Davis Hanson:
Everyone is distracted by the Olympics. The squabbling here on the campaign trail consumes the media. Two presidential candidates and a lame-duck president all are weighing in on foreign policy. No wonder Vladimir Putin thought it was a good time to invade Georgia.

Apparently the Russian prime minister knew exactly what he was doing but assumed no one in the West did. And he was right.

Our pundits and politicians are all over the map as Putin is variously portrayed as villain, victim, patriot, tyrant -- and more still.

[read more]

Iran Deems Mention of Friendship "Unforgivable"
By Michael Medved

A hopeful signal from an Iranian official produced an enraged response from the nation's parliament that shows the true nature of that regime. Esfandiar Rahim Mashai, Vice President for Tourism, gave a speech in which he declared, "We are a friend of all people in the world, even Israelis and Americans."

Parliament then voted by an overwhelming margin to denounce these words as "an unforgivable mistake" and to demand that President Ahmadinejad dismiss the tourism chief immediately--even though that official is related to the president by marriage, with his daughter having married Ahmadinejad's son. Of Parliament's 290 members, 200 signed the statement declaring it "unforgivable" to even discuss friendship with Israelis or Americans.

This should serve as a powerful lesson to those who believe that our problems with Iran can be readily solved with more negotiation.

Wednesday, August 20, 2008

Bloomberg Wants Windmills on Top of NYC Buildings

The Nanny State Diaries

From trans fat to plastic grocery bag bans, the media often take the side of the government making decisions for you. The Business & Media Institute takes a look at nine examples of regulatory nonsense promoted by journalists. Read it at The Balance Sheet.

US, Poland OK missile defense base, riling Moscow

The United States and Poland signed a deal Wednesday to place a U.S. missile defense base just 115 miles from Russia _ a move followed swiftly by a new warning from Moscow of a possible military response.

For many Poles _ whose country has been a staunch U.S. ally _ the accord represented what they believed would be a guarantee of safety for themselves in the face of a newly assertive Russia. [continue reading]

Norway: Russia to cut all military ties with NATO

Russia has informed Norway that it plans to suspend all military ties with NATO, Norway's Defense Ministry said Wednesday, a day after the military alliance urged Moscow to withdraw its forces from Georgia.

NATO foreign ministers said Tuesday they would make further ties with
Russia dependent on Moscow making good on a pledge to pull its troops
back to pre-conflict positions in Georgia. However, they stopped short
of calling an immediate halt to all cooperation. [continue reading]

Obama Adviser Meets With Syria

By Amanda Carpenter
Barack Obama’s Middle East Policy Adviser recently discussed presidential politics with high-level Syrian officials during a conference underwritten Syrian business interests and a Canadian oil company.

Adviser Daniel Kurtzer told the New York Sun the trip was not related to his campaign work, but that he did discuss the next president’s role in Syria’s relationship with Israel with Syria’s Foreign Minister Walid al-Moallem. [more]

Tuesday, August 19, 2008


“Whatever the political outcome of Russia’s invasion of Georgia, the incident has reminded American voters that in uncertain times it is dangerous to choose a rookie with no foreign policy experience and a juvenile approach to world affairs over one tempered by war who understands that U.N. resolutions might as well be written in disappearing ink. John McCain knows that peace through strength is what defeated the Soviet Union and that it’s peace through strength that will best preserve free nations and advance their interests.”

—Cal Thomas


“Truthfully, an Obama presidency should scare the pants off 70 percent of Americans... Across the board, Obama is dramatically out of sync with this center-right nation... Obama’s entire campaign theme is fraudulent. How can a man unite America when his views are so far out of line with average Americans for whom he has revealed unbridled contempt? How can he inspire America when he advertises his disdain for what he believes America has become?”

—David Limbaugh

Georgia and NATO

“Georgia, whose desire for NATO membership had U.S. support, is not in NATO because some prospective members of McCain’s league of democracies, e.g. Germany, thought that starting membership talks with Georgia would complicate the project of propitiating Russia. NATO is scheduled to review the question of Georgia’s membership in December... If Georgia were in NATO, would NATO now be at war with Russia? More likely, Russia would not be in Georgia.”

—George Will

“It is the madness of folly, to expect mercy from those who have refused to do justice; and even mercy, where conquest is the object, is only a trick of war; the cunning of the fox is as murderous as the violence of the wolf.”

—Thomas Paine

The Iran Scenarios
By Alan Caruba
These days you can read as many different scenarios regarding the likelihood that Israel will attack Iran’s nuclear facilities as there are experts putting them forth. History, past and present, may have already written the script. [read more]

USA Today:
Iraqis buy billions in U.S. arms

Obama appears ready to announce running mate

International Herald Tribune reports,"Senator Barack Obama has all but settled on his choice for a running mate and set an elaborate rollout plan for his decision, beginning with an early morning alert to supporters, perhaps as soon as Wednesday morning, aides said."

The hot rumor is that Joe Biden is Obama's pick for the veep slot.


As US Looks to Improve Ties, Libya Positions Itself in Russia’s Corner
At a time when the U.S. is moving towards full normalization of relations with Libya, Muammar Gaddafi’s son has made it clear that the North African nation is looking to Russia as its strategic partner.

In a little-noticed interview with Russia’s Kommersant business daily, Seif al-Islam Gaddafi said Moscow’s resurgence, demonstrated by this month’s military incursion into Georgia, was a positive development for the Arab world.

“What happened in Georgia is a good sign, which means America is no longer the sole world power setting the rules of the game,” Gaddafi said.

“Now there is balance in the world. Russia is being reborn, and we value that. It is very good for us, for all of the Middle East,” he said.


Putin Could Face ‘Ethnic Cleansing’ Charges, Experts Say
Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin’s role in the military invasion of the former Soviet state of Georgia could lead to him facing charges for war crimes, the Georgian ambassador to the United States said at a discussion at the conservative Heritage Foundation on Monday…

Obama Draws Ire Over Comments on Clarence Thomas
Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) drew howls of protest from conservatives over comments he made about Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas over the weekend at Saddleback Church, a megachurch in Lake Forest, Calif

Arab Sentiment Backs Russia Over Georgia
Russia’s military intervention in Georgia in the face of Western protests is being viewed by some in the Arab world as evidence of American weakness, with media commentators voicing barely-disguised delight at what they see as a defeat for Washington…

The Real World Order

After every major, systemic war, there is the hope that this will be the war to end all wars. The idea driving it is simple. Wars are usually won by grand coalitions. The idea is that the coalition that won the war by working together will continue to work together to make the peace. Indeed, the idea is that the defeated will join the coalition and work with them to ensure the peace. This was the dream behind the Congress of Vienna, the League of Nations, the United Nations and, after the Cold War, NATO. The idea was that there would be no major issues that couldn’t be handled by the victors, now joined with the defeated. That was the idea that drove George H. W. Bush as the Cold War was coming to its end.

Those with the dream are always disappointed. The victorious coalition breaks apart. The defeated refuse to play the role assigned to them. New powers emerge that were not part of the coalition. Anyone may have ideals and visions. The reality of the world order is that there are profound divergences of interest in a world where distrust is a natural and reasonable response to reality. In the end, ideals and visions vanish in a new round of geopolitical conflict.

On Sept. 11, 1990, U.S. President George H. W. Bush addressed Congress. He spoke in the wake of the end of Communism in Eastern Europe, the weakening of the Soviet Union, and the invasion of Kuwait by Saddam Hussein. He argued that a New World Order was emerging: “A hundred generations have searched for this elusive path to peace, while a thousand wars raged across the span of human endeavor, and today that new world is struggling to be born. A world quite different from the one we’ve known. A world where the rule of law supplants the rule of the jungle. A world in which nations recognize the shared responsibility for freedom and justice. A world where the strong respect the rights of the weak.”

After every major, systemic war, there is the hope that this will be the war to end all wars. The idea driving it is simple. Wars are usually won by grand coalitions. The idea is that the coalition that won the war by working together will continue to work together to make the peace. Indeed, the idea is that the defeated will join the coalition and work with them to ensure the peace. This was the dream behind the Congress of Vienna, the League of Nations, the United Nations and, after the Cold War, NATO. The idea was that there would be no major issues that couldn’t be handled by the victors, now joined with the defeated. That was the idea that drove George H. W. Bush as the Cold War was coming to its end.

Those with the dream are always disappointed. The victorious coalition breaks apart. The defeated refuse to play the role assigned to them. New powers emerge that were not part of the coalition. Anyone may have ideals and visions. The reality of the world order is that there are profound divergences of interest in a world where distrust is a natural and reasonable response to reality. In the end, ideals and visions vanish in a new round of geopolitical conflict.

The post-Cold War world, the New World Order, ended with authority on Aug. 8, 2008, when Russia and Georgia went to war. Certainly, this war was not in itself of major significance, and a very good case can be made that the New World Order actually started coming apart on Sept. 11, 2001. But it was on Aug. 8 that a nation-state, Russia, attacked another nation-state, Georgia, out of fear of the intentions of a third nation-state, the United States. This causes us to begin thinking about the Real World Order.

The global system is suffering from two imbalances. First, one nation-state, the United States, remains overwhelmingly powerful, and no combination of powers are in a position to control its behavior. We are aware of all the economic problems besetting the United States, but the reality is that the American economy is larger than the next three economies combined (Japan, Germany and China). The U.S. military controls all the world’s oceans and effectively dominates space. Because of these factors, the United States remains politically powerful — not liked and perhaps not admired, but enormously powerful.

The second imbalance is within the United States itself. Its ground forces and the bulk of its logistical capability are committed to the Middle East, particularly Iraq and Afghanistan. The United States also is threatening on occasion to go to war with Iran, which would tie down most of its air power, and it is facing a destabilizing Pakistan. Therefore, there is this paradox: The United States is so powerful that, in the long run, it has created an imbalance in the global system. In the short run, however, it is so off balance that it has few, if any, military resources to deal with challenges elsewhere. That means that the United States remains the dominant power in the long run but it cannot exercise that power in the short run. This creates a window of opportunity for other countries to act.

The outcome of the Iraq war can be seen emerging. The United States has succeeded in creating the foundations for a political settlement among the main Iraqi factions that will create a relatively stable government. In that sense, U.S. policy has succeeded. But the problem the United States has is the length of time it took to achieve this success. Had it occurred in 2003, the United States would not suffer its current imbalance. But this is 2008, more than five years after the invasion. The United States never expected a war of this duration, nor did it plan for it. In order to fight the war, it had to inject a major portion of its ground fighting capability into it. The length of the war was the problem. U.S. ground forces are either in Iraq, recovering from a tour or preparing for a deployment. What strategic reserves are available are tasked into Afghanistan. Little is left over.

As Iraq pulled in the bulk of available forces, the United States did not shift its foreign policy elsewhere. For example, it remained committed to the expansion of democracy in the former Soviet Union and the expansion of NATO, to include Ukraine and Georgia. From the fall of the former Soviet Union, the United States saw itself as having a dominant role in reshaping post-Soviet social and political orders, including influencing the emergence of democratic institutions and free markets. The United States saw this almost in the same light as it saw the democratization of Germany and Japan after World War II. Having defeated the Soviet Union, it now fell to the United States to reshape the societies of the successor states.

Through the 1990s, the successor states, particularly Russia, were inert. Undergoing painful internal upheaval — which foreigners saw as reform but which many Russians viewed as a foreign-inspired national catastrophe — Russia could not resist American and European involvement in regional and internal affairs. From the American point of view, the reshaping of the region — from the Kosovo war to the expansion of NATO to the deployment of U.S. Air Force bases to Central Asia — was simply a logical expansion of the collapse of the Soviet Union. It was a benign attempt to stabilize the region, enhance its prosperity and security and integrate it into the global system.

As Russia regained its balance from the chaos of the 1990s, it began to see the American and European presence in a less benign light. It was not clear to the Russians that the United States was trying to stabilize the region. Rather, it appeared to the Russians that the United States was trying to take advantage of Russian weakness to impose a new politico-military reality in which Russia was to be surrounded with nations controlled by the United States and its military system, NATO. In spite of the promise made by Bill Clinton that NATO would not expand into the former Soviet Union, the three Baltic states were admitted. The promise was not addressed. NATO was expanded because it could and Russia could do nothing about it.

From the Russian point of view, the strategic break point was Ukraine. When the Orange Revolution came to Ukraine, the American and European impression was that this was a spontaneous democratic rising. The Russian perception was that it was a well-financed CIA operation to foment an anti-Russian and pro-American uprising in Ukraine. When the United States quickly began discussing the inclusion of Ukraine in NATO, the Russians came to the conclusion that the United States intended to surround and crush the Russian Federation. In their view, if NATO expanded into Ukraine, the Western military alliance would place Russia in a strategically untenable position. Russia would be indefensible. The American response was that it had no intention of threatening Russia. The Russian question was returned: Then why are you trying to take control of Ukraine? What other purpose would you have? The United States dismissed these Russian concerns as absurd. The Russians, not regarding them as absurd at all, began planning on the assumption of a hostile United States.

If the United States had intended to break the Russian Federation once and for all, the time for that was in the 1990s, before Yeltsin was replaced by Putin and before 9/11. There was, however, no clear policy on this, because the United States felt it had all the time in the world. Superficially this was true, but only superficially. First, the United States did not understand that the Yeltsin years were a temporary aberration and that a new government intending to stabilize Russia was inevitable. If not Putin, it would have been someone else. Second, the United States did not appreciate that it did not control the international agenda. Sept. 11, 2001, took away American options in the former Soviet Union. No only did it need Russian help in Afghanistan, but it was going to spend the next decade tied up in the Middle East. The United States had lost its room for maneuver and therefore had run out of time.

And now we come to the key point. In spite of diminishing military options outside of the Middle East, the United States did not modify its policy in the former Soviet Union. It continued to aggressively attempt to influence countries in the region, and it became particularly committed to integrating Ukraine and Georgia into NATO, in spite of the fact that both were of overwhelming strategic interest to the Russians. Ukraine dominated Russia’s southwestern flank, without any natural boundaries protecting them. Georgia was seen as a constant irritant in Chechnya as well as a barrier to Russian interests in the Caucasus.

Moving rapidly to consolidate U.S. control over these and other countries in the former Soviet Union made strategic sense. Russia was weak, divided and poorly governed. It could make no response. Continuing this policy in the 2000s, when the Russians were getting stronger, more united and better governed and while U.S. forces were no longer available, made much less sense. The United States continued to irritate the Russians without having, in the short run, the forces needed to act decisively.

The American calculation was that the Russian government would not confront American interests in the region. The Russian calculation was that it could not wait to confront these interests because the United States was concluding the Iraq war and would return to its pre-eminent position in a few short years. Therefore, it made no sense for Russia to wait and it made every sense for Russia to act as quickly as possible.

The Russians were partly influenced in their timing by the success of the American surge in Iraq. If the United States continued its policy and had force to back it up, the Russians would lose their window of opportunity. Moreover, the Russians had an additional lever for use on the Americans: Iran.

The United States had been playing a complex game with Iran for years, threatening to attack while trying to negotiate. The Americans needed the Russians. Sanctions against Iran would have no meaning if the Russians did not participate, and the United States did not want Russia selling advance air defense systems to Iran. (Such systems, which American analysts had warned were quite capable, were not present in Syria on Sept. 6, 2007, when the Israelis struck a nuclear facility there.) As the United States re-evaluates the Russian military, it does not want to be surprised by Russian technology. Therefore, the more aggressive the United States becomes toward Russia, the greater the difficulties it will have in Iran. This further encouraged the Russians to act sooner rather than later.

The Russians have now proven two things. First, contrary to the reality of the 1990s, they can execute a competent military operation. Second, contrary to regional perception, the United States cannot intervene. The Russian message was directed against Ukraine most of all, but the Baltics, Central Asia and Belarus are all listening. The Russians will not act precipitously. They expect all of these countries to adjust their foreign policies away from the United States and toward Russia. They are looking to see if the lesson is absorbed. At first, there will be mighty speeches and resistance. But the reality on the ground is the reality on the ground.

We would expect the Russians to get traction. But if they don’t, the Russians are aware that they are, in the long run, much weaker than the Americans, and that they will retain their regional position of strength only while the United States is off balance in Iraq. If the lesson isn’t absorbed, the Russians are capable of more direct action, and they will not let this chance slip away. This is their chance to redefine their sphere of influence. They will not get another.

The other country that is watching and thinking is Iran. Iran had accepted the idea that it had lost the chance to dominate Iraq. It had also accepted the idea that it would have to bargain away its nuclear capability or lose it. The Iranians are now wondering if this is still true and are undoubtedly pinging the Russians about the situation. Meanwhile, the Russians are waiting for the Americans to calm down and get serious. If the Americans plan to take meaningful action against them, they will respond in Iran. But the Americans have no meaningful actions they can take; they need to get out of Iraq and they need help against Iran. The quid pro quo here is obvious. The United States acquiesces to Russian actions (which it can’t do anything about), while the Russians cooperate with the Unit ed States against Iran getting nuclear weapons (something Russia does not want to see).

One of the interesting concepts of the New World Order was that all serious countries would want to participate in it and that the only threat would come from rogue states and nonstate actors such as North Korea and al Qaeda. Serious analysts argued that conflict between nation-states would not be important in the 21st century. There will certainly be rogue states and nonstate actors, but the 21st century will be no different than any other century. On Aug. 8, the Russians invited us all to the Real World Order.

By George Friedman


CPUSA Online - Editorial: Eye on the Prize
Barack Obama is not a left candidate. This fact has seemingly surprised a number of progressive people who are bemoaning Obama’s “shift to the center.” (Right-wingers are happy to join them, suggesting Obama is a “flip-flopper.”) It’s sad that some who seek progressive change are missing the forest for the trees. But they will not dampen the wide and deep enthusiasm for blocking a third Bush term represented by John McCain, or for bringing Obama by a landslide into the White House with a large Democratic congressional majority. [continue]

Obama and Abortion

(1). Rich Lowry: Barack Obama - Abortion Extremist
Barack Obama had a mini Bob Dole moment after the Saddleback presidential forum the other night. Asked on the Christian Broadcasting Network about a controversy over his opposition to legislation in Illinois protecting infants born alive after surviving abortions, an irked Obama replied, "I hate to say that people are lying, but here's a situation where folks are lying."

Obama's line recalled Dole's plaint on national TV after the first George Bush beat him in New Hampshire in 1988, "Tell him to stop lying about my record." Dole's outburst would live in infamy as evidence of his distemper. Obama's problem isn't his temperament, but the unsustainable exertions necessary to attempt to square his reasonable-sounding rhetoric on abortion with the extremism of his record. [more]

(2.) Amanda Carpenter: Obama Calls Pro-Lifers Liars
Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama is harshly accusing a pro-life group of "lying" about his record on abortion as a Illinois state senator, despite compelling evidence on the pro-lifers' side.

Obama made the aggressive attack when Christian Broadcasting Network Senior National Correspondent David Brody asked Obama about documentation the National Right to Life Committee recently obtained of a 2003 committee vote on “born alive” legislation that would have required medical officials to give life-saving care to babies who survived abortion. [more]

If There Is No God

Dennis Prager:
We are constantly reminded about the destructive consequences of religion -- intolerance, hatred, division, inquisitions, persecutions of "heretics," holy wars. Though far from the whole story, they are, nevertheless, true. There have been many awful consequences of religion.

What one almost never hears described are the deleterious consequences of secularism -- the terrible developments that have ............ [more]

Pro-Choice McCain Veep Equals Political Suicide

David Limbaugh:
I hate to rain on John McCain's parade right after he trounced Barack Obama at Rick Warren's Saddleback Church forum, for which I heartily applaud him, but McCain's trial balloon consideration of a pro-choice running mate demands a response.

The prospect of an Obama presidency is so horrifying that... [more]

Georgia On Our Mind

Thomas Sowell:
What is happening in the republic of Georgia is all too reminiscent of what happened back in 1956, when Russian tanks rolled into Hungary-- and the West did nothing.

An argument might well be made that, realistically, there was nothing the West could have done-- then or now-- that would have forced the Russians out.

But there was bitterness, then as now, that the West may... [more]

Monday, August 18, 2008

Whose "Special Interests"?

By Thomas Sowell
We take it for granted that a vote means a secret ballot but it was not always that way. Moreover, it will not remain that way for workers who vote on whether or not they want a labor union, if legislation sponsored by Congressional Democrats and endorsed by Senator Barack Obama becomes law.

Before there were secret ballots, voters dared not express ....[more]

The Marxist Brother

By Burt Prelutsky
I must confess that I am spending an awful lot of time thinking about Barack Obama. I hasten to add that it’s not, as is the case with Chris Matthews, because the Senator sends shivers up my leg. Rather, it’s because I simply can’t figure out how he’s managed to convince so many people that he should be the President of the United States. It’s a lot like trying to figure out how Las Vegas magicians make lions and tigers disappear.

To be perfectly honest, I invariably feel that way about the..... [more]

Russia wants to send naval fleet to Venezuela: Chavez

President Hugo Chavez said on Sunday that Russian President Dimitri Medvedev wants to send a Russian naval fleet to visit Venezuela.

“Russia has informed us they intend to visit Venezuela, that is, the intention that a Russian fleet should come to the Caribbean,” Chavez said on his weekly radio program.

“I told the president (Medvedev), ‘If you’re coming to the Caribbean, we’ll welcome you,’” Chavez said, adding that the Russian naval fleet would pay “a friendly and working” visit to Venezuela…

“We very much need them here,” Chavez said of the Russian weapons. “We’ve got the helicopters, the Sukoi fighters and we’re now considering buying some Russian submarines to patrol our territorial waters,” Chavez said. [more]

American Thinker: Gang of 10 on Nuclear Energy
With the increasing public debate this election year over energy policy, proposals to remove offshore and ANWR drilling restrictions have rightly caught the public's attention. While this is a critical policy focus requiring re-examination and revision, other energy policy issues are also seeing the light of day that normally are buried in the trivia of governmental regulation.

A new faction within the US Senate, the "Gang of 10", have put forward a set of energy policy proposals that they see as a compromise between the "soft energy path" types like.....

American Thinker: The Shape of the Race Changes
Slowly, almost imperceptibly, the contest for President has become a real horse race, close to a tossup (Obama maintains a 1-2 point lead in the tracking polls). The 17 days of the Olympics and the exploits of Michael Phelps have driven most political stories off the front burner, other than Russia's aggression against Georgia.

The Russia-Georgia story played into John McCain's hands, with McCain quickly and ...............

Obama is 'nuanced'
By Joseph Farah
I've been hearing this a lot lately – from the experts.

Barack Obama is "nuanced." [more]

Mexico criticizes shooting at border

U.S. says agent fired after rocks thrown
By Debbi Baker, Kristina Davis and Sandra Dibble

August 14, 2008

SAN YSIDRO – The shooting of a Mexican man by a U.S. Border Patrol agent during a rock-throwing incident west of the San Ysidro border crossing drew a rebuke yesterday from the Mexican Consulate in San Diego and a demand that U.S. authorities conduct a “thorough investigation.” [full story]

Chuck Norris responds to this latest incident:

Are you kidding me? Do I smell another Compean and Ramos case in the making? Do illegals think border crossing is nothing more than a game of cat and mouse? Do Mexican officials think we're only playing "rocks, scissors and paper" at the borders? When will we finally draw a line in the sand and stop this insanity at our nation's boundaries? When will we back our agents and their Bill of Rights? When will we give them the complete resources, permissions and support they need to fully carry out their duties? [full commentary]

Totally Disgusting

FRIENDS and family of Tim Russert are saddened by a piece in Harper's magazine by Lewis Lapham, who characterizes the late host of NBC's "Meet the Press" as a toady of the establishment and asks, "Why a requiem Mass for a pet canary?" [continued]

Work begins on $57 million border fence in San Diego

Bulldozers roll after $57 million project overcomes 12 years of setbacks

Italy illegal immigration 'soars'

The number of illegal immigrants entering Italy doubled in the first seven months of the year compared with the same period in 2007, Rome says.
[Read more]

Senator John Kerry For Vice President?

BOSTON (WBZ) ― Barack Obama has yet to name a vice presidential nominee and some are wondering if he might turn to Massachusetts to round out the ticket.

John Kerry for vice president?

Don't dismiss the notion just yet.

Some political insiders are telling WBZ it could happen.

So why would Obama reach out to Kerry as his choice?

Kerry brings more money and name recognition to the table than any other name on the Obama list so far. Americans do tend to love a comeback kid and this would be the most amazing political comeback since Richard Nixon came back from the dead forty years ago. [more]

Iran sparks US concern with satellite rocket launch
Iran said it had sent a rocket carrying a dummy satellite into space on Sunday, triggering fresh concern in Washington that the technology could be diverted to ballistic missiles.

The launch is likely to further exacerbate tensions with the West over its nuclear drive, which Iran's arch-foe Washington and its allies claim is a cover for atomic weapons ambitions. [more]

Libya to receive reparations for Reagan air strike

Sunday, August 17, 2008

Lawmakers take up battle against light bulb ban
U.S. Rep. Michele Bachmann, R-Minn., and 24 other representatives on Capitol Hill have asked the government to reconsider mandating that all Americans use exclusively compact fluorescent bulbs, or CFLs, in light of growing concerns over the safety and environmental impact of the bulbs.

As WND reported, the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 was signed into law in December, phasing out the use of traditional, incandescent light bulbs in favor of CFLs beginning in 2012 and culminating in a ban on incandescent bulbs in 2014.

Now, concerns about mercury in the bulbs and mercury vapor released when a CFL is broken have led Bachmann and a group of legislators in the House to second-guess the government's choice.

"Each light bulb contains between 3-6 milligrams of mercury," Bachmann said. "There's a question about how that mercury will fill up our landfills, and also if you break one in your home, you'll have mercury that instantaneously vaporizes in your home. That poses a very real threat to children, disabled people, pets, senior citizens. And I just think it's very important that Americans have the choice to decide, would they like an incandescent or a (CFL)?" [read more..]

Obama abortion support exceeds even NARAL's

Records document opposition to protecting born-alive babies

Was young Obama Indonesian citizen?

Document, travel suggest 'Barry Soetero' member of world's largest Muslim country

Indonesian school registration for "Barry Soetoro" (AP photo)
JERUSALEM – Was Sen. Barack Obama a citizen of Indonesia at any point in his life?
Read more.

Are Terrorists Planning to Strike Denver?

Check out "Bob McCarty Writes" and his post called Are Terrorists Planning to Strike Denver?

Senate “Gang of 10” Energy Plan

Recently the Senate “Gang of 10” released an outline of the proposed energy compromise reached between five Democrats and five Republicans. While language has yet to be released, highlighted below are our some initial concerns with the proposal.

Extremely Limited Offshore Production:

The off-shore provisions of this grand compromise are woefully inadequate to addressing the current crisis. The proposal only opens additional areas in the Gulf of Mexico to leasing and permits only the States of Virginia, North and South Carolina and Georgia to opt in to a leasing program. The proposal even creates a new “no drill zone” within 50 miles of the coast in areas where drilling would be permitted, permanently taking off-line some of the most promising areas for production. Presumably the ban on production remains in place in Florida, along the West Coast and off of Alaska.

American families would be better served to just let the current offshore ban expire.

New Government Subsidies Funded by Tax Increases:

Rather than using revenues from increased oil and gas production to fund competitive research into alternative fuels as proposed by House Republicans, the Gang of Ten proposal includes what the Wall Street Journal calls “a Democratic giveaway” that is funded by $84 billion in tax increases.

Approximately $30 billion in new taxes will come from American oil and gas companies through repeal of the Section 199 manufactures deduction and increased revenue on oil and gas leases in the Gulf of Mexico. Raising taxes on one specific industry, American oil and gas companies will make it harder to expand oil and gas production in America.

An additional $55 billion in new taxes will be disclosed at a later date according to their press release: “Remaining offsets will be finalized in consultation with the Finance Committee after accounting for interaction effects with other pending legislation.” Since the release of their plan, rumored tax increases have included:

Ø Economic substance doctrine, which will raise taxes on American companies by allowing the IRS to question their business decisions

Ø Delaying worldwide interest allocation, making U.S. based international companies less competitive compared to foreign based companies

Ø Modifying the tax treatment of offshore non-qualified deferred compensation

Fails the “All of the Above” Test:Keeps ANWR off-line

Ø Continues the policy of denying us access to our vast oil-shale reserves

Ø Does nothing to cut the bureaucratic red tape that hinders the construction of new refineries

Ø Fails to repeal the prohibition on government purchasing of alternative energy including Coal-to Liquids

Office of the Republican Whip